Summary.
The bill would allow municipalities throughout the Republic of Panama (República de Panamá) to participate voluntarily as operational support for the Land Transit and Transportation Authority (ATTT) in issuing and serving tickets for traffic violations already defined by existing rules. Each municipality would have to join by resolution of its Municipal Council and sign a cooperation agreement. Municipal action would be auxiliary, delegated and subject to ATTT direction and control; it would create neither municipal traffic jurisdiction nor separate procedures. Participating municipalities could establish auxiliary traffic officer units. Their members would need ATTT training, certification and accreditation, as well as physical and psychological fitness, visible identification, body cameras, and compliance with ethics and disciplinary rules. The authority could suspend or revoke accreditation.
Cooperation agreements would specify the area of operation, interoperable equipment, ticketing and service protocols, continuing training, road safety targets, supervision, data protection, risk coverage, and grounds for suspension or termination. Tickets would be issued through the ATTT’s single system, with numbering and a seal or electronic signature, on the basis of direct observation, approved instruments or digital evidence with a chain of custody. They would state the incident, legal basis, officer’s identity, means of challenge and payment channels. Failure to meet essential requirements would entail relative nullity. Processing, decisions, appeals and collection would follow existing traffic rules. The bill provides for the right of defense and access to the case file. Objections and appeals would be heard by the competent transit authorities or judges, although municipalities could receive filings. A second sanction for the same act would be prohibited.
Evidence collection equipment would require ATTT approval, current calibration and chain of custody protocols. The handling of evidence and personal data would be subject to rules on purpose, security, confidentiality, access and retention. The ATTT would administer a single collection gateway and share net fine proceeds with cooperating municipalities in the proportion set by regulation. Each municipality would allocate its share by Municipal Council resolution: up to thirty percent (30%) could cover direct operating costs, while at least seventy percent (70%) would fund community investment in road safety and traffic management. Incentives tied to ticket volume or amounts, and use for general operating expenses, would be prohibited. Separate accounts, public reports, audits and an accessible complaint mechanism would be required. Municipal officers and authorities would face the administrative, civil and criminal liability described in the bill.
Implementation would proceed gradually over eighteen (18) months, with evaluations every six months. The ATTT would issue implementing regulations within six (6) months, and interested municipalities would join within twelve (12) months after entry into force. Conflicting municipal mobility, parking and road control provisions would yield to the applicable traffic rules. The bill states that it does not amend existing traffic laws or regulations. Its provisions concern the ATTT, Municipal Councils, transit authorities and judges, drivers, and the transport and mobility sectors.
What it proposes.
- Auxiliary municipal participation in issuing and serving traffic tickets.
- Officer accreditation, cooperation agreements and ATTT oversight.
- Management of evidence, personal data and fine revenue.
Who it would affect.
- Municipalities that join by council resolution and agreement.
- Participating auxiliary officers and municipal authorities.
- People issued tickets for traffic violations.
- The ATTT and competent transit authorities or judges.
Key points.
- Municipal participation would be voluntary and require a Municipal Council resolution and an agreement with the ATTT.Art. 1
- Municipal cooperation would be auxiliary and would neither transfer sanctioning authority nor create a municipal traffic procedure.Art. 2
- Auxiliary officers would need ATTT training, certification and accreditation to issue and serve tickets.Art. 3
- Agreements would define the area of operation, protocols, interoperability, oversight and grounds for suspension or termination.Art. 4
- Tickets would be issued through the ATTT’s single system on sufficient evidence; objections and appeals would be handled by competent authorities or judges.Arts. 5-6
- Evidence collection devices would require approval and current calibration, while data handling would follow security and retention rules.Art. 7
- Collection would use a single gateway; the municipal share would have designated uses and spending limits, separate accounts and annual reports.Art. 8
- The ATTT would oversee the system and could suspend accreditation and agreements; implementation would be gradual and require regulations.Arts. 9-10