The Lockerbie indictment

[Fifteen years ago, on this date in 1999, the indictment for the forthcoming Lockerbie trial was served upon the two Libyans accused of the bombing of Pan Am flight 103. The High Court of Justiciary had ordered that the indictment be served by 30 October. The full text of the indictment appears below, but without the appended list of the names and addresses of the 270 victims and the lists of 1,058 prospective witnesses, 1,489 documentary productions and 550 label productions (ie items of physical evidence).]

ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI, born 1 April 1952 and AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH, born 1956, Prisoners in the Prison of Zeist, Camp Zeist (Kamp van Zeist), The Netherlands:

You are Indicted at the instance of The Right Honourable THE LORD HARDIE, Her Majesty's Advocate, and the charges against you are that:

(1) between 1 January 1985 and 21 December 1988, both dates inclusive

·        at the premises occupied by you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and by the Libyan Intelligence Services, in Tripoli, Libya

·        at a special forces training area, Sabha, Libya

·        at the premises occupied by the firm MEBO AG

·        at the Novapark Hotel, Zurich, Switzerland

·        at Frankfurt am Main Airport, Federal Republic of Germany

·        at the Holiday Inn, Tigne Street, Sliema

·        at the Libyan People's Bureau, Tower Road, Sliema and Notabile Road, Balzan

·        at the Libyan Cultural Centre, Tower Road, Sliema, all in Malta

·        at the house occupied by you AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH at 3 St John's Flats, Spring Street, Mosta, Malta

·        at Luqa Airport, Malta and at the Libyan People's Bureau, East Berlin, German Democratic Republic, in Prague, Czechoslovakia and elsewhere in Libya, Malta, Switzerland, the Federal Republic of Germany, the German Democratic Republic, Czechoslovakia, and elsewhere to the Prosecutor unknown

Being members of the Libyan Intelligence Services, and in particular being respectively the head of security of Libyan Arab Airlines and thereafter Director of the Centre for Strategic Studies, Tripoli, Libya and the Station Manager of Libyan Arab Airlines in Malta ...

You did conspire together and with others to further the purposes of the Libyan Intelligence Services by criminal means, namely the use of explosive devices in the commission of acts of terrorism directed against nationals and the interests of other countries and in particular the destruction of a civil passenger aircraft and murder of its occupants ...

And, in pursuance of said conspiracy, while acting in concert together and with others:

(a) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH did between 1 January 1985 and 31 December 1985, both dates inclusive, through the hands of Said Rashid and Ezzadin Hinshiri, both also being members of the said Libyan Intelligence Services, and others at the said premises occupied by MEBO AG, in Zurich, aforesaid, at the said premises of said Libyan Intelligence Services, in Tripoli, aforesaid, at the said Libyan People's Bureau, East Berlin aforesaid and elsewhere to the Prosecutor unknown ...

Order, cause to be manufactured and obtain from the said firm of MEBO AG twenty electronic timers capable of detonating explosive devices;

(b) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH did between 1 January 1985 and 30 June 1987 both dates inclusive at the said special forces training area at Sabha, Libya or elsewhere in Libya cause the effectiveness of such timers to be tested in conjunction with explosives under the supervision of Nassr Ashur, a member of the said Libyan Intelligence Services;

(c) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH did between 1 January 1985 and 21 December 1988, both dates inclusive, within the offices of Libyan Arab Airlines at Luqa Airport, Malta, at the said Libyan Cultural Centre, Sliema aforesaid, the said premises occupied by the said Libyan People's Bureau, Malta, aforesaid, in an area of ground near Ghallis Tower, Malta and elsewhere in Malta have in your possession and under your control quantities of high performance plastic explosive and airline luggage tags;

(d) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI did between 31 July 1987 and 21 December 1988, both dates inclusive, within the said premises occupied by MEBO AG, in Zurich aforesaid establish and maintain along with Badri Hassan, also a member of the Libyan Intelligence Services, a pretended business under the name ABH as a cover for the operations of said Libyan Intelligence Services;

(e) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI did on 22 August 1987 travel from Zurich, Switzerland to Malta, enter Malta and reside at the Holiday Inn, Sliema, aforesaid and on 23 August 1987 depart from Malta and travel from there to Tripoli, Libya using a passport in the false name and using the false identity of Ahmed Khalifa Abdusamad, all while travelling along with the said Nassr Ashur, who was then using a passport in the false name and using the false identity of Nassr Ahmed Salem;

