[This is the headline over a report published this afternoon on The Guardian website. It reads in part:]
A British lawyer representing victims of the Lockerbie bombing is meeting Libya's revolutionary leaders in pursuit of evidence a senior rebel claims to have that Muammar Gaddafi ordered the attack.
Jason McCue, head of the Libya Victims Initiative, is also seeking "an apology from the Libyan people" for the blowing up of the Pan Am flight in 1988 and the country's supply of explosives used in IRA attacks.
McCue said he had been invited to Benghazi by the chairman of its interim governing council, Mustafa Abdul Jalil, who served as Gaddafi's justice minister. Jalil has said publicly that he has evidence of the Libyan leader's involvement in the Lockerbie bombing but has not elaborated further.
McCue is also seeking redress for 150 British families who were victims of IRA attacks.
"There are evidential issues, particularly on Lockerbie. Jalil has made indications that he has evidence linking Gaddafi to it. We've fought for years and never had that information. It's about getting that evidence [and] getting apologies which are worth their weight in gold to the victims," he said.
McCue is ruling out new litigation for now, saying that would be the wrong time to sue individuals such as Moussa Koussa, Gadaffi's foreign minister who has defected to Britain and who allegedly established Libya's relationship with the IRA. (...)
McCue said that he believed an apology to victims of terrorist attacks sponsored by Libya would help establish the revolutionary leadership as bona fide supporters of human rights.
"The IRA victims have never had an apology off the Gaddafi regime ... Likewise the Lockerbie families have never had an unequivocal apology. It's always been tongue-tied," he said.
"The Libyan people, it is so important for them to express their sorrow for what that regime did ... and it's important for the international victims to hear that. I think that is absolutely essential."
Asked if that should mean that the British people should apologise to Libyans for helping to prop up Gaddafi following the rapprochement with the west in recent years, including the training of his military, McCue said: "I know that the victims I'm representing spoke out very loudly against that rapprochement."
[I was, of course, aware of Mr McCue in the context of the campaign for compensation for victims of IRA attacks involving Libyan-supplied semtex. I was not aware that he represented any relatives of those killed at Lockerbie.]
Monday, 4 April 2011
Questioning Moussa Koussa
[The following are excerpts from a report published this afternoon on the Channel 4 News website:]
The father of a victim of the Lockerbie bombing has told Channel 4 News that he has approached Scottish police with a list of questions about Moussa Koussa s involvement in the atrocity.
Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was among the 270 killed when Pan Am Flight 103 exploded in 1988, does not believe that the one man convicted over the bombing – Abdelbaset al-Megrahi– was involved.
However, he does think that Moussa Koussa - who defected last week from Muammar Gaddafi’s regime - knows crucial details about the event and he has a number of questions to put to him; preferably in person or through theCrown Office in Scotland. Dumfries and Galloway police have also asked to interview Koussa.
Koussa was head of Gaddafi's intelligence agency from 1994 and was a senior intelligence agent at the time of the Lockerbie bombing. He later went on to become Foreign Minister by the time of his defection.
"I have three main questions to put to Mr Koussa," Dr Swire told Channel 4 News.
"One: was he and the Libyan Government intimately involved in the atrocity. Two: if not, why did Megrahi submit himself for trial. And three: if Libya was involved, why was it involved?"
Dr Swire had long believed that Libya’s only role in the bombing was to supply Semtex, the plastic explosive used in the attack, to the perpetrators. Instead, he thinks that Iran and Syria masterminded the actrocity. Dr Swire hopes that if Mr Koussa is forthcoming with further details about Libya's involvement, or lack thereof, it could lead to Megrahi's exoneration. (...)
"I'm not vengeful, I just want to know the truth," Dr Swire said. "At the very least, Mr Koussa will know if Libya was involved, if it was solely behind the attack. If he can offer or point to a way of proving that Libya was, in fact, not involved, the investigation into Lockerbie would take a very dramatic turn.
"But I accect that if Mr Koussa does supply any information it will have to be considered in the context that it is presented: he'll be talking in a situation where he'll be trying to save his own skin because he's reneged on Gaddafi and thrown himself on the mercy of the West; and so what he will say, no doubt will be likely to blacken the regime he's just left and I think anything he says should be taken with great caution."
The father of a victim of the Lockerbie bombing has told Channel 4 News that he has approached Scottish police with a list of questions about Moussa Koussa s involvement in the atrocity.
Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was among the 270 killed when Pan Am Flight 103 exploded in 1988, does not believe that the one man convicted over the bombing – Abdelbaset al-Megrahi– was involved.
However, he does think that Moussa Koussa - who defected last week from Muammar Gaddafi’s regime - knows crucial details about the event and he has a number of questions to put to him; preferably in person or through theCrown Office in Scotland. Dumfries and Galloway police have also asked to interview Koussa.
Koussa was head of Gaddafi's intelligence agency from 1994 and was a senior intelligence agent at the time of the Lockerbie bombing. He later went on to become Foreign Minister by the time of his defection.
"I have three main questions to put to Mr Koussa," Dr Swire told Channel 4 News.
"One: was he and the Libyan Government intimately involved in the atrocity. Two: if not, why did Megrahi submit himself for trial. And three: if Libya was involved, why was it involved?"
Dr Swire had long believed that Libya’s only role in the bombing was to supply Semtex, the plastic explosive used in the attack, to the perpetrators. Instead, he thinks that Iran and Syria masterminded the actrocity. Dr Swire hopes that if Mr Koussa is forthcoming with further details about Libya's involvement, or lack thereof, it could lead to Megrahi's exoneration. (...)
"I'm not vengeful, I just want to know the truth," Dr Swire said. "At the very least, Mr Koussa will know if Libya was involved, if it was solely behind the attack. If he can offer or point to a way of proving that Libya was, in fact, not involved, the investigation into Lockerbie would take a very dramatic turn.
"But I accect that if Mr Koussa does supply any information it will have to be considered in the context that it is presented: he'll be talking in a situation where he'll be trying to save his own skin because he's reneged on Gaddafi and thrown himself on the mercy of the West; and so what he will say, no doubt will be likely to blacken the regime he's just left and I think anything he says should be taken with great caution."
Defection of Moussa Koussa can only bring good
[This is the heading over three letters published in today's edition of The Herald. They read as follows:]
The defection of Muammar Gaddafi’s foreign minister (...) may be a case of a rat deserting a sinking ship, prematurely.
When Moussa Koussa baled out, the rebel forces were at the gates of Sirtre, Gaddafi’s home town. Had that fallen it would have been game over for Gaddafi.
We should, though, welcome the junking of Mr Koussa’s loyalty to the colonel for the light he might shed on the Lockerbie bombing for which he was allegedly responsible.If the allegation has merit then the UK and US will have a casus belli against the colonel himself, who must have given the order.
On the other hand, Mr Koussa may share the view of the US Defense Intelligence Agency and other intelligence bureaux around the globe, that the bombing of Pan Am 103 was ordered by Iran using a Syrian-based proxy, the PFLP-GC. In which case, a can of worms inside a Pandora’s box is opened; not least for Scottish politicians now on the election stump.
Thomas McLaughlin
The French Napoleonic justice system identified Gaddafi’s brother [-in-law] Abdullah Senoussi as the main perpetrator of the UTA aircraft bombing which followed Lockerbie, but Mr Koussa was not found to have been a perpetrator.
The Scottish system of justice had nothing to say in the Lockerbie case about any Libyan other than the two men, indicted by them and presented for trial, Al Amin Khalifa Fhima and Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi.
The French reaction underlines the importance of Scottish investigators having access to Mr Koussa to find out whether he can help with their claimed active and ongoing criminal investigation into the Lockerbie tragedy.
If the profound doubts many of us have over the conviction of Megrahi were to be supported by Mr Koussa’s contribution, it might finally galvanise the Scots into examining at last why their Scottish Criminal Case Review Commission, after studying the case for three years, came to the conclusion that the Zeist trial might have been a miscarriage of justice.
At the elections next month, voters might like to consider which candidates are most likely to support sweeping reforms to their criminal justice system, and vote for them.
Meanwhile Mr Koussa has not been accused (except in the US) over either atrocity, and his presence here, if he is treated with courtesy, may encourage others to defect.
Dr Jim Swire
Why do Scottish prosecutors insist on ignoring what is undoubtedly the only independent report on the case against Megrahi, and on taking serious steps to ensure the report is never published? The SCCRC found six grounds to suggest a miscarriage of justice may have occurred at the original trial.
Those findings make up a report which all of us should be free to read, yet we have been denied this right. Politicians do not have the right to interfere with our justice system in order to prevent uncomfortable truths from being exposed about particular cases, and nor does the judiciary have the right to delay the hearing of appeals related to those cases. Yet it has happened in this case.
Consider some of those truths: the US paid two witnesses, the Gauci brothers, $3 million for testimony. In fact, let’s stop right there. Had the US told the Scottish court at Zeist that it intended to pay such vast sums to any witness in that trial, those witnesses would have been rejected immediately. Scots law would have deemed it bribery.
Let us not rely on Mr Koussa. Let us begin with the SCCRC report. That, at least, is independent. It was almost four years in the making and cost a fortune. It should not be wasted.
Mrs J Greenhorn
The defection of Muammar Gaddafi’s foreign minister (...) may be a case of a rat deserting a sinking ship, prematurely.
When Moussa Koussa baled out, the rebel forces were at the gates of Sirtre, Gaddafi’s home town. Had that fallen it would have been game over for Gaddafi.
We should, though, welcome the junking of Mr Koussa’s loyalty to the colonel for the light he might shed on the Lockerbie bombing for which he was allegedly responsible.If the allegation has merit then the UK and US will have a casus belli against the colonel himself, who must have given the order.
On the other hand, Mr Koussa may share the view of the US Defense Intelligence Agency and other intelligence bureaux around the globe, that the bombing of Pan Am 103 was ordered by Iran using a Syrian-based proxy, the PFLP-GC. In which case, a can of worms inside a Pandora’s box is opened; not least for Scottish politicians now on the election stump.
Thomas McLaughlin
The French Napoleonic justice system identified Gaddafi’s brother [-in-law] Abdullah Senoussi as the main perpetrator of the UTA aircraft bombing which followed Lockerbie, but Mr Koussa was not found to have been a perpetrator.
The Scottish system of justice had nothing to say in the Lockerbie case about any Libyan other than the two men, indicted by them and presented for trial, Al Amin Khalifa Fhima and Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi.
The French reaction underlines the importance of Scottish investigators having access to Mr Koussa to find out whether he can help with their claimed active and ongoing criminal investigation into the Lockerbie tragedy.
