Saturday, 19 December 2015

Justice Committee resumes consideration of Megrahi petition on 5 January

[Justice for Megrahi’s petition calling for an independent inquiry into the conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi (PE1370) features on the agenda for the meeting of the Scottish Parliament Justice Committee to be held on 5 January 2016 at 10.00 in Holyrood Committee Room 4. The Committee Clerk’s paper on the agenda item reads as follows:]

PE1370: Independent inquiry into the Megrahi conviction – Lodged: 01 November 2010

Terms of the petition
The petition on behalf of Justice for Megrahi (JFM), calls for the opening of an inquiry into the 2001 Kamp van Zeist conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi for the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 in December 1988.

Operation Sandwood
At its meeting on 21 April 2015, the Committee considered an update received from Justice for Megrahi, which included a request to consider the appointment of an “independent prosecutor” to assess the findings of the forthcoming Police Scotland investigation known as “Operation Sandwood”. 'Sandwood' is the operational designation for Police Scotland's investigation of JFM‟s nine allegations of criminality levelled at Crown, police and forensic officials involved in the investigation and legal processes relating to the Lockerbie/Zeist affair which led to Megrahi‟s conviction. The allegations range from perversion of the course of justice to perjury. Police Scotland‟s final “Sandwood” report is expected to be completed before the end of the year.

The Committee previously agreed to write to the Lord Advocate seeking his views on the appointment of an “independent prosecutor”. His response outlined arrangements made by the Crown Office to employ an independent Crown Counsel who had not been involved in the Lockerbie case to deal with the matter. JFM have reject the involvement of an independent Crown Counsel because it does not represent an “independent, unbiased and constitutionally sound approach.‟

Police Scotland regularly meets with JFM to discuss ongoing issues regarding the case. At its meeting of 28 April officers highlighted the appointment of an independent QC to enhance the professional integrity of the investigation separate from the appointment by the Crown office.

High Court ruling
Separately, in December 2014 the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission asked the High Court for a ruling on the legal status of the victims’ relatives, to enable it to decide whether they can pursue an appeal on Megrahi‟s behalf. It ruled in July that the victims’ relatives had no legitimate interest to institute an appeal against the deceased‟s conviction.  It appears that the only method by which an appeal against the deceased conviction could be instigated is through the deceased‟s relatives or the executor of his estate. Whilst there have been some reports indicating that Megrahi’s family wish to be involved in an appeal, the Court proceeded on the basis that the SCCRC‟s reference was on behalf only of certain victims of the bombing.

Recent developments
Operation Sandwood
Following consideration of the petition on 22 September, the Committee agreed to write to the Lord Advocate again requesting more information about the appointment of an independent prosecutor to examine the findings of the Police investigation “Operation Sandwood”. The response, attached in Annexe C does not add to the earlier response provided and cites an earlier response sent to JFM (Annexe D) which the committee had sight of last time I considered the petition. [RB: These two annexes are to be found at the end of the committee papers.]

JFM have now responded directly to members reiterating their concerns about the impartiality of the COPF in handling this case and have sought assurances that independent consideration of the police investigation be agreed to. To date both the Scottish Government and COPF have concluded this is not necessary.

Clerks expect a further response from JFM in due course. This will be forwarded to members as soon as it is received. [RB: A lengthy response has been submitted by JFM to the committee. Once it appears on the Justice Committee’s section of the Scottish Parliament website, I shall reproduce it on this blog.]

Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission
On 5 November the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) announced that: “it is not in the interests of justice” to continue with a review of the conviction of the late Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi. Consequently, the application has been refused.”

In a news release published that day The Commission‟s Chairman, Jean Couper said:

“A great deal of public money and time was expended on the Commission‟s original review of Mr Megrahi‟s case which resulted, in 2007, in him being given the opportunity to challenge his conviction before the High Court by way of a second appeal. In 2009, along with his legal team, Mr Megrahi decided to abandon that appeal. Before agreeing to spend further public money on a fresh review the Commission required to consider the reasons why he chose to do so. It is extremely frustrating that the relevant papers, which the Commission believes are currently with the late Mr Megrahi‟s solicitors, Messrs Taylor and Kelly, and with the Megrahi family, have not been forthcoming despite repeated requests from the Commission. Therefore, and with some regret, we have decided to end the current review. It remains open in the future for the matter to be considered again by the Commission, but it is unlikely that any future application will be accepted for review unless it is accompanied with the appropriate defence papers. This will require the cooperation of the late Mr Megrahi’s solicitors and his family.”

