The BBC Scotland news website is running the following article about Lockerbie's plans for the twentieth anniversary of the disaster on 21 December 2008:
'Community groups in Lockerbie are planning a "low key" approach to the 20th anniversary of its air disaster.
'A total of 270 people were killed when Pan Am flight 103 blew up above the Dumfries and Galloway town on 21 December 1988.
'Local organisations said they hoped events would "remember the past" but also be "focused on the future".
'Residents have been asked to make their suggestions for commemoration events to the town's district council.
'Proposals can also be left at the town hall.
'The anniversary falls on a Sunday this year and an ecumenical service is planned by local churches.
'All commemoration sites around the town will have extended opening hours and a symbolic quilt has been commissioned.
'Lockerbie Academy is also organising a number of events with a particular focus on the links between Lockerbie and Syracuse University which lost 35 students in the disaster.'
See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_of_scotland/7279203.stm
Wednesday, 5 March 2008
Sunday, 2 March 2008
Andrew Fulton: is he a professor?
The Sunday Herald reports that Andrew Fulton's CV, issued to the press when he was appointed chairman of the Conservative Party in Scotland, claims that he is a visiting professor at Glasgow University's School of Law. The university denies this. The article reads in part:
"The new chairman of the Scottish Tories has become embroiled in a row over his CV after false claims were made about his academic credentials.
"Andrew Fulton, a former MI6 spy who was appointed by the Conservatives on Friday, was hailed as a 'visiting professor' at Glasgow University's school of law.
"But a spokesman for the university rebutted the claims, saying: 'Mr Fulton is not associated with the University of Glasgow's law school and is not entitled to call himself a professor.' Fulton, 64, took up the post as the Scottish Tories' top official last week and received endorsements from Conservative leaders David Cameron and Annabel Goldie.
"The biography supplied to the media claimed he had read law at Glasgow University and was 'now visiting professor at his alma mater's school of law'.
"But Fulton, who was a government diplomat for 30 years, was only briefly a visiting professor at the university between 1999 and 2000. He worked in the university's law school at the Lockerbie Trial Briefing Unit until he was dropped from his post when he was unmasked as an ex-spook.
"Visiting professors lose their title after leaving a university, but the academic status symbol has somehow followed Fulton in his business career."
The full article can be read here.
"The new chairman of the Scottish Tories has become embroiled in a row over his CV after false claims were made about his academic credentials.
"Andrew Fulton, a former MI6 spy who was appointed by the Conservatives on Friday, was hailed as a 'visiting professor' at Glasgow University's school of law.
"But a spokesman for the university rebutted the claims, saying: 'Mr Fulton is not associated with the University of Glasgow's law school and is not entitled to call himself a professor.' Fulton, 64, took up the post as the Scottish Tories' top official last week and received endorsements from Conservative leaders David Cameron and Annabel Goldie.
"The biography supplied to the media claimed he had read law at Glasgow University and was 'now visiting professor at his alma mater's school of law'.
"But Fulton, who was a government diplomat for 30 years, was only briefly a visiting professor at the university between 1999 and 2000. He worked in the university's law school at the Lockerbie Trial Briefing Unit until he was dropped from his post when he was unmasked as an ex-spook.
"Visiting professors lose their title after leaving a university, but the academic status symbol has somehow followed Fulton in his business career."
The full article can be read here.
Saturday, 1 March 2008
Andrew Fulton
A member of Glasgow University's Lockerbie Trial Briefing Unit (which provided press briefings during the trial at Zeist) who resigned when his connections with the UK Secret Intelligence Service were revealed, has been appointed chairman of the Conservative Party in Scotland. Today's issue of The Herald contains the following:
“A former MI6 spy appointed as Scottish Tory chairman yesterday insisted the party could recover from two decades of "fallow" results at the next General Election.
“Andrew Fulton, who has spent more than 30 years in senior positions in the secret service, claimed the Conservatives had an opportunity to catch the SNP on the hop at Westminster and exploit the current disarray of Labour and Liberal Democrats.…
“The former agent, who was born in Rothesay on the Isle of Bute, also brings his own baggage to the post: his unmasking as an MI6 operative led to him stepping down in 2000 as an adviser to Glasgow University's briefing unit which advised the media about the Lockerbie bombing trial amid speculation - which he strongly denied - that he had a competing agenda.
