Moussa Koussa and the Scottish police and prosecutors

[The following is from a report in The Independent today:]

Libya's acting foreign minister flew into Athens last night on a mission from Muammar Gaddafi which his Greek government hosts said meant the regime was now seeking an end to the fighting.

Disilllusioned with what he sees as the betrayal by France, Britian and Italy because of the NATO-led military intervention, the Libyan leader may see Greece—with which he has long enjoyed good relations—as a possible diplomatic conduit to the West.

After Abdelati Obeidi met Prime Minister George Papandreou, Mr Obeidi's Greek counterpart, Dimitri Droutsas, said last night: "It seems that the Libyan authorities are seeking a solution." Though there were few details of what, if anything, the regime is proposing, Mr Papandreou has been in touch with Western governments over the past few days. Mr Obeidi is expected to travel on to Malta and Turkey. [RB: An article on the Aljazeera website on the Obeidi mission can be read here.]

Meanwhile, Scottish officials have arrived in London to question Libya's former foreign minister, Moussa Koussa, on what he knows about the Lockerbie bombing. The interview, which may take place today, comes as MPs and families of victims of the attack demand that Mr Koussa should not be granted immunity from prosecution, even if there have been attempts to encourage others in the Gaddafi regime to defect.

Despite reports that Mr Koussa is named in court documents as overseeing Libya's supply of Semtex explosive to the Provisional IRA, British officials will seek to delay any legal moves against him, arguing that the priority is to oust Colonel Gaddafi.

[The other UK media that I have been able to access online go no further than to state that Scottish officials will today discuss with UK Foreign Office officials the possibility of interviewing Moussa Koussa. There is no suggestion that any such interview will take place today or, indeed, any time soon. For example, the report on the BBC News website can be read here; that on the Sky News website can be read here; that in The Scotsman (which is misleadingly headlined) can be read here; and the Press Association news agency report here.

However, the report in the Daily Record contains the following:]

A young Scottish prosecutor is leading efforts to question the high-profile Libyan defector Musa Kusa over the Lockerbie bombing.

Lindsey Miller, head of the Crown Office Serious and Organised Crime Division, has been liaising with families of the Lockerbie victims and wrote to them promising to pursue Gaddafi's former spy chief.

Lawyers and police could start interviewing Kusa today.

Miller, 39, is the senior procurator fiscal heading the investigation into the terrorist attack on Pan Am flight 103 in 1988 that killed 270 people.

In an email sent to relatives of the victims after Kusa arrived in Britain, Miller said her staff had notified the Foreign Office that "we wish to interview [Kusa] regarding any information he may have concerning the bombing of Pan Am flight 103."

She added that the bomb probe "remains open and we will pursue all relevant lines of inquiry in conjunction with our US counterparts". [RB: Regrettably, the Scottish police and prosecutors have a very narrow concept of what is "relevant" -- only material that supports the Malta-Frankfurt-Heathrow scenario.]

Representatives of the Crown Office and Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary are to meet Foreign Office officials today to discuss access to the Libyan foreign minister.

Last night, Scottish justice minister Kenny MacAskill said: "They'll be seeking to interview him tomorrow.

"It's not for me to interfere with due process here. I have to stand back and leave that to the relevant authorities, but they've been there waiting in London since Friday." (...)

Foreign Secretary William Hague yesterday gave the green light to the Crown Office after denying there would be an amnesty deal with Kusa if he helped topple Gaddafi.

Hague said: "It is a good thing, of course, where the Crown Office in Scotland wish to talk to him about what's happened in the past such as at Lockerbie.

"My officials are discussing with the Crown Office how to go about that. That's not a bad thing either - we want more information about past events."

Hague insisted there is no deal with Kusa. He said: "The Prime Minister and I have made clear there is no immunity from prosecution, there will be no immunity, he hasn't asked for that, there isn't a deal."

MacAskill added: "I welcome the commitment of the Foreign Secretary to allow them access and I hope that this provides further clarity on the Lockerbie atrocity."

