Libya fears 'new compensation bid' in Lockerbie investigation

[This is the headline over a report from The Press Association news agency published today on the website of The Independent.  It reads in part:]

Libyan authorities fear compensation is the motive behind fresh investigations into the Lockerbie bombing, MPs were told today.

Foreign Office Minister Alistair Burt said there were "apprehensions" in "some quarters" that hopes of re-opening existing settlements were fuelling inquiries.

He told the Commons foreign affairs committee the UK was continuing to "make the case" for Scottish police to have access to the state but there are concerns that must be "got over".

Mr Burt intends to revisit to Libya soon and insisted the "legacy issues" remained a "matter of high priority" for the UK.

They also include the case of WPc Fletcher, who was shot dead while policing a protest outside the Libyan embassy in London in 1984.

"There's some concern in some quarters, not in relation to WPc Fletcher but in relation to other cases that there is a matter of re-opening compensation and we are busy seeking to dissuade people that isn't the case."

Confirming he was talking about the Lockerbie bombing, Mr Burt added: "I don't believe there are institutional barriers to that but there are other apprehensions to get over.

"We continue to make the case that the Dumfries and Galloway police must have access and must be able to get on with that investigation."

He added: "There is an apprehension in some parts of the Libyan structure that this is about re-opening compensation that they believe was dealt with in the past where as we are keen to make the case supporting those who are conducting the investigation that it is about finding out the truth of the matter."

In February a formal submission was sent to the Libyan Government requesting access to the country for police and prosecutors who want to examine information and documents relating to lines of inquiry.

The Libyan National Transitional Council has previously confirmed to the UK Government that it will assist the ongoing criminal investigation. (…)

"The capacity of the Libyan authorities at the moment is understandably limited because of the circumstances in which they are operating."

He added: "Their commitment has been genuine. They do know from us how important these issues are.”

Vincent Cannistraro, Jack Straw and a new car

[This is the headline over an item posted today on the Lockerbie Truth website of Dr Jim Swire and Peter Biddulph.  It reads as follows:]

Today's news that Libya's military commander and former opponent of Gaddafi is taking legal action against Jack Straw comes to us as no surprise. 

Abdel Hakim Belhadj claims that CIA agents took him from Thailand to Gaddafi-led Libya, via UK-controlled Diego Garcia. His lawyers have served papers on Mr Straw after a Sunday Times report claims that Straw approved or allowed the rendition to take place. 

From approximately 2000 to 2008 Libyan intelligence services were effectively an out-sourced section of the CIA.  Tripoli was cooperating with both the CIA and MI6 in the rendition of Libyan dissidents, occasionally their wives, children, and other suspects to Libyan prisons for interrogation, torture, and sometimes death. In addition MI6 were monitoring the activities of active Libyan dissidents living in the UK and providing reports to at that time head of intelligence Moussa Koussa.¹

In 1995, as part of our research into the background to the Lockerbie tragedy, we discovered from files published by the US National Archive that the foundation for the current US network of rendition was established as far back as 1986, revealed in an email written by Vincent Cannistraro to his chief Admiral John Poindexter.  

We should recall that Cannistraro was, in December 1988, placed in charge of the CIA team investigating the Lockerbie bombing.  It was on his watch that a fragment of a timer circuit board mysteriously appeared on a hillside near to Lockerbie, and that fragment formed a central ground for the conviction of Abdel Baset Ali Al-Megrahi.

It has now been proved by independent scientific testing at two separate laboratories that the Lockerbie fragment could not have come from a batch of timer boards sold to Libya by Swiss company MEBO. [RB: See John Ashton, Megrahi: You are my Jury, pages 355 to 362.] So it was either a separately manufactured timer of unknown origin, or it was a fake, planted to turn suspicion away from Iran towards the simpler target nation of Libya. In either case, it destroys the prosecution claims against Al-Megrahi.  And what is notable today is the complete silence by the FBI and the Scottish Crown Office upon this matter. 

