Lockerbie inquiry calls rejected

[This is the headline over a report just published by The Press Association news agency.  It reads as follows:]

Fresh calls for an inquiry into the Lockerbie bombing have been rejected by the First Minister.

Only a court of law can determine guilt or innocence, Alex Salmond said during First Minister's Questions at Holyrood.

He was urged by Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie to consider an inquiry less than a week after the man convicted for the atrocity died in Libya.

More than 40 politicians, religious leaders and journalists signed a letter on Tuesday calling for an independent inquiry into Abdelbaset al-Megrahi's conviction. The "perverse judgment" has left Scotland's criminal justice system a "mangled wreck", the letter says.

Mr Rennie said: "The First Minister has previously said he would be prepared to co-operate with a UK inquiry. If he has no objection to an inquiry in principle, and this group wants a Scottish inquiry, will he agree to hold it?"

Mr Salmond said: "The place where you determine guilt or innocence of an individual is a court of law.

"As Willie Rennie should know, the relatives of Mr Megrahi have the ability, if they so choose, to go back to the Scottish Criminal Case Review Commission and seek further leave to appeal. That is the process which can be followed."

Mr Rennie said the conduct of the Crown should be looked at, rather than focusing on guilt or innocence.

He asked Mr Salmond: "Surely it can't just be left in the hands of a family somewhere in Tripoli for that to be determined? If he chooses to act on this inquiry he'd have the support of Desmond Tutu, Terry Waite, John Pilger and so many others. This is not a normal case. It's Scotland's biggest terrorist atrocity. These are serious questions raised by serious people, and the world is watching."

Mr Salmond replied: "They're looking for an inquiry for the responsibility, ultimately, for Lockerbie. That touches on matters of huge international importance which would be beyond the ability of the Scottish inquiry to summon witnesses, compel evidence, etcetera."

[Mr Salmond gravely misrepresents the nature of the inquiry that Justice for Megrahi is seeking.  The true position is, as has been pointed out on many occasions, that what is being called for is an inquiry into the investigation, prosecution and conviction of Abdelbaset Megrahi. Each and every one of these matters is within the jurisdiction of Scots law and the remit of the Scottish Government:

The event occurred over and on Scottish territory.
The case was investigated by a Scottish police force.
The trial was conducted under Scots Law.
Mr Megrahi was convicted under Scots Law.
Mr Megrahi was imprisoned in a Scottish gaol.
The SCCRC referred the second appeal to the Scottish Court of Appeal.
Mr Megrahi was given compassionate release by the Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Justice.

That is the nature of the inquiry that Justice for Megrahi's petition is asking the Scottish Government to convene. A more wide-ranging inquiry into what really happened to Pan Am 103 would involve non-devolved issues.  Such an inquiry would have to be instituted by the UK Government (or by the UK and Scottish governments jointly -- the Inquiries Act 2005 specifically envisages such joint inquiries in section 32 read with section 1(2)). But we are and always have been clear that our request to the Scottish Government relates exclusively to matters that are within devolved Scottish jurisdiction.  


In a statement after First Minister’s Questions, Willie Rennie said:

“A liberal society should be one that is prepared to look hard at its justice system, even if it is worried about what it might find.

“I have called for a Scottish public inquiry into the Lockerbie prosecution.

“The First Minister has the opportunity to shine a light onto the conduct of the Crown Office, which for years has been left blemished by the six separate grounds of appeal identified by the Government's own Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission.

“On matters which relate to the integrity, fairness and justice of the Scottish justice system, it is simply not good enough to leave this to a family in Tripoli.

"Questions relating to Scottish justice are not a matter to be left to a UK inquiry. It has the backing of 40 leading figures, is about Scotland's biggest terrorist atrocity and potential flaws have been identified by the Government's own review body. We need the First Minister to act."]

Pan Am 103: Libya and a case unclosed

[This is the title of an article by Professor Paul Rogers published today on the Open Democracy website.  It reads as follows:]

The death on 20 May 2012 of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the only person ^↑ convicted of the bombing of a passenger airplane over the Scottish town of Lockerbie on 21 December 1988, has been followed by calls for a renewed enquiry into the circumstances of and responsibility of the tragedy. The focus of these calls is thus very different from the controversy over al-Megrahi's release ^↑ from custody by the Scottish government in August 2009 on medical grounds, for it relates to the murders of the 259 people on Pan Am 103 and the eleven townspeople who died in Lockerbie itself.