Gaddafi-era Lockerbie officials go on trial in Tripoli

[The trial of thirty-seven Gaddafi-era officials on charges of murder, conspiracy to murder and human rights crimes during the revolution, opened yesterday in Tripoli. Most media reports have mentioned only one of the accused, Abdullah al-Senussi, Gaddafi’s intelligence chief and brother-in-law. However, the report in the Libya Herald refers to a number of other defendants:]

The Tripoli hearing was largely concerned with the formalities of establishing charges and identities. Along with Senussi who looked thin and gaunt, appearing to confirm his doctor’s claim that he has prostate cancer, the 36 accused appearing today included Qaddafi’s External Security Agency head Abu Zaid Omar Dorda, former Foreign Minister Abdul Ati al-Obeidi, the General People’s Conference head Mohamed al-Zway, former Prime Minister Al-Baghdadi al-Mahmoudi, and Tripoli Internal Security Agency head Mansour Dhou.

Unlike Senussi, Dorda, Obeidi and Zway have already made court appearances in Tripoli. Dorda’s case was adjourned on several occasions while Obeidi and Zway, who were arrested in July 2011, were found not guilty in June on charges of maladministration while in office and wasting public funds. (...)

At the end of two hours today, during which the defendants confirmed their names and the charges against them were read out, the pre-trial hearing was adjourned until 3 October. By then, the judge and his deputy ordered, defence lawyers must have reviewed their clients’ files and prepared their defences.

The proceedings were watched by a handful of foreign press reporters alongside local print and media journalists. Outside the court, there was a small protest by families of Busleem prison massacre victims, many with placards demanding that Senussi and others be hanged.  Security was high both inside and outside the courtroom, with local shops being asked to close up.

[Messrs Dorda, Obeidi and Zway were all heavily involved in the resolution of the Lockerbie impasse.  I had many meetings with all of them and always found them open, trustworthy and honest in their dealings with me.]

PanAm cash duo tried for treason

[This is the headline over a report in today’s Scottish edition of the Sunday Express.  It reads in part:]

The new Libyan regime has challenged Colonel Gaddafi’s decision to compensate the families of the Lockerbie bombing, claiming the £1.7billion was paid illegally.

Two officials who worked under the former leader have appeared in court accused of squandering public money and treason for their part in the deal.

The Libyans agreed to pay the reparations and accept responsibility for the 1988 attack in exchange for the lifting of United Nation sanctions. [RB: The full text of the Libyan regime’s “acceptance of responsibility” can be read in this letter.]

However, it is now alleged that former Secretary General Mohammed al-Zwai and one time Foreign Minister Abdulati al-Obeidi should not have approved the compensation as the new administration insists Libya was not responsible.

Prosecutors also claim the two men should not have negotiated the deal in return for the lifting of the “unjust” sanctions and insist they should have been demanding compensation instead.

Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter, Flora, was killed in the bombing, said Mr al-Zwai and Mr al-Obeidi were “two of the good people” under the then Libyan regime.

“I know both men and they would have inevitably been required to do what their boss told them, so they wouldn’t have had any choice,” he added. “I liked them both, they were two people we found it easy to talk to. Gaddafi wanted to get rid of the sanctions by paying the compensation.

“The accusers are still pursuing the intent of pinning as much blame as possible on the late Gaddafi’s regime. Any supposedly objective process of justice in Libya at the moment is very suspect.”

Frank Duggan, the President of the Victims of Pan Am 103 support group, added: “I don’t know why they want to resurrect the whole thing. And I don’t understand why they are saying the money shouldn’t have been paid out. The money was – as we say in the US – ‘chump change’, nothing to Gaddafi’s family.”   

Gaddafi agreed to pay £6.25million to the families of each victim after Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi was found guilty of the attack, which saw Pan Am Flight 103 blow up over the town of Lockerbie killing 270 people.

Robert Black, Professor of Scots Law at the University of Edinburgh, who has taken a keen interest in the case, described the recent revelations as “very odd”.

He said: “If this is what the current regime are charging these men with, it seems to indicate that they don’t believe that this money was in fact due.

“The view of the early new Libyan regime was that Gaddafi was responsible for everything, but now they seem to be saying, ‘Oh well, maybe not’.” (...)

Mr al-Zwai and Mr al-Obeidi pleaded not guilty but were denied bail. Speaking after the hearing, their defence lawyer said: “We hope that the trial will be a fair one.”

Regardless of the outcome of the ongoing case, legal experts on both sides of the Atlantic say even if the payments were deemed illegal in Libyan law the cash could not be reclaimed.

American lawyer James Kreidles [RB: presumably this should read “James Kreindler”] dismissed the court proceedings as having “absolutely no effect whatsoever” on the victims’ families.

