Our Reporter, Abuja
A civil society organisation, the Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre (RULAAC), has criticised the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) over its recent defence of the Motor Vehicle Tinted Glass Permit Policy, accusing the police of confrontational rhetoric, disregard for judicial restraint, and failure to address public trust deficits associated with traffic enforcement.
In a press statement dated December 19, 2025, and signed by its Executive Director, Mr Okechukwu Nwanguma, RULAAC said the statement issued by the Force Public Relations Officer raised concerns not only about the content of the police’s position but also about what it revealed regarding the institution’s attitude to civic criticism, accountability, and constitutionalism.
RULAAC clarified that it was not disputing the existence of the Motor Vehicles (Prohibition of Tinted Glass) Act, 2004, nor the statutory powers of the Inspector-General of Police under the law. Rather, it said the core issue was how the policy is exercised, enforced, and communicated within a democratic framework.
“The issue in contention has never been whether the Police can regulate tinted glass, but how such regulation is exercised, enforced, and communicated in a constitutional democracy,” the organisation stated.
The group faulted the Police for what it described as a failure to exercise restraint in the face of ongoing litigation, noting that matters relating to the policy are currently before courts of competent jurisdiction, including Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1821/2025.
According to RULAAC, public insistence by the Police that “no court has restrained” enforcement misses the constitutional point and risks prejudicing judicial processes. It warned that threats of enforcement and dismissive language toward critics could undermine public confidence in the institution.
RULAAC also condemned what it described as intemperate and unprofessional language in the Police statement, including references to “ignorant and mischievous claims” and accusations that critics were seeking “limelight and fame.”
“Such language is unbecoming of a national law enforcement institution and inconsistent with democratic policing principles,” the statement said, adding that the Police should not personalise legitimate policy criticism or frame dissent as malice.
The organisation argued that public scepticism surrounding the tinted glass permit system is rooted in longstanding experiences of abusive traffic enforcement, extortion at checkpoints, lack of transparency in fee collection, and weak internal accountability mechanisms within the Police.
While acknowledging security concerns cited by the Police, RULAAC maintained that such concerns must be addressed through proportional and intelligence-led policing, rather than blanket roadside enforcement that could create further opportunities for harassment of motorists.
It also dismissed claims that previous suspension of enforcement was an act of courtesy, insisting that what Nigerians require are clear legal safeguards and oversight mechanisms to prevent abuse of discretionary powers.
RULAAC emphasised that criticism by civil society organisations, professional bodies, and citizens strengthens, rather than weakens, institutional accountability. It warned that attempts to delegitimise scrutiny only deepen public fears of resistance to transparency.
The group called on the Nigeria Police Force to tone down confrontational rhetoric, respect ongoing judicial processes, engage critics with facts, and address the history of enforcement abuses linked to traffic regulations.
“Policing in a democracy is not measured by how forcefully laws are asserted, but by how responsibly power is exercised,” RULAAC said, adding that Nigerians deserve a Police Force that is firm against crime but respectful of the Constitution, the courts, and the citizens it serves.
