[This is part of the headline over an article by Wayne Madsen published today on the Intrepid Report website. It reads in part:]
Intelligence files held by Qaddafi’s government on the 1988 downing of PanAm 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland and the files on negotiations on the release of accused bomber, former Libyan intelligence agent Abdelbaset al Megrahi, will also be a high priority for seizure by the CIA. The files, if released to the public, will show that it was Iran, not Libya, that was responsible for the 1988 downing of PanAm 103 and that it was President George H W Bush who ordered Libya be blamed to clear the way for a showdown with Iraq’s Saddam Hussein by absolving Iran of any blame and ensuring Tehran’s neutrality in the Operation Desert Storm showdown with Iraq.
There are now calls for Megrahi to be renditioned to the United States to stand trial for the PanAm 103 bombing. Megrahi was freed by the Scottish government in close consultation with Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s government, because he was suffering from cancer and was believed to be terminally ill. However, it is believed that the deal was cut to give British Petroleum expanded access to Libyan oil fields and guarantee Libyan bailout funds for failed British banks. Libyan documents on the British-Libyan deals are also highly sought by the CIA and Britain’s MI-6 intelligence service.
A secret report that alleges that Megrahi was innocent of carrying out the PanAm 103 bombing is due to be released soon by the Commission (SCCRC). New Jersey senators Frank Lautenberg and Robert Menendez, both recipients of large amounts of Israeli campaign cash through the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), have called for Megrahi to be extradited by the Libyan rebel government to stand trial in the United States for Lockerbie. However, Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond stands by his decision to free Megrahi and any move by the United States to second-guess Scotland may result in frayed relations between the Scottish government and the United States, especially seen as important with Scotland’s government striving for independence from Britain and the US submarine base at Holy Loch a potential casualty of a fracture in relations between Washington and Edinburgh.
In the record of the CIA’s sordid operations in the Middle East, Operation Desert Storm led to Operation Iraqi Freedom and finally, Operation Mermaid Dawn, the capture of Tripoli by Libyan rebel forces. One of the casualties of Mermaid Dawn will be the continued secrecy of the power politics that led to the US invasion and occupation of Iraq and now NATO’s proxies’ invasion and occupation of Libya.
Thursday, 25 August 2011
Should Mr Al-Megrahi be sent back to prison? Newsnight and the curious thoughts of Geoffrey Robertson QC
[This is the heading over a long article published today by Paul McConville on his blog Random Thoughts Re Scots (and Other) Law. It deals with last night's Newsnight Scotland segment on the issue of the fate of Abdelbaset Megrahi, featuring English QC Geoffrey Robertson and Scottish QC Gordon Jackson. After a detailed dissection of Robertson's contribution, the author concludes as follows:]
There is clearly great public interest in this issue. Mr Al-Megrahi stands convicted of a heinous crime and it appears that there are people looking for him to remove him from Libya.
However this debate was not helped by one of the contributors having no knowledge at all, it seemed, of the relevant legal rules applicable to the matter at hand. This could be contrasted with the later appearance on the programme of Lord Foulkes to discuss the differing university tuition fees charged in Scotland depending on the domicile of the student. His Lordship, notwithstanding a distinguished career in the House of Commons, the House of Lords and the Scottish Parliament, is not a lawyer. Legal niceties might understandably escape him.
Mr Robertson however does not have that excuse. His failure to acknowledge the “rule of law” in this matter is surprising given his very public stance regarding that doctrine over the years, and the rights people have to protect them from the vagaries or abuses of State power. I suspect John Cooke would not be demanding Mr Al-Megrahi’s return to Scottish imprisonment were he here today. [RB: Geoffrey Robertson is the author of a biography of Cooke and has recently written about him in The Guardian.]
Perhaps next time Newsnight Scotland considers having a lawyer on as a guest, they should ask if the person actually knows about what the topic under discussion is.
