Experienced motorists say that if the driver agrees with the violation, the protocol is considered “automatic”. And disagreeing with the decision may mean that the driver intends to appeal the decision of the traffic police inspector. Therefore, the inspector will have to collect higher quality administrative evidence so that the collected material does not “fall apart” in the future.
They even warn novices that this allegedly allows the inspector to “give in” in some way to cause additional trouble for the driver.
Is that right?
Expert opinion
Sergei Smirnovlawyer:
– In fact, the inspector doesn’t care what the driver writes. Agree or not, it doesn’t matter. In any case, the inspector states his position in the protocol.
There are also no mechanisms to punish the driver for stubbornness from harm. The inspector doesn’t need it. The case will be heard in the administrative practice group if it is the traffic police, or in court if the offense results in a disqualification from driving.
Plus, whether you agree with it or not, writing doesn’t make any sense at all.
If the driver has arguments or evidence that can help him protect his rights, he must of course write everything in the protocol.
Witness statements, video evidence from the Registrar of Births, Deaths or the like – all this must be carefully recorded. Agree/disagree doesn’t matter.
- In Russia, criminal liability has been introduced for particularly persistent traffic offenders.
- “Driving” can now be read in In contact with
Photo: TASS and “Behind the wheel”