[This is the heading over a post today by Caustic Logic on his blog The Lockerbie Divide. It reads in part:]
Conspiracy theories naturally arise among many commentators [RB: referring to commentators here, on this blog], naturally I think given the duplicitous handling of this case from the beginning. Others have voiced a more generous interpretation. For example, Robert Forrester (as "Quincey Riddle") said somewhere in there, three days ago, when people were starting to voice suspicions:
JFM deals in verifiable facts only. The facts concerning the current difficulties on the Scottish Parliament Petitions Site are at present:
1 The site crashed in the early hours of 21/10/10.
2 BT is still working on a solution.
[...] Speaking personally, I do not hold with the contention that those whom JFM is confronting on the Lockerbie/Zeist case are attempting to sabotage the petition. There are far more effective methods of dealing with us, also including the tried and tested 'just-ignore-them' tactic. To do something as blatant as this would simply present JFM with yet another weapon to use against them.
That's a darn good point, and considering the known issues with the occoasional ill-managed government site, and how inundated as this one was by signers and viewers, something along these lines should be the obvious default conclusion. But the days dragged on without a fix and, by number, the comments espousing the paranoiac view are predominating. (...)
Forrester continued, helping put this in perspective:
Once the petition comes down on the 28/10/10, we will be able to assess any impact this breakdown may have had. However, given that the JFM petition went online on the 8/10/10 and was around the 1,500 mark at the time of the crash, there are good grounds for concluding that it had already broken existing records for the number of signees over time. [...] the average number of signees per day has been around a steady 100 plus. [...] the phenomenal response to the petition has already made a very significant point, and one which cannot easily be ignored, even if the site remains down right up to the 28/10/10. [...] I believe in sporting circles that could be described as something of 'a result'. (...)
Let's do what we can to keep the word out there for a few more days, encourage e-mail submissions unless/until the petition is restored. And then come Thursday it'll be time to move on to the next things as we wait and see. Any evil plot that may lurk here has already failed (unless it's very clever and will unfurl itself in our midst later on...).
[How to sign by SMS is explained here and how to sign by e-mail here.]
Monday, 25 October 2010
Ninety-six hours on ...
The Scottish Parliament's e-petitions website is still not operational, more than four full days after it crashed. The Justice for Megrahi petition was opened for signature on 8 October 2010. The last date for signing (fixed, amongst other reasons, so that the petition could be dealt with before the Scottish Parliament elections) is 28 October. The website's failure has already deprived the petition of twenty per cent of the time allotted for signature.
Note, however, that you can sign the petition by SMS. Text the number 417 and your name to 07537 400395 (from outside the UK +44 7537 400395).
Note, however, that you can sign the petition by SMS. Text the number 417 and your name to 07537 400395 (from outside the UK +44 7537 400395).
Sunday, 24 October 2010
Seventy-two hours on ...
Well over seventy-two hours have now passed since the Scottish Parliament's e-petition website crashed. It remains out of commission. And still no explanation of what the problem is and when it will be rectified.
Scottish lawyers' magazine The Firm once again highlights the issue in a report headlined Holyrood Petitions crash persists into 4th day as Parliament launches "Digital Future".
Scottish lawyers' magazine The Firm once again highlights the issue in a report headlined Holyrood Petitions crash persists into 4th day as Parliament launches "Digital Future".
Saturday, 23 October 2010
Forty-eight hours on ...
It is now well over forty-eight hours since the Scottish Parliament's e-petition website crashed. It is still not operational. We should now be told by the Parliament's officials exactly what the problem is and just when it is likely to be rectified.
A report on the saga of the e-petitions website in Scottish lawyers' magazine The Firm can be read here.
A report on the saga of the e-petitions website in Scottish lawyers' magazine The Firm can be read here.
Friday, 22 October 2010
Scottish Parliament e-petition website still down
"Unfortunately, the Scottish Parliament’s e-petitions website is currently experiencing technical difficulties and is temporarily unavailable. We are working on a solution to resume the service as quickly as possible. Once the service is back online, users will be able to sign e-petitions as normal. Please accept our apologies for the inconvenience caused."
This statement appears on the Scottish Parliament's Public Petitions Committee's webpage. The e-petitions website has now been unavailable for at least thirty hours. The Justice for Megrahi e-petition opened for signatures on 8 October. The closing date is 28 October. Disappointed supporters can sign by following the procedure suggested here.
