Megrahi's trial

[This is the heading over a letter from Farouk Araie published today on the website of the Khaleej Times, an English language newspaper published in the United Arab Emirates.  It reads as follows:]

Twenty-five years ago, Pan Am 103 was destroyed by a bomb over Lockerbie in Scotland.

The truth about Pan Am 103 continues to be covered up by a blanket of lies. It exposes the cruellest international cover-up in modern history, one that makes Watergate and Irangate pale by comparison.

Two Libyan intelligence agents were charged with mass murder, in connection with the destruction of Pan Am 103. The trial was held at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands. Abdelbaset Al Megrahi was convicted and sentenced to life in prison for the killing of 270 people. His co-accused was found not guilty.

The conviction of Al Megrahi is legally puzzling. How could the court come out with a verdict of guilty for one and innocent for the other when they were both being tried with the same evidence? The judgment appears to be politically motivated.

The key forensic witness in the Lockerbie trial, Allen Feraday, gave false evidence about the fragment of the bomb timer said to have been found at Lockerbie. The only identification witness, Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci, extorted money from Western intelligence for his confused evidence.

Al Megrahi died on May 20, 2012. The evidence produced at his trial was fabricated and manipulated in Europe and North America. Legal scholars believed that many aspects of the Lockerbie prosecution were at best incompetent and at worst amounted to an attempt to pervert the course of justice. It is glaringly evident that at least six nations were involved in the downing of Pan Am 103. It was decided at the highest level to pin the blame on Libya.

On January 31, 2001, Al Megrahi, was found guilty. It took a total 84 days’ evidence, spread out over eight months, during which 230 witnesses were called, 10,232 pages of transcript compiled, and 621 items exhibited. The cost of the trial came to 80 million pounds. It was one of the greatest miscarriages of justice in international history. If the truth is ever revealed, it will cause a firestorm that will rock Western nations. The culprits got away with mass murder.

The trial that debased western justice

[This is the headline over an article by Dr Neil Berry published today on the Arab News website.  It reads as follows:]

It was 25 years ago in December that Pan Am Flight 103 from London to New York exploded over the Scottish town of Lockerbie killing 270 people. It has become routine to refer to Lockerbie as the UK’s worst ever terrorist atrocity, with the Libyan, Abdelbaset Al-Megrahi, who was convicted of planting a bomb on the plane, ranked next to the 9/11 hijackers in the West’s demonology of Arabs.

When in 2009, Scotland’s devolved government allowed the terminally ill Megrahi to return to Libya on grounds of compassion, public outrage on both sides of the Atlantic was extreme. Millions believed that Scotland was covering itself in infamy by releasing an unrepentant mass murderer. Yet there are compelling grounds for believing that the Scottish authorities were already mired in infamy — the infamy of conniving at one of the most monstrous miscarriages of injustice in modern history. In a cogent new book, Scotland’s Shame: Why Lockerbie still matters, John Ashton reinforces the case made in his magisterial study, Megrahi: You are My Jury (2012) — that Megrahi’s conviction by three Scottish judges at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands in January 2001 — had no credibility. Another book, Adequately Explained by Stupidity? by Morag G Kerr makes similarly short work of the official Lockerbie story. 

It is true that Megrahi was in Malta in December 1988 when, according to the prosecution case, the suitcase containing the bomb that blew up Flight 103 was loaded onto a flight bound for Frankfurt. But the key prosecution claim — that the timing device on the Lockerbie bomb belonged to a Swiss batch of such devices sold to Col Qaddafi’s Libya — has been shown to have no foundation. It is also clear that the Maltese shopkeeper, Tony Gauci, whose evidence was scarcely less vital to the prosecution case, was anything but a reliable witness. Witheringly judged by Scotland’s sometime chief prosecutor, Lord Fraser, to be “one apple short of a picnic,” Gauci — after years of being groomed by the Scottish police and the FBI — testified that Megrahi bought clothes from him in Malta that were wrapped round the bomb. He was later lavishly rewarded for his services by the US Department of Justice.

As John Ashton and Morag G Kerr make plain, Megrahi’s defense was systematically denied access to much crucial information — not least the fact that that a major breach of security took place at London’s Heathrow Airport in the hours before Flight 103 took off. Though reported in the British press at the time, this sinister circumstance — which raised the possibility that Megrahi’s presence in Malta in December 1988 was irrelevant — went unmentioned at his trial. But for the handicaps under which they were laboring, Megrahi’s defense would have had little difficulty in demonstrating that the charge against him came nowhere near to satisfying the basic requirement of a western court of law: that a verdict of guilt must be “beyond reasonable doubt.” 

