[What follows is an excerpt from today's edition of The Sun.]
Defence chiefs last night warned national security will be put "at risk" by a devastating new leak of secret American files.
Controversial website WikiLeaks will this weekend publish more than two million US diplomatic messages. Senior defence official Air Vice-Marshal Andrew Vallance urged the British media not to publish the classified documents.
He said: "Aspects of national security might be put at risk if a major UK news outlet brought such information into obvious public prominence."
The documents were issued by the White House, the CIA and US embassies to allied governments around the world. The messages to British diplomats contain highly sensitive conversations that could reap huge damage.
The most compromising are believed to contain secret intelligence sources, as well as information about Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.
[A much longer article appears in the Daily Mail (and The Sun's story is probably taken from this) which indicates that the documents relating to Megrahi concern discussions about his return to Libya, rather than how he came to be accused, tried and convicted.
Scotland on Sunday runs a short piece which contains the following:]
With governments across the world bracing themselves for the release of hundreds of thousands of pages of classified papers and cables last night, there was growing expectation that some of the material will relate to the release of Abdelbaset Al Megrahi last year.
A Scottish Government spokesman said they had received no contact from the US Consul in Edinburgh about any information relating to their own actions. However, it is understood that among the millions of pages to be put up on the web over coming days is more information detailing US views on the bomber's return to Libya last August.
Saturday, 27 November 2010
Friday, 26 November 2010
So now we know
Even if profiling could detect every terrorist, it could not detect every terrorist plot. Remember Pan Am Flight 103, which blew up over Lockerbie, Scotland? That was accomplished without any terrorists aboard. An unsuspecting passenger was turned into a weapon of mass destruction when she carried on a bomb disguised as a radio. Profiling would not have stopped that plot.
[From an article in The Philadelphia Inquirer supporting the enhanced passenger screening procedures for anyone boarding a plane in America by Louis Lombardi, an attorney and former New York City police captain.]
[From an article in The Philadelphia Inquirer supporting the enhanced passenger screening procedures for anyone boarding a plane in America by Louis Lombardi, an attorney and former New York City police captain.]
Thursday, 25 November 2010
False memories?
[What follow are excerpts from an article published today on The Guardian website.]
In fact, many hundreds of people have been wrongfully convicted in the UK because juries and those involved in the legal system relied upon "common sense" in considering issues relating to memory. Several thousand case histories have been referred to the British False Memory Society and at least 672 of these are known to have involved the police or higher legal authorities.
It is imperative that those working in the legal system are familiar, at least in general terms, with the way that memory works. Experimental psychologists, following the initial controversy over the veracity of recovered memories back in the 1980s, have developed several reliable techniques to study factors that influence the formation and maintenance of false memories. The studies have proved beyond doubt that false memories can be produced quite readily in susceptible individuals.
Of course, false memories do not only arise in the context of sexual abuse allegations. As Professor Tim Valentine, an expert in psychology and the law at Goldsmiths, University of London, informs me:
"Witnesses' recall can be influenced by information acquired during an investigation. Just repeatedly questioning a witness tends to increase their confidence in both correct and mistaken answers. A shopkeeper who was a key witness in the Lockerbie bomb case was interviewed 20 times by the police, during which he was shown fragments of burnt clothing. He recalled a Libyan customer who had been in the shop nine months previously. Initially he said he did not sell the man any shirts. In court he described selling two shirts to the customer that were similar to fragments of clothing found in the suitcase that contained the bomb. Might this be a false memory induced by questioning about the shirts?"
In fact, many hundreds of people have been wrongfully convicted in the UK because juries and those involved in the legal system relied upon "common sense" in considering issues relating to memory. Several thousand case histories have been referred to the British False Memory Society and at least 672 of these are known to have involved the police or higher legal authorities.
It is imperative that those working in the legal system are familiar, at least in general terms, with the way that memory works. Experimental psychologists, following the initial controversy over the veracity of recovered memories back in the 1980s, have developed several reliable techniques to study factors that influence the formation and maintenance of false memories. The studies have proved beyond doubt that false memories can be produced quite readily in susceptible individuals.
Of course, false memories do not only arise in the context of sexual abuse allegations. As Professor Tim Valentine, an expert in psychology and the law at Goldsmiths, University of London, informs me:
"Witnesses' recall can be influenced by information acquired during an investigation. Just repeatedly questioning a witness tends to increase their confidence in both correct and mistaken answers. A shopkeeper who was a key witness in the Lockerbie bomb case was interviewed 20 times by the police, during which he was shown fragments of burnt clothing. He recalled a Libyan customer who had been in the shop nine months previously. Initially he said he did not sell the man any shirts. In court he described selling two shirts to the customer that were similar to fragments of clothing found in the suitcase that contained the bomb. Might this be a false memory induced by questioning about the shirts?"
Wednesday, 24 November 2010
Good news regarding the Cadder emergency legislation
[The following is taken from a report just published on the website of Scottish lawyers' magazine The Firm.]
The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission has joined the growing clamour of concern about section 7 of the Criminal Procedure (Legal Assistance, Detention and Appeals) (Scotland) Act 2010, passed by the Scottish Parliament last month, with Commission chairman Jean Couper saying there is “no evidence” that the provisions in section 7 of the new Act were required.
She added that the new section was “a fundamental constitutional change in the role of the Commission and in its relationship with the appeal court in Scotland.”
She said the provision “risks undermining the role of the Commission as an independent arbiter of issues relating to alleged miscarriages of justice.”
However, Couper also said that following a meeting with Kenny MacAskill the new measures, which had been criticised for fundamentally changing the nature of SCCRC referrals, were temporary, and would be reviewed as part of Lord Carloway’s investigation into criminal procedure.
“Whilst the court has and will continue to refuse some appeals based upon a referral by the Commission and on occasion will comment upon our basis of referral, I have no evidence of any concern amongst the judiciary that the Commission is unable or unwilling to undertake its duties in a measured, considered and appropriate way,” she said.
“Section 7 of the new Act, and in particular the creation of a new section 194DA of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995, creates a fundamental change in the relationship between the court and the Commission.
“The new legislative framework that gives authority to the High Court to reject a reference from the Commission at the outset risks undermining the role of the Commission as an independent arbiter of issues relating to alleged miscarriages of justice. The appropriate remedy for any aggrieved party, whether this be the applicant or the Crown, to challenge a decision made by the Commission, after it has considered the matter and reached a determination, is by way of judicial review. This, we feel, is the correct forum for the Commission’s application of our statutory test to be considered and tested, and not by the High Court in terms of the new section 194DA(2).”
