Lawyer confident about Lockerbie appeal

[This is the headline over a report published on the BBC News website on this date in 2001. It reads in part:]

The Libyan lawyer in charge of the Lockerbie bomber's appeal says he is confident that his client will soon be freed.

Dr Ibrahim Legwell's comments came after it was revealed that two top international legal experts had joined the appeal team.

English barrister Michael Mansfield QC and American human rights lawyer Alan Dershowitz are both involved in the fight to free Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi.

The Libyan was sentenced to life imprisonment earlier this year for murdering 270 people in the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie.

His co-accused, Al Amin Khalifa Fahima, was found not guilty by three judges at a specially convened Scottish court in the Netherlands.

Speaking from London on Wednesday, Dr Legwell said: "I sent them a copy of the verdict and the transcripts of the trial and asked them for their views and analysis.

"I wanted to know what western lawyers thought about the verdict.

"Their replies gave me the confidence that we can go ahead with the trial with confidence in the western judicial system.

"There are definite aspects which show there has been a miscarriage of justice and I am very confident that we will be able to turn over his conviction." (...)

A further six lawyers have been enlisted to work on Megrahi's appeal.

Among them is Clive Nicholls QC, who represented the former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet during extradition hearings at the High Court in London last year.

High profile American lawyer Frank Rubino has also been recruited to the appeal team.

Dr Legwell said he would consult the international legal team for further advice before passing it on to "our Scottish defence team so they can adapt it to Scots law".

Referring to his client, Dr Legwell said: "He is suffering a lot because he knows he is innocent, but has been convicted. But he is optimistic and confident he will win his case."

[RB: Dr Legwell had been the Libyan lawyer originally appointed to represent Megrahi and Fhimah. He was sacked in September 1998 and replaced by Kamal Maghur: the circumstances are outlined here. Maghur died shortly after the Zeist trial ended with Megrahi’s conviction, and Legwell took up the reins once again.

Dr Legwell was always a great enthusiast for international advisory teams, though what they could usefully contribute to preparation for a Scottish trial seemed, to me at least, to be questionable. Here is something written by me about an earlier stage in the case:]

… it was indicated to me that the Libyan government was satisfied regarding the fairness of a criminal trial in Scotland but that since Libyan law prevented the extradition of nationals for trial overseas, the ultimate decision on surrender for trial would have to beone taken voluntarily by the accused persons themselves, in consultation with their independent legal advisers. For this purpose a meeting was convened in Tripoli in October 1993 of the international team of lawyers which had already been appointed to represent the accused. This team consisted of lawyers from Scotland, England, Malta, Switzerland and the United States and was chaired by the principal Libyan lawyer for the accused, Dr Ibrahim Legwell. The Libyan government asked me to be present in Tripoli while the team was meeting so that the government itself would have access to independent Scottish legal advice should the need arise.

Libya undertakes to pay Lockerbie compensation

[What follows is excerpted from a report published in The Independent on this date in 2002:]

The Libyan government said yesterday that it was ready to pay compensation for the 1988 Lockerbie bombing and address UN demands that it accept responsibility for the attack, which killed 270 people.

Libya's Foreign Minister, Mohammed Abderrahman Shalgam, made the announcement after talks between the Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi, and the Foreign Office minister Mike O'Brien. He also said Libya was ready to normalise relations with the US.

Mr Shalgam said: "Regarding compensation, as a principle, yes, we are going to do something on that topic. Regarding responsibility, we are discussing this issue. We are ready to get rid of this obstacle." The minister's comments mark a sea-change in Libya's official position. While a team of lawyers and business leaders has been involved in discussions about compensation for the past 18 months, the Libya has until now expressed reluctance to make such payments. (...)

British officials said the comments were Libya's clearest declaration so far that it was prepared to comply with conditions for lifting all sanctions imposed over its role in the Lockerbie bombing, for which the Libyan agent Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi was convicted last year at the specially established Scottish court in the Netherlands.

Mr O'Brien is the first British minister to visit Libya for 20 years and is believed to be the first yet to meet Colonel Gaddafi.Their meeting was held in a bedouin tent on the beach of Sirte and marked a day of intensive discussions, which also included five hours of talks with senior Libyan ministers. British officials described the meeting as a "thorough work-through of the bilateral issues", including co-operation against terrorism, as well as Lockerbie.

[The Guardian’s report contains the following:]

Outstanding issues remain between Britain and Libya.

