Yes UITA they’re plenty of indicators that Beaker and co have gone to a lot of trouble to subvert their obligations to ICAO. And just like FF they’ve now got the obfuscation in the form of notified differences to Annex 13 down to a fine art.
Which means that although Oz is a signatory to ICAO we are merely paying lipservice to the principles and charter of the Chicago Convention 1944. This appears to be so ATSBeaker can pick and choose accidents/incidents that they investigate or notify purely for fiscal or politically sensitive reasons not for the stated reasons of improving and mitigating risk in aviation safety.
Do we really want our once small but proud aviation safety watchdog to go down the FF path of thumbing it’s nose at ICAO?
Anyway back to the thread…and to perhaps lead on from Kharon’s very insightful post.
Although FF ended up truncating their investigation into the Hempel accident (for as yet unexplained reasons) doesn’t change the fact that as a federal law enforcement agency they are obligated under AGIS 2003 or 2011 to manage, document and adhere to a set standard for an investigation (just like with Pel-Air and dare I say Barrier). This ‘standard’ is referred to throughout the CasA enforcement manual and the SOPs for upholding this standard is apparently contained within flying fiend’s invisible ‘Investigator’s Manual’.
Extracts from the enforcement manual:
“11.5.1.1 Initial steps (pg 11-4 enforcement manual)
If the relevant manager considers that there may be evidence of a breach then the first action to be taken is initiation of the CEP (see Chapters 2 and 3). It is only after discussion in this forum that a request for investigation should be made using form 333.
The tasked investigator will conduct an investigation to provide the Manager EPP with a report and recommendations in accordance with the procedures set out in the Investigators Manual which incorporates the Australian Government Investigations Standards. (Reference 11-4 enforcement manual.)
If a prima facie case exists and prosecution is considered, a Brief of Evidence will be compiled and submitted in accordance with the procedures set down in the Investigators Manual. Alternatively, on consideration of the investigator’s report, the Manager EPP may decide that the issue of an AIN is a more appropriate penalty. This will also be discussed as part of the CEP. (Reference 11-4 enforcement manual.)
11.5.2 Reporting The Investigators/Coordinator Investigations make entries on AIRS, on the ASIS database and on the Enforcement Action Register on the Enforcement Action eRooms.” (Note: This would be as per the AGIS 2003.)
“13.6.2 Staff Responsible
Inspectors.
At any time, where inspectors may be unsure of exhibit-handling procedures, advice should be sought from EPP.
Note: Investigators are also responsible for evidence/exhibits and should refer to the Investigators’ Manual. (reference 13-7 enforcement manual).
Note: For procedures for evidence and evidence handling (for Inspectors) refer to section 13 of enforcement manual. Investigators procedures are contained within the Investigators Manual.”
“3.7.1 Enforcement Policy and Practice Branch (EPP)
EPP is the focal point for linking all enforcement action and the Manager EPP is the contact point for the CEP.
In addition to its role in the development of CASA’s enforcement policies and practices, coordinating enforcement action and the conduct of investigations by investigators appointed under Part IIIA of the Civil Aviation Act, EPP also has responsibility for:
������ Issuing infringement notices
������ Administering the Demerit Points Scheme
������ Monitoring the Aviation Self-Reporting Scheme
������ Monitoring enforcement processes including compliance-related processes such as counselling.
While some CASA Part IIIA investigators are based in field offices, they are tasked by the Manager EPP, through the Coordinator, Investigations, to investigate complex matters that could result in a variety of outcomes, including referral to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (CDPP). Because Part IIIA investigators are tasked on a centralised basis, all requests for their investigative assistance must be made to the Manager EPP or the Coordinator Investigations using form 333. Requests for the assistance of a Part IIIA investigator or the conduct of a Part IIIA investigation should only be made on the basis of a prior CEP consultation. (See Sections 3.4, 3.6.2 and 3.8).
Any general questions relating to enforcement matters should be referred to the Manager, EPP.”
“3.9 Requesting the Services of a Part lllA Investigator
The primary purpose of a Part lllA investigation is to establish the facts and circumstances that gave rise to the breach, by the gathering of information and evidence. This needs to be understood when requesting the assistance of a Part lllA investigator.
Requesting the assistance of a Part lllA investigator is NOT an initial step in relation to enforcement. While investigators undertake investigations that may result in referral of briefs to the CDPP, they also help managers in the collecting of information to support other enforcement responses such as administrative action and to support compliance-related action.
Before an investigation is requested, the operational/technical manager must first take part in the CEP to identify what the manager is trying to achieve, and to assess whether the services of an investigator are actually necessary. While investigators in the EPP Branch have specific powers under Part lllA of the Act in relation to entry and seizure of documents and while they may also be more familiar with the gathering of evidence and the investigative process generally, operational inspectors also have the capability to undertake many of the basic tasks of gathering information and evidence. (See Chapters 12, 13, 14 and 15)
Requests for Part lllA investigations are initiated by using form 333 after a CEP Meeting. (See also the flowcharts Coordinated Enforcement Process A and Coordinated Enforcement Process B.”
So questions for the Coroner:
Q/ Are the above requirements and documentation, as per the AGIS, contained within the 6 volumes of information FF passed onto the QPS?
Q/ Where is the CAsA accident investigation report and recommendations from the Part IIIA investigator for this accident?
Q/ Can the Coroner have a copy of the original form 333 (request for a Part IIIA investigator)?
Q/ As the CDPP prosecution against certain managers of Hempels has now been dropped can the Coroner now get a copy of the FF ‘brief of evidence’?
There’s a start…I’m off doing a Sundy Kelpie! 