The controversial 2013 Soreze bus accident involving the National Transport Corporation (NTC) was followed by a court case which was opened to provide a ruling on the affair. The court has finally pronounced its conclusion, stating that the main braking systems were not working, and that the driver, for one reason or another, had not resorted to using the emergency brake.
The tragic NTC Soreze bus accident that took place last year has long since been a serious bone of contention. Ten people lost their lives in the accident. A court case was thereafter opened to shed light on the circumstances that led to the mishap. The driver, Deepchand Gunness, who died saving most of the passengers onboard, was previously blamed by the bus company. Thereafter, during the legal proceedings, the maintenance of the NTC buses was also questioned. Now, finally, a conclusion has been reached: yesterday, 23rd of September , the magistrate, Ida Dookhy-Rambarran, stated that there has been “no foul play”.
The main question revolved around two possibilities: was the driver at fault, or was it some intentional defect in the bus itself? The conclusion deduced was that there was no sabotage: noone had maliciously manipulated the brakes.
The magistrate stated that certain factors had however contributed to the accident; she highlighted four main points:-
- The Rear Brake Chamber should have been of type 24, but the bus was equipped with one of type 20.
- The Exhaust Brake System, which is the second braking system, was not working.
- The bus structure was supported by plastic. The magistrate is of the opinion that had it been of a stronger material, the damage done could have been minimised.
- The magistrate also stated that the bus driver could have very well used another system of braking: the emergency brake.
Furthermore, the magistrate purported that the dashboard should display a conspicuous sign or, at least, a sound alert, to indicate that the braking system is not working.
Also, the Court sent the report to experts of the Ashock Leyland company. The latter thereafter recommended that the employees of the NTC are fully trained so that they are acquainted with the aspect of security, together with the braking systems, and electric circuits.
The unanswered question remains as to why did the driver not use the emergency brake.
A survivor of the accident, Adila Emamboccus, voiced her opinion out concerning the controversy of the driver’s option to use the emergency brake on Radio Plus yesterday after the conclusions of the court case were made. She said that the driver would surely have used it had this option been available to him. Perhaps, he could not respond because of the panic that overtook him in that hectic situation. She also argued that he might not have had the psychological framing to deal with that kind of technical problem where lives of people are at stake. She ended by saying that the driver really did his best to avoid the worst.