Questions still need answering

[This is the headline over an editorial in today’s edition of the Morning Star. It reads as follows:]

Yesterday’s ruling by the Appeal Court in Edinburgh against Lockerbie family survivors’ bid to challenge the conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi cannot be the last word.

Lord Justice Clerk Lord Carloway ruled that the law was “not designed to give relatives of victims a right to proceed in an appeal for their own or the public interest.”

But, if so, there has to be another mechanism to deliver justice not only to Megrahi’s family but also the relatives of all 270 people murdered on December 21 1988 when a bomb blew up Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie.

The Morning Star has made no secret of its longstanding disquiet over the legal charade that led to the Libyan security official’s conviction.

Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was among the casualties, has been relentless in his efforts to discover the truth, meeting the scapegoat before he died and continuing to campaign after Megrahi’s death.

He has refused to be fobbed off by official opacity and convenient but clearly flawed legal proceedings.

US and British authorities have offered differing explanations of how Flight 103 met its fate.

Their first thesis was that the atrocity was a revenge attack masterminded by elements within the theocratic regime in Tehran in response to the shooting down by a US warship of an Iranian civilian passenger plane over the Persian Gulf in July 1988, killing all 290 people on board.

The crime was said to have been contracted out to a Palestinian splinter group, but this theory, proclaimed with great authority, fizzled out in the run-up to the first Iraq war in 1990.

When Washington began building a coalition to oppose Saddam Hussein’s invasion and planned annexation of Kuwait, Iran was persuaded to jump on board.

In contrast, Libyan leader Muammar Gadaffi threw his country’s support behind Iraq.

Tripoli rapidly filled the scapegoat pigeonhole vacated by Iran, with US “intelligence” agents concocting an implausible scenario that involved Megrahi and other Libyan officials placing a bomb on Flight 103 in Malta.

The real conspiracy, that undertaken by US spooks, included bribery of Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci to testify that he remembered Megrahi buying clothing in his shop shortly before the flight, fragments of which were discovered in the wreckage around Lockerbie.

The approach of most British MPs to what is self-evidently a miscarriage of justice has been one of indifference.

Their attitude reflects a viewpoint that the key players — victims and supposed perpetrator — are all dead, so move on.

Some point out that Gadaffi stumped up $2.5 billion in compensation for the families of those killed in the bombing, but this ignores the fact that this payment was a quid quo pro for the US and its allies dropping their embargo of Libya and resuming trade and investment links.

It was as cynical a payoff as the CIA agents’ sweetener to their Maltese “witness.”

Dr Swire is as intent as ever on finding out what really happened, pointing out last year that his daughter “was brutally murdered in a situation where it’s clear that the national protection security services had abysmally failed.

“Do you not think that even 25 years later you might want to feel that you had a status in discovering the truth about who murdered her and why she was not protected?”

Whatever the finer points of interpretation over the design of current law, too many questions still remain over Lockerbie for the grass to be allowed to grow over this inquiry.

Lockerbie families lose bid to appeal al-Megrahi verdict

[What follows is excerpted from a report in today’s edition of The National. It provides further details about the arguments advanced during yesterday’s hearing on the SCCRC’s Megrahi petition:]

An attempt to appeal the conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi by families of those who died in the Lockerbie bombing has failed.

Judges at the Appeal Court in Edinburgh said legally the bid had to be rejected as the families could not be considered to have a “legitimate interest” in the appeal. (...)

Yesterday’s hearing came about after the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC), which is looking at Megrahi’s conviction, asked the Appeal Court in Edinburgh for guidance on whether members of the victims’ families can take forward an appeal.

Previous rulings mean a post mortem appeal can only be requested by the executor of a dead person’s estate or their next of kin.

The panel of three judges had heard legal arguments from Ailsa Carmichael QC on behalf of the SCCRC and Gordon Jackson QC for the relatives.

Carmichael told the court the SCCRC needed to determine at an early stage if relatives of victims were considered to be a “person with a legitimate interest to pursue an appeal”.

This, Carmichael said, was necessary to know before the SCCRC could decide to refer the case back to the High Court for a third appeal.

