Statement from the ministry of transport that there are high chances for some grounded Antonov aircraft to resume airlift operations in the country soon is baffling.
This comes less than one month after the South Sudan Civil Aviation Authority (SSCA) banned all the Antonov planes operating in the country due to safety concerns linked to substandard maintenance.
The order came days after an Antonov cargo plane, belonging to Optimum Antonov 26, crashed in Gondokoro a few minutes after taking off from Juba International Airport.
All five crew members perished.
The planes that were grounded were mostly Antonov [aircraft], including AN-26, AN-24, 28, and 30, as well as AN-SO Hawkers and HS-748 except for the UN-run Antonovs.
But Madut Biar Yiel said some of those grounded planes would soon resume their normal duties in the country after presenting their well-deserved documents from recognised maintenance companies.
It was a surprising announcement from the ministry of transport that the banned Antonov plans would soon resume operation. However, when the government suspended the operation of the Antonov planes in November, it directed all those planes to return to their places of origin for maintenance. It was only the United Nations Antonov planes that were allowed to continue operating. The question is when those planes fly out of the country for maintenance that would qualify them to present “well-deserved documents from recognised maintenance companies.”
During the ban, the South Sudan Civil Aviation Authority stated that the majority of those planes had not flown back to the country for regular maintenance since their arrival.Some of them have spent more than 10 years in the country without maintenance, which has been the cause of the rampant accidents. When did they go for maintenance? These are some of the questions that the public needs to hear from the ministry of transport. Second, what was the outcome of the recent plane crash investigation?
People need to be assured of the safety of those planes, and the government needs to hold the airlines’ operators accountable in the future in case of an accident. People have perished several times in plane accidents like chicken without any compensation being made to the families of the victims.
It seems there is no firm law that talks about compensation after the death of life of a passenger.
It would be understandable if the person is a military member and dies on-duty in a military aircraft. In this case, the family may not demand compensation. But if it’s a commercial aircraft, the company has to compensate the victims, as well as cover the medical expenses for the survivors.
We do understand that the ban has caused some economic impact on the airlines’ operators, but their resumption should not be a means to salvage the economic losses at the expense of the citizens’ lives.