The forthcoming Megrahi appeal

[What follows is excerpted from a long document recently produced by the Crown in connection with the forthcoming posthumous appeal against the conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.]

On 6 March 2020 the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission referred the late Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi’s 2001 conviction for the murder of 270 people in the Lockerbie bombing back to the High Court of Justiciary. (...)

The current appeal stems from an application made to the SCCRC by Mr Megrahi’s family in July 2017. In April 2018 the Commission accepted that application and began a full review of Mr Megrahi’s conviction. In their 2020 statement of reasons the Commission summarised the application by Mr Megrahi’s family as being based on 6 grounds, they were:

1. Insufficient Evidence;

2. Unreasonable Verdict;

3. Fresh Evidence, namely the Christmas Lights;

4. Non-disclosure;

5. Evidence relating to the Timer Fragment; and

6. Evidence relating to the Suitcase Ingestion.

On 6 March 2020 the Commission published their Statement of Reasons, a lengthy volume setting out the findings of their review, and in conclusion referred the conviction back to the High Court of Justiciary for an appeal hearing.

The Commission concluded that they could only refer the conviction back to the High Court on two of the above six grounds: Unreasonable Verdict and Non-Disclosure.

In June 2020 those representing the family of the late Mr Megrahi lodged their Grounds of Appeal at the High Court of Justiciary, thereby formally beginning the third appeal against conviction in this case.

The Appeal Court is bound in law to hear the appeal on the grounds of appeals in so far as they are in line with the Commission’s reference, and there is also provision for the appellants to argue that they should be allowed to argue further grounds of appeal not covered by the Commission’s reference.

The grounds to be argued at the appeal, also referred to as the scope of the appeal, were argued at the preliminary hearing on 21 August 2020.

The Preliminary Hearing called before Lord Carloway the Lord Justice General, Lady Dorrian the Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Menzies at the Appeal Court on 21 August 2020. This was a virtual hearing of the Appeal Court. Submissions were heard from the Appellants, the Crown and on behalf of the Advocate General. (...)

The Grounds of appeal were numbered Part 1, and Part 2, A – D. Arguments were made by both sides as to the scope of the appeal and whether additional grounds of appeal, which did not form part of the SCCRC’s referral, could be argued in the appeal. The grounds of appeal which were matters referred by the SCCRC were automatically included in the scope of the appeal and no arguments were made in relation to them. These are:

Ground 1 - that no reasonable jury could have convicted Mr Megrahi based on the evidence;

and

Ground 2 Part A - the non-disclosure of information in relation to the evidence of Crown Witness Antony Gauci.

A number of documents were listed in support of Ground 2 Part A. However, one of them, (described as Part A, para 14 in the Grounds of Appeal), was not included in the SCCRC referral and has now been excluded by the Court from the appeal.

The Appellants argued that additional grounds of appeal in addition to the Commission’s grounds of referral should also be admitted, namely:

Ground 2 Part B - the non-disclosure of information in relation to the witness Abdul Majid, also known as Giaka;

Ground 2 Part C - the non-disclosure of information contained in protectively marked documents; and

Ground 2 Part D - the non-disclosure of other information which shows there was no effective system of disclosure to ensure a proper procedural safeguard to guarantee the right to a fair trial. This information was further divided into 7 distinct areas.

Parts B, C and D (and also one item from Part A) did not form part of the reasons for the referral by the SCCRC. They were points that the SCCRC considered and have commented on within their Statement of Reasons but which they did not consider were in the interest of justice to refer. The SCCRC did say, however, that the appellants might seek to include them within an additional ground of appeal.

The Crown position at the hearing in respect of the potential additional grounds of appeal inGround 2, Part A (item 14), Part B, Part C and one of the 7 areas in Part D was that whilst recognising it was ultimately a matter for the Court, the preference was that they were heard in the full appeal hearing because the Crown would wish to answer the points and consider it is in the interests of justice to do so because to leave the points unanswered may affect public confidence in the safety of Mr Megrahi’s conviction and the administration of criminal justice in Scotland more generally. In relation to part D above, the Crown asked for all but one of the 7 examples given to be excluded from the scope of the appeal.

