A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has slammed a restraining order on the
Directorate of Road Traffic Services otherwise known as Vehicle Inspection Office VIO to refrain from stopping, impounding and imposing fines on motorists.
Presiding judge Justice Evelyn Maha gave the judgement October 2 in an application filed by human rights activist and lawyer Abubakar Marshall in a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1695/2023.
The respondents were the Directorate of Road Traffic Services, the Director, Directorate of Road Traffic Services, Mr Leo, the Area Commander, Directorate of Road Traffic Services (as at December 12, 2023) Onoja Solomon, Team Leader, Directorate of Road Traffic Services, Jabi Area command, the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, as 1st to 5th respondents respectively.
Justice Maha agreed with the applicant that there was no legal backing for the VIO to impound, or confiscate vehicles or to levy fines against motorists.
Marshall in his originating motion on notice among others, had asked the court for a declaration that the “1st to 4th respondent under the control of the 5th respondent, herein are not empowered by a law or status to stop, impound or confiscate the vehicle of motorists or impose fine on motorists and doing so is wrongful, oppressive and unlawful as it violates the fundamental human right of such motorists to fair hearing, freedom of movement and presumption of innocence and therefore unlawful by virtue of section 6(6)(B) 35 (1)( 8) and (12) and 41 and 42 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended and article 2(7) (b) 12 and 14 of the African Charter of human and peoples right”.
The court in its judgement held that “the 1st (Directorate of Road Traffic Services) to 4th Respondents under the control of the 5th Respondent (Minister of the Federal Capital Territory) are not empowered by any law or statute to stop, impound, confiscate the vehicles of motorists and or impose fine on motorists.”
The court made an order of perpetual injunction restraining the respondents whether by themselves, agents, privies, allies or anybody acting on behalf of the 1st respondent from further violating the rights of Nigerians to freedom of movement, presumption of innocence and right to own property without lawful justification inter alia.
