[This is the headline over a report by Bob Smyth in this week's edition of The Sunday Post. It is not on the newspaper's website but has just been sent to me. It reads as follows:]
The Scottish Government is under pressure to change the law to allow the release of secret files on the Lockerbie case.
Campaigners desperately want to study an 800-page dossier on bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi’s abandoned appeal.
They say the Scottish Government could change the legislation to allow that — but they are stalling.
The row erupted after the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission revealed earlier this month it had failed to get the green light to release details of its “statement of reasons” for referring Megrahi’s case back to court for the appeal. That’s because the law requires that all those involved agree to the release of the files.
The main parties include Megrahi, the Crown Office, the Foreign Office and police. It’s understood none have given the required unqualified consent.
The Scottish Government admits it’s disappointed the information couldn’t be made public and says it will now consider a law change to get round the need to get the go-ahead from all those involved.
But ministers say it would need the lengthy process of an Act of Parliament to do that.
Campaigners who doubt Megrahi’s guilt say this “primary legislation” is not necessary and the change could be done a lot quicker through a simple variation of the legal order that put the consent rule in place.
MSP Christine Grahame, who is battling for answers on Lockerbie, has tabled a motion in the Scottish Parliament. It says she is unsurprised consent wasn’t given and calls for the Scottish Government to repeal or amend the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (Permitted Disclosure of Information) Order.
She has also lodged a question, asking ministers if they’ll delete the part of the order that says everyone’s consent is needed.
She said, “I don’t understand the suggestion that primary legislation is necessary. There would be no time to get it through the Parliament before next year’s elections.
“It could be done before then in the way I have suggested.”
She said the consent requirements amount to a “gagging order”.
“Given that the Crown Office, the police and the UK Government are involved, why would they possibly agree to a release of information that might show that Megrahi should never have been found guilty?
“They’ve just stonewalled the whole thing.”
Professor Robert Black, a legal expert who was the architect of the Lockerbie trial, agreed a change to the law could be done quicker.
He said, “It doesn’t have to be an Act of Parliament and go through all the committee procedure and other stages that entails.
“When the Scottish Government say they’re considering primary legislation, given that’s not necessary, we have to ask what they are playing at.
“The suspicion is they are simply adopting delaying tactics.”
A Scottish Government spokesman said, “Based on legal considerations about the most effective way of overcoming constraints of existing legislation, we are now considering primary legislation to address the issue of consent while retaining the necessary protection for any third parties potentially affected.”
Tuesday, 21 December 2010
UK officials greased Lockerbie bomber's release, report finds
[This is the headline over an article just published on the msnbc.com website based on an advance copy of the report to be issued today by US Senators Menendez, Lautenberg, Schumer and Gillibrand. It reads in part:]
Intense political pressures and "commercial warfare" waged by the regime of Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi led to last year’s release of the "unrepentant terrorist" who blew up Pam Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, according to a new report prepared by four US senators.
The report is being released Tuesday, 22 years to the day after a terrorist bomb exploded aboard the Pan Am airliner, killing 270 people — including 189 Americans — in one of the deadliest acts of domestic terrorism prior to 9/11.
An advance copy of the report – titled Justice Undone: The Release of the Lockerbie Bomber — was provided to NBC News.
The report finds that senior officials under former British Prime Ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown quietly and repeatedly pressured Scottish authorities to release Abdel Baset Ali al-al-Megrahi, the former Libyan intelligence officer convicted of the bombing.
They did so in order to protect British business interests in Libya, including a $900 million BP oil deal that the Libyans had threatened to cut off, as well as a $165 million arms sale with a British defense firm that was signed the same month al-Megrahi was freed from prison, the report states.
“This was a case in which commercial and economic considerations trumped the message of our global fight against terrorism,” said Sen Bob Menendez, D-NJ, one of the four senators, who commissioned the report by a Senate investigator.
"God forbid there should be another terrorist attack. We have to make it impossible that anything like this injustice takes place again," he added.
The report also concludes that, in releasing Megrahi last year on the grounds that he was suffering from terminal prostate cancer and had only three months to live, Scottish authorities relied on a "false" and "flawed" medical prognosis that was possibly influenced by a doctor hired by the Libyan government. (Although there were recent reports that Megrahi was in a coma, that account has been disputed. As the Senate report notes, he remains alive, reportedly living in a luxury villa in Tripoli.)
The Senate report calls for a renewed investigation into Megrahi’s release by the State Department and a public apology by both the British and Scottish governments.
That request was rejected this week by both British and Scottish officials. "We totally reject their false interpretation," a Scottish government spokesperson said in an emailed response to NBC News. The decision to release Megrahi "was not based on political, economic or diplomatic considerations, but on the precepts of Scots law and nothing else."
[For those with a strong stomach, the full report by the four senators can be read here.
There is now a report on the Telegraph website which can be read here.]
Intense political pressures and "commercial warfare" waged by the regime of Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi led to last year’s release of the "unrepentant terrorist" who blew up Pam Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, according to a new report prepared by four US senators.
The report is being released Tuesday, 22 years to the day after a terrorist bomb exploded aboard the Pan Am airliner, killing 270 people — including 189 Americans — in one of the deadliest acts of domestic terrorism prior to 9/11.
An advance copy of the report – titled Justice Undone: The Release of the Lockerbie Bomber — was provided to NBC News.
