IPB: A group of MPs are preparing to violate the Road Traffic Act once again

A group of MPs is preparing to violate the Road Traffic Act once again. Their goal is to create another bubblegum through their voters that they care about road safety. In the National Assembly, more than 10 draft laws have been introduced to amend the ZDP. This is stated in an official address of the Institute of Road Safety (IPB).

All the proposed changes are just another piecemeal patch, and in a local election year, another cheap political PR tool that only shows one – powerlessness and incompetence !

Therefore, we believe that the current Bills should not be adopted in their form, but that all institutions should join hands and, together with the non-governmental sector, harness efforts in drafting a completely new Law on Road Traffic, which will respond adequately way of reality !

1. All draft laws overlap in no small part with those already presented in the previous National Assembly.

2. The bills introduced by the Council of Ministers and the Group of People's Representatives: Bozhidar Plamenov Bojanov, Martin Dimitrov Dimitrov, Dimitar Georgiev Naydenov, Yordan Ivov Terziyski, Stella Dimitrova Nikolova, Vyara Metodieva Todeva, Alexander Dimitrov Simidchiev, Nadezhda Georgieva Yordanova, Vasil Stefanov Stefanov, Venko Nikolov Sabrutev, in a part overlap and create a prerequisite for the admission of incomplete/unclear legislation.

3. It creates an economic benefit for municipalities to issue electronic slips and collect fines. By its very nature, the control activity should not and is not correct to lead to revenue for the budget of the relevant control body, as it is a prerequisite for a conflict of interests and the generation of corruption pressure, in contrast to the EF and NP issued by the Ministry of the Interior, the revenue from which provide to the Road Traffic Safety Fund. The proposed changes provide for 70% of the fines to be provided to the budget of the respective municipality. This text will lead to two problems. First, the money from fines will be unaccounted for, i.e. they will not be targeted, will be spent equally with all receipts and will be on a par with tax revenues in terms of importance. Second, it is not clear how exactly the offender will pay the obligation on one account or two separate accounts. The second option is more likely to be implemented, which can lead to confusion, since there are 265 municipalities and each has its own account. What will happen in the event that the municipality changes its servicing bank after delivery of the EF is not clear.

4. Instead of introducing service by electronic notification and making the entire file available through the Secure Electronic Service System, it relies on the proven ineffective approach of on-the-spot service and “luck”.

5. Nowhere in the draft law is it mentioned, and the idea of the municipalities providing their ATCCs to the Traffic Police, which will use them, is not shared in the public space either. For more than 10 years, the Ministry of the Interior, with its limited number of ATCCs, has failed to organize at the central level, its control activity, what will happen when 265 municipalities with different levels of administrative capacity start generating EF?

6. An applied preliminary impact assessment is incorrect regarding the Cost-Benefit Analysis and Administrative Burden and Structural Changes.

Control for compliance with any law does not follow it is the PRIVILEGE of the control body to decide IF and WHEN to control. On the contrary, if the municipalities and their employees will participate in the control of traffic on the roads, then they must be clearly defined and have AUTHORITY.

Next, it would be difficult to assume that the additional control powers will not lead to a burden on the work of the Municipalities. This is because in our country the lack of a proper approach leads to the many violations identified by the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and this inevitably leads to lawsuits. If we take the territory of the SDVR, which is the record holder for undelivered EFs and NPs – around 280,000, we cannot logically accept the thesis that additional over 500,000 files would not lead to burden. The municipalities that have built systems will have to allocate funds for the annual metrological and technical control for these ATSS is paid, which was for some reason omitted by the proponents of the Bill. What remains without analysis is how it will affect the municipalities that do not have available ATSS or, more precisely, how the purchase and construction of the systems does not lead to a burden on the budget?

Lastly, it is said that the revenue from fines will support the maintenance and development of the control systems, which in itself logically does not allow the achievement of the goal of reducing violations, since it is the revenue from them that sustains the system.< /p> 7. The proposal is a prerequisite for the creation of a second "Forest" situation, because the statute of limitations for Electronic Receipts remains unchanged, and according to the current regulations as a result of Interpretive Decree No. 1 of 27.02.2015, the absolute statute of limitations expires after 4.5 years! !! It is not difficult to imagine how a municipality with a small administrative capacity and a large number of violations detected in a given period, in the current situation, can issue them with a huge delay and thus turn every driver into a “jigit“ and “systemic offender“.

8. Instead of focusing efforts on creating a more complex approach to systemic offenders and their detection, texts in the law are proposed that should be left as they are now – within the operational autonomy of each director of the ODMVR. More specifically, it is about the proposal for drivers with five or more undelivered NP/EF to be searched as a matter of priority. This text is absurd and shows a lack of practical experience and total understanding of the matter by its authors. If a driver has multiple violations and owns a private car, this is no guarantee that firstly he is always in it and secondly that he is always the offender.

9. If any of the petitioners had taken the trouble to look at the ZDvP in its original form, in which it was published in 1999, they would have realized that the Law does not need changes. We need a completely new law, because the matter in the current one has spread to such an extent in so many directions that it is difficult to be understood by drivers with many years of experience or even university professors, what is left for young drivers. The current version of the Law includes control over road traffic participants, persons performing road traffic accidents and psychological research, as well as conducting training courses. In addition to control, rules and procedures for issuing permits for carrying out the relevant activities are outlined. In addition to the permits, there are also rules for type approval of the various types of safety equipment, as well as those for child restraint systems.

10. Last year's number of submitted projects was 8, fortunately they did not come to fruition. Those changes that were promulgated by amending and supplementing the Criminal Code and creating problems that need changes prove our thesis that the Criminal Code is exhausted in its form.