Saturday, 31 January 2009

Prisoner Transfer Agreement laid before Parliament

The treaty setting up a prisoner transfer agreement between the United Kingdom and Libya was laid before the UK Parliament on 27 January 2009. At least twenty-one parliamentary sitting days must elapse before the UK Government can ratify the treaty. Both governments must do so before the Treaty becomes operational. Because of a parliamentary recess, the UK's ratification cannot take place before 4 March 2009. How long the Libyan ratification process will take, I have no idea. The text of the treaty can be read here.

Art 2(3) reads: "Transfer may be requested by either the transferring State or the receiving State."

Art 3 provides: "A prisoner may be transferred under this Treaty only if the following criteria are met: (...)

(b) the judgment is final and no other criminal proceedings relating to the offence ... are pending in the transferring State; (...)

(e) the transferring and receiving States agree to the transfer."

It is clear therefore that no transfer could be requested without Mr Megrahi's abandoning the current appeal.

4 comments:

  1. I'd like to ask two questions.
    1) Would it be the Scottish or UK government which would have to agree to the transfer?
    2) If Megrahi gave up the appeal could he take up any civil litigation?

    ReplyDelete
  2. 1) It is the Scottish Government that would have to agree to the transfer of a prisoner serving his sentence in Scotland.

    2) It would not be possible to raise civil proceedings for wrongful imprisonment while the criminal conviction stood.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Would be possible to raise another kind of civil action such as misfeasance?

    ReplyDelete
  4. It would be theoretically possible to raise civil actions against individuals who deliberately or negligently misled the court that convicted Mr Megrahi. But if he had abandoned his current appeal, I think it would be virtually impossible for him to succeed in any such action.

    A defamation action against persons who referred to him as being guilty of the Lockerbie bombing would not be possible, since Scots law has an irrebuttable presumption in such circumstances that a person who has been convicted of a crime is guilty of it.

    ReplyDelete