Wednesday, 26 November 2008
Ninth (public) procedural hearing
A further procedural hearing will take place in the High Court on Thursday, 27 November (and on Friday 28th, if more time is required). This hearing will consider (a) the protocol regarding the rôle of the special (security vetted) advocate which the parties were instructed to negotiate in relation to the mystery document in respect of which the UK Foreign Secretary claimed public interest immunity; (b) a further petition for disclosure of documents submitted by the appellant's legal team, along with any answers lodged by the Lord Advocate on behalf of the Crown and the Advocate General on behalf of the UK government; and (c) case management issues, including time-tabling and the order in which the appellant's grounds of appeal should be argued.
Rebuilding US-Libyan Relations Twenty Years after Lockerbie
This is the title of a lengthy article in the Policy Watch series on the website of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. It can be read here. In the course of the article, it is said:
'The Lockerbie attack was a crisis in Libya's relations with the United States and the rest of the world. To avoid the brunt of responsibility, Colonel Qadhafi eventually blamed rogue intelligence agents, and one, Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi, was found guilty by a special Scottish court. Despite repeated attempts to reopen his case and reports that he is dying of cancer, al-Megrahi is still in a Scottish prison. Libya did agree to pay financial compensation to the victims' families, a slow process that eventually led to payouts last week from a fund that includes monies from U.S. corporations wanting to do business in the north African state.'
It is disappointing, but instructive, that a supposedly reputable organisation could publish such a farrago of inaccuracy. Gaddafi has never admitted that Libyan "rogue intelligence agents" were responsible for Lockerbie. The individuals eventually handed over for trial were identified not by Gaddafi but by the US and UK investigators. And the delay in handing them over, at least from January 1994, was attributable wholly to the Governments of the United Kingdom and the United States. It might also have been thought worth mentioning that the most recent attempt to reopen Megrahi's case has been successful and that an appeal is currently wending its way -- painfully slowly -- through the Scottish criminal justice system.
'The Lockerbie attack was a crisis in Libya's relations with the United States and the rest of the world. To avoid the brunt of responsibility, Colonel Qadhafi eventually blamed rogue intelligence agents, and one, Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi, was found guilty by a special Scottish court. Despite repeated attempts to reopen his case and reports that he is dying of cancer, al-Megrahi is still in a Scottish prison. Libya did agree to pay financial compensation to the victims' families, a slow process that eventually led to payouts last week from a fund that includes monies from U.S. corporations wanting to do business in the north African state.'
It is disappointing, but instructive, that a supposedly reputable organisation could publish such a farrago of inaccuracy. Gaddafi has never admitted that Libyan "rogue intelligence agents" were responsible for Lockerbie. The individuals eventually handed over for trial were identified not by Gaddafi but by the US and UK investigators. And the delay in handing them over, at least from January 1994, was attributable wholly to the Governments of the United Kingdom and the United States. It might also have been thought worth mentioning that the most recent attempt to reopen Megrahi's case has been successful and that an appeal is currently wending its way -- painfully slowly -- through the Scottish criminal justice system.
Tuesday, 25 November 2008
Saif-al-Islam Gaddafi on the settlement
A CNN interview with Saif-al-Islam Gaddafi, son of the Leader, in which he talks about the Libya's settlement with the families of the Lockerbie victims, can be viewed here.
Monzer al-Kassar
[The following is reproduced, for what it is worth, from the Terrorism blog. The full text can be read here.]
On 20 November 2008, Monzer Al Kassar, following a three-week jury trial in Manhattan federal court, was found guilty of: conspiracy to murder U.S. nationals, conspiracy to murder U.S. officers and employees, conspiracy to acquire and export anti-aircraft missiles, conspiracy to provide material support and resources to the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC), a designated foreign terrorist organization, and money laundering. (...)
Reportedly, since the early 1970s, Al Kassar was a source of weapons and military equipment for groups engaged in violent conflicts around the world. (...)
Kassar is said to have been a CIA asset, involved with Colonel Oliver North and General Richard Secord. (...)
