Civil servants lose retirement age appeal

TWO CIVIL servants who claimed they were unfairly forced into early retirement have lost their appeal at the Supreme Court.

Yesterday, the 12-judge panel of the Supreme Court informed the two appellants that they did not have the jurisdiction to intervene in laws that had been passed by Parliament.
Civil servants Vasos Constantinou and Androula Stavrou had appealed to the Supreme Court claiming they were forced into retirement at 61 because of what they described as an “unconstitutional law” passed in 2005.

According to the retirement age law:
Those who reach their 60th year after July 1, 2008 must retire when they reach 63.
Those who reach their 60th year between January, 2007 and June, 30 2008 must retire when they reach 62.

Those who reach their 60th year between July 1, 2005 and December 31, 2006 must retire when they reach the age of 61.

Defence lawyer Andreas Angelides had described the ruling as an obstruction of article 28 of the Constitution because it discriminates between employees.

Angelides added that all employees should hold the right to retire at 63 after the law was passed to increase the retirement age.

However, the Supreme Court in its ruling yesterday stated that, “The constitutional control of the law, which the Supreme Court has the right to exercise, cannot be used to regulate the law itself. Such an act would overstep its jurisdiction.

“Such authority rests, according to the Constitution, in the hands of the House of Representatives, which, when needed, votes what is necessary.”

Despite being “powerless” to intervene in the matter, the court decided not to burden Constantinou and Stavrou with court expenses.

“Because they have presented to the court a very serious matter that serves a public interest they will not be handed the court procedure expenses. This matter, according to the Supreme Court, not only concerns civil servants but also every citizen.”