After hearing all the arguments, the Court made avizandum (this means a pause) while they considered their decision. On 26 August 2020 the Court issued their decision on the scope of the appeal, and set out the procedure to be followed:

1. They allowed Mr Megrahi’s son, Ali Abdulbasit Ali Almaqrahi to bring the appeal on behalf of his late father.

2. They also allowed the appellants to proceed with some additional grounds of appeal that did not relate to any of the reasons set out by the SCCRC in its 2020 Statement of Reasons. These are as follows:

a) The Court allowed Ground 2, Part B to be heard at the appeal as an additional ground. This is with regard to information relating to the witness Abdul Majid, also known as Giaka.

b) In respect of Ground 2, Part C, which related to information contained in the protectively marked documents, the court has not made a final decision about whether this will form a ground of appeal yet. Instead, it ordered that the documents in question be produced to the court and that a special hearing be fixed in a closed court in order to consider whether the Public Interest Immunity Certificate granted in respect of the documents should remain in place. A hearing took place on 11 November 2020. The result is awaited (...) [RB: On Friday, 20 November the High Court published its decision upholding the UK Government's claim of public interest immunity. Accordingly this proposed ground of appeal falls.]

c) With regard to Ground 2, Part D, in which the appellants argued that there was not an effective system of disclosure to ensure that Mr Megrahi had received a fair trial, the court refused to allow this, excluding all 7 parts of it and the wider argument. It stated that it would not allow any ground of appeal to proceed which related to "system of disclosure which was not fit for the purpose of ensuring that all relevant information was identified and disclosed", the absence of a "robust system of disclosure", a "systemic failure of disclosure"; and “bad faith on the part of the respondent” (the Crown).

d) The court also set out that the hearing will start on Tuesday 24 November 2020 and the three following days. 

The Appeal Court will sit at 10am UK time from Tuesday 24th until Friday 28th [sic] November 2020. 

A bench of five Judges of the High Court of Justiciary will hear the full appeal hearing and rule on the merits of the appeal. They will be: 

The Right Hon Lord Carloway, the Lord Justice General

The Right Hon Lady Dorrian, the Lord Justice Clerk

The Right Hon Lord Glennie 

The Right Hon Lord Menzies

The Right Hon Lord Woolman.

The Crown will be represented at the appeal by three Advocate Deputes: 

Ronnie Clancy QC

Douglas Ross QC  

Nick Gardiner. 

They also represented the Crown in the 2007-2009 appealfollowing the SCCRC’s 2007 reference  which was ultimately abandoned by the appellant. At the appeal hearing, as senior Crown Counsel, Ronnie Clancy QC will make the Crown’s submissions to the Court.

The appellants will be represented by Senior Counsel and Junior Counsel. They are respectively:

Claire Mitchell QC

Claire Connelly.

[RB: It appears that the hearing will once again take place by means of WEBEX, a video conferencing online application. Log-in information for members of the public wishing to follow the proceedings (audio only) is to be found here.]

Procedural hearing in the Megrahi family appeal

[What follows is excerpted from a report published today on the website of The Herald:]

Lawyers representing the family of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the Libyan man jailed for the 1988 Lockerbie bombing, are to begin a fight against his conviction on Friday - with a call for better transparency.

Megrahi, who died in 2012, was the only person convicted for the bombing which killed 243 passengers and 16 crew on Pan Am Flight 103 as it travelled from London to New York. Eleven people on the ground in Lockerbie also lost their lives in what was the biggest terrorist attack on British soil. (...)

Now an appeal is being started after a Scottish commission ruled a miscarriage of justice may have occurred.

On Friday a procedural hearing in an appeal against conviction will start presided over by Scotland’s most senior judge the Lord President – Lord Carloway along with the Lord Justice Clerk-Lady Dorian and Lord Menzies.

The hearing will take place by means of WEBEX, a video conferencing online application.

The judges will appear on screen and appeal legal team will appear from a facility in Glasgow.

Appeal lawyer Aamer Anwar (below)  on behalf of the family of the late Al-Megrahi said they need to move the court to consider granting authority to see certain "important" documents "over which public interest immunity is asserted".

He said: "Our argument is that public interest immunity certificate is not everlasting, it has been 31 years since the bombing and the UK Government represented by the Advocate General should justify why it is still asserting PII and denying full disclosure of this information to our team."

He added: "We are disappointed that the Scottish Government, the UK Government, the United States and other foreign governments have refused consent to disclose matters which at this time remain redacted in papers disclosed to us."

Mr Anwar has said the grounds for the family’s appeal were “substantial”. (...)

The Scottish Criminal cases review commission in March issued a 419-page decision saying that “further information” provided grounds for appeal.

The commission cited an “unreasonable verdict” and “non-disclosure” in the handling of the case. (...)

Mr Anwar's office says that it is widely claimed that the Lockerbie bombing was ordered by Iran and carried out by a Syrian based terrorist group in retaliation for a US Navy strike on an Iranian Airbus six months earlier, in which 290 people died.

Mr Anwar said: "The reputation of the Scottish criminal justice system has suffered badly both at home and internationally because of widespread doubts about the conviction of Mr Al-Megrahi; he was convicted in a Scottish court of law and that is the only appropriate place for his guilt or innocence to be determined.