This may seem a fine distinction, since the "compassionate" release in 2009 ^↑  provoked fierce international criticism of the Scottish government's decision; not least because of suspicions that it was linked to potential oil deals between the British government in London and the then Libyan regime of Colonel Gaddafi. Scotland's first minister Alex Salmond stoutly denies any such hidden agenda, and points ^↑ out that the case remains under police investigation; for, whatever the extent or otherwise ^↑ of al-Megrahi's guilt, few people, whatever their views, believe that he acted alone.

The doubts over the case ^↑ revolve around several areas, but at the outset it is worth bearing in mind two things:

* Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi was one of two people tried for the attack; the other, Lamen Khalifa Fhimah, was cleared, released and returned to Libya

* Al-Megrahi's case was itself up for consideration by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission ^↑ in 2007 following the raising of issues about his conviction, a review process that ceased on his release.

But the core issue regarding the Lockerbie attack goes much further than details of legal proedure, important though these are. It concerns the question ^↑ of Libyan involvement as a whole. This has been pursued by a number of people, most notably the families of some ^↑ of the British passengers who were among the 270 people killed when Pan Am 103 exploded over Lockerbie.

A different scenario

Many press articles and broadcast documentaries have examined the background. A recent, detailed analysis is by Davina Miller in a leading academic security journal (see "Who Knows About This? Western Policy Towards Iran: The Lockerbie Case ^↑", Defense and Security Analysis, 27/4, December 2011). The intention of Miller's paper is not to reach a firm conclusion, but to use numerous sources (including United States and United Kingdom legal documents and intelligence-agency sources) to examine the argument that there is a convincing alternative narrative to the official one.

In the most compressed terms, the proposition at the heart of this narrative is that the attack was sponsored by Iran in retaliation for the deaths of 290 passengers and crew of Iran Air Flight 655 when this craft, an Airbus 300, was shot down ^↑ in July 1988 over the Persian Gulf by the American guided-missile cruiser ^↑ USS Vincennes.

The case does not claim that Iranian officials were directly involved in the Lockerbie bombing, but that they sponsored the Damascus-based PFLP-GC ^↑ Palestinian paramilitary group to conduct the attack. This group both had the expertise and was known at the time to be working towards attacking western aircraft.

At first sight the idea seems far-fetched. After all, why would Libya surrender the two defendants for trial (in April 1999) and offer compensation of $2.7 billion to the bereaved families (in August 2003)? The counter-argument is that these moves ^↑were predicated on easing and even ending international sanctions, and that their timing - four years years after the attack - was connected to Libya's effort to "come in from the (geopolitical) cold".

That aspect of the whole affair ^↑ may still be problematic. But it has to be set alongside substantial problems with the case against al-Megrahi that Davina Miller ^↑analyses.

There are four elements involved:

* Luqa Airport in Malta, where the bomb was apparently put on a feeder flight, was regarded as a particularly secure airport and one that presented considerable difficulties for any individual or group that wanted to get a bomb onto a plane

* Al-Megrahi was identified as buying clothing in Malta, fragments of which were found among the remains of the suitcase containing the bomb; but there were serious doubts about the reliability of the identification

* Al-Megrahi used a false passport in Malta, though this was apparently common practice among Libyan security people (al-Megrahi was actually known to the CIA as a Libyan "technical communications expert")

* There were some problems with the forensic evidence presented at the trial, evidence that became very much more problematic after it when some of the forensic personnel were discredited for reasons of incompetence.

If al-Megrahi was not responsible ^↑ for the Lockerbie attack, this still leaves thequestion ^↑ of why the investigation focused on Libya and so neglected the possibility of Iranian involvement.

The argument here is that the Lockerbie attack ^↑ came at a time when there was a need to improve relations between the United States and Iran, because of the influence Tehran had on the release of western hostages ^↑ being held by its Shi'aallies in Lebanon. To focus systematic blame for Lockerbie on the Iranians would, it is argued, have made release of the hostages much less likely.

Perhaps the strongest aspect of the whole matter ^↑ relates to the starting-point: that one of the two people tried for the mass murder was found not guilty, and even al-Megrahi's guilt was sufficiently problematic for his case to be up for review.

The major political changes in Libya in 2011-12 make it possible that further evidence may emerge there, though the hatred of the current leadership for theGaddafi regime may make them more than willing for him to continue to take the blame. The answer, instead, may actually lie in Tehran, and might in due course be confirmed, but there is little probability of that in the near future.

