If it really is true that Abdel Baset Al-Megrahi is not guilty, it must be very difficult for him to agree to take advantage of the Prisoner Transfer Agreement (your report, 7 May).
Why would he trust a deal under which he would have to renounce his appeal in the hope that ministers of the state, which he would see as having wrongly convicted him, would later agree to his transfer?
He has an alternative. When he applied previously for bail on compassionate grounds because of his illness, this was rejected but he was told that his lawyers could apply again if his circumstances changed.
On 8 May, we heard in court that he was in too much discomfort from his illness, and in too great a need for further treatment urgently this week, to be able even to listen to the court proceedings over the line arranged for him between the court and Greenock prison.
This surely is a grave change of circumstances.
If he applied again, maybe bail would be approved, he has little to lose by doing so, the decision by their lordships could be quickly reached, and if positive, the bail conditions would require him to remain in Scotland, but he could be with his family at the house which is already available for them.
Separation from his family is known to be a great stress for him. Reducing his stress level would be likely to prolong his life. Guilty or innocent, it also seems the humane, Christian and merciful thing to do.
Were he to die in prison during the appeal, he will surely be seen as a martyr, Scots law would take further criticism, and there would be at least further delay in examining the totality of the evidence now available.
Those who, like us, seek the truth in this terrible case should be greatly relieved were bail granted, since he would not be required to withdraw his appeal, and we are desperately keen to see all the evidence examined again in the appeal court under Scots law as soon as possible.
There also appears to be no obvious alternative to the appeal for the Scottish legal system to redress the grave damage which its reputation has sustained, particularly abroad, through the verdict reached on the basis of the evidence at Zeist.
[This is the text of a letter from Dr Jim Swire published in today's edition of The Scotsman. There is, of course, the further alternative of an application to the Scottish Government for compassionate release on licence; this is dealt with here.]
Thursday, 14 May 2009
The appeal: week three
The first session of Abdelbaset Megrah's appeal has been continuing in the High Court of Justiciary in Edinburgh though, until today, there has been no media coverage that I have been able to trace on the internet. However, a report has now appeared on The Herald's website. It reads in part:
'The Libyan intelligence officer convicted of the Lockerbie bombing made an unexplained trip to Malta using a false passport and an assumed name, appeal judges were told yesterday.
'He arrived the day the bomb that killed 270 people was planted at the island's Luqa Airport and left the following morning, said Ronnie Clancy QC.
'"At no stage was any significant evidence offered as to the issue or use of the passport in any innocent connection.
'"The only evidence about that was a false denial of the possession of the passport."
'Despite rumours that have been circulating for days that Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi will drop his appeal in exchange for a return to Libya, the hearing continued at the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh. (...)
'Defence QC Maggie Scott has been arguing that no reasonable jury would have found al Megrahi guilty and that there was not sufficient evidence, in law, to convict him.
'Mr Clancy, for the Crown, has now begun the task of trying to demolish the defence claims by reminding the five appeal judges of the reasons why their colleagues found al Megrahi guilty in 2001.
'"No explanation for the visit to Malta the evening before the device was on the plane and departed for Tripoli the following morning," said Mr Clancy.
'"It is clear beyond doubt that the court is linking the use of the passport with the commission of the offence," he said.
'If the Libyan wins this round of his long-running appeal he could go home a free man. If the court, led by Lord Justice General Lord Hamilton, rules against him, al Megrahi still has other challenges to his conviction that are yet to be argued.'
[As regards the coded -- not false -- passport, it is of relevance only if the bomb actually started from Malta, which is a finding that the defence have strongly challenged in the appeal; and they have pointed out that although Megrahi travelled under a coded passport, he stayed in a hotel in Malta under his own name.]
'The Libyan intelligence officer convicted of the Lockerbie bombing made an unexplained trip to Malta using a false passport and an assumed name, appeal judges were told yesterday.
'He arrived the day the bomb that killed 270 people was planted at the island's Luqa Airport and left the following morning, said Ronnie Clancy QC.
'"At no stage was any significant evidence offered as to the issue or use of the passport in any innocent connection.
'"The only evidence about that was a false denial of the possession of the passport."
'Despite rumours that have been circulating for days that Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi will drop his appeal in exchange for a return to Libya, the hearing continued at the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh. (...)
'Defence QC Maggie Scott has been arguing that no reasonable jury would have found al Megrahi guilty and that there was not sufficient evidence, in law, to convict him.
'Mr Clancy, for the Crown, has now begun the task of trying to demolish the defence claims by reminding the five appeal judges of the reasons why their colleagues found al Megrahi guilty in 2001.
'"No explanation for the visit to Malta the evening before the device was on the plane and departed for Tripoli the following morning," said Mr Clancy.
'"It is clear beyond doubt that the court is linking the use of the passport with the commission of the offence," he said.
'If the Libyan wins this round of his long-running appeal he could go home a free man. If the court, led by Lord Justice General Lord Hamilton, rules against him, al Megrahi still has other challenges to his conviction that are yet to be argued.'
[As regards the coded -- not false -- passport, it is of relevance only if the bomb actually started from Malta, which is a finding that the defence have strongly challenged in the appeal; and they have pointed out that although Megrahi travelled under a coded passport, he stayed in a hotel in Malta under his own name.]
Monday, 11 May 2009
Marquise and Swire on the Malta connection
The website of Malta Today publishes opinion pieces by FBI Lockerbie investigator Richard Marquise and by Dr Jim Swire, father of Flora who died aboard Pan Am 103. Mr Marquise's article on the credibility of Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci can be read here; and Dr Swire's on his belief that the bomb did not leave from Malta here.
Sunday, 10 May 2009
Lockerbie bomber Megrahi may be allowed home
Scottish ministers consider releasing Libyan convicted of atrocity on compassionate grounds
Jason Allardyce and Mark Macaskill
The Scottish government is considering whether the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing should be set free.
Ministers are examining the possibility of giving Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi early release on compassionate grounds instead of a prisoner transfer requested by the Libyan government last week.
Under the transfer deal, brokered by London and Tripoli, prisoners cannot leave the country while criminal proceedings are ongoing. (...)
According to senior government sources, Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish justice secretary, believes an alternative would be to allow him to leave on humanitarian grounds while allowing his appeal to continue, if necessary by his family after he dies. (...)
