Monday 4 July 2016

Lockerbie case: Call for independent investigation

[What follows is the text of a press release issued on behalf of Professor Hans Köchler on this date in 2007:]
United Nations observer Dr. Hans Köchler sends letters to Scottish and British officials
Vienna, Austria, 4 July 2007
P/RE/20453c-is
Dr Hans Köchler, the international observer appointed by the United Nations to the Lockerbie trial in the Netherlands, today reiterated his call for a full and independent public inquiry of the Lockerbie case, a measure which he had initially suggested in April 2002.
In letters sent to the First Minister of Scotland, Alex Salmond, the British Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, the British Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, and the Minister for Africa, Asia and the UN, Mark Malloch Brown, Dr Köchler transmitted his statement on last week's decision of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC), in which he emphasized,inter alia, that, in order to avoid bias, an investigation into the handling of the Lockerbie case by the Scottish and British authorities will require the participation of additional legal experts, to be appointed by the United Nations Organization, from countries other than the UK, US and Libya, ie from countries that were not involved in the Lockerbie dispute.
In the statement issued today, the UN observer also expressed his full support for the proposal made by Tam Dalyell, former MP and Father of the House of Commons, to end all doubt with a public inquiry.
In his earlier comprehensive reports on the Lockerbie trial (issued on 3 February 2001) and appeal (issued on 26 March 2002) Dr. Köchler had suspected a miscarriage of justice - a conclusion now also reached by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission ("The Commission is of the view ... that the applicant may have suffered a miscarriage of justice": Dr Graham Forbes, Chairman of the Commission, according to an SCCRC News Release of 28 June 2007).

Sunday 3 July 2016

USS Vincennes and IR 655

[On this date in 1988 Iran Air flight 655 was shot down by the USS Vincennes. What follows is taken from an article on the Mail Online website. A great deal more about this shameful event can be found here.]

On July 3, 1988 an Iranian passenger jet was shot down by an American naval warship patrolling the Persian Gulf, killing all on board.

Iran Air flight 655 had been travelling from Bandar Abbas in Iran to Dubai when it was shot down by the USS Vincennes, resulting in the deaths of 290 civilians from six countries, including 66 children.

The USS Vincennes had tracked the plane electronically and warned it to keep away. When it did not the ship fired two surface-to-air missiles at the Airbus A300 B2-203, carrying many Iranians on their way to Mecca.

The attack still has the highest death toll of any aviation incident involving an Airbus A300, and any such incident in the Indian Ocean.

An official inquiry carried out by the US attributed the mistake to human error, saying that the crew had incorrectly identified the plane as a F-14 Tomcat fighter, and that the flight did not identify itself otherwise.

However, the Iranian government has always disputed the American version of events, with many claiming that the attack was purposeful, and a sign that the US can not be trusted in its dealings with the country.

The black box flight recorder on board the Airbus was never found, so it is unknown whether the crew ignored the American warnings via distress frequencies, or did not hear them.

It was only in 1992 that the US officially admitted that the vessel had been in Iranian waters after one of its helicopters drew warning fire from Iranian speedboats for operating within Iranian territory.

In 1996 the US agreed to pay Iran $61.8 million in compensation for the 248 Iranians killed, plus the cost of the aircraft and legal expenses.

It had already paid a further $40 million to the other countries whose nationals were killed. To date a formal apology has not been issued by the US for the tragedy.

Some believe the Lockerbie bombing, carried out six months later in December 1988, was masterminded by Iranians in revenge for the Airbus tragedy, although a Libyan man was convicted and jailed in 2001.

Going against an informal convention to discontinue flight numbers associated with aviation tragedies, Iran Air continues to use flight number IR655 on the route as a memorial to the victims.

Saturday 2 July 2016

Why the focus shift from Iran to Libya as culprits?

[Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer has today posted a fascinating article on his PT35B website. It offers a plausible geopolitical explanation for the shift from Iran to Libya as the preferred culprits in the bombing of Pan Am 103. The following is an excerpt -- the full text should be read:]

Soon after the tragedy of Pan Am 103 on December 21st 1988, the investigators suspected that a Syrian-based terrorist group (the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command) was responsible. It was assumed by some (known by others?) that Iran had ordered the attack as revenge for the downing of Iran Airbus 655 on July 3rd 1988.
When a joint US/UK indictment finally came in November 1991, Libya – and Libya alone according to President Bush - was the culprit.
How did they get from Iran to Libya? For one thing, the metamorphosis of the “evidence” is quite spectacular. I will provide just one example. The forensic scientists initially “were fully satisfied” that the bomb had been hidden in a white Toshiba radio. In their final report, they were fully satisfied that the item was a black Toshiba radio. Who cares? The white radio pointed to a device assembled by the PFLP-GC in Germany during October 1988. The black Toshiba radio was pointing to Libya as it had been mostly delivered to a Libyan company whose director was a person suspected of terrorism by Western Intelligence agencies.
When did the “switch” occur? Jack Anderson and Dale Van Atta claimed in 1990 that the Lockerbie investigation switched from Iran to Libya following a phone call in March 1989 between George H W Bush and Margaret Thatcher.
Conspiracy Theory
Many observers have suggested that the “switch” was the result of realpolitik. Here is the explanation provided [RB: at letter K] by The Guardian:
“The impending Anglo-American war against Iraq necessitated neutralising Iran and winning the support of Syria. Britain’s diplomatic relations with Syria were duly restored in November 1990 and the Gulf war commenced in 1991. Sure enough, the credibility of intelligence theories about the Lockerbie bombing being masterminded by the Iran- and Syria-backed Palestinian gang was soon dismantled.”
I do not subscribe to this theory. The invasion occurred in August 1990. And even if Saddam had probably made up his mind a few months earlier, the timing simply does not work.
Questions
Is the theory of a “switch” for geopolitical reasons plausible? Is there any evidence it occurred around March 1989? If so, what could possibly be the rationale?
Key Dates of the Forensic Work
Dr Hayes began its work on December 27 1988 when he found evidence of an explosion on the lower frame of a luggage pallet. The work goes on – day after day – until March 1989 when it came to a sudden halt. Then the work resumed on May 12, 1989 with the discovery of PT/35(b) recorded on the infamous page 51. Little happens next. Then in September 1989, the investigation goes to Malta and, from now on, Libya is the new focus. The PFLP-GC is officially history as far as Lockerbie is concerned.
Therefore, I consider that the “Switch Theory” is entirely plausible with a caveat. The calendar seems to point to a “Wait and See Strategy”. It appears that Thatcher recommended to “cool it” until events unfold. The question is: What events did she have in mind?
[RB: Dr De Braeckeleer then explains how political developments in Iran in 1989 rendered it no longer in the interests of the United Kingdom and the United States for Iran to be accused of responsibility for Lockerbie.]

Guilty based on false and unsound evidence

[On this date in 2004 Abdelbaset Megrahi wrote a letter from prison to Lisa Gibson, sister of Pan Am 103 victim Ken Gibson. What follows is excerpted from an account of the story on the Sloppynoodle Christian website:]

Megrahi was found to have serious prostate cancer and was given only six months to live. Shortly after his release there were allegations that his release was motivated by an oil deal. With his continued survival an additional two years, several of the American Lockerbie family members began calling for his return to prison and enlisted the support of members of Congress in their efforts.

Lisa Gibson, who lost her brother Kenneth on the 1988 terrorist bombing of Pan Am flight 103 has taken a different approach. She made a decision to forgive Megrahi and sent him a letter in June 2004 saying that “Only God knows if you are really responsible. But as a Christian I need to forgive you.”
Megrahi sent her a letter back in July 2004 saying he was sorry for her loss, that he could tell she was a religious person and that, like her, he has a family and would never commit such a horrific act.
He quoted Scriptures both from the Bible and the Quran believing one day he would be proven innocent. He cited Luke 18 in his letter which says, “Listen to what the unjust judge says and will not God bring about Justice for his chosen ones who cry out to him day and night? Will he keep putting them off? I tell you He will see that they get justice and quickly.”
Megrahi closed the letter by saying, “Madam, I pray for you to be happy in your life and suffer no such sadness in the future. I pray that there will be love amongst all mankind and for peace on Earth for God is peace, goodness and in God we find eternal happiness.”
[RB: A report on the BBC News website contains the following:]
He sent a grateful reply from his prison cell in Scotland. In the letter, dated 2 July 2004, he also denied responsibility for the Lockerbie bombing.
"The court found me guilty based on false and unsound evidence," he wrote. "I pray day and night that God helps me to prove my innocence."

