Originally Posted by Carrier
[referring to ICAO Annex 13 protocols]...That applies in the first world. This happened in Africa.
Hi Carrier:
I hear what you are saying, but, don't confuse 'process' with 'outcomes'. The
processes in the ICAO annexes are generally followed by everyone, regardless of the capabilities or level of development of the regulatory agencies in various countries. The
results (outcomes) of any accident investigation will depend on the capabilities of the country that is the lead agency.
Further, if the lead agency submits findings that any one of the accredited representatives disagree with, each accredited representative has the right to file a dissent. For example, if the lead agency is Country A, and they publish a finding that says "the aircraft fell out of the sky because the Gods were angry", and the accredited representative from the country of manufacture (or country of registration, or a state that had a citizen on that flight as a passenger) disagrees, they can file a dissent saying "We believe the aircraft fell out of the sky because it was covered with ice", or "because it ran out of fuel", or "because the engine failed", as the case may be.
If you would like to see an excellent example of this dissention process in actual practice, look up the report of the investigation into the Concorde take-off accident in France about 10 years ago.
Having said all that, the process can break down entirely if the lead agency does not file a report at all. This is what appears to have happened (to date) in the case of the South African B-1900 that crashed in the DRC - one of the examples you cited.