The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja on Thursday upheld the judgment of the Federal High Court in Abuja, which barred the Directorate of Road Traffic Services, commonly known as the Vehicle Inspection Office (VIO), from stopping, impounding, or confiscating vehicles, and from imposing fines on motorists.
Justice Oyejoju Oyebiola Oyewumi delivered the judgment.
The judgment comes months after the trial court, presided over by Justice Evelyn Maha, underscored the importance of adhering to the legal limits of the agency’s powers in a fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by Abubakar Marshal, a human rights activist and public interest attorney.
Dissatisfied with the trial court’s decision, the Directorate of Road Traffic Services and others appealed the ruling.
What the Appeal Court Said
In its judgment on Thursday, the three-member panel of the appellate court agreed with the reasoning of the lower court and resolved all issues against the Directorate of Road Traffic Services.
- Justice Oyejoju Oyeyemi Oyewumi held that the appeal lacked merit and ought to be dismissed.
- The court also awarded a cost of N1 million in favour of the respondent, Abubakar Marshal.
Backstory
Marshal’s legal argument at the trial court centred on the assertion that the VIO and other respondents had overstepped their legal authority by stopping vehicles and imposing fines without any clear statutory mandate.
The suit listed several respondents, including the Director of Road Transport, the Area Commander of Jabi, the Team Leader of Jabi, and the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), all of whom were implicated for their roles in the alleged unlawful practices.
After reviewing the case, Justice Maha upheld Marshal’s argument and ruled that the respondents were not empowered by any existing law to stop vehicles, confiscate them, or impose fines on motorists.
She described their actions as wrongful, oppressive, and unlawful. The judge further declared that their conduct violated motorists’ fundamental rights—including the right to freedom of movement, the presumption of innocence, and the right to own property without unlawful interference.
In response, Justice Maha issued a perpetual injunction restraining the respondents from continuing these practices.
She emphasized that any future attempts to stop, seize, or fine motorists without proper legal backing would constitute a violation of their fundamental rights.
This ruling set a significant precedent in the ongoing debate over the scope of authority granted to road traffic enforcement agencies across the country.
Justice Maha’s decision substantially limits the powers of the VIO and other related bodies, ensuring that motorists are protected from arbitrary and unlawful practices on Nigeria’s roads.
The judgment reaffirmed Nigerians’ rights to free movement, property ownership, and the presumption of innocence, without the threat of unjust penalties or vehicle confiscations.