Friday 1 July 2016

First book about Lockerbie disaster causes controversy

[On this date in 1989 the first book about the Lockerbie disaster was officially published (though copies had been circulating for a short time before that). The book in question is Lockerbie: The Real Story by journalist David Johnston. For some unfathomable reason Amazon refers to the author as “David, Governor General of Canada Johnston” - the current Governor General of Canada is a different David Johnston. The book caused a bit of a stooshie. What follows is a contemporary report in The Herald:]

Police investigating the Lockerbie Jumbo jet bombing, in which 270 people were killed, last night criticised a book about the disaster, describing some of its conclusions as ''outrageous.''

Scotland's Lord Advocate joined the attack, saying the book ''contains elements of truth along with much which is inaccurate or speculative.''

The criticism was aimed at journalist Mr David Johnston's book, Lockerbie: The Real Story, which says the disaster jet was carrying five American Central Intelligence Agency men who had with them top secret plans for a possible attempt to rescue US hostages in Beirut.

The author says CIA men disguised as engineers from the jet's owners, Pan American airlines, scoured the countryside round the town after the disaster in search of debris which they tested before putting back on the hillside, where police could re-discover it and deal with it as a piece of evidence.

Dumfries and Galloway Chief Constable George Esson, who is in charge of the investigation, said last night that much of the book was inaccurate ''or simply untrue.''

He went on: ''I will not lend any credibility to the book by discussing individual claims or conclusions, except to say that some are totally outrageous.

''It is to be regretted that publication of this book will undoubtedly add to or renew the trauma and suffering experienced by the relatives and victims of PanAm Flight 103.

''The only authoritative sources of information are the Lord Advocate and myself.

''I am not prepared to divert the resources of this criminal investigation in order to respond to, or publicise material, which is so widely off the mark that it is offensive to those who have given us tireless and expert assistance.''

The Lord Advocate, Lord Fraser of Carmyllie, said in a statement the book ''contains elements of truth along with much which is inaccurate or speculative.

''I can make no further comment on the book, except to state that my overriding objective remains to establish the true facts of the circumstances surrounding this appalling criminal act, and the bringing of the perpetrators to justice.

''I want to emphasise this determination to the relatives of the victims of PA 103, and to make the point that no matter what theories may be in circulation the truth behind this crime will only be revealed through the painstaking and meticulous investigative work of the agencies of the three countries involved.

''This will continue relentlessly in the interests of justice.''

Mr Johnston, whose book is to be published on Monday, says the key piece of evidence was the remains of a suitcase belonging to one of the five men, Major Charles Dennis McKee. He was ''immersed in a top secret Middle East mission,'' the book says.

Thursday 30 June 2016

More a political compromise than an act of justice

[What follows is excerpted from an article by Robert Parry published on this date five years ago on the Consortium News website. It reads in part:]

The New York Times, like most US newspapers, prides itself on its “objectivity.” The Times even boasts about printing news “without fear or favor.” But the reality is quite different, with the Times agreeing – especially last decade – to withhold newsworthy information that the Bush-43 administration [RB: George W Bush was the 43rd President of the United States] considered too sensitive. (...)

The Lockerbie Bombing
Yet, to this day, The New York Times and other major US news outlets continue to tilt their coverage of foreign policy and national security issues to fit within the general framework laid out by Official Washington. Rarely do mainstream journalists deviate too far.

It has been common, for instance, for the Times and other media outlets to state as flat fact that Libyan agents, presumably on orders from Col Muammar Gaddafi, blew Pan Am 103 out of the skies over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, killing 270 people.

However, anyone who has followed that case knows that the 2001 conviction of Libyan operative Ali al-Megrahi by a special Scottish court was highly dubious, more a political compromise than an act of justice. Another Libyan was found not guilty, and one of the Scottish judges told Dartmouth government professor Dirk Vandewalle about “enormous pressure put on the court to get a conviction.” [RB: The High Court information officer, Elizabeth Cutting, has denied that this ever happened.]

