[The Herald reports Christine Grahame MSP's visit to Abdelbaset Megrahi under the above headline. The full report can be read here. The Scotsman's similar report can be read here. The following are excerpts from The Herald's account:]
The Libyan convicted of the Lockerbie bombing is in deteriorating health and "absolutely desperate" to see his family, an MSP said yesterday.
But Christine Grahame refused to say whether Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi intends to abandon his appeal against conviction, following her meeting with him at Greenock Prison.
Libyan authorities have applied for Megrahi to be moved to Libya under a prisoner transfer treaty between that country and the UK.
But no decision on this can be made by Scottish Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill if there are outstanding legal proceedings. (...)
Emerging from the prison, Ms Grahame said: "I found it quite upsetting. The man is obviously very ill and he is desperate to see his family - absolutely desperate to see his family - so, whatever it takes, that's the priority."
She went on: "He did tell me things I can't discuss with you. But I am absolutely more convinced than ever that there has been a miscarriage of justice."
Asked if Megrahi planned to press on with his appeal, she said: "I can't say that - that is for him to say through his lawyers." (...)
Megrahi was diagnosed with prostate cancer last year and later failed to be freed on bail pending his appeal, which finally got under way last Tuesday in Edinburgh. Legal experts have warned that although the Libyan government has made the application for the transfer agreement, it cannot go ahead without the agreement of the prisoner.
The appeal against the length of sentence imposed on Megrahi would also have to be dropped if the transfer agreement is to go ahead.
Ms Grahame said: "His health is deteriorating, he was pretty upset and he is a man who wants to see his family."
With his health worsening, al Megrahi believed he had only "a short time to go", Ms Grahame said. "It was all about his family - we did talk about other matters, but it kept coming back to the importance of family."
Megrahi did not tell her how long he expected to live, nor did he offer an opinion on the move by Libyan authorities, said Ms Grahame. But she also said he wanted to clear his name.
"That is essential to him as well," she said. "Other matters I can't discuss with you because it would prejudice anything else."
Ms Grahame has previously said that if his appeal was abandoned there should be a public inquiry, and yesterday she repeated that view.
She said Megrahi knew a lot about the Lockerbie case.
"This man has lived this case for the last decade, he knows more about it probably than any other person on the planet. He is well-informed but his priority is his family.
"The man is an able man but he is a man who is terminally ill and missing his family as we all would. He wants to die at home with his family."
Saturday, 9 May 2009
Friday, 8 May 2009
First Minister hints at delays in Lockerbie case
First Minister Alex Salmond has cast doubt on whether Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill will be able to rule on the prisoner transfer request from Libya of Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi.
Libyan authorities have applied for Megrahi to be moved to Libya under a treaty between that country and the UK. The process should be completed within 90 days.
However, Mr Salmond has said it may be a problem to fulfil the agreement in that time frame.
Mr Salmond said: "In the prisoner transfer agreement, it says this process would normally take 90 days but of course there are unknowns, including the judicial process in Scotland which is not completely under our control."
[From a report on the STV website. The full text can be read here.]
Libyan authorities have applied for Megrahi to be moved to Libya under a treaty between that country and the UK. The process should be completed within 90 days.
However, Mr Salmond has said it may be a problem to fulfil the agreement in that time frame.
Mr Salmond said: "In the prisoner transfer agreement, it says this process would normally take 90 days but of course there are unknowns, including the judicial process in Scotland which is not completely under our control."
[From a report on the STV website. The full text can be read here.]
Megrahi appeal goes on after experts reveal deal not agreed
[This is the headline over an article by Lucy Adams in today's edition of The Herald. The full text can be read here. The following are excerpts.]
The Lockerbie appeal continued yesterday despite the Libyan Government's request to transfer the man convicted of the bombing back to Tripoli.
Legal experts warned that the deal has not yet been agreed and that, although the Libyan Government has made the application, it cannot go ahead without the agreement of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi.
Maggie Scott, QC, told the court that Megrahi, who is suffering from terminal prostate cancer, would be undergoing tests today and next week and that he will not be able to watch but "he wants the matter to proceed".
In order for the transfer to take place, there can be no proceedings active, so Megrahi would have to drop the appeal.
The Crown Office appeal against the length of the 27-year sentence imposed on the Libyan would also have to be dropped. It, too, is currently still live.
Professor Robert Black, one of the architects of the original trial at Camp Zeist, said: "The application is a government-to-government application. The only indication of what Mr Megrahi's attitude towards it is from the mouths of other people. For the transfer to go through, it is Megrahi who would have to agree to drop the appeal."
Megrahi, 57, whose condition is said to have deteriorated considerably, could also re-apply for bail on the basis of his health.
Last year, when three appeal court judges turned down his request for interim liberation, they left it open for him to apply again.
"He is in considerable discomfort," Ms Scott told the court yesterday. "It is anticipated he will be undergoing tests tomorrow and in the course of next week, so it is not anticipated he will be able to witness proceedings over the next series of days. He does, however, want matters to proceed. It is appropriate I point that out to the court."
The Lockerbie appeal continued yesterday despite the Libyan Government's request to transfer the man convicted of the bombing back to Tripoli.
Legal experts warned that the deal has not yet been agreed and that, although the Libyan Government has made the application, it cannot go ahead without the agreement of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi.
Maggie Scott, QC, told the court that Megrahi, who is suffering from terminal prostate cancer, would be undergoing tests today and next week and that he will not be able to watch but "he wants the matter to proceed".
In order for the transfer to take place, there can be no proceedings active, so Megrahi would have to drop the appeal.
The Crown Office appeal against the length of the 27-year sentence imposed on the Libyan would also have to be dropped. It, too, is currently still live.
Professor Robert Black, one of the architects of the original trial at Camp Zeist, said: "The application is a government-to-government application. The only indication of what Mr Megrahi's attitude towards it is from the mouths of other people. For the transfer to go through, it is Megrahi who would have to agree to drop the appeal."
