By Philemon Adjekuko
In aviation, facts are rarely obvious in the immediate aftermath of an incident. That is why the world’s most respected accident investigation agencies are guided by a simple principle: collect the evidence first, draw conclusions later. The recent aircraft incident near Asaba Airport serves as a timely reminder that this principle is as important to public communication as it is to aviation safety.
Since the incident, Nigerians have been presented with two competing narratives. One comes from the aircraft operator, which has portrayed the landing outside the airport as the outcome of an aborted approach managed by the flight crew. The other has emerged through the National Safety Investigation Bureau (NSIB), where testimony reportedly suggested that an observer pilot mistook a nearby roadway for the runway. Both accounts are newsworthy. Neither should be mistaken for the final truth.
Modern business jets are equipped with sophisticated navigation systems, published instrument approach procedures and cockpit protocols designed to prevent precisely this type of occurrence. For an aircraft to land on a roadway instead of a runway would almost certainly require a combination of technical, environmental and human factors. Determining which of these factors played a role is the very purpose of an independent accident investigation.
That is why caution is essential. The operator’s explanation leaves important questions unanswered. If the crew intentionally executed a missed approach before landing on the roadway, what sequence of events led them there? What cockpit indications did they have? How did every layer of safety intended to prevent such an outcome fail simultaneously?
Perhaps even more perplexing is what followed. The aircraft reportedly departed the roadway and flew back to Lagos without prior regulatory clearance. Whatever explanation eventually emerges, that decision inevitably raises additional questions about operational judgement and regulatory compliance. It is an issue that deserves scrutiny independent of the landing itself.
The NSIB, on its part, deserves credit for promptly securing the aircraft’s flight data and cockpit voice recorders. Those recordings, together with air traffic control communications, radar data and physical evidence, will provide the objective foundation upon which credible conclusions must rest.
However, accident investigators must also recognize that public confidence depends not only on the quality of their technical work but also on the discipline of their public communication. Testimony from a crew member is an important investigative lead, but it is not synonymous with an established finding. Human recollections, particularly after highly stressful events, can be incomplete or even inaccurate. This is precisely why international accident investigation standards place greater weight on recorded data than on memory alone.
The danger of allowing preliminary testimony to dominate public discourse is that it may unintentionally shape public opinion before the evidence has spoken. Once that happens, every subsequent finding risks being interpreted through the lens of an already established narrative.
Nigeria’s aviation sector has made significant strides in strengthening safety oversight over the past two decades. Preserving that progress requires investigations that are demonstrably independent, transparent and patient. The objective is neither to protect reputations nor to apportion blame prematurely. It is to establish, beyond reasonable doubt, what happened, why it happened and how similar occurrences can be prevented.
The Asaba incident is therefore about more than a single aircraft. It is a test of institutional credibility. The public deserves neither speculation nor competing public relations campaigns. It deserves evidence.
When the NSIB eventually publishes its final report, its findings should be judged not by how closely they align with today’s headlines but by how faithfully they reflect the facts uncovered through scientific investigation.
In aviation, every accident report carries lessons written in evidence rather than emotion. Those lessons save lives only when investigators allow the facts, and not competing narratives, to have the final word.
Adjekuko, a public affairs analyst, wrote in from Abuja. He can be contacted via padjekuko@yahoo.com.com.
