How a traffic police officer must prove your violation

Should a traffic police inspector show a video violation to the driver?

Will there be violations in the actions of the traffic police inspector if, when drawing up a protocol, he refuses to show the driver a video recording from the service recorder confirming the violation? Drivers believe that refusal to show this video recording is interpreted as a lack of evidence, and therefore is a reason to cancel the protocol. Is it really?

Traffic police inspectors often use video recording on roads with complex markings or illogical placement of road signs. These are the so-called “fishing” places where inexperienced or non-local drivers violate traffic rules more often than others.

Does the traffic police inspector have to prove your violation?

By law, the traffic police inspector must have evidence of an offense. But if earlier inspectors were more often “fed” by video recordings of speed, now many of them have switched to “driving into the oncoming lane.” This is understandable - oncoming traffic is much more expensive than speeding. Why issue cheap speed protocols if you can stop two or three “oncoming” people, show them video recordings, and the shift is a success?

This widespread practice has led to the fact that now an increasing number of drivers require the inspector drawing up the protocol to show video evidence of the offense. And if there is a recording, but the inspector does not show it, then there was no violation of the rules, and the protocol can be successfully appealed.

In fact, everything is not quite like that. In accordance with the administrative procedure, the driver has the right, from the moment the protocol is drawn up, to familiarize himself with the case materials, submit petitions, provide evidence and give explanations.

The inspector is obliged to explain the essence of the violation to the driver. But none of the regulations specifically mention “video recording.” Moreover, according to Art. 26.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, any data is considered evidence in the case, including the testimony of the inspector, which establishes the guilt of the driver.

At a court hearing or when considering a case, the driver is required to familiarize himself with the available video recording. But when drawing up a protocol, options are possible.

If you remember, ten years ago the same Code of Administrative Offenses was in effect, and no one even came close to mentioning any video when drawing up a protocol. Nothing has changed significantly since then (except for fines). Let's consider cases of road accidents - again, no one asks to show a video recording of their violation.

Most often, traffic police officers present a video recording to stop arguing with the driver who insists that he is right and believes that he is not obligated to do this.

If the protocol mentions a video recording as evidence of the driver’s guilt, then in order to familiarize himself with the case materials (and he has every right to do this by law), the driver’s demand to present it is legal. But the inspector’s refusal is not.

A traffic police officer who draws up a report without familiarizing the driver with the case materials violates the administrative process. In this case, there is only one piece of advice to the driver - to make an appropriate entry in the protocol: “the inspector refused to familiarize me with the evidence in the case.” It would be nice to capture this moment on video or a voice recorder.

The fact is that if you do not make the appropriate mark, then when the case is considered in court or at a hearing at the traffic police, the inspector will state that he offered to look at it and you refused or that you did not ask for it.

Should the traffic police inspector present evidence of traffic violations?

Every day in the Russian Federation hundreds of offenses committed by vehicle drivers are recorded. But don’t traffic police officers themselves make mistakes when stopping a car? New videos and photos of illegal behavior of inspectors with drivers regularly appear on the Internet. Nevertheless, not everyone still knows how a patrolman is obliged to act after stopping a vehicle, what the car owner has the right to demand and what evidence of traffic violations is valid, and where the law enforcement officer is simply using his official position.

Legislative regulation

In accordance with Article 25 of the Russian Code of Administrative Offences, the traffic police patrol officer is obliged, after stopping the vehicle, to name the reason - the alleged violation. But he should not provide all the materials, including video recording, at the time of the stop. According to the law, the whole procedure is as follows:

Employee presentation in form.
Announcement of the reason for the stop by the inspector with reference to the specific traffic rule violation.
Please provide the driver's documents for review.
Drawing up the protocol itself.
Demonstration of all evidence of the violation to the perpetrator, as a participant in the opened case under the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation.

If, after stopping the vehicle, the inspector can present evidence of a violation committed by the driver, then after drawing up a protocol he undertakes to do so. Now the traffic police officer bears administrative responsibility for refusing to familiarize himself with the case materials. If, even after drawing up the protocol, the policeman does not show the culprit a record of his violation, then the driver must mention this in the document drawn up in free form before signing it. After which it is necessary to request a copy of the protocol so that the inspector does not write anything into it without the driver’s knowledge.

What can serve as evidence of guilt?

The reason given while stopping the motorist must subsequently be confirmed financially by the traffic police officer. This could be photographs, video recordings of what happened, speed radar readings, or a diagram of the offense. According to the law, the inspector only provides evidence of the driver’s guilt for review; he should not comment on or explain it. For example, they show a photo of a car with fake license plates. The patrolman only shows the picture; he is not obliged to give reasons for his decision. The judge will determine the legality of his claim. In the case of radar, proof of guilt will be quick and difficult to dispute, since there are readings from an accurate device. Which, by the way, will also be shown to the violator after the protocol is drawn up.

If the car was stopped due to its similarity to the vehicle from the landmark, then the process of proving the driver’s innocence will be more difficult. According to the law, police cannot show the driver the orientation itself under the pretext of confidentiality of the investigation. However, they are required to name the wanted car by form (make, model, color, license plates, if any are indicated in the document). There is also a plus here: such a detention does not threaten the driver (if it was not he who stole the car) with an administrative fine, since, according to the results of the reconciliation, he does not fit the guidelines. However, today this can only be an excuse to stop, after which the inspector will find new violations in the owner’s documents themselves or inside the cabin. Since the policeman may ask to see a first aid kit, fire extinguisher, etc.

Procedure for visually recording a violation

One of the most common forms of recording an offense is visual. Here, stopping a vehicle is possible due to “eyeballing”. A traffic police officer saw that a violation was being committed (the driver turned in the wrong place, parked, crossed a double line, and overtook, despite the prohibitory sign). To determine such violations, no special instruments are needed, since the inspector personally becomes a witness.

But proving visual fixation will not be easy. Today, drivers immediately after a stop demand proof of the violation committed, not knowing that the policeman is not obliged to present it immediately. In order to subsequently provide evidence that the car owner did not adhere to traffic rules while driving, a traffic police officer must record the incident in any way available. This is where photography and video recording come to the rescue, the results of which are later attached to the case. The protocol must include the testimony of the police officer as a witness to the violation and a mention of the fact that a photographic recording of the incident was later made.

Conclusion

The procedure for inspecting a vehicle and verifying documents implies that the traffic police officer only names the reason for stopping the car, and demonstrates the evidence after drawing up the protocol. However, the driver should not refuse to sign the document simply because the police officer refused to show the recording materials. You should indicate when drawing it up that you do not agree with the alleged traffic violation and ask for a copy of the protocol after signing.

Does the traffic police officer have to prove that you violated the rules?

Can a traffic police officer stop a car to check documents? ... is an insurance policy for compulsory civil liability insurance. Does the inspector have to prove that you broke the rules ?

In what cases can a traffic police inspector stop a car?

A traffic police inspector may stop a vehicle if:

Traffic violations. The inspector was able to establish visually or record this using special technical means.
Involvement of the driver or passengers in an accident, crime or administrative offense. The inspector has data in the form of orientation or information from the duty officer.
Car theft or search. The inspector has data that can prove the fact that the car is stolen or is wanted.
To testify if you are an eyewitness or witness to an accident or a crime committed.
To attract the driver as a witness.
To carry out administrative and regulatory actions.
To provide a vehicle to doctors or traffic police officers.
To assist victims or police officers.
To carry out special events that must be carried out on the basis of administrative acts. This is done to check cars for the presence of prohibited goods or people who are wanted.

Can a traffic police officer stop a car to check documents?

Yes maybe. But if this is the only reason for the stop, then the document check must be carried out exclusively at the traffic police post. (clause 63 of the order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia dated March 2, 2009 No. 185).

If a traffic police officer stopped you to check your documents without stating the reason ( traffic violation , need for a witness, etc.), then you can refuse to provide documents outside the traffic police post.

What documents must be provided for verification?

If a driver violates traffic rules, the inspector has the right to stop the violator, and the driver of the vehicle is obliged to have with him and, at the request of the police officers, hand over to them for inspection:

a driver's license or temporary permit to drive a vehicle of the appropriate category;
registration documents for this vehicle;
insurance policy of compulsory civil liability insurance.

Does the inspector have to prove that you broke the rules?

Must. The traffic police inspector is obliged, at the driver’s oral request, to present evidence of the violation, be it photo or video recording, witness testimony or other evidence. The basis for this is Art. 35 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation: “Persons participating in the case have the right to familiarize themselves with the case materials, make extracts from them, make copies, file challenges, present evidence and participate in their study, ask questions to other persons participating in the case, witnesses, experts and specialists."

If the inspector did not do this and began to draw up a report, then the driver should write in the document: “I was not familiar with the evidence of the violation charged to me.” Or you can record a conversation with the inspector. The driver will first have to prove his innocence before the administrative commission. If she does not accept the arguments and issues a ruling on an administrative violation, then you need to go to court and prove your case there.

Is it possible to appeal the protocol?

The driver has the right to appeal the decision to impose administrative liability within 10 days, but he will have to prove his innocence independently in court.