The Committee can:  

Keep the petition open and monitor the progress of “Operation Sandwood”,  

Take any other action in relation to the petition that the Committee considers appropriate (including closing the petition).


  1. Dossier Lockerbie, 2015 >google translation, German English:

    For 27-year commemoration Lockerbie. With respect to the families of the PanAm 103 victims, the truth is not the silence of the desert, therefore the untrue stories and innsinuations including the wrong judgment of the Scottish Justice, against Abdelbaset Al Megrahi and Libya must be uncovered with the new secured Fakts and accepted...

    The proof of fraud with the first, black carbonized MST-13 timer fragment (PT-35) referred to as the "original":

    Sorry the first part is in German language, in working for English Translation

    The proof of fraud by two manipulated MST-13 timer fragments are supported by false testimony under oath from officials, in the court in Kamp van Zeist (2000).
    Mit dem ersten schwarz karbonisierten MST-13 Timerfragment (PT-35) "fabriziert" aus einem MST-13 Circuit Board (Prototyp) wurde im Lockerbie-Prozess, das Gericht in Kamp van Zeist mit betrügerischen Absichten getäuscht, um offensichtlich aus politischen Gründen, via MEBO, das damalige Kathafi Regime in Libyen, mit dem Anschlag auf PanAm 103, in Verbindung zu bringen:

    1.) Durch ein manipuliertes MST-35 Timerfragment (PT-35) welches angeblich am 15. September 1989, in einem verkohlten Slalom Shirt, bei 'RARDE', von Experte Allen gefunden wurde. (Das Datum enthüllte sich als Täuschung).

    2.) Mit Unterstützung von 2 überschriebenen Polizei Labels (PI-955, former PI-95) the discription of the article was originally written: cloths (charred).
    After the manipulation of (PI-95) the new designation was PI-995 with the same date, 17th of January 1989. The text of the discription of the article was changed into debris (charred).
    Das zweite Polizei Label (DP-137) mit realem Datum vom 10. 09. 1990, wurde auf 15. 09. 1989 abgeändert und nahm Bezug auf Feraday's Memorandum mit gleichem Datum, bekannt als "the lads and lassies memo"...

    3.) Durch eine weitere Rückbuchung des Datums auf 12. Mai 1989, über das Auffinden des selben MST-13 Timerfragments (PT-35) musste eine falsche Seite Nr. 51, generiert werden, welche zusätzlich in Dr. Heyes Report 181, zur bereits bestehenden Seite 51, eingesetzt wurde; versehen mit falschen Informationen, u.a. unter Sektion b) das Fragment (PT-35).

    4.) Das MST-13 Timerfragment (PT-35) wurde angeblich nie auf Sprengstoff-spuren untersucht ! Das muss logischerweise eine Schutzlüge sein, weil man sehr wohl wusste, dass das Fragment keine Sprengstoffspuren aufwies und durch Bekanntgabe folgerichtig, als Beweismittel, die entscheidende Position verloren hätte. (Übrigens wäre es für die Anklage in dieser Signifikanz kein Problem gewesen, während des Gerichtverfahrens das Fragment forensisch auf solche Beweismerkmale prüfen zu lassen, wenn es der Anklage genützt hätte...
    continued below >>>

