[The following report on today’s proceedings in the Scottish Parliament’s Justice Committee is taken from The Press Association news agency report on the Kincardineshire Observer’s website:]
Calls for a public inquiry into the Lockerbie bombing have continued after "serious formal allegations" relating to the conduct of the investigation were laid before the Justice Secretary.
Holyrood's Justice Committee once again continued the long-running petition by the Justice For Megrahi (JFM) group calling for an independent inquiry into the 2001 Kamp van Zeist conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi for the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 in December 1988.
Convener Christine Grahame said: "A letter of complaint has been sent to the Cabinet Secretary lodging serious formal allegations relating to the conduct of the investigation and the trial.
"That has been given 30 days grace to be answered by the Cabinet Secretary and then it will be public. I think we would like to see the Cabinet Secretary's response before we decide to do anything."
Despite initial objections by Labour MSP Graeme Pearson, who suggested that formal routes of appeal against the conviction remain open, the committee agreed to continue the petition.
Ms Grahame added: "I accept what is said about a court case being one way forward, but there is a possibility under the Inquiries Act for the Government to conduct an inquiry into something wholly within its remit. Well, the operation of the police and the Crown Office is wholly within the remit of the Scottish Government. So, there are certain powers that the Government has, whether or not they are used."
JFM said they have given Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill until October 13 to respond to their letter of complaint before they go public with the allegations. In a submission to the committee, sent shortly after the complaint was lodged, JFM said: "Serious question marks (have been) raised concerning the quality of forensic evidence relating to the shard of PCB alleged by the Crown to have been part of a triggering device for a bomb.
"It would now appear that expert evidence provided to the court by representatives of the Royal Armament and Research Establishment was deeply flawed and at least one of the expert witnesses may well have perjured himself."
A Scottish Government spokesman said: "The issues being raised in relation to the conviction itself must be a matter for a court of law. Mr Al-Megrahi was convicted in a court of law, his conviction was upheld on appeal and that is the only appropriate place for his guilt or innocence to be determined.
"As was made clear by the Cabinet Secretary in his statement to the Scottish Parliament in February this year, it remains open for relatives of Mr Al-Megrahi to ask the SCCRC (Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission) to refer the case to the Appeal Court again on a posthumous basis, which ministers would be entirely comfortable with."
[A report on the website of The Scotsman contains the following:]
Campaigners with the Justice For Megrahi (JFM) group, including Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died in the tragedy, have a petition lodged at Holyrood demanding a full inquiry and MSPs today agreed to keep it running.
Nationalist Rod Campbell, himself an advocate, said it was a “comparatively short time” since Megrahi had died.
“We have no information as to what his intentions are in respect of a possible appeal,” he said.
“The proper place is in the criminal courts until we’re satisfied that no further criminal proceedings will be forthcoming.”
Former police officer John Finnie of the SNP said the current Libyan regime was unlikely to result in the family “receiving encouragement” to pursue an appeal.
Justice committee convenor Christine Grahame, herself a member of the JFM group said a letter has also been sent to justice secretary Kenny MacAskill with “serious formal allegations” about the conduct of the inquiry.
The cabinet secretary has been given 30 days grace to respond to this.
Ms Grahame added: “We would like to see that and the cabinet secretary’s response before we decide anything.
“I accept that the court case is one way forward, but there is also - and I just put this as a possibility – there is a possibility under the inquiries act for the Government to conduct an inquiry wholly within its remit. The operation of the police and Crown Office is within the remit of the Scottish Government.
“There are certain powers that Governments do have whether or not they are used.”
Dr Swire said afterwards major scientific doubts had been cast on the crucial evidence surrounding the bomb’s circuit board, which he believes undermined the verdict.
But he said: “The petition is for an independent inquiry and that would be my number one preference because there are very serious allegations over the Crown Office’s conduct in this case and it’s hard to see how an appeal would do anything other than raise the verdict against Megrahi who is no longer with us.”
“Alex Salmond has the power to call such an inquiry if he so decides.”
Tuesday, 25 September 2012
Deliberately false and misleading allegations, says rattled Crown Office
[A report in today’s edition of The Scotsman, about Justice for Megrahi’s letter to Kenny MacAskill alleging serious wrongdoing in the Lockerbie investigation and prosecution contains the following:]
But the Crown Office yesterday branded the allegations “defamatory and entirely unfounded”. A spokesman added that one of the allegations had been investigated by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SSCRC) which found no basis for appeal, while it was also found there was “no basis” for claims that any police officers or officials fabricated evidence.
“It is a matter of the greatest concern that deliberately false and misleading allegations have been made in this way,” he added. The Lockerbie conviction has already been upheld by five appeal court judges, while Megrahi abandoned a second appeal.
[Justice for Megrahi has undertaken not to make public the allegations of serious wrongdoing in the Lockerbie investigation and prosecution until 30 days after the date of its letter (13 September 2012). However, since the article from which the following is excerpted has been in the public domain since its publication in The Scotsman on 23 July 2007, I see no reason not to reproduce it:]
The behaviour of the Crown in the Lockerbie trial was certainly not beyond criticism - and indeed it casts grave doubt on the extent to which the Lord Advocate and Crown Office staff can be relied on always to place the interest of securing a fair trial for the accused above any perceived institutional imperative to obtain a conviction.
To illustrate this in the context of the Lockerbie trial, it is enough to refer to the saga of CIA cables relating to the star Crown witness, Abdul Majid Giaka, who had been a long-standing CIA asset in Libya and, by the time of the trial, was living in the US in a witness protection programme. Giaka's evidence was ultimately found by the court to be utterly untrustworthy. This was largely due to the devastating effectiveness of the cross-examination by defence counsel. Their ability to destroy completely the credibility of the witness stemmed from the contents of cables in which his CIA handlers communicated to headquarters the information that Giaka had provided to them in the course of their secret meetings. Discrepancies between Giaka's evidence-in-chief to the Advocate Depute and the contents of these contemporaneous cables enabled the defence to mount a formidable challenge to the truthfulness and accuracy, or credibility and reliability, of Giaka's testimony. Had the information contained in these cables not been available to them, the task of attempting to demonstrate to the court that Giaka was an incredible or unreliable witness would have been more difficult, and perhaps impossible.
