[This is the heading over a post published today on the University of Edinburgh School of Law's Scots Law News blog. It reads as follows:]
As the Gaddafi regime in Libya was finally toppled in August 2011, so inevitably speculation also began about the implications for Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the convicted Lockerbie bomber, the second anniversary of whose compassionate release from Greenock prison by the Scottish Government came and went as the insurgents reached Tripoli.
Megrahi had been filmed a couple of weeks before attending a pro-Gaddafi rally in Tripoli, apparently in a wheelchair, and it was also reported that he remained in regular contact with East Renfrewshire Council social workers (one of the conditions of his release).
The concatenation of events led to voices being raised, not only about a possible recall to prison in Scotland, but also, in the USA and especially on Fox News and the like, of capturing Megrahi and putting him on trial in America. Presumably that might be less difficult in present conditions in Libya than finding and killing Osama bin Laden in Pakistan was earlier this year.
Scots Law News does wonder what legality might have to say about a US trial for Megrahi, given that he has already been convicted of the crime in question and neither the Scottish or the UK governments have for a moment suggested that the conviction has been over-turned. Presumably the co-operation of the Crown Office would be needed as well to enable US prosecutors to get hold of the material evidence that would be needed for a trial with any pretensions to being one under the rule of law.
Finally there is the interesting question of whether in the ruins of the Gaddafi regime there will be found any further evidence about the plan to bring down Pan-Am 103. The Crown Office has indicated that it continues to investigate the possible involvement of others beyond Megrahi. Scots Law News rather suspects that the Gaddafi regime did not prioritise archiving its records, if indeed it kept very many, so that mystery is likely to remain - unfortunately meaning lots of room for speculation and more debate. Some of it may be reduced, however, if the Scottish Government's planned Bill to enable publication of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission report raising questions about the Megrahi conviction succeeds in passing the Scottish Parliament.
Wednesday, 24 August 2011
Lockerbie: Romney, the Monroe Doctrine and justice denied?
[This is the headline over an article posted yesterday on David Macadam's The Oligarch Kings blog. It reads in part:]
A hundred years ago [RB: actually eighty] a legal case in Scotland swept across the world establishing her legal system in the front row of jurisprudence in the world. [Donoghue v Stevenson] Scots Law was all grown up and walking tall. (...)
Thereafter the Scottish profession, chuffed to the gutties, has over the hundred years since rather rested on the rollocks, basking in the lingering afterglow of their glory days, complacent, flabby minded and arrogant, quietly assuming that the world’s lawyers continue to turn to her for guidance in novelties in law. It was an amusing conceit, something to smile at when seeing the representatives of the profession strut their stuff at conferences abroad, an engaging foible at worst. Until, a December night in 1988 when a jumbo jet fell from the sky over Lockerbie. Here at last they thought was an opportunity to once again show the world that Scots Law was right up there at the cutting edge, a golden opportunity again to show the world how things are done.
What followed was a disaster for the reputation of Scots law. The profession was out of its depth from the get-go. The case was mishandled from the beginning, and the trial, such as it was, held in the Nederlands on specially created Scottish soil, a catastrophe. For whatever reason the profession was completely unprepared, would not listen to advice, were utterly overwhelmed by forces far greater than they had met before, and the investigation, management and trial became riddled with contentious errors. No one at any stage stood up for justice and everyone allowed themselves to be bullied into a guilty verdict. If you want the whole sordid thing in expert detail turn to Professor Bob Black’s excellent blog here. (...)
And it’s not just my opinion. Here is Hugh Miles writing in the Independent [on Sunday] on 21st December 2008. “Since the Crown never had much of a case against Megrahi, it was no surprise when the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) found prima facie evidence in June 2007 that Megrahi had suffered a miscarriage of justice and recommended that he be granted a second appeal. If Megrahi didn’t do it, who did? Some time ago suspicion fell on a gang headed by a convicted Palestinian terrorist named Abu Talb and a Jordanian triple agent named Marwan Abdel Razzaq Khreesat. Both were Iranian agents; Khreesat was also on the CIA payroll. Abu Talb was given lifelong immunity from prosecution in exchange for his evidence at the Lockerbie trial; Marwan Khreesat was released for lack of evidence by German police even though a barometric timer of the type used to detonate the bomb on Pan Am Flight 103 was found in his car when he was arrested”.
The problems became so acute with the prisoner at death’s door, and the distinct probability of his winning any appeal dealing permanent damage to Scots legal profession that the Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill, himself a member of the legal profession, was required to go to the prisoner in person. The result was to create another legal fiction in Scots Law (a new maxim to join the snail) the concept of Compassion in Scots Law. Actions which never went anywhere near the central question of his guilt or innocence. (...)
Miscarriage of justice it might be, an embarrassment for Scotland certainly, but surely still a storm in a tea cup far from the world’s great decisions? Nothing to bother a blog on American politics surely?
But I have also written about the gradual extension of Monroe’s doctrine into international legal areas. (...) Now we see Mitt Romney the lead candidate for the GOP and a possible President of the USA, seek to overturn the due process of law in another country (and an ally at that) to unilaterally render Abdel al-Megrahi from the jurisdiction of Scotland to some unknown unstated destination. Unlawful certainly but when the reach of Scotland’s justice minister Kenny MacAskill cannot touch (or protect his ward) what is to stop them?
“It is my hope that Libya will now move toward a representative form of government that supports freedom, human rights, and the rule of law,” Romney said in his statement strickingly lacking in an appreciation of irony. Bloody rich really, but he does not stop there. “As a first step, he continued I call on this new government to arrest and extradite the mastermind behind the bombing of Pan Am 103, Abdelbaset Mohmed Ali al-Megrahi, so justice can finally be done." Which seems plain enough to me. (...)
You see, far from having been simply released as a free man to live it up in Libya as the press frequently assert, Megrahi is still subject to the Scottish legal system. He was released on license and allowed to remain in Libya. Every month Megrahi has to abide by the terms of his release and contact the Parole officers of Renfrewshire County Council who administer these matters for Greenock Prison. And, he cannot leave Libya, save with the express permission of the Scottish Justice Minister. Hello again Kenny.
So Kenny MacAskill finds himself beset by numerous different factions seeking to devour him.
1. The Scottish public, who because they do not hear the doubts or speak with professionals who know in their bones it is wrong,want him back in jail.
2. The British public who, embarrassed at the old Libyan regime making whoopee, want him back in jail.
3. Kenny MacAskill has exposed his beloved Scotland to the worst ridicule of all - that of simply being ignored and no one in this game is really listening to Scottish lawyers anymore. The profession are aghast.
4. The fact that his decision, far from protecting Megrahi, has placed him at deadly risk and by his actions Kenny Macaskill may have signed not so much an instrument of compassion, but a death warrant. As Kenny is a good man at heart this must sit heavily indeed.
5. The terror of an Appeal going ahead.
6. The terror of the Grounds of Appeal being released. This would certainly embarrass his profession, his government and the justice system in Scotland as a whole, and may very well expose American interference with the evidence and due process including bribery of witnesses and tampering with witnesses. It is certain there are an awful lot of awkward questions that want answered.
7. The crushing vice of American opinion to have Megrahi extradited and tried (even though he has been tried already). There he would face a death penalty which is not an option in Scotland.
8. Worst of all, the distinct probability that the transitional regime may themselves render Megrahi to the Americans to get him out of the country and remove a source of internal tension from their soil.
In fact looking at the options the most likely outcome that would serve everyone’s interests (except those of justice and Megrahi himself) would be that he dies. Very shortly.
Will my next post on this subject be called “Who killed Megrahi”?
[An article in today's edition of The Scotsman headlined Libya: Hunt for Lockerbie bomber amid the chaos of Tripoli deals with (a) the concerns of East Renfrewshire Council about their supervisory duties in respect of Megrahi in the current situation and (b) the calls by US and UK politicians for him to be returned to jail.
A similar article in The Herald can be read here.]
A hundred years ago [RB: actually eighty] a legal case in Scotland swept across the world establishing her legal system in the front row of jurisprudence in the world. [Donoghue v Stevenson] Scots Law was all grown up and walking tall. (...)
Thereafter the Scottish profession, chuffed to the gutties, has over the hundred years since rather rested on the rollocks, basking in the lingering afterglow of their glory days, complacent, flabby minded and arrogant, quietly assuming that the world’s lawyers continue to turn to her for guidance in novelties in law. It was an amusing conceit, something to smile at when seeing the representatives of the profession strut their stuff at conferences abroad, an engaging foible at worst. Until, a December night in 1988 when a jumbo jet fell from the sky over Lockerbie. Here at last they thought was an opportunity to once again show the world that Scots Law was right up there at the cutting edge, a golden opportunity again to show the world how things are done.
What followed was a disaster for the reputation of Scots law. The profession was out of its depth from the get-go. The case was mishandled from the beginning, and the trial, such as it was, held in the Nederlands on specially created Scottish soil, a catastrophe. For whatever reason the profession was completely unprepared, would not listen to advice, were utterly overwhelmed by forces far greater than they had met before, and the investigation, management and trial became riddled with contentious errors. No one at any stage stood up for justice and everyone allowed themselves to be bullied into a guilty verdict. If you want the whole sordid thing in expert detail turn to Professor Bob Black’s excellent blog here. (...)
And it’s not just my opinion. Here is Hugh Miles writing in the Independent [on Sunday] on 21st December 2008. “Since the Crown never had much of a case against Megrahi, it was no surprise when the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) found prima facie evidence in June 2007 that Megrahi had suffered a miscarriage of justice and recommended that he be granted a second appeal. If Megrahi didn’t do it, who did? Some time ago suspicion fell on a gang headed by a convicted Palestinian terrorist named Abu Talb and a Jordanian triple agent named Marwan Abdel Razzaq Khreesat. Both were Iranian agents; Khreesat was also on the CIA payroll. Abu Talb was given lifelong immunity from prosecution in exchange for his evidence at the Lockerbie trial; Marwan Khreesat was released for lack of evidence by German police even though a barometric timer of the type used to detonate the bomb on Pan Am Flight 103 was found in his car when he was arrested”.