Alex Salmond is believed to harbour doubts about the strength of the case against Megrahi. Last week the first minister said he wanted to see the prisoner face “due process” through the Scottish courts.
A source close to Salmond said that could involve releasing him “on licence” under the supervision of the Libyan authorities.
The proposal was welcomed by Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died in the crash and who has since pursued a tireless quest for information about the bombing.
“This is a genuine alternative for him. The dropping of an appeal would be a disaster for those who seek the truth. We want to see evidence old and new exposed in court,” he said. (...)
Robert Black, the Edinburgh law professor who helped to broker Megrahi’s original trial, said: “In my view, that’s the ideal solution.
“The problem up until now is that compassionate release is not granted unless the individual has three months or less to live and cancer specialists are very wary of getting it wrong. I understand that his condition has rapidly deteriorated, so a specialist may well now be of the opinion that he is ill enough to be released.”
However, Bill Aitken, justice spokesman for the Scottish Conservatives, warned against giving Megrahi special treatment.
“There has to be a presumption that Megrahi will finish his sentence in Scotland unless it can be proved that there are compelling reasons why not,” he said. “His case must not be handled any differently from anyone else in similar circumstances and there would be great resentment if this was to be the case.
“While there is a very voluble, eloquent and no doubt sincere minority of people who want him released, many of the relatives of the deceased wish him to spend the rest of his life in jail and they are not receiving the same attention.”
Bob Monetti, whose son Rick was among the victims of the bombing, said releasing Megrahi would be an “act of betrayal” by the Scottish government.
“The deal that the Scottish and US authorities agreed was that he would serve out his term in Scotland. He is right where he belongs.
“If they release him back to Libya, that’s a bad joke. The families would feel immensely betrayed. There will be a lot of anger.”
[The above are excerpts from an article in today's edition of The Sunday Times (UK). The full text can be read here.
A further long article in the same newspaper entitled "Focus: To free or not to free Megrahi" can be read here.
The relevant statutory provisions relating to compassionate release (as distinct from prisoner transfer) are to be found in the Prisoners and Criminal Proceedings (Scotland) Act 1993 (c 9), section 3 of which provides as follows:
'Power to release prisoners on compassionate grounds
'(1) The [Scottish Ministers] may at any time, if satisfied that there are compassionate grounds justifying the release of a person serving a sentence of imprisonment, release him on licence.
'(2) Before so releasing any long-term prisoner or any life prisoner, the [Scottish Ministers] shall consult the Parole Board unless the circumstances are such as to render consultation impracticable.'
There is a practice guideline -- not a rule of law -- that prisoners who are terminally ill may be released when they have three months or less to live.]
Jason Allardyce and Mark Macaskill
The Scottish government is considering whether the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing should be set free.
Ministers are examining the possibility of giving Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi early release on compassionate grounds instead of a prisoner transfer requested by the Libyan government last week.
Under the transfer deal, brokered by London and Tripoli, prisoners cannot leave the country while criminal proceedings are ongoing. (...)
According to senior government sources, Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish justice secretary, believes an alternative would be to allow him to leave on humanitarian grounds while allowing his appeal to continue, if necessary by his family after he dies. (...)
Alex Salmond is believed to harbour doubts about the strength of the case against Megrahi. Last week the first minister said he wanted to see the prisoner face “due process” through the Scottish courts.
A source close to Salmond said that could involve releasing him “on licence” under the supervision of the Libyan authorities.
The proposal was welcomed by Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died in the crash and who has since pursued a tireless quest for information about the bombing.
“This is a genuine alternative for him. The dropping of an appeal would be a disaster for those who seek the truth. We want to see evidence old and new exposed in court,” he said. (...)
Robert Black, the Edinburgh law professor who helped to broker Megrahi’s original trial, said: “In my view, that’s the ideal solution.
“The problem up until now is that compassionate release is not granted unless the individual has three months or less to live and cancer specialists are very wary of getting it wrong. I understand that his condition has rapidly deteriorated, so a specialist may well now be of the opinion that he is ill enough to be released.”
However, Bill Aitken, justice spokesman for the Scottish Conservatives, warned against giving Megrahi special treatment.
“There has to be a presumption that Megrahi will finish his sentence in Scotland unless it can be proved that there are compelling reasons why not,” he said. “His case must not be handled any differently from anyone else in similar circumstances and there would be great resentment if this was to be the case.
“While there is a very voluble, eloquent and no doubt sincere minority of people who want him released, many of the relatives of the deceased wish him to spend the rest of his life in jail and they are not receiving the same attention.”
Bob Monetti, whose son Rick was among the victims of the bombing, said releasing Megrahi would be an “act of betrayal” by the Scottish government.
“The deal that the Scottish and US authorities agreed was that he would serve out his term in Scotland. He is right where he belongs.
“If they release him back to Libya, that’s a bad joke. The families would feel immensely betrayed. There will be a lot of anger.”
[The above are excerpts from an article in today's edition of The Sunday Times (UK). The full text can be read here.
A further long article in the same newspaper entitled "Focus: To free or not to free Megrahi" can be read here.
The relevant statutory provisions relating to compassionate release (as distinct from prisoner transfer) are to be found in the Prisoners and Criminal Proceedings (Scotland) Act 1993 (c 9), section 3 of which provides as follows:
'Power to release prisoners on compassionate grounds
'(1) The [Scottish Ministers] may at any time, if satisfied that there are compassionate grounds justifying the release of a person serving a sentence of imprisonment, release him on licence.
'(2) Before so releasing any long-term prisoner or any life prisoner, the [Scottish Ministers] shall consult the Parole Board unless the circumstances are such as to render consultation impracticable.'
There is a practice guideline -- not a rule of law -- that prisoners who are terminally ill may be released when they have three months or less to live.]
From The Sunday Times, Malta
The judges got it wrong
Ian Ferguson
In an article for The Sunday Times, British journalist and author Ian Ferguson, who has covered the Lockerbie case extensively internationally for TV, radio and newspapers, casts doubt over the Malta-link to Lockerbie.
A German expert has raised fresh controversy on a crucial piece of evidence in the conviction of Abdel Basset Al-Megrahi as the Lockerbie bomber.
