The appellant’s written Grounds of Appeal are not a public document. It follows that while the grounds are being discussed in court, those sitting in the public benches find it very difficult to follow the proceedings. These persons include representatives of the press, law students, humble bloggers and, by far the most important, relatives of the victims of the Lockerbie disaster. These last have expressed to me the deep sense of exclusion that they feel when numbered grounds of appeal are discussed while they themselves are in complete ignorance of what issues these numbered grounds relate to.
I appreciate that the Grounds of Appeal are a very lengthy document and contain legal argument as well as mere bald specification of appeal points. If it is thought undesirable that the document in this form be in the public domain, would it not be possible for a summary (perhaps confined to the headings and sub-headings of the various grounds) to be made public? This would be greatly appreciated by the relatives and would be of immense value to the press and to bloggers in their mission to provide accurate and useful information and commentary on the proceedings.
I respectfully invite the court and the parties to give consideration to this proposal.
Saturday, 29 November 2008
Friday, 28 November 2008
Ninth (public) procedural hearing: second day (cont’d)
The appellant’s legal team and the Advocate General (representing the UK Government) had been unable to agree the whole terms of a protocol governing the role and functions of a special (security-vetted) counsel to protect the interests of the appellant in relation to the document(s) in respect of which PII has been asserted. In particular, the appellant’s view was that, while the special advocate was to be appointed by the court, the appellant should be allowed to nominate him or her. The Advocate General, Lord Davidson of Glen Clova QC, appearing in person, took the view that while the appellant should be entitled to make representations specifying objections to the court’s choice, he should have no right to suggest who that counsel should be.
The other main divergence of view related to what relations should exist between the special counsel once appointed and the appellant’s regular legal team. The Advocate General contended that, after the special counsel had been given access to the document(s), there should be no contact between him or her and the appellant’s lawyers (or indeed between him or her and anyone other than the court and the Advocate General). Ms Scott contended that the recognised principles applicable in England to special counsel, namely “minimum derogation” from the normal rights of an accused person or appellant and “maximum participation” of the appellant’s chosen legal representatives should apply and that the special counsel, so long as he or she did not divulge the contents of the document(s) in respect of which PII was asserted, should be free to consult whomever he or she thought might be helpful in the performance of his/her function of protecting the interests of the appellant.
The court indicated that, after having considered the submissions of the parties, it would draft a protocol which would settle these issues of principle. The parties, at a hearing yet to be fixed, would be given an opportunity to make representations on matters of detail, but not on the principles enshrined therein.
The Reuters report of the proceedings can be read here.
The other main divergence of view related to what relations should exist between the special counsel once appointed and the appellant’s regular legal team. The Advocate General contended that, after the special counsel had been given access to the document(s), there should be no contact between him or her and the appellant’s lawyers (or indeed between him or her and anyone other than the court and the Advocate General). Ms Scott contended that the recognised principles applicable in England to special counsel, namely “minimum derogation” from the normal rights of an accused person or appellant and “maximum participation” of the appellant’s chosen legal representatives should apply and that the special counsel, so long as he or she did not divulge the contents of the document(s) in respect of which PII was asserted, should be free to consult whomever he or she thought might be helpful in the performance of his/her function of protecting the interests of the appellant.
The court indicated that, after having considered the submissions of the parties, it would draft a protocol which would settle these issues of principle. The parties, at a hearing yet to be fixed, would be given an opportunity to make representations on matters of detail, but not on the principles enshrined therein.
The Reuters report of the proceedings can be read here.
Ninth (public) procedural hearing: second day
The High Court this morning announced its decisions on the matters ventilated at yesterday’s hearing.
The court accepted the prioritisation of grounds of appeal advanced by the appellant, and ordered a four-week hearing on grounds 1 and 2 (unreasonableness, on the evidence, of the verdict) to be held in the spring of 2009. Written notes of argument are to be lodged by the appellant six weeks before the date eventually fixed and by the Crown four weeks before. As suggested by Maggie Scott QC for the appellant, the next chapter to be argued will be those parts of ground of appeal 3 (fairness of the trial) that relate to Tony Gauci. The Crown was ordered to provide written answers to this ground of appeal (directed particularly to the appellant’s assertions of fact) within eight weeks from today. The court will then decide how long a hearing will need to be allocated and when that hearing should take place.
The court accepted undertakings from the Crown to hand over to the appellant’s legal team the bulk of the witness statements by 12 December. In respect of those few assessed by the Crown possibly to give rise to public interest immunity issues, the Crown would submit them as soon as possible to the Advocate General who would by 23 January 2009 determine which, if any, gave rise to national security or international relations concerns which the court would require to adjudicate upon. All the rest would be handed over to the appellant.