Reportedly, Rifat Assad, 'the Syrian boss of the Lebanese heroin industry', and Monzer al-Kassar took over Lebanon's Bekaa Valley in 1975 with the help of the Syrian Army.
Allegedly, heroin was transported from the Bekaa Valley to the USA on PanAm flights with the help of Kassar and elements of the CIA. (...)
Kassar has been linked to the Lockerbie Bombing.
On board Pan Am 103, on 21 December 1988, were Major Charles McKee, of the the US Defence Intelligence Agency in Beirut, and Matthew Gannon, CIA Deputy Station Chief in Beirut.
McKie and his team had reportedly discovered evidence that a 'rogue' CIA unit called COREA, was involved in the drugs business with Monzar Al-Kassar. (...)
Reportedly Al-Kassar 'was part of the secret network run by US Lt. Colonel Oliver North.'
Outraged that COREA was doing business with a Syrian 'who made money from drugs, arms and terrorism', the McKee team reportedly 'decided to fly to CIA HQ in Virginia to expose COREA'.
They flew on Pan Am flight 103 which came down over Lockerbie. (...)
Kassar was arrested just days before the Libyan convicted of the Lockerbie bombing was granted a second extraordinary appeal and 'just days after Blair went to Tripoli to negotiate a deal that would save him the embarrassment of a fresh appeal.'
On 20 November 2008, Monzer Al Kassar, following a three-week jury trial in Manhattan federal court, was found guilty of: conspiracy to murder U.S. nationals, conspiracy to murder U.S. officers and employees, conspiracy to acquire and export anti-aircraft missiles, conspiracy to provide material support and resources to the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC), a designated foreign terrorist organization, and money laundering. (...)
Reportedly, since the early 1970s, Al Kassar was a source of weapons and military equipment for groups engaged in violent conflicts around the world. (...)
Kassar is said to have been a CIA asset, involved with Colonel Oliver North and General Richard Secord. (...)
Reportedly, Rifat Assad, 'the Syrian boss of the Lebanese heroin industry', and Monzer al-Kassar took over Lebanon's Bekaa Valley in 1975 with the help of the Syrian Army.
Allegedly, heroin was transported from the Bekaa Valley to the USA on PanAm flights with the help of Kassar and elements of the CIA. (...)
Kassar has been linked to the Lockerbie Bombing.
On board Pan Am 103, on 21 December 1988, were Major Charles McKee, of the the US Defence Intelligence Agency in Beirut, and Matthew Gannon, CIA Deputy Station Chief in Beirut.
McKie and his team had reportedly discovered evidence that a 'rogue' CIA unit called COREA, was involved in the drugs business with Monzar Al-Kassar. (...)
Reportedly Al-Kassar 'was part of the secret network run by US Lt. Colonel Oliver North.'
Outraged that COREA was doing business with a Syrian 'who made money from drugs, arms and terrorism', the McKee team reportedly 'decided to fly to CIA HQ in Virginia to expose COREA'.
They flew on Pan Am flight 103 which came down over Lockerbie. (...)
Kassar was arrested just days before the Libyan convicted of the Lockerbie bombing was granted a second extraordinary appeal and 'just days after Blair went to Tripoli to negotiate a deal that would save him the embarrassment of a fresh appeal.'
Saturday, 22 November 2008
Unjust Verdict
As a former student of Professor Robert Black, QC, who arranged for the Lockerbie bomber's trial to be held at Camp Zeist, and having researched the case myself, I am still amazed that al-Megrahi was convicted.
It made a mockery of the Scottish judiciary. What happened at Lockerbie was undoubtedly murder, but the tragedy does not sanction the imprisonment of a potentially innocent man to appease American prosecutors and some of the families of the victims.
G. M., by email
[A letter from today's Daily Record. I hasten to add that the Lockerbie case did not feature in my lectures during my tenure as Professor of Scots Law. But I did, I hope, help to turn out students who are capable of recognising a miscarriage of justice when they see one.]
It made a mockery of the Scottish judiciary. What happened at Lockerbie was undoubtedly murder, but the tragedy does not sanction the imprisonment of a potentially innocent man to appease American prosecutors and some of the families of the victims.