(f) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI did on 18 October 1987 travel from Tripoli, Libya to Malta and enter Malta and reside between 18 and 20 October 1987, both dates inclusive, at the Holiday Inn, Sliema, aforesaid and on 22 October 1987 depart from Malta and travel from there to Tripoli, Libya using a passport in the false name and using the false identity of Ahmed Khalifa Abdusamad;

(g) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH did between 1 September 1988 and 21 December 1988, both dates inclusive, at Eucharistic Congress Road, Mosta, Malta and elsewhere in Malta and in Prague, Czechoslovakia take steps with others to establish and maintain pretended businesses to be known as and under the name of Med Tours or Medtours Services Limited and as and under the name of Al Khadra Company or Al Khadra Medtours Services respectively as cover for the operations of said Libyan Intelligence Services;

(h) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI did between 8 and 10 October 1988, both dates inclusive, at the premises occupied by Libyan Arab Airlines at Luqa Airport and Valletta, Malta and elsewhere in Malta attempt along with Mohammed Abouagela Masud, also a member of the said Libyan Intelligence Services, and others to the Prosecutor unknown, to travel to Ndjamena, Chad for the purpose of carrying out an operation on behalf of the said Libyan Intelligence Services;

(i) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH did on 10 and 11 November 1988 cause the said Nassr Ashur to travel from Tripoli, Libya to Malta on 10 November 1988 and from Luqa Airport aforesaid to Frankfurt am Main Airport aforesaid on 11 November 1988 on Air Malta flight KM 2180 using a passport in the false name and using the false identity of Nassr Ahmed Salem;

(j) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH did between 20 November and 20 December 1988, both dates inclusive, at the said premises occupied by MEBO AG, in Zurich aforesaid, at the said premises occupied by you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and by the said Libyan Intelligence Services, in Tripoli aforesaid, and elsewhere in Switzerland and Libya, through the hands of the said Ezzadin Hinshiri and Badri Hassan, order and attempt to obtain delivery of 40 further such timers from the said firm of MEBO AG;

(k) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH did between 1 and 21 December 1988, both dates inclusive, at Luqa Airport, Malta without authority remove therefrom airline luggage tags;

(l) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI did on 7 December 1988 in the shop premises known as Mary's House at Tower Road, Sliema, Malta purchase a quantity of clothing and an umbrella;

(m) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH did on 20 December 1988 at Luqa Airport, Malta enter Malta while you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI were using a passport in the false name of Ahmed Khalifa Abdusamad and you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH did there and then cause a suitcase to be introduced to Malta;

(n) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI did on 20 and 21 December 1988 reside at the Holiday Inn, Sliema, aforesaid under the false identity of Ahmed Khalifa Abdusamad;

(o) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH did on 21 December 1988 at Luqa Airport, aforesaid place or cause to be placed on board an aircraft of Air Malta flight KM180 to Frankfurt am Main Airport, Federal Republic of Germany said suitcase, or a similar suitcase, containing said clothing and umbrella and an improvised explosive device containing high performance plastic explosive concealed within a Toshiba RT SF 16 "Bombeat" radio cassette recorder and programmed to be detonated by one of said electronic timers, having tagged or caused such suitcase to be tagged so as to be carried by aircraft from Frankfurt am Main Airport aforesaid via London, Heathrow Airport to New York, John F Kennedy Airport, United States of America; and

(p) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI did on 21 December 1988 depart from Malta and travel from there to Tripoli, Libya using a passport in the false name of Ahmed Khalifa Abdusamad, while travelling with said Mohammed Abouagela Masud;

and such suitcase was thus carried to Frankfurt am Main Airport aforesaid and there placed on board an aircraft of Pan American World Airways flight PA103 and carried to London, Heathrow Airport aforesaid and there, in turn, placed on board an aircraft of Pan American World Airways flight PA103 to New York, John F Kennedy Airport aforesaid;

and said improvised explosive device detonated and exploded on board said aircraft flight PA103 while in flight near to Lockerbie, Scotland whereby the aircraft was destroyed and the wreckage crashed to the ground and the 259 passengers and crew named in Schedule 1 hereof and the 11 residents of Lockerbie aforesaid named in Schedule 2 hereof were killed and you did murder them;

and it will be shown that between 1 January 1985 and 21 December 1988, both dates inclusive, in Tripoli, Libya, at Dakar Airport, Senegal, in Malta and elsewhere the said Libyan Intelligence Services were in possession of said electronic timers, quantities of high performance plastic explosive, detonators and other components of improvised explosive devices and Toshiba RT SF 16 "Bombeat" radio cassette recorders, all for issue to and use by their members, including Mohammed El Marzouk and Mansour Omran Ammar Saber.