The report finds that senior officials under former British Prime Ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown quietly and repeatedly pressured Scottish authorities to release Abdel Baset Ali al-al-Megrahi, the former Libyan intelligence officer convicted of the bombing.
They did so in order to protect British business interests in Libya, including a $900 million BP oil deal that the Libyans had threatened to cut off, as well as a $165 million arms sale with a British defense firm that was signed the same month al-Megrahi was freed from prison, the report states.
“This was a case in which commercial and economic considerations trumped the message of our global fight against terrorism,” said Sen Bob Menendez, D-NJ, one of the four senators, who commissioned the report by a Senate investigator.
"God forbid there should be another terrorist attack. We have to make it impossible that anything like this injustice takes place again," he added.
The report also concludes that, in releasing Megrahi last year on the grounds that he was suffering from terminal prostate cancer and had only three months to live, Scottish authorities relied on a "false" and "flawed" medical prognosis that was possibly influenced by a doctor hired by the Libyan government. (Although there were recent reports that Megrahi was in a coma, that account has been disputed. As the Senate report notes, he remains alive, reportedly living in a luxury villa in Tripoli.)
The Senate report calls for a renewed investigation into Megrahi’s release by the State Department and a public apology by both the British and Scottish governments.
That request was rejected this week by both British and Scottish officials. "We totally reject their false interpretation," a Scottish government spokesperson said in an emailed response to NBC News. The decision to release Megrahi "was not based on political, economic or diplomatic considerations, but on the precepts of Scots law and nothing else."
[For those with a strong stomach, the full report by the four senators can be read here.
There is now a report on the Telegraph website which can be read here.]
More shameless politicking
Senator to unveil finding of Scotland's release of Pan Am bomber
Sen Robert Menendez will unveil Tuesday the results of his office's investigation into the release of convicted Pan Am Flight 103 bomber Abdelbeset al-Megrahi.
The results are expected on the 22nd anniversary of the bombing, which exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland, in December 1988, killing 259 people on the plane and 11 on the ground.
Al-Megrahi was released from a Scottish prison last year on the grounds that he had cancer and was not likely to live more than three more months. But Menendez has asserted he is not terminally ill.
The lawmaker said he undertook the investigation after British and Scottish officials refused to testify at a Senate Committee on Foreign Relations hearing he was scheduled to chair in July.
[The above is the opening section of a report just published on the CNN ebsite.]
Sen Robert Menendez will unveil Tuesday the results of his office's investigation into the release of convicted Pan Am Flight 103 bomber Abdelbeset al-Megrahi.
The results are expected on the 22nd anniversary of the bombing, which exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland, in December 1988, killing 259 people on the plane and 11 on the ground.
Al-Megrahi was released from a Scottish prison last year on the grounds that he had cancer and was not likely to live more than three more months. But Menendez has asserted he is not terminally ill.
The lawmaker said he undertook the investigation after British and Scottish officials refused to testify at a Senate Committee on Foreign Relations hearing he was scheduled to chair in July.
[The above is the opening section of a report just published on the CNN ebsite.]
Tory politicking on Lockerbie anniversary
[Today is the twenty-second anniversary of the Lockerbie disaster. A number of print and broadcast media run commemorative features and interviews with relatives of victims. Two examples can be found here and here.
But the Scottish Conservative Party has chosen today to launch a further attack on the compassionate release in August 2009 of Abdelbaset Megrahi. A report in today's edition of The Herald reads in part:]
The Conservatives have renewed their attack on the decision to release the Libyan convicted of the Lockerbie bombing on the 22nd anniversary of the atrocity. (...)
Conservative justice spokesman John Lamont said yesterday: “The decision by the SNP to release the Lockerbie bomber was a bad decision, made badly.
“But, as a consequence he has spent the last 18 months with his family and friends in Libya. He has been allowed to live his final weeks and months with those he loves.
“That is something he denied his victims.” (...)
A Scottish Government spokesman said last night: “Our thoughts and sympathies are with all those affected by the events of that terrible night, but most especially the families and relatives, wherever they are in the world.
“Scotland’s justice system has been dealing with the Lockerbie atrocity for 22 years and in every regard the due process of Scots law has been followed – in terms of the investigation, prosecution, imprisonment, rejection of the prisoner transfer application and granting of compassionate release.”
[The Tory Party in Scotland is moribund. In this year's UK general election it won one Scottish seat out of a total of fifty-nine. In the light of political crassness such as is displayed in the above statement, it is not difficult to see why.]
But the Scottish Conservative Party has chosen today to launch a further attack on the compassionate release in August 2009 of Abdelbaset Megrahi. A report in today's edition of The Herald reads in part:]
The Conservatives have renewed their attack on the decision to release the Libyan convicted of the Lockerbie bombing on the 22nd anniversary of the atrocity. (...)
Conservative justice spokesman John Lamont said yesterday: “The decision by the SNP to release the Lockerbie bomber was a bad decision, made badly.
“But, as a consequence he has spent the last 18 months with his family and friends in Libya. He has been allowed to live his final weeks and months with those he loves.
“That is something he denied his victims.” (...)
A Scottish Government spokesman said last night: “Our thoughts and sympathies are with all those affected by the events of that terrible night, but most especially the families and relatives, wherever they are in the world.