“Last year he became the first acknowledged former spy to join a listed British company when he was appointed as an adviser to the Armor Group, which provides security services to national governments.”
Read the full article here:
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.2085939.0.Fallow_decades_are_over_says_new_Scots_Tory_chairman.php
“A former MI6 spy appointed as Scottish Tory chairman yesterday insisted the party could recover from two decades of "fallow" results at the next General Election.
“Andrew Fulton, who has spent more than 30 years in senior positions in the secret service, claimed the Conservatives had an opportunity to catch the SNP on the hop at Westminster and exploit the current disarray of Labour and Liberal Democrats.…
“The former agent, who was born in Rothesay on the Isle of Bute, also brings his own baggage to the post: his unmasking as an MI6 operative led to him stepping down in 2000 as an adviser to Glasgow University's briefing unit which advised the media about the Lockerbie bombing trial amid speculation - which he strongly denied - that he had a competing agenda.
“Last year he became the first acknowledged former spy to join a listed British company when he was appointed as an adviser to the Armor Group, which provides security services to national governments.”
Read the full article here:
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.2085939.0.Fallow_decades_are_over_says_new_Scots_Tory_chairman.php
Friday, 29 February 2008
Lockerbie "a dump"
For the past few days the Scottish newspapers (and some UK ones) have been running the story of SNP MSP Christopher Harvie's description of Lockerbie as "a dump" with two-thirds of shops derelict, and shell-suited drunken youths rampaging in the streets. Professor Harvie has partially recanted but the row rumbles on. Here is an article on the subject from one of the local newspapers, The Dumfries & Galloway Standard.
As someone born and brought up in the town, and who last visited it in November 2007, I can testify that Harvie is grossly exaggerating. The town has attractive buildings, the vast majority of the commercial premises are occupied (and those few which are not are certainly not derelict) and the youth are no more prone to drunken hooliganism than the youth of other Scottish towns and cities (which is not, perhaps, saying too much).
As someone born and brought up in the town, and who last visited it in November 2007, I can testify that Harvie is grossly exaggerating. The town has attractive buildings, the vast majority of the commercial premises are occupied (and those few which are not are certainly not derelict) and the youth are no more prone to drunken hooliganism than the youth of other Scottish towns and cities (which is not, perhaps, saying too much).
Thursday, 28 February 2008
Statement by Professor Köchler
Patrick Haseldine has kindly drawn my attention to the following statement issued on 25 February by Professor Hans Köchler:
Statement by Dr Hans Koechler, International Observer, appointed by the United Nations, at the Scottish Court in the Netherlands (Lockerbie Trial), on the withholding of supposedly secret evidence from the Defence by order of the Government of the United Kingdom
Upon conclusion of an information and consultation visit on international law issues to the Asia-Pacific region, Dr Hans Koechler today issued the following statement on the decision of the United Kingdom’s Foreign Secretary not to allow the disclosure of a document, provided by a “Foreign Government” that is related to the electronic timer device which supposedly triggered the explosion of a bomb on board Pan Am Flight 103:
1. The continued withholding of evidence related to the case of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi makes a new appeal actually impossible. Should the document in question not be made available, criminal proceedings under Scots Law will have to be terminated.
2. The behaviour of the British Government is in contravention to the commitment it made vis-à-vis the United Nations Organization prior to the adoption of Security Council resolution 1192 (1998) to enable a fair and independent trial of the two Libyan suspects in the Lockerbie case under Scots Law.
3. The invocation of “Public Interest Immunity” (PII) – unprecedented in the history of Scottish criminal justice – is tantamount to political interference into the Appeal Court’s conduct. It is obvious that criminal proceedings cannot be fair if the Defence is denied access to a piece of evidence (document) which has been revealed to the Prosecution.
4. Under the highly politicized circumstances of the Lockerbie Trial, the issuing of a PII certificate by the Foreign Secretary of the United Kingdom appears to be a rather desperate measure to influence the conduct of the court in a manner favourable to the British Government; it further strains the constitutional relations between Scotland and the United Kingdom.
5. The separation of powers between the Executive and Judiciary is a basic characteristic of the rule of law. In the present case, this principle is violated because of the outright interference of the British Government in a matter of the Scottish Judiciary.
6. The British Government’s interference makes Devolution of authority in matters of Criminal Justice to Scotland entirely meaningless. What is the meaning of “Devolution” if a Scottish Court is prevented from operating according to its own rules? Scots Law is not to be administered under the terms of a Protectorate. The crucial question will now be whether the Scots will be able to assert their (Constitutional) independence in Devolved matters.