The verdict relied heavily on the judges' acceptance of a brief computer printout of the baggage movements at Frankfurt airport. The prosecution had argued it proved an unaccompanied bag containing the bomb was transferred from Air Malta flight KM180 to the Pan Am flight 103 to London on December 21, 1988.
The expert who helped design the baggage system in place at Frankfurt airport in 1988 and familiar with the operating software has now said: "The Lockerbie judges got it wrong, they simply got it wrong."
In the original trial, the Crown could offer no evidence of how the bag got aboard the Air Malta flight in the first place. Malta had presented records showing that no unaccompanied baggage was on the Air Malta flight in question.
The baggage reconciliation system at Malta's airport did not only rely on computer lists. Personnel also counted all pieces of baggage, manually checking them off against passenger records. Maltese baggage loaders had been prepared to testify, yet they were never called as witnesses.
In spite of a lack of evidence that the baggage containing the bomb actually left Malta, the judges concluded that it must have been the case, based on an interpretation of the computer print out from Frankfurt.
The hotly disputed computer printout was saved by Bogomira Erac, a technician at Frankfurt airport. She testified at the original trial under the pseudonym Madame X. One of the reasons this computer printout was so controversial was that although Ms Erac thought it important to save, she then tossed it in her locker and went on holiday.
Only on her return did she hand it to her supervisor who gave it to the Bundeskiminalmt (BKA), the German Federal Police. The BKA did not disclose this printout to Scottish and American investigators for several months.
The German expert has now examined all of the evidence that related to the Frankfurt baggage system placed before the court in the original trial. The expert, who agreed to review this evidence on condition of anonymity, spent six months examining the data.
Although he demanded anonymity, he agreed that if a formal approach was made by Mr Al-Megrahi's lawyers or the Scottish Criminal Cases review commission, he would meet them.
He was puzzled when he saw how short the printout out was and explained that there was no need to print a very small extract from the baggage system traffic, as a full back-up tape was made. This would have shown all the baggage movements at Frankfurt airport that day.
When it was explained that the court heard that the system was purged every few days and that no back-up tape existed, he said: "This is not true."
"Of course it is possible no back-up tape was made for that particular day but that day would have been the first and only day in the history of Frankfurt Airport when not one piece of baggage or cargo was lost, rerouted or misplaced," he added.
He went on to say that FAG, the company that operated Frankfurt Airport, needed these tapes to defend against insurance claims for lost or damaged cargo.
The expert maintains that even with his expert knowledge of the system he could not draw the conclusion reached by the Lockerbie trial judges in 2001.
"They would have needed much more information of the baggage movements, not this very narrow time frame," he said.
Questions are now raised about why Mr Al-Megrahi's legal team at the trial in the Netherlands decided to accept and rely upon a report on the baggage system compiled by a BKA officer and not find an expert on the system. The Scottish police also did not seek to interview those people who designed and installed the system.
Jim Swire, whose daughter lost her life in the bombing and who has been campaigning relentlessly for the truth to emerge, explained there was a break-in at Heathrow airport, early on December 21, 1988, in the relevant area of Terminal 3. This was followed by the sighting (before the flight from Frankfurt had even landed) of an unauthorised bag within the very container where the explosion later occurred.
"What we need now is an equally clear explanation as to why the information about the Heathrow break-in was concealed for 13 years," he said.
Dr Swire added: "At last, the time has come to turn away from Malta and Frankfurt and look a lot closer to home at Heathrow airport for the truth, for that is what we still seek.
Scottish legal expert says Lockerbie verdict was flawed
'No evidence the bomb left from Malta'
Caroline Muscat, Mark Micallef
A former Scottish judge who was the architect of the original Lockerbie trial has told The Sunday Times there was never any evidence that the bomb which claimed the lives of 270 people actually left from Malta.
The trial held in the Netherlands under Scottish law led to the conviction in 2001 of Abdel Basset Al-Megrahi as the bomber who placed the explosive on Air Malta flight KM180 on December 21, 1988. It was said that the suitcase containing the bomb was transferred in Frankfurt to Pan Am flight 103A which then headed for London before continuing to the US.
"There is no acceptable evidence that the bomb left Malta. There never was. There was never an explanation given by the judges to contradict the clear evidence from Malta," Prof. Robert Black said.
Malta presented records at the original trial showing there had been no unaccompanied bags on the flight.
Prof. Black echoed comments made last week by a representative of the families of the British victims, Jim Swire, who lost his 24-year-old daughter Flora when Pan Am Flight 103 from London Heathrow to New York's JFK airport exploded over Lockerbie in Scotland an hour into the journey on December 21, 1988. All 259 people on board died as well as 11 locals on the ground.
The legal team representing Mr Al-Megrahi, who is eight years into a 27-year sentence for his part in the bombing, began appeal proceedings in Edinburgh on April 28. They are arguing that the evidence against him in the original trial was "wholly circumstantial".
Mr Al-Megrahi was told last year he is dying. Doctors discovered he has advanced and aggressive prostate cancer, which has spread to his bones. He has a few months left to live, a diagnosis confirmed by two cancer specialists.
The Maltese government yesterday told The Sunday Times it was monitoring the situation, while Air Malta said it had no comment to make.
The ongoing appeal was ordered by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission in 2007, after a four-year investigation that concluded Mr Al-Megrahi may have suffered a "miscarriage of justice".
According to Prof. Black the appeal took so long to reach the court because the prosecutors and the British Foreign Office used delaying tactics.
"They refused the defence access to documents they were entitled to see and that were an important part of the conclusions reached."
Documentation sought by the defence team includes a fax they say questions the original testimony of key Maltese witness Tony Gauci, who said he sold clothes to Mr Al-Megrahi from his shop in Sliema. It was said the suitcase containing the bomb on the Pan Am flight included those clothes.
The evidence the defence team is seeking relates to contact between police and other investigators with another potential Maltese witness, David Wright. They believe Mr Wright may have material evidence that calls into question Mr Gauci's statement.
At the start of the appeal, the judges ordered prosecutors to hand over 45 key pieces of evidence to the defence in what was described by British newspaper The Herald as "an embarrassing setback for the Crown Office".
Prof. Black was not surprised: "The truth would be extremely embarrassing from the point of view of saving what is left of the reputation of the Scottish criminal justice system. Also, the truth would not place Britain's reputation in a very good light."
