A commentary on the case of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, convicted of the murder of 270 people in the Pan Am 103 disaster.
Thursday 7 October 2010
Doyen of Nationalist lawyers speaks out
[From an e-mail sent today by Ian Hamilton QC and quoted with his permission. Ian Hamilton is a veteran campaigner for Scottish independence. He was the recipient of a lifetime achievement award at the 2009 Law Awards of Scotland. Ian Hamilton blogs here.]
Wednesday 21 August 2013
Police instructed not to investigate three of JFM's criminality allegations
In an unprecedented action the Crown Office has stopped Police Scotland from investigating criminal allegations of perjury and attempting to pervert the course of justice made by Justice for Megrahi (JFM). This action is only the latest twist in what are seen as Crown Office and Government attempts to thwart a public inquiry into the conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi for the murder of 270 people in the downing of Pan Am 103 on 21 December 1988.
Background
For years Justice for Megrahi has been campaigning to have the conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi overturned. For years successive governments and the Crown Office have resisted these pleas.
Last year JFM, following a detailed reassessment of the available evidence, made eight criminal allegations to the Cabinet Secretary for Justice on 13 September in relation to the investigation, prosecution and conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi. They asked him to order an independent investigation into these matters as some of the allegations involved personnel from the Crown Office, and Scottish police forces including Dumfries and Galloway. Mr MacAskill refused to act and JFM was forced, under protest, to report the matters to the Dumfries and Galloway Force. From 1 April this year Police Scotland has been carrying out the investigation.
Before the police had even started their investigations however the Crown Office publicly dismissed them as “defamatory and entirely unfounded” and stated that, “It is a matter of the greatest concern that deliberately false and misleading allegations have been made in this way”. A short time later the Lord Advocate, Mr Frank Mulholland, publicly criticised JFM and their allegations in similar terms.
Last week the police informed members of JFM that the Crown Office had instructed that they should no longer investigate three of the most serious allegations of perjury and perverting the course of justice and that they were not at liberty to give any explanation.
Comment
In 2009 Stone of Scone legend Ian Hamilton QC, a member of the Justice for Megrahi campaign, pointed out that ”When the minister for Justice shares a bed with the Lord Advocate the freedom of us all is in jeopardy… Many of us believe there are prosecutions which are politically driven. Mr Megrahi was one of them.”
Now four years later it seems that the possibility of political interference rears its ugly head yet again. Members of JFM regard this latest development as profoundly disturbing and sinister in that it confirms their original misgivings over having the Crown Office and police effectively investigate themselves. These arrogant and arbitrary actions by the Crown Office undermines the Lord Advocate’s traditional constitutional political independence, raises serious questions about the entire function and administration of the criminal justice system in Scotland and places at risk the rights of the citizens of Scotland to have to a fair and impartial investigation of their legitimate concerns.
(Note: A redacted copy of the full allegations and other information can be found at:
[RB: It was indicated by the investigators that although the Crown Office had instructed that the allegations in question should not form part of the current investigation, it was intended that they should be investigated at some unspecified date in the future. Scepticism is, I think, permissible.]
Monday 3 January 2011
Money has no place in Scots justice
"Never in the history of Scots law has the crown adduced witnesses who have been paid, or promised payment, by a third party in connection with their evidence. Why were they adduced in this case? The Lord Advocate must explain why."
Of course, it now appears that such witnesses were adduced by the Crown ten years ago in the trial of Abdelbaset Megrahi and Lamin Fhimah in the Scottish Court at Camp Zeist. This formed the subject of paragraph 3.1.7 of Megrahi's Grounds of Appeal in the appeal that was abandoned in August 2009. Ian Hamilton recognises this in his article when he states:
"Purchase of witnesses has no place in Scots law. Indeed payment by the Americans of witnesses in the Megrahi case is one of the things that make many people think the conviction is unsafe."
[My own understanding of the present state of Scottish criminal procedure is that there is no bar on, or necessary impropriety in, the Crown's leading the evidence of a witness who has been paid, or has been promised payment, by a third party. What is grossly improper -- and is alleged to have happened in the Lockerbie case -- is concealing from the defence and the court the fact that such payment has been made or promised, since it is a factor highly relevant to the court's assessment of the witness's credibility.]
Tuesday 4 October 2022
RIP Justice for Megrahi stalwart Ian Hamilton KC
I am saddened to learn of the death at the age of 97 of Ian Hamilton KC. He was a longtime stalwart supporter of the Justice for Megrahi campaign. Here are a few of the comments from him that have previously featured on this blog.
"I don't think there's a lawyer in Scotland who now believes Mr Megrahi was justly convicted. The Americans were out for vengeance. Anyone with a darker skin would do. With their barrowloads of money to buy witnesses, aided by our police and prosecution, they hoodwinked our courts."
”When the minister for Justice shares a bed with the Lord Advocate the freedom of us all is in jeopardy… Many of us believe there are prosecutions which are politically driven. Mr Megrahi was one of them.”
"Never in the history of Scots law has the crown adduced witnesses who have been paid, or promised payment, by a third party in connection with their evidence. Why were they adduced in this case? The Lord Advocate must explain why. (...) Purchase of witnesses has no place in Scots law. Indeed payment by the Americans of witnesses in the Megrahi case is one of the things that make many people think the conviction is unsafe."