There is clearly great public interest in this issue. Mr Al-Megrahi stands convicted of a heinous crime and it appears that there are people looking for him to remove him from Libya.
However this debate was not helped by one of the contributors having no knowledge at all, it seemed, of the relevant legal rules applicable to the matter at hand. This could be contrasted with the later appearance on the programme of Lord Foulkes to discuss the differing university tuition fees charged in Scotland depending on the domicile of the student. His Lordship, notwithstanding a distinguished career in the House of Commons, the House of Lords and the Scottish Parliament, is not a lawyer. Legal niceties might understandably escape him.
Mr Robertson however does not have that excuse. His failure to acknowledge the “rule of law” in this matter is surprising given his very public stance regarding that doctrine over the years, and the rights people have to protect them from the vagaries or abuses of State power. I suspect John Cooke would not be demanding Mr Al-Megrahi’s return to Scottish imprisonment were he here today. [RB: Geoffrey Robertson is the author of a biography of Cooke and has recently written about him in The Guardian.]
Perhaps next time Newsnight Scotland considers having a lawyer on as a guest, they should ask if the person actually knows about what the topic under discussion is.
If Megrahi is to be tried again, then let it be in the new Libya
[This is the headline over Iain Macwhirter's column in today's edition of The Herald. It reads in part:]
‘More bad news for Megrahi,” said the London newspaper headline.
“Scottish probation officers are on his trail.” I’m not sure the man convicted of the worst terrorist atrocity in British history is exactly shaking in his wheelchair at the prospect of East Renfrewshire Council being on his case. Under the terms of his release from Greenock Prison two years ago, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi is supposed to be in regular contact, but I doubt if a crack team of special probation officers is preparing to be dropped into the war zone to track him down.
I would worry rather more about those reports in June that a deal has been struck between Barack Obama and the Libyan rebels to hand Megrahi over to American special forces so he can be extradited to America. There’s something of a bidding war underway among US politicians right now over bringing back the head of Megrahi.
Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican presidential candidate, says he wants the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing seized and brought to face trial in America. This would raise some interesting legal issues, not least because Megrahi has already been convicted by a Scottish court in Camp Zeist in 2001 and the US doesn’t have any jurisdiction in Scots Law. Of course, the US Navy Seals have a tried and tested way of cutting through these legal technicalities, as the late Osama bin Laden discovered in Pakistan.
It’s all becoming just a little tasteless, this hot pursuit of a dying man. David Cameron, William Hague and Nick Clegg didn’t help by saying that they agreed Megrahi should be brought back to jail. The Prime Minister and his Cabinet colleagues have no jurisdiction here either and they would have been wiser to keep their traps shut. Many US politicians and Lockerbie parents believe the British Government shared responsibility for springing Megrahi in the first place.
The New York lawyer, James Kreindler, who has represented the Pan Am 103 victims is in no doubt. “It was all a scam so (British Petroleum) could get its oil leases for Libyan oil fields,” he said yesterday (...)
Of course, as we in Scotland know, oil and UK policy had nothing to do with the release of Megrahi in August 2009 by the Scottish Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill. He was released on compassionate grounds under due process of Scots Law on the basis of evidence from Dr Andrew Fraser, the director for health and care for the Scottish Prison Service, that Megrahi had only three months to live.
It’s hardly surprising the Americans find this account hard to swallow, and not just because Megrahi is still going strong two years on. The Cabinet Secretary, Sir Gus O’Donnell, admitted in February that Britain had pursued a covert policy to “discreetly” help the Libyans to repatriate Megrahi. The former Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown was fully aware of this policy even as he condemned the Scottish Government for releasing Megrahi – one of the most blatant examples of diplomatic hypocrisy since, well, since Britain sold £100 million of arms to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, including tear gas and sniper rifles, while condemning his record on human rights.