G. M., by email
[A letter from today's Daily Record. I hasten to add that the Lockerbie case did not feature in my lectures during my tenure as Professor of Scots Law. But I did, I hope, help to turn out students who are capable of recognising a miscarriage of justice when they see one.]
Friday, 21 November 2008
Posts on the new Lockerbie blog
Two new posts have been made today on the blog The Masonic Verses - Lockerbie and Related Scams. They are "A Poisoned Pill - The Mysterious Life and Death of Ian Spiro" and "Lockerbie Propositions" a summary in twenty-five paragraphs of the author's views about the Lockerbie disaster.
US Senate confirms ambassador to Libya
The US Senate has confirmed career diplomat Gene Cretz to be the first US Ambassador to Libya in 36 years. His nomination had been held up by Senate Democrats until Libya made good on its promise to fully compensate the families of victims of terrorist acts in the 1980s.
The Senate action late Thursday came after the Senate Democrat who had led the effort to block the nomination cleared the way for confirmation by noting that Libya last month paid $1.5 billion to relatives of victims of acts of terrorism for which Tripoli accepted responsibility.
"I lifted my hold. The process will work its way now," said Senator Frank Lautenberg, a New Jersey Democrat. (...)
Relatives of those who died in the Pan Am bombing joined Senator Lautenberg at a Capitol Hill news conference Thursday to mark the settlement of claims. "We are here today to say that a measure of justice has finally prevailed," he said.
Kara Weipz lost her brother in the tragedy. "We are free now to close this chapter in our nightmare. Does it change the majority of feelings of families towards Mr. Gadhafi? Absolutely, positively not. And do the families believe that he himself or those high-ranking officials in his regime were responsible for this? Absolutely. And that does not change just because this was completed."
The Pan Am bombing claimed the lives of 270 people.
[From the website of Voice of America. The full article can be read here.]
The Senate action late Thursday came after the Senate Democrat who had led the effort to block the nomination cleared the way for confirmation by noting that Libya last month paid $1.5 billion to relatives of victims of acts of terrorism for which Tripoli accepted responsibility.
"I lifted my hold. The process will work its way now," said Senator Frank Lautenberg, a New Jersey Democrat. (...)
Relatives of those who died in the Pan Am bombing joined Senator Lautenberg at a Capitol Hill news conference Thursday to mark the settlement of claims. "We are here today to say that a measure of justice has finally prevailed," he said.
Kara Weipz lost her brother in the tragedy. "We are free now to close this chapter in our nightmare. Does it change the majority of feelings of families towards Mr. Gadhafi? Absolutely, positively not. And do the families believe that he himself or those high-ranking officials in his regime were responsible for this? Absolutely. And that does not change just because this was completed."
The Pan Am bombing claimed the lives of 270 people.
[From the website of Voice of America. The full article can be read here.]
Lockerbie families say compensation complete
Nearly two decades after the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, the families of the 180 Americans aboard the plane said Thursday they had received full compensation from Libya for the loss of their loved ones.
At the same time, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice met with Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's son, who is in Washington on a private visit following an unprecedented phone call this week between his father and President Bush. (...)
Under the agreement worked out between U.S. and Libyan officials in August, Libya agreed to hand over $1.5 billion to finish compensation payments to families of Americans killed on Pan Am 103, those killed and wounded in a 1986 attack on a Berlin disco, and resolve other claims for property and personal damages.
The agreement also called for $300 million in compensation to be paid for the Libyan victims of U.S. airstrikes that were ordered by former President Reagan in retaliation for the Berlin bombing. The Bush administration says no taxpayer money will be used for those payments but has not said where the money is coming from. (...)
Libya completed payments into the compensation fund in late October, clearing the last hurdle in restoration of full normalization of diplomatic relations between Washington and Tripoli, and the Treasury began transfers to the Lockerbie families earlier this month. In return, Bush restored Libya's sovereign immunity from terror-related lawsuits.
