Residents of Lagos State may have accepted the reality of the ban on operations of commercial motorcyclists, popularly called okada riders, on some roads in the state, but the legal battle seeking to upturn the court judgment which affirmed the ban is still on.
However, the Lagos State Government may have shunned the legal action, perhaps not concerned about whatever is the outcome of the decision of the Court of Appeal, Lagos Division, where the motorcyclists had proceeded to challenge the judgment of the lower court.
The commercial motorcyclists had filed an appeal against the judgment since April 2013, but it is now a year that the government had refused to oppose it.
The government may have shunned the rules of the appellate court which provide that respondents must file their briefs within 30 days of being served with the appellant’s.
But the Senior Special Assistant to Lagos State Governor on Justice Sector Reform, Mr. Lanre Akinsola, in a chat with our correspondent, denied the allegation that the government had shunned the appeal.
Akinsola said government was already working on its respondent’s brief, adding that its filing had only been delayed by closing down of the Lagos Division of the Court of Appeal for renovation purposes.
“We are working on our brief; but you know that the Court of Appeal in Lagos has been shut down for renovation,” Akinsola said.
The appellants, under the aegis of the All Nigerians Autobike Commercial Owners and Workers Association, have filed an application, urging the Court of Appeal to hear their appeal without the opposition from the respondents.
Justice Aisha Opesanwo of a Lagos High Court in Ikeja had on December 13, 2012, in a judgment, dismissed the suit filed by appellants challenging the propriety of the law.
The motorcyclists had sued under the aegis of the ANACOWA. Apart from the association, other claimants in the suit dismissed by the lower court were officials of the association and others using motorcycles as their means of private transportation: Mr. Yusuf Oladimeji, Mr. Mordecai Samuel, Mr. Aremu Simeon and Mr. Ejiofor Godwin.
The claimants are now the appellants before the Court of Appeal, Lagos Division.
The respondents both at the Lagos High Court and at the appellate court are: the Lagos State Government, the Lagos State House of Assembly and the state Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr. Ade Ipaye.
The appellants, through their counsel, Mr. Bamidele Aturu, argue in their application dated June 24, 2013, that they had served their appellant’s briefs on all the three respondents on March 27, 2013.
Aturu maintained that the respondents were no longer entitled to filing their briefs of arguments in opposition to their appeal.
The application states, “The 30 days within which the respondents have to file their respective respondents’ briefs have long expired. The respondents were served with the appellants’ brief of argument on the following days respectively:
“The 1st respondent was served on March 27, 2013; the 2nd respondent was served on March 27, 2013; and the 3rd respondent was served on March 27, 2013; while a copy of the appellants’ brief was served on the counsel for the 2nd respondent on April 2, 2013.
“The time allowed by the rules of this honourable court for the respondents to file their respective respondents brief of argument has lapsed and the respondents have failed to file their respective respondents’ brief.
“This honourable court has the unfettered power to set down the appellants’ appeal for hearing, the respondents having failed, refused or neglected to file their respondents brief within the time stipulated by the rules of this honourable court.
“It is in the interest of justice to grant this application. The respondents will not be prejudiced by the grant of this application.”
In their brief of argument, the appellants expressed dissatisfaction over the judgment of the Lagos High Court, which dismissed, among other arguments of the claimants, that the state government lacked the power to regulate traffic on the federal trunk or highway roads.
The appellants’ brief reads in part, “On the 2nd day of August 2012, the Governor of Lagos State, the 1st respondent herein, signed into law the Lagos State Traffic Law, No. 4 of 2012, which was passed by the 2nd respondent ( the House of Assembly).
“The said law in section 3 specifically prohibits the use of carts, wheel barrows, motorcycles and tricycles of some roads, bridges and streets in certain local government areas in Lagos State.
“However, the prohibited roads listed under Items 1 – 11 and in other parts of Schedule II of the said law are Federal Trunk or Highway roads within the meaning of the Federal Highways Act, Cap., F 13, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.
“The 1st appellant which is an association duly registered under the Companies and Allied Matters Act to protects the interest of commercial motorcyclists and the other appellants who are individuals and private motorcyclists, who use their motorcycles as a means of private transportation, challenged the law by way of an Originating Summons at the High Court of Lagos State on the grounds that the respondents had no power to regulate traffic on Federal Trunk Roads or Highways in Lagos State and that the law was discriminatory and to that extent a breach of their fundamental rights.”
The appellants submitted six issues for determination by the Court of Appeal.
The issues are that, “Whether the learned trial judge was in holding that the roads listed in Schedule II of the Lagos State Road Traffic Law, 2012 are not federal trunk roads;
“Whether the learned trial judge was right in holding that the respondents could validly enact section 3(1) of the Lagos State Road Traffic Law, 2012 and Schedule II thereof which prohibited the use of certain modes of transportation on Federal Highways/Trunk Roads.
“Whether having regard to the circumstances of the case, the learned trial judge was right in her decision that the means or mode of movement is not recognised in section 41 of the Constitution which guarantees the right to freedom of movement.
“Whether the learned trial judge was correct in deciding that only persons who live in a common location can validly complain against breach of their right not to be discriminated against under section 42 of the Constitution;
“Whether the learned trial judge was right to have held that except a right is specifically provided for in Chapter IV of the Constitution no declaration can be made by a court in the name of fundamental right.
“Whether the lelarned trial judge was right to have refused to restrain the respondents from forcible seizure of the property of the appellants and order release of the already seized property of the appellants by the respondents.”
Aturu asked the Court of Appeal to determine the issues in the favour of his clients and set aside the judgment of the Lagos High Court.
The highways on which the appellants argue that the state government lack the power to regulate traffic are: Lagos-Ibadan Expressway, Apapa-Oshodi Expressway, Oworonshoki-Oshodi Expressway, Lagos-Ikorodu Expressway, Lagos-Abeokuta Expressway and Third Mainland Bridge. Others are, Eti-Osa/Lekki-Epe Expressway, Lagos-Badagry Expressway, Funsho Williams Avenue, Agege Motor Road and Eti-Osa/Lekki Coastal Road.
The roads are as listed in the Items 1 to 11 of Schedule II of the Lagos State Road Traffic Law.
No date has been fixed for the hearing of the appellants’ application and the abstantive appeal
No comments:
Post a Comment