Connect with us

News

Aggrieved Police Officers Demand PSC Compliance with Court Judgment on Appointment Regularization

Published

on

Aggrieved Police Officers Demand PSC Compliance with Court Judgment on Appointment Regularization

By: Zagazola Makama

Aggrieved police officers from Courses 33, 34, and 35 of the Police Academy have kicked against any attempt to forcefully retire them from service and called on the Police Service Commission (PSC) to immediately comply with the judgment of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria (NICN), which ordered the regularization of their first appointment dates.

It would be recalled that the PSC at a meeting in Abuja earlier this month ordered the immediate retirement of all senior police officers who have either exceeded 35 years in service or are above the age of 60.

The spokesman of the commission, Ikechukwu Ani, recalled that the Commission at its 24th Plenary Meeting of 27th and 28th September 2017, approved that the Force Entrants should have their date of appointment in the Force against the date of their enlistment.

The Commission revisited their decision and has come to the conclusion that the said decision in its intent and purpose contradicted the principle of a merger of service in the public service, and it is in violation of Public Service Rule No 020908 (i & ii) which provides for retirement on the attainment of 35 years in service or 60 years of age.

“Accordingly, the Commission at its 1st extraordinary meeting of the 6th Management Board held today, Friday, 31st January 2025, approved the immediate retirement of those officers who have spent more than 35 years in service and those above 60 years of age,” Ani had said.

But the aggrieved officers argued that, Despite the April 19, 2022, ruling and subsequent reinforcement of the judgment on February 4, 2025, the officers alleged that the PSC has failed to implement the directive, thereby denying them their rightful ranks, promotions, and entitlements.

Recalled that in 2021, The officers, led by CSP Egong Egwu Egong, CSP Omeh Felix Okechukwu, CSP Paul Obot Umoh, and SP Galadima Bello, won a legal battle in Suit No. NICN/ABJ/281/2021, in which the court ruled that their first appointment date should be the date they entered the Police Academy, not when enlisted as recruit constable.

The National Industrial Court, presided over by Justice O. A. Obaseki Osaghae, reaffirmed in its latest sitting that the PSC and the Nigeria Police Force must recognize the officers’ first appointment dates as follows: Course 33 – June 10, 1994, Course 34 – August 6, 1996, Course 35 – May 1, 2000

The court also ordered that: The decision of the PSC at its 24th Plenary Meeting regularizing the officers’ appointment dates remains valid and binding. The officers’ records must reflect their correct first appointment dates as per the court ruling. The premature retirement of some affected officers must be reversed, and they should be paid their full entitlements.

The PSC and the Police Force are restrained from unlawfully retiring officers of Courses 33, 34, and 35 before their actual due dates.

However, During a recent court proceeding, counsel for the officers, Adeleke Agbola (SAN), informed the court that the PSC had issued a circular contradicting the judgment by insisting that the officers’ first appointment date would be based on their commissioning date, not their academy entry date.

Agbola argued that this action amounted to contempt of court, as the judgment had not been appealed and remained binding on all parties. He urged the court to maintain the status quo and proceed with committal proceedings against the PSC for non-compliance.

In response, counsel for the PSC, Ade Adedeji (SAN), assured the court that the defendants intended to comply with the judgment, stating that there was no pending appeal challenging the ruling. He also noted that steps had been taken to post the affected officers accordingly and that the PSC had no intention of undermining the court’s decision.

The court adjourned the matter to March 18, 2025, for a report on full compliance or hearing of contempt proceedings against the PSC.

Following the court session, the aggrieved officers have urged the PSC to immediately implement the judgment, update their service records, reinstate unlawfully retired officers, and grant them their due promotions and benefits.

They warned that continued delay would amount to willful disobedience of a valid court order, which could lead to legal consequences for the PSC and police authorities.

The officers further called on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the Inspector-General of Police, and the Attorney General of the Federation to intervene and ensure that justice is served in line with the rule of law.

Background to the Dispute

The case dates back to longstanding grievances by police officers of Courses 33, 34, and 35, who argued that while their colleagues in similar categories had their appointments regularized, they were denied the same recognition.

The PSC is now asking for their retirement despite the National Industrial Court ruling which was disobeyed or delayed by the concerned authorities. This delays in implementation have left the officers frustrated and seeking further legal enforcement.

With the next court hearing scheduled for March 18, 2025, all eyes are on the PSC and the Nigeria Police Force to see whether they will comply with the judgment or face contempt proceedings.

Aggrieved Police Officers Demand PSC Compliance with Court Judgment on Appointment Regularization

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

VP Shettima Attends High-Level Meeting On Africa’s Health Security Sovereignty

Published

on

VP Shettima Attends High-Level Meeting On Africa’s Health Security Sovereignty

By: Our Reporter

Shortly after his bilateral discussions with United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, Vice President Kashim Shettima moved on to a high-level meeting on Building Africa’s Health Security Sovereignty on the sidelines of the African Union Summit in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

The session, organized by Africa CDC and fully supported by the Nigerian government, convenes African leaders and health policymakers to chart the path toward strengthening the continent’s health emergency preparedness, response systems, and pharmaceutical independence.

Joining the Vice President at the meeting are key Nigerian officials including the Coordinating Minister of Health and Social Welfare, Prof. Muhammad Ali Pate, and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Amb. Yussuf Tuggar.

Other African health ministers in attendance include Dr. Ibrahim Sy of Senegal, Madalisto Baloyi of Malawi, and Dr. Mekdes Daba of Ethiopia.

