Brown: I played no role in the release of Megrahi

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

Gordon Brown finally spoke out about the release of the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing but was condemned for maintaining a "Trappist silence" on whether or not it was the right thing to do.

Political opponents mocked his refusal to comment on Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill's decision to release Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi, branding it a "failure of leadership" and a "masterclass in evasion", that would lead people to suspect the Prime Minister had something to hide.

Mr Brown broke his silence as the Scottish Government said it would publish details of what was said in the meeting in Greenock Prison between the Justice Secretary and the Libyan prisoner.

The notes and "all relevant information" on the applications for prisoner transfer and compassionate release will be made public before a debate in the Scottish Parliament next Wednesday. (...)

Mr Brown broke his silence on Megrahi's release at a joint press conference with his Israeli counterpart Benyamin Netanyahu.

Asked whether he thought it was the right decision to release Megrahi, the PM said his first thoughts were with the families of the Lockerbie victims and then referred to how "angry" and "repulsed" he was at the hero's welcome afforded the Libyan at Tripoli airport.

"When I met Colonel Gaddafi over the summer, I made it absolutely clear to him that we had no role in making the decision about Megrahi's future because it was a quasi-judicial matter, because it was a matter legislated for by the Scottish Parliament and not by us, it was a matter over which we could not interfere and had no control over the final outcome."

Mr Brown stressed: "I want to make it clear, however, that whatever the decision that was made on compassionate grounds by the Scottish Parliament, our resolve to fight terrorism is absolute..."

Whitehall sources told The Herald the PM was determined to stick to not commenting on Mr MacAskill's decision.

Former Labour minister, Brian Wilson, however, described it as "pretty odd". He said the charge of being "the guy who's never around when there's a problem" was so blatantly obvious that "you would have thought there would have been some pre-emptive strategy which went beyond a Trappist silence".

[A further article in the same newspaper by chief UK political correspondent Torcuil Crichton is headed "Evasive Brown leaves himself open to ridicule". An editorial headed "Brown's silence" contains the following paragraphs:

'The nature of Mr Brown's bind is self-evident. If he condemns Kenny MacAskill's decision, he risks damaging relations with Libya and Alex Salmond would be quick to condemn him for interfering in what is a devolved matter. Conversely, if he condones it, he will draw to himself the fire currently directed at the SNP administration at Holyrood and further enrage the Americans. Yesterday's revelations about CIA interrogation techniques under George W Bush suggest the US has little to teach Britain about justice, but there is nothing to be gained by alienating our main ally.

'Mr Brown is right to repeat that this was a quasi-judicial decision that could be made only by the Scottish Justice Secretary. However, he should be more forthcoming about the terms in which he discussed this matter with the Libyan leader, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, when the two met in July at the G8 summit in Italy, especially since the latter's insistence on thanking "my friend Brown" for helping secure Megrahi's release. We also need to know what transpired in Corfu when Business Secretary Lord Mandelson bumped into Gaddafi's son, Saif al-Islam, who complicated matters by claiming that whenever he discussed trade deals, the prisoner's release was "always on the negotiating table". Unless the British government is prepared to publish notes from these meetings that confirm the British stance, the suspicion will remain that Megrahi's release and the dropping of his appeal are in some way linked to the decision to release him on compassionate grounds. The Westminster government should also release details of the prisoner transfer agreement made between Britain and Libya following Tony Blair's "deal in the desert". So far, it has refused to do so.

'The British government's coyness in this business contrasts with the stance taken at Holyrood, where Mr MacAskill yesterday undertook to publish "all relevant information" on both the prisoner transfer application that was refused and the prisoner's plea for compassionate release. Presumably, this will include notes of the Justice Secretary's meeting with Megrahi in Greenock Prison. This is welcome and is the least he owes relatives of the bereaved. Ultimately, they should also be party to the detail of the grounds for allowing the second appeal, abandoned last week. It will be no bad thing if the pressure for a public inquiry mounts as a consequence.']