[This is the heading over a letter from Tom Minogue published in today's edition of The Scotsman. It reads as follows:]
Like Tam Dalyell (Letters, 27 August), Dr Jim Swire believes Kenny MacAskill's decision was corrupted by self-interest and he is supporting an inexplicable verdict to protect some of his judges/prosecutors from criticism. [Note by RB: I have no recollection, and certainly no record, of Dr Swire having ever made such a crticism of Kenny MacAskill.] He may well be right in this.
Likewise Megrahi's inexplicable decision to abandon the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission appeal may have been the result of a nod and a wink from those dealing with his compassionate release and if so would have been welcomed by those in the justice establishment. If Megrahi had died waiting for his appeal to be heard there would have been an outcry that the Crown Office had procrastinated for years while this appellant's health faded.
And if Megrahi survived long enough to attend his appeal the prospect of Tony Gauci and his brother being called (from wherever they are now) to explain the millions of dollars gifted them by the US government would have been a disaster for Scotland's reputation for independent justice.
So many political factors have dictated events in the Megrahi saga, but for those who believe that MacAskill acted purely on compassionate grounds I would ask them to listen again to his monotone 20-minute statement to the Scottish Parliament.
Invoking the Almighty was pure political theatre pitched at the Bible Belt rather than his constituents in the Central Belt.
Saturday, 28 August 2010
Friday, 27 August 2010
Justice For Megrahi committee put Salmond on the spot
[This is the headline over an article just published on the website of Scottish lawyers' magazine The Firm. It reads as follows:]
The Justice for Megrahi Committee, the group who have garnered an international coalition of signatories to a petition calling for a full investigation of the Pan Am 103 event and its aftermath, have written to the First Minister querying his refusal to sign their petition, accusing him of raising "more questions than answers" in his response to the invitation.
"Albeit that he has declined offer, we accept his decision. However, the message delivered by the Scottish Government’s spokesman in response to the invitation raises more questions than it answers insofar as it comes across as confusing and contradictory," the group said.
The committee, who have gathered signatories to their cause as diverse as Archbishop Desmond Tutu, John Pilger, Professor Noam Chomsky, Kate Adie and Parliamentarians Tam Dalyell and Sir Teddy Taylor, have asked Salmond to respond to six questions raised by the response submitted to them in Salmond's name, in which he appears to contradict his earlier position that he was willing to take part in an inquiry into the Pan Am 103 event, the discredited trial and the debacle surrounding Megrahi's release.
"Mr Salmond continues to maintain his stance that the Scottish Government is satisfied with the safety of Mr al-Megrahi’s conviction, thus setting himself squarely against the findings of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) in their referral of the case to the Court of Appeal," the group said.
"He does, however, state that he would co-operate fully with an inquiry by an independent authority such as the United Nations.
"Further to this, according to the Scottish Government’s spokesman, despite confidence in the safety of the verdict, “there remain concerns on the wider issues of the Lockerbie atrocity.” If these “concerns” differ from those of JFM’s, what are they? JFM would very much like the Scottish Government to clarify which “concerns” it is alluding to.
"Mr Salmond also consistently contends, as has been reiterated via the Scottish Government’s spokesman in response to the JFM invitation, that “the questions to be asked and answered in any such inquiry would be beyond the jurisdiction of Scots Law and the remit of the Scottish Government, and such an inquiry would, therefore, need to be initiated by those with the required power and authority to deal with an issue, international in its nature.”
"With the greatest respect, JFM disputes this. The international nature of the event was not such an impediment when it came to trying Messrs al-Megrahi and Fhimah at Zeist in the first instance, was it? What then is the obstruction now, when it comes to opening a Holyrood inquiry into the safety of a verdict reached under Scots Law?"
The Justice for Megrahi committee's membership includes Dr Jim Swire and Professor Robert Black QC, whose guidance on these matters allowed the international trial to be convened in the Netherlands under Scots law.
"JFM and its signatories seek clarification on the questions raised here resultant from the statement delivered by the Scottish Government’s spokesman. We list the questions below for Mr Salmond’s convenience.
"The questions:
-What are the wider concerns over the Lockerbie case as mentioned in the Scottish Government spokesman’s statement?
-Does the Scottish Government have the authority to set up inquiries?
-If the answer to question 2 is in the negative, under whose auspices was the 2003 inquiry into the Scottish Parliament building project, headed by Lord Fraser of Carmyllie, set up?
-If the answer to question 2 is in the negative, is, therefore, the judiciary of Scotland sacrosanct and beyond the scrutiny of the people of Scotland, who pay for it?
-Is the First Minister going to lobby Westminster to request that either UN General Assembly or the Security Council set up an inquiry into the Lockerbie case?
-Given that such a considerable quantity of the evidence required for such inquiry falls under Scottish jurisdiction, what precisely is preventing the Scottish Government from opening an inquiry into the evidence already available to it?"
The full letter to Salmond can be read here.
[As regards question 2, I -- in my wonted spirit of helpfulness -- suggest that the First Minister and his advisers start researching their answer by consulting the Inquiries Act 2005 (c12), particularly sections 1, 27, 28 and 32.
The coverage of this story on the Newsnet Scotland website can be accessed here.]
The Justice for Megrahi Committee, the group who have garnered an international coalition of signatories to a petition calling for a full investigation of the Pan Am 103 event and its aftermath, have written to the First Minister querying his refusal to sign their petition, accusing him of raising "more questions than answers" in his response to the invitation.
"Albeit that he has declined offer, we accept his decision. However, the message delivered by the Scottish Government’s spokesman in response to the invitation raises more questions than it answers insofar as it comes across as confusing and contradictory," the group said.
The committee, who have gathered signatories to their cause as diverse as Archbishop Desmond Tutu, John Pilger, Professor Noam Chomsky, Kate Adie and Parliamentarians Tam Dalyell and Sir Teddy Taylor, have asked Salmond to respond to six questions raised by the response submitted to them in Salmond's name, in which he appears to contradict his earlier position that he was willing to take part in an inquiry into the Pan Am 103 event, the discredited trial and the debacle surrounding Megrahi's release.
"Mr Salmond continues to maintain his stance that the Scottish Government is satisfied with the safety of Mr al-Megrahi’s conviction, thus setting himself squarely against the findings of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) in their referral of the case to the Court of Appeal," the group said.
"He does, however, state that he would co-operate fully with an inquiry by an independent authority such as the United Nations.
"Further to this, according to the Scottish Government’s spokesman, despite confidence in the safety of the verdict, “there remain concerns on the wider issues of the Lockerbie atrocity.” If these “concerns” differ from those of JFM’s, what are they? JFM would very much like the Scottish Government to clarify which “concerns” it is alluding to.
"Mr Salmond also consistently contends, as has been reiterated via the Scottish Government’s spokesman in response to the JFM invitation, that “the questions to be asked and answered in any such inquiry would be beyond the jurisdiction of Scots Law and the remit of the Scottish Government, and such an inquiry would, therefore, need to be initiated by those with the required power and authority to deal with an issue, international in its nature.”
"With the greatest respect, JFM disputes this. The international nature of the event was not such an impediment when it came to trying Messrs al-Megrahi and Fhimah at Zeist in the first instance, was it? What then is the obstruction now, when it comes to opening a Holyrood inquiry into the safety of a verdict reached under Scots Law?"
