Editorial 2: India needs a sincere aircraft accident investigation

Context

India does not lack the talent or the technical capability to investigate air accidents; what it truly lacks is the institutional courage to speak the truth.

Introduction

In a country where every life lost in an aircraft accident should result in Despite promises of justice, transparency, and reform, India’s system appears designed to obscure the truth. The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), though statutory on paper, is not truly independent. It operates under the Ministry of Civil Aviation (MoCA), which also regulates airlines and appoints AAIB and DGCA leadership, creating a clear conflict of interest. Unlike railway accidents, where an independent Commissioner of Railway Safety leads inquiries, aviation investigations remain under the control of those they are meant to scrutinize

Stop the firefighting

• Accident Severity: The June 12, 2025 Ahmedabad accident was not a minor operational issue—it was a serious aircraft accident and should be treated as a wake-up call for aviation safety in India.
• Safety Framework Gap: India's aviation safety framework must be questioned in light of its rapid sectoral growth.
• Recent Incidents: Notable safety failures include:
  • Helicopter crashes – indicating gaps in rotorcraft operations.
  • Flying school accidents – reflecting issues in pilot training standards.
  • A weather-related incident involving a Delhi–Srinagar IndiGo flight in May 2025 – highlighting deficiencies in weather preparedness.
  • Ground handling lapses, such as the cancellation of Çelebi Aviation's permit – raising serious airport security concerns.
• Systemic Weakness: These events are not isolated, but reveal deeper structural flaws in India’s aviation safety ecosystem.
• Risk Management: Are we proactively identifying risks, or simply reacting after failures?
• Prevention vs Reaction: Firefighting is unsustainable; India needs a preventive aviation safety system rather than one focused solely on crisis management.
• Investigative Scope: The high-level committee investigating the Air India AI171 crash must go beyond reviewing a single accident.
• Policy Outdated: India’s aviation sector has outgrown the existing National Civil Aviation Policy (NCAP).
• NCAP Reform: A comprehensive overhaul of the NCAP is required, making safety a foundational principle in all aviation policy and regulatory decisions.
• Global Responsibility: Embedding safety at every level is how India can prepare to responsibly manage its role as one of the world’s largest aviation markets.

Historical Neglect of Honest Reviews

• The Air Marshal J.K. Seth Committee Report (1997) remains India’s most honest and comprehensive reviewof aviation safety.
• It exposed systemic flaws including:
  • Fragmented oversight
  • Lack of institutional independence
  • Inadequate training and resources
  • Regulatory capture
• However, the report was quietly buried because it revealed uncomfortable truths.
• New investigative committees must confront these unresolved issues and avoid superficial reviews that are shelved without action.

Examples of Investigative Contradictions

Misuse of AAIB Reports

• The Aircraft (Investigation of Accidents and Incidents) Rules, 2017 clearly state that investigations are for preventing future accidents, not assigning blame.
• Yet, law enforcement and courts often treat the AAIB’s findings as legally binding, despite their technical scopebeing non-judicial.
• Police and courts, lacking aviation expertise, use AAIB reports to assign conclusive guilt, often without proper context.
• This leads to the truth being lost, and reports being misinterpreted for legal or punitive purposes.

Convenient Blame: The Pilot as Scapegoat

• Investigators and courts often default to blaming the pilot:
  • This is legally simple and expedites insurance payouts.
  • It shields other actors like airlines, maintenance teams, and air traffic controllers from scrutiny.
• The label of “pilot error” becomes a convenient conclusion, even in cases where the system as a whole failed.
• In effect, the deceased pilot becomes the scapegoat, and deeper accountability is avoided.

Institutional Failures and Structural Control

Data vs Reality

Urgent Reforms for Aviation Safety in India

• Structural Independence: Transfer the AAIB (Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau) and DGCA (Directorate General of Civil Aviation) to an independent statutory body that reports directly to Parliament, ensuring autonomy and credibility in investigations.
• End Parallel Committees: Discontinue the practice of forming ad hoc or parallel investigative committees that bypass or dilute the role of official investigative agencies, preserving the integrity of due process.
• Legal Safeguards for AAIB Reports: Enact laws to prevent the misuse of AAIB reports in criminal trials, unless independently validated by experts. This will protect the technical scope of safety investigations and uphold due legal process.
• Reform Rule 19(3) of Aircraft Rules, 1937: Amend the provision that penalizes pilots for any mistake. Introduce a genuine no-blame culture, ensuring pilots are protected unless gross negligence is clearly established.
• Independent Ombudsman: Appoint an external ombudsman to audit and review how aviation accident reports are prepared, processed, and acted upon. This will introduce an accountability mechanism free from internal bias.

Conclusion

India does not lack talent or the technical tools required to investigate aircraft accidents. What it truly lacks is the institutional courage to confront and reveal the truth. This is the core of the writer’s plea: to conduct an honest and sincere investigation into such accidents—one that reflects a commitment to truth and the value of human life over maintaining a superficial image. Let this be the legacy India offers—not just for the lives lost in the skies, but also for those lost in the silence that follows.