When Kayode Egbetokun, Inspector General of Police received a court order on , the nationwide debate over tinted glass permits hit a legal pause. The Federal High Court sitting in Warri, Delta State, instructed the Nigeria Police Force to keep the status quo until the pending case is fully determined. The ruling, recorded as Suit No. FHC/WR/CS/103/2025, was filed by John Aikpokpo‑Martins, a senior counsel who argued that the police’s renewed enforcement scheme violates constitutional rights.
Historical backdrop of the tinted glass controversy
The saga began in early 2022 when the police suspended the permit scheme that had been in place since 2019. The suspension was meant to address concerns that tinted windows were being used to conceal illegal activities. However, in , the force announced the revival of the program under the Police Specialized Services Automation Project, promising a streamlined, digitised permit system. Critics said the move ignored a flood of complaints from motorists who feared arbitrary arrests.
Industry estimates suggest that roughly 3.2 million registered vehicles in Nigeria sport tinted windows, many of which would now need a permit that costs between ₦15,000 and ₦25,000. The cost, combined with the lack of clear guidance, turned a technical regulation into a flashpoint for civil‑rights activists.
Court rulings and the legal battle intensifies
The Warri court’s order is the latest twist. It explicitly told the police to “respect judicial processes and refrain from enforcing or altering the disputed tinted glass permit policy until the matter is fully determined.” A breach, the judgment warned, would constitute contempt of court.
Just two days earlier, the Nigerian Bar Association – via its Publicity Secretary Bridget Edokwe – issued a stern warning to the IGP, accusing the force of “reckless disregard for the rule of law.” In a letter dated , the association announced a separate constitutional challenge filed in Abuja (Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1821/2025) under the banner of NBA‑SPIDEL (Section on Public Interest and Development Law).
“We will not stand by while a regulation that lacks legislative backing is weaponised against innocent motorists,” Bridget Edokwe said at a press briefing. “The court’s intervention today re‑affirms that any enforcement must be grounded in law, not in arbitrary police directives.”
Police response and on‑the‑ground confusion
The day after the Warri judgment, CSP Benjamin Hundai, the force’s Public Relations Officer, told reporters that the police had not been formally served with the restraining order. “We are currently reviewing the documentation. Until we receive a verified copy, our operational procedures remain unchanged,” he said on .
This claim sparked a flurry of social‑media posts from motorists who claimed police officers were already detaining drivers for unlicensed tinted windows. Human‑rights lawyer Olukayode Adebayo (not a primary entity for markup) circulated what he described as “partial excerpts” of the court’s decision, fueling public bewilderment.
Impact on motorists and the broader public
- Legal uncertainty: Drivers risk arrest for a violation that may not be enforceable.
- Financial strain: Estimated ₦20 billion in potential permit fees if the scheme proceeds.
- Public trust erosion: Recent polls show a 12 % drop in confidence in the police since the April 2023 announcement.
For many, the issue is less about the colour of their windows and more about the principle that a law must be clear, published, and subject to parliamentary oversight. “If the police can reinstate a policy without consulting the public or the legislature, where does that leave us?” asked John Aikpokpo‑Martins, the plaintiff’s counsel, during a televised interview.
Next steps and what to watch for
Legal analysts predict two parallel tracks: the Warri case will likely be appealed, while the Abuja suit proceeds to a constitutional hearing slated for early 2026. Meanwhile, the police have hinted at an internal review of the permit‑issuance system, though no official timeline has been released.
Stakeholders—automotive associations, human‑rights groups, and the Federal Ministry of Transport—are urging a legislative solution rather than a piecemeal court order. “The National Assembly must step in to codify any future tinted‑glass framework,” suggested Dr. Chinyere Okafor, a transport policy expert (not a primary markup entity).
Until a definitive ruling emerges, motorists are advised to keep any existing permits handy, document interactions with police, and stay tuned to official communications from the Nigeria Police Force.
Key facts at a glance
- Court: Federal High Court, Warri, Delta State.
- Date of order: 3 Oct 2025.
- Primary plaintiffs: John Aikpokpo‑Martins (lawyer).