Cannistraro in 1986 was tasked by President Reagan to lead a campaign of "disinformation" to destabilise and eventually destroy the Gaddafi regime. 

For most folks with any sense of morality, the word "disinformation" means "lies". But to the White House and their CIA agents, it means doing one's duty for God and America.  

The motto in the entrance hall of CIA headquarters at Langley, Virginia is "Seek you the Truth and the Truth shall set you free."  Some say that Americans have no sense of irony. Well, maybe...

Cannistraro was exercised at the refusal of White House assistant Clair George to sign off a proactive counter-terrorism programme which involved kidnappings across the world of “suspected terrorists”. In USA speak of that era, the words meant simply “those who actively oppose US policy”. 

Cannistraro advised: "Dewey Clarridge told me he is being frustrated in carrying out the new counter-terrorist program. Specifically Clair is refusing to sign off on command cables setting up ops to apprehend terrorists abroad.... there was solid agreement on the objectives and intent, and the only contentious point was the legal language which CIA wanted and State and White House counsel insisted be deleted. Clair really doesn't want CIA to get into counter-terrorist mode. I discussed this with Ollie [North] before he left on his trip and he agrees. I think you should raise with [CIA Director] Casey. If you agree, I will do this as DCI [Director of Central Intelligence] / JMP [Poindexter] agenda item or as TPs [talking points] for a secure line call."²

In 2004 Prime Minister Tony Blair must have been aware of these issues. His much vaunted meeting in the desert with Gaddafi in 2004 would surely have covered such matters. But if it did not, then the conclusion one is forced to draw is that MI6 were not including reports on the running of the rendition system in their intelligence briefings at Downing Street. We might therefore fairly ask who runs Britain?

Be that as it may, if we look at this disgusting history with an objective eye, we might consider the honesty and credibility of all these characters.  The standard test of such is usually "Would you buy a used car from this man?"  Our answer is: No. And we wouldn't buy a new one, either.

¹http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2091653,00.html  , BBC and Sky News reports, Human Rights Watch research into files retrieved from Moussa Koussa’s office in Tripoli, 3^rd September 2011.

²Vincent Cannistraro email to John Poindexter, 6th May 1986. White House Email. Pub 1995, National Archive of the United States, Ed. Tom Blanton.

La vérité sur l'attentat de Lockerbie se fait attendre

[This is the headline over a report by Pierre Prier in today’s edition of the French newspaper Le Figaro.  It reads in part:]

Le Libyen condamné pour l'attentat de Lockerbie va sans doute disparaître sans lever tout à fait les doutes sur son rôle dans la plus grave action terroriste attribuée à la Libye. Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, condamné à la prison à perpétuité par un tribunal spécial écossais en 2001, puis libéré pour «raisons de santé» en août 2009, a été hospitalisé «dans un état très critique», selon sa famille. Son frère a indiqué lundi soir qu'il a finalement quitté l'établissement affirmant toutefois que «ses jours sont comptés».

Abdelbaset al-Megrahi aura affirmé jusqu'au bout son innocence.
Kadhafi l'avait livré à la justice tout en niant sa responsabilité, soutenant céder aux «pressions occidentales».

De façon étonnante, la version libyenne est partagée aujourd'hui encore par une partie des familles de victimes. Leur chef de file Jim Swire, dont la fille figure parmi les 270 morts du vol Pan Am 103 en décembre 1988, reste persuadé que l'attentat a été perpétré pour le compte de l'Iran par un groupe palestinien installé en Syrie. (…)

Le dossier est complexe, mais les partisans de la manipulation avaient remporté en 2007 une grande victoire: la justice écossaise avait accordé à Megrahi le droit de faire appel, au motif d'une possible «erreur judiciaire».

Deux ans plus tard, Megrahi se voyait libéré car son cancer de la prostate ne lui laissait plus que «trois mois à vivre», selon les experts médicaux. Auparavant, il avait renoncé lui-même à faire appel, entraînant dans la presse britannique des soupçons de marchandage.

