Court strips Police, FRSC of power to fine motorists for third-party insurance

A Federal High Court in Abuja has issued an order barring the Nigeria Police Force and the Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC) from unilaterally imposing fines or penalties on motorists for violating the Third Party Motor Vehicle Insurance Act.

In a judgment, Justice Hauwa Joseph Yilwa clarified the limits of enforcement powers under existing laws.

In the judgment delivered on Friday, Justice Yilwa ruled that while the police and the FRSC are legally empowered to enforce the Act, they lack the constitutional authority to act as both prosecutor and judge by imposing penalties without a valid court order.

The ruling followed a last minute attempt by the Nigeria Police to halt the proceedings.

Counsel to the police, Mr Victor Andrew Okoye, moved a Notice of Preliminary Objection challenging the court’s jurisdiction.

He argued that the police had not been properly served with the court processes, asserting that jurisdictional issues can be raised at any stage before judgment.

Justice Yilwa, however, dismissed the objection in a bench ruling, describing it as an attempt to “arrest” the judgment.

“This court notes that the originating summons was served on all respondents,” Justice Yilwa stated, citing court records that showed the police were served on multiple dates, including April 3, May 21, November 14, January 28, and April 21.

The judge further noted that despite being aware of the suit, the police had failed to file a response.

“The 1st respondent is very much aware of the suit but refused to respond. This is viewed as an attempt to arrest this judgment, and this court will not allow it,” she ruled.

In her judgment, the trial judge held that the police and FRSC, who are 1st and 3rd respondents in the suit, although empowered to enforce the Third Party Motor Vehicle Insurance Act, lack the powers to impose fines and penalties on motorists in breach of the Act without a court order.

The suit was filed by activist lawyer Deji Adeyanju against the Inspector-General of Police, the Attorney-General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi, and the FRSC.

He brought the suit under Section 17 of the Motor Vehicles (Third Party Insurance) Act, 1950, Sections 68(3) and (4) of the Insurance Act, 2003, and provisions of the Federal Road Safety Commission (Establishment) Act, 2007.

Adeyanju asked the court to determine four issues: whether the police have powers to enforce third-party insurance, whether they can impose fines on alleged offenders, whether routine stop-and-search operations breach constitutional rights to privacy and freedom of movement.

He sought a declaration on whether the power to enforce third-party motor insurance lies solely with the FRSC.

The applicant requested orders of perpetual injunction restraining the police from enforcing third-party insurance and from imposing fines without court backing.

He also urged the court to hold the Attorney-General of the Federation responsible for providing legal guidance on the scope of police powers under the relevant laws.

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.

Reacting to the judgement, Mr Adeyanju expressed satisfaction.

He said the central objective of the suit had been achieved.

“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 said.

He said the ruling would curb what he described as a pattern of extortion by enforcement agencies and restore confidence among motorists.

Adeyanju added that although the court declined to grant all the reliefs sought, especially the request to remove the police’s enforcement powers, it made a significant pronouncement on the limits of those powers.

He also urged Nigerians to rely on the judgment to assert their rights and seek legal remedies where necessary.

On the other hand, lawyer to the defendants, Victor Okoye, said the judgement was only partly favourable to the police and indicated plans to challenge it at the Court of Appeal.

Mr Okoye said the defence raised a preliminary objection challenging the court’s jurisdiction to hear the suit. He argued that the suit was incompetent and unsuitable for resolving contentious issues.

He relied on appellate decisions to stress that jurisdiction is fundamental and must be determined before substantive issues.

He said the court proceeded to deliver judgement despite the 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,” Okoye said.

He also argued that the suit was improperly constituted because the Inspector-General of Police was named instead of the Nigeria Police Force as a corporate entity.

He maintained that several issues raised by the applicant were contentious and should not have been initiated by originating summons, which is reserved for non-contentious matters involving interpretation of law.

However, he acknowledged that the judgment affirmed the concurrent powers of the police and the FRSC to stop, search and verify compliance with third-party insurance requirements.