He insisted that it was in the interest of the British government that this appeal would "quietly go away".
"The easiest way for that to happen is for Mr Al-Megrahi to abandon his appeal and be transferred back to Libya."
Libyan authorities recently applied for Mr Al-Megrahi's transfer to Libya. It came after a prisoner transfer agreement was ratified by the UK and Libyan governments two weeks ago.
A few weeks earlier, the Westminister Joint Select Committee on Human Rights had called for the ratification of the agreement to be delayed, pending investigation into concerns over the content of the treaty. But Jack Straw, the UK Secretary of State for Justice, insisted the treaty must go ahead.
This prompted the campaign group UK Families Flight 103 to issue a statement accusing Mr Straw of hypocrisy, saying the agreement cleared the way for the man convicted of the bombing to return home before the truth emerged. But Kathleen Flynn, from New Jersey, US, who also lost her son John Patrick to the bombing, said she would be horrified if Mr Al-Megrahi is released to the Libyan government.
"This man is not a political prisoner, he is a murderer and there is a big difference... to me it is inconceivable how this idea could be entertained," she told The Sunday Times.
"He is likely to be received as a national hero in Libya," she added.
Unlike Dr Swire, she has full confidence in the guilty verdict: "The person responsible for a crime of this nature should serve his entire sentence, while given all the medical attention he needs."
Asked what would happen if the transfer is given the go ahead, she said: "I can assure you we will not just say au revoir... we have been successful in the past 20 years at making sure justice is done."
According to Scottish law, the application for transfer cannot be submitted while an appeal is pending, meaning Mr Al-Megrahi has to abandon his appeal before he can go home.
Although Mr Al-Megrahi is suffering from terminal cancer, his lawyers did not confirm whether he would choose to go home. If he does, he will remain a condemned man and Malta will remain implicated in a terrorist act that killed 270 people.
[The first of these articles can be accessed here; and the second here.]
Ian Ferguson
In an article for The Sunday Times, British journalist and author Ian Ferguson, who has covered the Lockerbie case extensively internationally for TV, radio and newspapers, casts doubt over the Malta-link to Lockerbie.
A German expert has raised fresh controversy on a crucial piece of evidence in the conviction of Abdel Basset Al-Megrahi as the Lockerbie bomber.
The verdict relied heavily on the judges' acceptance of a brief computer printout of the baggage movements at Frankfurt airport. The prosecution had argued it proved an unaccompanied bag containing the bomb was transferred from Air Malta flight KM180 to the Pan Am flight 103 to London on December 21, 1988.
The expert who helped design the baggage system in place at Frankfurt airport in 1988 and familiar with the operating software has now said: "The Lockerbie judges got it wrong, they simply got it wrong."
In the original trial, the Crown could offer no evidence of how the bag got aboard the Air Malta flight in the first place. Malta had presented records showing that no unaccompanied baggage was on the Air Malta flight in question.
The baggage reconciliation system at Malta's airport did not only rely on computer lists. Personnel also counted all pieces of baggage, manually checking them off against passenger records. Maltese baggage loaders had been prepared to testify, yet they were never called as witnesses.
In spite of a lack of evidence that the baggage containing the bomb actually left Malta, the judges concluded that it must have been the case, based on an interpretation of the computer print out from Frankfurt.
The hotly disputed computer printout was saved by Bogomira Erac, a technician at Frankfurt airport. She testified at the original trial under the pseudonym Madame X. One of the reasons this computer printout was so controversial was that although Ms Erac thought it important to save, she then tossed it in her locker and went on holiday.
Only on her return did she hand it to her supervisor who gave it to the Bundeskiminalmt (BKA), the German Federal Police. The BKA did not disclose this printout to Scottish and American investigators for several months.
The German expert has now examined all of the evidence that related to the Frankfurt baggage system placed before the court in the original trial. The expert, who agreed to review this evidence on condition of anonymity, spent six months examining the data.
Although he demanded anonymity, he agreed that if a formal approach was made by Mr Al-Megrahi's lawyers or the Scottish Criminal Cases review commission, he would meet them.
He was puzzled when he saw how short the printout out was and explained that there was no need to print a very small extract from the baggage system traffic, as a full back-up tape was made. This would have shown all the baggage movements at Frankfurt airport that day.
When it was explained that the court heard that the system was purged every few days and that no back-up tape existed, he said: "This is not true."
"Of course it is possible no back-up tape was made for that particular day but that day would have been the first and only day in the history of Frankfurt Airport when not one piece of baggage or cargo was lost, rerouted or misplaced," he added.
He went on to say that FAG, the company that operated Frankfurt Airport, needed these tapes to defend against insurance claims for lost or damaged cargo.
The expert maintains that even with his expert knowledge of the system he could not draw the conclusion reached by the Lockerbie trial judges in 2001.
"They would have needed much more information of the baggage movements, not this very narrow time frame," he said.
Questions are now raised about why Mr Al-Megrahi's legal team at the trial in the Netherlands decided to accept and rely upon a report on the baggage system compiled by a BKA officer and not find an expert on the system. The Scottish police also did not seek to interview those people who designed and installed the system.
Jim Swire, whose daughter lost her life in the bombing and who has been campaigning relentlessly for the truth to emerge, explained there was a break-in at Heathrow airport, early on December 21, 1988, in the relevant area of Terminal 3. This was followed by the sighting (before the flight from Frankfurt had even landed) of an unauthorised bag within the very container where the explosion later occurred.
"What we need now is an equally clear explanation as to why the information about the Heathrow break-in was concealed for 13 years," he said.
Dr Swire added: "At last, the time has come to turn away from Malta and Frankfurt and look a lot closer to home at Heathrow airport for the truth, for that is what we still seek.
Scottish legal expert says Lockerbie verdict was flawed
'No evidence the bomb left from Malta'
Caroline Muscat, Mark Micallef
A former Scottish judge who was the architect of the original Lockerbie trial has told The Sunday Times there was never any evidence that the bomb which claimed the lives of 270 people actually left from Malta.
The trial held in the Netherlands under Scottish law led to the conviction in 2001 of Abdel Basset Al-Megrahi as the bomber who placed the explosive on Air Malta flight KM180 on December 21, 1988. It was said that the suitcase containing the bomb was transferred in Frankfurt to Pan Am flight 103A which then headed for London before continuing to the US.
