Uganda’s EPS, modernisation or misstep?

________________

OPINION

By Patrick Gukiina Musoke

Uganda’s recent adoption of the Express Penalty System (EPS) for traffic violations was initially heralded as a significant advancement in road safety enforcement. However, a critical examination reveals that the EPS, in its current formulation, is fundamentally deficient in its adherence to the principles of proportionality and due process.

This deficiency exacerbates public discontent and renders the system unjust both in conception and application. It must be noted that any legitimate legal regime, particularly one that imposes penalties, must ensure that sanctions are proportionate to the gravity of the offence, and fines should never be excessive or imposed without clear and rational justification.

Unfortunately, the EPS has, within a matter of days, resulted in scenarios where drivers accumulate fines amounting to sh2 million, an astronomical sum that far exceeds the ordinary income of most Ugandans. Such penalties are not only disproportionate but also punitive in a manner that undermines the very notion of justice.

Moreover, the absence of a clearly defined threshold for enforcement has led to fines for trivial infractions, such as marginally exceeding a speed limit by as little as one kilometre per hour. This zero-tolerance approach is both illogical and irrational, failing to account for the inevitable human errors inherent in urban driving.

Equally troubling is the EPS’s manifest disregard for the right to a fair hearing, a cornerstone of legal systems worldwide and a principle enshrined in both constitutional frameworks and international human rights instruments.

More to that, by automating the issuance of fines and severely curtailing opportunities for contestation, the EPS contravenes the doctrine of audi alteram partem, or the right to be heard which procedural deficiency erodes public confidence and violates the rule of law, which mandates that no individual should be penalized without the opportunity to present their case before an impartial arbiter.

Furthermore, the EPS also falls short of the principle of legal certainty, which dictates that laws must be clear, publicised, and accessible, as its rollout has been marred by inadequate public sensitisation, leaving many drivers unaware of new regulations and their rights. Compounding this issue is the lack of adequate road signage, which undermines the foreseeability of legal consequences, which is a key prerequisite for both compliance and fairness.

In light of these legal and factual considerations, it is my well-considered opinion that a well-designed fines regime must reflect the best traditions of legal philosophy, encompassing proportionality, deterrence, due process, and legal certainty and fines must be commensurate with the severity of the infraction and the harm caused, serving as effective deterrents while ensuring that every recipient has access to a fair, transparent, and timely appeals process.

In summation, Uganda’s Express Penalty System, as presently constituted, egregiously falls short of the standards of justice and fairness that ought to underpin any legitimate legal framework, and for Uganda to realise the promise of modernised road safety enforcement, a fundamental recalibration of its approach is imperative. Only then can the EPS be transformed into a legitimate and effective instrument of public policy, worthy of the trust and confidence of the citizenry.

The writer is a lawyer, author and researcher.

gukiimeni@gmail.com