She said that Justice Minster Kenny MacAskill had visited the Commission after concerns were raised.
“He assured me at our meeting that the new legislation was intended to provide interim measures which will now be subject to full consultation as part of Lord Carloway`s review. The Commission has been asked to play an active part in the forthcoming consultation and review process and is pleased to do so.”
[The Herald also has a shorter report on the subject.]
The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission has joined the growing clamour of concern about section 7 of the Criminal Procedure (Legal Assistance, Detention and Appeals) (Scotland) Act 2010, passed by the Scottish Parliament last month, with Commission chairman Jean Couper saying there is “no evidence” that the provisions in section 7 of the new Act were required.
She added that the new section was “a fundamental constitutional change in the role of the Commission and in its relationship with the appeal court in Scotland.”
She said the provision “risks undermining the role of the Commission as an independent arbiter of issues relating to alleged miscarriages of justice.”
However, Couper also said that following a meeting with Kenny MacAskill the new measures, which had been criticised for fundamentally changing the nature of SCCRC referrals, were temporary, and would be reviewed as part of Lord Carloway’s investigation into criminal procedure.
“Whilst the court has and will continue to refuse some appeals based upon a referral by the Commission and on occasion will comment upon our basis of referral, I have no evidence of any concern amongst the judiciary that the Commission is unable or unwilling to undertake its duties in a measured, considered and appropriate way,” she said.
“Section 7 of the new Act, and in particular the creation of a new section 194DA of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995, creates a fundamental change in the relationship between the court and the Commission.
“The new legislative framework that gives authority to the High Court to reject a reference from the Commission at the outset risks undermining the role of the Commission as an independent arbiter of issues relating to alleged miscarriages of justice. The appropriate remedy for any aggrieved party, whether this be the applicant or the Crown, to challenge a decision made by the Commission, after it has considered the matter and reached a determination, is by way of judicial review. This, we feel, is the correct forum for the Commission’s application of our statutory test to be considered and tested, and not by the High Court in terms of the new section 194DA(2).”
She said that Justice Minster Kenny MacAskill had visited the Commission after concerns were raised.
“He assured me at our meeting that the new legislation was intended to provide interim measures which will now be subject to full consultation as part of Lord Carloway`s review. The Commission has been asked to play an active part in the forthcoming consultation and review process and is pleased to do so.”
[The Herald also has a shorter report on the subject.]
Tuesday, 23 November 2010
An inquiry into conviction of Megrahi should go ahead but is unlikely to win support in the US
[This is the heading over a letter by John M Wilson of Houston (presumably the Renfrewshire not the Texas one) in today's edition of The Herald. It reads as follows:]
The idea that American families will respond favourably to Father Pat Keegans’s letter in support of an inquiry into the conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi (“US families urged to back new inquiry into Megrahi conviction”, The Herald, November 22) is as likely as the old adage about turkeys voting for Christmas.
The recent rejection of a review of the case by the Scottish Government will only give support to the theorists that Megrahi was wrongly convicted. Scotland should not be left in a situation similar to that which exists in the US, where theories still abound about who really shot John F Kennedy.
The verdict at Camp Zeist is considered [by the Scottish Government] to be a just one but, despite that, there are people who declare themselves dissatisfied with that. The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission is critical of the verdict but has no axe to grind other than to highlight what it considers deficiencies in the case which could have resulted in an incorrect verdict. Dr Jim Swire and his many supporters have declared similar views and should at least be granted some form of judicial review. The fact that Megrahi has survived beyond the estimated time following his release adds weight to the demands for a review and has created more suspicion that his release was more to do with politics than justice.
The idea that American families will respond favourably to Father Pat Keegans’s letter in support of an inquiry into the conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi (“US families urged to back new inquiry into Megrahi conviction”, The Herald, November 22) is as likely as the old adage about turkeys voting for Christmas.
The recent rejection of a review of the case by the Scottish Government will only give support to the theorists that Megrahi was wrongly convicted. Scotland should not be left in a situation similar to that which exists in the US, where theories still abound about who really shot John F Kennedy.
The verdict at Camp Zeist is considered [by the Scottish Government] to be a just one but, despite that, there are people who declare themselves dissatisfied with that. The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission is critical of the verdict but has no axe to grind other than to highlight what it considers deficiencies in the case which could have resulted in an incorrect verdict. Dr Jim Swire and his many supporters have declared similar views and should at least be granted some form of judicial review. The fact that Megrahi has survived beyond the estimated time following his release adds weight to the demands for a review and has created more suspicion that his release was more to do with politics than justice.
Monday, 22 November 2010
US families urged to back new inquiry into Megrahi conviction
[This is the headline over an article in today's edition of The Herald. It reads in part:]
American families who lost loved ones in the Lockerbie bombing have nothing to fear from an inquiry into Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi’s conviction, a long-standing campaigner has told them.
Lockerbie priest Father Pat Keegans has written an open letter to families of the US victims urging them to support a public inquiry into the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over the Dumfries and Galloway town on December 21, 1988, which killed everyone on board and 11 people on the ground. (...)
However, [Megrahi's] conviction has been mired in controversy, splitting opinion on either side of the Atlantic. The rift has intensified amid mounting pressure from Scottish campaigners for an inquiry, after the Libyan had to drop his appeal as a condition of being sent home to die. [RB: Dropping the appeal was a condition of repatriation under the UK-Libya prisoner transfer agreement, not under compassionate release. But, of course, the Justice Secretary made clear that he would deal with both applications together and Megrahi had no way of knowing which -- if either -- the Justice Secretary would favour.]
Father Keegans’s letter asks the US families to “show your concern for the legitimate and sincere views consistently held by me and many others”, insisting the growing number of dissenting voices “cannot be discounted as the rantings and ravings of conspiracy theory fanatics”.
He said: “It is your strongly held view that the trial and verdict were valid … However, your certainty in the validity of the trial and conviction should allow you to accept that such an inquiry would vindicate your belief and you should have nothing to fear from it.”
He added: “Whatever our views, it is clear that the full truth has not emerged; people who murdered our family members and friends are still at large.
“There has been a conviction which is not universally accepted but has been questioned by many. A full, public, independent inquiry into all aspects of the bombing would assist us in finding truth and justice.”
Earlier this month, a petition by the Justice For Megrahi pressure group signed by 1500 people was handed in to MSPs, calling on Holyrood to urge the Scottish Government to open an independent inquiry into the Libyan’s conviction.
Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died in the Lockerbie bombing, was among the group.
Father Keegans – whose home in Lockerbie escaped virtually unscathed after flaming debris from the aircraft demolished neighbouring houses – has been a counsellor for bereaved relatives in Scotland and overseas as well as an outspoken critic of the investigation and trial which led to Megrahi’s conviction.
Father Keegans said he wrote to the families after receiving an e-mail from Frank Duggan, president of the US family group, criticising comments made by Cardinal Keith O’Brien earlier this month supporting an independent inquiry into the conviction of Megrahi. (...)
But Ted Reina, whose daughter Jocelyn was a flight attendant on the aeroplane, said an inquiry would reopen old wounds.
Mr Reina, from California, said: “I see no good from opening an inquiry into the Lockerbie bombing except for the lawyers lining their pockets. Megrahi has been sent home to a hero’s welcome and is alive and well … For the families who have had years of anguish I see only more pain. I wonder how many of those who call for an inquiry actually saw the trial or watched it on closed circuit TV as my wife and I did.”
[According to a report by The Press Association news agency, Dr Jim Swire commented on The Herald article as follows:]
'Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died in the bombing, asked MSPs on Holyrood's Petitions Committee to push for an inquiry earlier this month.
'He backed Father Pat Keegans' attempts, hoping for an "objective look" at the evidence.
'Dr Swire said: "I think in the long term, some degree of truth is going to come out. I agree with what Pat Keegans has been saying but there will be some risk. The longer the truth takes to come out, the harder it will be for some people."'
[The full text of Canon Keegans's letter is as follows:]
Dear USA Families of Pan Am Flight 103,
The President of the family group, Mr Frank Duggan, sent an email to me expressing his disappointment with the recent statements made by Cardinal O’Brien. Rather than simply reply to him as an individual I wish to use his comments as an opportunity to speak to all the families.
Dear Families,
We met through an horrendous act of murder. We lost family members and friends through this heinous crime. In all that has happened over the years I have never lost sight of the great suffering inflicted upon you and have sought where possible to be a source of solace, healing and comfort. At the same time I have also been a challenge. Before the trial of Mr Megrahi and Mr Fahima I was saying to many of the families and to the media that I did not believe that the real perpetrators had been arrested and put on trial. During the trial and afterwards I was saying that the trial and the verdict would not stand up to scrutiny; it has not stood up to serious scrutiny. What I was voicing before, during and after the trial has now been voiced by many people at an international level. In his statement Cardinal O’Brien said this: “From the moment the verdict was announced, voices have been raised in protest. Over the years the clamour has grown amongst lawyers, politicians, academics and a growing number of ordinary citizens that the verdict amounted to a miscarriage of justice.”
I for my part would affirm that such voices cannot be discounted as the rantings and ravings of conspiracy theory fanatics or deranged and misguided people. Their voices merit a full, independent and public enquiry into all aspects of what we in Scotland call the Lockerbie Bombing.
I am aware that this is not a view commonly held by you; however, I would ask you to give your support, individually and/or as a group to a full, independent public enquiry. It is your strongly held view that the trial and verdict were valid. After all that has happened since the trial I would have to wonder if such a view is tenable. However, your certainty in the validity of the trial and conviction should allow you to accept that such an enquiry would vindicate your belief and you should have nothing to fear from it. At the same time your support for an enquiry would show your concern for the legitimate and sincere views consistently held by me and many others.
From the beginning we have all sought justice and truth. Whatever our views, it is clear that the full truth has not emerged; people who murdered our family members and friends are still at large. There has been a conviction which is not universally accepted but has been questioned by many. A full, public, independent enquiry into all aspects of the bombing would assist us in finding truth and justice for ourselves and all who have died.
Finally, I will continue to offer to you unconditionally, wherever it is accepted, any support, solace and comfort that I can give.
You are never far from my thoughts and prayers.
Yours sincerely,
Pat Keegans
American families who lost loved ones in the Lockerbie bombing have nothing to fear from an inquiry into Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi’s conviction, a long-standing campaigner has told them.
Lockerbie priest Father Pat Keegans has written an open letter to families of the US victims urging them to support a public inquiry into the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over the Dumfries and Galloway town on December 21, 1988, which killed everyone on board and 11 people on the ground. (...)
However, [Megrahi's] conviction has been mired in controversy, splitting opinion on either side of the Atlantic. The rift has intensified amid mounting pressure from Scottish campaigners for an inquiry, after the Libyan had to drop his appeal as a condition of being sent home to die. [RB: Dropping the appeal was a condition of repatriation under the UK-Libya prisoner transfer agreement, not under compassionate release. But, of course, the Justice Secretary made clear that he would deal with both applications together and Megrahi had no way of knowing which -- if either -- the Justice Secretary would favour.]
Father Keegans’s letter asks the US families to “show your concern for the legitimate and sincere views consistently held by me and many others”, insisting the growing number of dissenting voices “cannot be discounted as the rantings and ravings of conspiracy theory fanatics”.
He said: “It is your strongly held view that the trial and verdict were valid … However, your certainty in the validity of the trial and conviction should allow you to accept that such an inquiry would vindicate your belief and you should have nothing to fear from it.”
He added: “Whatever our views, it is clear that the full truth has not emerged; people who murdered our family members and friends are still at large.
“There has been a conviction which is not universally accepted but has been questioned by many. A full, public, independent inquiry into all aspects of the bombing would assist us in finding truth and justice.”
Earlier this month, a petition by the Justice For Megrahi pressure group signed by 1500 people was handed in to MSPs, calling on Holyrood to urge the Scottish Government to open an independent inquiry into the Libyan’s conviction.
Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died in the Lockerbie bombing, was among the group.
Father Keegans – whose home in Lockerbie escaped virtually unscathed after flaming debris from the aircraft demolished neighbouring houses – has been a counsellor for bereaved relatives in Scotland and overseas as well as an outspoken critic of the investigation and trial which led to Megrahi’s conviction.
Father Keegans said he wrote to the families after receiving an e-mail from Frank Duggan, president of the US family group, criticising comments made by Cardinal Keith O’Brien earlier this month supporting an independent inquiry into the conviction of Megrahi. (...)
But Ted Reina, whose daughter Jocelyn was a flight attendant on the aeroplane, said an inquiry would reopen old wounds.
