Lockerbie mystery never solved

[This is the headline over an article by Farouk Araie published today in the South African newspaper The Star. It reads as follows:]

Thirty-two years ago Pan Am 103 exploded over the Scottish town of Lockerbie. Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was the only man convicted of the worst terrorist crime in UK history. He has proclaimed his innocence and unsuccessfully appealed against his conviction.

A new suspect has been charged 32 years later. Abu Agila Mohammad Mas’ud is alleged to have built the bomb and worked with Megrahi to carry out the attack.

The case of Megrahi was a complex one since the day he was indicted on 270 counts of murder in November 1991.

Malta has been dogged over the past 32 years by the Lockerbie prosecution’s contention that the bomb responsible for one of the most heinous terrorist acts in history began it’s deadly flight on an Air Malta flight out of Luqa. Many nations have conspired to cover up the true identities of those responsible for planning and executing the Lockerbie crash.

The shocking truth is that Western intelligence agencies were complicit in the murders. From the moment the plane went down, a supposedly impartial investigation was distorted to conceal this dark reality from the victims’ relatives and the public.

Many analysts believe that Megrahi was framed and that the Scottish government was part of the cover-up.

No one in authority has the guts to reveal the truth about the bombing. The British government, in effect, blackmailed Megrahi into dropping his appeal as a condition of his release.

Had the appeal gone to a higher court, new and suppressed evidence would have shown that a fragment of a circuit bomb and bomb timer, discovered in the countryside of Lockerbie, and said to have been in Megrahi’s suitcase, was a plant. A forensic scientist found no trace of an explosion on it. The evidence would demonstrate the impossibility of the bomb beginning its journey at Malta before it was allegedly transferred through two airports undetected to flight 103.

Megrahi’s trial was a politically influenced sham from the start, in which key witnesses were bribed and coached and crucial evidence was tampered with. New witnesses and crucial evidence would have shown that it was impossible for Megrahi to have bought the clothes that were found in the wreckage of Pan Am 103.

The accused was convicted on the word of a Maltese shop owner who claims to have sold him the clothes, then gave a false description of him in 19 separate statements ...

During the course of our lifetime, someday, someone will reveal the ultimate truth.

[RB: The Hogmanay edition of The National covers this story in a report headlined Lockerbie bombing: Western intelligence agencies ‘complicit’ in disaster.]

Campaigners write to Lord Advocate about 'prejudicial' US Lockerbie briefing

[This is the headline over a report in today's edition of The National. It reads as follows:]

Campaigners who believe that the only man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing was innocent, have written to the Lord Advocate criticising a briefing by the US which they say is prejudicial to the family of the late Abdelbaset al-Megrahi as they try to clear his name.

The committee of Justice for Megrahi (JfM) – which includes professor Robert Black QC – architect of the Camp Zeist trial that saw Megrahi convicted, and Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was killed in the bombing – wrote to James Wolffe QC saying the briefing by outgoing US attorney general William Barr on December 21, its 32nd anniversary, caused “extreme distress” to the bereaved UK families.

Barr said the US had charged a “third conspirator” – Abu Agila Mohammad Masud Kheir Al-Marimi – who allegedly acted along with Megrahi and his acquitted co-accused Lamin Khalifah Fhimah, to bring down Pan Am Flight 103 in 1988.

Scots lawyer Aamer Anwar, who represents the Megrahi family in their appeal, accused Barr of “grandstanding”.

JfM said they agreed with John Mosey – whose daughter died in the bombing – that Barr’s action was, “bizarre, disrespectful, insensitive and extremely ill-considered”.

In their letter to Wolffe, JfM said Barr and others had referred to the Megrahi family appeal, identifying him as an accomplice of the new suspect, along with Fhimah, who was cleared of all charges in the Lockerbie trial.

“We, and many other commentators, consider the statements made by Mr Barr and others, and the contents of the affidavit, to be prejudicial to the Megrahi family’s appeal, and that had they been made in Scotland they would have been deemed to be in contempt of court,” JfM wrote.

“Over many years Justice for Megrahi has, alongside other individuals and groups, consistently raised doubts about Mr Megrahi’s conviction and provided detailed evidence in support of these doubts.

“We have been in regular correspondence with yourself and Crown Office and in 2010 lodged a petition with the Scottish Parliament calling for an independent inquiry.

“That petition is still being considered by the Parliament’s Justice Committee.”

They added: “If the American statements are accurate, it would appear that you and Crown Office are closely linked to the American actions and conclusions, as outlined in their briefing and in the affidavit, and have agreed to them.”

JfM asked why Masud was not indicted in Scotland given the disaster happened here; why was a media briefing not held in Scotland and if the Lord Advocate agreed that the briefing should have been held on the 32nd anniversary of the bombing.

“Given that Kara Weipz, president of Victims of Pan Am Flight 103, was fully briefed on the American enquiry and was present at the briefing, why did Crown Office not ensure that the interests of UK groups like ‘UK Families Flight 103’ were similarly updated and represented?”

JfM asked if Wolffe agreed that statements in the US briefing were prejudicial to the Megrahi family appeal.

They added: “Do you agree that had this media briefing been held in Scotland some of the statements made at it would have been deemed to be in contempt of court?"

The search for justice goes on and William Barr's actions are unlikely to help

[This is part of the headline over a long article by Kim Sengupta in The Independent. It reads in part:]

With great fanfare, on the anniversary of the Lockerbie bombing, the US has announced charges against the supposed bomb maker who blew up Pan Am flight 103, the worst act of terrorism in this country, with 270 lives lost.  

One of William Barr’s final acts as Donald Trump’s Attorney General, a deeply controversial tenure, is supposed to fit one of the final pieces of the jigsaw in the hunt for the killers.  

There are historic links between the Lockerbie investigation and the current, turbulent chapter of American politics. Barr was also the Attorney General in 1991, in the George W Bush administration, when charges were laid against two Libyans, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, and Lamin Khalifa Fhimah, over the bombing. The inquiry was led at the time by Robert Mueller, the head of the Department of Justice’s criminal division.  