[From Matthew Lee of the news agency Associated Press. The full article can be read here. The deal covers the families of all Lockerbie victims, not just the American ones.]
At the same time, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice met with Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's son, who is in Washington on a private visit following an unprecedented phone call this week between his father and President Bush. (...)
Under the agreement worked out between U.S. and Libyan officials in August, Libya agreed to hand over $1.5 billion to finish compensation payments to families of Americans killed on Pan Am 103, those killed and wounded in a 1986 attack on a Berlin disco, and resolve other claims for property and personal damages.
The agreement also called for $300 million in compensation to be paid for the Libyan victims of U.S. airstrikes that were ordered by former President Reagan in retaliation for the Berlin bombing. The Bush administration says no taxpayer money will be used for those payments but has not said where the money is coming from. (...)
Libya completed payments into the compensation fund in late October, clearing the last hurdle in restoration of full normalization of diplomatic relations between Washington and Tripoli, and the Treasury began transfers to the Lockerbie families earlier this month. In return, Bush restored Libya's sovereign immunity from terror-related lawsuits.
[From Matthew Lee of the news agency Associated Press. The full article can be read here. The deal covers the families of all Lockerbie victims, not just the American ones.]
Thursday, 20 November 2008
New Lockerbie blog
A warm welcome is extended to a new blog entitled The Masonic Verses - Lockerbie and Related Scams. Its first post was on 14 November 2008 and takes the form of a critique of the evidence relating to insertion on Pan Am 103 of the suitcase containing the bomb, concluding that it was inserted at Heathrow and was not an interline bag from Malta via Frankfurt. Baz, the blog administrator, informs me that he will be doing one post a week.
Tuesday, 18 November 2008
UK and Libya sign prisoner transfer agreement
The United Kingdom Government and the Libyan Government have just signed the prisoner transfer agreement that was negotiated between them some time ago. The relevant Foreign and Commonwealth Office press release can be read here.
Two points are made very clear. (1) The Prisoner Transfer Agreement (PTA) allows the return of a prisoner to serve out his sentence in his home country where both jurisdictions are in agreement. Prisoners do not have an automatic right to transfer: the consent of the authorities in both states is required before transfer can take place. (2) No individual can be transferred under the PTA until all criminal proceedings in relation to that individual have been exhausted.
In the case of a prisoner serving his sentence in Scotland, it is the Scottish (not the UK) Government that would require to decide whether transfer should be allowed; and the Scottish First Minister, Alex Salmond, has so far made it abundantly clear that in his view the PTA negotiated by the UK Government should specifically have excluded anyone convicted in respect of the Lockerbie bombing. On 2 February 2008 he said:
"My role, the role of the government is to defend the integrity of the judicial system in Scotland and that's exactly what we intend to do.
"We've made it quite clear that, in terms of prisoner transfer agreement with Libya, we thought it would be appropriate if anyone connected with the Lockerbie atrocity was excluded specifically from any prisoner transfer agreement.
"Until very recently, that was also the position of the UK Government."
It might therefore appear that, if an application were made for Abdelbaset Megrahi to be transferred back to Libya (and there has been no hint that one is likely to be made), the Scottish Government would not be disposed to grant it.
Two points are made very clear. (1) The Prisoner Transfer Agreement (PTA) allows the return of a prisoner to serve out his sentence in his home country where both jurisdictions are in agreement. Prisoners do not have an automatic right to transfer: the consent of the authorities in both states is required before transfer can take place. (2) No individual can be transferred under the PTA until all criminal proceedings in relation to that individual have been exhausted.
In the case of a prisoner serving his sentence in Scotland, it is the Scottish (not the UK) Government that would require to decide whether transfer should be allowed; and the Scottish First Minister, Alex Salmond, has so far made it abundantly clear that in his view the PTA negotiated by the UK Government should specifically have excluded anyone convicted in respect of the Lockerbie bombing. On 2 February 2008 he said:
"My role, the role of the government is to defend the integrity of the judicial system in Scotland and that's exactly what we intend to do.
