Malta to investigate evidence of key Lockerbie witness

[This is the headline over a report in today's edition of The Daily Telegraph. It reads in part:]

Malta is preparing to launch an investigation into the evidence one of the key trial witnesses who helped convict Abdelbasset al-Megrahi over the Lockerbie bombing.

Government officials want to look at the claims of Tony Gauci, the shopkeeper who identified the Libyan as the man responsible for placing explosives on Pan Am Flight 103.

Mr Gauci ran a clothes shop, in [Sliema], Malta in 1988, and claimed Megrahi purchased an incriminating piece of clothing found among the debris of the aircraft.

But he has long been dogged by accusations that he concocted the story to receive a multi-million payout from the US.

Megrahi, who was released from a Scottish prison on compassionate grounds in August, is running an internet campaign to prove his innocence.

The former Libyan secret agent has accused America of "buying evidence" by paying Mr Gauci $2 million (£1.2m) under the Rewards for Justice programme.

The international outcry over Megrahi's release has finally persuaded the Maltese authorities to consider an inquiry.

A Maltese legal official told The Daily Telegraph: "Tony Gauci is an area where we have to investigate more thoroughly and we are preparing for this.

"There was never enough proof, to be frank, on the circumstances of his evidence and there is pressure coming from many quarters on Malta to move to resolve the issue." (...)

A review of Megrahi's conviction by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission in 2007 also revealed that Mr Gauci had been interviewed 17 times by Scottish and Maltese police but had made a series of "contradictory" statements.

Critics claim he manufactured his testimony after prompting by American agents who already had Megrahi in their sights and were desperate to get a conviction.

Relatives of the Scottish victims of the bombing have also voiced doubts about Megrahi's conviction. (...)

Campaigners for an investigation into the collection of evidence and subsequent trial of Megrahi before a Scottish court at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands said Mr Gauci was peripheral to efforts to find justice.

"I don't think he's of much use," said Robert Black, a Scottish QC who campaigns on Lockerbie. "He says what he thinks people want him to say." [RB: The reporter has completely misunderstood what I was saying. The trial judges' assessment of Gauci as credible and reliable was absolutely crucial to their conviction of Megrahi. If it can be demonstrated that Gauci was neither credible nor reliable, the foundation of that conviction completely disappears.]

Mr Black has co-operated with Dr Jim Swire, who's daughter Flora was one of 11 people who died in the village when Flight 103 exploded above Lockerbie in 1988 killing 270.

Both men are signatories to a letter to the United Nations General Assembly calling for an international inquiry into the tragedy.

"Malta is well placed to ask for this because its airport was stigmatised by the verdict," Mr Black said. "Malta has proved it could not be involved. It was in fact one of the very few places in the world that carried out physical reconciliation by baggage handlers at that time."

Dr Swire has threatened the government with legal action to overturn the Lockerbie verdict.

Mr Gauci now refuses to respond to questions about his controversial testimony. His last known residence was a well-guarded house shared with his brother in the Maltese suburb.

[What follows is from a report on the website of the Maltese newspaper, The Times:]

Malta has denied reports in the Daily Telegraph that it was to investigate the evidence of one of the key witnesses who helped convict the Lockerbie bomber.

According to the newspaper, the Maltese government wants to examine the claims of Tony Gauci, the shopkeeper who identified Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi as the man responsible for placing explosives on Pan Am flight 103. (...)

The Telegraph quoted a Maltese legal official as saying: "Tony Gauci is an area we want to investigate more thoroughly and we are preparing for this."

But Home Affairs Minister Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici told timesofmalta.com the report was untrue.

[The MaltaMedia website report on the issue contains the following:]

The Government has categorically denied that any Government official said that the Maltese Government is preparing to look into the testimony that Maltese national Tony Gauci gave during the said trial. The Maltese Government is not prepared to do any such thing.

Since 1988 successive Maltese Governments have always maintained that the bomb which downed the Pan Am flight 103 had not departed from Malta and ample proof of this was produced. The Maltese Government hopes that this statement will put an end to this kind of speculation once and for all.