The Justice for Megrahi committee's membership includes Dr Jim Swire and Professor Robert Black QC, whose guidance on these matters allowed the international trial to be convened in the Netherlands under Scots law.
"JFM and its signatories seek clarification on the questions raised here resultant from the statement delivered by the Scottish Government’s spokesman. We list the questions below for Mr Salmond’s convenience.
"The questions:
-What are the wider concerns over the Lockerbie case as mentioned in the Scottish Government spokesman’s statement?
-Does the Scottish Government have the authority to set up inquiries?
-If the answer to question 2 is in the negative, under whose auspices was the 2003 inquiry into the Scottish Parliament building project, headed by Lord Fraser of Carmyllie, set up?
-If the answer to question 2 is in the negative, is, therefore, the judiciary of Scotland sacrosanct and beyond the scrutiny of the people of Scotland, who pay for it?
-Is the First Minister going to lobby Westminster to request that either UN General Assembly or the Security Council set up an inquiry into the Lockerbie case?
-Given that such a considerable quantity of the evidence required for such inquiry falls under Scottish jurisdiction, what precisely is preventing the Scottish Government from opening an inquiry into the evidence already available to it?"
The full letter to Salmond can be read here.
[As regards question 2, I -- in my wonted spirit of helpfulness -- suggest that the First Minister and his advisers start researching their answer by consulting the Inquiries Act 2005 (c12), particularly sections 1, 27, 28 and 32.
The coverage of this story on the Newsnet Scotland website can be accessed here.]
The right response?
Tony Hayward, the outgoing chief executive of BP, has refused to testify for the second time before a US Senate hearing about BP’s role in the release of the Lockerbie Bomber.
Mr Hayward, who also refused to testify in July shortly after resigning from BP, wrote to US Sen Robert Menendez that he is focused on ensuring a “smooth and successful leadership change” at the company and will be unable to testify. (...)
BP has admitted that Sir Mark Allen, an adviser to the firm, spoke to Jack Straw, the former Justice Secretary, about Britain introducing a prisoner transfer agreement with Libya. Mr Menendez initially planned the hearing for last month, but was forced to postpone it when he could not get Mr Hayward or officials from Britain and Scotland to testify. (...)
Citing public comments from British and Scottish officials saying they found no evidence that BP played a role in al-Megrahi’s release, Mr Hayward in his latest letter said, “BP has nothing to add to these clear, unequivocal statements.”
Mr Menendez has said that although the committee cannot compel foreign nationals to testify at a hearing in the U.S., the committee will look into whether Mr Hayward could be subpoenaed because BP conducts business in the US.
[From a report in today's edition of the Daily Telegraph.
The Washington Post's Spy Talk blog has a post headed "CIA retirees call for escalated probe of Pan Am 103 bomber's release". The Association of Former Intelligence Officers, an organization of CIA and other ex-intelligence officers, is calling for Scotland, Britain and all relevant branches of the US government to cooperate with a US Senate investigation into the circumstances surrounding the release of Abdelbaset Megrahi. A number of US intelligence officers were amongst the victims of Pan Am 103. Now, if AFIO were to call for an inquiry into the circumstances of Mr Megrahi's conviction and to call for the US and other governments to make available all documents and evidence pertinent to that issue, that really would be a news story.]
Mr Hayward, who also refused to testify in July shortly after resigning from BP, wrote to US Sen Robert Menendez that he is focused on ensuring a “smooth and successful leadership change” at the company and will be unable to testify. (...)
BP has admitted that Sir Mark Allen, an adviser to the firm, spoke to Jack Straw, the former Justice Secretary, about Britain introducing a prisoner transfer agreement with Libya. Mr Menendez initially planned the hearing for last month, but was forced to postpone it when he could not get Mr Hayward or officials from Britain and Scotland to testify. (...)
Citing public comments from British and Scottish officials saying they found no evidence that BP played a role in al-Megrahi’s release, Mr Hayward in his latest letter said, “BP has nothing to add to these clear, unequivocal statements.”
Mr Menendez has said that although the committee cannot compel foreign nationals to testify at a hearing in the U.S., the committee will look into whether Mr Hayward could be subpoenaed because BP conducts business in the US.
[From a report in today's edition of the Daily Telegraph.
The Washington Post's Spy Talk blog has a post headed "CIA retirees call for escalated probe of Pan Am 103 bomber's release". The Association of Former Intelligence Officers, an organization of CIA and other ex-intelligence officers, is calling for Scotland, Britain and all relevant branches of the US government to cooperate with a US Senate investigation into the circumstances surrounding the release of Abdelbaset Megrahi. A number of US intelligence officers were amongst the victims of Pan Am 103. Now, if AFIO were to call for an inquiry into the circumstances of Mr Megrahi's conviction and to call for the US and other governments to make available all documents and evidence pertinent to that issue, that really would be a news story.]
Wednesday, 25 August 2010
Shock! FBI think they got the right man!
[What follow are excerpts from an article in today's edition of The Christian Science Monitor.]
But to Richard Marquise, the lead FBI investigator into the bombing, the public doubts expressed about Megrahi, who was convicted by a tribunal of three Scottish judges in 2001, are puzzling and frustrating. In his 31 years at the FBI, Mr. Marquise said he's rarely seen a "stronger circumstantial case" than the one against Megrahi, who was also caught repeatedly lying to investigators and reporters. "There's nobody else that I'm aware of anywhere in the world that has such evidence pointing to their guilt," he says. (...)
Marquise says that "there were other people that we strongly believed were involved in terms of the planning process and ordering process.... Megrahi was the guy who was assigned to get it done. We think at least six were probably involved if you only had to make an intelligence case, but in terms of making a criminal case, we didn't have strong enough evidence." (...)
But many remain unconvinced -- though, as Marquise and others point out, there's no evidence to support any of a myriad of alternative theories about his guilt. One popular alternative theory, advanced most recently by The Herald newspaper of Scotland on Friday, is that Mohammed Abu Talb, an Egyptian convicted of carrying out other attacks in Europe in the early 1980s on behalf of a Palestinian group, carried out the bombing.
The Herald writes that the "Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) is understood to have uncovered new evidence that strengthens the case against Talb" without actually explaining how this is "understood" or what additional evidence, if any, exists to tie him to the murders. The article also asserts that Mr. Talb was "arrested in connection with the bombing of Pan Am flight 103" in 1989.
Marquise says that last assertion is false and that Talb's arrest in 1989 dealt with a different terrorism case. While Megrahi was proven to have traveled to Malta on a false passport (which he had originally lied about), and to [have] been there on the date that the explosive was placed on the plane, Talb was in Sweden at the time.
The key piece of evidence against Megrahi was a fragment of the timer used for the bomb at Lockerbie, which was of an unusual design. "There were maybe as many as 25 of these timers ever made -- 20 really with a couple of circuit boards left over," says Marquise. "All 20 were hand-delivered to Libyan intelligence."
Another theory floating about is that the British government squashed possibly exculpatory evidence about Megrahi at the time of his trial and has been hiding it ever since. The Guardian newspaper quoted a Scottish human rights lawyer last week as saying that there is a "secret intelligence report" that "is believed to cast serious doubts on prosecution claims that Megrahi used a specific Swiss timer for the bomb."
Again, it isn't clear who believes this or how they could possibly know such the contents of a "secret" document.
"I don’t know if some of these people are reading too many of these spy novels or what," says William Chornyak, another former FBI investigator. "But a lot of the people making these suppositions simply weren't there. It's easy to say, 'I'm going to assume there's some secret document' ... that proves Megrahi is innocent. But where is the document?"