Mr Reina, from California, said: “I see no good from opening an inquiry into the Lockerbie bombing except for the lawyers lining their pockets. Megrahi has been sent home to a hero’s welcome and is alive and well … For the families who have had years of anguish I see only more pain. I wonder how many of those who call for an inquiry actually saw the trial or watched it on closed circuit TV as my wife and I did.”
[According to a report by The Press Association news agency, Dr Jim Swire commented on The Herald article as follows:]
'Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died in the bombing, asked MSPs on Holyrood's Petitions Committee to push for an inquiry earlier this month.
'He backed Father Pat Keegans' attempts, hoping for an "objective look" at the evidence.
'Dr Swire said: "I think in the long term, some degree of truth is going to come out. I agree with what Pat Keegans has been saying but there will be some risk. The longer the truth takes to come out, the harder it will be for some people."'
[The full text of Canon Keegans's letter is as follows:]
Dear USA Families of Pan Am Flight 103,
The President of the family group, Mr Frank Duggan, sent an email to me expressing his disappointment with the recent statements made by Cardinal O’Brien. Rather than simply reply to him as an individual I wish to use his comments as an opportunity to speak to all the families.
Dear Families,
We met through an horrendous act of murder. We lost family members and friends through this heinous crime. In all that has happened over the years I have never lost sight of the great suffering inflicted upon you and have sought where possible to be a source of solace, healing and comfort. At the same time I have also been a challenge. Before the trial of Mr Megrahi and Mr Fahima I was saying to many of the families and to the media that I did not believe that the real perpetrators had been arrested and put on trial. During the trial and afterwards I was saying that the trial and the verdict would not stand up to scrutiny; it has not stood up to serious scrutiny. What I was voicing before, during and after the trial has now been voiced by many people at an international level. In his statement Cardinal O’Brien said this: “From the moment the verdict was announced, voices have been raised in protest. Over the years the clamour has grown amongst lawyers, politicians, academics and a growing number of ordinary citizens that the verdict amounted to a miscarriage of justice.”
I for my part would affirm that such voices cannot be discounted as the rantings and ravings of conspiracy theory fanatics or deranged and misguided people. Their voices merit a full, independent and public enquiry into all aspects of what we in Scotland call the Lockerbie Bombing.
I am aware that this is not a view commonly held by you; however, I would ask you to give your support, individually and/or as a group to a full, independent public enquiry. It is your strongly held view that the trial and verdict were valid. After all that has happened since the trial I would have to wonder if such a view is tenable. However, your certainty in the validity of the trial and conviction should allow you to accept that such an enquiry would vindicate your belief and you should have nothing to fear from it. At the same time your support for an enquiry would show your concern for the legitimate and sincere views consistently held by me and many others.
From the beginning we have all sought justice and truth. Whatever our views, it is clear that the full truth has not emerged; people who murdered our family members and friends are still at large. There has been a conviction which is not universally accepted but has been questioned by many. A full, public, independent enquiry into all aspects of the bombing would assist us in finding truth and justice for ourselves and all who have died.
Finally, I will continue to offer to you unconditionally, wherever it is accepted, any support, solace and comfort that I can give.
You are never far from my thoughts and prayers.
Yours sincerely,
Pat Keegans
Megrahi expert aids appeal
This is the headline over an article (which does not appear on the newspaper's website) in yesterday's edition of The Sunday Post. It discloses that Professor Tim Valentine of the University of London has prepared a report in connection with the appeal of William Gage.
Professor Valentine also prepared a report on the eyewitness evidence accepted by the Zeist judges as constituting an identification of Abdelbaset Megrahi as the person who bought in Tony Gauci's shop the items that were in the same suitcase as the Pan Am 103 bomb. This report would have featured in Mr Megrahi's appeal had it not been abandoned prior to his compassionate release. The report can be read here.
Professor Valentine also prepared a report on the eyewitness evidence accepted by the Zeist judges as constituting an identification of Abdelbaset Megrahi as the person who bought in Tony Gauci's shop the items that were in the same suitcase as the Pan Am 103 bomb. This report would have featured in Mr Megrahi's appeal had it not been abandoned prior to his compassionate release. The report can be read here.
Saturday, 20 November 2010
Suffering is the lot of mankind
[The following are a few sentences from an extract in today's Irish Times from the book The Things I’ve Seen: Nine Lives of a Foreign Correspondent, by Lara Marlowe, the newspaper's Washington correspondent.]
Suffering is the lot of mankind; if my reporting sometimes strikes a chord in readers, I believe it is because I feel tied to the people whose pain I describe. As T S Eliot wrote:
“I am moved by ... The notion of some infinitely gentle/Infinitely suffering thing.” Some, like the parents of children who died violently in Ireland and France, became friends. Most have been swallowed up by distance and time. But I do not forget them.
There is Leila Behbehani, the three-year-old Iranian girl whose body I saw in a cold storage warehouse in Bandar Abbas, one of 290 civilians killed when the USS Vincennes guided-missile cruiser shot down an Iranian airliner in 1988. Leila was on her way to a wedding, and was wearing a turquoise party dress. She died with the contorted face of a child who is crying. Captain Will Rogers III, the commander of the Vincennes, was given a medal. (...)
I still believe that the Lockerbie bombing was retaliation for the downing of the Iran Air flight six months earlier.
Suffering is the lot of mankind; if my reporting sometimes strikes a chord in readers, I believe it is because I feel tied to the people whose pain I describe. As T S Eliot wrote:
“I am moved by ... The notion of some infinitely gentle/Infinitely suffering thing.” Some, like the parents of children who died violently in Ireland and France, became friends. Most have been swallowed up by distance and time. But I do not forget them.
There is Leila Behbehani, the three-year-old Iranian girl whose body I saw in a cold storage warehouse in Bandar Abbas, one of 290 civilians killed when the USS Vincennes guided-missile cruiser shot down an Iranian airliner in 1988. Leila was on her way to a wedding, and was wearing a turquoise party dress. She died with the contorted face of a child who is crying. Captain Will Rogers III, the commander of the Vincennes, was given a medal. (...)
I still believe that the Lockerbie bombing was retaliation for the downing of the Iran Air flight six months earlier.
Tuesday, 16 November 2010
What Justice for Megrahi seeks to achieve
[Following the appearance of Justice for Megrahi committee members before the Scottish Parliament's Public Petitions Committee last Tuesday, Dr Morag Kerr who had not been able to attend the hearing contacted me to express her congratulations on the team's performance. However, she felt that one point had not perhaps been adequately stressed. I agreed, and asked Dr Kerr to let me have a piece for posting on the blog. Here it is.]