- Defendant: Kayode Egbetokun, Inspector General of Police.
- Related case: NBA‑SPIDEL v. IGP, Abuja, Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1821/2025.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does the Warri court order actually require the police to do?
The judgment tells the Nigeria Police Force to keep the current situation unchanged – no new permits may be issued, no arrests made for tinted glass violations, and no existing enforcement actions altered – until the court fully decides the legality of the policy.
How many motorists could be affected by this dispute?
Industry bodies estimate about 3.2 million vehicles nationwide have tinted windows, meaning a sizable portion of drivers could face uncertainty about whether they need a permit or risk prosecution.
Why did the Nigerian Bar Association intervene?
NBA‑SPIDEL argued the tinted glass permit scheme lacks constitutional backing and that its enforcement breaches fundamental rights. The association filed a separate lawsuit in Abuja to have the policy declared unlawful.
What are the possible outcomes if the Abuja case rules against the police?
Should the court find the policy unconstitutional, the police would be barred from requiring permits altogether, and any existing permits could be nullified. The government would then need to draft a new, legislatively approved framework.
Is there any indication the police will change its stance after the order?
CSP Benjamin Hundai said the force has not yet received a verified copy of the order, suggesting a possible administrative delay. However, the public warning from the court and the NBA’s pressure make a swift policy reversal likely.
Sihle Tana
I am a journalist with a passion for covering daily news in Africa. My work has taken me across the continent, reporting on significant events and stories that impact communities. I strive to bring insightful and comprehensive news coverage to my readers.
The Warri Court's decision to freeze police enforcement of tinted‑glass permits has sparked a wave of relief across the nation, especially among motorists who have long felt the pinch of ambiguous regulations. It is heartening to see the judiciary step in and protect constitutional rights, reaffirming that no agency should act above the law :) . While some may worry about the practical implications, this pause offers an invaluable opportunity for legislators to craft clear, transparent policies that respect both public safety and individual freedoms. In Nigeria, where cultural diversity runs deep, the notion of tinted windows has even become a subtle expression of identity, a way to shield privacy in bustling cities. The court's order thus protects more than just legal rights; it preserves a cultural nuance that many drivers hold dear. Moreover, the case underscores the importance of citizen engagement, reminding us that collective voices can influence high‑level legal outcomes. It also highlights the need for better communication between the police, the judiciary, and the public, something that has been lacking since the 2019 permit scheme was first introduced. The legal community should take this moment to examine the broader implications for administrative law and the balance of powers. As the case proceeds, it will be fascinating to observe how the Nigerian Bar Association continues its advocacy, ensuring that any future framework is backed by legislative authority. This could set a precedent for other regulatory areas where enforcement outpaces clear statutory guidance. Let us remain optimistic that this pause leads to constructive dialogue rather than prolonged stalemate. The public should stay informed, document interactions, and support NGOs that are championing transparency. In doing so, we collectively reinforce the democratic fabric of our society, making sure that governance remains people‑centred. The path ahead may be uncertain, but the collective will to safeguard rights shines brightly, and that optimism can guide us through the complexities that lie ahead.
Stay hopeful and stay engaged!
It’s encouraging to see the courts taking a firm stand; this sends a clear message that due process matters. The police should respect the injunction and avoid any overreach. This is a win for accountability and rule of law. Keep pushing for a legislative solution, folks.
Drama unfolds as the police scramble, the courts hold steady. Tension rises, uncertainty looms. Citizens watch, hearts pound. Resolution awaits.
Honestly, it’s a bit of a mess but I get why people are frustrated. The court’s pause gives everyone a breather. Let’s hope the lawmakers step up soon. I’m just trying to stay chill about it.
Look, the whole tinted‑glass saga is a textbook case of bureaucratic overreach. The police think they can reinvent policy overnight, but the constitution says otherwise. It’s like watching a circus where the clowns think they’re the ringmaster-very colourful but ultimately absurd. If they don’t get their act together, the public will keep calling them out, typo‑prone as ever.
Our great nation cannot tolerate such arbitrary impositions on honest drivers! The police must back off, respect the court, and let the people breathe. This is about national pride and protecting our citizens from overbearing authority.