Mr. Chonyak says he's "absolutely" convinced that Megrahi's conviction was accurate. "The evidence is pretty specific, the guy even admitted using a phony passport, and he was caught lying. If a guy is going to lie in one instance, and you have the documentation that proves he lied, he’s going to continue to lie."
"I feel bad for the families," says Marquise. "They got partial justice."
[Readers are invited to compare the above with Lockerbie: A satisfactory process but a flawed result and The SCCRC decision.
Caustic Logic's commentary on The Christian Science Monitor article can be read here on The Lockerbie Divide blog.]
But to Richard Marquise, the lead FBI investigator into the bombing, the public doubts expressed about Megrahi, who was convicted by a tribunal of three Scottish judges in 2001, are puzzling and frustrating. In his 31 years at the FBI, Mr. Marquise said he's rarely seen a "stronger circumstantial case" than the one against Megrahi, who was also caught repeatedly lying to investigators and reporters. "There's nobody else that I'm aware of anywhere in the world that has such evidence pointing to their guilt," he says. (...)
Marquise says that "there were other people that we strongly believed were involved in terms of the planning process and ordering process.... Megrahi was the guy who was assigned to get it done. We think at least six were probably involved if you only had to make an intelligence case, but in terms of making a criminal case, we didn't have strong enough evidence." (...)
But many remain unconvinced -- though, as Marquise and others point out, there's no evidence to support any of a myriad of alternative theories about his guilt. One popular alternative theory, advanced most recently by The Herald newspaper of Scotland on Friday, is that Mohammed Abu Talb, an Egyptian convicted of carrying out other attacks in Europe in the early 1980s on behalf of a Palestinian group, carried out the bombing.
The Herald writes that the "Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) is understood to have uncovered new evidence that strengthens the case against Talb" without actually explaining how this is "understood" or what additional evidence, if any, exists to tie him to the murders. The article also asserts that Mr. Talb was "arrested in connection with the bombing of Pan Am flight 103" in 1989.
Marquise says that last assertion is false and that Talb's arrest in 1989 dealt with a different terrorism case. While Megrahi was proven to have traveled to Malta on a false passport (which he had originally lied about), and to [have] been there on the date that the explosive was placed on the plane, Talb was in Sweden at the time.
The key piece of evidence against Megrahi was a fragment of the timer used for the bomb at Lockerbie, which was of an unusual design. "There were maybe as many as 25 of these timers ever made -- 20 really with a couple of circuit boards left over," says Marquise. "All 20 were hand-delivered to Libyan intelligence."
Another theory floating about is that the British government squashed possibly exculpatory evidence about Megrahi at the time of his trial and has been hiding it ever since. The Guardian newspaper quoted a Scottish human rights lawyer last week as saying that there is a "secret intelligence report" that "is believed to cast serious doubts on prosecution claims that Megrahi used a specific Swiss timer for the bomb."
Again, it isn't clear who believes this or how they could possibly know such the contents of a "secret" document.
"I don’t know if some of these people are reading too many of these spy novels or what," says William Chornyak, another former FBI investigator. "But a lot of the people making these suppositions simply weren't there. It's easy to say, 'I'm going to assume there's some secret document' ... that proves Megrahi is innocent. But where is the document?"
Mr. Chonyak says he's "absolutely" convinced that Megrahi's conviction was accurate. "The evidence is pretty specific, the guy even admitted using a phony passport, and he was caught lying. If a guy is going to lie in one instance, and you have the documentation that proves he lied, he’s going to continue to lie."
"I feel bad for the families," says Marquise. "They got partial justice."
[Readers are invited to compare the above with Lockerbie: A satisfactory process but a flawed result and The SCCRC decision.
Caustic Logic's commentary on The Christian Science Monitor article can be read here on The Lockerbie Divide blog.]
Tuesday, 24 August 2010
"... you know for certain that it wasn’t Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi ..."
Of course, having made a discovery at the fringe, you find yourself having to follow their progress in subsequent years. Ever since David Benson first moved and astonished us with his uncannily accurate impression of Kenneth Williams but also personalised it by telling us how important Williams had been to him, I have seen him again and again at Edinburgh, but never to quite the same effect. Until yesterday, when he brought a quietly devastating authority and sense of outrage to Lockerbie: Unfinished Business, a documentary recreation of one tireless man’s campaign to find out who was responsible for the terrorist outrage that fateful December night that claimed the life of his young daughter. And by the end of this show, you know for certain that it wasn’t Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi, convicted of the crime but released last year to return to Libya to die of the cancer that he is suffering from. Benson’s performance is the best I expect to see in Edinburgh this year, and perhaps all year.
[From an article by Mark Shenton on the website of The Stage.]
[From an article by Mark Shenton on the website of The Stage.]
Salmond snubs Megrahi probe bid
[This is the headline over a report in today's edition of The Herald. It reads as follows:]
First Minister Alex Salmond has turned down an invitation to support a campaign for an international inquiry into the Lockerbie bombing and the subsequent conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi.
Salmond received the request from the Justice for Megrahi campaign following comments that he had “nothing to hide” from such an inquiry into the atrocity.
The group has petitioned the UN general assembly to hold an investigation into the Lockerbie case and has drawn a number of high-profile backers including former journalist Kate Adie, writer and campaigner John Pilger, human rights commentator Professor Noam Chomsky and Private Eye editor Ian Hislop.
The First Minister has said he would co-operate fully with an inquiry by an independent authority such as the UN, however, the Scottish Government said it would be inappropriate for Mr Salmond to lend his support to the Justice for Megrahi campaign.
A spokesman said: “On the broader questions of inquiry, the Scottish Government does not doubt the safety of the conviction of Megrahi. Nevertheless, there remain concerns over some on the wider issues of the Lockerbie atrocity.
“The questions to be asked and answered in any such inquiry would be beyond the jurisdiction of Scots law and the remit of the Scottish Government, and such an inquiry would therefore need to be initiated by those with the required power and authority to deal with an issue, international in its nature.”
Meanwhile, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission is understood to have uncovered new evidence that strengthens the case against original suspect Mohammed Abu Talb, who was allegedly funded by Iran to blow up the plane in revenge for the American cruiser USS Vincennes shooting an Iran Air flight out of the sky on July 3, 1988, killing 290 people.
The Egyptian-born militant served as a prosecution witness at the Megrahi trial. Talb has now been freed from prison in Sweden where he served sentences linked to terror attacks in Copenhagen and Amsterdam.
Professor Bob Black, QC, member of the Justice for Megrahi Committee, said he was “disappointed but not surprised” by Mr Salmond’s rejection, claiming it would have been a “major step forward” for the campaign.
[What follows is the text of the letter sent -- more in hope than in expectation -- to the First Minister by Justice for Megrahi.]
We, the Justice for Megrahi Committee and all signatories to the committee’s activities, wish to convey to you our most sincere gratitude for your recent outspoken comments in the broadcast media in support of an independent United Nations inquiry into circumstances surrounding what has become commonly referred to as the Lockerbie case.
