ARTICLE: US Air Safety Audit may Proceed this Month
The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) was formed to establish and promote safety standards on a global basis. That UN organization, through the consent of its sovereign nations, has established criteria that are intended to be universally applied. It periodically sends out investigators to assess the compliance of its members and it posts on its web subjective judgments whether each country meets those rules. Some do and some do not.
The European Union, through EASA, and the FAA, utilizing its IASI tool, send their respective staffs out to duplicate the assessments of ICAO. Why? One can reasonably infer that neither fully relies upon the UN’s professional judgments. What is odd is that the degree of variation between and among the ICAO, the EASA and FAA bases of determination is minimal.
The linked article about the situation in the Philippines raises a simple question—why the redundancy? CAAP has been approved by two of the three teams. Is there a need here, AND WITH OTHER COUNTRIES, to triplicate the reviews by these governments?
If there is going to be an international audit of civil aviation authorities, should not there be one set of rules and one audit? Does world aviation safety benefit from multiple eyes inspecting them? Should not one body be authorized to do the job for all? If there are worries whether the UN staff will return with a critical report on one of ICAO’s voting members, then would it be wise to denominate an impartial 3rd party, one beyond any doubt, and have that body (private?) do the work once?
Recently the DGAC of India inferred that there were economic levers to this process. Denuding these reviews of all politics and assigning an organization beyond reproach might be a better solution.Share this article: