MAY 17 — I am facing arrest for not settling a traffic summons issued on 6.3.2010 for the offence of “TIDAK IKUT TANDA DI TRAFIK LINE” (not following marking on ‘traffic line’).

There are numerous ‘TANDA DI TRAFIK LINE’, Have I no right to know which specific ‘TANDA DI TRAFIK LINE’ I had violated? So how am I to know what to do in future when I come to that mysterious ‘TANDA DI TRAFIK LINE’?

The purpose of penalizing road traffic offenders is not simply to collect money from them in the form of fines, but primarily to educate them on the Highway Code. There is no education if the exact fault is not spelt out. I my case, I am not being given any education about the specific road marking the summons was issued for. Why is the specific road marking that I am accused of violating being kept a secret hidden under the veil of “TANDA DI TRAFIK LINE”?

Summons No. AH928402 written on Polis 257 – Pin. 1/03 was issued to me at KM 73, Federal Road 1, in the Kuala Lumpur to Ipoh direction (where the JPJ weighbridge is located south of Tanjung Malim). The photograph shows the spot in question. It has the following markings on the road, which remain the same till today:

a)  Double lines in the middle of the road;

b)  Cross-hatching (or Chevron), i.e. the oblique lines in the foreground (also known as “Ghost Island” in JKR parlance;

c)  A right-turn arrow;

d)  A “stop” line across the lane for motorists turning right to stop to allow any oncoming traffic on the other side to pass before turning.

This is not a two-lane road, but a single lane road with a “storage lane” on the left, i.e. a 150 meter long widened stretch to allow vehicles to overtake by the left any vehicles ahead which are slowing down or waiting to turn right into the side road.

I was driving south and as the road ahead was very clear (just as in the picture), I drove straight ahead, across the cross-hatchings. About 150 to 200 meters ahead I was stopped by the police who were under a tree with their patrol car.

I was told I had crossed the double lines. I said I had not as the road was very clear and I had driven straight ahead. The policeman repeated that I had crossed the double lines. I held out my driving license, but he did not take it. Again he repeated that I had crossed the double lines. After a few exchanges, he took the license and wrote out a summons.

When I asked him why he had written “TIDAK IKUT TANDA DI TRAFIK LINE” although he had said several times that I had crossed the double lines, his answer was that for crossing double lines the fine is RM300.00 but for the offence he had written it was RM100.00. We were complete strangers and I wonder why he suddenly became so merciful. Or, did his conscience not let him write what he did not see, and having stopped me he had to write a summons anyway although I did not agree that I had crossed the double line?

Back in Penang a few days after getting the summons, I lodged a complaint with the Consumers Association of Penang (CAP) which sent a letter to the traffic chief in Bukit Aman enquiring about traffic rules regarding the cross hatchings. The reply stated that the traffic section had no answers to the enquiries made. It was suggested that the matter be referred to the Road Transport Department, the Public Works Department and the Local Authority.

It was only in late July 2014 that the Road Transport Department (RTD) provided information that having checked the law under the Road Transport Act 1987, it was found that there is no clear provision of law pertaining to cross-hatchings. This information was given to CAP by the RTD after CAP had written to the Attorney General.

In April 2015 CAP sent a letter to the newly set up police integrity department in Bukit Aman seeking clarification about the “tanda di trafik line”, i.e. which of the road markings as shown in the photograph, was the policeman who wrote the summons referring to?

CAP received a reply from the head of the Traffic Division in Bukit Aman but could not give a copy to me. I was informed it was deemed “sulit” (secret) as it had come in a red-wax sealed envelope enclosed in a second outer envelope. Anyway, CAP advised me that the reply had said:

a)  The traffic chief had investigated the matter and found that the issuance of the summons to me was “sahih” i.e. it was in order;

b)  The summons was not issued due to any “prasangka” (ill-will) towards me;

c)  A policeman can summon a driver if he sees the driver breaking any road traffic law/rule in the Road Transport Act or Regulations;

d)  CAP had been requested to inform me that if I was not happy with the summons issued, I had the right to take the matter to court as the burden of proof was on me as provided under Section 119 of the Road Transport Act.

Some questions that beg an answer are:

a)  Which particular “tanda di trafik line” did the policeman see me violating?

b)  Why is the proper name of that specific “tanda di trafik line” not written in the summons? E.g. “melintas garisan kembar”, “berhenti dalam kotak kuning” are very specific; but what does one make of “TIDAK IKUT TANDA DI TRAFIK LINE”? 

c)  Is it traffic police SOP to write summonses in vague terms and let the summoned persons guess what their offence(s) was/were?

d)  Has the motorist who is summoned no right to know the exact road sign or road marking that he violated?

e)  Is the vague “tidak ikut tanda di trafik line” listed in those words as an offence in the Highway Code or any road traffic law or regulation? Under which section or regulation number?

f)  Is it wrong, impolite or even unbecoming of me to have asked the police to clarify what/which “tanda di trafik line” is meant by the summons?

g)  Is stopping a motorist and citing a certain offence, then showing reluctance to write a summons and finally doing it but writing some other offence in vague terms, a job done with integrity?

h)  Is the summons above-board and valid in law when the specific “tanda di trafik line” supposedly not complied with is not identified by its proper name as all road signs and road markings have specific, proper names?

The policeman definitely saw me going over the cross-hatchings for that is what I did as the road was clear and it was perfectly safe to do so at that time. If that is what the policeman meant, under which section/ regulation of the Road Transport Act is it an offence to drive over cross-hatchings when there is no vehicle ahead that is about to turn right?

If it is some other “tanda di trafik line” that the policeman saw me violating, have I no right to know what that “tanda” is? Or has the traffic police the right to keep that information secret from me and let me guess what “tanda di trafik line” I did not comply with? What other road signs or road markings are there on this rural road that I could not have seen and violated?

The issue is not about not wanting to pay the summons, (RM50.00 after discount), but about why I am not being told clearly, specifically, which particular “tanda di trafik line” I did not comply with. Am I not given this right under the Road Traffic Act or under any other law? How am I to know what I am supposed to do or not to do when I see that particular “tanda di trafik line” in future?

Could the traffic police please clarify, or otherwise tell me why they cannot tell me the exact “tanda di trafik line” that I am accused of disobeying. Traffic offence fines are not about collecting some money, but for educational purposes. Where is the education if the exact offence is not spelt out clearly? Why is the police not educating me about the specific “TANDA DI TRAFIK LINE” that I am accused of violating so that when I see that “TANDA DI TRAFIK LINE” again, whether at this same spot or elsewhere, I would know what the law’s requirement about it is?

* This is the personal opinion of the writer and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail Online.