[This is the headline over a report published today in The Scotsman. It reads as follows:]
The Conservatives have urged the Scottish Government to release the medical evidence on which it based its decision to free the Lockerbie bomber.
Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was released from Greenock prison on compassionate grounds two years ago, after he was diagnosed with terminal cancer and given three months to live.
Megrahi gave up his appeal against conviction for the murder of 270 people shortly before his release.
The Scottish Government has asked Westminster to set aside data protection rules to allow the release of more details about Megrahi’s abandoned appeal.
However Scottish Conservative justice spokesman, David McLetchie MSP said: “If any information is to be released then it should be all the medical evidence as to why the SNP government set Megrahi free, something it has consistently refused to do.”
[A similar report appears here in The Sun.
Is Mr McLetchie really saying that it is more important to release the medical evidence relating to Megrahi's repatriation than to release the evidence upon which the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission concluded that his conviction might have amounted to a miscarriage of justice? I find it hard to believe that a lawyer could say this. But Mr McLetchie is a Scottish Conservative. Flawed judgement goes with the territory.]
Wednesday, 28 December 2011
Tuesday, 27 December 2011
Al-Megrahi ‘gives up fight to beat cancer’
[This is the headline over the lead story on the front page of today's Scottish edition of The Times (behind the paywall). It reads in part:]
Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi is no longer receiving treatment for his terminal cancer and is taking high levels of morphine only to dull the pain after giving up his fight against terminal prostate cancer, he has told Scottish officials.
The Lockerbie bomber, freed on compassionate grounds more than two years ago, spoke about his care via a video link from his bed in Libya this month. “Megrahi was able to speak to the officials,” a source told The Times. “He was no longer talking about trying to beat the illness and said he didn’t expect to live for much longer. It sounds as if he has given up.” (...)
His survival thus far has been attributed to the fact that he started receiving chemotherapy on his return to Tripoli. Karol Sikora, who examined the convicted bomber before his release from Greenock prison in August 2009, has said that al-Megrahi was being given medication developed in Britain but not available on the NHS, leading some to speculate that it is this that has kept him alive.
However, the source who spoke to The Times said: “I think that was a bit of a myth and it is certainly the case that he is not receiving anything other than morphine now.”
Al-Megrahi remains, technically, a Scottish prisoner released on licence and is obliged to stay in regular contact with East Renfrewshire Council. It was local authority officials with whom he communicated via video link.
The confirmation that he is receiving only palliative care comes after the convicted bomber used what he described as his final interview to protest his innocence and to accuse one of the Crown’s main witnesses of lying at the trial in The Hague. The Times reported last week that al-Megrahi continued to insist that he had not bought clothes from a shop in Malta owned by Tony Gauci, whose identification of al-Megrahi was instrumental in securing his conviction.
Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi is no longer receiving treatment for his terminal cancer and is taking high levels of morphine only to dull the pain after giving up his fight against terminal prostate cancer, he has told Scottish officials.
The Lockerbie bomber, freed on compassionate grounds more than two years ago, spoke about his care via a video link from his bed in Libya this month. “Megrahi was able to speak to the officials,” a source told The Times. “He was no longer talking about trying to beat the illness and said he didn’t expect to live for much longer. It sounds as if he has given up.” (...)
His survival thus far has been attributed to the fact that he started receiving chemotherapy on his return to Tripoli. Karol Sikora, who examined the convicted bomber before his release from Greenock prison in August 2009, has said that al-Megrahi was being given medication developed in Britain but not available on the NHS, leading some to speculate that it is this that has kept him alive.
However, the source who spoke to The Times said: “I think that was a bit of a myth and it is certainly the case that he is not receiving anything other than morphine now.”
Al-Megrahi remains, technically, a Scottish prisoner released on licence and is obliged to stay in regular contact with East Renfrewshire Council. It was local authority officials with whom he communicated via video link.
The confirmation that he is receiving only palliative care comes after the convicted bomber used what he described as his final interview to protest his innocence and to accuse one of the Crown’s main witnesses of lying at the trial in The Hague. The Times reported last week that al-Megrahi continued to insist that he had not bought clothes from a shop in Malta owned by Tony Gauci, whose identification of al-Megrahi was instrumental in securing his conviction.
We must have Lockerbie inquiry, no matter the cost
[This is the headline over an editorial in today's edition of The Herald. It reads as follows:]
As Pamela Dix, whose brother died in the Lockerbie bombing, says: "It is unfinished business." Now one more step has been taken towards unravelling the uncertainty that has hung over this case ever since that awful December night 23 years ago.
Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill has revealed that he has the go-ahead under the Data Protection Act from Kenneth Clarke, his opposite number in the UK Government, to publish the 800-page Statement of Reasons from the Scottish Criminal Case Review Commission (SCCRC). This document explains the grounds for appealing the conviction of the Libyan Abdel Baset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi, the only person convicted of the atrocity. It was never published because the appeal itself was dropped when he was released on compassionate grounds in August 2009.
It emerged earlier this year that legislation going through Holyrood could not guarantee publication because the material would continue to be subject to UK data protection legislation. Now that potential hurdle appears to have been removed.
If, as the Scottish Government maintains, it supports the maximum possible transparency in this case, it is apposite to ask why it took some time to make an official approach to the Westminster Justice Department regarding this matter. For years the UK and Scottish governments have played a slow-motion version of pass the parcel with this case, with neither seemingly prepared to increase the snail's pace progress and the prospect of political advantage (or damage) playing its part.
The imminent publication of John Ashton's biography of Megrahi may force the pace as, once the material is public, SCCRC will be free to publish it themselves. It is not clear how much further it will take us. The document dates from 2007. Fresh material and new forensic techniques have appeared in the interim. Also, in the interests of national security, some items and passages will be redacted.
Regardless of whether or not the man convicted of this crime is guilty as charged, others must have been involved. There are still many unanswered questions. Only a full and wide-ranging independent public inquiry can tackle these issues. This case may show the quality of Scottish justice in a poor light but ultimately getting at the truth is more important. It is also what the relatives of those who died desire and deserve.
[This editorial follows on from an article by chief reporter Lucy Adams which contains the following:]
Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill has revealed he has received assurances from the UK Government to help smooth the path to publication of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission's (SCCRC) long-awaited report.
Mr MacAskill wrote to the UK Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke earlier this month to ask the Coalition Government to remove obstacles presented by the Data Protection Act 1998, which is reserved to the UK Parliament, to enable a Scottish Government Bill to be put forward.
Mr Clarke has replied to say he is happy for his officials to discuss the matter directly with the SCCRC to find out more information about the barriers to publication of its Statement of Reasons in the case of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi.
The Scottish Government has responded by providing contact details for the SCCRC to facilitate discussions. (...)
The chief executive of the SCCRC said that, regardless of the legislation going through the Scottish Parliament, the commission still had to "comply with the requirement of the Data Protection Act 1998 which is, of course, UK-wide legislation".
Robert Black, QC, one of the architects of the original trial at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands, said the Scottish legislation was a "waste" of time. (...)
It is thought Megrahi's official biography, expected early next year, will contain much of the detail from the report. If it does, that could free the commission to publish the full report because it will already be in the public domain.
Mr MacAskill said: "I welcome this willingness from Kenneth Clarke and the UK Government to engage with the SCCRC on this important issue. We in the Scottish Government have always made it clear that we want to be as open as possible when it comes to publishing information relating to the Lockerbie atrocity.
"This is a welcome step forward that we have sought for some time in the process of removing the obstacles that bar publication by the SCCRC of its Statement of Reasons in the case of Megrahi.
"We will be following the outcome of discussions between the UK Government and the SCCRC very closely and will review the necessary steps forward after these discussions have concluded."
