Forgotten Dairies
Understanding Nigeria’s Tinted Glass Law And Its National Security Rationale -By Kelvin Adegbenga
There is no doubt that criminal elements have, over time, exploited tinted vehicles to facilitate kidnapping, armed robbery, and other violent crimes. We must recognise that Nigeria is contending with complex security issues. As citizens, it behoves us to strike a reasonable balance between personal convenience or perceived privacy and the collective need for safety and security.
The debate around the enforcement of Nigeria’s tinted-glass regulations has once again taken centre stage, fuelled by recent court action and public commentary. While opinions may differ, the law itself is unambiguous. The Motor Vehicles (Prohibition of Tinted Glass) Act, CAP M21, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria (formerly Decree No. 6 of 1991), clearly “prohibits the tinting or treating in any other way of any glass fitted in a motor vehicle to render persons in the vehicle obscure or invisible”.
It is instructive to note that Section 1(1) of the Act expressly provides that:
“Except with the permission of the appropriate authority designated for this Act and for such good cause as may be determined from time to time by the appropriate authority, no person shall cause any glass fitted on a motor vehicle to be—
(a) tinted; or
(b) shaded; or
(c) coloured lightly or thickly; or
(d) darkened; or
(e) treated in any other way.”
This provision leaves no room for ambiguity. The default position of the law is prohibition, subject only to permission granted by the appropriate authority for good cause. In effect, tinted glass is not a right; it is a regulated exception.
Against this clear statutory backdrop, the ex parte injunction reportedly issued by Justice Joe Egwu of the Delta State High Court, Orerokpe, purporting to stop and bar the Inspector General of Police (IGP), the Nigeria Police Force (NPF), and the Commissioner of Police, Delta State Police Command, from resuming enforcement of the tinted-glass permit policy nationwide, amounts to an unnecessary distraction. Indeed, the suit itself ought not to have been entertained in the first place.
Why? Because there is an existing Act of the National Assembly that outrightly prohibits the tinting or treatment of vehicle glass, except as permitted by law. More importantly, Section 5 of the Act confers jurisdiction on the Federal High Court to try offenders under this Act.
This raises serious jurisdictional questions about the propriety of proceedings before a State High Court on a matter so clearly governed by federal legislation with a designated enforcement and adjudicatory framework.
The Nigerian Police Force, as the statutory enforcer of this law, has not acted outside its powers or jurisdiction. To suggest otherwise is to misread both the letter and spirit of the law.
Consequently, the posture adopted by some commentators and associations, including the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), as well as the implication of the Delta State High Court’s order, is injurious to matters of national security and can reasonably be viewed as an affront to constituted authorities charged with keeping the country safe.
I align firmly with the Nigerian Police Force’s decision to resume the implementation of the tinted-glass permit regime. This policy was not introduced in a vacuum. It is a response to escalating security challenges in several parts of the country and follows a careful review of emerging threats and criminal tactics.
The safety of lives and property remains a core responsibility of the state, and proactive measures should be encouraged, not undermined.
There is no doubt that criminal elements have, over time, exploited tinted vehicles to facilitate kidnapping, armed robbery, and other violent crimes. We must recognise that Nigeria is contending with complex security issues. As citizens, it behoves us to strike a reasonable balance between personal convenience or perceived privacy and the collective need for safety and security.
In conclusion, the merits of the tinted-glass permit regime are innumerable, from enhanced visibility for law enforcement to deterrence of criminal activity. Professional bodies and pressure groups, including the NBA, should therefore be circumspect and measured in their public interventions on issues that touch directly on national security.
The law is clear, the threat is real, and responsible enforcement is not oppression, it is protection.
Kelvin Adegbenga writes from Ikeja, Lagos. kelvinadegbenga@yahoo.com