She said: “It would be a waste of public funds for the [SCCRC] to move into a full consideration of whether to make a reference and carry out all the investigations that would be required in order to take that decision if they have a reasonable apprehension as to whether there will be anybody to pick up an appeal in the event a reference was made.”

Jackson said it wrong to worry about the public funds given all the work that has already gone into the case.

He said: “If [the families] believe, as they do, that a miscarriage of justice has happened and there has been a wrongful conviction, as they do believe, in the case of the death of their relative then that in my submission is a legitimate interest.”

Delivering his report yesterday, the Lord Justice Clerk Lord Carloway, sitting with Lord Brodie and Lady Dorrian said the law was “not designed to give relatives of victims a right to proceed in an appeal for their own or the public interest” and the relatives of those who died could not be considered to have a “legitimate interest”.

Dr Jim Swire and the Reverend John Mosey, who both lost relatives in the Lockerbie bombing stood with Aamer Anwar, the solicitor for the Megrahi family and 26 British relatives of Lockerbie victims, to deliver a statement outside the court.

Anwar said: “It is regularly claimed that we place victims at the heart of our justice system.

“So why should the families of murder victims not have a legitimate interest in seeking to overturn the wrongful conviction of a person convicted of the murder of their loved ones? Justice does not die with the accused in this case Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.

“Despite 26 long years since the Lockerbie bombing the families will not give up their fight for justice and the truth.”

Anwar said that the legal battle was not concluded, as he remains instructed by the family of al-Megrahi who seek to overturn the conviction. (...)

It was the first time in UK legal history relatives of murdered victims have united with the relatives of a convicted deceased in such a way.

However, the SCCRC previously said that they have struggled to get proof from al-Megrahi’s family members of their wish to be involved in any appeal. 

[RB: Unlike the SCCRC, apparently, I have no doubt that Aamer Anwar is instructed by the Megrahi family (including the son who is the equivalent of Abdelbaset’s executor under Libyan law) to pursue a further appeal. I have seen the relevant documents and have had contact, through Facebook, with members of the family.]

Court's reasons for holding victims' relatives not entitled to pursue Megrahi appeal

[What follows is the text of the statement made by the Lord Justice Clerk, Lord Carloway, when the High Court today ruled that victims’ relatives are not entitled to pursue an appeal on behalf of a deceased convict:]

“The court will furnish a full written Opinion to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission in terms of the statute (section 194(d)(3) of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995) in early course. At this stage, it will give brief oral reasons for its decision.

The application raises a sharp point of statutory interpretation. Section 303A(1) of the 1995 Act permits ‘any person’ to apply to the court for an order authorising him to institute or continue any appeal which could have been authorised by a convicted person who is deceased. Subsection 303A(4), however, assumes that it will be the executor of the deceased who will do so. It continues by referring also to an applicant who ‘otherwise appears to the court to have a legitimate interest’. This application on behalf of the Commission raises a general question of the scope of that phrase. The more particular issue is whether it extends to the relatives of deceased victims of a deceased convicted person and, presumably, in other cases, to the victims themselves.  

The court does not consider that this statutory provision applies to the relatives of the deceased’s victims in this case.

First, on a plain reading of the statute, the person who has a right to make an application for authority to instruct or continue an appeal is the executor, who is the personal representative of the deceased. This is demonstrated by subsection (5), whereby the person authorised to institute or continue the appeal steps into the position of the deceased in the appeal. He does not represent a separate interest. The Scottish criminal justice system does not, at present, allow victims or relatives of victims to be direct participants in criminal proceedings. The court does not consider that this provision was intended to provide such a right, just because the convicted person is deceased.  

Secondly, to decide otherwise would reverse a central element in criminal proceedings in this jurisdiction. If that were what was intended, the court would have expected it to have been spelled out clearly in the statute.  

Thirdly, in recommending this mode of procedure, the Sutherland Committee referred to persons who could demonstrate ‘good reason for pursuing an appeal, for example a personal or business partner, close relation or executor’; that meaning a close relative of the deceased, who might wish to clear the convicted person’s name posthumously and to persons with, for example, an interest in the estate of the deceased who may be affected financially by the conviction. The discussion by the Sutherland Committee provides a helpful aid to construction, were that required.