“At the meeting on 9 April, I proposed that US $2m should be paid to Anthony Gauci"

[What follows is excerpted from a report published in the the Maltese newspaper The Sunday Times on 24 November 2013:]

The lead investigator in the Lockerbie bombing personally lobbied US authorities to pay two Maltese witnesses at least $3 million for their part in securing the conviction of Abdelbaset Al Megrahi, documents published today in The Sunday Times of Malta reveal. (...)

In one of the documents, Detective Superintendent Tom McCulloch, from the Scottish Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary, wrote to the US Department of Justice on April 19, 2002, making the case for Maltese witness Tony Gauci and his brother Paul to be compensated for their role in the trial from the US Rewards for Justice programme.

McCulloch wrote: “At the meeting on 9 April, I proposed that US 2 million dollars should be paid to Anthony Gauci and US 1 million dollars to his brother Paul. However, following further informal discussions I was encouraged to learn that those responsible for making the final decision retain a large degree of flexibility to increase this figure.”

The letter followed on from a meeting with the Justice Department and the FBI and another letter sent a year earlier in which Mr McCulloch first made his plea on behalf of the Gaucis.

In this first letter, he wrote: “There is little doubt that (Tony Gauci’s) evidence was the key to the conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohammed Al Megrahi. I therefore feel that he is a worthy of nominee for the reward...”

Mr McCulloch said he had discussed the reward with the Crown Office (the prosecution) but they would not offer an opinion on whether the Gaucis should be paid as this was deemed “improper”.

“The prosecution in Scotland cannot become involved in such an application,” Mr McCulloch wrote. (...)

Mr Gauci himself gave evidence before the commission and stressed that he had never shown any interest in receiving payment. To sustain his point, he underlined the fact that he had turned down various offers for payment by journalists, who had been hounding him and his brother for an exclusive, over the years.

He had also turned down an offer made by an unidentified Libyan man for compensation from the Libyan regime.

However, extracts from a diary kept by Dumfries and Galloway Inspector Harry Bell give a different picture. In a note dated September 29, 1989, early into the investigation, Mr Bell noted that FBI Agent Chris Murray had told him he had “the authority to arrange unlimited money for Tony Gauci” and that he could arrange for “$10,000 immediately”.

Moreover, there are also various entries in the classified documents in which Scottish police describe Paul Gauci as being very forceful about seeking some sort of financial gain and also that he influenced his brother greatly.

“It is apparent from speaking to him for any length of time that he has a desire to gain financial benefit from the position he and his brother are in relative to the case. As a consequence he exaggerates his own importance as a witness and clearly inflates the fears that he and his brother have...” (...)

Robert Black, an emeritus professor of Scots law, who is widely credited as having been the architect of the non-jury trial at the neutral location of Camp Zeist in the Netherlands, said he found one of the documents shocking.

In this document, dated January 12, 2001, the officer, whose name was redacted, writes: “(the Gauci brothers) will maintain their current position and not seek to make adverse comment regarding any perceived lack of recognition of their position. Nor is it anticipated would they ever seek to highlight any remuneration perceived”.

Reacting to this passage, Prof Black said: “It is no part of an investigator’s or prosecutor’s function to seek to secure that a witness maintains his current position.

“To try to influence a witness, or secure benefits for him, to achieve this result is grossly improper. The passage also recognises that it is important that the remuneration arrangement should not be ‘highlighted’. This manifests a clear, and correct, understanding that the arrangement is not one that would meet with legal or public approbation.”

The act itself of paying out money to a witness is no longer illegal under Scottish law, although it once was. However, Prof Black insisted, it is something that should always be disclosed to the defence.

“In this case, the authorities did everything in their power to conceal it, including ‘mislaying’ Harry Bell’s diary until it was eventually unearthed by the SCCRC in the course of their investigation of the Megrahi conviction.”