Yet the Crown strove valiantly to prevent the defence obtaining access to these cables. At the trial, on 22 August 2000, when he was seeking to persuade the Court to deny the defence access to those cables in their unedited or uncensored form, the then Lord Advocate, Colin Boyd QC, stated that the members of the prosecution team who were given access to the uncensored CIA cables on 1 June 2000 were fully aware of the obligation incumbent upon them as prosecutors to make available to the defence material relevant to the defence of the accused and, to that end, approached the contents of those cables with certain considerations in mind.
Boyd said: "First of all, they considered whether or not there was any information behind the redactions which would undermine the Crown case in any way. Second, they considered whether there was anything which would appear to reflect on the credibility of Majid... On all of these matters, the learned Advocate Depute reached the conclusion that there was nothing within the cables which bore on the defence case, either by undermining the Crown case or by advancing a positive case which was being made or may be made, having regard to the special defence... I emphasise that the redactions have been made on the basis of what is in the interests of the security of a friendly power... Crown counsel was satisfied that there was nothing within the documents which bore upon the defence case in any way."
One judge, Lord Coulsfield, then intervened: "Does that include, Lord Advocate... that Crown counsel, having considered the documents, can say to the Court that there is nothing concealed which could possibly bear on the credibility of this witness?"
The Lord Advocate replied: "Well, I'm just checking with the counsel who made that... there is nothing within these documents which relates to Lockerbie or the bombing of Pan Am 103 which could in any way impinge on the credibility of Majid on these matters."
Notwithstanding the opposition of the Lord Advocate, the court ordered the unedited cables to be made available to the defence, who went on to use their contents to such devastating effect in questioning Giaka that the court held that his evidence had to be disregarded in its entirety. Yet, strangely enough, the judges did not see fit publicly to censure the Crown for its inaccurate assurances that the cables contained nothing that could assist the defence.
[The allegations in Justice for Megrahi’s letter to the Cabinet Secretary for Justice are equally weighty and equally strongly founded on evidence.]
But the Crown Office yesterday branded the allegations “defamatory and entirely unfounded”. A spokesman added that one of the allegations had been investigated by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SSCRC) which found no basis for appeal, while it was also found there was “no basis” for claims that any police officers or officials fabricated evidence.
“It is a matter of the greatest concern that deliberately false and misleading allegations have been made in this way,” he added. The Lockerbie conviction has already been upheld by five appeal court judges, while Megrahi abandoned a second appeal.
[Justice for Megrahi has undertaken not to make public the allegations of serious wrongdoing in the Lockerbie investigation and prosecution until 30 days after the date of its letter (13 September 2012). However, since the article from which the following is excerpted has been in the public domain since its publication in The Scotsman on 23 July 2007, I see no reason not to reproduce it:]
The behaviour of the Crown in the Lockerbie trial was certainly not beyond criticism - and indeed it casts grave doubt on the extent to which the Lord Advocate and Crown Office staff can be relied on always to place the interest of securing a fair trial for the accused above any perceived institutional imperative to obtain a conviction.
To illustrate this in the context of the Lockerbie trial, it is enough to refer to the saga of CIA cables relating to the star Crown witness, Abdul Majid Giaka, who had been a long-standing CIA asset in Libya and, by the time of the trial, was living in the US in a witness protection programme. Giaka's evidence was ultimately found by the court to be utterly untrustworthy. This was largely due to the devastating effectiveness of the cross-examination by defence counsel. Their ability to destroy completely the credibility of the witness stemmed from the contents of cables in which his CIA handlers communicated to headquarters the information that Giaka had provided to them in the course of their secret meetings. Discrepancies between Giaka's evidence-in-chief to the Advocate Depute and the contents of these contemporaneous cables enabled the defence to mount a formidable challenge to the truthfulness and accuracy, or credibility and reliability, of Giaka's testimony. Had the information contained in these cables not been available to them, the task of attempting to demonstrate to the court that Giaka was an incredible or unreliable witness would have been more difficult, and perhaps impossible.
Yet the Crown strove valiantly to prevent the defence obtaining access to these cables. At the trial, on 22 August 2000, when he was seeking to persuade the Court to deny the defence access to those cables in their unedited or uncensored form, the then Lord Advocate, Colin Boyd QC, stated that the members of the prosecution team who were given access to the uncensored CIA cables on 1 June 2000 were fully aware of the obligation incumbent upon them as prosecutors to make available to the defence material relevant to the defence of the accused and, to that end, approached the contents of those cables with certain considerations in mind.
Boyd said: "First of all, they considered whether or not there was any information behind the redactions which would undermine the Crown case in any way. Second, they considered whether there was anything which would appear to reflect on the credibility of Majid... On all of these matters, the learned Advocate Depute reached the conclusion that there was nothing within the cables which bore on the defence case, either by undermining the Crown case or by advancing a positive case which was being made or may be made, having regard to the special defence... I emphasise that the redactions have been made on the basis of what is in the interests of the security of a friendly power... Crown counsel was satisfied that there was nothing within the documents which bore upon the defence case in any way."
One judge, Lord Coulsfield, then intervened: "Does that include, Lord Advocate... that Crown counsel, having considered the documents, can say to the Court that there is nothing concealed which could possibly bear on the credibility of this witness?"
The Lord Advocate replied: "Well, I'm just checking with the counsel who made that... there is nothing within these documents which relates to Lockerbie or the bombing of Pan Am 103 which could in any way impinge on the credibility of Majid on these matters."
Notwithstanding the opposition of the Lord Advocate, the court ordered the unedited cables to be made available to the defence, who went on to use their contents to such devastating effect in questioning Giaka that the court held that his evidence had to be disregarded in its entirety. Yet, strangely enough, the judges did not see fit publicly to censure the Crown for its inaccurate assurances that the cables contained nothing that could assist the defence.
[The allegations in Justice for Megrahi’s letter to the Cabinet Secretary for Justice are equally weighty and equally strongly founded on evidence.]
Kenny MacAskill given Lockerbie probe claims deadline
[This is the headline over a report by Reevel Alderson, BBC Scotland home affairs correspondent, on the BBC News website. It reads as follows:]
Campaigners demanding a new inquiry into the 1988 Lockerbie disaster claim to have evidence that the investigation into the tragedy - and the subsequent trial - were mishandled.
They have written to Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, giving him 30 days to respond.
