The European Commission (EC) had in December, 2013 banned Nepali airliners from flying in European airspace after a damning evaluation of Nepal's air safety by the International Civil Aviation Authority (ICAO). The UN specialized agency, which is also the regulator of global air traffic, was particularly concerned about Nepal's inadequate aviation legislation, the country's out of date 'operating regulations' and lack of autonomy for the Civil Aviation Authority of Nepal (CAAN). Sanjiv Gautam, the director general of the national air regulator, speaking on the occasion of the International Civil Aviation Day on December 7, claimed that Nepal had made significant progress in improving its air safety after the 2013 ICAO audit. He cited changes in air operators ' certificate requirements and amendments in the Civil Aviation Regulation (2002), both in line with ICAO guidelines, as marks of progress. In light of these improvements, Gautam expressed hope that the EC's significant safety concern (SSC) tag for Nepal would now be removed. But it might not be as easy as the CAAN chief would have us believe.Part of the reason the EC decided to impose a ban on Nepali airlines from European airspace was Nepal's 2013 decision to buy six Chinese aircrafts from manufacturers whose airworthiness the European body doubts. Although the EC had legitimate safety concerns, its ban, announced within days of the aircraft deal with China, could also have been indicative of EC's displeasure at Nepal's attempt to diversify its fleet away from the (European) Airbus and (American) Boeing. The entry of cheap Chinese planes is steadily eating into the profits of the Western companies that have traditionally dominated international civil aviation. How will Nepal address this concern of the Europeans? There are other doubts as well. ICAO wants a "flexible, self-sustainable and autonomous" CAAN. The aim is to minimize political meddling. But after the 2006 changes the level of political interference in Nepali bureaucracy has increased as important state organs are increasingly used as recruitment grounds for the loyalists of those in power—and CAAN has not been immune to this trend. Nor does the country seem to have learned much from its air accidents; the recommendations of committees investigating them are seldom implemented. This was another of ICAO's major concerns.
Although no aircraft from Nepal flies into Europe at present, the ban has nonetheless had a negative impact on Nepali tourism. After the ban European travel operators have to inform EU residents who want to travel to Nepal about 'unsafe' Nepali skies; and such travelers, to the headache of travel operators, would be able to cancel their scheduled trips to (and in) Nepal with full reimbursement. Many have as such been dissuaded from traveling to Nepal. The ban also means that the national carrier, NAC, would not be able to resume its flights to European destinations like London and Frankfurt. But more than the fear of losing out on business, the biggest reason why steps must be taken to remove Nepal from the ICAO's blacklist is that it is also the most effective way to make air travel in Nepal safe. There have been positive developments. But loopholes remain.
Related story
To return or not to return: Nepali expats’ dilemma
