Taiwan will not prosecute SQ 006 pilots

[aviator_38]

From the Singapore Straits Times:
-------

Taiwan will not prosecute SQ 006 pilots


TAIPEI -- Taiwan will not prosecute three Singapore Airlines pilots who tried to take off on the wrong runway and crashed Los Angeles-bound jetliner SQ 006 two years ago, killing 83 people, a chief prosecutor said on Friday.

Prosecutors decided not to indict the pilots because the men had a good safety record before the Oct 2000 crash, and the accident was chiefly caused by low visibility created by an approaching typhoon, chief prosecutor Chiang Kuei-chang told The Associated Press.

'At the time of the crash, there was heavy wind and rain brought by the typhoon and that hindered the visibility,' the prosecutor told the AP by phone.

Mr Chiang added that the airline has offered a public apology and has agreed to compensate the victims.

But he said that prosecutors decided that the pilot and co-pilot should not be allowed to fly to Taiwan in the next 12 months.

However, the third pilot can fly to the island because he was not
responsible for the take-off, he said.

The three pilots were flight commander Capt Foong Chee Kong, a Malaysian, and Singaporean co-pilots Latif Cyrano and Ng Kheng Leng.

Last April, Taiwanese investigators issued a final crash report that listed pilot mistakes and stormy weather as the chief probable causes of the crash.

The jumbo jet took off on a runway that was partially closed for repairs.
The plane slammed into huge mechanical shovels and construction debris before bursting into flames.

Singaporean officials complained that Taiwanese investigators focused too much on pilot errors and glossed over problems at the airport, such as poorly marked runways and other safety lapses.

Pilot groups criticised the Taiwanese prosecutors for considering whether the pilots should be punished.

Investigators and pilot unions traditionally oppose the prosecution of pilots in accidents that were not caused by gross negligence, such as flying while intoxicated. They say that prosecuting pilots could discourage them from cooperating with crash investigations. -- AP


Cheers

[downfourgreen]

Are they still flying for SIA?

[Centaurus]

Comforting to know that typhoons and poor visibility causes crashes and not pilots.

[Localiser Green]

It was always my understanding that the weather is never the cause of an aircraft accident, it is only a misjudgement of the weather which causes the accident.

Blaming the weather is a bit like blaming the ground after you've crashed into it...

[Rockhound]

So, Loc Green, are you saying that, if an aircraft goes down after being caught in a microburst and suffering excessive wind shear during an approach, this would be ascribed to misjudgment of the weather by the pilot and not the weather itself?
Rockhound

[Four Seven Eleven]

I have no doubt that it would be possible to find "pilot errors" on any flight . Only some errors precede accidents. (I am on a day off, and already I have made about three hundred errors - ranging from misreading a tape measure -I am doing some plastering - to not turning on the kettle. No-one died.)

I do not know enough about SQ006 to comment on the specifics, however:

1) It is dangerous to consider prosecutions for accidents.
2) No pilot deliberately causes an accident. (Leaving aside suicides etc.)
3) Intent is generally accepted as an essential element in any prosecution of a crime.
4) In the absence of intent, gross negligence or indifference may be enough.
5) In the absence of evidence of anything other than a tragic series of mistakes (not solely by the SQ006 crew), the Taiwanese authorities are to be congratulated for their decision.
6) Prosecution of aircrew should be the exception, rather than the rule, and only be considered where there is evidence of either intent or gross negligence.

[Localiser Green]

Rockhound,

Sudden, largely unpredictable and severe weather conditions like microbursts would be an exception to that rule, obviously.

That is not what happened in this case. But by the same token you cannot say that SQ006 and accidents such as the Tenerife Pan Am / KLM were caused by the weather, clearly human factors were also involved.

I recall the Delta Tristar (into DFW) which was lost to a microburst and windshear. In this case human factors were also largely considered as contributing causes. The pilots, and of course Air Traffic Control, were criticised for allowing the aircraft to proceed on the basis of deteriorating weather conditions.

But of course I take your point, some unusual weather conditions are pretty much impossible to categorise as human error.

[Four Seven Eleven]

Have to agree with Loc Green here.

Provided that the weather is either forecast or apparent, then it should be factored in to any decision making process. (Accuracy of forecasts or other info becomes a factor here.)

For example: I am a relatively low hours VFR pilot. MY decision making 'model' is simple: any bad weather and I don't go.

This is obviously not an option for a B744 crew, but they also have their limits. The decision to go or not to go is a judgement call, based upon knowledge, experience and any regulations and company SOPs.

I just want to caution against equating a bad judgement call with "guilt". (Once again, I do not know enough about SQ006 to comment. My comments are to be taken as a generalisation.)

[SQ6 Survivor]

Congratulated nothing!
It seems to me that all the Taiwanese were interested in doing with this threat of prosecution was to divert attention away from the atrocious conditions at CKS and absolve themselves of any responsibility. And it worked -- for nearly two years they repeatedly switched media attention back to the pilots. And it's a despicable game the Taiwanese authorities have played before in other accidents.

