Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences (Aarto) infringement notices, bearing undecipherable information, have been sent to motorists, apparently as a result of an IT glitch.
The allocation of demerit points to traffic law infringers, as per the Aarto Act, is set to be introduced on a national basis from 1 April 2011. Once implemented, the demerits will reflect against the driving licences of infringing motorists on the National Contravention Register on eNatis.
The Justice Project SA (JPSA) says “strange looking” fines, that start with 02-4099, have been sent out and follow the illegal issue of numerous 03 Aarto infringement notices, via standard surface mail, many of which bore tripled fine values when issued to juristic persons.
“The problem appears to have been caused by incorrect data field mappings that caused the wrong field information to be imprinted on the notices,” says the JPSA.
Faulty fines
The organisation says some of the problems include no city/town under the location heading, no general location under the infringement particulars, and speed readings being given as names of jpeg images and not the speed measured. Fines where the penalties field is blank and where the discount is the rand amount equal to the full penalty amount, which makes for a 100% discount, were also noted.
The JPSA adds that the charge type category is blank. "In addition, no details on these notices appear on payfine.co.za, which comes back saying 'no records found'. This has added to the angst of many members of the public since it is highly unusual for payfine.co.za not to have notices issued by the JMPD [Johannesburg Metro Police department] on their database, even on very old notices.”
The organisation adds that many people who have contacted aartoenquiries@rtmc.co.za have been told to fill in an Aarto 08 representation form in reply to their queries.
“Many people who have contacted JPSA to enquire about these notices have suspected that some kind of criminal activity was taking place, but JPSA assures the public that this is not the case.
“We immediately addressed the issue with the acting registrar of Aarto, on Monday, 16 August 2010, and followed this up with a phone call on Tuesday morning, but have heard nothing since.”
Legal pardon
The JPSA says the opinion of attorney Anton Burger is that these errors nullify the notices and the reissue of them would not be legal, since “ultra vires” (beyond the powers of the authorities due to delegated powers or requisite procedures having not been observed) would apply.
It also explains that “functus officio" would apply, which means "having performed his office" and is a legal term used to describe a public official, court, governing body, statute, or other legal instrument that retains no legal authority, because his or its duties and functions have been completed.
“The issuing authority should have checked that the notices were correctly issued prior to sending them out.”
The JPSA agrees that the correct procedure may well be to complete an Aarto 08 representation form, but that would be under the proviso that the electronic form is available from the official 'Aarto Web site' of the RTMC and could actually be completed. However, this is not the case, as the site rejects the notice number when the user attempts to print it.
The JPSA has provided another form for motorists to submit. It instructs users to download the form and complete in full. The representation portion has been filled in and should remain unchanged. Once completed, the form should be printed out, signed, dated attested by a commissioner of oaths. It must then be sent via registered post to the address listed on the form.
Share