OR ALTERNATIVELY

(2) being members of said Libyan Intelligence Services as above libelled and having, while acting in concert with others, formed a criminal purpose to destroy a civil passenger aircraft and murder the occupants in furtherance of the purposes of said Libyan Intelligence Services and having obtained possession of and tested the effectiveness of electronic timers and being in possession of and having under your control quantities of high performance plastic explosive and airline luggage tags and having established and maintained and taken steps to establish and maintain pretended businesses all as above libelled, while acting in concert together and with others ...

(a) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH did on 10 and 11 November 1988 cause the said Nassr Ashur, to travel from Tripoli, Libya to Malta on 10 November 1988 and from Luqa Airport aforesaid to Frankfurt am Main Airport aforesaid on 11 November 1988 on Air Malta flight KM 2180 using a passport in the false name and using the false identity of Nassr Ahmed Salem;

(b) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH did between 20 November and 20 December 1988, both dates inclusive, at the said premises occupied by MEBO AG, in Zurich aforesaid, at the said premises occupied by you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and by the said Libyan Intelligence Services, in Tripoli aforesaid, and elsewhere in Switzerland and Libya, through the hands of the said Ezzadin Hinshiri and Badri Hassan, order and attempt to obtain delivery of forty further such timers from the said firm of MEBO AG;

(c) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH did between 1 and 21 December 1988, both dates inclusive, at Luqa Airport, Malta without authority remove therefrom airline luggage tags;

(d) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI did on 7 December 1988 in the shop premises known as Mary's House at Tower Road, Sliema, Malta purchase a quantity of clothing and an umbrella;

(e) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH did on 20 December 1988 at Luqa Airport, Malta enter Malta while you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI were using a passport in the false name of Ahmed Khalifa Abdusamad and you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH did there and then cause a suitcase to be introduced to Malta;

(f) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI did on 20 and 21 December 1988 reside at the Holiday Inn, Sliema, aforesaid using the false identity of Ahmed Khalifa Abdusamad;

(g) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH did on 21 December 1988 at Luqa Airport, aforesaid place or cause to be placed on board an aircraft of Air Malta flight KM180 to Frankfurt am Main Airport, Federal Republic of Germany said suitcase, or a similar suitcase, containing said clothing and umbrella and an improvised explosive device containing high performance plastic explosive concealed within a Toshiba RT SF 16 "Bombeat" radio cassette recorder and programmed to be detonated by one of said electronic timers, having tagged or caused such suitcase to be tagged so as to be carried by aircraft from Frankfurt am Main Airport aforesaid via London, Heathrow Airport to New York, John F Kennedy Airport, United States of America; and

(h) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI did on 21 December 1988 depart from Malta to Tripoli and travel from there to Libya using a passport in the false name of Ahmed Khalifa Abdusamad, while travelling with said Mohammed Abouagela Masud;

and such suitcase was thus carried to Frankfurt am Main Airport aforesaid and there placed on board an aircraft of Pan American World Airways flight PA103 and carried to London, Heathrow Airport aforesaid and there, in turn, placed on board an aircraft of Pan American World Airways flight PA103 to New York, John F Kennedy Airport aforesaid;

and said improvised explosive device detonated and exploded on board said aircraft flight PA103 while in flight near to Lockerbie, Scotland whereby the aircraft was destroyed and the wreckage crashed to the ground and the 259 passengers and crew named in Schedule 1 hereof and the 11 residents of Lockerbie aforesaid named in Schedule 2 hereof were killed and you did murder them;

and it will be shown that between 1 January 1985 and 21 December 1988, both dates inclusive, in Tripoli, Libya, at Dakar Airport, Senegal, in Malta and elsewhere the said Libyan Intelligence Services were in possession of said electronic timers, quantities of high performance plastic explosive, detonators and other components of improvised explosive devices and Toshiba RT SF 16 "Bombeat" radio cassette recorders, all for issue to and use by their members, including Mohammed El Marzouk and Mansour Omran Ammar Saber.

