Tuesday, 23 December 2014

Law officers should never close their minds

[A number of news media today have reports on yesterday’s announcement by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission and Aamer Anwar’s response on behalf of the applicants for review of the Megrahi conviction. A typical example is The Scotsman’s Lockerbie families bid to fight Megrahi conviction.

A letter from Bob Taylor in the same newspaper today reads as follows:]

At first glance Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland seems to have struck a balanced tone on the question of continuing attempts to bring all those allegedly involved in the Lockerbie bombing to justice.

But many will be surprised at his remark that “not one Crown Office investigator or prosecutor has raised a concern about the evidence in the case”.

Miscarriages of justice have often been identified by the vigilance of writers and journalists rather than simply the rigour of the official legal establishment.

He and his law officers should never close their minds to information that might come to light from many sources within and outwith Libya.

Nor should he be inhibited by any complex geopolitical factors which might get in the way of the search for the truth.

The Lockerbie controversy has moved on in recent years, largely because of the downfall of the Gaddafi regime in Libya.

Whereas there is still some doubt as to whether Abdel Baset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi was involved at all, the emphasis seems to have shifted.

Who were the other culprits in the Libyan hierarchy, it has been asked? This now seems to be the modus operandi of Mr Mulholland and his officers.

But while some doubt might remain about Megrahi’s guilt, he cannot let that matter rest.

The case for an international inquiry under United Nations supervision may still be the way to establish whether Libya and its intelligence service was involved at all and, if so, was Megrahi 
simply a soldier carrying out orders from a deadly chain of command?

1 comment:

  1. “Not one Crown Office investigator or prosecutor has raised a concern about the evidence in the case”!

    That is a dissembling comment!

    No ‘Crown Office investigator or prosecutor’ has [formally] raised a concern [to avoid being sacked], as opposed to, ‘many in the legal world have raised concerns about the case’, if only because of the publicity it has attracted.

    The Lord Advocate’s comment [like Cameron’s “insulting the relatives”] is intended as an implicit order to the Police, SCCRC and High Court not to progress the Lockerbie Case.