[§291D-1]  Purpose.  Act 222, SessionLaws of Hawaii 1978, began the process of decriminalizing certain trafficoffenses, not of a serious nature, to the status of violations.  In response toa request by the legislature, the judiciary prepared a report in 1987 thatrecommended, among other things, further decriminalization of traffic offenses,elimination of most traffic arraignments, disposition of uncontested violationsby mail, and informal hearings where the violation or the proposed penalty isquestioned.  The legislature finds that further decriminalization of certaintraffic offenses and streamlining of the handling of those traffic cases willachieve a more expeditious system for the judicial processing of trafficinfractions.  The system of processing traffic infractions established by thischapter will:

(1)  Eliminate the long and tedious arraignmentproceeding for a majority of traffic matters;

(2)  Facilitate and encourage the resolution of manytraffic infractions through the payment of a monetary assessment;

(3)  Speed the disposition of contested cases througha hearing, similar to small claims proceedings, in which the rules of evidencewill not apply and the court will consider as evidence the notice of trafficinfraction, applicable police reports, or other written statements by thepolice officer who issued the notice, any other relevant written material, andany evidence or statements by the person contesting the notice of trafficinfraction;

(4)  Dispense in most cases with the need for witnesses,including law enforcement officers, to be present and for the participation ofthe prosecuting attorney;

(5)  Allow judicial, prosecutorial, and lawenforcement resources to be used more efficiently and effectively; and

(6)  Save the taxpayers money and reduce theirfrustration with the judicial system by simplifying the traffic court process.

The legislature further finds that this chapter willnot require expansion of the current traffic division of the district courts,but will achieve greater efficiency through more effective use of existingresources of the district courts. [L 1993, c 214, pt of §2]