Nigeria’s democracy and adherence to constitutional principles are facing a major test with the controversial Tenure Elongation bill passed by the National Assembly seeking to increase the retirement age for parliamentary staff from 60 to 65 years. This move, which seems squarely aimed at allowing the current Clerk of the National Assembly to remain in office beyond his scheduled retirement in November 2024, raises serious red flags that demand public scrutiny.
At its core, the tenure elongation bill appears to be a self-serving piece of legislation pushed by the current National Assembly leadership to consolidate their power and potentially set a dangerous precedent of public officials extending their tenures for personal benefit. This undermines the democratic ideals of tenure limits, institutional checks and balances, and the separation of powers.
Aggrieved National Assembly staff have rightly petitioned the new President Bola Tinubu to veto this constitutionally questionable bill. Their legal arguments are quite compelling – pointing out how the constitution clearly defines the terms and conditions for the Clerk’s position, and any alteration would require a formal constitutional amendment process rather than unilateral legislative action.
The bill potentially violates multiple sections of the Nigerian Constitution protecting citizens’ rights to equality, prohibiting discrimination based on age, and upholding principles of social justice and fairness. By giving current employees preference over new entrants, it appears to breach these core constitutional tenets.
Moreover, the petitioners argue this bill oversteps the National Assembly’s bounds by encroaching on the powers of the executive branch and the National Council of Establishment, which has an advisory role on public service conditions. Such a unilateral move seems to violate the separation of powers.
From an ethics standpoint, the fact that this bill directly benefits the tenure of the current Clerk whose retirement triggered the legislation reeks of conflicts of interest and undermines public trust. The perception that it is a “pork barrel” law advancing narrow personal interests over the national interest is quite damaging for the image of the National Assembly.
While parliamentary staff clearly have genuine grievances about their terms of service that could be addressed through proper processes, this tenure elongation gambit is not the right approach. It sets a terrible precedent that could enable power hunger by opening the floodgates to all manner of public officials unilaterally extending their tenures through crafty legislation.
President Tinubu has a crucial decision to make that will signal his administration’s commitment to upholding democratic principles, respecting the Constitution, and promoting transparency and accountability in governance. The wise move would be to veto this problematic bill and ensure any future legislation follows due constitutional processes through proper channels rather than sketchy tenure elongation tactics.
The integrity of Nigeria’s democracy and adherence to the rule of law is at stake. The president must demonstrate true leadership by rejecting any semblance of personal interests superseding the national interest and constitutional order. The tenure elongation bill saga is an important early litmus test for the new administration
Reference
Tenure elongation bill: Aggrieved N/ Assembly staff petition Tinubu published in Vanguard By John Alechenu, Abuja