Mais la vérité ne disparaîtra pas avec «l'homme de Lockerbie». Trois hauts responsables libyens la connaissent. Ils n'ont pas parlé jusqu'à aujourd'hui, permettant aux partisans de la théorie du complot de pavoiser. «Si ces trois hommes ne parlent pas, c'est qu'ils ne savent rien, puisque la Libye est innocente», assure l'avocat écossais Robert Black, médiateur entre la Libye et l'Écosse pour organiser le procès de 2001.

En tête des détenteurs du secret, Moussa Koussa, ancien chef des services secrets, a été exfiltré quatre mois avant la chute de Tripoli, et il coule aujourd'hui des jours tranquilles au Qatar. Béchir Salah Béchir, l'ancien directeur de cabinet de Kadhafi, vit à Paris après s'être enfui de Libye. Abdallah el-Senoussi, lui aussi ancien cacique des services libyens, a été arrêté en Mauritanie. Paris a réclamé son extradition. Senoussi a été condamné par un tribunal français à la prison à vie pour un autre attentat, contre un DC 10 d'UTA, 170 morts en septembre 1989. Il fait l'objet de délicates négociations entre la France, la Mauritanie et la Libye, qui souhaite aussi le juger. Un nouveau procès en France, conformément à la loi, ne manquerait pas d'évoquer Lockerbie. La procédure écossaise paraît close, mais celle du DC 10 reste ouverte.

[A translation can be obtained through Google Translate.]

Megrahi home from hospital

[What follows is an excerpt from a Reuters news agency report published this evening:]


The Libyan former intelligence officer convicted of the 1988 Lockerbie bombing that killed 270 people was released from a Tripoli hospital on Monday after receiving an emergency blood transfusion, his brother said.


Abdel Basset al-Megrahi was taken to a private hospital on Friday to receive a transfusion of eleven litres of blood, but subsequently felt strong enough to return home, his brother Abdel Hakim told Reuters.


"His health is going from bad to worse, but he felt ready to go and his family took him home," Abdel Hakim said.

"I accuse..."

[This is the headline over an article by me published today on the website of Scottish lawyers’ magazine The Firm. It consists of verbatim extracts (in translation) from Émile Zola’s famous public letter “J’accuse...” on the Dreyfus affair.  The final two paragraphs of my article read as follows:]

With the substitution of Megrahi for Dreyfus, Scotland for France, and the office of First Minister for that of President of the French Republic, every word can with equal justice be addressed to Alex Salmond. The magnitude of the Scottish miscarriage of justice and the flaws in the investigation, prosecution and adjudication that led to it have been exposed in the SCCRC’s Statement of Reasons published by The Herald; in John Ashton’s book Megrahi: You are my Jury ; in David Wolchover’s monograph Culprits of Lockerbie; and in Dr M G Kerr’s article An overview of the Lockerbie case.  There is now no shred of justification for continuing to maintain that all is for the best in the best of all criminal justice systems or  -- the coward’s fallback position -- that, while there may have been a few technical, procedural defects in his trial and conviction, Megrahi was clearly guilty anyway, so what does it matter?

Zola’s letter was headed “J’accuse”.  Although the Lockerbie investigation, prosecution and conviction occurred under UK Conservative and Labour administrations, it is Mr Salmond and the Scottish Government that today have the power to put right the disgraceful miscarriage of justice that occurred on the watch of two of their political opponents; and it is accordingly the Scottish SNP Government that today stands accused. The only honourable course of action open to that government is to institute an independent inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005 into the performance of the Scottish criminal justice system in the Megrahi case, as a matter which has caused grave public concern. 


[I am grateful to Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer, author of the encyclopaedic 174-part Lockerbie series Diary of a Vengeance Foretold, for drawing my attention to an article entitled The Dreyfus Affair: Enduring CI Lessons published in the March 2011 issue (vol 55, no 1) of the journal Studies in Intelligence.]

