Federal High Court Bars FRSC Officials from Operating on State Roads

The Federal High Court, Warri delivered Judgement today in the
case of Darlington Ugo Ehirim v. Federal Road Safety Commission
Suit No. FHC/W/CS/90/2017.

The Plaintiff in an affidavit in support of his originating
summons stated that he was stopped by FRSC officials while driving
along Ajamimogha Road, Warri on his way to court. The Plaintiff had
challenged the authority of the FRSC officials to be creating a
long queu early in the morning while checking vehicle particulars.
Plaintiff further stated that the FRSC officials, out of annoyance
told him to park, which he obeyed. They seized his vehicle
particulars and charged him to court on a purported charge of not
wearing seat belt. The charge aagainst the plaintiff was withdrawn
upon the intervention of Kunle Edun, the then Vice Chairman of NBA,
Warri( now the National Publicity Secretary of the Nigerian Bar
Association).

Mr. Kunle Edun, acting as the Plaintiff’s counsel and Chairman
NBA Warri Human Right Committee subsequently filed an action
against the FRSC at the Federal High Court, Warri seeking the
following issues for resolution:
1) Whether the provisions of the Federal Road Safety Commission
Act, 2007 ( particularly section 30 thereof that defines “public
road”) and it’s subsidiary legislation; the provisions of section
118 of the National Road Traffic Regulations, 2004 (which defines
“Highway”) to the extent that public road and highways are defined
to include all roads in States and local governments are
constitutional in the face of of the clear provisions of sections
1(3) and item 63 of Part 1 of the Second Schedule to the
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended,
regarding the power of the Defendant (a federal agency) to exercise
jurisdiction regarding vehicular traffic monitoring and enforcement
over Stares and Local Governments roads in Nigeria?

2) Whether by virtue of the clear provisions of sections 1(3)
and item 63 of Part 1 of the Second Schedule to the Constitution of
the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended; the Defendant
has the vires, authority and/or power to arrest, detain and/or
prosecute the Plaintiff or any person regarding any violation of
traffic laws on any road that is not designated as a federal trunk
road?

3) Whether there is any provision in the Federal Road Safety
Commission Act (Cap F19) LFN 2010 or any subsidiary legislation
made thereunder that entitles the officers of the Defendant to
mount any form of road blocks (human or otherwise) on public
highways in the purported exercise of it’s functions under the said
Act?

The Plaintiff claimed the following reliefs:
1) A declaration that by virtue of the clear provisions of section
1(3) and item 63 of Part 1 of the Second Schedule to the
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended,
the Defendant lacks the vires, authority and/or power to exercise
any jurisdiction regarding vehicular traffic, monitoring and
enforcement in respect of States and Local Governments roads in
Nigeria.

2) A declaration that by virtue of the clear provisions of
section 1(3) and item 63 Part 1 of the Second Schedule to the
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended, the
Defendant lacks the vires, authority and/or power to arrest, detain
and/or prosecute the Plaintiff or any person regarding the traffic
violations on a State or Local Government road in Nigeria.

3) A declaration that the definitions of “Public Road” in the
provisions of section 30 of the Federal Road Safety Commission Act,
2007 (Cap F19) LFN 2010 and “Highway” as contained in the
provisions of section 118 of the National Road Traffic Regulations,
2004 do not extend to or includes States and Local Government Roads
in Nigeria by virtue of the clear provisions of section 1(3) and
item 63 of Part 1 of the Second Schedule to the Constitution of the
Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended; and therefore, it is
ultra vires the power of the National Assembly to make laws
regulating traffic on roads other than federal trunk roads.

4) A declaration that the Defendant’s operations and
jurisdiction are restricted only to traffic on federal highways or
federal trunk roads by virtue of the clear provisions of section
1(3) and item 63 of Part 1 of the Second Schedule to the
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as
amended.

5) A declaration that the stoppage of the Plaintiff’s vehicle
Reg. No. KJA 502 and the seizure of his driver’s licence by the
Defendant on the 15th day of June, 2017 along the Ajamimogha Road,
by Herismor House, Warri (not being a federal trunk road) is
unlawful and a violation of Plaintiff’s tight to freedom of
movement as guaranteed by the provisions of section 41 of the
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as
amended.

6) An order of injunction restraining the Defendant by itself
and/or through it’s privies, agents, officials, subordinates or
under any other guise from further harrasing, arresting, detaining
abd/or prosecute the Plaintiff or any motorist in respect of
anything done in connection with vehicular traffic and/or the use
of States’ it Local Giverment roads.
7) The sum of N10, 000,000.00 (Ten Million Naira)as exemplary and
general damages.

The trial court agreed with all the issues raised by Kunle Edun,
the Plaintiff’s counsel and accordingly granted all the reliefs
sought. The court also awarded cost of N200,000 00 against the
Defendant.