"There is no acceptable evidence that the bomb left Malta. There never was. There was never an explanation given by the judges to contradict the clear evidence from Malta," Prof. Robert Black said.
Malta presented records at the original trial showing there had been no unaccompanied bags on the flight.
Prof. Black echoed comments made last week by a representative of the families of the British victims, Jim Swire, who lost his 24-year-old daughter Flora when Pan Am Flight 103 from London Heathrow to New York's JFK airport exploded over Lockerbie in Scotland an hour into the journey on December 21, 1988. All 259 people on board died as well as 11 locals on the ground.
The legal team representing Mr Al-Megrahi, who is eight years into a 27-year sentence for his part in the bombing, began appeal proceedings in Edinburgh on April 28. They are arguing that the evidence against him in the original trial was "wholly circumstantial".
Mr Al-Megrahi was told last year he is dying. Doctors discovered he has advanced and aggressive prostate cancer, which has spread to his bones. He has a few months left to live, a diagnosis confirmed by two cancer specialists.
The Maltese government yesterday told The Sunday Times it was monitoring the situation, while Air Malta said it had no comment to make.
The ongoing appeal was ordered by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission in 2007, after a four-year investigation that concluded Mr Al-Megrahi may have suffered a "miscarriage of justice".
According to Prof. Black the appeal took so long to reach the court because the prosecutors and the British Foreign Office used delaying tactics.
"They refused the defence access to documents they were entitled to see and that were an important part of the conclusions reached."
Documentation sought by the defence team includes a fax they say questions the original testimony of key Maltese witness Tony Gauci, who said he sold clothes to Mr Al-Megrahi from his shop in Sliema. It was said the suitcase containing the bomb on the Pan Am flight included those clothes.
The evidence the defence team is seeking relates to contact between police and other investigators with another potential Maltese witness, David Wright. They believe Mr Wright may have material evidence that calls into question Mr Gauci's statement.
At the start of the appeal, the judges ordered prosecutors to hand over 45 key pieces of evidence to the defence in what was described by British newspaper The Herald as "an embarrassing setback for the Crown Office".
Prof. Black was not surprised: "The truth would be extremely embarrassing from the point of view of saving what is left of the reputation of the Scottish criminal justice system. Also, the truth would not place Britain's reputation in a very good light."
He insisted that it was in the interest of the British government that this appeal would "quietly go away".
"The easiest way for that to happen is for Mr Al-Megrahi to abandon his appeal and be transferred back to Libya."
Libyan authorities recently applied for Mr Al-Megrahi's transfer to Libya. It came after a prisoner transfer agreement was ratified by the UK and Libyan governments two weeks ago.
A few weeks earlier, the Westminister Joint Select Committee on Human Rights had called for the ratification of the agreement to be delayed, pending investigation into concerns over the content of the treaty. But Jack Straw, the UK Secretary of State for Justice, insisted the treaty must go ahead.
This prompted the campaign group UK Families Flight 103 to issue a statement accusing Mr Straw of hypocrisy, saying the agreement cleared the way for the man convicted of the bombing to return home before the truth emerged. But Kathleen Flynn, from New Jersey, US, who also lost her son John Patrick to the bombing, said she would be horrified if Mr Al-Megrahi is released to the Libyan government.
"This man is not a political prisoner, he is a murderer and there is a big difference... to me it is inconceivable how this idea could be entertained," she told The Sunday Times.
"He is likely to be received as a national hero in Libya," she added.
Unlike Dr Swire, she has full confidence in the guilty verdict: "The person responsible for a crime of this nature should serve his entire sentence, while given all the medical attention he needs."
Asked what would happen if the transfer is given the go ahead, she said: "I can assure you we will not just say au revoir... we have been successful in the past 20 years at making sure justice is done."
According to Scottish law, the application for transfer cannot be submitted while an appeal is pending, meaning Mr Al-Megrahi has to abandon his appeal before he can go home.
Although Mr Al-Megrahi is suffering from terminal cancer, his lawyers did not confirm whether he would choose to go home. If he does, he will remain a condemned man and Malta will remain implicated in a terrorist act that killed 270 people.
[The first of these articles can be accessed here; and the second here.]
Reaction to the transfer application
Today's edition of Scotland on Sunday carries three articles on the Lockerbie case: a news report, a lengthy opinion piece by the Scottish Political Editor and a leader.
The news report is headed "FBI agent slams review of Lockerbie conviction" and records the views of Richard Marquise. It reads in part:
'The Scottish legal body which cast doubt on the safety of the Lockerbie bomber's conviction has been condemned for carrying out a "woefully inadequate" investigation by the American FBI agent in charge of the case.
'Richard Marquise claimed that the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission did not make thorough enough inquiries before it concluded that there were grounds for Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi to appeal against his conviction.
'Marquise criticised the three-year investigation conducted by the SCCRC, the body responsible for looking into potential miscarriages of justice, because they failed to speak to him or other key people involved in the case.
'"Their 'investigation' was woefully inadequate because they never spoke with me or many others who could have shed some light on how we reached certain conclusions in the case," Marquise told Scotland on Sunday.
'"As a 31-year investigator, I could never had gotten away with conducting such an incomplete inquiry."'
I do not quite understand how talking to Mr Marquise could have led the SCCRC to form different conclusions on the evidence that they uncovered, the materials that were not disclosed to the defence, and the factual conclusions reached by the court that no reasonable tribunal could have reached. Interested readers can find details here and may also care to consult the most recent article "Lockerbie: J'accuse" by Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer on OhMyNews International which provides an in-depth crtique of the crucial evidence that led to the wrongful conviction of Abdelbaset Megrahi.
The Scotland on Sunday opinion piece by Tom Peterkin is headed "Should this man, jailed for life for the Lockerbie bombing, be freed to die with his family?" It reads in part:
'The CCTV link that connects [Megrahi's] cell with the Court of Appeal in Edinburgh lies unused as he languishes on his bed resting between hospital appointments.
'The pain also distracts him from the satellite television that keeps him in touch with the political developments that will determine what remains of his future.
