Controversy has continued to trail a proposed amendment to the Magistrates Law of Lagos State seeking to alter the retirement framework for Magistrates and Law Officers, with the Lagos State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Lawal Pedro, SAN, defending the proposal while a citizens’ advocacy group has raised questions over its constitutional and institutional implications.

Pedro, in a statement issued on Monday, said the proposed amendment was not an Executive Bill sponsored by his office, but a Private Member’s Bill currently before the Lagos State House of Assembly.

He said the bill was considered to have sufficient justification, particularly in the interest of strengthening and sustaining the state’s justice sector.

According to him, the proposal is consistent with a longstanding policy of harmonising the conditions of service of Law Officers with those of Magistrates in Lagos State, a policy he said had been in existence since 1997 pursuant to a government circular dated March 20, 1997.

The Attorney-General also argued that similar arrangements existed in other states, citing Abia, Kogi, Benue, Imo, Kwara and Osun as examples of states that had adopted measures to harmonise or extend the retirement arrangements of officers involved in the administration of justice.

Pedro said the proposed amendment should therefore be viewed as a continuation of an existing policy rather than the creation of a new privilege for lawyers or Law Officers generally.

He explained that the proposal was primarily intended to address what he described as an unintended institutional consequence of the 2023 constitutional amendment that increased the retirement age of High Court judges from 65 to 70 years.

Before the constitutional amendment, Pedro said, the retirement of High Court judges at 65 created a regular pattern of vacancies that provided opportunities for experienced Chief Magistrates and senior Law Officers to progress to the High Court Bench.

He argued that the extension of the retirement age of High Court judges had reduced the number of vacancies and consequently narrowed the traditional pathway for career progression within the lower judiciary and the Ministry of Justice.

The Attorney-General said experienced Chief Magistrates and senior Law Officers could now reach the age of 60 and retire without having the opportunity to progress to the High Court, despite their experience and institutional knowledge.

He said the proposed amendment was therefore designed to correct the resulting imbalance, retain experienced personnel, facilitate succession planning and preserve institutional knowledge within the justice sector.

Under the proposed framework, a Magistrate or Law Officer would have the discretion to retire at 60 but would cease to hold office at 65 or after 40 years in service, whichever comes earlier.

Pedro maintained that the reform was not simply an extension of individual tenure but a structural response to changes brought about by the constitutional alteration of the retirement age of High Court judges.

However, the proposal has attracted criticism from Adebayo Akinlade, national convener of Citizens Support for Lower Courts, who questioned both its rationale and the manner in which it was being pursued.

Akinlade, reacting to Pedro’s statement, raised questions about the absence of the Attorney-General’s office at the public hearing on the proposed amendment and whether the Magistrates Law was the appropriate legislative vehicle for increasing the retirement age of Law Officers.

He also questioned the premise of harmonising the conditions of service of Magistrates with those of Law Officers, arguing that the two cadres occupy different institutional positions.

According to him, Magistrates belong to the Judiciary, while Law Officers are part of the Executive arm of government through the Ministry of Justice. He warned that placing them within the same legislative framework could blur the constitutional principle of separation of powers.

Akinlade further questioned whether the concept of harmonisation should extend across other arms and levels of government.

He argued that if High Court judges could be compared with other public office holders for the purpose of harmonising retirement conditions, similar arrangements could theoretically be proposed for Federal High Court judges, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court justices alongside ministers, legislators and other political office holders.

The citizens’ group convener said the more fundamental issue was the working conditions of Magistrates rather than simply extending their retirement age.

He urged the Lagos State Government to engage stakeholders in what he described as a more robust conversation on the proposal, stressing that better salaries, accommodation, transportation and general working conditions would be more effective in retaining competent judicial officers.

Akinlade argued that extending retirement ages would not, by itself, resolve challenges confronting the lower courts or improve access to justice.

He also raised concerns about corruption and the broader conditions under which Magistrates operate, contending that institutional retention of experienced personnel would have limited value if fundamental problems affecting the justice system remained unresolved.

The opposing positions have therefore brought into focus a wider debate over how Lagos State should structure career progression, remuneration, retirement and institutional independence within its justice system.

While the Attorney-General’s position is that the proposed amendment is a necessary response to the changed retirement structure of the higher judiciary and would preserve experience within the justice sector, its critics argue that the proposal raises questions about separation of powers, the appropriate legislative framework and whether improved conditions of service should take precedence over extending retirement ages.

The proposed amendment remains subject to legislative consideration by the Lagos State House of Assembly.

Dear readers, we really need your support to keep on serving you with authoritative, truthful, and juicy stories everyday. For your support, please reach out to the editor @gavelinternational66@gmail.com