The question has been asked, would it not be fair to say that Megrahi had his chance, he had his appeal ongoing, but he chose to drop it. Why should he be given another bite at the cherry?
To ask such a question is to misunderstand profoundly the point of the petition. Despite its name, “Justice for Megrahi” is not and never has been concerned with giving Mr al-Megrahi “another bite at the cherry”. It is concerned with establishing the truth, which transcends the mere fact of a verdict against one individual.
Over a million pounds of public money was spent by the SCCRC on their 3½-year investigation, and the outcome was an 800-page report with 13 volumes of appendices, and no less than six grounds on which a miscarriage of justice was suspected. What has been revealed of that report suggests that the original investigation quite simply got the wrong man, which means that the real perpetrators of the Lockerbie atrocity have never been identified.
Mr al-Megrahi stated that he dropped the appeal in order to improve his chances of returning home to Libya before he died. It appears he was mistaken in that belief, and how he came to be under that misapprehension might in itself be an interesting question. Be that as it may, the dropping of the appeal left the SCCRC findings untested in court. It is the contention of JFM that this unfortunate development should not be allowed to bury the truth, if the truth is indeed contained in these 800 pages.
Taking a wider view, it cannot be overemphasised that the conviction as it stands is acting as an insuperable barrier to any further investigation of the Lockerbie disaster. While JFM is not asking the Scottish government to investigate the identity of the real perpetrators, which would indeed be outwith its remit, it is clear that if indeed the wrong man was convicted, this is the first error that must be addressed before any further steps can be taken to hold a more wide-ranging enquiry, or indeed to re-open the criminal investigation.
[Dr Kerr has also pointed out that in an answer I gave in the hearing I referred to Tony Gauci's having described in police statements the purchaser in his shop as being over six feet tall and over 50 years of age, whereas Mr Megrahi is 5 feet 8 inches tall and was at the time 38 years old. At the relevant time (November/December 1988) Mr Megrahi was in fact 36 years of age.]
The question has been asked, would it not be fair to say that Megrahi had his chance, he had his appeal ongoing, but he chose to drop it. Why should he be given another bite at the cherry?
To ask such a question is to misunderstand profoundly the point of the petition. Despite its name, “Justice for Megrahi” is not and never has been concerned with giving Mr al-Megrahi “another bite at the cherry”. It is concerned with establishing the truth, which transcends the mere fact of a verdict against one individual.
Over a million pounds of public money was spent by the SCCRC on their 3½-year investigation, and the outcome was an 800-page report with 13 volumes of appendices, and no less than six grounds on which a miscarriage of justice was suspected. What has been revealed of that report suggests that the original investigation quite simply got the wrong man, which means that the real perpetrators of the Lockerbie atrocity have never been identified.
Mr al-Megrahi stated that he dropped the appeal in order to improve his chances of returning home to Libya before he died. It appears he was mistaken in that belief, and how he came to be under that misapprehension might in itself be an interesting question. Be that as it may, the dropping of the appeal left the SCCRC findings untested in court. It is the contention of JFM that this unfortunate development should not be allowed to bury the truth, if the truth is indeed contained in these 800 pages.
Taking a wider view, it cannot be overemphasised that the conviction as it stands is acting as an insuperable barrier to any further investigation of the Lockerbie disaster. While JFM is not asking the Scottish government to investigate the identity of the real perpetrators, which would indeed be outwith its remit, it is clear that if indeed the wrong man was convicted, this is the first error that must be addressed before any further steps can be taken to hold a more wide-ranging enquiry, or indeed to re-open the criminal investigation.
[Dr Kerr has also pointed out that in an answer I gave in the hearing I referred to Tony Gauci's having described in police statements the purchaser in his shop as being over six feet tall and over 50 years of age, whereas Mr Megrahi is 5 feet 8 inches tall and was at the time 38 years old. At the relevant time (November/December 1988) Mr Megrahi was in fact 36 years of age.]
Monday, 15 November 2010
Lead Pan Am 103 investigator recalls search for suspect
[This is the headline over the report of Richard Marquise's recent talk at Syracuse University, NY in the university's newspaper The Daily Orange. It reads as follows:]
Richard Marquise searched the 845 square-mile crime scene for a piece of circuit board that would link Libyan terrorists to the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing.
"The piece of evidence that cracked the case could fit on the tip of my finger," Marquise said. "I said, ‘If someone sneezes, we're going to need to do another crime scene search for evidence.'"
Marquise is a former FBI special agent and lead investigator of the task force assigned to the bombing over Lockerbie, Scotland, that killed 35 Syracuse University students. Marquise, who spoke Thursday in the Life Sciences Complex, worked in the FBI for more than 30 years.
Marquise walked the audience chronologically through what he called the "10-year odyssey" of the investigation. The tiny piece of circuit board evidence eventually led Marquise's task force to Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, who was eventually convicted as a Libyan intelligence officer and the man behind the bombings. Al-Megrahi was tried before a Scottish court in the Netherlands.
"It was an electric moment. They don't have commercials in situations like this. The judge just stood up and said that they found Mr. Megrahi guilty on all accounts," Marquise said.
Al-Megrahi was released from prison in August 2009 on compassionate grounds that terminal prostate cancer could end his life in three months. He remains alive today. New York senators and other U.S. leaders have called for al-Megrahi to be put back in prison after he survived nearly a year longer than expected and after questions arose about a possible backdoor deal between British Petroleum and the British government to have him released.
Marquise showed the audience a picture of a baby's shoe embedded in the ground after falling from the plane and another of the broken tail of the plane emblazoned with an American flag.
"It hits home here in Syracuse maybe more than in any other city in the United States," Marquise said.
Marquise finished the lecture with a short video that showed interviews with some family members of the victims of the tragedy.
In one video, the mother of a Syracuse student who died in the crash was directed to the imprint that her son's body had made in the ground after falling from the plane. She said she lay down in the imprint and was able to feel close to her son once again. Several audience members wiped their eyes at the end of the video.
Marquise retired from the FBI in 2002 but remains active in the intelligence community by teaching and consulting.
He said: "I'm going to keep doing this because I don't think man was meant to retire."
Richard Marquise searched the 845 square-mile crime scene for a piece of circuit board that would link Libyan terrorists to the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing.
"The piece of evidence that cracked the case could fit on the tip of my finger," Marquise said. "I said, ‘If someone sneezes, we're going to need to do another crime scene search for evidence.'"