British officials said Libya needed to comply fully with UN resolutions calling for Libya to accept responsibility and pay compensation to families of the victims of the 1988 Lockerbie bombing.

Col Gadafy has agreed to pay compensation but still refuses to admit responsibility despite the conviction of Libyan official Abdel Baset al-Megrahi of involvement in the bombing. UN sanctions against Libya, now suspended, will not be fully lifted until he does.

[In a letter dated 15 August 2003, which I helped to draft, Libya accepted “responsibility for the actions of its officials”.]

The late Robin Cook

On this date in 2005 the death of Robin Cook was announced. As Foreign Secretary in the Labour Government formed after the general election held on 1 May 1997, he played a significant part in overcoming the UK and US intransigence that was preventing a neutral venue Lockerbie trial. According to the report in The Independent:

As Foreign Secretary in Labour's first term, he sought to implement a more ethical approach to Britain's relations with the rest of the world. Mr Cook himself had listed his proudest achievements in Government as: "Breaking the deadlock in the Lockerbie case; defending Kosovo; saving lives and relieving suffering in Sierra Leone; contributing to the fall of Milosevic; transforming Britain's relations with Europe; rebuilding respect for Britain in the world."

Items on this blog referring to Robin Cook can be found here.

Lockerbie fake goes on

[This is part of the headline over an article by the late Henk Ruyssenaars that was published on this date in 2008 on the Storming Heaven’s Gates website. It reads in part:]

UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan appointed Professor H Köchler in April 2000 as the international UN-observer at the Scottish Court in the Netherlands concerning the Lockerbie Trial, and his comments on the Scottish Court's verdict in August 2003 were bitter. "This has been a political court case, where the verdict already was decided upon in advance", a shocked Professor Köchler, the UN-observer at the Scottish Lockerbie Court at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands stated. "The whole is a spectacular miscarriage of justice." he said.

"This was a classical case of a "Show Process" from the time of the Cold War. Like they had in the Soviet Union and East Germany before the Iron Curtain fell," Professor Hans Köchler commented, after the verdict of the Scottish Court's conclusion in the Lockerbie Trial.

In a 'strange' way his remarks have since 2003 hardly been used by the international propaganda media, covering the biggest and most expensive mass murder trial in British legal history which ended when the court upheld the conviction of the Libyan agent Abdelbaset Ali Mohammed al-Megrahi." - The rest is at www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4460.htm

It's all a fake, but this is what Reuters now spreads from Washington: ''US President George W Bush on Monday (Aug 4th 2008) signed into law legislation paving the way for Libya to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to compensate US victims of bombing attacks that Washington blames on Tripoli. The Libyan Claims Resolution Act clears the way to resolve all outstanding US claims related to what Washington regards as Libyan terrorist acts. These include the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, that killed 270 people and the 1986 bombing of a Berlin disco that killed three people and wounded 229.

"For too many years, Libya has refused to accept responsibility for its horrific acts of terrorism against American victims," said Sen Frank Lautenberg, the New Jersey Democrat who sponsored the original legislation to allow compensation. "But after the pressure we applied, Libya will finally be held accountable for these devastating events. Our bill becoming law means these victims and their families can get the long overdue justice they deserve." The United States and Libya worked out a tentative deal to resolve all the outstanding cases. Libya has yet to sign the agreement but US officials said they expected it to do so after the deal was signed into US law.

Bush signed the bill before leaving Washington on a week-long visit to Asia. A group of Lockerbie victims' families said the new moves brought them a step closer to holding Libya accountable. "It is a relief to say that this part of our fight is coming to an end. There's still more work to be done and the families aren't done fighting for the truth," said Kara Weipz, spokeswoman for the Families of the Victims of Pan Am 103. "There are still a lot of things that we want to know."

Under the arrangement, Libya would not accept responsibility for the acts, but would provide the money to compensate the victims. If carried out, the deal could end the legal liability to Libya stemming from multiple lawsuits by families of the US victims, and it could herald a further warming in ties between Tripoli and Washington.  - Source: 2008 The International Herald Tribune http://tinyurl.com/63wc7u

Bush and his criminal buddies, including Sen Lautenberg who sponsored the original legislation to allow this criminal 'compensation', know that Libya had absolutely nothing to do with either the La Belle disco bombing or the Lockerbie disaster, and even part of the families of the victims know Bush and his ilk are lying: plane-truth.com/megrahi_innocent.htm

The Guardian partly shows how it also was done: "The key prosecution witness in the Lockerbie bombing trial was allegedly offered a $2m reward in return for giving evidence, raising fresh doubts about the safety of the case. Lawyers for Abdelbaset Ali Mohamed al-Megrahi, the Libyan convicted of murdering 270 people on board Pan Am Flight 103, have evidence that detectives investigating the bombing recommended that Tony Gauci, a shopkeeper from Malta, be given the payment after the case ended.