The coverage of the issue in Scottish lawyers' magazine The Firm can be read here.
The latest bulletin reads:
"UPDATE 22/10/10: 16:30. Work is still ongoing to resolve the technical difficulties we are experiencing. Those wishing to access the e-petition site may wish to return and try to access the link periodically should the problems be resolved over the weekend."
This statement appears on the Scottish Parliament's Public Petitions Committee's webpage. The e-petitions website has now been unavailable for at least thirty hours. The Justice for Megrahi e-petition opened for signatures on 8 October. The closing date is 28 October. Disappointed supporters can sign by following the procedure suggested here.
The coverage of the issue in Scottish lawyers' magazine The Firm can be read here.
The latest bulletin reads:
"UPDATE 22/10/10: 16:30. Work is still ongoing to resolve the technical difficulties we are experiencing. Those wishing to access the e-petition site may wish to return and try to access the link periodically should the problems be resolved over the weekend."
"Disappointed with Scotland in nabbing the wrong guy to begin with"
[This is the first of the readers' comments on an article headlined Bomber's freedom damaged Scotland in today's Scottish edition of The Sun. The article reads in part:]
Kenny MacAskill's decision to free the Lockerbie bomber has damaged Scotland's standing in the US, a new poll has revealed.
The troubling survey shows almost a third of Americans feel less positive towards this country because of Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi's release.
And 17 per cent of those quizzed said they are now less likely to visit Scotland - a potential hammer blow to our tourist industry.
Exporters are also affected, with 15 per cent of Americans saying they're less likely to buy Scottish goods.
The YouGov poll shows 29 per cent of Americans feel less positive towards Scotland because of the release, 61 per cent say it hasn't affected their view, while just three per cent are more positive towards us. (...)
Within Scotland, the Megrahi scandal appears to have split opinion.
His release made 15 per cent more positive about their own country and 15 per cent are more negative, while 68 per cent say it hasn't changed their feelings.
Only one per cent of Scots say they are now less likely to purchase Scottish products as a result of the Megrahi decision, while six per cent are more likely to buy and 90 per cent say it's had no effect.
Last night Labour shadow justice minister Richard Baker said: "It is obviously very disappointing that our standing seems to have been diminished by MacAskill's misguided decision.
"It's time for him to apologise to all the families - particularly those in America - who have been traumatised by it."
Kenny MacAskill's decision to free the Lockerbie bomber has damaged Scotland's standing in the US, a new poll has revealed.
The troubling survey shows almost a third of Americans feel less positive towards this country because of Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi's release.
And 17 per cent of those quizzed said they are now less likely to visit Scotland - a potential hammer blow to our tourist industry.
Exporters are also affected, with 15 per cent of Americans saying they're less likely to buy Scottish goods.
The YouGov poll shows 29 per cent of Americans feel less positive towards Scotland because of the release, 61 per cent say it hasn't affected their view, while just three per cent are more positive towards us. (...)
Within Scotland, the Megrahi scandal appears to have split opinion.
His release made 15 per cent more positive about their own country and 15 per cent are more negative, while 68 per cent say it hasn't changed their feelings.
Only one per cent of Scots say they are now less likely to purchase Scottish products as a result of the Megrahi decision, while six per cent are more likely to buy and 90 per cent say it's had no effect.
Last night Labour shadow justice minister Richard Baker said: "It is obviously very disappointing that our standing seems to have been diminished by MacAskill's misguided decision.
"It's time for him to apologise to all the families - particularly those in America - who have been traumatised by it."
Thursday, 21 October 2010
Lockerbie petition hit by technical glitch
[This is the headline over a long article just published on the Newsnet Scotland website. The first two paragraphs read as follows:]
Having been online accepting signatures for only thirteen complete days at the Scottish Parliament’s Petitions Site, the Justice for Megrahi petition has suffered a technical glitch. Just as the petition was about to break through the 1,500 mark, possibly a record for the parliamentary site, the system crashed today.
As yet no explanation has been forthcoming from BT, however, it may simply be down to a system overload or suchlike. In the meantime a solution to the problem is available via e-mail (see details at the end of this piece). The petition has attracted huge support in the short period that it has been up and running despite the almost non-existent press coverage, particularly over the border.
Having been online accepting signatures for only thirteen complete days at the Scottish Parliament’s Petitions Site, the Justice for Megrahi petition has suffered a technical glitch. Just as the petition was about to break through the 1,500 mark, possibly a record for the parliamentary site, the system crashed today.
