The Lagos State Government has issued a firm clarification regarding a recent Court of Appeal judgment, stating that the ruling which declared certain Vehicle Inspection Officer (VIO) activities illegal in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) has no bearing on the operations of its own Vehicle Inspection Service (VIS).
In a statement released on Sunday, the Lagos State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr. Lawal Pedro (SAN), addressed what he described as a “viral misrepresentation” of the appellate court’s decision.
The clarification follows a judgment by the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, which affirmed a 2025 ruling by Justice Evelyn Maha of the Federal High Court, Abuja. The lower court had held that VIO officials in the FCT were “not empowered by any law or statute to stop, impound or confiscate vehicles and/or impose fines on motorists,” and subsequently restrained such activities in Abuja.
While acknowledging the validity of the judgment, the Lagos State Government stressed that its application is strictly limited.
“The judgment, though binding, is not of general application or of nationwide effect in Nigeria,” the statement read.
The government argued that only parties to the original suit and jurisdictions lacking their own statutes on VIO operations, such as the FCT, are bound by the ruling.
The Attorney-General emphasized that Nigeria operates a federal system, where legislative powers are clearly delineated. He noted that vehicle inspection and traffic management fall under “residual matters,” placing them within the purview of state governments.
Unlike the FCT, Lagos State has a specific statutory framework: the Lagos State Transport Sector Reform Law. Section 12(1) of this law empowers the State VIS to inspect vehicles for roadworthiness, conduct pre-registration checks, issue Road Worthiness Certificates, and cooperate with other agencies on traffic enforcement.
Furthermore, Section 23(1) prescribes fines for offences and outlines a clear procedure. Fines may be paid on the spot if imposed by a mobile court, or within 48 hours upon issuance of a ticket by an authorized officer. Motorists who default may face charges in a Magistrate or Mobile Court but retain the right to defend themselves and challenge the validity of any ticket.
The government insisted that the enforcement procedures adopted by its VIS officers are in “strict compliance with the state law and are neither unlawful nor unconstitutional.”
The Ministry of Justice advised the public not to be misled by the “misinterpretation” of the federal court rulings and urged motorists to cooperate with VIS officers to avoid sanctions.
It added that the state would continue to ensure traffic enforcement is conducted with “civility, decorum and respect for road users.” However, it issued a stark warning: any motorist who disobeys or assaults a VIS officer in the course of their statutory duty will be “liable to arrest and prosecution.”
