NCAA Explains Clearance of Air Peace Co-Pilot Despite NSIB Report

The Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority (NCAA) has explained why it cleared the co-pilot of an Air Peace aircraft to resume duties despite a preliminary report from the Nigerian Safety Investigation Bureau (NSIB) that raised concerns over possible alcohol and drug use by crew members involved in the July 13, 2025, incident at the Port Harcourt International Airport. The development has drawn attention to the sometimes complex relationship between investigation findings and regulatory decisions in Nigeria’s aviation sector.

On July 13, an Air Peace Boeing 737-524, operating a scheduled Lagos-Port Harcourt flight, veered off the runway after landing at Port Harcourt. Though no fatalities were recorded, the incident triggered investigations from both the NSIB and NCAA. In its preliminary report, the NSIB claimed that toxicology tests conducted on the captain, co-pilot, and a member of the cabin crew showed traces of alcohol and cannabis use. The captain was said to have tested positive for alcohol, while a flight attendant allegedly tested positive for cannabis.

Following the report, the Bureau issued immediate safety recommendations, including stricter oversight of flight crew fitness for duty, more robust alcohol and drug monitoring, and reinforcement of Crew Resource Management (CRM) practices. The NSIB stressed that its recommendations aimed to prevent future accidents rather than apportion blame.

The findings, however, sparked a wave of controversy, particularly because the co-pilot—who the report also suggested might have been implicated—was cleared by the NCAA and reinstated by Air Peace. This raised questions about consistency between the investigative and regulatory arms of the sector.

Air Peace, in its reaction, distanced itself from the toxicology findings, saying it had not officially received any report from the NSIB confirming the alleged results. The airline maintained that it enforces one of the strictest anti-drug and alcohol policies in the industry and has a zero-tolerance stance on crew impairment. According to the airline, the captain involved in the incident was suspended not because of toxicology results but due to lapses in judgment during the landing. Air Peace explained that the captain had ignored his co-pilot’s professional advice to execute a go-around after the approach became unstable, a clear violation of CRM principles.

The NCAA confirmed that the co-pilot was cleared to return to active duty after thorough evaluations, including medical checks and regulatory reviews. According to the Authority, the clearance process considered his professionalism and decision-making during the flight, particularly his insistence on a go-around when conditions were unsafe. The NCAA emphasized that the NSIB’s reports are advisory and not legally binding on regulatory decisions. While the NSIB identifies safety gaps and issues recommendations, the NCAA holds the authority to enforce licensing, medical fitness, and operational standards.

Officials explained that the co-pilot would not have been cleared had he failed any NCAA-mandated toxicology or medical fitness tests. His clearance, they said, was a result of meeting all necessary professional and health requirements. The NCAA’s stance has, however, fueled public debate over the transparency of Nigeria’s aviation safety framework.

Aviation experts argue that the apparent disconnect between NSIB’s findings and NCAA’s decision highlights systemic gaps. While the NSIB’s role is investigative and advisory, there are calls for better alignment with regulatory enforcement to prevent confusion among passengers and stakeholders. For many in the public, the idea that a crew member named in a preliminary report could be back in the cockpit within weeks has raised concerns about accountability.

The incident has also placed Air Peace, Nigeria’s largest carrier, under increased scrutiny. The airline has repeatedly defended its safety record, insisting it conducts regular checks, enforces strict disciplinary measures, and aligns with international aviation standards. The management stressed that its decision to ground the captain was evidence of its commitment to prioritizing safety above all else.

For passengers, however, the matter has reopened long-standing questions about transparency in Nigeria’s aviation sector. Some industry analysts note that incidents such as the Port Harcourt excursion provide an opportunity to reinforce safety culture through clear communication and collaboration between regulators, airlines, and investigators. A lack of clarity, they warn, risks undermining public confidence in the system.

Globally, aviation regulators maintain strict rules around alcohol and drug use, with random testing, immediate grounding, and disciplinary measures forming part of safety oversight. Analysts suggest that Nigeria’s aviation industry must take lessons from such practices, ensuring that regulatory clearance processes are transparent and that investigative findings receive due weight in decision-making.

The NSIB has reiterated that its purpose is not punitive but preventive, urging airlines to adopt its recommendations. It called for mandatory go-around procedures to be reinforced in training programs and stressed the importance of CRM compliance to avoid accidents caused by human error.

The NCAA, meanwhile, has promised to continue enforcing high standards, noting that passenger safety remains its top priority. It also defended the clearance of the co-pilot, saying it followed due process and met international aviation protocols.

The Port Harcourt incident has therefore become a flashpoint for broader discussions on aviation safety oversight in Nigeria. The interplay between NSIB investigations, NCAA regulations, and airline policies underscores the need for better harmonization. For passengers and industry stakeholders, the ultimate concern remains ensuring that safety is not compromised in the pursuit of operational continuity.

As investigations proceed, the spotlight will remain on how Nigeria’s aviation authorities handle the balance between investigative findings and regulatory action. For Air Peace, the episode serves as a reminder of the delicate task of maintaining both operational integrity and public trust. For the wider sector, it is a call to strengthen collaboration, transparency, and adherence to the highest safety standards.