Why this law exists and what it aims to do

(a) Act 222, Session Laws of Hawaii 1978, began the process of decriminalizing certain traffic offenses, not of a serious nature, to the status of violations. In response to a request by the legislature, the judiciary prepared a report in 1987 that recommended, among other things, further decriminalization of traffic offenses, elimination of most traffic arraignments, disposition of uncontested violations by mail, and informal hearings where the violation or the proposed penalty is questioned. The legislature finds that further decriminalization of certain traffic offenses and streamlining of the handling of those traffic cases will achieve a more expeditious system for the judicial processing of traffic infractions. The system of processing traffic infractions established by this chapter will: (1) Eliminate the long and tedious arraignment proceeding for a majority of traffic matters; (2) Facilitate and encourage the resolution of many traffic infractions through the payment of a monetary assessment; (3) Speed the disposition of contested cases through a hearing, similar to small claims proceedings, in which the rules of evidence will not apply and the court will consider as evidence the notice of traffic infraction, applicable police reports, or other written statements by the police officer who issued the notice, any other relevant written material, and any evidence or statements by the person contesting the notice of traffic infraction; (4) Dispense in most cases with the need for witnesses, including law enforcement officers, to be present and for the participation of the prosecuting attorney; (5) Allow judicial, prosecutorial, and law enforcement resources to be used more efficiently and effectively; and (6) Save the taxpayers money and reduce their frustration with the judicial system by simplifying the traffic court process. The legislature further finds that this chapter will not require expansion of the current traffic division of the district courts, but will achieve greater efficiency through more effective use of existing resources of the district courts. (b) The legislature finds that the pandemic related to the coronavirus disease 2019 necessitated the imposition of emergency period rules in an attempt to control the spread of the disease in the State. The thousands of violations of the emergency period rules caused an examination of the ability to impose infractions for lesser offenses as an alternative to using the Penal Code and to allow for more efficient use of the judicial system. The system of processing traffic infractions under this chapter was enacted in 1993 and has provided a useful mechanism for handling offenses deemed as infractions and is well-suited to certain types of violations of emergency period rules that are designated infractions by the governor or mayor under the state's emergency management laws. (c) The legislature further finds that the illegal use of fireworks poses a serious public health and safety hazard. Due to the high number of fireworks being set off throughout the State, an expeditious adjudication system for fireworks infractions, such as the system for processing traffic infractions, will allow the judiciary to expediently process violations of the fireworks control law. This system will allow the judiciary to reserve resources for cases that require more resources.