Marquise is a former FBI special agent and lead investigator of the task force assigned to the bombing over Lockerbie, Scotland, that killed 35 Syracuse University students. Marquise, who spoke Thursday in the Life Sciences Complex, worked in the FBI for more than 30 years.
Marquise walked the audience chronologically through what he called the "10-year odyssey" of the investigation. The tiny piece of circuit board evidence eventually led Marquise's task force to Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, who was eventually convicted as a Libyan intelligence officer and the man behind the bombings. Al-Megrahi was tried before a Scottish court in the Netherlands.
"It was an electric moment. They don't have commercials in situations like this. The judge just stood up and said that they found Mr. Megrahi guilty on all accounts," Marquise said.
Al-Megrahi was released from prison in August 2009 on compassionate grounds that terminal prostate cancer could end his life in three months. He remains alive today. New York senators and other U.S. leaders have called for al-Megrahi to be put back in prison after he survived nearly a year longer than expected and after questions arose about a possible backdoor deal between British Petroleum and the British government to have him released.
Marquise showed the audience a picture of a baby's shoe embedded in the ground after falling from the plane and another of the broken tail of the plane emblazoned with an American flag.
"It hits home here in Syracuse maybe more than in any other city in the United States," Marquise said.
Marquise finished the lecture with a short video that showed interviews with some family members of the victims of the tragedy.
In one video, the mother of a Syracuse student who died in the crash was directed to the imprint that her son's body had made in the ground after falling from the plane. She said she lay down in the imprint and was able to feel close to her son once again. Several audience members wiped their eyes at the end of the video.
Marquise retired from the FBI in 2002 but remains active in the intelligence community by teaching and consulting.
He said: "I'm going to keep doing this because I don't think man was meant to retire."
Sunday, 14 November 2010
Deal that freed bomber
[This is the headline over a report in today's edition of the Scottish Sunday Express. It does not appear on the newspaper's website. The report reads as follows:]
FBI's top Lockerbie agent claims Tony Blair sold Megrahi
The former FBI agent who led the Lockerbie investigation has reignited the debate over the bomber's release by accusing Tony Blair of manufacturing Britain's controversial prisoner transfer agreement with Libya to make it happen.
Richard Marquise poured scorn on the UK government's official stance that the infamous "deal in the desert" with Colonel Muammar Gaddafi in 2007 did not relate solely to Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi.
And in a rare interview during a visit to New York's Syracuse University which lost 35 students in the 1988 atrocity, he admitted he believed Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill faced a "difficult decision" after Westminster's meddling.
Mr Marquise said: "When he was released it was not a total shock to those of us involved in the investigation because of the deal in the desert between the British government and the Libyan government about the exchange of prisoners.
"We know that the deal when it was signed only related to Megrahi, it didn't relate to any other prisoners. It talked about exchanging prisoners and he was the only one." He also insisted they had got the right man, despite claims on this side of the Atlantic that Megrahi, controversially freed on compassionate grounds, may be innocent.
Lockerbie campaigner Robert Black, Professor Emeritus of Scots Law at the University of Edinburgh, said: "As far as the Libyans were concerned the prisoner transfer agreement was always about Megrahi, there was no one else they were even slightly interested in."
However, he branded Mr Marquise's insistence that Megrahi was guilty, as "absolute and utter balderdash."
[I had much more to say to the reporter about Mr Marquise's views, which the Express, as a family newspaper, wisely did not print.
The Sunday Post has an article (again, not on the newspaper's website) about Karen Torley's support for the Justice for Megrahi petition. For twelve years Karen Torley campaigned for the release of Kenny Richey from death row in Ohio. Coincidentally, Kenny Richey was born in Zeist.]
FBI's top Lockerbie agent claims Tony Blair sold Megrahi
The former FBI agent who led the Lockerbie investigation has reignited the debate over the bomber's release by accusing Tony Blair of manufacturing Britain's controversial prisoner transfer agreement with Libya to make it happen.
Richard Marquise poured scorn on the UK government's official stance that the infamous "deal in the desert" with Colonel Muammar Gaddafi in 2007 did not relate solely to Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi.
And in a rare interview during a visit to New York's Syracuse University which lost 35 students in the 1988 atrocity, he admitted he believed Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill faced a "difficult decision" after Westminster's meddling.
Mr Marquise said: "When he was released it was not a total shock to those of us involved in the investigation because of the deal in the desert between the British government and the Libyan government about the exchange of prisoners.
"We know that the deal when it was signed only related to Megrahi, it didn't relate to any other prisoners. It talked about exchanging prisoners and he was the only one." He also insisted they had got the right man, despite claims on this side of the Atlantic that Megrahi, controversially freed on compassionate grounds, may be innocent.
Lockerbie campaigner Robert Black, Professor Emeritus of Scots Law at the University of Edinburgh, said: "As far as the Libyans were concerned the prisoner transfer agreement was always about Megrahi, there was no one else they were even slightly interested in."
However, he branded Mr Marquise's insistence that Megrahi was guilty, as "absolute and utter balderdash."
[I had much more to say to the reporter about Mr Marquise's views, which the Express, as a family newspaper, wisely did not print.
The Sunday Post has an article (again, not on the newspaper's website) about Karen Torley's support for the Justice for Megrahi petition. For twelve years Karen Torley campaigned for the release of Kenny Richey from death row in Ohio. Coincidentally, Kenny Richey was born in Zeist.]
Case made for fresh Lockerbie inquiry
[This is the headline over an article in today's edition of the Maltese newspaper The Sunday Times. It reads as follows:]
The “flawed” evidence which secured the Maltese connection to the 1988 Lockerbie bombing became a central plank in the plea for a fresh independent inquiry into the atrocity last week.
Had it not been for this evidence, which implicated Malta in the bombing of Pan Am flight 103, Libyan national Abdelbaset Al-Megrahi could not have been found guilty, said former judge Prof Robert Black.
He was speaking at a hearing of the petitions committee in the Scottish Parliament, which has been asked to consider a call for a fresh inquiry into the case on the strength of a list of serious concerns about the safety of Mr Al-Megrahi’s conviction.
A panel of three Scottish judges, sitting in a special court at Camp Zeist, the Netherlands, had found the former Libyan intelligence officer guilty of the murder of 270 people.
However, Prof Black, the architect of the extraordinary trial, along with others of the Justice for Megrahi pressure group, which includes relatives of victims, believe Mr Al-Megrahi was wrongly convicted. They are now asking the Scottish petitions committee to call a fresh inquiry backed by a petition signed by 1,649 people, including 100 Maltese citizens.