"He is on his last breath"

[What follows is an excerpt from a report from The Associated Press news agency published today on the CTV News website:]

The former Libyan intelligence officer convicted in the 1988 Lockerbie plane bombing was taken to hospital on Saturday for a blood transfusion with his health deteriorating, his family says.

The son of Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, Khaled, said his father was carried to Tripoli Medical Center for the second time in two days.

"My dad's health is very bad and has been worsening," Khaled told The Associated Press at the family house in Tripoli. "He is on his last breath," he added. (…)

Since his return to Libya, al-Megrahi rarely appeared in public. Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi's fall last year spurred calls in the United States and Europe to return him to prison. Two New York senators asked the former rebels to hold al-Megrahi fully accountable for the bombing.

At that time, Libya's rebel leaders, who were scrambling to replace Gadhafi's regime with a government of their own, said they would not deport al-Megrahi or any other Libyan. They then softened their stance, saying that only the future elected government could deal with such issues. (…)

Little is known about al-Megrahi. At his trial, he was described as the "airport security" chief for Libyan intelligence, and witnesses reported him negotiating deals to buy equipment for Libya's secret service and military.


[Reports on the websites of The Scotsman and The Independent can be read here and here; and one in The Sunday Times (behind the paywall) here. An Agence France Presse news agency report published this afternoon contains the following:] 

Abdelbaset Ali Mohmet al-Megrahi, the Libyan convicted of the 1988 Lockerbie plane bombing, was unconscious and in critical condition in hospital on Sunday, a close relative said.

"He is unconscious and his condition has been very critical over the last three days," a member of the family who declined to be named told AFP by telephone.

"Three days ago (Friday) he lost a lot of blood to the extent his life was in danger," the relative said, adding that Megrahi was hospitalised for an emergency blood transfusion.

"He hadn't been able to speak for 11 days so we were afraid," he said.

In Al-Afia clinic, near Tripoli international airport, members of his family shuttled in and out of his bedroom but declined to speak to the press, an AFP journalist at the scene said.

"We are very tired," his brother told AFP.

"We feel a huge loss because he was a prisoner for 10 years and then came back to us sick," said the relative, adding that his family has since been under "huge pressure" from the press and even come to blows with reporters.

Medical officials at the hospital declined to comment on his health.

"It is against hospital policy, medical ethics and the wishes of his family," clinic director Fawzi Addala said.

Nurses were equally tight-lipped.

Some pertinent questions from Dr Swire

[What follows is from a message sent today by Dr Jim Swire to actor, writer and director David Benson:]

Now that we know, thanks to John Ashton that the famous timer fragment was indeed a forgery there can be absolutely no excuse for pretending that this trial was fair.

For the sake of people in Scotland it is essential that an inquiry be launched into why the Crown Office failed to discover the forgery - they had the basic information before the trial - and why they failed to pass the information about the Heathrow break-in to the defence. We now know that the Scottish police were aware of the break-in in early 1989 but failed to pass it to the Crown till 1999. As often happens, it seems the police (whether or not under improper persuasion from others) decided to back their hypothesis of the bomb coming from Malta, to the exclusion of all other possibilities.

Later, in support of their hypothesis, along came the famous fragment to bolster their hypothesis. Who made it? Just how did it get into the 'evidence chain'? This must be investigated.

A side effect of the failure to alert the defence and therefore the court to the Heathrow evidence was that the defence were denied the opportunity of incorporating it into their defence of incrimination which would have pointed to the Syrian air pressure sensitive bombs, which required either arming or introduction at Heathrow, and which were obligated to a 35-45 minute flight time.

As for me, I remain enraged by the fact that Heathrow has escaped criticism for doing nothing for 16 hours, when they knew of the break-in immediately, from the early morning of the day of Lockerbie, and while our Flora boarded her flight, expecting that there would be a responsible level of security protecting it.