What remains is the unsatisfactory situation that has received fresh attention ^↑ with al-Megrahi's death. But Davina Miller's investigation does present copious evidence of exactly why the situation is unsatisfactory. This at least makes it less likely that the matter will now fade from view.

... a stain on Scotland's very soul ...

[What follows is taken from an article in the current issue of the Scottish Review by Judith Jaafar headlined Unless the SNP tells us what it knows about Lockerbie, I'm quitting the party:]

I am one of the many supporters of the present Scottish Government who is suffering what one might describe, in a cliched manner, as a dark night of the soul. Why is it not coming clean about the lies of previous administrations regarding the guilt of Megrahi? 

Why is it not, even in the most cynical view of such things, making political traction out of the fact that this happened before it came to power and that it is now in a position to show the world what a just, decent and honest nascent nation Scotland is, by washing dirty, filthy linen in public and pointing fingers at conspirators and wrongdoers? Why indeed has it seemingly made it even more legislatively difficult for potential miscarriages of justice to be opened up to public inquiry, away from the judiciary who may indeed have perpetrated such miscarriages?

I have thought long and hard about these questions, speculating wildly about this and that and the other. I do not believe that the SNP government is intrinsically weak and corrupt, nor ill-motivated. I firmly believe that it knows the whole truth about the Lockerbie affair, as does the Westminster government, the American government and just about every Tom, Dick and Harry on the planet – everybody knows that something is seriously amiss (except Johann Lamont) [Scottish Parliament Labour Party leader]. 

I think that by releasing Megrahi compassionately the Scottish Government tried to do the right thing, morally, whilst failing to address the legal and justiciary issues. So what's stopping it going the whole hog and revealing the the extent of the fitting-up of an innocent man, and the cover-up that has thus ensued? What is tying its hands? What subtle, or even overt pressure is being applied? By whom? For what reason? For surely there are things going on here that we do not understand, at least not in public circles. (...)

My speculations are as useful or as useless as anyone else's, but I must admit my old buddy Robert Fisk of Beirut and Independent fame put into words the other day in the paper exactly what my thoughts are on this matter. Oh, how enraged the Americans were when we released Megrahi on compassionate grounds. Hillary Clinton went ape-shit, at least publicly, and half the American government and nation wanted to see Scotland disappear off the face of the earth, those of them that had any knowledge of the Lockerbie bombing in the first place. What weak fools the Scots were, and a whole bunch of Yankees were never going to set foot in Scotland again. 'Bovvered', I had to ask?

But therein lies the possible answer to this ethical/judicial/political conundrum. How much does a fledgling-yet-ancient nation on the periphery of Europe, breaking away from the colonial master and possibly now flying free without the safety net of a strong European Union, need the goodwill of the USA (and all the Scottish expats and ancestors therein), still the most powerful political and economic entity in the world? Hmm. As Fisk concluded, no matter how self-righteously enraged the Yanks were at the release of Megrahi, can you imagine how incandescent they would be if Scotland dared to reveal the truth about the Lockerbie bombing?

If I were Alex Salmond, I would be finding it hard to sleep at night. I don't envy him his position, but have informed the party executive that unless they come clean about Megrahi, in whatever way they can, I will be leaving the party that I have belonged to since I was a nipper. That's how important this issue is to me. It's not really about poor Abdelbaset (may Allah bless him), but about the integrity of Scotland. This whole affair is a stain on Scotland's very soul.

Lockerbie faces Megrahi death

[This is the headline over a report in today’s edition of the Dumfries &  Galloway Standard, a newspaper circulating in the Lockerbie area.  It reads as follows:]

Tears won’t be shed in Lockerbie for convicted mass murderer Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.

Local reaction to his death has been subdued with the regret that his passing will “change nothing.”

It leaves many questions unanswered and an ongoing investigation for Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary.

Dumfriesshire MP David Mundell said: “Mr Meghrahi’s passing is the end of a chapter but not the end of a story that has unfolded since that terrible night in 1988. “It will not bring closure to all those bereaved or otherwise caught up in that tragic event and who want answers.”

Former Lockerbie councillor Marjory McQueen (pictured) became a public face for the town in the wake of the Lockerbie Disaster and in 2010 received an MBE for her work.

She said: “There will be no tears shed in Lockerbie but there won’t be dancing in the streets either.