In October this year, Gerard Sinclair, the commission's chief executive, said: "As I previously indicated, the commission is willing, in principle, to publish this document, the content of which has been the subject of a great deal of public and media speculation and debate.
"I believe, however, that legislation passed by the Scottish Parliament cannot, by itself, guarantee publication of this document, as both the Scottish Parliament and the commission must act at all times in compliance with their respective obligations under the Human Rights Act.
"In addition, the commission would also still require to act lawfully and comply with the requirement of the Data Protection Act 1998 which is, of course, UK-wide legislation."
Scottish officials claim the Bill currently going through the Justice Committee is important because it will remove the ability of parties who disclosed the information to block its publication.
The Criminal Cases (Punishment & Review) (Scotland) Bill is expected to be passed early next year. It should give statutory authority to the SCCRC to decide whether it is appropriate to publish a Statement of Reasons in cases it has investigated where an appeal has subsequently been abandoned.
However, it has no power to get around UK data protection legislation.
[The Scottish Government's press release on the issue can be read here.]
As Pamela Dix, whose brother died in the Lockerbie bombing, says: "It is unfinished business." Now one more step has been taken towards unravelling the uncertainty that has hung over this case ever since that awful December night 23 years ago.
Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill has revealed that he has the go-ahead under the Data Protection Act from Kenneth Clarke, his opposite number in the UK Government, to publish the 800-page Statement of Reasons from the Scottish Criminal Case Review Commission (SCCRC). This document explains the grounds for appealing the conviction of the Libyan Abdel Baset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi, the only person convicted of the atrocity. It was never published because the appeal itself was dropped when he was released on compassionate grounds in August 2009.
It emerged earlier this year that legislation going through Holyrood could not guarantee publication because the material would continue to be subject to UK data protection legislation. Now that potential hurdle appears to have been removed.
If, as the Scottish Government maintains, it supports the maximum possible transparency in this case, it is apposite to ask why it took some time to make an official approach to the Westminster Justice Department regarding this matter. For years the UK and Scottish governments have played a slow-motion version of pass the parcel with this case, with neither seemingly prepared to increase the snail's pace progress and the prospect of political advantage (or damage) playing its part.
The imminent publication of John Ashton's biography of Megrahi may force the pace as, once the material is public, SCCRC will be free to publish it themselves. It is not clear how much further it will take us. The document dates from 2007. Fresh material and new forensic techniques have appeared in the interim. Also, in the interests of national security, some items and passages will be redacted.
Regardless of whether or not the man convicted of this crime is guilty as charged, others must have been involved. There are still many unanswered questions. Only a full and wide-ranging independent public inquiry can tackle these issues. This case may show the quality of Scottish justice in a poor light but ultimately getting at the truth is more important. It is also what the relatives of those who died desire and deserve.
[This editorial follows on from an article by chief reporter Lucy Adams which contains the following:]
Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill has revealed he has received assurances from the UK Government to help smooth the path to publication of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission's (SCCRC) long-awaited report.
Mr MacAskill wrote to the UK Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke earlier this month to ask the Coalition Government to remove obstacles presented by the Data Protection Act 1998, which is reserved to the UK Parliament, to enable a Scottish Government Bill to be put forward.
Mr Clarke has replied to say he is happy for his officials to discuss the matter directly with the SCCRC to find out more information about the barriers to publication of its Statement of Reasons in the case of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi.
The Scottish Government has responded by providing contact details for the SCCRC to facilitate discussions. (...)
The chief executive of the SCCRC said that, regardless of the legislation going through the Scottish Parliament, the commission still had to "comply with the requirement of the Data Protection Act 1998 which is, of course, UK-wide legislation".
Robert Black, QC, one of the architects of the original trial at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands, said the Scottish legislation was a "waste" of time. (...)
It is thought Megrahi's official biography, expected early next year, will contain much of the detail from the report. If it does, that could free the commission to publish the full report because it will already be in the public domain.
Mr MacAskill said: "I welcome this willingness from Kenneth Clarke and the UK Government to engage with the SCCRC on this important issue. We in the Scottish Government have always made it clear that we want to be as open as possible when it comes to publishing information relating to the Lockerbie atrocity.
"This is a welcome step forward that we have sought for some time in the process of removing the obstacles that bar publication by the SCCRC of its Statement of Reasons in the case of Megrahi.
"We will be following the outcome of discussions between the UK Government and the SCCRC very closely and will review the necessary steps forward after these discussions have concluded."
In October this year, Gerard Sinclair, the commission's chief executive, said: "As I previously indicated, the commission is willing, in principle, to publish this document, the content of which has been the subject of a great deal of public and media speculation and debate.
"I believe, however, that legislation passed by the Scottish Parliament cannot, by itself, guarantee publication of this document, as both the Scottish Parliament and the commission must act at all times in compliance with their respective obligations under the Human Rights Act.
"In addition, the commission would also still require to act lawfully and comply with the requirement of the Data Protection Act 1998 which is, of course, UK-wide legislation."
Scottish officials claim the Bill currently going through the Justice Committee is important because it will remove the ability of parties who disclosed the information to block its publication.
The Criminal Cases (Punishment & Review) (Scotland) Bill is expected to be passed early next year. It should give statutory authority to the SCCRC to decide whether it is appropriate to publish a Statement of Reasons in cases it has investigated where an appeal has subsequently been abandoned.
However, it has no power to get around UK data protection legislation.
[The Scottish Government's press release on the issue can be read here.]
Monday, 26 December 2011
Megrahi, other Lockerbie bombers must face justice
[This is the headline over an article in today's edition of the New York Daily News. It reads as follows:]
Justice, so very long delayed, may finally be coming to the families of those murdered on Pan Am Flight 103.
It has been 23 years since the Pan Am plane bound for JFK from London was blasted out of the sky over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing 270 people — most of them Americans, many of them New Yorkers.
It has been 23 years of excruciating failure to bring those responsible to justice. In 2009, victims’ loved ones watched powerlessly as the only man convicted for his role in the crime, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, was released from a Scottish prison — and given a hero’s welcome in Libya.
The Libyans and the Scottish courts then insisted Megrahi had late-stage prostate cancer and was sure to die within a matter of weeks, but he has yet to do the world the honor of keeling over.
And the notion that this was a one-man crime has always offended common sense.
Now, fingers crossed, comes the possibility of some clarity.
Justice, so very long delayed, may finally be coming to the families of those murdered on Pan Am Flight 103.
It has been 23 years since the Pan Am plane bound for JFK from London was blasted out of the sky over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing 270 people — most of them Americans, many of them New Yorkers.
It has been 23 years of excruciating failure to bring those responsible to justice. In 2009, victims’ loved ones watched powerlessly as the only man convicted for his role in the crime, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, was released from a Scottish prison — and given a hero’s welcome in Libya.
The Libyans and the Scottish courts then insisted Megrahi had late-stage prostate cancer and was sure to die within a matter of weeks, but he has yet to do the world the honor of keeling over.
And the notion that this was a one-man crime has always offended common sense.
Now, fingers crossed, comes the possibility of some clarity.
Saturday, 24 December 2011
US State Department on Megrahi
[What follows is an excerpt from yesterday's US Department of State daily press briefing, conducted by acting spokesperson Mark C Toner:]
QUESTION: One question on Libya, too?
MR TONER: Sure. Go ahead.
QUESTION: Al-Megrahi, the guy who was accused of the bombing Pan Am, he gave an interview. He said it would be the last before he dies, and he is –
MR TONER: That’s a story we’ve heard before.
QUESTION: Yeah, yeah. He’s confirming his innocence. What’s the update on your talks with the authorities in Libya about the bombing of Pan Am?