If the profound doubts many of us have over the conviction of Megrahi were to be supported by Mr Koussa’s contribution, it might finally galvanise the Scots into examining at last why their Scottish Criminal Case Review Commission, after studying the case for three years, came to the conclusion that the Zeist trial might have been a miscarriage of justice.
At the elections next month, voters might like to consider which candidates are most likely to support sweeping reforms to their criminal justice system, and vote for them.
Meanwhile Mr Koussa has not been accused (except in the US) over either atrocity, and his presence here, if he is treated with courtesy, may encourage others to defect.
Dr Jim Swire
Why do Scottish prosecutors insist on ignoring what is undoubtedly the only independent report on the case against Megrahi, and on taking serious steps to ensure the report is never published? The SCCRC found six grounds to suggest a miscarriage of justice may have occurred at the original trial.
Those findings make up a report which all of us should be free to read, yet we have been denied this right. Politicians do not have the right to interfere with our justice system in order to prevent uncomfortable truths from being exposed about particular cases, and nor does the judiciary have the right to delay the hearing of appeals related to those cases. Yet it has happened in this case.
Consider some of those truths: the US paid two witnesses, the Gauci brothers, $3 million for testimony. In fact, let’s stop right there. Had the US told the Scottish court at Zeist that it intended to pay such vast sums to any witness in that trial, those witnesses would have been rejected immediately. Scots law would have deemed it bribery.
Let us not rely on Mr Koussa. Let us begin with the SCCRC report. That, at least, is independent. It was almost four years in the making and cost a fortune. It should not be wasted.
Mrs J Greenhorn
Moussa Koussa and the Scottish police and prosecutors
[The following is from a report in The Independent today:]
Libya's acting foreign minister flew into Athens last night on a mission from Muammar Gaddafi which his Greek government hosts said meant the regime was now seeking an end to the fighting.
Disilllusioned with what he sees as the betrayal by France, Britian and Italy because of the NATO-led military intervention, the Libyan leader may see Greece—with which he has long enjoyed good relations—as a possible diplomatic conduit to the West.
After Abdelati Obeidi met Prime Minister George Papandreou, Mr Obeidi's Greek counterpart, Dimitri Droutsas, said last night: "It seems that the Libyan authorities are seeking a solution." Though there were few details of what, if anything, the regime is proposing, Mr Papandreou has been in touch with Western governments over the past few days. Mr Obeidi is expected to travel on to Malta and Turkey. [RB: An article on the Aljazeera website on the Obeidi mission can be read here.]
Meanwhile, Scottish officials have arrived in London to question Libya's former foreign minister, Moussa Koussa, on what he knows about the Lockerbie bombing. The interview, which may take place today, comes as MPs and families of victims of the attack demand that Mr Koussa should not be granted immunity from prosecution, even if there have been attempts to encourage others in the Gaddafi regime to defect.
Despite reports that Mr Koussa is named in court documents as overseeing Libya's supply of Semtex explosive to the Provisional IRA, British officials will seek to delay any legal moves against him, arguing that the priority is to oust Colonel Gaddafi.
[The other UK media that I have been able to access online go no further than to state that Scottish officials will today discuss with UK Foreign Office officials the possibility of interviewing Moussa Koussa. There is no suggestion that any such interview will take place today or, indeed, any time soon. For example, the report on the BBC News website can be read here; that on the Sky News website can be read here; that in The Scotsman (which is misleadingly headlined) can be read here; and the Press Association news agency report here.
However, the report in the Daily Record contains the following:]
A young Scottish prosecutor is leading efforts to question the high-profile Libyan defector Musa Kusa over the Lockerbie bombing.
Lindsey Miller, head of the Crown Office Serious and Organised Crime Division, has been liaising with families of the Lockerbie victims and wrote to them promising to pursue Gaddafi's former spy chief.
Lawyers and police could start interviewing Kusa today.
Miller, 39, is the senior procurator fiscal heading the investigation into the terrorist attack on Pan Am flight 103 in 1988 that killed 270 people.
In an email sent to relatives of the victims after Kusa arrived in Britain, Miller said her staff had notified the Foreign Office that "we wish to interview [Kusa] regarding any information he may have concerning the bombing of Pan Am flight 103."
She added that the bomb probe "remains open and we will pursue all relevant lines of inquiry in conjunction with our US counterparts". [RB: Regrettably, the Scottish police and prosecutors have a very narrow concept of what is "relevant" -- only material that supports the Malta-Frankfurt-Heathrow scenario.]
Representatives of the Crown Office and Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary are to meet Foreign Office officials today to discuss access to the Libyan foreign minister.
Last night, Scottish justice minister Kenny MacAskill said: "They'll be seeking to interview him tomorrow.
"It's not for me to interfere with due process here. I have to stand back and leave that to the relevant authorities, but they've been there waiting in London since Friday." (...)
Foreign Secretary William Hague yesterday gave the green light to the Crown Office after denying there would be an amnesty deal with Kusa if he helped topple Gaddafi.
Hague said: "It is a good thing, of course, where the Crown Office in Scotland wish to talk to him about what's happened in the past such as at Lockerbie.
"My officials are discussing with the Crown Office how to go about that. That's not a bad thing either - we want more information about past events."
Hague insisted there is no deal with Kusa. He said: "The Prime Minister and I have made clear there is no immunity from prosecution, there will be no immunity, he hasn't asked for that, there isn't a deal."
MacAskill added: "I welcome the commitment of the Foreign Secretary to allow them access and I hope that this provides further clarity on the Lockerbie atrocity."
Libya's acting foreign minister flew into Athens last night on a mission from Muammar Gaddafi which his Greek government hosts said meant the regime was now seeking an end to the fighting.
Disilllusioned with what he sees as the betrayal by France, Britian and Italy because of the NATO-led military intervention, the Libyan leader may see Greece—with which he has long enjoyed good relations—as a possible diplomatic conduit to the West.
After Abdelati Obeidi met Prime Minister George Papandreou, Mr Obeidi's Greek counterpart, Dimitri Droutsas, said last night: "It seems that the Libyan authorities are seeking a solution." Though there were few details of what, if anything, the regime is proposing, Mr Papandreou has been in touch with Western governments over the past few days. Mr Obeidi is expected to travel on to Malta and Turkey. [RB: An article on the Aljazeera website on the Obeidi mission can be read here.]
Meanwhile, Scottish officials have arrived in London to question Libya's former foreign minister, Moussa Koussa, on what he knows about the Lockerbie bombing. The interview, which may take place today, comes as MPs and families of victims of the attack demand that Mr Koussa should not be granted immunity from prosecution, even if there have been attempts to encourage others in the Gaddafi regime to defect.
Despite reports that Mr Koussa is named in court documents as overseeing Libya's supply of Semtex explosive to the Provisional IRA, British officials will seek to delay any legal moves against him, arguing that the priority is to oust Colonel Gaddafi.
[The other UK media that I have been able to access online go no further than to state that Scottish officials will today discuss with UK Foreign Office officials the possibility of interviewing Moussa Koussa. There is no suggestion that any such interview will take place today or, indeed, any time soon. For example, the report on the BBC News website can be read here; that on the Sky News website can be read here; that in The Scotsman (which is misleadingly headlined) can be read here; and the Press Association news agency report here.
However, the report in the Daily Record contains the following:]
A young Scottish prosecutor is leading efforts to question the high-profile Libyan defector Musa Kusa over the Lockerbie bombing.
Lindsey Miller, head of the Crown Office Serious and Organised Crime Division, has been liaising with families of the Lockerbie victims and wrote to them promising to pursue Gaddafi's former spy chief.
Lawyers and police could start interviewing Kusa today.
Miller, 39, is the senior procurator fiscal heading the investigation into the terrorist attack on Pan Am flight 103 in 1988 that killed 270 people.
In an email sent to relatives of the victims after Kusa arrived in Britain, Miller said her staff had notified the Foreign Office that "we wish to interview [Kusa] regarding any information he may have concerning the bombing of Pan Am flight 103."
She added that the bomb probe "remains open and we will pursue all relevant lines of inquiry in conjunction with our US counterparts". [RB: Regrettably, the Scottish police and prosecutors have a very narrow concept of what is "relevant" -- only material that supports the Malta-Frankfurt-Heathrow scenario.]
Representatives of the Crown Office and Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary are to meet Foreign Office officials today to discuss access to the Libyan foreign minister.
Last night, Scottish justice minister Kenny MacAskill said: "They'll be seeking to interview him tomorrow.
"It's not for me to interfere with due process here. I have to stand back and leave that to the relevant authorities, but they've been there waiting in London since Friday." (...)
Foreign Secretary William Hague yesterday gave the green light to the Crown Office after denying there would be an amnesty deal with Kusa if he helped topple Gaddafi.
Hague said: "It is a good thing, of course, where the Crown Office in Scotland wish to talk to him about what's happened in the past such as at Lockerbie.
"My officials are discussing with the Crown Office how to go about that. That's not a bad thing either - we want more information about past events."
Hague insisted there is no deal with Kusa. He said: "The Prime Minister and I have made clear there is no immunity from prosecution, there will be no immunity, he hasn't asked for that, there isn't a deal."
MacAskill added: "I welcome the commitment of the Foreign Secretary to allow them access and I hope that this provides further clarity on the Lockerbie atrocity."
Sunday, 3 April 2011
Questions for Koussa
[In an article by foreign editor David Pratt in today's edition of the Sunday Herald, Dr Jim Swire talks about what the Scottish police and prosecutors should ask Moussa Koussa (if they ever get access to him). The following are excerpts:]
Scottish prosecutors and police are due to meet Foreign Office officials tomorrow to discuss access to the high-profile Libyan defector and former foreign minister Moussa Koussa. (...)
Speaking to the Sunday Herald, Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died in the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, said he was pleased that Koussa had arrived in the UK but warned that difficulties lay ahead.
“He certainly knows a lot. A problem will be interpreting what he says. It will be difficult to accept whatever information he gives. But he is a potential source for vital information,” said Swire. He also confirmed his own lawyers were seeking to question Koussa. Asked about the enquiries Swire’s legal team might put to the Libyan, he said that there were three categories of questions: Why convicted Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Mohmed Ali al-Megrahi was surrendered in the first place? [Whether] the regime was involved in the Lockerbie plot? How did they carry it out?
Swire said: “He [Koussa] will know the answers to these conundrums. Whether he talks about them, I don’t know. We have to be very careful in interpreting everything he says. He has a lot to lose if he gets it wrong. He will be a target for expatriate Libyans.”
