Squabble over cross-border permit fees unresolved

The Road Freight Association (RFA) is currently awaiting the outcome of an appeal decision by the Constitutional Court involving the Cross-Border Road Transport Agency (C-BRTA). The agency and the RFA have been at loggerheads for years over permit fees, which finally saw the RFA heading to court last year. The High Court found that the substantially increased cross-border road transport fees instituted by the C-BRTA in 2011 were invalid as there had been insufficient public participation prior to the increase. It also found that correct processes had not been followed by the agency prior to increasing the cross-border fees. The High Court instructed the C-BRTA to refund monies paid for permits on a higher tariff rate and ruled that operators were only liable for the tariff rates that existed before April 2011. The court at the time suspended the order of invalidity for six months for the Minister of Transport to remedy the situation and publish the higher tariff rates in the correct order. This suspension expired in August 2013 without any new regulations being published. While the RFA was calculating the monies owed to operators that had to to be paid back as per the judgment, another dispute arose and the matter was back in the High Court where a second judge ruled that the regulations regarding higher tariffs were invalid. “The C-BRTA then headed to the Constitutional Court where the matter was heard in February,” said RFA spokesman Gavin Kelly. The C-BRTA is arguing that the full retrospective order granted by the High Court – in which it has to pay back all monies charged at a higher tariff rate – will not be in the public interest as its financial position is worsening and this will in fact have a crippling effect. Whilst the case is between the Central African Road Services (Cars) and the C-BRTA, the RFA is a friend of the court and is in support of the full retrospective effect. Kelly said regardless of the Constititutional Court finding in favour or not of the full retrospective the case would have far reaching effects and consequences. “It is about the tariff rate and the amounts that have to be paid back or not, but in actual fact the bigger concern has been the process involved in determining the tariffs,” he said.