Megrahi, 57, whose condition is said to have deteriorated considerably, could also re-apply for bail on the basis of his health.
Last year, when three appeal court judges turned down his request for interim liberation, they left it open for him to apply again.
"He is in considerable discomfort," Ms Scott told the court yesterday. "It is anticipated he will be undergoing tests tomorrow and in the course of next week, so it is not anticipated he will be able to witness proceedings over the next series of days. He does, however, want matters to proceed. It is appropriate I point that out to the court."
MSP visits Megrahi in Greenock Prison
Thursday, 7 May 2009
Salmond assures MSPs on Lockerbie transfer decision
First Minister Alex Salmond told Holyrood a decision on whether the Lockerbie bomber is to be transferred to Libya will be taken on "judicial grounds alone"
A decision on whether the Lockerbie bomber is to be transferred to Libya will be taken on "judicial grounds alone", the First Minister said. (...)
The second appeal against conviction by Megrahi began in Edinburgh last week, but this must be dropped if his transfer to a Libyan jail is to take place.
Alex Salmond, speaking during First Minister's Questions on Thursday, said it would have been "greatly to be preferred if the judicial processes of Scotland" were allowed to take their course.
But Mr Salmond insisted that the decision on the prisoner transfer - which will be considered by Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill - would be based solely on judicial grounds.
Mr Salmond stressed: "What I have said throughout this process is that everything we do as a government will uphold the integrity of the Scottish judicial system.
"Let me repeat that today and also say the decision made by the Justice Secretary will not be made on economic grounds or on political grounds; it will be made on judicial grounds and judicial grounds alone."
The issue had been raised by Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Tavish Scott, who said that he believed that "al Megrahi should serve his sentence in Scotland".
And the Lib Dem recalled a statement Mr Salmond had made to Holyrood in June 2007, when he said that Scottish law officers and others, including the Secretary General of the UN, had given assurances that any sentence that was imposed would be served in Scotland.
Mr Scott then asked Mr Salmond: "Does he stand by that statement he made as First Minister?" (...)
Labour MSP Elaine Murray, member for Dumfries, asked what consideration had been given to the possible transfer of Megrahi to Libya.
Ms Murray said comments had already been made by the First Minister that anyone connected to the bombing should be excluded from prisoner transfer.
"Do these statements indicate that Scottish ministers have actually predetermined their response to the Libyan Government, and if so does this enable the Libyans to seek judicial review if the request is turned down?" she asked.
Mr Salmond insisted no decision has been made and added: "I think we were absolutely right - demonstrably right - to warn of the possible consequences of the sequence of events set in place in June 2007, just as we are absolutely duty bound to consider a prisoner transfer agreement on its merits.
"Given the relevant legislation, there can be no prejudging of that agreement before such a PTA came into place."
[From the STV (Scottish Television) website. The full report can be read here.]
A decision on whether the Lockerbie bomber is to be transferred to Libya will be taken on "judicial grounds alone", the First Minister said. (...)
The second appeal against conviction by Megrahi began in Edinburgh last week, but this must be dropped if his transfer to a Libyan jail is to take place.
Alex Salmond, speaking during First Minister's Questions on Thursday, said it would have been "greatly to be preferred if the judicial processes of Scotland" were allowed to take their course.
But Mr Salmond insisted that the decision on the prisoner transfer - which will be considered by Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill - would be based solely on judicial grounds.
Mr Salmond stressed: "What I have said throughout this process is that everything we do as a government will uphold the integrity of the Scottish judicial system.
"Let me repeat that today and also say the decision made by the Justice Secretary will not be made on economic grounds or on political grounds; it will be made on judicial grounds and judicial grounds alone."
The issue had been raised by Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Tavish Scott, who said that he believed that "al Megrahi should serve his sentence in Scotland".
And the Lib Dem recalled a statement Mr Salmond had made to Holyrood in June 2007, when he said that Scottish law officers and others, including the Secretary General of the UN, had given assurances that any sentence that was imposed would be served in Scotland.
Mr Scott then asked Mr Salmond: "Does he stand by that statement he made as First Minister?" (...)
Labour MSP Elaine Murray, member for Dumfries, asked what consideration had been given to the possible transfer of Megrahi to Libya.
Ms Murray said comments had already been made by the First Minister that anyone connected to the bombing should be excluded from prisoner transfer.
"Do these statements indicate that Scottish ministers have actually predetermined their response to the Libyan Government, and if so does this enable the Libyans to seek judicial review if the request is turned down?" she asked.
Mr Salmond insisted no decision has been made and added: "I think we were absolutely right - demonstrably right - to warn of the possible consequences of the sequence of events set in place in June 2007, just as we are absolutely duty bound to consider a prisoner transfer agreement on its merits.
"Given the relevant legislation, there can be no prejudging of that agreement before such a PTA came into place."
[From the STV (Scottish Television) website. The full report can be read here.]
The on-going appeal
The appeal hearing continued on Wednesday, notwithstanding the prisoner transfer application submitted by the Libyan Government.
Maggie Scott QC for Megrahi continued her review of the evidence regarding ingestion of the fatal suitcase at Luqa Airport in Malta, and argued that the trial court's conclusion that the bomb started its fatal progress there was one that they were not entitled to reach on the evidence presented at the trial. She also contended that the evidence was insufficient to entitle the trial court to reach the conclusion that the destruction of Pan Am 103 was a "Libyan plot".
Ms Scott indicated to the court that she was likely to conclude her submissions on Thursday morning. It will then be for Ronnie Clancy QC to respond on behalf of the Crown.
Maggie Scott QC for Megrahi continued her review of the evidence regarding ingestion of the fatal suitcase at Luqa Airport in Malta, and argued that the trial court's conclusion that the bomb started its fatal progress there was one that they were not entitled to reach on the evidence presented at the trial. She also contended that the evidence was insufficient to entitle the trial court to reach the conclusion that the destruction of Pan Am 103 was a "Libyan plot".
