AIR CARG O WEEK


SPECIAL CARGO


THE FINAL JOURNEY: MOVING HUMAN REMAINS BY AIRFREIGHT


BY James GRAHAM


THE REPATRIATION OF HUMAN REMAINS BY AIR IS AMONG THE MOST DELICATE OPERATIONS IN AVIATION. UNLIKE OTHER FORMS OF CARGO, A COFFIN OR CASKET REPRESENTS NOT SIMPLY FREIGHT BUT A PERSON WHOSE LIFE HAS ENDED FAR FROM HOME


F


“Secrecy, or more accurately, discretion, surrounds every stage of the process.”


amilies often want their loved ones returned quickly and with dignity, yet behind the scenes the process is complex, tightly regulated and conducted with deliberate discretion. Moving a body across borders by air involves a mesh of


legal, medical and logistical requirements.


The International Air Transport Association (IATA) publishes the Compassionate Transportation Manual, updated most


recently


in 2025, which sets global standards for airlines and freight forwarders.


This covers packaging requirements, paperwork,


special handling codes and the need for staff training. A shipment of human remains is booked under the code HUM, which triggers distinct handling procedures,


from acceptance at the cargo


terminal through to loading and unloading. The paperwork is formidable. Many countries require an


embalming certificate, a hermetically sealed coffin or zinc lining and an export authorisation from the local authority. On arrival in the United Kingdom, the family or their appointed funeral director must provide a death certificate, a certificate of embalming or sealing, and often a consular mortuary certificate. A British coroner may then become involved, especially if the death was sudden or unexplained. The UK government’s own guidance emphasises that families should not cancel a passport until the remains have been successfully transported, a reminder of how small administrative details can derail a process already laden with grief. Capacity and routing present further challenges. Not all airlines


accept human remains, and not all airports have the facilities to store or transfer them. Where refrigeration is not available, transit times must be minimised. Disruptions, such as strikes, security alerts or missed connections, can strand remains in warehouses, raising both practical and ethical concerns. Airlines usually seek to avoid placing human remains in proximity to hazardous or odorous goods but operational those intentions.


realities sometimes complicate


The veil of secrecy Secrecy, or more accurately, discretion, surrounds every stage of the process. At airports, caskets are usually handled out of sight of the public. Ground handlers are briefed to minimise exposure. Cargo manifests mark such consignments by code rather than by name, both to preserve dignity and to comply with data protection rules. At some airports, remains are loaded or unloaded in screened areas to prevent photographs. This discretion has several purposes. It protects the privacy


of families, reduces the risk of protest or interference, and helps ensure that staff treat the process as a solemn duty rather than a routine transaction. In Britain, coronial procedures and data minimisation under privacy law reinforce this discretion. In military contexts, the secrecy is heightened further for reasons of national security and ceremony.


10


Civilian and military remains For civilians, repatriation is usually a private arrangement, organised through insurance companies,


international funeral directors, or


specialist repatriation agents. The body is prepared abroad, packed in accordance with IATA and local regulations, then booked onto a commercial flight as cargo. Families in Britain then meet their loved one at the airport or, more often, after a funeral director has cleared the remains through customs and liaised with the coroner. For the armed forces, the process is markedly different. The


UK Ministry of Defence operates a dedicated pathway through RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire. Fallen personnel are returned on military aircraft, greeted with ceremonial honours and transferred to coroners who have jurisdiction over service deaths overseas. From 2007 to 2011, repatriations through RAF Lyneham and the town of Wootton Bassett became a national moment of mourning; since then, Brize Norton has been the main entry point. Families are supported by the Joint Casualty and Compassionate Centre, and the movements are tightly choreographed, with security and protocol given equal weight to dignity.


When things go wrong Despite


procedures, repatriation can and does go awry.


Identification is the most obvious point of failure: if mistakes are made at the scene of death or during preparation abroad, they may not be detected until arrival in Britain. Documentation errors can delay flights or lead to remains being stranded overseas. Even small lapses in the chain of custody can have devastating effects on grieving families. The crash of Air India Flight 171 in June 2025 led to the deaths of hundreds of passengers,


reported harrowing errors during repatriation:


including British citizens. Families in some cases,


bodies were misidentified or returned commingled in the same casket. Coroners in Britain conducted DNA checks that exposed the mistakes, and families have since demanded answers from the airline and its contractors. The case illustrated the fragility of chain-of-custody arrangements under pressure and the enduring trauma caused when errors occur. In April 2024, seven World Central Kitchen staff, including three


Britons, were killed in an Israeli air strike. Their bodies had to be moved across multiple jurisdictions: collected in Gaza, transferred through the Rafah crossing into Egypt, and then flown home. Each leg of the journey required diplomatic clearances, consular involvement and meticulous handling. The episode highlighted how political and security barriers can complicate what would otherwise be a straightforward logistical task. The body of a British teenager who died in Tenerife, Jay Slater,


was returned home in August 2024, almost two months after his disappearance. Spanish authorities required a full investigation and post-mortem before authorising export. The delay demonstrated


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16