7. It is to be hoped that the Scottish Judges will uphold the independence of the Judiciary and will reject the British Government’s interference. A court of law is transformed into a political body should the Judges allow this kind of interference.
8. The persistent refusal of the UK Government to allow the disclosure of vital evidence to the Defence points into the direction of a cover-up. In the context of the irregularities at the Lockerbie trial and appeal in the Netherlands (described in the undersigned’s reports of 2001 and 2002), this development demonstrates the need for an independent investigation under a United Nations mandate – especially since the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission has declared that a “miscarriage of justice” may have occurred.
9. The convicted Libyan national has a right to a genuine judicial review of his verdict outside the confines of international realpolitik. In June 2007 the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission referred his case back to the High Court of Justiciary for a second appeal. If appeal proceedings are now made impossible due to the British Executive’s interference, Mr al-Megrahi will be denied his right to fair trial under the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
Los Angeles, 25 February 2008
Dr Hans Koechler
[The official version of the statement, with typographical errors corrected, is to be found at http://i-p-o.org/Lockerbie-statement-koechler-25Feb08.htm]
Statement by Dr Hans Koechler, International Observer, appointed by the United Nations, at the Scottish Court in the Netherlands (Lockerbie Trial), on the withholding of supposedly secret evidence from the Defence by order of the Government of the United Kingdom
Upon conclusion of an information and consultation visit on international law issues to the Asia-Pacific region, Dr Hans Koechler today issued the following statement on the decision of the United Kingdom’s Foreign Secretary not to allow the disclosure of a document, provided by a “Foreign Government” that is related to the electronic timer device which supposedly triggered the explosion of a bomb on board Pan Am Flight 103:
1. The continued withholding of evidence related to the case of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi makes a new appeal actually impossible. Should the document in question not be made available, criminal proceedings under Scots Law will have to be terminated.
2. The behaviour of the British Government is in contravention to the commitment it made vis-à-vis the United Nations Organization prior to the adoption of Security Council resolution 1192 (1998) to enable a fair and independent trial of the two Libyan suspects in the Lockerbie case under Scots Law.
3. The invocation of “Public Interest Immunity” (PII) – unprecedented in the history of Scottish criminal justice – is tantamount to political interference into the Appeal Court’s conduct. It is obvious that criminal proceedings cannot be fair if the Defence is denied access to a piece of evidence (document) which has been revealed to the Prosecution.
4. Under the highly politicized circumstances of the Lockerbie Trial, the issuing of a PII certificate by the Foreign Secretary of the United Kingdom appears to be a rather desperate measure to influence the conduct of the court in a manner favourable to the British Government; it further strains the constitutional relations between Scotland and the United Kingdom.
5. The separation of powers between the Executive and Judiciary is a basic characteristic of the rule of law. In the present case, this principle is violated because of the outright interference of the British Government in a matter of the Scottish Judiciary.
6. The British Government’s interference makes Devolution of authority in matters of Criminal Justice to Scotland entirely meaningless. What is the meaning of “Devolution” if a Scottish Court is prevented from operating according to its own rules? Scots Law is not to be administered under the terms of a Protectorate. The crucial question will now be whether the Scots will be able to assert their (Constitutional) independence in Devolved matters.
7. It is to be hoped that the Scottish Judges will uphold the independence of the Judiciary and will reject the British Government’s interference. A court of law is transformed into a political body should the Judges allow this kind of interference.
8. The persistent refusal of the UK Government to allow the disclosure of vital evidence to the Defence points into the direction of a cover-up. In the context of the irregularities at the Lockerbie trial and appeal in the Netherlands (described in the undersigned’s reports of 2001 and 2002), this development demonstrates the need for an independent investigation under a United Nations mandate – especially since the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission has declared that a “miscarriage of justice” may have occurred.