Believers in Megrahi’s culpability have maintained that definitive proof that he was the Lockerbie bomber would emerge from post-Qaddafi Libya. Two years on from the Qaddafi’s downfall, the smoking gun in question remains as elusive as Saddam Hussein’s mooted weapons of mass destruction. 

That Megrahi was a hapless pawn in a cynical international power game can scarcely be doubted. All the indications are that the Lockerbie bomb was a reprisal by Iran, sub-contracted to a Palestinian splinter group, for the shooting down of an Iranian airbus by a US warship in July 1988. What appears no less certain is that the US, anxious to secure the release of US hostages held in Lebanon at the behest of Iran, orchestrated a subterfuge designed to impart to the world another story altogether. Mindful that later this year Scottish people will vote in an historic referendum on whether or not they wish Scotland to declare itself independent of the UK, John Ashton believes that Lockerbie is a stain on Scotland’s vaunted justice system that is crying out to be purged. In truth, the conviction of Abdelbaset Al-Megrahi was a miscarriage of justice that dishonors not just Scotland but western morality itself.  

[This article now also appears in the United Arab Emirates Khaleej Times.]

The Bombing of Pan Am Flight 103: Case closed?

[This is the headline over an article by William Blum published yesterday on the Foreign Policy Journal website.  It reads as follows:]

When the 25th anniversary of the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 occurred on December 21, I was fully expecting the usual repetitions of the false accusation against Libya and Moammar Gaddafi as being responsible for the act, which took the lives of 270 people over and in Lockerbie, Scotland. But much to my surprise, mingled with such, there were a rash of comments skeptical of the official British-US version, made by various people in Scotland and elsewhere, including by the governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, and Libya.

In a joint statement the three governments said they were determined to unearth the truth behind the attack. “We want all those responsible for this brutal act of terrorism brought to justice, and to understand why it was committed”, they declared.[1]

Remarkable. In 1991, the United States indicted a Libyan named Adelbaset al-Megrahi. He was eventually found guilty of being the sole perpetrator of the crime, kept in prison for many years, and finally released in 2009 when he had terminal cancer, allegedly for humanitarian reasons, although an acute smell of oil could be detected. And now they speak of bringing to justice “those responsible for this brutal act of terrorism”.

The 1988 crime was actually organized by Iran in retaliation for the American shooting down of an Iranian passenger plane in July of the same year, which took the lives of 290 people. It was carried out by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command (PFLP-GC), a 1968 breakaway from a component of the Palestine Liberation Organization, with some help from Syria. And this version was very widely accepted in the Western world, in government and media circles—until the US buildup to the Gulf War came along in 1990 and the support of Iran and Syria was needed. Then, suddenly, we were told that it was Libya behind the crime.

If the US and UK now wish to return to Iran, and perhaps Syria, as the culprits, they will have a lot of explaining to do about their previous lie. But these two governments always have a lot of explaining to do. They’re good at it. And the great bulk of their indoctrinated citizens, with little resistance, will accept the new/old party line, and their mainstream media will effortlessly switch back to the old/new official version, since Iran and Syria are at the top of the current list of Bad Guys. (The PFLP-GC has been quiescent for some time and may scarcely exist.)

If you’re confused by all this, I suggest that you start by reading my detailed article on the history of this case, written in 2001 but still very informative and relevant. You may be rather surprised.

The UK, US, and Libyan governments have now announced that they will co-operate to reveal “the full facts” of the Lockerbie bombing. And Robert Mueller, the former head of the FBI, said he believes more people will be charged. This could be very interesting.

Note

1. Reuters news agency, December 22, 2013

New Private Eye article and John Ashton's comments

[The following item was posted today on John Ashton’s Megrahi: You are my Jury website:]

The following article has been published in the latest issue of Private Eye (no. 1357). It was prompted by Magnus Linklater’s front page article in the Scottish edition of The Times, which was published on 21 December under the headlines ‘QC breaks silence over Lockerbie bombing. Lawyer dismisses Iran conspiracy theories.’  My comments follow.

The Scottish criminal justice system, facing a series of new claims after the 25th anniversary of the Lockerbie bombing that it had locked up the wrong man, has a surprising champion. Bill Taylor, the QC who originally represented Abdelbasset al-Megrahi at his trial, has, according to the Times in Scotland, “condemned” critics and campaigners, including Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died in the attack. Taylor and other unnamed defence lawyers are reported to have said that claims that Iran, rather than Libya, was involved in the atrocity “and other theories” were examined in detail and dismissed at the time of trial because they did not stand up to scrutiny or standards required in a court of law.