Mueller, of course, became the Special Counsel who examined if Trump was the Muscovian candidate for the White House. Barr was the Attorney General, in his second term in the post, accused of distorting the findings of Mueller’s report to protect Trump from accusations of obstruction of justice, which he denies.  

The charges which have been laid against Abu Agila Mohammad Masud, another Libyan, are intrinsically connected to Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, who is the only person to have been found guilty by a court of the bombing.  

Megrahi is now dead. There are good reasons to hold that the investigation, trial and verdict which brought his conviction were flawed and a miscarriage of justice has taken place. This is a view shared by bereaved families, international jurists, intelligence officers and journalists who had followed the case.  

Last month, an appeal hearing began at the High Court in Edinburgh to posthumously clear Megrahi’s name. This was the third appeal in the attempt to prove that the verdict against him was unsound, with his legal team focusing on the veracity of the prosecution evidence at his trial. 

Much of the case against Masud, a former Libyan intelligence officer, now charged, comes from an alleged confession he made in jail, where he had ended up after the fall of the regime of Muammar Gaddafi. Masud, according to the FBI, named Megrahi and Fhimah as co-conspirators, who had together manufactured an explosive device using Semtex during a trip to Malta. Masud has said that he had bought the clothing which had been wrapped around the bomb, hidden in a radio-cassette player, before being placed in a Samsonite suitcase which was put on the flight.  

There are two points which are immediately relevant. The same trial which convicted Megrahi had acquitted Fhimah of all charges. And one of the key allegations against Megrahi, which the judges said made them decide on the verdict of guilt, was that it was he who had bought the clothing put around the explosive device.  

These contradictions are among many, big and small, which have marked the official narrative presented by the US and UK authorities of what lay behind the downing of the airliner.  

I went to Lockerbie on the night of the bombing, attended the trial of the two Libyan defendants, and met Megrahi at his home in the Libyan capital, Tripoli, where he had been allowed to return after suffering from cancer. I have followed the twists and turns of the case throughout.   

Soon after the downing of the Pan Am flight, American and British security officials began laying the blame on an Iran-Syria axis. The scenario was that Tehran had taken out a contract in revenge for the destruction of an Iranian civilian airliner, Iran Air Flight 655, which had been shot down by missiles fired from an American warship, the USS Vincennes, a few months earlier. The theory went that the contract had been taken up by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC), which specialised in such operations.  

But the blame switched to Libya, then very much a pariah state, around the time Iran and Syria joined the US-led coalition against Saddam Hussein in the first Gulf War. Robert Baer, the former American intelligence officer and author, was among those who held that the Iranian sponsored hit was the only plausible explanation for the attack. This was the firm belief held “to a man”, he stated, by his former colleagues in the CIA.  

After years of wrangling, Megrahi, the former head of security at Libyan Airlines and allegedly in the Libyan security service, and Fhimah, allegedly a fellow intelligence officer, were finally extradited in 1999. (...)

The two men were charged with joint enterprise and conspiracy. Yet only Megrahi was found guilty. (...)

So, deprived of finding a partner in crime for Megrahi, the prosecutor switched to claiming, and the judges accepting, that he had conspired with himself.  

The prosecution evidence was circumstantial; details of the bomb timer on the plane were contradictory; and the testimony of a key witness, a Maltese shopkeeper, extremely shaky under cross-examination. Five years on from the trial, the former Lord Advocate, Lord Fraser of Carmville – who had been responsible for initiating the Lockerbie prosecution – described the witness, Tony Gauci, as “an apple short of a picnic” and “not quite the full shilling”. Gauci was, however, flush in dollars: the Americans paid him for his testimony.  

The performance and evidence of a supposedly prime “CIA intelligence asset”, Abdul Majid Giaka, codenamed “Puzzle Piece” who turned up in a Shirley Bassey wig, was widely viewed as risible. It emerged later that important evidence had not been passed on to the defence lawyers. Ulrich Lumpert, an engineer who testified to the validity of a key piece of evidence, admitted later in an affidavit of lying to the court.  

It has also emerged that Giaka had been described by his CIA handler, John Holt, in an official report as someone who had a “history of making up stories”.

Holt was denied permission to appear at court. Earlier this month he reiterated in an interview that, like his CIA colleagues, he believes the Libyan connection was a concocted red herring and culpability lay with PFLP (GC). "I would start by asking the current Attorney General, William Barr, why he suddenly switched focus in 1991, when he was also Attorney General, from where clear evidence was leading, toward a much less likely scenario involving Libyans”, he said.  

The observer for the UN at the trial, Hans Kochler severely criticised the verdict. Writing later in The Independent, he described a case based on “circumstantial evidence”; the “lack of credibility” of key prosecution witnesses who “had incentives to bear false witness against Megrahi”; the fact that one was paid cash by the Americans; and that “so much key information was withheld from the trial”.    

Robert Black, a law professor born in Lockerbie, who played an important role in organising the Camp Zeist proceedings, later became convinced that a great injustice had taken place, as have many other eminent jurists.  

Some who were in Lockerbie on that terrible night and dealt with the aftermath also felt the same way. Father Patrick Keegans, the parish priest at the time, joined the “Justice for Megrahi” campaign after meeting the convicted man’s family and has backed appeals to clear his name.  

Many members of the bereaved families feel that justice has not been done, among them Jim Swire, who lost his daughter Flora in the bombing and became a spokesman for “UK Families 103”.  

When there were objections to the severely ill Megrahi being allowed to return to Tripoli, he pointed out “the scandal around Megrahi is not that a sick man was released, but that he was even convicted in the first place. All I have ever wanted to see is that the people who murdered my daughter are brought to justice.”  

After the charging of Masud, Dr Swire said: “I'm all in favour of whatever he's got to tell us being examined in a court, of course I am. The more people who look at the materials we have available the better.”  

He wanted to stress: “There are only two things that we seek, really. One is the question of why those lives were not protected in view of all the warnings and the second is: what does our government and the American government really know about who is responsible for murdering them.”  

Some bereaved families have criticised the presentation and motivation of the US move. The State Department had sent an invitation for livestreaming of the event.  

