I agree with your first two points.
Not with your third, for 2 reasons:
- a quote from the BEA: "
The BEA nevertheless regrets the difficulties encountered by the AAIB investigators and their advisers." => That doesn't feel like "all is normal" to me.
- two quotes from the AAIB: "
Co-operation between the BEA and the AAIB enabled the AAIB to make an effective contribution to the investigation."
"
In other areas [than the judicial 'blockade']
, whilst the UK Accredited Representative and his Advisors agree with the evidence presented in the BEA report, the comments represent differences in the weighting of the conclusions."
Conclusions?
- The implementation of the French system of "2 parallel inquiries" was (far)
too rigourous and
inappropriate in 2000. This implementation was in contradition with international agreements. Clearly, that left room for improvment regarding full cooperation with foreign technical teams. Such improvments will show more transparency and consenquently less room for critics/accusations of partiality. (*)
- Now, was the situation so dark, in 2000, that the BEA report should be discarted as incorrect/partial in its entirety? (**) The AAIB didn't go that far, quite the contrary. On some specific points, the view of the AAIB differs from the view of the BEA. Those differences have been dully reported by the BEA. As such, the public has access to those comments (transparency: here at least, it's good), and is able to find that
the AAIB agrees with the general scenario, e.g.: "
This made it clear that the tank rupture had resulted from the effects of the tyre rupture." and "
The evidence presented in the BEA report makes it clear that the fuel release, initiated when Fuel Tank 5 ruptured, had ignited within about 1 second of the rupture."
(*) It is my belief that improvments regarding transparency was notable since then (e.g. AF447). Kudos on that point: lesson was learned.
(**) It is legitimate to ask the question: after all, there certainly was a lot of tentation for some people/organisations to be interested only in covering their a**es, as is always the case in such events.
In short: My position?
- Transparency is the best cure against skepticism.
- Impartiality is the best course to counter partiality.