No-one comes out of this affair untainted, except, of course, the victims. Even their families were criticised for accepting £1.7 billion in “blood money” from the Libyan government. The release of Megrahi has undoubtedly caused damage to Scotland’s image abroad, especially in the US, and has raised awkward questions about the competence of Scots Law. Perhaps, indeed, reopening the case could be the way to resolve this whole issue. But it has to be in Libya. It would surely be in the interests of everyone – victims, lawyers, politicians in America and Britain – if, rather than be assassinated by US special forces, or extradited to face an unfair trial in the America, Colonel Gaddafi’s former intelligence officer were to be tried on Libyan soil. He has a lot to tell the world about what had been going on under his watch. From IRA arms shipments, to bombs on planes. Hopefully, the Transitional National Council will see the opportunity here to begin the process of peace and conciliation by making Megrahi face trial in Tripoli.
In the end, they and only they have legal authority to hold Megrahi to account for actions that have so damaged Libya abroad and at home. American lawyers and Scottish civil rights activists would be free to provide the new Libyan prosecution service with all the evidence that has been collected on this extraordinary case over the last quarter century, including the evidence re-examined by the Scottish Criminal [Cases] Review Commission (SCCRC).
One reason why feelings run so high in America is that they still believe Megrahi really did bomb Pan Am 103 in 1988, killing 273 passengers. In Scotland, many prominent public figures, like the former Labour MP, Tam Dalyell, and Dr Jim Swire, of the Lockerbie victims’ groups, are adamant that there was a miscarriage of justice and that Megrahi is innocent.
Kenny MacAskill claims this climate of opinion didn’t influence his decision, but it provided the backdrop. He must have known the SCCRC also had serious doubts because it agreed to allow Megrahi the right to make another appeal. This was only abandoned when Megrahi was released on health grounds, thus saving Scottish law any further embarrassment. We will know more when the SCCRC report is published next month. But for most people the revelation that the key prosecution witness, Maltese shop owner Tony Gauci, had been offered large sums of money, perhaps $2m, to give evidence fatally undermines the prosecution case.
If there were to be another trial, all this could be re-examined and the conspiracies laid to rest. Assuming, of course, that Megrahi lives that long – as well he might since he is believed to be on expensive drugs that slow the progress of prostate cancer.
We don’t need lynch law here. The best way to honour the dead of Pan Am 103 would be to let the new democratic Libya settle its own account with its bloody past.
[In the same newspaper three letters appear on this subject, under the headline Cameron and Hague should keep their counsel on Megrahi’s future.]
‘More bad news for Megrahi,” said the London newspaper headline.
“Scottish probation officers are on his trail.” I’m not sure the man convicted of the worst terrorist atrocity in British history is exactly shaking in his wheelchair at the prospect of East Renfrewshire Council being on his case. Under the terms of his release from Greenock Prison two years ago, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi is supposed to be in regular contact, but I doubt if a crack team of special probation officers is preparing to be dropped into the war zone to track him down.
I would worry rather more about those reports in June that a deal has been struck between Barack Obama and the Libyan rebels to hand Megrahi over to American special forces so he can be extradited to America. There’s something of a bidding war underway among US politicians right now over bringing back the head of Megrahi.
Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican presidential candidate, says he wants the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing seized and brought to face trial in America. This would raise some interesting legal issues, not least because Megrahi has already been convicted by a Scottish court in Camp Zeist in 2001 and the US doesn’t have any jurisdiction in Scots Law. Of course, the US Navy Seals have a tried and tested way of cutting through these legal technicalities, as the late Osama bin Laden discovered in Pakistan.
It’s all becoming just a little tasteless, this hot pursuit of a dying man. David Cameron, William Hague and Nick Clegg didn’t help by saying that they agreed Megrahi should be brought back to jail. The Prime Minister and his Cabinet colleagues have no jurisdiction here either and they would have been wiser to keep their traps shut. Many US politicians and Lockerbie parents believe the British Government shared responsibility for springing Megrahi in the first place.