  2. continued >>>

    5.) Ab April 1990 konnten die "Scottish Officials" von der schweizerischen 'BUBO', offenbar überzeugt werden, dass das präsentierte Prototyp MST-13 Fragment mit den 3 sichtlichen Kratzstellen und dem Letter "M" (für Muster) nicht identisch sein kann, mit den nach Libyen gelieferten MST-13 Timer, von MEBO AG.
    Deshalb besuchten, Insp. Willliam Williamson und Jim Gilchrist (ohne Feraday) am 17. April 1990, die Firma Siemens AG in München.
    Dort wurde die Oberfläche des MST-13 Timerfragments abgeschliffen (poliert), sowie das Fragment auf Anweisung von Inspector Williamson, in zwei Teile zersägt. Das grössere Teilstück, Nr. 353, bekam erst nach der Rückkehr in Scotland, die Markierung (PT-35/b) das zweite kleine Teilstück, Nr. 419, die Bezeichnung (DP-31/a).
    Aus den Siemens Labor-Fotografien ist nicht ersichtlich, ob der Letter "M" und die
    3 Kratzspuren, bei Siemens auspoliert wurden, oder zuvor von den "Scots" entfernt worden sind ?

    6.) Ich, Edwin Bollier besuchte, am 13. September 1999, für eine Befragung das Crown Office in Edinburgh. Von Procurator Mirian Watson, wurde mir garantiert, dass ich das originale MST-13 Fragment, in Lockerbie aufgefunden, begutachten könne.
    Beide Teile waren zuvor in getrennten Glashülsen versiegelt. Das grössere Teilstück (PT-35/b), war nicht schwarz karbonisiert, sondern mit grüner "Solder Mask" überzogen. Das kleine Teilstück (DP-31/a) war schwarz verkohlt !
    Nach diesem "Event" verlangte ich ein Zeuge um die signifikante Feststellung zu bestätigen. Det. Ms. DI Thonson wurde beauftragt dies zu tun, aber ihr Statement wurde dem Gericht und der SCCR-Commission, nachweislich vorenthalten !
    Die gesamte Befragung durch die Procuratoren Watson und Harvie, sowie die Antworten von Zeuge Bollier, wurden auf zwei "Dumfries" Polizei "Statements of Witness", am 16. bis 17. Sept. 1999, festgehalten und stehen für ein neues Appeal von MEBO, zur Verfügung.

    7.) Beim Lockerbie Prozess 2000, wurde ein Faxschreiben, vom 22. Januar 1990, zwischen Experte Feraday (RARDE) und dem Scottish SIO Chief, Superintendent Stuart Henderson, unterschlagen.
    Die bedeutsame Faxmitteilung stand erst zwischen 2003 und 2007, der Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) zur Verfügung !
    Seit dieser Fax Nachricht wurde klar, dass das angeblich in Lockerbie aufgefundene MST-13 Timerfragment, erst im Januar 1990, in einem Slalom Shirt gefunden wurde...
    Somit werden alle Zeugenaussagen unter Eid, von Chief Inspector, William Williamson Scottish Police (Crown Witness Nr. 696) und von Forensic Expert Allen Feraday, Zeuge Nr. 355 > "das Fragment (PT-35) sei am 15. Sept. 1989, bezugsweise, am *12. Mai 1989, in einem Slalom Shirt gefunden worden", zur strafbaren Lüge ! *(Seite 51)
    +++ continued below >>>

  3. continued from below:

    The second decisive evidence of fraud with an MST-13 timer fragment, now coated on both sides with green "Solder Mask" and under the same name (PT-35) - finally brought the "desirable involvement" Libya's, in the attack on Pan Am 103, over Lockerbie !

    A report released by the U.S. Dept. of Justice, gives MEBO the conviction, that obviously a second, manipulated MST-13 timer fragment PT-35 (not black carbonized) but on both sides covered with green "Solder Mask", was handed over to the responsible mployee in the FBI Criminal Laboratory, for forensic comparison; this means, the FBI- have been deceived by the 'Scots' !

    The former Scottish SIO Chief Superintendent Stuart Henderson (Crown witness number 696) ­in June 1990, accompanied by Chief Inspector, William Williamson (Scottish Police) and Forensic expert Allen Feraday (RARDE) ­visited the FBI Criminal Laboratory in Washington, lead by FBI Expert Tom Thurmann.