It was clear from the start that the pilots were not criminally negligent in this case and they did not intentionally crash the plane. They are human and humans make mistakes. At the end of the day pilots Foong, Cyrano and Ng have suffered enough and will have to live with the fact that their mistake was ultimately responsible for causing the death of 83 men, women and children and injuring and disfiguring 40 survivors. That's punishment enough for anyone.

[Semaphore Sam]

Although the threat of prosecution may well have been a diversion, with the aim of deflecting criticism of their long-time safety lapse of painting & lighting a taxiway as a runway, at least they have stopped their legal stupidity.

What ever happened to the Swissair pilots prosecuted by the Greeks, after they slid off the Athens runway, into a ditch, because of Greek negligence in not removing rubber deposits in a timely manner? I still haven't heard. It seems that in Greece, as opposed to Taipei, someone always gets it in the end!

[Taildragger67]

The United Evening News newspaper in Taiwan says that the Taoyuan Prosecutor's Office has delayed the indictments for the PIC and F/O for three years.

[aviator_38]

And the latest updated and more comprehensive report,stating the reasons for nonprosecution , in :

http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/primenews/story/0,1870,126136,00.html


Taiwan will not prosecute SQ 006 pilots

Prosecutor says they are excellent pilots who had expressed their sympathies to victims' families through newspaper ads
By Lawrence Chung
15 June 2002
STRAITS TIMES TAIWAN BUREAU

TAIWAN'S judicial authorities yesterday decided not to prosecute the three pilots of SQ006, although finding them in part negligent in the crash that killed 83 people two years ago.

Only one pilot is completely in the clear - First Officer Ng Kheng Leng - who was not at the controls on the night of the crash.
As for Captain Foong Chee Kong and First Officer Latiff Cyrano, they were found negligent for turning into the wrong runway, but jailing them was not the right solution, said the authorities.
Instead, prosecution against them has been suspended for three years, said Mr Chiang Kuei-chang, chief of the review department of the Taoyuan Prosecutors' Office.

If they commit any crimes in Taiwanese jurisdiction in that time, the authorities can still prosecute them.

Also, the two of them will be banned from flying civilian jetliners to Taiwan for a year, said Mr Chiang.

'The pilot and co-pilot must take responsibility for mistakenly entering the wrong runway,' he said.

But prosecution was suspended because they were excellent pilots with above average flying skills, and had expressed their sympathies to the victims' families in newspaper advertisements in three local newspapers last Friday. And they had offered to perform community service in Singapore.

Also, the incident occurred on a stormy night with low visibility. The Los Angeles-bound Boeing 747-400, carrying 179 people, tried to take off on a closed runway from Taiwan's Chiang Kai-shek International Airport during a typhoon on Oct 31, 2000.
Investigations into possible professional negligence on the part of the pilots started after Taiwan's Aviation Safety Council blamed the crash on the pilots and bad weather in its final report on April 26.

Singapore's Ministry of Transport disputed the conclusions, citing a combination of factors, including deficiencies at Taiwan's airport.
No action will be taken against the airport or air- traffic controllers, because deficiencies at the airport were due to budget constraints and were beyond their control, said Prosecutor Chiang Yuan-chen.

The decision not to prosecute the pilots was welcomed by aviation officials and families of the victims.

Mr Abram Huang, deputy director of Taiwan's Civil Aeronautics Administration, found the decision 'nicely made' as 'it takes into account the views of all parties'.

Mr Hsu Chao-peng, whose brother and sister-in-law were killed in the crash, said: 'After all, the pilots did not want to kill anyone. It's also their lives they were risking, and prosecuting them would not be appropriate.'

Singapore Airlines and the Air Line Pilots Association Singapore (Alpa-S) also welcomed the move not to prosecute the pilots of SQ 006.

An Alpa-S spokesman said the association was relieved and encouraged especially as the crew involved had, at all times, cooperated fully with the authorities.

A spokesman for MOT said 'both sides should put the issue behind us and move on'.




Cheers

[smiths]

Send these men back to the flight deck!

[Gladiator]

Singapore government, SIA, ALPA-S and all SIA pilots should thank ALPA (US) and most probably the US government for applying pressure on the Taiwanese authorities to achieve the outcome in hand. Singapore is lucky the United States has close relations with Taiwan.

Original post on PPRuNe, July 2001

ALPA (US) and SQ006 Flight Crew Release
In October 2000, the Taiwanese government detained the flight crew of Singapore Airlines Flight SQ006 after being involved in a fatal accident at Taipei-Chang Kai Shek Airport.

IFALPA and its member unions called for the crew's release, which the Taiwanese government ignored. At the direction of ALPA's(US)president, Capt. Duane Woerth, Capt. Dennis Dolan (ALPA's IFALPA representative) and the government Affairs Department weighed in with members of the US Congress who were friendly to Taiwan as well as with the lobbying firms that represent Taiwan's interests in Washington, D.C.
ALPA and others explained the dangerous precedent set in not releasing the flight crew and the possible consequences. As a result, Taiwan relented and released the crew, who returned to Singapore.

Recently ALPA (US) wrote to the Ministers of Justice and Transportation urging them not to criminally prosecute the pilots, unless they find proof of gross negligence or wilful misconduct.