REINSTATEMENT OF THE 38 NIGERIAN ARMY OFFICERS THAT WERE UNLAWFULLY RETIRED IN 2016
1. Background:
a. Unjust Retirement: In June 2016, 38 senior Nigerian Army officers, including nine major generals, 11 brigadier generals, seven colonels, and 11 lieutenant colonels, were compulsorily retired by the Buhari administration under allegations of professional misconduct, corruption, and partisanship. These retirements were executed without the officers being formally queried, investigated, or tried by a court martial, which is a significant breach of due process.
b. Legal Grounds for Retirement: The retirements were based on the Harmonized Terms and Conditions of Service for Officers, which stipulates that officers can be retired for serious offences. However, in this case, the application of these terms was arbitrary as no formal charges or legal proceedings preceded the action.
c. Public Announcement and Impact: The retirement was publicly announced, causing widespread shock and concern among military personnel and the general public about the integrity of the military justice system. This action not only demoralized the serving officers but also set a precedent that could undermine military discipline and loyalty.
d. Historical Context: This incident is not isolated in Nigeria’s military history, where arbitrary retirements or dismissals have been used as tools for political control or to purge perceived dissent, reflecting a pattern seen during various military regimes in Nigeria.
2. Efforts of the Victimized Officers Thus Far:
a. Administrative Appeals: Initially, the officers attempted to seek redress through internal mechanisms within the military hierarchy and by appealing to the then President Muhammadu Buhari, but these efforts were met with silence or inaction.
b. Judicial Recourse: Several officers, having exhausted internal routes, took legal action. Various judgments from the National Industrial Court, including cases like those of Major General Ijioma Nwokoro Ijioma, Colonel Danladi Ribah Hassan, Colonel Auwal Suleiman, Lt Col TE Arigbe, Lt Col D Dazang, Lt Col A Mohammed and Lt Col AS Mohammed ruled that the retirements were illegal, ordering reinstatement with back payments for salaries and allowances.
c. Non-Compliance with Court Orders: Despite these court orders, the previous administration did not implement the rulings, showcasing a lack of respect for judicial decisions and highlighting systemic issues of non-compliance within government institutions.
d. Public Advocacy and Support: The victimization of these officers have garnered support from human rights lawyers like Femi Falana, who has publicly and legally advocated for their cause, urging the new government to uphold the rule of law by reinstating these officers.
3. Key Questions:
a. Did the Nigerian Army accuse the officers formally of committing any offence by way of issuing them a Charge before terminating their careers?
b. Did the Nigerian Army avail the senior officers fair hearing or an opportunity to defend themselves against any accusations as enshrined in both Section 36 (2) of the Constitution and in Section 117 of the Armed Forces Act?
c. If the Army says it granted fair hearing, can they provide evidence of the court martial trial dates, hearings and judgments?
d. If the Army has lost all its cases in court, why cant they obey the judgments?
e. In the case of Major General Ahmadu Mohammed, the army reinstated him in 2016 after they admitted that they failed to follow due process in retiring him, why is the same army refusing to reinstate their officers? What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
f. What are the Ministers of Justice and Defence doing to uphold justice, equity and fairness in the reinstatement of the officers?
4. Recommendations to the Current Government:
a. Immediate Reinstatement: The current government should act swiftly to reinstate the officers to the current ranks of their course mates, to restore faith in the legal system and military morale.
b. Compensation for Losses: Beyond reinstatement, the government must provide compensation for the years of service lost, including back pay, pension contributions, and any other rightful benefits, acknowledging the hardship and injustice faced by these officers.
c. Review of Military Retirement Practices: Instigate a thorough review of the military’s retirement procedures to ensure they align with legal standards of due process, transparency, and fairness, preventing future abuses of power within the military.
d. Strengthen Judicial Authority: Ensure that there are mechanisms in place for the enforcement of judicial decisions, particularly those involving the military, to prevent the culture of impunity where government bodies can ignore court rulings. This could involve legislative changes or policy reforms to enhance accountability.
5. Crucial Takeaways
a. Correcting Injustices of the Nigerian Army: In 2016, the Nigerian Army reinstated Major General Ahmadu Mohammed and issued the below press statement:
“Although, it is not an aberration for the international human rights body to raise such an observation, however, it did not take into cognizance the circumstances leading to his illegal retirement and the legal procedure that was followed in his reinstatement”.
“The compulsory and premature retirement of Major General Mohammed did not follow due process and was rather arbitrary. The senior officer was never charged, tried, let alone found guilty of any offence that justified his premature retirement”.
“The action was therefore a clear violation of extant rules, regulations, as well as Terms and Conditions of Service of the Armed Forces of Nigeria. This obvious violation prompted the senior officer to seek redress using the appropriate legal means. “Consequently, the realization of these omissions called for a review of the case by the Army Council and his subsequent reinstatement into the Service.’
If the 38 senior officers were never charged, tried or even found guilty of any offence that justified their premature retirement then why wont the Nigerian Army do the honorable, just and professional thing by reinstating the officers as it did for the Major General in 2016.
b. Human Rights and Obedience to the Laws of the Federation and the Constitution: The Nigerian Constitution affords every Nigerian fair hearing, however the Nigerian Army refused to grant its own officers this constitutional right and is now enforcing impunity and injustice. Would any of the Defenceand Army Leadership like this injustice to have been meted out on them??
c. Failure of Defence and Judiciary Leadership: This reflects the inability of the Ministers of Justice and Defence to ensure the compliance of the Nigerian Army to court judgments. This is an example of why the western world have little regard for our Defence and Army Leadership as displayed recently. These countries have high ethical and professional standards coupled with respect for human rights and demand the same from their partners as part of global best practices. They don’t want to be associated with people who have no respect for rule of law and human rights.
What are the Ministers of Justice and Defence and even the NSA doing to uphold justice, equity and fairness in the reinstatement of the officers? Why isn’t there an investigation to uncover what happened??
This is a big opportunity for this government to correct injustices meted out on these Nigerian Army officers, uphold rule of law and strengthen the democratic pillars of government as well as restore the professional reputation and integrity of the Nigerian Army.
Over to you, Ministers of Justice and Defence.
These recommendations provide a structured approach for the current government to address this historical injustice, rectify it, and prevent similar issues in the future.