“Scotland’s justice system has been dealing with the Lockerbie atrocity for 22 years and in every regard the due process of Scots law has been followed – in terms of the investigation, prosecution, imprisonment, rejection of the prisoner transfer application and granting of compassionate release.”
[The Tory Party in Scotland is moribund. In this year's UK general election it won one Scottish seat out of a total of fifty-nine. In the light of political crassness such as is displayed in the above statement, it is not difficult to see why.]
Monday, 20 December 2010
Tell the truth over Lockerbie
[This is the headline over an article published today on the website of the Morning Star. It reads in part:]
A Scottish MSP accused the Foreign Office and other interested parties today of using legal blocks to hide evidence in a review of the conviction of the only man jailed for the Lockerbie bombing.
Christine Grahame of the Scottish National Party called for a change to legislation which has allowed the Foreign Office, Crown Office and other parties to "block" publication of a report by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission into the 2001 conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi. (...)
The SCCRC conducted a review of the conviction and found that a potential miscarriage of justice may have occurred. But the commission has been prevented from publishing its Statement of Reasons after the Foreign Office and Crown Office apparently refused permission.
Under the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (Permitted Disclosure of Information) Order 2009, interested third parties can refuse permission for disclosure of evidence they directly or indirectly provided to an investigation.
Ms Grahame told the Star that the law effectively acted as "a gagging order" and said that the Scottish government should amend it to allow publication of all the evidence in the case.
Ms Grahame has tabled a parliamentary motion arguing that, under the order: "Third parties such as the Crown Office and the Foreign Office and relevant police authorities have refused consent in writing to disclosure of information provided directly or indeed indirectly by them."
That meant, she said, that "parties with an interest in the conviction remain untested, and, as a consequence, that access to undisclosed information has been successfully blocked."
She urged the government to repeal or amend the order "in the interests of openness, accountability and justice."
Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was killed in the bombing, told MSPs at Holyrood last month: "I now believe that Scottish justice's verdict on this man is not safe, it must be re-examined.
"And until it is, the name of Scottish justice will lie in the gutter."
A Scottish government spokesperson said: "The Scottish government has always wanted to be as open and transparent as possible on this issue.
"Based on legal considerations about the most effective way of overcoming constraints of existing legislation, we are now considering primary legislation to address the issue of consent while retaining the necessary protection for any third parties potentially affected."
The Foreign Office had not responded by time of press.
A Scottish MSP accused the Foreign Office and other interested parties today of using legal blocks to hide evidence in a review of the conviction of the only man jailed for the Lockerbie bombing.
Christine Grahame of the Scottish National Party called for a change to legislation which has allowed the Foreign Office, Crown Office and other parties to "block" publication of a report by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission into the 2001 conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi. (...)
The SCCRC conducted a review of the conviction and found that a potential miscarriage of justice may have occurred. But the commission has been prevented from publishing its Statement of Reasons after the Foreign Office and Crown Office apparently refused permission.
Under the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (Permitted Disclosure of Information) Order 2009, interested third parties can refuse permission for disclosure of evidence they directly or indirectly provided to an investigation.
Ms Grahame told the Star that the law effectively acted as "a gagging order" and said that the Scottish government should amend it to allow publication of all the evidence in the case.
Ms Grahame has tabled a parliamentary motion arguing that, under the order: "Third parties such as the Crown Office and the Foreign Office and relevant police authorities have refused consent in writing to disclosure of information provided directly or indeed indirectly by them."
That meant, she said, that "parties with an interest in the conviction remain untested, and, as a consequence, that access to undisclosed information has been successfully blocked."
She urged the government to repeal or amend the order "in the interests of openness, accountability and justice."
Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was killed in the bombing, told MSPs at Holyrood last month: "I now believe that Scottish justice's verdict on this man is not safe, it must be re-examined.
"And until it is, the name of Scottish justice will lie in the gutter."
A Scottish government spokesperson said: "The Scottish government has always wanted to be as open and transparent as possible on this issue.
"Based on legal considerations about the most effective way of overcoming constraints of existing legislation, we are now considering primary legislation to address the issue of consent while retaining the necessary protection for any third parties potentially affected."
The Foreign Office had not responded by time of press.
Timeline of events leading to Megrahi's release
A useful timeline can be found here on the 24dash.com website.
Another Lockerbie bomb is set to go off
[This is the heading over an article by George Galloway on his blog on the Daily Record website. It reads as follows:]
I'm going to Libya in the first week of the new year with Mick Devine, of the Scottish-Libyan business link, and Celtic supporters champion Brian Dempsey. The priority is to win business orders for Scots companies and thus jobs for Scottish workers. But if Abdelbaset al-Megrahi is still alive and conscious, I hope to speak with him.
If not, I'm promised discussions with those in possession of the kind of evidence which will explode the real scandal.
Not that the Scottish government released Megrahi from jail but that the Crown kept Megrahi behind bars when they knew he was an innocent man.
In any case, I will be discussing these issues at the highest levels and I give the Crown Office fair notice that if I get to Holyrood, I'm going to unmask this conspiracy.
The Scottish Crown Office is in all sorts of trouble now but that's as nothing, compared to the storm brewing for them if I get elected to the Scottish Parliament in May.
There are several decisions they have made which I shall be pursuing but none is as serious as the case of Megrahi. The Scottish government took abuse for releasing him on compassionate grounds due to his imminent demise, now so imminent that even the most hardened cynic should shut up, surely.
