Let’s delve deeper into the topic of non-approved speed cameras which has been talked about a lot recently. Until March 2015, the Italy of speed cameras was a “Wild West” with few, confused and disorganized rules. Those that existed were not always respected to the letter by the road managers who placed speed detectors. This is demonstrated by countless ministerial circulars that attempted to clarify so that road managers used speed detectors only to improve road safety, and not to make money, gathered in the Maroni directive of 2009 (reaffirmed by the Minniti directive of 2017).
In April 2015, the first turning point, with a ruling by the Constitutional Court itself, “forced” to rule to clear up any misunderstandings.
Mandatory approval for speed cameras and traffic light violation detection devices
With ordinance 10505/2024, the Cassation has established that only approved speed cameras can regularly detect speed: if an authority issues a fine with a non-approved speed camera, the report is null and void. prior approval of the device is not sufficient: approval is required. Approval and approval are completely different.
Approval and homologation, be careful not to get confused
The two procedures of Approval and homologation of the prototypehave different characteristics, nature and purposes. TheMinisterial approval authorizes the mass reproduction of a device tested in the laboratorywith the attribution of competence to the Ministry of Economic Development (or of Enterprises and Made in Italy).
THE’approval consists of a procedure bureaucratic which does not require the comparison of the prototype with characteristics considered fundamental or with particular requirements set out in the regulation.
The approval it is an administrative procedure (like approval) which also has a necessarily mandatory nature technique. This specific connotation is aimed at guaranteeing the perfect functionality and precision of the electronic instrument to be used for the verification activity by the authorised public official. This requirement constitutes the indispensable condition for the legitimacy of the verification itself, which is the subject of the general rule referred to in paragraph 6 of article 142 of the Highway Code. This functionality, in the event of a dispute by the offender, must be proven by the Public Administration on which the inspection body depends, according to the now unequivocal jurisprudence (Cassation 14597/2021).
Approved equipment
THE’Article 142, paragraph 6, of the Highway Code talks about “duly approved equipment”, the results of which are considered “sources of evidence” for determining compliance with speed limits, explains the Court of Cassation. This is also stated in Article 25, paragraph 1, letter a) of Law 120/2010, which provided for its inclusion in paragraph 1 of the same Article 142 of the Highway Code, with regard to motorway sections. All in line with Article 192 of the Implementation Regulation of the Highway Code. It speaks of distinct activities and functions of the approval and homologation procedures: hence the difference in the consequent effects attributable to them.
How can we deduce that the approval procedure is a preparatory step in order to proceed with the approval of the speed camera? The judges answer: the General Inspectorate for Traffic and Road Safety of the Ministry (of Public Works) verifies, also through tests, and availing itself, when deemed necessary, of the opinion of the Higher Council of Public Works, the compliance and effectiveness of the object for which approval is requested with the requirements established by the Regulation. And it approves the prototype when the checks have given a favorable outcome.
When the request concerns elements for which the Regulation does not establish the fundamental characteristics or particular requirements, the Ministry (of Public Works) approves the prototype.
On each element conforming to the approved or homologated prototype, the number and date of the ministerial decree of homologation or approval and the name of the manufacturer must be reported.
Speed camera not approved but only APPROVED by the Ministry?
If there is any past or future circular according to which the“approval” on the part of the Ministry is sufficient, this has zero value: of lower rank than the law, that is to say Highway Code, which requires approval. Therefore, Municipalities and all managers must use only approved and periodically calibrated speed cameras for correct measurement.
Is a speed camera homologated today?
No, today no speed camera is homologable, says Giorgio Marcon, of Migliore Tutela. Reason: there is no decree that establishes how to proceed with homologation. A regulatory “vulnus”, a void. By law, homologation is required. But no law says how to do it. Who knows, maybe the Ministry of Infrastructure will take action in the future: today, according to the Court of Cassation, all speed cameras should be turned off, because they are not homologated.
Speed Camera Calibration: Why It Is Necessary and Mandatory
1) With ruling 113/2015, the Constitutional Court imposes on road managers (such as Municipalities) to calibrate speed cameras at least once a year. In case of failure to comply with this rule, the report will be deleted.
2) The Court declares the constitutional illegitimacy of Article 45, paragraph 6, of the Highway Code, in the part in which it does not provide that all the equipment used in the detection of violations of speed limits be subjected to calibration. It is a question of logic. For the Court, any measuring instrument, especially if electronic, is subject to variations in its characteristics and therefore to variations in the measured values. The cause? The aging of its components. Multiple events such as impacts, vibrations, mechanical and thermal shocks, variations in the supply voltage. This is a natural dysfunctional tendency directly proportional to the temporal element.The exemption from periodic checks, or those following maintenance events, appears intrinsically unreasonable”, say the judges.
Obsolescence and deterioration can affect not only the reliability of equipment, but also the public faith that is placed in a sector of significant social relevance, such as road safety. A speed camera must absolutely measure with scientific precision. Otherwise, fines are issued to those who go under the limit (or perhaps no fine to those who exceed it). It is therefore necessary to ensure that the functioning of the measurements is contextual to the moment in which the speed is detected, which could be significantly distant from the calibration date.
The custody and preservation of the reliability of the speed camera constitute the point of extreme tension within which the certainty of legal relationships and the right of defense of the sanctioned person do not lose their inalienable reason for being.
Traffic light cameras: is there the same approval problem?
According to the prevailing theory, yes: not only speed cameras need approval. Even cameras (PARCV, T-Red, T-XROAD, Velocar Red&Speed, Photored), which identify those who pass through a red light. No instrument is exempt from Legal Metrological Certification if used for reasons of public interest, public health, public safety, public order, environmental protection, consumer protection, imposition of taxes and duties and fairness of commercial transactions. This is stated in Article 117, paragraph r) of the Constitutional Charter and Decree 93/2017.
→ Read also “new rules for speed cameras“
#Speed #camera #approved #approved #fines