But are they speaking out now because they themselves have come under attack by the late Megrahi’s subsequent legal team, led by Maggie Scott QC, who devoted no fewer than 60 of the 340 pages of appeal to what she alleges was Megrahi’s “defective” defence? Their comments coincide with publication of a new book that claims the bomb on the ill-fated Pan-Am Flight 103 was loaded on to the plane at Heathrow, contrary to prosecution claims that it started its journey in Malta (see last Eye). 

Channel 4 News has also revealed new documents showing that both high-level Syrian officials and the CIA had independently stated that the Syrian-based Palestinian group, the PFLP-GC (Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command), not Libya, was responsible for the atrocity. (According to declassified US intelligence documents, the group was hired by Iran.) And other newspaper and TV reports have again focused attention on the original suspects, members of the PFLP-GC group who were based in West Germany at the time.

The lawyers dismiss the claims that the bomb was smuggled through Heathrow, saying the theory “was tested to destruction” at trial and that those who back the theory offered no explanation for how clothes purchased in Malta were found in the suitcase bomb. But the new book, Adequately Explained by Stupidity? Lockerbie, Luggage and Lies, by Dr Morag Kerr, gives a very plausible explanation: there was another connected PFLP-GC cell operating in Malta at the time the clothes were bought to stuff the bomb case.

Taylor himself gave another explanation at the trial. Referring to the dodgy identification evidence of Megrahi by the Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci and disputes about when the clothes were bought, Taylor suggested that the perpetrator may have deliberately been setting a false trail. “Having regard to the high level of risk of detection, wouldn’t one have expected him to remove the clothing labels?” he asked.

As to all other theories and in particular the involvement of the PLFP-GC being exhaustively examined, the grounds of appeal prepared by Ms Scott say the defence teams missed vital tricks. Taylor says the decision by the new Libyan administration announced ahead of the anniversary to appoint prosecutors to liaise with Scotland’s Lord Advocate “in the discovery of any fresh evidence” undermined the argument that Libya was not involved. But that ignores the fact that two and a half years after the investigation was re-opened in Libya, no new evidence has emerged.

Taylor’s assertions that huge sums paid into Megrahi’s bank account by the Libyan government indicated he was not the low-level official he claimed to be may be on firmer ground. The Scottish Criminal Case Review Commission (SCCRC) examined his finances in detail and said it could “see the potential for further criminative inferences had the applicant been subjected to cross-examination”.

Megrahi’s new team says it has masses of documents to show the money was disposed of legitimately. But, as the Eye has long argued, and the SCCRC has concluded, that and other evidence relied on at trial was a far cry from proving that Megrahi was guilty.

As a non-lawyer, I do not feel qualified to comment upon the defective representation allegations made in Abdelbaset’s grounds of appeal. The SCCRC rejected such allegations in his SCCRC application, and Mr Taylor and the other members of the defence team vigorously countered the claims.

The documents referred to in the final paragraph were, in fact, available at the trial, but, as Abdelbaset followed the advice of his lawyers not to give evidence, were not used. Had he given evidence, the defence would have used the documents to demonstrate that he was involved in legitimate business activities. He would also have explained all the major payments in and out of his bank account.

Lockerbie: the Swiss silence

[This is a translation of the headline over a long article in German by Otto Hostettler in collaboration with John Ashton, published on the website of the Swiss magazine Beobachter. The first few sentences, in translation, read as follows:]

Officially, the terrorist attack of Lockerbie has been solved: Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the Libyan Arab Airlines security chief and officer of the Libyan intelligence service, was sentenced to life imprisonment in early 2001 by a Scottish court. The court held it established that he smuggled the suitcase with the bomb onto the Pan Am jumbo jet which on the evening of 21 December 1988 exploded over the Scottish town of Lockerbie. All 259 people on board and eleven inhabitants of the village died.

The convicted al-Megrahi has been dead for two years, but the case has not come to rest. Last year a 800-page report by an official investigative body became publicly available which listed a number of serious inconsistencies in the investigation. Conclusion: The judgment might well have been different if a lot of information had not been withheld from the defence in advance of the trial. Survivors, lawyers, former police investigators and the renowned law professor Robert Black have been demanding for years that the truth must finally be placed on the table.

In the largest terror attack ever perpetrated in Europe, Switzerland also plays an important role.