"A reversal of the verdict would have meant that the governments of the United States and the United Kingdom stand accused of having lived a monumental lie for 31 years, imprisoning a man they knew to be innocent and punishing the Libyan people for a crime which they did not commit."

He said the Appeal Court in a judgment in July 2015, ruled that the relatives of Lockerbie bombing victims would not be allowed to pursue an appeal on behalf of the only man convicted of the crime.

The families did not give up and in July 2017 a further application was lodged with the Commission on behalf of the Al-Megrahi family.

"There can be never be a time limit on justice, the families who support this appeal have never given up their search for the truth," said Mr Anwar. "On March 11th 2020, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission decided that Mr Megrahi’s case should be referred to the High Court for the determination.

Magrahi's legal team  submitted "serious allegations" of the failure of the Crown to disclose evidence which Mr Anwar's team say have been key to the defence and "interfered with the right to a fair trial".

Mr Anwar's team said the Crown "failed in its duty of disclosure" of relevant material to Mr Al Megrahi’s defence team prior to trial.

"This prejudiced the defence in their preparation and conduct of the trial to such an extent that the Commission have concluded that this may have given rise to a miscarriage of justice," they said.

[RB: In a blogpost on 13 August 2020 I speculated that the document being sought was the one in respect of which Foreign Secretary David Miliband had previously granted a public interest immunity certificate. It appears that I was right.]

Preliminary procedural matters in Megrahi appeal

The criminal court rolls for the week beginning 17 August 2020 have just been published.  The appeal brought by the family of the late Abdelbaset al-Megrahi features twice, in the following terms:

HIGH COURT OF JUSTICIARY

1st APPEAL COURT - 5 JUDGES - CRIMINAL APPEAL ROLL

under THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (SCOTLAND) ACT 1995

A SITTING will be held on

FRIDAY 21ST AUGUST 2020

at Ten o’clock forenoon, for the disposal of the following:

PROCEDURAL HEARING IN AN APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION

FOLLOWING UPON THE APPLICATION FROM THE SCCRC

1. Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed   John Pryde & Co,   HCA/2020 - 5/XM

Al Megrahi                           Edinburgh

(Other)  

***

HIGH COURT OF JUSTICIARY

1st APPEAL COURT - CRIMINAL APPEAL ROLL

under THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (SCOTLAND) ACT 1995

A SITTING will be held on

FRIDAY 21ST AUGUST 2020

at Ten o’clock forenoon, for the disposal of the following:

APPLICATION FOR COMMISSION AND DILIGENCE FOR RECOVERY OF

DOCUMENTS

1. Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed    John Pryde & Co,   HCA/2020 - 5/XM

Al Megrahi                            Edinburgh

(Other) 

***

John Pryde & Co are Edinburgh solicitors acting as agents for the Glasgow-based solicitors for the Megrahi family, Aamer Anwar & Co. As previously announced, the proceedings will be conducted via video link.  

Under the first item on the roll, the court will probably seek to ascertain how far advanced is the preparation of the cases of both the appellant and the Crown; when the full appeal hearing can realistically be expected to start; and how long that hearing is estimated to last.  The second item on the roll is an application by the Megrahi legal team for documents to be made available to them that they claim are necessary to enable them properly to present the appeal. I do not know what documents are being sought, but they may well include the document in respect of which the UK Government has previously asserted public interest immunity.

Lockerbie case: campaigner and lawyer hit out at 'withheld' evidence

[This is the headline over a report in today's edition of The National. It reads as follows:]

A prominent figure in the fight to prove the innocence of Libyan Abdelbaset al-Megrahi for the Lockerbie bombing has said keeping the contents of a 1991 telegram to then prime minister John Major secret until at least 2032 is not in Scotland’s – or any other nation’s – public interest.

Dr Jim Swire was speaking to The National after the claim about the document resurfaced. Its contents have been in the public domain for more than three years.

It was said to have been written by the late King Hussein of Jordan, who said the group originally suspected of carrying out the December 1988 atrocity – the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC) – was responsible.

And Aamer Anwar, the Scottish lawyer who is leading the Megrahi family’s bid to clear his name, told The National it was a “vital piece of evidence” that had been withheld from Megrahi’s defence.

That view is shared by Swire, who lost his daughter Flora in the bombing. He said: “I can’t make out why it should be in the public interest of the Scots or any other nation for this to remain under public interest immunity (PII) after this long – unless you believe it is in Scotland’s interest to continue to conceal the failure of her biggest international criminal investigation of recent years.

