Some states that passed laws for the payment of pensions to their former governors and their deputies have said they have justification for making the laws.

In separate counter-affidavits to a suit filed at the Federal High Court Abuja by 36 non-governmental organisations including Human Development Initiatives and two activists - Ayodeji Kolawole and Tunde Asaju, the states asked the court to dismiss the suit.

Lagos, Sokoto, Cross River, Akwa Ibom and Kwara states are among the states that have counter-affidavits to oppose the suit.

They have also filed preliminary objections seeking a dismissal of the suit.

In its notice of preliminary objection predicated on the same sets of grounds canvassed by Kwara, Sokoto and other states, Lagos State argues that the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the suit.

The states contended that the plaintiffs lacked legal personality, locus standi and consensus among them to institute the suit.

In its counter-affidavit, the Lagos State Government justified the enactment of law on the grounds that its state House of Assembly had the powers to enact such law for former governors and their deputies in the absence of a federal legislation in that regard. The plaintiffs had argued in the suit that the states did not have the powers to pass such laws.

The plaintiffs' suit, which is before Justice Ahmed Mohammed, was instituted against the 36 state governors, their Houses of Assembly, the Attorney-General of the Federation and the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission.

The plaintiffs jointly filed the suit through their counsel, Mr. Chino Obiagwu, on July 15, 2014. But the states through their governors and Houses of Assembly, have filed counter-affidavits and notices of preliminary objection seeking the dismissal of the suit.

Justice Mohammed had on Tuesday fixed October 15 for hearing of the applications by some of the state governments.

In their joint counter-affidavit and notice of preliminary objection to the suit, Lagos State governor and the House of Assembly insisted that RMAFC was not the only constitutional body empowered to stipulate the remuneration of public officers.

The counter-affidavit deposed to by a counsel in the office of Lagos State Attorney General, Mr. Justin Jacobs, also stated that the plaintiffs' suit was misleading, adding that they failed to tender any document to show that the said pension law has been enacted.

It reads in part, "In response to paragraph 4 of the affidavit in support, I state that the paragraph is not correct to the extent that it states that the 74th defendant (RMAFC) is the only constitutional body mandated to stipulate the remuneration of public office holders in Nigeria, including the 1st - 36th defendants (state governors) and their deputies.

"Section 32(d) of the 3rd Schedule to the 1999 Constitution and Item 34 of the 2nd Schedule to the 1999 Constitution does not preclude the Lagos State House of Assembly from making laws on pensions payable to the governor and deputy governor of the state.

"In answer to paragraph 5 of the affidavit in support, I know that the National Assembly has not enacted any enabling law to determine the pension of governors and deputy governors for the states and I was informed by Mrs. S. Y Kolawole, Director for Civil Litigation at the Attorney General's Chambers, Lagos State on October 24, 2014 at 4p.m stated that the plaintiffs failed, neglected and or refused to plead the Act of the National Assembly which they allege regulates the pension of governors and deputy governors.

"Paragraphs 8, 9 and 11 of the affidavit in support are not only false, but misleading and speculative as there is no document to show that the said pension laws have been enacted."

The affidavit added that "the powers of the Revenue Mobilisation, Allocation and Fiscal Commission established pursuant to the Act of the National Assembly and made by virtue of Section 32(d) of the 3rd Schedule to the 1999 constitution to stipulate the remuneration of certain public office holders in Nigeria do not include pension of governors and deputy governors".

The plaintiffs had contended that the state Houses of Assembly lacked the legislative competence to enact pension laws for public officials when the constitution has conferred on the Revenue Mobilisation, Allocation and Fiscal Commission, the exclusive power of setting the remuneration of public officials.

Apart from seeking an order nullifying the various pension laws, the plaintiffs also want the court to order the 36 state governors to recover from former governors and deputy governors, what they have received in excess of the amounts stipulated by RMAFC as pension.

According to the plaintiffs, the pension laws have been enacted in Abia, Akwa Ibom, Bayelsa, Benue, Gombe, Kwara, Kogi, Oyo and Lagos states, while the other 29 states are yet to release theirs to the public or planning to enact similar law.

Some of the plaintiffs are Human Development Initiatives, Media Rights Agenda, Enough is Enough Nigeria, Human Rights and Human Rights Law, Socio-Economic Rights Initiative, Social Watch Initiative, Women Advocates Research and Documentation Centre, Legal Resources Consortium, Legal Defence and Assistance Project.