[The article goes on to deal with what it describes as three central questions: (1) The case of the Zürich electronics engineer Edwin Bollier; (2) Zürich as a hub for Gaddafi’s buyers; (3) Millions paid into an account in Lausanne.

For those without German, Google Translate does a reasonable job with this article.]

Lockerbie: innuendo, myth, half-truths and rumour

The current edition of the Scottish Review contains an article by Magnus Linklater entitled Lockerbie: innuendo, myth, half-truths and rumour, in which Mr Linklater’s well-known views on the conviction of Abdelbaset Megrahi, the proceedings which led up to it and and the concerns and evidence that cast doubt on it, are rehearsed.

I understand that John Ashton is to be accorded space in the Scottish Review to respond to this article. In the meantime, Mr Ashton’s responses to previous articles by Magnus Linklater can be read here and here. My own concerns about the Megrahi conviction are set out here and here and here.

RIP Chris Jeans, Lockerbie documentary producer

[What follows is a short excerpt from The Guardian’s obituary of Chris Jeans, published on Monday:]

Christopher Jeans abandoned the constraints of a BBC suit for the riskier freedom of an independent television producer. He has died of cancer aged 68, two weeks after finishing his final programme, the third part in a trilogy for Al Jazeera about the bombing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie 25 years ago. Chris worked until days before his death, showing his customary exuberance and unyielding persistence, chasing down facts and negotiating his way though complex challenges with a combination of shrewd guile and disarming laughter.

[Two of Chris Jeans’s Aljazeera documentaries have aready been broadcast, Lockerbie: The Pan Am Bomber  and Lockerbie: Case Closed.  The third, provisionally entitled If not Megrahi, then who?, has yet to be shown. 

I am grateful to George Thomson, who was associated with Chris Jeans in all three of Aljazeera’s Lockerbie documentaries, for allowing me to publish this tribute:]

I only met Chris for the first time three years ago when he and Bill Cran approached me to ask for my assistance in producing what was to be one documentary film on Lockerbie.  We went on to make three and I can assure anyone waiting to view the third film that, it will be broadcast.

I agree with Morag [Kerr] it should be broadcast if for nothing else, in honour of one of the kindest, most jovial men I have ever met.

Chris could act the clown, he was great fun to work with but he got the best out of all the people he interviewed.  I was there during the filming of Morag's piece and I can vouch for everything she has so kindly said.

Jim Swire has described him as perhaps the best informed interviewer to have interviewed him on the case.

Bill and Chris were a great double act and I christened them "The Last of the Summer Wine", but they were brilliant and prolific documentary makers who made hard work fun.

When we were on location in Malta Chris would have us up and in the sea before 7am every morning, he loved swimming.  I got my own back by getting him arrested by the local police for hunting down Tony Gauci.

I was with him the day before he died at his home in London, he was very, very ill, but miraculously he managed a smile and squeezed my hand. He could not have been better looked after, his son and new daughter-in-law are both doctors and they assisted his lovely Wife Jessica to care for him right to the very end.  

The world of television documentaries has lost a star, I have lost a very good pal.

Channel 4 News Lockerbie revelations

The important Lockerbie item broadcast on Channel Four News on 20 December 2013 can now be viewed here. The press release that accompanied the programme can be read here.

UK and US geopolitical interests could derail fresh Lockerbie inquiry

[This is the heading over a letter from Joan S Laverie in today’s edition of the Sunday Herald. It reads as follows:]

In a sudden conversion on the road to Damascus, the UK and United States governments, joined by the fledgling administration in Libya, have pledged to uncover the truth about Lockerbie (Lockerbie disaster: 25th anniversary, News, December 22). [RB: What the US and UK governments have pledged to do is to seek evidence against Libyans supposedly involved in the Lockerbie bombing along with Abdelbaset Megrahi.  This is far removed from uncovering the truth.  The truth about the Lockerbie bombing is the last thing the US and UK governments (and, apparently, the Scottish Government) want to be uncovered.]

This collective resolve, however, may have been derailed in its infancy by a ruling last week by a High Court judge in England. In a case brought by a Libyan dissident, abducted and tortured when rendered to Tripoli in 2004 as part of a joint MI6-CIA operation, the judge - according to reports - instructed the plaintiff to abandon his quest to sue both MI6 and the then foreign secretary, Jack Straw, on the grounds that to pursue it would damage Britain's relationship with the US and therefore the "national interest".

