Including e-tolls in demerits 'flawed'

679 05.11.2014 Gantry/ E-Toll/ Etoll issue. Motorists makes their way along the N1 highway near South Gate mall. Picture: Itumeleng English

679 05.11.2014 Gantry/ E-Toll/ Etoll issue. Motorists makes their way along the N1 highway near South Gate mall. Picture: Itumeleng English

Published Dec 28, 2015

Share

Johannesburg - The Opposition to Urban Tolling Alliance has slammed new amendments to the soon-to-be demerit licensing system, saying that attempts to include the non-payment of e-tolls as a traffic violation were flawed.

In a statement issued late on Sunday night, Outa said the department of transport published a Gazette notice (#39482) on 7 December 2015, which requests comment from the public before the closing date of 6 January 2016.

“Outa urges the public to participate, as the amendments are impractical and infringe on the motoring public’s rights to defend themselves from an unworkable processes, if the proposed amendments to the regulations are approved,” the organisation said.

ALSO READ

JPSA in bid to squash Aarto fines

‘Draconian” demerit law ready to go

Outa charged that the Gazette sought to amend the Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences Act, in an attempt to make it easier to include e-toll infringements into the adjudication process by the Road Traffic Infringement Agency.

“Outa believes however, that the modification to the infringement notice process through the use of a new form (AARTO 03e), is flawed in many respects as it is designed to include multiple infringement entries being included onto a single page, seemingly to assist the South African National Roads Authority Limited in trying to treat the non-payment of e-tolls as a traffic violation.

“By doing so, the entire infringement notification process becomes impractical and almost un-administrable,” Outa chairman Wayne Duvenage chairman said.

“This new form is flawed in that it does not provide proof that the driver’s vehicle was at the scene of the incident noted, as there is no photograph provided for each and every infringement listed. There is also an absence of a unique reference number or magisterial district listed per incident, which is required for dispute resolution purposes.”

He urged the public to submit their comments to the authorities on the Gazette.

Related Topics: