Keep your eyes open: Russian woman was stripped of her license for forgotten glasses
A driver suspected of drinking alcohol before a trip and unable to sign a protocol due to poor eyesight is considered to have refused a medical examination. This decision was confirmed by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. Attempts by motorists to avoid punishment by trying in one way or another to avoid signing procedural documents are doomed to failure, lawyers and experts say. Details can be found in the Izvestia article.
I don't see anything
In May last year, in the Chelyabinsk region, traffic police officers stopped a car to check documents and suspected that a motorist was driving under the influence due to secondary signs of intoxication. The police issued all the necessary documents in this case, removed the woman from management and offered to undergo an examination first in a patrol car, and then in a medical facility. However, she refused to sign any procedural documents, claiming that she had left her glasses at home and therefore could not read what was written in the protocols.
Last summer, the magistrate's court found her guilty under Part 1 of Article 12.26 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation ("Failure by the driver of a vehicle to undergo a medical examination for intoxication"), deprived her of her driver's license for a year and a half and fined 45 thousand rubles. The woman challenged this decision first in the District Court, and then in the Seventh Court of Cassation of General Jurisdiction. However, both instances upheld the decision of the Justice of the peace. As a result, the citizen filed a complaint with the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.
They read it out and explained it
Having reviewed the case materials and studied the video recording of the traffic police officers communicating with the motorist, made by the police, the Supreme Court also found no legal grounds to satisfy the complaint. According to the explanations of the Constitutional Court dated April 26, 2016, refusal to comply with the requirements for passing an examination for intoxication can be expressed in any way: both in the form of action and inaction, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation noted.
"Ifanova's actions (last name changed. — Izvestia) <...> clearly indicate that she deliberately delayed the procedures being carried out and prevented the commission of these procedural actions against her, which forms the objective side of the composition of an administrative offense," the Supreme Court ruling says.
The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation noted that, as follows from the video, police officers explained the procedures to the driver, read out the texts of the issued documents, "the meaning of which is clear and understandable and does not give grounds for any other interpretation." In addition, the motorist was repeatedly asked by her husband, who was also at the scene of the offense, to go for glasses. However, both spouses ignored these suggestions.
The Supreme Court dismissed the complaint and upheld the decisions of the lower courts.
"Ears for what"
Such behavior by drivers is not uncommon, says Sergey Radko, a lawyer for the Freedom of Choice movement. Often, motorists, trying to avoid responsibility for drunk driving, simulate exhaling into a breathalyzer or declare that for one reason or another it is impossible to exhale normally for analysis, he noted.
— The refusal to sign protocols due to poor eyesight, citing an alleged misunderstanding of the essence of these documents, is just another way to "play dumb", trying to evade responsibility. But these are futile attempts: both the explanations of the Constitutional Court and Article 12.26 of the Administrative Code itself state that responsibility for this violation comes from both actions and inactions. Therefore, the decisions of all the courts that found the driver guilty of this offense are absolutely lawful and fair," the lawyer noted.
Separately, Sergei Radko stressed that the police, as follows from the case file, read out to the motorist the protocols they had drawn up and explained their essence, as well as the consequences.
"Even if we assume that the driver really couldn't read what was written in the documents without glasses, no one covered her ears and she didn't complain about hearing," he pointed out.
"How did she even get behind the wheel"
The driver's statements that he allegedly does not see what is written in the protocol, does not understand the essence of what is written, or other ways to avoid signing the document are nothing more than guile, says Valery Soldunov, a member of the Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation, chairman of the All—Russian Society of Motorists.
— It is obvious that behind all these tricks there is only a desire to avoid responsibility. And the fact that the driver, who, in fact, refused to undergo an examination for intoxication, was appropriately punished for this is absolutely true and correct," he told Izvestia.
If the motorist could not read what was written in the protocol, then it is unclear how she drove the car at all, sitting behind the wheel without glasses, auto expert Igor Morzharetto wonders. In his opinion, in this situation, it might make sense to additionally check whether the driver has any medical restrictions and contraindications for driving, taking into account poor eyesight, he believes.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
