My apologies in advance if this seems like 'sucking eggs' stuff. That's not the intention.
If the pilot is taking an aircraft into somewhere that is likely to overload the manoeuvring areas (ACN, PCN, etc), it is the PIC, or the organisation they work for, to obtain the appropriate Pavement Concession (PC). It is still the ultimate responsibility of the PIC to ensure that this is 'in hand' before planning to go there (except in an emergency, of course).
In AF1's case, a PC would have been:
a. granted on the understanding that pavement damage would have been minimal (which it was, in reality);
or
b. granted on the understanding that, although the aircraft ACN was excessive, the aircraft 'movement' would be within the allowed maximum number of movements at CBR with excessive SIWL (relating to cumulative damage over several movements);
or
c. deemed 'not required' because the Gov't, after weighing up all costs and other political factors (ie. land Vs not land), they agreed to bear the cost of repairs.
We'll never know. Does it really matter ? Just repair the tarmac and keep on governing.