Other Opinion<\/p>\n
The right of assembly<\/p>\n
The question of licenses needed for various purposes has once
\nagain come to the fore. Among the reasons is the fact that Police
\nBrig. Gen. (ret.) Mrs. Roekmini Koesoemo was recently denied the
\nopportunity to speak at a meeting in Surabaya because of the lack
\nof a permit. And most recently a get-together planned for W.S.
\nRendra at Emha Ainun Najib's house in Yogyakarta was canceled
\nbecause no permit had been obtained.<\/p>\n
It is no wonder that questions have arisen among the public as
\nto the need for such licenses. Among other things, the legal
\ngrounds and the criteria for such actions have been questioned.<\/p>\n
Actually it has long been proposed that this matter of
\nlicenses for meetings be regulated by legislation, as stipulated
\nby Article 18 of the 1945 Constitution.<\/p>\n
If we are truly consistent in our intent to foster a climate
\nof openness, then the passing of a law to ensure the freedom of
\nassembly has become an urgent matter.<\/p>\n
-- Suara Pembaruan, Jakarta<\/p>\n
Man and technology<\/p>\n
The events leading to the crash of a China Airlines jetliner
\nlast month began when an automatic "circling" procedure was
\naccidentally triggered.<\/p>\n
The pilots of the CAL Airbus A300-600R attempted to lower the
\nnose of the plane for landing while the jet's computer worked to
\nraise it in order to circle. These conflicting operations
\ncontinued until the last moment, causing the aircraft to stall
\nand crash at Nagoya airport, killing 264 people.<\/p>\n
An interim report released recently by a Transport Ministry
\npanel vividly details the tension in the cockpit and events
\nduring the flight immediately before the April 26 crash, the
\nnation's second worst air disaster.<\/p>\n
However, the report did not go so far as to identify the cause
\nof the crash, leaving unanswered many mysteries surrounding the
\ntragedy, including why the automatic flight procedure was
\ntriggered.<\/p>\n
There is a dispute between French and Taiwanese aeronautic
\nauthorities as to whether the crash was due to pilot error or
\nequipment. But the disaster poses a more fundamental question:
\nHow man can live in harmony with rapid advances in high
\ntechnology?<\/p>\n
We hope the panel's final report will not only identify the
\ncause of the crash but also examine basic concepts of high-tech
\naircraft and present proposals to ensure safe flights, including
\nimprovements in pilot training.<\/p>\n
It is the fundamental duty of airlines to identify the cause
\nof minor accidents and use their findings to raise the overall
\nsafety of flights.<\/p>\n
We also believe a new perspective is needed regarding aircraft
\ndesign. For years, many aeronautic specialists have noted that
\nthe noses of such craft become pitched at an increasingly higher
\nangle when manually operated during an automatic landing mode. It
\nremains to be seen whether this peculiarity of the model may have
\nplayed a part in the crash.<\/p>\n
It is not easy to determine which should take precedence,
\nmanual or automatic navigation. Nevertheless, high-tech aircraft
\nmust be equipped with a more advanced fail-safe system that can
\ncontain pilot error to avoid tragedy when manual operations
\noverride the automatic mode.<\/p>\n
In consideration of all these factors, it is apparent that
\nfourth-generation jetliners leave much room for improvement. All
\nthe argument about the China Airlines' tragedy should not end in
\na dispute over whether it was caused by pilot error or a
\ntechnical breakdown.<\/p>\n
--The Yomiuri Shimbun, Tokyo<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/other-opinion-1447899208", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }