By DAYO BENSON & BARTHOLOMEW MADUKWE
Captain Dele Ore is the President of Aviation Round  Table. A former pilot with the defunct Nigeria Airways and a lawyer, he was instrumental to the drafting of the nation’s Aviation Act. In this interview, he spoke on effectiveness of the regulatory agency and seeming non-compliance with the provisions of the Aviation Act. Excerpts:

What are the legal issues in the aviation industry, particularly as it affects the regulatory agencies?

The first indication is the fact that we have been audited by the KO in very flying colours. And as far as regulatory agencies are concerned, we could say we have scored much more higher in the region of 97.3. as far as regulatory agency is concerned. And this is confirmed again by the USA FAA Category 1 Certification.

So what are we saying, our regulations are at par with the world standard in line with standard and practices.

*Captain Dele Ore, President of Aviation Round Table, (ART)

So what you are saying is that the regulations are consistent with international standard?

Yes, very much so!

How effective would the regulation agencies are vis-a-vis the law setting them up?

We have very effective regulatory agency and it has been proven. As an indication of that effectiveness, it is that recognition and respect that the whole world is now according Nigeria as a country.

And it is because of this that they selected Africa as the Chairmanship of the General Assembly; and recently, several appointments to head several safety committees in Africa and Indian Ocean.

Of course this respect reflected on the readiness of the KO and the international bodies to come to Nigeria an unrestrained support very very willingly so that we can maintain the pact to move forward.

But let me say something which most people do not know. The regulatory agency as was delivered by the UN Supreme court at the SKJ cannot be responsible for negligence certification with emphasis because the regulatory authority cannot be the policeman of the air. Operators therefore, having been given the regulatory requirement, they don’t expect that big sticks should be kept at their back before they comply.

You can decipher that not only in Nigeria are we talking about Nigeria, it is the global standard. You cannot hold the regulatory agency responsible for any lapses here and there, the operators will be held responsible once the regulatory authority have already laid down the procedure and how to comply and then they set up what you call “Enforcement Mechanism”. That is all that is required. And that is what we have firmly on the ground and we must be very proud of that in Nigeria.

What about the Supervisory ministry, since you said the regulatory agency should take the blame?

This a Nigeria context, we always talk about supervisory ministry. It is not in that content. I always think that we should have a Ministry of Aviation that will set out policies. Not a ministry of Aviation that will be interfering with safety and economic regulations. Regulations, economy and safety should start and end with the regulatory authority without any undue interference. That is what the Aviation Act says. The Aviation only empowers the ministry to set out policies.

Are you then saying that the ministry should be blamed for negligence certification?

No! We should do what the Aviation Act says we should do, which is what we should ensure. We will continue to carry on and let the regulatory agency do its work without undue interference.

We have achieved that before, under the honourable minister, Omotoba.

As a former pilot with Nigeria Airways and a lawyer, what advice would you give to the National Assembly on this issue?

What advice can we give when they already have their own consultants? But the fact remains that they should ensure and understand the provisions of our regulations and also not forget that the Civil Aviation Industry is a dynamic industry that is always moving according to technology. Our National Assembly should therefore use the best people on particular issues.

Are you suggesting a review of the Aviation Act, in view of the present challenge?

The Act is a very perfect document. Let us continue to use the provisions of the Act because the Act is a perfect document but we are not following the provisions of the Act.

On the issue of compensation for the victims onboard and those on ground too, are the victims on ground also covered by the Aviation Law on compensation?

If something happened to a person on the ground who did not buy a ticket to fly, the compensation also covers third party on ground. So it is quite clear that those on ground are covered just like those onboard. Those on ground did not go to the airport; it was a missile to their home. So the third parties on ground, on the surface, are fully covered.