A proposed amendment to the Lagos State Magistrates’ Court Law has sparked controversy over the inclusion of state counsel in a provision dealing with the retirement of magistrates.
The development followed concerns raised by the Lagos Advocacy Group over what it described as an attempt to introduce provisions concerning Law Officers into legislation principally dealing with the Magistracy and Magistrates’ Courts.
A copy of the proposed amendment cited by our correspondent shows that the bill seeks to amend the Magistrates’ Court Law of Lagos State, 2015, including provisions on retirement, monetary jurisdiction and the jurisdiction of the Chief Judge.
One of the provisions attracting attention is the definition of a “Law Officer.”
According to the document cited by our correspondent, the bill defines a Law Officer as “all Counsel appointed into the Lagos State Public Service.”
The proposed amendment further provides that, notwithstanding the Lagos State Public Service Rules or any other law of the state, a Magistrate appointed under Section 4 of the law and a Law Officer duly employed in the State Public Service shall cease to hold office upon attaining the age of 65 years or completing 40 years in service, whichever comes first.
It is this provision that the Lagos Advocacy Group has questioned, arguing that Magistrates and Law Officers belong to constitutionally and administratively distinct structures.
In a statement signed by its Convener, Comrade Yakubu Eleto, Esq., who is also Publicity Secretary of the Nigerian Bar Association, Epe Branch, the group said Magistrates are officers of the Judiciary, while Law Officers are public servants attached to the Ministry of Justice and operate within the Lagos State Public Service.
The group said it had no objection to efforts aimed at improving the conditions of service of Magistrates, including the proposed extension of their retirement age and years of service.
It, however, questioned the rationale for including state counsel in the same provision.
According to the group, if the government considers it necessary to extend the retirement age and years of service of Law Officers, such a policy should be pursued through the appropriate legislative and administrative framework rather than through an amendment to legislation governing the Magistrates’ Court.
The advocacy group also questioned whether extending the proposed benefit to Law Officers would create an issue of fairness when compared with other professionals working in the Lagos State Public Service.
It specifically mentioned doctors, healthcare professionals, engineers, teachers, accountants, planners, surveyors, architects and administrators, arguing that their expertise is also critical to the development and functioning of the state.
The group said: “If the argument is that Law Officers deserve an extension of their years of service from 35 to 40 years and their retirement age from 60 to 65 years, then the same question must be asked: What makes Law Officers so uniquely deserving that they should be singled out from other professionals serving the Lagos State Public Service?”
The organisation also urged the Lagos State House of Assembly to subject the proposed amendment to closer legislative scrutiny, particularly the provisions relating to Law Officers.
It called on the Governor of Lagos State and the Speaker of the House of Assembly to reconsider the provisions extending the retirement age and years of service to Law Officers through the proposed amendment.
However, the document cited by our correspondent shows that the bill contains other proposed changes that relate directly to the Magistrates’ Court.
For instance, the proposed amendment to Section 28 seeks to increase the monetary limits contained in the relevant provisions from N10 million to N25 million.
The bill also proposes the deletion and replacement of Section 30 of the principal law under a new provision titled “Power to Increase Jurisdiction.”
Under the proposed provision, the Chief Judge may, by notice published in the Gazette, increase the jurisdiction to be exercised under the law.
The Lagos Advocacy Group welcomed the proposed reforms relating to the Magistracy, particularly the increase in monetary jurisdiction.
It also said the proposal to extend the retirement age and years of service of Magistrates deserved consideration, citing the importance of experience in the administration of justice.
The group, however, said reforms concerning Magistrates should be accompanied by improvements in their welfare.
It alleged that some Magistrates still do not have official vehicles and are compelled to commute themselves to work using motorcycles, tricycles or taxis, despite having served for years.
The group consequently urged that the welfare of Magistrates should form part of the proposed reforms, including a provision requiring that official vehicles be provided to newly appointed Magistrates within three months of their appointment.
The controversy therefore centres not on the proposed improvement of the Magistracy itself, but on the decision to define “Law Officer” broadly and place such officers within the retirement provision contained in the Magistrates’ Court Law.
The bill, however, remains a proposal and its provisions could be amended, retained or withdrawn during legislative consideration.
The Lagos State House of Assembly may therefore be expected to clarify the legislative intention behind the inclusion of the Law Officers provision and whether it is intended to create a new retirement framework for state counsel or align an existing public service arrangement with the proposed amendment.
Culled: INDEPENDENT