What the statute is intended to provide is an avenue whereby an executor as of right, and others in a similar relationship with the deceased, can continue or institute appeal proceedings. It is not designed to give relatives of victims a right to pursue an appeal for their own, or the public, interest in securing that miscarriages of justice should not occur.”

Families lose Lockerbie case ruling

[This is the headline over a Press Association news agency report as published today on the website of The Star. It reads as follows:]

Judges have ruled that relatives of the victims of the Lockerbie bombing should not be allowed to pursue an appeal on behalf of the only man convicted of the atrocity.

A group of British relatives argued that they had a ''legitimate interest'' in trying to get the case of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi back before a court for a full appeal.

They believe the Libyan, who died protesting his innocence in his home country in 2012, was the victim of a miscarriage of justice and want his conviction overturned.

The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC), which is once again looking at Megrahi's conviction, asked the Appeal Court in Edinburgh for guidance on whether members of the victims' families can take forward an appeal.

Previous court decisions have meant that only the executor of a dead person's estate or their next of kin could proceed with such a posthumous application. [RB: There were no previous decisions explicitly excluding victims' relatives from applying.]

A hearing took place at the court today before The Lord Justice Clerk Lord Carloway sitting with Lord Brodie and Lady Dorrian.

Delivering their judgment, Lord Carloway said that the law was "not designed to give relatives of victims a right to proceed in an appeal for their own or the public interest".

Two of the relatives of victims involved in the action - Dr Jim Swire and Rev John Moseley - were present in court for the hearing.

After the decision, they joined Aamer Anwar, solicitor for the Megrahi family and 26 British relatives of Lockerbie victims, to deliver a statement outside the court saying the fight would continue.

Mr Anwar said: "It is regularly claimed that we place victims at the heart of the justice system, so why should the families of murder victims not have a legitimate interest in seeking to overturn the wrongful conviction of the person convicted of the murder of their loved ones?

"Justice does not die with the accused, in this case Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.

"Despite 26 long years since the Lockerbie bombing the families will not give up their fight for justice and the truth.

"The matter is not concluded as we remain instructed by al-Megrahi's family."

Lockerbie families told they cannot appeal Megrahi's conviction

This is the headline over a report just published on the STV News website. It reads as follows:]

Relatives of Lockerbie bombing victims have been told they cannot pursue an appeal on behalf of the man convicted of the atrocity.

Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was found guilty of the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over the south of Scotland on December 21, 1988, in which 270 people were killed.

Some families believe his conviction was a miscarriage of justice and say it should be overturned.

The Justice for Megrahi Campaign appealed to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) in June last year. [RB: The SCCRC application was not at the instance of the Justice for Megrahi campaign, but of a group of victims' relatives.]

The SCCRC asked the High Court for guidance on whether the families can take forward an appeal on Megrahi’s behalf and a hearing was held at the Appeal Court in Edinburgh on Friday.

Judges declined their petition, saying the families were not allowed to continue with the appeal.

Megrahi died in 2012 after abandoning his second appeal against his conviction.

He was released on compassionate ground in 2009 and went back to Libya.

Anniversary of shooting down of Iran Air 655 by USS Vincennes

It was on this date in 1998 that Iran Air flight 655 was shot down over the Strait of Hormuz by the USS Vincennes. The story can be followed on this blog here and on Wikipedia here.

Judges hear Lockerbie appeal bid

[This is the headline over a Press Association news agency report published today on the Yahoo! News website.  It reads as follows:]

A hearing will take place today to decide whether relatives of Lockerbie bombing victims could pursue an appeal on behalf of the only man convicted of the atrocity.

A group of British relatives maintain they have a ''legitimate interest'' in trying to get the case of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi back before a court for a full appeal.

They believe the Libyan, who died protesting his innocence in his home country in 2012, was the victim of a miscarriage of justice and say his conviction should be overturned.

The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC), which is once again looking at Megrahi's conviction, has petitioned the High Court asking for guidance on whether members of the victims' families can take forward such an appeal on the convicted man's behalf.

A hearing on the issue will take place before three judges at the Appeal Court in Edinburgh today.

