At least 15 Rohingya refugees drown after boat sinks off Bangladesh

Karachi, May 25: The pilot of the Pakistan International Airlines (PIA)'s crashed plane ignored three warnings from the air traffic controllers about the aircraft's altitude and speed before the landing, saying he was satisfied and would handle the situation, according to a report on Monday.

The national flag carrier's PK-8303 tragedy on Friday, in which 97 people were killed and two miraculously survived, is one of the most catastrophic aviation disasters in the country's history.

The Airbus A-320 from Lahore to Karachi was 15 nautical miles from the Jinnah International Airport, flying at an altitude of 10,000 feet above the ground instead of 7,000 when the Air Traffic Control (ATC) issued its first warning to lower the plane's altitude, Geo News quoted an ATC report as saying.

Instead of lowering the altitude, the pilot responded by saying that he was satisfied. When only 10 nautical miles were left till the airport, the plane was at an altitude of 7,000 feet instead of 3,000 feet, it said.

The ATC issued a second warning to the pilot to lower the plane's altitude. However, the pilot responded again by stating that he was satisfied and would handle the situation, saying he was ready for landing, the report said.

The report said that the plane had enough fuel to fly for two hours and 34 minutes, while its total flying time was recorded at one hour and 33 minutes.

Pakistani investigators are trying to find out if the crash is attributable to a pilot error or a technical glitch.

According to a report prepared by the country's Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), the plane's engines had scraped the runway thrice on the pilot's first attempt to land, causing friction and sparks recorded by the experts.

When the aircraft scraped the ground on the first failed attempt at landing, the engine's oil tank and fuel pump may have been damaged and started to leak, preventing the pilot from achieving the required thrust and speed to raise the aircraft to safety, the report said.

The pilot made a decision "on his own" to undertake a "go-around" after he failed to land the first time. It was only during the go-around that the ATC was informed that landing gear was not deploying, it said.

"The pilot was directed by the air traffic controller to take the aircraft to 3,000 feet, but he managed only 1,800. When the cockpit was reminded to go for the 3,000 feet level, the first officer said 'we are trying'," the report said.

Experts said that the failure to achieve the directed height indicates that the engines were not responding. The aircraft, thereafter, tilted and crashed suddenly.

The flight crashed at the Jinnah Garden area near Model Colony in Malir on Friday afternoon, minutes before its landing in Karachi's Jinnah International Airport. Eleven people on the ground were injured.

The probe team, headed by Air Commodore Muhammad Usman Ghani, President of the Aircraft Accident and Investigation Board, is expected to submit a full report in about three months.

According to the PIA's engineering and maintenance department, the last check of the plane was done on March 21 this year and it had flown from Muscat to Lahore a day before the crash.

In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Pakistan government had allowed the limited domestic flight operations from five major airports - Islamabad, Karachi, Lahore, Peshawar and Quetta - from May 16.

After the plane tragedy, the PIA has called off its domestic operation.

For the first time in the 15 years of the Global Risks Report, the climate change and environment risk has occupied all the top five slots.

According to the 15th edition of the World Economic Forum's (WEF) Global Risks Report, the top five risks in terms of likelihood are extreme weather, climate action failure, natural disasters, biodiversity loss and human-made environmental disasters. They all fall in the one category of climate change and related environmental disasters.

WEF President Borge Brende said the world was feeling long-mounting and interconnected risks.

The report also points to how citizens are protesting across the world as discontent rises with failed systems that are creating inequality. The citizens' discontent had hardened with systems that had failed to promote advancement, it said.

"Disapproval of how governments are addressing profound economic and social issues has sparked protests throughout the world, potentially weakening the ability of governments to take decisive action should a downturn occur. Without economic and social stability, countries could lack the financial resources, fiscal margin, political capital or social support needed to confront key global risks," it said.

Listing the grim scenario, Borge said the global economy was faced with "synchronised slowdown", the past five years had been the warmest on record and cyber attacks were expected to increase this year.

The report warns that while the myriad risks were rising, time was running out on how to prevent them.

