Experts in the Nigerian aviation industry have expressed concerns over the recent summons of the Nigerian Safety Investigation Bureau (NSIB) and the conduct of a public hearing on the agency’s report about Air Peace’s incident at the Port Harcourt Airport by the Senate Committee on Aviation is an attempt to politicise and interfere in a technical decision by the political class, OLUSEGUN KOIKI reports.

Air accident investigation, by statute and global convention, is protected from legislative interference to preserve its integrity, accuracy and safety outcomes.

In line with this, the Nigerian Safety Investigation Bureau (NSIB) Establishment Act 2022 empowers the bureau to gather, record and analyse relevant information on transport safety data, in particular, for accident or incident prevention purposes, since those functions do not affect its independence and entail no responsibility in regulatory, administrative or standard issues.

Also, the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) Annexe 13 sets out the standards and practices for air accident and serious incident investigations. The annexe tells countries how to investigate, who to investigate and what principles must guide against in such an investigation.

Annexe 13 creates a strict separation between safety investigations to prevent future occurrences and judicial or political inquiries, which often aim to apportion blame or determine liability.

The NSIB Act specifies that the bureau is not subject to the direction or control of any other person or authority, including the regulators, operators, ministries and the National Assembly.

No doubt, Nigeria’s aviation sector has made significant progress in almost two decades, which has been driven by consistent adherence to global investigation standards.

However, when the Senate Committee on Aviation, last week, held a public hearing over one of the NSIB’s preliminary reports – Air Peace’s ‘serious incident’ that occurred in Port Harcourt International Airport (PHIA), Omagwa, it raised a legal red flag.

Many of the country’s aviation industry experts feared that legislative scrutiny of an investigation’s substance could slide into political influence of a body the law has insulated.

Apart from Nigeria, the accident investigators from other developed aviation countries are shielded from political interference. For instance, the United States National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), which was set up as an independent federal agency, is legally structured to be insulated from political interference and in practice, its independence is guarded very jealously.

The NTSB does not report to any government ministry or department, including the Department of Transportation or even the White House.

When an accident occurs, the NTSB leads the investigation and everyone else – the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), airlines, manufacturers, local law enforcement and political officeholders are either observers or participants under the NTSB rules. No organisation or institution can override the NTSB’s technical decisions, as attempted by the National Assembly last week.

Besides, the investigators in the Transport Safety Investigation Bureau (TSIB), formerly Air Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) in Singapore, have statutory authority to lead investigations without directives from policymakers, airlines or regulatory bodies.

The TSIB, like the NSIB, derives authority under ICAO Annexe 13 principles, which clearly require independence from regulators, operators and political establishments.

Apart from the above, operations of accident investigators in the United Kingdom (Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB), Canada (Transportation Safety Board) and Japan (Japan Transport Safety Board), among others, conduct accident investigations independently and follow the ICAO Annexe 13 principles in their conduct.

Consequence of Senate’s interference

Commenting on the issue, an aviation security expert, Grp. Capt. John Ojikutu (rtd.), said the upper chamber lacked the power to summon stakeholders to a public investigative hearing on any serious incident or accident reports of NSIB, including that of the Air Peace runway overrun incident at the Port Harcourt International Airport earlier in the year.

Ojikutu described such an investigation as an interference in technical safety oversight processes.

He insisted the Senate was overreaching its mandate by probing issues that fall strictly within the statutory responsibilities of specialised aviation safety like the NSIB and the Nigeria Civil Aviation Authority (NCAA).

Ojikutu, who was a former military commandant at the Murtala Muhammed Airport (MMA), Lagos, said the Senate lacked the justification for convening a public hearing on what was a “serious incident” rather than an accident or fatal accident.

He maintained that incidents of this nature were strictly within the purview of the NCAA for oversight and enforcement, and the NSIB for technical investigation, not the legislature.

