Tinted glass crackdown pits security concerns against legal rights

Nigeria’s reintroduction of the tinted-glass permit policy has sparked a fresh national debate, pitting security concerns against questions of legality, transparency, and citizens’ rights.

While the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) insists the measure is necessary to curb crime and enhance public safety, legal experts and rights advocates argue
that the framework underpinning the policy is outdated, unconstitutional, and vulnerable to abuse.

Tunde Ogunsakin, a retired assistant inspector-general of police, said the policy’s intent is understandable given Nigeria’s security challenges but warned that its current implementation raises serious legal concerns.

Ogunsakin explained that the regulation of tinted glass is rooted in the 1991 decree introduced under Ibrahim Babangida. According to him, while the decree empowered the police to regulate tinted windows for security purposes, it did not authorise the collection of permit fees.

He questioned the legality of the current N14,000–N15,000 permit charges, noting that the original law only prescribed a modest fine for violations.

He cautioned that without proper legal backing, enforcement risks being perceived as revenue generation rather than a genuine security measure.

Ogunsakin maintained that regulating tinted vehicles remains important, as criminals often exploit heavily tinted windows to conceal identities, weapons, or victims.

However, he stressed that such regulation must be guided by transparent laws, not discretionary enforcement.

Rather than scrapping the policy, Ogunsakin proposed a comprehensive legislative overhaul involving the National Assembly, the police, and the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA).

He recommended adopting measurable standards similar to those used in countries like the United States and the United Kingdom, where tint levels are defined by light transmission percentages and enforced through clear legal provisions.

According to him, a modern law would strike a balance between security needs and civil liberties, especially in a country where advanced surveillance infrastructure remains limited.

Inibehe Effiong, a human rights lawyer, strongly criticised the policy, describing it as unconstitutional and exploitative.

He argued that the police lack the authority under existing laws to impose or collect permit fees.

“The police are not a revenue-generating agency,” he said, adding that the practice has become a channel for extortion on Nigerian roads.

Effiong also questioned the practicality of the policy, noting that many vehicles in Nigeria come with factory-fitted tinted windows.

He described the requirement for annual permit renewal as illogical, arguing that there is no justification for a permit tied to a feature that does not change yearly.

He further challenged claims that the policy would reduce crimes such as “one-chance” robberies, saying there is no empirical evidence linking tinted-glass enforcement to crime reduction.

Related News

Citing provisions of the Police Act 2020 and the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, Effiong stressed that police officers are only permitted to stop and search vehicles based on reasonable suspicion, warning that indiscriminate checks violate the law and enable abuse.

Another legal practitioner, Samuel Ihensekhien of PathLegal & Co., described the policy as a form of illegal taxation, arguing that no gazetted law authorises the collection of permit fees.

He also raised concerns about due process, noting that the police often act as accuser and enforcer simultaneously, sometimes impounding vehicles without promptly charging offenders to court, an action he said undermines the principle of fair hearing.

On October 3, 2025, a Federal High Court sitting in Warri issued an injunction restraining the NPF and the Inspector-General of Police from enforcing the policy nationwide.

The suit, filed by lawyer John Aikpokpo-Martins, argued that the regulation imposed undue burdens on citizens.

The NBA, through its Section on Public Interest and Development Law, also initiated legal action questioning the constitutional validity of the policy.

Despite the court order, enforcement reportedly continued in some states before being temporarily suspended by police authorities.

Further controversy emerged over the handling of permit payments, particularly allegations that funds were routed through a private firm, Parkway Projects, instead of the federal government’s Treasury Single Account (TSA).

This triggered demands from civil society groups for clarity on procurement processes, contractual arrangements, and revenue management under the Police Specialised Services Automation Portal (POSSAP).

In response, the NPF maintained that all payments are ultimately remitted to the TSA, dismissing claims of private profiteering.

Kayode Egbetokun, the then Inspector-General of Police , who reintroduced the policy in April 2025, said the digital permit system was designed to improve efficiency, reduce physical contact, and enhance accountability.

The police argue that the regulation is essential to tackling crimes committed under the cover of tinted windows and have indicated plans to resume nationwide enforcement.

The NPF also clarified the role of the National Identification Number (NIN) in security screening, particularly for tinted glass permits.

According to the Police, the NIN is integrated into a central database used to verify whether individuals have criminal records before issuing documents such as character certificates required by foreign embassies.

The system, officials say, enables authorities to conduct background checks in collaboration with international partners, strengthening Nigeria’s role in global security and migration control.

However, the police acknowledged that the database only reflects recorded offences, meaning individuals without prior arrests or convictions would not appear, highlighting the limitations.