New evidence casts doubt in Lockerbie case

[This is the headline over a report published today on the Aljazeera News website.  It reads as follows:]

Fresh scientific evidence unearthed by a Scottish legal review undermines the case against the man convicted of being responsible for the Lockerbie aircraft bombing, an investigation for Al Jazeera has found.

The Scottish Criminal Case Review Commission (SCCRC) report details evidence that would likely have resulted in the verdict against Abdel Baset al-Meghrahi, a Libyan man convicted of carrying out the bombing of Pan-Am flight 103 in 1988, being overturned.

'Lockerbie: Case Closed', an hour-long documentary to be aired on Al Jazeera on Monday, examines the evidence uncovered by the SCCRC as well as revealing fresh scientific evidence which is unknown to the commission but which comprehensively undermines a crucial part of the case against the man known as the Lockerbie bomber.

Among the evidence examined by the SCCRC was the testimony of Tony Gauci, a shop owner from Malta, and the most important prosecution witness in the case.

Gauci identified Megrahi as a man who had bought clothing and an umbrella from him on December 7, 1988 - remnants of which were later recovered from among debris recovered from the disaster scene. 

The SCCRC found a number of reasons to seriously question this identification and Gauci’s account of events on that date, which was also the only day on which Megrahi could have been present in Malta to make such purchases.

The report also raises concerns about the legitimacy of the formal identification process, in which Gauci picked Megrahi out from a line-up. The commission found that Gauci had seen Megrahi’s photo in a magazine article identifying him as a possible suspect many weeks before the parade took place.

The SCCRC also found that Scottish police knew that Gauci was interested in financial rewards, despite maintaining that the shopkeeper had shown no such interest.

Gauci reportedly picked up a $2 million US government reward for his role in the case. Under Scottish law, witnesses cannot be paid for their testimony.

Most significantly, the documentary will reveal the dramatic results of new scientific tests that destroy the most crucial piece of forensic evidence linking the bombing to Libya.

The new revelations were put to the terminally sick Megrahi in Libya, and his comments on the case will be heard for the first time in these films.

Of Gauci, he maintains that he never visited his shop.

"If I have a chance to see him [Gauci] I am forgiving him. I would tell him that I have never in my entire life been in his shop. I have never bought any clothing from him. And I tell him that he dealt with me very wrongly. This man – I have never seen him in my entire life except when he came to the court. I find him a very simple man," Meghrahi told Al Jazeera.

John Ashton, who has been investigating the case for nearly 20 years, including time spent as part of Megrahi’s defence team, said: "The Lockerbie disaster was Europe’s worst terrorist attack. More Americans died in that attack than in any other terrorist event before 9/11. It's also Britain’s worst miscarriage of justice, the wrong man was convicted and the real killers are still out there."

Lockerbie: Case Closed will be broadcast on Monday 27 February at 20:00 GMT on Al Jazeera English.


[The following is an excerpt from a report in today’s edition of The Herald:]


Today the official biography of the Libyan convicted of the atrocity, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi, will be launched and two documentaries will be aired, all of which highlight new evidence and previously unseen documents that experts say would have overturned the conviction.

Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci claimed that Megrahi purchased clothes found packed around the bomb – a claim the Libyan has always denied.

In one of the TV programmes, Megrahi, 59, says: "I have never seen him in my entire life except when he came to the court. I find him a very simple man. But I do forgive him."

The Herald is one of only two newspapers in the world to have had advance access to the book, Megrahi: You Are My Jury, by John Ashton, a former member of the defence team.

The Al Jazeera documentary to be broadcast today claims Megrahi's conviction would "almost certainly" have been overturned had previously unseen evidence been used in an appeal.

The programme, Lockerbie: Case Closed, gained access to the investigations of the Scottish Criminal Case Review Commission (SCCRC) – which referred Megrahi's case for a fresh appeal in June 2007 on six grounds – and also uncovered fresh scientific evidence that it claims is unknown to the commission and "comprehensively undermines" part of the case against Megrahi. (…)

Earlier this month, campaigners fighting on behalf of Megrahi accused politicians, lawyers, civil servants and governments of an "orchestrated desire" to keep details of his case under wraps.