The conviction, Prof Black told the committee, hinges on the premise that Mr Al-Megrahi was the man who bought the clothes from the shop Mary’s House in Sliema, and which were later said to have been wrapped around the suitcase bomb which destroyed the Boeing 747.
According to this theory, consistently rejected by the Maltese government and Air Malta, the bomb left from Malta and was transferred onto the Pan Am Flight in Germany.
But Prof Black pointed out to the committee that Tony Gauci, the Maltese star witness for the prosecution, had only ever said that Mr Al-Megrahi looked “a lot like the man” who bought the clothes from his shop in the days before the bombing.
“He also said in his first police statement that the man was more than six feet tall and over 50 years old. At the relevant time in 1988, Mr Al-Megrahi was 38. He was then, and remains now I presume, five foot, eight inches tall. Still, the court held that he had been positively identified,” Prof Black said.
He also highlighted serious weaknesses in the rest of the evidence which placed Mr Al-Megrahi at Mary’s House.
For instance, according to Mr Gauci’s testimony, the man bought the clothes either on November 23 or December 7, 1988 – the days in which two legs of an international football match were aired on Maltese TV.
On November 23, it had rained heavily according to undisputed meteorological records tallying with Mr Gauci’s further evidence that his customer returned just after leaving to buy an umbrella.
However, Mr Al-Megrahi was not in Malta on the day. He was on the island in December 7 but it did not rain that day, according to the same meteorological records.
No reasonable court could have upheld the view that Mr Al-Megrahi was the man at Mary’s House on the strength of this evidence, Prof Black insisted.
This, he told the committee, was one of six legal points which led the Criminal Cases Review Commission in 2007 to declare that the Libyan “may have suffered a miscarriage of justice”.
The commission’s decree had set the ball rolling for Mr Al-Megrahi’s appeal, which was aborted when he was released from a Scottish jail on compassionate grounds last year because he was diagnosed with terminal prostate cancer.
Beyond clearing Mr Al-Megrahi’s name, according to Jim Swire, a leading figure of the pressure group and the father of a victim, an inquiry was necessary to expunge the stain on the Scottish justice system.
He also argued that an inquiry would deprive certain governments of the excuse not to keep pursuing the real plotters of the atrocity.
At the end of the hearing, the petitions committee wrote to the Scottish government asking if it will set up a new inquiry, and if not, asked to know why.
The “flawed” evidence which secured the Maltese connection to the 1988 Lockerbie bombing became a central plank in the plea for a fresh independent inquiry into the atrocity last week.
Had it not been for this evidence, which implicated Malta in the bombing of Pan Am flight 103, Libyan national Abdelbaset Al-Megrahi could not have been found guilty, said former judge Prof Robert Black.
He was speaking at a hearing of the petitions committee in the Scottish Parliament, which has been asked to consider a call for a fresh inquiry into the case on the strength of a list of serious concerns about the safety of Mr Al-Megrahi’s conviction.
A panel of three Scottish judges, sitting in a special court at Camp Zeist, the Netherlands, had found the former Libyan intelligence officer guilty of the murder of 270 people.
However, Prof Black, the architect of the extraordinary trial, along with others of the Justice for Megrahi pressure group, which includes relatives of victims, believe Mr Al-Megrahi was wrongly convicted. They are now asking the Scottish petitions committee to call a fresh inquiry backed by a petition signed by 1,649 people, including 100 Maltese citizens.
The conviction, Prof Black told the committee, hinges on the premise that Mr Al-Megrahi was the man who bought the clothes from the shop Mary’s House in Sliema, and which were later said to have been wrapped around the suitcase bomb which destroyed the Boeing 747.
According to this theory, consistently rejected by the Maltese government and Air Malta, the bomb left from Malta and was transferred onto the Pan Am Flight in Germany.
But Prof Black pointed out to the committee that Tony Gauci, the Maltese star witness for the prosecution, had only ever said that Mr Al-Megrahi looked “a lot like the man” who bought the clothes from his shop in the days before the bombing.
“He also said in his first police statement that the man was more than six feet tall and over 50 years old. At the relevant time in 1988, Mr Al-Megrahi was 38. He was then, and remains now I presume, five foot, eight inches tall. Still, the court held that he had been positively identified,” Prof Black said.
He also highlighted serious weaknesses in the rest of the evidence which placed Mr Al-Megrahi at Mary’s House.
For instance, according to Mr Gauci’s testimony, the man bought the clothes either on November 23 or December 7, 1988 – the days in which two legs of an international football match were aired on Maltese TV.
On November 23, it had rained heavily according to undisputed meteorological records tallying with Mr Gauci’s further evidence that his customer returned just after leaving to buy an umbrella.
However, Mr Al-Megrahi was not in Malta on the day. He was on the island in December 7 but it did not rain that day, according to the same meteorological records.
No reasonable court could have upheld the view that Mr Al-Megrahi was the man at Mary’s House on the strength of this evidence, Prof Black insisted.
This, he told the committee, was one of six legal points which led the Criminal Cases Review Commission in 2007 to declare that the Libyan “may have suffered a miscarriage of justice”.
The commission’s decree had set the ball rolling for Mr Al-Megrahi’s appeal, which was aborted when he was released from a Scottish jail on compassionate grounds last year because he was diagnosed with terminal prostate cancer.
Beyond clearing Mr Al-Megrahi’s name, according to Jim Swire, a leading figure of the pressure group and the father of a victim, an inquiry was necessary to expunge the stain on the Scottish justice system.
He also argued that an inquiry would deprive certain governments of the excuse not to keep pursuing the real plotters of the atrocity.
At the end of the hearing, the petitions committee wrote to the Scottish government asking if it will set up a new inquiry, and if not, asked to know why.
Nineteenth anniversary of Megrahi accusation
It was on 14 November 1991 that the prosecution authorities in Scotland (the Lord Advocate, Lord Fraser of Carmyllie QC) and the United States (acting US Attorney General, William Barr) simultaneously announced that they had brought criminal charges -- principally murder and conspiracy to murder -- arising out of the destruction of Pan Am 103 against two Libyan nationals, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi and Lamin Fhimah, who were alleged to be members, and to have been acting throughout as agents, of the Libyan intelligence service.
