NPF AND TINTED VEHICLE GLASSES
The Police should act within the law
In line with the directive from the Inspector-General of Police (IGP), Kayode Egbetokun, the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) last Thursday commenced the enforcement of the Tinted Glass Permit on vehicles. According to a statement by Mohammed Halima, the operation is being carried out in strict compliance with the Motor Vehicles (Prohibition of Tinted Glass) Act, 2004. “Vehicles with tinted glasses must now present approved permits during checks or face sanctions,” the statement warned. But we fail to see how the NPF can continue to enforce the controversial policy that is already facing legal challenge from several stakeholders.
Last Friday, the Federal High Court sitting in Warri, Delta State, ordered the NPF and the IGP to suspend the enforcement of the tinted glass permit by vehicle owners. The court asked the police and the IGP to maintain the status quo and “respect judicial processes pending further proceedings in the matter.” Although the case was from an individual, the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) had last month also instituted a public interest suit against the police to challenge the legality of the policy. The directive, according to the NBA, violates rights to dignity, privacy, freedom of movement, and property, noting that the police appear to rely on the Motor Tinted Glass (Prohibition) Act, a 1991 military decree that may not be “reasonably justifiable in a democratic society”.
Ordinarily, we would have considered the measure a welcome development especially in the face of the clear and present danger posed by the activities of terrorists, kidnappers, armed robbers, and sundry criminal elements. But within a few hours of the enforcement of the policy, there were reports of some unscrupulous police officers harassing and extorting money from innocent motorists. Besides, there are questions about what a special permit can achieve beyond the money that would be accrued from the registration. With or without any special permit, occupants of such vehicles should always be made to stop and wind down their window glasses for identification.
Besides, it is one thing to issue a directive as in the present case, and yet another to implement without needless consideration for some sacred cows. The same NPF is silent on the indiscriminate use of Police Supernumerary (SPY) plate numbers on highways across the country, including by people of questionable character. A former IGP once confessed that several individuals have turned the use of SPY number plates and tinted glass into a status symbol with “reports that some criminal elements are also utilising them as cover for their nefarious activities.”
There is no doubt that in a status-obsessed society like ours, people who consider themselves as “Very Important Personalities” would always seek to flaunt their “importance” by appearing different from the rest of society. Ironically, the Police have made itself a willing collaborator. Local Government chairmen and their spouses; traditional rulers; councillors and their wives; and indeed, anyone who can afford the fee do apply for and obtain these special police courtesies and privileges. It is therefore no surprise that criminals have equally leveraged access to these privileges and now hide under them to perpetrate their heinous acts. It is clear that enforcing the policy would not apply to those who already have contingents of police personnel as escorts.
While we endorse measures that would help in tackling the security challenge in the country, we enjoin the police not to take the law into their own hands by seeking to enforce a policy that the court has halted. The proper thing to do is to appeal the judgment. But beyond that, the NPF must work to redeem its public image. The perception that the policy was designed for extortion and not for security is rife.