Megrahi was found guilty of the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over the south of Scotland on December 21 1988 in which 270 people were killed.

He died after abandoning his second appeal, which itself came after the SCCRC referred the case back to senior High Court judges in 2007.

Since June last year, the SCCRC has been considering a fresh, joint application from members of Megrahi's family and the Justice for Megrahi campaign group, which includes relatives of British victims of the bombing, to review the conviction.

Aamer Anwar, solicitor for the Megrahi family and 26 relatives of Lockerbie victims, said: "On June 5 2014, the Commission received an application for a further review of Mr Al-Megrahi's conviction from my office.

"This application was lodged on behalf of two separate groups: Family members of the deceased victims of the Lockerbie bombing and members of Mr Al-Megrahi's family.

"Our legal team will argue today that the Commission is premature with their petition, as the role of the SCCRC is to investigate whether there has been a miscarriage of justice.

"When Pan Am flight 103 exploded over Lockerbie on 21 December 1988, 270 people from 21 countries perished. It remains the worst terrorist atrocity ever committed in the UK but the consequences are still being felt 26 years later.

"The family members of the Lockerbie victims instructing us maintain that they have as much a right to pursue an appeal as the Megrahi family because they also believe the wrong person was convicted.

"The families hope this matter can be resolved as finality in the Megrahi case is unlikely ever to be achieved unless a referral is made to the Appeal Court."

Substantive hearing on SCCRC Megrahi petition on Friday 3 July

In December last year the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission petitioned the High Court of Justiciary seeking guidance on whether relatives of Lockerbie victims, such as Dr Jim Swire and the Revd John Mosey, had a “legitimate interest” to pursue an appeal on behalf of the late Abdelbaset Megrahi, should the SCCRC decide that a miscarriage of justice might have occurred. The reaction of the relatives’ lawyers to this petition can be read here. A procedural hearing on the petition was held at the end of March 2015. The case is back before the High Court in Edinburgh tomorrow (Friday, 3 July) at 10.30 am when the substantive legal issues will be debated. Written heads of argument have been lodged by the SCCRC, the Crown and the relatives.

Lockerbie link to deported terrorist

[This is the headline over a report published on the website of The Herald newspaper on this date in 1996. It reads as follows:]

Germany has deported a Palestinian terrorist who has been linked to the 1988 Lockerbie bombing, justice officials said today. Hafez Kassem Dalkamoni was flown to Damascus, Syria, last Thursday, the news magazine Focus reported today.

A justice ministry spokes-woman in the central German city of Saarbrucken, Marion Walter, said the decision to deport Dalkamoni was made by the Federal Prosecutor's Office in Karslruhe. Dalkamoni, believed to be a member of the Damascus-based Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command, served half of a 15-year sentence for an attack against two US military trains in 1987 and 1988. Dalkamoni and another suspected member of the Popular Front were arrested in Germany two months before Pan Am Flight 103 exploded over Lockerbie, killing all 259 people on board and 11 people on the ground. A search of the Frankfurt apartment where the men were arrested turned up a portable radio-cassette recorder containing plastic explosives similar to the type that blew up the plane.

"The true culprits have literally gotten away with murder"

[Following on from its article of 8 June 2000, The Lockerbie Bombing Trial: Is Libya Being Framed?, the Middle East Intelligence Bulletin published on this date in 2000 Susan Lindauer’s sworn Lockerbie deposition dated 4 December 1998. The following are a few sentences from the end of the document:]

First, the accused Libyans are effectively denied the right to a fair trial where they might bring forth witnesses in their own defense, which could immediately exonerate them of all charges. And secondly, the families are denied the ability to close this terrible wound, and experience the healing that would be gained from discovering the complete truth and facts surrounding this case.

On both accounts, I cannot be silent. I suspect my disclosure will grieve the families with the horrible revelation that US government officials have behaved so cynically and despicably as to withhold evidence in this case. And yet such a cynical and desperate act must be condemned by civilized society. I dare say Libya is entitled to financial compensation for the economic harassment her people have endured because of these blatantly false accusations, and the deliberate efforts to mislead potential judges, and victimize potential witnesses by a policy of aggressive harassment and punishment for speaking out. Meanwhile, the true culprits have literally gotten away with murder.