In 2007, after the testimony of a key witness against Megrahi was discredited, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission agreed to reconsider the conviction as a grave miscarriage of justice. However, that review was proceeding slowly in 2009 when Scottish authorities released Megrahi on humanitarian grounds, after he was diagnosed with terminal prostate cancer.

Megrahi dropped his appeal in order to gain the early release, but that doesn’t mean he was guilty. He has continued to assert his innocence and an objective press corps would reflect the doubts regarding his curious conviction. [For details, see Consortiumnews.com’s “Three Deadly War Myths.”]

After all, the Lockerbie case is not simply a historical mystery. It is one of the central reasons why the United States and its NATO allies are insisting that Gaddafi must be removed from power prior to any negotiated settlement of Libya’s ongoing civil war.

In pressing this need to oust Gaddafi first, President Barack Obama made a reference to the Lockerbie bombing at his Wednesday news conference, a presumed “fact” that may have set the White House correspondents to nodding their heads but may well not be true.

Which brings us to a key problem regarding American journalists siding with U.S. officials in presenting information to the American people: Is it really “good for the country”?

By now, history should have taught us that it is often better for the American people to know what their government is doing than to be left in the dark where they can be led around by clever propagandists, aided and abetted by a complicit news media.

Indeed, when the Times and other US news outlets act in that way, they may be causing more harm than the propaganda organs of a repressive regime would, since the “news” from those government mouthpieces is discounted by those who read and see it.

Wednesday 29 June 2016

US reaction to SCCRC permitting Megrahi appeal

[What follows is the text of a report that was published in The New York Times on this date in 2007:]