Mr Gauci's testimony at the trial was crucial to al-Megrahi's conviction. He told the trial at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands that the Libyan had bought clothes at his shop which the prosecution claimed were packed into the suitcase bomb that exploded over Lockerbie on December 21 1988. The defence team believe Mr Gauci may have received a larger sum from the US authorities. His role in the case is to be central to al-Megrahi's appeal against his conviction, which the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission said was unsafe.

They are to press for full disclosure of these payments, and the release of a potentially vital US document which is thought to cast doubt on official accounts about the timer allegedly used in the bombing, at an appeal hearing next week.

The secret document is believed to dispute prosecution claims that al-Megrahi used a digital timer bought from a Swiss company, Mebo, and then planted the bomb on a flight from Malta to Germany - a disclosure which would fatally undermine his conviction." Fresh doubts on Lockerbie conviction: The Guardian http://tinyurl.com/5vzxem

Minister visits Lockerbie bomber

[This is the headline over a report published on the BBC News website on this date in 2009. It reads as follows:]

Scotland's justice secretary has visited the Lockerbie bomber amid speculation he might be moved to Libya.

Kenny MacAskill met Abdelbasset Ali al-Megrahi in Greenock Prison as he considers a transfer request from the Libyan government.

The minister has already heard the views of others, including relatives of some of the 270 victims of the December 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103.

Terminally-ill Megrahi has also asked to be freed on compassionate grounds.

The transfer request was made by Libya to the UK government last May, less than a week after a treaty allowing prisoners to be transferred between the two countries was ratified.

Under the agreement, the country holding a prisoner should give its answer within 90 days.

Decisions about prisoners are the responsibility of the Scottish Government, in effect giving Mr MacAskill the final say.

Mr MacAskill said last week he would miss the 90-day deadline, which expired on 3 August, because he was waiting for more information.

No transfer can take place if criminal proceedings are active, meaning Megrahi would have to drop his latest appeal against his conviction in order to be sent home.

He was ordered to remain in prison for a minimum of 27 years having been found guilty of murdering 270 people in the bombing of Pan-Am Flight 103.

Mr MacAskill has embarked upon a series of consultations with interested parties, including relatives of American victims with whom he held a video conference.

While unusual for a minister to discuss a prisoner's case with him while he remains in jail, Mr MacAskill is understood to believe the visit is important to allow him to consider all of the facts.

Megrahi's legal team have also made a separate request for him to released from prison on compassionate grounds as he is suffering from terminal prostate cancer.

An earlier request, made in October 2008, was rejected by Appeal Court judges after they heard medical evidence that with adequate palliative care, Megrahi could live for several years.

The court heard that such requests are normally only granted where a prisoner has less than three months to live.

[RB: Following criticism directed towards Mr MacAskill for visiting Megrahi, I commented on this blog as follows:]

The visit by the Cabinet Secretary for Justice to Abdelbaset Megrahi became inevitable as soon as Mr MacAskill decided, presumably after taking advice from his officials, to take representations in person (and not just in writing) from interested persons, such as relatives of those killed on Pan Am 103. He could not, while complying with the requirement of procedural fairness incumbent upon him, offer the opportunity to make representations in person to categories of interested persons while denying that opportunity to the prisoner himself.

Are the politicians who have rushed to criticise Kenny MacAskill for meeting Abdelbaset Megrahi prepared to criticise him for meeting (in person in some cases, by video link in others) Lockerbie relatives? If not, their criticism is based on a misunderstanding of the legal position and reflects on them, not on Mr MacAskill.

[Abdelbaset Megrahi’s own account of this meeting (Megrahi: You are my Jury, page 354) reads as follows:]

… MacAskill visited me in Greenock Prison. It was a controversial decision which drew much criticism from the media and the relatives of the American victims. I reiterated what I’d said in my application and again emphasised my innocence. He was courteous throughout and gave the impression of being strong-minded yet gentle. Prior to the meeting I’d obtained a copy of his book Building a Nation, as I wanted to know more about his political views. He was no doubt surprised when I asked him to sign it, but he agreed to do so. I promised him jokingly that I would not run off and tell the media.