The First Minister was even accused of seeking Libyan largesse for Scotland in return for the release now debunked by the Wikileaks revelations that Scotland turned down "a parade of goodies", as Salmond always insisted.
But the real scandal is not that he was released but that he was incarcerated for so long in the first place.
The appeal against conviction, which he was forced to withdraw for no necessary legal reason, contained material so explosive as to put even the murderous attack on the airliner into the shade.
Those who placed the bomb on board PanAm 103 were terrorists. The bombs in Megrahi's appeal all relate to the Crown Office.
I believe they knew the Libyan was innocent and he was convicted on trumped-up charges, while his country was falsely accused.
I'm going to Libya in the first week of the new year with Mick Devine, of the Scottish-Libyan business link, and Celtic supporters champion Brian Dempsey. The priority is to win business orders for Scots companies and thus jobs for Scottish workers. But if Abdelbaset al-Megrahi is still alive and conscious, I hope to speak with him.
If not, I'm promised discussions with those in possession of the kind of evidence which will explode the real scandal.
Not that the Scottish government released Megrahi from jail but that the Crown kept Megrahi behind bars when they knew he was an innocent man.
In any case, I will be discussing these issues at the highest levels and I give the Crown Office fair notice that if I get to Holyrood, I'm going to unmask this conspiracy.
The Scottish Crown Office is in all sorts of trouble now but that's as nothing, compared to the storm brewing for them if I get elected to the Scottish Parliament in May.
There are several decisions they have made which I shall be pursuing but none is as serious as the case of Megrahi. The Scottish government took abuse for releasing him on compassionate grounds due to his imminent demise, now so imminent that even the most hardened cynic should shut up, surely.
The First Minister was even accused of seeking Libyan largesse for Scotland in return for the release now debunked by the Wikileaks revelations that Scotland turned down "a parade of goodies", as Salmond always insisted.
But the real scandal is not that he was released but that he was incarcerated for so long in the first place.
The appeal against conviction, which he was forced to withdraw for no necessary legal reason, contained material so explosive as to put even the murderous attack on the airliner into the shade.
Those who placed the bomb on board PanAm 103 were terrorists. The bombs in Megrahi's appeal all relate to the Crown Office.
I believe they knew the Libyan was innocent and he was convicted on trumped-up charges, while his country was falsely accused.
Sunday, 19 December 2010
Lockerbie bomber's family set to appeal
[This is the headline over a report by Ben Borland in today's edition of the Sunday Express. It reads in part:]
Two of the Lockerbie bomber’s children are set to launch an appeal against his conviction within days of his death, the Sunday Express understands.
Ghada and Khaled al-Megrahi are determined to clear their father’s name and have been working hard behind the scenes to prepare another legal challenge in the Scottish courts.
Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, who is believed to be close to death in a coma in a Libyan hospital, dropped his second appeal shortly before his compassionate release in August 2009.
Ghada, 27, who is a qualified lawyer in Tripoli, and Khaled, 24, now plan to use the evidence gathered by his legal team, much of which has never been in the public domain before.
Legal experts said there is a much greater likelihood of an appeal being granted after death if the request comes from a member of the convicted person’s immediate family.
Both siblings, the eldest of Megrahi’s five children, spent many years in Scotland and are understood to be confident about tackling the intricacies of the legal system.
Families campaigner Jim Swire, who met the entire family when he flew to Tripoli to visit Megrahi recently, said they were determined to ensure that the “fight goes on” after his death.
“Between the two of them they know what they are going to do,” he added.
Khaled has also signed a Scottish Parliament petition calling for a new inquiry into the 1988 atrocity, which claimed 270 lives when a Pan Am passenger jet was blown up over Scotland.
Mr Swire said: “I spoke to him before he signed it and he was in favour of anything that might lead to a further inspection of the conviction of his dad. I also understand from my visit that the money set aside by Colonel Gaddafi for fighting his corner has pretty much gone. His advice to us has been to hold your horses until poor old Baset has gone.”
Robert Black, Professor Emeritus of Scots Law at the University of Edinburgh, explained Megrahi’s appeal was now “dead” and a fresh application would have to be made to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission.
“There are two tests for granting an appeal,” he said. “One, has there been a miscarriage of justice and the SCCRC has already decided that there may have been.
And two, is it in the interests of justice?
“It would be easier for the convicted man’s family to establish that an appeal is in the interests of justice than for anybody else, such as a victim’s relative like Jim Swire.” (...)
In a rare interview before Megrahi’s release, after Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill judged he had less than three months to live, both Ghada and Khaled spoke of their anger.
Khaled, who recently completed a four year IT degree at a Glasgow university, said: “We have always tried to believe in the Scottish justice system and don’t want to be let down now. Everyone in Libya believes my father is innocent and I think many here do too.”
Ghada added: “I wanted to go into law because of what happened to my father and people like him who are wrongly accused.”
[Any attempt by Mr Megrahi's family to launch a fresh appeal via the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission would, of course, have to surmount the disgraceful new hurdles erected by the Scottish Parliament in section 7 of the Criminal Procedure (Legal Assistance, Detention and Appeals) (Scotland) Act 2010 (the Cadder emergency legislation).]
Two of the Lockerbie bomber’s children are set to launch an appeal against his conviction within days of his death, the Sunday Express understands.
