Pensionless: How six governors are violating the constitution and failing workers

By Ivo Takor, mni
ViceChairman/Chairman Human Rights Committee,
Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Epe

ACROSS the world, social security is recognised as a fundamental human right, one that governments are obliged to guarantee and protect. International instruments such as the ILO Declaration of Philadelphia, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the Social Security (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1952 (No. 102) affirm this obligation. At the national level, pension remains the most visible expression of this right.

In Nigeria, the 1999 Constitution (as amended) anchors this entitlement firmly. Section 210(1) stipulates that the rights of persons in the public service of a state to receive pension or gratuity shall be regulated by law, while subsection (2) prohibits the withholding or alteration of such entitlement to the detriment of beneficiaries, except under clearly defined conditions.

Yet, despite this explicit constitutional guarantee, thousands of state workers and retirees remain stranded without protection, victims of a two-decade governance failure perpetuated by six states of the federation.

Prior to the landmark Pension Reform Act (PRA) 2004, pension administration across all tiers of government, Federal, FCT, States, and Local Governments, was governed by the Pension Act of 1990, which provided a unified statutory framework.

The enactment of the PRA 2004 fundamentally changed this architecture. Section 99(1)(a) of the Act repealed the Pension Act of 1990 with effect from 25 June 2004 and replaced it with the Contributory Pension Scheme (CPS).

Under the CPS, employers and employees contribute regularly into individual Retirement Savings Accounts, ensuring transparency and sustainability.

However, the PRA 2004 applied only to employees of the Federal Government, FCT, and private sector. States and local governments were expressly excluded unless they enacted their own pension laws, creating a regulatory vacuum for millions of public servants outside the federal structure.

To bridge this gap, the National Pension Commission (PenCom) drafted a model pension bill and submitted it to the National Council of State. The Council adopted it and advised state governments to domesticate the law to ensure uniformity and protect pension rights across the federation.

This was intended to give state workers the same degree of protection already enjoyed by federal employees. Yet, almost 21 years after the repeal of the Pension Act 1990, implementation remains uneven and, in some cases, nonexistent.

PenCom’s 2025 First Quarter Report provides a sobering overview of the subnational pension landscape. Six states, Plateau, Cross River, Kwara, Borno, Akwa Ibom, and Yobe, remain stuck at the legislative stage. They have not enacted the necessary laws to establish or operationalise a contributory pension scheme.

In practical terms, these “Red States” have no functional pension framework guaranteeing lawful retirement benefits for their workers and retirees. Strikingly, Cross River stands out as the only state among them without a law guaranteeing life pensions for former governors and deputies.

For over 20 years, successive administrations in these six states have presided over an indefensible contradiction. They have failed, and in many cases refused, to legislate the protections their workers are constitutionally entitled to. Yet, these same governments have rushed to enact generous, extravagant, pension packages for governors and their deputies.

The message is unmistakable: political officeholders deserve protection; lifelong civil servants do not.

This is not a technical oversight. It is a persistent pattern of governance choices that deliberately disregard the welfare of those who keep state institutions running.

Clearly, these are legal violations! The failure to enact comprehensive pension laws undermines the constitutional obligation to safeguard citizens’ welfare, denies workers the vested rights they hold in pensions as a form of deferred compensation, and contravenes the principles of non-discrimination and social justice set out in Chapter II of the Constitution.

A government that withholds legal protection for workers’ pensions, while securing luxury benefits for political elites, acts contrary to both the letter and spirit of the law.

Beyond legality, the moral implications are striking. Civil servants spend decades serving the public, only to retire into uncertainty, hardship, and in too many cases, avoidable death from poverty-induced conditions. Meanwhile, many former governors enjoy: State-funded mansions, luxury vehicles! Domestic staff, unlimited allowances and lifetime perks. This indeed is a moral failure on the part of of successive governors of these states.

This inversion of priorities reveals a troubling leadership culture that elevates temporary powerholders above career public servants whose labour sustains the state.

The most troubling irony is this: states that claim they cannot afford to fund pensions somehow find the fiscal space to finance opulent retirement lifestyles for a select political class. This contradiction erodes public trust, undermines institutional legitimacy, and entrenches inequality. No nation committed to the rule of law can justify such hypocrisy.

The continued failure of these six states to establish pension protection for their workers, while entrenching extravagant benefits for their political leaders, is one of the most glaring cases of policy irresponsibility in modern Nigerian governance.

Workers’ rights cannot remain optional. Pension is not charity. It is not a favour. It is earned, guaranteed, and constitutionally protected.

If Nigeria is to build a society anchored on justice, fairness, and respect for human dignity, the first step is to uphold the rights of those who have served the nation faithfully. The betrayal of public servants by these six states must end!