“Lockerbie has moved on since the disaster. As far as the town is concerned we are a generation on from it and we are getting on with our lives.”

Marjory, whose husband, Ken, was a GP in Lockerbie at the time of the disaster, said: “It has been noted that he has died. We were expecting that. It does not alter anything for the victims and their families and for Lockerbie. Nothing will change with his death – 270 innocent people have still lost their lives.

“We have a humanitarian role in Lockerbie to look after the memorials and the visitor centre so that we are welcoming to the loved ones who want to come.”

Annandale North councillor Ted Brown said: “The members of our close community will differ in the way that we respond to this news.

“Those who felt that he was guilty may obtain some closure now that he has died.

“Those who were not convinced of his guilt may feel that his passing means that we may never know the full truth of who was involved in the 1988 bombing.”

A local councillor at the time of the disaster, former teacher David Wilson said: “I don’t think there will be a tear shed or a celebration.

“So many of us lost friends and even neighbours that day and remembering those who died is the most important thing.

“His death might draw a line under some things but it won’t provide anyone with any closure.”

[A further report in the same newspaper reads in part:]

The family of Scotland’s worst ever mass murderer could seek an appeal in a bid to clear his name. (…)

His death has led to fresh calls for answers into the Lockerbie Disaster and comes as the Scottish Government is funding the Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary’s investigation team to seek the truth in Libya after the death of Colonel Gaddafi.

Prime Minister David Cameron, who publicly opposed Megrahi’s release, has rejected calls for further review into his conviction.

However, First Minister Alex Salmond said on Monday there is nothing to stop Megrahi’s family from seeking a fresh appeal.

He said: “It is open for relatives of Mr Megrahi to apply to the Scottish Criminal Case Review Commission to seek a further appeal. And the best, indeed the only, place for guilt or innocence to be determined is in a court of law.”

Mr Salmond added: “His death does, however, put to rest some of the conspiracy theories which have attempted to suggest that his illness was somehow manufactured.

“Mr Megrahi’s death ends one chapter of the Lockerbie case, but it does not close the book.

“The Lockerbie case remains a live investigation, and Scotland’s criminal justice authorities have made clear that they will rigorously pursue any new lines of inquiry. Scotland’s senior law officer the Lord Advocate recently visited Libya, and we have been offered the co-operation of the new Libyan authorities. It has always been the Crown’s position that Mr Megrahi did not act alone but with others.”

His thoughts were echoed by Dumfries and Galloway MP Russell Brown [Labour], who said: “There are still so many unanswered questions about the bombing of Pan Am 103. Megrahi’s death means that the possibility of getting all the truth about the disaster may have died with him.”

Elaine Murray MSP [Labour] said: “The Scottish Government still need to come clean about the medical evidence that led to the three month prognosis being made, but today our thoughts are with those who lost their lives.”

Jim Hume, Scottish Liberal Democrat MSP, said: “It should act as spur to establish the facts.”

And Dumfriesshire MP David Mundell [Conservative] said: “There are so many unanswered questions surrounding this tragedy and it is crucial that we continue to seek vital answers.”

Megrahi doubts

[Two of the letters that appear in The Scotsman today under this heading read as follows:]

Bearing in mind Tony Gauci’s insistence that the man who purchased clothing in his shop was about 50 years old, over 6ft tall, heavily built and dark-skinned (Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi was 36, 5ft 8in tall, of medium build and light-skinned), Clive Fairweather’s doubts over his identification of Megrahi (your report, 21 May) are well founded.

The “evidence” linking Megrahi to the bombing was sparse, none of it stands up to close scrutiny and without Gauci’s testimony there would surely be no case to answer.

I find it incomprehensible that anyone who has studied the Lockerbie case in any detail can swallow the guilty verdict.

Robert Woodcock

Bob MacDougall (Letters, 22 May) refers to Mr Megrahi getting a hero’s welcome on his return to Libya.

My impression was that it was mainly a family welcome, with little state participation apart from the presence of Colonel Gaddafi’s son. Clans and extended families seem less important now in Scotland than they once were, but remain significant in Libya. Mention is made of Saltire flags at that welcome but not of how they got there. There was a suggestion at the time that they were provided by the British Embassy.

We may never know the truth of that, or the motive if true. There is much which we may never know about this case, but we may hope that Mr Megrahi’s appeal may be re-opened, for the sake of his family and friends but also for the sake of the reputation of Scotland’s legal system.

David Stevenson


[Interesting commentaries following the death of Megrahi are to be found on the Business Insider website (Burying the “Lockerbie bomber”—and the truth) and on the Aljazeera website (Megrahi's death - An end to a century of mistrust?)]

Megrahi’s death and the quest for the truth

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

A day after the death, last Sunday, of Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, the man convicted of the bombing of Pan Am 103 that killed 270 people over Lockerbie in Scotland in 1988, The Times of London carried a cartoon showing someone about to cover the words The Truth painted on the nose of the airliner after the explosion. The inference is that, with Mr Megrahi’s death, the truth will not be uncovered now. But this need not be the case, particularly following the revelation, some time ago, that evidence not disclosed to the defence team at the time of the trial could have led to a different outcome.

It would be morally unjust to consider the case closed, not only with regard to Mr Megrahi, who pleaded innocent of the crime until his death, but also to the relatives of all the victims and to Malta too.

However much Malta denies the claim that the luggage containing the bomb started its journey here, the fact is that, often enough, news reports about Lockerbie carry graphics showing precisely that the bomb was loaded, in Malta, on an Air Malta flight bound for Frankfurt. This impression will not be removed until the true facts of the terrorist act become known. It is, therefore, in Malta’s interest too that the investigation into the bombing of the airliner is re-opened.

A relentless campaigner for the truth, Jim Swire, whose daughter was one of the passengers who died in the air tragedy, had this to say after Mr Megrahi’s death was announced: “At least, before he died we learnt what he already knew: that the story that a Libyan bomb using a long-running timer had started its journey from Malta was a myth. The famed fragment ‘PT35b’ could never have been part of one of the timers allegedly used. There is now no valid evidence left from the court that either Malta, its flag carrier airline or Baset’s own country were involved. Baset has a valid alibi and he died knowing that, in the end, the truth will emerge.”

Will it? Many, including a cross section of the national press in Britain, think it should.

One newspaper, for example, called for the Scottish government to agree to the holding of a public inquiry, arguing that Mr Megrahi’s death was no reason to stop trying to get to the truth. Another argued that “if ever a crime of this magnitude warranted an independent review it is this”.

At one time, a former Libyan Justice Minister, Mustafa Abdel-Jalil, had told a Swedish tabloid that he had proof that Muammar Gaddafi had personally ordered the Lockerbie bombing. But it seems that the story ended there.

What fuelled the belief that there might have been a miscarriage of justice was a report by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, which, among other matters, raised the credibility of the evidence given by a Maltese shopkeeper. The commission confirmed that the shopkeeper and his brother had been compensated by the US State Department for their evidence and held that this information should have been disclosed to the defence team.

Dr Swire feels it is a tragedy “that we have failed to overturn the verdict while he (Mr Megrahi) was alive”.

There have been various theories over the release of Mr Megrahi from prison on compassionate grounds in August 2009. For example, many believed that his release was done out of commercial interests.

However, irrespective of the reasons that led to his early release from prison, justice will not be done before the truth is unearthed.

Call for fresh inquiry into Lockerbie bomb conviction

[This is the headline over a report in today’s edition of The Times (behind the paywall).  It reads in part:]

Religious leaders, politicians and relatives of some victims of the Lockerbie bombing have called for an independent inquiry into the conviction of Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi, the man found guilty of the attack.

In an open letter, the campaigners claimed the case against al-Megrahi “held water like a sieve” and was compromised by both the “bribing” of a witness and “the very real possibility” that key evidence in his trial had been fabricated.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Terry Waite, formerly the Archbishop of Canterbury’s special envoy, and Sir Teddy Taylor, a former Conservative Secretary of State for Scotland, signed the letter, along with the journalists Kate Adie, Ian Hislop and John Pilger, and 35 others.

Al-Megrahi died at the weekend, almost three years after he was released on compassionate grounds by the Scottish government because he had [prostate] cancer.

The Scottish government denies that it granted his freedom in 2009 only after he decided to drop a second appeal against his conviction. It said that its decision was humane, in accordance with Scottish law.

Kenny MacAskill, the Justice Secretary, said that al-Megrahi would answer to “a higher power”.

The campaigners ironically quote Mr MacAskill in their letter, which criticises the Scotttish government. “Fine words are not enough. Action is required,” say the authors.

“If Scotland wishes to see its criminal justice system reinstated to the position of respect that it once held rather than its languishing as the mangled wreck it has become because of this perverse judgement, it is imperative that its government acts by endorsing an independent inquiry into this entire affair.

