Thursday 18 December 2008

Proceedings at tenth (public) procedural hearing

Today’s procedural hearing was largely concerned with fine-tuning the protocol drafted by the court regarding the appointment, powers and duties of the special counsel to be appointed in connection with the document relating to timers in respect of which the UK Foreign Secretary has asserted public interest immunity on grounds of national security and international relations.

This document has not been made public and so it is difficult for observers to form an opinion as to its contents or, indeed, to follow the submissions made by the appellant’s counsel and the Advocate General on behalf of the Foreign Secretary. However, the document has now been finalised and the person suggested by the appellant’s legal team has been appointed by the court to perform this function, subject to his (or her) successfully undergoing the necessary security vetting. The court urged the relevant authorities to carry out the vetting of the special counsel (and any solicitor appointed by him to assist in the performance of his duties) with the very highest urgency. The Crown and the Advocate General were instructed to prepare summaries of the submissions made by them at the closed hearing (from which the appellant’s lawyers were excluded) so that they can be handed over to the special counsel as soon as his vetting is successfully concluded. The appellant’s legal team indicated that they would be in a position fully to brief the special counsel by 23 January 2009.

The remaining issue discussed was the timing of the next procedural hearing (to consider the further petitions for disclosure lodged on behalf of the appellant before the ninth procedural hearing on 27 and 28 November). Maggie Scott QC for Mr Megrahi proposed that it should be on a date between 21 and 23 January, it having been indicated by the court administrative office that all three of the judges were available then. Ronnie Clancy QC argued that this was, for various reasons, far too early for the Crown and that a date should be fixed in February or March. The Advocate General concurred. The court indicated that it would consider these submissions and intimate its decision on the date of the next hearing “in early course”.

Still no obvious sign, therefore, that either the Crown or the Advocate General have revised their Fabian tactics in the light of the appellant's medical condition or any other factors.

1 comment:

  1. In January 2009, Barack Obama takes over the US Presidency with high hopes that he can blow away the cobwebs of the Bush (father and son) administrations.

    Things can only get better for speeding up Abdelbaset Megrahi's appeal against his wrongful conviction for the Lockerbie bombing?

    Not so:

    a. Senator Joe Biden, vice president-elect, co-sponsored recent legislation penalising Libya in the US Congress.
    b. Along with Senator Frank Lautenberg - Bush Snr's Presidential Commission on Aviation Security and Terrorism (PCAST) member in 1989 - who insists Megrahi and Libya are guilty as charged.
    c. Senator Hillary Clinton - the US Secretary of State-elect - is also well known as a Libya basher.

    So if you're waiting for Scottish Justice to exonerate Mr Megrahi, you can expect a lot more of the Fabian delaying tactics to be deployed by the Crown and the Advocate General in order to ingratiate themselves with the American sponsors of Lockerbie injustice.

    Truth will out in the end, though!

    ReplyDelete