They might have saved all those lives, had they not decided to ignore the break-in. How sad is that?

I am also increasingly aware that the function of the prosecuting service in Scotland must be reviewed: they have the great responsibility of ensuring that evidence is shared  with the defence, and if they are not investigated for their failures over that in this case, then who can expect a fair trial with equality of arms in a Scottish court in future?

We must reform the system for everyone's sake. Justice must be seen to be done in our country in future.

More on Megrahi hospitalisation

[Most of today’s Scottish and UK newspapers have reports on Abdelbaset Megrahi’s hospitalization, as reported yesterday by Reuters news agency. The most detailed account is on the Daily Mail website.  It reads in part:]

The Lockerbie bomber has been given an emergency blood transfusion following a sudden deterioration in his health, his brother revealed last night.

Libyan Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, who is suffering from terminal cancer, was taken from his home in Tripoli to the intensive care unit of a private hospital.

The news came less than a fortnight after he celebrated his 60th birthday. (…)

Recent pictures of the bomber have shown him looking increasingly ravaged by the cancer spreading through his body.

His brother Abdulkahim told reporters: 'His health began to deteriorate quickly and we were worried about him, so took him immediately to the hospital where he is receiving a blood transfusion.'

Last night, Megrahi's condition was not known but his wife Aisha was by his side at the private clinic with most of the couple's five children.

His death will mark the end of a long fight by the relatives of his American victims to get the former intelligence agent sent to face justice in the US. (…)

Megrahi himself has protested his innocence from the beginning. On his 60th birthday, on April 1, he said prayers thanking God for the 'miracle' of his survival.

Relatives said he was slipping in and out of consciousness, kept alive by oxygen and an intravenous drip, but saw the fact he was still alive as a sign.

A family friend said: 'He is convinced there is a reason for all this and that is why he wants to continue the fight to prove his innocence.

'Brother Abdelbaset is not able to say a great deal but he makes it clear that he has been given time to prove his innocence.'

He attempted to do this with a 'deathbed memoir' claiming several miscarriages of justice.

The book was mainly based on evidence that was never heard, which was intended for an appeal the bomber abandoned. He claimed he was indirectly pressured by Mr MacAskill to drop the appeal in exchange for repatriation to Libya – a claim dismissed by the SNP as 'hearsay'.

On returning to Libya, Megrahi was treated as a hero by Colonel Gaddafi's regime and the new National Transitional Council has refused to hand him over to the US to face further charges.

A source close to Megrahi's family said: 'He's treated as a Libyan who was falsely accused and wrongly found guilty of a terrorist outrage.

'There is a great deal of support for Brother Abdelbaset no matter what his links with Gaddafi were. Brother Abdelbaset is still viewed as a national hero by many Libyans.' (…)

His family have sworn to launch a fresh appeal on the bomber's behalf after his death. [RB: As far as I am aware, this has been discussed within the family, but no promise to launch a fresh appeal has been made.] 

[Update from Agence France Presse news agency:]

Abdelbaset Ali Mohmet al-Megrahi, the Libyan convicted of the Lockerbie plane bombing, has been hospitalized in Tripoli in critical condition, a source close to his family said on Saturday.

"Abdelbaset has been in hospital since yesterday and his condition is critical," the source told AFP.

"He was admitted on Friday when his health became not so good," the source said, adding that Megrahi's relatives were at his bedside.

Megrahi in hospital in Tripoli

Abdulbasit al-Megrahi was taken from his Tripoli home to a private hospital, his brother Abdulhakim told Reuters. "His health began to deteriorate quickly and we were worried about him, so took him immediately to the hospital where he is receiving a blood transfusion," he said. (...)


Britain freed him in 2009 on compassionate grounds because he was suffering from advanced terminal prostate cancer and thought to have months to live.