MR TONER: I don’t have an update for you. I know we have raised it multiple times with the interim government. They pledged to cooperate. I think we’ve said before that they say they have a number of different priorities before they can tackle this problem. For us, clearly, this is a very high priority. And so we’re going to continue to talk and engage with them. I’ll try to see if I can get an update on where those discussions stand.
QUESTION: But you don’t take his words serious, like he’s saying he’s innocent?
MR TONER: I don’t. But we certainly welcome additional – an additional investigation into if there is more evidence on this. But he should be back in jail in Scotland. He never should have been released.
QUESTION: One question on Libya, too?
MR TONER: Sure. Go ahead.
QUESTION: Al-Megrahi, the guy who was accused of the bombing Pan Am, he gave an interview. He said it would be the last before he dies, and he is –
MR TONER: That’s a story we’ve heard before.
QUESTION: Yeah, yeah. He’s confirming his innocence. What’s the update on your talks with the authorities in Libya about the bombing of Pan Am?
MR TONER: I don’t have an update for you. I know we have raised it multiple times with the interim government. They pledged to cooperate. I think we’ve said before that they say they have a number of different priorities before they can tackle this problem. For us, clearly, this is a very high priority. And so we’re going to continue to talk and engage with them. I’ll try to see if I can get an update on where those discussions stand.
QUESTION: But you don’t take his words serious, like he’s saying he’s innocent?
MR TONER: I don’t. But we certainly welcome additional – an additional investigation into if there is more evidence on this. But he should be back in jail in Scotland. He never should have been released.
Friday, 23 December 2011
Lockerbie truth
[This is the headline over a letter from David Flett published in today's edition of The Scotsman. It reads as follows:]
The farcical “evidence” used to convict Abdelbaset al-Megrahi (your report, 22 December) was quite frankly unbelievable. Scotland’s justice system had an obvious and very serious failure as it so obviously locked up (then released just in time before a successful appeal) the wrong man.
Worryingly, the real murdering perpetrators are at liberty.
It may be politically awkward and it may bring questions about the competence of our legal institutions, but the priority must be to get to the truth about who killed all those poor souls a few days before Christmas 1988.
[In today's edition of The Herald there are two letters on the Lockerbie case. They read as follows:]
You report that during his visit to Washington Scotland's Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland agreed with senior US Government officials that US investigators might join Scottish police in seeking further information on the Lockerbie bombing ("Lockerbie detectives will be in Libya early next year", The Herald December 22).
While I am pleased that Scottish police officers are to pursue answers to the many unanswered questions about the atrocity and the guilt of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi and others, I am less sanguine about them being "assisted" by US anti-terrorist agencies.
The main contribution of the CIA and FBI to the original investigation was to offer a huge bribe to jog the memory of the main prosecution witness about his identification of a casual customer in his shop several years earlier, and to magically find a tiny piece of the detonator casing in a Lockerbie field six months after the local police had scoured every inch of the area. We don't need any more of that kind of co-operation.
In seeking justice for the victims' families, and to restore the reputation of the Scottish justice system, what would extremely helpful would be the publication in full of the 800-page Report of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC), which found six reasons to indicate that there had been a miscarriage of justice in the original court conviction.
It is an ongoing disappointment to many who are concerned about the Camp Zeist trial that Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill and his officials have consistently found reasons to conceal this report, despite it being clearly in the public interest that it should be published. Now sections of it are to be revealed in Megrahi's biography early next year and will no doubt appear on the internet for all to see.
There is another possible scenario. Official Libyan Government documents may reveal what many have always suspected, that Libyan involvement was merely as an undercover agent for an Iranian terrorist group backed by Syria, seeking revenge for the unlawful shooting down of an Iranian civil airliner a few months earlier for which the captain and crew of the US warship were decorated and feted as heroes. How would the CIA manage to cover that up? Is that why it wants to be present at a Scottish criminal investigation?
Iain A D Mann
An extraordinarily detailed research paper published last month seems to confirm that US intelligence was well aware that a timer device of the type used by Palestinian terror group the PFLP-GC was used to detonate the bomb on Pan Am Flight 103, because of the flight time, but that even by November 1991, it was still unaware of the Heathrow break-in. The academic paper also reveals the interception of messages of relief from Iran following this switch of suspicion away from her.
During Mr Megrahi's trial in 2000, the Heathrow break-in remained unknown, blinding the court to an all-too-obvious route by which the bomb may well have been infiltrated.
The Heathrow break-in occurred just after midnight, 16 hours before the Lockerbie disaster. Because of the nature of the device, it could not possibly have been put on board in Malta.
Iran seemed to be the motivating force in the time between the US shooting down of her airbus and the "Autumn leaves" operation by the (West) German BKA.
Mr Megrahi is now near to death in Tripoli, but his guilt or innocence seems to tell us nothing about what the Gaddafi regime and Abu Nidal were up to between October and December 1988.
Scotland's compassion in allowing Mr Megrahi to go home to die looks like the release of an innocent scapegoat. The performance of her investigating police in failing to reveal the existence of the Heathrow break-in looks, at best, like a serious omission.
When a person is seriously injured, there is said to be a "golden hour" when life-saving treatment can best be given. At Heathrow 16 golden hours were allowed to elapse between the break-in and the Lockerbie bombing, with no appropriate counter action being taken.
Even so many years after the event an apology would still be welcome, along with proof that things really are done better now.
Having released Mr Megrahi in 2008 Scotland has been unable or unwilling to enforce a comprehensive review of the evidence against him, despite the findings of the SCCRC that the trial may indeed have resulted in a miscarriage of justice.
We hear that the Scottish police are to go to Libya soon to investigate whether other evidence can now be found as to whether the Gaddafi regime was itself involved in the Lockerbie bombing.
I wish them luck when they do finally get to Libya: they will need to remember it's a country where old scores against the Gaddafi regime are certainly still being actively settled.
Should the Scottish police find any such evidence, it is unlikely to connect with the story heard at Zeist, where, in retrospect it seems clear that Megrahi was no more than a convenient scapegoat. That would be a bitter pill for them and the Crown Office to swallow, and they would need great integrity to admit it.
Meanwhile Tehran is immune to accusations over Lockerbie, but the convulsions in Syria may, hopefully lead to new revelations from that direction. Perhaps the failure of the west to indict those two states over Lockerbie added to its boldness in threatening its own people as well as those of other countries.
Dr Jim Swire
The farcical “evidence” used to convict Abdelbaset al-Megrahi (your report, 22 December) was quite frankly unbelievable. Scotland’s justice system had an obvious and very serious failure as it so obviously locked up (then released just in time before a successful appeal) the wrong man.
Worryingly, the real murdering perpetrators are at liberty.
It may be politically awkward and it may bring questions about the competence of our legal institutions, but the priority must be to get to the truth about who killed all those poor souls a few days before Christmas 1988.
[In today's edition of The Herald there are two letters on the Lockerbie case. They read as follows:]
You report that during his visit to Washington Scotland's Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland agreed with senior US Government officials that US investigators might join Scottish police in seeking further information on the Lockerbie bombing ("Lockerbie detectives will be in Libya early next year", The Herald December 22).
The main contribution of the CIA and FBI to the original investigation was to offer a huge bribe to jog the memory of the main prosecution witness about his identification of a casual customer in his shop several years earlier, and to magically find a tiny piece of the detonator casing in a Lockerbie field six months after the local police had scoured every inch of the area. We don't need any more of that kind of co-operation.
In seeking justice for the victims' families, and to restore the reputation of the Scottish justice system, what would extremely helpful would be the publication in full of the 800-page Report of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC), which found six reasons to indicate that there had been a miscarriage of justice in the original court conviction.
