The Dutch Safety Board did the investigation into the crash of MH17. Dutch government officials say the final report is highly praised. My opinion is different. The report has many flaws and leave a lot of room for questions.
I am not alone. Russian aviation authority Rosaviatsiya send two letters to DSB with questions on the investigation.
And the Dutch Parliament asked 82 questions to DSB. These will be discussed in the plenary debate on the response of Dutch government to DSB report at March 1.
During the last couple of months I send many questions to DSB asking for information. The response of DSB is always the same: “we cannot comment on questions of which the answer is not documented in the final report”.
Even on questions which have nothing to do on MH17 DSB does not provide clear answers. Which is strange for an organization which was rewarded the Machiavelliprijs for the good communication and bringing clarity. The fact that Member of Parliament Han ten Broecke of ruling party VVD is also member of the board of the Stichting Machiavelli is ofcourse a coincidence.
Let me provide you an overview of questions asked to DSB and the response.
- DSB did a lot of effort to obtain the primary radar recordings of Ukraine. In March 2015 a special envoy of DSB went to Kiev. When the final report came out, a lot of questions were asked by Dutch parliament on why the goverment did not want to request ICAO, Russia and Ukraine for radar images.
The response of Dutch government: we will do that if DSB or prosecutor asks us to do so.Question to DSB: the more evidence the better. Why doesn’t DSB request the Dutch government to take action and request states for data?Answer DSB: this question was asked to use by Dutch Parliament as well. We will first answer Dutch Parliament.
- Federal Air Transport Angency (Rosaviatsiya) send a letter to DSB in January 2016. Did DSB respond and if so, what was the response.
Answer DSB: we did receive the letter. We do not comment on any correspondence to Federal Air Transport Angency
- DSB states that Russia should have recorded all radar data in raw format. However ICAO Annex 11 does not state this. Why does DSB reports raw data as mandatory?
Answer DSB: In het eindrapport en bijbehorende bijlagen staat beschreven wat de Onderzoeksraad verstaat onder ruwe data, informatie over ICAO annex 11 en waarom de Raad vindt dat de Russische Federatie hier niet aan heeft voldaan. ICAO is overigens als waarnemer en ondersteuner nauw betrokken geweest bij het onderzoek.
- DSB states ICAO agrees with DSB that radar data should be stored in raw format. What is the name of the ICAO employee who stated this?
Answer DSB: DSB does not comment on names and correspondence
- Was the ICAO response to DSB documented on paper?
Answer DSB: no response yet
- DSB did not speak to the Ukraine air traffic controller who spoke last to MH17.
Why didn’t DSB speak to the controller while in each investigation this is common practise?
Why didn’t DSB documented in the final report there has not been an interview with the air traffic controller?
Answer DSB: we cannot comment on questions not answered in final report