Ghada and Khaled al-Megrahi are determined to clear their father’s name and have been working hard behind the scenes to prepare another legal challenge in the Scottish courts.
Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, who is believed to be close to death in a coma in a Libyan hospital, dropped his second appeal shortly before his compassionate release in August 2009.
Ghada, 27, who is a qualified lawyer in Tripoli, and Khaled, 24, now plan to use the evidence gathered by his legal team, much of which has never been in the public domain before.
Legal experts said there is a much greater likelihood of an appeal being granted after death if the request comes from a member of the convicted person’s immediate family.
Both siblings, the eldest of Megrahi’s five children, spent many years in Scotland and are understood to be confident about tackling the intricacies of the legal system.
Families campaigner Jim Swire, who met the entire family when he flew to Tripoli to visit Megrahi recently, said they were determined to ensure that the “fight goes on” after his death.
“Between the two of them they know what they are going to do,” he added.
Khaled has also signed a Scottish Parliament petition calling for a new inquiry into the 1988 atrocity, which claimed 270 lives when a Pan Am passenger jet was blown up over Scotland.
Mr Swire said: “I spoke to him before he signed it and he was in favour of anything that might lead to a further inspection of the conviction of his dad. I also understand from my visit that the money set aside by Colonel Gaddafi for fighting his corner has pretty much gone. His advice to us has been to hold your horses until poor old Baset has gone.”
Robert Black, Professor Emeritus of Scots Law at the University of Edinburgh, explained Megrahi’s appeal was now “dead” and a fresh application would have to be made to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission.
“There are two tests for granting an appeal,” he said. “One, has there been a miscarriage of justice and the SCCRC has already decided that there may have been.
And two, is it in the interests of justice?
“It would be easier for the convicted man’s family to establish that an appeal is in the interests of justice than for anybody else, such as a victim’s relative like Jim Swire.” (...)
In a rare interview before Megrahi’s release, after Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill judged he had less than three months to live, both Ghada and Khaled spoke of their anger.
Khaled, who recently completed a four year IT degree at a Glasgow university, said: “We have always tried to believe in the Scottish justice system and don’t want to be let down now. Everyone in Libya believes my father is innocent and I think many here do too.”
Ghada added: “I wanted to go into law because of what happened to my father and people like him who are wrongly accused.”
[Any attempt by Mr Megrahi's family to launch a fresh appeal via the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission would, of course, have to surmount the disgraceful new hurdles erected by the Scottish Parliament in section 7 of the Criminal Procedure (Legal Assistance, Detention and Appeals) (Scotland) Act 2010 (the Cadder emergency legislation).]
Saturday, 18 December 2010
Gaddafi's threats or treats
[This is the headline over an article by John Fund on the website of The Wall Street Journal. It reads as follows:]
Despite its unsavory and reckless practices, WikiLeaks is clearing up some international mysteries—among them last year's release of the Lockerbie bomber by Scottish authorities.
At the time, Sean Connery, the actor and longtime Scottish nationalist, said that "I doubt we will ever know the full story" of why the Libyan agent who helped blow a Pan Am airliner out of the sky in 1988 was freed. Well, we now know a lot more. US diplomatic cables show that Britain was threatened and bullied into releasing the convicted Lockerbie bomber, Abdel Baset Al-Megrahi. He was finally sent home based on flimsy medical predictions that he had three months to live and should be allowed to die at home with his family. That was 16 months ago and Megrahi is still very much alive.
A cable by US diplomat Richard LeBaron reveals that Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi made "thuggish" threats to kill all trade deals with Britain and harass its embassy staff in Tripoli if no release was forthcoming. In 2008, Mr. LeBaron wrote to Washington that "The Libyans have told [Her Majesty's Government] flat out that there will be 'enormous repercussions' for the UK-Libya bilateral relationship if Megrahi's early release is not handled properly."
Although the Libyans combined their threats with an offer of "treats" for Scottish authorities in exchange for Megrahi's release, the US cables indicate that the Scots turned the offer down. British ministers weren't so honorable. When they faced international outrage over the release, they tried to deflect blame for it onto the Scots. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown hid behind the fact that Scotland has control of its own criminal justice system and said that his government "could not interfere and had no control over the final outcome."
But the cables reveal that it was British ministers who nudged Alex Salmond, the Scottish Nationalist minister, to take the political heat for releasing Megrahi. US diplomats were told by Jack Straw, who was British Justice Secretary at the time, that Megrahi might live another five years after any release, but the decision was still made to let him go.
While it's true that Britain kept its trade deals with Libya, the episode is now revealed to be another example of a democracy knuckling under to a dictator's threats. The latest revelations only embolden other dictators to use the same tactics in the future.
Despite its unsavory and reckless practices, WikiLeaks is clearing up some international mysteries—among them last year's release of the Lockerbie bomber by Scottish authorities.
At the time, Sean Connery, the actor and longtime Scottish nationalist, said that "I doubt we will ever know the full story" of why the Libyan agent who helped blow a Pan Am airliner out of the sky in 1988 was freed. Well, we now know a lot more. US diplomatic cables show that Britain was threatened and bullied into releasing the convicted Lockerbie bomber, Abdel Baset Al-Megrahi. He was finally sent home based on flimsy medical predictions that he had three months to live and should be allowed to die at home with his family. That was 16 months ago and Megrahi is still very much alive.