As yet no explanation has been forthcoming from BT, however, it may simply be down to a system overload or suchlike. In the meantime a solution to the problem is available via e-mail (see details at the end of this piece). The petition has attracted huge support in the short period that it has been up and running despite the almost non-existent press coverage, particularly over the border.
Scottish Parliament e-petitions website crashed
The Scottish Parliament's e-petitions website has been down all day. If you wish to sign, e-mail the Public Petitions Committee, mentioning e-petition 417, Justice for Megrahi. The e-mail address can be found here.
The Megrahi scandal
[This is the headline over an article by me just published on the website of the Scottish Review. It was written in response to a letter that appeared on the site yesterday from retired solicitor Alistair R Brownlie OBE, criticising the Megrahi petition. Other SR readers have written in supporting the petition and their contributions can be accessed on the same web page. My article reads as follows:]
At the end of June 2007, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) referred Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi's conviction of the Lockerbie bombing back to the High Court of Justiciary for a further appeal. The case had been under consideration by the SCCRC since September 2003 and its statement of reasons (available only to Megrahi, the Crown and the High Court) extends to more than 800 pages, accompanied by 13 volumes of appendices.
The commission, in the published summary of its findings, indicated there were six grounds on which it had concluded a miscarriage of justice might have occurred. Strangely, only four of these grounds are enumerated in the summary. They are:
• That there was no reasonable basis for the trial court's conclusion that the date of purchase of the clothes which surrounded the bomb was 7 December 1988, the only date on which Megrahi was proved to have been on Malta and so could have purchased them. The finding that he was the purchaser was 'important to the verdict against him'.
• That evidence not heard at the trial about the date on which Christmas lights were switched on in Malta further undermined the trial court's conclusion that the date of purchase was as late as 7 December.
• That evidence was not made available to the defence that four days before the shopkeeper made a tentative identification of Megrahi at an ID parade he had seen a magazine article containing a photograph of Megrahi, linking him to the bombing.
• That other evidence which undermined the shopkeeper's identification of Megrahi and the finding as to the date of purchase was not made available to the defence.
The reasons given by the commission for finding that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred in this case are not limited to the effect of new evidence (such as the payment to a key prosecution witness of $2m) which has become available since the date of the original trial and the non-disclosure by the police and prosecution of evidence helpful to the defence.
The prima facie miscarriage of justice identified by the commission includes the trial court's finding in fact on the evidence heard at the trial that the clothes which surrounded the bomb were purchased in Malta on 7 December 1988 and that Megrahi was the purchaser. This was the cornerstone of the Crown's case against him. If, as suggested, that finding had no reasonable basis in the evidence, then there is no legal justification for his conviction.
I have always contended that no reasonable tribunal could have convicted Megrahi on the evidence led. Here is one example of the trial court's idiosyncratic approach to the evidence. Many more could be provided.
A vitally important issue was the date on which the goods that surrounded the bomb were purchased in Malta. There were only two live possibilities: 7 December 1988, a date when Megrahi was proved to be on Malta, and 23 November 1988, when he was not. In an attempt to establish just which of these dates was correct, the weather conditions in Sliema on those two days were explored.
Shopkeeper Tony Gauci's evidence was that when the purchaser left his shop it was beginning to rain heavily enough for his customer to think it advisable to buy an umbrella to protect himself while he went in search of a taxi. The unchallenged meteorological evidence led by the defence established that, while it had rained on 23 November at the relevant time, it was unlikely to have rained at all on 7 December and, if there had been any rain, it would have been at most a few drops, insufficient to wet the ground. On this material, the judges found in fact that the clothes were purchased on 7 December.
On evidence as weak as this, how was it possible for the trial court to find him guilty? And how was it possible for the appeal court in 2002 to fail to overturn the conviction? The Criminal Appeal Court dismissed Megrahi's first appeal on the most technical of technical legal grounds: it did not consider the justifiability of the trial court's factual findings at all. Indeed, it is clear from their interventions during the Crown submissions in the appeal that at least some of the judges were only too well aware of how shaky certain crucial findings were and how contrary to the weight of the evidence.
I contend that at least part of the answer lies in the history of the Scottish legal and judicial system. For centuries courts have accorded a specially privileged status to the Lord Advocate. It has been unquestioningly accepted that, though a political appointee and the UK government's (now the Scottish Executive's) chief Scots law adviser, he (now she) would at all times, in his capacity as head of the prosecution system, act independently, without concern for political considerations, and would always place the public interest in a fair trial above the narrow interest of the prosecution in gaining a conviction.