The New York lawyer, James Kreindler, who has represented the Pan Am 103 victims is in no doubt. “It was all a scam so (British Petroleum) could get its oil leases for Libyan oil fields,” he said yesterday (...)
Of course, as we in Scotland know, oil and UK policy had nothing to do with the release of Megrahi in August 2009 by the Scottish Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill. He was released on compassionate grounds under due process of Scots Law on the basis of evidence from Dr Andrew Fraser, the director for health and care for the Scottish Prison Service, that Megrahi had only three months to live.
It’s hardly surprising the Americans find this account hard to swallow, and not just because Megrahi is still going strong two years on. The Cabinet Secretary, Sir Gus O’Donnell, admitted in February that Britain had pursued a covert policy to “discreetly” help the Libyans to repatriate Megrahi. The former Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown was fully aware of this policy even as he condemned the Scottish Government for releasing Megrahi – one of the most blatant examples of diplomatic hypocrisy since, well, since Britain sold £100 million of arms to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, including tear gas and sniper rifles, while condemning his record on human rights.
No-one comes out of this affair untainted, except, of course, the victims. Even their families were criticised for accepting £1.7 billion in “blood money” from the Libyan government. The release of Megrahi has undoubtedly caused damage to Scotland’s image abroad, especially in the US, and has raised awkward questions about the competence of Scots Law. Perhaps, indeed, reopening the case could be the way to resolve this whole issue. But it has to be in Libya. It would surely be in the interests of everyone – victims, lawyers, politicians in America and Britain – if, rather than be assassinated by US special forces, or extradited to face an unfair trial in the America, Colonel Gaddafi’s former intelligence officer were to be tried on Libyan soil. He has a lot to tell the world about what had been going on under his watch. From IRA arms shipments, to bombs on planes. Hopefully, the Transitional National Council will see the opportunity here to begin the process of peace and conciliation by making Megrahi face trial in Tripoli.
In the end, they and only they have legal authority to hold Megrahi to account for actions that have so damaged Libya abroad and at home. American lawyers and Scottish civil rights activists would be free to provide the new Libyan prosecution service with all the evidence that has been collected on this extraordinary case over the last quarter century, including the evidence re-examined by the Scottish Criminal [Cases] Review Commission (SCCRC).
One reason why feelings run so high in America is that they still believe Megrahi really did bomb Pan Am 103 in 1988, killing 273 passengers. In Scotland, many prominent public figures, like the former Labour MP, Tam Dalyell, and Dr Jim Swire, of the Lockerbie victims’ groups, are adamant that there was a miscarriage of justice and that Megrahi is innocent.
Kenny MacAskill claims this climate of opinion didn’t influence his decision, but it provided the backdrop. He must have known the SCCRC also had serious doubts because it agreed to allow Megrahi the right to make another appeal. This was only abandoned when Megrahi was released on health grounds, thus saving Scottish law any further embarrassment. We will know more when the SCCRC report is published next month. But for most people the revelation that the key prosecution witness, Maltese shop owner Tony Gauci, had been offered large sums of money, perhaps $2m, to give evidence fatally undermines the prosecution case.
If there were to be another trial, all this could be re-examined and the conspiracies laid to rest. Assuming, of course, that Megrahi lives that long – as well he might since he is believed to be on expensive drugs that slow the progress of prostate cancer.
We don’t need lynch law here. The best way to honour the dead of Pan Am 103 would be to let the new democratic Libya settle its own account with its bloody past.
[In the same newspaper three letters appear on this subject, under the headline Cameron and Hague should keep their counsel on Megrahi’s future.]
US lawmakers urge new moves against Lockerbie bomber
[This is the headline over a Reuters news agency report issued yesterday evening. It reads in part:]
New York and New Jersey politicians are demanding that any new government in Tripoli extradite to the United States a Libyan official convicted in Britain for the December 1988 bombing of a US-bound airliner. (...)
