Photo by: Duane Daws
South African National Roads Agency Limited (Sanral) on Wednesday said the failure to pay toll fees had been an infringement under the Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences Act (AARTO) since 2008.
This was in response to reports by the Opposition to Urban Tolling (Outa) that the main purpose of proposed amendments to the legislation was to accommodate the inclusion of outstanding e-toll bills into the normal traffic fines process.
The proposed amendments were published in the Government Gazette in December for public comment.
Sanral noted on Wednesday that the only amendment to provisions relating to toll infringements was the removal of the demerit points for the failure to comply with a toll sign.
“It is a pity, then, that Outa negates this by its warning about a looming tax revolt. It completely misunderstands the proposed changes and its dire warnings are misplaced,” Sanral communications GM Vusi Mona said, adding that this was “a clear case where a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.”
Sanral further noted that the Road Traffic Infringement Agency (RTIA) proposed that AARTO notices should have room for notification of more than one infringement. “This is legal. Should anybody wish to contest an infringement notice, photographic evidence on which this can be based, is available,” the agency stated.
The other proposed amendment regarding the extension of the period for service of an infringement notice from 40 to 90 days would allow for a more “practical arrangement that will ensure that alleged infringers receive notices within the service period”.
“To connect any of this this with e-tolling is another misjudgement – a multiple charge notice may be used by any issuing authority for any infringements. It is, in fact, simply a practical amendment that will save administrative and postal costs,” Mona said.
Meanwhile, the agency highlighted that confusion had also emerged regarding the need to include the name of the magisterial district where the infringement occurred. This was not necessary in term of the AARTO act but was required in terms of the Criminal Procedure Act.