"We've made it quite clear that, in terms of prisoner transfer agreement with Libya, we thought it would be appropriate if anyone connected with the Lockerbie atrocity was excluded specifically from any prisoner transfer agreement.
"Until very recently, that was also the position of the UK Government."
It might therefore appear that, if an application were made for Abdelbaset Megrahi to be transferred back to Libya (and there has been no hint that one is likely to be made), the Scottish Government would not be disposed to grant it.
Lockerbie victims' families call payment repulsive
This is the headline over a long article in the US news magazine Newsday published to coincide with President Bush's phone call to Colonel Gaddafi expressing his satisfaction at the final Libyan payment into the compensation fund. It reads in part:
'For Siobhan Mulroy, who lost six relatives when a terrorist bomb ripped apart a Pan Am 747 over Lockerbie, Scotland, the final restitution from Libya doesn't bring relief, or satisfaction, or closure. The feeling, she said, is closer to revulsion.
'"It's kind of a repulsive situation to be in where people are offering money, I guess, to make you feel better," said Mulroy of East Northport, who lost her father, brother, sister-in-law, uncle, aunt and cousin. (...)
'"I'm glad that the president is satisfied with it. I'm certainly not," said Peter Lowenstein of Montauk, whose son, Alexander, was one of 35 Syracuse University students on the flight who had been in London for the semester. "I don't recall him losing a relative on Flight 103.
'"His interest is to satisfy the oil industry, who are major supporters of his. ... He wants what they want, which is to get Libyan oil."
'Daniel Tobin, who lost his brother Mark Tobin of Hempstead, said the money doesn't put the issue to rest.
'"So many have forgotten us. ... I'm still concerned that Exxon Mobil and other oil companies, that they're able to do business with Gadhafi," said Tobin, also of Hempstead. "They're allowed to do business with terrorists."'
The full article can be read here. Interestingly, it contains a timeline of significant events relating to the Lockerbie tragedy. It omits all reference to the fact that the conviction of Abdelbaset Megrahi has been referred back to the High Court on the ground that it may have constituted a miscarriage of justice. When are the media in the United States going to wake up to the fact that the officially-approved Libyan guilt scenario is under severe attack and is highly unlikely to survive?
'For Siobhan Mulroy, who lost six relatives when a terrorist bomb ripped apart a Pan Am 747 over Lockerbie, Scotland, the final restitution from Libya doesn't bring relief, or satisfaction, or closure. The feeling, she said, is closer to revulsion.
'"It's kind of a repulsive situation to be in where people are offering money, I guess, to make you feel better," said Mulroy of East Northport, who lost her father, brother, sister-in-law, uncle, aunt and cousin. (...)
'"I'm glad that the president is satisfied with it. I'm certainly not," said Peter Lowenstein of Montauk, whose son, Alexander, was one of 35 Syracuse University students on the flight who had been in London for the semester. "I don't recall him losing a relative on Flight 103.
'"His interest is to satisfy the oil industry, who are major supporters of his. ... He wants what they want, which is to get Libyan oil."
'Daniel Tobin, who lost his brother Mark Tobin of Hempstead, said the money doesn't put the issue to rest.
'"So many have forgotten us. ... I'm still concerned that Exxon Mobil and other oil companies, that they're able to do business with Gadhafi," said Tobin, also of Hempstead. "They're allowed to do business with terrorists."'
The full article can be read here. Interestingly, it contains a timeline of significant events relating to the Lockerbie tragedy. It omits all reference to the fact that the conviction of Abdelbaset Megrahi has been referred back to the High Court on the ground that it may have constituted a miscarriage of justice. When are the media in the United States going to wake up to the fact that the officially-approved Libyan guilt scenario is under severe attack and is highly unlikely to survive?
Monday, 17 November 2008
A dilemma more moral than legal
Keeping a dying man in jail pending appeal is unnecessary on the part of the Scottish court of criminal appeal
The refusal of the Scottish court of criminal appeal to free Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi on bail while he awaits his appeal against his conviction as the Lockerbie bomber, has added unease to unease. It was not edifying to see lawyers quibble about when Megrahi, who has prostate cancer, is expected to die, then have the judge base his bail decision on that prediction.