Cover-up, conspiracy and the Lockerbie bomb connection

[This is the headline over an article by Marcello Mega that was published in Scotland on Sunday on 19 February 2006:]

If there is a day when the seemingly inconsequential case involving DC Shirley McKie morphed into the crisis which today is threatening the reputation of Scotland's judicial and political system, it is Thursday, August 3, 2000.

It was already more than three years since McKie had visited a house in Kilmarnock where a woman called Marion Ross had been brutally murdered. Since then McKie had been accused of entering that house unauthorised, and leaving her fingerprint on the crime scene. She had been charged with perjury, after claiming in court she had never set foot in there. She had been humiliated at the hands of her former colleagues.

Now, on that August day, a group set up by the Association of Chief Police Officers Scotland (ACPOS) to examine the McKie case, was faced with a stunning report. It had already been established that the fingerprint experts at the Scottish Criminal Records Office (SCRO) had got it wrong and that the print was not McKie's. Now, the document in front of the group - an interim update from James Mackay, the man they had asked to investigate the case - claimed the SCRO officers had acted criminally to cover up their mistakes. The consequences were immense: if Scotland's forensic service was both guilty of errors and of attempting to conceal those errors, what confidence could anyone have in the entire justice system?

Last week, Scotland on Sunday revealed the contents of Mackay's final report, which had been kept secret for six years, and which was never acted upon by Scotland's chief prosecutor, Lord Advocate Colin Boyd. This week, we can reveal that it was not just police and prosecutors who knew its contents; the devastating findings of the interim version were passed on to ministers as well.

Mackay, a much respected former Deputy Chief Constable of Tayside police, had been commissioned to investigate the McKie case after a separate report by HM Inspectors of Constabulary had found that - despite the SCRO's claims - McKie's prints had never been at the crime scene. Mackay now probed deeper. As this newspaper revealed last week, his final report found that a mistake had been made, yet had not then been owned up to. "The fact that it was not so dealt with," he reported, "led to 'cover up' and criminality." (...)

On Friday, [Lord Advocate Colin Boyd QC] declared that he had seen the full Mackay report and decided that there was still insufficient evidence to prosecute anyone from the SCRO. This decision, taken in September 2001, astonished Mackay. He is understood to have expressed his "surprise" and "disappointment" to the Crown Office and to have relayed his concerns to the then deputy crown agent, Bill Gilchrist. Indeed, so curious is the Lord Advocate's decision not to prosecute, that many are reaching their own conclusions as to why he didn't press ahead with a prosecution.

One is the theory that such a prosecution would undermine the case against David Asbury, the man jailed for the murder of Marion Ross. Such a fear was misguided: Asbury's conviction was quashed anyway in August 2002 on the back of the McKie revelations.

A second theory brings in the shadow of the Lockerbie bombing. Mackay's explosive report into the McKie case that August came three months after Boyd began the prosecution of Libyan suspects Abdelbaset Al Megrahi and Al Amin Khalifa Fhimah. The eyes of the world were focused on Scottish justice. What would it have said of that system if - just as the Crown was trying to convict the bombers - it emerged that fingerprint officials had been involved in "criminality and cover-up"?

Boyd strenuously denies that Lockerbie has any relevance to his judgments regarding the McKie case. When Iain McKie first raised the issue in 2000, Crown Office officials declared that Lockerbie "had not affected in any way the response from this or indeed any other department of the Scottish Executive to the issues raised by you."

But there is clear proof that senior justice chiefs had a stake in both cases; SCRO director Harry Bell, for example - whose agency was coming under such scrutiny - was a central figure in the Lockerbie investigation, having been given the key role in the crucial Maltese wing of the investigation, and given evidence in court.

Today's revelation that two American fingerprint experts who savaged the SCRO over the McKie case were asked by the FBI to "back off" suggests that plenty of people were aware of the danger that the case could undermine the Lockerbie trial.

Former MP Tam Dalyell - who has long campaigned on the Lockerbie case -

said: "I have always felt that there was something deeply wrong with both the McKie case and the Lockerbie judgment. It is deeply dismaying for those of us who were believers in Scottish justice. The Crown Office regard the Lockerbie case as their flagship case and they will go to any lengths to defend their position."

