How about examining CASA's selective approach to regulatory enforcement, where they protect the industry cowboys even when given hard and self incriminating evidence, but willingly use their powers of prosecution against the little guy.
This link is an interesting legal issue between CASA and an aircraft owner in Mareeba FNQ, featured online in the "Aviation Advertiser" editorial, where CASA brought proceedings against an aircraft owner alleging unauthorised maintenance.
http://www.aviationadvertiser.com.au...y-rides-again/
Part of the editorial comment said:
Throughout this entire process there appear to have been a large number of failures in observance of due process, legal accountability, compliance with published procedures, Australian legal evidentiary requirements, CASA administrative guidelines and executive orders, any one of which should have signalled that the matter should be stopped in its tracks, at least until the deficiencies were exposed to competent scrutiny.
But then we all knew CASA could be like that, didn't we.............
