Ahmedabad airplane crash: A nation in mourning, an business beneath scrutiny
An unbiased aviation authority for India?
A longstanding advice that has gained renewed urgency is the creation of an autonomous aviation authority — modelled on America’s FAA or UK’s Civil Aviation Authority.
In 2013, the Indian authorities had proposed a Civil Aviation Authority of its personal. The intention was to exchange the DGCA with an establishment that might be financially and administratively unbiased, able to setting and implementing security requirements free from political or business interference. It might additionally oversee accident investigations, environmental considerations and shopper grievances beneath a unified construction.
Nonetheless, regardless of detailed planning and budgetary estimates, the thought was shelved, largely because of political hesitation and bureaucratic inertia. With the AI171 crash drawing consideration to longstanding structural flaws, consultants argue that solely such an unbiased authority can guarantee neutral, expert-led oversight in a sector vital to nationwide infrastructure and public security.
The warnings we ignored: Revisiting the 1997 J.Ok. Seth report
The crash has additionally reignited curiosity in one of the revealing — and buried — paperwork in Indian aviation historical past: the 1997 report by Air Marshal J.Ok. Seth. This report highlighted systemic deficiencies throughout the DGCA, together with poor coordination, lack of unbiased investigation our bodies and regulatory seize as a result of DGCA and AAIB working beneath the identical ministry.
The report really useful structural reforms, practical independence for investigators, higher coaching and fashionable security audit mechanisms. Most of those proposals stay ignored.
At this time, almost three a long time later, most of the points flagged in that report stay unresolved, a haunting reminder of alternatives misplaced.
Are security plans simply paper guarantees?
India’s present strategic roadmap for aviation security, the Nationwide Aviation Security Plan (NASP) 2024–2028, outlines complete targets aligned with worldwide security protocols. Whereas the DGCA has developed this in session with business stakeholders, implementation has lagged. Audit backlogs, restricted manpower and budgetary constraints have impeded progress. Critics warn that except the NASP is backed by actual enforcement and capacity-building, it dangers turning into a tokenistic doc reasonably than a transformative one.
The AI171 crash has made one factor clear: piecemeal reforms and delayed implementation not suffice.