You will, on the back of prior correspondence we have sent to you, be fully cognisant of the fact that we lobbied the General Assembly of the UN in September of last year to precisely the same end. In addition to this, we have made approaches to other bodies, most notably the Government of Malta, the Senate of the United States of America and the Scottish Government requesting support for the establishment of an independent public inquiry encompassing: the Fatal Accident Inquiry into the downing of Pan Am 103; the police investigation of the tragedy; the subsequent Kamp van Zeist trial; the acquittal of Mr Fhimah and conviction of Mr Al-Megrahi; the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission’s referral of Mr Al-Megrahi’s case to the Court of Appeal; and finally, the circumstances surrounding the dropping of Mr Al-Megrahi’s second appeal and his compassionate release. Unfortunately, all our efforts to reach the goal of establishing an inquiry under the auspices of the UN have fallen on deaf ears thus far.
However, with the support which you are now clearly giving to this cause, in your capacity as the elected leader of the Scottish people, we are becoming increasingly optimistic of success.
You have quite correctly stated your reservations in the past with regard to any given nation state alone setting up an inquiry of any worth on the grounds that they do not individually possess the power of subpoena over other nation states to produce evidence that does not fall within the jurisdiction of the state conducing the inquiry. The obvious choice then is of course to resort to the UN. Regrettably, the General Assembly of the UN is in exactly the same position as individual states are with respect to the international power of subpoena. The only body with such a power is in fact the Security Council of the UN, and this body has ceased to deal with any and all matters relating to the Lockerbie incident (see Security Council binding resolution of 12th September 2003, which states, in operative para 3, that it “hereby removes this item from the list of matters of which the Council is seized”). Therefore, on the assumption that the Security Council may be reluctant to revoke its resolution and that the General Assembly has so far expressed no interest in opening an inquiry, we are at a loss to know how matters could be turned around in New York.
Nevertheless, someone of your experience, political acumen and standing as First Minister of Scotland will assuredly manage to make a deeper impact than we have. In that regard, we (JFM committee and signatories) will stand four square behind you in all your endeavours.
Should your attempts prove unsuccessful, at least you will have peace of mind in the knowledge that Scotland, unlike any other nation involved in this, is in a position to open its own inquiry without having to concern itself too greatly on the issue of international subpoena powers given that:
· The event occurred over and on Scottish territory.
· The case was investigated by a Scottish police force.
· The trial was conducted under Scots Law.
· Mr Al-Megrahi was convicted under Scots Law.
· Mr Al-Megrahi was imprisoned in a Scottish gaol.
· The SCCRC referred the second appeal to the Scottish Court of Appeal.
· Mr Al-Megrahi was given compassionate release by the Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Justice.
Therefore, much if not all the documentation, and many of the witnesses required to testify before such an inquiry, already lies within the jurisdiction of Scots Law. Thus, no difficulty whatsoever ought to be posed if the Scottish Government itself ultimately decides to open an inquiry into matters relating to the Lockerbie tragedy.
Not only do we wish to thank you for your most encouraging public comments and offer you our full support behind any course of action you may take to set up an inquiry, but we wish, moreover, to extend to you a warm invitation to add your name to the list of signatories who have over the last year supported the JFM inquiry campaign. By joining this group, you will be consulted as to strategy and kept up-to-date on all its activities. We are an egalitarian organisation. Whilst some signatories may choose a passive role, others have played an active part in formulating and forwarding our aims throughout. It is an individual choice. Justice for Megrahi is simply grateful to have the support of all of its signatories. Since it is clear that you so evidently identify with our aims, you are most welcome to join us.
We are confident that in the points we have made above we speak not only for a large portion of the bereaved of the Lockerbie tragedy, but also for many of the ordinary citizens of Scotland and elsewhere who would like to see a more satisfactory resolution to this issue. Furthermore, it is important to mention that for the inhabitants of the town of Lockerbie to be constantly reminded that their home is synonymous with this appalling event must be intolerable, and an open public inquiry covering events from December 1988 to the present day might contribute in some small way towards returning the town to a degree of normality.
We look forward to your response to our invitation and thank you for your time and attention.
First Minister Alex Salmond has turned down an invitation to support a campaign for an international inquiry into the Lockerbie bombing and the subsequent conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi.
Salmond received the request from the Justice for Megrahi campaign following comments that he had “nothing to hide” from such an inquiry into the atrocity.
The group has petitioned the UN general assembly to hold an investigation into the Lockerbie case and has drawn a number of high-profile backers including former journalist Kate Adie, writer and campaigner John Pilger, human rights commentator Professor Noam Chomsky and Private Eye editor Ian Hislop.
The First Minister has said he would co-operate fully with an inquiry by an independent authority such as the UN, however, the Scottish Government said it would be inappropriate for Mr Salmond to lend his support to the Justice for Megrahi campaign.
A spokesman said: “On the broader questions of inquiry, the Scottish Government does not doubt the safety of the conviction of Megrahi. Nevertheless, there remain concerns over some on the wider issues of the Lockerbie atrocity.
“The questions to be asked and answered in any such inquiry would be beyond the jurisdiction of Scots law and the remit of the Scottish Government, and such an inquiry would therefore need to be initiated by those with the required power and authority to deal with an issue, international in its nature.”
Meanwhile, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission is understood to have uncovered new evidence that strengthens the case against original suspect Mohammed Abu Talb, who was allegedly funded by Iran to blow up the plane in revenge for the American cruiser USS Vincennes shooting an Iran Air flight out of the sky on July 3, 1988, killing 290 people.
The Egyptian-born militant served as a prosecution witness at the Megrahi trial. Talb has now been freed from prison in Sweden where he served sentences linked to terror attacks in Copenhagen and Amsterdam.
Professor Bob Black, QC, member of the Justice for Megrahi Committee, said he was “disappointed but not surprised” by Mr Salmond’s rejection, claiming it would have been a “major step forward” for the campaign.
[What follows is the text of the letter sent -- more in hope than in expectation -- to the First Minister by Justice for Megrahi.]
We, the Justice for Megrahi Committee and all signatories to the committee’s activities, wish to convey to you our most sincere gratitude for your recent outspoken comments in the broadcast media in support of an independent United Nations inquiry into circumstances surrounding what has become commonly referred to as the Lockerbie case.
You will, on the back of prior correspondence we have sent to you, be fully cognisant of the fact that we lobbied the General Assembly of the UN in September of last year to precisely the same end. In addition to this, we have made approaches to other bodies, most notably the Government of Malta, the Senate of the United States of America and the Scottish Government requesting support for the establishment of an independent public inquiry encompassing: the Fatal Accident Inquiry into the downing of Pan Am 103; the police investigation of the tragedy; the subsequent Kamp van Zeist trial; the acquittal of Mr Fhimah and conviction of Mr Al-Megrahi; the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission’s referral of Mr Al-Megrahi’s case to the Court of Appeal; and finally, the circumstances surrounding the dropping of Mr Al-Megrahi’s second appeal and his compassionate release. Unfortunately, all our efforts to reach the goal of establishing an inquiry under the auspices of the UN have fallen on deaf ears thus far.
However, with the support which you are now clearly giving to this cause, in your capacity as the elected leader of the Scottish people, we are becoming increasingly optimistic of success.
You have quite correctly stated your reservations in the past with regard to any given nation state alone setting up an inquiry of any worth on the grounds that they do not individually possess the power of subpoena over other nation states to produce evidence that does not fall within the jurisdiction of the state conducing the inquiry. The obvious choice then is of course to resort to the UN. Regrettably, the General Assembly of the UN is in exactly the same position as individual states are with respect to the international power of subpoena. The only body with such a power is in fact the Security Council of the UN, and this body has ceased to deal with any and all matters relating to the Lockerbie incident (see Security Council binding resolution of 12th September 2003, which states, in operative para 3, that it “hereby removes this item from the list of matters of which the Council is seized”). Therefore, on the assumption that the Security Council may be reluctant to revoke its resolution and that the General Assembly has so far expressed no interest in opening an inquiry, we are at a loss to know how matters could be turned around in New York.