His release angered many relatives of the victims, 189 of whom were American, and the Obama administration criticised the decision. A number of US politicians have pressed for his extradition to the United States, something Libya's ruling National Transitional Council said it would not do.


[From a report datelined Tripoli, just published by the Reuters news agency.]

David Wolchover responds to a challenge

Barrister David Wolchover has returned to the Lockerbie case in a further article in the Criminal Law & Justice Weekly. It is a response to criticisms on this blog by Baz of one of his earlier articles. Unfortunately, access to Mr Wolchover's latest piece requires subscription to the magazine.  However, I shall provide further details once the full text becomes available and I have returned to South Africa from Namibia.

[Posted from an internet cafē in Lűderitz.]


I am grateful to David Wolchover for sending me a copy of the text of his article Lockerbie: The True Culprits - A Postscript on Proof. It can be read here.

Captured spy chief may hold key to Lockerbie

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


Former ambassador to Malta Saad Elshlmani tells Mark Micallef Libya’s transitional government has good reason to want Muammar Gaddafi’s former intelligence chief in captivity. He can unlock so many of the regime’s secrets.

Saad Elshlmani never came across as a Gaddafi man. Moderate and straight talking, he managed to build a reputation among Maltese politicians as a level-headed operator who could be truly trusted, even when he was forced to front the regime’s erratic stands. (...)

Like many young Benghazi students of his generation, he took part in the student protests of the 1970s, which provoked one of the most repressive reactions in the regime’s 42-year history. Hundreds of young protesters were arrested, many were tortured and some executed in high profile, sometimes televised hangings, which succeeded in terrorising large swathes of the Libyan population into submission for decades.

Unlike two other students in his group, who were hanged publicly in 1977, Dr Elshlmani ‘got away’ with spending a few weeks in detention in 1976 – during which he came face to face with the feared Abdallah al-Senussi, Libya’s former intelligence chief and Col Gaddafi’s right hand man, who was recently captured in Mauritania.

Libya has demanded 62-year-old al-Senussi be sent to Libya rather than the International Criminal Court, defying some international observers who argue the fledgling state already has too much on its plate to be dealing with such high profile and potentially divisive trials.

But Dr Elshlmani, now the spokesman for the transitional government’s Foreign Ministry, argues that the people making these statements may not be fully appreciating Libya’s position.

“Abdallah al-Senussi, perhaps even more than Saif, holds the key to so many of the regime’s secrets that it is vital for us to be able to speak to him. There are many stories of people who were killed or disappeared mysteriously on whom, probably, only al-Senussi can shed light at this point.”

He was Gaddafi’s conduit, Dr Eshlmani says, pointing out that the dictator would never give out orders directly but would always go through his intelligence chief. If Libya had any involvement in the Lockerbie bombing, for instance, al-Senussi would know, he points out.

Dr Elshlmani should know a thing or two about Lockerbie. In 2003 he formed part of a secret think tank which helped broker the historic deal with the US that prompted the lifting of sanctions on Libya.

The 1988 bombing of Pan Am flight 103 was perhaps the biggest hot potato in those talks, but Dr Elshlmani says he knows little more than the next person with a good grasp of the facts surrounding the tragedy.

“When I was Ambassador to Malta we had assisted the lawyers of (Abdelbasset) Al Megrahi as they prepared for the appeal. They were very confident that with new evidence they had in hand, particularly surrounding the testimony of the Maltese witness Tony Gauci, Al Megrahi’s conviction would be overturned. But I cannot say for certain if Gaddafi was involved or not. The person able to do that is al-Senussi.”

Despite the Maltese authorities’ insistence that the bomb never left from Luqa airport, the courts still decided to convict Mr Al Megrahi.

Without resorting to torture, Dr Elshlmani insists, the Libyans would be able to extract from Mr al-Senussi this information and other missing links in some of the darker happenings of the past 42 years

“It’s about asking the right questions. If I speak to al-Senussi about certain events in the 1970s, for instance, I would be able to extract information from him because he would not be able to lie to me... I would be able to take him back to the day we met and remind him what he told me,” he says. “The ICC would simply not be able to do this.”