He also emphasised the need for Scottish police and prosecutors to question Koussa, saying it was important if they were to “maintain the appearance of an ongoing investigation”. He added: “The Scots have major problems now. A court found a man guilty when they shouldn’t have done so. That causes problems for a lot of people in the Scottish judicial hierarchy, many of whom have gone from being junior at the time of Lockerbie to being kingpins in the system. So if this case gets blown open by Moussa Koussa, they have careers to lose.”
Scottish prosecutors and police are due to meet Foreign Office officials tomorrow to discuss access to the high-profile Libyan defector and former foreign minister Moussa Koussa. (...)
Speaking to the Sunday Herald, Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died in the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, said he was pleased that Koussa had arrived in the UK but warned that difficulties lay ahead.
“He certainly knows a lot. A problem will be interpreting what he says. It will be difficult to accept whatever information he gives. But he is a potential source for vital information,” said Swire. He also confirmed his own lawyers were seeking to question Koussa. Asked about the enquiries Swire’s legal team might put to the Libyan, he said that there were three categories of questions: Why convicted Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Mohmed Ali al-Megrahi was surrendered in the first place? [Whether] the regime was involved in the Lockerbie plot? How did they carry it out?
Swire said: “He [Koussa] will know the answers to these conundrums. Whether he talks about them, I don’t know. We have to be very careful in interpreting everything he says. He has a lot to lose if he gets it wrong. He will be a target for expatriate Libyans.”
He also emphasised the need for Scottish police and prosecutors to question Koussa, saying it was important if they were to “maintain the appearance of an ongoing investigation”. He added: “The Scots have major problems now. A court found a man guilty when they shouldn’t have done so. That causes problems for a lot of people in the Scottish judicial hierarchy, many of whom have gone from being junior at the time of Lockerbie to being kingpins in the system. So if this case gets blown open by Moussa Koussa, they have careers to lose.”
Libya: Gaddafi official Abdelati Obeidi 'leaves Libya'
[This is the headline over a report published this afternoon on the BBC News website. It reads in part:]
An official from Muammar Gaddafi's embattled government has left Libya and is said to have flown to Athens.
There was no immediate official comment on the departure of Abdelati Obeidi, a deputy foreign minister, whose car was seen crossing into Tunisia.
A security source at Tunisia's Djerba airport told Reuters that Mr Obeidi had flown to the Greek capital.
A Greek government source said the official had come to deliver a message from Colonel Gaddafi, Reuters said. (...)
Mr Obeidi accompanied the minister [Moussa Koussa] to Djerba but returned to Libya on that occasion while Mr Koussa flew on to London, AFP news agency reports.
At the foreign ministry, Mr Obeidi is responsible for European affairs.
[Abdel Ati al-Obeidi has been the chairman of the Libyan government's "Lockerbie Committee" since at least 1993. He has held over the years various posts in the Libyan regime, including Head of State; Prime Minister; Foreign Minister; Ambassador to various countries, including Italy; and Colonel Gaddafi's chef de cabinet. It would surprise me somewhat if his absence from Libya were other than temporary.]
An official from Muammar Gaddafi's embattled government has left Libya and is said to have flown to Athens.
There was no immediate official comment on the departure of Abdelati Obeidi, a deputy foreign minister, whose car was seen crossing into Tunisia.
A security source at Tunisia's Djerba airport told Reuters that Mr Obeidi had flown to the Greek capital.
A Greek government source said the official had come to deliver a message from Colonel Gaddafi, Reuters said. (...)
Mr Obeidi accompanied the minister [Moussa Koussa] to Djerba but returned to Libya on that occasion while Mr Koussa flew on to London, AFP news agency reports.
At the foreign ministry, Mr Obeidi is responsible for European affairs.
[Abdel Ati al-Obeidi has been the chairman of the Libyan government's "Lockerbie Committee" since at least 1993. He has held over the years various posts in the Libyan regime, including Head of State; Prime Minister; Foreign Minister; Ambassador to various countries, including Italy; and Colonel Gaddafi's chef de cabinet. It would surprise me somewhat if his absence from Libya were other than temporary.]
Libya: William Hague defends giving asylum to controversial minister
[This is the headline over a report just published on The Telegraph website. It reads in part:]
Foreign Secretary William Hague has defended giving refuge to Libyan henchman Moussa Koussa amid claims that the controversial minister may be linked to the Lockerbie bombing and other terrorist atrocities.
Foreign Secretary William Hague said he had not met Moussa Koussa personally since his defection, but had spoken to him briefly.
"I welcomed the fact that he had left the Gaddafi regime, I thought that was the right thing to do," Mr Hague told the BBC's Andrew Marr show.
"I asked him to have discussions with my officials, which is indeed what he is now doing."
Mr Hague admitted allowing Mr Koussa to take refuge in the UK raised "issues", but it had been the "right" thing to do. He stressed the ex-foreign minister would not be offered any immunity from prosecution.
"I think that when someone like that says they want to get out it would be quite wrong to say no, you have got to stay there," he added. (...)
"The Crown Office in Scotland want to talk to him about what has happened in the past, such as Lockerbie," he added. "My officials are discussing with the Crown Office tomorrow how to go about that.
"That is not a bad thing either. We want more information about past events." (...)
Scottish prosecutors said on Friday they wanted to interview Libya's former foreign minister about the 1988 Lockerbie bombing.
Official documents released in February as part of Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O'Donnell's review of the release of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi show the pivotal role Koussa played in the Lockerbie bomber's return to Libya. Koussa is described in one Foreign Office email as the man "whom Gaddafi has tasked with securing Megrahi's return".
However, Government sources insist that Moussa Koussa is not being treated as a "defector" and should not be seen as a "suspect" for past Libyan crimes.
Scottish police and prosectutors will meet with Foreign Office officials tomorrow to discuss the situation.
[A report just published on The First Post website contains the following:]
The latest Government utterances on Koussa stress that he has not defected. A government source told the Sunday Telegraph: "He is not a defector, he has not joined the [Libyan] opposition and he has not joined us.
"He is somebody who has left Col Gaddafi's government after a lifetime working for him. It was an enormously life-changing decision for him."
According to many observers, the Government is taking a 'softly, softly' approach. The message that Koussa is "not a defector" and has "not joined us" is aimed squarely at other Libyan officials who might be teetering on the edge of turning their backs on Gaddafi's faltering regime.
Foreign Secretary William Hague has defended giving refuge to Libyan henchman Moussa Koussa amid claims that the controversial minister may be linked to the Lockerbie bombing and other terrorist atrocities.
Foreign Secretary William Hague said he had not met Moussa Koussa personally since his defection, but had spoken to him briefly.
"I welcomed the fact that he had left the Gaddafi regime, I thought that was the right thing to do," Mr Hague told the BBC's Andrew Marr show.
"I asked him to have discussions with my officials, which is indeed what he is now doing."
Mr Hague admitted allowing Mr Koussa to take refuge in the UK raised "issues", but it had been the "right" thing to do. He stressed the ex-foreign minister would not be offered any immunity from prosecution.
"I think that when someone like that says they want to get out it would be quite wrong to say no, you have got to stay there," he added. (...)
"The Crown Office in Scotland want to talk to him about what has happened in the past, such as Lockerbie," he added. "My officials are discussing with the Crown Office tomorrow how to go about that.
"That is not a bad thing either. We want more information about past events." (...)
Scottish prosecutors said on Friday they wanted to interview Libya's former foreign minister about the 1988 Lockerbie bombing.
Official documents released in February as part of Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O'Donnell's review of the release of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi show the pivotal role Koussa played in the Lockerbie bomber's return to Libya. Koussa is described in one Foreign Office email as the man "whom Gaddafi has tasked with securing Megrahi's return".
However, Government sources insist that Moussa Koussa is not being treated as a "defector" and should not be seen as a "suspect" for past Libyan crimes.
Scottish police and prosectutors will meet with Foreign Office officials tomorrow to discuss the situation.
[A report just published on The First Post website contains the following:]
The latest Government utterances on Koussa stress that he has not defected. A government source told the Sunday Telegraph: "He is not a defector, he has not joined the [Libyan] opposition and he has not joined us.
"He is somebody who has left Col Gaddafi's government after a lifetime working for him. It was an enormously life-changing decision for him."
According to many observers, the Government is taking a 'softly, softly' approach. The message that Koussa is "not a defector" and has "not joined us" is aimed squarely at other Libyan officials who might be teetering on the edge of turning their backs on Gaddafi's faltering regime.
Libya's 'torturer-in-chief' offered asylum in Britain in return for help toppling Gaddafi
[This is the headline over an article by Robert Verkaik in today's edition of The Mail on Sunday. It reads in part:]
Libya’s feared ‘torturer-in-chief’ has been offered asylum in the UK in return for his help to topple Muammar Gaddafi and his hated regime.
The secret offer to Libya’s former foreign minister, Moussa Koussa, was made while he was still in Tripoli and helped persuade him to seek sanctuary in Britain.
But any promise of special protection for one of Gaddafi’s most notorious henchmen has provoked anger from those who want Koussa, 62, put on trial for his alleged crimes. (...)
MI6 officers first made contact with Koussa, who has been linked with the Lockerbie bombing and the killing of WPC Yvonne Fletcher outside the Libyan Embassy in London, in the first few days after the UN-sanctioned attacks on Gaddafi’s military machine on March 19.
A source told The Mail on Sunday: ‘Central to the enticements was the prospect of living in safety in the UK under the protection of the asylum laws. Koussa’s greatest concern was what would happen to him once he left Gaddafi.
‘This was not a long, drawn-out operation – once contact had been made it all happened pretty quickly.’
Koussa fled Tripoli last Monday night after telling colleagues that he was seeking medical help in Tunisia. The convoy of official vehicles crossed the Tunisian border and went on to Tunis’s Djerba-Zaris airport. (...)
Koussa is still being questioned by MI6 officers and diplomats in a safe house at a secret location in the Home Counties. His wife, at least one of his children and his extended family remain in Tripoli.
He also has two daughters educated and living in the UK and a son who is a neurosurgeon working in the US.
The Foreign Office refused to discuss whether any kind of offer had been made to Koussa and reiterated that there would be no immunity from prosecution. But a spokesman added: ‘Discussions are ongoing on a range of issues, obviously (immigration) status is an important issue.’ (...)
Foreign Office officials will meet Scottish police and prosecutors tomorrow about their formal request to interview Koussa over the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie which killed 270 people in December 1988. Prosecutors are hoping to charge six Libyan intelligence agents in connection the attack and believe he holds vital evidence.
Mike O’Brien, a former Labour Foreign Office Minister who negotiated with Koussa in 2003 over Lockerbie compensation, weapons of mass destruction and the investigation into WPC Fletcher, said he expected him to claim asylum.