Representative Nita Lowey, a New York Democrat, called on the Libyan rebels' Transitional National Council "to engage responsibly with the world community by extraditing Abdel Baset al-Megrahi to the United States to face justice for the Lockerbie bombing."
New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg, also a Democrat, wrote to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton suggesting that if Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi is ever brought before the International Criminal Court, he should also be prosecuted, for ordering the Pan Am 103 bombing.
However, a representative of the TNC indicated the US discussion about Megrahi and Lockerbie is premature. In a written statement, Libyan ambassador Ali Aujali said: "Before we can deliver justice to Gaddafi's many victims, we must first bring down the regime and then turn to the important work of forming a new government, writing a constitution, and establishing the rule of law."
"The Libyan people, the TNC will obviously have to look at this when they can," said State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland.
"The secretary's made clear this guy should be behind bars. The Department of Justice has the lead on these issues," she said. "No decisions have been made, we have to let Justice do its job here and we also have to have a Libyan government back in Tripoli before these conversations can happen." (...)
Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd, said: "We remain firmly committed to bringing to justice everyone who may have been involved in the Pan Am 103 bombing. The Justice Department investigation into the Pan Am 103 bombing that was initiated on December 21, 1988 remains open and active."
While the decision to release Megrahi was made by Scottish officials, documents published by the Scottish government indicated that officials of the British government, which at the time was headed by Labor Party prime minister Gordon Brown, supported the Scottish decision.
In a statement, a spokesperson for the British Embassy in Washington sought to distance Britain's current Conservative leader, David Cameron, from the Megrahi release decision, saying that the "Prime Minister has made clear that the Scottish Government decision to release Al-Megrahi was wrong and misguided."
But the spokesperson added that Britain had "no mechanism in place to request a person who has been released on compassionate grounds to be returned to prison if they have survived for longer than the period diagnosed by the relevant medical authorities."
New York and New Jersey politicians are demanding that any new government in Tripoli extradite to the United States a Libyan official convicted in Britain for the December 1988 bombing of a US-bound airliner. (...)
Representative Nita Lowey, a New York Democrat, called on the Libyan rebels' Transitional National Council "to engage responsibly with the world community by extraditing Abdel Baset al-Megrahi to the United States to face justice for the Lockerbie bombing."
New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg, also a Democrat, wrote to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton suggesting that if Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi is ever brought before the International Criminal Court, he should also be prosecuted, for ordering the Pan Am 103 bombing.
However, a representative of the TNC indicated the US discussion about Megrahi and Lockerbie is premature. In a written statement, Libyan ambassador Ali Aujali said: "Before we can deliver justice to Gaddafi's many victims, we must first bring down the regime and then turn to the important work of forming a new government, writing a constitution, and establishing the rule of law."
"The Libyan people, the TNC will obviously have to look at this when they can," said State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland.
"The secretary's made clear this guy should be behind bars. The Department of Justice has the lead on these issues," she said. "No decisions have been made, we have to let Justice do its job here and we also have to have a Libyan government back in Tripoli before these conversations can happen." (...)
Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd, said: "We remain firmly committed to bringing to justice everyone who may have been involved in the Pan Am 103 bombing. The Justice Department investigation into the Pan Am 103 bombing that was initiated on December 21, 1988 remains open and active."
While the decision to release Megrahi was made by Scottish officials, documents published by the Scottish government indicated that officials of the British government, which at the time was headed by Labor Party prime minister Gordon Brown, supported the Scottish decision.
In a statement, a spokesperson for the British Embassy in Washington sought to distance Britain's current Conservative leader, David Cameron, from the Megrahi release decision, saying that the "Prime Minister has made clear that the Scottish Government decision to release Al-Megrahi was wrong and misguided."
But the spokesperson added that Britain had "no mechanism in place to request a person who has been released on compassionate grounds to be returned to prison if they have survived for longer than the period diagnosed by the relevant medical authorities."