If he does not, the group - Justice for Megrahi (JFM) - said they will publish their evidence.
MSPs are later due to again consider the group's petition for an inquiry.
The Scottish government has previously rejected the group's demands for an inquiry into the 2001 conviction of Libyan Secret Service agent Abdelbaset al-Megrahi who was found guilty of 270 counts of murder.
A spokesman said: "The Scottish government does not doubt the safety of the conviction of al-Megrahi.
"Nevertheless, there remain concerns to some on the wider issues of the Lockerbie atrocity."
He added that the questions to be asked would be beyond the jurisdiction of Scots Law and the remit of the Scottish government.
JFM said the investigation of the bombing was carried out by the Crown Office and the prosecution at Kamp van Zeist in the Netherlands was under Scots law, so an inquiry would lie within the jurisdiction of the Scottish Parliament.
In its letter to Mr MacAskill, the group claims to have evidence of major flaws in the investigation and trial.
The group's secretary, Robert Forrester said: "We do not propose to go public or divulge details of our allegations at this stage.
"We have given 30 days from 13 September to allow the justice secretary time to respond."
He said if no response was forthcoming, JFM would publish its evidence.
The convener of the Scottish Parliament's justice committee, Christine Grahame, said discussion on the petition, which was presented to Holyrood in 2010, may be continued until the justice secretary has had time to consider it.
In 2001 Megrahi was found guilty of committing the 1988 atrocity which saw 270 people killed over the south of Scotland town of Lockerbie.
The Libyan bomber was returned to his home country on compassionate grounds in August 2009 after serving 10 years in a Scottish jail.
He was suffering from prostate cancer and was released by Mr MacAskill when it was thought he had only a matter of months to live.
Megrahi, who died in Tripoli in May this year, always protested his innocence.
[It is disappointing to see the Scottish Government trotting out the shopworn old excuse that any such inquiry would be beyond the jurisdiction of Scots law and the remit of the Scottish Government. As has been pointed out on many occasions, what is being called for is an inquiry into the investigation, prosecution and conviction of Abdelbaset Megrahi. Each and every one of these matters is within the jurisdiction of Scots law and the remit of the Scottish Government:
The event occurred over and on Scottish territory.
The case was investigated by a Scottish police force.
The trial was conducted under Scots Law.
Mr Megrahi was convicted under Scots Law.
Mr Megrahi was imprisoned in a Scottish gaol.
The SCCRC referred the second appeal to the Scottish Court of Appeal.
Mr Megrahi was given compassionate release by the Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Justice.]
Campaigners demanding a new inquiry into the 1988 Lockerbie disaster claim to have evidence that the investigation into the tragedy - and the subsequent trial - were mishandled.
They have written to Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, giving him 30 days to respond.
If he does not, the group - Justice for Megrahi (JFM) - said they will publish their evidence.
MSPs are later due to again consider the group's petition for an inquiry.
The Scottish government has previously rejected the group's demands for an inquiry into the 2001 conviction of Libyan Secret Service agent Abdelbaset al-Megrahi who was found guilty of 270 counts of murder.
A spokesman said: "The Scottish government does not doubt the safety of the conviction of al-Megrahi.
"Nevertheless, there remain concerns to some on the wider issues of the Lockerbie atrocity."
He added that the questions to be asked would be beyond the jurisdiction of Scots Law and the remit of the Scottish government.
JFM said the investigation of the bombing was carried out by the Crown Office and the prosecution at Kamp van Zeist in the Netherlands was under Scots law, so an inquiry would lie within the jurisdiction of the Scottish Parliament.
In its letter to Mr MacAskill, the group claims to have evidence of major flaws in the investigation and trial.
The group's secretary, Robert Forrester said: "We do not propose to go public or divulge details of our allegations at this stage.
"We have given 30 days from 13 September to allow the justice secretary time to respond."
He said if no response was forthcoming, JFM would publish its evidence.
The convener of the Scottish Parliament's justice committee, Christine Grahame, said discussion on the petition, which was presented to Holyrood in 2010, may be continued until the justice secretary has had time to consider it.
In 2001 Megrahi was found guilty of committing the 1988 atrocity which saw 270 people killed over the south of Scotland town of Lockerbie.
The Libyan bomber was returned to his home country on compassionate grounds in August 2009 after serving 10 years in a Scottish jail.
He was suffering from prostate cancer and was released by Mr MacAskill when it was thought he had only a matter of months to live.
Megrahi, who died in Tripoli in May this year, always protested his innocence.
[It is disappointing to see the Scottish Government trotting out the shopworn old excuse that any such inquiry would be beyond the jurisdiction of Scots law and the remit of the Scottish Government. As has been pointed out on many occasions, what is being called for is an inquiry into the investigation, prosecution and conviction of Abdelbaset Megrahi. Each and every one of these matters is within the jurisdiction of Scots law and the remit of the Scottish Government:
The event occurred over and on Scottish territory.
The case was investigated by a Scottish police force.
The trial was conducted under Scots Law.
Mr Megrahi was convicted under Scots Law.
Mr Megrahi was imprisoned in a Scottish gaol.
The SCCRC referred the second appeal to the Scottish Court of Appeal.
Mr Megrahi was given compassionate release by the Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Justice.]
Monday, 24 September 2012
Hillsborough-Pan Am 103 links laid before Justice Committee
[This is the headline over an article published today on the website of Scottish lawyers’ magazine The Firm. It reads as follows:]
The Justice Committee of the Scottish Parliament has been told by the Justice for Megrahi campaign group that the Pan Am 103 debacle bears parallel’s with “England’s shame”, the Hillsborough cover up.
In its submission to the committee ahead of tomorrow’s hearing of a petition calling for an inquiry into the affair, the Justice for Megrahi group say the efforts of the government to protect “wrongdoers” was prioritised ahead of the protection of innocent people.
The JFM campaigners also say that a further criminal appeal may be raised in the event the committee does not convene an inquiry.
“The outcome of the Hillsborough enquiry has undoubtedly shone a light on the inner workings of a justice system that purported to keep its citizens safe and secure,” the submission says.
“Now we can see that protection of the system and the wrongdoers within it took precedence over protection of the individual citizen. Indeed efforts were made to transfer blame to innocent third parties.