“It was the concealment of items such as this which led Professor Hans Koechler [UN observer to the Camp Zeist trial] to describe the proceedings as not representing justice, largely because of the Crown Office’s failure to share evidently significant material with the defence.

“The King of Jordan’s communication had been made available to the Crown Office for years before [then foreign secretary] David Miliband placed the PII certificate on it, at the Crown Office’s request. [RB: The Crown Office did not oppose release of the communication. It was the Advocate General for Scotland, acting on behalf of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, that did so.] I think it is in the Scottish public’s interest to know how Whitehall connived with the Crown Office to ensure that justice was not done at Zeist.

He added: “It was Lady Thatcher who originally forbade an inquiry. Could it have been in part because her then recently privatised Heathrow was the showpiece of her privatisation programme?”

Anwar said the Megrahi family case was still with the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) which he expected to report by the end of summer, when he hoped to return to the Appeal Court.

He said: “What is incredibly frustrating is the fact that the British government, the authorities, seem to still be maintaining attempts to continue what would be seen as a cover-up and deny critical information to the defence, because we remain the defence lawyers for Abdelbaset al-Megrahi posthumously.

All of this information which would go to proving his innocence continues to be denied us. The finger of blame as always pointed at the PFLP-GC.

“It is ... shocking behaviour, whether it be from the Crown Office or others in authority who seem to be conducting themselves in this manner.”

Meanwhile, The Telegraph yesterday named four members of the PFLP-GC – allegedly hired by Iran to bring down Pan Am flight 103 as revenge for a US naval attack on an Iranian Airbus in July 1988. They were: Ahmed Jibril, its potential mastermind; Hafez Dalkamoni, his right-hand man; Jordanian-born bomb-maker Marwan Khreesat, who possibly made the Lockerbie device; and Mohammed Abu Talb, who could have delivered it. [RB: I cannot find this Telegraph article. But the newspaper did publish an article naming these four men on 10 March 2014. It can be read here.]

The Crown Office said the PFLP-GC link was considered and rejected at the original trial. A spokesperson added: “The court concluded that the conception, planning and execution of the plot which led to the bombing was of Libyan origin. The only appropriate forum for the determination of guilt or innocence is the criminal court, and Mr Megrahi was convicted unanimously by three senior judges.

“His conviction was upheld unanimously by five judges, in an Appeal Court presided over by the Lord Justice General, Scotland’s most senior judge. As the investigation remains live, it would not be appropriate to offer further comment.” [RB: My commentary on the grave shortcomings of the trial verdict and the appeal can be read here.]

Reaction to sealing of 1991 Lockerbie telegram to John Major

[A letter from Dr Jim Swire is published in today's edition of The Times. It reads as follows:]

 As the father of Flora Swire, a victim of the 1988 Lockerbie disaster, may I congratulate The Times on its brave attempt to obtain the contents of a telegram sent to John Major as prime minister from an unnamed overseas government (“Lockerbie telegram must remain sealed until 2032”, Scotland edition, Apr 10). It has long been apparent that there are many fatal flaws in the evidence brought to the Zeist court in 2000-01, and used to convict the Libyan Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi of being a key perpetrator.

Lockerbie remains the worst single terrorist outrage to occur in the UK since the Second World War, yet there has been no inquiry. Those who value the independence of judicial systems from political interference must, like us relatives, be concerned about the reluctance of successive UK governments to allow relevant matters to become public. By 2032 I will be 96, and probably leaning on a cromach to listen.

[RB: As submitted, the letter read as follows:]

As the father of Flora Swire, a victim the 1988 Lockerbie disaster may I congratulate The Times on its brave attempt to obtain the contents of a telegram sent to Sir John Major as PM, from an overseas kingdom.

It has long been apparent that there are many fatal flaws in the evidence brought to the Zeist court in 2000/1, and used to convict the Libyan, Baset Al-Megrahi of being a key perpetrator.

During the second appeal by Mr Megrahi against conviction, Scotland's Advocate-General of the day was sent post-haste to confer with then UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband who was persuaded immediately to  issue a PII certificate to protect a communication received by Sir John from access by the public or the defence team.

When a distinguished Scottish newspaper, having discovered the contents was about to publish, it was threatened with draconian measures to disrupt its editions

This communication to Sir John  had been in the possession of the Megrahi  prosecution team for years, but denied to Megrahi's defence. Megrahi's second appeal was on the cusp of reaching parts of the evidence in which it might have been highly relevant.

At that point Mr Megrahi was offered compassionate release and his appeal was stopped.

Lockerbie remains the worst single terrorist outrage to occur in the UK since WWII, yet there has been no inquiry.

Those who value the independence of judicial systems from political interference must, like us relatives, be concerned about the reluctance of successive UK Governments to allow relevant matters to become public for so long.

