The Association of Certified Driving Instructors of Ghana (ASSODRIVE) has challenged the Chief Executive Officer of the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA), Julius Neequaye Kotey, to substantiate his recent comments questioning the quality of training provided by private driving schools in Ghana.
According to ASSODRIVE, Mr Kotey’s reported comments on TV3 on August 16, 2026, that private driving schools were not training drivers to the satisfaction of the DVLA and that this had informed the establishment of a new skills development centre, have raised serious concerns among certified driving instructors.
The National President of ASSODRIVE, Inst. Marshall MK Bobobee, said the association expected the DVLA CEO to publicly clarify the comments if they had been misrepresented by the media.
Inst. Marshall MK Bobobee, National President, Association of Certified Driving Instructors of Ghana (ASSODRIVE)
However, ASSODRIVE noted that almost a week had passed without any correction from the DVLA chief.
The association said the continued silence had compelled it to treat the reported comments as an accurate reflection of the CEO’s position and respond to what it described as a serious indictment of the professional integrity of certified driving instructors.
“We also find it troubling that the Ghana National Association of Driving Schools (GHANADRIVE), which is the umbrella body of driving schools, has itself said nothing publicly for a week on a statement that questions the very quality of the training its member schools provide,” ASSODRIVE said.
It argued that the silence of GHANADRIVE was particularly concerning because its members were directly affected by the comments.
“Silence from an association whose members are directly accused is not neutrality; it invites the public to assume agreement,” the statement added.
ASSODRIVE said the DVLA, rather than private driving schools or individual instructors, bears the ultimate responsibility for licensing drivers in Ghana.
The association cited Section 3(1)(d) of the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority Act, 1999 (Act 569), which empowers the DVLA to issue driving licences.
It argued that while driving instructors are responsible for teaching learners, it is the DVLA that ultimately tests applicants and determines whether they are fit to drive by issuing their licences.
According to ASSODRIVE, any concerns about the competence of licensed drivers must therefore be examined within the broader licensing and testing system administered by the DVLA.
“If a licensed driver later proves unsatisfactory, that outcome passes through DVLA’s own testing and licensing gate under Section 3(1)(d), a gate no driving school or instructor controls,” the association said.
ASSODRIVE further argued that the DVLA itself has statutory responsibility for establishing the standards that govern driver and instructor training.
The association cited Section 3(1) of Act 569, which mandates the Authority to establish standards and methods for the training and testing of driving instructors and drivers, provide syllabi for driver training and instructor training, and license driving instructors.
It said its members are certified instructors trained and licensed by the DVLA and the National Vocational Training Institute (NVTI), and are required under the association’s constitution to teach in accordance with the DVLA’s approved syllabus.
The association therefore questioned where responsibility should lie when drivers who have gone through the prescribed training and licensing process are subsequently found to be inadequately prepared.
“If graduates fall short, the fault traces back to the standards, syllabi and certification process that DVLA itself designs, issues and administers,” ASSODRIVE argued.
The association also pointed to Section 3(1)(m) of Act 569, which it said places supervisory responsibility on the DVLA.
It maintained that the Authority should therefore focus on strengthening supervision, monitoring and accountability across the entire driver training and licensing chain instead of publicly blaming driving schools and instructors.
ASSODRIVE also invoked provisions of the Road Traffic (Amendment) Act, 2025 (Act 1153), which it said require the Licensing Authority to collaborate with relevant bodies with expertise in road safety when developing standards.
The association argued that, as the representative body of certified driving instructors, it is one of the key stakeholders whose expertise should be incorporated into decisions affecting driver training and road safety.
It also cited Section 3(11) of Act 569, which it said provides for the Authority to receive advice on policy formulation from relevant bodies.
Against this background, ASSODRIVE questioned the decision to establish a parallel skills development centre without prior consultation with the association.
It said the approach appeared inconsistent with the statutory framework that envisages collaboration among relevant stakeholders.
Rather than engage in a blame game, ASSODRIVE proposed the development of what it described as a “live, end-to-end digital licensing ecosystem” to improve transparency and accountability in Ghana’s driver training and licensing system.
Under the proposal, the DVLA would lead the creation of a single national digital platform capable of tracking every learner throughout the licensing process.
The proposed platform would capture information from the initial payment and booking of a licensed driving school and DVLA-certified instructor through to training and testing.
According to ASSODRIVE, the system should record the number of training hours completed, lesson content, test schedules, the identity of the DVLA testing officer and the eventual test outcome, with all information linked to a single applicant record.
The association believes such a system would give the DVLA real-time nationwide data on driver training and testing.
It said this would enable the Authority to identify precisely where weaknesses exist and determine whether deficiencies arise from driving schools, instructors, learners or DVLA testing officers.
ASSODRIVE argued that the proposed digital system would also create a stronger accountability mechanism for all actors within the licensing chain.
“Such a platform would give DVLA live, nationwide data to identify exactly where any training or testing gap truly lies, hold every actor, schools, instructors and DVLA’s own testing officers, individually accountable, and replace unverified public statements with evidence,” the association said.
ASSODRIVE has consequently called on the DVLA CEO to either provide evidence supporting his comments or publicly correct the record.
It also challenged GHANADRIVE to break its silence and state its position on the matter.
The association, however, stressed that it remained open to engaging with the DVLA and other stakeholders to improve driver training and road safety.
It proposed collaboration on curriculum reviews, refresher training programmes, joint audits and the implementation of the proposed digital licensing platform.
The association said its objective was not to trade blame but to ensure that concerns about driver competence are addressed through evidence, proper supervision, stakeholder consultation and a transparent licensing system.
By 1960news.com
