Breaking

Reps: Pros and cons of establishing FRSC armed squad 

Recently, the House of Representatives passed at second reading stage, a Bill for an Act to establish an armed squad unit within the Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC). The move was however, greeted with mixed reactions, mostly on the dissenting side. JOSHUA EGBODO writes

Bill scales second reading 

On Thursday October 10, 2024, the House of Representatives passed for second reading, a Bill to amend the Federal Road Safety Commission Act of 2007.  

Its general principles

Jointly sponsored by Hon. Abiodun Adesida and Hon. Olaide Muhammed, it seeks to establish a Road Safety Special Armed Squad. The lawmakers proposed that the squad will enhance the commission’s ability to prevent and minimise road traffic crashes if enacted. It specifically in addition, will grant the Corps’ officers on the rank of Deputy Corps Marshal some benefits, including retirement packages.

The lawmakers said the Bill will  empower officers of the Corps “To manage road traffic administration and safety including preventing and minimising road traffic crashes, supervising users of public roads, and regulating traffic. The commission will have the powers to clear obstructions on public roads and educate drivers, motorists, and the public on proper road use”.

The Bill which was subsequently referred to the House Committee on the FRSC for further legislative action was believed to have been in response to a comment by a former Corps Marshal of the Commission, Dauda Biu, who about a year ago, said FRSC personnel ought to bear firearms due to increasing security challenges across the country. He argued that arming the officers would protect personnel who were often attacked by criminal road users.

FRSC’s core mandate

The Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC) has the primary function of preventing road crashes and minimising their consequences, clearing obstructions from highways, educating drivers, motorists, and other road users on safe driving practices, enforcing traffic laws and regulations, and providing emergency services and assistance to crash victims.

More specific roles include vehicle inspection and certification, issuance of driver’s licenses, registration of vehicles, traffic management and control, accident investigation and data analysis, providing traffic information and advisory services, conducting public enlightenment campaigns, collaborating with other agencies to enhance road safety, regulating and monitoring the use of number plates, and implementing the National Road Safety Policy. These points have however, left many with the argument of why the demand for firearms.

The revolt

Expectedly, public reaction to the move has been more of revolt, as analysts argued that the duty call of personnel of the FRSC does not require bearing arms, more at a time the country is faced with a lot of challenges, and resultant cases of mental instability at the peak.

There were reported massive call, especially through social media platforms on the National Assembly to immediately discard the proposal which is believed to be a move that may endanger the lives of road users, including drivers, passengers, and others.

President of the Joint Drivers Association of Nigeria, Akintade Abiodun, was quoted in one such such reports (The Punch) to have urged the House of Representatives to drop the bill in the interest of public safety, as according to him, curbing traffic offences, which is the FRSC’s core duty, does not require firearms, as he further cautioned that arming the officers could pose a danger to road users.

“We disagree with the bill, and it should be dropped. What do road safety officers need guns for? We have been obeying them without guns, so there is no need for them to be armed. They are bound to abuse or misuse the guns, thereby endanger the lives of road users, especially drivers and passengers.

“All members of the Joint Drivers Association of Nigeria are law-abiding citizens, and we have been respecting and obeying road safety officers. So, I see no reason for them to carry guns. They just want to complicate the problems of this country because they are bound to abuse it.

“Drivers are not criminals; any misconduct is usually within the realm of traffic offences. Why do you need to curb traffic offences with guns? Whose interests are they protecting?”, he said.

NSA’s worrisome verdict on illicit arms

Just a week after the House of Representatives passed the Bill for second reading, the National Security Adviser (NSA), Nuhu Ribadu also declared that many arms used to commit crimes in Nigeria were originally government-owned, at the Arms Destruction Exercise organised by the National Centre for the Control of Small Arms And Light Weapons in Abuja.

According to the NSA, the weapons ended up in the hands of non-state actors due to corrupt persons within the nation’s security agencies, saying such acts facilitated the access and availability of weapons for terrorists, bandits and several other criminals, assuring however that the government would do everything possible to ensure the Nigeria’s safety.

“We have to find a way of putting a stop to this. We must, if we want to recover our country and live in peace and stability. The worst human being is a policeman or a soldier who will take arms from his own formations and sell it or hire it out for the bad people to come and kill his own colleagues.

“We must fight these people but also, there are merchants of death and evil from outside the world. The proliferation of illicit small arms and light weapons remains a major threat to our national security, exacerbating issues such as insurgency, banditry and other violent crimes,” Ribadu said.

He also noted that destroying unserviceable, obsolete and recovered arms was a demonstration of government’s commitment to a secure future for all Nigerians. “All illicit arms, not only unserviceable, all illicit. Any weapon that is taken out there that is through an illegal process. We have laws that govern ownership of small arms. If you do not follow it, it is an illegal arm and it is supposed to be destroyed completely”, he stressed at the event.

Why give more arms?

With the declaration of the NSA over how arms are illegally sold or hired out to criminals by personnel of security agencies in the country, pundits have thus queried the rationale of giving more arms to agencies who do not need them to deliver on their core responsibilities. The question thus is what would be the guarantee that bad FRSC personnel will not adopt similar corrupt practices if given arms.

What next?

The House of Representatives Committee on the FRSC is expected to organise a public hearing on the Bill in due course, but with the public outcry already high, will it go ahead? It may, as such hearings usually offers the parliament the opportunity of harnessing public perception of any legislative instrument. Nigerians are therefore waiting in expectation of the next step.