The House of Lords hearing into the crash of the Chinook helicopter
ZD576 on the Mull of Kintyre continues. Early next year the
committee will decide either to uphold or reject the original Board
of Inquiry verdict of negligence on the part of the helicopter's
pilots.
But why should this be worthy of a campaign in a journal for IT
professionals? The answer lies in one word: accountability.
Lacking the expertise to evaluate the possibility of malfunction in
the safety-critical software onboard the Chinook, investigators
were forced to turn for advice to the very company that
manufactured the software under suspicion.
Should the finding be allowed to stand, the implication is that if
specialist manufacturers find no fault in their own equipment after
a major failure it is safe to blame the system's operators.
With complex technologies increasingly replacing humans in
decision-making processes, particularly in safety-critical areas,
there is a need to strengthen - not reduce - the accountability of
suppliers.
There is also the human element in this miscarriage of justice. The
finding against the pilots of ZD576 also undermines the basis of
British justice, which is that a person is innocent until proven
guilty.