It is an ongoing disappointment to many who are concerned about the Camp Zeist trial that Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill and his officials have consistently found reasons to conceal this report, despite it being clearly in the public interest that it should be published. Now sections of it are to be revealed in Megrahi's biography early next year and will no doubt appear on the internet for all to see.
There is another possible scenario. Official Libyan Government documents may reveal what many have always suspected, that Libyan involvement was merely as an undercover agent for an Iranian terrorist group backed by Syria, seeking revenge for the unlawful shooting down of an Iranian civil airliner a few months earlier for which the captain and crew of the US warship were decorated and feted as heroes. How would the CIA manage to cover that up? Is that why it wants to be present at a Scottish criminal investigation?
Iain A D Mann
An extraordinarily detailed research paper published last month seems to confirm that US intelligence was well aware that a timer device of the type used by Palestinian terror group the PFLP-GC was used to detonate the bomb on Pan Am Flight 103, because of the flight time, but that even by November 1991, it was still unaware of the Heathrow break-in. The academic paper also reveals the interception of messages of relief from Iran following this switch of suspicion away from her.
During Mr Megrahi's trial in 2000, the Heathrow break-in remained unknown, blinding the court to an all-too-obvious route by which the bomb may well have been infiltrated.
The Heathrow break-in occurred just after midnight, 16 hours before the Lockerbie disaster. Because of the nature of the device, it could not possibly have been put on board in Malta.
Iran seemed to be the motivating force in the time between the US shooting down of her airbus and the "Autumn leaves" operation by the (West) German BKA.
Mr Megrahi is now near to death in Tripoli, but his guilt or innocence seems to tell us nothing about what the Gaddafi regime and Abu Nidal were up to between October and December 1988.
Scotland's compassion in allowing Mr Megrahi to go home to die looks like the release of an innocent scapegoat. The performance of her investigating police in failing to reveal the existence of the Heathrow break-in looks, at best, like a serious omission.
When a person is seriously injured, there is said to be a "golden hour" when life-saving treatment can best be given. At Heathrow 16 golden hours were allowed to elapse between the break-in and the Lockerbie bombing, with no appropriate counter action being taken.
Even so many years after the event an apology would still be welcome, along with proof that things really are done better now.
Having released Mr Megrahi in 2008 Scotland has been unable or unwilling to enforce a comprehensive review of the evidence against him, despite the findings of the SCCRC that the trial may indeed have resulted in a miscarriage of justice.
We hear that the Scottish police are to go to Libya soon to investigate whether other evidence can now be found as to whether the Gaddafi regime was itself involved in the Lockerbie bombing.
I wish them luck when they do finally get to Libya: they will need to remember it's a country where old scores against the Gaddafi regime are certainly still being actively settled.
Should the Scottish police find any such evidence, it is unlikely to connect with the story heard at Zeist, where, in retrospect it seems clear that Megrahi was no more than a convenient scapegoat. That would be a bitter pill for them and the Crown Office to swallow, and they would need great integrity to admit it.
Meanwhile Tehran is immune to accusations over Lockerbie, but the convulsions in Syria may, hopefully lead to new revelations from that direction. Perhaps the failure of the west to indict those two states over Lockerbie added to its boldness in threatening its own people as well as those of other countries.
Dr Jim Swire
Thursday, 22 December 2011
Talks ongoing on Megrahi details
[This is the headline over a report published this evening by The Press Association news agency. It reads in part:]
The publication of details relating to the Lockerbie bomber's abandoned appeal is a matter for the UK Government and the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) which holds the information, the Justice Secretary has said.
Kenny MacAskill said the Scottish Government had tried to broker discussions between the two on the possibility of setting aside data protection laws to allow the SCCRC's information on the Abdelbaset al-Megrahi appeal to be published.
Megrahi gave up his legal challenge shortly before he was released on compassionate grounds from Greenock jail two years ago. He was serving a sentence for the murder of 270 people in the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 in December 1988.
The SCCRC said he was entitled to an appeal, but said it had no power to make its reasons available to the public.
Mr MacAskill wrote to his Westminster counterpart Ken Clarke asking if data protection could be set aside to allow the SCCRC's statement of reasons to be released.
Asked by Conservative MSP John Scott whether he had received a response from Mr Clarke, Mr MacAskill told Holyrood: "They have asked for further information related to the type of personal data included within the SCCRC's statement of reasons in the Megrahi case, and I have responded by providing contact details to allow direct discussion to take place between the UK Government and the Commission on the issues surrounding data protection."
Mr MacAskill added: "These are fundamentally a matter for the SCCRC. We've made it quite clear that we are trying to broker discussions and I am grateful to Ken Clarke for his willingness to do so, so that officials from his department can meet with the Commission.
"This information is actually information that is privy only to the Commission. It is not known by myself or any other member of Government, and accordingly the discussion is required to take place by Her Majesty's Government and the SCCRC."
[This is quite extraordinary. The Scottish Government has said that data protection considerations were prominent among the reasons for proceeding by primary legislation rather than by statutory instrument (secondary legislation) which is much less cumbersome and time-consuming. From the outset, I have been sceptical about there being any relevant data protection concerns. Like the UK Justice Secretary, Kenneth Clarke, I would very much like to know "the type of personal data included within the SCCRC's statement of reasons in the Megrahi case". The Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Kenny MacAskill, now says he doesn't know. Note that it is not the actual CONTENT of the information that he's saying he doesn't know -- that would be perfectly understandable -- but the TYPE. For the promoter of the primary legislation in question not to know the TYPE of personal data in the Megrahi report that his government says renders the legislation necessary is nothing short of mind-boggling.
The Official Report account of the exchange can be read here.]
The publication of details relating to the Lockerbie bomber's abandoned appeal is a matter for the UK Government and the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) which holds the information, the Justice Secretary has said.
Kenny MacAskill said the Scottish Government had tried to broker discussions between the two on the possibility of setting aside data protection laws to allow the SCCRC's information on the Abdelbaset al-Megrahi appeal to be published.
Megrahi gave up his legal challenge shortly before he was released on compassionate grounds from Greenock jail two years ago. He was serving a sentence for the murder of 270 people in the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 in December 1988.
The SCCRC said he was entitled to an appeal, but said it had no power to make its reasons available to the public.
Mr MacAskill wrote to his Westminster counterpart Ken Clarke asking if data protection could be set aside to allow the SCCRC's statement of reasons to be released.
Asked by Conservative MSP John Scott whether he had received a response from Mr Clarke, Mr MacAskill told Holyrood: "They have asked for further information related to the type of personal data included within the SCCRC's statement of reasons in the Megrahi case, and I have responded by providing contact details to allow direct discussion to take place between the UK Government and the Commission on the issues surrounding data protection."
Mr MacAskill added: "These are fundamentally a matter for the SCCRC. We've made it quite clear that we are trying to broker discussions and I am grateful to Ken Clarke for his willingness to do so, so that officials from his department can meet with the Commission.
"This information is actually information that is privy only to the Commission. It is not known by myself or any other member of Government, and accordingly the discussion is required to take place by Her Majesty's Government and the SCCRC."
[This is quite extraordinary. The Scottish Government has said that data protection considerations were prominent among the reasons for proceeding by primary legislation rather than by statutory instrument (secondary legislation) which is much less cumbersome and time-consuming. From the outset, I have been sceptical about there being any relevant data protection concerns. Like the UK Justice Secretary, Kenneth Clarke, I would very much like to know "the type of personal data included within the SCCRC's statement of reasons in the Megrahi case". The Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Kenny MacAskill, now says he doesn't know. Note that it is not the actual CONTENT of the information that he's saying he doesn't know -- that would be perfectly understandable -- but the TYPE. For the promoter of the primary legislation in question not to know the TYPE of personal data in the Megrahi report that his government says renders the legislation necessary is nothing short of mind-boggling.