But he also said it would be difficult to prove any of the charges against him, raising the prospect of Koussa living in Britain as a free man.
He said: ‘Koussa was head of the organisation (the Libyan intelligence service) that was blamed for much of this, but proving what he knew and when he knew it will be more difficult.
‘Although people have to be brought to justice, it is sometimes difficult to find the evidence.’ (...)
MI6 is now targeting other key members of the regime, including Abu Zayd Dorba, the head of external intelligence, Mohamed al-Zwai, secretary general of the People’s Congress and Abdul Ati al-Obeidi, a former prime minister. (...)
Mustafa Gheriani, spokesman for the Libyan revolutionary council, said: ‘We want to bring him to court. This guy has so much blood on his hands. There are documented killings, torturing. We want him tried here. International law gives us that right.’
Should Koussa be granted asylum, it will not protect him from extradition to other countries where he is wanted in connection with terrorism offences.
America may want to seek his trial over Lockerbie, and relatives of the 170 victims of the 1989 airliner bombing in Niger want Koussa questioned over that attack.
Libya’s feared ‘torturer-in-chief’ has been offered asylum in the UK in return for his help to topple Muammar Gaddafi and his hated regime.
The secret offer to Libya’s former foreign minister, Moussa Koussa, was made while he was still in Tripoli and helped persuade him to seek sanctuary in Britain.
But any promise of special protection for one of Gaddafi’s most notorious henchmen has provoked anger from those who want Koussa, 62, put on trial for his alleged crimes. (...)
MI6 officers first made contact with Koussa, who has been linked with the Lockerbie bombing and the killing of WPC Yvonne Fletcher outside the Libyan Embassy in London, in the first few days after the UN-sanctioned attacks on Gaddafi’s military machine on March 19.
A source told The Mail on Sunday: ‘Central to the enticements was the prospect of living in safety in the UK under the protection of the asylum laws. Koussa’s greatest concern was what would happen to him once he left Gaddafi.
‘This was not a long, drawn-out operation – once contact had been made it all happened pretty quickly.’
Koussa fled Tripoli last Monday night after telling colleagues that he was seeking medical help in Tunisia. The convoy of official vehicles crossed the Tunisian border and went on to Tunis’s Djerba-Zaris airport. (...)
Koussa is still being questioned by MI6 officers and diplomats in a safe house at a secret location in the Home Counties. His wife, at least one of his children and his extended family remain in Tripoli.
He also has two daughters educated and living in the UK and a son who is a neurosurgeon working in the US.
The Foreign Office refused to discuss whether any kind of offer had been made to Koussa and reiterated that there would be no immunity from prosecution. But a spokesman added: ‘Discussions are ongoing on a range of issues, obviously (immigration) status is an important issue.’ (...)
Foreign Office officials will meet Scottish police and prosecutors tomorrow about their formal request to interview Koussa over the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie which killed 270 people in December 1988. Prosecutors are hoping to charge six Libyan intelligence agents in connection the attack and believe he holds vital evidence.
Mike O’Brien, a former Labour Foreign Office Minister who negotiated with Koussa in 2003 over Lockerbie compensation, weapons of mass destruction and the investigation into WPC Fletcher, said he expected him to claim asylum.
But he also said it would be difficult to prove any of the charges against him, raising the prospect of Koussa living in Britain as a free man.
He said: ‘Koussa was head of the organisation (the Libyan intelligence service) that was blamed for much of this, but proving what he knew and when he knew it will be more difficult.
‘Although people have to be brought to justice, it is sometimes difficult to find the evidence.’ (...)
MI6 is now targeting other key members of the regime, including Abu Zayd Dorba, the head of external intelligence, Mohamed al-Zwai, secretary general of the People’s Congress and Abdul Ati al-Obeidi, a former prime minister. (...)
Mustafa Gheriani, spokesman for the Libyan revolutionary council, said: ‘We want to bring him to court. This guy has so much blood on his hands. There are documented killings, torturing. We want him tried here. International law gives us that right.’
Should Koussa be granted asylum, it will not protect him from extradition to other countries where he is wanted in connection with terrorism offences.
America may want to seek his trial over Lockerbie, and relatives of the 170 victims of the 1989 airliner bombing in Niger want Koussa questioned over that attack.
Richard Marquise on Moussa Koussa
[Today's edition of the Sunday Express has a report headlined Lockerbie: you must charge them all which quotes extensively from the FBI's head of the Lockerbie investigation, Richard Marquise. It reads in part:]
The US special agent who led the Lockerbie probe yesterday demanded Scottish authorities prosecute every Libyan official connected to the bombing – and not offer any deals just to capture Colonel Gaddafi.
Former FBI investigator Richard Marquise appealed to the Crown Office not to allow any high-ranking member of the regime to escape justice as a compromise for ensuring a conviction against the dictator.
While Prime Minster David Cameron has insisted Libyans defecting to Britain will not be granted diplomatic immunity, Mr Marquise said he fears charges could be waved if they help secure a showpiece trial. (...)
Speaking to the Sunday Express from Arlington, Virginia, Mr Marquise said: “In terms of Lockerbie, we know who was involved at the lower levels, but I’d like to know who was involved in the higher levels, how high up it went.
“We know there are more people who should be brought to justice. If Moussa Koussa, or anyone else with these facts, is going to come forward with documentary evidence so that we could make a case, then certainly all lower level officials should be prosecuted as well.
“Gaddafi has a lot to answer for which is one of the reasons he is staying put. He does not want to answer anything.
“Even if he was killed there are others in his administration that should be brought to justice.”
Mr Marquise said he believes the bombing was in retaliation for a 1986 US raid in Tripoli, which killed Gaddafi’s daughter.
He added: “Let’s say Gaddafi told Koussa, ‘I’d like something to happen,’ and Koussa orchestrated it. We can speculate and believe that it probably went to the highest level, but there is no evidence that I know of that could be brought to court.
“If I was in Moussa Koussa’s shoes I would want to say, ‘This was ordered by Gaddafi, I have proof and I can help. But Gaddafi’s got to be the only person who ends up being prosecuted.’
“It’s one of those catch-22 situations for him because I understand he’s not been granted immunity. So in his shoes, I wouldn’t say anything because I would be implicating myself.” (...)
[Attorney] Frank Duggan, president of the [US relatives' group] Victims of Pan Am 103, yesterday warned UK officials from striking any deals with defectors, particularly given the controversy still lingering over Megrahi’s release.
He said: “I think this is a golden opportunity. Moussa Koussa knows who ordered the bombing of that plane. He knows who made the bomb, he knows who paid for the bomb, he knows how it was transported to Malta, he knows how it was placed in the plane.
“It wasn’t just Megrahi – obviously other people were involved. Everybody has to account for their role. Now they could have proof. Now they could have that proof on a silver platter.”
[More from Mr Marquise can found in this report in Scotland on Sunday. A leader in the same newspaper headed "Moral maze" contains the following:]
One can only assume that the Lockerbie bombing is one of the issues being discussed. And from a Scottish point of view there is a sense of deja vu here. This is not the first time a British prime minister may have been tempted to use Scottish justice as a bargaining chip in his handling of Libya. Tony Blair's infamous "deal in the desert" raised the prospect of release for Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi in exchange for Gaddafi's assistance in the war against terror, plus some lucrative oil deals.
Now Cameron may be considering what price he is willing to pay - perhaps in immunity from prosecution - for useful information. This is a genuine moral dilemma. Yes, Koussa may well have had a role in the commission of a number of terrorist acts, from the arming of the IRA to Lockerbie in 1988 and the downing of a French airliner in 1989. (...)
An inconvenient truth needs to be mentioned here. The prime minister should be reminded that in the conduct of the criminal investigation into the Lockerbie bombing - the largest criminal act committed on British soil - he has no jurisdiction. All such decisions rest with the Crown Office, headed by the Lord Advocate, who as Scotland's senior prosecutor is appointed by the First Minister. That is not to say the relentless pursuit of every scrap of evidence on Lockerbie must take precedence over all other concerns, including the saving of lives in Libya and the future of the so-called Arab Spring in the Middle East.
But deals cannot be brokered behind closed doors in an MI6 safe house.
The strict rules surrounding our judicial system exist for a reason, and the Government has been quick to point out that as yet no evidence implicating Koussa in mass murder or terrorism exists. But the government has to position itself now to be ready to act correctly if such evidence emerges. If the Tripoli regime collapses, with many of its senior figures switching to the rebels' side, it is conceivable that an enormous amount of new evidence could become available.
Yes, there is such a thing as realpolitik and there is a difficlut balance between saving lives now and addressing issues in the past. But should evidence against Koussa emerge it would be outrageous if he should escape prosecution. No deals should be done with this man.
[The same newspaper also features a long article by Dani Garavelli entitled Moussa Koussa's defection: Dancing with the devil?]
The US special agent who led the Lockerbie probe yesterday demanded Scottish authorities prosecute every Libyan official connected to the bombing – and not offer any deals just to capture Colonel Gaddafi.
Former FBI investigator Richard Marquise appealed to the Crown Office not to allow any high-ranking member of the regime to escape justice as a compromise for ensuring a conviction against the dictator.
While Prime Minster David Cameron has insisted Libyans defecting to Britain will not be granted diplomatic immunity, Mr Marquise said he fears charges could be waved if they help secure a showpiece trial. (...)
Speaking to the Sunday Express from Arlington, Virginia, Mr Marquise said: “In terms of Lockerbie, we know who was involved at the lower levels, but I’d like to know who was involved in the higher levels, how high up it went.
“We know there are more people who should be brought to justice. If Moussa Koussa, or anyone else with these facts, is going to come forward with documentary evidence so that we could make a case, then certainly all lower level officials should be prosecuted as well.
“Gaddafi has a lot to answer for which is one of the reasons he is staying put. He does not want to answer anything.
“Even if he was killed there are others in his administration that should be brought to justice.”
Mr Marquise said he believes the bombing was in retaliation for a 1986 US raid in Tripoli, which killed Gaddafi’s daughter.
He added: “Let’s say Gaddafi told Koussa, ‘I’d like something to happen,’ and Koussa orchestrated it. We can speculate and believe that it probably went to the highest level, but there is no evidence that I know of that could be brought to court.
“If I was in Moussa Koussa’s shoes I would want to say, ‘This was ordered by Gaddafi, I have proof and I can help. But Gaddafi’s got to be the only person who ends up being prosecuted.’
“It’s one of those catch-22 situations for him because I understand he’s not been granted immunity. So in his shoes, I wouldn’t say anything because I would be implicating myself.” (...)
[Attorney] Frank Duggan, president of the [US relatives' group] Victims of Pan Am 103, yesterday warned UK officials from striking any deals with defectors, particularly given the controversy still lingering over Megrahi’s release.