Nevertheless, someone of your experience, political acumen and standing as First Minister of Scotland will assuredly manage to make a deeper impact than we have. In that regard, we (JFM committee and signatories) will stand four square behind you in all your endeavours.
Should your attempts prove unsuccessful, at least you will have peace of mind in the knowledge that Scotland, unlike any other nation involved in this, is in a position to open its own inquiry without having to concern itself too greatly on the issue of international subpoena powers given that:
· The event occurred over and on Scottish territory.
· The case was investigated by a Scottish police force.
· The trial was conducted under Scots Law.
· Mr Al-Megrahi was convicted under Scots Law.
· Mr Al-Megrahi was imprisoned in a Scottish gaol.
· The SCCRC referred the second appeal to the Scottish Court of Appeal.
· Mr Al-Megrahi was given compassionate release by the Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Justice.
Therefore, much if not all the documentation, and many of the witnesses required to testify before such an inquiry, already lies within the jurisdiction of Scots Law. Thus, no difficulty whatsoever ought to be posed if the Scottish Government itself ultimately decides to open an inquiry into matters relating to the Lockerbie tragedy.
Not only do we wish to thank you for your most encouraging public comments and offer you our full support behind any course of action you may take to set up an inquiry, but we wish, moreover, to extend to you a warm invitation to add your name to the list of signatories who have over the last year supported the JFM inquiry campaign. By joining this group, you will be consulted as to strategy and kept up-to-date on all its activities. We are an egalitarian organisation. Whilst some signatories may choose a passive role, others have played an active part in formulating and forwarding our aims throughout. It is an individual choice. Justice for Megrahi is simply grateful to have the support of all of its signatories. Since it is clear that you so evidently identify with our aims, you are most welcome to join us.
We are confident that in the points we have made above we speak not only for a large portion of the bereaved of the Lockerbie tragedy, but also for many of the ordinary citizens of Scotland and elsewhere who would like to see a more satisfactory resolution to this issue. Furthermore, it is important to mention that for the inhabitants of the town of Lockerbie to be constantly reminded that their home is synonymous with this appalling event must be intolerable, and an open public inquiry covering events from December 1988 to the present day might contribute in some small way towards returning the town to a degree of normality.
We look forward to your response to our invitation and thank you for your time and attention.
Wishing someone’s death is ghoulish
[This is the headline over an article by specialist writer on Middle East affairs, Linda Heard, recently published on the Arab News website. It reads in part:]
It seems to me that people in the highest echelons of the US government have nothing better to do than sit around hoping that the so-called “Lockerbie bomber” Abdel Baset Al-Megrahi will either keel over and die or spend his dying days behind bars.
Leading the revenge brigade is President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, who would surely be better employed fixing the economy or working toward getting out of Afghanistan.
Such high level preoccupation with the fate of one lingering cancer sufferer is not only petty but somehow vulgar. It’s the kind of thing one might expect from a crazed, egotistical dictator rather than the leaders of the free world and especially those who profess to be Christians when at the core of that religion is forgiveness. (...)
Equally nauseating is the way that America’s trans-Atlantic self-ascribed “junior partner” Britain is dancing to the White House’s tune by threatening Libya not to celebrate the first anniversary of Al-Megrahi’s homecoming. It really isn’t Britain’s business to tell another sovereign nation how it should behave. In truth, nobody in Libya believes Al-Megrahi committed the crime and I don’t blame them. The evidence against him was so flimsy as to be almost nonexistent and he has always vehemently denied any culpability. Moreover, there is a wealth of international legal opinion that believes his conviction by a panel of three Scottish judges is unsafe.
To most Libyans, Al-Megrahi is a patriot who willingly sacrificed his personal liberty to allow his country to re-join the international community. As far as they are concerned he is an innocent man who deserves their respect and thanks. Libya has long paid its dues. It was forced into taking responsibility for Lockerbie to free itself from UN sanctions, US trade sanctions and to gain access to funds frozen in American banks. It also sought its removal from the list of terrorist sponsoring states.
It went the extra mile toward acceptance by paying families of Lockerbie victims $10 million each and dismantling its advanced nuclear program so that it could be officially declared free of WMD. Yet, Libya still hasn’t been fully embraced into the fold and won’t be as long as Washington continues to bleat about the past when it has committed crimes against Libya that tend to be forgotten.
On April 14th, 1986, President Ronald Reagan ordered a strike on Libya that killed President Muammar Qaddafi’s 15-month-old adopted daughter Hanna along with 45 officials and 15 civilians. American bombs also injured two of the Libyan leader’s sons. That attack was loudly condemned in the UN General Assembly as “a violation of the UN Charter and international law.” Obama and Clinton might wish to reflect on that before they adopt their next holier than thou positions.
British Prime Minister David Cameron has already made it crystal clear that he does not approve of Al-Megrahi’s release on compassionate grounds when he should be supporting the Scottish decision that implemented in strict accordance with that country’s compassionate laws. If the doctor who believed that the Libyan had no more than three months to live got it wrong, so be it. Predicting how long an ill person might live is an inexact science yet the US media is spending an inordinate amount of column inches bashing Scotland’s justice minister and the doctor’s report which led him to take his decision.
My American friends should understand that justice in Scotland is a far cry from the hang ‘em high mentality prevalent in some US states or the lurid death row in Texas that was dubbed by the Texas Observer as “the most active human abattoir in North America.” (...)
If the White House and the Senate are seriously seeking justice instead of regurgitating the reasons behind Al-Megrahi’s release, they should institute a new enquiry into Lockerbie, which is exactly what Al-Megrahi — and many of the British Lockerbie victims’ families — wanted during all those years in his cell. Ah! But there isn’t a hope in hell that they would ever consider that when the truth and details of the way it was covered up could prove so embarrassing. If there was anything sinister behind the Libyan’s release as Americans claim, keeping inconvenient truth under wraps could well be it.
It seems to me that people in the highest echelons of the US government have nothing better to do than sit around hoping that the so-called “Lockerbie bomber” Abdel Baset Al-Megrahi will either keel over and die or spend his dying days behind bars.
Leading the revenge brigade is President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, who would surely be better employed fixing the economy or working toward getting out of Afghanistan.
Such high level preoccupation with the fate of one lingering cancer sufferer is not only petty but somehow vulgar. It’s the kind of thing one might expect from a crazed, egotistical dictator rather than the leaders of the free world and especially those who profess to be Christians when at the core of that religion is forgiveness. (...)
Equally nauseating is the way that America’s trans-Atlantic self-ascribed “junior partner” Britain is dancing to the White House’s tune by threatening Libya not to celebrate the first anniversary of Al-Megrahi’s homecoming. It really isn’t Britain’s business to tell another sovereign nation how it should behave. In truth, nobody in Libya believes Al-Megrahi committed the crime and I don’t blame them. The evidence against him was so flimsy as to be almost nonexistent and he has always vehemently denied any culpability. Moreover, there is a wealth of international legal opinion that believes his conviction by a panel of three Scottish judges is unsafe.
