In early September, a passenger on an Almaty–Aktau flight was removed from the aircraft just before departure after joking about a bomb allegedly in his bag. No explosive devices were found during inspection, but the careless remark led to flight delay, re-screening of passengers, and intervention by transport police.
What happens to a passenger who jokes about a bomb in Uzbekistan, what liability they face, and whether they will have to compensate for multi-million dollar losses due to flight delay — Podrobno.uz correspondent investigated.
In civil aviation, a threat is assessed not by whether a dangerous item was ultimately found. Any statement or action that could be perceived as a security threat requires verification. That is why even a phrase said in jest can lead to flight delay and additional checks. For airport staff, a passenger's intentions become clear only after the potential threat is ruled out.
Uzbekistan Airways emphasized that in such cases safety remains the top priority: "Any statement or action by a passenger that could potentially be regarded as a security threat cannot be ignored, even if it later turns out to have been a joke and no real threat existed."
But for a passenger who decides to joke about a bomb, the matter may not end with just an inspection. If a flight is delayed and emergency checks are launched because of the passenger's words, all resulting costs fall on the culprit. As Uzbekistan Airways told Podrobno.uz, the carrier has every right to file a recourse claim against the "joker" and recover the full amount of damages through court if the costs are documented.
Such a strict reaction did not appear by chance. Modern aviation security rules were shaped after major incidents that forced states to revise approaches to passenger and baggage control. One of the main turning points was the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States, which killed nearly three thousand people. Before that, the security system already included passenger and baggage screening, metal detectors, and X-ray machines. However, after the attacks, investigations revealed a number of serious vulnerabilities, and control requirements at airports and on board were significantly tightened.
Today, security is built on the principle of multiple layers of protection. Passengers and baggage are checked, access to various airport zones is controlled, and the crew is obliged to respond to potential threats directly on board.
In Uzbekistan, violation of rules of conduct on an aircraft entails administrative liability. Uzbekistan Airways referred to Article 117 of the Code of Administrative Responsibility — "Violation of rules of conduct on an aircraft." The rules of conduct for passengers are enshrined in Article 92-1 of the Air Code. A passenger must comply with the orders of the aircraft commander and crew members related to ensuring the safety of the flight, people, and property.
However, liability for actions on board is not limited to one administrative article. As the airline explained, depending on the nature and consequences of the incident, it may be administrative, and in cases provided by law — criminal. If signs of another offense or crime are seen in the incident, or if a threat arises to the aircraft or people, the final legal qualification is given by competent state bodies taking into account specific circumstances. In addition to the aforementioned compensation of airline expenses, the passenger may lose the opportunity to continue the flight.
Uzbekistan Airports added that the consequences of such incidents can affect not only the violator but also all passengers on the flight. "The scale of further actions depends on the results of the threat assessment. If the passenger is already on board, as was the case in Almaty, not only the culprit, their carry-on and baggage are checked, but as a rule, all passengers undergo additional screening. The entire aircraft and the baggage of other passengers are fully inspected. That is, the flight is delayed for the entire duration of the check. Such are the instructions. Therefore, in such a 'joking' situation, ultimately not only the joker but all other passengers suffer," commented Uzbekistan Airports.
And the main question for which many open such articles: what words can create problems for a passenger? According to Uzbekistan Airports, there is no formal list of words in Uzbekistan for uttering which a passenger is automatically punished. Therefore, it is impossible to compile a list like "said this word — got punished": the meaning of the statement and specific circumstances matter. At the same time, international practice offers specific recommendations. For example, Turkish airline Pegasus Airlines directly advises passengers on international flights not to use the words "terrorist," "bomb," "missile," and "weapon." The airline explains this by saying that such words can cause panic among passengers and crew, and separately notes that the set of sensitive expressions may vary depending on the country.
In addition, Uzbekistan Airports noted that an airport employee cannot independently decide that a passenger "was just joking" and leave such a phrase unattended. If a person speaks about a bomb, explosives, weapons, a planned explosion, a terrorist act, or hijacking an aircraft, employees must proceed from the assumption that the potential threat may be real until proven otherwise. In other words, problems can be caused not by a specific "forbidden word" but by a statement that in a specific situation can be understood as a threat. Only after that do specialists and law enforcement agencies assess the circumstances and decide whether there are grounds for further action. "Therefore, the best advice for passengers is very simple: do not joke about topics related to bombs, weapons, explosions, and terrorist threats. Not at check-in, not at screening, not on the plane," emphasized Uzbekistan Airports.
Source: podrobno.uz