At the Scottish court of criminal appeal, Lord Hamilton concluded that he might have a few more years left and therefore should not be released pending appeal. By way of consolation, he ruled that should his condition deteriorate more rapidly than expected, he could renew his application. What concerns me is that his appeal is unlikely to be heard before the summer. Why?
There has, for years, been a feeling among lawyers and others who have studied the case that Megrahi was not responsible for the bombing. Even Dr Jim Swire, the most prominent campaigner on behalf of Lockerbie victims, whose daughter died in the bombing, does not believe in his guilt; nor do the relatives of many other victims.
It has been alleged that because of the desire to have sanctions lifted against Libya, Muammar Gadafy delivered him to the Scottish authorities rather than the principal perpetrator. [RB: I am not aware of anyone having suggested that Megrahi was handed over in substitution for some other Libyan perpetrator.] The evidence against Megrahi has always seemed slightly deficient although, of course, the jury had convicted him [sic; he was in fact convicted by a court of three judges], and an appeal court in 2002 had turned down his first appeal.
Last year, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission studied new evidence and decided it was enough to justify Megrahi being granted another appeal. That does not mean the commission necessarily believes he is innocent, nor that the appeal court will necessarily overturn his conviction. But it does mean that he has a strong case.
Here's the dilemma - more moral than legal. If he is innocent, keeping a dying man in jail pending his appeal is a particularly cruel injustice to add to that of his years in prison. So why does the appeal have to wait so long? There can be no logistical reason.
[From an article by Marcel Berlins in The Guardian.]
The refusal of the Scottish court of criminal appeal to free Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi on bail while he awaits his appeal against his conviction as the Lockerbie bomber, has added unease to unease. It was not edifying to see lawyers quibble about when Megrahi, who has prostate cancer, is expected to die, then have the judge base his bail decision on that prediction.
At the Scottish court of criminal appeal, Lord Hamilton concluded that he might have a few more years left and therefore should not be released pending appeal. By way of consolation, he ruled that should his condition deteriorate more rapidly than expected, he could renew his application. What concerns me is that his appeal is unlikely to be heard before the summer. Why?
There has, for years, been a feeling among lawyers and others who have studied the case that Megrahi was not responsible for the bombing. Even Dr Jim Swire, the most prominent campaigner on behalf of Lockerbie victims, whose daughter died in the bombing, does not believe in his guilt; nor do the relatives of many other victims.
It has been alleged that because of the desire to have sanctions lifted against Libya, Muammar Gadafy delivered him to the Scottish authorities rather than the principal perpetrator. [RB: I am not aware of anyone having suggested that Megrahi was handed over in substitution for some other Libyan perpetrator.] The evidence against Megrahi has always seemed slightly deficient although, of course, the jury had convicted him [sic; he was in fact convicted by a court of three judges], and an appeal court in 2002 had turned down his first appeal.
Last year, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission studied new evidence and decided it was enough to justify Megrahi being granted another appeal. That does not mean the commission necessarily believes he is innocent, nor that the appeal court will necessarily overturn his conviction. But it does mean that he has a strong case.
Here's the dilemma - more moral than legal. If he is innocent, keeping a dying man in jail pending his appeal is a particularly cruel injustice to add to that of his years in prison. So why does the appeal have to wait so long? There can be no logistical reason.
[From an article by Marcel Berlins in The Guardian.]
Sunday, 16 November 2008
Mrs Megrahi speaks
The wife of convicted Lockerbie bomber Libyan Abdelbaset Ali Mohmet al-Megrahi said in an interview published on Sunday that her husband is critically ill with cancer and slammed Scotland's authorities for not taking better care of him.
Aisha al-Megrahi spoke to the daily Oea, considered close to Seif al-Islam, the son of Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi, after a Scottish court on Friday rejected her husband's appeal to be freed on bail because of his illness.
"Hospitals in Scotland refused to take him in because of the increased security involved in transferring him, especially the use of helicopters," Oea quoted her as saying.
