India
Today: New Delhi: Saturday, 07 March 2020.
After
IndiGo banned Kunal Kamra from flying the airline, for having heckled a TV
anchor, several other Airlines banned him as well. This happened after Civil
Aviation minister Hardeep Puri put out a tweet asking them to follow IndiGo's
lead. Air India, SpiceJet and GoAir banned Kamra from taking their flights for
an indefinite period. Two other airlines, Vistara and AirAsia India did not ban
Kamra at the time citing due processes.
To
find out if the due process was followed in this case India Today filed a Right
to Information (RTI) application with Air India. We asked, "What is the
process for barring a passenger from flying Air India?" In response, Air
India said, "Process of barring a passenger from flying Air India is done
as per the procedures mentioned in DGCA CAR pertaining to Handling of Unruly
Passengers. Section 6 of the CAR pertains to reporting and handling of Unruly
Passengers on Board the Aircraft."
When
did Air India decide to bar stand-up comedian Kunal Kamra from flying? This was
our second question. In reply, Air India said, "The information sought by
you, is exempted under section 8 (1) (j) of RTI rules 2005".
Section
8 (1) (j) of RTI Act 2005, which has been used by Air India bars sharing
personal information disclosure of which has no relationship to any public
activity or interest.
We
also asked Air India, "When was the complaint received and when was the
action taken? Please provide a certified copy of the file through which action
was taken." Again Air India cited the same Section 8 (1) (j) of RTI Act 2005
and refused to divulge any information.
Why
is Air India reluctant to share details? Has it then not followed due process?
The
rules, quoted by the Air India in response to our RTI, classify disruptive
behaviour by an airline passenger under three heads. They are:
Level
1: Verbal abuse in which the offender can be banned for 3 month
Level
2: Physical abuse that invites a 6 month ban
Level
3: Acts such as a murderous assault creating a life-threatening situation in
which the offender could be given a ban for two years or more.
But
the rule states that to go through this process, the pilot-in-command has to
complain to the airline authorities about it. Then an internal committee probes
it for 10 days and only then decides the seriousness of the passenger's
behaviour. The offender can be banned for an interim 10 days while the
investigation is on. Based on the findings of the investigation, the offender
can be put on a no-fly list maintained by the airline concerned and the DGCA
and followed by other airlines.
In
the case of Kunal Kamra, Pilot Rohit Mateti, who commanded the flight and whose
complaint is mandatory for initiating no-fly list proceedings, has said to the
IndiGo management that Kamra cannot be classified as an unruly passenger on the
basis of his 'unsavoury' behaviour towards the TV Anchor.
According
to the Pilot, this does not qualify for even a level 1 offence. But the ban
imposed for 6 months is punishment for a level 2 fault. The ban was also
initiated without the mandatory report of an internal committee that should
have looked into the matter.
While
IndiGo banned Kunal Kamra for 6 months Air India, SpiceJet and GoAir banned him
for an indefinite period. This again is not in tune with the DGCA norms.
Under
the circumstances would it be wrong to suppose that Air India did not follow
procedure? Are we to suppose that a Minister's tweet should replace laid down
aviation rules followed the world over? It seems that Air India like Indigo,
Spicejet and Go Air is ready to bypass rules in favour of the Minister in
charge of their industry.
.JPG)
.JPG)
