The pitfalls of AARTO.
What will follow from the introduction of AARTO.

There are many pitfalls within the AARTO system that will affect motorists in one way or another. Whilst over a decade has passed since the enactment of the AARTO Act, very little true preparation and planning has gone into its implementation.

This has a severe impact on the people against whom the law is applied and the net result is that many motorists will find themselves falling foul of these pitfalls. There is also plenty in the Act and Regulations that simply does not make sense, no matter how you look at it.

1. Adjudication is conducted by people with a vested interest in deriving an income from the process and no judicial experience is necessary.
   1. Whilst the selection requirements for adjudication officers do set some minimal standards, these are very low indeed. For instance, having been employed as a traffic officer for three years qualifies a person to become an adjudication officer.
   2. All adjudication officers are employed by the traffic authority for whom they adjudicate and not by the overseeing body, the RTMC.
   3. Overseeing the actions of these adjudication officers is not a function of the RTMC and they have no real say over what the officers do.
   4. If an adjudication officer finds in your favour, chances are that they will not last too long since they would be depriving the body they work for of income. Even if they were to be employed by the RTMC, their motivation would stay the same - minimise the success rate and maximise income.
   5. AARTO representations during the "pilot phase" have widely gone completely ignored. What makes anyone think that when this is rolled out nationally, the same thing won't happen?
   6. No provision, beyond electing to be tried in court has been made for an appeals process. The adjudication officer's decision is final.
      
      
2. Poorly trained enforcement officials can severely impact on your life.
   1. During and after the pilot phase, traffic officers have issued infringement notices for ridiculous reasons. They regularly use the incorrect charge code or one that does not apply to your particular class of vehicle and then you have the problem of dealing with the infringement notice.
   2. Once an infringement notice has been issued, the only way to deal with it is by submitting the relevant AARTO documentation.
   3. Traffic officers typically have attitudes that they are above the law and can do what they like, to whom they like, when they like. If they make a mistake on an infringement notice, it will be up to you to prove this or unjustifiably have points added to your license.
   4. Efforts have been concentrated on educating law enforcement officers in AARTO, but this has fallen flat as many of them simply don't get it - or want to. This is either because they don't have the capacity or are unwilling to do so. Whatever the reason, they remain poorly trained and incapable of applying AARTO correctly.
      
      
3. Public education about AARTO has been abysmally poor.
1. The RTMC has not educated the public at all about AARTO and many people are still of the opinion that they can wait for summons to be issued. This will never happen under AARTO.
2. Adjusting attitudes towards the rules of the road, not just one's fines should be the primary focus but it is not. Instead, the attitude of AARTO is "pay up or we will come get your things!"
3. Even though many members of the public have little or no interest in being educated in what AARTO is all about, this is no excuse for the authorities not to bother.
   
   
4. It is a fact that the public transport system in South Africa is particularly poor.
   1. In having a driving licence suspended many people will not be able to earn a living any longer.
   2. Transport Minister Debacle says "people will have to use public transport or lift clubs to get to work" failing to acknowledge that this is a pipe dream of epic proportion. There are rules governing the transportation of people and a "lift club" driver can easily fall foul of the law by not having a Public Driver's Permit.
   3. Drivers whose licenses are suspended are far more likely to drive whilst banned - out of necessity because of this.
      
      
5. Points assigned under the points-demerit system have been very poorly thought out.
   1. Running a red light or failing to stop at a stop street attracts only 2 points on your driving licence, despite the fact that is very dangerous and leads to many fatal crashes. If one crashes then this charge is changed to reckless or negligent driving, but how can it be claimed that the points-demerit system is designed to improve road safety if drivers may proceed through red lights?
   2. Doing 21 km/h over the 120 km/h speed limit on a five lane freeway, where all vehicles are going in the same direction also attracts 2 points. How does this make sense? Surely this is way less serious than running a red light?
   3. "Organized a race/sport on a public road without obtaining prior written consent from MEC" attracts 3 demerit points as does "Failed to stop vehicle at the scene of an accident in which he or she was involved where someone suffered damage". Racing on a public road is very dangerous indeed - just ask Jub Jub and his victims and not stopping at an accident in which you were involved used to be called "hit and run". But then the charge "Failed to hand in documents to issuing authority in prescribed manner" (like your charge of address) also gets lumped in the same category. Does this make sense?
   4. Removing your rear number plate on a motor car attracts just 1 demerit-point whilst doing the same on a motorcycle attracts 6 and is a criminal offence for which you will be arrested. The fact is that no person removes their number plate unless they want to avoid camera fines or commit a crime. There should be no discrimination in the law - but there is!
   5. Similarly "Failed to comply with the directions conveyed by a road traffic sign by using a road set aside for pedal cyclists and pedestrians. RWC" also attracts just 1 demerit-point, despite the fact that the risk of injury to pedestrians and cyclists is extremely high!
   6. The fact is that with the exception of infringements that apply only to transport operators, by far the greatest value fines and points-demerits apply to only one category of traffic law enforcement - speed.
      