9. The convicted Libyan national has a right to a genuine judicial review of his verdict outside the confines of international realpolitik. In June 2007 the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission referred his case back to the High Court of Justiciary for a second appeal. If appeal proceedings are now made impossible due to the British Executive’s interference, Mr al-Megrahi will be denied his right to fair trial under the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
Los Angeles, 25 February 2008
Dr Hans Koechler
[The official version of the statement, with typographical errors corrected, is to be found at http://i-p-o.org/Lockerbie-statement-koechler-25Feb08.htm]
Projected mechanism to avoid Scotland-UK conflicts
The Scotsman today reports that new committees involving ministers from the Scottish and UK Governments are to be set up to avoid conflicts and misunderstandings such as that which arose recently over the application to Abdelbaset Megrahi of the UK's new prisoner transfer agreement with Libya. The article reads in part:
"A new cross-border body is to be created to settle disputes between Holyrood and Westminster, The Scotsman has learned.
"Ministers are drawing up plans for a joint committee to arbitrate between the devolved administrations and the UK government on domestic matters.
"The move is intended to clear the air between London and Edinburgh, amid an increasing number of acrimonious disputes between the Scottish Government and the Labour administration at Westminster since Alex Salmond became First Minister last May.
"The most serious was in June last year when Mr Salmond accused Tony Blair, prime minister at the time, of ignoring the Scottish legal system by doing a deal with Libya over the possible transfer of the Lockerbie bomber to the North African country.
"And just this week, Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, provoked an angry reaction from Scottish ministers on two separate issues.
"First, Holyrood ministers called on Ms Smith to clarify her anti-terrorism plans amid warnings that the Home Secretary was preparing to trample on the Scottish legal system.
"Then she announced plans to deprive drug addicts of their benefits, without consulting the Scottish Government.
"Privately, Scottish ministers were furious about both incidents, believing that the Home Office pays little or no attention to Scots law and devolved issues when drawing up its policy plans."
For the full text of the lengthy article, see
http://news.scotsman.com/latestnews/Toplevel-meetings-will-open-door.3823911.jp
"A new cross-border body is to be created to settle disputes between Holyrood and Westminster, The Scotsman has learned.
"Ministers are drawing up plans for a joint committee to arbitrate between the devolved administrations and the UK government on domestic matters.
"The move is intended to clear the air between London and Edinburgh, amid an increasing number of acrimonious disputes between the Scottish Government and the Labour administration at Westminster since Alex Salmond became First Minister last May.
"The most serious was in June last year when Mr Salmond accused Tony Blair, prime minister at the time, of ignoring the Scottish legal system by doing a deal with Libya over the possible transfer of the Lockerbie bomber to the North African country.
"And just this week, Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, provoked an angry reaction from Scottish ministers on two separate issues.
"First, Holyrood ministers called on Ms Smith to clarify her anti-terrorism plans amid warnings that the Home Secretary was preparing to trample on the Scottish legal system.
"Then she announced plans to deprive drug addicts of their benefits, without consulting the Scottish Government.
"Privately, Scottish ministers were furious about both incidents, believing that the Home Office pays little or no attention to Scots law and devolved issues when drawing up its policy plans."
For the full text of the lengthy article, see
http://news.scotsman.com/latestnews/Toplevel-meetings-will-open-door.3823911.jp
Wednesday, 27 February 2008
Ludwig de Braeckeleer -v- Richard Marquise
OhMyNews International today features an article by Dr De Braeckeleer entitled “Lockerbie: FBI investigator debates OMNI reporter” which takes the form of a debate between him and Richard A Marquise, who headed the FBI investigation into the destruction of Pan Am 103, about the views expressed by Dr De Braeckeleer in his earlier article “Lockerbie: chronicle of a death foretold” (see http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?menu=c10400&no=381652&rel_no=1 and http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2008/02/lockerbie-chronicle-of-death-foretold.html). The article makes fascinating reading, and anyone interested in the Lockerbie case will have to read and absorb it. The full text of the debate is at
http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?menu=A11100&no=381904&rel_no=1&back_url=.
I make no secret of the fact that, in my view, no matter how pure and thorough the investigation into the Lockerbie tragedy may have been, the evidence presented at the trial simply did not warrant a conviction being returned against Abdelbaset Megrahi. See http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2007/07/lockerbie-satisfactory-process-but.html
I remain convinced that this view will be vindicated in the new appeal that is currently under way.
http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?menu=A11100&no=381904&rel_no=1&back_url=.
I make no secret of the fact that, in my view, no matter how pure and thorough the investigation into the Lockerbie tragedy may have been, the evidence presented at the trial simply did not warrant a conviction being returned against Abdelbaset Megrahi. See http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2007/07/lockerbie-satisfactory-process-but.html
I remain convinced that this view will be vindicated in the new appeal that is currently under way.
