PK-661 the aftermath

The investigation of any aircrash be it fatal or otherwise, large or small and wherever it happens in the world is slow, painstaking and complex. Air incidents that involve loss-of-hull are investigated by the aircraft manufacturer as well as the operator, possibly the police or security agencies if foul play is suspected, and whatever independent investigatory bodies there are in the country that the accident occurred in. If there is an international dimension further layers of complexity are added. The PK-661 flight was internal and it is now for the Safety Investigation Board to conduct the investigation, the first it has carried out since it became independent of the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). The separation occurred because of concerns about investigations being ‘influenced’ by the CAA and the SIB now reports to the Aviation Division directly.

Whatever the outcome of any enquiry, it is not going to be enough to gloss over the event only as an ‘accident’, because all accidents have a causal element be that human or mechanical or a combination of both. There must be a scrupulous examination of all ground and service procedures and records, and that examination be entered in the public domain along with every other aspect of the investigation, including that conducted by the manufacturer. Any deficit or irregularity in carrying out standard operating procedures or servicing must be identified to a named individual or individuals whoever they are and wherever they may be or whatever ‘seniority’ they may have. If there is any evidence of criminal negligence as a contributory or primary causal element to the crash, then that must be pursued by due process of law. There must be no escape or evasion and any hint of a culture of impunity to protect individuals or organisations is unacceptable.

Another aspect of this latest tragedy relates to how it is handled in the media, both print and electronic but primarily electronic and in particular the social media where a number of inaccuracies quickly emerged. An audio recording that was purported to originate from a ‘phone retrieved from the crash site and was said to have been made in the last minute of the PK-661 flight was circulated. In fact it was made on an Etihad Airways flight from Abu Dhabi to Jakarta in a period of severe turbulence in May 2016. The aircraft landed safely. In an instance of crass insensitivity a TV reporter asked the mother of a dead member of the aircrew what their favourite food was. As has happened so often in the past the bounds of common decency were breached somewhere by all the media platforms irrespective of any ‘code of conduct’ that has been agreed in the past. Ill-informed speculation was rife across TV channels throughout the evening on the day of the crash.

Whilst such poor taste and a lack of informed commentary may be difficult to regulate in an environment where the media are ever hungry for a breaking news strapline, the process of formal investigation is subject, at least theoretically, to stringent protocols many of which are internationally agreed and stretch across the entire global aviation industry. There is no shortage of suggestions, not all of them verified and some undoubtedly malicious or of doubtful origin, as to the quality or otherwise of air safety procedures on the ground and in the air as practiced in Pakistan. In the case of the Air Blue and the Bhoja Air crashes investigations found that the pilots were at fault. Both are dead, as are the pilot(s) of flight PK-661 — and dead men tell no tales.

Above all else, this tragedy must be investigated in a climate of disclosure rather than the obverse. The travelling public has a right to know what took down this aircraft and who or what was responsible for the loss of so many lives. The simple ‘accident’ verdict is never going to satisfy us, nor should it.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 9^th, 2016.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.