The Cost of Doing the Right Thing

Español: Hacer Lo Correcto Sale Caro

A few weeks ago, while driving along the Panamerican highway, I hit and killed a pedestrian. Contrary to what common sense dictates in El Salvador, I decided to stay. The consequences of this decision have led me to explore the behavior elicited by the policy of detaining drivers in fatal accidents for 72 hours. As a foreigner living in El Salvador for over ten years, I’ve had the opportunity to experience different transit policies and observe the systemic behaviors they produce. With this article, I aspire to stimulate a constructive dialogue on the conditions that lead may Salvadoran citizens to flee the scenes of serious accidents.

The Circumstances of the Accident:
As for the circumstances of the accident, I had been driving under the speed limit, in my lane, and had no alcohol in my bloodstream. The victim, allegedly intoxicated, had chosen to ignore two pasarelas, jump over a meter-high concrete wall and dart barefoot across a highway with oncoming traffic at dusk. According to the local police, pedestrians die in this strip on a weekly basis.

The Decision to Stay and its Consequences:
In the seconds that followed the impact, I perceived two exclusive alternatives. I could stay, facing the consequences of the accident or I could flee, avoiding a potentially violent reaction from the victim or his friends, eluding capture, economic costs, and time-consuming hassles that could result from reconciling. I decided to stay.

The 911 operator’s response to my call signaled what I considered to be a weakness in the system. When I told him what had just occurred, he replied, “We’ll send a unit” and then urgently suggested “Sir, get the hell out of there.” When I share with Salvadorans my decision to stay, many either compliment my ethical behavior or laugh at my naive faith in the legal system. Some argue that “that’s just how it is,” or “that’s just the culture here.” I couldn’t disagree more. The Salvadoran culture (or any culture per se) does not foster fearful behavior or unwillingness to assume responsibility in difficult situations.

In Theory and In Practice:
As structured today, the transit policy leads people to the logical conclusion that their best option -without a doubt- is to flee the scene of serious accidents. The systemic economic and personal repercussions of the policy lead good people to behave irresponsibly insofar as civil behavior is essentially punished. As a result of my decision to submit myself to the system, I was detained in police custody, absent from work and family for three days. I paid the family members of the victim despite his extreme negligence and incurred in transportation costs while my vehicle (and license) were confiscated for over two months.

When I ask, “What is the purpose of detaining drivers for 72 hours?” I receive two types of explanations: the first claims that the jail-time represents, in theory, a period of investigation when lawyers also negotiate with the victims family members. The second argues that the driver is detained to keep him/her from fleeing the country before having a) been proven not liable or b) paid compensated the victim’s family. In practice, according to the prosecution, 90% of drivers under similar circumstances flee the scene.

Conclusion:
To those of you with influence in legal circles or agents of change in general, I ask: “What would happen to this tendency if such civil disputes were resolved without penal punishment? How can the legal system incentivize more responsible and civil behavior?”



Gian Paolo Einaudi
Originally published in La Prensa Gráfica on October 10th, 2009: Hacer Lo Correcto Sale Caro