Reverend John Mosey, who lost his 19-year-old daughter Helga in the bombing, said the “timing and particularly the choice of this specific day, which is special to many of us, to be bizarre, disrespectful, insensitive and extremely ill considered”. He added: “Why exactly, when the Attorney General is about to leave office, has he waited 32 years to bring charges?”  

Behind the controversy over who carried out the attack, the political manoeuvres and legal actions, lay the human tragedy of Lockerbie, a scene which is difficult to forget, even after three decades, for many of us who went there.  (...)

There is also the memory of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, at his home in Tripoli in 2012. He lay in his bed attached to a drip, on red sheets stained by dark splashes of blood he had coughed up. An oxygen mask covered his skeletal face; his body twitched as he drifted in and out of consciousness. He was in the advanced stages of cancer: medicine he desperately needed had been plundered by looters; the doctors who had been treating him had fled. He died a few months later.  

The bitter accusations and recriminations over Lockerbie are unlikely to cease. But the search for justice for this terrible act of violence which took so many lives, and caused so much pain and grief, continues to remain elusive among the secrets and lies. 

Libyan Interior Minister calls for formation of "legal-political" team to defend Libya in Lockerbie case

[What follows is the English language text of a report published today in Arabic on the website of the Libya 24 television station:]

The Minister of the Interior of the Interim Government, Ibrahim Bushnaf, called for the formation of a legal and political team with knowledge of the law and international relations to defend Libya, after voices rose in the United States of America to reopen the Lockerbie case file.

Bushnaf explained that the aim of reopening the case is to seize Libyan resources, considering that the issue is urgent and must be worked on quickly away from political positions.

He pointed out that the issue was settled politically in the past, and Libya at the time endured the actions of its subordinates on the civil side, indicating that the current request wants to drag Libya into political responsibility, saying: “Falling into this slope will make Libya more permissible than it is now.” [RB: Google Translate renders this quote as "This slippage will make Libya more oppressive than it is now."]

He indicated that criminal responsibility will result in political responsibility, and thus future generations will be shackled to their burdens, pointing out that Libya has suffered from the ravages of the siege because of this issue.

Monday was the 32nd anniversary of the bombing of the American plane in 1988, over the village of Lockerbie, Scotland, when it was on a flight from London to New York, which killed 270 people, and Libya was accused at the time of masterminding the incident.

The enduring scandal of al-Megrahi’s conviction

[Don't call this a conspiracy theory is the heading over a letter published in The Times today. It reads as follows:]

Sir, Magnus Linklater (“Why I cannot believe Lockerbie conspiracies”, Scottish edition, Dec 21) has cast as conspiracy theorists those of us who believe that Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi was wrongly convicted. Yet in making his case he is guilty of a common failing of conspiracy theorists — misrepresenting certain facts and sidestepping others. He suggests that we believe that a fragment of circuit board was substituted for the one that implicated al-Megrahi and Libya. Had he read my biography of al-Megrahi he would know that I knocked down that claim. He would also know that I set out the scientific evidence — much of which had been produced by prosecution experts — that disproved the prosecution’s central claim that the fragment originated from a batch of timers that was supplied to Libya. Mr Linklater also ignores powerful evidence, most of which was unavailable to al-Megrahi’s trial judges, that the Lockerbie bomb began its journey at Heathrow, rather than, as the prosecution claimed, at Luqa airport, Malta. The enduring scandal of al-Megrahi’s conviction is that the prosecution failed to release numerous items of exculpatory evidence to the defence. Whether that was a result of a cock-up or a conspiracy is moot. What matters is that al-Megrahi was denied a fair trial.

John Ashton

Author, Megrahi: You Are my Jury

US charges third suspect in 1988 Pan Am bombing over Lockerbie, Scotland

[This is the headline over a report just published on the website of The Washington Post. It reads in part:]

The Justice Department on Monday announced it had charged a suspected participant in the 1988 bombing of a Pan Am jet over Lockerbie, Scotland, that killed 270 people and is considered one of the deadliest terrorist attacks in US history.

Abu Agila Mas’ud was charged in a criminal complaint with helping make the bomb used in the attack, Attorney General William P Barr said at a news conference. Barr said the operation was ordered by the leadership of Libyan intelligence, and that then-Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi personally thanked Mas’ud for his work.

“At long last, this man, responsible for killing Americans and many others, will be subject to justice for his crimes,” Barr said.

The charges were unsealed on the anniversary of the attack, which brought down a flight from London bound for New York. (...)

Mas’ud has been on US and foreign law enforcement’s radar since at least 2015, when a three-part series on PBS’s “Frontline” named potential suspects. US prosecutors had decades earlier charged two others in the case: Libyan intelligence operative Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi and his alleged accomplice Lamen Khalifa Fhimah. At the time, Barr was serving his first stint as attorney general under President George H W Bush.

Barr said a breakthrough came when law enforcement learned in 2016 that Mas’ud had been arrested after the fall of the Gaddafi regime and interviewed in 2012. Though Mas’ud remains in Libyan custody, authorities turned over that interview to law enforcement, who used it to build a case, Barr said.

Acting DC US Attorney Michael Sherwin said Mas’ud described his role and the role of his conspirators. He said travel records also showed Mas’ud traveling from Tripoli to Malta around the same time as his co-conspirators.

It’s unclear what the likelihood is of the United States taking Mas’ud into custody for trial. Barr said he was optimistic that Libyan authorities would turn him over. (...)

The case has long vexed federal law enforcement. Libya resisted extraditing the charged men to the United States for years, and in response, the United Nations and the United States imposed stiff economic sanctions and penalties on the country.

In 1999, Libya agreed to an unusual arrangement to turn the men over to be put on trial in the Netherlands before Scottish judges. Megrahi, who maintained his innocence, was convicted and sentenced to 27 years to life in prison, while his co-defendant Fhimah was acquitted.

In 2009, Megrahi was released from a Scottish prison on medical grounds after a prostate cancer diagnosis, and he returned home to a hero’s welcome in Libya. He died three years after his release.

[RB: The US Department of Justice press release can be read here; and the US Attorney General's speech here.

