
88   SA Flyer Magazine
W
hile AOPA South 
Africa has had 
success in keeping 
the CAA’s and other 
parties’ excesses 
in check, some of these impediments to 
the development and survival of GA keep 
rearing their heads, refusing to die.
Most of these little monsters have 
little or no basis in promoting safety or 
private aviation. When mulling over the real 
motivations behind them, the old adage 
‘follow the money’ comes to mind.
R10,000 FINES
Although there have been some 
regulatory changes to Part 185 of the 
Regulations, these only seem to entrench 
an extremely unconstitutional and 
unproductive approach to enforcement.
When Miller wrote about this subject 
in August 2013, CAA inspectors on 
‘roadshows’ were darkly telling quivering 
pilots that “CAA Director Poppy Khoza 
has all the powers of a magistrate.” That’s 
nonsense. As has been decided in case 
after case in South Africa, there is a 
clear separation of powers between the 
executive, the legislature and the judiciary.
Nevertheless, the CAA persists in trying 
to legislate by ignoring the limits on its 
power to regulate, and continues to mislead 
hapless victims of their enforcement 
process that the Director has powers to 
adjudicate over what are dened as criminal 
offences – without respecting the rights of 
accused persons. Essentially, CAA is still 
trying to be administrator, parliament and 
kangaroo court all in one.
A few determined individuals have 
taken matters to the High Court, which 
has in turn been critical of CAA’s failure to 
follow the correct procedures in attempting 
to penalise individuals. The doctrine of 
‘just culture’ has also been poured into the 
mix and, at this stage, has only served to 
confuse matters further. Just culture and 
criminal procedure are conceptually similar. 
Both only permit punishment of an offender 
if he or she has wilfully broken the rules or 
been unacceptably negligent.
Most of the enforcement actions that 
have crossed AOPA’s desk are trivial or 
justiable transgressions, if indeed they are 
transgressions at all. Yet, they all start with 
demands for payment of R10,000 or more. 
None of them would be likely to be enforced 
by the courts.
It is essential that anyone receiving an 
enforcement notice from CAA obtain advice 
from either a practitioner or from AOPA 
before making any kind of representation 
or payment. Payment of any fee or ne, or 
making plaintive representations, will only 
be detrimental to your case.
CORPORATE OPERATIONS
We reported in September 2013 that 
AOPA Europe was successful in preventing 
EASA from passing regulations regarding 
aireld limitations for turbine aircraft used 
for business purposes. An example was 
given of a member of AOPA Germany 
who would have been required to y to 
his destinations in a single-engine piston 
aircraft rather than the Piaggio Avanti he 
had been using extensively for many years 
without mishap. EASA saw the irrationality 
AOPA BRIEFING
Back in 2013, when 
the late John Miller 
was writing a similar 
article, we covered a 
number of unworkable 
proposals, regulations and 
procedures which have 
been a thorn in the side 
of general aviation for a 
considerable length of 
time.  
THE ZOMBIE 
REGULATIONS
Chris Martinus ‒ Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association – South Africa
According to AOPA, the 
Director shouldn't have 
powers to adjudicate 
over what are defined as 
criminal offences.