Need to revisit Lagos traffic law on vehicle seizure, By Rotimi Fashakin
It is doubtless that Governor Babajide Sanwoolu and his team are trying very hard to improve Lagos state. As a Lagosian, I can attest to the impressive road infrastructure that had come to the service of the last two years. It is cheering news that the Blue line of the railway infrastructure shall also be at the service of the people before the end of 2022. What needs to happen, as matter of urgency, is the amendment to the body of traffic rules that subsist in Lagos state.
It is disproportionate to seize the vehicle of a ‘one-way’ traffic offender. In law, traffic offence is a strict liability offence. What it means is that there is no need to prove Mens rea (intention). A legislation that prescribes seizure of an asset for an offence – when the legality of the asset is not in question – is to, say the least, very draconian.
It is quite understandable, however, that Laws are enacted to regulate behaviour within a polity. An emotional way of advancing this argument is to express the frustration of government and law-abiding citizens over the chaotic traffic situation in Lagos. But this is both inequitable and disproportionate to the offence.
Today’s (Thursday, 22nd September, 2022) Oxford Mail newspaper reported the arraignment of a woman who was brought to court for wrong way driving on M40. If she had done that in Lagos state, her car would have been impounded and auctioned! But the court held that the comeuppance for the offence shall be: disqualification for driving for 20 months; retaking an extended driving test; 12-month Community order; 250 hours of unpaid work and £180 fine.
What is noted in the court ruling was total concentration on the driver, that is, the driver of the vehicle. A car cannot drive itself. The legality of the car was not what was under adjudication; it was the man who committed the infraction by using the car wrongly! Given that his ownership of the car is still not what is under judicial scrutiny, why should he be deprived of that ownership by the State? And truly, chapter four of the Nigerian constitution guarantees every Nigerian the right to own property. Any law that seeks to deprive the Nigerian of that property – when the legality of the acquisition of the property is not in question- is to all intents and purposes, very unconstitutional.
Given the foregoing, how equitable is it to make the comeuppance for a strict liability offence to be so extreme?
Traffic Offences fall into this category. Intention (Mens rea) to commit the offence is not needed to prove guilt. This explains why the law enforcement agents (LASMA, POLICE etc) hide behind trees waiting for potential breakers. It is even alleged that they deliberately remove the ‘no-entry’ signs on the one-way roads! They have unwittingly made themselves – using the instrumentality of the Law – as Predators pouncing on Preys!
Quite truly, many motorists have innocently committed that offence. But in a situation where the burden of proof is not on the prosecution to prove Mens rea, the offender is made to pay dearly for his unintentional error. That should never be the objective of the Law. It is meant to regulate conduct and not for oppression of the citizens.
This is one of the reasons we shall continue to miss the late Chief Gani Fawehinmi, SAM, SAN. If he were to be alive, he would have tested the constitutionality of this Lagos state Law.
For me, this is an unjust piece of Legislation. The Bible says, Woe to them that decree unrighteous statutes …. Isaiah 10:1
-Fashakin, FNSE, a public affairs analyst writes from London
