The Federal High Court in Abuja has issued an order prohibiting the Nigeria Police Force and the Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC) from levying fines on drivers for not having third-party motor vehicle insurance. In a ruling delivered on Friday, Justice Hauwa Yilwa specified the boundaries of enforcement powers derived from existing legislation.
Her lordship stated that while both the police and FRSC are empowered to ensure adherence to third-party motor insurance regulations, neither agency possesses the legal right to impose fines without the adjudication of a court.
The lawsuit was initiated by activist lawyer Deji Adeyanju, with the Inspector-General of Police, Attorney-General of the Federation Lateef Fagbemi, and the FRSC named as defendants.
Mr. Adeyanju sought a judicial determination on four key questions: whether the police are authorised to enforce third-party insurance, if they can issue fines to alleged violators, and whether routine stop-and-search operations infringe upon constitutional rights to privacy and freedom of movement.
He also asked the court to clarify if the responsibility for enforcing third- party motor insurance exclusively rests with the FRSC.
Furthermore, the applicant requested perpetual injunctions to prevent the police from enforcing third-party insurance and from imposing fines without judicial approval.
He also sought to hold the Attorney-General of the Federation accountable for providing legal counsel regarding the extent of police authority under the applicable laws.
According to Marvin Omorogbe, the lawyer representing the applicant, the court upheld the authority of both agencies to verify compliance with motor vehicle insurance laws. However, the court explicitly ruled against direct fine imposition by either body.
"The police and the road safety may enforce compliance but outrightly lack the powers to impose fines on third parties or vehicle owners," the court declared, as conveyed by Mr. Omorogbe.
"The court also restrained the IGP, the Police Force and all their officers, including the FRSC, from imposing fines on motor vehicle users or Nigerians."
Mr. Adeyanju expressed his contentment with the judgment, asserting that the lawsuit's primary objective had been successfully met.
"The sole reason we came to court was to obtain a declaration that the police and the road safety do not have the right to impose fines on any Nigerian over motor vehicle insurance. And we have succeeded," he stated.
He added that the ruling is expected to curtail what he termed a pattern of extortion by enforcement agencies and to rebuild trust among drivers.
Mr. Adeyanju also noted that while the court did not grant all the reliefs sought, particularly regarding the removal of police enforcement powers, it delivered a significant statement on the limitations of those powers.
He encouraged Nigerians to leverage this judgment to assert their rights and pursue legal recourse when necessary.
Conversely, Victor Okoye, legal counsel for the defendants, indicated that the judgment was only partially favourable to the police and announced intentions to appeal the decision.
Mr. Okoye mentioned that the defence had filed a preliminary objection challenging the court's jurisdiction over the case, arguing that the lawsuit was invalid and unsuitable for resolving complex disputes.
He cited previous appellate court rulings to emphasize that jurisdiction is a fundamental prerequisite and must be established before addressing substantive matters.
He noted that the court proceeded to issue a judgment despite this objection.
"We will likely challenge the proceedings at the Court of Appeal to determine whether the court should have decided a case commenced by an incompetent originating summons," Mr. Okoye stated.
He further contended that the suit was improperly filed, as the Inspector- General of Police was named as a defendant instead of the Nigeria Police Force as a corporate entity.
He reiterated that several points raised by the applicant were contentious and should not have been brought via originating summons, which is typically reserved for straightforward legal interpretations.
However, he acknowledged that the judgment did confirm the shared authority of the police and the FRSC to stop, search, and verify compliance with third- party insurance requirements.
The Nigeria Police Force had initiated a nationwide enforcement drive for third-party motor vehicle insurance in early February, following public announcements urging drivers to comply with the law.
State police commands had stated that the initiative aimed to enforce existing laws mandating third-party insurance for vehicle owners.
This enforcement action followed numerous warnings and public notices instructing motorists to obtain valid insurance or face penalties.
However, the exercise attracted criticism from drivers and civil society organisations, who reported insufficient public awareness campaigns and alleged harassment during stop-and-search operations.
In certain instances, the enforcement activities reportedly led to altercations between officers and drivers, particularly concerning fines and documentation checks.
The then Inspector-General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, defended the enforcement as essential for ensuring legal compliance.
Mr. Egbetokun resigned on 24 February, and President Bola Tinubu subsequently appointed Tunji Disu as the acting Inspector-General of Police, who assumed duty on the same day.
Comments (0)
You must be logged in to comment.
Be the first to comment on this article!