If this same principle of "state doctrine" superseding the criminal law of the land was also applicable in May 2000 when the trial - under Scots law - began at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands of the two suspects rendered by Colonel Gaddafi, it is no wonder any attempt to obtain a safe conviction, albeit in the absence of a jury, was doomed to failure.

The United Nations observer at the trial described the verdict as "arbitrary, even irrational" and said: "Proper judicial procedure is simply impossible if political interests and intelligence services from whatever side, succeed in interfering with the actual conduct of a court."

It would seem that then, as now, the financial and geopolitical interests of the Western powers, and in particular those of the US, continue to preclude the pursuit of justice.

[UK government interference in judicial proceedings relating to Lockerbie on the pretext of "national interest" is, of course, nothing new. Regular readers of this blog will remember, for instance, the public interest immunity (PII) certificate signed by the then Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, during the second appeal in 2008. The sorry saga of the PII claim can be followed in these blogposts (amongst others):]

http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2007/12/second-procedural-hearing.html

http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2008/02/statement-by-professor-kchler.html
http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2008/02/third-procedural-hearing.html
http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2008/03/appeal-courts-decision-on-pii.html
http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2008/07/lockerbie-appeal-to-crown-it-all.html
http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2008/07/statement-by-professor-hans-kchler.html
http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2008/07/letter-from-professor-kchler-to-foreign.html
http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2008/10/more-on-pii-from-private-eye.html

Public concern that a great injustice may have been done in 2001

[What follows is a review by Graeme Purves on the Bella Caledonia website of Dr Morag Kerr’s Adequately Explained by Stupidity? Lockerbie, Luggage and Lies.]

Most of us who are old enough will remember the shock with which we learned of the atrocity which ended the lives of 270 people at Lockerbie on 21 December 1988.  I first heard about it from an evening BBC radio news bulletin while lying in bed with a nasty dose of flu.  At first I thought it was a preposterous fantasy conjured up by my fevered condition and staggered through to the television in the sitting room to have the horror confirmed.

Dr Morag Kerr is a Borders-based vet who has previously written books on veterinary laboratory medicine and pet care.  A trip which involved driving along the A74 less than two days after the Maid of the Seas fell from the sky was the initial stimulus for her meticulous research into how that terrible event came about.  She has been Secretary Depute of Justice for Megrahi since 2010.

The safety of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi’s conviction at the trial at Camp Zeist has troubled the national conscience for the last 13 years.   Dr Jim Swire whose daughter Flora died at Lockerbie was one of those not persuaded by the prosecution case.  He subsequently befriended Megrahi and has campaigned tirelessly and with great integrity and dignity for a re-examination of the evidence.  Dramatisations challenging the version of events accepted in the Camp Zeist judgement have played to packed houses at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe.  James Robertson’s novel, The Professor of Truth, draws its power from the widespread unease over the official attribution of responsibility.

A number of books have examined the voluminous evidence accumulated as a result of the investigations into the crime. John Ashton’s Megrahi: You are my Jury explores in detail the provenance of the circuit board fragment identified by investigators as part of a timer used in the bomb and the questions over the reliability of Tony Gauci’s identification of Megrahi as the man who bought the clothes packed in the bomb suitcase.  And disquieting revelations about the case continue to emerge.  On 20 December, Channel 4 News reported that between 1990 and 1995 several senior Syrian officials had told CIA agent Dr Richard Fuisz that the Syrian-based Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command, led by Ahmed Jibril, was responsible for the bombing.

Morag Kerr’s book is the first book about Lockerbie to deal rigorously with the detail of the transfer baggage evidence.  On the basis of a careful analysis of reports, statements and photographs not previously available to the public she presents compelling evidence that the Samsonite hardshell case containing the bomb could not have been loaded on flight KM180 in Malta because it was already in luggage container AVE4041 in the interline shed at Heathrow an hour before the connecting Boeing 727 from Frankfurt (PA103A) had landed.

If the bomb was indeed introduced into the luggage transfer system at Heathrow, then the whole case against Megrahi and Libya crumbles away.  Morag Kerr wants to see an inquiry into the police and forensic investigations of Lockerbie which she regards as seriously flawed.  Given the growing body of evidence which cannot readily be reconciled with the Camp Zeist judgement, only a fresh consideration of the case by a Scottish court can assuage public concern that a great injustice may have been done in 2001.

