Criminal Law Analysis of the Use of Substitute Driver Identities in Electronic Traffic Law Enforcement (ETLE)

Abstract

The development of Electronic Traffic Law Enforcement (ETLE) as a form of digitalized traffic law enforcement has facilitated the handling of traffic violations. In practice, however, substitute driver identities have been misused to transfer responsibility for traffic violations to other people. This conduct not only undermines enforcement effectiveness but may also satisfy the elements of criminal offenses such as document forgery, use of forged documents, and electronic data manipulation. This study addresses two questions: What forms of criminal liability apply to perpetrators who misuse driver identities in the electronic traffic ticketing (ETLE) system? How are criminal law provisions concerning the use of substitute driver identities in ETLE applied in judicial practice? The research adopts normative legal research (doctrinal research). The findings indicate that perpetrators may be held criminally liable where they are proven to have committed an unlawful act intentionally, possess the capacity for responsibility, and have no applicable justification or excuse. Normatively, such conduct may be prosecuted under the provisions on document forgery in the Criminal Code, electronic data manipulation under the Electronic Information and Transactions Law, or other provisions concerning identity misuse and population administration, depending on the characteristics of the conduct. In judicial practice, judges have applied criminal law provisions to substitute driver identity cases by considering electronic evidence, documents, witness testimony, and facts established at trial. Nevertheless, the absence of provisions specifically criminalizing identity misuse during ETLE confirmation leaves legal application dependent on the interpretations of enforcement officials and judges, potentially producing inconsistent judgments. Regulatory reform, stronger law enforcement capacity, improved ETLE technology, and public education are therefore necessary to achieve legal certainty, justice, and effective electronic traffic law enforcement.