Borge said the growing palpability of shared economic, environmental and societal risks indicated that the horizon had shortened for preventing "or even mitigating" some of the direst consequences of global risks.

"It's sobering that in the face of this development, when the challenges before us demand immediate collective action, fractures within the global community appear to only be widening," he said.

The report points to grave concern about the consequences of continued environmental degradation, including the record pace of species decline.

Pointing to an unsettled geopolitical environment, the report said today's risk landscape was one in which new centres of power and influence were forming and old alliance structures and global institutions were being tested.

"While these changes can create openings for new partnership structures in the immediate term, they are putting stress on systems of coordination and challenging norms around shared responsibility. Unless stakeholders adapt multilateral mechanisms for this turbulent period, the risks that were once on the horizon will continue to arrive," it said.

Calling it a "an unsettled world", the WEF report notes that powerful economic, demographic and technological forces were shaping a new balance of power. "The result is an unsettled geopolitical landscape in which states are increasingly viewing opportunities and challenges through unilateral lenses," it said.

"What were once givens regarding alliance structures and multilateral systems no longer hold as states question the value of long-standing frameworks, adopt more nationalist postures in pursuit of individual agendas and weigh the potential geopolitical consequences of economic decoupling. Beyond the risk of conflict, if stakeholders concentrate on immediate geo-strategic advantage and fail to re-imagine or adapt mechanisms for coordination during this unsettled period, opportunities for action on key priorities may slip away," the WEF said.

In a chapter on risks to economic stability and social cohesion, it said a challenging economic climate might persist this year and members of the multi-stakeholder community saw "economic confrontations" and "domestic political polarisation" as the top risks in 2020.

The report also warned of downward pressure on the global economy from macroeconomic fragilities and financial inequality. These pressures continued to intensify in 2019, increasing the risk of economic stagnation.

Low trade barriers, fiscal prudence and strong global investment, once seen as fundamentals for economic growth, are fraying as leaders advance nationalist policies. The margins for monetary and fiscal stimuli are also narrower than before the 2008-2009 financial crisis, creating uncertainty about how well countercyclical policies will work.

The strategic partners for the WEF report included Marsh & McLennan and Zurich Insurance Group. The academic advisers were National University of Singapore, Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford and Wharton Risk Management and Decision Processes Center, University of Pennsylvania.

Washington, Mar 1: The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has proposed a fine of over $200 million for all major US mobile carriers for selling the location data of customers to some agencies.

The Federal Communications Commission today proposed fines against the nation's four largest wireless carriers for apparently selling access to their customers' location information without taking reasonable measures to protect against unauthorised access to that information. As a result, T-Mobile faces a proposed fine of more than $91 million, AT&T faces a proposed fine of more than $57 million, Verizon faces a proposed fine of more than $48 million, and Sprint faces a proposed fine of more than $12 million, the FCC said in a statement on Friday.

The Enforcement Bureau of FCC opened this investigation after reports surfaced that a Missouri Sheriff, Cory Hutcheson, used a "location-finding service" operated by Securus, a provider of communications services to correctional facilities, to access the location information of the wireless carriers' customers without their consent between 2014 and 2017.

"American consumers take their wireless phones with them wherever they go. And information about a wireless customer's location is highly personal and sensitive. The FCC has long had clear rules on the books requiring all phone companies to protect their customers' personal information. And since 2007, these companies have been on notice that they must take reasonable precautions to safeguard this data and that the FCC will take strong enforcement action if they don't. Today, we do just that," said FCC Chairman Ajit Pai.

"This FCC will not tolerate phone companies putting Americans' privacy at risk."

The FCC also admonished these carriers for apparently disclosing their customers' location information, without their authorisation, to a third party

The four major US carriers mentioned sold access to their customers' location information to "aggregators," who then resold access to such information to third-party location-based service providers (like Securus).

Although their exact practices varied, each carrier relied heavily on contract-based assurances that the location-based services providers (acting on the carriers' behalf) would obtain consent from the wireless carrier's customer before accessing that customer's location information.