Ms Scott indicated to the court that she was likely to conclude her submissions on Thursday morning. It will then be for Ronnie Clancy QC to respond on behalf of the Crown.
Reaction to the transfer application
Alex Salmond [the First Minister in the Scottish Government] was preparing his legal team last night for the most difficult decision of his time in office – whether to allow Britain's biggest mass-murderer to be released from jail and serve the remainder of his sentence in Libya. (…)
Megrahi, 57, a former Libyan secret agent, is terminally ill with prostate cancer and has only just begun his appeal, a process expected to last a year.
However, if he opts to drop the appeal then it will be up to the First Minister, justice secretary Kenny MacAskill and Scottish Government officials to decide whether to send him home. (…)
Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Tavish Scott said: "A Scottish court convicted Megrahi of a truly heinous crime – 270 people lost their lives in the Lockerbie bombing.
"The justice secretary needs to respect the judgment of the Scottish courts. Megrahi should serve his time in a Scottish prison. This application should be refused." (…)
A senior Scottish Government source said there was no way ministers could agree to transfer Megrahi to Libya if legal proceedings were still ongoing. The appeal would have to be concluded – one way or the other – before any decision was taken, he said.
Megrahi has always protested his innocence, but if he drops his appeal and relies on the transfer agreement to get him home, he will leave as a convicted murderer. If he decides to pursue his appeal, he could die before the legal process concludes.
Scottish Tory justice spokesman Bill Aitken said: "When this issue (Megrahi's transfer] first arose as a possibility, we said we would normally expect someone convicted of such an atrocity over Scotland to serve their full sentence in Scotland. That view still prevails today."
[The above are excerpts from an article in today’s edition of The Scotsman. The article also contains the varying reactions of relatives of those killed on Pan Am 103 to the possibility that Mr Megrahi may be repatriated. The Herald’s coverage of the story can be read here.]
Megrahi, 57, a former Libyan secret agent, is terminally ill with prostate cancer and has only just begun his appeal, a process expected to last a year.
However, if he opts to drop the appeal then it will be up to the First Minister, justice secretary Kenny MacAskill and Scottish Government officials to decide whether to send him home. (…)
Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Tavish Scott said: "A Scottish court convicted Megrahi of a truly heinous crime – 270 people lost their lives in the Lockerbie bombing.
"The justice secretary needs to respect the judgment of the Scottish courts. Megrahi should serve his time in a Scottish prison. This application should be refused." (…)
A senior Scottish Government source said there was no way ministers could agree to transfer Megrahi to Libya if legal proceedings were still ongoing. The appeal would have to be concluded – one way or the other – before any decision was taken, he said.
Megrahi has always protested his innocence, but if he drops his appeal and relies on the transfer agreement to get him home, he will leave as a convicted murderer. If he decides to pursue his appeal, he could die before the legal process concludes.
Scottish Tory justice spokesman Bill Aitken said: "When this issue (Megrahi's transfer] first arose as a possibility, we said we would normally expect someone convicted of such an atrocity over Scotland to serve their full sentence in Scotland. That view still prevails today."
[The above are excerpts from an article in today’s edition of The Scotsman. The article also contains the varying reactions of relatives of those killed on Pan Am 103 to the possibility that Mr Megrahi may be repatriated. The Herald’s coverage of the story can be read here.]
Wednesday, 6 May 2009
What happens now?
[The most detailed report of today's events that I have been able to find comes from The Associated Press news agency. Excerpts appear below. The full report can be read here.]
The only person jailed over the 1988 Lockerbie bombing said he would drop his appeal against conviction — provided Britain allows him to serve the rest of sentence in Libya, a visiting Libyan official said Wednesday.
Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi, who is terminally ill with cancer, (...) has been fighting his conviction in a Scottish court, but a Libyan Foreign Ministry official said al-Megrahi would be willing to drop the case.
"He is sick. He has cancer. There is no cure for his case. He told me that he wants to die among his family and friends in his country," said Abdel Atti el-Ubaidi [more normally transliterated as Abdel Ati al-Obeidi, the Deputy Foreign Minister for European Affairs], who is leading a Libyan delegation to London. "Al-Megrahi said that he is ready to drop the appeal if he is guaranteed that he will be transferred to Libya." (...)
Al-Megrahi's lawyers have said British and U.S. authorities tampered with evidence, disregarded witness statements and steered investigators toward the conclusion that Libya, not Iran, was to blame. (...)
Al-Megrahi's appeal, which has been under review since April 28 at Edinburgh's High Court, points to an exhaustive 2007 legal review by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Board raised questions about evidence used to convict al-Megrahi.
Relatives of the victims expressed dismay Wednesday at the news that al-Megrahi might be sent to Libya.
Scottish lawmaker Christine Grahame said she believed al-Megrahi would succeed in clearing his name if he can complete the appeal process, but she said it was "understandable, on a personal level, why he would want to return to his homeland given his failing health."
She called for a public inquiry into the Lockerbie bombing, even if al-Megrahi were no longer in the country.
Robert Monetti, from Cherry Hill, New Jersey, whose son Rick died in the blast, said "the American families are incredibly opposed to letting al-Megrahi out of Scotland."
"As a group we are generally convinced that he is guilty and ought to serve his sentence" in Britain, Monetti said.
El-Ubaidi, the Libyan official, said he made a request to Scottish officials Tuesday to drop the appeal. Scotland's government confirmed receiving the request, and said a decision could take three months or longer. Scotland had said it would not repatriate him while his appeal was being heard.
Meanwhile, appeals proceedings were held Wednesday at the court in Edinburgh. Al-Megrahi's lawyer Tony Kelly declined comment, prosecution spokesman Kevin Bell said the appeal was expected to continue.