A cable by US diplomat Richard LeBaron reveals that Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi made "thuggish" threats to kill all trade deals with Britain and harass its embassy staff in Tripoli if no release was forthcoming. In 2008, Mr. LeBaron wrote to Washington that "The Libyans have told [Her Majesty's Government] flat out that there will be 'enormous repercussions' for the UK-Libya bilateral relationship if Megrahi's early release is not handled properly."
Although the Libyans combined their threats with an offer of "treats" for Scottish authorities in exchange for Megrahi's release, the US cables indicate that the Scots turned the offer down. British ministers weren't so honorable. When they faced international outrage over the release, they tried to deflect blame for it onto the Scots. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown hid behind the fact that Scotland has control of its own criminal justice system and said that his government "could not interfere and had no control over the final outcome."
But the cables reveal that it was British ministers who nudged Alex Salmond, the Scottish Nationalist minister, to take the political heat for releasing Megrahi. US diplomats were told by Jack Straw, who was British Justice Secretary at the time, that Megrahi might live another five years after any release, but the decision was still made to let him go.
While it's true that Britain kept its trade deals with Libya, the episode is now revealed to be another example of a democracy knuckling under to a dictator's threats. The latest revelations only embolden other dictators to use the same tactics in the future.
Friday, 17 December 2010
Compassionate release not appropriate for mass murderers
[This is the view expressed in an opinion piece by Hugh McLachlan, Professor of Law and Social Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, in today's edition of The Scotsman. It can be read -- but only by subscribers to the newspaper's premium content -- here. The following are excerpts.]
The information publicised recently by WikiLeaks regarding the release from prison of Abdelbaset Mohmed Ali al-Megrahi suggests that, all along, the Scottish Government has been telling the truth. He was not released for reasons of commercial expediency. He was released on the grounds of compassion in accordance with what were considered to be the principles and practices of Scots Law.
However, to say that in terms of the prevailing relevant rules, the decision of Kenny MacAskill, the Minister of Justice, was impeccable is not to defend the rules. (...)
... I do not find it understandable and excusable that someone who is assumed to be guilty of murdering two hundred and seventy people should be released from prison because he is terminally ill. This is a shocking injustice. The rules and procedures that lead to this outcome would appear to be wrong. At the very least, they require an elaboration and a justification.
If you murder two hundred and seventy people no punishment will be enough. You will not live long enough to serve an adequately long prison sentence no matter how long you live. That, at some stage, you have only a few months to live would not be a justification for ending that punishment. Compassion would be an appropriate motive for giving you medical treatment if you became ill but not for setting you free.
If Mr al-Megrahi was wrongly convicted, he did not deserve to be in prison. He should have been released -- but not on the grounds of compassion. He should have been released on the grounds of justice.
If, as Mr MacAskill's decision assumes, he is guilty of killing two hundred and seventy people, he deserves to be in jail whether he is terminally ill or not. His terminal illness is irrelevant to the justice of his punishment. To give him medical treatment is an appropriate compassionate response.
To release him from prison out of compassion is inappropriate. It is unethical.
[It surprises me somewhat to find a professor of law (even when combined with social sciences) ascribing the provision of medical treatment to ill prisoners to an exercise of compassion. I should have thought it was a matter of legal duty.
I am grateful to Professor McLachlan for informing me that The Scotsman misdescribed him. He is in fact Professor of Applied Philosophy in the School of Law and Social Sciences.]
The information publicised recently by WikiLeaks regarding the release from prison of Abdelbaset Mohmed Ali al-Megrahi suggests that, all along, the Scottish Government has been telling the truth. He was not released for reasons of commercial expediency. He was released on the grounds of compassion in accordance with what were considered to be the principles and practices of Scots Law.
However, to say that in terms of the prevailing relevant rules, the decision of Kenny MacAskill, the Minister of Justice, was impeccable is not to defend the rules. (...)
... I do not find it understandable and excusable that someone who is assumed to be guilty of murdering two hundred and seventy people should be released from prison because he is terminally ill. This is a shocking injustice. The rules and procedures that lead to this outcome would appear to be wrong. At the very least, they require an elaboration and a justification.
If you murder two hundred and seventy people no punishment will be enough. You will not live long enough to serve an adequately long prison sentence no matter how long you live. That, at some stage, you have only a few months to live would not be a justification for ending that punishment. Compassion would be an appropriate motive for giving you medical treatment if you became ill but not for setting you free.
If Mr al-Megrahi was wrongly convicted, he did not deserve to be in prison. He should have been released -- but not on the grounds of compassion. He should have been released on the grounds of justice.
If, as Mr MacAskill's decision assumes, he is guilty of killing two hundred and seventy people, he deserves to be in jail whether he is terminally ill or not. His terminal illness is irrelevant to the justice of his punishment. To give him medical treatment is an appropriate compassionate response.
To release him from prison out of compassion is inappropriate. It is unethical.
[It surprises me somewhat to find a professor of law (even when combined with social sciences) ascribing the provision of medical treatment to ill prisoners to an exercise of compassion. I should have thought it was a matter of legal duty.
I am grateful to Professor McLachlan for informing me that The Scotsman misdescribed him. He is in fact Professor of Applied Philosophy in the School of Law and Social Sciences.]
