Motorist sues NTSA over instant traffic fines

A motorist yesterday sued the National Transport andSafety Authority (NTSA) following the introduction of instant fines for traffic offenders.

In his case, filed before the High Court, Kennedy Maingi Mutwiri argued that the instant fines system denies motorists the opportunity to be heard before a fine is imposed.

The system, which uses cameras placed on major highways, will be able to detect the speed of vehicles, drivers driving on pavements, and failure to observe road signs.

Also targeted are drivers causing obstruction and failure to display life savers when a vehicle stalls, among other offences.

NTSA indicated that traffic violations detected through the system automatically trigger the issuance of fines, which are communicated to motorists through Short Message Service (SMS) notifications.

However, Maingi stated that the authority ignored a High Court judgment which ruled out the possibility of punishing a traffic offender without their day in court.

Maingi asserted that there is no law allowing the unmanned system to become the prosecutor, the jury, the judge, and the executioner once it has identified a motorist who is not complying with traffic rules.

“I believe that the impugned system bypasses the constitutionally established judicial process by imposing penalties without due process, including plea taking, the presentation and testing of evidence, and judicial determination of liability,” he argued.

NTSA said that the fines system is fully automated and operates without human intervention. It also stated that all fines imposed ought to be paid through its bank account within seven days; failure to do so will start earning interest.

In addition, NTSA also indicated that one would be blacklisted from transacting on its platforms until the fine is settled.

Yesterday, NTSA Director-General Nashon Kondiwa said once a traffic offence is captured, the vehicle’s details — especially the number plate — will be uploaded into the system to compute the fine and send it to the registered owner.

“The high-resolution CCTVs will give us clear evidence that you were speeding. We’ll give you an image of your vehicle and number plate,” Kondiwa said.

He said the cameras have already been installed on major highways based on the risk level of the road section.

“The decision by the first respondent to implement a system that automatically issues fines without the involvement of the Judiciary effectively allows the Executive arm of government to determine criminal liability and impose penalties,” argued Maingi.

He asserted that the fines are static, which takes away the motorist’s opportunity to plead for mercy or a lesser sentence.

He said that it was also unclear how the same rules would be imposed for non-motor vehicle users and passengers.

Maingi now wants the system quashed.

He said that the system proceeds on a skewed interpretation of Section 17 of the Traffic Act and the Traffic (Minor Offences) Rules.

According to him, the laws are clear on who is supposed to hear and handle traffic offences, be it minor or major ones.

 “ Notably, under Section 17 of the Traffic Act, Cap403 Laws of Kenya, the law sets in motion a mechanism to offer offenders of traffic laws an opportunity to be heard,d including taking a plea and adjudication by courts of law,” said Maingi, adding that it guarantees a right to be heard.

NTSA indicated that traffic violations detected through the Instant Traffic Fines Management System automatically trigger the issuance of traffic fines, which are communicated to motorists through Short Message Service (SMS) notifications.

However, Maingi stated that the authority ignored a High Court Judgment which ruled out the possibility of punishing a traffic offender without their day in court.

He said that traffic offences are criminal in nature; hence, the system ought to only capture the offender, after which it is presented as evidence in court.

 Maingi asserted that there is no law allowing the unmanned system to become the prosecutor, the jury, the judge, and the executioner once it has identified a motorist who is not complying with traffic rules.

“ It is therefore my belief that the impugned system bypasses the constitutionally

established judicial process by imposing penalties without due process, including plea taking, the presentation and testing of evidence, and judicial determination

of liability,” he argued.

NTSA said the process is fully automated and operates without human intervention. It also stated that all fines imposed ought to be paid through its bank account within seven days; failure to do so will start earning interest

In addition, NTSA also indicated that one would be blacklisted from transacting on its platforms until the fine is settled.

On Tuesday, NTSA Director General Nahashon Kondiwa said that once captured for the wrong, the details of once vehicles, particularly the number plates, will be updated in the system to calculate the fines and send them to the car owners.

“The high-resolution CCTVs will give us clear evidence that you are speeding. We’ll give you an image of your vehicle and number plate,” Kondiwa explained.

He said the cameras have already been installed on the major highways based on the risk level of the road section.

Nevertheless, Maingi in court argued that the system is crafted in a way that it presumes the motorist is guilty even before he or she explains or denies the same.

He asserted that the fines are static, which takes away the motorists’ opportunity to plead for mercy or a lesser sentence. He said that it was also unclear how the same rules would be imposed for non-motor vehicle users and passengers.

He now wants the notice quashed for NTSA’s alleged assumption that motorists are guilty before they are heard. At the same time, he urged the court to find that it is a violation of the right to be heard before a magistrate or a judge.

“ The decision by the first respondent to implement a system that automatically issues fines without the involvement of the judiciary effectively allows the Executive arm of government to determine criminal liability and impose penalties,” argued Maingi.