He said: “I think this is a golden opportunity. Moussa Koussa knows who ordered the bombing of that plane. He knows who made the bomb, he knows who paid for the bomb, he knows how it was transported to Malta, he knows how it was placed in the plane.
“It wasn’t just Megrahi – obviously other people were involved. Everybody has to account for their role. Now they could have proof. Now they could have that proof on a silver platter.”
[More from Mr Marquise can found in this report in Scotland on Sunday. A leader in the same newspaper headed "Moral maze" contains the following:]
One can only assume that the Lockerbie bombing is one of the issues being discussed. And from a Scottish point of view there is a sense of deja vu here. This is not the first time a British prime minister may have been tempted to use Scottish justice as a bargaining chip in his handling of Libya. Tony Blair's infamous "deal in the desert" raised the prospect of release for Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi in exchange for Gaddafi's assistance in the war against terror, plus some lucrative oil deals.
Now Cameron may be considering what price he is willing to pay - perhaps in immunity from prosecution - for useful information. This is a genuine moral dilemma. Yes, Koussa may well have had a role in the commission of a number of terrorist acts, from the arming of the IRA to Lockerbie in 1988 and the downing of a French airliner in 1989. (...)
An inconvenient truth needs to be mentioned here. The prime minister should be reminded that in the conduct of the criminal investigation into the Lockerbie bombing - the largest criminal act committed on British soil - he has no jurisdiction. All such decisions rest with the Crown Office, headed by the Lord Advocate, who as Scotland's senior prosecutor is appointed by the First Minister. That is not to say the relentless pursuit of every scrap of evidence on Lockerbie must take precedence over all other concerns, including the saving of lives in Libya and the future of the so-called Arab Spring in the Middle East.
But deals cannot be brokered behind closed doors in an MI6 safe house.
The strict rules surrounding our judicial system exist for a reason, and the Government has been quick to point out that as yet no evidence implicating Koussa in mass murder or terrorism exists. But the government has to position itself now to be ready to act correctly if such evidence emerges. If the Tripoli regime collapses, with many of its senior figures switching to the rebels' side, it is conceivable that an enormous amount of new evidence could become available.
Yes, there is such a thing as realpolitik and there is a difficlut balance between saving lives now and addressing issues in the past. But should evidence against Koussa emerge it would be outrageous if he should escape prosecution. No deals should be done with this man.
[The same newspaper also features a long article by Dani Garavelli entitled Moussa Koussa's defection: Dancing with the devil?]
Saturday, 2 April 2011
The man who knows Gaddafi's secrets
[This is the heading over an article published today by US political commentator Eric S Margolis on his website. It reads in part:]
Moussa Koussa is now closeted in London with British intelligence. MI6 will have a huge number of questions to ask the man who headed up Libyan intelligence for some fifteen years, either officially or unofficially, and acted as a top advisor to the Libyan strongman.
Her Majesty’s spooks will debrief Koussa about the loyalty of Gadaffi’s military and tribal supporters, and his “Plan B” in case of defeat. In spite of denials, the US, Britain and France are already sending increasing numbers of special forces into Libya, as I’ve reported for two months. (...)
The common view was that the Pan Am atrocity was revenge for the US bombing of Libya in 1986. A year later, Gadaffi showed me the ruins of his private quarters where a US 1,000 kg bomb had killed his two-year old daughter. “Why are the Americans trying to kill me,” he asked me?
A year later, a bomb destroyed a French UTA airliner over the Sahara, killing 171. France had just defeated Libya in a sharp border conflict over Chad. The late head of French intelligence, SDECE, told me French President Francois Mitterand ordered him to kill Gadaffi, but then cancelled the operation - a bomb hidden in Gadaffi’s aircraft - when Franco-Libyan relations improved.
In 1999, French investigators found Libya guilty of the UTA attack. Six Libyan officials, including the deputy chief of intelligence, Abdullah Senoussi, were convicted in absentia. Senoussi insisted to me over dinner in Tripoli that his nation was innocent. But it certainly looked like Libya was getting revenge for its defeat in Chad, and the attempt on Gadaffi’s life.
Lockerbie is another story. Some veteran observers believed al-Megrahi was framed to implicate Libya when the real culprit was Iran, seeking revenge for the downing of an Iranian airliner over the Gulf in July, 1988, by US cruiser “Vincennes” that killed 290, mostly pilgrims, headed for Mecca.
But questions over Megrahi’s guilt grew. Scotland’s respected legal system was considering an appeal that was likely to have revealed efforts to frame the Libyan. To head off this embarrassment, Britain sent him back to Libya, claiming he was about to die from cancer. In return, British oil and commercial interests in Libya were quickly expanded. It was a remarkably cynical business, greased by Tony Blair, oozing synthetic charm from every pore.
Libya never admitted guilt for these aerial crimes, but paid out $1.5 billion blood money in 2008. US President George Bush promptly “pardoned” Libya, ended punishing sanctions, and allowed US oil firms to return to Libya. The hapless Meghrahi was welcome home by Libyans as a hero and sacrificial lamb.
We still don’t know who really bombed Pan Am 103 or the full story about the UTA airliner. Hard evidence has been lacking. (...)
Another question: will Koussa himself be charged with crimes? One suspects a deal was made before he defected to spare the wily Libyan spook. The man in grey is stepping out of the shadows.
Moussa Koussa is now closeted in London with British intelligence. MI6 will have a huge number of questions to ask the man who headed up Libyan intelligence for some fifteen years, either officially or unofficially, and acted as a top advisor to the Libyan strongman.
Her Majesty’s spooks will debrief Koussa about the loyalty of Gadaffi’s military and tribal supporters, and his “Plan B” in case of defeat. In spite of denials, the US, Britain and France are already sending increasing numbers of special forces into Libya, as I’ve reported for two months. (...)
The common view was that the Pan Am atrocity was revenge for the US bombing of Libya in 1986. A year later, Gadaffi showed me the ruins of his private quarters where a US 1,000 kg bomb had killed his two-year old daughter. “Why are the Americans trying to kill me,” he asked me?
A year later, a bomb destroyed a French UTA airliner over the Sahara, killing 171. France had just defeated Libya in a sharp border conflict over Chad. The late head of French intelligence, SDECE, told me French President Francois Mitterand ordered him to kill Gadaffi, but then cancelled the operation - a bomb hidden in Gadaffi’s aircraft - when Franco-Libyan relations improved.
In 1999, French investigators found Libya guilty of the UTA attack. Six Libyan officials, including the deputy chief of intelligence, Abdullah Senoussi, were convicted in absentia. Senoussi insisted to me over dinner in Tripoli that his nation was innocent. But it certainly looked like Libya was getting revenge for its defeat in Chad, and the attempt on Gadaffi’s life.
Lockerbie is another story. Some veteran observers believed al-Megrahi was framed to implicate Libya when the real culprit was Iran, seeking revenge for the downing of an Iranian airliner over the Gulf in July, 1988, by US cruiser “Vincennes” that killed 290, mostly pilgrims, headed for Mecca.
But questions over Megrahi’s guilt grew. Scotland’s respected legal system was considering an appeal that was likely to have revealed efforts to frame the Libyan. To head off this embarrassment, Britain sent him back to Libya, claiming he was about to die from cancer. In return, British oil and commercial interests in Libya were quickly expanded. It was a remarkably cynical business, greased by Tony Blair, oozing synthetic charm from every pore.
Libya never admitted guilt for these aerial crimes, but paid out $1.5 billion blood money in 2008. US President George Bush promptly “pardoned” Libya, ended punishing sanctions, and allowed US oil firms to return to Libya. The hapless Meghrahi was welcome home by Libyans as a hero and sacrificial lamb.
We still don’t know who really bombed Pan Am 103 or the full story about the UTA airliner. Hard evidence has been lacking. (...)
Another question: will Koussa himself be charged with crimes? One suspects a deal was made before he defected to spare the wily Libyan spook. The man in grey is stepping out of the shadows.
Talks about talks
[What follows is the text of a press release just issued by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service.]
The following can be attributed to a Crown Office spokesperson:
"I can confirm that representatives of the Crown Office and Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary have been in close contact with FCO officials over recent days and will be meeting with them on Monday to discuss the situation concerning Mr Musa Kusa further."
[As a former civil servant (briefly, I rejoice to say) I am only too well aware of how meetings serve as a substitute for, but can be represented as, action.]
The following can be attributed to a Crown Office spokesperson:
"I can confirm that representatives of the Crown Office and Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary have been in close contact with FCO officials over recent days and will be meeting with them on Monday to discuss the situation concerning Mr Musa Kusa further."
[As a former civil servant (briefly, I rejoice to say) I am only too well aware of how meetings serve as a substitute for, but can be represented as, action.]
Libya & Lockerbie: secrets for sale
[This is the heading over an article just posted on Scottish national treasure Ian Bell's Prospero blog. A shorter version appears in The Sunday Herald. The blog version reads as follows:]
Moussa Koussa, Libya’s foreign minister until last Wednesday night, must be giving Her Majesty’s government a lot to think about. His insights into the state of the Gaddafi regime – if reliable – will be receiving undivided attention. His opinions on what might happen next will be scrutinised in minute detail. Above all, the question of what this defector really hopes to gain will surely keep MI6 busy for many an hour.
And then there’s Lockerbie. As the indefatigable Dr Jim Swire, who lost his daughter, has already said, “This is a guy who knows everything”. Koussa’s flight is therefore “a fantastic day for those who seek the truth”. Specifically, Dr Swire wants to hear the former head of the Libyan Bureau for External Security explain the how and why, if Libya was responsible, of the atrocity. After almost 23 years of evasion, obstruction and power politics, at home and abroad, that’s little enough to ask.
Some caution is required, however. Koussa is not just the latest in a succession of rodents quitting the foundering SS Gaddafi. The charge sheet is a long one. The Libyan rebel administration in Benghazi wants him returned for trial for bloody crimes that have nothing to do with Lockerbie. His alleged involvement in terrorism and internal repression goes back a very long way. If the Colonel is due a visit to the International Criminal Court, so is Koussa.
Yet here he is, in effect, handing himself over to British custody without – so we are told – preconditions. We are further assured that immunity from prosecution has not been granted. So let’s get this straight: he has preferred to flee Tripoli while Gaddafi yet survives and chosen to risk the possibility – it should be a certainty – of a trial for mass murder in a Scottish court, and much else besides? Either he has proof that would stand every Lockerbie allegation on its head, or he is not much of a terrorist mastermind. Or things are not as they seem.