      
6. Corrupt traffic police are rife in South Africa. So are corrupt members of the public. This is a very bad mix!
   1. During and after the "pilot phase" of AARTO, corrupt traffic officers have frequently threatened motorists of hefty fines and even more hefty points-demerits. They have then asked motorists "what they want to do about it", openly and actively soliciting bribes. Many motorists, scared of losing their licenses have paid these bribes faster than the eye can blink - and the points-demerit system is not even in play yet!
   2. When the points-demerit system comes into play, the opportunities for corruption will increase and so will the willingness of motorists to pay these bribes. This will further the culture of corruption.
   3. The levels and seriousness of corrupt demands have been escalating as time progresses. Where a traffic officer may have demanded a Coke or KFC meal in the past, they are now demanding hundreds and even thousands of Rands at a time. Even more serious than this, is the fact that there have been numerous reports of demands for sexual favours from females by male traffic officers. This is totally unacceptable!
   4. Despite JPSA pointing this out to authorities,very little has been done about it and only one case - where a traffic officer solicited a bribe from American visitors to the World Cup event has so much as been pursued and publicised.
   5. Corrupt cops belong in jail and not on our roads. Corrupt members of the public also belong in jail.
      
      
7. The tripling of fines provision in the AARTO Regulations means that some drivers will not be penalised.
   1. Yes, a fine of triple the value of an AARTO fine can represent up to R4500 for a fine, but there are plenty of people who will choose to register their vehicles in the name of a company to take advantage of this.
   2. Take for example, everybody's pet peeve - minibus taxis. An owner of these vehicles need only register them in the name of a company and increase their fares to cover their fines and the driver will not incur any points on their driving licence.
   3. Other companies may give their employees the choice of either being elected the driver and having the points added to their license or paying the tripled value to continue acting as they will.
   4. Once again, the law is being applied differently to different categories of motorist and this is simply not acceptable. It is also unconstitutional but no-one seems to care much about that.
      
      
8. A points-demerit system must be run on a sound and robust IT infrastructure.
   1. Currently, AARTO is run on two different platforms in the two operational areas in which it has been implemented.
   2. Tshwane Metropolitan Police Department (TMPD) in Pretoria run on the RTMC's eNatIS system screens that have been developed whilst Johannesburg Metropolitan Police Department (JMPD) run on a system developed by TMT Services, a contractor to the JMPD.
   3. Neither of the two systems talk to one another in any way and there is no unified database or software platform for AARTO at the moment.
   4. Fines that have been paid are often escalated to the following stages because accounting systems and banking accounts are not linked into these systems.
   5. If an infringer pays the public beneficiary "AARTO fines" on internet banking websites for a JMPD fine, then they will never be credited and will have to apply for a refund from the RTMC and pay the JMPD. An administrative mess then also ensues since courtesy letters, enforcement orders and the like have to be reversed.
   6. Solutions for dealing with the IT issue were offered to the RTMC by JPSA in November 2009 and met with no response until January 2010 when the RTMC announced a R300 million IT tender for AARTO.
      
      
9. The arrogance and unwillingness of the Department of Transport and the RTMC to listen to anyone with constructive criticism or other solutions and ideas leaves AARTO in its appalling state of disarray.
   1. JPSA has not once, but on multiple occasions attempted to raise issues with the RTMC with respect to AARTO. This has led to nothing more than rhetoric from the upper echelons of the RTMC and them labeling us as "trouble makers".
   2. The Department of Transport has ignored us entirely, despite numerous attempts to make contact with them.
      
      
10. The AARTO system and its associated fines is nothing more than a calculated money-making venture and very little focus on road safety is so much as contemplated.
    1. The use of camera-based speed enforcement remains the highest focus of most traffic authorities. Billions of Rands in fine revenue are derived each year by the municipalities and contractors by means of these fines which often do not comply with the TCSP guidelines and other regulations.
    2. Cape Town traffic authorities have acknowledged that their motivation is financial by objecting to the implementation of AARTO in Cape Town, not realising that the obstructive policies of AARTO make it easier for them to collect fine revenues. This is probably because their current fine values are already in excess of what AARTO prescribes.
    3. The amounts which go to the RTMC, who already receive R39.50 for each and every license disk issued in South Africa are little short of obscene. There is no clear specification for what these additional funds must be used for. In 2009, the CEO of the RTMC raised the salaries of all RTMC board members to R3 million a year - in reaction to the added revenue derived by AARTO.
    4. Every single statement released by the Ministry of Transport has referred to motorists not paying their fines and how AARTO will change this. Very little emphasis is placed on reducing road fatalities.
    5. The JMPD, jumped the gun in April 2010 by immediately tripling the fine values for juristic persons, even though the points demerit system to which this provision applies had not been instituted yet and will not be until 1 April 2011.

Anyone who denies that a points-demerit systems do initially have an effect on road safety is either a dreamer or has ulterior motives. The fact is that points-demerit systems all over the world have proven to have had an effect in the initial stages of their implementation, however this effect has declined as time progresses. What the reason for this phenomenal fact is, is anyone's guess however, it remains a very real fact.

Comparing AARTO to other demerit-points systems in the world is also only partially possible since very few other systems have gone to the lengths to raise revenue that AARTO is going. Whilst the primary motivation for AARTO remains financial gain, there can be little doubt that it is not going to be the silver bullet that the Minister of Transport and others claim it is going to be with respect to reducing road fatalities.

There are many pitfalls to the successful implementation of AARTO from the perspective of law enforcement entities as well and we have pointed these out to the RTMC on several occasions. If you are interested in what we had to say to them, you can click here to see what those are.