The State Duma rejected a bill limiting the use of private complexes for recording traffic violations

The State Duma rejected the bill, which proposed to limit the operation of any complexes for automatic recording of violations on the territory of the country, except those owned by the state. The issue was a ban on traffic cameras that are used under concession agreements or rented from private companies. The initiators of the amendments believe that in this way camera owners have an interest in recording as many violations as possible; they use “various methods to increase profitability.” The relevant State Duma committee assessed the initiative “positively,” but indicated that the amendments could not be adopted on formal grounds. The Russian government called the initiative “insufficiently justified.”

Bill, which was considered by the State Duma on Wednesday, was introduced by deputies and senators from the LDPR in July 2023. Amendments to the Code of Administrative Offenses proposed introducing a special condition for issuing fines from traffic cameras: they must be owned by constituent entities of the federation or federal authorities. The requirements for the “functional properties” of the complexes and the procedure for installing cameras must be determined by the government of the Russian Federation.

According to the traffic police, at the end of 2022 (statistics for 2023 have not yet been published) there were more than 23.8 thousand stationary cameras and 3.2 thousand mobile cameras in operation in the Russian Federation. 90% of fines for traffic violations are issued using complexes, payment goes to regional budgets. In many regions, cameras are installed as part of concessions with companies that receive a share of each fine paid (Moscow, Kurgan regions, Altai Republic, Trans-Baikal Territory) or a percentage of the total “fine” income to the budget (Ryazan region, Chechnya, Ingushetia).

Private traders use “various methods to increase profitability,” the explanatory note says. For example, the systems are installed in areas where drivers often slightly exceed the speed limit, including due to improper traffic management, or violations are recorded in violation of procedures. The latter leads to erroneous fines, which many drivers find easier to pay than to appeal.

“Complexes should belong only to the state or municipal structures; private owners should not be involved in this,” Yaroslav Nilov, head of the Duma Committee on Social Policy, said on Wednesday. “The mass abuse of motorists must end.”

The State Duma rejected the amendments proposed by the LDPR. However, as Nikolai Brykin, a member of the United Russia State Construction Committee, put it on Wednesday, the initiative “has a positive assessment.” Amendments, according to him, need to be made to the law “On Highways and Road Activities” – in this case, Mr. Brykin suggested, the initiative “can be supported.”

Today, cameras are classified as “elements of road infrastructure”; they can be the subject of a concession agreement, the conclusion of the State Construction Committee says. The government in its response indicated that the amendments were “not sufficiently substantiated,” and the option proposed by the deputies does not exclude the use of cameras by “other” individuals or legal entities in the case of renting equipment from government agencies.

In most cases, according to Kommersant, the equipment is registered and de jure in state ownership, but operational management is carried out by third-party companies.

Regional authorities use the concession to reduce the cost of installing cameras, Grigory Shukhman, an expert on violation recording systems, explained to Kommersant: costs are transferred to private owners in exchange for transferring part of the proceeds from fines. “Given that regional authorities are no less interested in receiving funds from penalties than their concession partners, the issue of the ownership of the cameras is secondary,” the expert points out. “We must strive to exclude commercial interests in principle.”

Back in 2022, the Ministry of Internal Affairs announced a position according to which cameras should be used to prevent violations, and not for financial revenue. The agency even proposed adjusting previously concluded concessions in order to remove the link between company income and fines, but the idea was not developed. In Moscow, we note that a camera rental scheme is used, but the owner receives a fixed amount from the budget as part of the contract. In Tatarstan, the installation and maintenance of cameras are financed from the budget.

Let us remind you that on September 1, amendments to the highway law regulating the installation of cameras come into force. The complexes will be allowed to be installed only in strictly defined places, including on marked roads; in emergency areas; in road works where temporary restrictions have been introduced; at pedestrian crossings, etc. At the same time, the rule will begin to apply according to which outside the city the camera control zone should begin no earlier than 150–300 m after the “Photo and video recording” sign, in a populated area – no earlier than 100 m after the sign. If these rules are violated, the fine from the camera can be canceled.

Ivan Buranov