The only person jailed over the 1988 Lockerbie bombing said he would drop his appeal against conviction — provided Britain allows him to serve the rest of sentence in Libya, a visiting Libyan official said Wednesday.
Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi, who is terminally ill with cancer, (...) has been fighting his conviction in a Scottish court, but a Libyan Foreign Ministry official said al-Megrahi would be willing to drop the case.
"He is sick. He has cancer. There is no cure for his case. He told me that he wants to die among his family and friends in his country," said Abdel Atti el-Ubaidi [more normally transliterated as Abdel Ati al-Obeidi, the Deputy Foreign Minister for European Affairs], who is leading a Libyan delegation to London. "Al-Megrahi said that he is ready to drop the appeal if he is guaranteed that he will be transferred to Libya." (...)
Al-Megrahi's lawyers have said British and U.S. authorities tampered with evidence, disregarded witness statements and steered investigators toward the conclusion that Libya, not Iran, was to blame. (...)
Al-Megrahi's appeal, which has been under review since April 28 at Edinburgh's High Court, points to an exhaustive 2007 legal review by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Board raised questions about evidence used to convict al-Megrahi.
Relatives of the victims expressed dismay Wednesday at the news that al-Megrahi might be sent to Libya.
Scottish lawmaker Christine Grahame said she believed al-Megrahi would succeed in clearing his name if he can complete the appeal process, but she said it was "understandable, on a personal level, why he would want to return to his homeland given his failing health."
She called for a public inquiry into the Lockerbie bombing, even if al-Megrahi were no longer in the country.
Robert Monetti, from Cherry Hill, New Jersey, whose son Rick died in the blast, said "the American families are incredibly opposed to letting al-Megrahi out of Scotland."
"As a group we are generally convinced that he is guilty and ought to serve his sentence" in Britain, Monetti said.
El-Ubaidi, the Libyan official, said he made a request to Scottish officials Tuesday to drop the appeal. Scotland's government confirmed receiving the request, and said a decision could take three months or longer. Scotland had said it would not repatriate him while his appeal was being heard.
Meanwhile, appeals proceedings were held Wednesday at the court in Edinburgh. Al-Megrahi's lawyer Tony Kelly declined comment, prosecution spokesman Kevin Bell said the appeal was expected to continue.
A MSP's response to the transfer application
Christine Grahame MSP (SNP) who is due to meet Mr Megrahi at Greenock Prison on Friday said:
“I am not surprised Mr Megrahi has made an application to be transferred back to Libya. Until that transfer takes place his appeal can still proceed, although I suspect his transfer application will not take a full 90 days to be considered. Even if it were it is likely his appeal will not now be heard given a year was set aside to consider it.
“Ideally it would have been better if the protocol which the British Government signed up to would have allowed for the appeal to continue whilst Mr Megrahi was transferred back to Libya. I firmly believe on the evidence I have seen that Mr Megrahi would win his appeal and clear his name. Unfortunately, because he is terminally ill, time is not on his side and it is understandable, on a personal level, why he would want to return to his homeland given his failing health.
“If the prisoner transfer does proceed, as I expect it will, and Mr Megrahi drops his appeal then I think the case for a full public inquiry into this whole episode will be necessary. Such an inquiry should not only examine how the official investigation was carried out, but also re-examine the evidence both contemporary and newly presented that points to another source and motive for this appalling atrocity.
“It is imperative therefore that all evidence gathered and maintained by the relevant authorities, including the Crown Office and Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission and others is secured and not destroyed in the event Mr Megrahi does drop his appeal. That evidence will be vital should there be a public inquiry.”
[Press release from Christine Grahame's office.]
“I am not surprised Mr Megrahi has made an application to be transferred back to Libya. Until that transfer takes place his appeal can still proceed, although I suspect his transfer application will not take a full 90 days to be considered. Even if it were it is likely his appeal will not now be heard given a year was set aside to consider it.
“Ideally it would have been better if the protocol which the British Government signed up to would have allowed for the appeal to continue whilst Mr Megrahi was transferred back to Libya. I firmly believe on the evidence I have seen that Mr Megrahi would win his appeal and clear his name. Unfortunately, because he is terminally ill, time is not on his side and it is understandable, on a personal level, why he would want to return to his homeland given his failing health.
“If the prisoner transfer does proceed, as I expect it will, and Mr Megrahi drops his appeal then I think the case for a full public inquiry into this whole episode will be necessary. Such an inquiry should not only examine how the official investigation was carried out, but also re-examine the evidence both contemporary and newly presented that points to another source and motive for this appalling atrocity.
“It is imperative therefore that all evidence gathered and maintained by the relevant authorities, including the Crown Office and Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission and others is secured and not destroyed in the event Mr Megrahi does drop his appeal. That evidence will be vital should there be a public inquiry.”
[Press release from Christine Grahame's office.]
Libya applies for transfer of Lockerbie bomb prisoner
The Libyan authorities have applied for the transfer of the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, the Scottish government said today.
The move, which could see Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi sent home to Libya to serve out his sentence, follows last week's ratification of a prisoner transfer agreement between the British and Libyan governments.
A Scottish government spokesman said: "The application will be considered by officials who will provide information and advice to Scottish ministers for decision on this matter.
"Under the terms of the agreement this process may take 90 days although it could be longer if further information is required in relation to the application, or for another reason."
[From The Herald's website. The BBC News website's report can be read here. The report on The Scotsman's website can be accessed here. The following are excerpts:
'[Megrahi's] second appeal against conviction began at the Appeal Court in Edinburgh last week, but this must be dropped if his transfer to a Libyan jail is to take place.
'Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was on board the Pan Am flight 103, welcomed the development.
'He said: "I am not opposed to this simply because I don't believe the man is guilty as charged and I don't think Megrahi should be in prison."
'He said it was only "right" Megrahi, who is dying from cancer, should be allowed home.