The pressure for a full public inquiry is now growing day by day.

Background to prisoner transfer agreement

[What follows is excerpted from an article by Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer that was published on the OhmyNews International website on this date in 2007:]

Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, the son of Libya leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, told the French newspaper Le Monde that the six health workers, held in Libya for nearly a decade for allegedly having infected hundreds of children with HIV, have been released in exchange for the transfer to Libya of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi. (...)

"We will soon have an extradition agreement with the UK. Our diplomats have discussed the matter with their British counterparts last month," Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi said.

Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi sought the interview, held on Tuesday in a luxurious hotel located in the French city of Nice, to "clarify a few issues." He told the French journalists that he never believed that the six Health workers were guilty. "Unfortunately, they were mere scapegoats," he stated calmly. (...)

The deal was initiated by the former Head of MI6 Global Operations, Marc Allan [sic; the person referred to is Sir Mark Allen], who arranged a series of meetings between Bulgarian and Libyan secret services agents.

[General Kirtcho] Kirov [head of Bulgarian secret services] met Moussa Koussa on five occasions in Tripoli, Roma, Paris and London. Koussa was the head of the Libyan secret services until 2004, when he was succeeded by Abdallah Sanoussi, the brother-in-law of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi. Kirov and Sanoussi pursued the negotiations over the last three years.

Last February, Saif Al-Islam, the sword of Islam, and Kirov held a secret night meeting in Vienna. The two men agreed on exchanging the six medics sentenced to death in Libya for Abdel Basset Ali Al-Megrahi.

"I knew that these issues would be solved by late July-early August," Kirov said. "Both affairs are indirectly linked to the geopolitical interests of the US, the UK and Libya." (...)

The agreement to swap the medics for Megrahi was finalized during Blair visit to Tripoli earlier this year. On June 28, less than a month after one of his last foreign travels as Prime Minister, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission decided to grant Megrahi a second appeal and to refer his case to the High Court.

The revelation by Saif Al-Islam and the timing of the events are devastating for Blair and the credibility of the Crown’s independence. Tony Blair's official spokesman has always denied the allegations that Megrahi would be returned to Libya.

Asked about these allegations, which were reported by the BBC and Sky News, at the G8 summit, Mr Blair's spokesman told AFP: "It's wrong."

The statement from the prime minister's office was backed by the Foreign Office spokesman. "It's an MoU that is going to lead to the start of discussions on the whole gamut of legal issues, judicial issues," he told AFP.

“Given that, it is totally wrong to suggest that we have reached any agreement with the Libyan government in this case. The memorandum of understanding agreed with the Libyan government does not cover this case,” he added. [RB: The Memorandum of Understanding, of course, did cover -- and was understood by both sides to cover -- Abdelbaset Megrahi.]

"Incredibly it seems that we are being asked to believe that this concerns other Libyan nationals, but not Megrahi," said Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was killed in the bombing.

The content of the MoU, which was signed on May 29 during Blair visit to Tripoli, is not known. Nevertheless, Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond told the Scottish Parliament that the document "deals with judicial cooperation on matters of law, extradition, and on the issue of prisoner transfer".

"This government is determined that decisions on any individual case will continue to be made following the due process of Scots law," Salmond said.

"Tony Blair has quite simply ridden roughshod over devolution and treated with contempt Scotland's distinct and independent legal system," said Scottish Tory leader Annabel Goldie.

It has long been suspected that the US and the UK governments would do whatever necessary to avoid a re-trial of the Lockerbie bombing. If indeed Megrahi is returned to Libya, it is almost certain that the real culprits of the worst act of terror in the UK will never be identified, let alone convicted. Neither will we ever know why both governments have conspired to cover up the identities of these culprits.

The metallurgy of the circuit board fragment

[On this date in 1991 Allen Feraday of RARDE noted that tests had established that PT35b, the fragment of circuit board alleged to have come from the timer of the Lockerbie bomb, was metallurgically distinct from the circuit boards in MST-13 timers manufactured by MEBO Ltd. What follows is taken from an article on Jim Swire and Peter Biddulph’s website Lockerbietruth.com:]

Here are three photographs.

The first is of the fragment of timer circuit board said by the prosecution to have been found at Lockerbie.

Photographs two and three are of annotations written by Allen Feraday, the forensic officer on whose forensic report the Lockerbie verdict of Guilty was founded.