By 2032 I will be 94 years old, and probably leaning on a cromach to listen.

[RB: An article published in today's edition of The National reads in part:]

A decision to keep under wraps a telegram sent to them prime minister John Major three years after the Lockerbie bombing “adds insult to injury” for the families and friends of those who died in the atrocity, according to a campaigner who believes in the innocence of the late Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the only person convicted for it.

The Cabinet Office claimed the contents of the telegram to Major in 1991 were against the national interest – despite the fact that former Scottish justice secretary Kenny MacAskill put them into the public domain almost three years ago in his book The Lockerbie Bombing: The Search for Justice.

Officials refused a Freedom of Information (FoI) request from The Times newspaper, which means the document will be kept secret at the UK National Archives, at Kew in London, until at least 2032.

Their response read: “In this instance, we believe the release of the information received in confidence would harm UK relations with the country which provided the information.

“This would be detrimental to the operation of government and would not be in the UK’s interest.

“In light of the potential harm to UK relations with the country concerned, and UK interests there, it is judged that release of the material would not be in the public interest.”

The material is covered by a controversial public interest immunity (PII) certificate, which was signed in 2008 by then foreign secretary David Miliband.

It was identified as important to the defence of Megrahi by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC), which granted his appeal after the Crown failed to disclose details at his 2002 trial.

In his book, MacAskill said the telegram to Major, above, was from the late King Hussein of Jordan and blamed the bombing on the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command (PFLP-GC), the group originally suspected of carrying it out.

Records at the National Archives confirm that Major received a telegram relating to the bombing on November 15, 1991 – the day after the British and US governments announced they were bringing charges against Megrahi and his co-accused Lamin Khalifah Fhimah.

Iain McKie, from the Justice for Megrahi (JfM) group, which is campaigning to clear the Libyan’s name, said: “It beggars belief that the UK government, after 30 years of widespread and well-founded doubts about various aspects of the Lockerbie investigation and trial, continues in its efforts to hide the truth about the tragedy.

“That it should claim to be protecting the public interest only adds insult to injury for the family and friends of the 270 souls who perished.

“Why would they claim it was in the public interest in keeping this material quiet until 2032?

“In some ways it heightens – not lessens – suspicion.

“Here in Scotland we’re awaiting the SCCRC decision on the submission from the Megrahi family – and there is a big story to be told internationally.”

MacAskill told The National there was “no good reason” to keep the contents secret, given that Hussein is dead. He said: “It can hardly exacerbate the situation in Jordan.

“Besides, the Crown has always been happy for it to be released as they think it just adds to the conspiracy theories when there’s a good explanation about it and it doesn’t exculpate Libya or Megrahi.” (...) [RB: The failure to disclose the document to Megrahi's legal team before or during the Lockerbie trial is one of the six reasons given by the SCCRC for finding that Megrahi's conviction might have amounted to a miscarriage of justice. It is accordingly difficult to accept the Crown's contention, as reported here by Mr MacAskill, that it does not exculpate Libya or Megrahi, or at least seriously undermine the case against them.]

Professor Robert Black QC, the architect of the Lockerbie trial in the Netherlands, who believes there was a miscarriage of justice, said: “It is extremely difficult to understand how a document dating from Nov-ember 15, 1991, could still in 2019 adversely affect the national interests of the UK or its relations with the country of origin.”

“Much more likely is that the contents of the documents would embarrass the UK by showing just how tenuous is the case for Libyan responsibility for the Lockerbie tragedy.”

Lockerbie telegram must remain sealed until 2032

[This is the headline over an article in today's edition of The Times. It reads in part:]

Ministers have refused to disclose the contents of a telegram sent to the prime minister three years after the Lockerbie bombing, claiming it would be harmful to Britain.

A message sent to John Major in 1991, containing information about the atrocity from an unnamed overseas government, is held at the UK National Archives at Kew, west London.

An application made by The Times to view it has been rejected on the basis that it would be damaging to national interests.

The cabinet office’s dismissal of the freedom of information request means the document will remain closed to the public until 2032 at the earliest. It has fuelled suggestions from campaigners that evidence relating to Britain’s worst terrorist atrocity is being concealed.

National Archive records confirm that Mr Major received a telegram relating to the Lockerbie bombing on November 15, 1991. [RB: Significantly, this is the day following the announcement by the UK and US governments that they were bringing charges against Abdelbaset Megrahi and Lamin Fhimah: 
http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2010/11/nineteenth-anniversary-of-megrahi.html]

Freedom of information requests are meant to be ruled on within 20 working days. It took almost six months before ministers finally decided that the telegram could not be brought into the public domain.

