SHC grills PIA for failure to finalise plane crash inquiry report

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court on Tuesday expressed concern over non-completion of the inquiry report of Pakistan International Airlines’ ATR crash at Hawalian in December 2016 despite the lapse of over three years.

Hearing a petition seeking a judicial inquiry into the December 2016 flight PK-661 crash, in which 42 passengers, including singer-turned-preacher Junaid Jamshed and his wife, and crew members perished, the SHC’s division bench, headed by Justice Mohammad Ali Mazhar, found it strange that despite the passage of three years, the final investigation report had not been concluded.

The counsel of the Civil Aviation Authority submitted that ‘preliminary investigation reports’ of the PIA’s ATR crash in Hawalian on December 7, 2016 and A320 crash in Karachi on May 22, 2020 were submitted. The court observed as to why the final report of the ATR plane crash incident had not been concluded by the Accident Investigation Board. It directed the federal law officer to find out when the Accident Investigation Board would finalise the report about the ATR crash.

The SHC directed submission of the report before the next date of hearing. It observed that if no proper response was submitted, the court would order personal appearance of the secretary Aviation before the court and directed the law officer to comply with the direction by September 8.

Citing the Hawalian crash, the petitioner, Syed Iqbal Kazmi, told the court the CAA director general had informed his seniors of serious defects in the functioning of ATR planes. He said that despite having knowledge of the defects in the aircraft, the respondents did not take precautionary measures to avoid accidents and save previous lives. The petitioner said that 20 incidents were recorded in which the engines of ATR planes used by the PIA had stopped during flights. Besides, in 90 cases the engines of the ATR planes’ were removed owing to defects, he added.

Kazmi argued that after the occurrence of such incidents, it was the constitutional obligation of the cabinet division secretary, the DG CAA and the PIA chairman not to purchase the outdated planes which posed risk to the lives of passengers and crew members. The petitioner claimed that the respondents had violated Article 9 of the Constitution and the civil aviation rules.

He pleaded for a judicial inquiry into the crash to fix responsibility and prosecute those found responsible, and for ordering compensation to the legal heirs of the victims. He also pleaded the SHC to direct the respondents to ground all the planes currently being used by the PIA and to order their inspection by the CAA or any other independent investigating agency or department.