1 month ago
15 ARTICLE AD
Some Senior Advocates of Nigeria have differed over the position of the Lagos State Government that a Federal High Court ruling barring the Directorate of Vehicle Inspection Services from stopping vehicles, impounding them, or imposing fines on motorists, does not apply in Lagos.
The judgment, delivered on October 2, 2024 by Justice Evelyn Maha of the FHC Abuja, stemmed from a fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by a human rights activist and public interest attorney, Abubakar Marshal.
Justice Maha, in the judgment, agreed with the applicant’s contentions that there was no legal basis for the VIO and its officials to stop, impound, or confiscate vehicles or to levy fines against motorists.
The applicant had in a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1695/2023, sued 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.
But in a statement issued on Tuesday, the Lagos State Commissioner for Transportation, Oluwaseun Osiyemi, emphasised that the court’s decision was based on the absence of a specific law in Abuja empowering the VIO to carry out such actions, noting that, in Lagos State, the situation is different.
“It is important to note and be informed that in law, a court has limits of its territorial jurisdiction and in this case, the judgment is restricted to Abuja,” Osiyemi said.
According to him, Lagos operates under the Transport Sector Reform Law of 2018, which establishes the duties and powers of the VIO in the state.
He referenced Part II, Sections 11-22 of the TSRL, which grants the VIO the legal authority to stop vehicles, impose fines, and enforce traffic regulations. The penalties for various traffic violations, listed in the law, are fully enforceable within Lagos.
“Therefore, the decision of the Federal High Court Abuja on VIO is inapplicable in Lagos State. Motorists in Lagos State are advised to continue to be law-abiding, uphold the TSRL, and respect the VIO,” he concluded.
Reacting in a telephone interview with our correspondent on Wednesday, Monday Ubani (SAN), said the court had its reason for making such a judgment.
He noted that although he had not read the nitty-gritty of the judgment, “there may be some sense in what the man (commissioner) is saying.”
“If it is not one VIO that is operating all over the federation and operating in the Federal Capital Territory, then the man may be right to say that the judgment does not apply to the VIO in Lagos – which is different from that of Abuja. That’s what I think. Because they are not the same party. Judgment can only bind a party that is before the court. So if it is not the VIO of Lagos that is before the court, which is different from the one of Abuja, then he may be right.
“In other words, the VIO in Lagos was not a party. It was not sued. Were they served the court process? If they were not served and they never participated in the proceeding, meaning it was the VIO of the FCT and not the VIO of Lagos.”
Identifying other intricacies, Ubani said, “But again, what was the ratio? What was the decision of the court? Why did the court say what it said? Does Lagos State VIO also run foul of the law that made the Federal High Court make that decision?”
“If that VIO in Abuja is different from the VIO in Lagos – different management and different body that creates them – then it will be very difficult for you now to say that that the judgment that was given against the VIO in Abuja will bind the VIO in Lagos because they are different entities and Lagos was never a party, was never represented.”
On his part, Wahab Shittu (SAN), in an interview, said an entity cannot decide not to respect a court order that affects it, without having appealed such a judgment.
Shittu said, “Well, I don’t have the facts. But no entity is encouraged to say it will not respect a court order that affects it. That’s the first thing. If an entity, which can be an individual, a corporate organisation or government is not satisfied with a particular ruling or judgment affecting it, the option open to it is to go and apply to set it aside or appeal against the ruling.
“Once the judgment has been delivered, everybody has the right and is obliged to respect the judgment. You can’t choose. All you can do is, if you disagree with the judgment, you can only use the machinery of the law to express your disagreement by way of appeal to set aside the judgment.”
Also, a Lagos-based lawyer, Festus Ogun, in a post on X on Wednesday, said the Lagos commissioner’s argument was very “sound.”
“Save for the issue of ‘territorial jurisdiction,’ this is a very sound legal argument. All the Lagos Government has done is to distinguish the facts of the case from the prevailing circumstances in Lagos, which in my view is timely and legally sound,” Ogun wrote.
