CITIZENS COMPASS— Lagos Advocacy Group on Tuesday, reacted to a recent publication by the Honorable Attorney General of Lagos State, Dr Lawal Pedro SAN, on the proposed amendment to the Magistrates Court Law of Lagos State.
The Group argued that the press statement was totally, inaccurate, anti Lagos particularly given the fact that it suggested that the entire content of the proposed law is a Private Member’s Bill ( by Hon. Ladi Ajomale).
Comrade Yakubu Eleto, ESQ, Publicity Secretary, Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Epe, Lagos/ Convener; Lagos Advocacy Group, disclosed this in a statement which reads:
Our attention has been drawn to the recent publication made by the office of the Honorable Attorney General of Lagos State Dr Lawal Pedro SAN and we most respectfully wish to make this clarification that the released Press Statement is totally, inaccurate, anti LAGOS particularly given the fact that the post suggests that the entire content of the proposed law is a Private Member’s Bill ( by Hon. Ladi Ajomale).
It is germane to recall that Hon. Ladi Ajomale, Chairman, House Committee on Judiciary, Human Rights, Public Petitions and LASIEC, while introducing the Bill and making his submissions on the floor of the House never included “ Law Officers” neither did Hon. Bonu Solomon Saanu on the same subject matter and there are video recordings of the distinguished Legislators on the internet attesting to this and we think it behoves on these distinguished Legislators to respond to the assertion of the Attorney-General to prove legislative integrity and in-depth understanding of the constitution on the need to at all times separate the Judiciary from the Executive.
Also during the Public Hearing on the Bill, the Deputy Speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly noted , after several criticisms of the inclusion of Law Officers in the Bill, which is a proposed amendment to the Magistrate’s Court Law, by stakeholders stated that the inclusion would be unconstitutional and the house, our house is mindful of separation of powers.
It is therefore surprising to read from the Attorney-General in person who neither attended the public hearing or at least sent representatives on his behalf to post on Facebook/Social Media in favour of the ‘’Private Member’s Bill”.
In another vein, the Attorney-General’s Press Statement may not after all be totally surprising to many observers after reading a similar publication at Page 4 of the Nation’s Newspaper of 7th September, 2026.
What is however disturbing to note is the latter referred publication quoted support from Lawyers who purportedly supported the extension of retirement age to Law Officers. The alleged lawyers are one Monday Akasike and Evans Ufordi who are not known Law Officers of Lagos State Ministry of Justice or Magistrates of the Lagos State Judiciary nor included on the Lawyers Platform of the Nigeria Bar Association or even have enrollment numbers and it is becoming obvious that the age extension for Law Officers is being sponsored by certain persons for their selfish interests for which the Executive as a whole, the Legislature and Judiciary must beware of being used for this narrow purpose.
Indeed, If the intended benefit of the amendment is desirable to the Executive arm of the Government, why then did it not propose this bill as Executive Bill, instead of it being proposed by a private member of the Legislature?
Harmonization of salary and allowances of State Counsel with Magistrates alluded to by the Attorney General was not done by any Law in Lagos State but through Policy implementation which required the Governor’s approval only.
The principal legislation being sought to be amended is the Magistrate’s Court Law which covers only Magistrates in Lagos State and Magistrates Courts at larger and one would naturally reason how do Law Officers fit into this?
To further expose the inherent illogicality and the invitation to absurdity embedded in the argument being canvassed, the purported harmonisation becomes untenable when tested against the actual realities of the situation. Investigations reveal that a Law Officer appointed from the Ministry of Justice to the Magistracy is, in practice, downgraded to Grade Level 10, notwithstanding the fact that such an officer may have previously attained Grade Level 13 or even Grade Level 14.
It is therefore difficult, if not impossible, to reconcile this glaring anomaly with the assertion that the Law is intended to harmonise the conditions of service of Magistrates and Law Officers. Indeed, a purported harmonisation which results in the loss of an officer’s previously attained grade and a corresponding diminution in status and benefits cannot, by any reasonable or logical interpretation, be described as harmonisation. Rather, it produces the very inequality and inequity which the purported legislative objective seeks to eliminate.
The absurdity is even more pronounced when an officer’s years of service, experience, rank, and previously attained grade are effectively disregarded upon appointment to the Magistracy. Such an outcome does not merely undermine the rationale for harmonisation; it renders the claimed objective of the Law internally contradictory and practically indefensible. One cannot, with any degree of rationality, profess to be harmonising conditions of service while simultaneously subjecting one category of officers to a substantial diminution in their established grade and attendant entitlements.
The question that therefore arises is: what meaningful purpose does the purported harmonisation serve if its practical effect is to place an otherwise senior Law Officer on a significantly lower grade upon appointment to the Magistracy? Such an interpretation would not only defeat the very essence of harmonisation but would also produce an outcome so manifestly unreasonable as to invite the very absurdity which a purposive interpretation of the Law ought to avoid.
Shockingly, the Attorney-General failed to appreciate the basis for the criticisms by right thinking and well-meaning Lagosians when he referred to similar legislations from other States. The unconstitutionality legislated by other States must not be replicated by Lagos State, the Centre of Excellence. There must be clear separation of powers and independence of the Judiciary from the Executive, in particular and as such Magistrates and Law Officers, appointed under different laws, to serve separate arms of governments should maintain their clear distinction.
Needless to say, Law Officers in Lagos State are deserving of all the packages previously highlighted in this piece and not necessarily to be squeezed into a Law to extend their retirement age. They deserve befitting salaries and allowances for their invaluable service to the cause of the State Government.
The Lagos State House of Assembly is called upon to preserve its legislative integrity and to avoid legislative summersault by engendering true independence between the Judiciary and the Executive and not waste legislative resources on any selfish, self centered piece of legislation that is crisis prone, unconstitutional, lacks utility and eventually waste legislative resources. Any provision bordering on Law Officers should be excluded from the Bill while the Attorney-General should concentrate on improving the welfare of Law Officers by the ways provided by Law and policy.