Gaddafi Foundation trustees concerned over Megrahi release role
[What follows is from a report in today's edition of the Financial Times.]
Saif al-Islam Gaddafi’s charity and the vehicle he has used to raise his political profile has announced an abrupt end to its advocacy of human rights and political reform, in what could represent a big setback for the son and heir apparent of the Libyan leader. (...)
In a statement late on Wednesday, the Gaddafi foundation announced it would focus on the less controversial work of delivering aid and relief to disadvantaged people primarily in sub-Saharan Africa. Saif’s role as chairman, moreover, would become honorary, with the board of trustees acting as the supreme governing authority. (...)
The Gaddafi foundation statement said the board of trustees had voiced concern that the charity’s lobbying for the release of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the only man convicted of the 1988 Lockerbie bombing, from a Scottish jail, and the delivery of aid to the Gaza Strip, had “taken on political overtones” and left the organisation open to criticism from “supporters of Israel”.
Saif al-Islam Gaddafi’s charity and the vehicle he has used to raise his political profile has announced an abrupt end to its advocacy of human rights and political reform, in what could represent a big setback for the son and heir apparent of the Libyan leader. (...)
In a statement late on Wednesday, the Gaddafi foundation announced it would focus on the less controversial work of delivering aid and relief to disadvantaged people primarily in sub-Saharan Africa. Saif’s role as chairman, moreover, would become honorary, with the board of trustees acting as the supreme governing authority. (...)
The Gaddafi foundation statement said the board of trustees had voiced concern that the charity’s lobbying for the release of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the only man convicted of the 1988 Lockerbie bombing, from a Scottish jail, and the delivery of aid to the Gaza Strip, had “taken on political overtones” and left the organisation open to criticism from “supporters of Israel”.
Wednesday, 15 December 2010
Gauci on al-Megrahi: Part II
The second part of Caustic Logic's video on Tony Gauci's "identification" of Abdelbaset Megrahi at the Zeist trial can be viewed here on The Lockerbie Divide blog.
Monday, 13 December 2010
Video: Gauci on al-Megrahi
This is the heading over a post on Caustic Logic's blog The Lockerbie Divide. It is subtitled "A little bit like exactly" like a non-identification. The post consists of the first part of a two-part video setting out the evidence of Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci that the Zeist court regarded as justifying the conclusion that Abdelbaset Megrahi was the purchaser of the items that surrounded the bomb that destroyed Pan Am 103. The perverseness of this conclusion was one of the reasons founded on by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission in deciding that Megrahi's conviction might have amounted to a miscarriage of justice.
Scottish Parliament motion regarding SCCRC disclosure
[What follows is the text of a motion just tabled in the Scottish Parliament by the SNP's Christine Grahame MSP.]
*S3M-7586 Christine Grahame: SCCRC, the Megrahi Conviction and SSI 2009/448 Article 2(b)—That the Parliament considers but is not surprised that, in terms of article 2(b) of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (Permitted Disclosure of Information) Order 2009, which came into force in February 2010, third parties such as the Crown Office and the Foreign Office and relevant police authorities have refused consent in writing to disclosure of information provided directly or indeed indirectly by them, that parties with an interest in the conviction remain untested, and, as a consequence, that access to undisclosed information has been successfully blocked and therefore urges the Scottish Government to either repeal or amend SSI 2009/448 to remove article 2(b) in the interests of openness, accountability and justice.
[Ms Grahame has also submitted a written question in the following terms:]
S3W-38294 Christine Grahame: To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will introduce a further statutory instrument amending the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (Permitted Disclosure of Information) Order 2009 to delete Article 2(b).
Due for answer Tuesday, January 18, 2011
*S3M-7586 Christine Grahame: SCCRC, the Megrahi Conviction and SSI 2009/448 Article 2(b)—That the Parliament considers but is not surprised that, in terms of article 2(b) of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (Permitted Disclosure of Information) Order 2009, which came into force in February 2010, third parties such as the Crown Office and the Foreign Office and relevant police authorities have refused consent in writing to disclosure of information provided directly or indeed indirectly by them, that parties with an interest in the conviction remain untested, and, as a consequence, that access to undisclosed information has been successfully blocked and therefore urges the Scottish Government to either repeal or amend SSI 2009/448 to remove article 2(b) in the interests of openness, accountability and justice.
[Ms Grahame has also submitted a written question in the following terms:]
S3W-38294 Christine Grahame: To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will introduce a further statutory instrument amending the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (Permitted Disclosure of Information) Order 2009 to delete Article 2(b).
Due for answer Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Sunday, 12 December 2010
Plan for Blair to block hero’s burial for Megrahi
[This is the headline over a report in today's edition of The Sunday Times. It can be accessed -- but only by those who have subscribed -- here. The report reads in part:]
The Foreign Office fears that Gadaffi intends to hold a high-profile ceremony to mark Megrahi’s imminent death from prostate cancer
Gordon Brown's government planned to use Tony Blair as a “lever of influence” to persuade Libya not to give the Lockerbie bomber a hero’s funeral, leaked documents reveal.
The Foreign Office fears that Colonel Muammar Gadaffi, who has declared Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi innocent of Britain’s worst terrorist attack, intends to hold a high-profile ceremony to mark his imminent death from prostate cancer.
Sources close to Megrahi’s family have claimed he is now in a coma and expected to die within days — although Scottish officials insist that he had been well enough to contact them recently.