    Their task was to compare a MST-­13 Timerfragment (PT-­35) ­ was (allegedly) found in Lockerbie­ with a MST-­13 Timer (K­1) in possession of the CIA. The K­1 Timer was found in Togo. The results of the investigations and comparison have been documented in a secret FBI- Report in Washington on August 20th, 1990. Dok. Nr. 26-2­23. The MST-13 timer (K1) was confiscated from a Libyan courier.

    The document is now declassified: Link to FBI declassified FBI­-report:…/36-fbi-report-dated-20-…

    Based on research by Edwin Bollier & MEBO Ltd. the presented fragment (PT-35)
    to the FBI lab, cannot be the original MST-13 fragment (black carbonized) as (allegedly) found in Lockerbie. The reasons for a fraud is following allegation:

    8) At the time of the presentation of the (PT-35) fragment at the FBI laboratory on June, 1990, the original (black carbonised) MST-13 timer fragment (PT-35)
    consisted already of two pieces and was no longer in green colour!
    The PT-35 fragment was cut by Siemens Germany, on April 27th, 1990 into two pieces, 2 (two) months before the visit by Henderson & Co, at the FBI laboratory in the USA. After the Siemens cutting session, the larger part was marked as (PT-35/b) and the smaller part was marked as (DP-31/a).

    9) The FBI laboratory report confirms that the examined (PT35) timer fragment was covered on both sides with solder masque. (Solder masques are green in colour).

    continued below >>>

  4. continued >>>

    9) The FBI laboratory report confirms that the examined (PT35) timer fragment was covered on both sides with solder masque. (Solder masques are green in colour).

    10) The FBI laboratory report confirms that the colour of fragment was green and consisted of 9 layers of fibreglass.
    All those characteristics confirm that they did not examine and compared the original black carbonised (PT35) fragment fabricated with 8 layers of fibreglass as allegedly found in Lockerbie.

    11) Also in this second MST 13 timer fragment (PT-35) were apparently not found traces of explosives, at RARDE, also nor in the FBI- laboratory, discovered ...
    Mainly this green MST-13 timer fragment (PT-35) was decisive, that Libya could connected in the Lockerbie tragedy.

    The fragment (PT-35) is A FRAUD OF EVIDENCE to harm Libya's, Abdelbaset al Megrahi and Bollier & MEBO Ltd.!

    by Edwin Bollier MEBO Ltd. Telecommunication Switzerland. Webpage:

    Statement of Witness
    S 5483 F
    Place & D.O.B:
    4/11/37 in Zürich
    Mebo Ltde Telecommunications,
    Badenerstrasse 414, 8004 Zurich
    Business Tel. No: [.....]
    Statement taken: on 16/9/99
    Loveburn St, Police Station
    By DT Leshi
    Transcript from the Original handwritten Statement
    (Page 1 – 5 all pages signed by [...............] and E.Bollier

    STATES: (handwritten)
    I have been interviewed by Scottish Police Officers on numerous occasions in the past. In addition to my previous statements I would like to make the following

    About a year ago I asked the Swiss Authorities to ask the Scottish Authorities by means of a request for Judicial Assistance that I be granted an opportunity to view the original fragment of the MEBO MST13 Timer found at Lockerbie from the PAN AM 103 Air Disaster.

    In response to this I received an invitation from the Crown Office to come to Scotland on 13 th September 1999 to discuss the whole matter. On 14 th September 1999 at about 4:15 pm – 4 Police Officers entered the room and gave me the opportunity to examine the original MST-13 timer fragment.

    One officer opened a sealed glass phial, removed and placed on the table a plastic bag containing the fragment for me to examine.

    Page 2
    I examined the fragment using a magnifying glass of about 10 x magnification and a pair of specially adapted spectacles. I established that the fragment was coloured green, lacquered on one side and identified it as being manufactured by Thuring, Switzerland. This type of PC board was used in at least 5 MST-13 Timers supplied to the Libyan Army.