I’ve been wondering about that. Consider, for one example, a report from the Washington Post dated February 24. This described Koussa as “a key CIA contact in the war on terror and the removal of [Gaddafi’s] weapons of mass destruction”. The foreign minister was central, in other words, to the brief rehabilitation of the regime. Such were his crimes, according to the Post, “he cannot defect to the opposition like other top Libyan officials”. The consensus a month ago was that Koussa “may have no option now but to go down with the ship”.
Clearly, the so-called “envoy of death” had other ideas. Having been Gaddafi’s “point man in clandestine meetings with top CIA and British officials” he may have lost the dictator’s trust. He may therefore have gained some trust elsewhere, or secured a stock of that commodity some time ago. Flying into London with (supposedly) no guarantee of immunity from prosecution over Lockerbie and a host of other terrorist acts suggests a certain confidence, if nothing else.
Koussa could tell us, as Dr Swire says, a very great deal. For one thing, he was said to be at the heart of Libyan efforts to secure the release of Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi, personally issuing threats – the only relevant word – to Scottish ministers. He would know better than most what went on. He would certainly know why al-Megrahi came to be the only person convicted of the murders of 270 people in December of 1988, the shambolic legal process that sealed and resealed the conviction, and the persistent efforts of various governments, Britain’s above all, to deflect serious questions.
Instead, we have a “key CIA contact” who is either prepared to deal with his responsibility, if any, for Lockerbie, or a man well known to “British officials” who foresees no difficulties in that regard. William Hague, foreign secretary, reiterates his refusal to offer an immunity from British or international justice. Hague fails to clarify a more important point: is Koussa therefore under arrest? If not, why not?
Dumfries and Galloway Police certainly want a word, as does the Crown Office. [RB: So they say.] Both would be obliged to seek an interview with any member of the Libyan regime. That doesn’t exactly put an inquiring mind at rest, however. Our prosecution service has not been exactly quick on its toes when previous opportunities for interview/investigation have presented themselves.
When was a request lodged, for one example, to interview Mustafa Abdul Jalil, former Libyan justice minister and the first defector to claim to know “for certain” about the planning and execution of the 1988 atrocity? Lockerbie remains a scandal and an open wound because, to put it no higher, domestic agencies have failed repeatedly to resolve the issues at stake.
But Koussa is different, in any case, from all the other defectors who have told the western media what the media want to hear where Lockerbie is concerned. Simply to say “Gaddafi did it” when Nato aircraft are supporting a rebellion and your neck is at risk is not the same, not remotely the same, as providing chapter, verse, eye-witness testimony, and an explanation of your personal involvement, if any, in mass murder.
So another question falls to Hague. Can the British public, the Scottish public in particular, be assured that Koussa will not be leaving these shores, that there is no deal in place concerning the Lockerbie atrocity or any other crimes? The government has already conceded that Gaddafi might be allowed to slip away into exile if he yields to the Libyan rebellion. Is Koussa to be granted the same consideration?
Or is he, as some suspect, only in Britain to negotiate such an arrangement on behalf of the whole Tripoli gang? Does that also merit an “amnesty”? Not where Lockerbie is concerned, even if playing nice with Koussa is being presented, in all media outlets, as a necessary stratagem to persuade others to desert the Colonel.
An amnesty and a plane ticket might be the pragmatic way to prevent further bloodshed in Libya, even if it did little for the standing of the international court. As an answer to those bereaved by Lockerbie, however, it would count as (yet another) insult. If Koussa has resigned as foreign minister, as the government claims, he has no diplomatic immunity. If his crimes are as extensive as his victims and his enemies allege, he should be facing arrest irrespective of Pan Am 103. An “unscheduled visit”, as former foreign secretary Jack Straw creepily describes it, hardly fits the case.
Never mind the Dumfries and Galloway force: the Scottish government should be saying as much. A prior claim exists, in the names of 270 individuals, that in no sense impinges on the progress of the Libyan rebellion. The Edinburgh political and legal coterie can parrot the line – another fine little mystery – that al-Megrahi’s conviction was and remains safe. The fact is that the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC), after four years of study, found fully six grounds (still buried beneath legal manure) for doubt.
For Scotland, and for Scots law, that remains the heart of the thing. The $3 million paid by US authorities to a pair of Maltese “witnesses” who could not remember the weather, far less a face, might be explained. The conduct of the Camp Zeist trial – sufficiently contentious to have the UN’s observer, Professor Hans Kochler, decrying a “spectacular miscarriage” – could even be overlooked. The presence of intelligence officers in the well of the court itself could be chalked up to bitter – if infinitely suggestive – experience. But the SCCRC referral hangs over all talk of justice.
Koussa, if anyone, is central to everything where Lockerbie is concerned. Dr Swire is dead right about that. I only hesitate over celebrations because I find it hard to believe no deal has been done. The former foreign minister may have been in the frying pan. Would he really jump into the fire, unprompted, when there is serious talk of Gaddafi being allowed to escape into exile? Or are we supposed to believe that Koussa has grown himself a conscience?
With luck, some parliamentarian will be asking Hague these questions before long. Where Lockerbie is concerned it is not enough, and never was enough, just to say “Gaddafi did it”. If the order was his, the order was followed. How – for the purposes of argument – and by whom? It is a long time since blind obedience to orders was last accepted as any sort of excuse.
The British government’s approach to this little problem is liable to be fascinating. David Cameron has spent a great deal of parliamentary time condemning al-Megrahi’s release. He has said, repeatedly, that he would never have agreed to such a thing. He has dismissed the Scottish government’s arguments in favour of compassionate release. Our Dave is unflinching, by his own account, in matters of justice, terrorist crime and condign punishment. So let’s see, where Moussa Koussa is concerned, whether he is also consistent.
But consider: if the truth is ever allowed to escape, Koussa might not be the only double-dealer, home and abroad, who finds himself in an uncomfortable position. Yet again, I suspect, opinion is being nudged towards the belief that “Gaddafi did it” settles all questions. Simultaneously, a spurious Lockerbie “resolution” will be a handy distraction, no doubt, amid the Libyan aftermath.
And if Koussa winds up in the United States for the sake of “intelligence sharing” and old alliances, we will all be just a little wiser. Dr Swire and many others deserve better. But they always did.
Moussa Koussa, Libya’s foreign minister until last Wednesday night, must be giving Her Majesty’s government a lot to think about. His insights into the state of the Gaddafi regime – if reliable – will be receiving undivided attention. His opinions on what might happen next will be scrutinised in minute detail. Above all, the question of what this defector really hopes to gain will surely keep MI6 busy for many an hour.
And then there’s Lockerbie. As the indefatigable Dr Jim Swire, who lost his daughter, has already said, “This is a guy who knows everything”. Koussa’s flight is therefore “a fantastic day for those who seek the truth”. Specifically, Dr Swire wants to hear the former head of the Libyan Bureau for External Security explain the how and why, if Libya was responsible, of the atrocity. After almost 23 years of evasion, obstruction and power politics, at home and abroad, that’s little enough to ask.
Some caution is required, however. Koussa is not just the latest in a succession of rodents quitting the foundering SS Gaddafi. The charge sheet is a long one. The Libyan rebel administration in Benghazi wants him returned for trial for bloody crimes that have nothing to do with Lockerbie. His alleged involvement in terrorism and internal repression goes back a very long way. If the Colonel is due a visit to the International Criminal Court, so is Koussa.
Yet here he is, in effect, handing himself over to British custody without – so we are told – preconditions. We are further assured that immunity from prosecution has not been granted. So let’s get this straight: he has preferred to flee Tripoli while Gaddafi yet survives and chosen to risk the possibility – it should be a certainty – of a trial for mass murder in a Scottish court, and much else besides? Either he has proof that would stand every Lockerbie allegation on its head, or he is not much of a terrorist mastermind. Or things are not as they seem.
I’ve been wondering about that. Consider, for one example, a report from the Washington Post dated February 24. This described Koussa as “a key CIA contact in the war on terror and the removal of [Gaddafi’s] weapons of mass destruction”. The foreign minister was central, in other words, to the brief rehabilitation of the regime. Such were his crimes, according to the Post, “he cannot defect to the opposition like other top Libyan officials”. The consensus a month ago was that Koussa “may have no option now but to go down with the ship”.
Clearly, the so-called “envoy of death” had other ideas. Having been Gaddafi’s “point man in clandestine meetings with top CIA and British officials” he may have lost the dictator’s trust. He may therefore have gained some trust elsewhere, or secured a stock of that commodity some time ago. Flying into London with (supposedly) no guarantee of immunity from prosecution over Lockerbie and a host of other terrorist acts suggests a certain confidence, if nothing else.
Koussa could tell us, as Dr Swire says, a very great deal. For one thing, he was said to be at the heart of Libyan efforts to secure the release of Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi, personally issuing threats – the only relevant word – to Scottish ministers. He would know better than most what went on. He would certainly know why al-Megrahi came to be the only person convicted of the murders of 270 people in December of 1988, the shambolic legal process that sealed and resealed the conviction, and the persistent efforts of various governments, Britain’s above all, to deflect serious questions.
Instead, we have a “key CIA contact” who is either prepared to deal with his responsibility, if any, for Lockerbie, or a man well known to “British officials” who foresees no difficulties in that regard. William Hague, foreign secretary, reiterates his refusal to offer an immunity from British or international justice. Hague fails to clarify a more important point: is Koussa therefore under arrest? If not, why not?
Dumfries and Galloway Police certainly want a word, as does the Crown Office. [RB: So they say.] Both would be obliged to seek an interview with any member of the Libyan regime. That doesn’t exactly put an inquiring mind at rest, however. Our prosecution service has not been exactly quick on its toes when previous opportunities for interview/investigation have presented themselves.
When was a request lodged, for one example, to interview Mustafa Abdul Jalil, former Libyan justice minister and the first defector to claim to know “for certain” about the planning and execution of the 1988 atrocity? Lockerbie remains a scandal and an open wound because, to put it no higher, domestic agencies have failed repeatedly to resolve the issues at stake.
But Koussa is different, in any case, from all the other defectors who have told the western media what the media want to hear where Lockerbie is concerned. Simply to say “Gaddafi did it” when Nato aircraft are supporting a rebellion and your neck is at risk is not the same, not remotely the same, as providing chapter, verse, eye-witness testimony, and an explanation of your personal involvement, if any, in mass murder.
So another question falls to Hague. Can the British public, the Scottish public in particular, be assured that Koussa will not be leaving these shores, that there is no deal in place concerning the Lockerbie atrocity or any other crimes? The government has already conceded that Gaddafi might be allowed to slip away into exile if he yields to the Libyan rebellion. Is Koussa to be granted the same consideration?
