THERE is something fundamentally wrong when retired members of the Armed Forces of Nigeria must protest at the Ministry of Defence to demand what they consider their rightful pension adjustment, while the State responds by deploying armed security personnel. These are not strangers to the Nigerian State. They are former soldiers. They served the country, faced danger, and surrendered the most productive years of their lives to national service. If they now gather to ask why their pensions remain stagnant while serving personnel receive salary increases, the appropriate response should be engagement, not intimidation.
The issue is straightforward. When government increases the remuneration of serving military personnel, it must address the pension consequences for those who have already retired. Colonel Innocent Azubike (retd), one of the veterans’ leaders, says President Bola Tinubu approved a military pay increase in November 2025 and that the consequential adjustment for pensioners was acknowledged by the military authorities. Yet, according to him, the adjustment was never implemented. Then came another salary increase announced in August 2026, with implementation scheduled for September. Again, pensioners were allegedly left out. If that account is correct, government owes the veterans a clear explanation.
There is also a constitutional dimension. Section 173(3) of the 1999 Constitution provides for the review of pensions every five years or alongside federal civil service salary reviews, whichever occurs earlier. The provision recognises an obvious truth: a pension cannot remain frozen indefinitely while salaries, prices and the cost of living move upwards. This is not merely an issue of money. It is an issue of fairness. Consider two military officers of the same rank who served for comparable periods. One retired years ago; the other retires under a new salary structure. If the newer retiree receives a substantially higher pension while the earlier retiree remains stuck on an old rate, the system creates an inequality based largely on the date of retirement. That cannot be a satisfactory pension policy.
The military establishment must also understand that the military does not end at the barracks gate. Today’s serving officer is tomorrow’s retiree. To separate the welfare of serving personnel from that of veterans is to pretend that retirement is somebody else’s problem. It is not. The authorities should therefore stop treating pensioners’ agitation as an inconvenience. They should sit with the veterans, publish the facts and resolve the issue.
If the November 2025 approval covered pensioners, implement it. If it did not, explain why. If the law requires a further process, tell the pensioners what that process is and give a definite timeline. If funding is the problem, say so openly. What government must not do is leave pensioners guessing while successive salary increases are announced for serving personnel. There is another lesson here. Nigeria should stop relying on protest before institutions perform their duties. Colonel I.A Nass (retd) has recounted how sustained pressure from veterans previously helped to force action on pension disparities among retired officers. His experience should not be celebrated as proof that protest works. It should embarrass the nation that protest was necessary in the first place.
The long-term solution is to establish a clear and enforceable mechanism for consequential pension adjustment whenever the remuneration structure of serving military personnel is reviewed. Pensioners should not have to organise demonstrations every time government adjusts military salaries. The military authorities must also resist the temptation to hide behind committees. Committees are useful when they produce solutions. They become another layer of bureaucracy when they merely buy time.
This is why the current situation demands leadership, not paperwork. The government owes veterans dignity. The military owes its retired personnel loyalty. And the pension system owes them predictability. Those who served Nigeria should not have to spend their retirement fighting Nigeria. A soldier may retire from service, but the nation’s obligation to him or her should never retire.
