Pilot-br :
Are you saying that we are not facing "ATC issuing an incorrect ATC clearance?". I thought we were
From your alias here I initially thought you were a commercial pilot. Having seen your posts now, I began to realize that you are most probably a lawyer, or at least someone knowledgeable with the law rather than in Aircraft operations and ATC.
So , for the sake of closing our debate let me just say that in our case above , the Bangkok WP on RVSM you quoted refers to height deviations to measure RVSM compliance and target Level of safety(TLS) Using this WP to prove something in a Brazil accident is not very wise.
Your vision of this case is that of a justice person : someone must have made an error, so by looking for the individuals , and punishing them we will ensure peace.( and the good name of our Country )
In Aviation accident investigation we are interested in finding the causes, and issue recommendations for the accident not to happen again .
Legal procedures and fears of prosecution should not enter the equation. If they do people are not talking and we learn nothing.
In our case here, errors have been committed of course, as always . But why is far more interesting than by who.
Restoring radar coverage and VHF coverage on all frequencies in Brasilia for instance would be one of those things a proper investigation would be looking at recommending. ( read the Fohla on line article of last monday (15 Oct) on this issue, very, very interesting)
If you take a flight tomorrow with your family between Sao Paulo and Manaus, the implementation of proper technical investigation recommendations will be 1000 times more effective in ensuring your family safe flight than sending 4 controllers and 2 pilot in jail.
Incidentally, after the Tenerife crash in 1977, one of the additional recommendation in one of the 3 reports was to warn about the " fear of prosecution " inhibiting many actors to tell the truth to the investigators then.
Unfortunately nothing has changed 30 years later.