Law officers in Lagos State have backed the proposed five-year extension of their retirement age from 60 to 65 years, arguing that the measure would bring their conditions of service in line with those of Magistrates.

They also argued that it will give legal backing to an existing government-approved harmonisation policy.

The proposal, contained in the planned amendment of the Lagos State Magistrates’ Court Law, 2015, has generated debate over whether the extension amounts to a new privilege for Law Officers or is part of a policy already approved and partially implemented by the state government.

The harmonisation policy was approved by the Lagos State Government in October 2021, after which implementation commenced.

Under the arrangement, State Counsel began receiving Security and Insurance Allowances similar to those enjoyed by Magistrates, while Responsibility Allowance was also expected to be implemented.

Supporters of the proposed amendment said the retirement-age extension should therefore be viewed as part of the process of completing the harmonisation of the conditions of service of Law Officers and Magistrates.

They also linked the proposal to changes in the retirement age of High Court Judges.

In 2023, the retirement age of High Court Judges was increased from 65 to 70 years following a constitutional amendment.

The development extended the period for which High Court Judges could remain in office but also reduced the number of vacancies that would ordinarily arise on the Bench.

Before the amendment, the retirement of High Court Judges at 65 was expected to create vacancies that could provide opportunities for qualified and experienced Chief Magistrates and Directors of Law to be considered for elevation to the High Court.

However, with High Court Judges now able to remain in service until 70, experienced Chief Magistrates and Directors of Law may reach the age of 60 and retire without having an opportunity.

Supporters of the proposed five-year extension said allowing Law Officers to remain in service until 65 would help retain experienced personnel and preserve institutional knowledge within the justice sector.

Monday Akasike, one of those backing the proposal, said the current amendment did not represent the beginning of the harmonisation policy.

“This is not a policy that started with the present amendment. The government had already approved the harmonisation and implementation had commenced. What is before the Assembly is essentially about giving the policy the necessary legal backing,” he said.

Evans Ufeli, a lawyer, said retaining experienced Law Officers would be beneficial to the state because of the knowledge they had acquired over years of handling government litigation, policies, legislation and transactions.

“The state cannot afford to lose experienced lawyers overnight when they have spent decades acquiring knowledge of government litigation, policies, legislation and transactions. That institutional knowledge has value and should be preserved where the officer is still capable and useful,” he said.

Maxwell Udoh, a lawyer and human rights activist, said Lagos would not be establishing an entirely new arrangement if the amendment was passed, noting that other states had adopted similar legislation.

“The idea of harmonising the conditions of service of Law Officers with those of Magistrates is not peculiar to Lagos. Other states have adopted similar legislative frameworks, which shows that there is already a precedent for the policy,” he said.

Bamidele Babatunde, another supporter, said concerns that extending the retirement age could limit opportunities for younger officers could be addressed through effective succession planning.

Law Officers and Magistrates, however, perform different functions.

While Magistrates exercise judicial powers, State Counsel work within the executive arm of government and handle government litigation, provide legal advice, draft legislation and undertake other legal transactions on behalf of the state.

Supporters of the proposal said the difference in their functions did not prevent the harmonisation of their conditions of service.

They also cited similar arrangements in other states.

Abia State enacted the Law Officers Harmonization with Magistrates Law, 2008, providing for the salaries and conditions of service of Law Officers to correspond with those of Magistrates in equivalent posts.

Kogi State has also legislated on the harmonisation of the conditions of service of Law Officers with Magistrates and specified judicial offices.

Benue State operates under its Legal Officers (Harmonisation of Conditions of Service with Magistrates, etc.) Law, while Imo State has a similar legal framework. Kwara State has also operated a harmonisation arrangement involving Law Officers and Magistrates.

The proposal has, however, raised questions about the legislative vehicle being used to effect the change.

Law Officers are members of the Lagos State Ministry of Justice, while Magistrates belong to the Judiciary. Critics have therefore questioned why the conditions of service of Law Officers should be addressed through an amendment to the Magistrates’ Court Law.

Supporters of the proposal argued that the Magistrates’ conditions of service were being used as the benchmark for the harmonisation arrangement.

They, however, acknowledged that the Lagos State House of Assembly could review the wording and structure of the proposed amendment to ensure that it provides an appropriate legal framework for the policy.

The proposed amendment is consequently expected to place before the Assembly broader questions around the retention of experienced legal officers, career progression and succession planning within Lagos State’s justice sector. (Guardian)