OR ALTERNATIVELY

(3) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and AL AMIN KHALIFA FHIMAH being members of said Libyan Intelligence Services and having, while acting in concert with others, formed a criminal purpose to destroy a civil passenger aircraft and murder the occupants and having obtained possession of and tested the effectiveness of electronic timers and being in possession of and having under your control quantities of high performance plastic explosive and airport luggage tags, and having established and maintained and taken steps to establish and maintain pretended businesses all as above libelled, did on and between the dates and at the places in charge 2 above libelled, by the means there libelled, unlawfully and intentionally destroy said aircraft in service and commit on board said aircraft in flight acts of violence which were likely to and did endanger the safety of said aircraft, in respect that you did murder said persons:

and it will be shown that between 1 January 1985 and 21 December 1988, both dates inclusive, in Tripoli, Libya, at Dakar Airport, Senegal, in Malta and elsewhere the said Libyan Intelligence Services were in possession of said electronic timers, quantities of high performance plastic explosive, detonators and other components of improvised explosive devices and Toshiba RT SF 16 "Bombeat" radio cassette recorders, all for issue to and use by their members, including Mohammed El Marzouk and Mansour Omran Ammar Saber.

CONTRARY to the Aviation Security Act 1982, Section 2(1) and (5)

Abuzed Omar Dorda: an important Libyan figure in securing a Lockerbie trial

The following are excerpts from an item posted on this blog on 28 October 2011:

Ex-intel chief to Gaddafi wounded, raising more questions about handling of detainees

[This is the headline over a report published yesterday in the Checkpoint Washington section of The Washington Post website.  It reads in part:]

The former intelligence chief to Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi was seriously injured Tuesday while in the custody of the National Transitional Council, fueling concerns about the treatment of loyalists to the deposed government.

The cause of Abuzed Omar Dorda’s injuries are disputed, but a relative of Dorda, a one-time UN envoy, has appealed to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and the Security Council president to intercede with Libyan authorities to protect the former official, saying he had been the target of an assassination attempt by his jailers. (...)

“Mr Dorda survived a murder attempt last night, 25 October, 2011, at the hands of his guards in the building where he was arrested,” Adel Khalifa Dorda, a nephew and son-in-law of the Gaddafi loyalist, wrote on behalf of the Dorda family. “He was thrown off the second floor leading to several broken bones and other serious injuries.”

The nephew said authorities were forced to move Dorda to a hospital in Tripoli, where “as of now he is being held under extremely poor conditions.” (...)

Dorda had long been a high-ranking official in Gaddafi’s government, playing a role during his years at the United Nations in negotiating the deal that ended UN sanctions on Libya imposed after the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, and paving the way to a financial payout to relatives of the victims.

[Omar Dorda played a significant part in gaining and maintaining Libyan Government acceptance of and support for my neutral venue proposal for a Lockerbie trial and in resolving difficulties that arose (largely through the intransigence of the then US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright) after the United States and the United Kingdom eventually accepted the need for such a solution. Without his quiet diplomacy at the United Nations in New York, I doubt if a Lockerbie trial would ever have taken place.]

Further references to Mr Dorda on this blog can be found here. The last, dated 14 April 2014, relates to the start of his trial (along with other officials from the Gaddafi regime) on charges ranging from corruption to war crimes related to the deaths during the 2011 uprising. A Google search discloses no references to Dorda or to this trial since that date.

Nelson Mandela and the path towards Zeist

On this date in 1997, President Nelson Mandela, who was in Scotland for the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, received the Freedom of the City of Edinburgh. His address on that occasion can be read here.  

At a press conference in Edinburgh, President Mandela took the opportunity to express some views on how the Lockerbie impasse between Libya and the United Kingdom might be resolved. He said amongst other things: “I have never thought in dealing with this question that it is correct for any particular country to be the complainant, the prosecutor and the judge at the same time.”

A relevant article in Wikipedia contains the following:

“Upon the indictment of the two Libyan suspects in November 1991, the Libyan government was called upon to extradite them for trial in either the United Kingdom or the United States. Since no bilateral extradition treaty was in force between any of the three countries, Libya refused to hand the men over but did offer to detain them for trial in Libya, as long as all the incriminating evidence was provided. The offer was unacceptable to the US and UK, and there was an impasse for the next three years.

“In November 1994, President Nelson Mandela offered South Africa as a neutral venue for the trial but this was rejected by the then British prime minister, John Major. A further three years elapsed until Mandela's offer was repeated to Major's successor, Tony Blair, when the president visited London in July 1997 and again at the 1997 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in Edinburgh in October 1997. At the latter meeting, Mandela warned that "no one nation should be complainant, prosecutor and judge" in the Lockerbie case.

