Was Agni Air crash really unexpected?

The recent Agni Air crash south of Kathmandu that resulted in the death of 14 people, including the crew, was not entirely unexpected. Given the fact that in this anarchic country where every aspect of life remains mired in selfish politics, would it be fair to expect only civil aviation safety to be an oddity by remaining untainted with the ubiquitous contaminants—corruption and irresponsibility? No, definitely not, most would say! Whereas the loss of lives in much more frequent road accidents in Nepal is brushed aside with utter disdain, an air crash on the contrary, even with a comparatively fewer fatalities, does manage to draw significant attention as well as statements of condolences from political leaders. Strangely, high-level civil aviation officials who should have been facing tough questions for their incompetence and willful misconduct, which directly resulted in this crash, are getting away by uttering that only the crash investigation commission’s report would shed light on the cause.

The television visuals where bare-footed locals and low-ranked police personnel were seen wading in the slush of the crash site trying to recover the human remains and aircraft parts is a reflection on the pathetic state of basic human rights in Nepal. These unsuspecting individuals, devoid of the standard personal protection equipment like steel-soled boots and industrial gloves, were being put into harms way by deliberately exposing them to submerged sharp metallic edges of aircraft structural remains as well as the biological hazards resulting from the contamination of the crash site with the human remains of the victims. This indifference of the government toward those still alive and barely eking out their living is visible from the declaration of a cash prize for the recovery of the flight recorders despite fully knowing that such a declaration would result in people making reckless recovery attempts without caring for their health. Surely, there would be no one to care for the injuries incurred in the process and the press world would just forget them for good. Is this not the sad destiny of a typical Nepali in his own land, exploited to the hilt by his “own”?

Statistically as well as factually speaking, those traveling by air in Nepal should be prepared to meet a premature end.

The composition of the investigation commission itself raises many troubling questions regarding the probable quality of the outcome. A perusal of the article “Justice denied to air-crash victims” published in this paper on the June 3 by this writer would certainly aid the understanding of those interested in the actual state of air crash investigation in Nepal. Additionally, in the present Agni Air case, the member secretary of the commission is an official of the ministry of civil aviation that is directly involved with the issuance of licenses necessary for operating airlines. This issuance of air-operator license involves a detailed assessment of the prospective air-operator’s capabilities, both financial as well as technical. Surely, Agni Air must have been granted its air-operator license by the ministry after a “satisfactory” assessment and a crash investigation, which also involves a critical review of the fitness of airlines, cannot be expected to find the state “unsatisfactory” especially if an office-bearer of the related desk is in the commission. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) of which Nepal too is a member has specifically warned about the risks posed by an airline not in the pink of financial health, where the management naturally resorts to cutting costs in matters that directly affect safety. Yet, in Nepal, those in charge lack the wherewithal to take cognizance of such (in)significant issues resolutely as they have much more important issues to tend to.

On the one hand is a hard reality that relatively new operators like Agni and the like are compelled to compete with airlines such as Buddha Air that now operate larger aircraft and as a result enjoy a much lower operational cost per seat. This results in a situation where operators at a comparative disadvantage are compelled to sell tickets at competitive prices for ensuring continued occupancy of flights, even suffering losses in the process. It is only the flights to foreign-tourist destinations like Lukla that make a profit, part of which is used to offset the losses being incurred on trunk routes like Biratnagar. In light of the above grim fact, the desperation on the part of the owners to pressurize flight crew to undertake flights even in marginal weather to Lukla or ask maintenance crew to release aircraft with less-than-complete maintenance (of course, the paper trails are well covered up) can be better understood.

The Civil Aviation Authority, the regulatory agency for civil aviation in Nepal, continues to be handicapped by the fact that it is headed by the minister for tourism and civil aviation. The minister unfortunately is harnessed with the twin tasks (both of inherently conflicting nature) of promoting as well as regulating civil aviation. While the responsibility of tourism promotion entails adding and expanding airlines and destinations, the responsibility as the head of the Civil Aviation Authority on the contrary involves regulating air transport. It is this very conflict of interest in the minister’s position that has made Nepal’s civil aviation the laughing stock of the international aviation community. The ICAO’s audit of Nepal’s regulatory oversight capabilities in 2009 has clearly documented the technical anomalies. Ironically, we are a country where the task of constitution-drafting gets consigned to the backburner by our illustrious politicians, and even the issue of buying aircraft for the national flag carrier, the Nepal Airlines Corporation, commands more attention than sorting out the safety issues raised in the audit. No wonder the next crash will be yet another statistic!

Though ICAO desires the director general to be the final authority for deciding issues related to aviation safety, its crew and maintenance personnel, pitifully it never realized the fact that the same director general is a mere mortal with a fleeting tenure and therefore a puppet in the hands of the minister who too has a limited stint at the ministry and thus “has to make hay while the sun shines”. A mere whim of the minister, tweaked by a dissatisfied air-operator’s capabilities, can bring the deemed “powerful regulator” to the streets within hours. Nepali civil aviation is replete with cases where the serving director general was removed by a straight proposal tabled in the cabinet by the then minister without even a demurral by his colleagues. No wonder, the average tenure of the director general in Nepal has been only a year and naturally the instincts of worrying about his position’s safety supercedes the cumbersome (nevertheless possible) task of ensuring aviation safety. Thus, statistically as well as factually speaking, those traveling by air in Nepal should therefore be prepared to meet a premature end.

pilots_nepal@yahoo.com