 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Busby v. State2/1/2002
ctors on the back of cycles. Busby's case requires us to construe Chapter V of the Convention (Articles 24 and 25), the chapter dealing with international driving permits. The particular point of contention is the proper interpretation of Article 24, Section 5.
The dispute concerning the meaning of Article 24, Section 5 Article 24, Section 1 requires each signatory country to recognize the driver's licenses issued by other signatory countries. Section 1 declares that if a driver "holds a valid driving permit issued ... by the competent authority of another [signatory] State or subdivision thereof", each signatory country ... shall allow driver ... to drive on its roads[,] without further examination[, all] motor vehicles of the category or categories ... for which the permit has been issued.
This obligation is modified slightly by Section 2, which allows signatory states to require drivers licensed in other countries to "carry an international driving permit conforming to the model [set forth] in nnex 10" to the Convention. But Section 3 requires signatory states to issue international driving permits to all drivers who apply for them (assuming the driver demonstrates the required driving competency).
As noted above, Busby received an international driving permit from the government of Nicaragua, and this permit was in force when Busby was stopped in Alaska and charged with driving with a revoked license. Busby contends that the State of Alaska was obliged to honor his international driving permit even though his Alaska driver's license was revoked.
Busby's argument appears to falter on Article 24, Section 5 of the Convention on Road Traffic. This provision gives each signatory country (and its political subdivisions, such as the State of Alaska) a limited power to withdraw a driver's right to use an international driving permit on its roads. Article 24, Section 5 declares:
A [signatory] State or a subdivision thereof may withdraw from the driver the right to use either [an international driving permit or a driving permit issued directly by another signatory country] only if the driver has committed a driving offence [sic: the Convention uses the British spelling] of such a nature as would entail the forfeiture of his driving permit under the legislation and regulations of that [signatory] State. ...
That is, each country has the authority to refuse to honor an international driving permit if the permit-holder has committed an offense that would entail the loss of driving privileges if committed by a resident of that country. Section 5 then continues:
[When the holder of an international driving permit has committed a driving offense of this nature], the [signatory] State or subdivision thereof withdrawing the use of the permit may withdraw and retain the permit until the period of the withdrawal of use expires or until the [permit-]holder leaves the territory of the [signatory] State, whichever is the earlier ... .
In other words, a signatory country (or a political subdivision within that country) has the authority to "withdraw and retain" a person's international driving permit until the period of license suspension or revocation imposed by that country or political subdivision expires, or until the person leaves the territory of that country or political subdivision.
Busby's Alaska license was revoked while he was a resident of Alaska - before he moved to a foreign country, and before he was issued his international driving permit. Thus, it is clear that the State of Alaska revoked Busby's Alaska license for an offense that carried the penalty of license revocation if committed by a residen
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Alaska DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|