COURT RESERVES JUDGEMENT ON ALLEGED RIGHTS VIOLATIONS OVER NUMAN–JALINGO ROAD
A Federal High Court sitting in Jalingo, Taraba State, has reserved judgement in a fundamental rights enforcement suit alleging that the deplorable condition of the Numan–Jalingo road amounts to violations of citizens’ rights and freedoms. The case will be determined at a later date following the conclusion of arguments before the court on Monday.
The plaintiffs, including commuters, transport workers and civil society groups, had approached the court claiming that the poor state of the federal highway, which links Taraba and Adamawa states, has exposed travellers to grave dangers including insecurity, kidnappings and excessive vehicle damage. They argued that government inaction has prejudiced their rights to freedom of movement, personal security and livelihood.
Counsel for the plaintiffs urged the court to declare that the failure of relevant government agencies to rehabilitate and maintain the road constitutes a breach of constitutional rights guaranteed under Sections 33, 34 and 41 of the Constitution. They also prayed for an order compelling the Federal Government to execute immediate remedial works.
Responding, government lawyers maintained that the matter raised complex issues, including budgetary constraints and security challenges associated with major road projects, which in their view should not amount to fundamental rights violations. They further argued that the court lacked jurisdiction to compel specific remedial action in road rehabilitation.
After hearing submissions from both sides, the trial judge announced that judgement would be reserved, with a ruling expected in the coming weeks.
The Numan–Jalingo road has long been notorious for its dilapidated state, forcing many motorists to endure long travel times and heightened risks from armed banditry and kidnappers who exploit poor road conditions to ambush travellers. Some drivers say the dilapidation had persisted for decades despite federal allocations and contractual awards for rehabilitation that have seen little progress.
The lawsuit reflects growing frustrations among road users and rights activists who argue that continued neglect of critical infrastructure undermines fundamental constitutional rights and calls into question government commitment to citizen wellbeing and public safety.
As the nation awaits the court’s ruling, many will be watching closely to see whether the judiciary will set a precedent in holding public authorities accountable for infrastructure failures that affect fundamental human rights.