One of the most compelling aspects that need addressing is the psychological factor which seems to have eluded the key players in mitigating the problem. It is incontrovertible that travelling, particularly by air, induces stress and emotional responses.
by Dr. Ruwantissa Abeyratne
Writing from Montreal
As some countries are gradually easing restrictions with cautious optimism, and airlines are slowly introducing services (though not without some trepidation), a disturbing social trend is emerging on the ground, fuelled by the frustration of social groups and communities around the world. A recently published research paper by Queen Mary University of London has highlighted growing unrest and protestations on the ground resulting from lockdowns in response to COVID-19 in Africa. Paul Jordan of the University of London writes: “The results show that the probability of riots, violence against civilians, food-related conflicts, and food looting has increased since lockdowns”. This is one dimension of revolt by the public against socio-economic stress caused by the pandemic.
Another disturbing social dimension is the resurgence of protestation against social distancing and the mandatory requirement of facial covering and prohibition of social gathering and closeness which is having a deleterious social effect in several jurisdictions. Microsoft News reports about the city of Melbourne in Victoria, Australia: “the city has become a confounding matrix of hefty fines for disobedience, minor exceptions for everything from romantic partners to home building, and endless versions of the question: So, wait, can I ____? Restaurant owners are wondering about food delivery after an 8 p.m. curfew began …. Teenagers are asking if their boyfriends and girlfriends count as essential partners. Can animal shelter volunteers walk dogs at night? Are house cleaners essential for those struggling with their mental health? Can the Covid-tested exercise outdoors?” BBC news records that some in Melbourne have assaulted police and the police in return have had to break down windows of cars of passengers who refused to cooperate with information with the police of Victoria.
It is incontrovertible that airline passengers would be under similar stress as, theoretically at least, the environment in the aircraft is a high risk area. Global News recorded in February 2020 that A 28-year-old man who falsely claimed he had coronavirus, caused a Toronto-to-Jamaica WestJet flight to return to the airport. The reason given by the miscreant was that he wanted to have a video go viral. In June 2020 CBC News reported that for the second time in just over a week RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) were called to Winnipeg airport because of person refusing to wear a facial covering.
Copious guidelines have been issued by both the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the International Air Transport Association (IATA) on how safety measures against the virus could be applied by the airlines. This does not detract from the possibility of passengers becoming unruly in apprehension of or on reacting to fears prompted by the pandemic. Travel Pulse in March 2020 reported that “a United Airlines flight traveling from Colorado ski country to Newark, New Jersey was diverted to Denver… after a group of passengers became disruptive because they were seated next to someone who was coughing and sneezing amid the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak”.
One of the most compelling aspects that need addressing is the psychological factor which seems to have eluded the key players in mitigating the problem. It is incontrovertible that travelling, particularly by air, induces stress and emotional responses. This starts at the airport and only ends when the journey is over and the passenger leaves the airport on arrival at the destination. An article published in the British Journal of Psychiatry in 1987 states: “travelling and air travel in particular may cause depression, anxiety, nervous attacks, and even madness in vulnerable people”. Another article published in Aviation and Space Environmental Medicine in 2014 says: “even experienced travelers, apparently, experience “emotional pressure” while they are in airplanes, trains, or cruises. This might be due to a wide range of emotional factors including leaving beloved relatives, anxiety and concerns as to the safety of the travel, lack of attachments, concerns as to break of routines, fear of attachments to strangers, and seemingly small issues such as quality of foods or losing baggage”.
There is of course the Tokyo Convention of 1963 by way of a multilateral treaty bu. However, while it is true that Article 1 of the Tokyo Convention refers inter alia to an offence committed against the safety of persons on board it remains mere equivocation as it expressly addresses assaults on crew members as an offence and avoids giving the same consideration to passengers. This begs the legal question arising from the maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius - when one or more things of a class are expressly mentioned others of the same class are excluded – and as a first measure, there must be clarification of the term “safety of persons and property on board” in Article 1 of the Tokyo Convention. Thankfully, The Protocol to the Tokyo Convention (of 2014) which corrects this lapse entered into force in January 2020. Secondly, ICAO should treat the issue of the unruly or disruptive passenger not only as a legal issue but as an air transport issue.
One of the best pieces of literature in this context is IATA’s Manual on the Guidance on Unruly Passenger Prevention and Management . This Manual has more clarity than the exiting treaties on the subject in that it provides that any person who commits on board a civil aircraft (a) assault, intimidation or threat, whether physical or verbal, against another person; (b) intentionally causing damage to, or destruction of, property; (c) consuming alcoholic beverages or drugs resulting in intoxication, commits an offence Some of the preventive management measures IATA recommends to airlines are: ensuring a smooth operation: diffusing the frustration that occurs over long waiting lines, the flight being overbooked, delays, lack of information, technical deficiencies; providing training for frontline employees (ground staff, cabin crew, flight crew) to learn how to recognize the early signs of potentially unruly behavior to ensure that those who are in direct contact with passengers have acquired necessary verbal and de-escalation skills to handle these types of situations; and imparting enhanced customer service skills to frontline staff which would help them manage rude and aggressive passengers and thus defuse a volatile situation.
Improving services both at the airport and in the aircraft cabin would make the passenger feel more comfortable and could alleviate anxiety and stress inherent in air travel. In addition, the use of artificial intelligence and big data could help authorities to evaluate the perfidious traveller. Short of China’s Social Credit System (SCS) – a national reputation system developed by the Chinese Government intended to standardize the assessment of citizens' and businesses' economic and social reputation, or 'Social Credi”t which rates behaviours as either positive or negative and crunches them into a single number, creating an individual’s “social trustworthiness”, there has been no credible measures taken. The Chinese system is driven by a database of a person’s criminal record (including offences committed under the influence of alcohol or offences involving domestic violence) over a certain period and could be shared between airlines and airports with strict guidelines for discretionary use. This measure – taken within parameters of existing privacy laws - could caution the authorities and provide them with predictive intelligence. If states can use Advance Passenger Information and Passenger Name Records to determine who comes into their territories, airlines and airports should have similar rights as to who gets into their properties.
Dr. Abeyratne, a former senior official at The International Civil Aviation Organization, is an aviation consultant practicing in Montreal and a visiting professor of aviation law and policy at McGill University.
Post a Comment