The Crown undertook to make available to the appellant within eight weeks the UK previous conviction information relating to witnesses. In respect of non-UK convictions, the Crown would use its best endeavours to secure the information from the relevant foreign countries.
The court invited the former legal representatives of the appellant to comment on the grounds of appeal relating to defective representation at the trial and requested them to supply any relevant documentation not already handed over to the appellant’s present legal team.
Argument is continuing on a protocol governing the role of the “special advocate” to be appointed in relation to the mystery document in respect of which the UK Foreign Secretary has asserted public interest immunity.
The court accepted the prioritisation of grounds of appeal advanced by the appellant, and ordered a four-week hearing on grounds 1 and 2 (unreasonableness, on the evidence, of the verdict) to be held in the spring of 2009. Written notes of argument are to be lodged by the appellant six weeks before the date eventually fixed and by the Crown four weeks before. As suggested by Maggie Scott QC for the appellant, the next chapter to be argued will be those parts of ground of appeal 3 (fairness of the trial) that relate to Tony Gauci. The Crown was ordered to provide written answers to this ground of appeal (directed particularly to the appellant’s assertions of fact) within eight weeks from today. The court will then decide how long a hearing will need to be allocated and when that hearing should take place.
The court accepted undertakings from the Crown to hand over to the appellant’s legal team the bulk of the witness statements by 12 December. In respect of those few assessed by the Crown possibly to give rise to public interest immunity issues, the Crown would submit them as soon as possible to the Advocate General who would by 23 January 2009 determine which, if any, gave rise to national security or international relations concerns which the court would require to adjudicate upon. All the rest would be handed over to the appellant.
The Crown undertook to make available to the appellant within eight weeks the UK previous conviction information relating to witnesses. In respect of non-UK convictions, the Crown would use its best endeavours to secure the information from the relevant foreign countries.
The court invited the former legal representatives of the appellant to comment on the grounds of appeal relating to defective representation at the trial and requested them to supply any relevant documentation not already handed over to the appellant’s present legal team.
Argument is continuing on a protocol governing the role of the “special advocate” to be appointed in relation to the mystery document in respect of which the UK Foreign Secretary has asserted public interest immunity.
Low key plans for bombing anniversary
Details have been released of the Lockerbie air disaster 20th year memorial events which will take place next month.
A series of public commemorations are planned in locations around the town on Sunday December 21 but they are going to be low key, in accordance with the wishes of the community.
The programme includes wreath laying at Dryfesdale Cemetery starting at 2 pm that afternoon with readings by the Lord Lieutenant and the US consul.
Free buses will run between the town hall and the cemetery for anyone wishing to attend.
There will also be an ecumenical service at Dryfesdale Church and a vigil at Tundergarth Church between 6.30 pm and 7.30 pm that night .
They have been timed to coincide with the actual time that Pan Am 103 exploded over Lockerbie in 1988.
Furthermore, the Dryfesdale Lodge Visitors’ Centre and Lockerbie Town Hall lesser hall will be open all day as designated ‘places to remember’ for visitors and townsfolk to attend and refreshments will be served in the town hall all day.
Meanwhile, two special TV programmes will be aired next month to mark the 20th anniversary.
The two-part Living Lockerbie will be shown on Border TV on December 4 and 11.
It has been made by filmmaker John Wallace, who was a 14-year-old pupil at Lockerbie Academy at the time of the disaster.
The first, entitled “Living Lockerbie: the media” examines the impact the arrival of journalists and news crews from around the world had on an already shocked community.
John said: “There were concerns raised at the time about how some of the media behaved in and around Lockerbie.
“What I didn’t know about was the groundbreaking work that went on to train local people to deal with reporters.”
He added: “It wasn’t pleasant for anyone who had to deal with that kind of attention, but lessons were learned and it did help to improve how the media behave in disaster situations.”
The second programme looks at some of the positive memorials that have been created over the last two decades to honour those who died.
John himself benefited from the scholarship programme, now in its 19th year, set up between Lockerbie and Syracuse University.
And 20 years on, victims’ relatives are still putting their hands in their pockets to support forward-looking projects, creating new memorials to their loved ones.
“I’ve been bowled over by the generosity of spirit I’ve found among people affected by the disaster -- there’s a real and ongoing effort to make good things come out of the tragedy,” he said.