'But Dr Swire added: "He has to renounce his appeal before he can go home. Just because the authorities have applied doesn't mean it is going to happen immediately."
'The application to the Scottish Government was made late yesterday, officials said.
'Under terms of Britain's agreement with Libya, a decision on transferring a prisoner cannot be made if there are any outstanding legal proceedings.
'But the fact that legal proceedings are still outstanding does not prevent an application being lodged.
'The prisoner transfer deal was ratified last Wednesday – the day after Megrahi's second appeal began in Edinburgh.
'For a prisoner like Megrahi, who has prostate cancer, the requirement that there can be no legal proceedings outstanding poses an agonising choice.
'He can either drop his appeal – and with it his bid to clear his name – and seek a return to Libya. Or he can persist with an appeal – and possibly die before it is completed.
'Labour's Scottish justice spokesman Richard Baker said: "It is absolutely right that it is Scottish ministers that will be responsible for any decision to transfer Mr Megrahi.
'"The Scottish Justice Minister has responsibility for Scottish prisoners and so it follows that Kenny MacAskill should decide on the issue."
'Barrie Berkley, who lost his son Alistair, said he hoped the appeal would continue.
'Mr Berkley, of Hexham, Northumberland, said: "I would rather the appeal be completed first and I hope the courts would facilitate it going through without any further delay.
'"We want the appeal to go through because it's the main means of us getting further information about how our family members died or why they died.
"We really want to know whether the Libyans were behind this and Megrahi was behind it.
'"Or of course if he was found not guilty that would mean the inquiry would have to reopen and the various agencies of the US and UK would need to find who was behind it if it wasn't Megrahi.
'"Our main motive is to find out whether Megrahi did do it or not."
'He added: "If he is found guilty then the Government has to decide where he serves the remainder of his term. It shouldn't be up to him or the Libyan authorities."'
The relevant legal provisions governing prisoner transfer are set out here. A prisoner may be transferred only if the judgment against him is final and no other criminal proceedings are pending in the transferring state. This means that Abdelbaset Megrahi's current appeal would have to be abandoned before transfer takes place. But it would seem on the face of it that there is no reason why the appeal should not continue while the Scottish Government is considering the application. Transfer cannot be effected without the consent of the prisoner concerned since it is he alone who can instruct the appeal to be abandoned to allow transfer to take place.]
The move, which could see Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi sent home to Libya to serve out his sentence, follows last week's ratification of a prisoner transfer agreement between the British and Libyan governments.
A Scottish government spokesman said: "The application will be considered by officials who will provide information and advice to Scottish ministers for decision on this matter.
"Under the terms of the agreement this process may take 90 days although it could be longer if further information is required in relation to the application, or for another reason."
[From The Herald's website. The BBC News website's report can be read here. The report on The Scotsman's website can be accessed here. The following are excerpts:
'[Megrahi's] second appeal against conviction began at the Appeal Court in Edinburgh last week, but this must be dropped if his transfer to a Libyan jail is to take place.
'Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was on board the Pan Am flight 103, welcomed the development.
'He said: "I am not opposed to this simply because I don't believe the man is guilty as charged and I don't think Megrahi should be in prison."
'He said it was only "right" Megrahi, who is dying from cancer, should be allowed home.
'But Dr Swire added: "He has to renounce his appeal before he can go home. Just because the authorities have applied doesn't mean it is going to happen immediately."
'The application to the Scottish Government was made late yesterday, officials said.
'Under terms of Britain's agreement with Libya, a decision on transferring a prisoner cannot be made if there are any outstanding legal proceedings.
'But the fact that legal proceedings are still outstanding does not prevent an application being lodged.
'The prisoner transfer deal was ratified last Wednesday – the day after Megrahi's second appeal began in Edinburgh.
'For a prisoner like Megrahi, who has prostate cancer, the requirement that there can be no legal proceedings outstanding poses an agonising choice.
'He can either drop his appeal – and with it his bid to clear his name – and seek a return to Libya. Or he can persist with an appeal – and possibly die before it is completed.
'Labour's Scottish justice spokesman Richard Baker said: "It is absolutely right that it is Scottish ministers that will be responsible for any decision to transfer Mr Megrahi.
'"The Scottish Justice Minister has responsibility for Scottish prisoners and so it follows that Kenny MacAskill should decide on the issue."
'Barrie Berkley, who lost his son Alistair, said he hoped the appeal would continue.
'Mr Berkley, of Hexham, Northumberland, said: "I would rather the appeal be completed first and I hope the courts would facilitate it going through without any further delay.
'"We want the appeal to go through because it's the main means of us getting further information about how our family members died or why they died.
"We really want to know whether the Libyans were behind this and Megrahi was behind it.
'"Or of course if he was found not guilty that would mean the inquiry would have to reopen and the various agencies of the US and UK would need to find who was behind it if it wasn't Megrahi.
'"Our main motive is to find out whether Megrahi did do it or not."
'He added: "If he is found guilty then the Government has to decide where he serves the remainder of his term. It shouldn't be up to him or the Libyan authorities."'
The relevant legal provisions governing prisoner transfer are set out here. A prisoner may be transferred only if the judgment against him is final and no other criminal proceedings are pending in the transferring state. This means that Abdelbaset Megrahi's current appeal would have to be abandoned before transfer takes place. But it would seem on the face of it that there is no reason why the appeal should not continue while the Scottish Government is considering the application. Transfer cannot be effected without the consent of the prisoner concerned since it is he alone who can instruct the appeal to be abandoned to allow transfer to take place.]
Appeal update
As far as I can discover, there is no online press coverage of the first day of the second week of the appeal on Tuesday.
However, a source who was present in court informs me that Maggie Scott QC for Megrahi continued her detailed examination of the evidence given by Tony Gauci at trial about the date of purchase of the clothing that accompanied the bomb in the brown Samsonite suitcase. In the course of these submissions reference was made to transcripts of the evidence provided at trial and in particular the evidence in relation to the football games shown on Maltese television on 23rd November 1988 and 7th December 1988, the weather on these dates and the evidence led at trial in relation to the Christmas lights.