He added: “It was an appropriate settlement. It was good for the families, good for the US and good for Libya.” [RB: it was also good for Kreindler & Kreindler whose contingency fees for representing the families amounted to many, many millions of dollars.]

Further postponement of Lockerbie trial of Zwai and Obeidi

[The following report appeared on 19 March on the English language website of Libya TV:]

The Tripoli Court of Appeal have deferred prosecution of the former regime’s officials, Mohamed Abu Al-Quasim al-Zwai and Abdul Ati al-Obeidi until Monday 6th May.

The accused both face charges including of causing damage to public property, granting compensation to the families of the Lockerbie bombing victims, a total of US$2.7 billion.

The Head of Court called the adjournment to allow counsel for the accused of the defence submission, within 15 days of Monday’s meeting. [RB: I do not know what this means, but it may possibly refer to an opportunity being accorded to the defence to file a motion to dismiss the charges, something hinted at in some earlier reports.]

Relatives of both defendants attended the hearing, as did human rights experts, along with local and international media.

[Earlier items on this blog about the proceedings against Messrs Zwai and Obeidi can be found here.]

Libya delays Lockerbie verdict on Gaddafi ministers

[This is the headline over a report published today by the Agence France Presse news agency.  It reads as follows:]

A Libyan court on Monday postponed its verdict in the case of two officials from ousted dictator Moamer Kadhafi's regime accused of "financial crimes" connected to compensation for the 1988 Lockerbie plane bombing.

Abdelati al-Obeidi, a former foreign minister, and Mohamed Belgassem al-Zwai, ex-speaker of parliament [RB: and ambassador in London], were accused of mismanaging public funds in compensating families of victims of the Lockerbie bombing, according to charges read by the judge.

The criminal court in Tripoli postponed the verdict until June 17 "to allow more time to study the file," the judge said.

At a hearing in September, the jailed pair pleaded not guilty to the charges. Their lawyer argued that they had not made any personal gain and had negotiated on behalf of the authorities.

The prosecution has said Obeidi and Zwai were responsible for negotiating settlements with the Lockerbie families and had paid out double the amount originally planned in return for Libya's removal from a US list of state sponsors of terrorism.

In 2003, the Kadhafi regime officially acknowledged responsibility for the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 that killed 270 people. [RB: No, Libya didn’t. Here is what it actually acknowledged.]  Libya paid 2.7 billion dollars (2.1 billion euros) in compensation to victims' families.

[This blog’s coverage of the proceedings against Messrs Zwai and Obeidi who, in my assessment -- and I met them on many occasions --, were two of the good guys in the Gaddafi regime, can be found here. I am shocked at their appearance in a photograph (last in the series) on the BBC News website.]

Some snippets from today's press

[From a letter in the Daily Telegraph:]

The Lockerbie bomber was tried by Scottish judges in a neutral country with the agreement of the Libyans. Why can't a similar arrangement be reached with Jordan regarding the trial of Abu Qatada, the extremist cleric (...)?

Then evidence can be monitored to ensure nothing obtained under torture is presented, and if found guilty the defendant can be sent to Jordan.

[From a report in the Belfast Telegraph:]

Victims of IRA terrorism should not expect direct compensation from the new Libyan government, a businessman with links to the country has warned.

However, Peter Lismore, chairman of the Libyan Irish Business Council, believes the country’s government will make a contribution to the International Fund of Ireland, or a new fund, as a gesture of goodwill. (...)

As part of its rapprochement with the west the Gaddafi regime made an “ex gratia” payment of $7.5m (£4.72m) to each of the families of the 270 people who died in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie in 1998. [RB: The amount paid was $10m per family. The reduced amount mentioned above may reflect the contingency fee paid to the US law firm
Kreindler & Kreindler.]

That payment was authorised by Abdul Atti al-Obeidi, Prime Minister of Libya under Gaddafi. Mr al Obeidi was detained by rebel forces in August of last year. “He is now on trial for settling that claim; the charge is over-compensating the victims and wasting state funds,” Mr Lismore said.

“Al Obeidi could be released soon but these charges show the present regime’s attitude towards compensation compared to the previous regime.”