And despite increased surveillance "he remains handcuffed to the bed when he is examined, which affects his morale badly," she added. (…)
His lawyers applied for his interim release after announcing last month that he has prostate cancer which has spread to other parts of his body.
But on Friday the Appeal Court in Edinburgh ruled that he could live for years depending on how successful his treatment is.
"While the disease from which the appellant suffers is incurable and may cause his death, he is not at present suffering material pain or disability," Lord Justice General Arthur Hamilton said.
The Libyan newspaper slammed the ruling as "inhuman" and accused the judicial authorities in Scotland of "politicising the trial" of Megrahi.
"We expected justice to atone for the sin of condemning an innocent man convicted for political reasons, and ease his suffering", the paper wrote, and accused the Scottish judges of having been "stripped of their humanity". (…)
On Friday Megrahi, who is being held at Greenock prison in western Scotland, voiced deep disappointment.
"I am very distressed that the court has refused me bail pending the hearing of my appeal, and the chance to spend my remaining time with my family," he said in a statement read out by his lawyer Tony Kelly.
"I wish to reiterate that I had nothing whatsoever to do with the Lockerbie bombing, and that the fight for justice will continue whether or not I'm alive to witness my name being cleared."
[From an article by the news agency Agence France Presse.
The story has been picked up in Monday's issue of The Scotsman. It can be read here.]
Aisha al-Megrahi spoke to the daily Oea, considered close to Seif al-Islam, the son of Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi, after a Scottish court on Friday rejected her husband's appeal to be freed on bail because of his illness.
"Hospitals in Scotland refused to take him in because of the increased security involved in transferring him, especially the use of helicopters," Oea quoted her as saying.
And despite increased surveillance "he remains handcuffed to the bed when he is examined, which affects his morale badly," she added. (…)
His lawyers applied for his interim release after announcing last month that he has prostate cancer which has spread to other parts of his body.
But on Friday the Appeal Court in Edinburgh ruled that he could live for years depending on how successful his treatment is.
"While the disease from which the appellant suffers is incurable and may cause his death, he is not at present suffering material pain or disability," Lord Justice General Arthur Hamilton said.
The Libyan newspaper slammed the ruling as "inhuman" and accused the judicial authorities in Scotland of "politicising the trial" of Megrahi.
"We expected justice to atone for the sin of condemning an innocent man convicted for political reasons, and ease his suffering", the paper wrote, and accused the Scottish judges of having been "stripped of their humanity". (…)
On Friday Megrahi, who is being held at Greenock prison in western Scotland, voiced deep disappointment.
"I am very distressed that the court has refused me bail pending the hearing of my appeal, and the chance to spend my remaining time with my family," he said in a statement read out by his lawyer Tony Kelly.
"I wish to reiterate that I had nothing whatsoever to do with the Lockerbie bombing, and that the fight for justice will continue whether or not I'm alive to witness my name being cleared."
[From an article by the news agency Agence France Presse.
The story has been picked up in Monday's issue of The Scotsman. It can be read here.]
UK Sunday newspapers on bail refusal
As far as I can see, only two UK Sunday newspapers feature stories related to the High Court's refusal of interim liberation to Mr Megrahi.
Scotland on Sunday's health correspondent, Kate Foster, provides an article on the difficulties that face his legal advisers of supplying to the court (or to the Scottish Government, if an application were made for compassionate release) a medical prognosis that indicates how long he has to live. An unnamed source is quoted as follows:
"All the doctors will say is that this is terminal and it's not their job to predict how long he has to live. That's the problem his legal team faces. The doctors won't commit themselves. The court is saying that if he gets a prognosis, then by all means come back. But the doctors simply won't give a prognosis. It's the nature of this particular condition and the fact he is on hormone treatment."
The Sunday Express picks up the story, run yesterday as an exclusive by The Herald, about Dr Jim Swire saying that, if Mr Megrahi dies before his appeal is decided, he (Swire) might seek to be recognised by the court as having a legitimate interest to continue it. Of course, if a member of Mr Megrahi's family (eg wife, child, sibling) were prepared to take over the appeal on his death, this would spare the High Court from having to decide whether the relative of a murder victim qualifies as having a legitimate interest to continue the appeal of the person convicted of the murder. The article can be read here.