David Cameron’s administration has warned the Libyans that a state funeral for the man given compassionate release from a Scottish prison last year would be deeply offensive to relatives of the 270 people who died when Pan Am flight 103 was blown up above Lockerbie on December 21, 1988. (...)
Last week, a secret US government cable, published by WikiLeaks, described how the Foreign Office regarded Brown’s predecessor as its best hope to persuade Gadaffi not to hold a state funeral for Megrahi. The memo, dated February 25, reported that Philippa Saunders, the incoming Foreign Office director for north Africa, had told US diplomats that Britain regarded Libya’s plans for Megrahi’s funeral as “a major concern and one that HMG [Her Majesty’s government] continues to raise regularly”. It said the British embassy was “engaged in an effort to identify all possible UK levers of influence with Tripoli”, although it warned, “unfortunately, there aren’t too many”.
Saunders, the cable said, singled out Blair as someone who night be able to intervene. It added: “The effort partially originated from the assumption there will be maybe a 48-hour window if we’re lucky between Megrahi’s eventual death and a funeral and the [Foreign Office] wants to ensure HMG is in a position to act quickly.”
Blair helped rehabilitate Gadaffi’s regime in the eyes of the West, and secured oil and defence deals for British firms during talks with the Libyan leader in 2007 that were designed to pave the way for Megrahi’s release. Earlier this year the dictator’s son claimed that Blair had become an adviser to his father, securing a consultancy role with a state fund that manages Libya’s £65 billion oil wealth, although Blair’s office has denied this. In an interview, Saif Gadaffi described Blair as a “personal family friend” who had visited Libya “many, many times” since leaving Downing Street.
Last year Brown said he had been “angry” and “repulsed” by the triumphalist scenes in Tripoli when Megrahi was given a hero’s welcome after being freed. Brown said he had written to Gadaffi asking him to ensure that Megrahi was given a low-key reception. President Barack Obama and US relatives of the victims of the bomb also condemned the scenes.
In August it emerged that Cameron’s government had warned Libya that any celebration of the first anniversary of Megrahi’s release would be an affront to the victims’ families.
Foreign Office sources confirmed that British officials in Tripoli had urged Libya to show restraint with Megrahi’s funeral. A senior Foreign Office source said: “Given the events surrounding his return last year, our position would be that any repeat along those lines would be very insensitive.” (...)
The Foreign Office fears that Gadaffi intends to hold a high-profile ceremony to mark Megrahi’s imminent death from prostate cancer
Gordon Brown's government planned to use Tony Blair as a “lever of influence” to persuade Libya not to give the Lockerbie bomber a hero’s funeral, leaked documents reveal.
The Foreign Office fears that Colonel Muammar Gadaffi, who has declared Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi innocent of Britain’s worst terrorist attack, intends to hold a high-profile ceremony to mark his imminent death from prostate cancer.
Sources close to Megrahi’s family have claimed he is now in a coma and expected to die within days — although Scottish officials insist that he had been well enough to contact them recently.
David Cameron’s administration has warned the Libyans that a state funeral for the man given compassionate release from a Scottish prison last year would be deeply offensive to relatives of the 270 people who died when Pan Am flight 103 was blown up above Lockerbie on December 21, 1988. (...)
Last week, a secret US government cable, published by WikiLeaks, described how the Foreign Office regarded Brown’s predecessor as its best hope to persuade Gadaffi not to hold a state funeral for Megrahi. The memo, dated February 25, reported that Philippa Saunders, the incoming Foreign Office director for north Africa, had told US diplomats that Britain regarded Libya’s plans for Megrahi’s funeral as “a major concern and one that HMG [Her Majesty’s government] continues to raise regularly”. It said the British embassy was “engaged in an effort to identify all possible UK levers of influence with Tripoli”, although it warned, “unfortunately, there aren’t too many”.
Saunders, the cable said, singled out Blair as someone who night be able to intervene. It added: “The effort partially originated from the assumption there will be maybe a 48-hour window if we’re lucky between Megrahi’s eventual death and a funeral and the [Foreign Office] wants to ensure HMG is in a position to act quickly.”
Blair helped rehabilitate Gadaffi’s regime in the eyes of the West, and secured oil and defence deals for British firms during talks with the Libyan leader in 2007 that were designed to pave the way for Megrahi’s release. Earlier this year the dictator’s son claimed that Blair had become an adviser to his father, securing a consultancy role with a state fund that manages Libya’s £65 billion oil wealth, although Blair’s office has denied this. In an interview, Saif Gadaffi described Blair as a “personal family friend” who had visited Libya “many, many times” since leaving Downing Street.
Last year Brown said he had been “angry” and “repulsed” by the triumphalist scenes in Tripoli when Megrahi was given a hero’s welcome after being freed. Brown said he had written to Gadaffi asking him to ensure that Megrahi was given a low-key reception. President Barack Obama and US relatives of the victims of the bomb also condemned the scenes.
In August it emerged that Cameron’s government had warned Libya that any celebration of the first anniversary of Megrahi’s release would be an affront to the victims’ families.
Foreign Office sources confirmed that British officials in Tripoli had urged Libya to show restraint with Megrahi’s funeral. A senior Foreign Office source said: “Given the events surrounding his return last year, our position would be that any repeat along those lines would be very insensitive.” (...)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)