If the traffic police officer did not explain to the driver accused of traffic violations (SDA), his rights, then the decision to punish the driver does not enter into force. Thus, the inspector must first explain to the driver the reason for the detention and explain the rights, and only then make a decision on punishment, the First Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction ruled.
The court cited as an example the story of citizen U., a resident of the Nizhny Novgorod region, who was punished for leaving the place car accident.
In the record of the administrative offense in the column “explanation of the rights of the person in respect of whom proceedings have been initiated”, U.’s signature was missing. At the same time, the traffic police officer must clearly explain what clause of the traffic rules did the driver not comply with.
In this regard, the court canceled the decision to punish the driver and sent the case for a new trial.
According to the law, a citizen brought to responsibility for an administrative offense has the right to familiarize himself with all the materials of the case, give explanations, present evidence, and use the help of a defense lawyer. Law enforcement officials are required to explain in detail to the alleged violator of his rights.
When drawing up a protocol on an administrative offense, a police officer is obliged to explain to the driver the rights provided for in Art. 51 of the Constitution: Do not testify against yourself or your next of kin. And the driver, after listening to the explanations, is free to sign or not to sign the protocol.
When detaining a driver, a traffic police officer is obliged to introduce himself, give his position, rank and surname, present (at the driver’s request) an official certificate, and then inform the reason for the detention and explain his rights.
The traffic police officer is obliged to explain the procedure for appealing the punishment and provide the driver with the opportunity to give explanations. If the traffic police officer does not consider the explanations convincing, then he additionally explains the essence of the offense and issues a decision on an administrative offense.