A human rights activist and public interest lawyer, Abubakar Marshal, has warned the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, over the continued operations of the Directorate of Road Traffic Services, known as VIO, despite a court order barring them from impounding vehicles and imposing fines.

Marshal, in a letter dated March 12 to the minister, warned that failure to comply within seven days would result in legal action.

A Federal High Court in Abuja had, on October 20, 2024, restrained the Directorate of Road Traffic Services from stopping vehicles on the road, impounding or confiscating vehicles, and imposing fines on motorists.

Justice Evelyn Maha issued the order in a judgment on a fundamental rights enforcement suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1695/202 declaring that the actions of the VIO either through their agents, servants, and assigns, from impounding, confiscating the vehicle of motorists, or imposing a fine on any motorist as doing so is wrongful, oppressive, and unlawful by themselves.

Despite the ruling, VIO officials have allegedly resumed operations, leading to confrontations with motorists.

Although the VIO has appealed against the judgment, the Appeal Court has yet to give its verdict on the matter.

However, Marshal, in his letter, accused the agency of openly defying the court’s order and also harassing motorists.

Marshal said, “Sadly, the officials of the Directorate of Road Traffic Services in utter violation of binding and subsisting orders, have resumed the stoppage, impounding, confiscation of cars and the imposition of fines within the FCT.

“We have been inundated with calls over the renewed illegal activities of the VIO within the FCT and have moved around the capital city to confirm their illegal operations, which have led to violent confrontations between some of these officials and vexed motorists. Video evidence abound.”

He further emphasized that as a senior member of the legal profession, Wike must ensure that agencies under his authority do not act in “egregious and contemptuous disdain of an express order of the court.”

Marshal said, “As a senior member of the legal profession, we are perturbed that officials under your command and authority could embark on such egregious and contemptuous disdain of an express order of court.

“On account of the foregoing dear minister, you are hereby required to employ the instrumentality of your good offices to restore compliance with the foregoing positive and binding orders pending the final determination of the appeal and cross-appeal processes.

“Please note that upon failing to comply with the foregoing request, seven days commencing from the date of receipt of this letter, we shall take all legal steps to commit you to prison for contempt of the orders of the court.

‘Whilst anticipating your cooperation and understanding, please accept my esteem and professional regards.”