ASECNA EVICTED FROM SENEGAL'S AIRPORTS - NEW POLICY FOR

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 DAKAR 000601 SIPDIS DEPT FOR PM/ISO-PPOPE, AF/W, AF/EPS, EB/TRA, DS/DSS/ATA DOT FOR OST BRUSSELS FOR FAA/AEU ROME FOR TSA/JHALINSKI E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: EAIR ECON EFIN SG SUBJECT: ASECNA EVICTED FROM SENEGAL'S AIRPORTS - NEW POLICY FOR USG? REFS: A. 07 DAKAR 2376, B. 07 STATE 106799 ¶1. This is an action request for PM/ISO and AF/W; see paras 10-11. ¶2. Summary: On May 10, following the previous day's announcement by Minister of Civil Aviation, Farba Senghor, the government of Senegal (GOS) took over operations of Senegal's airports, essentially kicking out the regional air navigation services provider ASECNA (Agency for Navigation Security in Africa and Madagascar). Senegal created a new National Agency for Airports to control, manage, and collect all airport fees (except for overflight) to "feed" the government treasury. This move needs to be evaluated within the context of the Chicago Convention and may eliminate the requirement for U.S. military aircraft to pay for navigation, landing, parking, and other similar fees. ASECNA authorities in Dakar noted that it is up to individual countries to decide whether to have ASECNA run its airports or not. However, they criticized Senegalese officials for rejecting the Dakar convention on the distribution of airport royalties. Other civil aviation experts expressed concern about whether the GOS could competently manage Dakar LLS Airport in a cost effective manner with such an abrupt change. Senegal continues to propose opting out completely from ASECNA, including from the Agency's navigation and radar services, which raises additional future safety concerns. End summary. WE WANT OUR NAA -------------- ¶3. Effective May 10, Senegal took back from ASECNA the management of its airports and local air traffic control. ASECNA authorities refused to attend the "signing ceremony" for the transfer of the airport management due to a last minute change in the draft by Senegal on the distribution of aeronautic royalties and the location for dispute settlements between the two parties. Minister Senghor was not deterred and stated that the government's "decision to control the management of our airports - which is part of our national sovereignty - is irrevocable, and it is in perfect compliance with article 10 of the Convention of Dakar signed in 1974." [Note: The Dakar Convention gives authority to member countries to decide whether ASECNA will run their airports or not. Currently Senegal is the 10th out of the eighteen member countries to manage its own airports. End note.] ¶4. The Senegalese authorities have established a new National Agency for Airports to collect fees, manage and upgrade airports facilities, train local technicians and "feed" the national treasury. Senghor claimed that Senegal lost as much as CFA 50 billion (USD 119 million) per year due to ASECNA's lack of transparency and inadequate and inefficient distribution of resources generated from different fees collected from Senegalese airports. "We have the ambition to develop and modernize our airport infrastructure, so we want to know where the money collected from our airports goes. We are not pulling out from ASECNA now, but we strongly want to control and manage the resources from our airports including landing, parking, navigation, and other related fees," stated Senghor. [Note: As outlined in Ref A, Senegal originally threatened to quit from ASECNA in November 2007, but suspended that decision and called for an international audit - agreed to by ASECNA - before taking a final decision. End note.] ¶5. All did not go smoothly during the transition. The day following Minister Senghor's announcement of the withdrawal, several police/gendarmes were posted around the control tower to screen the access which was open only to Senegalese technicians. Senghor said, "we don't need 'foreigners' here we have a competent and dedicated DAKAR 00000601 002 OF 003 Senegalese to operate our tower and we are strongly committed to pay their salaries including all the benefits previously paid by ASECNA." Because it is a regional body, a number of air traffic controllers who used to work at the Dakar airport were from other member countries. ¶6. ASECNA operated Dakar's LLS airport on a commercial basis and derived all of the airport's operating revenue from the fees it charged. Other than taxes, ASECNA did not return any revenue to the Senegalese treasury. In theory, profits were to be reinvested to upgrade airport facilities and equipment, but Senegalese officials claimed that ASECNA did not fund any major investment project in Senegal, and instead used resources collected from Senegalese airports to support investment in other member countries' airports. ASECNA DOWNPLAYS SENEGAL'S DECISION -------------- ¶7. An official from ASECNA confirmed to Econ staff that "member countries have the freedom to have ASECNA run their airports or not; this is not the most important role of ASECNA." He added that a country's withdrawal of its national infrastructures' management from ASECNA has not yet impacted significantly on the latter financial resources, noting that ASECNA's operating budget uses only 4.5 percent of the revenues generated from the fees collected at airports while the remaining resources are spent on infrastructure projects within the member countries. He stated that in the past, Mali and the Central African Republic took back control of their airports, but difficulties in managing the day-to-day operations have forced these two countries to again entrust the management of their airports to ASECNA. ¶8. Instead of attending the May 10 "signing ceremony," ASECNA management sent a letter to Senegal's Minister of Foreign Affairs, criticizing the Senegalese authorities for breaking Articles 3 and 6 of the Dakar Convention in a desire to collect all airport fees, except for over-flight fees, and to select the court of Dakar for dispute settlement. [Note: The Dakar Convention grants ASECNA the collection of overflight, landing and navigation fees and the selection of an international arbitration body for dispute settlement. End note.] ¶9. ASECNA was founded in 1959 and is headquartered in Dakar, but has its main financial operations and its President of the Board of Directors based in Paris. ASECNA controls airspace of 16 million square kilometers and manages more than 500,000 aircraft movements per year. Out of the eighteen member countries, only eight (Benin, Burkina, Central African Republic, Chad, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Mali, Niger, and Madagascar) have maintained agreements with ASECNA to manage and run their airports. ACTION REQUEST: NEXT STEPS ON THE U.S./SENEGAL CIVIL AVIATION RELATION -------------- -------------- ¶10. Now that the government of Senegal operates and runs its airports, they should, in principal, now be considered government, rather than commercial, facilities. This provides the USG an opportunity to revisit its civil aviation agreements with Senegal, and assert stated USG global policy of not paying fees charged to U.S. state aircraft for air navigation, overflight, landing, parking, or other fees at government airports, in conformity with the Chicago convention, and as outlined in Ref B. ¶11. Post recommends the Department pursue an inter-agency discussion on this development and advise on how to proceed with Senegalese authorities if asked to make payments on future airports DAKAR 00000601 003 OF 003 fees for U.S. state aircraft. COMMENT -------------- ¶12. With its decision to take control of its airports, Senegal has the opportunity to improve the security and safety and define clear lines of authority, responsibility, and communication for civil aviation in the country. That, however, will require the effective utilization of revenues from airport services, something that might prove difficult given Senegal's overall serious budget problems. It will also be interesting to see if the new National Agency maintains management of the airport, or if it is offered as a concession. There are already rumors that the GOS has struck a deal with Dubai Ports World to gain another lucrative contract in Senegal. USG agencies should also be prepared to engage with Senegal as it decides whether or not to opt out of ASECNA's air safety services for navigation and radar control. SMITH