“As a nation which aspires to independence, Scotland must have the courage to look itself in the mirror.” (…)

Dr Jim Swire and Rev John Mosey, who both lost daughters on the flight, are among the signatories, who criticised the actions of the Crown Office (the equivalent of the Crown Prosecution Service in England and Wales).

“The Crown and successive governments have, for years, acted to obstruct any attempts to investigate how the conviction of Mr al-Megrahi came about,” write the authors.

They allege a serious of failings in the prosecution case, including the bribery of Tony Gauci, the Maltese shopkeeper who was a key Crown witness; the possibility that forensic evidence was fabricated; the retraction of some testimony; and the non-disclosure of other evidence. The letter adds: “Evidence supporting the alternative and infinitely more logical ingestion of the bomb directly at Heathrow was either dismissed at the trial or withheld from the court until after the verdict of guilty had been returned.”

The Scottish government rejected the inquiry and said that the issues being raised related to the conviction and “must be a matter for a court of law”.

A Scottish government spokesman said that Al-Megrahi’s relatives, or the relatives of the victims of the Lockerbie atrocity, were all entitled to ask the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission to refer the case to the Appeal Court again on a posthumous basis.

He added: “Ministers would be entirely comfortable with that.”

A spokesman for the Crown Office said that the only appropriate forum for the determination of guilt or innocence was the criminal court.

[A similar article appears today in The Scotsman. A report in today’s edition of The Herald contains the following:]

Mr [Tam] Dalyell, a former Father of the House of Commons, told The Herald: "The SNP Government and Alex Salmond and Kenny MacAskill in particular are burying their heads in the sand on the Lockerbie issue. If they were to admit that Mr Megrahi had nothing to do with the crime of Lockerbie they would then by implication condemn the very institution which shows Scotland to be most separate from England – the justice system.

"The reason to pursue an inquiry after Megrahi's death, is that to not do so would leave an indelible stain on the Scottish justice system. It is about pursuing the truth. I simply do not think party politics should be played on this. If people or parties have to be embarrassed then so be it because they will have brought it on themselves by being less than candid. For the sake of the Scottish justice system we cannot let this go."

[It is sad, but entirely in character, to see the Scottish Government and the Crown Office repeating the tired old mantra that the only proper way to address concerns over the Megrahi conviction is through a court of law. It is indeed true that the only way that the verdict can be overturned is through a further appeal. But we have clear evidence now of flaws -- indeed wrongdoing -- in the Lockerbie investigation and in the conduct of the prosecution. It is quite certainly not the case that only way in which these matters can be ventilated is in an appeal against the verdict. They are matters which have caused, or are capable of causing, public concern; and that is precisely the test that must be satisfied for an inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005. It would be outrageous if police and Crown wrongdoing in a case could be exposed only if the accused person chose to exercise his right of appeal. Such wrongdoing is a matter of public concern and it is to address such concerns that the 2005 Act exists.  Moreover, such an inquiry could lead to a royal pardon (indeed royal pardons almost invariably flow from inquiries into cases in which there has been a conviction). A royal pardon does not overturn the verdict, which technically still stands, but it is an official recognition that the conviction was flawed. So there really is no constitutional or legal problem about asking for an inquiry into what went wrong in the investigation and prosecution of the Lockerbie case.]

Megrahi ‘innocent’

[This is the heading over a letter in today’s edition of The Times (behind the paywall) from Lord Lester of Herne Hill QC (Anthony Lester).  It reads as follows:]

Lord Lester of Herne Hill acted for Abdul Baset al-Megrahi in the European Court of Human Rights, and believes him to be innocent

I acted for Abdul Baset al-Megrahi in his unsuccessful application to the European Court of Human Rights complaining of a breach of his right to a fair criminal trial (reports, May 21 and 22). I did not appear in the Scottish proceedings, but, after reviewing all the transcripts and judgments, I came to the conclusion that there had been a serious miscarriage of justice.

When I met al-Megrahi in HMP Barlinnie, I asked him whether he thought the Libyan government would stand by him. He replied, “they ought to do so but I am not sure whether they will”.

He told me what it had been like in Tripoli when sanctions had been imposed to secure his extradition to face trial. He said that in the midst of a huge media campaign his mother had asked him if he had any more bombs in his possession. He said he realised that if even his own mother believed he was guilty it was unlikely that he would have a fair trial.