[For the next week I shall be travelling around southern Namibia and will be able to trawl for Lockerbie-related material and post to this blog only intermittently. Internet cafes and wifi hotspots are thin upon the ground in the Nama Karoo.]

Why Lockerbie continues to cause controversy

"For anyone who's ever wondered why Lockerbie continues to cause controversy, this is an excellent primer" says @TremendaoNeil on Twitter, referring to Dr M G Kerr's superb Scottish Review article An overview of the Lockerbie case. This article provides the irrefutable answer to those who -- like too many lazy Scottish politicians -- are wont to say "There may have been a few technical flaws in the Megrahi trial and conviction, but what does that matter, since he was clearly guilty anyway."  There is now no excuse for such ignorant claptrap.

Reaction to Colin Boyd QC's forthcoming elevation

[The following are excerpts from a report by Lucy Adams in today’s edition of The Herald:]

Meanwhile, the news Lord Boyd is due to become a judge has provoked criticism.

He led the prosecution of the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, and was criticised by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission for failing to disclose information to Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi's defence. He rejected the claims.

When he resigned as Lord Advocate in 2006 there was speculation his decision was connected to the Shirley McKie fingerprint inquiry and Lockerbie case criticisms. He denied that and said it was just time to move on.

Ms McKie's father Iain said the news "took my breath away". He said: "That the Judicial Appointments Board should recommend to the First Minister that Lord Colin Boyd be appointed as a judge to the highest court in the land set new standards for being out of touch."

Tam Dalyell, the former MP and father of the house, said: "The fact he may well become a judge should not inoculate Lord Boyd from the obligation to answer questions on Lockerbie over the period that he headed the Crown Office.

"The Crown Office, and I would have thought Lord Boyd in his position in the Crown Office, have an obligation to address powerful criticisms of non-disclosure."

Megrahi prosecutor to become Scottish judge

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

Four high-profile QCs, including the former Lord Advocate Colin Boyd and Tommy Sheridan's former defence counsel, Maggie Scott, are about to become high court judges.

Mr Boyd, now Lord Boyd, who led the prosecution of the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, was recently criticised by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission for failing to disclose crucial information to Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi's defence. He rejected the claim. [RB: An account of Colin Boyd QC's conduct at one stage of the Lockerbie trial can be read here.]

Ms Scott, who was sacked by Mr Sheridan during his perjury trial in 2010, and led Megrahi's recent appeal case and the defence in many high-profile cases, including Ice Cream War murderer Thomas "TC" Campbell and more recently Nat Fraser, as well as Luke Mitchell, who was convicted of murdering teenager Jodi Jones in January 2005.

The Herald understands Michael Jones and David Burns have also been recommended for the appointments.

A source close to the process said: "Colin Boyd and Maggie Scott are two of the people the Judicial Appointments Board has recommended to the First Minister. It would be highly unusual for ministers to reject such a recommendation. Their appointments are expected to be confirmed shortly."

Lord Boyd resigned as Lord Advocate in 2006. His decision was seen as unusual and triggered speculation he was concerned about the inquiry into the Shirley McKie case, in which a police officer was wrongly accused of leaving a fingerprint at a murder scene and lying about it.

Another potential reason raised was the imminent decision on whether the Lockerbie case would be referred back for a fresh appeal.

Lord Boyd denied he was leaving because of the McKie fingerprint investigation or any other case and said it was simply "time to move on".

Jim Swire, whose daughter died in the Lockerbie bombing, said: "I understand the limited personnel and resources of the Scottish criminal justice system but I am surprised that Colin Boyd would have been put forward as a potential judge.