A response to the request says: “In this instance, we believe the release of the information received in confidence would harm UK relations with the country which provided the information. This would be detrimental to the operation of government and would not be in the UK’s interest.

“In light of the potential harm to UK relations with the country concerned, and UK interests there, it is judged that release of the material would not be in the public interest." (...)

Robert Black, a legal expert who helped to establish the Lockerbie trial, has raised concerns about a lack of transparency from successive UK governments.

The professor emeritus of Scots law at the University of Edinburgh, who is convinced a miscarriage of justice took place, said: “It is extremely difficult to understand how a document dating from November 15, 1991, could still in 2019 adversely affect the national interests of the UK or its relations with the country of origin. Much more likely is that the contents of the documents would embarrass the UK by showing just how tenuous is the case for Libyan responsibility for the Lockerbie tragedy.”

Iain McKie, of the Justice for Megrahi group, said: “It beggars belief that the UK government, after 30 years of widespread and well-founded doubts about various aspects of the Lockerbie investigation and trial, continues in its efforts to hide the truth about the tragedy.

“That they should claim to be protecting the public interest only adds insult to injury for the family and friends of the 270 souls who perished.”

More than 50 government files relating to the bombing on December 21, 1988, are held at the archives.

Late last year a file containing records from the prime minister’s office relating to the “Pan Am 747 air crash” was declassified and listed in records as available to view.

When The Times asked to see it, reporters were told that it had been retained by the government on an indefinite basis.

Dozens of other files, listed under “Aviation security: destruction of Pam Am, Flight 103”, have been closed until 2032. Applications to view them are met with a notice saying that they are “closed and retained”.

[RB: I suspect that the document in question is, or is related to, the one from King Hussein of Jordan in respect of which then Foreign Secretary David Miliband issued a public interest immunity (PII) certificate barring disclosure to Megrahi's legal team in the run-up to his second appeal: https://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2016/06/bombshell-book.html.  

The sorry saga of the UK government's PII claim, as it unfolded in Megrahi's 2008 appeal following the SCCRC's reference of his conviction back to the High Court of Justiciary, can be followed here: https://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2014/01/uk-and-us-geopolitical-interests-could.html.]

Marwan Khreesat's daughter says Iran not Libya was behind bomb

[What follows is excerpted from a report in today's edition of the Daily Mirror:]

Iran paid a Palestinian terror group to carry out the Lockerbie bombing, it is claimed.

Member Marwan Khreesat ­allegedly told relatives boss Ahmed Jibril led the 1988 plot. Daughter Saha said: “He has a deal with Iran.”

For 17 years Libyan Abdelbaset al-Megrahi has been blamed for the Lockerbie bombing, despite grave doubts over his involvement.

But the Mirror today reveals fresh claims by the daughter of a former terrorist which she says finally proves Iran was behind the outrage that killed 270 people 30 years ago today.

Jordanian Marwan Khreesat left his wife a dossier of evidence that allegedly shows his boss in a Palestinian terror group, Ahmed Jibril, was paid millions of pound by Tehran to mastermind the horrific attack over the Scottish town.

Khreesat’s 43-year-old daughter Saha claims her father even gave the name of the bombmaker to her mother.

It will add to long-held suspicions that Tehran ordered the atrocity in revenge for the US shooting-down of an Iranian passenger plane months earlier, killing 290 civilians.

Saha insisted Khreesat played no part in the attack on Pan Am Flight 103 and blamed Jibril, who was leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command.

Speaking to us in the middle class suburb of the Jordanian capital Amman, she said: “I think he is responsible, and he has a deal with the Iran government.

“I do have a proof that Ahmed Jibril is ­responsible for ­Lockerbie." (...)

Khreesat was identified as a possible Lockerbie suspect shortly after the 1988 attack. He had been arrested two months earlier in Frankfurt with another PFLP-GC member who had plastic explosives hidden in a Toshiba cassette player in his car. The device was very similar to the one used on Flight 103.

Asked if her father knew the name of the bombmaker, Saha replied: “For sure he knows but I don’t know. My dad left ­something written about this but it’s not in the house.

“If my dad made the bomb he would have taken lots of money but now we don’t have anything because my dad didn’t have anything to do with it.

“Ahmed Jibril took the first million and then he took the rest of the money and got very rich but my dad didn’t take anything." (...)

Asked why her dad did not reveal this information while he was alive, she made reference to the US-led 1986 bombing of Libyan capital Tripoli, in revenge for terror explosions at a West Berlin nightclub.

She said: “Maybe he just wanted to protect Jordan. Maybe he’ll put Jordan in danger if he talked.

“What happened to Libya will happen to Jordan. Lockerbie is an important topic since it is related to America and no one is supposed to mess with America.”

