@ CLEE
The point is that this ravine is a risk to all other aircraft taking off or landing on both runways - should a future aircraft depart either runway, and we have to assume that one day one will, then the result will be similarly tragic. Avoidably tragic. The authorities, rightly, do not accept that sort of thing for technical faults on aircraft and issue ADs in response. Substituting this ravine with suitable drainage, infill and grading is a no brainer.
Arguing against myself, in this specific case I could agree ... although presumably the Airport Operating Authority would then be looking for some fiscal support to justify spending on
dramatically exceeding Internationally agreed norms
However, the ravine is no more a risk than anything else [such as mentioned previously] that lies outside the Safeguarding Criteria. The idea is to protect aircraft operating normally. Where do you stop? or indeed, even start?