By Davidson Ogbebor

ABUJA– Retired military personnel on Tuesday barricaded the entrance to the Military Pensions Board office in Dutse Alhaji, Abuja, to protest what they described as discrepancies in the formula used to calculate pension increases following salary adjustments for serving members of the Armed Forces.

The protest, according to reports by sources, saw the veterans use canopies and chairs to block the entrance to the board’s premises, while armed serving soldiers prevented them from entering the facility. The demonstration reflects continuing dissatisfaction among sections of the retired military community over the implementation of pension adjustments.

The latest protest follows an earlier demonstration in August, when retired servicemen were prevented by soldiers and other security personnel from accessing the Ministry of Defence headquarters in Abuja. The pensioners had demanded the implementation of consequential adjustments to their pensions following salary increases approved for serving military personnel.

At the centre of the dispute is the method adopted to translate salary increases for serving personnel into revised pension payments for retirees. Lieutenant Colonel Innocent Azubike (retd.), coordinator of the Veterans Association of Nigeria, alleged that the formula being applied by the board had left some pensioners dissatisfied and could result in unequal outcomes for personnel who retired at different times despite having comparable ranks and years of service.

The controversy follows reported salary increases of 80 per cent for personnel from Private to Staff Sergeant, 50 per cent for ranks from Warrant Officer to Colonel, and 30 per cent for officers above the rank of Colonel. Retired personnel have argued that the implications of these adjustments for their pensions require clear explanations and consistent implementation. However, the percentages approved for serving personnel do not, by themselves, establish that every pension must increase by the same percentage; the applicable pension rules and official implementation directives are central to resolving the dispute.

The Military Pensions Board had announced on October 2 that it had implemented newly approved pension rates arising from the new National Minimum Wage and processed applicable arrears for payment. The announcement, however, did not publicly specify the new rates or the total amount of arrears involved. The subsequent protest indicates that questions remain among some veterans about how the adjustments have been calculated and whether the amounts credited to individual accounts reflect the relevant approvals.

The retirees’ grievances extend beyond the timing of payments to concerns about transparency, fairness and accountability in pension administration. Veterans have called for clarification of the computation formula, a review of affected pension records, correction of any established underpayments and the settlement of outstanding entitlements. They have also sought a clear explanation of how the pension adjustment framework relates to the salary increases approved for serving personnel.

The dispute places renewed attention on the welfare of former members of the Armed Forces, many of whom depend on their pensions to meet basic living expenses after years of service. For the veterans, the issue is not simply whether a revised rate has been announced, but whether the calculation is understandable, consistently applied and supported by the relevant government approvals.

Although the Military Pensions Board has reiterated its commitment to implementing approved adjustments and improving pension administration, a transparent explanation of the disputed formula and an accessible process for resolving individual complaints could help address the concerns raised by the retirees. As of the reports reviewed for this story, the specific disagreements over individual calculations had not been publicly resolved.

The confrontation at the board’s entrance therefore underscores the need for sustained engagement between the authorities and recognised veterans’ associations. A documented review of the disputed calculations, publication of the applicable guidelines and a clear timetable for resolving verified discrepancies would provide a basis for addressing the grievances through institutional channels while respecting the rights and dignity of retired servicemen and women.