Busby vs. State

[weishaupt1776]

International Driving Permit Case

[idknow]

Originally Posted by weishaupt1776

International Driving Permit Case

that's interestink.

[Shoonra]

citation for Busby is Busby v. State, 40 P.2d 807 (Alaska App. 2002).

By its own terms, under the 1949 UN Convention on International Road Traffic, 3 US Treaties 3008, Cong.Rec., Aug. 9, 1950, perm.ed. pp.12090-93, altho it is called a permit, the International Driving Permit does not, by itself, authorize anyone to operate any sort of vehicle, nor can it be used separate from an official home-state driver's license. The IDP exists solely to provide multilingual translations of the data that appears on the official DL for the convenience of drivers and police in foreign countries who do not understand English; as it offers a translation of the official DL, it is supposed to be used in tandem with the official DL, and obviously it only has a use in a country that uses another language.

The IDP is supposed to be issued in the driver's home country, from an agency authorized by the national govt. In the US, the State Dept has authorized the AAA and the American Automobile Touring Alliance to issue IDPs ... and they do, for about $10(!). Some con artists are selling doubtful IDPs on the internet to wannabe sovereigns at a price of as much as $300(!), sometimes even suggesting that the IDP could be issued in a fake identity; the supposed IDPs are generated from a travel agency in the Caribbean, which is apparently NOT authorized even by its own govt, and since these don't match the country of the official DL, are more likely to generate trouble than avoid it. If the IDP has data on it that disagrees with the official DL, the likelihood of trouble becomes a certainty. Americans peddling such IDPs on the internet have been criminally prosecuted.

There is no provision for revoking an IDP because of traffic offenses, but an IDP will not suffice to authorize driving when the official DL has been suspended.

[Livefire]

So that tells me that had Busby rebutted the state of Alaska's presumption of residency and insisted they honored the doctrine of comity as codified in the IDP agrrement, he would've had the matter dismissed! Shoonra seems to imply once under their thumb, always under the thumb. *sigh*

[Shoonra]

Wrong.

The terms of the International Convention setting up IDPs is very clear on the matter, as are the courts in a number of states. An IDP is useless in the motorist's own country. An IDP is useless without a current, valid, official DL.

There's no eyesight or driving test, or anything else, for getting an IDP. An IDP does not, by itself, show that a person is capable of driving a car or that he even knows how to start one up (IDPs have been used by drivers of non-motor vehicles, such as ox carts). An IDP exists only to translate the usual data (height, weight, etc.) on the official DL into a multitude of other languages for convenience in foreign countries.

[weishaupt1776]

Busby must have had adhesion contracts still showing that he was a Federal Citizen.

[Shoonra]

Nothing of the sort. The Alaska Court was emphasizing the state's primacy in enforcing its traffic laws over its own roads ... when it revokes someone's privilege to drive on Alaska roads, that privilege cannot be revived by such roundabout means as moving outside Alaska, getting a DL in the new home state, and then coming back to Alaska to drive. In this case (and a couple of others), the motorist went to a foreign country, where the govt couldn't do any sort of background check on his driving privileges, to get a new DL and then went back to the state that had pulled his license. Still didn't make him good to drive in Alaska. For the moment, as far as I know, with a current foreign DL he might have been able to drive in the 49 other states, since they hadn't personally revoked his privileges, but I do not know of a case on point.