In a significant legal victory for Nigerian motorists, the Court of Appeal in Abuja has firmly upheld a ban on the arbitrary impoundment of vehicles by traffic officials. The ruling, delivered on Thursday, 4th December 2025, also awarded costs of N1 million against the appellant, the Directorate of Road Traffic Services (VIO).
Appellate Court Dismisses VIO's Appeal
The three-member panel of the appellate court, led by Justice Oyejoju Oyebiola Oyewumi, found the appeal by the VIO to be completely without merit. The court affirmed the earlier judgment of the Federal High Court, which had declared the VIO's actions unlawful. Justice Oyewumi stated plainly, "I find no iota of merit in this appeal; the decision of the lower court is hereby affirmed." The court's decision reinforces the principle that government agencies must operate strictly within the bounds of the law granted to them.
The Original Federal High Court Judgment
The case originated from a fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by rights activist and lawyer, Mr. Abubakar Marshal. Last year, Justice Evelyn Maha of the Federal High Court issued a landmark order restraining the VIO from several key actions. The judge ruled that the officials, including the Director of Road Transport, the Area Commander in Jabi, and the Team Leader in Jabi, lacked the necessary legal backing for their operations.
The respondents in the case, who are under the control of the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, were found to have no statutory power to:
- Stop vehicles on the road arbitrarily.
- Impound or confiscate vehicles from motorists.
- Impose fines on drivers.
Justice Maha described such acts as "wrongful, oppressive, and unlawful" and issued a perpetual injunction to prevent further violation of Nigerians' rights to freedom of movement, presumption of innocence, and property ownership.
Implications for Motorists and Traffic Law Enforcement
This ruling has profound implications for road traffic management in Nigeria, particularly within the Federal Capital Territory. It clearly delineates the limits of the VIO's authority and sets a legal precedent that protects citizens from potential overreach. The award of N1 million in costs underscores the court's stance on the matter and serves as a deterrent against similar unfounded legal challenges by government agencies.
The judgment empowers motorists with the knowledge that traffic officials cannot act outside expressly granted legal powers. It calls into question the basis of numerous fines and vehicle seizures conducted by the VIO in the past and mandates a reform of their operations to align with statutory provisions. The ball is now in the court of the legislature and the Federal Capital Territory Administration to provide clear, lawful frameworks for road traffic enforcement if such powers are deemed necessary.