Many hope Malta's name will eventually be cleared

[What follows is from an article headlined 2013’s top 10 issues published in the Maltese newspaper The Independent on 1 January:]

7 - Lockerbie anniversary

It may not be a strictly Maltese commemoration, but the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland on 21 December 1988 that killed 270 people will always be inextricably tied to Malta. That is because the man found guilty of the heinous act, Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, was found guilty of having loaded the bomb onto a feeder flight at Malta International Airport. Last week’s 25th anniversary of the tragedy, which many believe is still to be solved, was a poignant one, and new calls for fresh inquiries were made. Al-Megrahi, who died insisting in his innocence, had been granted an appeal by the Scottish authorities before being released from a Scottish prison on compassionate grounds.  Al-Megrahi has since died but there are many that hope the real truth behind the atrocity has not died with him – and that Malta’s name will eventually be cleared.

Significant Lockerbie developments expected in 2014

[The Hogmanay and New Year festivities at Gannaga Lodge being now over, may I take this opportunity to wish all the readers of this blog a happy and productive 2014.

Here is an item from the archives, headed Relatives of Lockerbie victims begin new legal fight for public inquiry, first published on 2 January 2010 and based on a report appearing on The Telegraph website :]

UK Families Flight 103, the relatives' campaign group, will use human rights laws in a bid to uncover the truth about the terrorist attack, which claimed 270 lives in December 1988.

The group has hired Gareth Peirce, the prominent human rights solicitor better known for her work representing terror suspects, to devise a legal strategy to secure the inquiry for which families have long campaigned.

It is the first time the families have formally hired lawyers to pursue an inquiry.

The development comes after Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, rejected the group's latest demands for an independent review of the bombing. He informed them of his decision in a letter, dated Christmas Eve, which was received by the relatives last week.

In the letter, Mr Brown said: "All of the matters which you have raised in support of the case for an inquiry are points which were raised at the original trial or the appeal in Scotland, and I do not see that it would be in the public interest to air them again at an inquiry." (...)

Pamela Dix, whose brother Peter was killed in the atrocity, said: "We are arguing that our human rights have been transgressed by the failure to hold an inquiry.

"This is the first time we have hired lawyers to do this. We have until now relied on appealing to the good sense and good nature of our politicians, and that has been to no avail."

The Rev John Mosey, whose daughter Helga, 19, was among the victims when Pan Am Flight 103 was blown up over Lockerbie, said: "I feel extremely positive about this development. For 21 years we have been asking the same questions and asking for an inquiry but I think we are nearer to getting it than we have ever been."

Legal tactics used by UK Families Flight 103 are likely to focus on Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, enshrined in British law by the Human Rights Act, which details the right to life.

Previous legal cases have shown that any failure by the state to properly investigate a suspected murder may amount to a breach of the right to life of the victim.

Options open to the families include launching a judicial review of the Government's decision to refuse an inquiry, or using human rights laws to overturn Megrahi's conviction so that ministers are forced to act.

Dr Jim Swire, whose 24-year-old daughter Flora died on the flight, said it was crucial to overturn Megrahi's guilty verdict so that "public outrage" left the Prime Minister with no choice but to allow in independent inquiry into the bombing.

Jean Berkley, who lost her 29-year-old son Alistair, said Mr Brown's letter "was not a well-considered reply" and added: "This is a kind of treatment we are used to receiving. Our perfectly-well thought out points were dismissed in a rather thoughtless way."

[The Prime Minister's letter, dated 24 December 2009, is in reply to the letter delivered by the UK relatives on 27 October 2009. It reads as follows:]

Thank you for your letter of 27 October.

As I said in my letter of 23 October, I am deeply aware of the pain and suffering caused to you and the other families of the Lockerbie bombing victims. You continue to have my deepest sympathies for your loss.

You referred in your previous letters to the need for a public inquiry into the investigation of the Lockerbie bombing and in your letter of 27 October you again referred to the Heathrow incident. As I said in my last letter, the Heathrow incident to which you refer was examined by the Court of Criminal Appeal in Scotland, which concluded that it did not render the conviction of Mr Megrahi unsafe.

All of the matters which you have raised in support of the case for an inquiry are points which were raised at the original trial or the appeal in Scotland, and I do not see that it would be in the public interest to air them again at an inquiry.

I do appreciate that this answer is still not what you were looking for. Please be assured that my thoughts, and those of the Government, remain with you and the other families, especially at what must be a particularly difficult time of year for you all.

[That was four years ago. Obduracy on the part of UK and Scottish Governments has so far stymied the campaign for an independent inquiry. But I am reasonably confident that 2014 will see significant developments leading ultimately to Abdelbaset Megrahi’s name being cleared.]