Yemenia / French Judicial Enquiry
As usual, when the French judicial process is evoked in the aftermath of an aviation-related accident/incident, there are a lot of misunderstandings and misconceptions… In this particular case relating to the 2009 Yemenia crash, you may want to take into consideration the following elements:
1/ The French BEA is only a “third party” in this investigation that concerns the crash of a Yemeni plane in the Comoro Islands.
2/ The French justice is also deemed to be competent, according to international legal standards, because many crash victims were French residents.
3/ The –very- slow progress of the Yemeni enquiry has been a frustration for the victims’ relatives, the French justice and the BEA, whose repeated offers to help were turned down. The BEA and the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs have publicly expressed their dissatisfaction since 2011, talking openly about “a distinct lack of cooperation” from the Comorian authorities.
4/ The French legal system operates in a very different way than its Anglo-Saxon counterparts: Any work-related accident/incident that causes death or serious bodily harm will automatically trigger a judicial enquiry, which needs to be motivated.
5/ In this particular case, the judicial enquiry is motivated on the grounds of “Homicide Involontaire” (“Involuntary –accidental- manslaughter”), a legal notion quite distinct from the Anglo-Saxon “manslaughter”, under its various acceptations (Premeditated, voluntary and accidental”). Quite logically, a similar enquiry is on-going in the case of AF 447, which a member evoked earlier on this thread.
6/ An enquiry for “homicide involontaire” can be brought against an individual (a drunk driver, responsible for a deadly accident, for example) or a corporate entity when the later entity could be entirely or in part responsible for a given accident. In this particular case, the French authorities will focus on areas of potential negligence from Yemenia, be it the training of their pilots, their qualifications or the quality of Yemenia’s maintenance programme.
7/ The “mise en examen” (“criminal indictement”) of Yemenia –and NOT the Captain or the FO- is the logical next step. It’s a legal technicality that gives all parties access to the various components of the French enquiry: The BEA conclusions, the conclusions of the police enquiry, the SAFA reports relating to Yemania and the third party reports that may have been commissioned, as well as any “amici curiae” communications that it deems to be relevant.
Nothing could be further from the truth than describing the course of French justice as an attempt to “criminalise” the actions of the crew. Similarly, the French Justice or the BEA cannot be held responsible for the delay in the production of the Comorian report. It’s fair to say that they have brought as much pressure to bear on the Comorian authorities as diplomatically possible.
I hope this has somewhat clarified the situation,
Last edited by Agnostique75; 1st Feb 2014 at 22:27.