The Official Report account of the exchange can be read here.]
Megrahi interviewer writes exclusively for The Lockerbie Case
[George Thomson has provided, exclusively to this blog, the following account of his recent meeting with Abdelbaset Megrahi:]
Of particular interest to myself, he formally released me from a confidentiality contract which has been in place for some time now and which has prevented me from answering some of the points made by certain contributors who pop up now and again and talk drivel.
On Baset's behalf I would challenge any of the following such as Mr Marquise, Harry Bell, John Crawford to face me across a table in open debate about the quality of the evidence. My door is open any time they want to call.
As you are probably aware some of this mornings newspapers are carrying a story of my recent trip to Libya where I managed to meet up with Baset on two occasions. I was shocked and I must admit a bit distressed by what I found. He is in a very poor state of health and I have no doubt in my mind that he has not got long on this earth. It will come as a surprise to many to learn that Baset possesses a strong sense of humour and I took him out a gift of a tea towel which had a lot of the old Scottish words on it like glaikit and crabbit. He used to try and learn one word every visit I made to him in prison. I was not slow to point out to him that I had found him to be crabbit on many of the occasions I visited him in jail. He responded by saying to me "George, I have a new word, 'I am knackered'" [RB: For those requiring a translation of these Scots words, resort should be made to the online Dictionary of the Scots Language.]
The reason I was in Tripoli was in connection with the making of a follow-up documentary to Lockerbie - The Pan Am Bomber in which much of the new evidence discovered by the SCCRC is investigated. We were hopeful to get a filmed interview with him which would be broadcast as part of the new documentary which will be screened in conjunction with the release of John Ashton's book sometime early in the New Year.
As it happened Baset was to ill to be bothered with a television crew setting up in his bedroom to which he is now confined, but he was keen to say something about his case before he dies and so he agreed to be interviewed by me on camera on condition that I operated the camera on my own. Having never held a television camera in my life I was a wee bit dubious as to how that would be possible, but it worked out not too badly and he was able to get some things off his chest.
As it happened Baset was to ill to be bothered with a television crew setting up in his bedroom to which he is now confined, but he was keen to say something about his case before he dies and so he agreed to be interviewed by me on camera on condition that I operated the camera on my own. Having never held a television camera in my life I was a wee bit dubious as to how that would be possible, but it worked out not too badly and he was able to get some things off his chest.
Because of contractual agreements I am not at liberty to disclose the parts of the interview where he talks about the new evidence which will be revealed in the book and in the film, but he was very keen to say something about the way he was treated during his time here in Scotland. In particular on camera he thanks the Scottish public for the kindness shown to him and the support he has received for his case. He also thanks the staff and prisoners of Barlinnie and Greenock Prison for the general way in which he was treated while in custody.
One of my questions to him was "If Tony Gauci was here tonight what message would you have for him?" With obvious passion he replied, "I would tell him that I have never in my life been in his shop and I have never ever bought any clothes from him, I would tell him that before I saw him in Holland I had never set eyes on him before. I would tell him that he was a simple man who would have to answer to his God and my God one day for what he has done." Baset went further at this point but I am prohibited from revealing the whole of his response to my question for the time being.
One of my questions to him was "If Tony Gauci was here tonight what message would you have for him?" With obvious passion he replied, "I would tell him that I have never in my life been in his shop and I have never ever bought any clothes from him, I would tell him that before I saw him in Holland I had never set eyes on him before. I would tell him that he was a simple man who would have to answer to his God and my God one day for what he has done." Baset went further at this point but I am prohibited from revealing the whole of his response to my question for the time being.
I asked him what he thought of the SCCRC report and he said that in many area they had done a very good job, but in others they had not addressed many of the points that they should have. He blames the SCCRC for not properly investigating some of the allegation of malpractice by the police and he goes on to identify two officers in particular who he particulary blames for malpractice. He claims that in all Gauci met with the police 55 times, but there exists only a handful of statements from him.
Off camera we talked about the continuing support he receives and in particular from this blog. He is well aware of the efforts of Bob and many of the regular contributors to the blog and he sends his thanks. He is no longer able to follow things on a regular basis.
Off camera we talked about the continuing support he receives and in particular from this blog. He is well aware of the efforts of Bob and many of the regular contributors to the blog and he sends his thanks. He is no longer able to follow things on a regular basis.
Of particular interest to myself, he formally released me from a confidentiality contract which has been in place for some time now and which has prevented me from answering some of the points made by certain contributors who pop up now and again and talk drivel.
On Baset's behalf I would challenge any of the following such as Mr Marquise, Harry Bell, John Crawford to face me across a table in open debate about the quality of the evidence. My door is open any time they want to call.
Finally the main purpose of him giving the final interview on camera and the generating of the press interest of today was to hammer home a final request from Baset to be allowed to now die in peace without intrusion from the world media or any other parties. You only have to see him to appreciate how really sick and weak he is now. I only hope that his plea is granted.
[What follows is the text of a comment posted in response to this blog post:]
As it happens, I was working in the education department in HMP Barlinnie during part of Megrahi's incarceration there. I obviously can't speak for them all but I can confirm that such staff as I spoke to who had any involvement with him took their responsibility seriously. It is gracious of a deeply-wronged man to find time to thank them. Thanks for the piece.
[What follows is the text of a comment posted in response to this blog post:]
As it happens, I was working in the education department in HMP Barlinnie during part of Megrahi's incarceration there. I obviously can't speak for them all but I can confirm that such staff as I spoke to who had any involvement with him took their responsibility seriously. It is gracious of a deeply-wronged man to find time to thank them. Thanks for the piece.
‘These are my last words: I am innocent’
[This is the headline over a report (behind the paywall) in today's Scottish edition of The Times. The article, under the byline of Marcello Mega and the paper's Scotland editor Magnus Linklater, gives an account of a very recent visit to Abdelbaset Megrahi by George Thomson (who presented the Aljazeera documentary on the Lockerbie case broadcast in June 2011). The report reads in part:]
The Libyan convicted of the Lockerbie bombing has given what he says is his last interview, using it to protest his innocence.
Speaking from his sick bed in Tripoli, Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi, who has prostate cancer, insisted that he was not involved in the attack on Pan Am 103 in December 1988 that killed 270 people. He also accused a key witness, whose evidence helped to convict him, of lying in court.
The interview was published as relatives of the American and Scottish victims gathered yesterday to mark the 23rd anniversary of the atrocity. At the Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia, Frank Mulholland, the Lord Advocate of Scotland, stood alongside US officials, including Eric Holder, the US Attorney-General, and Robert Mueller, the director of the FBI, to lay a wreath at the Lockerbie cairn.
They were joined by Ali Aujali, the Libyan ambassador to the United States, a mark of the new relationship between Tripoli and the West, and also a signal that new evidence may be produced in the search for the original instigators of the Pan Am bombing. (...)
A friend, George Thomson, who conducted the interview on Saturday, described him as ravaged by the cancer and very weak. “For any doubters who may think he is not ill, you only have to look at the man and how wasted he is to see he has not got long in this life,” said Mr Thomson on his return.
However, al-Megrahi still had enough strength to deliver a personal challenge to the Maltese shopkeeper, Tony Gauci, whose identification was instrumental in securing his conviction. Clothes from Mr Gauci’s shop were found, along with a tiny fragment of the timing device that triggered the bomb, in a briefcase among the wreckage of the plane.
Asked by Mr Thomson, a former police officer who was part of his defence team, what he would say to Mr Gauci if he met him again, al-Megrahi said: “If I had the chance to see him, I would tell him that I never ever in my entire life bought clothes from his shop, I never bought clothes from him. He dealt with me very wrongly, I have never seen him in my life before he came to the court. I am facing my death and I swear by my God, which is my God and Gauci’s God, I swear with him I have never been in that shop or buy any clothing from Gauci. He has to believe this because we are all together when we die.”