Members of the Justice For Megrahi group, who have called for an inquiry into his conviction, said the Crown Office and civil service would "do anything" to stop disclosure.

The Al Jazeera documentary claims to disclose the "dramatic results" of new scientific tests that undermine forensic evidence used in the case.

John Ashton, the author of the book, has been investigating the case for nearly 20 years.

He said: "The Lockerbie disaster was Europe's worst terrorist attack. More Americans died in that attack than in any other terrorist event before 9/11. It's also Britain's worst miscarriage of justice – the wrong man was convicted and the real killers are still out there."

[A report in today’s edition of The Scotsman contains the following:]

Scottish publisher Birlinn launches into the Lockerbie controversy today with the publication of a book that promises the fullest account yet of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi’s story in his own words.

Megrahi: You Are My Jury – The Lockerbie Evidence, is by John Ashton, who worked with Megrahi’s legal team from 2006 to 2009.

A long-time researcher on the case, he is said to have been working on the 500-page book with Megrahi since the latter’s release from a Scottish prison on compassionate grounds following a cancer diagnosis in August 2009.

In its summary, the book promises to present “conclusive new evidence” to prove Megrahi was “an innocent victim of dirty politics, a flawed investigation and judicial folly”. (…)

Details of the book’s contents have been a closely guarded secret. But it has hit the headlines well before its publication, with some parents of those who died denouncing it as “blood money”.

The Rev John Mosey, will be in Edinburgh today for the book’s launch. His daughter died in the atrocity.

He said he respected Mr Ashton’s research, adding: “If the rumours of its contents are well-founded, it could open up the Lockerbie thing in a very serious manner that the legal profession will have to take notice of.” (…)

Nearly half of the latest book is in Megrahi’s own words, a Birlinn spokesperson said yesterday. About a third explores the forensic evidence, and one person who has read it described it as so complicated that “my brain has been stewed”.

The Birlinn spokesperson said: “The book came to us, and the board talked about it long and hard, but decided that this was a book we wanted to publish.

“We published it without serialisation or profiting from the book, just to get Megrahi’s story on the record.

“There is new evidence within the book, and that’s what will be revealed today. It’s also the first time that we have had a wealth of material in Megrahi’s own words.

“He will not receive any form of payment for the book.”

[A further article in The Scotsman, which purports to disclose some of the evidence in the book and contains reactions from Lockerbie relatives, can be read here.  The Times's short report (behind the paywall) can be read here. A report in today’s Daily Mirror can be read here; the report in the Daily Record here; and the report in The Sun here. The Press Association news agency report can be read here. A report on the STV News website can be read here.]

Lockerbie bomb play may be shown in Malta

[This is the headline over a report published today on the BBC News website. It reads as follows:]

Talks are under way to stage a new play in Malta about the Lockerbie bombing.

The 1988 bombing of Flight 103 over Lockerbie killed 270 people and was the worst terrorist atrocity in UK history.

The Lockerbie Bomber is the latest in a long line of books and plays tackling the subject, and it will be performed in Alloa's Alman Theatre this week.

Malta is a key location in the case, and a theatre director in the capital, Valletta, is now in talks with writer Alan Clark about staging it there.

The Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci was a crucial witness in the trial, identifying the only man convicted of the atrocity, Abdelbaset Al-Megrahi.

Mr Gauci owned Mary's House clothes shop in the port of Sliema, and according to evidence given at Megrahi's trial in 2000, he sold him clothes which were said to have been wrapped around the bomb which brought down the flight.

Megrahi was also said to have loaded the bomb onto an Air Malta Flight at the island's Luqa airport.

He was convicted in 2001 but was released by the Scottish government on compassionate grounds in 2009, after being diagnosed with terminal cancer. He died last year.

The new play about the bombing considers events from three perspectives; families, journalists and security experts.