Libya 'granted oil concessions to BP on understanding Lockerbie bomber Megrahi would return home'

[This is the headline over a report published this morning on The Telegraph website.  It reads in part:]

Libya's former foreign minister has said that Tripoli granted massive oil concessions to BP on the understanding the Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber, would be returned home.

Abdulati al-Obeidi told the BBC that Britain had accepted Libyan indications that Abdelbaset al-Megrahi’s release was an unwritten quid pro quo of the multi-billion pound contract. 

“There was a hint that releasing him would help but it was not a condition,” he said. “The Libyan side, and you know the British, they know how to take things”

Asked if an exchange of the prisoner was part of the talks, Mr Obeidi said: “This is what I think”.

BP secured one of the largest contracts to exploit Libyan oil reserves after Col Gaddafi’s regime came in from the cold. The contract was celebrated as part of Tony Blair’s infamous Deal in the Desert trip to Libya.

Last year BP admitted it pressed for a deal over the controversial prisoner transfer agreement amid fears any delays would damage its “commercial interests”, but denied it had been involved in negotiations concerning Megrahi’s release.

[Here is what I wrote on this blog on 28 January 2010:]

According to Jack Straw "the Libyans understood that the discretion in respect of any PTA application rested with the Scottish Executive." This is not so. In meetings that I had with Libyan officials at the highest level shortly after the "deal in the desert" it was abundantly clear that the Libyans believed that the UK Government could order the transfer of Mr Megrahi and that they were prepared to do so. When I told them that the relevant powers rested with the Scottish -- not the UK -- Government, they simply did not believe me. When they eventually realised that I had been correct, their anger and disgust with the UK Government was palpable. As I have said elsewhere:

"The memorandum of understanding regarding prisoner transfer that Tony Blair entered into in the course of the "deal in the desert" in May 2007, and which paved the way for the formal prisoner transfer agreement, was intended by both sides to lead to the rapid return of Mr Megrahi to his homeland. This was the clear understanding of Libyan officials involved in the negotiations and to whom I have spoken.

"It was only after the memorandum of understanding was concluded that [it belatedly sunk in] that the decision on repatriation of this particular prisoner was a matter not for Westminster and Whitehall but for the devolved Scottish Government in Edinburgh, and that government had just come into the hands of the Scottish National Party and so could no longer be expected supinely to follow the UK Labour Government's wishes. That was when the understanding between the UK Government and the Libyan Government started to unravel, to the considerable annoyance and distress of the Libyans, who had been led to believe that repatriation under the PTA was only months away."

[Among the Libyan officials with whom I discussed this matter at the time were Abdulati al-Obeidi, Moussa Koussa and Abdel Rahman Shalgam.

Scottish lawyers' magazine The Firm has published a news item on this issue which can be read here.]

Obeidi & Zwai acquitted, Dorda sentenced to death

[What follows is the text of a report published this afternoon on the Libya Herald website:]

As was widely expected, a court in Tripoli has sentenced Seif Al-Islam Qaddafi and Abdullah Senussi to death for war crimes during the 2011 revolution. Seven other senior member of the Qaddafi regime have also been given death sentences. They are:

• Former prime minister Al-Baghdadi Al-Mahmoudi;
• Abuzeid Dourda; former General Secretary of the General People’s Committee (effectively prime minister) then Qaddafi’s external intelligence chief;
• Mansur Dhou, head of Qaddafi’s Tripoli internal security agency;
• Milad Daman head of internal security;
• Abdulhamid Ohida, an assistant to Senussi;
• Awidat Ghandoor Noubi, responsible for Qaddafi’s Revolutionary Committees in Tripoli;
• Mundar Mukhtar Ghanaimi

Among the other former regime figures on trial, 23 were given jail terms from life imprisonment in the case of eight of the accused to five years for one of them. One person, Nuri Al-Jetlawi, was ordered to be detained at a psychiatric hospital while four were found innocent and freed: former foreign minister Abdulati Al–Obeidi, Ali Zway, Mohamed Al-Waher and Amer Abani.

In the case of Saif Al-Islam, who like Abdullah Senussi, was wanted by the International Criminal Court in The Hague, the guilty verdict and sentencing was effectively in absentia. He is being held in Zintan.

All those sentenced to death, as well as the others, have a right to appeal within 60 days. Even if there is no appeal, the sentences still have to be endorsed by the High Court. If the sentences are carried out in the case of Saif Al-Islam, Senussi and the other seven sentenced to death, execution ill be by firing squad.

