Panayiotis Rougalas
The government has been given an ultimatum: install countdown timers at traffic lights equipped with cameras within six months—or shut down the traffic camera system entirely. This new law, passed by Parliament in mid-March, sets the stage for what could be another spectacular display of bureaucratic inertia.
Transport Minister Alexis Vafeades has repeatedly insisted in interviews that the current traffic lights with fixed cameras would not be getting countdown timers. Why? Because, according to him, they were supposed to be replaced with next-generation “smart” traffic lights—making any investment in timers pointless. He argued that issuing tenders, securing funding, and installing timers on soon-to-be-obsolete traffic lights would be a waste of time and money. Oh, and by the way, these futuristic smart lights were supposedly incompatible with countdown timers anyway.
Will the Minister suddenly fast-track the “smart” traffic lights to avoid installing the timers? Who knows. Will the Minister finally install the pre-warning lights he promised? Again, who knows.
Fast forward a year and counting, and—spoiler alert—the smart lights are nowhere to be seen. Not only have they not arrived, but not even a single alternative warning system has been installed to help drivers anticipate when the light will change. A year ago, the Minister suggested that instead of countdown timers, pre-warning lights could be placed 50 meters before traffic lights with cameras, giving drivers a chance to slow down in time rather than slamming on the brakes in a panic.
That also never happened.
So now, one year later, Parliament has passed a law requiring countdown timers at all traffic lights with cameras—within six months.
Will the Minister suddenly fast-track the “smart” traffic lights to avoid installing the timers? Who knows.
Will the Minister finally install the pre-warning lights he promised? Again, who knows.
But based on how fast things move in government, the six-month deadline will likely come and go without anything changing. And if that happens, the new law is clear: the traffic camera system will be suspended.
This law has huge implications. It could set a legal precedent for challenging past fines. What happens if all the drivers who’ve already paid fines decide to take legal action? Could they claim their money back because Parliament has now recognized a flaw in the system? Possibly.
One thing is certain: this law opens a can of worms that could put the entire traffic camera program under scrutiny.
To be clear, mobile speed cameras (those sneaky white vans operated by Brinks) are not part of this debate. Enforcing speed limits is necessary and non-negotiable. Yes, some speed camera operators have been less than transparent—hiding behind bushes or road signs instead of placing clear warning signs. But these practices have reportedly decreased, and in the end, speed kills—so monitoring it is essential.
As of March 2024, 320,000 fines had been issued through the traffic camera system in just two years. Of these, only 42% (about 148,000 fines) had been paid, generating €9.3 million in revenue for the state.
If we assume that over the past year, another 150,000 fines were issued and that half were paid, the total collected could now be approaching €15 million.
But now, here’s the million-euro question:
If Parliament itself acknowledges flaws in the system, should those who already paid fines have been fined in the first place? And if a group of drivers takes this to court, will they be entitled to refunds?
This debate is far from over. The government will sooner or later have to answer some tough questions—and possibly, face a flood of legal challenges.
*This opinion piece was translated from its Greek original and edited for clarity.
