Another Killer Driver Nailed

I do not know if you read or followed my series on killer drivers published some months ago. The piece was on reckless, lawless, and suicidal drivers prowling all over our highways and maiming drivers, including uniform personnel especially those from the Federal Road Safety Corps.

The piece came in different captions: ‘Time to Tame Killer Drivers’, while another was captioned, ‘How to Tame Killer Drivers’. The whole thrust was to unleash the appropriate legal consequence as provided by the books. If you didn’t read it, I would suggest that you search them out because the materials would become handy to you and a loved one as they had the professional guidance of my law teacher.

Today, I don’t know whether to jump in excitement, celebrate the judiciary, pop a wine, host friends or just be moody. If I do any of the above, a precious life lost through the recklessness of a driver would not be restored. No action would make up for his death. The family will still be without a breadwinner while the Corps would still miss a dedicated staff whose life and dreams were cut short.

I am talking of the life of Chief Road Assistant Abiodun Ajomale, a patrol operative who as usual had gone out on a scheduled patrol duty to save life which is the ultimate mandate of the FRSC. Sadly, his life was cut short by a driver, Okpara Onyekachi. The tragic incident occurred in Lagos when the truck driver precisely on November 16, 2023, drove excessively and rammed into a stationary mini truck during a patrol fatally injuring Ajomale.

As I said, the incident occurred in 2023. I don’t know when the judgement was passed but I just stumbled on it and cared less even if the court proceedings were dragged. All I care about is that the Lagos High Court in its judgment, ruled that Onyekachi drove a 40-foot container truck at excessive speed and rammed into the marshal.

The court found his actions grossly negligent and unlawful, convicting him of involuntary manslaughter under the criminal law of Lagos State, 2015. I know other cases are pending such as the ones cited in 2025 involving the Corps personnel killed between September and December.

While we await judgement on these incidents, there is already excitement in the Corps as the Federal Road Safety has welcomed the judgment, describing it as a strong message against reckless driving and a landmark victory for road safety enforcement in Nigeria.

Notwithstanding the above, I have chosen not to bore you with other statistics, including data on people killed due to recklessness on the part of the diver. For the sake of this week’s focus, please permit me to run long snippets of one of the materials on this same subject just to whet the appetite of those who missed my write-up.

In one of the closing writeups, I gave kudos to my tutor for bearing with my nuisance over the turenchi that is the parlance of legal studies. I equally doffed my hat for his patience but wandered for how long he would be able to cope with my ability to endure the torture of another legal tutoring. Excitingly, he wrapped up on how to truly nail these groups of drivers without the unnecessary hiccups that slow down the judicial process or even still- birth the process.

I recall that he cautioned me not to lose focus on the issues identified as the pitfalls or factors that militate against effective prosecution and securing a conviction against drivers who cause death by dangerous driving or other unsafe driving practices (killer drivers). I pray to run these pitfalls next week.

He, however, noted that it is quite the opposite that the already identified factors are pigeonholed into or within a legal context. In the case of DICKSON MOSES VS. THE STATE ( S.C.308/2002), he continued, the Appellant was convicted by the trial court, the Ogun State High Court Ijebu-Ode Division for the offence of causing death by dangerous driving, a.k.a manslaughter.

The Court of Appeal, Ibadan Division upheld the judgment of the trial Court. When the Appellant approached the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court did not disturb the concurrent findings of both the trial court and the Court of Appeal.

It is instructive to note that the prosecution called six witnesses, including the Vehicle Inspection Officer (VIO) who tested and examined the vehicles involved in the crash/ accident as it were. In his testimony, the VIO told the court that in his opinion, the crash/ accident was not caused by any mechanical defect in any of the vehicles involved in the crash.

The Investigation Police Officer (IPO) on his own part also testified and tendered the sketch map of the crash scene and the vehicles involved. The Appellant did not impeach the testimony of the VIO who testified as an expert witness.

Rather, he attacked the sketch map as tendered by the IPO. As a matter of fact, he made a heavy case of the “failure” of the IPO to indicate on the sketch map the distance between the point of impact and the final resting position of the vehicles. In all, the Supreme Court did not find merit in the appeal and so it did not allow it.

Now, the point in the above case as it touches on the issues that hamper the conviction of killer drivers in Nigeria were to a very large extent, to the exception of some, adequately addressed as outlined below. The first is on Poor crash investigation –Here, he noted that the “Accused”/ Appellant couldn’t evade justice because of the way the investigation of the crash was conducted-

On this note, my tutor is of the firm view that every serious crash, particularly the one resulting in the death of anybody, should be investigated thoroughly with prosecution in view. On the issue of poor prosecutorial skill, he stated that it is taken for granted that since the charge was filed at the high court, the prosecution was conducted by a lawyer.

My teacher is equally of the view that prosecution of any such serious charge should be undertaken by a lawyer no matter the court where it is filed. The benefit readily far outweighs any assumed cost because it will go a long way in minimising the number of killer drivers who escape justice due to poor or very limited prosecutorial skills of non-lawyers and the ease with which defense lawyers capitalize on the loopholes to the advantage of such killer drivers.

Again, the standard of proof is never lowered to accommodate the interest or disadvantage of a non-lawyer prosecutor. On the want or dearth of expert evidence in the case cited, he maintained that the VIO gave evidence of the result of his investigation and his expert opinion, and the same was not impeached or discredited by the Accused/ Appellant.

Above all, the prosecution was able to garner, preserve, and utilize evidence in a manner that enabled a conviction. However, mention must be made that not much could be gleaned by this observer as to what materials the VIO availed himself of while conducting his investigation.

This is in view of the fact that the vehicle maintenance history and the driver’s driving history are matters that require strict documentation as provided for under the National Road Traffic Regulations (2012), but considering that the charge was filed in 2002, much has to be guessed about the likelihood of compliance and the availability and reliability of such essential data.

In addition to the foregoing, it is strongly canvassed that the issue of effective data generation, preservation, and usage cannot be overemphasized. There is also a need for the FRSC to fully exploit and implement the penalty point system with respect to suspension, withdrawal, and revocation of licenses of reprobate and recalcitrant drivers even as the fines regime is applied side by side.

Law enforcement globally inclusive of traffic laws achieves its deterrent purpose mainly because of the fear of detection, apprehension, and punishment. It is hoped that when a killer driver is made to face the consequences of his action, other would-be or potential killer drivers will “take dressing “, as it is said in the parlance of the law enforcement community.

Aside from the criminal aspect of nailing killer drivers, the civil suit option remains open for relatives of victims who should not only take out civil suits against such drivers but also against their employers, and with the attendant image bashing, naming and shaming, and monetary compensations. It is not rocket science, it is simply diligence and demonstration of capacity, which is how to nail a killer driver.