Dr. confirmed. Ali bin Majid Al Nuaimi, Member of the House of Representatives, highlighted the importance of the proposed amendment to Article (56) of the Traffic Law promulgated by Law No. (23) of 2014, which stipulates extending the period for conciliation in traffic violations from seven days to thirty days, explaining that the current period is short and during which it is difficult for the perpetrator of the violation to arrange half of the minimum fine prescribed for conciliation, which reduces the feasibility of this mechanism approved by the legislator to reduce the burden on citizens and the judicial authority.
Al-Naimi said in his intervention during the House of Representatives session that extending the reconciliation period would encourage perpetrators of violations to resort to the option of reconciliation instead of litigation, which contributes to reducing the number of cases heard by the Traffic Court and reduces pressure on judicial authorities and the Public Prosecution, in addition to achieving speedy justice that is based on balancing between deterrence and facilitation. He explained that this draft law had been adopted by the House of Representatives from its inception as a proposal, and then approved as a draft law before it was referred to the House of Representatives. Shura Council in accordance with constitutional procedures, noting that the Shura Council’s decision to reject the project was based on justifications and considerations that no longer exist in light of recent legislative developments.
Al Nuaimi added that the recently discussed decree law included fundamental amendments to the Traffic Law, aimed at achieving general and private deterrence by tightening penalties and financial fines, including the same article under discussion. Therefore, the justifications adopted by the Shura Council when rejecting the project in April 2025 during its third session have today become inconsistent with the new legislative reality, as the decree was issued later last August and came to address aspects of deterrence and tightening that were previously under discussion.
Al-Nuaimi stated that extending the reconciliation period to thirty days does not conflict with the policy of deterrence, but rather enhances the effectiveness of the law and makes it a more balanced and just tool, as it gives citizens a reasonable time to settle their legal situations, and helps them adhere to the regulations without burdening them financially or exposing them to lengthy judicial procedures. He considered that when the legislator established the reconciliation mechanism in Article (56) he aimed to achieve timely justice and reduce the burden on the courts, but the period specified at seven days was no longer Sufficient to achieve this goal in light of the new amendments, which requires reconsidering it to become more flexible and fair in application.
Dr. concluded. Al Nuaimi made his intervention by stressing that the approval of the draft law represents an important reform step in developing the traffic system, because of the balance it achieves between deterrence and reform, and because of its positive impact in reducing traffic issues, achieving justice among citizens, and establishing a legal culture based on awareness and responsibility, saying that the purpose of the amendment is not to make it easier for violators, but rather to achieve fair deterrence that protects lives and reduces the burdens on citizens and concerned parties at the same time.