The court proceedings, held at Hadba Al-Khadra prison, have attracted considerable criticism from Libyan and international human rights lawayers and activists. In the case of Saif Al-Islam, his British lawyer, John Jones, condemned it as “a show trial”. “The whole thing is illegitimate from start to finish… It’s judicially sanctioned execution”, he said.

The internationally recognised government in Beida has rejected the trial as unsafe.

[RB: I am delighted at the acquittal of Messrs Obeidi and Zwai, both of whom played an important and honourable part in resolving the Lockerbie impasse between Libya and the United Kingdom and United States. The conviction of and death sentence on Abuzed Dorda horrify me. As Libya’s Permanent Representative at the United Nations he also had a major rôle in the resolution of the issue. I met all of them on many occasions and found them entirely trustworthy and likeable.]

Gaddafi-era officials go on trial accused over Lockerbie case

[This is the headline over a report published today by the Reuters news agency.  It reads in part:]

Two senior officials under late Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi went on trial on Monday accused of wasting public money by facilitating a compensation payment of more than $2 billion to families of those killed in the 1988 Lockerbie bombing.

The trial of the two men - former Foreign Minister Abdel-Ati al-Obeidi and former Secretary General of the General People's Congress [RB: and Libyan ambassador in London following restoration of diplomatic relations in 2001] Mohammed Zwai - was swiftly adjourned to give their legal team more time to prepare.

Zwai was the head of the legislature under Gaddafi, who was overthrown after an uprising last year and later killed.

Libya's new rulers, who aim to draw up a democratic constitution, are keen to try Gaddafi's family members and loyalists to show the country's citizens that those who helped Gaddafi stay in power for 42 years are being punished.

But human rights activists fret a weak central government and a relative lack of rule of law mean legal proceedings will not meet international standards.

The two men's appearance in the dock - 14 months after they were arrested - was brief.

"I refute these charges against me," Zwai told the court. Obedi also denied the charges.

The judge, whose name was not given, read out the charges against the duo, saying they were accused of arranging compensation worth $2.7 billion for the families of those killed in the Lockerbie bombing to try to get them to drop charges against Libya.

The 1988 bombing of a PanAm flight over Lockerbie in Scotland killed 270 people. Libyan Abdel Basset al-Meghrahi, who always denied involvement in downing the jet, was convicted of the bombing. He was released from jail in 2009 amid huge controversy in Britain and died of cancer in May.

Most but not all of the compensation was paid out by Libya on condition that U.N. sanctions against it were cancelled and U.S. trade sanctions against it lifted.

The judge said the two men's action was a crime because "the compensation was a waste of public money especially when there was no guarantee the charges in the Lockerbie case would be dropped if the compensation was made".

The judge adjourned the men's trial until October 15 after Mustafa Kishlaf, the defense lawyer, said he needed access to certain files and more time to study the case.

On Sunday, war-time interim Justice Minister Mohammed Al-Alagy told reporters that the current trials of Gaddafi-era officials were "invalid" because the prosecutor general's office was not following the necessary legal steps.

Under Libyan law, the Indictment Chamber reviews cases and then refers them to the appropriate court. But Alagy said prosecutors were bypassing this body and demanded they review their procedures and the legality of those held in custody.

Buzeid Dorda, a former intelligence chief and the first former senior official from the Gaddafi era to be put on trial in Libya, said in July he had been denied the right to meet privately with a lawyer and had been subjected to illegal interrogations during his 10 months in detention.

His trial, which began on June 5, has been adjourned several times since for procedural reasons.

[A report on the Libyan Mathaba website contains the following:]

The Tripoli Appeals Court today Monday postponed the trial of senior officials of the derailed Jamahiriya to consider the issue of the defendants Mohammed Abu El-Gassem Yusuf al-Zwai, Secretary of the General People's Congress of the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, and Abdulati Ibrahim Muhammad al-Obeidi, Secretary of External Communications at the Congress until the 15th October at the request of their lawyers.

This was followed by the trial judge citing charges against the two accused, by the public prosecutor for first in 2004 as public officials for harming public money by granting compensation to the families of the victims of the Pan Am flight 103 "Lockerbie" case, of over two thousand seven hundred million dollars (2.7 billion),  exceeded the ceiling granted to them in a weak and fake case, since Libya was not responsible.

