India still has to get a good grip on road safety

Last year, inaugurating a webinar on ‘Vehicle Accidents and Road Safety’ organized by MIT Art Design and Technology (ADT) University, Pune, Union Minister for Road Transport and Highways Nitin Gadkari remarked that “the target is to reduce 50% number of road accidents by 2025”, adding that “we can achieve zero deaths due to road accidents by 2030”. He said that the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways had participated in a conference in Sweden in 2020 – ‘The Third High Level Global Conference on Road Safety to Achieving Global Goals’ – where India had zero road fatalities by 2030. Was. Therefore, there was a need to expedite the work of saving lives in accidents.

While this approach requires staying focused and optimistic while setting goals, the past record of road accidents and the infrastructure available to deal with road safety measures in India should not be overlooked, especially when motor vehicle laws are primarily It is the responsibility of the states.

in number

Where do we stand against the target of the last decade? In 2010, the United Nations General Assembly, after considering the alarming status of road accident deaths, adopted the Global Plan 2011–2020 for the Decade of Action for Road Safety, which aims to increase the number of road accident deaths by the year 2020. has to be reduced by 50%, and accepted by most of the world including India. Although several steps have been taken in the last decade to check road accidents, figures published by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways show that the number of deaths in road accidents increased from 1,42,485 in 2011 to 1,51,113 in 2019. The ministry is yet to publish its data for the year 2020, but the National Crime Records Bureau’s annual publication, titled Accidental Deaths and Suicides in India (2020) shows that 1,33,201 deaths were recorded in 2020. 2020 was mainly due to the various lockdowns that were in place during the first wave of COVID-19, when only a limited number of motor vehicles were on the roads. However, the fatality rate (ie the number of deaths per 100 accidents) which was 26.9 in 2001, increased from 28.63 in 2011 to 37.54 in 2020. Thus, it is clear that in spite of setting a target of 50% reduction in accidents, there has actually been an increase in road accident deaths in the last decade.

court intervention

Supreme Court of India on Road Safety Dr. S. Rajseekaran, an orthopedic surgeon and the then President of the Indian Orthopedic Association (WP (Civil) No. 295 of 2012), passed the order to constitute a The ‘Road Safety Committee’ headed by Justice KS Radhakrishnan, which was notified by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways on May 30, 2014. On November 30, 2017, the Court issued a number of directions regarding road safety, inter alia, setting up of a State Road Safety Council, setting up of the lead agency, setting up a Road Safety Fund, notification of a Road Safety Action Plan, Formation of a District Road Safety Committee, engineering reforms, identification and rectification of black spots, adoption of traffic calming measures, road safety audits, acquisition of road safety equipment, establishment of trauma care centers and inclusion of road safety aid in schools in the academic curriculum. Though the Road Safety Committee along with the states followed every direction of the Court and helped in improving the overall road safety scenario, there are many lapses between the cup and the lip.

ground reality

The Motor Vehicles (MV) Act of 1988 was partially amended in August 2019, and some amended and new sections, which made traffic violations more stringent, became effective from September 1, 2019. However, most of the states did not increase the respective compounding. Traffic Violation Fee. This increase was criticized and people protested on the pretext that the average Indian’s ability to (fine) pay is still limited. Also, only a few cases of traffic violations are challenged in the court by the accused. Therefore, the expected impact of the preventive provisions of the amended law could not be felt on the ground.

Second, the enforcement manpower available is inadequate to deal with the ever-increasing volume of traffic. Automation of processes is still in its infancy and limited to large cities. If an ‘Intelligent Traffic Management System’ is implemented on highways and other major roads, the number of ‘hit and run’ cases can be reduced. Bureau of Police Research and Development has suggested a formula to calculate the number of traffic policemen required in any district. It is broadly based on the number of motor vehicles registered in any district. Similar considerations were suggested for traffic equipment requirements. However, actual enforcement personnel and equipment (due to limited road safety funds or other funds with the police) are insufficient to effectively prevent traffic violations.

Third, there is insufficient funding for black spot rectification and traffic calming measures. Although over 60 per cent of road accidents are reportedly caused by over speeding, ‘speed limit’ sign boards are rarely seen or found on state highways and major roads.

Fourth, most of the drivers, conductors and other employees in transport companies (except government corporations) do not get the benefits of the organized sector. They receive meager wages, usually do not have weekly off and are often forced to work overtime. Hence, unless their service conditions are improved, their attitude towards road safety cannot be expected to be above board.

unsafe roads

The fifth – and perhaps most challenging – task is to improve the driving skills of drivers and change the casual attitude of other road users towards road safety. Even today getting a driving license is not a difficult task. There is no standard written and rigorous practical exam. Many states do not have test driving tracks. There are no institutes for refresher training if a person’s driving license is suspended. Although there are some provisions in this regard in the amended Motor Vehicles Act, they are yet to come into force.

It has been observed that about two-thirds of the road accident victims are two wheeler drivers and rear riders, but adequate emphasis is not being given to them. Although wearing a safety cap is mandatory, it is not strictly enforced in all states due to lack of strong will. Even an amended provision relating to ‘offences by juveniles’ is not strictly enforced. The Emergency Response Support System (ERSS), with its pan-India emergency response number, 112, has proved to be very useful in saving the lives of accident victims in golden times, but the scheme is not implemented uniformly across states.

better data collection

The accident data collection format of the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, and now a part of the Police’s Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and System (CCTNS), is quite cumbersome (it requires about 60 fields to fill out). This process of data collection takes a lot of time but it is necessary to identify the exact cause of the accident and take remedial measures. Similarly, the main objective of the recent IRAD (Integrated Road Accident Database) project, an initiative of the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways under the World Bank funded and implemented, is to enrich the accident database and improve road safety. country by collecting data from various stakeholders using iRAD mobile and web application. Hopefully, the integration of these projects will bring some synergy and make the data collection process more user-friendly.

Several steps have been taken by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways and the States to improve the road safety scenario in the country. Lives cannot be lost at the cost of poor enforcement of traffic laws. However, until the states and the Center are on the same page to improve and strengthen the infrastructure of the states by enabling more funds, the one and only target is to reduce the deaths in road accidents. Wouldn’t be a practical approach.

RK Vij is the former Director General of Special Police of Chhattisgarh. Views expressed are personal