It is not suggested that the claims against Mr Gauci have any basis in fact. [RB: Well done, Magnus Linklater! The Times's lawyers will be proud of you!]
Mr Thomson filmed the 20-minute interview as part of a documentary about Lockerbie to be broadcast in February. The Libyan revealed that he has co-operated in writing a book with an investigative journalist, John Ashton, that will contain “dramatic” new evidence about his case.
Scottish prosecutors remain convinced that the evidence on which he was convicted is substantial, but al-Megrahi said: “I want people to read the book and use their brain, not hearts, and make judgment. Information is not from me, not from lawyers, not from the media, but experts who deal with criminal law and science, and they will be surprised when they read it. It will clear my name.”
Al-Megrahi is convinced that US agencies were determined to secure a conviction. “I am facing my death any time, and I don’t want to accuse anyone, or any country. But the Americans led the way,” he said.
He also revealed that he had been paid a visit a few days earlier by Jim Swire, whose daughter died in the atrocity, and who has long campaigned to clear his name. He said that he had confided in Dr Swire the details of new discoveries about the timing fragment made by investigators still working on his behalf.
He claimed that police were aware that there was another witness to the purchase of clothing in the Maltese shop, who might have helped to clear his name — Mr Gauci’s brother, Paul. It has always been believed that Mr Gauci was the only witness who could identify the buyer of the clothes.
“The commission met with Gauci. At the end of the statement they said he was nervous. He told them that when the man who bought the clothes left the shop, his brother Paul came to the shop, and took the parcels from the man and took them to the taxi he was taking. This information has never been raised before. There is an opportunity to have another physical witness who could have identified the man, yet they kept the brother out of it.”
Al-Megrahi ended the interview by saying he had a message for the international community, especially the people of Scotland and the UK: “I am about to die and I’d ask now to be left in peace to die with my family, and they be left in peace by the media as well. I will not be giving any more interviews, and no more cameras will be allowed into my home ... I am an innocent man, and the book will clear my name.”
[A longer and more personal article by Marcello Mega about George Thomson's visit to Megrahi appears in today's Scottish edition of The Sun. A further article appears in the Daily Mail. A Maltese perspective is to be found in this article in Malta Today; and a Libyan perspective in this article in The Tripoli Post.]
The Libyan convicted of the Lockerbie bombing has given what he says is his last interview, using it to protest his innocence.
Speaking from his sick bed in Tripoli, Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi, who has prostate cancer, insisted that he was not involved in the attack on Pan Am 103 in December 1988 that killed 270 people. He also accused a key witness, whose evidence helped to convict him, of lying in court.
The interview was published as relatives of the American and Scottish victims gathered yesterday to mark the 23rd anniversary of the atrocity. At the Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia, Frank Mulholland, the Lord Advocate of Scotland, stood alongside US officials, including Eric Holder, the US Attorney-General, and Robert Mueller, the director of the FBI, to lay a wreath at the Lockerbie cairn.
They were joined by Ali Aujali, the Libyan ambassador to the United States, a mark of the new relationship between Tripoli and the West, and also a signal that new evidence may be produced in the search for the original instigators of the Pan Am bombing. (...)
A friend, George Thomson, who conducted the interview on Saturday, described him as ravaged by the cancer and very weak. “For any doubters who may think he is not ill, you only have to look at the man and how wasted he is to see he has not got long in this life,” said Mr Thomson on his return.
However, al-Megrahi still had enough strength to deliver a personal challenge to the Maltese shopkeeper, Tony Gauci, whose identification was instrumental in securing his conviction. Clothes from Mr Gauci’s shop were found, along with a tiny fragment of the timing device that triggered the bomb, in a briefcase among the wreckage of the plane.
Asked by Mr Thomson, a former police officer who was part of his defence team, what he would say to Mr Gauci if he met him again, al-Megrahi said: “If I had the chance to see him, I would tell him that I never ever in my entire life bought clothes from his shop, I never bought clothes from him. He dealt with me very wrongly, I have never seen him in my life before he came to the court. I am facing my death and I swear by my God, which is my God and Gauci’s God, I swear with him I have never been in that shop or buy any clothing from Gauci. He has to believe this because we are all together when we die.”
It is not suggested that the claims against Mr Gauci have any basis in fact. [RB: Well done, Magnus Linklater! The Times's lawyers will be proud of you!]
Mr Thomson filmed the 20-minute interview as part of a documentary about Lockerbie to be broadcast in February. The Libyan revealed that he has co-operated in writing a book with an investigative journalist, John Ashton, that will contain “dramatic” new evidence about his case.
Scottish prosecutors remain convinced that the evidence on which he was convicted is substantial, but al-Megrahi said: “I want people to read the book and use their brain, not hearts, and make judgment. Information is not from me, not from lawyers, not from the media, but experts who deal with criminal law and science, and they will be surprised when they read it. It will clear my name.”
Al-Megrahi is convinced that US agencies were determined to secure a conviction. “I am facing my death any time, and I don’t want to accuse anyone, or any country. But the Americans led the way,” he said.
He also revealed that he had been paid a visit a few days earlier by Jim Swire, whose daughter died in the atrocity, and who has long campaigned to clear his name. He said that he had confided in Dr Swire the details of new discoveries about the timing fragment made by investigators still working on his behalf.
He claimed that police were aware that there was another witness to the purchase of clothing in the Maltese shop, who might have helped to clear his name — Mr Gauci’s brother, Paul. It has always been believed that Mr Gauci was the only witness who could identify the buyer of the clothes.
“The commission met with Gauci. At the end of the statement they said he was nervous. He told them that when the man who bought the clothes left the shop, his brother Paul came to the shop, and took the parcels from the man and took them to the taxi he was taking. This information has never been raised before. There is an opportunity to have another physical witness who could have identified the man, yet they kept the brother out of it.”
Al-Megrahi ended the interview by saying he had a message for the international community, especially the people of Scotland and the UK: “I am about to die and I’d ask now to be left in peace to die with my family, and they be left in peace by the media as well. I will not be giving any more interviews, and no more cameras will be allowed into my home ... I am an innocent man, and the book will clear my name.”
[A longer and more personal article by Marcello Mega about George Thomson's visit to Megrahi appears in today's Scottish edition of The Sun. A further article appears in the Daily Mail. A Maltese perspective is to be found in this article in Malta Today; and a Libyan perspective in this article in The Tripoli Post.]
Wednesday, 21 December 2011
" ... failing in my duty ..."
Scotland's most senior law officer has vowed to bring the perpetrators of the Lockerbie bombing to justice.
The Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland said he would be "failing in his duty" if he failed to find the people who were responsible for the bombing.
He was speaking on the 23rd anniversary of the 1988 atrocity, in which 270 people died when Pan Am Flight 103 exploded in the skies over Lockerbie. (...)
Speaking ahead of a US ceremony to commemorate the lives lost, Mr Mulholland said: "I think I would be failing in my duty if I didn't properly seek to take advantage of the opportunity that has opened up with the fall of Gaddafi.
"I am determined to get the answers these families deserve."
[From a report published this evening by The Press Association news agency.
The Lord Advocate will not "get the answers these families deserve" unless he exhibits willingness to pursue the copious evidence that exonerates Abdelbaset Megrahi. There is no indication whatsoever that he is prepared to do so. The Crown Office stance is that if it doesn't point towards Libya and Megrahi, then it just isn't evidence. It is in adopting this blinkered approach that Mr Mulholland is failing in his duty.
An interview with the Lord Advocate on the STV News website can be accessed here.]
The Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland said he would be "failing in his duty" if he failed to find the people who were responsible for the bombing.
He was speaking on the 23rd anniversary of the 1988 atrocity, in which 270 people died when Pan Am Flight 103 exploded in the skies over Lockerbie. (...)
Speaking ahead of a US ceremony to commemorate the lives lost, Mr Mulholland said: "I think I would be failing in my duty if I didn't properly seek to take advantage of the opportunity that has opened up with the fall of Gaddafi.
"I am determined to get the answers these families deserve."
[From a report published this evening by The Press Association news agency.
The Lord Advocate will not "get the answers these families deserve" unless he exhibits willingness to pursue the copious evidence that exonerates Abdelbaset Megrahi. There is no indication whatsoever that he is prepared to do so. The Crown Office stance is that if it doesn't point towards Libya and Megrahi, then it just isn't evidence. It is in adopting this blinkered approach that Mr Mulholland is failing in his duty.
An interview with the Lord Advocate on the STV News website can be accessed here.]
Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland meets FBI over Lockerbie bombing probe
[This is the headline over a report published today in the Daily Record. It reads in part:]
Scotland's top lawman has held talks with the FBI over plans to step up new inquiries into the Lockerbie bombing.
Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland met FBI director Robert Mueller and US Attorney Gereral Eric Holder in Washington last night.
It came as both countries prepare to send investigators to Libya to seek new evidence and speak to witnesses inthe hope of staging a second trial over the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103.
Mulholland said: “The meeting was to renew rapport over the joint inquiry into state-sponsored terrorism and explore the opportunities we have to bring others to justice.”
It is understood a number of potential witnesses have been identified. Negotiations are taking place to insure they are interviewed.
Hopes are high that vital evidence needed to convict those who acted along with Abdelbaset al-Megrahi will be uncovered.
One target is Lamin Khalifa Fhimah, who stood trial with Megrahi but was acquitted.
Mulholland has already set up a Lockerbie inquiry unit aimed at uncovering new evidence against Fhimah, 55.
The move came after Holyrood scrapped the double-jeopardy law which prevented people being tried twice for the same crime. (...)
Fhimah recently backed the Libyan rebels as the Gaddafi regime fell.
It was thought to be a desperate bid to persuade them not to hand him over for a re-trial.
Former justice minister Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, who claims to have evidence of Gaddafi’s involvement in Lockerbie, is a prominent figure in the new Libyan regime.
Scottish police have also questioned former foreign minister Moussa Koussa, who defected from the Gaddafi regime and is said to hold key information about the 1988 attack.
Other suspects include Gaddafi’s brother-in-law Abdullah Senussi, who headed Libya’s intelligence services, and Ibrahim Nayili, Libya’s former head of airline security.
[A report (behind the paywall) in today's edition of The Times contains the following paragraph:]
The US authorities were furious when Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish Justice Secretary, allowed al-Megrahi to be released on compassionate grounds more than two years ago, but, in a sign that relations are improving, the Lord Advocate has been working with the FBI in recent weeks on a detailed plan to find others who were involved in the attack.
[More public relations puffery from the Crown Office. There is not the slightest sign that the Crown Office or the FBI are pursuing the copious evidence that exonerates Abdelbaset Megrahi. On this of all days, the relatives of those who died in the Lockerbie disaster deserve better.]
Scotland's top lawman has held talks with the FBI over plans to step up new inquiries into the Lockerbie bombing.
Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland met FBI director Robert Mueller and US Attorney Gereral Eric Holder in Washington last night.
It came as both countries prepare to send investigators to Libya to seek new evidence and speak to witnesses inthe hope of staging a second trial over the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103.
Mulholland said: “The meeting was to renew rapport over the joint inquiry into state-sponsored terrorism and explore the opportunities we have to bring others to justice.”
It is understood a number of potential witnesses have been identified. Negotiations are taking place to insure they are interviewed.
Hopes are high that vital evidence needed to convict those who acted along with Abdelbaset al-Megrahi will be uncovered.
One target is Lamin Khalifa Fhimah, who stood trial with Megrahi but was acquitted.
Mulholland has already set up a Lockerbie inquiry unit aimed at uncovering new evidence against Fhimah, 55.
The move came after Holyrood scrapped the double-jeopardy law which prevented people being tried twice for the same crime. (...)
Fhimah recently backed the Libyan rebels as the Gaddafi regime fell.
It was thought to be a desperate bid to persuade them not to hand him over for a re-trial.
Former justice minister Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, who claims to have evidence of Gaddafi’s involvement in Lockerbie, is a prominent figure in the new Libyan regime.
Scottish police have also questioned former foreign minister Moussa Koussa, who defected from the Gaddafi regime and is said to hold key information about the 1988 attack.
Other suspects include Gaddafi’s brother-in-law Abdullah Senussi, who headed Libya’s intelligence services, and Ibrahim Nayili, Libya’s former head of airline security.
[A report (behind the paywall) in today's edition of The Times contains the following paragraph:]
The US authorities were furious when Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish Justice Secretary, allowed al-Megrahi to be released on compassionate grounds more than two years ago, but, in a sign that relations are improving, the Lord Advocate has been working with the FBI in recent weeks on a detailed plan to find others who were involved in the attack.
[More public relations puffery from the Crown Office. There is not the slightest sign that the Crown Office or the FBI are pursuing the copious evidence that exonerates Abdelbaset Megrahi. On this of all days, the relatives of those who died in the Lockerbie disaster deserve better.]
23rd anniversary of Lockerbie disaster
23 years ago, 270 people died when Pam Am Flight 103 exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland. The victims of the terrorist bombing will be remembered during an annual ceremony at the Lockerbie Cairn in Arlington National Cemetery.
Speakers at the ceremony include members of The Victims of Pan Am Flight 103, the group which organized the event, US attorney General Eric Holder, FBI Director Robert Mueller and others.
[From a report published today on the C-Span website.
A report on the STV News website reads in part:]
Libya’s Ambassador to the US Ali Aujali is scheduled to address relatives of the victims at the annual service at Arlington National Cemetery.
It is thought it will be the first time a Libyan politician has attended an event to commemorate Lockerbie. (...)
Other speakers due to address the Arlington Service include Scotland’s top law officer, the Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland QC.
Speakers at the ceremony include members of The Victims of Pan Am Flight 103, the group which organized the event, US attorney General Eric Holder, FBI Director Robert Mueller and others.
[From a report published today on the C-Span website.
A report on the STV News website reads in part:]
Libya’s Ambassador to the US Ali Aujali is scheduled to address relatives of the victims at the annual service at Arlington National Cemetery.
It is thought it will be the first time a Libyan politician has attended an event to commemorate Lockerbie. (...)
Other speakers due to address the Arlington Service include Scotland’s top law officer, the Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland QC.
Sunday, 18 December 2011
"My Lockerbie evidence was ignored"
[This is the headline over a report (not on the newspaper's website) published today on page 17 of the Scottish print edition of The Sunday Times. It reads in part:]
Envoy says he could have discredited key witness
A former Maltese minister with information that raises questions about the case against the Lockerbie bomber has criticised Scottish authorities for not interviewing him until almost 20 years after the atrocity.
Michael Refalo, a former tourism minister in Malta and a former high commissioner in London, said he disagreed with evidence given by Tony Gauci, a key witness in the case against Abdelbaset … al-Megrahi.
However, he was not approached until 2007 when the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) carried out an independent review of the case.
Gauci … claimed the Christmas lights were not lit in the Maltese city of Sliema when Megrahi allegedly bought clothes from his shop on December 7, 1988.
Megrahi’s trial heard claims that fragments of the clothes were recovered from the wreckage of Pan Am flight 103 later that month.