"I was not involved in the Lockerbie bombing in any way whatsoever"

[This is the headline over a report published in The Tripoli Post on this date in 2007. It reads as follows:]

Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al-Megrahi renewed his assertion that he is innocent after the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) said he "may have suffered a miscarriage of justice" based on new evidence.

"I reiterate today what I have been saying since I was first indicted in 1991: I was not involved in the Lockerbie bombing in any way whatsoever," he said in a statement.

The SCCRC referred his case to the Appeal Court in Edinburgh, Scotland's highest court, which could eventually quash his conviction, throwing the case wide open and reviving speculation as to who was behind the bombing.

Megrahi, who applied for the SCCRC review, welcomed the panel's decision, saying through his lawyer that he "shall finally be recognised as an innocent man" once the entire legal process is completed.

Megrahi, now 55, was convicted by a trio of Scottish judges sitting in a special court in the Netherlands of blowing up Pan Am Flight 103 on December 21, 1988 by means of a bomb smuggled on board in a suitcase. He was jailed for a total of 27 years.

Megrahi added there was little he could say to relatives of the victims that risked sounding "insensitive" but said that "their cause is in no way served by the incarceration of an innocent man."

The SCCRC led a three-year international probe starting in 2004, interviewing 45 witnesses -- including Megrahi and Libyan co-accused Al Amin Khalifa Fhimah who was cleared -- during inquiries in Britain, Malta, Libya and Italy.

In a statement summarizing the 800-page review which was not published, the panel said it had identified six grounds where it believed "a miscarriage of justice may have occurred."

It found there was no "reasonable basis" for the original trial court's finding that various items of clothing linked to the bomb suitcase were bought from a shop in Malta on December 7, 1988. Although it had been proved that Megrahi had been in Malta several times that month, evidence at the trial was that December 7 was the only date on which he would have been able to buy the items.

Mohammed al-Zwai, a Libyan official dealing with the Lockerbie issue and former ambassador to Britain and current Libyan ambassador to Morocco, said in a statement: "The decision opens the door of hope regarding the innocence of Abdel Basset al-Megrahi ... This decision will have good consequences."

"This legal decision will have some positive effects on relations between Libya and the European Union," al-Zwai, told AFP. "There will be more flexibility over all the dossiers on hold between the EU and Libya," added Zwai. said the Scottish panel's decision "opens the door of hope for an acquittal".

A previous appeal by Al-Megrahi, who is being held in a jail near Glasgow, western Scotland, was thrown out in 2002.

Jim Swire, a doctor who lost his daughter Flora in the bombing, said the decision opened a "new chapter" in the nearly 19-year search for the truth for the victims' families.

Swire told BBC radio: "I went into that court in Holland thinking I was going to see the trial of those who were responsible for the murder of my daughter.

"I came out thinking he had been framed. I'm very much afraid that we saw steps taken to ensure that a politically-desired result was obtained."

[A long profile of Jim and Jane Swire was published in The Herald on the same date.  It can be read here.]

Flawed trial and appeal proceedings

[What follows is the text of a statement released by Professor Hans Köchler on this date in 2007:]

Vienna, Austria, 29 June 2007/P/HK/20429

Dr Hans Köchler, President of the International Progress Organization (IPO) and Head of the Dept. of Philosophy at the University of Innsbruck, Austria, served from 5 May 2000 until 14 March 2002 as international observer at the Scottish Court in the Netherlands ("Lockerbie Court"). He had been nominated by the Secretary-General of the United Nations,  Mr Kofi Annan, on the basis of Security Council resolution 1192 (1998). Dr Köchler issued two comprehensive analytical reports after the Trial (3 February 2001) and after the Appeal (26 March 2002) respectively, which the International Progress Organization submitted to the United Nations.

