The Lagos State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr Lawal Pedro, SAN, has clarified that the proposed amendment to the Magistrates Law seeking to increase the retirement age of Magistrates and Law Officers is not an Executive Bill.
Pedro made the clarification in a statement on Monday, saying the bill was a Private Member’s Bill currently before the Lagos State House of Assembly for legislative consideration.
He said the bill, having been considered to have reasonable justification in the best interest of the state, particularly in strengthening and sustaining the justice sector, was presently before the House.
“For the avoidance of doubt, the proposed amendment is not an Executive Bill and is not sponsored by the Office of the Honourable Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice.
“It is a Private Member’s Bill which, having been considered to have reasonable justification in the best interest of the State, particularly in strengthening and sustaining the justice sector, is presently before the House of Assembly for legislative consideration,” he said.
The Attorney-General said the position of his office was premised on the long-standing policy of harmonisation of the conditions of service of Law Officers with those of Magistrates in Lagos.
He said the policy had been implemented in Lagos since 1997 pursuant to a Government Circular dated March 20, 1997.
According to him, the policy is not peculiar to Lagos, as other states, including Abia, Kogi, Benue, Imo and Kwara, have enacted legislation to give effect to similar arrangements.
He said Osun State had also, through Law No. 7 of 2023, assented to on Dec. 15, 2023, increased the retirement age of officers involved in the administration of justice, including State Counsel and Court Registrars, to 65 years in a single legislation.
Pedro said the proposed amendment was necessitated by an unintended institutional consequence arising from the constitutional amendment to Section 291(1) of the 1999 Constitution, as altered by the Fifth Alteration (No. 37) Act 2023.
He said the amendment increased the retirement age of High Court Judges from 65 to 70 years.
According to him, the development has diminished vacancies on the High Court Bench, thereby narrowing the traditional pathway through which experienced Chief Magistrates and senior Law Officers could progress to the High Court.
He said the proposed amendment was intended to correct the disparity, preserve institutional knowledge, strengthen continuity and establish a more coherent and sustainable career structure.
“The proposal concerns Law Officers as a specialised professional cadre performing functions integral to the administration of justice, and not lawyers generally.
“Therefore, the proposed amendment can be characterised as the continuation of an existing policy, rather than the creation of a new privilege for Law Officers,” he said.
Pedro said the proposed amendment was expected to give officers discretion to retire at 60, while prescribing that a Magistrate or Law Officer would cease to hold office at 65 or after 40 years in service, whichever was earlier.
He urged the public to approach discourse on the bill with facts and proper understanding of its rationale, legislative origin, purpose and policy context.