This vision of the role of the Lord Advocate was reinforced by the fact that, until the Scottish Judicial Appointments Board commenced operations in 2002, all Scottish High Court judges (and lower court judges) were nominated for appointment to the Bench by the Lord Advocate of the day. This meant that, in all criminal proceedings, the presiding judge owed his position to the person (or one of his predecessors in office) who was ultimately responsible for bringing the case before him, and for its conduct while in his court.
I believe that, subconsciously at least, the judges were reluctant to reach a verdict acquitting both accused because of the humiliation that this would entail for the office of Lord Advocate in the most high profile prosecution ever brought in the Scottish courts.
Megrahi launched an appeal based on the SCCRC findings, but abandoned it in 2009 in order to maximise his prospects of repatriation to Libya when terminal metastatic prostate cancer was diagnosed. But the concerns regarding the propriety of his conviction raised by the SCCRC and others have not disappeared.
Lord Denning tarnished his reputation by expressing the view that an alleged miscarriage of justice should not be investigated because it might undermine confidence in the English criminal justice and judicial systems. It is sad to see Alistair Brownlie appearing to take the same stance in Scotland.
At the end of June 2007, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) referred Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi's conviction of the Lockerbie bombing back to the High Court of Justiciary for a further appeal. The case had been under consideration by the SCCRC since September 2003 and its statement of reasons (available only to Megrahi, the Crown and the High Court) extends to more than 800 pages, accompanied by 13 volumes of appendices.
The commission, in the published summary of its findings, indicated there were six grounds on which it had concluded a miscarriage of justice might have occurred. Strangely, only four of these grounds are enumerated in the summary. They are:
• That there was no reasonable basis for the trial court's conclusion that the date of purchase of the clothes which surrounded the bomb was 7 December 1988, the only date on which Megrahi was proved to have been on Malta and so could have purchased them. The finding that he was the purchaser was 'important to the verdict against him'.
• That evidence not heard at the trial about the date on which Christmas lights were switched on in Malta further undermined the trial court's conclusion that the date of purchase was as late as 7 December.
• That evidence was not made available to the defence that four days before the shopkeeper made a tentative identification of Megrahi at an ID parade he had seen a magazine article containing a photograph of Megrahi, linking him to the bombing.
• That other evidence which undermined the shopkeeper's identification of Megrahi and the finding as to the date of purchase was not made available to the defence.
The reasons given by the commission for finding that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred in this case are not limited to the effect of new evidence (such as the payment to a key prosecution witness of $2m) which has become available since the date of the original trial and the non-disclosure by the police and prosecution of evidence helpful to the defence.
The prima facie miscarriage of justice identified by the commission includes the trial court's finding in fact on the evidence heard at the trial that the clothes which surrounded the bomb were purchased in Malta on 7 December 1988 and that Megrahi was the purchaser. This was the cornerstone of the Crown's case against him. If, as suggested, that finding had no reasonable basis in the evidence, then there is no legal justification for his conviction.
I have always contended that no reasonable tribunal could have convicted Megrahi on the evidence led. Here is one example of the trial court's idiosyncratic approach to the evidence. Many more could be provided.
A vitally important issue was the date on which the goods that surrounded the bomb were purchased in Malta. There were only two live possibilities: 7 December 1988, a date when Megrahi was proved to be on Malta, and 23 November 1988, when he was not. In an attempt to establish just which of these dates was correct, the weather conditions in Sliema on those two days were explored.
Shopkeeper Tony Gauci's evidence was that when the purchaser left his shop it was beginning to rain heavily enough for his customer to think it advisable to buy an umbrella to protect himself while he went in search of a taxi. The unchallenged meteorological evidence led by the defence established that, while it had rained on 23 November at the relevant time, it was unlikely to have rained at all on 7 December and, if there had been any rain, it would have been at most a few drops, insufficient to wet the ground. On this material, the judges found in fact that the clothes were purchased on 7 December.
On evidence as weak as this, how was it possible for the trial court to find him guilty? And how was it possible for the appeal court in 2002 to fail to overturn the conviction? The Criminal Appeal Court dismissed Megrahi's first appeal on the most technical of technical legal grounds: it did not consider the justifiability of the trial court's factual findings at all. Indeed, it is clear from their interventions during the Crown submissions in the appeal that at least some of the judges were only too well aware of how shaky certain crucial findings were and how contrary to the weight of the evidence.