“The eventually agreed compromise solution of a trial in the Netherlands governed by Scots law was engineered by legal academic Professor Robert Black of Edinburgh University and, in accordance with the Labour government's promotion of an "ethical" foreign policy, was given political impetus by the then foreign secretary, Robin Cook. The Scottish Court in the Netherlands, a special High Court of Justiciary, was set up under Scots law in a disused United States Air Force base called Camp Zeist in Utrecht, in the Netherlands.”

The worst Scottish miscarriage of justice since Oscar Slater

Most of the items posted on this blog record the published views of others on the Lockerbie case and the conviction of Abdelbaset Megrahi. Here, from this date six years ago, is one of the relatively rare articles written by me:

What should happen now

[My opinions about what should happen to Abdelbaset Megrahi now that he has been diagnosed with late stage prostate cancer are canvassed in a number of Sunday newspapers. What follows are my real views, expressed in my own words.]

Since 31 January 2001 -- the day the guilty verdict against Abdelbaset Megrahi was announced by the Scottish Court at Camp Zeist – I have made no secret of my belief in his innocence. His conviction, on the evidence led at the trial, was nothing short of astonishing. It constitutes, in my view, the worst miscarriage of justice perpetrated by a Scottish criminal court since the conviction of Oscar Slater in 1909 for the murder of Marion Gilchrist.

In this context it is highly relevant to note that one – by far the most important – of the grounds on which the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission held that there might have been a miscarriage of justice in Mr Megrahi’s case was its view that no reasonable court could have reached the conclusion that the Lockerbie court did on a matter absolutely central to its reasons for convicting. The SCCRC said:

“[T]he Commission formed the view that there is no reasonable basis in the trial court's judgment for its conclusion that the purchase of the items from Mary's House [which were in the suitcase that also contained the bomb] took place on 7 December 1988. Although it was proved that the applicant was in Malta on several occasions in December 1988, in terms of the evidence 7 December was the only date on which he would have had the opportunity to purchase the items. The finding as to the date of purchase was therefore important to the trial court's conclusion that the applicant was the purchaser. Likewise, the trial court's conclusion that the applicant was the purchaser was important to the verdict against him. Because of these factors the Commission has reached the view that the requirements of the legal test may be satisfied in the applicant's case.”

But even if there were not overwhelming grounds for doubting the justifiability of the court’s verdict, there are other reasons for pressing for his release from prison, given his recent diagnosis of late-stage, untreatable prostate cancer.

The first of these reasons is compassion and humanity. There is a practice -- though not an invariable one -- within the Scottish Prison Service of releasing a prisoner who has only three months to live. We none of us know whether that stage has been reached in the progression of Mr Megrahi’s illness. But is it really necessary for those in whose power the decision lies, to wait until they are certain that that point has arrived? This particular prisoner finds himself incarcerated in a foreign country whose culture is alien to him. His sense of isolation at this time and the psychological strain on him must be greater than what would be suffered by a Scottish prisoner in a Scottish jail. Would it not be both appropriate as well as merciful for this to be recognized by the Scottish authorities?

Secondly, the delay in bringing Mr Megrahi’s current appeal to the hearing stage has been appalling. Had a measure of urgency been shown, it is entirely conceivable that the appeal could have been over before now and the appellant back with his wife and children in his own country, a free man. The SCCRC had his case under consideration for more than three years before referring it back to the High Court. The submission made to them was, admittedly, a long and detailed one. But the issue of the trial court’s unreasonable findings, mentioned above, is a very simple and straightforward one and required virtually no investigation other that a perusal of the relevant portions of the transcript of evidence. If the SCCRC decided early in its deliberations that the case was going to have to be referred back on this ground – and it is difficult to believe that it did not – then delaying taking that step for three years is hard to justify.

Then there is the delay that has occurred after the SCCRC referred the case to the High Court in June 2007.

More than sixteen months have passed since then. More than thirteen months have passed since the first procedural hearing in the new appeal was held. More than ten months have passed since the appellant’s full written grounds of appeal were lodged with the court. Why has no date yet been fixed for the hearing of the appeal? Why does it now seem impossible that the appeal can be heard and a judgement delivered by the twentieth anniversary of the disaster on 21 December 2008?

