My 2 bobs worth...
Dom should be asking for assurances that:
1) Given that both the Senate inquiry and TSBC report highlighted that the current MoU between CASA & ATSB is hugely flawed and weighted against the principles of Annex 13 (& now Annex 19); (also because of the Senate findings) the MoU is currently under review; can Sanga provide assurances that the re-investigation will not be operating under the auspices of the MoU.
2) Given that both the Senate inquiry; and, in particular the TSBC report highlighted that the ATSB DIP/review process is flawed and highly vulnerable to 3rd party interference (conflict of interest) - can Dom get any written assurances that any of the original reviewers etc. (including the Commissioners) from the ATSB will not, in anyway be involved with the re-investigation.
3) Given the Senate inquiry and the TSBC report (in particular) highlighted that the autonomy of the IIC control (as per Annex 13) over the original investigation was severely eroded - can Dom get assurances that this will not happen again. This is a matter of trust; would it not be advisable that the Chief Commissioner appoint an independant special investigator (AFP officer or Parliamentary delegate), as per s63E of the TSI Act to oversee the integrity of this re investigation.
(a) This appointment would be highly desirable given the original investigation when examined by the Senate Committee highlighted many instances of suspect interference that could possibly be construed as breaches of s24 of the TSI Act.
(b) This appointment would also be advisable given the current outstanding MoP before the Senate Privileges Committee and also suspect interference/manipulation with Senate Inquiry Documents held under Parliamentary Privilege.
4) As the Senate Committee and now the TSBC are, by definition, Directly Interested Parties (DIP) to this re-investigation will they be involved in the DIP process?? If not why not?? And if not would Dom (or any other DIP) in the interests of transparency be allowed to appoint or suggest an
accredited representative to the re-investigation as per Annex 13 5.23 and subject to the conditions outlined in 5.24 to 5.26. Also if the FDR/CVR is miraculously recovered consideration should be given to the recordings being examined by an independent ICAO signatory state (as per 5.1 & 5.23) - with the necessary expertise of course...
I could go on...& on but..
I'll be back!