“If Hillsborough was England’s shame then Lockerbie is Scotland’s, and much of the indifference and arrogance identified within the former can be identified in the latter. We applaud the open- minded approach of the Hillsborough Independent Panel, and hope to see a similar scrutiny of the Lockerbie investigation, without fear or favour.”
Writing exclusively in The Firm last week, Dr Jim Swire also said the Hillsborough cover up was part of a consistent pattern of the Government in instances where it was at fault after the fact, such as the Chinook crash in 1994, the Shirley McKie affair and the Bloody Sunday events.
The issue will be discussed at a Firm Event addressed by Professor Robert Black QC, taking place in Glasgow tomorrow.
The JFM campaigners say that the possibility exists for a further appeal to be initiated by the executors or immediate family of Abdel Baset Al Megrahi, under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995, section 303A, which permit’s the transfer of the rights of appeal of a deceased person.
The committee adds that if the al-Megrahi family opt not to pursue it, “the door may be open for bereaved families” to do so.
“Whilst for some the death of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi on 20 May this year may have changed the tenor of the debate surrounding the 1988 Pan Am 103 tragedy, it has not deflected the determination of campaigners seeking justice for the 270 victims of the disaster and an independent inquiry into the conviction of Mr al-Megrahi for the atrocity,” the group adds.
“Events of 2012 have only strengthened the argument for an inquiry.”
The campaigners have also sent a letter to Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, lodging serious formal allegations relating to the conduct of the Lockerbie investigation and the Kamp van Zeist trial.
“Out of respect to Mr MacAskill, JFM does not propose to go public with the text of the letter or to divulge detail concerning the precise nature of the allegations for a period of thirty days from 13 September, in order to allow Secretary MacAskill sufficient latitude to respond,” the group said.
“The manner in which the allegations are dealt with could have a direct bearing on [the petition].”
[This story has now been picked up on the Scotsman website. It can be read here.]
The Justice Committee of the Scottish Parliament has been told by the Justice for Megrahi campaign group that the Pan Am 103 debacle bears parallel’s with “England’s shame”, the Hillsborough cover up.
In its submission to the committee ahead of tomorrow’s hearing of a petition calling for an inquiry into the affair, the Justice for Megrahi group say the efforts of the government to protect “wrongdoers” was prioritised ahead of the protection of innocent people.
The JFM campaigners also say that a further criminal appeal may be raised in the event the committee does not convene an inquiry.
“The outcome of the Hillsborough enquiry has undoubtedly shone a light on the inner workings of a justice system that purported to keep its citizens safe and secure,” the submission says.
“Now we can see that protection of the system and the wrongdoers within it took precedence over protection of the individual citizen. Indeed efforts were made to transfer blame to innocent third parties.
“If Hillsborough was England’s shame then Lockerbie is Scotland’s, and much of the indifference and arrogance identified within the former can be identified in the latter. We applaud the open- minded approach of the Hillsborough Independent Panel, and hope to see a similar scrutiny of the Lockerbie investigation, without fear or favour.”
Writing exclusively in The Firm last week, Dr Jim Swire also said the Hillsborough cover up was part of a consistent pattern of the Government in instances where it was at fault after the fact, such as the Chinook crash in 1994, the Shirley McKie affair and the Bloody Sunday events.
The issue will be discussed at a Firm Event addressed by Professor Robert Black QC, taking place in Glasgow tomorrow.
The JFM campaigners say that the possibility exists for a further appeal to be initiated by the executors or immediate family of Abdel Baset Al Megrahi, under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995, section 303A, which permit’s the transfer of the rights of appeal of a deceased person.
The committee adds that if the al-Megrahi family opt not to pursue it, “the door may be open for bereaved families” to do so.
“Whilst for some the death of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi on 20 May this year may have changed the tenor of the debate surrounding the 1988 Pan Am 103 tragedy, it has not deflected the determination of campaigners seeking justice for the 270 victims of the disaster and an independent inquiry into the conviction of Mr al-Megrahi for the atrocity,” the group adds.
“Events of 2012 have only strengthened the argument for an inquiry.”
The campaigners have also sent a letter to Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, lodging serious formal allegations relating to the conduct of the Lockerbie investigation and the Kamp van Zeist trial.
“Out of respect to Mr MacAskill, JFM does not propose to go public with the text of the letter or to divulge detail concerning the precise nature of the allegations for a period of thirty days from 13 September, in order to allow Secretary MacAskill sufficient latitude to respond,” the group said.
“The manner in which the allegations are dealt with could have a direct bearing on [the petition].”
[This story has now been picked up on the Scotsman website. It can be read here.]
Calls for justice for Lockerbie victims
[This is the headline over a report published in yesterday’s edition of the Sunday Mail. It does not appear to feature on the newspaper’s website, but can be read here. It picks up the item posted on this blog on 20 September. The somewhat longer version submitted by journalist Bob Smyth reads as follows:]
An American politician says not enough has been done to investigate the Lockerbie bombing – so she’s bidding for new laws to tackle her concerns.
US Congresswoman Ann Marie Buerkle has announced she will introduce two pieces of legislation regarding the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing in 1988.
They will demand a further investigation into the crime and "just compensation" for the families of the victims.
“Sadly, all these years later, the families of American victims are still awaiting justice,” she said.
“Until now, there has yet to be a complete investigation of those implicated in the crimes."
However, Scottish prosecutors responded last night by stressing that their investigation into the crime is ongoing.
The congresswoman added: “The families of the victims continue to hope for proper compensation for the crimes they have endured, as only some have received compensation.”
The Republican member for New York has worked closely with Families of Pan Am 103/Lockerbie and its president, Paul Hudson, on the legislation for several months.
The organisation is based at New York’s Syracuse University, which lost 35 students in the bombing over Lockerbie, which killed 270 people.
With Libya in the news for crimes against Americans, now is a good time to remember those who suffered under the Gaddafi regime, as well as the victims of the bombings, Buerkle said.
She added: “It is very little to ask that those who were responsible for the attack be brought to justice and that the families of the victims receive fair compensation.”
She has not revealed any more detail of the bills, which will be scrutinised by a committee of Congress to decide whether they should be allowed to proceed further.
Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the only person ever convicted over the bombing, died in Tripoli in May. He served eight years in prison, but was released in August 2009 after he was diagnosed with terminal prostate cancer.