'It is perhaps a strange paradox that while the Lockerbie bomber himself has been forced to avert his eyes from his own fate, the rest of the world is once again focusing on the man convicted of the murder of 270 people when Pan Am Flight 103 exploded over Lockerbie 20 years ago.
'But the world's gaze is not solely fixed on the former Libyan intelligence agent, who, depending on your point of view, is considered to be Britain's biggest mass-murderer or the victim of a gross miscarriage of justice.
'International eyes are also trained on Alex Salmond, the First Minister, and his Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill.
'The latest twist in the tortuous Lockerbie legal saga has provided Salmond with the most taxing dilemma that he has faced since he became First Minister two years ago.
'For it is now down to Salmond and MacAskill to decide whether Megrahi, 57, should remain in Scotland or go home to Libya to die. (...)
'Last week's application by the Libyan authorities to have Megrahi transferred from Scotland can be traced back to the so-called "deal in the desert" that was struck between Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and Tony Blair, the then Prime Minister.
'The deal, in June 2007, led to Salmond's first serious row with the UK Government when the First Minister protested that the Scottish authorities had not been consulted and warned that it could lead to Megrahi being transferred back to Libya.
'Ironically, it is now Salmond who has 90 days to make up his mind about Megrahi's future under the terms of the Prisoner Transfer Agreement agreed by Blair and Gaddafi. (...)
'It is perhaps easy to see how some in London and Edinburgh would view the repatriation of Megrahi as a convenient way of solving the long-standing Lockerbie problem.
'Should Megrahi agree to drop his appeal in order to go home, a question mark would always remain over whether there had been a miscarriage of justice by the Scottish courts in the original trial. But his return would cement the improving relationship between Britain and Gaddafi – a controversial tie that could bring great economic benefits to Britain in the oil fields of Libya. (...)
'The safety of Megrahi's conviction has been a subject of huge controversy ever since he was found guilty of killing 259 aircraft passengers and 11 people on the ground in 2001 in a specially convened Scottish court in the Netherlands.
'Professor Robert Black QC, one of the architects of the Camp Zeist court in The Hague, is one legal expert who believes in Megrahi's innocence.
'"So many concerns have been expressed that for all this to be swept under the carpet is not in the public interest," Black said.
'"In my view, it is in the Scottish public interest that the appeal proceeds, because it is a test of Scots Law. But I fully understand that, given Abdelbaset's state of health, his personal point of view is that he might want to return home to spend his last months with his family – that must be a very attractive proposition."
'Black's view is shared by Jim Swire, the retired GP who lost his daughter Flora when the aircraft came down.
'"At a human level, I am in favour of him being transferred because he is seriously ill," Swire said. "But it would be a bitter blow to drop the appeal, because I would like to see this evidence examined in public."
'Swire believes that the case against Megrahi is fatally flawed.
'He disputes the Camp Zeist court's view that Megrahi placed his bomb in a suitcase, wrapped in clothes he'd purchased from a shop in Malta, loaded it on to an Air Malta flight to Frankfurt, where it was transferred to a second flight to London before being eventually loaded on to the doomed aircraft.
'Instead, Swire claims that there was a break-in at Heathrow Airport on the morning of the flight, which resulted in the bomb boarding the plane in London – a theory that he claims has been covered up. (...)
'There is also a belief in some quarters that the appeal could reveal details about the politics of the Lockerbie investigation that could cause embarrassment in Washington, London and Edinburgh.
'But those who led the investigation are absolutely confident that the conviction is safe.
'"I am convinced of the evidence," said Richard Marquise, the FBI agent who led the US side of the investigation.
'"I am convinced the conviction is true, accurate and correct. I keep reading all these suggestions that evidence was planted, that it was manipulated, twisted and changed. But I got that evidence ready for the trial and I am absolutely convinced of its veracity and that what we collected was all accurate and correct.
'"There is so much information in the public domain that's just wrong. If you took everything published as fact, you would certainly think there was doubt. But a lot of things are published as fact that are just not true."
'Salmond will no doubt be keenly aware that many of the American victims agree wholeheartedly with Marquise's view. And there is no doubt that sending Megrahi back to Libya would trigger a huge amount of American anger and a massive diplomatic problem for both Scotland and the UK as a whole.
'"I think it would be outrageous if Megrahi was sent home," said Frank Duggan, a Washington lawyer who is president of Victims of Pan Am Flight 103.
'"The trial in the Hague was set up, because our Government and the British Government made statements saying that if anybody was found guilty, they would serve their prison sentence in Scotland. President Clinton and Tony Blair said that. The only way for him to be sent home would be for his miserable little carcase to go back to Libya in a pine box. The man is an unrepentant murderer."
'Megrahi's supporters also acknowledge the strength of feeling in America and the impact that could have on the Scottish ministers' decision. As Black said: "I suspect that Alex Salmond and Kenny MacAskill's civil servants are advising them that they should grant him the repatriation. There is nothing they would like better than this to go away quietly. But they are politicians and they have to weigh up the reaction."
'Mischievously, he added: "Given that we want lots and lots of Americans to come to Scotland for the Homecoming and this would have the American media up in arms – could that have adverse consequences?" That, it has to be said, may turn out to be the least of Alex Salmond's worries.'
The SoS leader is headed "Lockerbie bomber must stay" and reads in part:
'The case of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, poses a serious dilemma for Alex Salmond. But the First Minister must stand firm. Megrahi is a convicted mass murderer and must not be released unless he is cleared on appeal.
'It is difficult not to feel some empathy for the Libyan, who is seriously ill and dying of cancer. Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died in the 1988 bombing of Pan Am flight 103, is just one of those who would not begrudge him the right to die in his homeland.
'There are, too, geopolitical consequences to consider. (...)
'Yet justice should be blind to all those extraneous issues, and it is the reputation of Scottish justice that should be at the forefront of Salmond's mind as he ponders his decision on whether Megrahi should stay or go. Any decision to free the prisoner at this stage would be seen in some quarters as an attempt to avoid evidence being presented in court that could embarrass the Scottish, UK and US authorities.
'Were Megrahi to be released before the appeal process had run its course, then a question mark would forever hang over Scottish justice. That is too high a price to pay to assuage our discomfort at a dying man's desire to die in the country of his birth.'
