Report should be quashed and fresh inquiry should be ordered by experienced, highly technical experts of aviation
KARACHI: This is apropos Ali Malik Tariq’s letter, “Bhoja Air debacle”, published in these pages on January 31. The writer has rightly demanded action against those responsible for issuing licences and approving documents for the airline while disregarding the airline’s financial capacity, but has missed some very important points that need to be highlighted to draw correct conclusions about the inquiry report that appears to be an eyewash. The part of the report that blames the captain of the ill-fated flight is indeed right, but the fact that all those involved in the chain of command had allowed the pilot to play with the lives of the people onboard has been completely overlooked. The report says that the pilots on the plane had no experience or training in handling the situation, whereas the pilot’s first officer never received simulator training for the B-737, which has an automated deck. If that was the case, why was the crew cleared to fly?
Moreover, did anyone bother to check the airline’s financial position and see whether it could meet its financial obligations towards insurance claims? Bhoja Air had outstanding dues amounting to $188,000; why, then, was it allowed to operate before clearing its dues? Another glaring violation of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) rules was that during the time that the Air Operator’s Certificate was issued to Bhoja Air, a chief financial officer, who had no experience whatsoever in this field, was placed as the acting Air Transport Director by the former director general of the Civil Aviation Authority, whereas according to The Gazette of Pakistan, published on August 21, 1970 Part 1 of paragraph 20 lays down the condition of 12 years’ practical experience in an aeronautical organisation connected with air transport economics, fare structure, route planning, equipment utilisation and air transport agreements and there is no provision of direct induction for this position. This was a grave irregularity. All these questions should have been attended to and the responsibility fixed. You cannot appoint a dental surgeon to carry out heart surgery. Why were qualified people sidelined?
The report clearly exposes that this was a simple case of negligence by the regulator, and there were flaws, as well as institutional and individual failures at every level. The report should be quashed and a fresh inquiry should be ordered by experienced and highly technical experts from the profession of aviation to fix responsibilities and punish those responsible for failing to observe proper rules as per ICAO regulations. If this is done, future tragedies will be avoided.
Mukhtar Ahmed
Published in The Express Tribune, February 3rd, 2015.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