A Scottish judicial review body ruled Thursday that a former Libyan intelligence official jailed for the 1988 Lockerbie bombing might have been wrongfully convicted and was entitled to appeal the verdict against him.
After an investigation lasting nearly four years, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission delivered an 800-page report — much of it still secret — that identified several areas where “a miscarriage of justice may have occurred.”
The commission cast doubt on the testimony of a witness, who changed his story several times and had been shown a photograph of the Libyan official days before picking him out of a lineup. It also challenged evidence presented at the trial that the official had purchased the clothes found in the suitcase that held the bomb.
The ruling has potentially major ramifications both legally and emotionally for the victims’ relatives, reviving an array of questions and theories about the explosion on board Pan Am Flight 103 on Dec 21, 1988, that killed 270 people, including 179 Americans.
While the decision does not guarantee the success of the appeal, the commission’s findings are often upheld. Since its establishment in 1999, the commission says on its website, it has considered 887 cases and recommended 67 of them for appeal. Of those appeals, 39 have been heard, 25 of them successfully.
Some families expressed dismay at the ruling. But other people have long harbored misgivings about the official version of events, with some directing suspicions at a militant Palestinian group with ties to Iran, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command.
Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi, the former Libyan intelligence officer, was jailed in 2001 for the bombing after a trial under Scottish law at a special court in the Netherlands. He was the only person convicted in connection with the terrorist attack, Britain’s bloodiest. Mr Megrahi, who has always proclaimed his innocence, lost an initial appeal in 2002 and is serving a 27-year sentence in a Scottish prison.
Graham Forbes, the chairman of the Scottish commission, said the panel was “of the view, based upon our lengthy investigations, new evidence we have found and new evidence that was not before the trial court, that the applicant may have suffered a miscarriage of justice.”
A spokesman for the commission, who spoke in return for anonymity under the organization’s rules, said the next stage was for Mr Megrahi’s lawyers to present their case to the Appeal Court for a hearing date to be set. “It will be heard,” the spokesman said in response to a reporter’s question about the possibility of the court refusing to hear the case.
The section of the commission’s findings made public centered on evidence relating to purchases of clothing at a shop called Mary’s House in Sliema, Malta, on Dec 7, 1988; the clothing was said to have been wrapped around the bomb. The bomb was said to have been put on board a plane in Malta and then transferred to a Pan Am flight from Frankfurt to London before it was loaded onto Flight 103 at Heathrow Airport.
The original trial found that the bomb was hidden in a Toshiba radio cassette player placed inside a brown, hard-shell Samsonite suitcase with clothing traced to Mary’s House. The trial court found that Mr Megrahi bought the clothing at the shop on Dec 7, 1988. But, the Scottish commission ruled, new evidence relating to the dates when Christmas lights were switched on in Malta suggested that the clothes had been bought before Dec 6, 1988, before the time when there was evidence that Mr Megrahi was on Malta.
Additionally, the commission questioned the reliability of evidence by the shop’s proprietor, Tony Gauci, who singled out Mr Megrahi in a lineup. It said that additional evidence, not available to Mr Megrahi’s defense in the original trial, indicated that four days before the lineup “at which Mr Gauci picked out the applicant, he saw a photograph of the applicant in a magazine article linking him to the bombing.”
“In the commission’s view, evidence of Mr Gauci’s exposure to this photograph in such close proximity” to the lineup “undermines the reliability of his identification of the applicant at that time and at the trial itself,” the commission said.
In Scotland, Mr Megrahi’s lawyer, Tony Kelly, read a statement from his client: “I was never in any doubt that a truly independent review of my case would have this outcome. I reiterate today what I have been saying since I was first indicted in 1991: I was not involved in the Lockerbie bombing in any way whatsoever.”
Some of the victims’ families in the United States questioned the timing of the commission’s findings and whether it was linked to a recently announced agreement between Britain and Libya that could permit the extradition of Libyans serving prison terms in Britain. Some families say they are worried that the agreement may allow Mr Megrahi to be repatriated, ostensibly to serve out his term in Libya, or to be sent there for the duration of the appeal.
“It’s nonsense,” said Dan Cohen, whose only child, Theodora, a student at Syracuse University, was killed in the bombing. If Mr Megrahi is sent back to Libya, Mr Cohen said, “he’ll go back a hero, and a rich hero, I would assume.”
“It’s very depressing, ” he added.
The spokesman for the commission said the probable date for the publication of its findings had been made known last February. Any move to free Mr Megrahi from a Scottish prison, the spokesman said, would depend on whether his lawyers applied for “interim liberation” while his appeal was heard. The spokesman said it would be “normal practice” for Mr Megrahi to remain in prison in Scotland while his appeal was being heard. Mr Megrahi’s lawyer, Mr Kelly, said it was “premature” for his client to seek release on bail. “That’s something that will take a few months to determine,” he said.
In its statement, the commission also played down many conspiracy theories that had surfaced over the years. The commission, for instance, said it had “serious misgivings” about claims by a Scottish police officer, identified only as “The Golfer,” that the authorities had manipulated evidence. It also rejected claims of involvement by the United States Central Intelligence Agency.
The Scottish panel insisted that it had “found no basis for concluding that evidence in the case was fabricated by the police, the Crown, forensic scientists or any other representatives of official bodies or government agencies.”
The reaction among victims’ families was mixed. Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died in the bombing, said the commission’s decision was a “new chapter in our 18-and-a-half-year search for the truth.” In a television interview he alluded to speculation that Iran had orchestrated the bombing. Five months before the Lockerbie attack, he noted, the United States Navy mistakenly shot down an Iranian passenger jet over the Persian Gulf, killing 290 people.
Other families of Lockerbie victims in the United States said they were disappointed by the ruling, but several sought to minimize its importance.
“I think it’s just a review commission that’s covering all their bases,” said Kara Weipz, president of the Victims of Pan Am Flight 103, a family group. “From my understanding, it’s much like the Supreme Court of the United States. I don’t think that they even have to take the case.”
The spokesman for the Scottish panel, however, said it was “incumbent” on the Appeal Court to permit Mr Megrahi a further hearing.

Tuesday 28 June 2016

Man who released Megrahi says politicians should not make such decisions

[What follows is excerpted from a report published today on the website of Holyrood magazine:]