As far as Scotland is concerned, the Lord Advocate has issued a statement today which reads as follows:]

“For 32 years the families of the 270 people murdered in this atrocity have shown extraordinary and enduring dignity in the face of the loss they suffered on the terrible night of 21 December 1988. Today, our thoughts are with them once again.

“Scottish prosecutors and police have had a long-established and strong working relationship with US law enforcement agencies throughout this investigation.

“This relationship will continue to be important as the investigation progresses with the shared goal of bringing all those who committed this atrocity to justice.

“Scottish prosecutors will continue to work with US colleagues but we will not comment in detail on today’s announcement given that the Scottish criminal investigation is ongoing and there is an appeal before the court in relation to this crime.” 

[RB: A statement from Chief Constable Iain Livingstone reads as follows:]

“This announcement by the US Department of Justice is a significant development for the families of the victims, and my thoughts remain with them, particularly today, the 32nd anniversary of the bombing.

“Since 1988, policing in Scotland has been committed to carrying out the largest terrorist investigation ever undertaken in this country. Police Scotland will continue to work closely on this investigation, under the direction of the Crown Office, with our American law enforcement colleagues and other international partners.

“As judicial proceedings continue in Scotland, it would be inappropriate to comment further."

Go on, Mr Barr, surprise us with more lies

[This is the headline over an article by Libyan journalist and author Dr Mustafa Fetouri. I am grateful to him for allowing me to publish it here.]

Whatever the United States Attorney General, William Barr, plans to throw in our faces around 15:30 GMT today he will find us patiently waiting for his Hollywood-like bang that usually precedes the release of any new action movie. Except this time we have already seen the movie and it is hardly new!

Those who have been closely following the Lockerbie tragedy, like victims’ families, lawyers and independent observers like me already know what is coming tomorrow, is another unreliable, arbitrary and groundless accusations targeting new one or two Libyans as being culprits in the tragedy—continuation of the twisted Lockerbie narrative the US has been very good at alas with little success.

Whatever William Barr will throw at the world tomorrow will be much about lying and far less about the truth which his department, government and the UK authorities has made as elusive as ever. Yet it has been very obvious for last 32 years.

Libya today is so weak and chaotic. This means it is susceptible to blackmail even by its own criminal gangs and armed militias, as is the case everyday, let alone by imperialist hegemonic superpowers like the US. Let’s remember here that Mr. Barr’s own government, and more than 30 others, made sure in 2011 that Libya will never be viable independent state ever again.

Even worse Libya’s own so called Government of National Accord (GNA), the only one recognized by the United Nations, lacks any patriotic credentials and viewed, by the majority of Libyans, as a gang imposed on them by the West in a UN package.

Most GNA politicians, and those rivalling it in the east of the country, know very little about the Lockerbie bombing. On top of that they do not want anything to do with it. We have seen GNA defunded the defence team and I have firsthand account of how that happened and why.

GNA knew, long ago, that the third appeal was coming and it has great chances of succeeding in throwing out AL-Meghahi’s 2001 guilty verdict. While the lawyers stood at the court’s door GNA betrayed them by refusing to resume funding despite its repeated promises. This is actually against Libya’s domestic laws which oblige the government to help, financially, citizens abroad, should they face legal issues.

After Al-Meghrahi’s legal team launched their his appeal, posthumously, I started writing about the case in Arabic, the only Libyan journalist so far, I have been warned off at least twice and I risk being harmed once I return to Libya.

After the defence lawyers setup crowd funding page, I tried to do the same inside Libya but could not. Privately I have received hundreds of message from ordinary Libyan willing to help but I could not do anything really! It is not only GNA’s stooges that prevented me but also the financial and administrations issues it has failed to tackle in the country. Banks, for example, do not have cash in a country where other payment systems or credit cards unheard of. I could not publically announce funding campaign inside Libya except on my social media accounts.

On top of that some GNA linked individuals and supporters have been prejudiced towards my Facebook posts when I write about Lockerbie— something I do extensively nowadays.

I consider the entire country as victim of the Lockerbie tragedy. To me the case is much bigger than Gaddafi and Al-Meghrahi, both dead now, but the scars of Lockerbie still with every Libyan just as they are still with the families of the 270 innocent people who died in the tragedy. It is about Libya, its people and the injustice done to them.

The entire 6 million-plus Libyans paid heavily, in one way or another, as a result of crippling economic sanctions and ban of air travel imposed on them, for over ten years, in the wake of the Lockerbie bombing.

Gaddafi, however villain many see him, was a patriotic proud man full of dignity and love for his country and despite being the weakest link in the international power game he always maintained his self esteem and that of his people.

Today Gaddafi is gone and whatever legacy he left behind, at least as strong dignified leader to many, is being wiped out or distorted by western stooges, criminals, double agents, traitors, and outright terrorists he once kept at bay making Libya one of the safest countries in the most troubled parts of the world. To those who do not know Libya, this sounds like cheap nostalgic outburst but in fact it sums up the feelings of most of my fellow Libyans.

No wonder the majority of Libyans, including Gaddafi’s staunchest enemies, never dispute his loyalty to Libya nor his protection of its citizens and sovereignty.

Today Libya not only lacks strong and independent leadership but lacks the fundamentals of the normally functioning state courtesy, in part, of Mr. Barr’s government.

Most of those in power in Tripoli know very little about Lockerbie bombing and those few who know prefer to see Libya continue to be synonymous to the tragedy as if that is a victory for them against a murdered man –Gaddafi!

Mr Barr, on his way out of the justice department, maybe seeking to create false feeling of heroism, to chew on in his retirement.

Instead he is about to destroy another Libyan family and anger some victims’ families by intruding on their grief on the anniversary of the Lockerbie bombing.

His announcement, in couple of hours, is no more than yet another attempt to divert the search as away as possible from the truth we all seek.

[RB: A version of this article has now been published in The National.]

Why now?

[What follows is the texr of a statement by Aamer Anwar Lockerbie appeal lawyer for the family of the late Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, Dr Jim Swire and the Rev'd John Mosey:]

On Thursday information was released through The Wall Street Journal that the US Attorney General William Barr was due to unseal indictments against two other possible suspects for the Lockerbie Bombing.

