Bright Simons Questions Fairness of TraffiTech-GH Appeal Process

Bright Simons, Honorary Vice-President of IMANI Africa, has questioned the fairness of the dispute resolution mechanism under Ghana's newly launched automated traffic enforcement system, TraffiTech-GH. He argued that motorists should not be required to challenge traffic fines through the same police institution responsible for enforcing them. This arrangement could undermine public confidence in the system, Simons said. He called for an independent mechanism to review complaints from motorists who dispute electronic notices of violation.

Speaking on JoyNews' Newsfile programme on Saturday, November 7, Simons emphasized the need for a fair and credible process to ensure that motorists receive impartial hearings when challenging penalties imposed under the system. He highlighted that motorists must challenge penalties through the institution responsible for enforcing the traffic regulations, questioning the impartiality of this process. Simons' concerns form part of broader questions he raised about the implementation of TraffiTech-GH.

The Policy Analyst argued that an independent review mechanism would strengthen public confidence in the system and ensure that motorists have access to a fair process when challenging penalties. Under the current system, electronic notices of violation are sent to the registered owners of vehicles captured committing traffic offences. Motorists are required to settle the fines within 14 days or challenge the notices through the prescribed process.

The system is intended to use technology to improve compliance with road traffic regulations and reduce road crashes. However, Simons raised concerns about the transparency of the public-private partnership behind TraffiTech-GH, revenue-sharing arrangements, and the protection of motorists' personal data. These concerns need to be addressed to ensure the system's success and public trust.

Simons' comments come at a time when the Ghanaian government is promoting the use of technology to improve road safety and reduce traffic congestion. The implementation of TraffiTech-GH is part of this effort, but it requires careful consideration of the concerns raised by stakeholders like Simons. A fair and transparent process for challenging penalties is crucial for building public trust in the system.

The dispute resolution mechanism under TraffiTech-GH has significant implications for motorists who may be unfairly penalized. An independent review mechanism would provide a safeguard against potential abuses of power and ensure that motorists receive fair treatment. This is essential for maintaining public confidence in the system and promoting a culture of compliance with road traffic regulations.

The government must consider Simons' concerns and take steps to address them. This may involve revising the dispute resolution mechanism to ensure that it is fair, transparent, and independent. By doing so, the government can build trust in the system and promote a safer and more efficient road network.

Key points

• Bright Simons calls for an independent mechanism to review complaints from motorists who dispute electronic notices of violation under TraffiTech-GH.
• Simons questions the impartiality of a process in which motorists must challenge penalties through the institution responsible for enforcing traffic regulations.
• The implementation of TraffiTech-GH raises concerns about transparency, revenue-sharing arrangements, and the protection of motorists' personal data.