ROAD SAFETY ARTICLE
The addiction is everywhere. Some call it risky. I once called the driving, ‘crazy’. Defaulters, however, call it the vogue. It knows no bounds. Both the young and the old indulge in it. Even the very enlightened and polished do the same. The less privileged have equally joined. You would be surprised to know that all forms of transport operators do the same. From private car owners to commercial drivers. The Okada operators as well as tricyclists are not left out of the ding dong habit that has crippled some and caused the death of others.
Some of my colleagues in uniform are striving to catch up too. Some do it in uniform while the few who lack the guts or like I love saying, who fear God a little, indulge when they are in mufti. Some pious ones are not exempted as I have had cause to bail a few whenever the long arm of the law grabs them. If you think that health professionals who daily attend to victims of road traffic crashes are better off, then you need a rethink.
I recall the case of one who was arrested in Lagos This female health professional, a mother and a wife resorted to curses after her plea for mercy fell on deaf ears. The few decent and responsible road users would argue that they have inbuilt Bluetooth and all sorts of unprintable technology that permits them to break the law of the land and endanger their lives and others despite the strict warnings by the makers of mobile phones against flouting traffic rules. Fathers. Mothers. Sons and daughters all indulge while those believing God for their personal mobility while still trekking, do it too.
These mannerisms are truly not my real focus for this week. It is the battering, arguments, words trading and unnecessary lies or half-truths that are told sometimes by defaulters that is my worry. A couple of weeks back I treated the same subject with a strong call for tweaking the penalties for such infractions, as well as expanding the scope of technology deployment to address this major road safety risk behavior. I am talking about the penchant by motorists to drive and use the phone while driving and the arguments and half truths that result when apprehended as well as the near punches that are thrown.
So what really is this infraction that daily creates unnecessary verbal or physical assault on our operatives for merely doing their legitimate assignment as contained in the Federal Road Safety Corps Establishment Act,2007 as well as the National Road Traffic Regulations which has been cited over and over in this column. These two legal documents defines these infractions as well as empower our men,yet, daily they are verbally and physically assaulted for carrying out their legitimate responsibilities to save lives
Daily, we educate motorists that the habit or infraction of using the phone while driving include making or receiving calls, as well as using any facility in the phone such as email, text messaging, snapshots, and Google map among others. The essence is to disabuse the minds of those who mischievously argue that the use of a phone while driving simply refers to making or receiving a call while driving without using a hands free. This group would always argue that as at the time they were stopped or pullover by our men, they were not using their phone.Some would confess that they were just holding their phone to confirm calling without answering it
Today, the diseased behavior like I once wrote has won converts among all including vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and motor cyclists which has resulted in avoidable deaths and injuries. I do not know if you followed the celebrated case of a female offender arrested over a year in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja for driving and using her Goggle Map. This case went viral as she took her time to berate and insult not just the operatives but the entirety of the Corps for being backward and I guess primitive.
This case was personally handled by the former Corps Marshal, Boboye Oyeyemi who used the opportunity to educate the offender and her husband. Before his intervention, some offenders capitalised on this case to drag the Corps to the mud for insisting as provided by the regulations that should not endanger their lives or those of other road users by engaging in distracted driving.
The rising trend explains why there are calls globally including Nigeria to heighten and strengthen the enforcement on defaulters to cut down the rising spate of avoidable road traffic crashes especially in low and middle income countries which account for a greater portion of global crash index. There are equally series of researches seeking for better answers and feedback such as the one conducted in Spain which I hope to share with you this week if space permits or next week.
For the record again, the National Road Traffic Regulations, 2012 and the Revised Highway Code lists the use of phone while driving and driving under the influence of alcohol and drugs as traffic offences even though our focus is on what exactly is the use of phone while driving. The Revised Highway Code, warns drivers against driving under the influence of alcohol, drugs or harmful substances because they impair vision, judgement, coordination and slows down reaction just like distracted driving or specifically using your phone while driving.
The 2016 National Road Traffic Regulations in section 175(1) notes that,’’ any person, who while driving or attempting to drive or when in charge of a motor vehicle is under the influence of intoxicating drugs or alcohol above the legal limit or to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of such motor vehicle shall be guilty of an offence and liable on conviction…’’
Nevertheless, despite these provisions and the avalanche of strategies to address this risk behavior in low, middle income countries such as ours as well as developed climes, majority of drivers are unconvinced that indulging in this risk behavior poses dangers until they become direct or indirect victims. Others are also unconvinced that strengthened laws on the use of mobile phones while driving will deter defaulters and ultimately will make the roads safer. Those in this category will go to any length to oppose tougher laws or even stronger enforcement especially in developing climes.
I know that I once took you through the developments in the United Kingdom where a survey was conducted to psyche road users especially drivers behavior. The survey as well as the publications of the findings coincided with a new law on the use of phones while driving. The new law states that almost any use of a handheld phone is punishable with six points and a 200pounds fine which is equivalent to over a hundred thousand Naira depending on the exchange rate in our clime.
This new law, if you reflect, fits perfectly with the definition I stated earlier on in this piece on what the infraction of using the phone while driving truly means. Following this development and explanation given, this new introduction in the United Kingdom ultimately seeks to stop drivers from using their phones to take photos or videos, scroll through playlists or play games.
The new law has closed the lacuna that was created by the old law which merely stated that it was a criminal offence to use a hand-held mobile phone to call or text while driving ,thus leaving a legal lacuna which allowed drivers to escape punishment for other actions such as taking photos. Before now, taking photos while driving was not seen as ‘interactive communication’, and therefore did not fit the previous definition of the offence.
A further survey was conducted focusing on two thousand drivers. It found out that 43percent of respondents were not aware of the changes being introduced while 75percent were fully supportive of the change in the law. Notwithstanding these findings, many expressed skepticism as to how effective it will be in getting defaulting drivers to change their behavior and make the roads safer.
The findings also revealed that just two percent of drivers said they considered that the new changes will be ‘very effective’, with 49 per cent maintaining that it would be ‘partly effective’ while 45 per cent said it would not be effective. I have deliberately chosen to rehash some of these as a precursor to next week’s focus which I hope will be on the research study by a collection of researchers in Spain.
