The Association of Legislative Drafting and Advocacy Practitioners (ALDRAP), representing professional staff of the National Assembly, has formally taken legal action to contest a bill that seeks to increase the retirement age for legislative civil servants.
Background: Changes to Retirement Age
Previously, National Assembly staff retired at age 60 or after 35 years of service, whichever came first. The recently passed legislation proposes to extend retirement to age 65 or 40 years of service.
ALDRAP contends that this change grants National Assembly staff preferential treatment not afforded to employees in other federal ministries. Several senators, including Enyinnaya Abaribe (Abia South), and Ali Ndume, have also raised concerns about the potential for inequitable advantages under the new rules.
Legal Challenge: Constitutional Procedure
ALDRAP has filed a case at the National Industrial Court, arguing that the proper procedure for such a change is a constitutional amendment under Section 9 of the 1999 Constitution, not ordinary legislation under Section 58.
The association emphasizes that Section 318 of the Constitution references National Assembly staff, including the Clerk, and therefore any significant adjustments to their retirement terms must follow the formal constitutional amendment process.
Precedent: Judicial Retirement Reforms
ALDRAP points to recent reforms in the judiciary as precedent. The Fifth Alteration (No. 37) Act of 2023, which adjusted retirement ages for certain judicial officers, was enacted through a constitutional amendment. The association argues that a similar rigorous process should apply to legislative staff.
Relief Sought
ALDRAP is asking the court to:
-
Maintain the existing retirement rules of 60 years or 35 years of service until the constitutional process is properly observed.
-
Prevent the President from signing the new bill into law.
The association asserts that the bill, if enacted without proper procedure, violates constitutional provisions, undermines public service regulations, and increases government costs.
Statement from ALDRAP
“ALDRAP’s challenge is grounded in a deep respect for the 1999 Constitution,” said a spokesperson. “If the Constitution implicitly protects National Assembly staff, the courts must uphold that protection and strike down any law that circumvents the proper amendment process.”
