ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

In recent months, debates have intensified around a controversial bill before the National Assembly proposing the exit of the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) from the Contributory Pension Scheme (CPS) and the establishment of a separate Police Pension Board. While the agitation is driven by valid frustrations over the low pensions currently received by retired police officers, experts and stakeholders warn that the proposed solution risks plunging the country back into a dark era of fiscal inefficiency, delayed payments, and mismanagement.

The issues with Nigeria’s old Defined Benefit Scheme (DBS), where pensions were paid directly by the government, are well documented. Under that system, retirees often went unpaid for months, some even died waiting. This spurred the 2004 Pension Reform Act and the birth of the CPS, a modern, transparent, and accountable system that ensures pensions are paid monthly from professionally managed Retirement Savings Accounts (RSAs). Retirees under CPS, including police officers, now receive pensions regularly between the 14th and 18th of every month.

Yet, for all its benefits, the CPS has not resolved the issue of pension adequacy, especially for low-ranking officers. Many retired Assistant Superintendents of Police reportedly earn as little as ₦40,000–₦50,000 per month, while retired Commissioners of Police receive around ₦70,000, a far cry from what is needed for a dignified retirement after years of service under harsh and dangerous conditions. But experts argue that abandoning CPS is not the solution.

Security experts, pension professionals, and human rights advocates have spoken with one voice: the CPS needs reform and strengthening, not abandonment. According to Ivo Takor, a former NASU president and director of the Centre for Pension Rights Advocacy, “The problem is not the structure of CPS, but poor remuneration. Exiting CPS with a poor salary structure will only reproduce the same result, low pensions.” He added that CPS remains the best framework to ensure transparency, fiscal responsibility, and long-term sustainability.

Furthermore, Section 4(4)(a) of the Pension Reform Act empowers employers to provide additional benefits at retirement. This opens the door for the Federal Government to supplement the pensions of police personnel in a structured and lawful manner. PenCom has already proposed several enhancements, including increasing the employer’s contribution from 10% to 20%, making a total of 28% monthly (20% employer + 8% employee), up from the current 18%. This would go a long way toward achieving adequacy in pension payments.

The responsibility of improving the welfare of police retirees lies squarely with the government of the day. Rather than legislating a detour that threatens to undo two decades of pension reforms, the federal government should take bold steps to improve CPS for those who serve under the most challenging conditions.

Key among the necessary steps is to increase police salaries so that both take-home pay and pensions rise proportionally. Pension is a function of salary; poor earnings during service inevitably translate into poor pension outcomes. It is only just that the government aligns the reward with the risk, stress, and sacrifice that come with policing.

Secondly, the government must increase its monthly contributions to police RSAs from the statutory 10% to 20%, while also ensuring that the proposed reintroduction of gratuity payments, a lump-sum retirement benefit of up to 100% of the officer’s annual gross pay, is implemented. This plan, recently announced by PenCom’s Director General, Ms. Omolola Oloworaran, is a forward-thinking intervention, estimated to cost ₦35 billion annually.

To further tailor the CPS to the police’s unique needs, the NPF Pensions Limited was established in 2014 as a specialised Pension Fund Administrator (PFA) for the Nigeria Police Force. It operates independently of public service red tape, employs pension professionals, and is already delivering results. Initiatives such as the Retiree Resettlement Support Scheme (RRSS) and the Pension Augmentation Fund provide additional support to retired police officers, demonstrating the potential for continuous improvement within the CPS.

Moreover, pensioners under CPS enjoy guaranteed payment backed by regulation. Sections 4(5) and 84 of the PRA ensure minimum pension payments and life insurance coverage, respectively, providing both financial stability and dignity in retirement.

Supporters of the bill cite precedents in the military and intelligence services that exited CPS. However, these arguments overlook the financial strain that such exits impose on government budgets. As pointed out by experts, reviving a separate Police Pension Board would likely lead to fiscal indiscipline, mismanagement, and payment delays, issues the CPS was specifically designed to eliminate.

Furthermore, internalising pension management within the police command could open the door to abuse and non-transparent practices. Professional oversight by licensed PFAs under PenCom ensures accountability, regulatory compliance, and financial growth of pension assets through investment returns.

From a constitutional perspective, Section 173(1) of the 1999 Constitution guarantees the right of public servants, including police officers, to pensions regulated by law. This right must be implemented equitably. The doctrine of equal protection under the law (Section 42) also requires that police officers are not subjected to inferior retirement conditions compared to their counterparts in other security agencies.

The government cannot afford to abandon a functioning system simply because it needs fine-tuning. Rather, it should leverage the CPS’s strengths and improve weak areas, starting with funding and political will. From PenCom to police management, from pension advocacy groups to legal experts, the consensus is clear: keep the police within the CPS, reform it from within, and increase contributions and benefits to reflect the true cost of public service.

Senator Binos Yaroe, who sponsored the bill, rightly noted that poor pensions stem from poor salaries. However, the solution is not to pull out of CPS; it is to contribute more to it. The CPS is not the enemy. Inadequate funding is. As the bill awaits further legislative action, the onus is now on the Federal Government to act responsibly: protect the reform, fund the future, and deliver justice to those who risk their lives to protect the nation. Let history not remember us as the generation that unravelled a working system, but as the one that fixed it.

● Micheal Manson contributed this piece from Lagos.