Ms Scott continued with an examination of case law where the Crown sought to corroborate the identification of an accused with circumstantial evidence. She then addressed the Court on whether the trial court was entitled to draw the inference that the appellant knew the purpose for which the clothing was bought.
In the course of the afternoon Ms Scott began an examination of the evidence from which the trial court made the inference that the primary suitcase was ingested at Luqa airport in Malta. In order to examine this evidence she will ask the court to look at the evidence led at trial relating to Heathrow airport, Frankfurt airport and Luqa airport.
However, a source who was present in court informs me that Maggie Scott QC for Megrahi continued her detailed examination of the evidence given by Tony Gauci at trial about the date of purchase of the clothing that accompanied the bomb in the brown Samsonite suitcase. In the course of these submissions reference was made to transcripts of the evidence provided at trial and in particular the evidence in relation to the football games shown on Maltese television on 23rd November 1988 and 7th December 1988, the weather on these dates and the evidence led at trial in relation to the Christmas lights.
Ms Scott continued with an examination of case law where the Crown sought to corroborate the identification of an accused with circumstantial evidence. She then addressed the Court on whether the trial court was entitled to draw the inference that the appellant knew the purpose for which the clothing was bought.
In the course of the afternoon Ms Scott began an examination of the evidence from which the trial court made the inference that the primary suitcase was ingested at Luqa airport in Malta. In order to examine this evidence she will ask the court to look at the evidence led at trial relating to Heathrow airport, Frankfurt airport and Luqa airport.
Tuesday, 5 May 2009
Bomber visit 'blocked' claims MSP
[The following is a press release issued today by SNP Member of the Scottish Parliament, Christine Grahame. An article based on it appears on the BBC News website and can be read here.]
An MSP who is working with relatives of victims of the Lockerbie Pan Am bombing has been refused a visit to the man convicted of the atrocity, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi. Christine Grahame MSP had been offered a private meeting with the terminally ill Mr Megrahi who is currently serving a 27 year sentence at Greenock Prison. Mr Megrahi is currently appealing his conviction and had agreed to meet Ms Grahame, but officials at the Scottish Prison Service blocked the move at the last moment, refusing to give an explanation. Ms Grahame said:
“I believe, as many campaigners and relatives of Lockerbie victims believe, that the conviction against Mr Megrahi is unsafe and, like the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, I think there is evidence that a miscarriage of justice has taken place. If that is the case it is not only an injustice for Mr Megrahi but also for the 270 victims of Pan Am 103.
“I was offered a private visit last week to speak to Mr Megrahi directly and I intended to meet with him on Sunday morning. On Saturday evening however the prison Governor contacted my office to advise that the meeting would not be able to proceed due to unspecified reasons. Despite several attempts to seek clarification from the Scottish Prison Service no satisfactory explanation has been offered.”
Ms Grahame, a former lawyer, has been working closely with the Justice for Megrahi campaign which includes Professor Robert Black QC, the well respected legal expert and Dr Jim Swire whose daughter Flora was killed in the bombing. She added:
“From the evidence I have seen I think there is an indication that very senior officials and British Ministers do not want the truth about this case to enter the public arena.
“I believe that is why the British Government has rushed through the Prisoner Transfer Protocol with Libya, in the hope Mr Megrahi will drop his appeal, as he must do under the terms of the protocol arrangement to be eligible to be transferred back to his homeland. That would ensure that the details about the unsafe nature of this conviction and the manner in which the investigation was carried out by both Scottish and US investigators will be covered up.”
Mr Megrahi is understood to be disappointed that the visit is being blocked, despite his entitlement to such visits. Ms Grahame intends to pursue the matter with the relevant officials.
An MSP who is working with relatives of victims of the Lockerbie Pan Am bombing has been refused a visit to the man convicted of the atrocity, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi. Christine Grahame MSP had been offered a private meeting with the terminally ill Mr Megrahi who is currently serving a 27 year sentence at Greenock Prison. Mr Megrahi is currently appealing his conviction and had agreed to meet Ms Grahame, but officials at the Scottish Prison Service blocked the move at the last moment, refusing to give an explanation. Ms Grahame said:
“I believe, as many campaigners and relatives of Lockerbie victims believe, that the conviction against Mr Megrahi is unsafe and, like the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, I think there is evidence that a miscarriage of justice has taken place. If that is the case it is not only an injustice for Mr Megrahi but also for the 270 victims of Pan Am 103.
“I was offered a private visit last week to speak to Mr Megrahi directly and I intended to meet with him on Sunday morning. On Saturday evening however the prison Governor contacted my office to advise that the meeting would not be able to proceed due to unspecified reasons. Despite several attempts to seek clarification from the Scottish Prison Service no satisfactory explanation has been offered.”
Ms Grahame, a former lawyer, has been working closely with the Justice for Megrahi campaign which includes Professor Robert Black QC, the well respected legal expert and Dr Jim Swire whose daughter Flora was killed in the bombing. She added:
“From the evidence I have seen I think there is an indication that very senior officials and British Ministers do not want the truth about this case to enter the public arena.
“I believe that is why the British Government has rushed through the Prisoner Transfer Protocol with Libya, in the hope Mr Megrahi will drop his appeal, as he must do under the terms of the protocol arrangement to be eligible to be transferred back to his homeland. That would ensure that the details about the unsafe nature of this conviction and the manner in which the investigation was carried out by both Scottish and US investigators will be covered up.”
Mr Megrahi is understood to be disappointed that the visit is being blocked, despite his entitlement to such visits. Ms Grahame intends to pursue the matter with the relevant officials.