Sunday, 24 February 2008
Miliband has made Lockerbie appeal a mockery of justice
http://www.heraldscotland.com/default_content/12770332.Miliband_has_made_Lockerbie_appeal_a_mockery_of_justice/
The Sunday Herald also has an article on the same subject by John Bynorth. Its principal focus is the contrast between the Scottish Government’s volubility in criticizing the UK Government over the prisoner transfer issue and its silence when confronted by the UK Government’s attempt to interfere in Scottish criminal proceedings by denying the defence and the court access to a document whose disclosure an independent body (the SCCRC) has indicated is necessary for justice to be done. Tony Kelly (Abdelbaset Megrahi’s solicitor) is extensively quoted, as are Dr Jim Swire and myself. See
http://www.heraldscotland.com/default_content/12767528.Anger_over__apos_interference_apos__in_Lockerbie_appeal/
http://www.heraldscotland.com/default_content/12767528.Anger_over__apos_interference_apos__in_Lockerbie_appeal/
Saturday, 23 February 2008
Patrick Haseldine and Hans Köchler
I am grateful to Patrick Haseldine for copying to me the following e-mail exchange between himself and Professor Hans Köchler, the United Nations appointed observer at the Lockerbie trial.
Dear Robert,
You will, I think, be interested to see my exchange of emails with Dr Hans Koechler, the United Nations Observer at the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial:
| Date: | Fri, 22 Feb 2008 16:27:10 +0000 (GMT) |
| From: | |
| | |
| To: | info@i-p-o.org |
Dear Dr Koechler,
The ePetitions team gave the following explanation for the rejection: Criminal investigations are instigated by the police, not by the Prime Minister. You should take your request to the police authorities.
I understand that it was Prime Minister Thatcher who decided early in 1989 that the original Lockerbie investigation should be controlled by the small Dumfries and Galloway force - in liaison with the US Federal Bureau of Investigation and involving British and US intelligence - rather than by a specialist national police unit based in London. I had hoped that Prime Minister Brown would reverse that decision for a new investigation, but it could be that the powers devolved in 1998 from the House of Commons to the Parliament in
References supporting the text of the rejected petition can be found at the website of Professor Robert Black (http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2008/01/patrick-haseldine-on-lockerbie.html).
Yours sincerely,
Patrick Haseldine
| From: | "info@i-p-o.org" info@i-p-o.org |
| To: | patrick.haseldine |
| Date: | Fri, 22 Feb 2008 17:39:33 -0500 |
| | |
23 February 2008
Dear Mr. Haseldine!
Thank you for the information on the reply from the Prime Minister's office.
In view of the many revelations during the last two years in the English and Scottish media, the Scottish authorities should undertake an investigation into the handling of the Lockerbie case - and possible criminal misconduct - by the Scottish police and judiciary. The Scots have to demonstrate that they are capable to handle judicial matters properly.
Devolution in matters of criminal justice is meaningless if they are not able to assert their authority vis-a-vis the
With best regards
Hans Koechler
Dr Swire on the UK Foreign Office's PII claim
In today’s issue of The Herald there is a letter from Dr Jim Swire (who attended Wednesday’s procedural hearing, as he had also the previous two). He calls on the UK Government to cease objecting on “national security” grounds to disclosure to Megrahi’s legal team of the document emanating from a foreign country (relating to timers) that was in the hands of the Crown before the Zeist trial but which was not divulged to the defence even though (according to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission) it could have helped Megrahi’s defence.
Friday, 22 February 2008
Press comment on third procedural hearing
The Press and Journal, a daily newspaper published in Aberdeen and serving principally the north-east of Scotland, published on 21 February an editorial criticising the UK Government for seeking to prevent disclosure of the mysterious document to Megrahi's legal team. The article reads in part:
"Even those who do not subscribe to conspiracy theories must now have real doubts about the safety of the conviction following the rather extraordinary lengths to which Westminster is going to avoid releasing an official document which would help al Megrahi's appeal.
"Scotland's Lord Advocate, Elish Angiolini, is quite happy to hand over the document, the contents of which have not been divulged, but the move is being blocked by the UK Government, which claims it would not be in the public interest to do so. This is a strange position to take, given that al Megrahi was tried under Scottish law for a crime committed in Scotland, and creates the impression that, for some reason, the powers that be in London do not want the truth to emerge."