And Valletta theatre director Herman Grech is keen to stage it in the Maltese capital later this year.

He said: "The play struck me because it recalls the bombing of the aircraft in its vivid, horrific detail.

"But most of all, the script challenges the audience into thinking whether, beyond the odd newspaper headline, this could have been one of the grossest miscarriages of justice of our times.

"I have also found it ironic that while the Maltese government has maintained that the bomb never departed from the island's airport, it has remained reluctant to challenge the accusations against Megrahi."

Mr Clark said: "Mr Grech and I have had preliminary discussions about performances in Malta. It's especially interesting because Malta has particular relevance to Lockerbie, an angle that the play examines."

He said he hoped performances of the play, both in Scotland and in Malta, would boost calls for an independent public inquiry into the prosecution of the case.

And Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died in the attack, said: "I welcome the play as it tries to shed light on what happened when the investigation went off the rails."

[What follows is the full text of a press release from Tryst Theatre:]

A Maltese theatre director has expressed an interest in staging a new play by a Scottish writer about the Lockerbie bombing.

Malta-based Herman Grech is in discussions with writer Alan Clark about presenting The Lockerbie Bomber in Valletta later this year.

The bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie killed 270 people and was the worst terrorist atrocity in the UK. Now, for the first time, the horrific tragedy has been brought to the stage in this new work which attempts to lift the veil of secrecy thrown over the bombing by successive Governments and security services.

Mr Grech, who is also Head of Media at The Times of Malta, said: "The play struck me because it recalls the bombing of the aircraft in its vivid, horrific detail. But most of all, the script challenges the audience into thinking whether, beyond the odd newspaper headline, this could have been one of the grossest miscarriages of justice of our times.

“I have also found it ironic that while the Maltese government has maintained that the bomb never departed from the island's airport, it has remained reluctant to challenge the accusations against Megrahi." [RB: An article on Lockerbie and Malta by Herman Grech can be read here.]

Alan Clark said: “Mr Grech and I have had preliminary discussions about performances in Malta. It’s especially interesting because Malta has particular relevance to Lockerbie, an angle that the play examines.

“The Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci identified Megrahi, the only man convicted of the atrocity, as resembling the man who bought clothes in his shop. Megrahi was at Malta’s Luqa Airport on the day of the bombing. It’s alleged the bomb was put on a feeder flight at Luqa which went to Frankfurt and then to London Heathrow before detonating over Lockerbie. Following the bombing, a small fragment of printed circuit board was found embedded in a scrap of the Maltese clothing. After Megrahi was convicted, Tony Gauci and his brother were paid an alleged $3m for their evidence by the US Department of Justice ‘Rewards for Justice’ programme. So Malta is absolutely central to the case.”

Clark continued: “It’s worth pointing out that the trial judges had problems with how the suitcase containing the bomb got loaded at Malta. In their determination, they said: ‘The absence of an explanation as to how the suitcase was taken into the system at Luqa is a major difficulty for the Crown case but after taking full account of that difficulty, we remain of the view that the primary suitcase began its journey at Luqa.’”

He added: “Since then, compelling new evidence has come to light that the verdict was terribly flawed – the Heathrow break-in, the bomb timer fragment, the view of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission that there were six separate grounds where there may have been a miscarriage of justice. So it seems to me the only way the matter can be satisfactorily resolved is by having an independent public inquiry, not into Lockerbie itself, but specifically into the prosecution of the case – as allegations of evidence fabricated and evidence withheld continue to be made.

“I hope performances of the play, both here and in Malta, help us move towards such an inquiry.”

The play has been seen and welcomed by members of the Justice for Megrahi group. Founded in November 2008, the campaign maintains that the conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi for the Lockerbie bombing was a miscarriage of justice.

One of its members is former Police Superintendent Iain McKie who was at the premiere. “This is a challenging and thought-provoking play that brings the human suffering and political chicanery behind the tragedy of Lockerbie to vivid and dramatic life. It should be required viewing for every Scot as a reminder of a disaster that has become an indelible stain on the reputation ofScotland and its justice system."

And Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died in the attack, commented: “I welcome the play as it tries to shed light on what happened when the investigation went off the rails. I believe Megrahi was wrongly identified.”

Tryst Theatre is staging The Lockerbie Bomber in Alloa’s Alman Theatre from January 17-19 at 8pm. Call the Box Office on 07929 561 311 for tickets.

[This story features on the website of the Maltese newspaper The Independent, but not, strangely enough given Mr Grech's links, on that of The Times of Malta.]

Malta urged to clear its name on Lockerbie disaster

[This is the headline over a report published yesterday afternoon on the website of the Maltese newspaper The Independent.  It reads in part:]

Malta should seek to clear its name over the Lockerbie bombing victims by seeking a revocation of the conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the only man to have been found guilty of the attack, according to the father of one of the victims.

Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was one of the 270 people that died when Pan Am Flight 103 crashed over Lockerbie on 21 December 1988, and Robert Forrester, the secretary of the Justice for Megrahi Committee, are in Malta in connection with the play The Lockerbie Bomber, which delves into the potential miscarriage of justice that followed.

On Friday, the two men met Prime Minister Joseph Muscat and Foreign Minister George Vella to discuss the case, in a bid to persuade the Maltese government to seek a review of Mr al-Megrahi’s conviction.

Mr al-Megrahi was one of two people accused of being involved in the bombing; his co-accused, Lamin Khalifah Fhimah, was acquitted by a Scottish court specially convened in Camp Zeist, a disused US Air Force base in The Netherlands, due to extradition issues.

The two men were employed with Libyan Arab Airlines – Mr Fhimah was the station manager at Luqa airport while Mr al-Megrahi was head of security – when the bombing took place. The aircraft had left Malta for Frankfurt on its flight to Detroit, with planned stopovers at London Heathrow and JFK Airport in New York. [RB: Air Malta’s flight KM 180 terminated at Frankfurt. The prosecution case was that an unaccompanied bag was offloaded from it onto feeder flight Pan Am 103A to Heathrow and then onto Pan Am 103 bound for JFK and Detroit.]

According to the prosecution, the bomb had been planted in Malta, a claim based on the discovery of Malta-made (...) clothing which was believed to have come from the same suitcase. The owner of the shop they were purchased from, Tony Gauci, proved to be a key witness, and he identified Mr al-Megrahi as a Libyan who had indiscriminately purchased (...) clothes from his shop a couple of weeks before the bombing took place.

Mr al-Megrahi was ultimately jailed for life in January 2001, and a first appeal was refused in 2002. In 2007, after he applied for a review of the case, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission granted him permission to appeal against his conviction due to evidence that a miscarriage of justice may have taken place.

But the appeal was withdrawn days before Mr al-Megrahi was granted a release from detention on compassionate grounds due to terminal prostate cancer. He returned to Tripoli, and while he outlived the three-month prognosis that led to his release, he ultimately died on May 2012.

Verdict ‘used to deny us the truth’

But many relatives of Lockerbie victims remain unconvinced about Mr al-Megrahi’s guilt, and Dr Swire, a retired family doctor from Windsor, has been their most prominent representative. His daughter, a medical student, was one day shy of her 24th birthday when she died: she was travelling to the US to spend Christmas with her American boyfriend.

At St James’ Cavalier, Dr Swire said that he had gone to the trial believing that he would see those who murdered his daughter brought to justice, but left feeling that Mr al-Megrahi was a scapegoat. He ultimately befriended the only man convicted of killing his daughter, convinced that the true perpetrators are yet to face justice.

Mr al-Megrahi may have died, but this has not stopped Dr Swire and the Justice for Megrahi group he co-founded from seeking to overturn his conviction, as the verdict has implications beyond the injustice they are convinced the Libyan had suffered.