On Friday evening we were informed by some of the British relatives that instruct us, that they had received an email from the Crown Office Lockerbie Appeal Team that the US Department of Justice, the US Attorney’s Office, the FBI, Attorney General William Barr was inviting all the families of the victims of the Pan Am Flight 103 attack, to join him for an important public announcement and update regarding the investigation on Monday December 21, 2020, at 10:30 am EST/3:30 pm GMT. Internet live stream: http://www.justice.gov/live.

The families I represent are horrified at the intrusion on their grief, on the day that they wish to remember their loved ones. The fact that the outgoing Attorney General William Barr thinks it is appropriate to invite families to watch his ‘grandstanding’ at a press conference is deeply disrespectful to the families and victims.

Many of the families will refuse to do so and suspect the motivation of choosing to prosecute 32 years after the bombing.

The Rev'd John Mosey father of 19 year old Helga who was murdered on Pan Am Flight 103 wrote to the Crown Office and Attorney General to express his disgust at the invitation:

We consider the timing and particularly the choice of this specific day, which is special to many of us, to be bizarre, disrespectful, insensitive and extremely ill considered.

Why exactly when the Attorney General is about to leave office, has he waited 32 years to bring charges?

Why would you use the anniversary of our daughter Helga’s death along with 269 others to parade once more a highly suspect prosecution…..

Your own Department, and perhaps some parts of the Scottish legal system, should also investigated for spending over three decades trying to divert the course of justice and hide the truth.

Ali Megrahi the son of the late Abdelbasset Al-Megrahi whom I represent in the appeal had the following to say:

Monday is just another desperate excuse to accuse Libya and after 32 years want to accuse another Libyan. Why now?

Where were they in the past 32 years, especially when we have been fighting for an appeal over the last 6 years, so why release this information now? 

They want to perpetuate lies against Libya and will not let us live in peace- I lost my father and yet America continues to cause our family as well as those of the victims more pain.

As for the  American families of the victims of this atrocity, you lost loved ones and I lost my father, I am not against what you are doing, but I assure you that your government have lied to you for the past 32 years and my family and I will not give up  fighting for truth and justice.

Robert Black QC stated:

I wonder... why now? Masud’s name (and Senussi's) has featured in the Lockerbie case since the very beginning, when charges were brought against Megrahi and Fhimah in 1991. I think the answer is that Bill Barr, the US Attorney General, is wanting to go out with a bang.

He’s now about to leave the scene and he wants his name to be remembered: Lockerbie at the beginning of his career and Lockerbie at the end. 

The other possibility is that it is a blatant attempt to influence the Scottish judges when they have got the latest Megrahi appeal before them and we await their judgement.

To conclude, the actions of the US Department of Justice can only be described as a cynical attempt to use 270 dead victims for propaganda purposes.

The Attorney General must know that if the conviction of the late Al-Megrahi is overturned then the case against Abu Agila Masud is likely to fall apart. The real questions at 3.30pm will be is why now and what ‘dirty deals’ have taken place behind closed to doors to engineer these indictments.

Both the British and US Governments know that if the conviction is overturned then real questions would need to be answered as to why an innocent man Al-Megrahi was sent to prison whilst also punishing the people of Libya for a crime they did not commit.  

As we await the decision of the appeal court on the Megrahi case it would be inappropriate to comment any further.

"I wonder why they are still trying to blame the wrong people for my daughter’s death"

[What follows is excerpted from a long interview of Dr Jim Swire by Marcello Mega in today's edition of The Scottish Mail on Sunday:]

My daughter was murdered 32 years ago tomorrow on Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie. For us, the anniversary is no different to the other 364 days. We remember Flora and feel her loss every day.

She would have celebrated her 24th birthday in America with her boyfriend the next day. I’m sure she would have been a mother by now. That day, our family lost a beloved daughter and sister, and all the future joy she would have brought us.

I have no doubt she would have had a wonderful career. She wanted to specialise in neurology and had done so brilliantly at nottingham University that she had been given time out to set up her own research project at Queen Square Hospital, London, l ooking at how HIV affected the brain.

I have many reasons to be angry. Much of my anger is directed at our Government and prosecution service, and the US authorities.

I wonder why they are still trying to blame the wrong people for my daughter’s death.

To hear last week the US intends to pursue another Libyan suspected of making the bomb that murdered 270 people fills me with despair, as does the news there is ‘fresh evidence’ linking a second suspect.

American investigators refuse to acknowledge the many flaws in the case that blamed Libya, and they continue the charade, ignoring all the evidence pointing to Iran. Now, cynically I believe, while five Scottish judges consider the posthumous appeal raised by the family of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi – the only man convicted of the bombing – outgoing US attorney-general William Barr will announce they want to try Abu Agila Mohammad Masud, allegedly a bomb-maker for the late Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.

The second suspect, Abdullah Al Senussi, is the ex-intelligence chief and brother-in-law of Gaddafi.

Mr Barr held the same position when Megrahi was first charged in 1991. Having suddenly and inexplicably changed the focus of the investigation from Iran to Libya in the beginning, he appears to have rounded the circle when no credible evidence remains against Libya. I wonder if the timing now was contrived to put pressure on the judges.

To believe the Crown’s case against Megrahi, you have to believe in a series of astonishing coincidences.

In October 1988 a European cell of the PFLP-GC terror group was raided by the German secret police in Neuss. Four bombs were recovered, all hidden in Toshiba cassette-recorders. Members admitted one device had been taken away by their leader.

The devices had a simple timer that ran for half an hour after being triggered by lowered air pressure at altitude. On a Boeing 747 this would occur seven minutes into the flight. The explosion was 37 minutes after take-off. The evidence label for the fragment supposedly linked to Libya was the only one of thousands of productions to be altered. Originally it read ‘charred cloth’, but the word ‘debris’ was overwritten, presumably when the debris itself was added.

The case for Iran as culprit is far stronger. Five months before Lockerbie, the USS Vincennes, a warship patrolling the Gulf, shot down an Iranian Airbus, killing all 290 on board. Iran vowed the skies would run with the blood of Americans. The US offered no apology.

