Nigerians have expressed overwhelming opposition to a bill that seeks to authorize the Federal Road Safety Commission (FRSC) to bear arms, according to a report by Sunday Punch. The proposed legislation, viewed as potentially dangerous for road users, has sparked widespread concern.
On October 10, 2024, the House of Representatives advanced the bill, which aims to create a special armed unit within the FRSC, to its second reading. The bill, jointly sponsored by Abiodun Adesida (Ondo) and Olaide Lateef (Oyo), seeks to amend the 2007 FRSC Act to enhance the agency’s capabilities in handling increasing security challenges. This move follows a call made by former Corps Marshal Dauda Biu, who in 2023 suggested that FRSC personnel needed arms for protection amid growing threats from criminals.
However, many Nigerians, including civil society groups, drivers, and road users, have rejected the bill, citing concerns over potential abuse of firearms and the risk it poses to public safety.
Public Outcry Against the Bill
An online poll conducted by Sunday Punch across various social media platforms revealed that a majority of Nigerians are against the bill. On Facebook, over 1,000 comments poured in, with the majority opposing the legislation. Similarly, on X (formerly Twitter), 92% of the 1,115 respondents rejected the proposal, while only 8% supported it. Instagram users also overwhelmingly opposed the bill.
Drivers and Transport Leaders Voice Concerns
The President of the Joint Drivers Association of Nigeria, Akintade Abiodun, criticized the bill, urging lawmakers to drop it for the sake of public safety. He argued that curbing traffic offenses does not require firearms and warned that arming FRSC officers could lead to misuse, endangering drivers and passengers.
“We have been obeying FRSC officers without them carrying guns. There is no reason for this now, and it will only make things worse. The guns could be misused, putting everyone at risk,” Abiodun said.
Kasali Ajisafe, Secretary of the Park Management System in Oyo State, echoed these concerns, calling the bill a “bad idea” that could escalate tensions on the roads. “If they carry guns, innocent people could be killed,” he warned.
A vehicle owner, Akin Akanji, questioned the timing of the proposal, considering Nigeria’s ongoing economic crisis. “Our lawmakers should focus on more pressing issues. People are struggling to survive, and instead of addressing hunger and poverty, they want to arm road safety officers. It’s insensitive and unnecessary.”
Civil Society Groups Reject Move
Civil society organizations have also expressed disapproval. Urban Alert, a civic tech group, described the bill as a “misplaced priority” and urged lawmakers to focus on reforming the FRSC, particularly in curbing bribery and corruption within the agency.
Anthony Adejuwon, the group’s Team Lead, cautioned that arming the FRSC could lead to abuses similar to the police brutality witnessed across the country. “The FRSC should not rely on arms to enforce road safety. Instead, stricter protocols around driver licensing and traffic management would help the agency regain its credibility,” he said.
However, some voices like Steve Aluko, Executive Director of the Civil Liberty Organisation (Northern Region), supported the idea of arming FRSC officers. Aluko argued that in the face of Nigeria’s rising insecurity, arming a select group of FRSC officers could help them protect themselves and others, provided the necessary safeguards are in place to prevent misuse.
Mixed Reactions on Social Media
The debate extended to social media, where netizens voiced their opinions. Kenneth Chukwu commented on Facebook that the bill could result in more fatalities on Nigerian roads, arguing that the funds for firearms could be better used to create jobs. Another user, Bricks Philipsouls, criticized the bill as one of the worst decisions by the current administration, stressing that insecurity cannot be addressed by simply arming more people.
In contrast, a minority of users, like Lens Hong, supported the bill, clarifying that it aimed to create a specialized unit within the FRSC to protect its infrastructure, not to arm officers patrolling roads. However, others, like Izuchukwu Ekwenze, rejected this reasoning, arguing that the role of FRSC officers is to ensure road safety, not combat crime.
Calls for Alternatives
Several users and civic organizations have called on the government to explore alternative ways of improving road safety. Suggestions included investing in mobile ambulances and modern medical equipment for accident response, as well as implementing stricter traffic laws. Many argued that firearms are unnecessary for traffic management and could lead to increased violence on the roads.
As the debate continues, all eyes are on the House Committee on FRSC, which is expected to deliberate further on the bill in the coming weeks. For now, the overwhelming public sentiment is that arming the FRSC would do more harm than good, with many Nigerians urging lawmakers to prioritize public safety over militarizing road safety enforcement.