I contend that at least part of the answer lies in the history of the Scottish legal and judicial system. For centuries courts have accorded a specially privileged status to the Lord Advocate. It has been unquestioningly accepted that, though a political appointee and the UK government's (now the Scottish Executive's) chief Scots law adviser, he (now she) would at all times, in his capacity as head of the prosecution system, act independently, without concern for political considerations, and would always place the public interest in a fair trial above the narrow interest of the prosecution in gaining a conviction.
This vision of the role of the Lord Advocate was reinforced by the fact that, until the Scottish Judicial Appointments Board commenced operations in 2002, all Scottish High Court judges (and lower court judges) were nominated for appointment to the Bench by the Lord Advocate of the day. This meant that, in all criminal proceedings, the presiding judge owed his position to the person (or one of his predecessors in office) who was ultimately responsible for bringing the case before him, and for its conduct while in his court.
I believe that, subconsciously at least, the judges were reluctant to reach a verdict acquitting both accused because of the humiliation that this would entail for the office of Lord Advocate in the most high profile prosecution ever brought in the Scottish courts.
Megrahi launched an appeal based on the SCCRC findings, but abandoned it in 2009 in order to maximise his prospects of repatriation to Libya when terminal metastatic prostate cancer was diagnosed. But the concerns regarding the propriety of his conviction raised by the SCCRC and others have not disappeared.
Lord Denning tarnished his reputation by expressing the view that an alleged miscarriage of justice should not be investigated because it might undermine confidence in the English criminal justice and judicial systems. It is sad to see Alistair Brownlie appearing to take the same stance in Scotland.
Wednesday, 20 October 2010
Personal statements from members of JFM Committee on importance of petition
[Scottish lawyers' magazine The Firm today publishes a long article, prepared by Justice for Megrahi's Robert Forrester, which includes statements from Ian Hamilton QC and from JFM committee members Jim Swire, Iain McKie and Robert Black. Mr McKie's statement reads as follows:]
The Police Officer
I have had some interesting discussions with family members and friends who understandably feel, not knowing the full background, that they cannot fault the Megrahi conviction. It is very hard for them to accept that cover-up and corruption might be integral to the police investigation and eventual conviction. Others suffer from ‘Lockerbie fatigue’ and feel that the cost of an inquiry with cutbacks in the offing is a step too far.
As an ex-police officer this has also been hard for me to cope with and it has taken years of enquiry, (and the suffering of my daughter Shirley Mckie), to satisfy myself that from beginning to end the whole affair was overshadowed by incompetence and political and other interests intent on ensuring that the truth was never known. My answer to the doubters is, I suppose, it is a question of how highly we value justice? For me one resolvable injustice is the mark of a country in decline. I continue to believe that if, as a society, we accept injustice on the Lockerbie scale then we had better all watch our backs.
My involvement with the JFM committee is driven by a need to know that the investigative and prosecution process that led our judges to their conclusion that Mr. Megrahi was guilty of destroying the lives of 270 victims and their families was right and just. No, the UK and American governments will not want this and will do everything but co-operate but I firmly believe that a Scottish based inquiry will satisfy my hopes and aspirations for our Scottish justice system.
The Police Officer
I have had some interesting discussions with family members and friends who understandably feel, not knowing the full background, that they cannot fault the Megrahi conviction. It is very hard for them to accept that cover-up and corruption might be integral to the police investigation and eventual conviction. Others suffer from ‘Lockerbie fatigue’ and feel that the cost of an inquiry with cutbacks in the offing is a step too far.
As an ex-police officer this has also been hard for me to cope with and it has taken years of enquiry, (and the suffering of my daughter Shirley Mckie), to satisfy myself that from beginning to end the whole affair was overshadowed by incompetence and political and other interests intent on ensuring that the truth was never known. My answer to the doubters is, I suppose, it is a question of how highly we value justice? For me one resolvable injustice is the mark of a country in decline. I continue to believe that if, as a society, we accept injustice on the Lockerbie scale then we had better all watch our backs.
My involvement with the JFM committee is driven by a need to know that the investigative and prosecution process that led our judges to their conclusion that Mr. Megrahi was guilty of destroying the lives of 270 victims and their families was right and just. No, the UK and American governments will not want this and will do everything but co-operate but I firmly believe that a Scottish based inquiry will satisfy my hopes and aspirations for our Scottish justice system.
