Why planes must have two pilots and warning systems

After much elaborate drama, vehement opposition, and toing and froing, the 20th Amendment to the Constitution has been passed with a resounding majority in Parliament. The contents of this amendment and the seismic shift it creates to our governance system reminds me of a story from early this year, before global headlines had begun to be dominated by Covid-19 – namely, the tragic helicopter crash on 26 January in Los Angeles which caused the death of basketball legend Kobe Bryant and his daughter. The National Transport Safety Board (NTSB) of the US has come up with a 1,700-page report on the crash. While it provides no final conclusion, many aviation experts believe the pilot got disoriented, confused the pitch altitude, and thought he was ascending when he was descending. This is not a novel phenomenon in the field of aviation and is always a possibility as you are in the air without visual references. At least, that was the reasoning at surface level. But when we go a little in depth, there are two main factors highlighted by experts and the report (1).

1. The helicopter Kobe Bryant flew (Sikorsky-S76B) is operationally a hi-tech machine with a sophisticated flight-deck for two pilots. However, on this unfortunate day, it was operated by only one pilot. According to NTSB guidelines, any helicopter that carries more than five passengers must be a dual pilot operation, but in this case, nine innocent passengers died in the crash. A guideline for dual pilot operations was imposed post the investigations of a similar crash in the Gulf of Mexico in 2004. The simple reason to have a dual pilot operation is simply a check and balance mechanism to minimise the probability of human error in decision-making in flight.
2. The second reason was that the helicopter that hit the ground did not have a Terrain Avoidance and Warning System (TAWS) installed.

A dual pilot operation and installing a TAWS are simply just guidelines. Operating a flight without following those guidelines were not illegal, but the cost of not following the guidelines was proven to be human life. When I think about Sri Lanka’s Constitution and the proposed constitutional reforms which affect the economy and our structure of governance, I think of a helicopter operation and the tragic crash Kobe Bryant had to face. Checks and balances and processes are in place for a reason, and till things go wrong, we may not see the importance of their presence. In Sri Lanka’s context, our pilot is the policymaking unit and the 21 million population are the passengers who have to be safe onboard and flown to the destination of prosperity in their own lives. So we have to have systems in place where the aeroplane can be landed safely, even if key decision-makers in the cockpit get disoriented. The discussion on the 20th Amendment has been evaluated in that spirit, in particular from an economic perspective. That is why the checks and balances are vital and a mechanism has to be established to minimise the probability of human error, similar to the dual pilot model and the TAWS system. Otherwise, it is natural that in a cloud of “political power”, individuals may disconnect with the ground reality and make decisions to accelerate the momentum in the wrong direction. Our economy is already at a critical stage where we can’t afford to make any miscalculations. For example, there has been a rise in bond yields in secondary market bonds of Sri Lanka following the announcement of the changes in the 20th Amendment. One possibility for this could be the uncertainties created by the 20th Amendment with regard to checks and balances for the broader economy. The executive powers vested with the President have to be looked at in the spirit of “responsibility”. Political power provides the decision-making ability, and yet we should not underestimate the “responsibility” factor that is interconnected with power, which may impact millions of lives. What do we do with political power franchised by the people to develop their economies? This is the vital question. The three arms of the executive, legislature, and judiciary are the governance equivalents of a dual pilot and the TAWS safety net: The “executive” as the chief pilot and “legislature”, lead by the Prime Minister, as the core pilot have to work hand in hand in ensuring that there are measures to recheck whether we do the right thing. Then there has to be an independent judiciary to resolve any conflict. If Sri Lanka is to prosper, it is essential that we protect these checks and balances. It has been proven multiple times in Sri Lanka and across the world that when citizens are empowered to make their own decisions and choices, the chances for success and prosperity are greater. A single government trying to understand the needs and aspirations, motivations, behaviours, lifestyles, etc. of 21 million people is simply impossible. That is why the structure has to be organised in a way where people are empowered to make their own economic decisions and competition has to be in place along with a level playing field in order to ensure that hard work is incentivised and rewarded. All constitutional reforms have to be in the view of what is in it for people to make their own choices and how it affects the creation of a level playing field. As highlighted in this column less than a month ago on 27 September, the importance of the Auditor General having the ability to audit state-owned enterprises (SOEs) has to be appreciated. However, just the powers for the Auditor General will not ensure SOE governance as the corruption in SOEs is systemic and incredibly pervasive. The Government has to consider greater reform and should consider steps such as listing strategic SOEs at the Colombo Stock Exchange (CSE) and establishing a “Temasek model” for the governance of all SOEs. The general Sri Lankan sentiment is that merely appointing a political leader or moving a constitutional reform would provide solutions to all problems. When the amendments were brought to increase female representation at local government level, many were of the opinion that it would solve the problem of female underrepresentation. Unfortunately, what happened in reality was far different, with some women contesting elections simply to enable their husbands to effectively take over once elected. It is required that Sri Lankan political leadership initiates a comprehensive economic reform plan if we are to have any hope of development. What we do with the “powers” we have in hand is more important than what “powers” we install in one single position. In exercising power, we need a system to make sure we exercise it in the right way. Sri Lankans’ experience in the economic context over time is that the powers granted by people have not been utilised for the right objectives, and in many cases, the same power they have provided have limited people’s own right and freedom to enjoy a prosperous economic life. After the 20th Amendment, with new powers installed, “economic freedom” is a concept that we can start building into our country. It has been shown that countries with higher economic freedom, where people are provided with the independence and opportunity to earn higher incomes, generally experience a higher quality of life. Poverty levels reduce and the most vulnerable sections of society are able to have economic security. Per capita income and economic freedom quartile Sri Lanka has been ranked 83rd on the Economic Freedom Index and we have a long way to go. Let's hope that with checks and balances and executive powers, Sri Lanka will establish systems and guidelines such as dual pilot systems in aviation and TAWS in the form of institutions to incentivise people to work harder and become prosperous, so that we can prosper as a country. (The writer is the Chief Operating Officer of Advocata Institute. He can be contacted via dhananath@advocata.org. The opinions expressed are the author’s own views. They may not necessarily reflect the views of the Advocata Institute or anyone affiliated with the institute)