The Fate of JUSUN: Why Strike Never Works in Nigeria

Before the JUSUN Strike, Nigerians witnessed a series of strikes by the staff members of different establishments and parastatals of government. ASUU Strike of 2003, which lasted for almost 7 months stood out for its uniqueness in the history of strike in Nigeria. Now that the giant ASUU seemed to be asleep, JUSUN is fully awake. In this piece, LEADERSHIP’S MUHAMMAD KABIR YUSUF traces the origin of the damaging but avoidable strike.

In the wake of 1st December of this year, all the judicial establishments were closed, the gates of which were covered with leaves and branches of trees to symbolize strike. The Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) ordered all its members to get off any official duty of the judiciary. This from that date crippled all the activities of one of the three arms of the government across the nation.

A visit to the High Court and Sharia court of Appeal in Kano by LEADERSHIP revealed that the activities of the normally very busy places is minimized to something very close to zero. It is therefore, never a welcomed development for the masses with pending cases in the courts to know that the strike is indefinite. There is no gainsaying that whenever a government establishment goes on strike, the citizens at the receiving end suffer the strike the most. No activity of the top government officials and the so-called VIPs ever stops for any body’s strike. A case in point is the judgment of the Supreme Court of the nation in the Presidential Appeal case filed by the All Nigeria Peoples’ Party (ANPP) Presidential candidate in the 2007 polls Gen. (rtd) Muhammadu Buhari against the incumbent president of the nation. While the Nigerian masses were told that their pending cases in the courts couldn’t be treated for the strike of the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) I doubt much if the Chief Justice of the Federation, Justice Kutigi himself remembered that he shouldn’t act when (JUSUN) was still on strike. It is very reasonable therefore, that the Nigerian citizens at the receiving end to ask what is the essence of the strike?

In an exclusive interview with LEADERSHIP, the National president of the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) Comrade Usamatu B. Amin said that the strike is an alternative way of communicating their grievances to the authorities on top. The only had to embark on the strike when all other ways failed them. According to him, his union never wanted to had gone that far had it been that dialogue worked for them.

While talking about the root and genesis of the strike, the president said that, they were deliberately provoked by the government by non implementation of new salary scale as contained in the report of the Judicial Service Scheme from committee under the late Honourable Justice Akintola Ejinwumi. The national president suspected that those sabotaging their efforts are deliberately doing it because they don’t want to implement what somebody else did.

But then, the whole thing is complicated. This is because the report in question is not an exclusive document talking about the Judiciary alone. Rather, it also recommended a salary reformation for the police Officers and prison warders throughout their ranks and which was fully implemented since. In fact, the recommendations for judiciary sector was also implemented in part in favour of all the top ranks of the judiciary services up to the court judges and registrars. Down the ladder are the non-judicial employees who were categorically included in the recommendations but unexplainably excluded in the implementation. This must have triggered their anger and made them to decide on going on strike.

On the rather warning strike of February 2008, the Union submitted a communiqué which was later referred to in the judiciary circles as the Demands of the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN).

In the communiqué, (JUSUN) enumerated their demands which include the implementation of the enhanced unified salary structure as for the judiciary staff as recommended by the National Judiciary Institute (NJI) in 2001, unified scheme of service for the judiciary workers in recognition of the peculiar nature of their responsibilities and establishment of judiciary pensions board for judicial and non judicial officers. Other demands include the establishment of National Judicial Negotiation Councils, establishment of National Judicial Council for establishments and improvement of the work environment of the judiciary. The demands also contain the payment of JUSUN’s dues and the implementation of the section 121 of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Having discussed the communiqué, the government officials decided that all the demands are not important but two. The two considered fundamentals among the demands are enhanced unified salary structure, which was termed after the 28th February meeting, remuneration package and the schemes of service. This decision lead to sub-dividing the earlier negotiation committee set by the government to look into the matter into two sub-committees, each looking at one of the so-called fundamental issues from the demands of (JUSUN).

Pursuing through the report of the committee set to look into the scheme of service issue, one sees not only a contradiction in the report but an attempt to dismiss the issue in general. The report stated in an unmistakable terms the need for an independent scheme of service for the judiciary, it came to recommend that adoption of the scheme of service currently in use in the Federal Republic service.

Coming back to the report of the Enhanced Unified Salary Structure Committee, which recommended 30% increment on the normal civil service salary scale, the report reiterated the sensitivity of the judiciary services which entitled judicial officers to special incentives. In the words of the reports, “it is only natural to reiterate that from whom much is required, much should be given”. The report also acknowledged the need for the government to consider the modalities for improving the welfare package of the judiciary workers. It further emphasized the genuinely and reasonability of the demand by (JUSUN) while it expressed surprise on how these non judicial staff were simply excluded in the cause of implementation of Ejinwunmi’s committee recommendation.

On unique thing about this report is the way it has been specific about the way the welfare package should be, including the provision of the cost implication of the welfare.

That was what happened between February and March of this year. After about 8 – 9 months, (JUSUN) embarked on yet another strike. At this point, Nigerians have the right to ask: what again? But they would be shocked to know that the recommendations of the February committee on salary scale which itself complains of non-implementation of Ejiwunmi’s report, is not implemented too. But why? That is what nobody can be sure about. All that is available is a letter from the Federal Judicial Service Commission dated 27th November 2008, and signed by the Secretary of the commission Hajiya B.A . Bashir, intimating theMinister of Labour and Productivity of what the letter called the latest development. The latest development we learnt from the letter is the report of the negotiation committee set to look into the matter since February 28th. For this order of the day “Go slow” attitude, the unfortunate but avoidable strike by the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) came back with effect from 1st December and “paralyzed” the judiciary sector again.

From December 1st, to date many things happened including the meeting with the honourable Minister of labour and productivity, interference of the House of Representatives Committee on Judiciary and several other meetings with stakeholders and the likes. But who is sure that something will happen beyond writing reports.