“The verdict is used ruthlessly to deny us access to the truth,” Dr Swire maintains. And by doing so, he adds, the Scottish justice system was protecting the ones who actually did it.

He points out that a judge actually remarked that it was unfortunate that the prosecution had no evidence of how Mr al-Megrahi loaded the bomb in Malta.

“You bet it’s unfortunate, because he didn’t put it on a plane,” he adds.

Dr Swire maintains that the evidence pointed towards an attack by Iran, which swore revenge after a US missile cruiser – the USS Vincennes – shot down an Iranian passenger jet over the Persian Gulf, in Iranian airspace, on 3 July 1988, killing all 290 civilians on board.

The likely perpetrators, he argues, are a Syria-based Palestinian militant organisation – the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command (PFLP-GC) – as the bomb used to down the Pan Am Flight was of a type they had developed. The PFLP-GC had initially been blamed for the attack, before the two Libyans were indicted.

Dr Swire, who had been taught how to use explosives when he served in the Royal Engineers, explains that the bomb used a mechanism triggered by a drop in air pressure, which would occur as the aircraft gained elevation. He insists that the crude timer utilised could not be set for longer than 30 minutes.

As a result, he maintains, it would have been impossible for the bomb to have been loaded at Luqa airport, since it would have gone off before the aircraft reached Frankfurt. The bomb could not even have been loaded in Frankfurt itself, he adds.

While Mr Forrester notes that the Justice for Megrahi group itself is solely concerned with clearing Mr al-Megrahi’s name – and not with finding who the perpetrators may be – he points out that the group is concerned at the way investigations were diverted from the PFLP-GC in favour of the “fantasy yellow-brick road to Tripoli”.

Dr Swire questions the reliability of Mr Gauci’s testimony, noting that he and his brother Paul clearly had expectations of a financial reward for their role. The SCCRC ultimately revealed, when it granted approval for a second appeal, that the US Department of Justice had been asked to pay Tony Gauci $2 million and his brother $1 million under the US government’s Rewards for Justice anti-terrorism programme, although the amount the brothers received could not be determined.

Mr al-Megrahi was found to possess multiple false passports, but Dr Swire insists that this was related to his job with the Libyan airline, noting that he also had to procure spare parts for the Boeing aircrafts the airline used – easier said than done given the economic sanctions imposed on Libya at the time.

Ultimately, Libya’s dictator Muammar Gaddafi did agree to acknowledge responsibility for the attack, and even paid compensation to the victims’ families.

But Dr Swire insists that this was simply a political ploy to ensure that economic sanctions were lifted, noting that a repressive dictator would have needed an economy that was doing well to remain in power. He adds that he also evaded a direct admission of guilt, as his lawyers drafted a “clever” letter in which he claimed responsibility on the basis of the conviction of a Libyan citizen.

Nevertheless, Dr Swire does not rule out that Col Gaddafi or his regime was aware of – or even involved in – the bombing. He only categorically rules out the involvement of Mr al-Megrahi who, he points out, did not exactly act as a terrorist would when he visited Malta by choosing to stay at a hotel where he was well known.

Clearing Malta’s name

Dr Swire met Mr al-Megrahi for a final time in January 2012, and he notes that the Libyan man was keen to pass on documents to him after his death, in a bid to clear his family’s name. Given the situation in Libya, however, he is not keeping in touch with the family, fearing for their safety.

He points out that the SCCRC allows any parties who have a direct interest to seek a review of a court case: in this case, the list would include him as the relative of a victim, and Mr al-Megrahi’s family.

It would also include Malta, if it felt that its reputation was tarnished by being linked to the bombing, despite what Dr Swire describes to be one of the most secure airports on earth. In 1990, to prove airport security left much to be desired, Dr Swire took a fake bomb – with marzipan used as a substitute for Semtex – on a flight from London Heathrow to New York JFK, and subsequently from New York JFK to Boston.