Monday, 4 May 2009
More from Malta
In the dock: Lockerbie witness Gauci
The defence of convicted Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al Megrahi wants to attack the central plank of his prosecution – Malta shopkeeper Tony Gauci. MATTHEW VELLA looks at the mounting evidence.
[This is the heading over an article in the Sunday edition of Malta Today. The full text can be read here.]
The defence of convicted Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al Megrahi wants to attack the central plank of his prosecution – Malta shopkeeper Tony Gauci. MATTHEW VELLA looks at the mounting evidence.
[This is the heading over an article in the Sunday edition of Malta Today. The full text can be read here.]
Sunday, 3 May 2009
There is never enough evidence
We are not looking for anyone else. That is the traditional response of the police when faced with the acquittal of men they are convinced were guilty all along. They were at it again this week when three men accused of assisting the 7 July suicide bombers were found not guilty. Andy Hayman, former commissioner of Special Operations at Scotland Yard, wrote of "a sense of bitter disappointment" at the acquittal of the men. And this he said was probably "the last throw of the dice". The police had done a very thorough investigation but the evidence was "not convincing enough".
The implication is clear. The men were almost certainly guilty. The police just didn't have the evidence to prove it. At no point was Hayman prepared to admit that they might just have been innocent. As it happened, the acquittal of the three men coincided with the reopening of an appeal case in a terrorist attack far more serious even than that of 7 July – the Lockerbie bombing of 1988 which resulted in the deaths of 270 people.
The Libyan convicted of the bombing, Mr Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, began an appeal in Scotland against his conviction in 2001. Megrahi did not have the benefit of a jury trial but was found guilty by three Scottish judges who persuaded themselves that he had put a bomb in a suitcase in Malta which went unaccompanied to Frankfurt where it was loaded on to another plane to Heathrow before being transferred on to Pan Am Flight 103 to the US and exploding over Scotland.
Should Megrahi's appeal succeed, it will be interesting to see if the Scottish police say that they are not looking for anyone else.
[From a column by Richard Ingrams in Saturday's edition of The Independent.]
The implication is clear. The men were almost certainly guilty. The police just didn't have the evidence to prove it. At no point was Hayman prepared to admit that they might just have been innocent. As it happened, the acquittal of the three men coincided with the reopening of an appeal case in a terrorist attack far more serious even than that of 7 July – the Lockerbie bombing of 1988 which resulted in the deaths of 270 people.
The Libyan convicted of the bombing, Mr Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, began an appeal in Scotland against his conviction in 2001. Megrahi did not have the benefit of a jury trial but was found guilty by three Scottish judges who persuaded themselves that he had put a bomb in a suitcase in Malta which went unaccompanied to Frankfurt where it was loaded on to another plane to Heathrow before being transferred on to Pan Am Flight 103 to the US and exploding over Scotland.
Should Megrahi's appeal succeed, it will be interesting to see if the Scottish police say that they are not looking for anyone else.
[From a column by Richard Ingrams in Saturday's edition of The Independent.]
Malta may be cleared of Lockerbie connection
"I firmly believe the bomb did not leave from Malta" - victim's father
The Maltese connection to the 1988 bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie will be called into question with fresh evidence presented in the second appeal of the convicted bomber.
A representative of the British victims' families told The Sunday Times yesterday: "I firmly believe the bomb did not leave from Malta."
The appeal, launched last Tuesday, challenged the testimony of key witness Tony Gauci, a Maltese shopkeeper who had identified Abdel Basset al-Megrahi as having bought clothes from his shop that were later found wrapped around the bomb.
The prosecution's line in the initial trial was that Mr al-Megrahi, a Libyan intelligence agent, placed the bomb and clothes in a suitcase checked in at Luqa airport and transferred on to the ill-fated Pan Am flight in Frankfurt.
Ever since Mr al-Megrahi's conviction in 2001, Malta has been implicated in the terrorist act that killed 270 people.
But Mr al-Megrahi's lawyer, Margaret Scott, tore into Mr Gauci's evidence during last Friday's appeal hearing, saying the witness had initially given descriptions of the man in his shop as being taller and more than 10 years older.
"What we have here is a striking discrepancy," she told the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh, according to The Scotsman.
Investigating officers had shown the shopkeeper several photos but he rejected them, because the people were too young. He had even rejected the page showing the photo of Mr al-Megrahi.
But the lawyer told the court last Friday that "unlike before", Mr Gauci was told to look at the photos again. "It was a clear message that there is something there to be found," Dr Scott said.
In fact, Mr Gauci never identified Mr al-Megrahi. He simply stated: "He resembles him a lot."
The trial judges had accepted this identification as a "highly important element" of the case.
Attempts by The Sunday Times to contact Mr Gauci proved futile. During a visit to his Sliema shop yesterday, a man who claimed to be his brother said he had not seen the key witness for a month and insisted he had no comment to make.
Mr al-Megrahi's lawyer will call into question four crucial pieces of evidence that secured his conviction. These are that the accused bought the clothing found with the bomb; that the purchase happened on December 7, 1988; that the buyer knew the purpose for which the clothing was bought; and that the suitcase containing the bomb left from Malta. An element absent from the original trial provides a compelling alternative to the idea that the bomb left from Malta.
Just over 12 years after the bombing, the courts heard retired Heathrow security guard Ray Manly testify that a door leading to the baggage build-up area at Terminal 3 was forced open on the night of December 20, 1988.
The intruder, he had told court, could have easily introduced and tagged a suitcase as Pan Am baggage.
Dr Jim Swire, father of 24-year-old victim Flora, told The Sunday Times yesterday he believed the Malta connection was false: "Security at Luqa conformed to the requirement to check the amount of bags getting on to an aircraft and making sure it agreed with the number that had gone off at the other end."
In the case of the Air Malta flight, which allegedly carried the suitcase with the explosive, "the records show unequivocally that the bags loaded belonged to the passengers and that there were no other bags... and that in Frankfurt the same amount of bags were accounted for."