Following Megrahi’s death, Buerkle said: “I hope that his death will provide some level of closure for the families of the victims. However, the fight for justice will continue.”
Scottish prosecutors are currently making further investigations into Libya’s involvement in the tragedy. Earlier this week it was reported that authorities in Malta have held court hearings to take fresh evidence over Lockerbie.
Last night a Crown Office spokesman said: “The trial court accepted that Megrahi acted in furtherance of the Libyan intelligence services in an act of state-sponsored terrorism and did not act alone.
“Police are actively working with US law enforcement in pursuit of lines of enquiry to bring to justice the others involved in the Lockerbie bombing.
“The victims’ families are kept informed of any action or developments with the investigation wherever possible while preserving the integrity of the investigation.”
An American politician says not enough has been done to investigate the Lockerbie bombing – so she’s bidding for new laws to tackle her concerns.
US Congresswoman Ann Marie Buerkle has announced she will introduce two pieces of legislation regarding the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing in 1988.
They will demand a further investigation into the crime and "just compensation" for the families of the victims.
“Sadly, all these years later, the families of American victims are still awaiting justice,” she said.
“Until now, there has yet to be a complete investigation of those implicated in the crimes."
However, Scottish prosecutors responded last night by stressing that their investigation into the crime is ongoing.
The congresswoman added: “The families of the victims continue to hope for proper compensation for the crimes they have endured, as only some have received compensation.”
The Republican member for New York has worked closely with Families of Pan Am 103/Lockerbie and its president, Paul Hudson, on the legislation for several months.
The organisation is based at New York’s Syracuse University, which lost 35 students in the bombing over Lockerbie, which killed 270 people.
With Libya in the news for crimes against Americans, now is a good time to remember those who suffered under the Gaddafi regime, as well as the victims of the bombings, Buerkle said.
She added: “It is very little to ask that those who were responsible for the attack be brought to justice and that the families of the victims receive fair compensation.”
She has not revealed any more detail of the bills, which will be scrutinised by a committee of Congress to decide whether they should be allowed to proceed further.
Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the only person ever convicted over the bombing, died in Tripoli in May. He served eight years in prison, but was released in August 2009 after he was diagnosed with terminal prostate cancer.
Following Megrahi’s death, Buerkle said: “I hope that his death will provide some level of closure for the families of the victims. However, the fight for justice will continue.”
Scottish prosecutors are currently making further investigations into Libya’s involvement in the tragedy. Earlier this week it was reported that authorities in Malta have held court hearings to take fresh evidence over Lockerbie.
Last night a Crown Office spokesman said: “The trial court accepted that Megrahi acted in furtherance of the Libyan intelligence services in an act of state-sponsored terrorism and did not act alone.
“Police are actively working with US law enforcement in pursuit of lines of enquiry to bring to justice the others involved in the Lockerbie bombing.
“The victims’ families are kept informed of any action or developments with the investigation wherever possible while preserving the integrity of the investigation.”
Sunday, 23 September 2012
It is time to cut the puppeteer’s strings
[In
the Scottish edition of the Sunday Express today, the main
article on the leader page (p 36) comes from the pen of Robert Forrester,
secretary of Justice
for Megrahi. As far as I can discover, the article does not (yet) appear on
the newspaper’s website. Here is the
text as submitted:]
On
Tuesday
morning the Justice Committee at Holyrood will reach a decision which could
colour Scotland’s perception of our elected representatives in terms of their
relationship with the Crown for generations to come. It is a simple matter.
Namely, whether or not to throw out the Justice
for Megrahi petition calling for an independent inquiry into the conviction
of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi. Those who argue that it ought to be shut down, like
the Crown Office, will doubtless say that the issue is a matter exclusively for
the courts. Justice campaigners, however, feel that the courts have proven incapable
of resolution and the Crown downright obstructive.
It
is important to understand the facts of this case in order to appreciate its
potential as a massive miscarriage of justice.
At
the Kamp van Zeist trial, the first time ever that the Scottish High Court had
operated on neutral, international territory, the Crown, acting as prosecutor,
judge and jury offered a simple scenario.
Mr
al-Megrahi contrived to place an unaccompanied and unaccounted for bronze
coloured, hard shell Samsonite suitcase containing a bomb operated by a simple
count-down timer on to a flight from Luqa airport on Malta destined for
Frankfurt. At Frankfurt, the bomb suitcase was transferred to a feeder flight
bound for Heathrow. Once there, the suitcase, still unaccompanied and
unaccounted for, was loaded on to Pan Am 103 resulting in the tragic deaths of
270 souls in Lockerbie.
No
direct evidence, of any nature whatsoever, was presented at Zeist or has ever been
found to support these allegations. Importantly since the trial a mass of evidence
has transpired to undermine the Crown case.
Indisputable
eye witness and documentary evidence does exist which says that Heathrow
Terminal 3 airside was broken into only hours before the departure of Pan Am 103,
thus providing access to the loading
area. Vitally before the arrival of the
Frankfurt flight, an unaccounted for suitcase, which investigators eventually
concluded answered to the description of the bomb suitcase, was observed in the
luggage container in which the explosion took place.
Of
the prosecution’s star eye witnesses the first, Abdul
Majid Giaka, was dismissed as a ‘fantasist’ by their Lordships, and the
second, Tony Gauci, has been tainted by allegations of having accepted bribes
from the US justice Department.
Nothing
in the Crown case passes the test of credibility let alone guilt beyond
reasonable doubt, which is, of course, partly why the Scottish Criminal Cases
Review Commission (SCCRC) supported the need for a second appeal.
Zeist
is as uncomplicated and incredible as that.
Following
the application for the second appeal, a Public Interest Immunity Certificate
was placed over part of the evidence by the last UK Labour government. Scotland’s
High Court, in the full knowledge of Mr al-Megrahi’s terminal medical condition,
took an unreasonably long period deciding how to go about hearing the appeal.
As the appeal was progressing to a point where it was looking as if it might be
successful, Mr al-Megrahi was released on compassionate grounds and the appeal was
dropped. Yet again clouds of suspicion masked the truth.
As
things stand members of the al-Megrahi family could apply to resurrect the appeal.
However, Libya is riven with murderous political factionalism where not even
the US ambassador is immune. What hope then does this family stand of receiving
justice with all the internal and external political pressures against them?