The problems became so acute with the prisoner at death’s door, and the distinct probability of his winning any appeal dealing permanent damage to Scots legal profession that the Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill, himself a member of the legal profession, was required to go to the prisoner in person. The result was to create another legal fiction in Scots Law (a new maxim to join the snail) the concept of Compassion in Scots Law. Actions which never went anywhere near the central question of his guilt or innocence. (...)
Miscarriage of justice it might be, an embarrassment for Scotland certainly, but surely still a storm in a tea cup far from the world’s great decisions? Nothing to bother a blog on American politics surely?
But I have also written about the gradual extension of Monroe’s doctrine into international legal areas. (...) Now we see Mitt Romney the lead candidate for the GOP and a possible President of the USA, seek to overturn the due process of law in another country (and an ally at that) to unilaterally render Abdel al-Megrahi from the jurisdiction of Scotland to some unknown unstated destination. Unlawful certainly but when the reach of Scotland’s justice minister Kenny MacAskill cannot touch (or protect his ward) what is to stop them?
“It is my hope that Libya will now move toward a representative form of government that supports freedom, human rights, and the rule of law,” Romney said in his statement strickingly lacking in an appreciation of irony. Bloody rich really, but he does not stop there. “As a first step, he continued I call on this new government to arrest and extradite the mastermind behind the bombing of Pan Am 103, Abdelbaset Mohmed Ali al-Megrahi, so justice can finally be done." Which seems plain enough to me. (...)
You see, far from having been simply released as a free man to live it up in Libya as the press frequently assert, Megrahi is still subject to the Scottish legal system. He was released on license and allowed to remain in Libya. Every month Megrahi has to abide by the terms of his release and contact the Parole officers of Renfrewshire County Council who administer these matters for Greenock Prison. And, he cannot leave Libya, save with the express permission of the Scottish Justice Minister. Hello again Kenny.
So Kenny MacAskill finds himself beset by numerous different factions seeking to devour him.
1. The Scottish public, who because they do not hear the doubts or speak with professionals who know in their bones it is wrong,want him back in jail.
2. The British public who, embarrassed at the old Libyan regime making whoopee, want him back in jail.
3. Kenny MacAskill has exposed his beloved Scotland to the worst ridicule of all - that of simply being ignored and no one in this game is really listening to Scottish lawyers anymore. The profession are aghast.
4. The fact that his decision, far from protecting Megrahi, has placed him at deadly risk and by his actions Kenny Macaskill may have signed not so much an instrument of compassion, but a death warrant. As Kenny is a good man at heart this must sit heavily indeed.
5. The terror of an Appeal going ahead.
6. The terror of the Grounds of Appeal being released. This would certainly embarrass his profession, his government and the justice system in Scotland as a whole, and may very well expose American interference with the evidence and due process including bribery of witnesses and tampering with witnesses. It is certain there are an awful lot of awkward questions that want answered.
7. The crushing vice of American opinion to have Megrahi extradited and tried (even though he has been tried already). There he would face a death penalty which is not an option in Scotland.
8. Worst of all, the distinct probability that the transitional regime may themselves render Megrahi to the Americans to get him out of the country and remove a source of internal tension from their soil.
In fact looking at the options the most likely outcome that would serve everyone’s interests (except those of justice and Megrahi himself) would be that he dies. Very shortly.
Will my next post on this subject be called “Who killed Megrahi”?
[An article in today's edition of The Scotsman headlined Libya: Hunt for Lockerbie bomber amid the chaos of Tripoli deals with (a) the concerns of East Renfrewshire Council about their supervisory duties in respect of Megrahi in the current situation and (b) the calls by US and UK politicians for him to be returned to jail.
A similar article in The Herald can be read here.]
Tuesday, 23 August 2011
Send Megrahi back to chokey!
[This is the heading over a recent post on the magnificent Lallands Peat Worrier blog. In it the author considers the legality of returning Abdelbaset Megrahi to prison. The whole piece is recommended reading. Here are the first few paragraphs as a taster:]
Here's a shock. You can't just lock folk up without a legal basis. Well, I tell a lie. If you are a sturdy soul with an ambusher's low animal cunning, a ream of duct tape and a spare and empty man-sized cupboard, you could take up antemortem body-snatching in your spare time, but I doubt it'd avail you much at all. As for the state and its agents, quite rightly, their powers of arrest and detention are governed and limited by laws. Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights exemplifies this logic:
"... no one shall be deprived of his liberty save in the following cases and in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law".
So, whether or not they might wish it were otherwise, the polis can't just pounce on a fellow and toss them into an oubliette, there to rot away their days. If you commit offences punished by a determinate jail term, and serve out your sentence, you cannot be swooped upon and returned to your cell. If you are a life prisoner released on licence, there are processes of adjudication and deliberation on your condition. For most, these are consoling thoughts. For Robert Halfon, the Tory MP for Harlow in Essex, however, it is otherwise. Says Halfron...
"The release of al-Megrahi marked the low point of Britain's appeasement of Gaddafi. We should make every effort to bring him back so he can spend the rest of his time in prison where he belongs. Or he should spend the rest of his life in a Libyan jail, or be extradited to the US. We should do everything in our power to make sure he is in jail, rather than living a life of luxury."
Our old friends, the American senators - joined by Republican would-be President, the ludicrous Mitt Romney - are hullabalooing for Megrahi's extradition to the United States. Says Mormon Mitt...
"It is my hope that Libya will now move toward a representative form of government that supports freedom, human rights, and the rule of law. As a first step, I call on this new government to arrest and extradite the mastermind behind the bombing of Pan Am 103, Abdelbaset Mohmed Ali al-Megrahi, so justice can finally be done..."
You'd think these American politicians had quite forgotten the Camp Zeist trial, which convicted Megrahi in early 2001 and the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution, which provides that "no person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb".
[And here is the United Kingdom's Foreign Secretary, as quoted in an article on the Huffington Post:]
Foreign secretary William Hague has said he believes the Scottish government should “urgently” review the release of Lockerbie bomber Abdel Baset Ali Al-Megrahi.
“The prime minister and I were both sharply critical of the release of Al-Megrahi when that happened. We have always thought it was the wrong thing to do. It was of course a matter for the Scottish Executive, not for the United Kingdom Government, so it’s not a matter I can control now.
“But if I was a Scottish minister, rather than a UK Government minister, I would be looking urgently to review this situation and see what I could do about it”, he told BBC News on Tuesday afternoon.
[If William Hague were a Scottish minister, I think all sensible Scots would emigrate.]
Here's a shock. You can't just lock folk up without a legal basis. Well, I tell a lie. If you are a sturdy soul with an ambusher's low animal cunning, a ream of duct tape and a spare and empty man-sized cupboard, you could take up antemortem body-snatching in your spare time, but I doubt it'd avail you much at all. As for the state and its agents, quite rightly, their powers of arrest and detention are governed and limited by laws. Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights exemplifies this logic:
"... no one shall be deprived of his liberty save in the following cases and in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law".
So, whether or not they might wish it were otherwise, the polis can't just pounce on a fellow and toss them into an oubliette, there to rot away their days. If you commit offences punished by a determinate jail term, and serve out your sentence, you cannot be swooped upon and returned to your cell. If you are a life prisoner released on licence, there are processes of adjudication and deliberation on your condition. For most, these are consoling thoughts. For Robert Halfon, the Tory MP for Harlow in Essex, however, it is otherwise. Says Halfron...
"The release of al-Megrahi marked the low point of Britain's appeasement of Gaddafi. We should make every effort to bring him back so he can spend the rest of his time in prison where he belongs. Or he should spend the rest of his life in a Libyan jail, or be extradited to the US. We should do everything in our power to make sure he is in jail, rather than living a life of luxury."
Our old friends, the American senators - joined by Republican would-be President, the ludicrous Mitt Romney - are hullabalooing for Megrahi's extradition to the United States. Says Mormon Mitt...
"It is my hope that Libya will now move toward a representative form of government that supports freedom, human rights, and the rule of law. As a first step, I call on this new government to arrest and extradite the mastermind behind the bombing of Pan Am 103, Abdelbaset Mohmed Ali al-Megrahi, so justice can finally be done..."
You'd think these American politicians had quite forgotten the Camp Zeist trial, which convicted Megrahi in early 2001 and the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution, which provides that "no person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb".
[And here is the United Kingdom's Foreign Secretary, as quoted in an article on the Huffington Post:]
Foreign secretary William Hague has said he believes the Scottish government should “urgently” review the release of Lockerbie bomber Abdel Baset Ali Al-Megrahi.
“The prime minister and I were both sharply critical of the release of Al-Megrahi when that happened. We have always thought it was the wrong thing to do. It was of course a matter for the Scottish Executive, not for the United Kingdom Government, so it’s not a matter I can control now.
“But if I was a Scottish minister, rather than a UK Government minister, I would be looking urgently to review this situation and see what I could do about it”, he told BBC News on Tuesday afternoon.
[If William Hague were a Scottish minister, I think all sensible Scots would emigrate.]
Stand by for dodgy evidence to emerge
[This is the headline over an article by John Ashton in today's edition of The Herald. It reads in part:]
So, it seems Gaddafi is, at last, vanquished. The welcome exit of Libya’s dictator could have some unwelcome consequences, not least for Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi whom I, and many others, believe was wrongly convicted.
President Barack Obama has reportedly asked Libya’s rebel leaders to capture the terminally ill 59 year-old so he can be sent to face justice in the US. This would be as illegal as it would be inhumane – not that legality has been a pre-condition of recent US foreign policy.
It’s far more likely that he will become the victim of disinformation.
It will not be the first time. On February 22, 2011, I posed the following rhetorical question on Professor Robert Black’s Lockerbie blog: “What’s the betting that, sometime in the next few weeks, the following happens: 1) In the burned-out ruins of a Libyan Government building, someone finds definitive documentary ‘proof’ that Libya and Megrahi were responsible for Lockerbie and/or 2) A Libyan official reveals ‘we did it’.”
I pointed out that the case against Megrahi was now so thin that only such concoctions could save it.
Within 24 hours the country’s newly defected Justice Minister, and now leader of the National Transitional Council, Mustafa Abdel Jalil, told a Swedish newspaper: “I have proof that Gaddafi gave the order on Lockerbie.”
Gaddafi may be an appalling tyrant, but there is no more reliable evidence that he was behind the Lockerbie attack than there was that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11.
