From Victor Osula, Abuja
The Federal High Court in Abuja has restrained the Nigeria Police Force and the Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC) from imposing fines on motorists over third-party motor vehicle insurance without a valid court order.
The ruling, delivered on Friday by Justice Hauwa Yilwa, followed a suit instituted by activist-lawyer Deji Adeyanju against the Inspector-General of Police, the Attorney-General of the Federation and the FRSC.
Justice Yilwa held that while both enforcement agencies retain the statutory authority to ensure compliance with third-party motor insurance requirements, they do not possess the legal power to impose fines on alleged offenders without recourse to the courts.
The case, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/291/2025, was commenced via an originating summons pursuant to Section 17 of the Motor Vehicles (Third Party Insurance) Act, 1950, Sections 68(3) and (4) of the Insurance Act, 2003, as well as provisions of the Federal Road Safety Commission (Establishment) Act, 2007.
The applicant had asked the court to determine whether the police could lawfully enforce third-party motor insurance, impose fines without judicial backing, and whether such enforcement during routine stop-and-search operations infringed on constitutional rights. He also sought clarity on whether the enforcement powers reside exclusively with the FRSC.
In resolving the issues, the court drew a clear distinction between enforcement and sanctioning powers, affirming that while the police and the FRSC can stop, search and verify compliance with insurance laws, the imposition of penalties falls strictly within the jurisdiction of the courts.
Counsel to the applicant, Marvin Omorogbe, said the court upheld the enforcement powers of both agencies but unequivocally barred them from levying fines on motorists.
According to him, “The police and the road safety may enforce compliance but outrightly lack the powers to impose fines on third parties or vehicle owners.”
He added that the court issued a restraining order against the Inspector-General of Police, the Police Force and all its officers, as well as the FRSC, prohibiting them from imposing fines on motor vehicle users across the country.
Reacting to the judgement, Adeyanju described the decision as a major victory for the rule of law and civil liberties, noting that the central objective of the suit had been achieved.
“The sole reason we came to court was to obtain a clear declaration that the police and FRSC do not have the right to impose fines on Nigerians over motor vehicle insurance. We have succeeded”, he said.
He expressed optimism that the ruling would curb abuses associated with enforcement operations and restore public confidence, particularly among motorists who have long complained of arbitrary penalties and alleged extortion.
Adeyanju, however, acknowledged that the court declined to grant all the reliefs sought, especially the request to strip the police entirely of enforcement powers. Nonetheless, he noted that the judgment made a significant pronouncement on the limits of those powers.
He urged Nigerians to continue complying with insurance requirements while also asserting their rights where enforcement actions fall outside the bounds of the law.
However, counsel to the defendants, Victor Okoye, described the judgement as only partly favourable and indicated that the defence may challenge it at the Court of Appeal.
Okoye disclosed that the respondents had raised a preliminary objection questioning the jurisdiction of the court, arguing that the originating summons was incompetent for resolving contentious issues.
“We envisage that we will likely challenge the proceedings at the Court of Appeal to determine whether the court ought to have entertained the matter in its current form”, he said.
He further argued that the suit was improperly constituted, noting that the Inspector-General of Police was named as a party instead of the Nigeria Police Force as a corporate entity, and maintained that the issues raised were too contentious to be determined via originating summons.
Despite the planned appeal, Okoye acknowledged that the judgement affirmed the concurrent powers of the police and the FRSC to enforce compliance with third-party insurance laws.