“Knowing that, in the face of such a terrible loss, people can find the strength to try and build bridges like that -- it really gives you hope for the future.”
[From the Annandale Herald, Lockerbie's weekly local newspaper. Further details can be found in this article from another local newspaper, the Dumfries and Galloway Standard.]
A series of public commemorations are planned in locations around the town on Sunday December 21 but they are going to be low key, in accordance with the wishes of the community.
The programme includes wreath laying at Dryfesdale Cemetery starting at 2 pm that afternoon with readings by the Lord Lieutenant and the US consul.
Free buses will run between the town hall and the cemetery for anyone wishing to attend.
There will also be an ecumenical service at Dryfesdale Church and a vigil at Tundergarth Church between 6.30 pm and 7.30 pm that night .
They have been timed to coincide with the actual time that Pan Am 103 exploded over Lockerbie in 1988.
Furthermore, the Dryfesdale Lodge Visitors’ Centre and Lockerbie Town Hall lesser hall will be open all day as designated ‘places to remember’ for visitors and townsfolk to attend and refreshments will be served in the town hall all day.
Meanwhile, two special TV programmes will be aired next month to mark the 20th anniversary.
The two-part Living Lockerbie will be shown on Border TV on December 4 and 11.
It has been made by filmmaker John Wallace, who was a 14-year-old pupil at Lockerbie Academy at the time of the disaster.
The first, entitled “Living Lockerbie: the media” examines the impact the arrival of journalists and news crews from around the world had on an already shocked community.
John said: “There were concerns raised at the time about how some of the media behaved in and around Lockerbie.
“What I didn’t know about was the groundbreaking work that went on to train local people to deal with reporters.”
He added: “It wasn’t pleasant for anyone who had to deal with that kind of attention, but lessons were learned and it did help to improve how the media behave in disaster situations.”
The second programme looks at some of the positive memorials that have been created over the last two decades to honour those who died.
John himself benefited from the scholarship programme, now in its 19th year, set up between Lockerbie and Syracuse University.
And 20 years on, victims’ relatives are still putting their hands in their pockets to support forward-looking projects, creating new memorials to their loved ones.
“I’ve been bowled over by the generosity of spirit I’ve found among people affected by the disaster -- there’s a real and ongoing effort to make good things come out of the tragedy,” he said.
“Knowing that, in the face of such a terrible loss, people can find the strength to try and build bridges like that -- it really gives you hope for the future.”
[From the Annandale Herald, Lockerbie's weekly local newspaper. Further details can be found in this article from another local newspaper, the Dumfries and Galloway Standard.]
Thursday, 27 November 2008
Ninth (public) procedural hearing: first day
Today’s lengthy procedural hearing was taken up with (a) submissions on the appellant’s most recent petition for disclosure of material in the hands of the Crown; and (b) case management and timetabling.
As regards (a), the material in question is mainly the pre-trial witness statements of the more than 1100 witnesses who featured on the Crown’s list at the Zeist trial. The appellant’s lawyers claim that upwards of 800 of these statements have not yet been handed over. The Crown stated today that it was willing to do so, subject to any public interest immunity issues that might be raised by the Advocate General on behalf of the United Kingdom Government. The Advocate General’s counsel, Raymond Doherty QC, indicated that in the vast majority of cases there was unlikely to be any PII concern and that these statements could be handed over by the Crown within fourteen days. In respect of any few statements in respect of which the UK Government’s assessment was that PII issues arose, the matter would have to return to the court.
As regards (b) Maggie Scott QC for Megrahi asked that the Crown be ordered to answer in writing the appellant’s detailed grounds of appeal. This would serve the useful purpose of clarifying the issues of fact and law on which there was genuine dispute between the parties and of identifying the factual and legal issues on which the parties were at one. The Crown responded that this was not normal Scottish practice and questioned whether it would serve any beneficial function.
The appellant’s legal team had been asked for this hearing to prioritise their grounds of appeal and to indicate the order in which the court should be asked to address them. Ms Scott stated that the appellant wished first consideration to be given to grounds of appeal 1 and 2 relating to the reasonableness of the verdict (ie whether any reasonable tribunal, on the evidence led, could have convicted Megrahi). She stated that the appellant’s legal team would be in a position to argue these grounds in April 2009 and that she anticipated that perhaps four weeks of court time would be required. The next chapter to be addressed should be those portions of ground of appeal 3 relating to the evidence of the Maltese shopkeeper, Tony Gauci. Ms Scott tentatively suggested that this section of the hearing might be scheduled for July 2009 and that as much as eight weeks might be required.