1,200 back call for Megrahi inquiry
[This is the headline over a report in The Scotsman. It reads in part:]
More than 1,200 people have backed the call for an independent inquiry into the conviction of the Lockerbie bomber. (...)
One year after the Libyan's release on compassionate grounds, campaigners launched the new attempt to secure an inquiry, an online campaign which attracted 1,245 signatories in ten days.
The appeal is being led by pressure group Justice For Megrahi, which involves Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was killed in the Pan Am bombing.
He said the case has been "corrosive and deeply damaging" to the Scottish justice system and called on the government to open an inquiry.
Mr Swire added: "Only is such a manner can Scotland demonstrate that it is making a sincere attempt to resolve this highly contentious issue." (...)
The petition, lodged on October 8, can be accessed through the Scottish Parliament's website and closes on Thursday next week.
[The signature total now stands at 1325.]
More than 1,200 people have backed the call for an independent inquiry into the conviction of the Lockerbie bomber. (...)
One year after the Libyan's release on compassionate grounds, campaigners launched the new attempt to secure an inquiry, an online campaign which attracted 1,245 signatories in ten days.
The appeal is being led by pressure group Justice For Megrahi, which involves Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was killed in the Pan Am bombing.
He said the case has been "corrosive and deeply damaging" to the Scottish justice system and called on the government to open an inquiry.
Mr Swire added: "Only is such a manner can Scotland demonstrate that it is making a sincere attempt to resolve this highly contentious issue." (...)
The petition, lodged on October 8, can be accessed through the Scottish Parliament's website and closes on Thursday next week.
[The signature total now stands at 1325.]
Tuesday, 19 October 2010
Over 1,000 sign Lockerbie petition
[This is the headline over a Press Association news agency report just published on the website of the Selkirk Weekend Advertiser. It reads in part:]
More than 1,200 people have backed an independent inquiry into the conviction of the Lockerbie bomber, campaigners have revealed.
A petition was lodged at the Scottish Parliament urging ministers to look again at the 2001 trial, which saw Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi become the only man to be found guilty of the 1988 terror attack.
One year after the Libyan's release on compassionate grounds, campaigners launched the new attempt to secure an inquiry, attracting 1,245 signatories in 10 days.
The appeal is being led by pressure group Justice For Megrahi, which involves Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was killed in the Pan Am bombing.
He said the case has been "corrosive and deeply damaging" to the Scottish justice system and called on the Government to open an inquiry.
Mr Swire added: "Only in such a manner can Scotland demonstrate that it is making a sincere attempt to resolve this highly contentious issue."
Professor Robert Black QC, who has been described as the "architect" of the Kamp van Zeist trial, also leant his name to the campaign. He has hit out on the "weak" quality of evidence which placed Megrahi in Malta, linking him to the bombing later over Scotland.
Prof Black said: "I have always contended that no reasonable tribunal could have convicted Megrahi on the evidence led."
The petition, lodged on October 8, can be accessed through the Scottish Parliament's website and closes on Thursday next week.
More than 1,200 people have backed an independent inquiry into the conviction of the Lockerbie bomber, campaigners have revealed.
A petition was lodged at the Scottish Parliament urging ministers to look again at the 2001 trial, which saw Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi become the only man to be found guilty of the 1988 terror attack.
One year after the Libyan's release on compassionate grounds, campaigners launched the new attempt to secure an inquiry, attracting 1,245 signatories in 10 days.
The appeal is being led by pressure group Justice For Megrahi, which involves Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was killed in the Pan Am bombing.
He said the case has been "corrosive and deeply damaging" to the Scottish justice system and called on the Government to open an inquiry.
Mr Swire added: "Only in such a manner can Scotland demonstrate that it is making a sincere attempt to resolve this highly contentious issue."
Professor Robert Black QC, who has been described as the "architect" of the Kamp van Zeist trial, also leant his name to the campaign. He has hit out on the "weak" quality of evidence which placed Megrahi in Malta, linking him to the bombing later over Scotland.
Prof Black said: "I have always contended that no reasonable tribunal could have convicted Megrahi on the evidence led."
The petition, lodged on October 8, can be accessed through the Scottish Parliament's website and closes on Thursday next week.
