/ 8 August 2006

Hansie plane ‘had incomplete maintenance records’

The aircraft that carried former national cricket captain Hansie Cronje to his doom had incomplete maintenance records, an inquest into the crash heard on Tuesday.

The inquest is taking place in the High Court in Cape Town.

The only witness called to testify, Civil Aviation Authority senior accident investigator Dr Andre de Kock, confirmed that Airquarius Aviation did not have its own maintenance crew and subcontracted its aircraft maintenance work.

Airquarius Aviation operated the Hawker Siddeley 748 plane that crashed into the Outeniqua mountain range on June 1 2002, killing pilots Willem Meyer and Ian Noakes, as well as Cronje, who had hitched a ride to George aerodrome.

De Kock, questioned on the incomplete maintenance records, said it was possible for the work to be signed off in the office, but not in the ”flight folio”.

”Technically speaking it should be signed off in the flight folio … [in] smaller operators there are closer links between ground crew and pilots,” De Kock explained in response to a question from assessor Bruce Hyde on how pilots could ascertain whether defects were fixed if nothing was contained in the folio.

The MD of Airquarius, Gavin Bramson, was an interested observer in court, flanked by his attorney Carel le Roux, on a watching brief.

On Monday, the inquest, presided over by Cape High Court Judge Siraj Desai, heard that pilot error, faulty equipment and inclement weather all contributed to the fatal crash.

Desai said a decision will be handed down on Monday August 14.

He also ruled in favour of an application by Independent Newspapers to obtain crash photographs, except those that depict the deceased. ”The publishing of these will display a high degree of insensitivity,” said Desai.

Sanef praises judge

The South African National Editors’ Forum (Sanef) has praised Desai for his decision to keep open the inquest.

Sanef said in a statement on Tuesday it deplored the attempt by a state advocate to bar the public and thus the media from the inquest.

It was reported that advocate Willem Tarantal stated it would be in the interests of the administration of justice that the hearing be held in camera. He later conceded his request was based on a desire by the family to have the matter finalised and to subject them to still further media coverage was ”not in the interests of justice”.

”Sanef notes with approval that presiding Judge Siraj Desai told Tarantal that inquest proceedings were as a matter of course open proceedings; indeed open court proceedings are upheld in South Africa’s Constitution as a key requirement for the administration of justice and the judge rightly ruled that the inquest would be open,” the forum said.

Sanef also took issue with Tarantal for stating his request was also based on his presupposition that the media would report insensitively on the proceedings.

”The media’s role is to report the proceedings in such cases without fear or favour and it has a duty not to be swayed by factors such as how members of the family would regard the reports.

”For the same reason it is to be regretted that it is reported that the judge questioned representatives of the South African Broadcasting Corporation and e.tv on how they would report the proceedings and concluded that they would deal sensitively with matters.”

Reaching such a conclusion about the manner in which the proceedings would be reported came perilously close to breaching the principle that such reporting should be without fear or favour and the media’s independence, Sanef said. — Sapa