Even
the efforts of the Crown to locate new evidence in the shambles of today’s new
Libya, in order to resuscitate flagging public confidence in the verdict back
in Scotland, have turned out to be fruitless. Now in desperation they appear to have given
up and turned their attentions to Malta a country that has always denied guilt
for involvement in Lockerbie.
Quite
exceptionally an application for a third appeal could be left to families of
the victims of the atrocity but it is far from clear how successful such an
appeal would be given the miserable state of Scotland’s criminal justice
system.
The
question is: Will Scottish parliamentarians show courage and vision and support
our call for an inquiry or will they act against the interests of justice and
the truth and support the Crown’s continuing defence of the indefensible?
Last month’s damning
report into the Hillsborough Disaster revealed double dealing and cover up on a
massive scale. Lies and deceit came before truth and understanding and justice
to the victims.
Such
are the echoes of Lockerbie.
It
is time to cut the puppeteer’s strings.
Lockerbie probe is ‘live’ – prosecutors
[This is the headline over a report in today’s edition of the Maltese newspaper The Sunday Times. It reads as follows:]
Malta Court hears fresh evidence of 1988 case
Scottish prosecutors have stressed the investigation into the 1988 Lockerbie atrocity is still “live” but would not confirm a request has been made for the Maltese courts to gather fresh evidence.
“This is a live investigation to bring to justice the others involved in this act of state-sponsored terrorism,” the Crown Office in Scotland told The Sunday Times.
It added that police of the Dumfries and Galloway constabulary – which is responsible for the town of Lockerbie – were working with US law enforcement “in pursuit of lines of enquiry”.
The statement was a reaction to a story by The Times on Monday that reported evidence-gathering hearings have been taking place behind closed doors before Magistrate Claire Stafrace Zammit.
The Crown Office would not comment further “to preserve the integrity of the investigation”.
However, multiple sources have confirmed that several witnesses were heard in relation to travel logistics – a salient point that connects Malta to the atrocity. The established thesis, which underpinned the conviction of Abdelbasset Al-Megrahi, the only person ever jailed for the bombing, hinges on the notion that the explosive that brought down Pan Am flight 103 over the Scottish town of Lockerbie left Malta and was later transferred to London through Frankfurt.
The evidence of Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci was pivotal in pinning the blame on Al-Megrahi and securing the Malta connection to the bombing.
However, it later emerged that Mr Gauci had been coached and promised compensation by the CIA, undermining the credibility of his testimony.
Similarly, key elements of the evidence presented in the 2001 Camp Zeist trial in The Netherlands have been undermined.
Writing in the Scottish legal magazine The Firm, Jim Swire, whose 23-year-old daughter Flora died in the terrorist attack with another 269 victims, set out a series of outstanding questions about the established theory.
Among other things, Dr Swire pressed the point that a break-in at Heathrow Airport – from where Pan Am 103 took off – only 16 hours before the bomb exploded “remained hidden from view and from the Camp Zeist court” until after the verdict.
He also highlighted evidence uncovered by Al-Megrahi’s defence team after his conviction, showing that a key electronics fragment from the bomb found at the crash site could not have come from similar timer circuit boards that were bought in bulk by the Libyan Government in the 1980s.
Together with Mr Gauci’s identification of the former Libyan Intelligence officer, the circuit board evidence cemented the theory that the Libyan Government was behind the bombing and that Luqa airport was the original source of the bomb.
Mr Swire and a group of campaigners seeking the truth on the Lockerbie case are preparing to make a case before the Scottish Parliament next week for an inquiry to be held.
An inquiry could be the last avenue to answer the outstanding questions on the case, after Al-Megrahi withdrew his right to challenge his 27-year prison sentence in 2009, in return for an early release on compassionate grounds. He suffered from terminal cancer and died in May.
Malta Court hears fresh evidence of 1988 case
Scottish prosecutors have stressed the investigation into the 1988 Lockerbie atrocity is still “live” but would not confirm a request has been made for the Maltese courts to gather fresh evidence.
“This is a live investigation to bring to justice the others involved in this act of state-sponsored terrorism,” the Crown Office in Scotland told The Sunday Times.
It added that police of the Dumfries and Galloway constabulary – which is responsible for the town of Lockerbie – were working with US law enforcement “in pursuit of lines of enquiry”.
The statement was a reaction to a story by The Times on Monday that reported evidence-gathering hearings have been taking place behind closed doors before Magistrate Claire Stafrace Zammit.
The Crown Office would not comment further “to preserve the integrity of the investigation”.
However, multiple sources have confirmed that several witnesses were heard in relation to travel logistics – a salient point that connects Malta to the atrocity. The established thesis, which underpinned the conviction of Abdelbasset Al-Megrahi, the only person ever jailed for the bombing, hinges on the notion that the explosive that brought down Pan Am flight 103 over the Scottish town of Lockerbie left Malta and was later transferred to London through Frankfurt.
The evidence of Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci was pivotal in pinning the blame on Al-Megrahi and securing the Malta connection to the bombing.
However, it later emerged that Mr Gauci had been coached and promised compensation by the CIA, undermining the credibility of his testimony.
Similarly, key elements of the evidence presented in the 2001 Camp Zeist trial in The Netherlands have been undermined.
Writing in the Scottish legal magazine The Firm, Jim Swire, whose 23-year-old daughter Flora died in the terrorist attack with another 269 victims, set out a series of outstanding questions about the established theory.
Among other things, Dr Swire pressed the point that a break-in at Heathrow Airport – from where Pan Am 103 took off – only 16 hours before the bomb exploded “remained hidden from view and from the Camp Zeist court” until after the verdict.
He also highlighted evidence uncovered by Al-Megrahi’s defence team after his conviction, showing that a key electronics fragment from the bomb found at the crash site could not have come from similar timer circuit boards that were bought in bulk by the Libyan Government in the 1980s.
Together with Mr Gauci’s identification of the former Libyan Intelligence officer, the circuit board evidence cemented the theory that the Libyan Government was behind the bombing and that Luqa airport was the original source of the bomb.
Mr Swire and a group of campaigners seeking the truth on the Lockerbie case are preparing to make a case before the Scottish Parliament next week for an inquiry to be held.