Security warnings were shared by Western intelligence services from October 1988 that terrorists intended to bomb a US aircraft.

The later warnings were specific to Pan Am, prompting the US to offer embassy staff in Moscow the chance to fly home for Christmas with another airline. But the UK Government did nothing, failing to protect Flora and the other 269 victims, despite Heathrow having been notified of a bomb threat.

The story that saw Megrahi wrongly convicted of mass murder has the bomb on flights from Malta to Frankfurt and then on to Heathrow, but that did not happen. Even the judges who found Megrahi guilty in 2001 acknowledged the Crown had failed to show an unaccompanied bag flew on the flight from Malta. The Maid of the Seas, the Boeing 747 that would disintegrate over Lockerbie, was loaded from empty at Heathrow.

Evidence of a break-in at Heathrow the night before – which would have let someone plant the suitcase with the bomb in the relevant area – was known to the Scottish police, and must therefore have been known to the Crown, but was not revealed to Megrahi’s defence.

At the time, Heathrow had been notified by the UK department of Transport of the threat of bombs in Toshiba cassette-recorders.

We have a copy of a telex sent to Heathrow two days before Lockerbie, warning that such bombs would be hard to see on X-rays.

Incredibly, it told security staff at the airport that if an item looked uncertain on X-ray and was to be carried, it ‘could only be carried in the hold of the aircraft’.

The suppression of evidence that did not fit their case was a deliberate tactic of prosecutors.

They did not reveal that star witness Tony Gauci, owner of the shop that sold the clothing packed around the bomb, was to get $2 million (£1.5 million) for his testimony, even though he never once said the buyer was definitely Megrahi. The judges acknowledged his doubt in their verdict, but, uniquely in a criminal case where certainty is everything, made a virtue of it.

The statements Gauci made that didn’t fit the case were never shared but the judges later ruled on two matters Gauci was 100 per cent reliable on: the list of clothing and prices – not knowing that in an unseen statement he made in 1999 he had produced a different list – and that the buyer was Libyan.

The clothes purchase was agreed to have occurred on November 23, when Megrahi was in Malta. Other evidence, including Gauci’s brother Paul’s statement, pointed to december 7. Paul Gauci was not called to give evidence and received a $1 million (£740,000) reward. 

Megrahi received a life sentence.

The new appeal has not heard any of the considerable fresh evidence relating to the timer fragment.

The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission referred the case back to appeal but restricted the terms. There is copious evidence the fragment could not have been part of the bomb, yet the judges must decide if the conviction is safe without hearing it.

UK Families Flight 103 has always wanted to know why our loved ones were not protected despite the warnings, who killed them and why.

Our Government has always refused us a public inquiry. I am 84 and still hope to see justice done. It still brings tears to my eyes when I remember clearing out Flora’s London flat after her murder.

We found an offer to complete her studies at Cambridge, where I was an undergraduate. She would have been saving the news to tell us on Christmas day, or on her return from the States. I owe it to my wonderful daughter and to the man wrongly blamed for her death to keep fighting for the truth.

Lockerbie files show Scots police doubted key witness

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

Scottish detectives distanced themselves from a key Lockerbie witness, it has emerged, casting further doubt on the conviction of the only person ever found guilty over the attack.

Abdul Majid Giaka, a Libyan agent turned CIA informant, gave evidence that Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi collected a brown Samsonite suitcase from a Maltese airport the day before the 1988 bombing.

However, newly declassified files show that Scottish officers investigating the case admitted that his involvement had put them in a “delicate position”.

“The ‘birth’ of that witness was totally the making of the Americans,” they said in a document from 1991 that was marked secret.

It emerged this week that American prosecutors were seeking the extradition of the Libyan operative Abu Agila Mohammad Masud, accusing him of making the bomb that blew up Pan Am Flight 103, killing 270 people. He worked under Colonel Gaddafi and is serving a ten-year sentence for other crimes in a Tripoli prison.

The FBI is also believed to be interested in Abdullah Senussi, Gaddafi’s brother-in-law and security chief, who is suspected of overseeing the bombing and is in prison with Masud.

Lawyers carrying out a posthumous appeal on behalf of al-Megrahi, who died in 2012, say that the case against him was first made by Mr Giaka, whom they describe as “discredited”. They say that any charges levelled against Masud would fall apart if al-Megrahi’s conviction was overturned.

A report by the joint intelligence group of Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary has been declassified and placed in the National Archives at Kew. The dossier, seen by The Times, dates to October 1991, when reports of Mr Giaka’s emergence as an American asset began to circulate.

The document, written by Detective Chief Superintendent Stuart Henderson, the senior investigating officer, says: “The development of the ‘new witness’ has placed us in a delicate position. The ‘birth’ of that witness was totally the making of the Americans. The Americans must be ‘as one’ with us in anything we propose to expose to the Maltese.”

The document also mentions Tony Gauci, a Maltese shopkeeper whose evidence played a decisive role in al-Megrahi’s conviction at a Scottish court convened in the Netherlands in 2000. It states: “The Americans are keen to approach the witness Tony Gauci and ‘ascertain’ if he feels insecure or otherwise. Their intention is to take Gauci to America.” (...)

However, in 2005 Lord Fraser of Carmyllie, the former lord advocate who drew up the indictment against al-Megrahi, expressed doubts over Gauci’s testimony, describing him as “not quite the full shilling”. Last month appeal judges were told that Mr Gauci had asked for money in return for giving evidence.

The court was also told that Mr Gauci had been shown a photograph of al-Megrahi before he picked him out in an identity parade.

Aamer Anwar, the lawyer representing the al-Megrahi family, said: “These documents shine a light on dark and desperate actions taken by the US intelligence services over Lockerbie.

“We can only surmise that the ‘new witness’ who had been ‘birthed’ by the Americans was Abdul Majid Giaka.

“Megrahi’s family understands he was first accused of being involved in a conspiracy by Giaka. There has always been a suggestion that Giaka may have fabricated matters to make himself more valuable to the Americans. If the conviction of the late Megrahi was overturned then the case against Abu Agila Masud is likely to fall apart.”

