The much-anticipated Road Traffic Act is now in force. At its core is road safety. Consequently, the Act has several practical provisions designed with the explicit objective of achieving road safety.

One such provision is the prohibition and criminalisation of using an electronic device, such as a mobile phone, iPad, or tablet, without using a hands-free facility while driving or operating a vehicle on the road.

Scholarly scientific studies in Europe and North America have demonstrated that using a mobile phone while driving creates physical and visual distractions with disastrous consequences. For example, in attempting to make a mobile call, a driver may use one or both hands to manipulate the functions on the phone, resulting in his or her attention being diverted from the road. Moreover, reading and texting also resulted in a slower response time to traffic signals and failure to make proper adjustments to dangerous road conditions.

Against this background, a driver who uses his electronic device to make a call, view, send, or compose an electronic message or sends or receives an oral or written message, an e-mail, a still or moving picture, and surfs or browses the internet while driving a vehicle on the road commits an offence. The word “vehicle” is widely defined in the Act and includes a motor vehicle, motorbike, bicycle, and even a cart being pulled by a donkey or a mule.

The penalty is a maximum fine of $30,000 or, if the driver defaults on payment, he is liable to be imprisoned for 10 days. In addition to the fine, the driver will have his licence endorsed with four demerit points.

However, it is not an offence if, while driving, the mobile phone, iPad, tablet, or any device capable of sending or receiving data is used in a hands-free mode. For example, it is not an offence if the driver makes a call using a Bluetooth headset or uses a voice command to activate the phone. The phone is in hand-free mode if it is in a dashboard holder, on a windscreen mount, or some other mobile phone-holding mechanism.

The word “use” is widely defined in the Act. The mobile phone, iPad, or tablet is “in use” if the driver physically holds the device in his hand to call another person or composes, sends, or receives an electronic message. Moreover, the driver uses a mobile phone if he has the phone at his ear supported by his shoulder.

If the driver is at the traffic light or in a traffic jam and uses the opportunity to call his loved ones or a close friend, browse the internet, or check his e-mail, he commits an offence. The reason is that the vehicle is still in driving mode, although stationary.

It is not an offence if the driver pulls over on the soft shoulder, turns off the engine, makes a call on his mobile phone or engages in one or more telecommunication functions, such as sending or receiving a text message or viewing a still or moving image.

However, it is an offence to drive or operate a vehicle while using an “electronic visual device”, whether or not it is mounted on some surface in the vehicle or built into the dashboard. The Act defines an electronic visual device as a device that produces images on a screen.

In the context of the Act, an electronic visual device includes an in-dash TV or portable TV. The commission of the offence may occur in one of two ways. Firstly, viewing the electronic visual device while driving or viewing the electronic visual device within the driver’s line of sight. The fine and demerit points are the same as the offence of using a mobile phone while driving.

Jamaica is not the only country that prohibits using mobile phones and other electronic devices while driving on the roads. Several other countries have done so, such as England, Canada, and the United States of America.

Unfortunately, the provisions dealing with the offence of using an electronic device while driving on the road are poorly drafted. The relevant clauses use technical telecommunication jargon, which are hard to understand or interpret. Importantly, it is difficult for the layman to understand. I am sure that lawyers will have a field day interpreting these poorly drafted provisions.

Notwithstanding the defects in drafting, it is a welcome addition to road safety measures and may contribute to a reduction in crashes on the roads, but only time will tell.

Hugh Wilson and Jordan Wilson are attorneys-at-law. Send comments to the Jamaica Observer or hughfwilson@cwjamaica.com.