Decision to free Megrahi was right

[This is the heading over a letter from David McEwan Hill published in today's edition of The Herald. It reads as follows:]

The fact that Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi, the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, is refusing to die on schedule makes no difference whatsoever to the decision to release him – based carefully and correctly on all the legal conditions required to justify this (“So daft to expect Gaddafi to retire to Dun-dictating, The Herald, July 28).

The trial of this man at Camp Zeist remains a blot on Scotland’s record. It cannot be described as a “fair trial”, as Hans Koechler, the UN observer at the court, observed. I find it painful to have it described as a Scottish trial.

[A letter from David Stevenson in today's edition of The Scotsman reads as follows:]

You say that "Megrahi is a living rebuke to (justice secretary, Kenny] MacAskill" (leader, 28 July).

MacAskill followed the rules and in my view should be commended for doing so and for showing common sense and compassion.

Along with many other Scots, I see Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi as a living rebuke to a legal system which condemned him on very shaky evidence and which has failed properly to re-examine his case and what really happened at Lockerbie. It is still not too late to do this.