The answer is simple: because the Crown, in the person of the Lord Advocate, and the United Kingdom Government, in the person of the Advocate General for Scotland, have been resorting to every delaying tactic in the book (and where a particular obstructionist wheeze is not in the book, have been asking the court to rewrite the book to insert it). These tactics include, to name but a few, raising difficulties about allowing the appellant access to productions used at the original trial; seeking to overturn previous appeal court decisions on the scope of the appeal in SCCRC references; and claiming public interest immunity on “national security” grounds in respect of documents which have been in the hands of the Crown for more than twelve years and which have been seen by the SCCRC. The judges on a number of occasions have expressed disquiet at the Crown’s dilatoriness; but have so far done little, if anything, meaningful to curb it.

Abdelbaset Megrahi has been shabbily dealt with by the Scottish criminal justice system. The Scottish Government has an opportunity now to treat him with compassion and dignity. I, for one, hope that it has the moral courage to seize this opportunity.

Incomprehensible verdict that could be reached only through deliberate malpractice

Around this time in October 2009 the Crown Office announced that there would be a review of the evidence in the Lockerbie case with a view to ascertainining whether persons in addition to Abdelbaset Megrahi should stand trial. On 25 October 2009 the following item was published on this blog:

Dr Swire doubts sincerity of Crown Office announcement

[In an article written for Scottish lawyers' magazine The Firm, Dr Jim Swire casts doubt on the sincerity of the Crown Office's announcement of a review of the evidence in the Lockerbie case. He writes:]

Naturally the UK Lockerbie relatives would love to see a fully enabled objective criminal investigation re-examining all the currently available Lockerbie evidence. 

But how can an objective criminal investigation not impinge on the verdict against Megrahi? The Crown Office's case against Megrahi depended on the evidence of identification by Gauci. 

Yet we now know that when the clothing was in fact bought from Gauci's shop, Megrahi was not even on the island of Malta, but Abu Talb was. We also now know that Harry Bell of the investigating Scots police recorded that the Americans wanted to give Gauci $10,000 'up front' with $2,000,000 to follow if conviction was successful. Clearly they must have thought the identification evidence critical.

It was in Talb's flat in Sweden that the Swedish police found further items of clothing from Gauci's shop. The Crown currently has no known explanation for this.

Yet if Talb, not Megrahi, bought the clothing, the verdict against Megrahi would have to be quashed. Are those currently and previously forming the Crown Office, as well as Colin Boyd, (the most implicated Lord Advocate), prepared to see their 'new investigative directions' lead to such an outcome? There is of course no evidence that any of them offered any inducements to Gauci or anyone else, but surely their careers and reputations depend on their past conduct of this case? So would the new criminal investigation be objective, I ask myself? 

I cannot free my mind of the words of Prof Hans Koechler, the UN's appointed special International Observer at the court: he thought the verdict so incomprehensible that it could only have been reached through (his words) 'deliberate malpractice’ by Scotland's Crown Office. 

So what to do? Observers should remember that under current Human Rights legislation and the Inquiries Act 2005, we the relatives have a right to a full and objective enquiry. 

Meanwhile those who swear by the Megrahi verdict might like to visit the London Review of Books website and search for 'Megrahi' they will find a devastating analysis as to the conduct of the trial written by Gareth Peirce, one of England's most noted miscarriage of justice and human rights lawyers. 

Further, if the Crown Office are really to refer matters as alleged (for I personally have no communication from them) to 'forensic experts' it is to be hoped that they will never again try to use the thoroughly discredited Hayes and Feraday. 

[In another article in the magazine, headed 'Cynicism and doubt over latest Crown Office “spoiler”', the following paragraph appears:

"Dr Jim Swire told the Firm that - contrary to their usual practice - the Crown Office have not even contacted him to advise that any new investigation was planned. He said the coincidental timing of the Crown’s announcement had unavoidably distracted attention from the same day announcement by UK Families [Flight] 103 that they had delivered a letter to the Prime Minister asking him to instigate a full independent inquiry into the Lockerbie event under the Inquiries Act 2005. He described the Crown’s act as a “spoiler,” pointing out that any investigation would be useless as long as the Crown refused to quash the outstanding guilty verdict against Megrahi."]

Virtually nobody believes the true facts about the destruction of Pan Am 103 have been revealed

Five years ago on this date an item headed Why the Lockerbie families deserve an inquiry was posted on this blog. The families still deserve one. The item reads as follows:

[This is the heading over an editorial in the current edition of The Sunday Telegraph. It reads as follows:]

Telegraph View: There are strong grounds for a thorough and independent investigation into Britain's worst terrorist atrocity

Lockerbie is a name burned into the consciousness of the British public. Like Omagh and other places associated with atrocious terrorist outrages, it retains a grim resonance, more than 20 years after this vicious mass murder that saw 270 innocent people, including 51 British citizens, subjected to an exceptionally cruel death. To this day it remains the worst act of terrorism perpetrated on British soil. For the victims' families it is a wound that can never heal. The trauma would be alleviated, however, if the bereaved and the wider public could confidently feel that the circumstances had been investigated to the core and the truth established.

Today, therefore, we are proud to support the campaign being launched by relations of the victims to demand an independent inquiry into who ordered and carried out the bombing. This weekend, the families have written to Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, requesting such a step. The demand is well founded: the Crown Office, the prosecuting authority in Scotland, is already pursuing fresh inquiries, following the withdrawal of a second appeal by Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, in order to secure his release.

Particularly welcome is the assurance by Scottish authorities that this is no token gesture, but a thorough investigation, focusing partly on forensic evidence and with a full-time team of detectives assigned to it. The fact that the Scottish judiciary had given Megrahi permission to appeal for a second time testifies that experienced judges believed there was merit in further consideration of the case. This businesslike response by prosecutors and police requires to be supported by the Government ordering an independent inquiry.

Virtually nobody believes that the true facts about the destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 have been revealed. Alongside the inevitable conspiracy theories, there are substantive allegations regarding possible Iranian and Palestinian involvement that have never been properly investigated, not to mention a suspicious break-in that occurred at Heathrow Airport 17 hours before Flight 103 took off from there.

Potential scrutiny of such evidence was aborted by Megrahi's abandonment of his appeal. An independent inquiry would effectively test his appeal in absentia.

It would also go some way to restoring the reputations of the Scottish and British justice systems. The decision taken by the Scottish justice minister, Kenny MacAskill, to release Megrahi from prison on compassionate grounds and allow him to return to Libya, was the wrong one. The role of the British Government – the murky rumours of oil-related deals – was shameful. American officials remain angry at how the matter was handled.

If the authorities had investigated the case more rigorously and placed all the evidence in the public domain, an inquiry would not now be necessary. Considering the history of obfuscation surrounding the Lockerbie case, however, the details must be brought into the light of day. Nobody is asking for an open-ended, Bloody Sunday-style inquiry; but a full, detailed and public investigation of all the available evidence is now essential, if any kind of closure is to be achieved for the victims' families and the country.

[The same newspaper contains a report headed "Police relaunch Lockerbie bombing investigation" which reads in part:]

Authorities secretly ordered the re-examination of all evidence following the decision by Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi to drop his appeal against his conviction for mass murder. (...)

The Sunday Telegraph has seen the email sent by the Crown Office, Scotland's prosecuting authority, to British relatives of victims informing them of the new investigation, which includes a review of forensic evidence.

In the email, Lindsey Miller, a senior Procurator Fiscal who was involved in preparing evidence for Megrahi's trial, wrote: "Throughout the investigation we have, at various times, taken stock of the evidence as a whole with a view to identifying further lines of inquiry that can be pursued.

"Now that the appeal proceedings are at an end a further review of the case is under way and several potential lines of inquiry, both through a 'desktop' (paper) exercise and consultation with forensic science colleagues are being considered.

"You will of course appreciate that it would not be appropriate for me to elaborate on these lines but please be assured that this is not simply paying lip service to the idea of an 'open case'."

The investigation is understood to be headed by Detective Chief Inspector Michael Dalgleish, a senior officer who was part of the original team that brought the case against Megrahi. Four detectives from Dumfries and Galloway police, which covers the Lockerbie area, are working full-time on the case. (...)

Pam Dix, whose brother Peter died in the explosion, said last night: "This new investigation gives us new hope. It has to be right that police don't see this as concluded.

"Even if Megrahi was guilty, he could not possibly have carried out the bombing unaided and if he is not guilty then not a single one of the conspirators of the Lockerbie bombing have been brought to justice.

"This email implies they are looking at all the forensics again and that has to be a good thing. Police have always said the case is open and not closed as such but they have never said they are looking at all the evidence afresh."

[Note by RB: As the editorial in The Sunday Telegraph recognises, what is needed is an independent inquiry. But the police open case review is at least a start. However, it is difficult to disagree with Dr Jim Swire, as quoted on the heraldscotland website:

“I think that if they are really going to a meaningful investigation then that is all well and good and long overdue. I would be all for it.

