Federal Road Rafety Corps-and vehicles

“ It is not workable and this is the major problem we are having with all these consultants. Fines generated by the corps go to the consolidated revenue fund. The FRSC does not appropriate fines; we don’t touch it. The money goes straight to the government. It is an impossible task, unless it is in the budgetary provision,” Oyeyemi said. “But for me to do this, we are talking of five years, the spider technology firm would be getting 70 per cent and government 30 per cent of the entire fines. This is not realistic. I think the contractor must have misled some members of the House of Representatives. We are talking about restraining speed and somebody is talking about speed monitoring and installation of cameras for the roads. It is not the responsibility of the FRSC to provide road infrastructure. It is the responsibility of the state.”

The CMCE denied that the firms licensed to provide the speed limiters have any relationship with officials of the commission and other top government functionaries, pointing out, “that is not true. That is a wild allegation. Anybody who has the evidence should present it and I detest that kind of insinuation. “When agencies are bringing programmes that will save the country from destruction, we should not be reading meanings into it. No member of the corps is involved or has somebody fronting for him. If they have evidence against any of them, they should bring it out and immediate prosecution by appropriate agencies should be done. I stand by this, no member of management has any vested interest in it. My interest is seeing that crashes on our highways are reduced. And it would be my joy if I can succeed, if I can get this done.”

Oyeyemi also said the price of N36,000 to be paid by each vehicle owner was jointly decided by the trio of FRSC and the Standards Organisation of Nigeria have done as a policy measure but added that it would eventually be regulated by market forces. The Corps Marshal, who dismissed all insinuations about the speed limiter, paid glowing tribute to the device, saying that it was not outdated as claimed by most commentators. In a detailed response to Vanguard enquiry, the FRSC justified why it chose Speed limiter over the Spider technology. He said,”The technology being introduced is not outdated. It is important to note that the spider technology can only detect speed of a vehicle in motion upon which a ticket issued, where it is discovered that the vehicle is speeding above the prescribed limit. The speed limiting device technology, however, is an involuntary device that can prevent a vehicle from speeding beyond the calibrated speed. “Even though the FRSC is conscious that no technology or strategy can effectively work without the buy-in of motorists, the Corps however desires for Nigeria a technology that can make motorists not to over speed.

In other words, the speed limiter technology is a proactive measure that prevents speeding and its fatal consequences as against spider technology which is reactive, waiting to be deployed and catch and arrest erring speed violators after the deed had been done, which would have led to serious injuries or fatality in the case of a crash. “The speed limiter technology is tamper-proof and can generate report automatically by inserting a USB drive. How can this be said to be outdated? he queried. Boboye dismissed the fear that device would unduly expose car owners to avoidable dangers in the hands of criminals-kidnappers, armed robbers and assassins. His argument is that the excuse of escaping from robbery scene or kidnappers cannot be the sole reason for refusal to install speed limiter in a vehicle. According to him, most robberies or carjacking do not involve chasing the victims, but surprising the victims through sudden attack to immobilize or stop the victim’s vehicles. Even where the car jackers or armed robbers desire to pursue the victim or where the victim intends to escape from a robbery scene, it should be noted that when the goal of ensuring all vehicles are fitted with the speed limiting device is achieved, all vehicles, either that of the armed robber or his victim would not be able to drive above the mandatory speed limit. “The idea of speed limiter is not novel as countries that have relatively safe highways had introduced the mandatory use of speed limiters to regulate vehicle speed. “There are currently many countries that have speed limiting laws which made speed limiting devices compulsory for commercial vehicles. Most of the countries have even introduced additional stringent measures to make speed limiters more effective in their countries. Countries such as United Kingdom, Germany, Canada, Australia, Sweden, Philippines, Finland, Japan, India, Kenya, Tanzania, and a host of others are using the Speed Limiting Device to positive advantage.

The truth however is that most of this countries are using more of speed monitoring devices like the spider technology with security cameras to track down defaulting drivers and fine them rather than slam a general fee and install speed limiters on vehicles as the FRSC plans to do in Nigeria. Oyeyemi dismissed the notion that his commission was out to rip off Nigerians off with the fee imposed on commercial vehicles saying that FRSC was not a profit-making agency. Hear him: “The FRSC is not a profit making organization and therefore does not engage in product marketing. The FRSC as a regulator of road traffic and enforcer of traffic rules only provides the enabling environment for any suitably qualified vendor to provide safety products that can promote safety in the country. This was what was done in collaboration with other regulatory agencies that make up the speed limiters technical committee. “These agencies are Standards Organization of Nigeria (SON) and National Automobile Design and Development Council (NADDC), so as to set the standards and regulate the firms certified to procure, sell, install, and maintain speed limiters. “The regulation does not affect the pricing, as the market forces are expected to determine what prices they would be sold. With a free market situation, it would be much easier for the fleet operators, especially those with large fleet to negotiate a reduction in price.

