Mumbai boat accident: Why questions are being raised regarding sea traffic and surveillance

Rashmi Rajput: On Saturday afternoon, JOC recovered the body of six-year-old Johan Ashraf Pathan, a resident of Goa. he/she was probably the last person to go missing on the boat Neel Kamal, which was involved in an accident off the Mumbai coast. After this the search and rescue operation was stopped. However, this tragedy, which took the lives of 15 people, would have raised serious questions about the rules of navigation at sea. It also highlights the shortcomings in maritime coordination, policing and overall security measures of deep sea boat operators. The boat left Neel Kamal Gateway for Elephanta Island at around 2.30 pm on Wednesday. It was business as usual for the boat operators. Without paying much attention to rules and regulations, they overbooked to carry 110 passengers instead of 80 passengers permitted by the Maharashtra Maritime Board (MMB). When the boat reached Karanja at 3.55 pm, a naval ship conducting sea trials lost control. After this it collided with the boat, due to which the boat overturned.

Adherence to maritime rules, responsibility unclear

Just as traffic on roads is monitored and regulated, the sea also has its own rules. After the 26/11 attacks, when terror entered Mumbai by sea, coordination among multiple maritime stakeholders has improved and no maritime attack in the last 16 years is evidence of this. While the Indian Navy is entrusted with the responsibility of both coastal and offshore security, its authority over other maritime agencies such as maritime police, port trusts, state maritime boards and others is not clear.

However, in this case the Indian Navy needs to answer some difficult and uncomfortable questions. When a senior Mumbai police officer contacted Naval officials at the Western Command soon after the incident, they did not immediately confirm that the plane was theirs, a senior Mumbai police officer said on condition of anonymity. However, since the video has gone viral, there is no scope for debate on it.

Mumbai Police started investigation

By Wednesday night, the local police had registered an FIR against the sailor operating the navy boat under various sections of the BNS Act. Mumbai Police has started investigating the accident. he/she has a list of questions for the Navy to answer. This includes the SOPs used during sea trials, the use of commercial channels during such trials and the findings of the Board of Inquiry (BOI) constituted by the Navy to investigate the accident.

Police waiting for SOP

The Navy has told us that while conducting sea trials, as per the SOP, it is necessary to have another vessel along with the trial vessel to record the trial. Another officer associated with the investigation said that it does not seem that is the case here, so we have asked the Navy to share the SOP, so that it can be found out whether the sailor has violated the rules or not.

Police need SOP so that they can find out where the responsibility lies. Statements from survivors alleged that they felt the driver of the craft was performing a stunt and circled the boat twice, which was not required, the official said. Due to this, some passengers on the boat shot a video. The video has now become part of the evidence to establish the chain of events. The SOP here will help us figure out how, when and where trials are allowed to be conducted.

How dependent is it on the Navy for investigation?

With the Navy in the dock, Mumbai Police sources say that they will not completely depend on the Navy for their investigation. The official said that we have contacted the Port Trust and MMB to understand the commercial channels and the use of ROR. This is to find out whether trails are allowed in commercial channels or not. What is ROR and how are they monitored and regulated in such channels.

Although most of the answers in this matter can be given by the Navy itself, the findings of the police have revealed the negligence of the boat operator. The boat is allowed to carry only 80 passengers and 5 crew members, but this boat was carrying 110 people. Boat operators issue tickets only to adults, so children are not counted. Plus they overbook most people. Let them sit on the upper deck. In this case too, there were more children in the boat than its capacity.

Boat operator’s negligence in safety

Apart from this, the boat operator also did not ensure that all the passengers were wearing life jackets. Safety instructions were not even announced after the boat collision. Investigation has found that the boat did not capsize immediately after the collision, but it took at least 10 minutes to sink. However, in the absence of any safety announcement, the passengers, mainly women and children, quickly moved to the upper deck and clung to the boat.

Whereas JNPT officials were the first to reach the spot. There, life jackets were provided, but many of those who died died from head injuries. These people had stayed on the upper deck after the boat capsized and could have collided with the body of the boat. Another source revealed that those who jumped into the sea survived.

8.5 lakh passengers every year

Every year, around 8.5 lakh passengers use the boats from the Gateway of India. It has 110 wooden boats traveling daily to destinations like Mandwa and Elephanta Island. However, after the incident, the MMB left no stone unturned in issuing new rules including making life jackets mandatory and considering installing CCTV on boats. However, this should not be a reckless move that is not monitored or regulated.

A senior Navy officer clarified to our associate newspaper Economic Times that the trial does not require the presence of any other ship to monitor and capture the trace. Elaborating on the preliminary assessment made in the case, the source said that the driver was unable to steer the ship and all this happened within 7-9 seconds. The sailor was experienced and was also a senior OEM of the ship.

The ship was about to return to Karanja base

The ship had almost completed sea trials and was about to return to Karanja base, but while performing manoeuvres, the ship developed some fault and the driver lost control in the final stages. The source said the collision occurred within seconds and the driver or any other member of the ship did not have time to steer the ship safely out of the collision course.

On allegations of a ‘stunt’ being carried out by the sailors as suspected by the survivors, the officer clarified that these boats are used by the Navy in routine maritime patrolling in the waters. They regularly form ‘infinity or figure of eight’ formations in the sea around other ships. The source said it did not appear that they were deliberately ramming the boat… The boat was being trialled for maritime patrol and such formations are routine.

Question on use of commercial channels for trial

On the issue of use of commercial channels for trials, the official said the Navy is tasked with maritime security and these ships are used in day-to-day patrolling. So while ROR applies to every ship, the ship was conducting trials at a safe distance. However, it was unfortunate that the ship lost control and collided directly with the boat. The BOI will be able to shed more light on how the tragedy actually occurred.