Monday, 18 October 2010
Petition push for independent inquiry to get at the truth of the bombing of Pan Am flight 103
[This is the heading over a letter by Ruth Marr in today's edition of The Herald. It reads as follows:]
Hillary Clinton’s meddling in UK defence spending made it all the more refreshing to hear Kenny MacAskill declare that he is accountable only to the Holyrood Parliament (Salmond hits back at Senate on Megrahi “misinformation”, The Herald, October 16). Mr MacAskill deserves respect for standing firm throughout the Megrahi affair, upholding the principles of Scots law, and refusing to be bullied by the “might is right” pressure from the United States.
The parliament is a great example which many around the world would benefit from emulating. One of its strengths is its public petitions process, available to individuals and groups who wish to petition parliament. One has been opened by the group Justice For Megrahi, which includes Professor Robert Black, Desmond Tutu, Dr Jim Swire and other British Lockerbie relatives, lawyers, diplomats and aviation security experts. It calls on the parliament to urge the Scottish Government to open an independent inquiry into the conviction of Mr Megrahi for the bombing of Pan Am flight 103.
It is available for signing until October 28 by anyone – resident in Scotland or not. It can also be signed by text, and I would urge all concerned about what many consider a miscarriage of justice to access the petition via the Scottish Parliament’s website.
The victims’ families, including the Megrahis, need to know the facts about this most terrible tragedy, and they deserve the support of all who care about justice.
Hillary Clinton’s meddling in UK defence spending made it all the more refreshing to hear Kenny MacAskill declare that he is accountable only to the Holyrood Parliament (Salmond hits back at Senate on Megrahi “misinformation”, The Herald, October 16). Mr MacAskill deserves respect for standing firm throughout the Megrahi affair, upholding the principles of Scots law, and refusing to be bullied by the “might is right” pressure from the United States.
The parliament is a great example which many around the world would benefit from emulating. One of its strengths is its public petitions process, available to individuals and groups who wish to petition parliament. One has been opened by the group Justice For Megrahi, which includes Professor Robert Black, Desmond Tutu, Dr Jim Swire and other British Lockerbie relatives, lawyers, diplomats and aviation security experts. It calls on the parliament to urge the Scottish Government to open an independent inquiry into the conviction of Mr Megrahi for the bombing of Pan Am flight 103.
It is available for signing until October 28 by anyone – resident in Scotland or not. It can also be signed by text, and I would urge all concerned about what many consider a miscarriage of justice to access the petition via the Scottish Parliament’s website.
The victims’ families, including the Megrahis, need to know the facts about this most terrible tragedy, and they deserve the support of all who care about justice.
Sunday, 17 October 2010
Alex Salmond and the Megrahi release
Uncharacteristically, it seemed that Mr Salmond had disappeared from view for much of the year. For a while, too, it looked like he and his justice minister, Kenny MacAskill, would be engulfed in the fall-out from the discovery by Abdelbasat al-Megrahi that the privations of the Libyan desert nevertheless appear more conducive to life than a west of Scotland prison cell.
Yet it was to be this very issue and the clumsy posturing of American senators following the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico that handed Mr Salmond the opportunity to rediscover his political mojo. The first minister imperiously rebutted the senators' claims that the Scottish government had concluded a deal with BP by permitting the early release of al-Megrahi. In a series of coruscating and judiciously leaked letters, he exposed the Americans' ignorance of the issue. Having been soundly thrashed by George Galloway a few years ago, they ought to have hesitated before deciding to engage with another truculent and articulate Scottish bauchle.
Mr Salmond may not yet have reached the status of international statesman, but at times such as this he certainly looks the part. Thus the opposition were reminded that he remains our most formidable political belligerent heading into an election year.
[From an article by Kevin McKenna in today's edition of The Observer.]
Yet it was to be this very issue and the clumsy posturing of American senators following the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico that handed Mr Salmond the opportunity to rediscover his political mojo. The first minister imperiously rebutted the senators' claims that the Scottish government had concluded a deal with BP by permitting the early release of al-Megrahi. In a series of coruscating and judiciously leaked letters, he exposed the Americans' ignorance of the issue. Having been soundly thrashed by George Galloway a few years ago, they ought to have hesitated before deciding to engage with another truculent and articulate Scottish bauchle.
Mr Salmond may not yet have reached the status of international statesman, but at times such as this he certainly looks the part. Thus the opposition were reminded that he remains our most formidable political belligerent heading into an election year.
[From an article by Kevin McKenna in today's edition of The Observer.]