Mr Jalil knew the claim would help distance him from his old boss and win him friends in Washington and Whitehall.
His knowledge that the prosecution case was beyond repair probably accounts for why he later told a newspaper that Megrahi “was not the man who carried out the planning and execution of the bombing”, but was “nevertheless involved in facilitating things for those who did”.
Any credibility that this gained him was, however, destroyed by his claim that Megrahi had blackmailed Gaddafi into securing his release from prison by threatening to expose the dictator’s role in the bombing, and had “vowed to exact revenge’” unless his demand was met.
The notion that Megrahi held any power over Gaddafi was ludicrous: he was reliant on Gaddafi’s Government to fund his appeal and to shelter his family in Tripoli, so would have been insane to attempt blackmail.
Other senior defectors’ “Gaddafi did it” claims are equally dubious.
One of them, Abdel Fattah Younes, was so distrusted by some of the rebels that they killed him, while another, the ex-ambassador to the UN, Abdul Rahman al Shalgham, has previously denied Libya’s guilt.
So too has the mysterious Moussa Koussa, Gaddafi’s supposed terrorist godfather, who was reported to have helped the Scottish police with their inquiries.
If the official account of Lockerbie is true, this was like Radovan Karadzic helping the Srebrenica massacre investigation.
But it’s almost certainly not true, which is probably why Mr Koussa remains free.
And it’s why we should expect more dodgy evidence to emerge from newly liberated Tripoli, in particular, stories that patch over the gaping holes in the prosecution case.
I once said to Megrahi that I expected to read that he had made a deathbed confession. I was joking, but I’m not now.
*John Ashton is the author of Megrahi: You are my Jury, which will be published later this year.
[An editorial in the same newspaper reads in part:]
It will be a Herculean task to ensure that victory is not followed by revenge and reprisal but, if anarchy and mayhem are to be avoided in a post-Gaddafi Libya, justice must be seen to be done. Such even-handedness should also be applied to the internationally sensitive position of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi, the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing by a Scottish court convened in the Netherlands. Far too many questions about that terrorist atrocity remain unanswered.
However, Megrahi was released from custody in Scotland by the Scottish Justice Minister and allowed to return to Libya on compassionate grounds because he was suffering from terminal cancer and was expected to live for only a few months. Since that was two years ago and Megrahi remains alive, the anger that accompanied his release in some quarters has intensified. That is understandable, particularly on the part of relatives of those who were killed. Nevertheless, the calls for him to be extradited for imprisonment or retrial in the US should be resisted by Western powers who preach the importance of transparent application of the law.
Yesterday’s statement from David Cameron’s office that the Prime Minister believes Megrahi “should be behind bars” amounted at best to muddying the waters. Lest Mr Cameron needs reminded, he has no jurisdiction over a prisoner released under the Scottish justice system. What purpose would be served by sending him back to Scotland now that the Scottish Government is planning legislation to enable the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission to publish the six grounds for a possible miscarriage of justice?
The priority should be to establish the truth about who was responsible for plotting and carrying out the attack on PanAm 103 and why. The best hope lies with the capture and questioning of Col Gaddafi. However unlikely he is to reveal the murky secrets of his four-decade dictatorship, he should nevertheless answer for his actions to the ICC. It will be the test of Libya’s National Transitional Council (NTC) and the rebel forces to deliver the despot to international justice.
[In an article in today's edition of The Independent, Robert Fisk writes: "How soon will the world be knocking on the door of the supposedly dying Abdulbaset al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber – if indeed he was guilty of the crime – to discover the secret of his longevity and of his activities within Gaddafi's secret service? How soon will the liberators of Tripoli get their hands on the files of Gaddafi's oil and foreign ministries to find out the secrets of the Blair-Sarkozy-Berlusconi love affairs with the author of the Green Book? Or will British and French spooks beat them to it?"
This blog has today been accessed from within Libya, for the first time in several weeks.]
So, it seems Gaddafi is, at last, vanquished. The welcome exit of Libya’s dictator could have some unwelcome consequences, not least for Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi whom I, and many others, believe was wrongly convicted.
President Barack Obama has reportedly asked Libya’s rebel leaders to capture the terminally ill 59 year-old so he can be sent to face justice in the US. This would be as illegal as it would be inhumane – not that legality has been a pre-condition of recent US foreign policy.
It’s far more likely that he will become the victim of disinformation.
It will not be the first time. On February 22, 2011, I posed the following rhetorical question on Professor Robert Black’s Lockerbie blog: “What’s the betting that, sometime in the next few weeks, the following happens: 1) In the burned-out ruins of a Libyan Government building, someone finds definitive documentary ‘proof’ that Libya and Megrahi were responsible for Lockerbie and/or 2) A Libyan official reveals ‘we did it’.”
I pointed out that the case against Megrahi was now so thin that only such concoctions could save it.
Within 24 hours the country’s newly defected Justice Minister, and now leader of the National Transitional Council, Mustafa Abdel Jalil, told a Swedish newspaper: “I have proof that Gaddafi gave the order on Lockerbie.”
Gaddafi may be an appalling tyrant, but there is no more reliable evidence that he was behind the Lockerbie attack than there was that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11.
Mr Jalil knew the claim would help distance him from his old boss and win him friends in Washington and Whitehall.
His knowledge that the prosecution case was beyond repair probably accounts for why he later told a newspaper that Megrahi “was not the man who carried out the planning and execution of the bombing”, but was “nevertheless involved in facilitating things for those who did”.
Any credibility that this gained him was, however, destroyed by his claim that Megrahi had blackmailed Gaddafi into securing his release from prison by threatening to expose the dictator’s role in the bombing, and had “vowed to exact revenge’” unless his demand was met.
The notion that Megrahi held any power over Gaddafi was ludicrous: he was reliant on Gaddafi’s Government to fund his appeal and to shelter his family in Tripoli, so would have been insane to attempt blackmail.
Other senior defectors’ “Gaddafi did it” claims are equally dubious.
One of them, Abdel Fattah Younes, was so distrusted by some of the rebels that they killed him, while another, the ex-ambassador to the UN, Abdul Rahman al Shalgham, has previously denied Libya’s guilt.
So too has the mysterious Moussa Koussa, Gaddafi’s supposed terrorist godfather, who was reported to have helped the Scottish police with their inquiries.
If the official account of Lockerbie is true, this was like Radovan Karadzic helping the Srebrenica massacre investigation.
But it’s almost certainly not true, which is probably why Mr Koussa remains free.
And it’s why we should expect more dodgy evidence to emerge from newly liberated Tripoli, in particular, stories that patch over the gaping holes in the prosecution case.
I once said to Megrahi that I expected to read that he had made a deathbed confession. I was joking, but I’m not now.
*John Ashton is the author of Megrahi: You are my Jury, which will be published later this year.
[An editorial in the same newspaper reads in part:]
It will be a Herculean task to ensure that victory is not followed by revenge and reprisal but, if anarchy and mayhem are to be avoided in a post-Gaddafi Libya, justice must be seen to be done. Such even-handedness should also be applied to the internationally sensitive position of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi, the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing by a Scottish court convened in the Netherlands. Far too many questions about that terrorist atrocity remain unanswered.
However, Megrahi was released from custody in Scotland by the Scottish Justice Minister and allowed to return to Libya on compassionate grounds because he was suffering from terminal cancer and was expected to live for only a few months. Since that was two years ago and Megrahi remains alive, the anger that accompanied his release in some quarters has intensified. That is understandable, particularly on the part of relatives of those who were killed. Nevertheless, the calls for him to be extradited for imprisonment or retrial in the US should be resisted by Western powers who preach the importance of transparent application of the law.
Yesterday’s statement from David Cameron’s office that the Prime Minister believes Megrahi “should be behind bars” amounted at best to muddying the waters. Lest Mr Cameron needs reminded, he has no jurisdiction over a prisoner released under the Scottish justice system. What purpose would be served by sending him back to Scotland now that the Scottish Government is planning legislation to enable the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission to publish the six grounds for a possible miscarriage of justice?
The priority should be to establish the truth about who was responsible for plotting and carrying out the attack on PanAm 103 and why. The best hope lies with the capture and questioning of Col Gaddafi. However unlikely he is to reveal the murky secrets of his four-decade dictatorship, he should nevertheless answer for his actions to the ICC. It will be the test of Libya’s National Transitional Council (NTC) and the rebel forces to deliver the despot to international justice.
[In an article in today's edition of The Independent, Robert Fisk writes: "How soon will the world be knocking on the door of the supposedly dying Abdulbaset al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber – if indeed he was guilty of the crime – to discover the secret of his longevity and of his activities within Gaddafi's secret service? How soon will the liberators of Tripoli get their hands on the files of Gaddafi's oil and foreign ministries to find out the secrets of the Blair-Sarkozy-Berlusconi love affairs with the author of the Green Book? Or will British and French spooks beat them to it?"
This blog has today been accessed from within Libya, for the first time in several weeks.]
Prosecutors want to quiz leader over links to Lockerbie atrocity
[This is the headline over a report in today's edition of The Herald. It reads in part:]
Scottish prosecutors will interview Muammar Gaddafi over his links to the Lockerbie bombing if the embattled Libyan leader is taken alive by the rebels forces.
The Crown Office said last night it intends to pursue all lines of inquiry as the investigation into the terrorist atrocity, which killed 270 people, remains live and ongoing. (...)
Officers from Dumfries and Galloway Police have already interviewed Moussa Koussa, the former head of Gaddafi’s secret service, who defected to Europe in April this year.
The details of those talks remain secret, but investigators believe Gaddafi – the absolute ruler of Libya for more than four decades – has vital knowledge of the operation which led to a bomb being smuggled on to the Pan Am plane, as well as the motive behind the attack.
Last night, a spokesman for the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service said: “Given the current events in Libya the Crown stands ready to investigate any new leads.
“The Crown will continue to pursue lines of inquiry that become available.
“The trial court accepted that Mr Megrahi acted in furtherance of the Libyan intelligence services in an act of state sponsored terrorism and did not act alone.
“Lockerbie remains an open case concerning the involvement of others with Megrahi in the murder of 270 people.
“As the investigation remains live, and in order to preserve the integrity of that investigation, it would not be appropriate to offer further comment.” (...)
