|
|
The Plenary Session of the Criminal Chamber has demanded a clearer administrative classification of Personal Mobility Vehicles (VMP) , given their impact on road safety, in a ruling in which it confirms the acquittal of a woman accused of a crime of driving without a permit (from article 384.2 of the Penal Code ), and where the key question was whether the vehicle he was driving was a VMP or a moped. The Chamber emphasizes that “the new social reality shown by the multitude of devices with the characteristics of the VMP, should lead to a clearer administrative classification, given the diversity of devices with circulation capacity, or the prompt requirement for an administrative certification.
Which accredits its technical configuration, necessary for its circulation, in the terms that, certainly, are already being legislated in this matter. The same applies to the need, or not, to require some type of license, knowledge Phone Number Data or technical skill capacity to circulate with these new vehicles, and other aspects that are considered of interest, given the impact on road safety that "We should all be concerned." Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court (Photo: TS) Considers that it is not possible, today, to incriminate the driving of the VMP in the criminal infractions of Chapter IV of Title XVII of the Penal.
Code (crimes against road safety), unless fraudulent use is made of these categories to camouflage, after an apparent classification as VMP, “which is authentically, at the very least, a moped (even a motorcycle), thus attempting to circumvent the regulations referring to the license requirement, which would give rise to the crime that is the subject of this appeal, and other regulations , such as the mandatory helmet or insurance, at an administrative level, affecting – and this is the worst – on road safety, by putting the personal safety of other road users in real danger.
|
|
發表於 12:45:50