Pension Payment: Court slates May 19 for judgement on suit against FG

Forum 1 year ago

Pension Payment: Court slates May 19 for judgement on suit against FG

The National Industrial Court sitting in Abuja, on Tuesday, fixed May 19 to deliver judgement on a suit that aggrieved retirees from the six geo-political zones of the country, filed against the Federal Government over alleged discrimination in the payment of pension.

The suit, marked: NICN/ABJ/CS/1310/2022, which was brought before the court by eight plaintiffs, is specifically challenging FG’s alleged refusal to review or increase the entitlement of civil servants that retired under the Contributory Pension Scheme, CPC, since 2014.

The plaintiffs- Chike Ogbechie, Hajiya Fatima Ahmad, Olarewaju Ale, Vitas Ajaegbu, Alhaji Abubakar Giza, Samuel Oladosu Ajayi, Dama Peter Douglas and Alhaji Muhammed Maccido- maintained that having put into the civil service, the minimum mandatory period for gratuity before the 2014 Pension Act came into effect, they ought to be entitled to their gratuities.

They urged the court to declare that FG was discriminatory when it refused to review their pensions upward, in line with the provisions of Section 173 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.

Besides, the retirees, through their team of lawyers led by Chief Chiezonu Okpoko, SAN, prayed the court to determine the legality and applicability of Section 173 of the Constitution, Pension Acts of 2004 and 2014, as well as circulars that were subsequently issued by federal government agencies, relating to pension implementations.

Cited as defendants in the matter are the Attorney General of the Federation, the Minister of Labour and Employment, the Minister of Finance, Budget and National Planning, the Head of Civil Service of the Federation, the Director General, National Pension Commission, and the Chairman, National Salaries, Incomes and Wages Commission.

Among reliefs the litigants want from the court, include; a declaration that by the provisions of Section 1 of the Pension Reform Act 2004, re-enacted by the provisions of Section 3 of the Pension Reform Act 2014, the Federal Government introduced and established the Contributory Pension Scheme (CPS) to apply to all employees in the Federal Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) and the private sector.

“Declaration that by virtue of section 173 (3) of the 1999 Constitution, the pension shall be reviewed every five years or together with any Federal Civil Service salary reviews whichever is earlier.

“A declaration that by the plain language of section 173 (3) of the 1999 Constitution, the maximum period for review of pensions is five years.”

They further want a declaration “that the defendants are the relevant agents of the Federal Government that formulate government policies on pensions and supervise the implementation of the policies in the discharge of their respective duties.

“Declaration that it is discriminatory against the provisions of section 173 (3) of the 1999 Constitution for the defendants to have reviewed and increased salaries in the civil service with similar review and increment of the old Pension Scheme three times but excluded the Pensions in the Contributory Pension Scheme (CPS) to the detriment of the plaintiffs and all retirees under the CPS.

“Declaration that the failure of the defendants to review and increase pensions in the Contributory Pension Scheme in violation of section 173 (3) of the 1999 Constitution is detrimental to the entitlements of the plaintiffs and all the officers that retired from the Civil Service of the Federation under the Contributory Pension Scheme and that the failure constitutes a continuous injury to rights of the plaintiffs”.

As well as, “declaration that the rights of the plaintiffs who had served the minimum mandatory period for gratuity in 1999 when the Constitution came into force with extant pension laws provided for gratuity cannot be extinguished by the 2014 Act.”

They urged the court to declare that the Pension Reform Act, 2014 Act does not have a retrospective effect of taking away the rights that had accrued before the coming into effect of the 2014 Pension Reform Act.

More so, the plaintiffs prayed the court to issue an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants and their agents from further denying them and other retired officers of the Contributory Pension Scheme who had put into service the minimum years for gratuity before the effect of the 2014 Pension Act their earned entitlements.

Likewise, an order of mandamus compelling the defendants to compute, with immediate effect, all their financial entitlements and those of officers on Contributory Pension and their gratuity to put an end to the continuous injury being inflicted on them by the refusal to review their pension upward.

However, the defendants urged the court to dismiss the suit for want of competence and merit.

Justice Osatohanmwen Obaseki-Osaghae adjourned the matter for judgement after all the parties adopted their final briefs of argument on Tuesday.