Publications
Partners
JOHANNESBURG - Earlier today we reported that proposed amendments to current traffic laws would allow traffic infringement notices to be e-mailed to car owners. Now Justice Project SA says no way!
JPSA chair Howard Dembovsky said: "Nowhere in the proposed amendments is it contemplated that an ordinary motor vehicle owner or driver will have infringement notices delivered to them 'by email'."
'IMPRACTICAL, IMPOSSIBLE'
Beeld newspaper reported on March 04 2013, that the possibility of e-mailed notices emerged from the Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences (Aarto) Amendment Bill, published in the Government Gazette in February 2013.
Dembovsky said that since only 11% of South Africans have access to the internet it would prove "impractical and practically impossible to deliver fines by e-mail".
The bill indicated that if the "infringer" was a juristic person - a company, trust or other organisation - "electronic service" of the penalty would be used.
The term "electronic service" itself was problematic, as it was too broad and did not specify which exact type of electronic communication would be used.
Dembovsky said: "The amendment was proposed to facilitate a more-efficient driver nomination process for companies that operate fleets of vehicles.
"Electronic service will benefit companies in the case of infringement notices that result from camera fines... where the driver of the vehicle is not stopped at the time, so as to facilitate nomination of the driver timeously."
JPSA chair Howard Dembovsky said: "Nowhere in the proposed amendments is it contemplated that an ordinary motor vehicle owner or driver will have infringement notices delivered to them 'by email'."
'IMPRACTICAL, IMPOSSIBLE'
Beeld newspaper reported on March 04 2013, that the possibility of e-mailed notices emerged from the Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences (Aarto) Amendment Bill, published in the Government Gazette in February 2013.
Dembovsky said that since only 11% of South Africans have access to the internet it would prove "impractical and practically impossible to deliver fines by e-mail".
The bill indicated that if the "infringer" was a juristic person - a company, trust or other organisation - "electronic service" of the penalty would be used.
The term "electronic service" itself was problematic, as it was too broad and did not specify which exact type of electronic communication would be used.
Dembovsky said: "The amendment was proposed to facilitate a more-efficient driver nomination process for companies that operate fleets of vehicles.
"Electronic service will benefit companies in the case of infringement notices that result from camera fines... where the driver of the vehicle is not stopped at the time, so as to facilitate nomination of the driver timeously."