For the full text, see
http://www.thisisnorthscotland.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=149212&command=displayContent&sourceNode=149702&contentPK=19937714&folderPk=85910&pNodeId=149693
"Even those who do not subscribe to conspiracy theories must now have real doubts about the safety of the conviction following the rather extraordinary lengths to which Westminster is going to avoid releasing an official document which would help al Megrahi's appeal.
"Scotland's Lord Advocate, Elish Angiolini, is quite happy to hand over the document, the contents of which have not been divulged, but the move is being blocked by the UK Government, which claims it would not be in the public interest to do so. This is a strange position to take, given that al Megrahi was tried under Scottish law for a crime committed in Scotland, and creates the impression that, for some reason, the powers that be in London do not want the truth to emerge."
For the full text, see
http://www.thisisnorthscotland.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=149212&command=displayContent&sourceNode=149702&contentPK=19937714&folderPk=85910&pNodeId=149693
Thursday, 21 February 2008
Third procedural hearing ... much as predicted
From what has appeared in the media about the third procedural hearing in the new Lockerbie appeal, it would appear that the arguments were much as had been anticipated in this blog on 19 February.
The Guardian's account of the proceedings is to be found at http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/feb/21/lockerbie.scotland
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/20/nlockerbie120.xml
For the serious Scottish media’s accounts of the procedural hearing, see
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_of_scotland/7254822.stm
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.2060826.0.Westminster_meddling_in_Megrahi_case.php
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/scotland/Legal-row-breaks-out-over.3799673.j
Tuesday, 19 February 2008
Third procedural hearing
A full court day has been allocated on Wednesday, 20 February for the third procedural hearing in the appeal by Abdelbaset Megrahi. For an account of proceedings at the first two procedural hearings, see
http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2007/10/procedural-hearing_11.html
and
http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2007/12/second-procedural-hearing.html
The principal issue now to be discussed is the United Kingdom Government’s claim for public interest immunity (PII) in respect of disclosure of the document from a foreign country (not the United States of America) the failure to disclose which to the defence at the original trial was one of the reasons that the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission gave for concluding that Mehrahi’s conviction may have amounted to a miscarriage of justice.
Saturday, 16 February 2008
Prisoner transfer row rumbles on
Lucy Adams has yet another article in today's issue of The Herald about the row between the UK and Scottish Governments over the application of the Libya-UK prisoner transfer agreement to Abdelbaset Megrahi. She incorporates quotes from my postings on the subject on this blog. See
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.2049775.0.Straw_in_row_over_Lockerbie_letters.php
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.2049775.0.Straw_in_row_over_Lockerbie_letters.php
Friday, 15 February 2008
Yet more on prisoner transfer
Both The Herald and The Scotsman follow up the story about prisoner transfer. Much is made of a letter by UK Justice Minister, Jack Straw, to Scotland's First Minister, Alex Salmond. In it, he stresses that the UK Government gave no undertakings to the Libyan Government about Abdelbaset Megrahi and confirms that the decision on repatriation, if Megrahi were to apply for it, would rest with the Scottish Government. But he goes on to remind the First Minister that any decision denying repatriation would be open to judicial review. Subtle, or what?
For Lucy Adams's article in The Herald, see
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.2046568.0.Clash_over_Jack_Straws_secret_letter_on_Megrahi.php
and for that newspaper's editorial comment see
http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/editorial/display.var.2046488.0.Transfer_of_prisoners.php
And for some readers' letters on the subject, see
http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/letters/display.var.2046494.0.Families_of_Lockerbie_victims_have_a_right_to_be_informed.php
The Scotsman's coverage is at
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/latestnews/Straw-Lockerbie-bomber39s-fate-may.3781347.jp
I suggest that the terms of this letter supply further corroboration, if more were needed, that the negotiations with Libya were conducted with Megrahi very much in mind. The UK negotiators, however, were either (a) unaware that the ultimate decision on transfer of Megrahi rested with the Scottish Government or (b) were aware of this but deliberately concealed the fact from their Libyan counterparts, whom they knew to be concerned, above all, with the position of Megrahi. The fact that the Scottish Government was not informed that the negotiations were taking place might perhaps be construed as evidence supporting alternative (a). For my part, I am not at all sure that gross constitutional ignorance is all that much less of a sin in the UK Foreign Office than dishonest concealment.
For a somewhat different perspective from The Telegraph, an English newspaper, see
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/15/nlockerbie115.xml
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)