Should [Gaddafi] be taken into custody, the way would be open for Scottish detectives to interview him over his part in the Lockerbie bombing, which remains the worst terrorist attack on British soil. (...)
The Gaddafi regime previously accepted responsibility for the bombing, and allowed the former secret service agent to be prosecuted for the attack. [RB: The Libyan Government's "responsibility letter" can be read here.]
Edinburgh University law professor Robert Black, who was key to setting up Megrahi’s trial at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands, told The Herald that it is vital to find out what Gaddafi knows about the Lockerbie bombing as his testimony could be key to unravelling the facts behind the case.
He said: “By all means they should speak to him if it finally allows some evidence about what happened to come out.
“The Scottish prosecution service know as well as anybody that they were extremely lucky to get a conviction in the first place, so to actually have some evidence as to who is responsible for Lockerbie would be nice.
“It’s my position that we haven’t had anything approaching that.”
[What follows is an excerpt from today's edition of the Daily Record:]
David Cameron wants the Lockerbie bomber tracked down and put back behind bars.
The Prime Minister contacted the rebel leadership and told them Abdelbaset al-Megrahi should now be locked up.
Megrahi was jailed in 2001 for his role in the bombing of PanAm flight 103 over Lockerbie in 1988, which killed 270 people.
He was freed on compassionate grounds by justice secretary Kenny MacAskill two years ago, after he was diagnosed with terminal prostate cancer.
Despite a threemonth life expectancy at the time of his release, Megrahi continues to live in Tripoli with his family.
Cameron's spokeswoman made it clear he wants to see Megrahi rounded up along with Gaddafi.
She said: "The Prime Minister regrets the continuing anguish, pain and suffering that the release of Megrahi has caused and his personal view is that he thinks it was wrong that he was released."
[A similar report appears in The Scotsman and another in The Herald.
As I commented yesterday on the subject of an intervention by a backbench Tory MP, "It is interesting that law-makers, even such insignificant ones as Mr Halfon, can be so cavalier about legality. Is this perhaps a symptom of society's general moral collapse, about which there has been so much speculation since the recent riots in English cities?"]
Scottish prosecutors will interview Muammar Gaddafi over his links to the Lockerbie bombing if the embattled Libyan leader is taken alive by the rebels forces.
The Crown Office said last night it intends to pursue all lines of inquiry as the investigation into the terrorist atrocity, which killed 270 people, remains live and ongoing. (...)
Officers from Dumfries and Galloway Police have already interviewed Moussa Koussa, the former head of Gaddafi’s secret service, who defected to Europe in April this year.
The details of those talks remain secret, but investigators believe Gaddafi – the absolute ruler of Libya for more than four decades – has vital knowledge of the operation which led to a bomb being smuggled on to the Pan Am plane, as well as the motive behind the attack.
Last night, a spokesman for the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service said: “Given the current events in Libya the Crown stands ready to investigate any new leads.
“The Crown will continue to pursue lines of inquiry that become available.
“The trial court accepted that Mr Megrahi acted in furtherance of the Libyan intelligence services in an act of state sponsored terrorism and did not act alone.
“Lockerbie remains an open case concerning the involvement of others with Megrahi in the murder of 270 people.
“As the investigation remains live, and in order to preserve the integrity of that investigation, it would not be appropriate to offer further comment.” (...)
Should [Gaddafi] be taken into custody, the way would be open for Scottish detectives to interview him over his part in the Lockerbie bombing, which remains the worst terrorist attack on British soil. (...)
The Gaddafi regime previously accepted responsibility for the bombing, and allowed the former secret service agent to be prosecuted for the attack. [RB: The Libyan Government's "responsibility letter" can be read here.]
Edinburgh University law professor Robert Black, who was key to setting up Megrahi’s trial at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands, told The Herald that it is vital to find out what Gaddafi knows about the Lockerbie bombing as his testimony could be key to unravelling the facts behind the case.
He said: “By all means they should speak to him if it finally allows some evidence about what happened to come out.
“The Scottish prosecution service know as well as anybody that they were extremely lucky to get a conviction in the first place, so to actually have some evidence as to who is responsible for Lockerbie would be nice.
“It’s my position that we haven’t had anything approaching that.”
[What follows is an excerpt from today's edition of the Daily Record:]
David Cameron wants the Lockerbie bomber tracked down and put back behind bars.
The Prime Minister contacted the rebel leadership and told them Abdelbaset al-Megrahi should now be locked up.
Megrahi was jailed in 2001 for his role in the bombing of PanAm flight 103 over Lockerbie in 1988, which killed 270 people.
He was freed on compassionate grounds by justice secretary Kenny MacAskill two years ago, after he was diagnosed with terminal prostate cancer.
Despite a threemonth life expectancy at the time of his release, Megrahi continues to live in Tripoli with his family.
Cameron's spokeswoman made it clear he wants to see Megrahi rounded up along with Gaddafi.
She said: "The Prime Minister regrets the continuing anguish, pain and suffering that the release of Megrahi has caused and his personal view is that he thinks it was wrong that he was released."
[A similar report appears in The Scotsman and another in The Herald.
As I commented yesterday on the subject of an intervention by a backbench Tory MP, "It is interesting that law-makers, even such insignificant ones as Mr Halfon, can be so cavalier about legality. Is this perhaps a symptom of society's general moral collapse, about which there has been so much speculation since the recent riots in English cities?"]
Monday, 22 August 2011
Calls rise to send Lockerbie bomber back to prison
[This is the headline over a recent post on the Washington Wire blog of The Wall Street Journal. It reads as follows:]
The shape of a post-Gadhafi Libya is only just emerging, but already there are bipartisan calls in the US for the Transitional National Council to send the Lockerbie bomber, Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, back to prison.
Sen Charles Schumer (D, NY) issued a statement Monday saying such action by the TNC, which the Obama administration recognizes as Libya’s legitimate governing authority, would “send a strong statement to the world.”
Former Massachusetts Gov Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential front-runner, issued a similar statement calling on the TNC “to arrest and extradite” Mr al-Megrahi “so justice can finally be done.”
A White House spokesman had no comment Monday on President Barack Obama’s position.
Mr al-Megrahi was convicted in connection with 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, which killed 270 people, many of them Americans. He was released in 2009 after being diagnosed with prostate cancer and given three months to live. After arriving in Libya he was given a hero’s welcome by the Gadhafi government that drew outcry around the world.
In recent months, Mr al-Megrahi appeared on Libyan state TV attending a pro-Gadhafi rally. His apparent good health and the collapse of the Gadhafi regime has led to calls that he be returned to prison.
“Two years after an incorrect medical prognosis prompted his release from prison, the Lockerbie bomber is not only alive and well, but seems to have even outlived the Qaddafi regime,” Mr Schumer said in his statement
“As a transitional government takes hold in Libya, it should seek to undo the injustice of al-Megrahi’s release by returning him to the jail cell where he belongs,” he added. “A new Libya can send a strong statement to the world by declaring it will no longer be a haven for this convicted terrorist.”
Mr Romney said the arrest and extrication of Mr al-Megrahi should be the TNC’s first step toward “a representative form of government that supports freedom, human rights, and the rule of law.”
[A similar report headlined Gadhafi's downfall revives bitter dispute over Lockerbie bomber appears on the CNN website.
For a further flavour of what Americans are being treated to from their media, have a look at this transcript of an interview by a Fox News commentator with former US ambassador to the UN, John Bolton.]
The shape of a post-Gadhafi Libya is only just emerging, but already there are bipartisan calls in the US for the Transitional National Council to send the Lockerbie bomber, Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, back to prison.
Sen Charles Schumer (D, NY) issued a statement Monday saying such action by the TNC, which the Obama administration recognizes as Libya’s legitimate governing authority, would “send a strong statement to the world.”
Former Massachusetts Gov Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential front-runner, issued a similar statement calling on the TNC “to arrest and extradite” Mr al-Megrahi “so justice can finally be done.”
A White House spokesman had no comment Monday on President Barack Obama’s position.
Mr al-Megrahi was convicted in connection with 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, which killed 270 people, many of them Americans. He was released in 2009 after being diagnosed with prostate cancer and given three months to live. After arriving in Libya he was given a hero’s welcome by the Gadhafi government that drew outcry around the world.
In recent months, Mr al-Megrahi appeared on Libyan state TV attending a pro-Gadhafi rally. His apparent good health and the collapse of the Gadhafi regime has led to calls that he be returned to prison.
“Two years after an incorrect medical prognosis prompted his release from prison, the Lockerbie bomber is not only alive and well, but seems to have even outlived the Qaddafi regime,” Mr Schumer said in his statement
“As a transitional government takes hold in Libya, it should seek to undo the injustice of al-Megrahi’s release by returning him to the jail cell where he belongs,” he added. “A new Libya can send a strong statement to the world by declaring it will no longer be a haven for this convicted terrorist.”
Mr Romney said the arrest and extrication of Mr al-Megrahi should be the TNC’s first step toward “a representative form of government that supports freedom, human rights, and the rule of law.”
[A similar report headlined Gadhafi's downfall revives bitter dispute over Lockerbie bomber appears on the CNN website.
For a further flavour of what Americans are being treated to from their media, have a look at this transcript of an interview by a Fox News commentator with former US ambassador to the UN, John Bolton.]
MacAskill challenged over miscarriage report "conundrum"
[This is the headline over a report published today on the website of Scottish lawyers' magazine The Firm. It reads in part:]
The Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill has been asked by the secretary of the Justice for Megrahi Committee to explain why the Scottish Government has pledged to introduce an Act of Parliament to force the release of the crucial report from the Scottish Criminal Review Cases Commisison into Abdelbaset Al Megrahi's case, rather than a simple statutory instrument.
The SCCRC report concluded that a miscarriage of justice may have occured, and narrates the reasons in extensive detail explaining how it reached this conclusion.
The Justice For Megrahi secretary Robert Forrester contends that a simpler statutory instrument could facilitate the publication of the secret document (...)
"My understanding is that this process is not only very cumbersome and time consuming but also, on the face of it, appears to be unnecessary since the consent requirements blocking the document's publication are covered by a statutory instrument imposed in 2009 by means of secondary legislation," Forrester says. (...)
The letter was sent to MacAskill on 4 August and has not yet received a response.
