CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PENSION BENEFITS – SHOULD THE PUBLIC OFFICERS PROTECTION ACT BAR A PENSIONER’S CLAIM?

ABSTRACT

The issue of unpaid pension and other related issues have culminated in disputes which the courts have decided either in favour of the erring employer or the retiree. Oftentimes, the public service of the state, as an employer of labour, is a party to such suits. A usual argument often made in such suits, wherein the employer is the public service of a state, is that the Public Officers Protection Law of that state (a law derived through the domestication of the Public Officers Protection Act) bars the claim of the retired employee where such claim is not instituted within the period of three months from the accrual of the cause of action. The position of the court on this point has been divided. On one hand, the courts, while considering some exceptions, have held that the statute applies. On the other hand, the courts have held that it would not apply on the ground that the right to pension benefits of an employee in the public service of a state is guaranteed under section 210 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).  The rationale for the latter position is that the statute is contrary to the intention contained in section 210(2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended). The Public Officers Protection Act and the Public Officers Protection Law could be said to be a clog in the wheel of justice in Nigeria. An apt question is whether these statutes should bar a claim for pension benefits of an employee in the public service? The finding in this study puts the answer in the negative. This is based on the fact that the right to pension benefits of a retired employee in the public service is protected under sections 173 and 210 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended). Thus, a claim which borders on a breach of any of these constitutional provisions should not be statute-barred.