To most Libyans, Al-Megrahi is a patriot who willingly sacrificed his personal liberty to allow his country to re-join the international community. As far as they are concerned he is an innocent man who deserves their respect and thanks. Libya has long paid its dues. It was forced into taking responsibility for Lockerbie to free itself from UN sanctions, US trade sanctions and to gain access to funds frozen in American banks. It also sought its removal from the list of terrorist sponsoring states.
It went the extra mile toward acceptance by paying families of Lockerbie victims $10 million each and dismantling its advanced nuclear program so that it could be officially declared free of WMD. Yet, Libya still hasn’t been fully embraced into the fold and won’t be as long as Washington continues to bleat about the past when it has committed crimes against Libya that tend to be forgotten.
On April 14th, 1986, President Ronald Reagan ordered a strike on Libya that killed President Muammar Qaddafi’s 15-month-old adopted daughter Hanna along with 45 officials and 15 civilians. American bombs also injured two of the Libyan leader’s sons. That attack was loudly condemned in the UN General Assembly as “a violation of the UN Charter and international law.” Obama and Clinton might wish to reflect on that before they adopt their next holier than thou positions.
British Prime Minister David Cameron has already made it crystal clear that he does not approve of Al-Megrahi’s release on compassionate grounds when he should be supporting the Scottish decision that implemented in strict accordance with that country’s compassionate laws. If the doctor who believed that the Libyan had no more than three months to live got it wrong, so be it. Predicting how long an ill person might live is an inexact science yet the US media is spending an inordinate amount of column inches bashing Scotland’s justice minister and the doctor’s report which led him to take his decision.
My American friends should understand that justice in Scotland is a far cry from the hang ‘em high mentality prevalent in some US states or the lurid death row in Texas that was dubbed by the Texas Observer as “the most active human abattoir in North America.” (...)
If the White House and the Senate are seriously seeking justice instead of regurgitating the reasons behind Al-Megrahi’s release, they should institute a new enquiry into Lockerbie, which is exactly what Al-Megrahi — and many of the British Lockerbie victims’ families — wanted during all those years in his cell. Ah! But there isn’t a hope in hell that they would ever consider that when the truth and details of the way it was covered up could prove so embarrassing. If there was anything sinister behind the Libyan’s release as Americans claim, keeping inconvenient truth under wraps could well be it.
Monday, 23 August 2010
The vengeance bandwagon
Now Secretary of State Hilary Clinton has jumped on the vengeance bandwagon. She maintains that the families of Lockerbie victims have been denied justice because a year ago the Scottish justice minister released the only person to have been convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, Libyan Abdul Baset Al Megrahi.
Released on compassionate grounds in keeping with Scottish law, his mistake was he refused to die on cue. Instead of expiring within the proscribed three-months, he is lingering on thanks to new and innovative treatment. His longevity is offensive to Clinton, who blames Scotland for not keeping him behind bars until his last breath.
Apart from the fact that a slew of legal experts have deemed Al Megrahi's conviction as potentially unsafe, such bloodlust coming from a cultured woman politician is unseemly at best and, at worst, vulgar or ghoulish.
I'm reminded of Genghis Khan, who put the head of one of his enemies on a pole as a victory trophy and paraded it through village after village or, more recently, the US military that ensured that the corpses of Saddam's sons made it to our screens.
Clinton is now calling for Al Megrahi to serve out his sentence while the British government has warned Libya not to celebrate the one-year anniversary of his homecoming, although every Libyan believes in his innocence and he is considered a hero for sacrificing his freedom to enable his country to rejoin the international community. Whether he survives for three months or three years is neither here nor there in the great scheme of things.
[From an article on the Gulf News website by Linda S Heard, a specialist writer on Middle East affairs.]
Released on compassionate grounds in keeping with Scottish law, his mistake was he refused to die on cue. Instead of expiring within the proscribed three-months, he is lingering on thanks to new and innovative treatment. His longevity is offensive to Clinton, who blames Scotland for not keeping him behind bars until his last breath.
Apart from the fact that a slew of legal experts have deemed Al Megrahi's conviction as potentially unsafe, such bloodlust coming from a cultured woman politician is unseemly at best and, at worst, vulgar or ghoulish.
I'm reminded of Genghis Khan, who put the head of one of his enemies on a pole as a victory trophy and paraded it through village after village or, more recently, the US military that ensured that the corpses of Saddam's sons made it to our screens.
Clinton is now calling for Al Megrahi to serve out his sentence while the British government has warned Libya not to celebrate the one-year anniversary of his homecoming, although every Libyan believes in his innocence and he is considered a hero for sacrificing his freedom to enable his country to rejoin the international community. Whether he survives for three months or three years is neither here nor there in the great scheme of things.
[From an article on the Gulf News website by Linda S Heard, a specialist writer on Middle East affairs.]
Kirk official backs Scottish Government decision to release Megrahi
[This is the headline over a report published today on the Ekklesia website. It reads in part:]
The Scottish government was right to release the Libyan man convicted of the 1988 Lockerbie bombing on compassionate grounds, an official of the Church of Scotland says.
"The principle behind the release of Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi a year ago was right, compassion, and my views haven't changed since I welcomed his release on 20 August last year," the Rev Ian Galloway, convener of the Presbyterian denomination's church and society council, has told ENInews.
The spiritual leader of Roman Catholics in Scotland [Cardinal Keith O'Brien] has taken a similar stance, criticising the furore in the United States over the decision. (...)
The Catholic leader also backed the Scottish government's decision not to give evidence to American senators investigating Megrahi's release.
The similar opinions of a leading Church of Scotland figure reflect an overwhelming preference for mercy over vengeance among churches in Scotland, a commentator told Ekklesia.
The Scottish government was right to release the Libyan man convicted of the 1988 Lockerbie bombing on compassionate grounds, an official of the Church of Scotland says.
"The principle behind the release of Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi a year ago was right, compassion, and my views haven't changed since I welcomed his release on 20 August last year," the Rev Ian Galloway, convener of the Presbyterian denomination's church and society council, has told ENInews.
The spiritual leader of Roman Catholics in Scotland [Cardinal Keith O'Brien] has taken a similar stance, criticising the furore in the United States over the decision. (...)
The Catholic leader also backed the Scottish government's decision not to give evidence to American senators investigating Megrahi's release.
The similar opinions of a leading Church of Scotland figure reflect an overwhelming preference for mercy over vengeance among churches in Scotland, a commentator told Ekklesia.
For Sen Menendez read Joe McCarthy
[This is the heading over a letter from John Edwards in today's edition of The Herald. It reads as follows:]
So United States Senator Robert Menendez believes there is a “cloud of suspicion” hanging over the medical reports that led to the release of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi (“Scots back Salmond on US inquiry decision”, August 20). Just how far is Menendez going in his attempts to sully Scotland’s legal system, and his intereference in Scottish sovereignty?
And the US government wants Mr Megrahi returned to prison, because after a year in which he has no doubt been receiving the very best medical attention, he is still alive.
The American vengeance machine rolls on. This whole affair increasingly has echoes of the McCarthyism era in the United States in the 1950s, when free thinking liberals were put on trial for “un-American” activities.
The difference now is that it is not individuals being accused, but the Scottish nation and our government.
Now we learn that the Central Intelligence Agency had evidence that could have changed the course of the Camp Zeist trial, but was not presented. Why?
The stench of hypocrisy grows stronger by the day.