Both Dr Swire and Mr Forrester said that it would be highly inappropriate for them to divulge details of their meeting with Dr Muscat and Dr Vella, but Mr Forrester did point out that the meeting was “absolutely superb” and very constructive. Dr Swire noted that they had been greeted in a friendly manner they were not accustomed to when meeting western politicians.

The tragedy’s 25th anniversary falls in December, and their campaign has not yet achieved any measurable success.

But both men are convinced that eventually it will, although Dr Swire, who is in his late seventies, wonders whether he will live to see it. But he notes that there are others, younger people, who are willing to continue the work they have started.

SCCRC 2007 Megrahi report enters public domain

[With a fresh application lodged, it is worth recalling that it was on this date in 2012 that the Sunday Herald published the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission’s 2007 Statement of Reasons for finding that the conviction of Abdelbaset Megrahi might have amounted to a miscarriage of justice. Excerpts from an accompanying article by Lucy Adams were published on this blog. The Sunday Herald summarised the SCCRC report as follows:]

The SCCRC report criticises the former Lord Advocate who led the landmark prosecution. Colin Boyd QC, now Lord Boyd, was head of the team which has been accused of failing to disclose crucial information to Megrahi's defence team.

In its 800-page report, the SCCRC criticises Lord Boyd for his handling of CIA cables about a key witness.

The cables refer to Abdul Majid Giaka, an alleged double agent who was a Crown witness. Giaka identified Megrahi as a member of Libyan intelligence, but his subsequent evidence was rejected following revelations in the US intelligence agency's much-redacted cables that he had demanded and received reward money.

Lord Boyd originally told the trial there was no need for disclosure of the cables. However, the SCCRC said it was "difficult to understand" his assurances from August 22, 2000 that there was "nothing" in the documents relating to Lockerbie or the bombing which could "in any way impinge" on Giaka's credibility.

Lord Boyd rejected the commission's claim. He said: "I reject the suggestion that I or anyone else in the prosecution team failed to disclose material evidence to the defence. All of the relevant CIA cables were disclosed subject to some exceptions, principally to ensure that the lives of named individuals were not put at risk. They were disclosed as a result of a request from the court."

The SCCRC report refers to a number of occasions when it was not granted full access to security documents from the CIA. It was not allowed to disclose certain documents about the case – including one relating to timers found in Senegal which were similar to those thought to have caused the tragedy, and claims by former CIA staff.

The appendices contain a number of references to other CIA cables which have never been fully scrutinised.

The UK Security Services complied with all requests to share information with the SCCRC but said a number of documents could not be disclosed because of national security.

The six different grounds on which the SCCRC said Megrahi could have been a victim of a miscarriage of justice are:

Unreasonable verdict. Due to uncertainty over the date on which Megrahi was supposed to have bought clothes in Malta which were found among the plane debris.

Undisclosed evidence concerning the Gauci identification.

Undisclosed evidence concerning the date of the clothes purchase.

Undisclosed evidence concerning Gauci's interests in financial rewards.

Undisclosed secret intelligence documents –the documents' contents remain unknown.

New evidence concerning the date of clothes purchase.

The report refers to several documents which were not revealed to Megrahi's defence team.

Three of the undisclosed documents related to payments of around $3 million (£1.9m) made by the US Justice Department to Paul and Tony Gauci – key witnesses in the Crown's case.

Tony Gauci claimed Megrahi resembled the man who bought clothes in his Malta shop which were later found to be in the suitcase that contained the bomb which killed 270 people over Lockerbie in December 1988. His identification of Megrahi was critical to the prosecution case.

However, the defence did not know he had discussed and shown an interest in reward money before identifying Megrahi. If they had known, they could have challenged the credibility of the prosecution case. In its report, the SCCRC says: "Such a challenge may well have been justified, and in the commission's view was capable of affecting the course of the evidence and the eventual outcome of the trial."

The commission also found Tony Gauci had a magazine with a photograph of Megrahi stating he was the Lockerbie bomber three days before Gauci identified Megrahi at an identification parade in Holland. We now know that Gauci had it for several months prior to the parade.