The Road Traffic Infringement Agency (RTIA) is enforcing the AARTO Act in an illegal manner which means that the AARTO fines which have been issued to date, and which had not been paid within the prescribed deadline could possibly be illegal and unenforceable, Adv. Anton Alberts, the FF Plus’ parliamentary spokesperson on Transport, says.
Adv. Alberts says this implication follows from the finding in a judgment of Friday (24 February) in the Gauteng North High Court, and confirms the opinion that the FF Plus has repeatedly expressed, i.e. that AARTO is being enforced illegally and that the majority of the notices are therefore invalid.
Judge Bill Prinsloo, who made the finding, also made an order that the fines in the relevant case should be set aside.
In the relevant case, the court specifically referred to the process which the authorities had to follow in terms of the AARTO Act, as well as the deadlines, and found that it was mandatory in nature, and if the authorities do not stick to it any traffic infringement in terms of this Act, will not be enforceable, regardless of the merit of the case.
The judgment came after Fines4U, a company which deals with road traffic fines and notices on behalf of clients had brought an application and after hundreds of notices had simply got stuck in the AARTO system without any adjudication.
Cornelia van Niekerk, the owner of Fines4U, had exhausted all remedies to get the RTIA to process the notices which had been queried and referred for adjudication. The FF Plus praises her courage to have taken the case to court and eventually bring legal certainty for her clients, and for everyone who is struggling under an inadequate AARTO system.
Adv. Alberts says the problem with AARTO is that it, on the one hand, leaves road offenders exempt from punishment and makes the roads unsafe, and on the other hand denies road users who receive notices the opportunity to defend themselves.
“AARTO is a mess and should be scrapped. The ANC government is clearly not capable of managing the system. It is also one of the reasons why people drive recklessly on our roads. Some road users have started to realise that as a result of the inadequate enforcement of AARTO they could drive with impunity, and there would not be any consequences following from AARTO for them.
“The previous system in terms of the National Road Traffic Act and the Criminal Procedure Act was suspended in Johannesburg and Pretoria to make way for the roll-out of the test phase of AARTO, but it has now resulted in an administrative monster which completely undermines its main purpose of making the roads safer.
“If AARTO was to be properly enforced by well-trained traffic officers, traffic authorities and the RTIA officials, the fear that road users could lose their licenses and could even have their assets sold at auction to pay for fines in terms of AARTO, could have succeeded in making road users more obedient.
“At present AARTO is being enforced illegally in various ways and there is no chance that it could make our roads safer.
“Indicative of this incompetence of government to enforce AARTO, and the ANC government’s deployment of cadres who are not capable of doing their work is the letter which the deputy registrar of the RTIA t had sent to Van Niekerk, following inquiries about the non-adjudication of hundreds of fines.
“According to the court he responded to Van Niekerk with unnecessary aggression that the enquiry why certain fines had been cancelled, and others with the same sets of facts were not cancelled, did not set out any argument as to the merit thereof and that he would give instructions that the fines which had been successfully queried would be made summarily prosecutable again.
“The High Court had taken thorough note of this, and this letter is one of the pieces of evidence upon which the court made its finding that AARTO is being enforced illegally. The court also accused the deputy registrar of bias.
“On the basis of this finding, the FF Plus demands that he is fired immediately and the party will be writing a letter to the minister about this.
“The judgment’s effect is that all fines which did not closely follow the AARTO process are unenforceable. The implication is also that any fines which have been paid where the process had been defective may be claimed back on the basis of unjustified enrichment.
“The judge made the following important remark in his judgment (par. 69: p.48): “In any event, it seems to me where the process was tainted it would not be in the interests of justice to allow details of the alleged offences, which could not be addressed because of the tainted procedure, to remain on the NCR [National Contraventions Register] on a permanent basis”.
“Thus, all fines which had not been procedurally correct must be moved from the register. The following fines could, therefore, be illegal in terms of the judgment and thus unenforceable,” Adv. Alberts says. (Following examples):
a. Fines where notices had not been issued within 40 days of the infringement.
b. Notices which had not been delivered by registered post or personally to the person receiving the fine;
c. Notices which had been referred for adjudication by the RTIA but which had never been adjudicated;
d. Notices which the recipient had done nothing about and where 64 days had passed without the RTIA had sent a courtesy letter to the individual;
e. If a person did receive a courtesy letter and had not done anything about it and the RTIA had never followed this up with a letter of compliance;
f. If the road user did make a submission to the RTIA about the infringement and no decision had been taken about the submission;
g. If the RTIA did respond to the road user’s submission, but the outcome differs from any other similar submission in terms of other infringements of the road user – which was the case in the court case heard on Friday – and which indicates that the RTIA’s submissions officials had acted arbitrarily and inconsistently.
Contact numbers: 082 391 3117 / 083 419 5403
;