[A letter from James S MacDonald in The Scotsman reads as follows:]
With regards to your reports and letters over the release of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, for the first time in my life, I plan to vote SNP at the next election. The reason being I was pleased with our First Minister for standing up to that vindictive race of people who live across the Atlantic.
I don't recall an inquiry when the Americans shot down an Iranian airliner full of innocent people. Nor do I hear them showing remorse for the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians killed by their troops.
Perhaps the reason that Megrahi has survived longer than the prognosis is that the Libyan medical system is superior to ours.
So United States Senator Robert Menendez believes there is a “cloud of suspicion” hanging over the medical reports that led to the release of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi (“Scots back Salmond on US inquiry decision”, August 20). Just how far is Menendez going in his attempts to sully Scotland’s legal system, and his intereference in Scottish sovereignty?
And the US government wants Mr Megrahi returned to prison, because after a year in which he has no doubt been receiving the very best medical attention, he is still alive.
The American vengeance machine rolls on. This whole affair increasingly has echoes of the McCarthyism era in the United States in the 1950s, when free thinking liberals were put on trial for “un-American” activities.
The difference now is that it is not individuals being accused, but the Scottish nation and our government.
Now we learn that the Central Intelligence Agency had evidence that could have changed the course of the Camp Zeist trial, but was not presented. Why?
The stench of hypocrisy grows stronger by the day.
[A letter from James S MacDonald in The Scotsman reads as follows:]
With regards to your reports and letters over the release of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, for the first time in my life, I plan to vote SNP at the next election. The reason being I was pleased with our First Minister for standing up to that vindictive race of people who live across the Atlantic.
I don't recall an inquiry when the Americans shot down an Iranian airliner full of innocent people. Nor do I hear them showing remorse for the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians killed by their troops.
Perhaps the reason that Megrahi has survived longer than the prognosis is that the Libyan medical system is superior to ours.
Jail killed me a million times
Breaking his silence on the first anniversary of his release, the 58-year-old cancer sufferer said he was disgusted by those who effectively wanted him dead.
'They want to quicken my death. Is it up to me?' Abdelbaset Al Megrahi Megrahi told journalists in his home city of Tripoli.
'They killed me in prison a million times, denied as I was from seeing my children and family. So what more do they want from me?' (...)
Megrahi denies having anything to do with the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 in 1988 in which 270 died.
He began his second year of freedom talking to friends in Scotland and watching British TV.
Megrahi sat up in bed in his home in front of a large plasma screen, surrounded by close family.
Despite having difficulty speaking, he managed a few words to telephone callers, but mainly exchanged greetings via email. Meanwhile, VIP friends including members of Colonel Gaddafi's family visited his two-storey villa, bringing gifts to mark the first anniversary of his release. (...)
Megrahi has not been seen in public since December but those who arrived at his house in Mercedes and BMW limousines reported that he was 'comfortable and surrounded by loved ones'.
'Brother Abdelbaset has been sat up in bed and keeping his mind active,' said one.
'He has friends in Scotland following his many years there and was talking with them.
'He misses certain people in Scotland, and was asking about the obvious things - the weather, that kind of thing. He wanted to know how Glasgow Rangers, his favourite football team, were doing.'
Among those visiting him was Colonel Gaddafi's son, Saif, whose charitable foundation is bankrolling his cancer treatment.
Megrahi, who can now only walk with the aid of a stick, arrived home in Libya on August 20 last year. He is living with his wife, 48-year-old Aisha, and the couple's four sons and daughter.
Both Britain and the U.S. have started investing millions into Libya since Megrahi's release, with the North African country in turn pouring just as much into the UK.
[From a report in today's edition of the Daily Mail.]
'They want to quicken my death. Is it up to me?' Abdelbaset Al Megrahi Megrahi told journalists in his home city of Tripoli.
'They killed me in prison a million times, denied as I was from seeing my children and family. So what more do they want from me?' (...)
Megrahi denies having anything to do with the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 in 1988 in which 270 died.
He began his second year of freedom talking to friends in Scotland and watching British TV.
Megrahi sat up in bed in his home in front of a large plasma screen, surrounded by close family.
Despite having difficulty speaking, he managed a few words to telephone callers, but mainly exchanged greetings via email. Meanwhile, VIP friends including members of Colonel Gaddafi's family visited his two-storey villa, bringing gifts to mark the first anniversary of his release. (...)
Megrahi has not been seen in public since December but those who arrived at his house in Mercedes and BMW limousines reported that he was 'comfortable and surrounded by loved ones'.
'Brother Abdelbaset has been sat up in bed and keeping his mind active,' said one.
'He has friends in Scotland following his many years there and was talking with them.
'He misses certain people in Scotland, and was asking about the obvious things - the weather, that kind of thing. He wanted to know how Glasgow Rangers, his favourite football team, were doing.'
Among those visiting him was Colonel Gaddafi's son, Saif, whose charitable foundation is bankrolling his cancer treatment.
Megrahi, who can now only walk with the aid of a stick, arrived home in Libya on August 20 last year. He is living with his wife, 48-year-old Aisha, and the couple's four sons and daughter.
Both Britain and the U.S. have started investing millions into Libya since Megrahi's release, with the North African country in turn pouring just as much into the UK.
[From a report in today's edition of the Daily Mail.]
Sunday, 22 August 2010
Miscarriage of justice
This is the headline over an article in the Maltese newspaper The Sunday Times by Justice for Megrahi committee member Robert Forrester, based on the Address to the People and Government of Scotland. It can be read here.
Is it not sad that no Scottish Sunday newspaper has done the same? All credit, however, to Newsnet Scotland and to The Herald for their earlier coverage.
Is it not sad that no Scottish Sunday newspaper has done the same? All credit, however, to Newsnet Scotland and to The Herald for their earlier coverage.
Megrahi's conviction "entirely unsustainable"
The White House has told Scottish Ministers that they should return the Lockerbie bomber to jail in Scotland, amid fresh calls for a full public inquiry into his conviction and subsequent release.
John Brennan, counter-terrorism adviser to President Barack Obama, said Washington had expressed "strong conviction" to officials in Edinburgh over what he described as the "unfortunate and inappropriate and wrong decision" to free Abdelbaset Al Megrahi. (...)
But campaigners who believe in Megrahi's innocence are now arguing that the backlash over his freeing should not obscure more fundamental questions surrounding his conviction.
It came as it emerged that the Egyptian-born terrorist Mohammed Abu Talb - the man many suspect as the real figure behind the bomb - was released from jail in Sweden.
Michael Mansfield QC, one of the country's best-known defence lawyers, said a full judicial inquiry was required to settle the doubts over the case. Mansfield said he had no doubt that the evidence given to secure Megrahi's conviction was "entirely unsustainable".
[From a report in today's edition of Scotland on Sunday.
The same newspaper runs an opinion piece by Kenny Farquharson headlined "Scotland itself is in the dock" arguing that the Cabinet Secretary for Justice should go to Washington to testify on the compassionate release decision before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. As is so often the case with Scotsman publications these days, the readers' comments are much more interesting than the article.]
John Brennan, counter-terrorism adviser to President Barack Obama, said Washington had expressed "strong conviction" to officials in Edinburgh over what he described as the "unfortunate and inappropriate and wrong decision" to free Abdelbaset Al Megrahi. (...)
But campaigners who believe in Megrahi's innocence are now arguing that the backlash over his freeing should not obscure more fundamental questions surrounding his conviction.