In his reports, Dr Köchler was highly critical of the proceedings and questioned the fairness and impartiality of both the trial and appeal courts. In an interview for the BBC on 14 March 2002, he described the dismissal of the appeal as a "spectacular miscarriage of justice" (BBC News World Edition). At the time, the Scottish judicial establishment had tried to dismiss Dr Köchler's conclusion as a misunderstanding of the Scottish judicial system. The decision of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) to refer the case of Abdelbaset Ali Mohamed Al Megrahi back to the Scottish High Court of Justiciary has - after additional investigations lasting more than five years - confirmed Dr Köchler's original concerns. In particular, the SCCRC had doubted the credibility of one of the key witnesses, Maltese shop owner Tony Gauci, stating in its News Release of 28 June 2007 "that there is no reasonable basis in the trial court's judgment for its conclusion that the purchase of the items [clothes that were found in the wreckage of the plane] from Mary's House [in Malta] took place on 7 December 1988." Exactly this point had been stated in some detail by Dr Köchler in his appeal report of 26 March 2002 (!) (paras 10, 15 and 16).

However, in interviews conducted yesterday by representatives of the Scottish, British and German media, Dr Köchler expressed his surprise at the Commission's focus of review and apparent bias in favour of the judicial establishment: "In giving exoneration to the police, prosecutors, and forensic staff, I think they show their lack of independence. No officials to be blamed, simply a Maltese shopkeeper." (The Herald, Glasgow, 29 June 2007)

****

The decision, announced by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) on 28 June 2007, to refer Mr. Al Megrahi's case back to the High Court of Justiciary has been long overdue and has created the chance for a second legal evaluation by an Appeal Court of five Scottish judges.

It is to be hoped that, in view of the far-reaching political implications and international ramifications of the case, this time the judges will act in full independence and that the proceedings will meet the standards of fair trial under the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. If this final chance to put things right and conduct criminal proceedings in a fair and fully transparent manner is missed, irreparable damage will be done to the rule of law in Scotland and to the principle of "devolution" of important areas of public administration from the United Kingdom level to that of Scotland.

The undersigned would like to restate the point he made in his appeal report in 2002, namely that the final arbiter of the fairness of Scottish criminal proceedings (after all means of review in the domestic context have been exhausted) is the European Court of Human Rights (Strasbourg) that exercises its jurisdiction on the basis of the European Human Rights Convention.

Regrettably, the SCCRC has not disclosed all its grounds of referral and, in its news release of 28 June, has basically concentrated on the dubious role of Maltese witness Tony Gauci - while at the same time engaging in a rather strange exercise of "preventive exoneration" of certain people belonging to the British and/or Scottish police and judicial system whose behaviour, as pointed out in the undersigned's reports and confirmed, in the meantime, in several affidavits, has been highly questionable and may have detrimentally affected the fairness of the proceedings (see IPO News Release of 14 October 2005). It is particularly difficult to comprehend why the SCCRC would take great pains to "absolve" Mr Megrahi's defense team during the trial and first appeal from any criticisms in regard to their performance in the interest of their client (Par. 4.1 of the News Release of the SCCRC). The lack of integrity of the defense was obvious to the undersigned during the two years he observed the proceedings at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands and was the object of a conversation of the undersigned with the appellant (Mr Megrahi), arranged, at the latter's request, by the Scottish Court Service at HM Prison Zeist.

In view of the flawed trial and appeal proceedings, now acknowledged, at least in part, by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, and for the sake of transparency, the report of the Commission should be made public in its entirety. The victims' families as well as the international public deserve to know the full truth about the reasons of referral of Mr Al Megrahi's case back to the High Court of Justiciary.

In conformity with the principle of transparency of the proceedings that was guiding United Nations Security Council resolution 1192 (1998) (operative para 6), the proceedings of the Scottish Appeal Court should again be witnessed by international observers.

The undersigned renews his call for a full and independent public inquiry of the Lockerbie case and its handling by the Scottish judiciary as well as the British and US political and intelligence establishments. In order to avoid bias, such an investigation will require the participation of additional legal experts, to be appointed by the United Nations Organization, from countries that are not involved in the Lockerbie dispute.

Those politicians in the United Kingdom and the United States who have proclaimed an international "war on terror" will not be credible in their strategy if they prevent a full investigation into the causes of the explosion of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie. All those responsible, without exception,  must be brought to justice.

(signed) Dr Hans Köchler