Brussels, 03/09/2014 (Agence Europe) - The MH17 plane crash in Ukraine has led to a rather heated return of the European Parliament's transport committee (TRAN). More than a month after the disaster, MEPs are struggling to understand how the plane was able to fly over the conflict zone and to be shot down, and by whom. In this connection they posed a number of questions to Eurocontrol, the European Aviation Security Agency (EASA), the International Air Transport Association (IATA), the International Civil Aviation Organisation and the European Commission during their first meeting on Wednesday 3 September.
Although those guilty of the crash are, obviously, those that fired on flight MH17, causing the deaths of 298 people on 17 July, MEPs also want to know who was responsible for the blatant violation in the aviation security mechanism. Following the explanations provided by the experts, MEPs expressed concern on Wednesday about the lack of exchange of information between member states and the competent authorities. Aviation operators appear insufficiently informed about the risks there are in flying over conflict zones. They received recommendations issued by EASA; Eurocontrol has approved their flight plans and it is ultimately up to the country in question to take the decision of whether to close its airspace. Nonetheless, do all the different links in the information chain have and share the necessary data, such as military intelligence, to make the right decisions? British Airways, for example, had already taken the decision not to fly over the combat zone in Ukraine. How is it possible, therefore, that other airlines had not followed suite, asked Peter Van Dalen (the Netherlands, ECR). This disaster took the lives of 173 Dutch citizens.
The European Commission's Director-General for Aviation Services at DG Move, Matthew Baldwin, concluded that the roles and responsibilities of each of the actors was perfectly defined but that it was necessary “to improve the flow of information”. All the different bodies attending the hearing made this observation. Baldwin confirmed that the Commission would attempt to adapt and adjust these roles in order to eliminate the risk of this kind of disaster occurring in the future, but that this did not mean introducing legislation willy-nilly.
Giancarlo Buono, the director for security at IATA, however, suggested that implementation of the Single Sky could improve the flow of information by avoiding duplication of tasks. Baldwin cut this argument short and argued that the European Single Sky would not have been able to prevent the crash as Ukraine was not part of this area.
MEPs and experts also expressed concern about the still limited access given to investigators in the crash zone. A preliminary report is to be finalised in the coming weeks, based in particular on analysis of the flight recorders. The international investigation is being headed by the Netherlands, and the Dutch prosecution has also opened a criminal investigation under international jurisdiction. (MD)