John Holt, a former CIA agent who worked closely with Mr Giaka, claimed that the informant was a fantasist and an opportunist.

“I handled Giaka in 1989 for a whole year during which he never mentioned Libyan involvement in the bombing,” he said. “He was a car mechanic who was placed by Libyan intelligence as Malta airport office manager with Libyan Arab Airlines and had very little information about anything to do with bombs or Lockerbie.

“He felt humiliated by Megrahi, who was an official with the Libyan intelligence service, so the CIA knew he had a grudge.”

Mr Holt claimed that Mr Giaka changed his story in 1991 after fearing that his cover had been blown.

This month Mr Holt said: “When he was told he was useless to our intelligence services he began making up stories. It was only when he needed desperately to flee Libya in 1991 that he started telling the CIA things relevant to the Pan Am bombing, like hearing Megrahi and another man talking about a plan to bomb an American airliner.” (...)

“Is this an American attempt to influence the judges?"

[What follows is excerpted from an article by Tom Peterkin in today's edition of The Press and Journal:]

The FBI agent who led the original Lockerbie investigation has revealed the atrocity’s latest suspect was on his “radar” 30 years ago but there was a struggle to prove the case against him.

Richard Marquise said it was strongly suspected Abu Agila Mohammad Masud was the “technician” responsible for the bomb that killed 270 people in the worst terrorist outrage committed on UK territory.

Mr Marquise was reacting to reports suggesting that US prosecutors will seek the extradition of Mr Masud and he will be charged in a matter of days, to stand trial in America.

As the man who led the US side of the inquiry into the bombing, Mr Marquise welcomed reports that Mr Masud could face justice, claiming any progress would be appreciated by the families who lost loved ones on Pan Am Flight 103.

“If there is going to be another trial, I’m sure the families will be… I’m not going to use the word thrilled…. because it doesn’t bring a loved one back. But I am sure they will be grateful,” Mr Marquise said. (...)

“He’s been on my radar for around 30 years,” Mr Marquise said. “He was someone we were very interested in, but we never quite found out who he was. The Libyans disavowed any knowledge of him. We knew he existed but he was never really identified.

“Back in 1991, we knew his name. We knew what he looked like and we knew what he allegedly was responsible for. He was the technician.”

The retired FBI agent added: “In my mind I always felt he was connected to it somehow But we didn’t have the clues to prove it.”

Kenny MacAskill, the former Justice Secretary who controversially released Megrahi on compassionate grounds, agreed.

“He was the one with the skills. He was on the original indictment, I’m led to believe. So he was always a wanted man,” Mr MacAskill said. “The idea that Megrahi did this on his own was absurd.”

Reports from the other side of the Atlantic suggest Mr Masud had been in custody in Libya on unrelated charges but his current whereabouts are unknown.

Since Mr Marquise’s official involvement in the investigation, there have been some developments. At the forefront of these have been the work of Ken Dornstein, a journalist whose brother David was on the London to New York flight.

In 2015 Mr Dornstein produced a investigative documentary, Lockerbie: My Brother’s Bomber, which linked Mr Masud to the bombing of Berlin’s La Belle nightclub in 1986.

Mr Dornstein interviewed a Libyan intelligence officer who said Mr Masud was involved in the bombing before the unification of Germany, which killed two US servicemen.

The same source alleged Mr Masud, by then in jail in Tripoli, was involved in the Lockerbie bombing and said he was still alive.

Mr Dornstein also claimed Mr Masud met Megrahi after the latter was freed from a Scottish jail in 2009 and given a hero’s welcome when he landed back in Libya. (...)

Mr MacAskill has already made it plain that he believes that people other than Megrahi should be held to account for the bombing.

“Question arise as to why, if they are going for Masud, aren’t they going for Senussi?” asked the former Justice Secretary. 

Mr MacAskill was referring to Abdullah Al Senussi, the late Libyan dictator Colonel Gaddafi’s brother-in-law and former spy chief who has long been associated with the crime. (...)

“I heard over recent years the view of the Libyans was they don’t like Senussi and they don’t like Masud, but giving them up to the Americans is a step too far,” Mr MacAskill said.

“I think this is probably the juncture for Britain and America to be a bit more open in information they do have and produce it, as opposed to hiding it.”

What can be read into the timing of Masud’s extradition?

That is an interesting question, according to Professor Robert Black, an the Edinburgh University legal academic who has been a keen student of the Lockerbie case.

Professor Black is regarded as the architect of the Scottish court that was set up in Camp Zeist, Netherlands, to try Megrahi and his co-accused, Al Amin Khalifa Fhimah, who was found not guilty.

“I wonder…. why now?” asked Professor Black. “Masud’s name has featured in the Lockerbie case since the very beginning, when charges were brought against Megrahi and Fhimah in 1991.”

“I think the answer to that is William Barr, the US Attorney General, is wanting to go out with a bang.”

This week it was announced that Mr Barr, who has been one of Donald Trump’s staunchest allies, is to step down as head of the US’s Justice Department.

Professor Black pointed out that Mr Barr was actually acting Attorney General way back in 1991 and was the one to announce that Megrahi and Fhimah were being charged.

“Now that he’s about to leave the scene, I think he wants to go out and his name to be remembered: Lockerbie at the beginning and Lockerbie at the end,” Professor Black said. (...)

Professor Black, who has long argued that Megrahi should not have been convicted on the evidence brought before Camp Zeist, suggested cynics might view attempts to extradite Musad as an attempt to make an impact on the appeal process.

“The other possibility is that it is a blatant attempt to influence the Scottish judges because they have got the latest Megrahi appeal before them and we await their judgement,” Professor Black said.

The argument would be that the existence of another high-profile Libyan suspect, alongside Megrahi, would back up the case for Libyan involvement in the crime.

“Is this an American attempt to influence the judges to uphold the Megrahi conviction? That’s a very, very cynical view.”

But cynicism was how the development was greeted by Megrahi family’s lawyer, Aamer Anwar.

“It’s difficult not to be cynical about the motivation of the Americans, that on the eve of the anniversary of the Lockerbie bombing as well as the appeal decision, the US now wish to indict an individual, 32 years after the bombing, what exactly have they been doing up until now?” said Mr Anwar

“Why would the Attorney General William Barr wait until just as he is about to step down from the Justice Department, considering that he was involved with this case since 1991.”