Earlier this year Christine Grahame MSP asked a similar query, to which Mr MacAskill said: "Primary legislation is needed for full flexibility to ensure that an appropriate legislative framework is put in place.
"The proposed legislation will facilitate, as far as possible, the release of a statement of reasons by the Commission in circumstances where an appeal has been abandoned. In doing so, it will also maintain appropriate provision for such matters as data protection, the convention rights of individuals and international obligations attaching to information provided by foreign authorities."
Professor Black said those ends could "equally well be achieved in an appropriately drafted statutory instrument", and queried the legal basis for MacAskill's response.
The JFM Secretary has asked Mr MacAskill to explain the "conundrum".
"Why is it that the government is planning to pursue a programme for the introduction of primary legislation to remove the consent requirements that are impeding publication of the SCCRC's statement of reasons relating to Mr al-Megrahi's appeal?" Forrester's email asks.
"Obviously we may be missing something in the detail of what is required regarding this problem and we would be most appreciative if you could shed some light on the situation.
"Thank you again for your letter and we look forward to your response to the above puzzle."
The Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill has been asked by the secretary of the Justice for Megrahi Committee to explain why the Scottish Government has pledged to introduce an Act of Parliament to force the release of the crucial report from the Scottish Criminal Review Cases Commisison into Abdelbaset Al Megrahi's case, rather than a simple statutory instrument.
The SCCRC report concluded that a miscarriage of justice may have occured, and narrates the reasons in extensive detail explaining how it reached this conclusion.
The Justice For Megrahi secretary Robert Forrester contends that a simpler statutory instrument could facilitate the publication of the secret document (...)
"My understanding is that this process is not only very cumbersome and time consuming but also, on the face of it, appears to be unnecessary since the consent requirements blocking the document's publication are covered by a statutory instrument imposed in 2009 by means of secondary legislation," Forrester says. (...)
The letter was sent to MacAskill on 4 August and has not yet received a response.
Earlier this year Christine Grahame MSP asked a similar query, to which Mr MacAskill said: "Primary legislation is needed for full flexibility to ensure that an appropriate legislative framework is put in place.
"The proposed legislation will facilitate, as far as possible, the release of a statement of reasons by the Commission in circumstances where an appeal has been abandoned. In doing so, it will also maintain appropriate provision for such matters as data protection, the convention rights of individuals and international obligations attaching to information provided by foreign authorities."
Professor Black said those ends could "equally well be achieved in an appropriately drafted statutory instrument", and queried the legal basis for MacAskill's response.
The JFM Secretary has asked Mr MacAskill to explain the "conundrum".
"Why is it that the government is planning to pursue a programme for the introduction of primary legislation to remove the consent requirements that are impeding publication of the SCCRC's statement of reasons relating to Mr al-Megrahi's appeal?" Forrester's email asks.
"Obviously we may be missing something in the detail of what is required regarding this problem and we would be most appreciative if you could shed some light on the situation.
"Thank you again for your letter and we look forward to your response to the above puzzle."
Council concern over Lockerbie bomber following Libya rebel uprising
[This is the headline over a report published this afternoon on the STV News website. It reads in part:]
A Scottish council that has been in contact with the Lockerbie bomber since his release from prison has confirmed it will try to speak to him “imminently” following this weekend’s developments in the Libyan war.
Staff at East Renfrewshire Council communicate with Abdelbaset al-Megrahi as part of the conditions of his release from Greenock Prison. While he was in jail, members of his family lived in the East Renfrewshire area, so the responsibility of monitoring Megrahi’s adherence to his bail conditions fell to the local authority when he returned to his homeland.
A spokesman from East Renfrewshire Council has confirmed a report that appeared in The Guardian, which states the council urgently want to speak to the convicted terrorist after rebel forces reportedly took control of Libya’s capital, Tripoli, and are close to overthrowing the country’s under fire leader Muammar Gaddafi.
He said: "Right up to this point, there has been no breach of the release conditions and nothing up to now which gives us cause for concern. The conditions in the country put us into the position where we will need to contact him imminently to make sure we can still maintain that contact."
A spokesman from the council confirmed to STV News that contact is only made with Megrahi when council justice teams need to speak to him. The spokesman added disruption to Libya’s government since the rebel uprising earlier this year has largely been irrelevant to this arrangement, as contact is made directly with Megrahi and not via any governmental bodies. (...)
Meanwhile, an English MP has said Megrahi should be brought back to the UK if Gaddafi’s regime falls. Conservative Robert Halfon said extradition to the US should also be considered so the convicted bomber does not continue a "life of luxury" in Libya.
Mr Halfon said: "The release of al-Megrahi marked the low point of Britain's appeasement of Gaddafi. We should make every effort to bring him back so he can spend the rest of his time in prison where he belongs.
"Or he should spend the rest of his life in a Libyan jail, or be extradited to the US. We should do everything in our power to make sure he is in jail, rather than living a life of luxury."
[It is interesting that law-makers, even such insignificant ones as Mr Halfon, can be so cavalier about legality. Is this perhaps a symptom of society's general moral collapse, about which there has been so much speculation since the recent riots in English cities?
A report just published in the UK edition of the Huffington Post contains the following:]
A representative for East Renfrewshire Council said that whilst they were monitoring Abdel Baset Ali Al-Megrahi to ensure he kept to the terms of his release, they were under “no obligation” to protect him.
“Up to this point, all of the contact we expected to have, we have had. We have received monthly medical reports. All of our contact is up to date, as of Friday," said the spokesman.
But he said the council was currently trying to get in contact with Al-Megrahi: “Up until Friday, I would have said all of the contact is entirely up to date. The position at the moment is because of the situation in the city we will be looking to make contact with him sooner than we’d expected to, and the reason for that is to make sure that we can continue to make the contact we’ve had over the last two years.”
The spokesperson added that any breaches would be referred back to the parole board and the Scottish justice department, but stressed he would need permission to leave Libya.
“Our role is, because he’s been released on compassionate grounds, he’s released under certain conditions. We need to monitor him under those conditions, things like where he lives."
Scottish lawyer Derek Livingston said the change in government did not matter in “legal terms” but the Libyan transitional council may attempt to send Al-Megrahi back: “It doesn’t matter one iota that there’s been a change of government from a legal point of view. It might matter from a political perspective. In theory the Libyans could try and send him back.”
A Scottish Government Spokesperson did not comment on calls from an MP to send Al-Megrahi back to Britain, only saying: "Al-Megrahi was sent back to Libya because he is dying of terminal cancer, he is being monitored by East Renfrewshire Council according to the terms of his release licence which he has not breached."
A Scottish council that has been in contact with the Lockerbie bomber since his release from prison has confirmed it will try to speak to him “imminently” following this weekend’s developments in the Libyan war.
Staff at East Renfrewshire Council communicate with Abdelbaset al-Megrahi as part of the conditions of his release from Greenock Prison. While he was in jail, members of his family lived in the East Renfrewshire area, so the responsibility of monitoring Megrahi’s adherence to his bail conditions fell to the local authority when he returned to his homeland.
A spokesman from East Renfrewshire Council has confirmed a report that appeared in The Guardian, which states the council urgently want to speak to the convicted terrorist after rebel forces reportedly took control of Libya’s capital, Tripoli, and are close to overthrowing the country’s under fire leader Muammar Gaddafi.
He said: "Right up to this point, there has been no breach of the release conditions and nothing up to now which gives us cause for concern. The conditions in the country put us into the position where we will need to contact him imminently to make sure we can still maintain that contact."
A spokesman from the council confirmed to STV News that contact is only made with Megrahi when council justice teams need to speak to him. The spokesman added disruption to Libya’s government since the rebel uprising earlier this year has largely been irrelevant to this arrangement, as contact is made directly with Megrahi and not via any governmental bodies. (...)
Meanwhile, an English MP has said Megrahi should be brought back to the UK if Gaddafi’s regime falls. Conservative Robert Halfon said extradition to the US should also be considered so the convicted bomber does not continue a "life of luxury" in Libya.
Mr Halfon said: "The release of al-Megrahi marked the low point of Britain's appeasement of Gaddafi. We should make every effort to bring him back so he can spend the rest of his time in prison where he belongs.
"Or he should spend the rest of his life in a Libyan jail, or be extradited to the US. We should do everything in our power to make sure he is in jail, rather than living a life of luxury."
[It is interesting that law-makers, even such insignificant ones as Mr Halfon, can be so cavalier about legality. Is this perhaps a symptom of society's general moral collapse, about which there has been so much speculation since the recent riots in English cities?
A report just published in the UK edition of the Huffington Post contains the following:]
A representative for East Renfrewshire Council said that whilst they were monitoring Abdel Baset Ali Al-Megrahi to ensure he kept to the terms of his release, they were under “no obligation” to protect him.
“Up to this point, all of the contact we expected to have, we have had. We have received monthly medical reports. All of our contact is up to date, as of Friday," said the spokesman.
But he said the council was currently trying to get in contact with Al-Megrahi: “Up until Friday, I would have said all of the contact is entirely up to date. The position at the moment is because of the situation in the city we will be looking to make contact with him sooner than we’d expected to, and the reason for that is to make sure that we can continue to make the contact we’ve had over the last two years.”
The spokesperson added that any breaches would be referred back to the parole board and the Scottish justice department, but stressed he would need permission to leave Libya.
“Our role is, because he’s been released on compassionate grounds, he’s released under certain conditions. We need to monitor him under those conditions, things like where he lives."
Scottish lawyer Derek Livingston said the change in government did not matter in “legal terms” but the Libyan transitional council may attempt to send Al-Megrahi back: “It doesn’t matter one iota that there’s been a change of government from a legal point of view. It might matter from a political perspective. In theory the Libyans could try and send him back.”
A Scottish Government Spokesperson did not comment on calls from an MP to send Al-Megrahi back to Britain, only saying: "Al-Megrahi was sent back to Libya because he is dying of terminal cancer, he is being monitored by East Renfrewshire Council according to the terms of his release licence which he has not breached."
Rifkind on Libya and Megrahi
[What follows is an excerpt from an article by Sir Malcolm Rifkind QC MP, a former Tory Secretary of State for Scotland and Foreign Secretary, in today's edition of the London Evening Standard:]
It is not just Libyans who are entitled to celebrate Gaddafi's demise. The United Kingdom has a special interest in seeing the end of this despot. The destruction of PanAm flight 103 above Lockerbie in 1988 was the single greatest terrorist incident in Britain's history.