An inquiry could be the last avenue to answer the outstanding questions on the case, after Al-Megrahi withdrew his right to challenge his 27-year prison sentence in 2009, in return for an early release on compassionate grounds. He suffered from terminal cancer and died in May.
Saturday, 22 September 2012
Lockerbie: New hope for justice
[This is the headline over an article published on 20 September in the Malta Independent. It reads as follows:]
Irrespective of which side of the Lockerbie divides one stands, it is beyond argument that the case that convicted Abdelbaset al-Megrahi for the atrocity has more than a few gaping holes in it. And with a furtive request by Scottish prosecutors for the Maltese courts to gather more evidence in the case, the chances of those holes being filled once and for all have seen a new light of day.
This fresh push for evidence raises hopes that justice and the answers to the many pending questions could at long last be delivered to the Lockerbie attack’s victims, al-Megrahi’s family and to Malta as well, which many believe had been erroneously labelled as the bomb’s point of departure.
This week, a Maltese court began hearing evidence from several witnesses behind closed doors with even the courtroom’s peepholes blocked from prying eyes. Both the Maltese and Scottish judicial authorities have been reticent about revealing details of the new line of inquiry. All the Scottish authorities would say, according to press reports, was that they were working in conjunction with American law enforcement on yet to be disclosed lines of inquiry and that ‘this is a live investigation to bring to justice the others involved in this act of state-sponsored terrorism’.
Authorities in the post-Gaddafi Libya have said they have in their possession previously top secret documents related to the case, while the capture last month and ensuing interrogation of Gaddafi’s intelligence chief Adbullah al-Senussi, it is hoped, could also shed further light on what many still believe to be an unsolved mystery.
The new lines of inquiry also come as Justice for Megrahi
campaigners prepare to repeat their arguments for the case to be re-examined in an inquiry. They are expected to appear before the Scottish Parliament later this month.
Malta’s name has been much maligned over the years for its connection to the case in which Megrahi was convicted of placing the bomb on a plane leaving Malta International Airport, where its fateful journey to the skies over Lockerbie was said to have begun.
With his death last May, al-Megrahi, the only man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, the victims’ families and the world runs the risk of the truth behind the Lockerbie bombing going to the grave with him, but this new inquiry could finally clear Malta’s, and al-Megrahi’s names.
The man died protesting his innocence, despite having dropped a planned appeal against his conviction so as to clear the way for his release and return to Libya under Scottish law, which grants compassionate release for the terminally ill.
That, were it to come to pass, would also be a gross injustice to Malta, whose good name has been tarnished over these last 23 years as the point of departure of the lethal luggage that brought down Pan Am flight 103 over Scotland on 21 December 1988, killing 270 people.
Evidence presented during the trial that the bomb, it has been said time and time again, had originated at Luqa Airport was some of the weakest of the entire proceedings. Al-Megrahi, a former employee with Libyan Arab Airlines in Malta and the only person to have been found guilty of the terrorist attack, was convicted largely on the basis of evidence supplied by Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci – of the now infamous Mary’s House on Tower Road, Sliema.
In his evidence, Mr Gauci identified Mr al-Megrahi as the purchaser of articles of clothing and an umbrella found in the suitcase containing the bomb – placed on an Air Malta flight and transferred to the ill-fated Pan Am flight in Frankfurt.
It is not known whether Mr Gauci himself gave evidence in the Maltese courts this week. But he certainly should: in reviewing Megrahi’s request for an appeal, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission had clearly found “there is no reasonable basis in the trial court’s judgement for its conclusion that the purchase of the items from Mary’s House, took place on 7 December 1988” – the very argument that had sealed the indictment against Mr al-Megrahi.
In fact, this week’s testimony is believed to have centred on matters related to travel logistics.
In recommending that the appeal be heard, the Commission had ruled that although it had been proven that al-Megrahi had been in Malta on several occasions during the month in question, it was determined through the new evidence submitted that 7 December 1988 was the only date on which he would have had the opportunity to make the purchases from Mary’s House.
The evidence that was not heard at the trial concerned the date on which Christmas lights had been illuminated in Sliema near Mary’s House which, taken together with Mr Gauci’s evidence at trial and the contents of his police statements, indicates the purchase of the incriminating items had taken place before 6 December 1988 – when no evidence had been presented at trial to the effect that al-Megrahi was in Malta before 6 December.
Yet more new evidence indicated that, four days before the identification parade at which he picked out Mr al-Megrahi, Mr Gauci had seen a photograph of al-Megrahi in a magazine article linking him to the bombing.
The Commission found Mr Gauci’s exposure to the photograph, so close to the date of the identity parade, “undermines the reliability of his identification of the applicant at that time and at the trial itself”.
Al-Megrahi’s lawyers have also claimed that Mr Gauci had given contradictory evidence, including differing dates of purchase and his account of the sale itself, and that, on one occasion, he had even identified Palestinian terrorist leader Abu Talb as the purchaser.
And then there are the other allegations made by Mr al-Megrahi’s defence team that Scottish detectives had coached Mr Gauci on at least 23 occasions, sometimes over alleged fishing trips on the Scottish lochs, and that he also received up to US$2 million in return for his testimony.
There are so many questions about the case that are still lingering or, rather, festering, that one questions whether the truth behind the Lockerbie bombing will ever be known, new lines of inquiry or not. Real justice, however, will never be served until those questions are answered once and for all and this new line of inquiry, however vague it may be at the moment, offers a new ray of hope.
Friday, 21 September 2012
Please do not let us down
This is the last sentence of a document submitted by the committee of Justice for Meghrahi to the Scottish Parliament’s Justice Committee in advance of its meeting on Tuesday, 25 September 2012 at 10.00am in Holyrood’s Committee Room 4, when it will consider how to proceed with JFM’s petition (PE1370) calling for an independent inquiry into the prosecution and conviction of Abdelbaset Megrahi. The committee clerk has suggested that the options open to the Justice Committee are as follows:
(a) keep the petition open;
(b) take a view on whether there should be an independent inquiry as proposed by the petitioners;
(c) take any other action the Committee considers to be appropriate (e.g. seek views or take evidence from any appropriate person/body); or
(d) close the petition.