Ms Scott also requested the court at this stage to forward the grounds of appeal to the lawyers who represented Mr Megrahi at the original trial, in order to give them an opportunity, if so minded, to respond to the issues raised and the criticisms made of them in ground of appeal 4 relating to defective or inadequate representation.
The Crown did not indicate any strong views on these prioritising and timetabling matters. The one particularly interesting thing that Ronnie Clancy QC for the Crown disclosed was that, as of today, the Crown did not concede that even if Tony Gauci’s evidence were wholly discredited there remained insufficient evidence to justify the conviction of Megrahi. This is a view that few legal observers share.
The hearing was continued until tomorrow (Friday). It is to be expected that the court will then issue its decision on most of the issues outlined above. The other matter to be dealt with tomorrow is the protocol governing relations between the appellant’s legal team and the special (security-vetted) advocate appointed to consider the mystery document(s) in respect of which the UK Foreign Secretary has already asserted public interest immunity and the non-disclosure of which formed one of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission’s grounds for holding that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred. It is possible that when these matters are discussed tomorrow, the court will have to go into closed session.
The report on the BBC News website can be read here. The Herald's report of the proceedings can be read here. It appears to be the only Scottish or UK newspaper to provide any coverage. Like the BBC, it concentrates on the application for the criminal records of witnesses to be disclosed. Trust the British media to focus on the peripheral and inessential!
As regards (a), the material in question is mainly the pre-trial witness statements of the more than 1100 witnesses who featured on the Crown’s list at the Zeist trial. The appellant’s lawyers claim that upwards of 800 of these statements have not yet been handed over. The Crown stated today that it was willing to do so, subject to any public interest immunity issues that might be raised by the Advocate General on behalf of the United Kingdom Government. The Advocate General’s counsel, Raymond Doherty QC, indicated that in the vast majority of cases there was unlikely to be any PII concern and that these statements could be handed over by the Crown within fourteen days. In respect of any few statements in respect of which the UK Government’s assessment was that PII issues arose, the matter would have to return to the court.
As regards (b) Maggie Scott QC for Megrahi asked that the Crown be ordered to answer in writing the appellant’s detailed grounds of appeal. This would serve the useful purpose of clarifying the issues of fact and law on which there was genuine dispute between the parties and of identifying the factual and legal issues on which the parties were at one. The Crown responded that this was not normal Scottish practice and questioned whether it would serve any beneficial function.
The appellant’s legal team had been asked for this hearing to prioritise their grounds of appeal and to indicate the order in which the court should be asked to address them. Ms Scott stated that the appellant wished first consideration to be given to grounds of appeal 1 and 2 relating to the reasonableness of the verdict (ie whether any reasonable tribunal, on the evidence led, could have convicted Megrahi). She stated that the appellant’s legal team would be in a position to argue these grounds in April 2009 and that she anticipated that perhaps four weeks of court time would be required. The next chapter to be addressed should be those portions of ground of appeal 3 relating to the evidence of the Maltese shopkeeper, Tony Gauci. Ms Scott tentatively suggested that this section of the hearing might be scheduled for July 2009 and that as much as eight weeks might be required.
Ms Scott also requested the court at this stage to forward the grounds of appeal to the lawyers who represented Mr Megrahi at the original trial, in order to give them an opportunity, if so minded, to respond to the issues raised and the criticisms made of them in ground of appeal 4 relating to defective or inadequate representation.
The Crown did not indicate any strong views on these prioritising and timetabling matters. The one particularly interesting thing that Ronnie Clancy QC for the Crown disclosed was that, as of today, the Crown did not concede that even if Tony Gauci’s evidence were wholly discredited there remained insufficient evidence to justify the conviction of Megrahi. This is a view that few legal observers share.
The hearing was continued until tomorrow (Friday). It is to be expected that the court will then issue its decision on most of the issues outlined above. The other matter to be dealt with tomorrow is the protocol governing relations between the appellant’s legal team and the special (security-vetted) advocate appointed to consider the mystery document(s) in respect of which the UK Foreign Secretary has already asserted public interest immunity and the non-disclosure of which formed one of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission’s grounds for holding that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred. It is possible that when these matters are discussed tomorrow, the court will have to go into closed session.
The report on the BBC News website can be read here. The Herald's report of the proceedings can be read here. It appears to be the only Scottish or UK newspaper to provide any coverage. Like the BBC, it concentrates on the application for the criminal records of witnesses to be disclosed. Trust the British media to focus on the peripheral and inessential!
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)