According to Art. 1.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, a person is subject to administrative liability only for those administrative offenses for which his guilt has been established. A person against whom proceedings are being conducted for an administrative offense is considered innocent until his guilt is proven in the manner prescribed by the Code and established by a decision of the judge, body, or official who considered the case that has entered into legal force.

RF Armed Forces: a written explanation from a traffic police inspector is not admissible evidence in a case of an administrative offense

The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dismissed the case against a motorist who was deprived of his driver's license for driving into oncoming traffic due to the lack of sufficient evidence of an offense (Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of May 29, 2017 No. 5-AD17-17).

The court indicated that the written explanations of the traffic police inspector cannot be considered admissible evidence due to the fact that they were written by the inspector in his own hand and were received from himself. After all, the inspector warned about responsibility for giving deliberately false testimony to himself and explained to himself the rights provided for by the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Code of Administrative Offenses.

The RF Armed Forces expressed the position that the explanations of a traffic police official cannot be recognized as admissible evidence in a case of an administrative offense. While the lower courts made decisions in this case on the deprivation of a driver's license based on the explanation of the traffic police inspector, the protocol on the administrative offense and the video recording of the violation. This evidence was also rejected by the RF Armed Forces.

What comments does the driver have the right to make in the road accident diagram drawn up by the traffic police inspector? Find out from the material “Fixing evidence at the scene of an accident” in the “Home Legal Encyclopedia” of the Internet version of the GARANT system. Get full access for 3 days for free!

Should the inspector show the driver evidence of violation?

Many people do not know, but in reality, the traffic police inspector must, at your request, present evidence of a violation. Moreover, “requirement” in this case is the key concept. Any driver needs to be clearly aware of this, because this will allow him to competently protect his rights and avoid most of the troubles.

Driver's license

Even an innocent driver often feels uncomfortable in front of an inspector, because the car is stopped for a reason, not just like that. It seems to a person that a lot depends on the inspector, because he will decide how to punish the driver. However, it is extremely important for the driver to know Article 25.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses. With it he can:

1. give explanations;

2. get acquainted with the case materials;

3. provide evidence;

4. use legal assistance from a defense attorney.

It should also be taken into account that from the moment the inspector stops for a certain violation of traffic rules, a case of administrative violation begins. An administrative case is considered initiated from the time the protocol on the administrative offense is drawn up, including the inspection of the scene of the incident.

Does the traffic police officer have to prove your violation?

Despite the fact that the inspector’s duties include the obligation to present you with evidence of a violation, he is not obliged to justify it. This is true. In terms of traffic violations, the presumption of innocence of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation does not apply. You have the right to appeal the decision to hold you administratively liable within 10 days, but you will need to prove your innocence yourself in court. These cases are not subject to state duty.

There was even a precedent for the above issue. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation issued Determination 03/22/2011 N 391-О-О, according to which it was refused to accept for consideration the complaint of Yuri Viktorovich Petrov, who saw a violation of his rights, part 3 of article 1.5 with a note to article 1.5, as well as article 2.6.1 Russian Code of Administrative Offences.

In this ruling, the Constitutional Court explained in detail the special procedure for proving one’s own innocence by an alleged traffic violator.

Bringing to administrative responsibility using photo and video recording

A separate block is the issue of bringing to administrative responsibility with the help of photo and video recording. This question also has an answer in the current legislation.

In the event that you were sent a “chain letter” by mail, that is, a corresponding resolution to bring the driver to administrative responsibility with a photograph of your car attached, then you should pay attention to the time the offense was recorded, because it is quite likely that you could not have been there at all driving a car. Accordingly, the inspector will not be able to legally hold you accountable

If you have encountered such a problem, you should file a claim in court to challenge this decision. To do this, it will be enough to ensure that the traffic violator appears at the court hearing so that he can confirm your arguments.

Please note: If you do not want to frame the violator, then you need to know that the statute of limitations for bringing to administrative responsibility is 3 months (except for violations under Articles 12.8, 12.24, 12.26, 12.27, 12.30 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of Russia - the statute of limitations is 1 year).

Often, traffic police inspectors themselves violate the law by denying you the opportunity to present evidence that is in the materials of the administrative violation case. In these cases, you do not need to give in to emotions; you should indicate in the protocol that you do not agree with the violation charged to you. You need to pick up a copy and go to court with a statement of claim, this is the path of least resistance, the most beneficial for you.

Conclusion: do not violate traffic rules and do not give the inspector a reason to stop. If you do not agree with the charges, then go to court, having previously provided yourself with legal support.