The news report is headed "FBI agent slams review of Lockerbie conviction" and records the views of Richard Marquise. It reads in part:
'The Scottish legal body which cast doubt on the safety of the Lockerbie bomber's conviction has been condemned for carrying out a "woefully inadequate" investigation by the American FBI agent in charge of the case.
'Richard Marquise claimed that the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission did not make thorough enough inquiries before it concluded that there were grounds for Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi to appeal against his conviction.
'Marquise criticised the three-year investigation conducted by the SCCRC, the body responsible for looking into potential miscarriages of justice, because they failed to speak to him or other key people involved in the case.
'"Their 'investigation' was woefully inadequate because they never spoke with me or many others who could have shed some light on how we reached certain conclusions in the case," Marquise told Scotland on Sunday.
'"As a 31-year investigator, I could never had gotten away with conducting such an incomplete inquiry."'
I do not quite understand how talking to Mr Marquise could have led the SCCRC to form different conclusions on the evidence that they uncovered, the materials that were not disclosed to the defence, and the factual conclusions reached by the court that no reasonable tribunal could have reached. Interested readers can find details here and may also care to consult the most recent article "Lockerbie: J'accuse" by Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer on OhMyNews International which provides an in-depth crtique of the crucial evidence that led to the wrongful conviction of Abdelbaset Megrahi.
The Scotland on Sunday opinion piece by Tom Peterkin is headed "Should this man, jailed for life for the Lockerbie bombing, be freed to die with his family?" It reads in part:
'The CCTV link that connects [Megrahi's] cell with the Court of Appeal in Edinburgh lies unused as he languishes on his bed resting between hospital appointments.
'The pain also distracts him from the satellite television that keeps him in touch with the political developments that will determine what remains of his future.
'It is perhaps a strange paradox that while the Lockerbie bomber himself has been forced to avert his eyes from his own fate, the rest of the world is once again focusing on the man convicted of the murder of 270 people when Pan Am Flight 103 exploded over Lockerbie 20 years ago.
'But the world's gaze is not solely fixed on the former Libyan intelligence agent, who, depending on your point of view, is considered to be Britain's biggest mass-murderer or the victim of a gross miscarriage of justice.
'International eyes are also trained on Alex Salmond, the First Minister, and his Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill.
'The latest twist in the tortuous Lockerbie legal saga has provided Salmond with the most taxing dilemma that he has faced since he became First Minister two years ago.
'For it is now down to Salmond and MacAskill to decide whether Megrahi, 57, should remain in Scotland or go home to Libya to die. (...)
'Last week's application by the Libyan authorities to have Megrahi transferred from Scotland can be traced back to the so-called "deal in the desert" that was struck between Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and Tony Blair, the then Prime Minister.
'The deal, in June 2007, led to Salmond's first serious row with the UK Government when the First Minister protested that the Scottish authorities had not been consulted and warned that it could lead to Megrahi being transferred back to Libya.
'Ironically, it is now Salmond who has 90 days to make up his mind about Megrahi's future under the terms of the Prisoner Transfer Agreement agreed by Blair and Gaddafi. (...)
'It is perhaps easy to see how some in London and Edinburgh would view the repatriation of Megrahi as a convenient way of solving the long-standing Lockerbie problem.
'Should Megrahi agree to drop his appeal in order to go home, a question mark would always remain over whether there had been a miscarriage of justice by the Scottish courts in the original trial. But his return would cement the improving relationship between Britain and Gaddafi – a controversial tie that could bring great economic benefits to Britain in the oil fields of Libya. (...)
'The safety of Megrahi's conviction has been a subject of huge controversy ever since he was found guilty of killing 259 aircraft passengers and 11 people on the ground in 2001 in a specially convened Scottish court in the Netherlands.
'Professor Robert Black QC, one of the architects of the Camp Zeist court in The Hague, is one legal expert who believes in Megrahi's innocence.
'"So many concerns have been expressed that for all this to be swept under the carpet is not in the public interest," Black said.
'"In my view, it is in the Scottish public interest that the appeal proceeds, because it is a test of Scots Law. But I fully understand that, given Abdelbaset's state of health, his personal point of view is that he might want to return home to spend his last months with his family – that must be a very attractive proposition."
'Black's view is shared by Jim Swire, the retired GP who lost his daughter Flora when the aircraft came down.
'"At a human level, I am in favour of him being transferred because he is seriously ill," Swire said. "But it would be a bitter blow to drop the appeal, because I would like to see this evidence examined in public."
'Swire believes that the case against Megrahi is fatally flawed.
'He disputes the Camp Zeist court's view that Megrahi placed his bomb in a suitcase, wrapped in clothes he'd purchased from a shop in Malta, loaded it on to an Air Malta flight to Frankfurt, where it was transferred to a second flight to London before being eventually loaded on to the doomed aircraft.
'Instead, Swire claims that there was a break-in at Heathrow Airport on the morning of the flight, which resulted in the bomb boarding the plane in London – a theory that he claims has been covered up. (...)
'There is also a belief in some quarters that the appeal could reveal details about the politics of the Lockerbie investigation that could cause embarrassment in Washington, London and Edinburgh.
'But those who led the investigation are absolutely confident that the conviction is safe.
'"I am convinced of the evidence," said Richard Marquise, the FBI agent who led the US side of the investigation.
'"I am convinced the conviction is true, accurate and correct. I keep reading all these suggestions that evidence was planted, that it was manipulated, twisted and changed. But I got that evidence ready for the trial and I am absolutely convinced of its veracity and that what we collected was all accurate and correct.
'"There is so much information in the public domain that's just wrong. If you took everything published as fact, you would certainly think there was doubt. But a lot of things are published as fact that are just not true."
'Salmond will no doubt be keenly aware that many of the American victims agree wholeheartedly with Marquise's view. And there is no doubt that sending Megrahi back to Libya would trigger a huge amount of American anger and a massive diplomatic problem for both Scotland and the UK as a whole.
'"I think it would be outrageous if Megrahi was sent home," said Frank Duggan, a Washington lawyer who is president of Victims of Pan Am Flight 103.
'"The trial in the Hague was set up, because our Government and the British Government made statements saying that if anybody was found guilty, they would serve their prison sentence in Scotland. President Clinton and Tony Blair said that. The only way for him to be sent home would be for his miserable little carcase to go back to Libya in a pine box. The man is an unrepentant murderer."