He said: “There is no reason for calling a public hearing on an incident of a runway incursion. This is primarily a responsibility of the regulatory oversight and enforcement agency.

“What the committee needs for incidents are aviation safety consultants to review NSIB findings, not public hearings.”

He added that questions surrounding runway conditions, periodic maintenance, lighting systems, navigational aids, and compliance with NSIB safety recommendations should be directed first to service providers like the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN), the Nigerian Airspace Management Agency (NAMA) the NCAA, which certifies and enforces safety standards.

Ojikutu listed several issues the committee should instead direct to the responsible agencies, including when the last runway maintenance and Nigerian Civil Aviation Regulations (NCARs) audits were carried out, whether Notice-To-Airmen (NOTAM) were issued, or previous NSIB safety recommendations were implemented.

Besides, the aviation security expert criticised what he described as “ministerial interference” in regulatory matters, noting that only the NCAA was empowered to enforce compliance on operators and service providers.

He warned that any attempt by the Ministry of Aviation and Aerospace Development or the legislature to assume technical oversight roles would weaken the regulator.

Also, the Chief Executive Officer of Belujane Konsult, Chris Aligbe, said that the Senate lacked the competence to investigate NSIB’s reports.

According to him, the Senate requires proper schooling on its activities before it makes an attempt to legislate beyond its jurisdiction.

“The Senate went into an area it has neither the authority nor a scintilla of competence. The senate needs to be thoroughly educated to stay away, otherwise the senate will be made a laughing stock,” he said.

Also, an aviation analyst, Emmanuel Olisemeka, said once the Senate attempts to question, influence or review a safety investigation by the NSIB, independence would be compromised.

Olisemeka declared that the law was clear on the jurisdiction of the NSIB, maintaining that the bureau does not answer to political bodies on the technical content of an investigation.

He feared that legislative scrutiny of an investigation’s substance could easily slide into political influence, pointing out that the shielding of the NSIB was not about hiding anything, but about protecting the integrity of a process that must be free from pressure.

He added: “Nigeria is also bound by ICAO Annexe 13, the globally accepted framework for aircraft accident investigations.

“Annexe 13 creates a strict separation between safety investigations that aim to prevent future occurrences and judicial or political inquiries, which often aim to apportion blame or determine liability. Investigations are technical by design. They are not political hearings,” he said.

Olisemeka, however, said that legislative oversight was still allowed, but only on the administrative performance, funding usage or policy compliance of the NSIB as an agency.

The aviation analyst pointed out that one of the most important reasons for independence is the culture of safety reporting.

According to him, pilots, engineers, air traffic controllers and airline management often cooperate more openly when they know their statements would not be weaponised politically.

He added: “Annexe 13 investigations depend heavily on this candour. If investigators begin to fear political backlash, they tone down their reports. If witnesses fear Senate hearings, they become cautious or defensive. Safety suffers.”

But the Director, Research, Zenith Travels Ltd, Olumide Ohunayo, sees the senate’s public hearing on the investigation of NSIB’s report differently.

According to Ohunayo, the Senate Committee on Aviation’s summoning of NSIB and other organisations was premised on the Senate resolution directing the committee to look into the Air Peace incident and NSIB’s preliminary report.

The Zenith Travel boss insisted that the public hearing would help to garner and improve safety in the industry, but noted that the National Assembly’s reports on accidents or serious incidents are not recognised by the NCAA, ICAO and other relevant bodies.

“Those bodies will rather deal with the reports of the NSIB that is given the responsibility than take the Senate report, except there are other revelations that come out that show there was a compromise from the NSIB.

“Anything that will improve safety should not be too much. What we want is a safe and efficient industry and I think that is what they have called for, not that the report of NSIB is not reliable; rather, they are asking everyone to look at the report and comment on it,” he said.

Ohunayo questioned the alleged overwriting of the cockpit and voice recorders of the serious incident, wondering if the equipment had been tampered with. (The Guardian)