The Federal High Court in Abuja has restrained the Nigeria Police Force and the Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC) from imposing fines on motorists for failure to present third-party motor vehicle insurance without a court order.
The judgment followed a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/291/2025 filed by activist-lawyer Deji Adeyanju against the Inspector-General of Police, the Attorney-General of the Federation, and the FRSC.
Delivering judgment on Friday, Justice Hauwa Yilwa held that while both the police and the FRSC are empowered to enforce compliance with third-party motor insurance laws, neither agency has the legal authority to impose fines on alleged offenders.
The suit was instituted through an originating summons brought under provisions of the Motor Vehicles (Third Party Insurance) Act, 1950, the Insurance Act, 2003, and the FRSC Establishment Act, 2007.
Adeyanju had asked the court to determine whether law enforcement agencies could impose fines during roadside checks without judicial approval, and whether such actions violated constitutional rights. He also sought clarification on whether enforcement authority over third-party insurance rests exclusively with the FRSC.
In addition to declaratory reliefs, he sought a perpetual injunction restraining the police from imposing fines or enforcing third-party insurance compliance without court authorization, and urged the court to hold the Attorney-General responsible for clarifying the scope of police powers under the law.
In its ruling, the court drew a clear distinction between enforcement and punishment. It held that while the police and FRSC may verify insurance compliance, they lack the power to impose fines on motorists.
According to Adeyanju’s counsel, Marvin Omorogbe, the court affirmed that both agencies may enforce compliance but “outrightly lack the power to impose fines on motorists or citizens” during enforcement operations.
The court further restrained the Inspector-General of Police, the Nigeria Police Force, their officers, and the FRSC from imposing fines on motorists without judicial authorization.
Reacting to the ruling, Adeyanju said the decision achieved the central aim of the suit, which was to curb what he described as unlawful fines imposed on motorists.
He argued that the judgment would help address alleged extortion by enforcement agencies and strengthen public confidence in road traffic enforcement.
Although the court declined to grant all the reliefs sought including a total restriction on police enforcement powers, it affirmed limits on the scope of those powers.
Adeyanju urged Nigerians to rely on the judgment to assert their rights and seek redress where necessary.
However, counsel to the defendants, Victor Okoye, said the ruling was only partially favourable to the police and confirmed plans to appeal.
He argued that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the suit, claiming the originating summons was incompetent and unsuitable for resolving contentious issues. He also challenged the inclusion of the Inspector-General of Police as a defendant instead of the Nigeria Police Force as a legal entity.
Despite the objections, the court proceeded to judgment.
Okoye maintained that the case raised disputed issues of fact that should not have been commenced by originating summons, which is reserved for matters of legal interpretation.
He, however, acknowledged that the judgment affirmed the authority of both the police and FRSC to stop, search, and verify compliance with third-party insurance requirements.
