JUST IN: Court Delivers Verdict In Suit Seeking Reversal Of Lagos Okada Ban

JUST IN: Court Delivers Verdict In Suit Seeking Reversal Of Lagos Okada Ban

The Lagos State Federal High Court dismissed a suit filed by a Lagos resident, Julius Ajibulu, seeking to overturn the Lagos State Government’s ban on commercial motorcycles (okada) and tricycles (keke) on some of the state’s roads.

In his 27-page decision, Justice Akintayo Aluko held that the applicant failed to establish that the Lagos State Government lacks the authority to prohibit the operation of tricycles and motorcycles on designated state roads.

The Lagos State Government took action against okada and keke on January 27, 2020, prohibiting their operations in six local government areas (LGAs), nine local council development areas (LCDAs), and ten major highways across the state beginning February 1, 2020.

The government also prohibited the use of okadas and tricycles on 40 bridges and flyovers throughout the state.

Read Also JUST IN: Buhari Gives Ex-IGP Arase Fresh Appointment

To address the chaos and disorderliness caused by the illegal operations of okada and tricycle riders in restricted areas, the government directed security operatives to begin total enforcement of the state’s Transport Sector Reform Law of 2018.

However, as the first to fourth defendants, the plaintiff sued the Governor of Lagos State, the Attorney General of Lagos State, the Commissioner for Transportation and Speaker, and the Lagos State House of Assembly.

The plaintiff contended that sections 15, 16, 19, 46 and 68 of the Lagos State Transport Sector Reform Law 2018 violated sections 1, 4, 5, items 11 and 63 of the exclusive legislative list in part 1, second schedule to the constitution.

He also claimed that it violated sections 10(3)(t) of the Federal Road Safety Commission (Establishment) Act, 92 of the Federal Road Safety Commission (Establishment) Act, and 1 of the Federal Highways Act/Subsidiary Legislation Cap F13, LFN, 2004.

Read Also Drama As Armed Robber Kills Gang Member While Trying To Rob Victim In Anambra

In his decision, Justice Aluko agreed with the plaintiff that section 4(3) of the constitution grants the National Assembly the authority to make laws on any matter on the exclusive legislative list, to the exclusion of the Houses of Assembly of States.

He held: “The Plaintiff has referred the court to items 11 and 63 of part 1 in the exclusive legislative list which have to do with construction, alteration and maintenance of such roads as may be declared by the National Assembly to be Federal trunk roads and traffic on Federal trunks roads.

“The Plaintiff has however failed to show to the court that all the over 40 roads and bridges listed in his reliefs are Federal trunk roads declared by the National Assembly as provided under items 11 and 63 in the Exclusive Legislative list under part 1 of the 2nd schedule to the Constitution.

“The Plaintiff failed to establish before the court that the provisions of sections 15, 16, 19, 46 and 68 of the Lagos State Transport Sector Reform Law 2018 were made to apply to the operations of tricycles and motorcycles in respect of the over 40 roads mentioned in his reliefs.”

The judge noted that Ajibulu “failed woefully” to prove his entitlement to the reliefs stated in the originating summons.

“The Plaintiffs has failed to establish that the State House of Assembly has no power to have made the law in contention and has equally failed to establish that the State government has no power to ban the operation of tricycles and motorcycles in respect of the designated roads in Lagos State.

“Granting the reliefs of the Plaintiff without placing any credible evidence before the court is tantamount to preventing the State House of Assembly from making laws for the peace, order and good government of the state or any part thereof and engaging in such venture will undoubtedly constitute a violation of and amount to overrunning Section 4(7)CFRN, 1999 (as amended).

“That is forbidden and this court will not venture into such unconstitutional enterprise.

“Coming from the foregoing, the Plaintiff has failed to prove his case by credible evidence as required by law.

“Accordingly, the case of the Plaintiff lacks merit and same is hereby dismissed,” he said.

For More News Join Our WhatsApp Group With This Link Below

https://chat.whatsapp.com/HlD7kmxUzAc2lwlP7yuXzk