According to the Scottish and American prosecutors, what had happened was this. The two Libyans had manufactured, or caused to be manufactured, a bomb using a Toshiba cassette recorder, Semtex explosive and a digital electric timer (supplied and manufactured by a Swiss company based in Zurich, MeBo AG, the principals of which were Erwin Meister and Edwin Bollier). The device had been placed in a brown Samsonite suitcase in Malta, along with items of clothing purchased for the purpose from a particular shop (Mary's House) in Sliema owned by the Gauci family. Using stolen Air Malta luggage tags, the Libyans (one of whom -- Fhimah -- had occupied the post of station manager for Libyan Arab Airlines in Malta) introduced the suitcase at Luqa Airport into the interline baggage system as unaccompanied luggage on Air Malta Flight KM 180 from Malta to Frankfurt, with directions for its onward transmission (first) on to a feeder flight (PA 103A) to Heathrow and (second) on to Pan Am flight 103 from Heathrow to J F Kennedy Airport in New York.
[From a forthcoming book on the Lockerbie case.]
According to the Scottish and American prosecutors, what had happened was this. The two Libyans had manufactured, or caused to be manufactured, a bomb using a Toshiba cassette recorder, Semtex explosive and a digital electric timer (supplied and manufactured by a Swiss company based in Zurich, MeBo AG, the principals of which were Erwin Meister and Edwin Bollier). The device had been placed in a brown Samsonite suitcase in Malta, along with items of clothing purchased for the purpose from a particular shop (Mary's House) in Sliema owned by the Gauci family. Using stolen Air Malta luggage tags, the Libyans (one of whom -- Fhimah -- had occupied the post of station manager for Libyan Arab Airlines in Malta) introduced the suitcase at Luqa Airport into the interline baggage system as unaccompanied luggage on Air Malta Flight KM 180 from Malta to Frankfurt, with directions for its onward transmission (first) on to a feeder flight (PA 103A) to Heathrow and (second) on to Pan Am flight 103 from Heathrow to J F Kennedy Airport in New York.
[From a forthcoming book on the Lockerbie case.]
Saturday, 13 November 2010
Dispatches from the Dark Side
[What follows is a short review of Gareth Peirce's Dispatches from the Dark Side (Verso, £9.99) by Steven Poole in The Guardian.]
When is a "miscarriage" of justice really a perversion of it? The answer is clear enough in the most compelling essay here, on the Lockerbie bombing, justifiably entitled "The Framing of al-Megrahi". Other subjects include British complicity in "rendition" and torture overseas; the indefinite "detention" without trial (or, as Peirce calls it, "internment") of British citizens after 9/11; and the American mania for imposing solitary confinement, both before trial and in its "SuperMax" prisons, which she argues persuasively is at least blatantly vindictive and probably constitutes torture.
Along the way there are illuminating detours into terminological history (Peirce is very good on the way "defence of the realm" became "national security"), and a consistent seething contempt for governmental mendacity and secrecy. Despite some occasionally opaque syntax (one often ends up reading a sentence twice in a dour hunt for the main verb), the writing has an attractive steeliness.
When is a "miscarriage" of justice really a perversion of it? The answer is clear enough in the most compelling essay here, on the Lockerbie bombing, justifiably entitled "The Framing of al-Megrahi". Other subjects include British complicity in "rendition" and torture overseas; the indefinite "detention" without trial (or, as Peirce calls it, "internment") of British citizens after 9/11; and the American mania for imposing solitary confinement, both before trial and in its "SuperMax" prisons, which she argues persuasively is at least blatantly vindictive and probably constitutes torture.
Along the way there are illuminating detours into terminological history (Peirce is very good on the way "defence of the realm" became "national security"), and a consistent seething contempt for governmental mendacity and secrecy. Despite some occasionally opaque syntax (one often ends up reading a sentence twice in a dour hunt for the main verb), the writing has an attractive steeliness.
Friday, 12 November 2010
"Kicked into the long grass"
[A letter from Iain A D Mann in today's edition of The Herald contains the following paragraph:]
On Tuesday, Dr Jim Swire’s strongly-supported appeal to the Public Petitions Committee for an independent inquiry into the conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi for the Lockerbie bombing was casually kicked into the long grass, with the bare statement that “the Scottish Government has no doubt about the safety of Megrahi’s conviction”. The genuine concerns of about 75% of the Scottish people, the report of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission and the doubts of many legal experts worldwide were brushed aside with contempt.
[It is, of course, disappointing that the immediate reaction of the Scottish Government to Tuesday's hearing should have been to parrot the usual tired pretexts for not instituting an independent inquiry. But the outcome of the hearing was that a letter should be written to the Scottish Government asking them to explain in detail their reasons for refusing to set up an inquiry, with chapter and verse cited for the legal objections that they have referred to in the past.
The questions that the Public Petitions Committee has addressed to the Scottish Government are:
• Will you open an independent inquiry into the 2001 Kamp van Zeist conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi for the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 in December 1988 as called for by the petitioner and for the reasons given in the petition?
• If not, will you provide a detailed explanation why not, specifying whether there is any legislation which would prevent you from holding such an inquiry, what this legislation is and how it prevents?
• Who would have the power to undertake an inquiry in the terms proposed in the petition?
The ball may have been kicked into the long grass. It is not going to be allowed to languish there.]
On Tuesday, Dr Jim Swire’s strongly-supported appeal to the Public Petitions Committee for an independent inquiry into the conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi for the Lockerbie bombing was casually kicked into the long grass, with the bare statement that “the Scottish Government has no doubt about the safety of Megrahi’s conviction”. The genuine concerns of about 75% of the Scottish people, the report of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission and the doubts of many legal experts worldwide were brushed aside with contempt.
[It is, of course, disappointing that the immediate reaction of the Scottish Government to Tuesday's hearing should have been to parrot the usual tired pretexts for not instituting an independent inquiry. But the outcome of the hearing was that a letter should be written to the Scottish Government asking them to explain in detail their reasons for refusing to set up an inquiry, with chapter and verse cited for the legal objections that they have referred to in the past.
The questions that the Public Petitions Committee has addressed to the Scottish Government are:
• Will you open an independent inquiry into the 2001 Kamp van Zeist conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi for the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 in December 1988 as called for by the petitioner and for the reasons given in the petition?
• If not, will you provide a detailed explanation why not, specifying whether there is any legislation which would prevent you from holding such an inquiry, what this legislation is and how it prevents?
• Who would have the power to undertake an inquiry in the terms proposed in the petition?
The ball may have been kicked into the long grass. It is not going to be allowed to languish there.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)