Brazilians Sentence American Pilots to Prison: Not in Best Interests of Safety
In many countries, criminal prosecution of those involved in aviation accidents is the rule, not the exception. For example, the French courts began a criminal investigation almost immediately after the crash of Air France Flight 447. The Indonesian legal system convicted a Garuda Airlines 737 pilot of negligence and sentenced him to two years in prison following a 2007 crash in Jakarta. And a French court convicted a US mechanic of involuntary manslaughter for causing the July 2000 crash of the Air France Concorde. The mechanic got 15 months.
This week a Brazilian court convicted two American pilots of negligence for their role in the midair collision involving a Embraer Legacy and a Gol Airlines 737 over the jungles of Brazil in 2006. That court handed each pilot a four year suspended jail sentence..jpg)
Why are foreign courts so quick to turn aviation accidents into criminal cases?
Simple. The US legal system focuses on requiring those responsible for a crash to compensate their victims. When that happens, victims feel that, to some extent, justice has been served. The legal systems of many other countries, however, do not really concern themselves with compensating victims. Thus, to make things right, someone must be punished criminally and handed a jail sentence. Even if it was “just an accident.”
Either system may serve the interests of "justice." But the US system better serves the interests of safety. By taking the profit out of carelessness, it gives the airlines a monetary incentive to be safe. The systems of other countries, however, actually impede the interests of safety. That's because criminal prosecutions cause those involved in aviation accident investigations to "clam up" for fear of ending up in jail. That makes it only more difficult to determine the cause of an aviation accident and, most importantly, to bring about the changes necessary to prevent similar accidents from happening again in the future.
With due respect sir...this is a very judgmental piece of writing. "the American system is better' and 'serves the interest of safety' are very relative statements (I won't be surprised if they are coming from here in America). The Laws of every nation/state reflect the culture and social norms of the land. The U.S. is basically an individualistic /materialistic society and hence everything here is measured in monetary terms. Money will make a manufacturer/operator take safer precautions in the future and money will make somebody forget their loss eh? the French and Brazilians may punish somebody for 'negligence' or 'criminal negligence' to bring closure to the relatives of victims that somebody was held accountable for the loss of their near and dear ones(Im not saying theirs is the perfect approach). Maybe in their culture a few thousand dollars don't do much to heal another's sorrow. Lastly, aviation safety doesn't come from either monetary compensations or sending someone to jail, it arises from learning from the causes and making sure that any chance of them happening again is removed as much as possible.
"Lastly, aviation safety doesn't come from either monetary compensations or sending someone to jail, it arises from learning from the causes and making sure that any chance of them happening again is removed as much as possible."
I agree. Most airline accidents can be traced back to corporate short-cuts that place profit over safety. We know that. The question is how to make sure they don't happen again. The best way is to take the profit motive out of the short cuts. Compensating the victims for the harm they have suffered does exactly that.