RE; Federal High Court in Lagos has declared void

RE; Federal High Court in Lagos has declared void
the
powers of the Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC)
to
impose fines on motorists for traffic offences.
Justice John Tsoho held that the FRSC could not
turn itself into a court of law by punishing those
who
commit traffic offences.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that a
lawyer, Mr Tope Alabi, had approached the court to
declare that only a court of competent jurisdiction
could pronounce a person guilty under Section 10
(4)
and 28 (2) of the FRSC Act 2007.
Other defendant in the suit was the Attorney
General
of the Federation.
A copy of the judgment made available to newsmen
in Lagos on Wednesday quotes Tsoho as declaring
the sections null and void for being inconsistent
with
Section 6 of the 1999 Constitution.
The judge also awarded N1million damages in
favour of the plaintiff because officials of the
FRSC
had confiscated his vehicle and driver’s licence.
According to him, while FRSC was statutorily
empowered to arrest and fine traffic offenders, a
closer look at the definition of the word ``fine’’
means
a pecuniary criminal punishment or civil penalty
payable to the public treasury.
Tsoho said, “In the instant case, however, the
involvement of the element of arrest takes the
imposition of fine by the FRSC to the realm of
criminal punishment.
"From these definitions, it is obvious that the act
of
sentencing is a judicial action or exercise, and
imposition of fine connotes conviction for an
alleged
offence.
``It is, thus, very clear that the FRSC, not being a
court of law, cannot impose fine, especially as it
has
no powers to conduct trial.
"Hence, the exercise of the statutory powers given
to
the defendant under the Act as pertain to
imposition
of fine is clearly a usurpation of judicial powers
exclusively vested in the courts.
"In the circumstances, I endorse the plaintiff’s
submission that by virtue of Section 1(3) of the
Constitution, the power to impose fine conferred
on
FRSC by the enabling Act is null and void to the
extent of its inconsistency with the Constitution,”
the
judge held.
Besides, Tsoho held that the FRSC resorted to
“legislative absurdity” when it imposed a fine of
3,000 on the plaintiff, rather than the N2,000
statutorily prescribed.
"FRSC’s function should not go beyond issuance of
mere notices of offence.
"It is a cardinal principle of natural justice that no
person can be condemned without being heard.
"It is in observance of this that a person alleged to
have committed an offence has to respond to such
allegation before a court of law during trial,” he
said.
According to the judge, the plaintiff was issued a
Notice of Offence Sheet on April 4, 2013, but
FRSC
did not take him to court for five months before
the
plaintiff filed his suit on Sept. 9, 2013.
"The vital question to ask is how long would it take
the FRSC to reasonably commence prosecution of a
traffic offence?
"The plaintiff was not under obligation to wait
indefinitely for redress due to FRSC’s inaction or
laxity,” the judge added.
"I hold the view that the confiscation of the
vehicle
was unnecessary in the first place, though the
FRSC
spiritedly sought to justify it."
The judge then granted 11 of the 14 reliefs sought
by
the plaintiff, adding that he also awarded
N1million
in his favour instead of the N10 million prayed for.
Tsoho held that the FRSC acted under the belief
that
it was statutorily empowered to do so, adding that
its innocent mistake constituted a mitigating
factor
as to the quantum of damages. (NAN).