'Megrahi's supporters also acknowledge the strength of feeling in America and the impact that could have on the Scottish ministers' decision. As Black said: "I suspect that Alex Salmond and Kenny MacAskill's civil servants are advising them that they should grant him the repatriation. There is nothing they would like better than this to go away quietly. But they are politicians and they have to weigh up the reaction."
'Mischievously, he added: "Given that we want lots and lots of Americans to come to Scotland for the Homecoming and this would have the American media up in arms – could that have adverse consequences?" That, it has to be said, may turn out to be the least of Alex Salmond's worries.'
The SoS leader is headed "Lockerbie bomber must stay" and reads in part:
'The case of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, poses a serious dilemma for Alex Salmond. But the First Minister must stand firm. Megrahi is a convicted mass murderer and must not be released unless he is cleared on appeal.
'It is difficult not to feel some empathy for the Libyan, who is seriously ill and dying of cancer. Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died in the 1988 bombing of Pan Am flight 103, is just one of those who would not begrudge him the right to die in his homeland.
'There are, too, geopolitical consequences to consider. (...)
'Yet justice should be blind to all those extraneous issues, and it is the reputation of Scottish justice that should be at the forefront of Salmond's mind as he ponders his decision on whether Megrahi should stay or go. Any decision to free the prisoner at this stage would be seen in some quarters as an attempt to avoid evidence being presented in court that could embarrass the Scottish, UK and US authorities.
'Were Megrahi to be released before the appeal process had run its course, then a question mark would forever hang over Scottish justice. That is too high a price to pay to assuage our discomfort at a dying man's desire to die in the country of his birth.'
Saturday, 9 May 2009
Megrahi transfer row puts Salmond under pressure
[What follows are excerpts from a report in the Daily Express. The full text can be read here.]
Alex Salmond yesterday came under mounting pressure not to send the Lockerbie bomber home to die as he insisted politics would play no part in any transfer.
The First Minister said the request to allow terminally ill Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi to serve the remainder of his sentence in Libya would be considered on “judicial grounds alone”.
His comments came as American relatives of those who died in the 1988 atrocity revealed they had made a direct plea to Scottish ministers, who have the final say on whether the deal is done, to block Tripoli’s request.
It is also thought the United States government, which has long maintained Megrahi should complete his sentence in Scotland, is preparing to make diplomatic representations about the case. (...)
His second appeal against the 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.
Mr Salmond said it would have been “greatly to be preferred if the judicial processes of Scotland” were allowed to take their course.
But he insisted that the decision on the prisoner transfer – which will be considered by Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill – would be based solely on judicial grounds. (...)
Ministers have up to 90 days to reach a decision on the case under the terms of a controversial prisoner transfer agreement struck between then Prime Minister Tony Blair and Libyan leader Colonel Gaddafi two years ago. American Susan Cohen, whose 20-year-old daughter Theodora was among those killed, last night said she had already e-mailed the Nationalist administration pleading for the request to be refused.
Ms Cohen said: “It would be a horrible slap in the face to the Scottish justice system if this man, who is a convicted mass murderer lest we forget, is allowed home. There are many conspiracy theories but not a single shred of evidence has come out saying anything other than the truth of Libyan involvement. He would be feted as a hero back in Libya.”
A spokesman for the US Embassy said his government’s long-held position was that “Megrahi should serve his sentence in a Scottish prison”. Asked if the US State Department would be making any representation he said: “We can’t discuss diplomatic exchanges.”
Until now, Megrahi, who is serving a minimum of 27 years in HMP Gateside, Greenock, has insisted he wants to clear his name.
His appeal continued yesterday. Five judges in Edinburgh have spent eight days listening to criticisms of the Camp Zeist trial in the Netherlands which found him guilty.
His QC, Maggie Scott, yesterday made no mention of the transfer request. But she told the court Megrahi had given up watching proceedings over a live CCTV link with his prison cell.
She said: “He is in considerable discomfort. He does, however, want matters to proceed.
“It is appropriate I point that out to the court.”
Alex Salmond yesterday came under mounting pressure not to send the Lockerbie bomber home to die as he insisted politics would play no part in any transfer.
The First Minister said the request to allow terminally ill Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi to serve the remainder of his sentence in Libya would be considered on “judicial grounds alone”.
His comments came as American relatives of those who died in the 1988 atrocity revealed they had made a direct plea to Scottish ministers, who have the final say on whether the deal is done, to block Tripoli’s request.
It is also thought the United States government, which has long maintained Megrahi should complete his sentence in Scotland, is preparing to make diplomatic representations about the case. (...)
His second appeal against the 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.
Mr Salmond said it would have been “greatly to be preferred if the judicial processes of Scotland” were allowed to take their course.
But he insisted that the decision on the prisoner transfer – which will be considered by Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill – would be based solely on judicial grounds. (...)
Ministers have up to 90 days to reach a decision on the case under the terms of a controversial prisoner transfer agreement struck between then Prime Minister Tony Blair and Libyan leader Colonel Gaddafi two years ago. American Susan Cohen, whose 20-year-old daughter Theodora was among those killed, last night said she had already e-mailed the Nationalist administration pleading for the request to be refused.
Ms Cohen said: “It would be a horrible slap in the face to the Scottish justice system if this man, who is a convicted mass murderer lest we forget, is allowed home. There are many conspiracy theories but not a single shred of evidence has come out saying anything other than the truth of Libyan involvement. He would be feted as a hero back in Libya.”
A spokesman for the US Embassy said his government’s long-held position was that “Megrahi should serve his sentence in a Scottish prison”. Asked if the US State Department would be making any representation he said: “We can’t discuss diplomatic exchanges.”
Until now, Megrahi, who is serving a minimum of 27 years in HMP Gateside, Greenock, has insisted he wants to clear his name.
His appeal continued yesterday. Five judges in Edinburgh have spent eight days listening to criticisms of the Camp Zeist trial in the Netherlands which found him guilty.
His QC, Maggie Scott, yesterday made no mention of the transfer request. But she told the court Megrahi had given up watching proceedings over a live CCTV link with his prison cell.
She said: “He is in considerable discomfort. He does, however, want matters to proceed.
“It is appropriate I point that out to the court.”
Megrahi desperate to see his family, says MSP
[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."
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."
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.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)