Regular rest on "prison" bunks in the very near future happen, apparently, any driver who not only fled the scene of the accident, did not pay on time a fine or sat behind the wheel, being deprived, but also to those who just ... not fulfilled the requirement employee traffic police "not to exceed", "not to violate," "do not go".
In the depths of traffic police, with the support of the judiciary developed and introduced into practice a mechanism to punish administrative detention essentially for any traffic violations ...
Fee for pleasure. Triple ...
Serezhkina glass on the car were blacked really beyond measure: the passion for love joys, it always catches by surprise, forced disguise. Inspector DPS Sgt heads that not only had the opportunity to study Serezhkina documents, but also the car busily raised on the hand pocket "hyperboloid" and put it on the glass. The device was indignant surprise.
- That's what - succinctly stated the existence of a "crime" Sergeant - I will fine you, and give you time ... ten days. During this time, take off your film and introduced the car in our battalion. Understood conspirator?
Of the two pieces of paper, which gave the inspector Sergei was familiar to only one - the decision on the penalty. Others were obscure and wonder called - "orders to eliminate the causes and conditions that lead to violations." In the period until October 16, it behooves Earring rid of the glass toning film.
... Knowing people calmed baffled Sergei saying, will drive a car is not necessary - even if the traffic police caught and fined each time. For fun you have to pay.
Did not expect future trouble Sergei two weeks later on the same post stopped the same DPS inspector.
- Yeah! - He grimaced maliciously. - Do not do this ... Nara cry for you!
In the judicial sector Sergei delivered quickly - I did not have to sit in the "monkey" while awaiting trial.
Inspector DPS Golovko explain to the judge that Sergei Bezborodov not complied with the legal requirements of a police officer, against him, in writing, for which on the basis of Article 19.3 of the RF Code of Administrative Offences should be held liable to the most severe.
And the judge, not too going into details, verdict, which in Serezhkina eyes darkened forest than in the cabin of his car after tinting glass:
- Ten days of administrative arrest ...
The legal requirement of a prescription or illicit?
Holders of bagels and right to turn her claim that some units of the traffic police of the Russian cities and villages, as if by prior agreement, in the summer of this year, began en masse to distribute drivers such requirements for any reason, and even keep their records than secured the ability to control the discharge of the driver duties. And the courts from giving cops pricked famously send drivers in "jail".
Truly unimaginable happened: in temporary detention centers have begun to fall, those who for default provisions to justice and could not be held.
To understand the essence of judicial errors, and being armed with the theory, do not ring out on the "bunk", it is important to distinguish between two concepts that are lumped together and traffic cops (they - forgivable) and judge (them - not): legal requirements and instructions.
So the writ.
Based on the meaning of the concept, it is issued in writing and oblige to commit certain actions, eliminating the causes of disorders or conditions conducive to its commission.
For example, under paragraph 12 of the Presidential Decree №711 traffic police officer can issue an order to the Director's office, demanding sweeping thoroughly sweep the roadway, as in the banana skins (at the risk of life!) Go not only cars, but also - at a stoplight! - Pedestrians. And for not taking measures to eliminate the causes and conditions that contributed to the violation of traffic rules by pedestrians and drivers, the director of the office as an officer on the basis of Article 19.6 of the Code can easily be punished by a fine up to five hundred rubles.
It differs significantly from the requirements of "legal requirement". In accordance with Article 11 of the Law "On militia" any police officer is entitled to "demand from citizens and officials of the termination of a crime or misdemeanor." In other words, if, for example, a citizen Petrov illegally cut down the forest, and the driver Petrov all four wheels of the car presses hated valet, police officer lawfully may need to stop these actions. This requirement is maintained orally: audible shout or articulate team. For failure to comply with legal requirements of Article 19.3 of the Administrative Code provides severe but just punishment: a fine of up to one thousand rubles or administrative arrest for up to fifteen days.
And now the most important thing, which is not suspected - most of them - no traffic police or stepchildren Themis: the law provides for the presentation of citizens (in this case - the driver) the legal requirements, but does not provide issuing prescriptions!
But because courts often go on about the poorly educated roadside policemen, Sergei B. and his like traffic police issued an illegal instruction, and judges are thrown into jail for alleged failure to comply with legal requirements!
Think about Thomas, and talk about ...
A Erema a rootless!
Prescription - scantily phenomenon.
The form of any document (certificate, protocol, and so forth.) Approved by order of the appropriate authorities. Form requirements (even issued lawfully officials) has not been approved by anyone. This form is simply no. There is in nature.
And if at the homeless prescription is not "Father and mother", each DPS inspector, the other day are included in the all-Russian competition on the topic "Who is the greatest pieces of paper will give" drivers, draws this dokumentik on my own: in many ways, but with full confidence that they are right. Here are just a judge with the same confidence sentenced almost all the same: how to legitimate demands for non-compliance with all its consequences.
The conjectures suffer only lawyers: if (closing his eyes to the law) we assume that the DPS inspector still has the right to issue an order to remove the driver, for example, a car dubbing the film, whether it is necessary to clarify with the driver's rights and obligations? Is it necessary to give an order on receipt? How much time is necessary for its implementation set: reasonable or from the bulldozer? Is it possible to appeal against an order? If so, in what order and to whom? Is it possible to request the extension of the execution and who? And most important: a requirement is considered legitimate?
If - anyone, supported by the judges crazy initiative unidentified police Cardinals, received all-Russian continued, give moral (but not legal) right to roadside police to issue drivers prescriptions with a demand to continue not to exceed the speed limit, do not drive through the intersection on a red and not to leave the wide road without policy.
And for non-compliance - to build, all together to drag on the bench ...
© Autorambler.ru (12.11.2008)