The National Industrial Court (NIC), sitting in Abuja, has nullified a provision in the Harmonized Terms and Conditions of Service for Officers of the Nigerian Armed Forces (HTACOS) which mandated a minimum of 15 years of service before a soldier could resign.
Delivering judgment on Tuesday, Justice Emmanuel Subilim held that the provision was oppressive and amounted to a gross violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
The decision arose from Suit No. NICN/ABJ/25/2025 filed by Flight Lieutenant J.A. Akerele, an officer of the Nigerian Air Force (NAF), who challenged the legality of the 15-year compulsory service requirement.
The claimant, commissioned in 2013 as a Pilot Officer during the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan, alleged systematic persecution and victimisation by the NAF after he applied to disengage from service.
He told the court that the then Chief of Air Staff not only rejected his resignation letter but also declared him absent without leave (AWOL) and issued a signal for his arrest.
In his supporting affidavit, filed through human rights lawyer Inibehe Effiong, the claimant narrated that he was selected in July 2013, while in his final year at the Nigerian Defence Academy, to complete flight training in the United States.
According to him, allowances were withheld for about five months during the training, and in July 2014, he was abruptly recalled to Nigeria, resulting in loss of seniority and over a year without unit assignment.
He recounted switching five different career paths within the NAF, remaining on the rank of Flying Officer for six years instead of the standard four, and experiencing repeated changes in specialty.
His postings included the National Air Defence Corps, Air Traffic Control, and later Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) training, which was terminated due to non-payment of foreign contractors.
After months of inactivity, his specialty was changed again to the Intelligence Arm of the Air Force, but his nomination for an Intelligence Course was cancelled, and he was returned to UAV duties.
The claimant said these experiences caused severe emotional distress, feelings of victimisation, and a lack of direction, ultimately affecting his mental health and prompting his voluntary resignation.
He stated that after submitting his resignation letter, he underwent interviews and counselling sessions, during which his Commander and disposal officers supported his disengagement.
Despite these recommendations, the then Chief of Air Staff rejected the resignation, citing HTACOS provisions, and insisted he must serve at least 15 years before being eligible to resign.
The claimant argued that, as a public servant, he had a constitutional right to resign voluntarily, and that the HTACOS provision breached Section 306 of the 1999 Constitution and contradicted existing judicial precedents.
In his judgment, Justice Subilim likened the NAF’s stance to “modern-day slavery under the guise of national service” and affirmed that members of the Armed Forces have a statutory right to retire or resign voluntarily.
The court struck down the 15-year service requirement, dismissed the NAF’s argument over the wording of the resignation letter, and held that constitutional provisions on resignation must be interpreted liberally in line with Supreme Court authority.
Consequently, the court declared the claimant’s resignation valid from the date it was received, and issued a perpetual injunction restraining the Chief of Air Staff and the NAF from arresting, detaining, or compelling him to continue in service.