JFM’s submission to the Committee ends with the following two paragraphs:
“The outcome of the Hillsborough enquiry has undoubtedly shone a light on the inner workings of a justice system that purported to keep its citizens safe and secure. Now we can see that protection of the system and the wrongdoers within it took precedence over protection of the individual citizen. Indeed efforts were made to transfer blame to innocent third parties. If Hillsborough was England’s shame then Lockerbie is Scotland’s, and much of the indifference and arrogance identified within the former can be identified in the latter. We applaud the openminded approach of the Hillsborough Independent Panel, and hope to see a similar scrutiny of the Lockerbie investigation, without fear or favour.
“The Justice Committee and through them the Scottish Government presents the best and perhaps only chance that the families who lost loved ones will ever have of uncovering the real truth behind Lockerbie. Please do not let us down.”
This story is picked up in Saturday's edition of The Herald in a report headlined Lockerbie campaigners call for inquiry.
(a) keep the petition open;
(b) take a view on whether there should be an independent inquiry as proposed by the petitioners;
(c) take any other action the Committee considers to be appropriate (e.g. seek views or take evidence from any appropriate person/body); or
(d) close the petition.
JFM’s submission to the Committee ends with the following two paragraphs:
“The outcome of the Hillsborough enquiry has undoubtedly shone a light on the inner workings of a justice system that purported to keep its citizens safe and secure. Now we can see that protection of the system and the wrongdoers within it took precedence over protection of the individual citizen. Indeed efforts were made to transfer blame to innocent third parties. If Hillsborough was England’s shame then Lockerbie is Scotland’s, and much of the indifference and arrogance identified within the former can be identified in the latter. We applaud the openminded approach of the Hillsborough Independent Panel, and hope to see a similar scrutiny of the Lockerbie investigation, without fear or favour.
“The Justice Committee and through them the Scottish Government presents the best and perhaps only chance that the families who lost loved ones will ever have of uncovering the real truth behind Lockerbie. Please do not let us down.”
This story is picked up in Saturday's edition of The Herald in a report headlined Lockerbie campaigners call for inquiry.
Thursday, 20 September 2012
Lockerbie legislation to be introduced into US Congress
[What follows is the text of a report published today on the website of The Daily Orange, the newspaper of Syracuse University, New York:]
Congresswoman Ann Marie Buerkle [Republican, New York] has announced she will introduce two pieces of legislation regarding the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing.
The legislation will call for further investigation into the bombing and just compensation for the families of the victims, according to a Sept 19 press release.
The 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, killed 270 people, including 35 Syracuse University students returning from study abroad programs in London and Florence, Italy.
Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the only individual ever convicted in the bombings, died in Tripoli in May. He served eight years in prison, but was released in August 2009 after he was diagnosed with terminal prostate cancer. Doctors gave him only three months to live, but the former Libyan intelligence officer lived for nearly three years after his release.
Moammar al Gadhafi, the former Libyan dictator who many suspect orchestrated the attack, was killed last October.
With Libya in the news for crimes against Americans, now is a good time to remember those who suffered under the Gadhafi regime, as well as the victims of the bombings, Buerkle said in the press release.
“Sadly, all these years later, the families of American victims are still awaiting justice. Until now, there has yet to be a complete investigation of those implicated in the crimes,” she said. “The families of the victims continue to hope for proper compensation for the crimes they have endured, as only some have received compensation.”
Buerkle has been working with the organization Families of Pan Am 103/Lockerbie and its president, Paul Hudson, on the legislation for several months.
Said Buerkle: “It is very little to ask that those who were responsible for the attack be brought to justice and that the families of the victims receive fair compensation.”
Congresswoman Ann Marie Buerkle [Republican, New York] has announced she will introduce two pieces of legislation regarding the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing.
The legislation will call for further investigation into the bombing and just compensation for the families of the victims, according to a Sept 19 press release.
The 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, killed 270 people, including 35 Syracuse University students returning from study abroad programs in London and Florence, Italy.
Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the only individual ever convicted in the bombings, died in Tripoli in May. He served eight years in prison, but was released in August 2009 after he was diagnosed with terminal prostate cancer. Doctors gave him only three months to live, but the former Libyan intelligence officer lived for nearly three years after his release.
Moammar al Gadhafi, the former Libyan dictator who many suspect orchestrated the attack, was killed last October.
With Libya in the news for crimes against Americans, now is a good time to remember those who suffered under the Gadhafi regime, as well as the victims of the bombings, Buerkle said in the press release.
“Sadly, all these years later, the families of American victims are still awaiting justice. Until now, there has yet to be a complete investigation of those implicated in the crimes,” she said. “The families of the victims continue to hope for proper compensation for the crimes they have endured, as only some have received compensation.”
Buerkle has been working with the organization Families of Pan Am 103/Lockerbie and its president, Paul Hudson, on the legislation for several months.
Said Buerkle: “It is very little to ask that those who were responsible for the attack be brought to justice and that the families of the victims receive fair compensation.”
Independent inquiry versus SCCRC application and appeal
A contributor to the Friends of Justice for Megrahi page on Facebook commented earlier today: “If Megrahi's family aren't interested in pursuing an appeal then that's an end to it. Question is... why not?”
I replied: “If the family isn't interested in pursuing an appeal (and I do not believe this to be the case) the reason might well be lack of support (indeed hostility) on the part of the current regime in the country in which they have to make their lives. Anyway, exposing and fixing what this case demonstrates has gone dreadfully wrong in the criminal justice system in Scotland is not something that should rest on the shoulders of a Libyan family. It is a matter for Scots. That is why the pressure on our politicians to establish an independent inquiry must be maintained. Those politicians want to place the whole onus on the Megrahi family, well knowing the problems that they would encounter (some of them created by legislation enacted by those very same politicians). We, the people of Scotland, must not allow them to get away with it.”
I replied: “If the family isn't interested in pursuing an appeal (and I do not believe this to be the case) the reason might well be lack of support (indeed hostility) on the part of the current regime in the country in which they have to make their lives. Anyway, exposing and fixing what this case demonstrates has gone dreadfully wrong in the criminal justice system in Scotland is not something that should rest on the shoulders of a Libyan family. It is a matter for Scots. That is why the pressure on our politicians to establish an independent inquiry must be maintained. Those politicians want to place the whole onus on the Megrahi family, well knowing the problems that they would encounter (some of them created by legislation enacted by those very same politicians). We, the people of Scotland, must not allow them to get away with it.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)