"I think you [JFM] are doing a splendid job in exposing what is a running sore in the body politic of Scotland. The Lord Advocate must be seen to be independent of the government whom it is his duty to prosecute should it traverse any law. Parliament makes the law; not the government and the latter is bound by the law like the rest of us. Neither the Justice Minister nor the Lord Advocate have proved themselves fit to hold office and the sooner this is referred to the international body the better."
“The whole case against Megrahi was soured and poisoned from the very beginning by the CIA. They wanted a conviction at any cost to satisfy the understandable desire of the victims, many of whom were American citizens, for vengeance. I’m afraid Dumfries and Galloway Police and the Scottish Crown Office caved into this desire. It seems to me that this prosecution was conducted with a desire to get a conviction at all costs, even at the cost of justice itself. This has gone on too long and is a blot on Scotland’s reputation for fair trials.”
Monday 26 August 2013
Insidious and frightening scandal
I quote Len Murray, hailed as the greatest criminal solicitor of his generation: "This is the most insidious and most frightening scandal in the judicial process of Scotland in living memory. And that is not just a hysterical outburst. It is quite unbelievable that Crown Office should act this way." Need I say more?
What the hell, let's say more, why not? Here from Mr Ian Hamilton QC: "I think you [JFM] are doing a splendid job in exposing what is a running sore in the body politic of Scotland. The Lord Advocate must be seen to be independent of the government whom it is his duty to prosecute should it traverse any law. Parliament makes the law; not the government and the latter is bound by the law like the rest of us. Neither the Justice Minister nor the Lord Advocate have proved themselves fit to hold office and the sooner this is referred to the international body the better."
I ought to add that the international body that Ian Hamilton refers to is the UN's International Association of Prosecutors, whose tenets the Crown Office is only too keen to boast its adherence to. JFM is considering lodging a complaint against the COPFS with said body under sections 2 and 3 of the UN body's Standards of Professional Responsibilities and Statement of Essential Duties and Rights of Prosecutors. http://www.iap-association.org/ressources/Standards_English.pdf . See also:http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/report-on-meetings-with-investigators.html
Sunday 26 December 2021
RIP Archbishop Desmond Tutu
Campaign for the acquittal of Baset Al-Megrahi and an official inquiry into Lockerbie
Father Pat Keegans, Lockerbie Catholic parish priest at the time of the tragedy.
Mr Andrew Killgore, former US Ambassador to Qatar. Founder of Washington Report on Middle Eastern Affairs.
Monday 9 December 2013
Lockerbie: 25 years on - a message from Justice for Megrahi
On 21 December 1988, Europe was subject to its most notorious peacetime assault. In a matter of moments, the Lockerbie atrocity took 270 lives. All our hearts go out in love and comradeship to those the victims left behind as they remember their losses of a quarter of a century ago.
At Kamp van Zeist in 2001, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was convicted for the villainy behind Pan Am 103. In 2009, his second appeal supported by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) was dropped against a background of arguably dubious political double dealing which secured his repatriation to Libya and his family due to his terminal medical condition. He died in 2012, without having succeeded in clearing his name.
As one of the country’s most renowned political and legal figures has put it: “There is not a lawyer in Scotland who believes he was guilty.” In 2011, a leading Scottish newspaper’s poll found that 52% of Scots agreed there should be an independent inquiry into the Lockerbie bombing while 34% disagreed and 14% were unsure. A petition for an inquiry has been before the Scottish Parliament for three years now calling for such an inquiry. The petition continues to receive unanimous parliamentarian support. Allegations of criminality against police, forensic and Crown officials have been sidelined by the Scottish police and the Crown Office since August of this year because it is claimed that the allegations conflict with the Crown’s attempts to shore up the indefensible. Would the Crown Office, Police Scotland and the FBI be going on trips to Libya and Malta in their futile and secretive attempts to maintain the charade of implicating further Libyan nationals 25 years after the event were it not for the pressure they have found themselves under due to the overwhelming evidence presented by activists? Doubtful. What seems to be being presented is a cynical blind for public consumption.
Precisely how is justice being served by such intransigence as is being displayed by both the Crown Office and the Scottish Government? What kind of justice is it that produces more victims than it started with? Many good and honest folk firmly believe that justice has not been either done or seen to be done in this tragic case. There has been no completion, nor has there been any finality. A resolution is required. The hearts and minds of the bereaved, the al-Megrahi family and all who invest their trust and faith in our justice system must be satisfied.
In the last few weeks another flood of information further undermines the Crown Office and Scottish Government position. The Foreign Minister of Malta has declared his profound doubts over the conviction. Documentary evidence has been revealed which proves that a key witness in the case against Mr. Megrahi was paid $2 million by the American authorities. This mounting evidence, on top of the evidence the SCCRC relied on for the basis of the second appeal, only serves to prove that our justice system has failed.
A third appeal must be referred. Methodical and persistent pressure can rectify the mistakes of dubious forensics, a bungled investigation and a misguided judgement. Something is seriously wrong in this case. Something seems deeply rotten in a state when public officials attempt to bluster their way out of having to deal with mass murder and a deranged court process to preserve a fantasy of reputation and as a result risk allowing those who may have committed this gross act to escape justice.
As the 25th anniversary of the Lockerbie tragedy approaches and the legacy of Nelson Mandela unfolds we demand no retribution or vengeance, we do not even seek to attribute blame, we simply ask that those who profess to serve justice do so without fear, favour or prejudice.
Signatory members of Justice for Megrahi
Ms Kate Adie (Former Chief News Correspondent for BBC News).
Deceased members of Justice for Megrahi
Mr Moses Kungu (Lockerbie Councillor in 1988).