VP Shettima Attends High-Level Meeting On Africa’s Health Security Sovereignty

Continue Reading

News

ISWAP suspected in Baga abduction of five civilians

Published

on

ISWAP suspected in Baga abduction of five civilians

By: Zagazola Makama

Five civilians were abducted on Feb. 12, 2026, by suspected Boko Haram/ISWAP terrorists in Doro Baga, Kukawa Local Government Area, Borno State, the Police Command reported.

Sources disclosed that the victims, Alhaji Sani Boyi, Bullama Dan Umaru, Baba Inusa, Abubakar Jan Boris, and Mallam Shaibu, were taken while purchasing fresh fish at a local market around 7:00 a.m.

The troops of Sector 3 Operation HADIN KAI, Civilian Joint Task Force (CJTF)/hunters immediately responded to the incident.

Relevant intelligence has been gathered, and search and rescue operations are ongoing to secure the release of the victims.

ISWAP suspected in Baga abduction of five civilians

Continue Reading

News

Is Russia Immune to Media Scrutiny in Africa?

Published

on

Is Russia Immune to Media Scrutiny in Africa?

•Press freedom, sovereignty and Africa’s refusal to be silence

By Oumarou Sanou

A dangerous precedent is emerging across Africa’s diplomatic and media landscape: the public targeting of individual journalists by foreign missions for simply asking difficult questions. The recent pattern of responses from the Russian Embassy in Nigeria toward African journalists and media platforms raises deeper concerns, not only about geopolitics but also about press freedom, sovereignty, and the dignity of African voices.

Bullying a single African journalist through official diplomatic channels is not merely a disagreement; it is an intolerable affront to free expression. Journalism exists to question power, whether domestic or foreign. When embassies shift from presenting facts to publicly discrediting individuals, the implication is clear: criticism will be punished personally rather than debated professionally. Today it is one journalist; tomorrow it could be an entire media ecosystem.

In recent months, respected outlets, including Premium Times, THISDAY, The Guardian Nigeria, and Leadership Newspaper, have faced unusually harsh diplomatic rebukes after publishing critical analyses. Prominent commentators such as Azu Ishiekwene and Richard Akinnola, as well as Oumarou Sanou, have also been singled out. Instead of counter-evidence, the response has often been personal accusations and insinuations of hidden sponsors. That approach undermines constructive dialogue and erodes trust in diplomatic engagement.

Let us be clear: journalists are human and can make mistakes. Professional reporting welcomes correction. If the facts are incorrect, present evidence, make the data open, and allow readers to judge. Insults, calumny and attempts to destroy professional reputations are not rebuttals; they are attempts to silence scrutiny. No foreign government should expect immunity from questioning on African soil.

Africa’s position in the evolving global order must remain principled and independent. Africans are not invested in the confrontation between Russia and the West; it is not our war. A genuine Pan-African perspective demands equal scrutiny of all external powers. If tomorrow credible evidence emerges that Britain, France, America, China or any other actor is recruiting Africans into foreign conflicts under deceptive pretence, the same criticism must apply. The principle is simple: African lives are not expendable tools in geopolitical struggles.

Reports of African nationals—including Nigerians—fighting and dying thousands of miles away in foreign wars raise serious ethical and security questions. Whether through informal networks, deceptive job offers, or shadow recruitment channels, African citizens are being drawn into conflicts that do not belong to them. Journalists who expose these risks are not attacking any nation; they are protecting their fellow Africans from exploitation and preventable tragedy.

Kenya’s recent stance offers a compelling example. Kenyan authorities publicly condemned the recruitment of their citizens into foreign conflicts and moved to close illegal agencies while seeking diplomatic explanations. That response signals a broader African awakening: governments must prioritise the safety and dignity of their citizens over the sensitivities of powerful partners. Nigeria and other African states would do well to adopt similar vigilance.

Beyond individual cases lies a deeper philosophical question. Neocolonialism today is not defined by flags or territorial control but by influence, dependency and narrative domination. Great powers—East or West—sometimes behave as though African voices must align with their geopolitical agendas. This assumption is unacceptable. Africans have their own interests, challenges and aspirations. We are not puppets in anyone’s strategic theatre.

Respect in diplomacy must be reciprocal. If a foreign embassy publicly attacked a journalist by name inside Moscow, Paris or Washington, would it be considered acceptable conduct? Sovereignty demands mutual respect, not selective outrage. African countries deserve the same diplomatic courtesy that global powers expect at home.

At the same time, African journalism must remain grounded in professionalism and evidence. Responsible reporting strengthens credibility and protects the integrity of public discourse. But professionalism cannot thrive in an atmosphere of intimidation. When journalists are targeted individually, the chilling effect extends far beyond the targeted individual; it discourages others from investigating sensitive issues of public concern.

The response from Africa’s media community must therefore be collective. Silence in the face of intimidation risks normalising it. Journalists, editors and civil society organisations should stand together to defend the right to ask difficult questions without fear of diplomatic retaliation. Protecting a single journalist ultimately concerns protecting the profession and safeguarding the democratic space.

Africa’s future in a multipolar world will depend on its ability to engage all partners while remaining fiercely independent. That independence begins with intellectual sovereignty: the freedom to question everyone and align with no external agenda. Whether criticism targets Russia, Western nations or any other power, the standard must remain consistent: facts over propaganda, dialogue over intimidation, and mutual respect over coercion.

No nation is above scrutiny. No African journalist should be silenced for doing the work that democracy demands.

Oumarou Sanou is a social critic, Pan-African observer and researcher focusing on governance, security, and political transitions in the Sahel. He writes on geopolitics, regional stability, and African leadership dynamics. Contact: sanououmarou386@gmail.com

Is Russia Immune to Media Scrutiny in Africa?

Continue Reading

Trending

Verified by MonsterInsights