Wednesday, 24 August 2011
UK deputy PM wants Lockerbie bomber back in jail
[This is the headline over a Reuters news agency report issued this afternoon. It reads in part:]
British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said on Wednesday he would like to see convicted Lockerbie bomber Abdel Basset al-Megrahi put back in jail after the overthow of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.
Many US politicians and victims' relatives are pressing for Megrahi's extradition to the United States following his release on compassionate grounds two years ago. (...)
"My personal view is that I would like to see al Megrahi behind bars, because whatever you think he was convicted in a court of law for one of the most atrocious terrorist acts this country has ever seen," Clegg told Sky TV. [RB: That "whatever you think" is interesting. Is it perhaps a reference to the widespread disquiet about the conviction -- disquiet shared most significantly by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission?] (...)
Prime Minister David Cameron, who took office in May 2010, has called the release a mistake.
However, Scotland has responsibility for its own legal system following devolution in 1999.
"At the end of the day this is an issue for the Scottish government alone," said Clegg.
Scottish government sources said Megrahi had abided by the licence terms of his release -- submitting regular medical reports and reporting in though telephone conference calls.
[A related report appears on the BBC News website. In it Dr Jim Swire is quoted as follows:]
"I think he is at great risk of being assassinated, either by the incoming rebels or perhaps being snatched by an American special forces team - I can't know which is the most likely.
"But if he escapes that the question will be how will the rebels - when they are victorious - deal with him?"
British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said on Wednesday he would like to see convicted Lockerbie bomber Abdel Basset al-Megrahi put back in jail after the overthow of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.
Many US politicians and victims' relatives are pressing for Megrahi's extradition to the United States following his release on compassionate grounds two years ago. (...)
"My personal view is that I would like to see al Megrahi behind bars, because whatever you think he was convicted in a court of law for one of the most atrocious terrorist acts this country has ever seen," Clegg told Sky TV. [RB: That "whatever you think" is interesting. Is it perhaps a reference to the widespread disquiet about the conviction -- disquiet shared most significantly by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission?] (...)
Prime Minister David Cameron, who took office in May 2010, has called the release a mistake.
However, Scotland has responsibility for its own legal system following devolution in 1999.
"At the end of the day this is an issue for the Scottish government alone," said Clegg.
Scottish government sources said Megrahi had abided by the licence terms of his release -- submitting regular medical reports and reporting in though telephone conference calls.
[A related report appears on the BBC News website. In it Dr Jim Swire is quoted as follows:]
"I think he is at great risk of being assassinated, either by the incoming rebels or perhaps being snatched by an American special forces team - I can't know which is the most likely.
"But if he escapes that the question will be how will the rebels - when they are victorious - deal with him?"
The Megrahi debate: justice done or justice denied?
[This is the main heading over a page in today's edition of the Scottish Review. It contains interesting contributions from Labour-supporting Brian Fitzpatrick; SNP-supporting David McEwan Hill; and Dr Alasdair Galloway. This last item addresses recent criticisms of the medical evidence on which Kenny MacAskill acted. It reads as follows:]
Its interesting that Dr Simpson's comments on Megrahi's release should appear within a few days of the intervention by Professor Roger Kirby, who has suggested that much of the reason for his survival can be explained by the use of a hormone drug that isn't available in the UK even now. Professor Kirby refers specifically to abiraterone which he says 'is transforming the prospects for patients with advanced prostate cancer. They just are living longer and longer'. However, he then goes on to condemn the decision to offer a three month prognosis since treatment advances could keep him alive for several years.
This point of view seems to be extremely unfair for several reasons. First of all abiraterone is not, and was not then, available in the UK, so Megrahi couldn’t have been treated with it, either then or now. Moreover, as with many other such advanced treatments, there may well be a high cost associated, and it's very easy to imagine the furore there would have been had Megrahi been medically treated at that sort of cost.
