Case against CAAN chief
 

The government is perfectly entitled to remove the chief of the Civil Aviation Authority of Nepal (CAAN) by stepping on the Nepal Civil Aviation Authority Act. Section 19 of the Act says the term of the CAAN director general shall be four years but if the government so desires it can terminate the DG’s contract at any time. Thus the Minister for Tourism and Civil Aviation Jitendra Narayan Dev has the right to seek clarification, on any issue, from CAAN Director General Sanjeev Gautam, and if the clarification is not satisfactory, to dismiss him. Yet there has to be a good reason to sack someone holding such a vital position. It is true that Gautam’s tenure so far, and he has been in the job for little over two years, has had its downsides. Perhaps he could have done more to hurry up the long-delayed project of upgrading Tribhuvan International Airport (TIA). Perhaps he could have dealt better with fuel spillage at TIA from a Nepal Airlines aircraft earlier this year. Yet none of these reasons are sufficient for the drastic step of sacking Gautam mid-term. This is why suspicions of foul play have again been raised. 

The post of CAAN Director General is considered extremely lucrative and there have over the years been bitter political battles over it. According to CAAN sources Republica talked to, the real reason behind the recent effort to remove Gautam is to appoint Suresh Acharya, a secretary at the ministry, in his stead. Acharya has long been angling for the job and has been actively lobbying for it with the ruling parties. Yet it would be dangerous to remove Gautam right now, even if he is guilty of some of the charges that have been leveled against him. For instance, Minister Dev has sought clarification from Gautam as to why CAAN ended its contract with a Spanish company, Constructora San Jose S.A, for the upgrade of TIA. Everyone knows that the contract with San Jose had to be annulled after the company repeatedly missed its deadlines. So when the company filed a case against CAAN, first at the Kathmandu District Court, then at a Spanish court, and finally at the Singapore International Arbitration Center, the Nepali civil aviation regulator easily won the case each time. 

But now, with Minister Dev seeking clarification from Gautam as to why the contract with San Jose had to be cancelled, “resulting in chaos at TIA”, the hand of San Jose is again strengthened, because it appears that the fault was on CAAN’s part and not San Jose’s. Earlier, the Singapore arbitration center had dismissed the company’s claim, but now it will have a valid ground to accept the case. And if CAAN loses the case, it could have to pay up to Rs 6 billion to San Jose. Why would a Nepali minister seek clarification from a government employee in a way that directly benefits a foreign company, a company which was booted out of Nepal after failing on a vital responsibility? And why would the minister saddle the country with such a big financial burden? Whether Gautam stays or goes, Nepali people deserve a credible answer on the whole affair from the minister of civil aviation. 

 
• spanish flu
 
• editorial
 
• caan