As Secretary of State for Scotland at the time, I had to visit Lockerbie hours after the explosion.
I toured the town with Margaret Thatcher and witnessed not only the debris from the stricken aircraft but the destruction and loss of life on the ground too.
The decision of the SNP government in Edinburgh to free convicted Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi two years ago was unforgivably foolish, as were Tony Blair's naïve efforts to treat Gaddafi as a man with whom we could do business. He has remained, to the end, a vicious and cruel tyrant.
It is a relief that the present Government has been far more robust in its approach to Libya. David Cameron, in particular, is entitled to credit for taking the lead in calling for international action and ensuring that the RAF has been one of the lead participants in the successful Nato action.
It is not just Libyans who are entitled to celebrate Gaddafi's demise. The United Kingdom has a special interest in seeing the end of this despot. The destruction of PanAm flight 103 above Lockerbie in 1988 was the single greatest terrorist incident in Britain's history.
As Secretary of State for Scotland at the time, I had to visit Lockerbie hours after the explosion.
I toured the town with Margaret Thatcher and witnessed not only the debris from the stricken aircraft but the destruction and loss of life on the ground too.
The decision of the SNP government in Edinburgh to free convicted Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi two years ago was unforgivably foolish, as were Tony Blair's naïve efforts to treat Gaddafi as a man with whom we could do business. He has remained, to the end, a vicious and cruel tyrant.
It is a relief that the present Government has been far more robust in its approach to Libya. David Cameron, in particular, is entitled to credit for taking the lead in calling for international action and ensuring that the RAF has been one of the lead participants in the successful Nato action.
The fall of Gaddafi...
...and the assassination of Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi
[This is the headline over an article by Kevin Williamson posted today on the Bella Caledonia website. It reads as follows:]
As opposition forces move into Tripoli the final chapter of the Gaddafi regime seems about to be writ large, and in blood. This time there seems little chance of yet another miraculous reprieve for The Colonel, his parasitical family, his henchmen and assorted hangers-on.
Future narratives are limited as this stage. The CIA will have been working hard behind the scenes to smooth the transition towards democracy; consorting with and advising rebel commanders, and identifying those sympathetic to US strategic objectives.
A new “democratic” “populist” “leader” may soon emerge, as if from nowhere. A US-compliant provisional government could soon take the place of the old regime and elections will be planned, some distance down the line. Once the US, of course, has had a chance to vet all the suitable candidates.
If the Libyan people think that their country’s vast oil reserves will end up in the hands of the people, working for the common good, then they are in for another great betrayal. Compliant tribal warlords turned politicians in suits will ensure that global oil corporations will assume control. It’ll be business as usual.
Then there is the troublesome figure of Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi, the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, who now lives under the protection of the Gaddafi regime. What will the CIA do with him? Do they return him to a Scottish prison? And risk a resumption of his appeal procedure – a legal process which may clear him of the bombing and stir up an international hornet’s nest? Implement a rendition process to put al-Megrahi in the hands of the same organisations who may have framed him in the first place? Or will they take the tried-and-tested CIA option and simply put a bullet in his head. Case closed. Time to move on.
Let’s put it this way. If al-Megrahi is found dead at any point in the next few weeks – irrespective of the convoluted official explanations of how he died – then we can take it as read that a) it was a premeditated strike by agents acting on behalf of the CIA, b) he was assassinated for the same reasons he was released with such haste: because he was innocent of the Lockerbie bombing and a legal appeal had to be stopped at all costs, c) the Scottish legal system was complicit in this framing, and d) those responsible for framing him, like those who actually carried out the worst mass murder in Scottish history, remain at liberty.
If al-Megrahi is not assassinated then let him return to Scotland – under house arrest if need be – and resume his judicial appeal. The SCCRC have collated the evidence that formed the basis of al-Megrahi’s appeal. It’s about time it saw the light of day. Irrespective of the repercussions, the Lockerbie victims’ families need justice and resolution. That will never happen if al-Megrahi is assassinated by the CIA or if a rendition process places him into the hands of those who were instrumental in the framing.
[This is the headline over an article by Kevin Williamson posted today on the Bella Caledonia website. It reads as follows:]
As opposition forces move into Tripoli the final chapter of the Gaddafi regime seems about to be writ large, and in blood. This time there seems little chance of yet another miraculous reprieve for The Colonel, his parasitical family, his henchmen and assorted hangers-on.
Future narratives are limited as this stage. The CIA will have been working hard behind the scenes to smooth the transition towards democracy; consorting with and advising rebel commanders, and identifying those sympathetic to US strategic objectives.
A new “democratic” “populist” “leader” may soon emerge, as if from nowhere. A US-compliant provisional government could soon take the place of the old regime and elections will be planned, some distance down the line. Once the US, of course, has had a chance to vet all the suitable candidates.
If the Libyan people think that their country’s vast oil reserves will end up in the hands of the people, working for the common good, then they are in for another great betrayal. Compliant tribal warlords turned politicians in suits will ensure that global oil corporations will assume control. It’ll be business as usual.
Then there is the troublesome figure of Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi, the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, who now lives under the protection of the Gaddafi regime. What will the CIA do with him? Do they return him to a Scottish prison? And risk a resumption of his appeal procedure – a legal process which may clear him of the bombing and stir up an international hornet’s nest? Implement a rendition process to put al-Megrahi in the hands of the same organisations who may have framed him in the first place? Or will they take the tried-and-tested CIA option and simply put a bullet in his head. Case closed. Time to move on.
Let’s put it this way. If al-Megrahi is found dead at any point in the next few weeks – irrespective of the convoluted official explanations of how he died – then we can take it as read that a) it was a premeditated strike by agents acting on behalf of the CIA, b) he was assassinated for the same reasons he was released with such haste: because he was innocent of the Lockerbie bombing and a legal appeal had to be stopped at all costs, c) the Scottish legal system was complicit in this framing, and d) those responsible for framing him, like those who actually carried out the worst mass murder in Scottish history, remain at liberty.
If al-Megrahi is not assassinated then let him return to Scotland – under house arrest if need be – and resume his judicial appeal. The SCCRC have collated the evidence that formed the basis of al-Megrahi’s appeal. It’s about time it saw the light of day. Irrespective of the repercussions, the Lockerbie victims’ families need justice and resolution. That will never happen if al-Megrahi is assassinated by the CIA or if a rendition process places him into the hands of those who were instrumental in the framing.
Bring the Lockerbie bomber back to Britain
[This is the headline over an article on The Telegraph website by Nile Gardiner, "conservative commentator, director of the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at The Heritage Foundation, and a former aide to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. He is also a commentator on US and British television and a frequent contributor to the Fox News network". It reads as follows:]
With the impending downfall of Muammar Gaddafi, I imagine the Lockerbie bomber, Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi, is a very nervous man today. Megrahi was released to the Libyan government almost exactly two years ago by Scottish authorities on “compassionate grounds”, supposedly dying of cancer with just a few months to live, and was feted like a hero on his return to Tripoli. He has since staged something resembling a “miraculous” recovery, and is alive and well and expected to survive for several more years. Under Gaddafi’s patronage al-Megrahi has been living a life of luxury in Libya, frequently wheeled out as a ghastly cause célèbre by the old regime, in every effort to cause offence to the US and Britain.
An immediate priority for Downing Street – if a transitional government takes charge – should be to get al-Megrahi on a plane to London, where he should serve the rest of his life sentence. The Lockerbie bomber is one of the biggest mass murderers of modern times, responsible for the killing of 189 Americans and 43 Britons on board PanAm Flight 103, blown up over Lockerbie, Scotland in December 1988, as well as the murder of 38 passengers from 19 other countries. His release by Scottish authorities with the complicity of the Labour government was sickening – and a stain on Britain’s international reputation.
The Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary must press a post-Gaddafi government to arrest Megrahi and have him extradited to the United Kingdom. At the same time, the British government should back a further inquiry into the release of the Lockerbie bomber, drawing on any relevant Libyan government files that may become available, shedding additional light on the whole affair. A price must be paid for the shedding of British and American blood, and the Lockerbie bomber should be back where he belongs – behind bars. And as for “Mad Dog” Gaddafi, the butcher of Tripoli will no doubt get his just desserts from his own people, who have suffered four decades of relentless fear and terror at his murderous hands.
[Well, at least he's not calling for Megrahi's summary execution or rendition to the United States. In Nile Gardiner's book that probably amounts to moderation.
And trust an insignificant, homoeopathy-supporting Tory MP to add his tuppenceworth: Call for Libya's al-Megrahi to be reimprisoned in UK.]
With the impending downfall of Muammar Gaddafi, I imagine the Lockerbie bomber, Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi, is a very nervous man today. Megrahi was released to the Libyan government almost exactly two years ago by Scottish authorities on “compassionate grounds”, supposedly dying of cancer with just a few months to live, and was feted like a hero on his return to Tripoli. He has since staged something resembling a “miraculous” recovery, and is alive and well and expected to survive for several more years. Under Gaddafi’s patronage al-Megrahi has been living a life of luxury in Libya, frequently wheeled out as a ghastly cause célèbre by the old regime, in every effort to cause offence to the US and Britain.
An immediate priority for Downing Street – if a transitional government takes charge – should be to get al-Megrahi on a plane to London, where he should serve the rest of his life sentence. The Lockerbie bomber is one of the biggest mass murderers of modern times, responsible for the killing of 189 Americans and 43 Britons on board PanAm Flight 103, blown up over Lockerbie, Scotland in December 1988, as well as the murder of 38 passengers from 19 other countries. His release by Scottish authorities with the complicity of the Labour government was sickening – and a stain on Britain’s international reputation.
The Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary must press a post-Gaddafi government to arrest Megrahi and have him extradited to the United Kingdom. At the same time, the British government should back a further inquiry into the release of the Lockerbie bomber, drawing on any relevant Libyan government files that may become available, shedding additional light on the whole affair. A price must be paid for the shedding of British and American blood, and the Lockerbie bomber should be back where he belongs – behind bars. And as for “Mad Dog” Gaddafi, the butcher of Tripoli will no doubt get his just desserts from his own people, who have suffered four decades of relentless fear and terror at his murderous hands.