Megrahi dossier pledge
[What follow are excerpts from an article on page 17 of today's edition of The Sunday Post. It does not feature on the newspaper's website unless, perhaps, you are a subscriber, which I am not.]
The Lockerbie bomber is to pass a shattering dossier of evidence to campaigners fighting to clear his name.
Dr Jim Swire ... has revealed Abdelbaset al-Megrahi has pledged to give him a folder of information the Libyan claims will crush his conviction.
Dr Swire believes Megrahi ... made the promise because he feels guilty about letting down relatives who want answers about the case.
The campaigner says Megrahi regrets denying them the chance to hear evidence of a potential miscarriage of justice when he dropped his appeal before he was freed on compassionate grounds last year.
Megrahi made the pledge last month as Dr Swire sat by his hospital bed in Libya.
Now Dr Swire hopes the dossier will boost his plans to re-launch Megrahi's appeal after his death.
Dr Swire ... said, "He promised that there is a folder, which he thinks would destroy the verdict once and forever, which will be made available to me at a later date.
"I didn't like to firm it up with him and he didn't say so in so many words, but I think he meant that when he dies this folder will be passed to me. (...)"
Dr Swire says he didn't know why Megrahi had decided to drop his appeal but he detected he was in anguish over the move.
He said, "Talking as two men who'd met before and had a common cause, I got the vibe that he felt guilty.
"Not about having caused Lockerbie -- he denies that as resolutely as ever. What he was feeling guilty about was having withdrawn his appeal.
"I think telling me that there was a folder waiting for me one day was his way of soothing his conscience because he knew very well that the withdrawal was a blow to people like me who are seeking the truth."
Dr Swire has previously said he's been given legal advice indicating it would be possible for him to lead an appeal over Megrahi's conviction after his death.
He said, "If we're granted permission to restart the appeal we'd want as much information as possible, including whatever it is that Baset has got squirreled away to give to me."
Dr Swire's revelations come as he and other campaigners in the group Justice for Megrahi launched a petition at the Scottish Parliament, calling for an independent inquiry into Lockerbie.
The group includes Lockerbie relatives, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, TV journalist Kate Adie, retired politician Tam Dalyell and Professor Robert Black (...)
Dr Swire said, "We have over 1000 signatures after a week but we need more people to sign before the deadline of October 28."
The Lockerbie bomber is to pass a shattering dossier of evidence to campaigners fighting to clear his name.
Dr Jim Swire ... has revealed Abdelbaset al-Megrahi has pledged to give him a folder of information the Libyan claims will crush his conviction.
Dr Swire believes Megrahi ... made the promise because he feels guilty about letting down relatives who want answers about the case.
The campaigner says Megrahi regrets denying them the chance to hear evidence of a potential miscarriage of justice when he dropped his appeal before he was freed on compassionate grounds last year.
Megrahi made the pledge last month as Dr Swire sat by his hospital bed in Libya.
Now Dr Swire hopes the dossier will boost his plans to re-launch Megrahi's appeal after his death.
Dr Swire ... said, "He promised that there is a folder, which he thinks would destroy the verdict once and forever, which will be made available to me at a later date.
"I didn't like to firm it up with him and he didn't say so in so many words, but I think he meant that when he dies this folder will be passed to me. (...)"
Dr Swire says he didn't know why Megrahi had decided to drop his appeal but he detected he was in anguish over the move.
He said, "Talking as two men who'd met before and had a common cause, I got the vibe that he felt guilty.
"Not about having caused Lockerbie -- he denies that as resolutely as ever. What he was feeling guilty about was having withdrawn his appeal.
"I think telling me that there was a folder waiting for me one day was his way of soothing his conscience because he knew very well that the withdrawal was a blow to people like me who are seeking the truth."
Dr Swire has previously said he's been given legal advice indicating it would be possible for him to lead an appeal over Megrahi's conviction after his death.
He said, "If we're granted permission to restart the appeal we'd want as much information as possible, including whatever it is that Baset has got squirreled away to give to me."
Dr Swire's revelations come as he and other campaigners in the group Justice for Megrahi launched a petition at the Scottish Parliament, calling for an independent inquiry into Lockerbie.
The group includes Lockerbie relatives, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, TV journalist Kate Adie, retired politician Tam Dalyell and Professor Robert Black (...)
Dr Swire said, "We have over 1000 signatures after a week but we need more people to sign before the deadline of October 28."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)