In fact fleet operators with very large fleet of vehicles such as manufacturing companies and corporate bodies are upon application granted waivers to conduct in-house installation and calibration of speed limiters of their fleet, provided they satisfy the minimum prescribed standards. “The Corps has no intention of limiting the scope of procuring the device or specifying who to purchase from. However, standards and specifications as prescribed by SON and NADDC will be enforced. “It is important to note here that apart from the safety benefits, the implementation of the programme has job creation potentials as the approved vendors have already trained over 200 technicians who have commenced installation of the limiters in vehicles. This number is expected to increase when the second phase is commenced. Aside from this, some investors are already looking into the possibility of establishing speed limiting device manufacturing plants in Nigeria.

It is within the purview of the Corps, as empowered by the National Assembly through the enactment of the FRSC Establishment Act (2007), to implement as a major strategy the safe-guard of lives and property of all road users. “A clear cut advantage of the speed limit device over the spider tech is the fact that spider tech only detects over speeding, whereas the speed limiting device ensures that drivers do not drive beyond the calibrated speed limit, and thus proactively prevents speeding and the fatal consequences of same. But experts who are very familiar with the spider technology and system, have disagreed with the FRSC boss, pointing out that what he is bringing to Nigeria had since been discarded by other countries because of the obvious dangers associated with speed limiter technology. A Psychologist, who has been deeply involved in road transport business and management in Nigeria and the U.S, Mr. Kalu E. Onwuka, says the superior benefits of Spider technology far outweigh those of the speed limiter and asked Mr. Oyeyemi to explain to Nigerians why the Chinese and Indians who manufacture the cheap devices do not use them in their own countries but prefer to ship them to Nigeria after being rejected by Kenya and Uganda.

Onwuka said in a response to Vanguard that the Spider technology does not only detect vehicle speed after an incident had occurred, but equally detects the speed as any road offence is being committed on the road and showcases the situation online and real time to the FRSC and any other associated security arm of the government the events on the roads and highways as they are happening. Onwuka says, “The spider technology and system does not only issue offence tickets but notify the mobile courts across the nation on the offence being committed. Offence citation will be issued online and real-time to the offending vehicle owner and also caution or punish the driver as he will be losing money as long as the vehicle driver is violating the Nigerian road use rules and regulations as stipulated in FRSC act. “Vehicle drivers that choose to violate the Nigeria road use and regulations are the only ones to be penalized. Under the spider technology, no Nigerian would be compelled or forced to spend money unless they commit road offence as opposed to the speed limiter, which is taxing the Nigerian vehicle owners to cough out N36,000 without committing any traffic offence.

“It sounds funny that Nigeria with all the security challenges with armed robbers, kidnappers, terrorists and assassins on the prowl, is thinking of applying speed limiters, which are tamper-proof and can easily be disconnected by daredevils, to vehicles in 2016. Kenya introduced the speed limiter in their country but due to the technology ineffectiveness abolished the technology immediately. Kenya has the same challenge Nigeria has like terrorism, robbery on their roads, speeding and other road offences and violations. “Note that no country in the world is currently using the speed limiter device due to many defects. Security-conscious nations now deploy the Spider technology to control their roads and highways because of the multi-dimensional devices built into one,” the security expert said. However, the Standards Organisation of Nigeria, SON and the National Automotive Development Council, which the FRSC mentioned as partners in the choice of speed limiter technology and the selection of the 16 vendors to import the devices into Nigeria, have spoken out on the level of their involvement in the device.

The Director General of the Standards Organisation of Nigeria, Dr. Paul Angya, in a reply to Vanguard on the level of the agency’s involvement in the deal, said that his organisation was aware of the plan by the FRSC to introduce the new speed control device and had helped to screen the 16 vendors to import the devices into the country in its firm belief that the move would reduce road carnage in Nigeria. Dr. Angya said that what Nigeria has chosen for now should be sufficient given our own condition but added that if a new technology is found to be more efficient, safe and cost effective than the speed limiter, SON would not hesitate to review its position. “Yes, we won’t hesitate to go for a better option because in SON we believe that standards are subject to emerging technology and should be reviewed after three years. Speed limiter is a creation of the FRSC and SON was represented at the Public hearing in the House of Representatives and I have never heard of Spider technology.