The second charge concerned treason of the suspects in taking part in negotiations with the lawyers of the families of the victims and agreeing to pay the compensation in exchange for the lifting of the unjust sanctions imposed upon Libya, instead of demanding compensation for those sanctions, which is still outstanding, and to remove Libya from the list of countries sponsoring terrorism, while knowing that lawyers are not authorised to negotiate the conditions mentioned above by the US administration, which resulted in harm to the public money as applicable in the articles 2/9 of Law No. 2 of 1979 on economic crimes and articles 183 and 76 of the Penal Code.

Both the accused during the hearing rejected charges brought against them by the trial judge, and asked their defense counsel for for the copies of some papers and documents of the court with a request for the release of those documents, which was met by an objection by the prosecution. The court decided in its second public meeting today to defer consideration of the charges at the request of the defendants to give them more time so as to enable the defense lawers to interview their clients in accordance with legal procedures applicable and to see all documents permitted.

[Further information regarding the Lockerbie role of Obeidi can be found on this blog here; of Zwai here; and of Dorda here.]

Blair, Gaddafi, Megrahi

What follows is an item originally posted on this blog on this date in 2009:

Tony Blair and Colonel Gadaffi discussed al-Megrahi

Tony Blair discussed with Colonel Gadaffi how best to “find a way through" for the jailed Lockerbie bomber Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi after BP formally signed an exploration deal in 2007, according to Libya’s Europe minister.

In an interview with The Sunday Times in Tripoli yesterday, Abdulati al-Obeidi, the minister, said that al-Megrahi had been on the agenda during Blair’s visit that year.

“They (Blair and Gadaffi) discussed possible ways on how legally to bring al-Megrahi to Libya, whether through British or international laws or the Scottish system,” the minister said.

“At that time they were merely exchanging ideas. The idea was discussed as a title. Everyone was looking for a relationship to continue and prosper into the future and to find a way out for Abdul Baset, but nothing was agreed." (...)

The minister, Libya’s longest-serving politican, going back since 1968, said he had been asked by his government to become involved in the negotiations over al-Megrahi’s release following the prisoner’s cancer diagnosis.

It was he who first conveyed Libya’s concerns to Bill Rammell, a Foreign Office minister at the time, about the possible consequences should al-Megrahi die in prison.

“I told Rammell and then (Ivan) Lewis, his successor, that al-Megrahi was very sick with cancer and that if he died in prison it would be disastrous in general, not just with regards to trade issues, but more importantly with public opinion, as people here and in the Middle East believed he was innocent, a hero.

“If he had died in prison they would also have believed that his illness was brought about intentionally and this would have been bad.”

He said he had conveyed the same message to Scottish officials.

It was then that Rammell had told him that neither Gordon Brown, the prime minister, nor David Miliband, the foreign secretary, wanted al-Megrahi to die in prison.

Legal experts were hired to explore ways in which to seek his freedom and they were made aware of possible release on compassionate grounds as well as under the Prisoner Transfer Agreement.

The minister said al-Megrahi had insisted on dropping his appeal against conviction for the Lockerbie bombing in order to give both options a better chance.

“He was a sick man, a dying man who wanted to return home, reunite with his family and see them before he died,” he said. Al-Megrahi had declared when he made his decision: “I want to die among my family.”

[The above are excerpts from an article in The Sunday Times.]

Further information about Abdul Ati al-Obeidi, a highly significant figure in the Lockerbie saga, is to be found in blogposts here. My take on the “deal in the desert” can be read here.

Megrahi release today to prevent 'martyrdom'

[This is the headline over the main Lockerbie report by Lucy Adams in today's edition of The Herald. It reads in part:]

The man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing will be released today on compassionate grounds but Libya has given an undertaking that there will be no "triumphalism".

The Herald understands that one compelling reason for allowing the Libyan to return to Tripoli is to avoid him dying as a "martyr" in prison and putting Scotland on the map for all the wrong reasons.

The public announcement will be made at 1pm by Kenny MacAskill, the Justice Secretary, who has been considering an application for prisoner transfer and for Megrahi's release on compassionate grounds.

Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi, who is suffering from terminal prostate cancer and has less than three months to live, will fly home to his family in time for Ramadan - as The Herald stated last week.

