News (Media Awareness Project) - CN MB: OPED: New Tool To Fight Impaired Driving |
Title: | CN MB: OPED: New Tool To Fight Impaired Driving |
Published On: | 2003-12-11 |
Source: | Winnipeg Free Press (CN MB) |
Fetched On: | 2008-01-19 03:50:27 |
NEW TOOL TO FIGHT IMPAIRED DRIVING
I was surprised to read your editorial of Dec. 3 criticizing Justice
Minister Gord Mackintosh and the proposed amendments to Manitoba's Highway
Traffic Act. In Mothers Against Drunk Driving Canada's opinion, Manitoba
has established itself as a leader in the fight against impaired driving.
Manitoba, under Mackintosh's leadership, ranked No. 1 in our 2003 Rating
the Provinces Report Card.
MADD Canada recommended in its latest report card that the province of
Manitoba give police explicit statutory authority to demand a standard
field sobriety test (SFST) from a driver who they reasonably suspect has
alcohol or drugs in his or her body. The ability to demand that a suspect
participate in SFST would assist in impaired driving enforcement in several
ways.
SFST can be used as an alternative to a roadside test on an "approved
screening device" (ASD) to establish the necessary grounds for demanding an
evidentiary breath test on an approved instrument under Sec. 254(3) of the
Criminal Code. For example, the need for an alternative would arise if the
officer did not have an ASD readily available.
Moreover, some courts have indicated that police only have authority to
demand an ASD test from a person who is operating or has care and/or
control of a motor vehicle. Therefore, the police could not demand an ASD
test from a driver who has left or been removed from the immediate scene
for safety, medical or other reasons. In both situations, the results of
SFST, coupled with the officer's observations, would provide a far stronger
basis for demanding an evidentiary breath test than the officer's
observations alone.
Unequivocal legislation would clarify the current uncertainty concerning
both the police authority to demand that suspects participate in SFST and
the consequences of a suspect's refusal.
SFST can also provide evidence establishing that the suspect's ability to
drive was impaired by alcohol or drugs.
The police commonly complain that judges refuse to accept their testimony
that the accused's ability to drive was impaired.
SFST, conducted by nationally certified officers using standard
record-keeping procedures and supported by a videotape record, would
greatly enhance the weight given to an officer's testimony.
American research and practice has established that SFST is an extremely
effective and accurate tool in identifying drivers impaired by drugs or
alcohol. Research also shows that videotaping of the SFST assists in the
prosecution of impaired driving cases.
The results and videotape of SFST may be essential if an approved
instrument is unavailable, the evidentiary breath tests cannot be conducted
within the prescribed time, or there is some other successful challenge to
the evidentiary breath-test results.
Similarly, the SFST evidence may be pivotal if a driver is impaired solely
by drugs or a combination of drugs and alcohol in circumstances in which
his or her blood alcohol content level is below 0.08 per cent.
Your editorial goes on to suggest that the justice minister should have
waited for Parliament to deal with the drugs and driving issue.
In 1999, the federal justice committee recommended that the federal Justice
Department bring forth legislation to deal with the drugs and driving issue.
Four and a half years later there is still no legislation forthcoming.
Meanwhile, the percentage of impaired deaths and injuries on Canadian roads
has increased -- so much for the federal government's commitment to this
issue. The greatest progress in the fight against impaired driving has come
from the provinces.
Through their commitment, thousands of lives have been saved. No province
has made greater progress in reforming its legislation in recent years than
Manitoba.
The justice minister's proposal to add SFST will provide police with a
scientifically proven tool in the fight against impaired driving.
The minister is to be congratulated for his leadership and should be
supported by all those who are truly committed to reducing the needless
toll of alcohol-related deaths and injuries on our roadways.
I was surprised to read your editorial of Dec. 3 criticizing Justice
Minister Gord Mackintosh and the proposed amendments to Manitoba's Highway
Traffic Act. In Mothers Against Drunk Driving Canada's opinion, Manitoba
has established itself as a leader in the fight against impaired driving.
Manitoba, under Mackintosh's leadership, ranked No. 1 in our 2003 Rating
the Provinces Report Card.
MADD Canada recommended in its latest report card that the province of
Manitoba give police explicit statutory authority to demand a standard
field sobriety test (SFST) from a driver who they reasonably suspect has
alcohol or drugs in his or her body. The ability to demand that a suspect
participate in SFST would assist in impaired driving enforcement in several
ways.
SFST can be used as an alternative to a roadside test on an "approved
screening device" (ASD) to establish the necessary grounds for demanding an
evidentiary breath test on an approved instrument under Sec. 254(3) of the
Criminal Code. For example, the need for an alternative would arise if the
officer did not have an ASD readily available.
Moreover, some courts have indicated that police only have authority to
demand an ASD test from a person who is operating or has care and/or
control of a motor vehicle. Therefore, the police could not demand an ASD
test from a driver who has left or been removed from the immediate scene
for safety, medical or other reasons. In both situations, the results of
SFST, coupled with the officer's observations, would provide a far stronger
basis for demanding an evidentiary breath test than the officer's
observations alone.
Unequivocal legislation would clarify the current uncertainty concerning
both the police authority to demand that suspects participate in SFST and
the consequences of a suspect's refusal.
SFST can also provide evidence establishing that the suspect's ability to
drive was impaired by alcohol or drugs.
The police commonly complain that judges refuse to accept their testimony
that the accused's ability to drive was impaired.
SFST, conducted by nationally certified officers using standard
record-keeping procedures and supported by a videotape record, would
greatly enhance the weight given to an officer's testimony.
American research and practice has established that SFST is an extremely
effective and accurate tool in identifying drivers impaired by drugs or
alcohol. Research also shows that videotaping of the SFST assists in the
prosecution of impaired driving cases.
The results and videotape of SFST may be essential if an approved
instrument is unavailable, the evidentiary breath tests cannot be conducted
within the prescribed time, or there is some other successful challenge to
the evidentiary breath-test results.
Similarly, the SFST evidence may be pivotal if a driver is impaired solely
by drugs or a combination of drugs and alcohol in circumstances in which
his or her blood alcohol content level is below 0.08 per cent.
Your editorial goes on to suggest that the justice minister should have
waited for Parliament to deal with the drugs and driving issue.
In 1999, the federal justice committee recommended that the federal Justice
Department bring forth legislation to deal with the drugs and driving issue.
Four and a half years later there is still no legislation forthcoming.
Meanwhile, the percentage of impaired deaths and injuries on Canadian roads
has increased -- so much for the federal government's commitment to this
issue. The greatest progress in the fight against impaired driving has come
from the provinces.
Through their commitment, thousands of lives have been saved. No province
has made greater progress in reforming its legislation in recent years than
Manitoba.
The justice minister's proposal to add SFST will provide police with a
scientifically proven tool in the fight against impaired driving.
The minister is to be congratulated for his leadership and should be
supported by all those who are truly committed to reducing the needless
toll of alcohol-related deaths and injuries on our roadways.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...