“As the technology takes off, we in SON will continue to weigh all the available options and will not hesitate to do the best that is possible for this country so as to save lives and property being carelessly destroyed by careless drivers on a daily basis. “We are ready to weigh all options in the overall public interest of Nigerians,” Angya stated. On his part, the Director General of the National Automotive and Development Council, Dr. Aminu Jalal, also confirmed that his agency was brought into the picture of the project by the FRSC and that it assisted in testing the competence of the vendors chosen to supply the speed limiter to Nigeria. According to Jalal, only vendors who scored 70 percent and above based on a set of criteria were selected for the importation of the speed devices into the country. Like his SON’s counterpart, Dr. Aminu Jalal said his council was never presented with the Spider technology proposal, having also never known about the said technology. “I don’t even know about the spider tech proposal. What we had was that after the House of Representatives had approved the use of speed limiting devices by the FRSC, we were brought in to help vet the competence of the vendors and we approved about 16 of them with stringent conditions that they should open offices in Abuja and other parts of Nigeria so as to continue to provide the services, maintain and repair it for users.

“The N36000 to be paid by each car owner is a once off fee and we are not imposing fines because the question of fine does not arise since the device will not allow you to over speed. “If the government feels that the speed limit is too low, it can pass a law changing it higher because the current limit is what was set by law in the 80s. “ Personally, I prefer the Speed limiter because fleet owners, like ABC bus, which are currently using it, are happy that they applied it to their fleet of buses across the country. “I also know that the House of Representatives approved the speed limiter to be used in the country and that was why we support it,” the DG explained. But there appears to be major plot by aggrieved commercial vehicles owners to vent their anger against the introduction of the new speed device next month. The National Union of Road Transport Workers, which is seriously aggrieved by the plan, has decided to keep its plan action against the new device under wraps until a few days to the takeoff.

However, the National President of the NURTW, Alhaji Najeem Usman Yasin, told Vanguard that he would neither comment on the imposition of the N36000 flat levy on its members nor give the position of the powerful union until what he calls ‘the right time’. But Vanguard learnt from authoritative sources close to the NURTW that the transport workers plan to withdraw their vehicles from the road with effect from October 1 as a demonstration of their dissatisfaction with the FRSC action. The commercial transporters are said to have argued that government was insensitive to the people by allowing the FRSC to impose a compulsory levy of N36,000 on them shortly after they had grudgingly accepted the huge financial burden brought upon them by the removal of fuel subsidy which eventually increased price of fuel. “Does the President know that we the poor commercial vehicle workers who voted for him are being exploited by the FRSC and some powerful people in his government,” a senior official of the union asked our correspondent without expecting and answer. “Look, let me tell you, the commercial drivers will not pay that N36000 imposed by the FRSC. We are not going to say anything until that day comes and you will see if the FRSC and the Presidency can force all of us into the prison in order to collect the money.

But the human rights group that sued FRSC for trying to defraud Nigerians with the imposition of the N36000 compulsory speed limiter levy, International Human Rights and anti-corruption Society, IHRAS, has described the refusal of the road safety agency to respect the court ruling barring it from imposing the fee and the 16 speed limiter vendors on Nigerians, as an affront on the rule of law and a display of crass impunity. For this reason, the human rights group confirmed to Vanguard that it was going back to court to compel the FRSC chief executive and his officials to comply with the court ruling since it was not above the law. Dr. Udofia O Udofia, the Director General of the IHRAS, said that it was wrong for the FRSC and its backers to turn the law on its head all in their quest to collect about N900 billion from innocent Nigerian motorists under the Buhari government whose major agenda is to fight graft. “We believe that it is either Buhari has not been properly briefed that top officials of his government are planning to scam Nigerians and make away with huge sum of money or he has been deceived to think that these people mean well for his government,” Udofia told our correspondent.

“If the FRSC does not respect the court ruling by Justice Evo Chukwu in our favour barring it from imposing the N36000 per commercial vehicle and imposing vendors on any Nigerian, why should Nigerians comply with its order? Udofia asked angrily. “In any case, if the FRSC and their backers are sure that they are driven by pecuniary motives and that they mean well for Nigeria, why do they not show the country the comparative advantage of the so-called speed limiter they have chosen against the world acclaimed Spider technology that most countries use today? How much of the about N900 billion they are going to make will go to the federal government? This is the crucial question Mr. President should ask the FRSC and its backers. “For us, we are watching to see if Buhari, who promised to tackle corruption would close his eyes to this latent rip off by a few well placed persons under him. Now is the time to stop these elements before it is too late,” the activist said.

Credit: Vanguard. http://www.vanguardngr.com/2016/09/fgs-speed-limiter-scam-dent-buharis-anti-graft-war/