The former SNP minister who approved the release of the Lockerbie bomber has said that such decisions should be taken out of the hands of politicians.   
Former justice secretary Kenny MacAskill’s decision to release Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, who was dying from cancer, on compassionate grounds, saw the SNP gripped by one of the most damaging rows of its nine years in power.
However, MacAskill, said that such controversial decisions over the release of prisoners should not be made by politicians and suggested the judiciary would be better placed to deal with them.
Speaking at an event to promote his book ‘The Lockerbie Bombing: The Search For Justice’, he said: “I ultimately believe that such decisions should be taken out of the hands of politicians.”
MacAskill also said that Scotland should have its own Privy Council where the government shares information about issues of national security with opposition politicians.
He suggested that such a move would make it easier to deal with issues such as the release of Megrahi, a decision he approved amid widespread controversy and condemnation in August 2009.
The UK has operated a Privy Council for centuries, with a membership that consists of cabinet members past and present, the Commons Speaker, the leaders of the main opposition parties, Archbishops, various senior judges as well as other senior public figures.   
Under the arrangements, it is commonplace for prime ministers to share information, some of it classified, with leaders of the opposition on "Privy Council terms", on the express understanding that it will not be made public.
MacAskill suggested that having an equivalent body for Scotland would make it easier to prevent political row over issues such as the release of Megrahi. (...)
Scottish Labour said the process had been a "shambles" and accused MacAskill of a “woeful handling of the decision and announcement", in a series of bitter rows that saw Holyrood recalled and the government’s decision condemned in a separate parliamentary vote.
MacAskill said that a Privy Council system for Scotland could allow governments to take a more bipartisan approach to such issues.   
He added: “At some stage we need some sort of Privy Council arrangement where you are able to say to Labour or whoever, look we’ve got a problem here.
Former Labour First Minister Henry McLeish, who chaired MacAskill’s book event in Edinburgh, backed the proposed reform.       
McLeish said: “The idea would be that Scotland has an equivalent to the Privy Council and where there’s a threat to Scotland you would avoid the really stupid questions that come at all ministers.”
Meanwhile, MacAskill said that releasing Megrahi, but keeping him in Scotland rather than sending him back to Libya, would have led to a media circus that was on the same scale as the high profile murder trial for former American football star OJ Simpson.  

Lockerbie bomber allowed appeal

[This is the headline over a report published on the BBC News website on this date in 2007. It reads in part:]

The man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing has been granted leave to make a second appeal. (...)

The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, which has been investigating Megrahi's case since 2003, recommended the second appeal.

In light of the review findings, the Libyan reiterated his innocence.

The commission is responsible for looking into possible miscarriages of justice.

It said the Lockerbie review, which cost £1.1m, was a "difficult" one to deal with.
The chief executive of the group, Gerard Sinclair, said it was the "longest, the most expensive and singularly most complex case we have had to investigate and review".

There were four main areas for referring the case back to court.

They included the "reasonableness" of the court's verdict; additional evidence; new evidence and "other" evidence.

Scotland's Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini said it was inappropriate for her to comment on the basis of the commission's decision.

However, she added that she had appointed Ronald Clancy QC and advocate Nick Gardiner as the Crown's counsel in the event of an appeal going ahead.

It is likely to be held in Scotland before a panel of three judges and is unlikely to be heard for about a year. (...)

Announcing the decision, the chairman of the commission, the Very Reverend Dr Graham Forbes, said: "The commission has a very special role within the Scottish criminal justice system and has been given extensive statutory powers to enable it to carry out this role.

"The function of the commission is not to decide upon the guilt or innocence of an applicant.

"We are neither pro-Crown nor pro-defence. Our role is to examine the grounds of review identified, either by the applicant, a third party, or by our own investigations, and to decide whether any of the grounds meet our statutory test."

Megrahi said in a statement on Thursday that he was never in any doubt that he would be allowed a fresh appeal.

He added: "I was not involved in the Lockerbie bombing whatsoever.

"I am confident that when the full picture is put before the ultimate arbiters, the Lords Commissioners of Justiciary, I shall finally be recognised as an innocent man."

Scotland's First Minister Alex Salmond said the ability to look into alleged miscarriages of justice was a vital part of the criminal justice system, adding that it was now time to allow the independent legal process to take its course.” (...)

Lawyers representing Megrahi have always maintained he was the victim of a miscarriage of justice.

He has already had one appeal following his conviction in January 2001.

That was heard at Kamp van Zeist, the former Dutch air base where he and his co-accused, Al-amin Khalifa Fhima, were tried.

Mr Fhima was acquitted and flew home to Tripoli.

Megrahi's appeal was rejected in March 2002 and since then he has been held in Gateside Prison in Greenock.