The date was crucial as Megrahi is known to have been on the island that day. Refalo said he had lit them the day before, casting doubt on the reliability of Gauci’s testimony.
“Without going into the merits of whether Megrahi was guilty or not, there are a few inaccuracies in Tony Gauci’s testimony about the Christmas lights. Gauci said that on December 7 the Christmas street lights were not on. That’s incorrect. As minister for tourism at the time, I switched them on the day before at 5.30pm.”
Refalo criticised Scottish police for not interviewing him before the trial. He said that as a former member of the Maltese government he was easy to trace but had never been approached.
His evidence forms part of the unpublished 800-page report from the SCCRC, which casts doubt on Megrahi’s conviction and offers six reasons why he may have suffered a miscarriage of justice (…)
The secret report has remained under lock and key since 2007. It is understood that it states that during inquiries in 1990-91, officers tried and failed to establish when the Christmas lights outside Gauci’s shop were lit in 1988, but adds that the most significant missing evidence now available is Refalo’s.
“The first time I got to know my evidence was required was during my term as Malta’s high commissioner to the United Kingdom when I was contacted by the SCCRC,” said Refalo. “I was interviewed by lawyers acting for the SCCRC and released a sworn affidavit about the date and time I had turned on the lights.”
[The context and importance of this material are better elucidated in the Megrahi appeal documentation (pages 209 to 225) than in The Sunday Times report.
This is yet another nail in the coffin of the Megrahi conviction. The flaws that have been exposed in the investigation and the prosecution are so glaring that it is a gross insult to the people of Scotland for the Scottish Government to continue to deny that an independent inquiry is necessary into the operation of the Scottish criminal justice system in the Megrahi case.
Scottish lawyers' magazine The Firm has published a news item on this story.]
Envoy says he could have discredited key witness
A former Maltese minister with information that raises questions about the case against the Lockerbie bomber has criticised Scottish authorities for not interviewing him until almost 20 years after the atrocity.
Michael Refalo, a former tourism minister in Malta and a former high commissioner in London, said he disagreed with evidence given by Tony Gauci, a key witness in the case against Abdelbaset … al-Megrahi.
However, he was not approached until 2007 when the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) carried out an independent review of the case.
Gauci … claimed the Christmas lights were not lit in the Maltese city of Sliema when Megrahi allegedly bought clothes from his shop on December 7, 1988.
Megrahi’s trial heard claims that fragments of the clothes were recovered from the wreckage of Pan Am flight 103 later that month.
The date was crucial as Megrahi is known to have been on the island that day. Refalo said he had lit them the day before, casting doubt on the reliability of Gauci’s testimony.
“Without going into the merits of whether Megrahi was guilty or not, there are a few inaccuracies in Tony Gauci’s testimony about the Christmas lights. Gauci said that on December 7 the Christmas street lights were not on. That’s incorrect. As minister for tourism at the time, I switched them on the day before at 5.30pm.”
Refalo criticised Scottish police for not interviewing him before the trial. He said that as a former member of the Maltese government he was easy to trace but had never been approached.
His evidence forms part of the unpublished 800-page report from the SCCRC, which casts doubt on Megrahi’s conviction and offers six reasons why he may have suffered a miscarriage of justice (…)
The secret report has remained under lock and key since 2007. It is understood that it states that during inquiries in 1990-91, officers tried and failed to establish when the Christmas lights outside Gauci’s shop were lit in 1988, but adds that the most significant missing evidence now available is Refalo’s.
“The first time I got to know my evidence was required was during my term as Malta’s high commissioner to the United Kingdom when I was contacted by the SCCRC,” said Refalo. “I was interviewed by lawyers acting for the SCCRC and released a sworn affidavit about the date and time I had turned on the lights.”
[The context and importance of this material are better elucidated in the Megrahi appeal documentation (pages 209 to 225) than in The Sunday Times report.
This is yet another nail in the coffin of the Megrahi conviction. The flaws that have been exposed in the investigation and the prosecution are so glaring that it is a gross insult to the people of Scotland for the Scottish Government to continue to deny that an independent inquiry is necessary into the operation of the Scottish criminal justice system in the Megrahi case.
Scottish lawyers' magazine The Firm has published a news item on this story.]
Friday, 16 December 2011
Libya to allow police to probe Lockerbie - minister
[This is the headline over a report published late yesterday evening by the news agency Reuters. It reads in part:]
The Libyan government will allow British police to go to Libya to investigate the 1988 Lockerbie bombing and the unsolved 1984 killing of a policewoman in London, a British minister said on Thursday.
Foreign Office Minister Alistair Burt, who held talks with Libyan ministers in Tripoli last week, said the Libyan government had given permission for British police to carry out fresh investigations into the two shadowy episodes that occurred under the rule of late strongman Muammar Gaddafi.
"I have absolute confidence that the police from Dumfries and Galloway (in Scotland) and the Metropolitan Police (in London) will be going back to Libya to get their investigations going again and they will be given a positive opportunity to do so by the Libyan authorities," Burt told Reuters in a telephone interview.
Burt, the Foreign Office minister responsible for North Africa and the Middle East, said no date had been set yet for a police visit, noting that Libyan authorities had a lot of other issues to deal with in a turbulent post-Gaddafi transition.
But he said that in his talks with Libyan Interior Minister Fawzi Abd al All and Foreign Minister Ashour bin Hayal, both had recognised the importance of the so-called "legacy" issues.
[Why Reuters is featuring this story a week after the rest of the media (see here and here) is a minor mystery. It has now been picked up on the Libya TV website.]
The Libyan government will allow British police to go to Libya to investigate the 1988 Lockerbie bombing and the unsolved 1984 killing of a policewoman in London, a British minister said on Thursday.
Foreign Office Minister Alistair Burt, who held talks with Libyan ministers in Tripoli last week, said the Libyan government had given permission for British police to carry out fresh investigations into the two shadowy episodes that occurred under the rule of late strongman Muammar Gaddafi.
"I have absolute confidence that the police from Dumfries and Galloway (in Scotland) and the Metropolitan Police (in London) will be going back to Libya to get their investigations going again and they will be given a positive opportunity to do so by the Libyan authorities," Burt told Reuters in a telephone interview.
Burt, the Foreign Office minister responsible for North Africa and the Middle East, said no date had been set yet for a police visit, noting that Libyan authorities had a lot of other issues to deal with in a turbulent post-Gaddafi transition.
But he said that in his talks with Libyan Interior Minister Fawzi Abd al All and Foreign Minister Ashour bin Hayal, both had recognised the importance of the so-called "legacy" issues.
[Why Reuters is featuring this story a week after the rest of the media (see here and here) is a minor mystery. It has now been picked up on the Libya TV website.]
Wednesday, 14 December 2011
Public confidence paramount
In his reaction to the report of the judicial inquiry by Sir Anthony Campbell into the Shirley McKie fingerprint case, the Scottish Government's Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Kenny MacAskill, said this:
"Scotland's Criminal Justice system is a cornerstone of our society, and it is paramount that there is total public confidence in it."
Does Mr MacAskill believe that there is "total public confidence" in the operation of the Scottish criminal justice system in relation to the conviction of Abdelbaset Megrahi? Certainly, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission had no such confidence. How therefore can the Cabinet Secretary and the Scottish public? An independent inquiry is essential if confidence is ever to be restored.
"Scotland's Criminal Justice system is a cornerstone of our society, and it is paramount that there is total public confidence in it."
Does Mr MacAskill believe that there is "total public confidence" in the operation of the Scottish criminal justice system in relation to the conviction of Abdelbaset Megrahi? Certainly, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission had no such confidence. How therefore can the Cabinet Secretary and the Scottish public? An independent inquiry is essential if confidence is ever to be restored.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)