A new punitive “know-how” unexpectedly came out in Tatarstan. The local Council of State decided it was time to redraw the Code of Administrative Violations once again in terms of penalties for drivers. And he sent for consideration to the Council of Legislators of the State Duma a proposal to “enhance the degree of responsibility for the repeated violation of the rules of overtaking and speed limits.”
We are talking about amendments to art. 12.9 of the Code of Administrative Violations, punishment for speeding offenses and art. 12.15 of the Code of Administrative Violations, which regulates penalties for violation of the rules of overtaking and passing. And most importantly – the Tatar legislators intend Art. 28.6 of the Code of Administrative Violations, which prescribes the imposition of an administrative fine without drawing up a protocol – based only on “pictures” from the police camera.
The initiators of the amendments do not like that the protocol, on the basis of which someone can be denied a WU, is deemed to have been drawn up exclusively by a traffic police inspector who is still alive. We are talking about offenses such as entering the oncoming lane where it is prohibited and exceeding the speed limit above 60 km/h. When this happens in front of the traffic police inspector, he takes the sinful driver to court, where he is threatened with deprivation of “rights”.
And when the same actions of the car owner are seen through the electronic eye, only a fine of 5,000 rubles can serve as a punishment. In Tatarstan, they decided that financial deprivation does not prevent offenders from repeated dangerous escapades on the road. Depriving VU, they believe there, is much more effective. Since you can’t put a traffic police officer on every corner and there are already traffic police cameras almost everywhere, the State Council of the Republic proposes to actually equalize the powers of the inspector and the electronic “piece of iron” hanging above the street. away.
If we assume that the proposed changes are still accepted, then the authorities will have the opportunity to issue an “automatic deprivation” to the owner of the car. And then let him go to court like a fool and prove that he was not driving, but his friend or relative. The only problem is that the legal entity that owns the car, by definition, does not have a driver’s license. Who will we deprive of “rights” in this case?
It is an indication that the representative of the company that operates cameras for automatic fixation of the Moscow region in principle refused to “comment on this populism” for the AvtoVzglyad portal. But the Duma deputy commented.
– After all, the presumption of innocence for Chapter 12 of the Code of Administrative Offenses does not work for us and the owner of the vehicle will of course be held liable. Even if he is neither sleep nor mind about the incident. For example, truck drivers who alternate on a long journey. One transgressed, the other after a while committed a second offense – to deprive the second? Not fair. But there are also taxi drivers, car depots … Another example: the owner has been deprived of all his “rights”, he walks and the camera records an offense on his vehicle. And what? Is he now 15 days old for nothing? In short: first, we must abandon the presumption of driver guilt in the 12th chapter of the Code of Administrative Offences, adjust the cameras to accurately determine the perpetrator behind the wheel at the time of the violation, and only then can we return to consider the proposal of colleagues from Tatarstan, – the head told the AvtoVzglyad portal State Duma Committee of Labor and Social Policy Yaroslav Nilov.
A new punitive “know-how” unexpectedly came out in Tatarstan. The local Council of State decided it was time to redraw the Code of Administrative Violations once again in terms of penalties for drivers. And he sent for consideration to the Council of Legislators of the State Duma a proposal to “enhance the degree of responsibility for the repeated violation of the rules of overtaking and speed limits.”
We are talking about amendments to art. 12.9 of the Code of Administrative Violations, punishment for speeding offenses and art. 12.15 of the Code of Administrative Violations, which regulates penalties for violation of the rules of overtaking and passing. And most importantly – the Tatar legislators intend Art. 28.6 of the Code of Administrative Violations, which prescribes the imposition of an administrative fine without drawing up a protocol – based only on “pictures” from the police camera.
The initiators of the amendments do not like that the protocol, on the basis of which someone can be denied a WU, is deemed to have been drawn up exclusively by a traffic police inspector who is still alive. We are talking about offenses such as entering the oncoming lane where it is prohibited and exceeding the speed limit above 60 km/h. When this happens in front of the traffic police inspector, he takes the sinful driver to court, where he is threatened with deprivation of “rights”.
And when the same actions of the car owner are seen through the electronic eye, only a fine of 5,000 rubles can serve as a punishment. In Tatarstan, they decided that financial deprivation does not prevent offenders from repeated dangerous escapades on the road. Depriving VU, they believe there, is much more effective. Since you can’t put a traffic police officer on every corner and there are already traffic police cameras almost everywhere, the State Council of the Republic proposes to actually equalize the powers of the inspector and the electronic “piece of iron” hanging above the street. away.
If we assume that the proposed changes are still accepted, then the authorities will have the opportunity to issue an “automatic deprivation” to the owner of the car. And then let him go to court like a fool and prove that he was not driving, but his friend or relative. The only problem is that the legal entity that owns the car, by definition, does not have a driver’s license. Who will we deprive of “rights” in this case?
It is an indication that the representative of the company that operates cameras for automatic fixation of the Moscow region in principle refused to “comment on this populism” for the AvtoVzglyad portal. But the Duma deputy commented.
– After all, the presumption of innocence for Chapter 12 of the Code of Administrative Offenses does not work for us and the owner of the vehicle will of course be held liable. Even if he is neither sleep nor mind about the incident. For example, truck drivers who alternate on a long journey. One transgressed, the other after a while committed a second offense – to deprive the second? Not fair. But there are also taxi drivers, car depots … Another example: the owner has been deprived of all his “rights”, he walks and the camera records an offense on his vehicle. And what? Is he now 15 days old for nothing? In short: first, we must abandon the presumption of driver guilt in the 12th chapter of the Code of Administrative Offences, adjust the cameras to accurately determine the perpetrator behind the wheel at the time of the violation, and only then can we return to consider the proposal of colleagues from Tatarstan, – the head told the AvtoVzglyad portal State Duma Committee of Labor and Social Policy Yaroslav Nilov.
Source: Avto Vzglyad
Donald Salinas is an experienced automobile journalist and writer for Div Bracket. He brings his readers the latest news and developments from the world of automobiles, offering a unique and knowledgeable perspective on the latest trends and innovations in the automotive industry.