It is regrettable that, despite the concerns expressed by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, after a three-year examination of the evidence, he was persuaded to abandon his further appeal before being released and returned to die in Libya.

In my view, he was not the perpetrator of the barbaric Lockerbie atrocity.

Wickedness in Washington and in the Crown Office in Edinburgh

[ Tam Dalyell’s obituary of Abdelbaset Megrahi  in The Independent reads as follows:]

Acres of newsprint have appeared in recent years, covering various rather separate theories about the release of the so-called Lockerbie bomber.

If I thought for one moment that Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was guilty as charged in the mass murder of 270 innocent people in the crash of the Pan Am airliner "Maid of the Seas" at Lockerbie on 21 December 1988, I would not have agreed to pen an obituary – let alone an affectionate one.

My settled conviction, as a "Professor of Lockerbie Studies" over a 22-year period, is that neither Megrahi nor Libya had any role in the destruction of Pan Am 103. The Libyans were cynically scapegoated in 1990, two years after the crash, by a US government which had decided to go to war with Iraq and did not want complications with Syria and Iran, which had harboured the real perpetrators of the terrible deed.

Libya and its "operatives", Megrahi and Al Amin Khalifa Fhimah, only came into the frame at a very late date. In my informed opinion, Megrahi has been the victim of one of the most spectacular (and expensive) miscarriages of justice in history. The assertion of innocence is confirmed in the 497 pages of John Ashton's scholarly and remarkable book, Megrahi: You Are My Jury – The Lockerbie Evidence, published by Birlinn.

This is an opinion shared by the senior and experienced solicitor Eddie McKechnie, who successfully represented Fhimah at Zeist in Holland, where a Scottish court was assembled to try the two accused under rules conducted by the jurisdiction of the laws of Scotland, and who took on Megrahi's case following his conviction; by Tony Kelly, the immensely thorough solicitor who has represented him for the past six years; by the bereaved relatives Dr Jim Swire and the Reverend John Mosey, who lost daughters and attended the entire Zeist trial; by Professor Robert Black, Emeritus Professor of Scots Law at the University of Edinburgh, and Lockerbie-born; and by many others in legal Edinburgh.

Furthermore, the Scottish Criminal Review Commission, in the course of its 800-page report, says (paragraph 24, page 708): "The Crown deprived the defence of the opportunity to take such steps as it might have deemed necessary – so the defence's case was damaged." It concluded: "The commission's view is that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred."

Megrahi was not in Malta on the date the clothing, so crucial in the whole Lockerbie saga, was bought from the shopkeeper Tony Gauci. The proprietor of Mary's House identified a number of different people, including Abu Talb, who appeared at the trial to deny his part in the bombing.

Talb was a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine General Command and is now serving a life sentence in Sweden for the 1985 bombings in Copenhagen and Amsterdam. These discrepancies were part of the reason why the Scottish criminal review commission concluded that there could have been a miscarriage of justice; another was the unexplained payment of $10m from Iranian sources into the coffers of the Popular Front.

The testimony of Lesley Atkinson, who knew Megrahi well in Tripoli, is interesting. She is the wife of Neville Atkinson, who, in 1972, left a career as a night-fighter pilot in the Royal Navy to take up a position as personal pilot to the president of Libya, Colonel Gadaffi, until 1982. "Megrahi was polite and friendly and worked for Libyan Arab Airlines," Mrs Atkinson told me. "Of course, lots of people who worked for LAA were connected to the security services and I do not doubt that he was one of them. We knew him both at work and at the Beach Club – he was a normal, nice guy. I cannot imagine that he would ever have dreamt of planting a bomb on an airliner. He just would not have done that to passengers."

Eddie McKechnie described Megrahi as a cultured man doing a job for his country, and certainly not a mass-murderer. Had he not been given extremely bad advice not to appear in the witness box Megrahi would have revealed the truth – that he was a sanctions-buster, travelling the world to find spare parts for the Libyan oil industry and Libyan Arab Airlines. This role was confirmed to me by Colonel Gadaffi, when, as leader of the Inter-Parliamentary Union delegation to Libya in March 2001, I saw him in his tent outside Sirte. Gaddafi's own knowledge or involvement in Lockerbie is a different matter.