Photograph two is of his note dated 1st August 1991 concerning the above fragment. The words are "Plating on the two thin lines is of pure tin (Cu [copper] breaking through from underneath. Alan F.)"

The third is of his note on the same day concerning a set of circuit boards sent to him for comparison by the Swiss company Thuring. The words are "Tinning on the thin tracks is of 70/30 sn/pb [tin/lead]. However this may be dipped or roller tinned on top of either the Cu tracks? or the Cu tracks with a layer of pure tin? Alan F."

There is a clear metallurgical difference between the two items. Feraday indicates some puzzlement as to why this may be the case, hence his two question marks.

But did he draw this difference and his two questions to the attention of the judges in the Lockerbie trial?

No. He stated with absolute certainty:

“The particular tracking pattern of the fragment has been extensively compared with the control samples of the [Thuring] MST-13 timers and circuit boards and it has been conclusively established that the fragment materials and tracking pattern are similar in all respects to the area around the connection pad for the output relay of the `MST-13' timer.”

"Conclusively established ... materials and tracking pattern similar in all respects ..." Ten simple words. Yet on this false statement a man was condemned to a lifetime of imprisonment.  

What was the origin of the Lockerbie fragment? Who made it, where and when? It clearly did not come from Thuring and was not from the batch sold to Libya in 1985. Whatever its origin, it contradicts the unique central feature of the prosecution case.  

The Scottish Crown Office continues to stonewall the nation and Scottish Government by pronouncing that this evidence can only be considered in a court of law.  Well, here are the pictures. Please judge for yourself.

[RB: Further details can be found here (John Ashton) and here (Dr Morag Kerr).]

We had nothing to do with Lockerbie

[What follows is the text of a report headlined Return of Lockerbie bomber 'a priority' that was published in The Scotsman on this date in 2007:]

Saif al-Islam, the son of Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi, yesterday said securing the release of the Lockerbie bomber was more important to Libya than the return of £2.7 billion paid in compensation to victims families.

Islam, Col Gaddafi's most influential son, said he was confident Libya would be proved innocent of the 1988 terrorist attack, which claimed 270 lives.

Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi is currently serving a life sentence at Gateside Prison, Greenock.

Last month the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission ruled that Megrahi "may have suffered a miscarriage of justice" and referred the case back to the Court of Appeal. But an agreement signed between Tony Blair and Col Gaddafi in May could allow the ex-Libyan secret agent to complete his sentence in Libya - with the consent of Scottish ministers.

On a visit to France yesterday, Islam said: "The top of our priority is the return of Mr Megrahi and not the return of the money because he is more important than the money.

"We are confident one day it [will] be proved to the world we had nothing to do with Lockerbie."

US agent knows Lockerbie secret

[This is the headline over a report published in The Independent on this date in 1995. It reads as follows:]

Scotland's top law officer, the Lord Advocate, is to be asked to give diplomatic immunity to a disgraced American intelligence agent to uncover the part he claims the US played in the Lockerbie disaster.

The Labour MP Tam Dalyell, says the former agent, Lester Coleman, is willing to speak to Scottish police about an alleged security loophole set up by the US which resulted in a bomb being placed on Pan Am Flight 103 at Frankfurt airport.

The bomb exploded above Lockerbie after leaving London en route for the US on 21 December, 1988, killing all 259 people on board and 11 on the ground. Mr Coleman's theory of a connection between a drugs run from the Lebanon through Cyprus and Germany was the conclusion of a book about him by Donald Goddard, The Trail of the Octopus. The book is the subject of a libel action by another US agent.

Mr Coleman believes the bomb was able to be planted on the Pan Am flight because of an arrangement between US intelligence agents based in Beirut in 1988 and Lebanese terrorists. In exchange for information about Western hostages, the Americans agreed to facilitate a route for drugs from the Lebanon into the US.

Luggage containing drugs was protected by US intelligence with normal security restrictions on baggage at airports removed, allowing the bomb to be planted in a bag at Frankfurt.

Mr Coleman was indicted on charges of perjury and travelling on a false passport in 1993. He fled the US and is in hiding.

Mr Dalyell said he had written to the Lord Advocate asking him to bring Mr Coleman to the UK "on the promise of immunity from extradition to the US to talk to the police". He would not say where Mr Coleman was, adding: "The difficulty is that he is certainly threatened by US agents.