This leads on to the issue of what question Dr Fraser and his colleagues were required to address. Were they asked to consider what his prognosis would be as a prisoner in Greenock Prison? Or were they asked to give an estimate of his survival were he to be released and returned to Libya? The problem with the latter question is that those charged with answering it have no idea and no control over what treatment he might receive in Libya. The only treatment regime they could be sure of, would be that extended to him in the UK prison system. Given that the specific treatment Professor Kirby refers to was not available, and that it is very likely there would have been serious political ructions if it had been made available to him, then, even on the basis of Professor Kirby’s argument, had he not been treated with abiraterone (or similar) it does seem more likely that he would have succumbed by now.
Dr Simpson, as we know, had serious doubts about the prognosis at the time, but with his considerable expertise in this area of medicine, I am sure he knows that prognosis with advanced cancer is more art form than science. He also knows that a comparison of Megrahi’s survival in Libya – with his family around him, not to mention the different treatment regimes that he will be on – to his likely survival in Greenock is a classic comparison of an apple with a pear.
I have no background in medical matters, but it does seem obvious that a longer life span could have been predicted for Megrahi back in Libya. But since Dr Fraser had no knowledge or control over Megrahi’s conditions in Libya, it seems reasonable for him to have addressed the question of prognosis on the basis of his continuing imprisonment at Greenock. Therefore, perhaps we need to understand the prognosis of three months as being 'if he continues to be held in Greenock Prison, his life expectancy is approximately three months'. To contrast that with the outcome at home in Libya is not comparing like with like.
Its interesting that Dr Simpson's comments on Megrahi's release should appear within a few days of the intervention by Professor Roger Kirby, who has suggested that much of the reason for his survival can be explained by the use of a hormone drug that isn't available in the UK even now. Professor Kirby refers specifically to abiraterone which he says 'is transforming the prospects for patients with advanced prostate cancer. They just are living longer and longer'. However, he then goes on to condemn the decision to offer a three month prognosis since treatment advances could keep him alive for several years.
This point of view seems to be extremely unfair for several reasons. First of all abiraterone is not, and was not then, available in the UK, so Megrahi couldn’t have been treated with it, either then or now. Moreover, as with many other such advanced treatments, there may well be a high cost associated, and it's very easy to imagine the furore there would have been had Megrahi been medically treated at that sort of cost.
This leads on to the issue of what question Dr Fraser and his colleagues were required to address. Were they asked to consider what his prognosis would be as a prisoner in Greenock Prison? Or were they asked to give an estimate of his survival were he to be released and returned to Libya? The problem with the latter question is that those charged with answering it have no idea and no control over what treatment he might receive in Libya. The only treatment regime they could be sure of, would be that extended to him in the UK prison system. Given that the specific treatment Professor Kirby refers to was not available, and that it is very likely there would have been serious political ructions if it had been made available to him, then, even on the basis of Professor Kirby’s argument, had he not been treated with abiraterone (or similar) it does seem more likely that he would have succumbed by now.
Dr Simpson, as we know, had serious doubts about the prognosis at the time, but with his considerable expertise in this area of medicine, I am sure he knows that prognosis with advanced cancer is more art form than science. He also knows that a comparison of Megrahi’s survival in Libya – with his family around him, not to mention the different treatment regimes that he will be on – to his likely survival in Greenock is a classic comparison of an apple with a pear.
I have no background in medical matters, but it does seem obvious that a longer life span could have been predicted for Megrahi back in Libya. But since Dr Fraser had no knowledge or control over Megrahi’s conditions in Libya, it seems reasonable for him to have addressed the question of prognosis on the basis of his continuing imprisonment at Greenock. Therefore, perhaps we need to understand the prognosis of three months as being 'if he continues to be held in Greenock Prison, his life expectancy is approximately three months'. To contrast that with the outcome at home in Libya is not comparing like with like.
In Tripoli south of Lockerbie
[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.
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)