Incidents of unruly passengers are increasing day by day in carriage of passengers by air. The regulations on unruly passengers regulate the unruly passenger and the measures taken in response to the unruly behavior of the unruly passenger, but do not specify the consequences of such measures if the measures exceed a reasonable level. Again, the narrow definition of an unruly passenger in the regulations creates uncertainty regarding the measures to be taken against passengers who engage in unruly behavior before the doors of the aircraft are closed and after the doors are opened after landing. This uncertainty causes hesitation on the part of the carrier, the persons to intervene and the passengers, and delays the measures to be taken against the unruly passenger. This situation will jeopardize the safety of the passenger, the crew and the flight. In this context, our study will first define the unruly passenger in a broad and narrow sense, discuss the reasons underlying the unruly passenger behavior, and then discuss the international and national regulations regarding the unruly passenger. Finally, the liability arising from the measures to be taken against the unruly passenger will be analyzed and the controversial points will be tried to be resolved.
Having emerged in the early 20th century, the air transportation sector is developing quite rapidly today. These developments in air transportation have increased flight safety and made air transportation more accessible by more people today. However, in addition to the benefits of this development, it can be said that it has also led to some negative consequences. The most important or widespread of these negative consequences is unruly passengers. Unruly passengers are those who endanger themselves, other passengers, crew and the flight by violating the rules and instructions required by civil air transportation.
There are many reasons for unruly passenger behavior. These reasons include alcohol on flights, narrow seat legrooms compared to the past as a result of more seats in order to reduce the carrier’s costs and the transportation fee to be paid by the passenger, and the change in the behavior of the crew due to the fact that they are serving more passengers, whereas in the past they were obliged to serve fewer passengers, paid services that were free of charge in the past, increased airport security checks compared to the past which puts extra stress on passengers, the increase in the duration of delays and the increase in the number of delays due to the widespread use of air transportation, etc. The presence of even one of these reasons may lead to unruly passenger behavior.
The increase in the incidents of unruly passengers in accordance with the development of the air transportation sector has necessitated adoption of national and international legal regulations against unruly passengers by states. In this context, firstly the Tokyo Convention of 1963 was signed, followed by the Hague Convention of 1970 and the Montreal Convention of 1971. Among these regulations, the 1963 Tokyo Convention regulates the intervention to be made against unruly passengers. Although there was no change in the article of the Convention on measures to be taken against unruly passengers, the Convention was amended by the Montreal Protocol of 2014. The most important changes introduced by the Protocol are the scope of the flight and the jurisdiction. However, the Protocol has been criticized for not providing an adequate solution for unruly passengers and for the fact that the number of unruly passenger incidents increases every year compared to the previous year.
The 1963 Tokyo Convention amended by the 2014 Montreal Protocol authorizes the captain pilot to take measures against unruly passengers during the flight. Accordingly, the pilot-in-command may exercise the authority to take measures in person or may give orders and instructions to the crew or make requests to the passengers, but may not give instructions to the passenger. Moreover, the crew or the passenger may also exercise this authority ex officio when necessary. However, the Convention stipulates that the measures must be reasonable. As long as the measure is reasonable, the liability of the person and carrier will not arise. However, if the measure exceeds the reasonable extent, an “accident” and therefore the liability of the carrier will be mentioned within the scope of the 1999 Montreal Convention, which regulates the liability of the carrier for the death and bodily injury of the passenger.
The acceptance of the existence of an accident if the measure exceeds a reasonable level raises some disputable issues. The first of these concerns is the scope of the flight. The 1963 Tokyo Convention, as amended by the 2014 Montreal Protocol, defines the duration of the flight as the moment the aircraft doors close before take-off and the moment the aircraft doors open after landing. In this context, unruly passengers who engage in unruly behavior on the ground; in the terminal building or on the apron will not be included in the scope of the Convention. However, it should be accepted that the regulation of the contract regarding the duration of the flight is intended to limit the captain pilot’s powers. In this context, considering the general principles of law, the measures to be taken against to the unruly passengers on the ground should also be reasonable, and if the measures exceed the reasonable limits, the existence of an accident should be accepted. Otherwise, the passenger who commits the same unruly behavior may face different consequences depending on his/her location. In addition, the fact that the 1963 Tokyo Convention and the 1999 Montreal Convention, as amended by the 2014 Montreal Protocol, have different regulations regarding the jurisdiction may also create disputes, and therefore a regulation is needed here as well. In our opinion, it would be correct to accept the jurisdiction of the courts regulated under the 1999 Montreal Convention here, since an accident will be mentioned in case the reasonable measure is exceeded against to the unruly passenger.
Passenger, Unruly Passenger, Measures Against Unruly Passenger, Liability of Carrier
