Owerri, Imo State — In a landmark judgment that redefines the boundaries of enforcement powers, the Court of Appeal in Owerri has ruled that the Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC) does not have the legal authority to confiscate drivers’ licences, vehicles, or related documents without due process or lawful justification.
Court Declares FRSC’s Actions Unconstitutional
The ruling came in Appeal No: CA/OW/199/2022, filed by the FRSC, the Corps Marshal, and one of its officers (identified only by Uniform No. COSS 35) against Dr. Emmanuel Ugochukwu Shebbs, the respondent. The Court of Appeal upheld a previous decision by the Abia State High Court, which found that such actions by the FRSC constituted a violation of fundamental human rights.
In a unanimous decision, Justices Amina Audi Wambai, M. Lawal Abubakar, and Ntong F. Ntong reaffirmed that FRSC operatives are not empowered by law to impound vehicles or retain licences arbitrarily.
Damages Reduced but Verdict Upheld
While the court maintained FRSC’s liability, it revised the financial penalty. The original N30 million awarded in damages by the lower court was reduced to N10 million, covering both general and exemplary damages.
The Incident: A COVID-Era Traffic Stop Gone Wrong
The case dates back to 2020, during the COVID-19 lockdown. Dr. Shebbs was reportedly stopped along Bende Road in Umuahia by FRSC officials for a routine inspection. According to his testimony, the officers found no faults with his vehicle during the initial check but demanded a bribe. When he refused, they conducted a second inspection, alleged his tyre was worn out, and then confiscated his driver’s licence while issuing a ₦3,000 booking fine.
Rather than comply with what he considered an unlawful extortion, Dr. Shebbs filed a human rights lawsuit at the Abia High Court, which ruled in his favor. That decision has now been reinforced by the Court of Appeal.
Legal Implication: FRSC Can’t Operate Outside the Law
This ruling sets a significant legal precedent by reaffirming that the FRSC cannot act as judge, jury, and enforcer. It underscores that while the agency has regulatory powers, it must act within the ambit of the law and constitutional rights of citizens.
Legal analysts say the judgment could trigger a wave of litigation against unlawful seizures by traffic authorities and serves as a warning to government agencies against overreach.