Scotland on Sunday's health correspondent, Kate Foster, provides an article on the difficulties that face his legal advisers of supplying to the court (or to the Scottish Government, if an application were made for compassionate release) a medical prognosis that indicates how long he has to live. An unnamed source is quoted as follows:
"All the doctors will say is that this is terminal and it's not their job to predict how long he has to live. That's the problem his legal team faces. The doctors won't commit themselves. The court is saying that if he gets a prognosis, then by all means come back. But the doctors simply won't give a prognosis. It's the nature of this particular condition and the fact he is on hormone treatment."
The Sunday Express picks up the story, run yesterday as an exclusive by The Herald, about Dr Jim Swire saying that, if Mr Megrahi dies before his appeal is decided, he (Swire) might seek to be recognised by the court as having a legitimate interest to continue it. Of course, if a member of Mr Megrahi's family (eg wife, child, sibling) were prepared to take over the appeal on his death, this would spare the High Court from having to decide whether the relative of a murder victim qualifies as having a legitimate interest to continue the appeal of the person convicted of the murder. The article can be read here.
Saturday, 15 November 2008
Swire: I will carry on appeal if Megrahi dies in jail
The Herald runs an article by Lucy Adams with this title. The relevant portion reads:
'The father of a woman killed over Lockerbie yesterday vowed to stand in and continue the appeal of the Libyan convicted of the bombing if he dies "before justice is done".
'Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora, 23, died in the tragedy 20 years ago, has taken legal advice and believes he would be able to pursue the case if Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi cannot. (...)
'Dr Swire said he felt the court had missed a "golden opportunity" in not granting Megrahi bail and he would pursue the appeal personally.
'He told The Herald last night: "I understand that someone with a legitimate interest in the case can continue the appeal provided they apply within three months of the death of the person who lodged the appeal. So the Libyan Government or his family or one of the relatives could apply to pursue the appeal.
'"I very much hope Megrahi will live to see it completed but, if he does not, then I will look to pursue it. The defence has said there is new evidence and it sounds like pretty potent stuff. We would want to hear this in court. I have reason to believe there would be solicitors and advocates who would be willing to take this up on a pro bono free basis."'
[The issue of transfer of rights of appeal if an appellant dies before his appeal is determined is dealt with in this post in this blog. Here is what Mr Megrahi himself said in the statement issued yesterday on his behalf:
"I wish to reiterate that I had nothing whatsoever to do with the Lockerbie bombing and that the fight for justice will continue, regardless of whether I am alive to witness my name being cleared."]
'The father of a woman killed over Lockerbie yesterday vowed to stand in and continue the appeal of the Libyan convicted of the bombing if he dies "before justice is done".
'Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora, 23, died in the tragedy 20 years ago, has taken legal advice and believes he would be able to pursue the case if Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi cannot. (...)
'Dr Swire said he felt the court had missed a "golden opportunity" in not granting Megrahi bail and he would pursue the appeal personally.
'He told The Herald last night: "I understand that someone with a legitimate interest in the case can continue the appeal provided they apply within three months of the death of the person who lodged the appeal. So the Libyan Government or his family or one of the relatives could apply to pursue the appeal.
'"I very much hope Megrahi will live to see it completed but, if he does not, then I will look to pursue it. The defence has said there is new evidence and it sounds like pretty potent stuff. We would want to hear this in court. I have reason to believe there would be solicitors and advocates who would be willing to take this up on a pro bono free basis."'
[The issue of transfer of rights of appeal if an appellant dies before his appeal is determined is dealt with in this post in this blog. Here is what Mr Megrahi himself said in the statement issued yesterday on his behalf:
"I wish to reiterate that I had nothing whatsoever to do with the Lockerbie bombing and that the fight for justice will continue, regardless of whether I am alive to witness my name being cleared."]
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)