· Demand uniform retirement age, wages
· Seek ₦3m maximum for president’s salary, ₦135k for minimum wage
· Challenge ‘discriminatory’ electricity banding, budgeted excesses
Three Senior Advocates of Nigeria have dragged President Bola Tinubu to court, mounting a sweeping legal challenge against retirement age disparities, self-fixed public emoluments and allegedly discriminatory electricity tariffs, DAVID MAXWELL and JIBRIN NDANUSA write.
Three Senior Advocates of Nigeria, SANs, acting under the platform of the Public Interest Advocacy Network, PIAN, have instituted fresh legal actions against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu at the National Industrial Court, in a sweeping challenge that targets disparities in retirement age policy, alleged excesses in public sector remuneration, and what they describe as unconstitutional electricity tariff practices.
The suits, filed against the Attorney-General of the Federation, AGF, as the statutory representative of the Federal Government, are spearheaded by Dr Paul Harris Ogbole, SAN; High Chief A. A. Malik, SAN; and Dr Mohammed Ndarani Mohammed, SAN, with the backing of ten other senior lawyers. The actions are the latest in a series of public interest litigations mounted by PIAN to, in its words, “straighten governance in Nigeria and get things moving in the right direction”.
At the heart of the first suit is a challenge to what the claimants describe as the President’s unilateral fixation of differing retirement ages for various categories of public and civil servants. The SANs are asking the court to declare that the President lacks the constitutional authority to prescribe disparate retirement ages across the public service, arguing that the current arrangement has bred discrimination, discontent and inequality.
Specifically, the suit contends that while certain categories of public officers have had their retirement age raised to 70 years, others remain bound by the traditional 60-year limit, despite being paid from the same public purse. According to the claimants, this selective adjustment offends the principles of fairness and equal treatment enshrined in the Constitution.
They are therefore urging the court to order a harmonisation of retirement ages across the public service at 70 years, or, alternatively, to vest individual employees with the discretion to retire at any point up to that age. In a far-reaching prayer, the SANs are also seeking a declaration that all persons whose salaries are funded from public resources should retire uniformly at 70 years.
Perhaps most controversially, the claimants are asking for restorative relief for officers who, they argue, were prematurely retired at 60 during the tenure of the current administration. They want such officers recalled to their duty posts. Where recall is impracticable, the suit demands that affected officers be paid their full salaries and emoluments until they attain the age of 70.
The second suit delves into the politically sensitive terrain of public sector pay, allowances and bonuses. In it, the SANs seek judicial affirmation that Nigeria should operate both a national minimum wage and a national maximum wage applicable to all persons paid from the public purse.
Under this proposed framework, political office holders would be barred from fixing what the claimants describe as “outrageous salaries and emoluments” for themselves, regardless of the nomenclature under which such payments are disguised. The suit argues that any public officer who authorises payments beyond the stipulated national wage limits should be deemed to have committed a financial crime, rendering such a person liable to prosecution by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC.
The claimants are inviting the court to set the national maximum wage for the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria at ₦3 million per month, while pegging the national minimum wage at ₦135,000 for the least-paid public servant. They argue that the proposed minimum aligns with the United Nations’ prescribed benchmark of three dollars per day as the threshold for decent living.
“That political office holders are not at liberty to fix outrageous salaries and emoluments for themselves by whatever name known, and that any public officer who causes payments from the public purse to be made outside the laid down national minimum wage and the national maximum wage commits a financial crime for which such a person is liable to prosecution by the EFCC
“That the National Maximum wage should be set at N3m per month for the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the national minimum wage be set at N135k for the least paid personnel in the public service, in line with the UN prescribed minimum standards of $3:00 per day;
“That the President and all other public officers must pay their own bills for expenses such as feeding, logistics, etc from their earned income, rather than the current outrageous provisions in the national budgets for such expenses. For instance, in the 2024 budget, an outrageous sum of N9 billion was provided for feeding the President and his family, translating to over N200m daily!” The suit claims in part.
In a further bid to curb what they characterise as the monetisation of public office, the SANs are asking the court to rule that the President and all other public officers must personally bear routine expenses such as feeding, logistics and sundry living costs from their earned income, rather than relying on budgetary provisions.
To illustrate their point, the suit references the 2024 national budget, which allegedly earmarked about ₦9 billion for the feeding of the President and his family — a figure the claimants calculate as translating to more than ₦200 million daily. Such provisions, they argue, are indefensible in a country grappling with widespread poverty and fiscal strain.
According to PIAN’s Convener, Chief Madaki Omadachi Ameh, the overarching aim of the suit is to strip public office of its material allure. “Anyone going into public service should know it is purely for service to the people and nothing else,” he said, adding that the current system has turned political offices into the exclusive preserve of the obscenely wealthy.
These latest actions come on the heels of another suit filed by PIAN against the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, seeking to drastically reduce the cost of nomination forms for political party offices. That case argues that the present regime effectively bars Nigerians who earn the national minimum wage from aspiring to high political office, thereby entrenching elite capture of the political space.
Beyond the suits already before the court, PIAN disclosed that further litigations are in advanced stages. Among them is a planned action to restrain the Federal Government from implementing newly enacted tax laws that would impose additional burdens on citizens, pending a transparent accounting of previously collected tax revenues.
Another impending suit is expected to challenge the electricity tariff regime, particularly the classification of consumers into bands. PIAN contends that the ‘banding’ system is discriminatory, exploitative and unconstitutional, claiming Nigeria is unique in billing electricity consumers in such a manner.
Scanned copies of the originating summonses in the current cases are to be circulated to PIAN members for detailed scrutiny. As the legal battles unfold, they are likely to ignite robust national debate on equity, governance and the true cost and purpose of public office in Nigeria.