It came as it emerged that the Egyptian-born terrorist Mohammed Abu Talb - the man many suspect as the real figure behind the bomb - was released from jail in Sweden.
Michael Mansfield QC, one of the country's best-known defence lawyers, said a full judicial inquiry was required to settle the doubts over the case. Mansfield said he had no doubt that the evidence given to secure Megrahi's conviction was "entirely unsustainable".
[From a report in today's edition of Scotland on Sunday.
The same newspaper runs an opinion piece by Kenny Farquharson headlined "Scotland itself is in the dock" arguing that the Cabinet Secretary for Justice should go to Washington to testify on the compassionate release decision before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. As is so often the case with Scotsman publications these days, the readers' comments are much more interesting than the article.]
Saturday, 21 August 2010
Address to the People and Government of Scotland
This is the title of an open letter issued by Justice for Megrahi calling upon the Scottish Government to set up an independent inquiry into:
• The Fatal Accident Inquiry into the downing of Pan Am 103.
• The police investigation of the tragedy.
• The subsequent Kamp van Zeist trial.
• The acquittal of Lamin Fhimah and conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.
• The SCCRC’s referral of Mr al-Megrahi's case to the Court of Appeal.
• The dropping of this second appeal and the compassionate release of Mr al-Megrahi.
The full text of the address can be read here on the Newsnet Scotland website.
The list of signatories is as follows:
Ms Kate Adie (Former Chief News Correspondent for BBC News).
Mr John Ashton (Co-author of Cover-up of Convenience: The Hidden Scandal of Lockerbie).
Mr David Benson (Actor and author of the play Lockerbie: Unfinished Business).
Mrs Jean Berkley (Mother of Alistair Berkley, who was killed on flight 103).
Mr Peter Biddulph (Lockerbie tragedy researcher).
Professor Robert Black QC (Commonly referred to as the architect of the Kamp van Zeist Trial).
Professor Noam Chomsky (Professor Emeritus of Linguistics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and human rights commentator of international repute).
Mr Tam Dalyell (Member of Parliament: 1962 – 2005, Father of the House: 2001 – 2005).
Mr Ian Ferguson (Co-author of Cover-up of Convenience: The Hidden Scandal of Lockerbie).
Mr Robert Forrester (‘Justice for Megrahi’ committee member).
Ms Christine Grahame (Member of the Scottish Parliament and justice campaigner).
Mr Ian Hislop (Editor of Private Eye: one of the UK’s most highly regarded journals of political comment).
Father Pat Keegans (Lockerbie Parish Priest at the time of the Pan Am 103 incident).
Mr Adam Larson (Editor, writer and proprietor of The Lockerbie Divide).
Mr Iain McKie (Retired Police Superintendent and justice campaigner).
Ms Heather Mills (Reporter for Private Eye specialising in matters relating to Pan Am flight 103).
Mr Charles Norrie (Brother of Tony Norrie, who died aboard UT-772 over Niger on 19th September 1989).
Mr Denis Phipps (Aviation security expert).
Mr John Pilger (Author and campaigning human rights journalist of world renown).
Mr Steven Raeburn (Editor of The Firm, one of Scotland’s foremost legal journals).
Mr James Robertson (Writer and author of the recently published And the Land Lay Still).
Doctor Jim Swire (Justice campaigner, Dr Swire’s daughter, Flora, was killed in the Pan Am 103 incident).
Sir Teddy Taylor (Former Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland and Member of Parliament from 1964 to 2005).
His Grace, Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Mpilo Tutu (Defender of human rights worldwide, Nobel Peace Prize winner and headed South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission).
[The writer A L Kennedy is the latest person to add her name to the list of signatories.]
• The Fatal Accident Inquiry into the downing of Pan Am 103.
• The police investigation of the tragedy.
• The subsequent Kamp van Zeist trial.
• The acquittal of Lamin Fhimah and conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.
• The SCCRC’s referral of Mr al-Megrahi's case to the Court of Appeal.
• The dropping of this second appeal and the compassionate release of Mr al-Megrahi.
The full text of the address can be read here on the Newsnet Scotland website.
The list of signatories is as follows:
Ms Kate Adie (Former Chief News Correspondent for BBC News).
Mr John Ashton (Co-author of Cover-up of Convenience: The Hidden Scandal of Lockerbie).
Mr David Benson (Actor and author of the play Lockerbie: Unfinished Business).
Mrs Jean Berkley (Mother of Alistair Berkley, who was killed on flight 103).
Mr Peter Biddulph (Lockerbie tragedy researcher).
Professor Robert Black QC (Commonly referred to as the architect of the Kamp van Zeist Trial).
Professor Noam Chomsky (Professor Emeritus of Linguistics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and human rights commentator of international repute).
Mr Tam Dalyell (Member of Parliament: 1962 – 2005, Father of the House: 2001 – 2005).
Mr Ian Ferguson (Co-author of Cover-up of Convenience: The Hidden Scandal of Lockerbie).
Mr Robert Forrester (‘Justice for Megrahi’ committee member).
Ms Christine Grahame (Member of the Scottish Parliament and justice campaigner).
Mr Ian Hislop (Editor of Private Eye: one of the UK’s most highly regarded journals of political comment).
Father Pat Keegans (Lockerbie Parish Priest at the time of the Pan Am 103 incident).
Mr Adam Larson (Editor, writer and proprietor of The Lockerbie Divide).
Mr Iain McKie (Retired Police Superintendent and justice campaigner).
Ms Heather Mills (Reporter for Private Eye specialising in matters relating to Pan Am flight 103).
Mr Charles Norrie (Brother of Tony Norrie, who died aboard UT-772 over Niger on 19th September 1989).
Mr Denis Phipps (Aviation security expert).
Mr John Pilger (Author and campaigning human rights journalist of world renown).
Mr Steven Raeburn (Editor of The Firm, one of Scotland’s foremost legal journals).
Mr James Robertson (Writer and author of the recently published And the Land Lay Still).
Doctor Jim Swire (Justice campaigner, Dr Swire’s daughter, Flora, was killed in the Pan Am 103 incident).
Sir Teddy Taylor (Former Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland and Member of Parliament from 1964 to 2005).
His Grace, Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Mpilo Tutu (Defender of human rights worldwide, Nobel Peace Prize winner and headed South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission).
[The writer A L Kennedy is the latest person to add her name to the list of signatories.]
Megrahi’s release was the correct decision made on humane, compassionate grounds
This is the heading over four letters published today in The Herald. They all support the release and some draw attention to the grave concerns that exist about the original conviction.
The Scotsman publishes three letters under the heading "Megrahi decision will not topple the SNP" of which two support the decision.
For a representative press account of the US call for Abdelbaset Megrahi to be returned to a Scottish prison, see the Daily Telegraph's "Lockerbie bombing: US calls for Megrahi to be returned to jail".
A good account of the US call and the Scottish Government's response can be read in the Financial Times article "Scots take firm stand over Megrahi".
The Scotsman publishes three letters under the heading "Megrahi decision will not topple the SNP" of which two support the decision.
For a representative press account of the US call for Abdelbaset Megrahi to be returned to a Scottish prison, see the Daily Telegraph's "Lockerbie bombing: US calls for Megrahi to be returned to jail".
A good account of the US call and the Scottish Government's response can be read in the Financial Times article "Scots take firm stand over Megrahi".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)