Aggrieved Police Officers Urge Court To Hold PSC For Contempt
Some police officers of Courses 33, 34, and 35 of the Police Academy have urged the National Industrial Court to initiate committal proceedings against the Police Service Commission (PSC).
The aggrieved officers said that the PSC has refused to implement the ruling of the court given since April 19, 2022 directing it to regularise their first appointment dates.
They told the court that instead, the PSC 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 without taking into cognisance the ruling of the court.
“Despite the April 19, 2022, ruling and subsequent reinforcement of the judgment on February 4, 2025, the PSC has failed to implement the directive, thereby denying us our rightful ranks, promotions, and entitlements.”
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 by Justice O. A. Obaseki Osaghae, however said 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 court restrained the PSC and the Police Force from unlawfully retiring officers of Courses 33, 34, and 35 before their actual due dates.
Counsel for the officers, Adeleke Agbola (SAN), had informed the court that the latest circular issued by the PSC contradicts the judgment by insisting that officers’ first appointment date would be based on their commissioning date not 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 therefore 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.
