The Plenary Chamber of the Constitutional Court declared unconstitutional the rule that suspended, for up to two years, the expiration of driver’s licenses that expired between January 1 and 31, 2022.
This is article 11 of Law 2161 of 2021, which was issued with the aim of establishing measures to combat evasion in the acquisition of Compulsory Traffic Accident Insurance (SOAT).
The Court concluded that this order was illegal because it was not consistent with the objective of the law, which also proposes incentives that promote optimal driving habits and road safety.
“The principle of consecutiveness and flexible identity was violated. In other words, there is no connection with the purpose of Law 2161, which establishes a series of measures to promote the acquisition, renewal and non-evasion of compulsory traffic accident insurance (SOAT)”, the Court stated in its decision.
To avoid a collapse in the driver’s license system, the Court established that the rule will begin to effective from June 20, 2023that is, the Court gives everyone time to renew their expired driver’s license.
“The unconstitutionality was deferred until June 20, 2023, to allow people to renew their licenses; likewise, to prevent a collapse in the renewal of driving licenses such as the one presented in 2014”, said the Court.
Thus, the Court agreed with the claim that the rule ignored “the principle of flexible identity” because it was a “provision that was only included until the fourth debate of the legislative process and is not directly related to the main objective of the law. law”.
Although attorney Margarita Cabello Blanco recognized that the norm was included in the fourth debate in Congress, she asked the Court to approve it without success, arguing that it was an initiative of the congressmen.
“This is a rule derived from legislative dynamics that is not unrelated to the object of the law and was endorsed by both chambers at the conciliation headquarters”, reads the concept of the Attorney General.
The concept of the Attorney added that “its approval originated in the intention of the congressmen to seek an intermediate formula between the benefits that were discussed throughout the parliamentary process for citizens and the sustainability of the mandatory traffic accident insurance system. ”.