In the wake of Wednesday's terrifying skyjacking it will be unanimously agreed that security for domestic aviation flights is virtually non-existent. Two questions have since arisen. Who is primarily responsible for security - government or the private operators? And what measures need to be put in place?

Much heat has been generated on the first question following Home Affairs Minister Gajraj's declaration that the private airlines have to be responsible for the security of their passengers and that the police force could not be blamed for the hijacking. It is quite clear, however, that the government and the Civil Aviation Department (CAD) must bear the premier responsibility for security. As the former Director of Civil Aviation, Aubrey Alexander pointed out in a news item in yesterday's Sunday Stabroek, the Security Annexe to the International Civil Aviation Organisation Convention to which Guyana is a signatory says that each contracting state shall require the appropriate authority (in Guyana's case the CAD) to define and allocate tasks for the implementation of an aviation security programme that encompasses the state, airport administration, operators and other stakeholders. The CAD therefore has the overall responsibility on behalf of the state.

How the various responsibilities and costs are carved up between the stakeholders would then have to be worked out under the aegis of the CAD. It is the most sensible option considering the trans-border nature of most hijackings as in Wednesday's case. The same security standards that are set for international flights should therefore apply to domestic flights and particularly since the cataclysmic events of September 11 where hijacked planes were used in kamikaze attacks on huge buildings. The level of the security threat posed by a hijacked plane is also markedly different from the threat posed for e.g. by the commandeering of a mini-bus or boat. Our level of preparedness to repulse hijackings and aerial terrorism must be rapidly stepped up.

The price tag for achieving this would naturally have to be split between the airline operators who profit from the business and the state which has the overarching responsibility. Ancillary questions such as the security procedures needed, the resources required and whether state or private security should be used can then be addressed. Hopefully these questions can be answered quickly in a high level meeting among the various line ministries, the CAD, airline operators and consumer groups.

Wednesday's gunpoint holdup of the pilot in mid-air shows how frightening the situation can be in the absence of tighter security. Four men were nonchalantly able to board a light aircraft with guns. There was no security screening whatsoever. Even in the absence of a functioning agreement where security responsibility is split between the government and the airline operator, Trans Guyana should have taken it upon itself to ensure the safety of its passengers and aircraft. Manual checking of passengers could easily have uncovered the firearms before boarding thereby obviating the crisis.

There were two narrow escapes over the last five years: the hijacking of the Roraima Airways plane and the stabbing in mid-flight of an Air Services Limited pilot. The lessons from these incidents were obviously not heeded neither was corrective action taken. In the post September 11 world, a drastically different response is required following last Wednesday's act of air piracy.