    When asked what I could see by Ms. Watson, Procurator Fiscal Depute in the presence of Mr. Harvie of the Criminal Investigation Team Crown Office I said that the solder points where a relay would normally be connected to the board showed that there had never been any soldering there. (ie no structure), The edge of the solder print on the fragment that I was shown had no distance between it and the edge of circuit board Thüring PC boards normally have a 1 mm gap between the edge of the solder and the edge of the PCB. Seeing this I said “This fragment cannot be from a working timer

    Page 3:
    Q: Mr.Bollier have you had any contact with the Defence?
    A: Yes
    Q: When and how did you speak to them
    A: 9.00 pm last night by telephone. He was in Holland.
    Q: Who did you speak to?
    A: Alistair Duff
    Q: Who instigated the contact?
    A: I phoned him
    Q: Can I ask why
    A: I asked him when he was coming to Scotland.
    Q: Why did you ask him that
    A: Because I have a couple of legal questions for him about the interview
    and generally in connection with the Lockerbie matter, specially about
    my rights here.
    Q: Did the conversation discuss any other matters
    A: It was short conversation and he said he would ring me after 5 pm.
    I have nothing to add at this time.
    The Statement is signed:
    continued below >>>

  6. continued >>>
    Statement of Witness
    Full Name::
    Edwin Bollier
    Electronic Engineer
    Age & D.O.B:
    Place of Birth: Zürich
    Business Address: Mebo Ltde Telecommunications,
    Badenerstrasse 414, 8004 Zurich
    Business Tel. No: [.....]
    Statement taken: on 19/9/99
    Dumfries St, Police Station
    By DC Brown No 117
    Transcript from the Original handwritten Statement
    (Page 1 – 3 ; all pages signed by [...............] [.................. ] and
    STATES: (handwritten)

    On 17 September 1999 at about 4:10 pm, I was shown for the second
    time a piece identified as DP 31, [....] second smaller section of the
    whole original Lockerbie fragment from a Mebo MST-13 timer.
    I examinded this [.....] again under a magnifying glass of 10 x magnification and established that it was light brown in colour. This is not the same colour [................] Lockerbie fragment, which [.....] green.

    I suggested that 2 CID or forensic [......] are called [.....] witness so that
    they can confirm what colour they see, and they could then prepare statement to that [........].
    Despite repeted requests to do this, my suggestion was rejected by Principal Procecutor Fiscal Miss Watson and Mr.Harvie of the Crown Office and they gone [....] a reason that I [....] have [....] a witness and [....] such I couold not call for other witnesses.

    They doo confirmed that they had recorded my comments in their own notebooks, and that they would carry out the necessary investigations.

    Page 2
    I also wish to [ add] the following to this statement.
    On Tuesday 14 th September 1999, in the presence of the Principal Procuator Fiscal Depute Misss Watson and Mr Harvie of the Lockerbie Criminal Investigation Team, I was shown the alleged original piece of evidence of an MST-13 timer fragment, which was allegedly found at the Pan Am 103 airplane disaster by the investigating authorities.
    It was confirmed to me that a photograph [identified] [...] PT / 35 (b), on page 336 of the investigation files was identical with the gfragment tghat
    I was shown.

    The fragment I was shown is green in colour, [........] from Thüring and
    [....] [............] from MEBO. It is not identical to the three prototypes buiolt
    by Mr.Lumpert.
    Shortly before 5 pm on Friday 17 September 1999, at [the point in my
    Statement, Mr. Harvie intercepted us and asked me to return to the Crown office room on the top floor of the Police Station.
    I accompanied him to that room [...........................................................]
    noting this Statement(DC Brown) and the interpreter.

    Miss Watson then told me that she would allow me, plus an independent
    Police officer to view [............................................................ She said that the Police officer would be called to [.........................] what colour the items [.....] and to provide a statement to [.......].

    A short while later a female officer came into the room (DI Thomson ?)
    [....................................] I then viewed items PT 35 (b) and [......] DP
    3e1. The officer was orred ? not to say what colour she saw, just to remember it.
    Once we had viewed these [........], the officer and I signed [.....] attached
    to each.
    [...........................] E.Bollier

    Page 3
    The Statement is signed: