No economic or commercial motives for Megrahi release decision

[What follows is the text of a press release issued by the Scottish Government on this date in 2010.]

First Minister Alex Salmond has today replied to the letter from Senator Menendez of July 29.

This follows the First Minister's previous letter to Senator Menendez on July 26, which answered five detailed questions from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and also provided copies of documents.

The First Minister has also previously written to Senator John Kerry on July 21, providing comprehensive information and assistance ahead of the planned hearing which was later postponed. Senator Kerry described this correspondence as "thoughtful and thorough".

The letter is copied below:

Dear Senator Menendez

Thank you for your letter of 29 July.

I have made clear in my letters to you and to Senator Kerry that the Scottish Government's decision to decline your previous invitation for the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Dr Fraser to attend a hearing in the US was based on principle rather than on any issue of practicality.

The most appropriate way for us to assist the Foreign Relations Committee is to provide a statement of the position of the Scottish Government, as I have done, and to answer any questions that the Committee may have in writing, as we have also done.

Scottish Ministers and public officials are properly accountable to the Scottish Parliament and not to other legislatures. It is difficult to envisage circumstances in which serving members of the US Government would agree to appear as witnesses in hearings or inquiries held by the legislature of another country, and there are many high-profile and indeed current examples of the US Government declining such invitations.

Your letter again seeks to link BP with the decision made by the Scottish Government to grant Mr Al-Megrahi compassionate release. No-one has produced any evidence of such a link because there is none. We have said repeatedly that there has never, at any point, been any contact between BP and the Scottish Government in relation to Al-Megrahi. The statements we have made on this issue are entirely clear and consistent.

It was with concern that I watched you attempt to insinuate such a link on BBC Newsnight on 30th July by citing a letter from Conservative Party peer Lord Trefgarne, the chair of the Libyan British Business Council, to Justice Secretary MacAskill last year. This was one of approximately one thousand representations received by the Scottish Government last year, including many from the USA. You have this letter because the Scottish Government published this last year as part of our comprehensive issue of documentation related to the decision. That being the case, you must also have seen the reply from Mr MacAskill, also published, which stated that his decisions would be "based on judicial grounds alone and economic and political considerations have no part in the process". In order to avoid any suggestion of misrepresentation, I trust that you will include that fact in future references.

BP's admitted lobbying on this issue referred to the Prisoner Transfer Agreement (PTA) and with the UK Government. As you must by now be aware, the Scottish Government opposed this agreement from its inception, a position that we have maintained publicly and privately since. Indeed, I revealed the existence of the proposed PTA to the Scottish Parliament in a statement on 7 June 2007. It is perhaps to be regretted that our warnings about the circumstances in which this agreement came into being found no response at that time from the UK Government, the then opposition in the UK Parliament, or indeed from the United States Senate.

Finally, you and some of your Senatorial colleagues, have suggested that the Scottish Government have sought to pass responsibility to others for the release of Al-Megrahi. That is simply not the case. Secretary MacAskill took the decision following the precepts and due process of Scots law and jurisdiction - the same jurisdiction which over a period of some 20 years led Scotland to play the leading role in investigating, trying, convicting and incarcerating Al-Megrahi. We do not resile from our responsibility in making that decision.

The point we make is a different but a quite simple one. Please do not ascribe to the Scottish Government economic or commercial motives for this decision when there is no evidence whatsoever for such a claim.

If you wish to investigate commercial or indeed other motivations surrounding this case, then call the former UK Ministers and Prime Ministers who were involved in proposing, negotiating and then signing the PTA and, of course, where there is a public record of admission that business and trade, along with other issues, were factors. In this light your decision not to proceed with the draft invitation to offer evidence to former Prime Minister Blair, who actually signed the proposed PTA in May 2007, seems puzzling.

These people, of course, may have had, and indeed in some cases have conceded, motivations other than justice considerations. However, they did not take the decision on Mr Megrahi.

I am copying this letter to Senator Kerry.

BP lobbied UK Government to speed up prisoner transfer agreement

[What follows is excerpted from a report published in The Evening Standard on this date in 2010:]

BP admitted today that it put pressure on the British Government to speed up talks on a deal that led directly to the early release of the Lockerbie bomber.

In a statement the oil giant said that in "late 2007" it told ministers that "we were concerned about the slow progress that was being made in concluding a Prisoner Transfer Agreement with Libya".

The agreement was a key piece of the complex diplomatic jigsaw that ended in the dramatic return of Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi to Tripoli on compassionate grounds last August. The lobbying came after BP signed a $900 million exploration agreement with Libya in May 2007.

BP said it was aware that any delay in signing the agreement "could have a negative impact on UK commercial interests, including the ratification by the Libyan government of BP's exploration agreement".

However, the company insisted that it did not get involved in the detail of al-Megrahi's release.

It said: "The decision to release Mr al- Megrahi in August 2009 was taken by the Scottish government. It's not for BP to comment on the decision of the Scottish government. BP was not involved in any discussions with the UK Government or the Scottish government about the release of Mr al-Megrahi."

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said she would look at requests from US Senators to investigate the role BP played in the release.

Yesterday, Mrs Clinton confirmed she had received the letter from Democratic Senators Robert Menendez, Frank Lautenberg, Kirsten Gillibrand and Charles Schumer "and we will obviously look into it".

US plot to snatch Megrahi

[On this date in 2011 an article headlined US tells Libya rebels: Capture the Lockerbie bomber for us was published on the Mail Online website. It reads in part:]

A dramatic mission to capture the freed Lockerbie bomber from Libya and return him to face justice in the United States was revealed last night.

Under a secret deal between Barack Obama and Libyan rebel leaders, Abdelbaset Al Megrahi would be detained by opposition troops and then handed over to US Special Forces.

Senior Congressional sources in Washington have disclosed to The Mail on Sunday that President Obama has told the Libyan rebels through intermediaries that a condition of continued support from the US is that they must hand over Megrahi if they enter Tripoli.

The mission would involve Megrahi being flown to a neutral Arab country by US Special Forces once he is handed over by the rebels, and then on to America to face trial. [RB: Megrahi had already faced trial and been convicted -- wrongly, in my view -- in a process that the United States supported and participated in. He could not have been tried again in the USA unless Federal Law had been changed to allow it.] British SAS soldiers are unlikely to be directly involved in the operation. (...)

If Megrahi is captured, the hope is he may implicate Libyan leader Colonel Gaddafi in the Lockerbie bomb plot.

The plan to capture the bomber came after US Senators Frank Lautenberg and Robert Menendez met Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Attorney General Eric Holder last week to demand the US ‘continue working to return Abdelbaset Al Megrahi to prison’.

Mr Menendez has amended a Congressional Bill authorising the continued use of force in Libya to include a paragraph ordering ‘the continuation of Federal investigations into the 1988 bombing of Pan Am flight 103’.

Congressional sources disclosed that the US will ‘grab’ Megrahi as soon as they can. (...)

When the US State Department was asked to comment on the Megrahi plot, an official said he would ‘take the question’. This is a regular tactic used by the State Department enabling it to neither confirm nor deny what is put to officials.

US government sources say if Megrahi were found guilty after a trial, he would get life without parole.

Although there would be calls for him to be executed, international pressure is likely to prevent the death sentence being carried out.

Lockerbie: Unanswered questions

[The current (December 2015) issue of the excellent iScot magazine contains an article entitled “Lockerbie: Unanswered questions”, the first in a series by Dr Morag Kerr. It reads in part:]

Most people in Scotland probably know that, some quarter of a century ago, a Jumbo Jet with the name Maid of the Seas painted on her nose-cone fell out of the sky on to the Dumfriesshire town of Lockerbie.  Many people still harbour grave doubts about the safety of the conviction, twelve years later, of the so-called “Lockerbie bomber” Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.  Few retain a detailed recollection of the circumstances, but “Wasn’t the key witness paid millions to implicate him?” is a common refrain.  

Abdelbaset al-Megrahi died in May 2012, but the doubts linger.  Efforts to secure a third appeal against his conviction received a setback last month when the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission refused to proceed unless his family, virtually incommunicado inside war-torn Libya, provided them with a specific document which doesn’t actually exist under Sharia law.  Quite separately, however, a major police investigation is underway into formal allegations of wrongdoing against individuals involved in both the original investigation and the later court proceedings.  A third strand is public petition PE1370 calling for an independent inquiry into the Lockerbie affair, laid before the Scottish parliament in October 2010.  Only two months ago the disaster was once again in the headlines as the Lord Advocate revealed that he was on the trail of two of Megrahi’s alleged accomplices – but was that story quite what it seemed?  This month, with further revelations likely in the near future, we look back on the chain of events that began in 1988. (...)

A terrorist attack was immediately suspected, and senior police insisted the crash site be treated as a crime scene.  Detectives reviewing the case in 2015 have remarked that even today it’s unlikely the evidence-gathering could be handled any better, and it’s hard to argue with that.  Meticulous records of where every item was recovered yielded a detailed picture of how the plane broke up and what caused it.

What caused it turned out to be a small improvised explosive device disguised as a radio-cassette recorder, packed into a suitcase with some items of clothing. The baggage container carrying the exploding suitcase was identified as one containing only transfer luggage – luggage belonging to passengers connecting from other flights.  The bomb hadn’t been checked in at Heathrow.  The relief of the British investigators when they discovered this seems to have been immense.

After that, things got murkier.  While most of the luggage in that container was transferred from a single flight (a feeder from Frankfurt also designated PA103), a few items from other flights were also present.  The Frankfurt luggage was security-screened in Germany and shunted directly across the tarmac, but the other cases had been collected in Terminal 3 and were supposed to have been screened there.

When the fragments of the container were reassembled the explosion proved to have been about ten inches from the floor.  The Heathrow interline cases had been loaded first and covered the bottom, and everything from the second layer upwards was from the feeder flight.  The forensic scientists believed the bomb suitcase had been on the second layer, and so attention focussed on Frankfurt.

The German police joined the inquiry, and they had news for the Scottish investigators.  Two months before Lockerbie they had busted a terrorist gang in Düsseldorf, making bombs obviously designed to destroy aircraft in flight.  The gang was a cell of a hard-line Palestinian group, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command, or PFLP-GC.  Unfortunately the suspects had been released by the German authorities, and it was feared they had regrouped and completed their mission.

A picture began to emerge.  On 3rd July 1988 an Iranair passenger flight carrying pilgrims travelling to Mecca had been shot down over the Persian Gulf by an American cruiser.  The aftermath of the disaster was appallingly mishandled by the US authorities and Ayatollah Khomeini vowed revenge.  Money appeared to have changed hands, and the suspicion was that Iran had employed proven sabotage experts to do its dirty work.

There was a catch to all this, which the Germans tried to point out to the British investigators.  The type of device the PFLP-GC was known to be making, launched from Frankfurt, would have exploded somewhere over Belgium.  These devices were triggered by the drop in internal pressure that occurs shortly after take-off, and would detonate about half an hour after that.  An IED like that, exploding over Lockerbie, must have been loaded at Heathrow.  The forensics team discounted this and remained wedded to their belief that the bomb had flown in from Germany.

By March 1989 Paul Channon, the UK Transport Secretary, was talking about imminent arrests.  However, no arrests were forthcoming.  The case receded from public consciousness until the autumn, when it emerged that a new lead had been uncovered.  Investigators were now certain the bomb had arrived in Frankfurt on a third aircraft, flight KM180 from Malta. (...)

The investigators secured one big breakthrough.  Scraps of burnt clothing believed to have been packed with the bomb were traced to a Maltese manufacturer, and from there to a small retailer in the Maltese town of Sliema, only three miles from the airport – and the shopkeeper Tony Gauci remembered selling some of the items to a customer in late 1988.  He described the man and his purchases, even remembering the bill and the amount of change given. Detectives set out to try to identify this mystery shopper.

However, as 1989 became 1990, the case went cold again.  The clothes purchaser was elusive, and nobody could figure out how Air Malta’s security precautions might have been breached.  Once again the story faded from the news until in the autumn of 1990 another change of tack hit the headlines.  Iran and the PFLP-GC were no longer suspected.  Iran had taken a “bum rap”, according to US President George Bush Snr.  The new suspect was Colonel Gaddafi’s Libyan regime, and the motive was retaliation for the US bombing of the Libyan cities of Tripoli and Benghazi back in 1986.

Events moved quickly after that.  By January 1991 the police had a suspect, a Libyan national named Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, and on 13th February Tony Gauci picked Megrahi’s passport photo out of a photo-identity parade.  Some time later it was discovered that Megrahi had been at Malta airport on the morning of 21st December 1988, travelling under an assumed name.  Case closed, or so it seemed.  In November 1991 simultaneous indictments were issued in Scotland and the USA against Megrahi and his colleague Lamin Fhimah for the murder of 270 people at Lockerbie.

Megrahi and Fhimah, however, were in Libya, protesting their innocence. Gaddafi offered to try the pair in Libya, if he was provided with the relevant evidence.  This was correct procedure under the Montreal Convention, but unsurprisingly the offer was rejected.  Stalemate.  Britain and the USA approached the UN complaining that Gaddafi was sheltering terrorists from justice, and as a result punitive sanctions were imposed which heavily impacted the Libyan economy.  In the years that followed the damage multiplied, and eventually the two accused agreed to surrender themselves for trial to secure an end to the blockade.

It was agreed that the trial would be held in a neutral venue.  A disused US air base in the Netherlands, Camp van Zeist, was decreed to be Scottish territory for the duration and converted into a court facility.  The trial began on 3rd May 2000, and on 31st January 2001 the verdict was announced.  Megrahi was found guilty, but Fhimah was not guilty.

The controversy began immediately.  How could one conspirator be guilty but not the other?  It was Fhimah who was alleged to have put the bomb on the plane, so how had Megrahi managed it without Fhimah’s assistance?  The defence had destroyed the prosecution’s star witness, a Libyan CIA informer called Abdul Majid Giaka, and without his testimony was there really enough evidence to convict beyond reasonable doubt?  In late January the Foreign Office had been briefing in the expectation of a double acquittal.  Many people, including UN-appointed observer to the trial Dr. Hans Köchler, believed there was an enormous amount of entirely reasonable doubt.

An appeal was heard at Camp Zeist in early 2002.  The defence had new evidence.  A Heathrow security guard revealed details of a security breach airside in Terminal 3, the night before the disaster.  A door padlock had been broken, apparently from the landward side, not far from the shed where the ill-fated container was parked the following afternoon.  The appeal judges heard his evidence, but dismissed it on the grounds that the trial court recognised that Heathrow security was poor, and knowing there had been an actual breach wouldn’t have altered their conclusions.  Megrahi was sent to Barlinnie to begin a life sentence for mass murder.

In 2003 he applied to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission for leave to mount a second appeal.  In its 2007 report the Commission identified six grounds on which a miscarriage of justice might have occurred.  These centred round the disputed fingering of Megrahi as the man who bought the infamous Maltese clothes, and without the eye-witness identification the case was expected to collapse.

Megrahi’s second appeal came to court in spring 2009, by which time he had received what turned out to be a death sentence – a diagnosis of advanced prostate cancer.  The following August his application for compassionate release was granted by Kenny MacAskill, three days after Megrahi had formally abandoned his hard-fought-for appeal.

The appeal could have continued despite the release of the applicant.  Was Megrahi pressurised into withdrawing it?  His advocate Maggie Scott said that he was.  Kenny MacAskill has consistently denied it.  Professor Robert Black has a more nuanced take on the matter, suggesting that Megrahi was poorly informed about the options available to him and open to pressure from Libyan officials anxious to get him back home.

Whatever the rights and wrongs, the appeal was swiftly forgotten in the universal stampede to condemn the Scottish government for releasing a mass murderer.  Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Jack Straw, David Cameron, Jack McConnell, Barack Obama, Robert Menendez and others, who before Megrahi’s release had breathed not a hint of opposition (because of course they were all heartily glad to see Megrahi back in Libya and the obstacle to trade and oil deals with Gaddafi removed), turned on Kenny MacAskill and Alex Salmond and monstered them.

Others were dismayed for a different reason.  The abandoning of the appeal torpedoed the chance to have the case reviewed again in court and the doubts and uncertainties examined.  Was it possible, or likely, that Megrahi had bought these clothes?  Did the bomb really start its journey on Malta, as the investigators believed?  And what was all that about a fragment of printed circuit board, widely alleged to be a fabricated plant?

Subsequent articles in this series will examine these contentious issues.  How much reasonable doubt surrounds Megrahi's guilt?  Was the evidence tampered with?  Might we, indeed, suggest that his innocence can be proved beyond reasonable doubt?

When will they ever learn? When will they ever learn?

[What follows is the text of a report headlined Bill would double reward in Lockerbie bombing to $10 million published yesterday on the NJ.com website:]

With the news that there may be two more suspects in the 1988 bombing Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, the US Senators from New Jersey and New York have introduced a bill doubling the reward for evidence resulting in a conviction to $10 million.

"Nothing we do will bring back home the 270 mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters we lost that day, including 34 New Jerseyans," New Jersey's junior senator, Cory Booker, said in a statement. "But our hope is that this legislation will empower the State Department to continue seeking justice for the victims and their families."

The Dec 21 terrorist bombing of the London-New York flight killed all 259 people on board, many traveling home for the holidays, plus another 11 people on the ground in Lockerbie.

Lybian [sic] intelligence officer Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison in 2001, but was released in 2009 and allowed to return to Lybia in a  controversial decision that Scottish authorities said was prompted by his terminal cancer. He died in 2012.

Booker and fellow Democrats Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York introduced the bill after the Associated Press reported earlier this month that Scottish prosecutors had identified two other Libyans as suspects.

[RB: In the light of the problems created by the payments to the Gauci brothers from the US Rewards for Justice scheme, one may perhaps be forgiven for thinking that this is actually a Baldrick-style cunning plan.]

US Senator Robert Menendez 'faces corruption charge'

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

The US justice department is preparing to bring criminal corruption charges against Democratic Senator Robert Menendez, US media reports say.

The politician from New Jersey is alleged to have used his office to promote the interests of a Democratic donor, in exchange for gifts.

Attorney General Eric Holder has reportedly given prosecutors permission to proceed with charges.

Senator Menendez has labelled the probe a smear campaign.

"I am not going anywhere," he said on Friday at a press conference in New Jersey.

"Let me very clear, very clear. I have always conducted myself appropriately and in accordance with the law."

An official announcement from prosecutors is expected in the coming weeks.

Sen Menendez is one of the highest-ranking Hispanic members of Congress and a former chairman of the Senate's foreign relations committee.

[Senator Menendez has been one of the most high-profile US politicians to intervene in Lockerbie matters. His history in this regard can be followed here.]

Father of Lockerbie victim fears US plans to ‘abduct’ Megrahi

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

The father of one of the victims of the Lockerbie bombing has accused the US government of trying to “abduct” the only man convicted of the crime after it emerged it will seek to extradite him from Libya.

Jim Swire, whose 24-year-old daughter Flora was on Pan Am Flight 103 when it was blown up in December 1988, spoke out after the US state department indicated it intended to take advantage of the new Libyan government’s decision to allow Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi to be deported.

Megrahi is the only man convicted of the atrocity, but many British relatives have questioned the guilty verdict while American relatives believe he was responsible. (...)

Dr Swire described the US’s attempts to bring Megrahi to America and put him in prison as “vindictive” and questioned the validity of the move under international law.

He said: “What they want to do is take him [Megrahi] off to prison in America.

“But the US agreed that Megrahi should be tried under Scottish law and subject to its decisions. This would be the opposite of that.

“Effectively this would be an abduction of Megrahi because it would have no legal status. He is out on licence from a Scottish prison and if he is taken to America he would actually be in breach of that licence. So this is a complete legal mess.”

He added: “I am appalled by the idea. Megrahi should be left in peace to enjoy his last few weeks of life.”

The move by America to extradite Megrahi came after a senior minister in the new Libyan government said the bomber no longer enjoyed the VIP status he was granted by ousted president Muammar al-Gaddafi.

This means Libyans are willing to allow foreign governments to request his extradition, which would allow the bomber to face another trial – in America.

The US state department has said it intends to take advantage of this development.

A spokesman for the state department said it was ready to make a “formal approach” to Libya’s interim government, the National Transitional Council (NTC).

The new regime in Libya has made it clear it has no intention of protecting those who were close to Gaddafi.

NTC information minister Mahmoud Shamam said: “Basically, we don’t care what happens to him. He can live his life however he wants, provided there is no legal reason why he shouldn’t.

“For example, if the Scottish [or the US] want to get him back, they can apply through the courts and we would respect any such application.”

Last month, US secretary of state Hillary Clinton said the US believes Megrahi should be returned to prison.

Meanwhile, the US Senate is also preparing to put pressure on Libya’s new government to launch a formal inquiry into the Lockerbie bombing. New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez said: “We know that Megrahi didn’t act alone, and I will continue to press the new government until all the facts are revealed and we can bring some sense of final closure to the hundreds of families who are still waiting.”

Lockerbie: US demands Libya co-operation

[This is the headline over a report published last night on the Sky News website.  It reads in part:]

US officials are threatening to block the unfreezing of Libyan assets without more cooperation from rebels over the Lockerbie bombing. 

Senators are introducing the Pan Am 103 Accountability Act because of concerns Libya's rebel government is not serious about helping the US investigate the atrocity.

Senator for New Jersey, Robert Menendez, told Sky News the rebels seem to be changing their attitude on the issue in a worrying way.

"From the comments and commitments that were made to me and others to the comments that I have read subscribed to the TNC, it makes me concerned that they may not want to be co-operative," Mr Menendez said.

The move threatens to sour relations between Libya's new government and the US from the outset.

Senator Menendez was one of the senators leading efforts to approve US action against Colonel Gaddafi. (...)

He is demanding that American investigators are given access to Abdelbaset al Megrahi - who was convicted for the Lockerbie bombing and released on humanitarian grounds because he was believed to be dying of cancer.

But he believes there are many others in Libya who have vital information about the outrage.

He says Libya's rebels are talking the talk about cooperating on the issue but not delivering in concrete terms (...)

Transitional government Justice Minister, Mohammed al Alagi, told journalists in Tripoli: "We will not hand over any Libyan citizen. It was Gaddafi who handed over Libyan citizens," he said, referring to the government's decision to turn al Megrahi over to a Scottish court for trial. [RB: Gaddafi did not "hand over" Megrahi and Fhimah for trial. Libyan law does not permit the extradition of its own citizens for trial overseas. Megrahi and Fhimah voluntarily surrendered for trial.]

He said the request by American senators had "no meaning" because al Megrahi had already been tried and convicted.

US: No plans to tie Libya aid to Lockerbie case

[This is the headline over a report issued today by The Associated Press news agency. It reads in part:]

The Obama administration said Wednesday it will continue to press Libyan rebels to review the case of the convicted Lockerbie bomber but ruled out making the transfer of frozen Gadhafi regime assets contingent on his return to prison.

Getting the money to the opposition is a higher initial priority than handling the case of Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, the State Department said. (...)

Some lawmakers, including Clinton's former Senate colleague, Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer have called on the Obama administration to withhold U.S. support for the rebels until Megrahi is jailed and independently examined by medical professionals to determine his health status. Other lawmakers and at least one Republican presidential hopeful, Mitt Romney, have urged the administration to demand that the opposition arrest and extradite al-Megrahi.

But [State Department spokeswoman Victoria] Nuland said that the Libyan opposition's most important tasks are finishing its apparent victory over Gadhafi, restoring stability and starting a democratic transition. She said the administration would keep up pressure over the al-Megrahi case but would not link it to the return of assets. She also noted that it was Gadhafi, not his foes, who had treated al-Megrahi as a hero.

"We all have to take a hard line, and we have been, on Megrahi and anybody else who has blood on their hands from the Lockerbie bombing, and we will continue to do so," she told reporters.

"We need to give the TNC a chance to do job one, which is to finish the job of ousting Gadhafi and his regime; begin the job of establishing Libya on a democratic path," Nuland said. "And we are very gratified by the fact that they have made clear that they are willing to look into this. We will continue to talk to them about it, and we will certainly make sure that Congress's views are conveyed."

The opposition has pledged to look at the handling of the al-Megrahi case once it has established itself as a fully functioning government.

That is apparently not soon enough for some. (...)

New York's other senator, Kirsten Gillibrand, and New Jersey Sens Robert Menendez and Frank Lautenberg have also made the al-Megrahi case an issue.

Megrahi conviction was a “politically motivated crusade”

[This is the headline over an article published today on the Newsnet Scotland website. It reads in part:]

Lockerbie campaigner Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora perished in the tragedy, has claimed that the conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was a “politically motivated crusade”.

Dr Swire was speaking on Radio Scotland after the Libyan was discovered close to death in his parent’s home in Tripoli, disproving earlier media reports that he had fled the city.

“I bitterly resent the fact that having been present throughout the trial of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, what I heard convinced me, not that he was one of the murderers of my daughter, but that he wasn’t involved as accused.” he said.

Dr Swire added “I bitterly resent the fact that my daughter’s murder and all those two hundred and sixty nine other murders are couched in what seems to me to have been a politically motivated crusade to ensure that the blame was passed to Megrahi and Gaddafi.

“In fact the evidence did not stack up.”

As part of the Justice for Megrahi group Dr Swire has been at the forefront of a campaign for a full inquiry into Megrahi’s trial. He said he found it “appalling” that the Scottish government had thus far “failed to find a venue for re-examination of the verdict”.

He suggested that subsequent revelations about the trial process, including allegations that the main witness against Megrahi had been paid $2 million by the US, was to Scotland’s shame and also criticised the withholding of vital evidence citing the break in at a Heathrow airport hanger in the hours prior to Pan Am 103 taking off that was not presented at trial. (...)

Dr Swire described the calls from the American Senators and various UK politicians as “monstrous” and predicted that when the truth of Lockerbie finally emerges there will be "a lot of red faces". [RB: According to an Agence France Presse news agency report, the egregious US Senator Robert Menendez has written another of his letters to Hillary Clinton, this time insisting that US investigators must have access to Abdelbaset Megrahi in Libya to assess his health and question him about the attack.]

Responding to suggestions that there may be information yet to emerge from Libya about Lockerbie, Dr Swire warned against believing anything that came out a country he described as being “submerged in the fog of war.”

An investigation carried out by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission cast doubt on the trial verdict and the results of the report are expected to be published soon by the Scottish government.

Dr Swire suggested that people may have to accept that Libya may not have been the prime mover in the Lockerbie atrocity and insisted that the modus operandi of a 38 minute timer pointed to a Palestinian terror group having been responsible.

The CIA’s top priority in Libya

[This is part of the headline over an article by Wayne Madsen published today on the Intrepid Report website. It reads in part:]

Intelligence files held by Qaddafi’s government on the 1988 downing of PanAm 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland and the files on negotiations on the release of accused bomber, former Libyan intelligence agent Abdelbaset al Megrahi, will also be a high priority for seizure by the CIA. The files, if released to the public, will show that it was Iran, not Libya, that was responsible for the 1988 downing of PanAm 103 and that it was President George H W Bush who ordered Libya be blamed to clear the way for a showdown with Iraq’s Saddam Hussein by absolving Iran of any blame and ensuring Tehran’s neutrality in the Operation Desert Storm showdown with Iraq.

There are now calls for Megrahi to be renditioned to the United States to stand trial for the PanAm 103 bombing. Megrahi was freed by the Scottish government in close consultation with Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s government, because he was suffering from cancer and was believed to be terminally ill. However, it is believed that the deal was cut to give British Petroleum expanded access to Libyan oil fields and guarantee Libyan bailout funds for failed British banks. Libyan documents on the British-Libyan deals are also highly sought by the CIA and Britain’s MI-6 intelligence service.

A secret report that alleges that Megrahi was innocent of carrying out the PanAm 103 bombing is due to be released soon by the Commission (SCCRC). New Jersey senators  Frank Lautenberg and Robert Menendez, both recipients of large amounts of Israeli campaign cash through the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), have called for Megrahi to be extradited by the Libyan rebel government to stand trial in the United States for Lockerbie. However, Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond stands by his decision to free Megrahi and any move by the United States to second-guess Scotland may result in frayed relations between the Scottish government and the United States, especially seen as important with Scotland’s government striving for independence from Britain and the US submarine base at Holy Loch a potential casualty of a fracture in relations between Washington and Edinburgh.

In the record of the CIA’s sordid operations in the Middle East, Operation Desert Storm led to Operation Iraqi Freedom and finally, Operation Mermaid Dawn, the capture of Tripoli by Libyan rebel forces. One of the casualties of Mermaid Dawn will be the continued secrecy of the power politics that led to the US invasion and occupation of Iraq and now NATO’s proxies’ invasion and occupation of Libya.

Court should have heard ID evidence

[This is the headline over a report published yesterday evening on the Mirror website. It reads as follows:]

The veracity of identification evidence that led to the conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi for the Lockerbie bombing "could and should have been judged in a court of law", according to Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond.

Mr Salmond said it is unfortunate that Megrahi's appeal against his conviction never reached the High Court.

However, the First Minister said he has "never doubted Mr Megrahi's guilt".

The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission is currently withholding a report which raises questions about identification evidence that led to Megrahi's conviction, and contains its statement of reasons for referring the conviction back to the High Court.

The Libyan dropped his appeal shortly before Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill's decision to release him.

Speaking at a charity race day in Perth on the second anniversary of Megrahi's release, Mr Salmond said: "The SCCRC wanted to remit the case back to the court of appeal.

"That wasn't based on the forensics, which it upheld, but on identification evidence upon which there was a question mark which could and should have been judged in a court of law. Unfortunately that wasn't possible. I have never doubted Mr Megrahi's guilt."

The Scottish Government has pledged to bring about a change in the law to allow the SCCRC report to be published.

Mr Salmond said this publication would negate the need for a public inquiry, saying the report "will give more information than any public inquiry ever could".

The First Minister said he knows nothing about reports that the United States has made a "secret deal" with anti-Gaddafi forces in Libya to seize Megrahi and try him in a US court. He said: "I've read a number of reports, mutually contradictory incidentally, and I suspect they are based on very little indeed."

[It is clear that if the First Minister has "never doubted" Megrahi's guilt he simply has not read the Zeist court's reasons for convicting him or Lockerbie: A satisfactory process but a flawed result or The SCCRC Decision.

Meanwhile, US Senators Menendez and Lautenberg are at it again.]

Call for Megrahi to have 'open door' to Scotland

[This is the headline over a report in today's edition of Scotland on Sunday. It reads as follows:]

Supporters of Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi say he should be allowed to return to Scotland to avoid being extradited to the United States.

The Justice for Megrahi group is calling on the Scottish Government to offer him an "open door" after American senators declared last week that they hoped to persuade Libyan rebels to hand him over if they gain control of the country.

Megrahi's supporters say the Scottish Government should pre-empt such a plan by bringing him back to Scotland to prevent a "diplomatic disaster".

Robert Forrester, of the Justice for Megrahi group, wrote: "It is now of vital importance that the Scottish authorities at least offer Mr al-Megrahi an open door through which to escape his current circumstances if he wishes to do so, not least because so many profound doubts exist over his 2001 conviction."

His comments come after US politicians stepped up their war of words over Megrahi's release after TV images of the bomber were broadcast at a pro-Gaddafi event in Libya last week.

Democrat Senator Robert Menendez said he hoped to persuade a new Libyan government "to extradite Mr al-Megrahi to the United States to pay for his crimes".

A Scottish Government spokeswoman said: "East Renfrewshire Council, as the supervising local authority, is responsible for monitoring al-Megrahi's release licence, and the council has been able to maintain regular contact with Mr al-Megrahi during the recent conflict in Libya."

[The same newspaper publishes a long article by Eddie Barnes headlined As the anniversary of the Lockerbie bomber's release looms are we any closer to solving the riddle? This focusses on the release of Megrahi and the medical evidence that underpinned it. There are extensive quotes from representatives of US relatives of Pan Am 103 victims but, strangely enough, none from UK relatives whose attitude has always been markedly different. The article does at least recognise that there are doubts about the Megrahi conviction in the following passage:]

Under pressure once again, MacAskill last week repeated the now familiar words he had used two years ago when he told the world that the man found guilty of Britain's worst terrorist atrocity could pack his bags and go home. Megrahi was suffering from a terminal illness; his fate was in the hands of a higher power; the Scottish Government had acted in good faith - and not with reference to any "deals in the desert".

And while MacAskill will find himself under greater pressure, it may be that the focus moves away from the decision to set him free to the decision to convict him in the first place. Last week, Salmond repeated his pledge to publish a confidential report, compiled by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, which sets out its reasons for sending Megrahi's conviction back to the Court of Appeal in Edinburgh.

If published, the report, which was locked away after Megrahi dropped his appeal, is likely to put fresh scrutiny on his involvement in the bombing. (...)

Inquiries by Scottish prosecutors remain "ongoing". The Crown Office is examining new evidence to establish whether it can retry Al-Amin Khalifa Fhimah, Megrahi's co-accused who was found not guilty at the Camp Zeist trial in 2001. Prosecutors are re-examining evidence to see whether it is strong enough to invoke the new double jeopardy law, which allows prosecutors to try someone twice for the same offence.

Meanwhile, US Senators are hoping to use the Libyan revolution to spirit Megrahi back out of Libya to the US. Having watched Megrahi on the TV, Democrat Senator Robert Menendez said last week: "I will continue to work to ensure that any new government in Libya co-operates with efforts to extradite Mr al-Megrahi to the United States to pay for his crimes."

Menendez and veteran fellow Democrat Frank Lautenberg have written to Hillary Clinton urging her to act. As we report today, the Justice for Megrahi group - which insists he is innocent - are calling on the SNP Government to offer Megrahi the option of returning to Scotland if he wishes to avoid what they describe as the threat of his "rendition" to the US. Robert Forrester, the secretary of the group, says: "It is now of vital importance that the Scottish authorities at least offer Mr al-Megrahi an open door through which to escape his current circumstances if he wishes to do so, not least because so many profound doubts exist over his 2001 conviction."

Such a move would be seen as the ultimate betrayal by families in the US, however, many of whom - such as [Frank] Duggan [President of Victims of Pan Am 103 Inc] - believe 100 per cent in Megrahi's guilt, and view those who consider him innocent as hopelessly naive. As he approaches a second anniversary which none of them ever dreamed of experiencing, Duggan's view of matters is understandably cynical. "There is no credible medical evidence. So the conclusion is that the man was let go for what were diplomatic, commercial and political reasons," he says. It may also be a case that a very sick man is clinging on to life, now that he has something to live for. If he continues to do so, he may finally see the riddle of his life finally brought to light.

Lautenberg statement on Megrahi's appearance at pro-Qaddafi rally

[What follows is the text of a press release issued yesterday by Senator Frank Lautenberg:]

US Senator Frank R Lautenberg (D-NJ) released the following statement today after video footage showed Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi attending a pro-Qaddafi rally in Libya. Megrahi is the only person convicted of the Pan Am 103 bombing and was released from prison on August 20, 2009, under the presumption he had only three months to live.

“The families of the victims of Pan Am Flight 103 have suffered so much already, and the images of Megrahi at a pro-Qaddafi rally in Libya only add salt to their wounds,” said Lautenberg. “Parading one terrorist out to support another is an affront to justice and further affirmation that Megrahi was released from prison on false pretenses. We will continue to fight for justice on behalf of the Pan Am 103 families.”

Last month, Lautenberg and Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) called on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Attorney General Eric Holder to continue working to bring to justice those responsible for the Pan Am 103 bombing, which killed 189 Americans, as well as to return convicted terrorist Abdelbaset al-Megrahi to prison. A copy of their letter can be found here.

US tells Libya rebels: Capture the Lockerbie bomber for us

[This is the headline over a report published today on the Mail Online website. It reads in part:]

A dramatic mission to capture the freed Lockerbie bomber from Libya and return him to face justice in the United States was revealed last night.

Under a secret deal between Barack Obama and Libyan rebel leaders, Abdelbaset Al Megrahi would be detained by opposition troops and then handed over to US Special Forces.

Senior Congressional sources in Washington have disclosed to The Mail on Sunday that President Obama has told the Libyan rebels through intermediaries that a condition of continued support from the US is that they must hand over Megrahi if they enter Tripoli.

The mission would involve Megrahi being flown to a neutral Arab country by US Special Forces once he is handed over by the rebels, and then on to America to face trial. [RB: Megrahi has already faced trial and been convicted -- wrongly, in my view -- in a process supported by the United States. He could not be tried again in the USA unless Federal Law were changed to allow it.] British SAS soldiers are unlikely to be directly involved in the operation.

The plan to capture the bomber came after US Senators Frank Lautenberg and Robert Menendez met Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Attorney General Eric Holder last week to demand the US ‘continue working to return Abdelbaset Al Megrahi to prison’.

Mr Menendez has amended a Congressional Bill authorising the continued use of force in Libya to include a paragraph ordering ‘the continuation of Federal investigations into the 1988 bombing of Pan Am flight 103’.

Congressional sources disclosed that the US will ‘grab’ Megrahi as soon as they can.

Lautenberg, Menendez call on Clinton & Holder to seek justice for Pan Am 103 bombing

[What follows is the text of a letter sent on 15 June by Senators Lautenberg and Menendez to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Attorney General Eric Holder.]

Dear Secretary Clinton and Attorney General Holder:

As high-level Libyan officials continue to defect from the Qaddafi regime, we urge you to do everything in your power to obtain information regarding and hold the responsible parties accountable for the bombing of Pan Am 103 and other terrorist attacks perpetrated by Libyan officials.

Defecting Libyan officials like former Foreign Minister Moussa Koussa may hold valuable information regarding the Pan Am 103 bombing – or may be culpable themselves. The US case to prosecute this heinous crime remains open and our government must do everything possible to gather evidence and any information that could help bring all of those responsible, including Qaddafi, to justice.

As you know, the only person that has been convicted in the Pan Am bombing is now living freely in Libya. On August 20, 2009, the Scottish government released al-Megrahi, based on the assertion that he had less than three months to live. Almost 22 months later, the convicted terrorist is living in luxury in Libya. The families of the victims of Pan Am 103 waited over a decade to see justice with the conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, only to have that justice taken away. This is an entirely unacceptable situation and every effort must be made to return al-Megrahi to prison.

The current upheaval in the Libyan government provides a new opportunity to demand responsibility for this act of terrorism. While we recognize there are many critical foreign policy decisions to be made with regard to Libya at this extraordinary time, we ask that justice for the Lockerbie bombing victims and their families remain a top priority and not be overlooked.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

New Libya regime should aid Lockerbie probe

[This is the headline over a report published yesterday in the Maltese newspaper The Times. It reproduces a report that featured in one of the two disappearing posts on this blog. The report reads in part:]

The United States would "encourage" any new Libyan government to help a new investigation of the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, a top US official said.

"I would encourage them, we would hope that they would do that," Deputy US Secretary of State James Steinberg told Democratic Senator Robert Menendez during a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Libya.

But Steinberg repeatedly sidestepped Menendez's push to make US diplomatic recognition of any government to replace embattled strongman Moamer Kadhafi contingent on cooperating on a new probe into the attack.

"We share the importance that you attach to it," the diplomat said, but it would be better for Libya to do so of their own accord "rather than because we impose the commitment."

Menendez said he had met with senior Libyan opposition figure Mahmud Jibril, who handles foreign policy for Libya's National Transitional Council (NTC) and discussed the issue.

"He indicated that, once a new government is formed, that they would be willing to cooperate with the United States on a new investigation" into the Lockerbie bombing, said the senator. (...)

Scottish prosecutors, who as part of a devolved administration operate independently from the British government in London, have said that they are still investigating the bombing.

[Any genuine new investigation should be warmly welcomed. But I fear that the outcome of an investigation such as is here envisaged would be pre-determined.]

Barack Obama orders Lockerbie bomber al-Megrahi be seized

[This is the headline over an article in today's edition of the Sunday Mirror. It reads as follows:]

Barack Obama will ­demand the Lockerbie bomber as the price of supporting a new government in Libya.

The US President says the ­deportation of freed Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi is a condition of him backing the rebels if they win power.

Mr Obama wants ­Megrahi to be tried in the States for putting a bomb on the New York-bound jet that blew up over Lockerbie, ­Scotland, in 1988, a crime for which he was convicted by a Scottish court.

Cancer-stricken Megrahi has disappeared in Libya where he has been living after being released from jail because he supposedly had only months to live.

Intelligence sources fear he has been taken into ruler Colonel Muhamar Gaddafi’s own compound - and that Libyan leader would rather kill him than let his Lockerbie secrets be revealed.

Megrahi is believed to know the full story of the bombing in which 270 died and can name everyone involved - including Gaddafi.

The Sunday Mirror understands that top US officials have held talks with rebel leaders and demanded Megrahi be handed over.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton held a conference on Wednesday with FBI Director Robert Mueller and Attorney-General Eric Holder about how bring Megrahi and Gaddafi to justice.

A Washington source said: “This is seen as a real chance to get hold of the bomber who killed 189 American citizens.

“He may have spent a few years in a Scottish prison but in the eyes of the American people he has never faced justice.

"The US Justice Department said the indictment of Megrahi and another suspect remained pending and the investigation into the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 remains open.”

Democratic Senator Robert Menendez said the deportation of al-Megrahi should be a condition of the US recognising a new Libyan government.

[The United States Government, along with that of the United Kingdom, proposed the UN Security Council resolutions that set up the Lockerbie trial at Camp Zeist. Both governments thereby undertook internationally binding obligations to comply with the legal processes thus set in motion. The United States cannot lawfully renounce those obligations either unilaterally or in conjunction with whatever new government it chooses to recognise in Libya. To have Abdelbaset Megrahi lawfully handed over to the US would require a further UN Security Council resolution. The United States, as a permanent member of the Security Council could, of course, propose such a resolution. But would the other members support it? The US could also, naturally, simply ignore international legality (as it did, with the UK's supine support, in launching the invasion of Iraq) and seize Megrahi by force (with or without the connivance of a new Libyan regime).

The IntelliBriefs website yesterday published an interesting article entitled Libya, Kaddafi and Lockerbie. It incorporates articles from Tam Dalyell, Robert Fisk and others.

An article by Susan Lindauer on Lockerbie and Libya can be read here on The People's Voice website.]

Libyan leader ordered Lockerbie bombing, envoy tells NJ senators

[This is the headline over a report published on Thursday on the New Jersey Courier Post Online website. I refer to it (and to a further news report that can be read here) because the ambassador to the US, Ali Aujali, had previously stated that Libya had agreed to compensate the relatives of the victims only in order to get back into normal diplomatic and commercial relations with the US, the UK and the rest of the Western world, and not because of any recognition of responsibility for the bombing. The report reads in part:]

But Ali Suleiman Aujali didn’t produce evidence to back up his claim during a meeting with New Jersey Democrats Robert Menendez and Frank Lautenberg and New York Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand.

He offered to put U.S. officials in touch with the just-resigned Libyan justice minister, who has proof, Lautenberg said. (...)

Before the U.S. establishes diplomatic ties with a new government, Menendez said he would push for the Libyans to extradite Abdel Basset al-Megrahi so he could spend the rest of his life in an American prison. (...)

Of the 189 Americans on board, 38 were from New Jersey.

[Because of continuing problems with the telephone service and with electricity supply here in the Roggeveld Karoo, postings on this blog are likely to remain intermittent.]