Megrahi, who is serving 27 years in HMP Greenock for the bombing that killed 270 people in December 1988, is expected to fly to Tripoli in a private jet owned by the Libyan government.

The Foreign Office yesterday advised the State Department of the decision.

Despite concerns that Megrahi will be paraded through the streets to a hero's welcome, The Herald understands that Libyan delegates have told ministers that there would be no such triumphalism.

There is also a tacit agreement that the Libyan government will make no comment until after his return and that, even then, it will not use Megrahi as a big part of Colonel Gaddafi's September celebrations for 40 years in power.

Abdul Ati al-Obeidi, the Libyan minister and former ambassador who was key to the talks to resume diplomatic relations with the UK and has been involved in the discussions about Megrahi, was in London yesterday. Obeidi is expected to fly from Luton to collect Megrahi at lunchtime.

[The same newspaper has a further article by Lucy Adams headed "Scotland caught in the middle of an international drama" on the diplomatic manoeuvrings that got us where we are today; and a thoughtful and moving opinion piece by Anne Johnstone entitled "Ability to show compassion is a gift more precious to the giver".]

MacAskill under pressure over Megrahi appeal claim

[This is the headline over a report by Lucy Adams in today’s edition of The Herald.  It reads as follows:]

Scotland's Justice Secretary is under pressure to explain claims he advised the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing to drop his appeal against conviction to smooth the way for his compassionate release.

The allegation levelled against Kenny MacAskill – and denied by the Scottish Government – is contained in a new book, entitled Megrahi: You Are My Jury, in which Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi says he was "the innocent victim of dirty politics, a flawed investigation and judicial folly". It also makes claims about new evidence it says could have cleared the Libyan, but which the Crown Office failed to disclose to the defence.

Mr MacAskill is claimed to have made the offer to Megrahi through a Libyan official.

Scottish LibDem leader Willie Rennie called for Mr MacAskill and Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland to make a statement to Holyrood. He said: "Allegations of suppression of evidence and a Greenock Prison release deal between the Justice Secretary and Megrahi make it essential for a statement to be made to Parliament - it is important the Justice Secretary answers serious questions."

Tory leader Ruth Davidson said: "This is a staggering claim and implies the Scottish Justice Minister was offering legal advice to help a convicted killer escape prison."

Scottish Labour's justice spokesman, Lewis Macdonald, said Mr MacAskill may have "knowingly misled Parliament".

The new book details previously unseen evidence not disclosed to the defence, including forensics reports that suggest the fragment of circuit board found in the Lockerbie debris did not match those sold to the Libyans – as per the prosecution case at trial.

The book claims that the metal content did not match – but reports referring to this were not shared with the defence until 2009.

Megrahi dropped his appeal shortly before Mr MacAskill said he would be released on "compassionate grounds" on August 20, 2009. The book states that Mr MacAskill met Libyan officials, including Foreign Minister Abdulati al Obeidi, 10 days earlier.

Megrahi claimed: "After the meeting, the Libyan delegation came to the prison to visit me. Obeidi said that, towards the end of the meeting, MacAskill had asked to speak to him in private.

"Once the others had withdrawn, he stated that MacAskill gave him to understand that it would be easier to grant compassionate release if I dropped my appeal.

"He said he was not demanding that I do so, but the message seemed to me clear.

"I was legally entitled to continue the appeal, but I could not risk doing so."

Mr MacAskill has categorically denied the claim. A Scottish Government spokesman branded the book, as "third-hand hearsay".

The spokesman added: "These claims are wrong – and officials were present at all meetings the Justice Secretary had on this matter at all times. The minutes of this meeting and indeed all other meetings, including with Mr Megrahi in Greenock Prison, were published by the Scottish Government and have been in the public domain since September 2009.

"We can say categorically that neither did the Scottish Government have any involvement of any kind in Mr Megrahi dropping his appeal, or indeed any interest in it. That was entirely a matter for Mr Megrahi and his legal team."

The Crown Office said the decision was taken by Megrahi and his lawyers.

The book's author, John Ashton, who spent three years as a researcher with Megrahi's legal team, described the Crown's failure to disclose key information as a "scandal".

Professor Robert Black, one of the architects of the original trial, said the book appeared to have "put the final nail in the coffin of the conviction."

Prime Minister David Cameron described the book as "an insult to the families of the 270 people who were murdered".

[In today's edition of the Daily Express there is another report on this issue.]