Or is he, as some suspect, only in Britain to negotiate such an arrangement on behalf of the whole Tripoli gang? Does that also merit an “amnesty”? Not where Lockerbie is concerned, even if playing nice with Koussa is being presented, in all media outlets, as a necessary stratagem to persuade others to desert the Colonel.
An amnesty and a plane ticket might be the pragmatic way to prevent further bloodshed in Libya, even if it did little for the standing of the international court. As an answer to those bereaved by Lockerbie, however, it would count as (yet another) insult. If Koussa has resigned as foreign minister, as the government claims, he has no diplomatic immunity. If his crimes are as extensive as his victims and his enemies allege, he should be facing arrest irrespective of Pan Am 103. An “unscheduled visit”, as former foreign secretary Jack Straw creepily describes it, hardly fits the case.
Never mind the Dumfries and Galloway force: the Scottish government should be saying as much. A prior claim exists, in the names of 270 individuals, that in no sense impinges on the progress of the Libyan rebellion. The Edinburgh political and legal coterie can parrot the line – another fine little mystery – that al-Megrahi’s conviction was and remains safe. The fact is that the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC), after four years of study, found fully six grounds (still buried beneath legal manure) for doubt.
For Scotland, and for Scots law, that remains the heart of the thing. The $3 million paid by US authorities to a pair of Maltese “witnesses” who could not remember the weather, far less a face, might be explained. The conduct of the Camp Zeist trial – sufficiently contentious to have the UN’s observer, Professor Hans Kochler, decrying a “spectacular miscarriage” – could even be overlooked. The presence of intelligence officers in the well of the court itself could be chalked up to bitter – if infinitely suggestive – experience. But the SCCRC referral hangs over all talk of justice.
Koussa, if anyone, is central to everything where Lockerbie is concerned. Dr Swire is dead right about that. I only hesitate over celebrations because I find it hard to believe no deal has been done. The former foreign minister may have been in the frying pan. Would he really jump into the fire, unprompted, when there is serious talk of Gaddafi being allowed to escape into exile? Or are we supposed to believe that Koussa has grown himself a conscience?
With luck, some parliamentarian will be asking Hague these questions before long. Where Lockerbie is concerned it is not enough, and never was enough, just to say “Gaddafi did it”. If the order was his, the order was followed. How – for the purposes of argument – and by whom? It is a long time since blind obedience to orders was last accepted as any sort of excuse.
The British government’s approach to this little problem is liable to be fascinating. David Cameron has spent a great deal of parliamentary time condemning al-Megrahi’s release. He has said, repeatedly, that he would never have agreed to such a thing. He has dismissed the Scottish government’s arguments in favour of compassionate release. Our Dave is unflinching, by his own account, in matters of justice, terrorist crime and condign punishment. So let’s see, where Moussa Koussa is concerned, whether he is also consistent.
But consider: if the truth is ever allowed to escape, Koussa might not be the only double-dealer, home and abroad, who finds himself in an uncomfortable position. Yet again, I suspect, opinion is being nudged towards the belief that “Gaddafi did it” settles all questions. Simultaneously, a spurious Lockerbie “resolution” will be a handy distraction, no doubt, amid the Libyan aftermath.
And if Koussa winds up in the United States for the sake of “intelligence sharing” and old alliances, we will all be just a little wiser. Dr Swire and many others deserve better. But they always did.
Libya: Gaddafi aide Moussa Koussa faces more questions
[This is the headline over a report published this morning on the BBC News website. It reads in part:]
The UK is still seeking information from ex-Libyan Foreign Minister Moussa Koussa, who fled to London on Thursday, Defence Secretary Liam Fox has said.
Asked what should happen now to Mr Koussa, Dr Fox told the BBC he would not provide daily updates but "clearly we want to get information from him". (...)
Scottish prosecutors have asked to interview Mr Koussa about the 1988 Lockerbie bombing, which left 270 people dead.
Asked whether Mr Koussa would stand trial if evidence was found linking him to Lockerbie, Dr Fox said: "It's very clear in Britain that our judicial process moves independently from government."
Previously, Prime Minister David Cameron has insisted that Mr Koussa had not been offered immunity from prosecution.
[Slippery customer, Liam Fox. But it is, of course, the case that -- at least with regard to Lockerbie -- any investigation and prosecution of Moussa Koussa would be a matter not for UK Government authorities or institutions, but for the Scottish police and the Scottish Crown Office, both of which are accountable to the Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament.]
The UK is still seeking information from ex-Libyan Foreign Minister Moussa Koussa, who fled to London on Thursday, Defence Secretary Liam Fox has said.
Asked what should happen now to Mr Koussa, Dr Fox told the BBC he would not provide daily updates but "clearly we want to get information from him". (...)
Scottish prosecutors have asked to interview Mr Koussa about the 1988 Lockerbie bombing, which left 270 people dead.
Asked whether Mr Koussa would stand trial if evidence was found linking him to Lockerbie, Dr Fox said: "It's very clear in Britain that our judicial process moves independently from government."
Previously, Prime Minister David Cameron has insisted that Mr Koussa had not been offered immunity from prosecution.
[Slippery customer, Liam Fox. But it is, of course, the case that -- at least with regard to Lockerbie -- any investigation and prosecution of Moussa Koussa would be a matter not for UK Government authorities or institutions, but for the Scottish police and the Scottish Crown Office, both of which are accountable to the Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament.]
Is Libya’s star defector actually a fake?
[This is the headline over a report on the Frum Forum website. It reads in part:]
Is Libya’s most important defector to the West really on a deep-cover diplomatic mission? One of the architects of the 2001 prosecution of two Libyans charged with downing the Pan Am flight over Lockerbie thinks it is possible.
One of Qaddafi’s most reliable allies – and most feared enforcers – Moussa Koussa arrived in England on Wednesday from Tunisia. He has reportedly been seeking medical treatment and is now being debriefed. Both the UK and US heralded his defection as a stunning coup since he is the highest-level member of the dictator’s palace guard to abandon him since the popular uprising began in January.
But Robert Black, the Edinburgh University law professor emeritus who engineered the special trial that convicted Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, said Koussa may well be playing a double-game with the full knowledge and encouragement of the US and UK.
“Has Moussa Koussa really defected? There are some indications that this may be a diplomatic mission – negotiating an exit strategy for the Qaddafi regime – rather than a defection,” Black said at his blog, listing some of those indications:
"2. He was accompanied to Tunisia (but not beyond) for his flight from Djerba to Farnborough by Abdel Ati al-Obeidi who remains a trusted counselor of Qaddafi (and a trusted intermediary in the eyes of the UK and US).
"3. If Koussa had defected, he would surely have negotiated immunity from prosecution for any personal involvement in Lockerbie (if Libya was implicated in any capacity, Koussa would inevitably have been personally involved). According to UK Foreign Secretary William Hague, no such immunity has been granted. This suggests that his visit is already covered by diplomatic immunity."
Some intelligence analysts agree. They say a defection story may have been floated for a combination of plausible reasons: as a face-saving maneuver for a proud Qaddafi while Koussa discusses the final terms of his exile; as a morale-booster for rebel forces; and, perhaps most consequentially, as a feint allowing for Anglo-American input into the shape of whatever Libyan government emerges if the strongman exits the stage.
Neither the UK or the US wants to exchange Qaddafi’s regime for an Islamist-dominated one on the Mediterranean. Koussa might be able to play a post-Qaddafi role in shaping that next regime.
According to diplomats, Koussa has come to be viewed as a trusted partner by both the US and the UK as well as a skilled go-between with the sometimes obdurate Qaddafi. But his past is not very clean. (...)
Scottish police have said they would like to interview Koussa concerning the Lockerbie case, but in what The Times called “an unusual intervention”, Foreign Office officials later said Koussa was not the “prime suspect” in the Lockerbie bombing. And they also failed to rule out the possibility Koussa might leave the UK before investigations are completed.
“Surprise, surprise,” commented Robert Black.
[Professor Paul Wilkinson takes a not dissimilar line in an article headed "Why our 'defector' may not be quite what he seems" in today's edition of The Scotsman.]
Is Libya’s most important defector to the West really on a deep-cover diplomatic mission? One of the architects of the 2001 prosecution of two Libyans charged with downing the Pan Am flight over Lockerbie thinks it is possible.
One of Qaddafi’s most reliable allies – and most feared enforcers – Moussa Koussa arrived in England on Wednesday from Tunisia. He has reportedly been seeking medical treatment and is now being debriefed. Both the UK and US heralded his defection as a stunning coup since he is the highest-level member of the dictator’s palace guard to abandon him since the popular uprising began in January.
But Robert Black, the Edinburgh University law professor emeritus who engineered the special trial that convicted Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, said Koussa may well be playing a double-game with the full knowledge and encouragement of the US and UK.
“Has Moussa Koussa really defected? There are some indications that this may be a diplomatic mission – negotiating an exit strategy for the Qaddafi regime – rather than a defection,” Black said at his blog, listing some of those indications:
"2. He was accompanied to Tunisia (but not beyond) for his flight from Djerba to Farnborough by Abdel Ati al-Obeidi who remains a trusted counselor of Qaddafi (and a trusted intermediary in the eyes of the UK and US).
"3. If Koussa had defected, he would surely have negotiated immunity from prosecution for any personal involvement in Lockerbie (if Libya was implicated in any capacity, Koussa would inevitably have been personally involved). According to UK Foreign Secretary William Hague, no such immunity has been granted. This suggests that his visit is already covered by diplomatic immunity."
Some intelligence analysts agree. They say a defection story may have been floated for a combination of plausible reasons: as a face-saving maneuver for a proud Qaddafi while Koussa discusses the final terms of his exile; as a morale-booster for rebel forces; and, perhaps most consequentially, as a feint allowing for Anglo-American input into the shape of whatever Libyan government emerges if the strongman exits the stage.
Neither the UK or the US wants to exchange Qaddafi’s regime for an Islamist-dominated one on the Mediterranean. Koussa might be able to play a post-Qaddafi role in shaping that next regime.
According to diplomats, Koussa has come to be viewed as a trusted partner by both the US and the UK as well as a skilled go-between with the sometimes obdurate Qaddafi. But his past is not very clean. (...)
Scottish police have said they would like to interview Koussa concerning the Lockerbie case, but in what The Times called “an unusual intervention”, Foreign Office officials later said Koussa was not the “prime suspect” in the Lockerbie bombing. And they also failed to rule out the possibility Koussa might leave the UK before investigations are completed.
“Surprise, surprise,” commented Robert Black.
[Professor Paul Wilkinson takes a not dissimilar line in an article headed "Why our 'defector' may not be quite what he seems" in today's edition of The Scotsman.]
