The State government's increasing reliance on AI cameras for traffic enforcement raises important questions about fairness and accountability. Instead of immediately imposing penalties, the government could have introduced the system on a one-year trial basis to evaluate its effectiveness in improving road discipline. Even the Supreme Court of India permits the use of artificial intelligence only as an aid, recognizing that it cannot replace human reasoning, judgment, and consideration of individual facts and circumstances. The same principle should apply to traffic enforcement. Across India, many vehicles are driven by family members, relatives, or friends rather than their registered owners, who may be living or working elsewhere. Since AI cameras are not linked to facial recognition systems or identity databases, penalties may be issued to innocent registered owners instead of the actual offenders, creating unnecessary disputes. Moreover, most vehicles lack GPS or onboard systems that could provide supporting evidence in contested cases. Relying solely on AI-generated evidence risks compromising the principles of natural justice. Technology should assist enforcement, not replace fair hearing and human oversight.
PAUL PEREIRA, Utorda