Saha claimed Jordan’s intelligence services were not interested in the truth about Lockerbie. (...)

Scottish MSP Christine Graham said: “These various discoveries that you have made builds further on the case that it was, as many of us believe, Iran that was responsible for the ­Lockerbie bombing and that al-Megrahi was the fall guy. Libya took the rap for various reasons.”

Dr Jim Swire, whose 23-year-old daughter Flora died in the attack, added: “This confirms what we have known for a long time and have never been able to say in public.” Within months of Lockerbie, it was being blamed on the PFLP-GC and Iran by the US and UK. America named Jibril.

Former King Hussein of Jordan said the group was behind the attack in a 1996 letter to John Major. [RB: This is the document in respect of which the UK Government claimed Public Interest Immunity during the appeal by Megrahi that was abandoned when he sought repatriation. The details can be found here.] 

Khreesat died two years ago at 70. Jibril, 80, is believed to be in Syria fighting for Bashar al-Assad.

A special mass marking Lockerbie’s 30th anniversary will take place today at Holy Trinity RC Church. Parish priest at the time of the bombing, Canon Pat Keegans, will say he is “not convinced” justice has been done.

How UK Government hid secret Lockerbie report

[This is the headline over a report published in The Herald on this date in 2012. It reads as follows:]

It has been hidden, blocked and kept secret by the UK Government for more than 20 years, but The Herald can reveal for the first time the contents of the top-secret Lockerbie document that the UK tried to prevent us from publishing.

The highly classified document, which has never even been aired in public or shared with the courts, originally came from Jordan and indicates that a Palestinian terrorist group was involved in the bombing that killed 270 people – something the UK Government has vehemently denied.

The UK Government has gone to considerable lengths to prevent details of the document – which casts further doubt on the safety of the conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi – being published by The Herald.

It has threatened legal action to stop publication of the newspaper and asked the paper to sign up to a court-approved gagging order.

Our decision to publish details of the document, which was obtained by the Crown Office but never shown to the defence team, will prove highly embarrassing to the Crown, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Office of the Advocate General, whose lawyers have worked tirelessly to prevent it ever being even discussed in public.

The document incriminates the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command (PFLP-GC) in the Lockerbie bombing.

The PFLP-GC were the original suspects in the investigation into the biggest terrorist atrocity ever to have been committed in mainland Britain. However, by 1991 police and prosecutors were entirely focused on Libya. Since then politicians and the investigating authorities have denied the possibility of their involvement, instead blaming the whole atrocity on Libya.

Repeated, high-level attempts to block the report indicate it is vital to unearthing the truth about the Lockerbie bombing. The UK Government arranged for the document to be covered by Public Interest Immunity on national security grounds. This prevented it from being shared with the defence but does not prevent publication by a newspaper.

A source said: "The document itself is historical and regimes have changed so it is hard to believe it presents any risk at all to national security. It originates from Jordan and incriminates the Palestinian terror group the PFLP-GC. The contents are very important but what makes them so much more significant is the lengths the UK Government and others have gone to in order to prevent anyone from seeing the document.

"This is the most remarkable piece of evidence. It does not rule out the Libyans but it does indicate that others were involved.

"It also shows the lengths the UK Government was prepared to go to in order to ensure that any evidence undermining their case against Libya would never see the light of day."

It is thought the document could fatally undermine the case against Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi. He died of cancer last month without knowing the contents of this report.

The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) team that investigated Megrahi's conviction discovered the existence of the document during their four-year investigation which concluded in 2007. Their 800-page report explains that their investigative team were allowed to access the document in Dumfries police station but they were prohibited from removing the notes they made on it and the document itself.

The commission was only able to access the document after signing up to a special agreement not to divulge the contents and was told by the Crown that "a conclusion was reached that the documents did not require to be disclosed in terms of the Crown's obligations".

The SCCRC then ruled that the contents were sufficiently disturbing for a court to have believed the conviction could have been a miscarriage of justice. The failure to disclose the document was one of the six grounds on which the case was referred back for a fresh appeal in 2007.

To date, only the Crown, UK Government and SCCRC team know the contents of this closely guarded document.

Megrahi's legal team pushed for disclosure of the document once it was revealed by the SCCRC. The Scottish courts were in the process of appointing special advocates and a special judge who would decide in secret whether the contents of the document could be disclosed when Megrahi dropped an appeal in 2009 in order to speed his return to Libya. He was released on compassionate grounds in August 2009 because he was suffering from terminal prostate cancer.

This new evidence and the fact it points to the guilt of non-Libyans will also prove embarrassing for the prosecution who failed to share the document with the trial court and who have subsequently argued that the investigation should focus on Libya alone.