Dr Swire believed the possibility that the bomb had been planted at Heathrow was suppressed: "Despite this security breach, the airport was not shut down until the breach was explained. Had this been done, I believe my daughter would still be alive." He hoped this second trial would prove to be the watershed he and other sceptical relatives had been waiting for.
However, the appeal may not be concluded if Mr al-Megrahi chooses to return home through a prisoner exchange programme between the UK and Libya, which was ratified by Britain last week.
Mr Al-Megrahi, 57, is suffering from advanced prostate cancer. A decision to drop the appeal would leave him condemned as guilty.
A Scottish journalist following the case told The Sunday Times he suspected that Mr al-Megrahi could be biding his time until this first round of the appeal was over.
"If the judges return with an early verdict in favour of al-Megrahi, he goes back home a free man. If not, he'll likely take the exchange."
Dr Swire was sympathetic to Mr al-Megrahi's position. Although it could mean he would never know the truth about his daughter's death, he said: "Put yourself in his shoes, what else would you do?"
"I would go, and could not blame him if he does. He has told me before that he would rather clear his name before he goes home," Dr Swire added.
But if the appeal did not go through, Dr Swire would be "clamouring" for a full inquiry, which would also be in Malta's interest.
"I think Malta has nothing but substance to gain from this."
[This is an article by Mark Micallef and Caroline Muscat in today's edition of the Maltese newspaper The Sunday Times. As far as I can discover, none of the Scottish or UK Sundays covers the first week of the appeal hearing.]
The Maltese connection to the 1988 bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie will be called into question with fresh evidence presented in the second appeal of the convicted bomber.
A representative of the British victims' families told The Sunday Times yesterday: "I firmly believe the bomb did not leave from Malta."
The appeal, launched last Tuesday, challenged the testimony of key witness Tony Gauci, a Maltese shopkeeper who had identified Abdel Basset al-Megrahi as having bought clothes from his shop that were later found wrapped around the bomb.
The prosecution's line in the initial trial was that Mr al-Megrahi, a Libyan intelligence agent, placed the bomb and clothes in a suitcase checked in at Luqa airport and transferred on to the ill-fated Pan Am flight in Frankfurt.
Ever since Mr al-Megrahi's conviction in 2001, Malta has been implicated in the terrorist act that killed 270 people.
But Mr al-Megrahi's lawyer, Margaret Scott, tore into Mr Gauci's evidence during last Friday's appeal hearing, saying the witness had initially given descriptions of the man in his shop as being taller and more than 10 years older.
"What we have here is a striking discrepancy," she told the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh, according to The Scotsman.
Investigating officers had shown the shopkeeper several photos but he rejected them, because the people were too young. He had even rejected the page showing the photo of Mr al-Megrahi.
But the lawyer told the court last Friday that "unlike before", Mr Gauci was told to look at the photos again. "It was a clear message that there is something there to be found," Dr Scott said.
In fact, Mr Gauci never identified Mr al-Megrahi. He simply stated: "He resembles him a lot."
The trial judges had accepted this identification as a "highly important element" of the case.
Attempts by The Sunday Times to contact Mr Gauci proved futile. During a visit to his Sliema shop yesterday, a man who claimed to be his brother said he had not seen the key witness for a month and insisted he had no comment to make.
Mr al-Megrahi's lawyer will call into question four crucial pieces of evidence that secured his conviction. These are that the accused bought the clothing found with the bomb; that the purchase happened on December 7, 1988; that the buyer knew the purpose for which the clothing was bought; and that the suitcase containing the bomb left from Malta. An element absent from the original trial provides a compelling alternative to the idea that the bomb left from Malta.
Just over 12 years after the bombing, the courts heard retired Heathrow security guard Ray Manly testify that a door leading to the baggage build-up area at Terminal 3 was forced open on the night of December 20, 1988.
The intruder, he had told court, could have easily introduced and tagged a suitcase as Pan Am baggage.
Dr Jim Swire, father of 24-year-old victim Flora, told The Sunday Times yesterday he believed the Malta connection was false: "Security at Luqa conformed to the requirement to check the amount of bags getting on to an aircraft and making sure it agreed with the number that had gone off at the other end."
In the case of the Air Malta flight, which allegedly carried the suitcase with the explosive, "the records show unequivocally that the bags loaded belonged to the passengers and that there were no other bags... and that in Frankfurt the same amount of bags were accounted for."
Dr Swire believed the possibility that the bomb had been planted at Heathrow was suppressed: "Despite this security breach, the airport was not shut down until the breach was explained. Had this been done, I believe my daughter would still be alive." He hoped this second trial would prove to be the watershed he and other sceptical relatives had been waiting for.
However, the appeal may not be concluded if Mr al-Megrahi chooses to return home through a prisoner exchange programme between the UK and Libya, which was ratified by Britain last week.
Mr Al-Megrahi, 57, is suffering from advanced prostate cancer. A decision to drop the appeal would leave him condemned as guilty.
A Scottish journalist following the case told The Sunday Times he suspected that Mr al-Megrahi could be biding his time until this first round of the appeal was over.
"If the judges return with an early verdict in favour of al-Megrahi, he goes back home a free man. If not, he'll likely take the exchange."
Dr Swire was sympathetic to Mr al-Megrahi's position. Although it could mean he would never know the truth about his daughter's death, he said: "Put yourself in his shoes, what else would you do?"
"I would go, and could not blame him if he does. He has told me before that he would rather clear his name before he goes home," Dr Swire added.
But if the appeal did not go through, Dr Swire would be "clamouring" for a full inquiry, which would also be in Malta's interest.
"I think Malta has nothing but substance to gain from this."
[This is an article by Mark Micallef and Caroline Muscat in today's edition of the Maltese newspaper The Sunday Times. As far as I can discover, none of the Scottish or UK Sundays covers the first week of the appeal hearing.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)