By: Fatou Krubally

National Assembly Members (NAMs), on Tuesday engaged in a tense debate over whether salary increases for judges already implemented by the executive before parliamentary approval amounted to a constitutional violation.

The bill entitled: the “Judicial Officers’ Service (Conditions of Service) Bill” saw members clashed over its legality.

The Bill, tabled for consideration at the stage under Order 72 of the Standing Orders, seeks to overhaul conditions of service for judicial officers, including a new remuneration structure. But its progress was overshadowed by sharp exchanges on claims that the revised pay had taken effect since June 2025, months before legislative approval.

A covering letter from the Ministry of Justice had initially indicated that the revised pay scale was already effective, having been approved by the President. But when pressed, the Justice Minister told lawmakers that the proposed retrospective clause had been dropped.

He urged the Assembly to “treat the Bill as it is” and disregard the cover letter.

That clarification triggered heated reactions. Several members argued that implementing the new salaries before parliamentary approval violated constitutional procedure. “Already a violation has been done, and the parliament is the custodian of the constitution. If the executive went around to make an increment by themselves, this is a non-starter,” Sulayman Saho, member for Central Badibou warned.

Others countered that Parliament’s role was to judge the Bill on merit rather than interrogate how the payments were sourced. Referring to Section 153 of the Constitution, some argued that once expenditures had been met from available funds, the Assembly’s responsibility was to decide whether the new scale was justified. “For the fact that they are already paying it means there is money. What Parliament needs to do is determine if the pay structure is fair,” one member said.

Speaker Fabakary Tombong Jatta intervened repeatedly to steer the debate, reminding members that their task was to scrutinize the Bill clause by clause and decide on its effective date. He emphasized that questions about irregularities or prior payments could be dealt with separately. “What we are saying is: here with us is the Judicial Officers’ Service Bill. If there are things that went wrong, that is for Parliament to look at, but not to derail this Bill,” he cautioned.

Despite the wrangling, lawmakers proceeded with clause-by-clause scrutiny of the Judicial Officers (Conditions of Service) Bill. The Assembly later resolved that the Bill now advances to its third reading, where members will take a final decision on its passage.

Post Views: 118