Abdelbaset Ali Mohamed al-Megrahi was born in 1952 and educated in Tripoli and in the Engineering Faculty of Benghazi University. He became involved in the Ministry of Trade, and like many other officials, certainly did so in the intelligence services. He served as the head of security for Libyan Arab Airlines and as director of the Centre for Strategic Studies in Tripoli. A genuine believer in what the young Gaddafi was trying to achieve, and in the Great Jamariyah, Megrahi was happy to put his talents at the service of the state. Where else in Africa is there no hint of personal corruption among the leadership, he asked me! He had good relations with engineers at Brown and Root, I was told by their chairman and managing director, Sir Richard Morris (1980-90). Brown and Root was the contractor for the huge irrigation projects in Cyrenerica, south of Benghazi, the man-made river bringing water to desert areas that had been fertile in Roman times.

He was understandably proud of the traditional skills associated with his people. On one occasion, when I visited him in Barlinnie Prison in Glasgow and told him that I had been to Leptis Magna, he responded: "You know that my Tripolitanian ancestors were the artists in stone, responsible for work throughout the Empire, not least in Rome itself!" Had the judges had the opportunity to get to know Megrahi, as I knew him, they could never have arrived at the verdict of "guilty" – at most, the good Scots legal term "not proven".

After Zeist, Fhimah, represented by the aggressively formidable barrister Richard Keen QC, was cleared and returned to a hero's welcome in Tripoli. Fhimah talked with knowledge and pride, as did Megrahi, about the wonderful sight of Sabbratah and the glories of the Greek colonial city at Cyrene.

Meanwhile, Megrahi was incarcerated in Barlinnie Prison. I was not his only visitor there and in Greenock who came away with a favourable opinion. Dr Swire, who lost his daughter Flora, a medical student at the University of Nottingham, told me: "On meeting Abdelbaset in Greenock prison, I found him charming, rational, not given to anger or bluster. He made it obvious that his first priority was to clear his name before returning to his much-loved family in Tripoli.

"I saw him for the last time just before Christmas 2008, when, he, a devout Muslim, gave me a Christmas card in which he asked me and my family to pray for him and his family. That card is one of my most precious possessions.

"This meeting was before he could have known just how closely death loomed. I cannot criticise his apparently voluntary decision to spend his last months on earth with his family, above the priority of clearing his name."

I know that in some uninformed quarters, Dr Swire's views are regarded as eccentric. But it is the other British relatives who have studied the position in depth, such as Martin Cadman, who lost his son Bill; Pamela Dix, who lost her brother; and the Reverend John Mosey, who lost a daughter, have arrived at precisely the same conclusions about Megrahi's innocence. Unlike some American relatives, they have bothered to make exhaustive studies of the detail.

In my opinion, whatever Gordon Brown, Kenny MacAskill, Alec Salmond and Jack Straw – all fundamentally decent human beings – may feel they have to say in public due to pressure, and wickedness in Washington and in the Crown Office in Edinburgh, which, above all, did not want their misdeeds exposed by the truth, they all knew that they were acquiescing in the release of an innocent man. I am not quite so sure that Fhimah did not have an inkling about potentially explosive material on its way to the Bekaa valley.

Even in his final hours, controversy never deserted Megrahi. The Libyan authorities were absolutely justified in declining to extradite him, both for reasons of international law and more importantly, that he was not guilty as charged of the Lockerbie crime – also the considered opinion of Dr Hans Koechler, who attended Megrahi's trial as an official UN observer and has examined his appeal process in Scotland.

As James Cusick, who has followed the twists and turns of the Lockerbie saga for many years as a highly informed journalist, wrote in The Independent on Tuesday 30 August, "The truth behind the Lockerbie bombing remains enmeshed in diplomatic gains."

My last sight of Abdelbaset was on TV on 3 October, attended by Mrs Megrahi, with tubes galore, thanking Dr Swire in gentle tones for trying to furnish necessary drugs and hissing out that there were many liars at Zeist. So there were.

Abdelbaset Ali Mohamed al-Megrahi, intelligence officer: born Tripoli, Libya 1 April 1952; married Aisha (four sons, one daughter); died 20 May 2012

CNN: Did someone else bomb Pan Am 103?

Here are links to five of today’s more interesting internet contributions arising out of the death of Abdelbaset Megrahi:

On the CNN website Lockerbie: Did someone else bomb PanAm103?
On the BBC News website Public figures demand inquiry into conviction

On the website of the Maltese paper The Times Family defend bomber at burial

On the same website Search for Lockerbie truth must continue
On Labour MP Michael Meacher’s website What is Cameron hiding over Megrahi?