A spokesman for the UK's Foreign and Commonwealth Office said: "The UK Government provided all relevant information on the Lockerbie bombing to the Scottish authorities, who considered it as part of the investigation which led to Megrahi's conviction. Any suggestion of 'hiding' documents is simply incorrect.

"The Government entered into a dialogue with The Herald in line with its long-established practice, supported by successive governments, to seek to prevent publication of any material that could cause significant harm to the UK's international relations and national security. We have consistently made clear that we sought to do this through dialogue rather than legal action".

Chapter 25 of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission's Statement of Reasons refers to material which the Crown had proactively disclosed to the Commission during its review of Megrahi's conviction. The Crown claim they wanted to provide this information to Megrahi's legal team during the second appeal and made this clear to the court, but this could not be done because of the UK Government's Public Interest Immunity Certificate.

A spokesman for the Crown Office said: "The suggestion that the PFLP-GC was responsible for the Lockerbie bombing was fully considered by the trial court following the incrimination of this terrorist group by Megrahi during his trial and does nothing to undermine the Crown's case that Megrahi acted with others in the bombing of flight Pan Am 103.

"All material which met the Crown's disclosure obligations in relation to the PFLP-GC was properly disclosed to the defence before the trial and this was confirmed by the SCCRC's investigation.

"The court concluded that the conception, planning and execution of the plot which led to the bombing was of Libyan origin. The court was, of course, only dealing with evidence, not matters of opinion or conjecture."

Astonishing Foreign Office threat to preserve Lockerbie secrecy

[What follows is excerpted from a report that appeared on the website of The Herald on this date one year ago:]

Tory MP threatened to 'pull edition of Herald' over Lockerbie story

It would have been an action unheard of in the Scottish press - the UK Government pulling an entire edition of a newspaper in a bid to suppress a secret document.

But that's exactly what the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) threatened to do to The Herald in 2012 when it sought to publish details of a report implicating a Palestinian terror group in the Lockerbie bombing.

The full details of what happened were published yesterday in Kenny MacAskill's new book on the atrocity - and the FCO is again taking action.

The government department has said it is "considering the contents" of the book, The Lockerbie Bombing: The Search for Justice, amid claims it may breach of Official Secrets Act.

Mr MacAskill reveals that at the time the Herald was seeking to publish the information, he took a call from Tory MP Alistair Burt, who was working with the FCO. [RB: He was a junior minister in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.]

"He threatened not just to pull the Herald's story, but to pull the whole edition of the newspaper," he said.

"I was incredulous. I told him that the people of Scotland would definitely notice if there was no Herald the next day.

"It really showed the extremes the UK Government was prepared to go to to stop the publication of something fundamental to Scotland's leading criminal case."

The document was subject to Public Interest Immunity, which prevented its release to the defence in the trial of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the Libyan convicted of the bombing.

After taking legal advice, the Herald ran the story detailing the main points of the document, including that it came from Jordan and implicated the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC) in the December 1988 attack.

Certain information was not available to The Herald at that time, however it has all now been revealed in Mr MacAskill's book.

It is understood that the FCO requested a copy of the book on Sunday ahead of Thursday's publication, but were not provided with one as officials refused to rule out seeking an injunction.

The PFLP-GC were the original suspects in the investigation into Lockerbie, however by 1991 police and prosecutors were entirely focused on Libya.

This document naming the terror group was repeatedly suppressed at a high-level, despite sources claiming it presented little risk to national security.

In 2012, a source told The Herald: "The contents are very important but what makes them so much more significant is the lengths the UK Government and others have gone to in order to prevent anyone from seeing the document.

"This is the most remarkable piece of evidence. It does not rule out the Libyans but it does indicate that others were involved."

Mr MacAskill, who claimed the suppression of the document had more to with keeping the Jordanians happy so that radical cleric Abu Qatada could be deported from the UK, admits in his book that he believes the PFLP-GC were involved in the plot which killed 270 people.

The former politician, who made the controversial decision to release Megrahi on compassionate grounds in 2009, also raises doubts over the identification of Megrahi buying clothes from a shop in Malta that were found wrapped around the bomb.

However, he is now facing claims it is "dumbfounding" and "hypocritical" for a former justice minister to make such assertions that the case against Megrahi was flawed.

Robert Black QC, one of the architects behind Megrahi's trial who now heads up the Justice for Megrahi campaign, said: "Many of the things that Kenny is saying are the things that we've been saying for years.

"He said on the radio that there should be a new inquiry into Lockerbie - we've been asking for that for years, and it was him we were asking.

"It's only now that he doesn't actually have any power to do something that he's agreeing with us."