[Well, at least he's not calling for Megrahi's summary execution or rendition to the United States. In Nile Gardiner's book that probably amounts to moderation.
And trust an insignificant, homoeopathy-supporting Tory MP to add his tuppenceworth: Call for Libya's al-Megrahi to be reimprisoned in UK.]
Sunday, 21 August 2011
New report may put us on the road to finally discovering Lockerbie truths
[This is the headline over an editorial in today's edition of the Sunday Herald. It reads as follows:]
The news that the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) report into the conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi for the Lockerbie bombing is to be published is welcome.
The furore surrounding the Scottish Government’s decision to release Megrahi on compassionate grounds, and his refusal to stick to the “agreed” timetable for his death in his home country of Libya, has obscured the central question in this whole sorry story: was Megrahi actually guilty of the crime?
This newspaper has never been convinced that the conviction was sound. We are not alone. Many experts and some of the British families of the victims of the terrorist atrocity share that view.
Advanced reports suggest that the SCCRC also has serious concerns about the conviction.
It would, of course, have been better if Megrahi’s appeal had gone ahead and his conviction had been tested by a court of law. But that avenue is no longer open.
Megrahi is a free man – a fact which in itself infuriated US senators to such an extent that they are demanding he be handed over to America if Libyan leader Gaddafi’s regime collapses – but that does not mean the central question of his guilt or innocence is no longer relevant.
Lockerbie is now at the centre of so many complex conspiracy theories that it would be naive to suggest that the publication of the SCCRC’s report will finally put an end to decades of speculation. Nothing will succeed in doing that.
It will, however, shed light on the reliability or otherwise of some of the evidence put forward at the trial, notably that of chief prosecution witness Tony Gauci, whose testimony was riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions.
It will throw up other questions, and we may never know the answers to some of these.
The most important questions are: first, if Megrahi’s conviction for the bombing is unsound ... who did carry out the atrocity?
Secondly, if the SCCRC was about to question so strongly the court’s original guilty verdict, why did Megrahi withdraw his appeal? There was no legal requirement to do so. The decision to grant him compassionate release was independent of the appeal process.
It is not just the relatives of those who died on that fateful flight who deserve to know the answers. Scotland needs to know if, in this most controversial and public of cases, it can continue to place its faith in the Scottish legal system.
[The same newspaper features an article headlined Secret report casting doubt on Megrahi’s guilt will be published. It reads in part:]
A secret report casting doubt on the conviction of the Lockerbie bomber is to be published under a new law to be unveiled by the Scottish Government next month, when it sets out its legislative programme for Parliament.
The bill, to be formally announced on September 7, will enable the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) to release its 800 pages of findings on Adbel Baset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi, which have remained under lock and key since they were finalised in 2007.
The SCCRC report identified six grounds for believing Megrahi may have suffered a miscarriage of justice when he was prosecuted and tried for the murder of 270 people in the atrocity.
They included doubts over pivotal aspects of the prosecution case against him, and undisclosed payments to a key prosecution witness. (...)
The SNP Government has already tried and failed to make the SCCRC report public through a minor piece of legislation, but not all the parties to the case agreed, blocking its release.
It is understood the new bill will be a weightier measure, allowing the SCCRC to publish any of its reports which relate to cases where a subsequent appeal has been dropped, which includes Megrahi.
Last month the SCCRC’s chair, Jean Couper, said the organisation had “no objections, in principle, to the release of the Statement of Reasons detailing its decision” in the Megrahi case, provided the law allowed it.
The SCCRC report claims the court acted unreasonably when it concluded he had definitely bought the clothes which ended up in the suitcase carrying the airplane bomb.
Tony Gauci, the Maltese shopkeeper who testified he sold Megrahi the clothes, was also found to have been paid a $2 million reward by the US government.
The news that the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) report into the conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi for the Lockerbie bombing is to be published is welcome.
The furore surrounding the Scottish Government’s decision to release Megrahi on compassionate grounds, and his refusal to stick to the “agreed” timetable for his death in his home country of Libya, has obscured the central question in this whole sorry story: was Megrahi actually guilty of the crime?
This newspaper has never been convinced that the conviction was sound. We are not alone. Many experts and some of the British families of the victims of the terrorist atrocity share that view.
Advanced reports suggest that the SCCRC also has serious concerns about the conviction.
It would, of course, have been better if Megrahi’s appeal had gone ahead and his conviction had been tested by a court of law. But that avenue is no longer open.
Megrahi is a free man – a fact which in itself infuriated US senators to such an extent that they are demanding he be handed over to America if Libyan leader Gaddafi’s regime collapses – but that does not mean the central question of his guilt or innocence is no longer relevant.
Lockerbie is now at the centre of so many complex conspiracy theories that it would be naive to suggest that the publication of the SCCRC’s report will finally put an end to decades of speculation. Nothing will succeed in doing that.
It will, however, shed light on the reliability or otherwise of some of the evidence put forward at the trial, notably that of chief prosecution witness Tony Gauci, whose testimony was riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions.
It will throw up other questions, and we may never know the answers to some of these.
The most important questions are: first, if Megrahi’s conviction for the bombing is unsound ... who did carry out the atrocity?
Secondly, if the SCCRC was about to question so strongly the court’s original guilty verdict, why did Megrahi withdraw his appeal? There was no legal requirement to do so. The decision to grant him compassionate release was independent of the appeal process.
It is not just the relatives of those who died on that fateful flight who deserve to know the answers. Scotland needs to know if, in this most controversial and public of cases, it can continue to place its faith in the Scottish legal system.
[The same newspaper features an article headlined Secret report casting doubt on Megrahi’s guilt will be published. It reads in part:]
A secret report casting doubt on the conviction of the Lockerbie bomber is to be published under a new law to be unveiled by the Scottish Government next month, when it sets out its legislative programme for Parliament.
The bill, to be formally announced on September 7, will enable the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) to release its 800 pages of findings on Adbel Baset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi, which have remained under lock and key since they were finalised in 2007.
The SCCRC report identified six grounds for believing Megrahi may have suffered a miscarriage of justice when he was prosecuted and tried for the murder of 270 people in the atrocity.
They included doubts over pivotal aspects of the prosecution case against him, and undisclosed payments to a key prosecution witness. (...)
The SNP Government has already tried and failed to make the SCCRC report public through a minor piece of legislation, but not all the parties to the case agreed, blocking its release.
It is understood the new bill will be a weightier measure, allowing the SCCRC to publish any of its reports which relate to cases where a subsequent appeal has been dropped, which includes Megrahi.
Last month the SCCRC’s chair, Jean Couper, said the organisation had “no objections, in principle, to the release of the Statement of Reasons detailing its decision” in the Megrahi case, provided the law allowed it.
The SCCRC report claims the court acted unreasonably when it concluded he had definitely bought the clothes which ended up in the suitcase carrying the airplane bomb.
Tony Gauci, the Maltese shopkeeper who testified he sold Megrahi the clothes, was also found to have been paid a $2 million reward by the US government.
Al-Megrahi was only Libyan in identity parade
[This is the headline over an article by Paula Murray in today's edition of the Sunday Express. It reads in part:]
The Lockerbie bomber was the only Libyan in the crucial identity parade before his trial in the Netherlands, the Sunday Express can reveal.
Secret documents prepared by Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi’s lawyers show Dutch officials struggled to find volunteers who resembled the terror suspect.
The pool of lookalikes included white Europeans, men who were significantly taller or shorter than Megrahi and one who would have been 14 at the time of the atrocity.
Even so, Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci – the Crown’s key witness who was paid £1.2 million to testify – still struggled to pick out Megrahi.
The revelations cast further doubt on the Libyan’s conviction over the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing, which killed 270 people. in December 1988.
Yesterday, details of a secret report emerged showing that there were seven major flaws in the evidence. (...)
First Minister Alex Salmond and Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, writing in today’s Sunday Express, have defended their decision. [RB: I cannot find an article by Mr MacAskill on the newspaper's website, though a short one appears in the print edition.]
Yesterday, Mr Salmond said the new evidence “could and should have been judged in a court of law” but added that he “did not doubt” Megrahi’s guilt. (...)
A dossier for Megrahi’s appeal – which was dropped days before his release – claim the ID parade in April 1999 “fell short of what was fair”. Gauci, who sold clothing that was later packed in a suitcase with the bomb, said he could not be sure if any of the men were the same individual who had visited his shop a decade earlier.
Eventually, he picked out Megrahi as the one who “looked a little bit like exactly” the purchaser.
The report claims the parade was carried out after “an extraordinary length of time” using “stand-ins” who were not “sufficiently similar”.
It also points out that Megrahi’s photograph had widely published.Police reports from the parade are described as “incomplete and confusing”.
Professor Steven Clark, Professor of Psychology at the University of California, states: “At no time did [Gauci] ever clearly and definitively assert that Mr. Megrahi was the man who came into his store.
“Rather, in each identification procedure, he stated that Mr. Megrahi was ‘similar’ or ‘resembled’ the man.” [RB: Professor Clark's report on the identification evidence relating to Megrahi can be read here.]
Another eyewitness identification expert, Professor Tim Valentine, of Golsmiths University of London, said: “I do have concern of the quality of the identification evidence. I wouldn’t want to be convicted on identification evidence of that quality.” [RB: Professor Valentine's report on the identification evidence relating to Megrahi can be read here.]
Scottish campaigner Iain McKie, a member of the Justice for Megrahi committee, added: “The identification process of Megrahi was totally and utterly flawed and wrong. Yet the conviction rests on that identification. The whole process was rotten.”
[On the Express website Susan Lindauer posted the following comment on this story:]
Megrahi deserves to die a free man. As the primary negotiator w/Libya for the trial, I want to state as forcefully as possible and without equivocation: the CIA started talks for the trial with full knowledge of Megrahi's innocence. Unhappily, we recognized the US and Britain were so obsessed with Libya's guilt. It was decided that politicians and family members could not accept the truth of Megrahi's innocence, until they saw the (lack of) evidence on the table. There would have to be a trial.
However everyone expected an immediate acquittal. The CIA stood alert in the wings, ready to reconfigure the attack and arrest the real culprits. So ironically, the Lockerbie families would have achieved real justice 10 years ago, if only the Courts had behaved honorably in acknowledging Megrahi's innocence in the first place. It was obvious to anyone who examined the case.
[A comment from Susan Lindauer on an earlier Express story can be read here.]
The Lockerbie bomber was the only Libyan in the crucial identity parade before his trial in the Netherlands, the Sunday Express can reveal.
Secret documents prepared by Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi’s lawyers show Dutch officials struggled to find volunteers who resembled the terror suspect.
The pool of lookalikes included white Europeans, men who were significantly taller or shorter than Megrahi and one who would have been 14 at the time of the atrocity.
Even so, Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci – the Crown’s key witness who was paid £1.2 million to testify – still struggled to pick out Megrahi.
The revelations cast further doubt on the Libyan’s conviction over the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing, which killed 270 people. in December 1988.
Yesterday, details of a secret report emerged showing that there were seven major flaws in the evidence. (...)
First Minister Alex Salmond and Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, writing in today’s Sunday Express, have defended their decision. [RB: I cannot find an article by Mr MacAskill on the newspaper's website, though a short one appears in the print edition.]
Yesterday, Mr Salmond said the new evidence “could and should have been judged in a court of law” but added that he “did not doubt” Megrahi’s guilt. (...)
A dossier for Megrahi’s appeal – which was dropped days before his release – claim the ID parade in April 1999 “fell short of what was fair”. Gauci, who sold clothing that was later packed in a suitcase with the bomb, said he could not be sure if any of the men were the same individual who had visited his shop a decade earlier.
Eventually, he picked out Megrahi as the one who “looked a little bit like exactly” the purchaser.
The report claims the parade was carried out after “an extraordinary length of time” using “stand-ins” who were not “sufficiently similar”.
It also points out that Megrahi’s photograph had widely published.Police reports from the parade are described as “incomplete and confusing”.
Professor Steven Clark, Professor of Psychology at the University of California, states: “At no time did [Gauci] ever clearly and definitively assert that Mr. Megrahi was the man who came into his store.
“Rather, in each identification procedure, he stated that Mr. Megrahi was ‘similar’ or ‘resembled’ the man.” [RB: Professor Clark's report on the identification evidence relating to Megrahi can be read here.]
Another eyewitness identification expert, Professor Tim Valentine, of Golsmiths University of London, said: “I do have concern of the quality of the identification evidence. I wouldn’t want to be convicted on identification evidence of that quality.” [RB: Professor Valentine's report on the identification evidence relating to Megrahi can be read here.]
Scottish campaigner Iain McKie, a member of the Justice for Megrahi committee, added: “The identification process of Megrahi was totally and utterly flawed and wrong. Yet the conviction rests on that identification. The whole process was rotten.”
[On the Express website Susan Lindauer posted the following comment on this story:]
Megrahi deserves to die a free man. As the primary negotiator w/Libya for the trial, I want to state as forcefully as possible and without equivocation: the CIA started talks for the trial with full knowledge of Megrahi's innocence. Unhappily, we recognized the US and Britain were so obsessed with Libya's guilt. It was decided that politicians and family members could not accept the truth of Megrahi's innocence, until they saw the (lack of) evidence on the table. There would have to be a trial.
However everyone expected an immediate acquittal. The CIA stood alert in the wings, ready to reconfigure the attack and arrest the real culprits. So ironically, the Lockerbie families would have achieved real justice 10 years ago, if only the Courts had behaved honorably in acknowledging Megrahi's innocence in the first place. It was obvious to anyone who examined the case.
[A comment from Susan Lindauer on an earlier Express story can be read here.]
Court should have heard ID evidence
[This is the headline over a report published yesterday evening on the Mirror website. It reads as follows:]
The veracity of identification evidence that led to the conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi for the Lockerbie bombing "could and should have been judged in a court of law", according to Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond.
Mr Salmond said it is unfortunate that Megrahi's appeal against his conviction never reached the High Court.
However, the First Minister said he has "never doubted Mr Megrahi's guilt".
The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission is currently withholding a report which raises questions about identification evidence that led to Megrahi's conviction, and contains its statement of reasons for referring the conviction back to the High Court.
The Libyan dropped his appeal shortly before Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill's decision to release him.
Speaking at a charity race day in Perth on the second anniversary of Megrahi's release, Mr Salmond said: "The SCCRC wanted to remit the case back to the court of appeal.
"That wasn't based on the forensics, which it upheld, but on identification evidence upon which there was a question mark which could and should have been judged in a court of law. Unfortunately that wasn't possible. I have never doubted Mr Megrahi's guilt."
The Scottish Government has pledged to bring about a change in the law to allow the SCCRC report to be published.
Mr Salmond said this publication would negate the need for a public inquiry, saying the report "will give more information than any public inquiry ever could".
The First Minister said he knows nothing about reports that the United States has made a "secret deal" with anti-Gaddafi forces in Libya to seize Megrahi and try him in a US court. He said: "I've read a number of reports, mutually contradictory incidentally, and I suspect they are based on very little indeed."
[It is clear that if the First Minister has "never doubted" Megrahi's guilt he simply has not read the Zeist court's reasons for convicting him or Lockerbie: A satisfactory process but a flawed result or The SCCRC Decision.
Meanwhile, US Senators Menendez and Lautenberg are at it again.]
The veracity of identification evidence that led to the conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi for the Lockerbie bombing "could and should have been judged in a court of law", according to Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond.
Mr Salmond said it is unfortunate that Megrahi's appeal against his conviction never reached the High Court.
However, the First Minister said he has "never doubted Mr Megrahi's guilt".
The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission is currently withholding a report which raises questions about identification evidence that led to Megrahi's conviction, and contains its statement of reasons for referring the conviction back to the High Court.
The Libyan dropped his appeal shortly before Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill's decision to release him.
Speaking at a charity race day in Perth on the second anniversary of Megrahi's release, Mr Salmond said: "The SCCRC wanted to remit the case back to the court of appeal.
"That wasn't based on the forensics, which it upheld, but on identification evidence upon which there was a question mark which could and should have been judged in a court of law. Unfortunately that wasn't possible. I have never doubted Mr Megrahi's guilt."
The Scottish Government has pledged to bring about a change in the law to allow the SCCRC report to be published.
Mr Salmond said this publication would negate the need for a public inquiry, saying the report "will give more information than any public inquiry ever could".
The First Minister said he knows nothing about reports that the United States has made a "secret deal" with anti-Gaddafi forces in Libya to seize Megrahi and try him in a US court. He said: "I've read a number of reports, mutually contradictory incidentally, and I suspect they are based on very little indeed."
[It is clear that if the First Minister has "never doubted" Megrahi's guilt he simply has not read the Zeist court's reasons for convicting him or Lockerbie: A satisfactory process but a flawed result or The SCCRC Decision.
Meanwhile, US Senators Menendez and Lautenberg are at it again.]
Saturday, 20 August 2011
Did secret report set Megrahi free?
[This is the headline over a double-page article (which does not feature on the newspaper's website) by Marcello Mega and Alan Roden on pages 14 and 15 of today's edition of the Scottish Daily Mail. Much of the content is similar to the article in today's issue of The Scottish Sun. The following are brief extracts from the Mail article:]
A devastating secret report that casts doubt on the Lockerbie bomber's guilt led to his early release from a Scottish jail, it was claimed last night.
Mass murderer Abdelbaset ... Al Megrahi was granted compassionate release to avoid the humiliation of a court overturning his conviction, according to critics.
These claims are today fuelled by leaked documents seen by the Scottish Daily Mail, which conclude 'no reasonable court' could have accepted some of the evidence that helped convict Megrahi. (...)
Finalised in 2007, the main report [by the SCCRC], which has never been released, runs to more than 800 pages with 13 volumes of appendices. (...)
But suspicion has persisted that Scottish authorities did not want the contents of the SCCRC findings made public.
Last night, veteran Scots Labour politician Tam Dalyell -- a former Father of the House of Commons --said: 'What was made clear to Megrahi was that by dropping [his appeal], it hugely enhanced his chance of returning to his family and the Tripoli sunshine.
'It was indicated to him -- by who I don't know, it may well have been Kenny MacAskill.'
Mr Dalyell, who believes Megrahi is innocent, added: 'Megrahi was desperate to get back [to Libya]. I went to see him in prison and I knew exactly what the situation was.' (...)
Dr Jim Swire, who lost his daughter Flora on the flight, said last night: 'This underlines again the need for a full public inquiry.
'If the case against Megrahi was strong and compelling, there would have been no need to suppress evidence. It's time people listened to the facts. Megrahi did not do it -- and we need to know who did.'
Robert Forrester, chairman of the Justice for Megrahi group, said the case against the bomber amounted to 'assumption upon supposition upon thin air.'
A devastating secret report that casts doubt on the Lockerbie bomber's guilt led to his early release from a Scottish jail, it was claimed last night.
Mass murderer Abdelbaset ... Al Megrahi was granted compassionate release to avoid the humiliation of a court overturning his conviction, according to critics.
These claims are today fuelled by leaked documents seen by the Scottish Daily Mail, which conclude 'no reasonable court' could have accepted some of the evidence that helped convict Megrahi. (...)
Finalised in 2007, the main report [by the SCCRC], which has never been released, runs to more than 800 pages with 13 volumes of appendices. (...)
But suspicion has persisted that Scottish authorities did not want the contents of the SCCRC findings made public.
Last night, veteran Scots Labour politician Tam Dalyell -- a former Father of the House of Commons --said: 'What was made clear to Megrahi was that by dropping [his appeal], it hugely enhanced his chance of returning to his family and the Tripoli sunshine.
'It was indicated to him -- by who I don't know, it may well have been Kenny MacAskill.'
Mr Dalyell, who believes Megrahi is innocent, added: 'Megrahi was desperate to get back [to Libya]. I went to see him in prison and I knew exactly what the situation was.' (...)
Dr Jim Swire, who lost his daughter Flora on the flight, said last night: 'This underlines again the need for a full public inquiry.
'If the case against Megrahi was strong and compelling, there would have been no need to suppress evidence. It's time people listened to the facts. Megrahi did not do it -- and we need to know who did.'
Robert Forrester, chairman of the Justice for Megrahi group, said the case against the bomber amounted to 'assumption upon supposition upon thin air.'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)