The automatic retirement of officers senior to an appointed service chief is a deeply ingrained military tradition in Nigeria, though it is not formally written into the armed forces’ terms of service. It is widely understood that officers of higher rank or superior seniority (based on their year of graduation from the Nigerian Defence Academy) cannot take orders from a junior, and therefore must retire.
Origin and purpose of the tradition
The tradition is not a new practice; observers note it dates back to the era of military rule in Nigeria and was reinforced by former President Olusegun Obasanjo. The tradition’s origins and rationale are often attributed to:
- Preventing insubordination: Military discipline requires a strict chain of command. The rationale is that a junior officer cannot effectively command or be seen as the ultimate authority if more senior officers who could potentially challenge their orders remain in service.
- Maintaining control: In a country with a history of military coups, forcing the retirement of potential rivals is seen by some as a way for a new leadership to consolidate power and reduce the risk of a rebellion or counter-coup.
- Political considerations: The appointment of a junior officer as a service chief is often a political decision made by the Head of State. It allows the leader to select a loyalist, rather than being restricted to the most senior person, and then remove potential opposition.
The “wastage” of experienced officers
The forced retirement of experienced, high-ranking officers is a significant and contentious consequence of this tradition, criticized by many as a form of “wastage” of talent. The reasons for this viewpoint include:
- Loss of expertise: The officers who are forced to retire are often among the most experienced and trained in the armed forces. Their sudden and often premature exit means the military loses a wealth of institutional knowledge and leadership skills.
- Impact on morale: The practice can be highly demoralizing for officers who dedicate their lives to military service, only to have their careers cut short based on another’s appointment. This creates a sense of uncertainty and can lead to frustration among the officer corps.
- Inefficient career management: Critics argue that the practice makes a mockery of years of service and merit-based advancement. It discourages long-term career planning and removes incentives for professional excellence among those who do not make it to the top.
- Inconsistency with modern practice: Many argue that the tradition is an archaic and illegal practice, particularly when compared to other democracies where military leaders can command those with greater seniority. This is viewed by some as an unfortunate legacy of Nigeria’s military past.
Centre for Nigeria Progress 