“But if it is just a dodge to prevent an investigation into why the lives of those killed were not protected then I would be livid."

As regards the scope of this investigation, the Crown Office is quoted in Scotland on Sunday as saying:

"There is no question of reopening the case against Megrahi. The open case concerns only the involvement of others with Megrahi in the murder of 270 people and the Crown will continue to pursue such lines of inquiry that become available.

"The trial court accepted the Crown's position that Mr Megrahi acted on in furtherance of the Libyan intelligence services and did not act alone. 

"The Crown stood ready, willing and able to support his conviction throughout the appeal process which he abandoned."]

President Mandela's October 1997 visit to Libya

[What follows is the text of a Reuters news agency report from 23 October 1997:]

South African President Nelson Mandela, sternly dismissing US reservations about his mission, arrived in Libya on Wednesday for a visit described by diplomats as the most important for Muammar Gaddafi since the United Nations clamped sanctions on his nation in 1992.

Mandela, his Mozambican companion, Graca Machel, and Foreign Minister Alfred Nzo arrived at the Libyan border town of Ras Adjir by helicopter from the nearby Tunisian resort island of Djerba and drove across the frontier and 160 km (100 miles) to Tripoli. The trip was made by road because of an air embargo imposed on Libya by the United Nations.

Mandela's 50-vehicle convoy passed under a series of welcoming banners, including one that set the tone for his visit saying: "Mandela's visit to Libya is a devastating blow to America."

After a triumphant cavalcade around downtown Tripoli, Mandela, 79, was greeted by Gaddafi outside the ruined home in which the Libya leader's daughter, Hana, was brutally killed in a US air raid more than 10 years ago.

Greeting Gaddafi with a hug and a kiss on each cheek, Mandela told him: "My brother leader, my brother leader. How nice to see you."

Shortly afterwards, he told reporters he remained unimpressed by US opposition to his mission, adding:"Those who say I should not be here are without morals. I am not going to join them in their lack of morality."

Mandela said he had spent 27 years in jail rather than abandon his principles under pressure and said he felt the same way about his debt to Gaddafi and the Libyan people for their support in the struggle against apartheid.

"This man helped us at a time when we were all alone, when those who say we should not come here were helping the enemy (South Africa's white government)," Mandela said.

He reiterated South Africa's policy on the sanctions imposed by the United Nations to force Libya to hand over two suspects in the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland -- saying a way should be found to lift them.

Mandela said South Africa supported the Organisation of African unity's call for a trial in a neutral third country.

He said he would seek to promote a resolution of the stalemate between Libya and the United States and Britain at the Commonwealth summit in Edinburgh next week.

"It would be premature now to say exactly how we are going to search for a solution. (We) feel that to maintain these sanctions is to punish the ordinary people of Libya and that is why there is now great concern that the remaining sanctions must be lifted," he said.

Diplomats in Tunisia said Mandela was Gaddafi's most significant guest since the UN banned air travel to the North African state. "Colonel Gaddafi receives a regular stream of African leaders in Tripoli, but it would be fair to say that with his international stature, Mr Mandela is the most significant visitor he has received since 1992," said an African diplomat. The United States has branded Libya a terrorist state and, in line with its policy of discouraging trade or diplomatic relations, on Monday renewed its objection to Mandela's visit. "We would be disappointed if he decided to make such a trip. To give (the Libyans) any solace at a time like this would be unfortunate," said US State Department spokesman James Rubin.

Ebrahim Saley, South Africa's ambassador to Tunisia and Libya, told Reuters, however, Libya had offered Mandela's ANC consistent moral support throughout the 30-year armed struggle against white rule in South Africa, including training and financial backing that helped the party to sweep apartheid into history.

Mandela visited Libya twice between his release from jail in 1990 and his election as South Africa's first black leader in 1994, but has not been to Tripoli since becoming president.

Abdalla Abzubedi, Libya's ambassador to South Africa, told Reuters the visit would focus on regional peace-making efforts and bilateral trade. Asked whether the Lockerbie issue could be raised, he said: "President Mandela always makes a difference to any international issue - especially in Africa."

Relative of Syracuse University 2014 Remembrance Scholar died on Pan Am 103

Today’s edition of the Daily Orange, the newspaper of Syracuse University, New York, thirty-five of whose students died on Pan Am 103, contains a moving article about one of the university’s 2014 Remembrance Scholars. The article is headed Coming full circle and subheaded Student honors family member who died in Pan Am Flight 103 bombing by becoming Remembrance Scholar.