| 
         
          |  |       Will the Air Cargo Agents Association of India 
        (ACAAI) accept the decision of the nine-year-old case that had been going 
        on at the Competition Commission of India (CCI)? The CCI recently put an end to the case that 
        had been going on since December 2012, nine years ago when the ACAAI said 
        that IATA was guilty of anti-competitive practices.
 Simply put, the cargo agents association pointed 
        a finger at IATA for determining the rate of the agents' commission highlighting 
        that the rules of the agency's Cargo Accounts Settlement Systems (CASS) 
        were unfair.
 FlyingTypers has been reporting about 
        the case since it was filed.
 In fact, the furor over CASS erupted during a 
        trade show in Mumbai.
 So no one should hold their breath and assume 
        the ACAAI will go quietly into that good night.
 The CCI ordered recently that "no case of 
        contravention of the provisions of the Act is made out against any of 
        the Opposite Parties and the matter is directed to be closed forthwith" 
        after it found out that there had been no violation of competitive norms.
 The CCI also pointed out that ACAAI's charges 
        were about the accreditation of cargo agents and the introduction of IATA's 
        CASS in India.
 For its part, IATA welcomed the CCI order and 
        also pointed out that the outcome of the case only emphasized the fact 
        that IATA had been operating in accordance with the competition laws of 
        India.
 In the many twists and turns that the case took, 
        ACAAI lawyers, contend that IATA, comprised of approximately 260 international 
        airlines operating globally, has controlled the market in a manner that 
        is "adverse to competition by virtue of its dominant position.”
 “IATA,” ACAAI asserts “had 
        appropriated to itself the right to accredit air cargo agents in India 
        as well as in other countries.
 “Without such accreditation,” air 
        cargo agents said, “we are unable to carry out our business with 
        airlines, as most airlines globally are members of IATA.”
 It was pointed out that contrary to similar rules 
        prevailing elsewhere, the CASS Rules as prescribed by IATA airlines were 
        anti-competitive, "being unilateral and one-sided, and agents have 
        no say in the same".
 ACAAI said that "IATA also unilaterally 
        prescribes the criteria for accreditation of air cargo agents, including 
        the imposition of many financial terms and conditions and untenable penalties.
 “This clearly indicates abuse of dominant 
        position by IATA."
 The ACAAI lawyers also mentioned that "IATA 
        has also abrogated to itself the status of a Self Regulated Organization 
        (SRO) in India without sanction by any Indian authority."
 Pay Me My Money Down
 
 It is no overstatement to say that ACAAI and 
        IATA have not been the best of working partners.
 Almost a year ago, in April 2020, with COVID-19 
        raging all round in India, ACAAI highlighted and brought forward problems 
        that air freight forwarders were facing during the 21-day lockdown that 
        India was going through at that time, due to the conflicting directives 
        from authorities and regulators. The biggest challenge was the payment 
        of handling charges through IATA's Cargo Account Settlement System (CASS) 
        to international carriers bringing or taking goods from India.
 
  Sunil Arora, President of the Air Cargo Agents Association of India (ACAAI), 
        speaking to FT pointed out that more than 500 IATA-authorized forwarders 
        were unable to pay the cargo handling charges to the carriers if they 
        were not given an extension (the payments were due on April 1 and IATA 
        had given an extension of nine days until April 9). Nine days was not enough time, said Arora, “primarily 
        because of the lockdown”.
 At that time IATA had said that since banks were 
        not part of the lockdown, the payments could be done electronically.
 So, the date would not be changed from April 
        9, 2020.
 As you read this, the beat and the heat goes 
        on.
 Tirthankar Ghosh
 |