KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 21 — The Department of Civil Aviation (DCA) director-general (DG) said reasonable steps were taken to secure communication or to initiate efforts to find the MH370 aircraft which disappeared on a flight from the Kuala Lumpur International Airport to Beijing, China on March 8, last year.       

As such, he denied the allegation that the DCA had failed or neglected to take adequate measures to find the aircraft. 

The DCA DG said this in his statement of defence which was obtained by the media today, in connection with a lawsuit filed by two sons of a passenger of the MH370 aircraft to demand compensation on the disappearance of the aircraft their father was on. The statement of defence was filed in December last year.   

The DCA DG, as the second defendant, said steps to look for the MH370 aircraft involving the Malaysia Airlines Operations Centre and the air control centres of Singapore, Hong Kong and Phonm Penh were taken to determine the location of the aircraft.               

Meanwhile, Malaysian Airlines System Berhad (MAS), as the first defendant, in its statement of defence denied having failed to carry out its duties to ensure a safe flight for its passengers.

The Malaysian Immigration Department DG, as the third defendant, said the department had taken full action, appropriate and careful measures in inspecting the passports of the passengers of MH370 in line with the Passports Act 1966.           

As such, the incident of the missing MH370, with the claim it was connected to the two passengers who used false passports, was merely speculative.        

The court, during a prior proceeding, fixed February 17 for case management.

Last October 31, two brothers, aged 12 and 14, via their mother, Ng Pearl Ming, 39, filed a lawsuit against MAS, the DCA DG, Malaysian Immigration DG, Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) and the Malaysian government.   

In their statement of demand, the two brothers claimed that their father, Jee Jing Hang, 41, a passenger on board MH370, had entered into a flight contract agreement with MAS on the flight from Kuala Lumpur at 12.41am and was expected to arrive in Beijing, China at 6.30am, March 8.   

The plaintiffs claimed that via the agreement, MAS as the first defendant, should have taken all necessary measures to ensure a safe flight, but had reneged on the agreement after the aircraft failed to land in Beijing, and there were no further details on the fate of the aircraft until today.

In addition, the plaintive claimed that the DCA DG, as the second defendant, who was responsible for providing air traffic control service to ensure the flight was safe, had failed and neglected to take adequate measures to secure communication and to track the aircraft via radar.            

The siblings also claimed the Malaysian Immigration Department had failed and was negligent in conducting close inspection on the passengers of the aircraft, which enabled a number of passengers to board the aircraft by using false identification.   

They also claimed that the RMAF failed and was negligent to send its aircraft promptly to identify an unscheduled aircraft which had appeared on the RMAF’s radar system, which could have been MH370.  

As such, both plaintiffs, among others, are demanding compensation from all defendants on the disappearance of their father, who was their sole breadwinner, a businessman who earned RM16,865 a month, and additional compensation for their sufferings. — Bernama