In an effort to prevent re-occurrence, the investigators will need to answer why no G/A from a misadjusted approach and what can be done in the future to ensure the landing is not continued. A neighbouring country realized some time ago and enforced a punitive non-go-around policy (as opposed to a non-punitive go-around one).
And I'd vote in favour. What else there is, TEM and CRM training does not seem to deliver since people keep crashing airworthy aeroplanes under the impression they are performing alright and the dark side of HF does not apply to them. Which itself is one of the HF dark sides. The prospect of dying and killing everyone seems too distant and severe so that it gets suppressed by the unconscious and does not enter the decision making when needed. The OLD / FLD concept fails to save lives, since when rushed pilots just do not run the numbers.
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=219098
https://aviation-safety.net/database...?id=20091222-0
Then let it be FDM and HR. Give the pilots a railing they can hold on to and not fall over the cliff of their own importance. Otherwise, as very respectable non-pilot contributor posted elsewhere in the forums the last week(my re-phrase): As long as pilots keep crashing airworthy aeroplanes, future of that profession is deservedly grim.