The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA) has been challenged to disclose the legal basis, approval process and calculation used to impose escalating “delinquency” charges on Ghanaians who renew or replace their driver’s licences after expiry.
CUTS International, a public policy think tank, says it has found no clear legal basis for the charges in the Road Traffic Regulations, 2012 (L.I. 2180) and is therefore calling on the DVLA to suspend their collection.
In a press release dated August 9, 2026, and signed by Appiah Kusi Adomako, Director of the West Africa Regional Centre of CUTS International, Accra, the organisation demanded that the charges be suspended until the DVLA publicly explains the precise legal authority, approval process and formula used to determine the amounts.
Under the DVLA’s Summary of Licensing and Other Activity Rates for 2026, the standard fee for renewing a driver’s licence before its expiry is GH¢127.00.
However, the amount increases to GH¢204.25 when the licence has expired for between one day and six months. It rises further to GH¢279.25 for expiry periods of seven to 12 months, GH¢315.25 for up to two years, GH¢352.25 for up to four years and GH¢404.25 for licences that have been expired for more than four years.
The schedule also applies similar escalating charges to the replacement of an expired driver’s licence.
CUTS International argues that the automatic nature of the charges, coupled with their progressive increases, makes the system unfair, opaque and potentially open to abuse unless the DVLA can identify the specific statutory instrument and approved fee item authorising each charge.
“The DVLA must show Ghanaians the law, the approved fee schedule and the formula behind every cedi it collects as a delinquency charge. Public power must rest on law. If the Authority cannot point to a clear legal basis for each charge, it must stop collecting the money and refund affected licence holders,” Mr Adomako said.
The organisation cited Regulation 33(1) of the Road Traffic Regulations, 2012 (L.I. 2180), which provides that a driver’s licence “may” be renewed within one month before its expiry.
Regulation 33(2), it noted, expressly provides for renewal after the licence has expired, indicating that the law anticipates circumstances in which drivers may renew their licences after the expiry date.
L.I. 2180 also creates an offence for failure to renew a driver’s licence as prescribed. Regulation 33(9) states that a person who fails to renew a driver’s licence as prescribed commits an offence and is liable, upon summary conviction, to a fine of not less than 10 penalty units and not more than 25 penalty units, or imprisonment for not more than 30 days, or both.
According to CUTS International, the law therefore provides for enforcement through the appropriate authorities and the courts, raising questions about the legal basis for a separate automatic “delinquency” charge imposed at the DVLA when a person seeks to renew an expired licence.
The organisation argues that the use of the word “may” rather than “shall” in the regulations reflects the intention of the lawmakers. It maintains that failure to renew a licence only becomes a punishable offence in circumstances where a person drives without a valid licence, rather than simply because the licence has expired.
CUTS therefore contends that imposing an additional fine for late renewal could amount to the DVLA acting beyond its legal authority.
It argues that such a practice would effectively require the DVLA to interpret “may” as “shall”, something it says a public authority cannot do without clear statutory authority.
CUTS International is consequently asking the DVLA to clarify whether the escalating charges are renewal fees approved under the applicable Fees and Charges legislation, administrative penalties or another category of charge.
The organisation says the distinction is important because, if the amounts constitute penalties, the DVLA must explain the legal process that allows it to impose them administratively without establishing that the person drove during the period in which the licence was expired, providing an opportunity for a hearing or obtaining a court finding.
“CUTS is not encouraging anyone to drive with an expired licence. Driving without a valid licence must attract lawful enforcement. Our concern is different: the DVLA should not presume that every person with an expired licence continued to drive, then impose an automatic escalating charge without first establishing the legal and factual basis,” Mr Adomako said.
CUTS further argues that the expiry of a driver’s licence does not necessarily mean that the holder continued to drive.
It noted that a person may hold a Ghanaian driver’s licence without owning a vehicle or driving regularly and could be unable to drive for an extended period because of illness, studies, travel or other circumstances.
The organisation said the mere expiry of the document should therefore not be treated as proof that the holder drove on a public road while the licence was invalid.
It cited the example of a Ghanaian who leaves the country for a five-year PhD programme or work assignment while holding a valid Ghanaian driver’s licence. If the licence expires while the person is abroad and they do not drive on Ghanaian roads during that period, CUTS argues that charging the person the highest delinquency rate upon their return would be disproportionate.
“That citizen should be encouraged to regularise his licence before returning to the road. He should not be branded delinquent and punished as though expiry itself proves unlawful driving. The system must distinguish an expired document from the separate act of driving without a valid licence,” Mr Adomako said.
CUTS said the same principle could be applied to other public documents, noting that Ghanaians are allowed to renew expired passports when they next intend to travel. The state, it said, does not automatically assume that the holder travelled unlawfully simply because the passport had expired.
The organisation believes the DVLA should adopt a similarly evidence-based and proportionate approach while maintaining strict enforcement against anyone found driving without a valid licence.
CUTS International has also questioned the use of the term “delinquency” to describe every instance of late renewal or replacement of an expired licence.
It argues that the term creates an impression of wrongdoing before the circumstances of the individual have been established and has urged public institutions to consider neutral terminology such as “renewal after expiry”.
The think tank also called for clear provisions on waivers, exemptions and circumstances in which a licence holder can demonstrate that the licence was not used during the period of expiry.
It further raised concerns about what it described as the possibility of double punishment.
According to CUTS, a driver who has already been prosecuted and fined by a court for driving with an expired licence could still face an additional escalating charge when attempting to renew the licence.
The organisation said the DVLA reportedly does not accept a court receipt as proof of payment where a person has been convicted for driving with an expired licence, because the additional charges are system-generated.
CUTS has consequently called on the DVLA and the Ghana Police Service to clarify their respective enforcement responsibilities.
It wants the public to know which institution investigates cases of driving without a valid licence, which authority initiates prosecution and the circumstances under which the DVLA is legally permitted to impose or collect an administrative charge.
The organisation acknowledged that the DVLA requires internally generated funds to provide licensing services but stressed that revenue generation cannot override the obligation of a public institution to charge only fees authorised by law.
It said the DVLA, as both a regulator and service provider, has a responsibility to ensure that its fees are transparent, lawful and fair, with revenue generation remaining secondary to road safety and effective public service.
CUTS International also expressed concern about the GH¢181 charge for amending a licence holder’s electronic records.
It said charging people to update basic information such as their residential address or telephone number could discourage licence holders from keeping their records current.
According to the organisation, accurate contact and residential information is important for road safety, identity verification, criminal investigations and emergency communication.
It therefore urged the DVLA to consider making basic updates to contact information free or charging only a modest, cost-based fee where a new physical licence card is required.
“The DVLA should design fees to support compliance, not discourage it. When a citizen wants to correct an address or telephone number, the Authority gains better data. Charging GH¢181.00 for a basic update risks leaving the database outdated and weakens the public interest the database is meant to serve,” Mr Adomako said.
CUTS International is calling on Parliament to conduct an urgent inquiry into the legality, approval and administration of the DVLA’s escalating “delinquency” charges and related operations.
CUTS International, Accra, describes itself as an independent, non-profit research, advocacy and capacity-building policy think tank working in road safety and urban mobility, consumer protection, competition policy and law, trade and development, regional integration and economic regulation across Ghana and the wider West African region.
Also read:
