SENSE Position on Automated Enforcement

---

To that end, SENSE opposes any form of law enforcement that violates the spirit of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms by eliminating reasonable notice to those accused of a crime (notification weeks or months later) thereby reducing the ability of the accused to raise a defence. These systems fundamentally change the operation of law to a reverse-onus situation (guilty until proven innocent).

These systems target the owner of the motor vehicle, not the driver. For traffic safety, it is imperative that police officers have direct interaction with traffic offenders to ensure that they are licensed, insured, competent, and unimpaired. Automated enforcement fines do not deter the criminal drivers who are largely responsible for severe crashes.

Responsible owners can be faced with traffic fines for offences they had no control over. The systems put revenue collection above punishment of the offender.

Photo radar speed-enforcement systems eliminate the necessary practice of independent visual corroboration by the police officer. A single still photograph of a vehicle cannot later be examined to determine intermittent operational fault or other failures in the photo radar system.

SENSE believes:

• the provincial government is correct to target intersection infractions.
• the provincial government is correct to target drivers travelling at excessive speeds, but that
• speed limits must meet the standards of the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Speed Zoning Recommended Practice (the 85th percentile rule).
• photographic evidence gathering is acceptable as long as it is a component of apprehension and immediate notice.
• that speeding laws should be prima facie (defendable by "reasonable and prudent" argument or engineering study), not absolute or strict liability offences (not defendable).
• that laws viewed as reasonable by the majority of the population will be obeyed.
• that democratic society must strive for voluntary compliance to its laws.