Flysafair (FA, Johannesburg or Tambo) has urgently requested South African Transport Minister Barbara Creecy to intervene in a regulatory proceeding in which the company has been found to be in breach of the country's foreign ownership restrictions. Airlines say the civil aviation regulator's interpretation of the law is flawed and, if applied, would put nearly all airlines in the country out of compliance, leading to widespread groundings and a “catastrophic” economic impact. It is argued that it can lead to.
The low-cost airline faces the possibility of suspension or cancellation of its license to operate domestic and international flights. With a domestic market share of 60%, the company said this would destabilize the local aviation market, threaten the livelihoods of its 1,925 employees as job losses spread to other industries, and have a significant impact on South Africa's economy and tourism industry. It claims to cause damage.
Flysafair faces two challenges to its ownership structure at national and international licensing councils following separate complaints from competitors Global Aviation Operations (which operates Lyft Air) and Airlink (South Africa). facing. On October 31st, the International Air Services Licensing Council found that Flysafair was in violation of the law, but the company won a court injunction and filed a complaint with regulators on January 20th before taking any punitive action. asked to meet.
A similar process is in place at the Air Service Licensing Council (ASLC). On January 14, Flysafair and Global appeared before the council in Pretoria to argue for “mitigation or aggravation'', a necessary procedure before any sanctions can be imposed against an airline. During the meeting, the council confirmed its previous decision on December 19 that Flysafair did not meet nationality provisions. According to the council's interpretation of the law, 75% of the voting rights must be held by South African citizens resident in the country, i.e. natural persons, as legal entities cannot have citizenship. The council concluded that ultimate control of Flysafair rests with its parent company in Ireland (ASL Aviation Holdings) and ultimately in Belgium.
Frysafair said the council's reasoning and conclusions were unfounded and inaccurate, and were based on misunderstandings, errors of fact, misunderstandings of the law, the council's lack of legal expertise, and a “fundamental lack of understanding of the complexity of the law.” It is objected to because it is based on “absence''.
While seeking legal recourse, the airline has asked ministers for an emergency exemption from the disputed legal provisions. The authority asked Creasey to order a stay on further proceedings against the council until the South African High Court clarifies its interpretation of the law. It also calls on the Minister to facilitate a resolution through mediation.
“There remains hope that the Minister of Transport will take note of this process and guide it along a rational path, given that the council is appointed by the Minister and acts under his supervision. The Minister of Transport has already reported on this point. “The distribution of the new Air Services Bill shows that government policy is tilted in favor of the interpretation advanced by Flysafair in its dispute with Parliament, and the final It is encouraging that there is political will to address these disputes. Ambiguity has been the bane of the aviation industry for far too long.”