'Koussa told me Lockerbie wasn't Libya's fault' – Dalyell
[This is the headline over a report in today's edition of The Scotsman. It reads in part:]
Former MP and veteran campaigner Tam Dalyell says the high-level Libyan defector who arrived in the UK this week told him the Gaddafi regime had not been responsible for the Lockerbie bomb and pointed the finger at Palestinian terrorists.
Mr Dalyell also claimed that Scottish authorities could not be trusted to question former Libyan foreign minister Moussa Koussa, who has been a key figure in the Gaddafi regime for most of its 42 years. (...)
He is being kept in a safe house and has been questioned by MI6 officers and diplomats, but the Crown Office in Scotland is still pressing its claim to interview him about Lockerbie.
Mr Dalyell, who has long campaigned to find the truth behind the murder of 270 people when Pan Am Flight 103 was blown up over Lockerbie on 21 December, 1988, held a one-and-a-half-hour meeting Mr Koussa at an Inter Parliamentary Union conference in Syria in March 2001.
The former MP said: "He asked to see me and we met along with John Cummings, who was then the MP for Easington. He wanted to discuss how to bring Libya back into the international community.
Obviously, Lockerbie played a large part in our discussions, but when I asked him about it, he said ‘that was none of my doing'."
Mr Dalyell maintains the real perpetrator of the crime was the Iranian-funded Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, headed by Ahmed Jibril, although the main suspect, Abu Nidal, was probably tortured to death by Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq in 2002.
The organisation has been linked in a conspiracy theory involving a tacit agreement between the US authorities and the Iranian regime to allow a tit-for-tat revenge attack following the shooting down of an Iranian passenger plane in July 1988 by the USS Vincennes, with the loss of 290 lives .
Mr Dalyell told The Scotsman: "When I asked him [Koussa] about Nidal and Jabril, he said ‘you may not be wrong'.
"I do believe he knew a lot more about what happened than he was willing to tell me."
Despite the former spymaster's formidable reputation, Mr Dalyell said he found him "extremely friendly and frank".
"Other people have described him as scary, but I saw none of that," he said. (...)
But Mr Dalyell did not believe the Scottish authorities should be allowed to speak to Koussa. He said: "I think that two generations on, the officers at Dumfries and Galloway police force will be under terrible pressure to justify the investigation carried out by their predecessors."
He was more scathing about the Crown Office, which he has criticised for its handling of the case of Abdelbaset Mohmed Ali al-Megrahi, the only man found guilty of the attack, a conviction Mr Dalyell has claimed was wrong. "As I have said before, I believe that at times the Crown Office has been duplicitous about this," he said. "So they would be the wrong people to question him."
He said British diplomat Sir Richard Dalton was best-qualified to lead the questioning of Gaddafi's former close aide.
The Crown Office said it did not wish to comment on an "individual's comments" but that it was still in discussions with the Foreign Office regarding interviewing Mr Koussa over the Lockerbie bombing.
A spokesman said: "We are liaising with the Foreign Office regarding an interview with Mr Koussa. As with any ongoing investigation, we will not go into the details of our inquiries which includes the dates of interviews with any individuals."
[This story has now been picked up by the Libyan Enlish-language newspaper The Tripoli Post.
Moussa Koussa has also in conversation with me denied that Libya was responsible for Lockerbie. The response to this from those still blindly convinced of the truth of the official version of events will, of course, be "He would say that, wouldn't he?"
The following are excerpts from a report in today's edition of The Herald:]
A friend of Moussa Koussa, who claims he helped to co-ordinate his defection to the UK, has said the former Libyan foreign minister will be very co-operative in giving key evidence about the Lockerbie bombing.
Noman Benotman, who now works as an analyst with the Quilliam Foundation, a counter-terrorism think-tank, made it clear that Koussa would be willing to open up to the British authorities about Libya’s past involvement in international terrorism, including the 1988 Lockerbie bombing which claimed 270 lives. (...)
Mr Benotman, who said he helped Koussa escape from Tripoli, said it would “not be an issue” for the UK Government to get information about Libyan-sponsored terrorism, including the bombing of a UTA flight in Niger in 1989.
He said: “It’s going to be very easy to handle all these issues regarding Lockerbie, UTA and the IRA as well. It’s not a problem, I’m sure about this.”
He said Koussa “is the regime – everybody knows that” and that he was one of only five people during the last 30 years who was close to Gaddafi.
“I want to emphasise ... why he chose London. It’s very important. He believes in the system of justice regardless of the outcomes. He is very co-operative regarding crucial intelligence,” added Mr Benotman, who was the leader of the jihadist and anti-Gaddafi Libyan Islamic Fighting Group before he worked for the Quilliam Foundation.
First Minister Alex Salmond said police want to talk to Koussa “on the basis of information that might be provided” and that there was no suggestion at this stage that he was being treated as a suspect.
“Nonetheless, there is every reason to believe that this individual can shed light on the Lockerbie atrocity and the circumstances that led up to it,” Mr Salmond said.
[The Herald has an editorial on the Moussa Koussa "defection" issue which can be read here.
I find it more than a little surprising that a person who was "the leader of the jihadist and anti-Gaddafi Islamic Fighting Group" should be a friend of decades-long Gaddafi loyalist and henchman Moussa Koussa. As for helping him "to escape from Tripoli", Moussa travelled to Djerba in Tunisia in an official Libyan Government car, accompanied by Abdel Ati al-Obeidi, one of Gaddafi's most trusted counsellors.]
Former MP and veteran campaigner Tam Dalyell says the high-level Libyan defector who arrived in the UK this week told him the Gaddafi regime had not been responsible for the Lockerbie bomb and pointed the finger at Palestinian terrorists.
Mr Dalyell also claimed that Scottish authorities could not be trusted to question former Libyan foreign minister Moussa Koussa, who has been a key figure in the Gaddafi regime for most of its 42 years. (...)
He is being kept in a safe house and has been questioned by MI6 officers and diplomats, but the Crown Office in Scotland is still pressing its claim to interview him about Lockerbie.
Mr Dalyell, who has long campaigned to find the truth behind the murder of 270 people when Pan Am Flight 103 was blown up over Lockerbie on 21 December, 1988, held a one-and-a-half-hour meeting Mr Koussa at an Inter Parliamentary Union conference in Syria in March 2001.
The former MP said: "He asked to see me and we met along with John Cummings, who was then the MP for Easington. He wanted to discuss how to bring Libya back into the international community.
Obviously, Lockerbie played a large part in our discussions, but when I asked him about it, he said ‘that was none of my doing'."
Mr Dalyell maintains the real perpetrator of the crime was the Iranian-funded Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, headed by Ahmed Jibril, although the main suspect, Abu Nidal, was probably tortured to death by Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq in 2002.
The organisation has been linked in a conspiracy theory involving a tacit agreement between the US authorities and the Iranian regime to allow a tit-for-tat revenge attack following the shooting down of an Iranian passenger plane in July 1988 by the USS Vincennes, with the loss of 290 lives .
Mr Dalyell told The Scotsman: "When I asked him [Koussa] about Nidal and Jabril, he said ‘you may not be wrong'.
"I do believe he knew a lot more about what happened than he was willing to tell me."
Despite the former spymaster's formidable reputation, Mr Dalyell said he found him "extremely friendly and frank".
"Other people have described him as scary, but I saw none of that," he said. (...)
But Mr Dalyell did not believe the Scottish authorities should be allowed to speak to Koussa. He said: "I think that two generations on, the officers at Dumfries and Galloway police force will be under terrible pressure to justify the investigation carried out by their predecessors."
He was more scathing about the Crown Office, which he has criticised for its handling of the case of Abdelbaset Mohmed Ali al-Megrahi, the only man found guilty of the attack, a conviction Mr Dalyell has claimed was wrong. "As I have said before, I believe that at times the Crown Office has been duplicitous about this," he said. "So they would be the wrong people to question him."
He said British diplomat Sir Richard Dalton was best-qualified to lead the questioning of Gaddafi's former close aide.
The Crown Office said it did not wish to comment on an "individual's comments" but that it was still in discussions with the Foreign Office regarding interviewing Mr Koussa over the Lockerbie bombing.
A spokesman said: "We are liaising with the Foreign Office regarding an interview with Mr Koussa. As with any ongoing investigation, we will not go into the details of our inquiries which includes the dates of interviews with any individuals."
[This story has now been picked up by the Libyan Enlish-language newspaper The Tripoli Post.
Moussa Koussa has also in conversation with me denied that Libya was responsible for Lockerbie. The response to this from those still blindly convinced of the truth of the official version of events will, of course, be "He would say that, wouldn't he?"
The following are excerpts from a report in today's edition of The Herald:]
A friend of Moussa Koussa, who claims he helped to co-ordinate his defection to the UK, has said the former Libyan foreign minister will be very co-operative in giving key evidence about the Lockerbie bombing.
Noman Benotman, who now works as an analyst with the Quilliam Foundation, a counter-terrorism think-tank, made it clear that Koussa would be willing to open up to the British authorities about Libya’s past involvement in international terrorism, including the 1988 Lockerbie bombing which claimed 270 lives. (...)
Mr Benotman, who said he helped Koussa escape from Tripoli, said it would “not be an issue” for the UK Government to get information about Libyan-sponsored terrorism, including the bombing of a UTA flight in Niger in 1989.
He said: “It’s going to be very easy to handle all these issues regarding Lockerbie, UTA and the IRA as well. It’s not a problem, I’m sure about this.”
He said Koussa “is the regime – everybody knows that” and that he was one of only five people during the last 30 years who was close to Gaddafi.
“I want to emphasise ... why he chose London. It’s very important. He believes in the system of justice regardless of the outcomes. He is very co-operative regarding crucial intelligence,” added Mr Benotman, who was the leader of the jihadist and anti-Gaddafi Libyan Islamic Fighting Group before he worked for the Quilliam Foundation.
First Minister Alex Salmond said police want to talk to Koussa “on the basis of information that might be provided” and that there was no suggestion at this stage that he was being treated as a suspect.
“Nonetheless, there is every reason to believe that this individual can shed light on the Lockerbie atrocity and the circumstances that led up to it,” Mr Salmond said.
[The Herald has an editorial on the Moussa Koussa "defection" issue which can be read here.
I find it more than a little surprising that a person who was "the leader of the jihadist and anti-Gaddafi Islamic Fighting Group" should be a friend of decades-long Gaddafi loyalist and henchman Moussa Koussa. As for helping him "to escape from Tripoli", Moussa travelled to Djerba in Tunisia in an official Libyan Government car, accompanied by Abdel Ati al-Obeidi, one of Gaddafi's most trusted counsellors.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)