"In support of his colleagues on the prosecution team, it seemed to me that Boyd made a statement to the court [at Zeist] which was later shown by the revelations in the CIA cables to be untrue. It was over a matter of extreme importance because it concerned the credibility of the prosecution's star witness." (…)

Maggie Scott has described herself as "relatively rebellious". Following her sacking by Sheridan in 2010, the former MSP represented himself and was convicted of perjury in his defamation action against the News of the World in 2006.

Mr Jones, QC, acted for the News of the World in the Sheridan case and the owners of the Rosepark care home in South Lanarkshire after 14 residents died in a fire. Mr Burns recently acted for Craig Roy, who was convicted of murdering Jack Frew. [RB: David Burns QC was second senior counsel for Abdelbaset Megrahi at the Zeist trial and at the first appeal.]

Maggie Scott, QC, said last night that she could not comment. Lord Boyd could not be contacted.

[Two other members of the prosecution team, Alastair Campbell QC and Alan Turnbull QC have already become High Court judges. The principal procurator fiscal at the trial, Norman McFadyen, has become a sheriff.  A commentary by Lucy Adams in the same newspaper headlined Judges are no strangers to controversy focuses particularly on Colin Boyd’s controversial role in the Lockerbie trial.]

Did justice prevail in the Lockerbie trial?

[This is the headline over an editorial in today's edition of the Maltese newspaper The Times.  It reads as follows:]

 

Two hundred and seventy people died when Pan Am flight 103 exploded over Lockerbie in Scotland on December 21, 1988. One man, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, was convicted of the crime but the story is not over yet because, according to a report by a Scottish review commission, there may have been a miscarriage of justice.

Mr al-Megrahi had unsuccessfully appealed and then dropped a second appeal shortly before the highly controversial decision by Scotland to release him on compassionate grounds in August 2009 as he had been expected to die from cancer within three months. He is still alive though bedridden.

Investigators had alleged that the suitcase containing the bomb that destroyed the aircraft in the explosion had started its journey from Malta, a claim that the Maltese government had persistently denied. According to the investigators, the case had also contained fragments of clothing made by a manufacturer in Malta and sold by a shop in Sliema.

A Scottish newspaper, the Sunday Herald, has now published online a report into the al-Megrahi case, drawn up by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission and which had been kept secret for five years. In the commission’s view, seven vital pieces of evidence had not been disclosed by the Crown Office. It argues that, had such information been shared with the defence team, the outcome of the trial could have been different.

At stake in the review commission’s report is the credibility of the evidence given by a Maltese shopkeeper and which was a determining factor in the case for the prosecution. Confirming media reports that the shopkeeper and his brother had been compensated by the US State Department for their evidence, the commission argued, correctly, that the information should have been disclosed. It held the information could have been used to question the shopkeeper’s credibility. Had this been done, it could have put the prosecution’s case in serious difficulty.

Jim Swire, who lost a daughter in the terrorist act, believes there is even more compelling evidence relating to a “fabricated” metal fragment initially used to trace the bomb to Libya. He holds that the fragment was made and planted deliberately as evidence to mislead the Scottish courts. Following the publication of the review commission’s report, he now feels the Maltese government ought to petition the Crown Office in Edinburgh to reopen the investigation.

Dr Swire has for long believed that Mr al-Megrahi is innocent of the crime.

There are bound to be differences over whether there is need for Malta to clear its name with some arguing, for example, that there had never been any conclusive evidence that the bomb had left from here and that the country had never been accused of aiding terrorists. This may very well be true but the perception created by the investigators’ conclusion that the case containing the bomb had started its journey from Malta is hard to remove without conclusive evidence to the contrary.

It would, therefore, be only fair for Malta to have the perception removed altogether if this is at all possible after so many years since the explosion.

Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill has said that issues raised in the review commission’s report would have been properly considered by the Appeal Court had Mr al-Megrahi not withdrawn his appeal. So, whose interest is it now to ensure that there has not been a miscarriage of justice? And is it not crucial for Malta to clear its name altogether?