Separate responsibilities across the charter chain
IONA JETS reviews independent air charter Broker Partners before network admission using criteria relevant to the broker entity, its insurance cover and its professional processes. For each request, responding brokers decide which operators to consider and which mission-specific checks to apply. The proposal should identify the selected Broker Partner, proposed operator, aircraft and supporting evidence, while the operator and competent authorities continue to perform their respective operational, certification and oversight functions.
- Network admission review: IONA JETS considers information about a Broker Partner before admitting it to the network. Admission is not certification, regulatory approval or an endorsement of every future provider, proposal or flight.
- Broker-specific due diligence: A responding Broker Partner determines its own sourcing and verification process, identifies the proposed operator and should explain the evidence reviewed for the particular aircraft, route, operation and contractual structure.
- Operator and authority roles: The identified operator exercises operational control and performs the flight under its own certificate and approvals. Competent authorities issue authorizations, conduct oversight and may impose, vary, suspend or withdraw permissions.
Confirm the operator's authority and scope
An operating certificate should be checked against the proposed activity, not treated as a generic quality label. The legal form and name of the authorization vary by jurisdiction. In Switzerland, the Federal Office of Civil Aviation states that operators conducting commercial air transport with complex aircraft require certification, while EASA explains that an AOC permits specified commercial air transport operations. In the United States, certificate and Operations Specifications define operating authority. The responding broker should verify current status, legal identity, authorized scope and any route or mission-specific approval with the relevant authority and operator.
- Official certificate source: For a Swiss operator, consult the FOCA Air Operator Certificate information and supervised-carrier lists. For another jurisdiction, use the current register or confirmation provided by its competent authority before relying on submitted documents.
- Scope before label: The EASA AOC explanation confirms that an AOC permits specified commercial air transport operations. Its existence alone does not establish authority for every aircraft, particular route, jurisdiction or specialized activity.
- Identity and documentation match: The operator's legal name, certificate number and proposed operating role should align across the proposal, contract and supporting documents. Trading names, broker references or aircraft branding should not replace that check.
Review crew, aircraft and mission requirements
A certificate-level check does not answer mission questions. The broker should obtain evidence proportionate to the operation and Client requirements. Subjects may include aircraft registration and configuration, insurance, maintenance or airworthiness, crew licensing, medical fitness, training, checking, recency and airport or route competence. The operator remains responsible for assigning qualified personnel and airworthy equipment and deciding whether the flight may proceed. Specialized activities, including dangerous goods or medical operations, require separate approvals, procedures, equipment and personnel confirmed for the proposal.
- Crew evidence: Current EASA Air Operations rules address operator supervision of license validity, qualifications, competence, training, checking and recency. Applicable evidence and requirements depend on the operator's jurisdiction, certificate and proposed operation.
- Aircraft and insurance records: Registration, operating status, insurance and applicable maintenance or airworthiness documents should identify the proposed aircraft and responsible parties. Document existence or expiry dates do not, by themselves, guarantee suitability or future availability.
- Specialized operating authority: The proposed scope must cover the actual mission. The FAA description of operating authorities illustrates how certificate type, Operations Specifications and dangerous-goods authority may differ within one national regulatory system.
Use safety systems and audits as evidence
Regulatory oversight, safety management systems and independent audits have different purposes. ICAO guidance states that safety management supports hazard identification and risk management, but implementation and oversight remain with organizations and authorities. Audit registrations or ratings may add information when required by a Client's travel policy, but their scope, status and applicability require confirmation from the issuing program and operator. No certificate, audit, rating, database entry or document eliminates operational risk or guarantees a flight outcome.
- Safety management context: The ICAO Safety Management Manual supports States and service providers in implementing safety management under Annex 19. It is guidance for accountable organizations, not a platform certification or flight guarantee.
- Audit limitations: If a policy requests an audit registration or rating, the responding broker should confirm the issuing body, current status, covered entity, scope and relevant limitations. A name or logo alone is insufficient.
- Documented Client review: Before acceptance, the Client should review the named operator, contractual parties, certificate and approval evidence, insurance, requested audit status, exclusions and unresolved questions, obtaining independent professional advice where its own policy requires it.
.png)
