Powers To Impose Fine

Fine is a criminal sanction, that is imposed against those who violate the law. They are mostly reserved for less serious and non-violent crimes. Their main purpose is to provide deterrence and punishment for the defendant, in attempts to prevent them from committing offences. In the judgement delivered by Justice Abba Aji of the Court of Appeal in the case of Abdullahi V. Kano State (2015) LPELR (CA), he defined fine as a payment of money ordered by a court from a person who had been found guilty of violating the law and that a fine may be specified as the punishment for an offender, usually a minor offence, but could also be specified and used as an option to imprisonment for major crimes or a compliment to other punishments specified for such crimes.
Several judicial authorities have made it clear that awarding a fine is a judicial act and it is the sole prerogative of a court of law under Section 6 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended); No other organisations or bodies can usurp that power. Any law that would consign to anybody other than the court the power to award fine is unconstitutional. The court will not allude any authority to act ultra vires its powers under the constitution. Sections 1& 6 of the constitution empower the courts to declare any Act of the National Assembly inconsistent with the provisions of the constitution null and void By 5 1(1) x (3) of the 1999 Constitution, the constitution is superior and its provision are binding on all authorities and persons in Nigeria.
Therefore, if any law is inconsistent with the provisions of the constitution, the constitution shall prevail, and the other law shall to the extent of that inconsistency be void.
Imposition of fines by regulatory agencies without recourse to the courts is illegal and did not accord with the rules of national justice and fairness. The Federal High Court in Lagos has ruled that the Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC) lacks the power to impose fines on erring motorist. Justice James Tsoho held that FRSC cannot turn itself into a court of law by punishing those who commit traffic offences. The court declares 5.10 (4) as 5.28 (2) of the FRSC (Establishment Act) 2007 and Regulation 143 of the Nigerian Roads Traffic Regulation 2011 null and void for being inconsistent with 5.6 of the 1999 Constitution which vest judicial powers in the court.
The court in the FRSC case noted that imposition of fine connotes conviction for an alleged offence. This presupposes a trial and conviction of the person fined, it is thus very clear that the FRSC not being a court of law cannot impose fine, especially as it has no power to conduct trials. So imposing fine by the FRSC, is a usurpation of judicial powers exclusively vested in the courts. The court held that though the National Assembly is empowered to make laws, it cannot go outside the limits set by the 1999 Constitution. So 5.28(2) of the FRSC Act 2007 which conferred power on the FRSC is unconstitutional and unenforceable. FRSC function should not go beyond issuance of mere notices of offences.
It is a cardinal principle of natural justice that no person be condemned without being heard. That is why person alleged to have committed an offence has to respond before a court of law during trial.

Nkechi Bright-Ewere