“It’s difficult not to be cynical about the motivation of the Americans"

[What follows is excerpted from a report in today's edition of The National headlined Lockerbie appeal lawyer raises questions over timing of US suspect announcement:]

A lawyer representing the family of the late Abdelbaset al-Megrahi in their court bid to clear him of blame for the Lockerbie bombing has criticised America’s timing in announcing it intended to indict another man for the atrocity. (...)

American media reports claimed the US Justice Department expected to unseal charges in the coming days, with Abu Agila Mas’ud named as the suspect that will be indicted.

Five appeal judges in Edinburgh are currently deliberating whether to acquit Megrahi after the conclusion of the third appeal against his conviction last month.

Lawyer Aamer Anwar, who is acting for the Megrahi family, said the timing of the American announcement was suspect.

“How ‘convenient’ that this should happen just as the decision of the Megrahi miscarriage of justice appeal in the Scottish courts is awaited,” he said. “It’s difficult not to be cynical about the motivation of the Americans, that on the eve of the anniversary of the Lockerbie bombing as well as the appeal decision, the US now wish to indict an individual, 32 years after the bombing, what exactly have they been doing up until now?

“Why would the Attorney General William Barr wait just as he is about to step down from the Justice Department, considering that he has been involved with this case since 1991 … It is once again a matter of deep concern that the Americans claim to have shared information with Scottish authorities in 2017, yet for some reason this information was never disclosed to the Megrahi family’s legal team.”

Anwar’s comments came as Jim Swire, who lost his daughter Flora in the attack and is convinced that Megrahi was innocent, said he hoped the truth would come out. He told BBC Breakfast: “My position has been difficult in that I cannot bring myself to feel that the evidence we’ve heard so far does in fact point us towards the truth of who committed those 270 foul murders back in 1988 … I do hope that with what’s going on at the moment, coming up to the 32nd anniversary of this awful business on Monday, that some truth will come out of what’s happening now.”

US journalist Ken Dornstein told the Today programme on BBC Radio 4 that he had passed fresh information about Mas’ud to the FBI after he discovered more details about him.

He added: “I think a little bit of truth, if it can be established beyond any real doubt in this case, is always important to fight for.”

Lockerbie bombing: US said to be near charges for another suspect in 1988 plane crash

[This is the headline over a report just published on the website of The Wall Street Journal. It reads in part:]

US prosecutors are expected to unseal charges against a suspect they allege was a top bomb-maker for the late Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi and assembled the device that blew up Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, opening a new chapter in one of the world’s longest and most sprawling terrorism investigations.

The Justice Department is expected to unseal a criminal complaint against Abu Agila Mohammad Masud, who is currently held by Libyan authorities, in the coming days and to seek his extradition for trial on charges in US federal court, according to senior department officials. (...)

The case, filed by prosecutors in the US attorney’s office in Washington, DC, is based largely on a confession that Mr Masud gave to Libyan authorities in 2012, which was turned over to Scottish authorities in 2017, as well as travel and immigration records of Mr Masud, US officials said.

Libyan officials didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on the charges against Mr Masud.

Only one man — Abdel Baset al-Megrahi — was convicted by Scottish judges of playing a role in the attack, leaving many of the victims’ families saying they felt robbed of justice for the crimes. Megrahi was released eight years after his 2001 conviction on “compassionate grounds” and he died in 2012.

His family is appealing the verdict, which was made by a special panel of judges without a jury. Some prominent Scottish jurists and family members of the victims have questioned the evidence presented and the procedure used for the trial, which was held at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands in a bid to find a neutral locale. UK prosecutors have argued that the case was properly prosecuted and the judges’ initial verdict should stand and US law-enforcement authorities have long supported the guilty verdict.

The case is also of personal significance to Attorney General William Barr, who had announced US charges against Megrahi and another Libyan official in his first major press conference in his first stint in the job in 1991. He is expected to unveil the new case at a press conference in the next few days, officials said, in what will be one of his last official public acts before he steps down from serving in the post a second time later this week.

In announcing the case as acting attorney general in the Bush administration in 1991, Mr Barr said: “we will not rest until all those responsible are brought to justice.” The efforts to prosecute the men drifted for years. Scottish prosecutors had brought a parallel case, and it wasn’t until 1999—after years of wrangling among the US, the UK and Libya—that the Gadhafi regime handed over Megrahi and Lamin Khalifah Fhimah. Mr Fhimah was acquitted, and Megrahi was given a life sentence.

Evidence in the Megrahi prosecution included the remains of clothing from a suitcase thought to have carried the bomb. Investigators traced the clothing to a shop in Malta, whose owner identified Megrahi as the man who purchased it. Investigators also found remnants of a thumb-size timer, which they traced to a Swiss company that had contacts with Libya.

Mr Masud faces charges of destruction of an aircraft resulting in death and destruction of a vehicle of interstate commerce resulting in death. US officials said he traveled to Malta just before the bombing, constructed the bomb there and filled the suitcase with clothing before it was ultimately placed on Pan Am 103.

In Libya, the charges against a former Gadhafi regime official recall an era of an era of terror and repression under the former government. (...)

Some Libyans still believe their country was falsely accused. But many regard any accusations against the former regime as the work of a deposed and discredited government.

The United Nations Security Council put sanctions on Libya over the Lockerbie attack, isolating the country internationally. The UN lifted the sanctions in 2003 after the government agreed to pay out compensation to the victims, easing Libya’s isolation. (...)

Libyan authorities have questioned jailed former regime officials in connection with the bombing, according to Mohammed Ali Abdullah, an adviser to the Tripoli government. Among those questioned was Abdullah Senussi, Gadhafi’s former intelligence chief, who is being held in a prison in Tripoli and also has been indicted by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity.

The Lockerbie bombing wasn’t the only international act of terror the Gadhafi regime was accused of carrying out. In 1986, Libyan agents bombed a nightclub in West Berlin, killing three people including two American soldiers and injuring more than 200 others. In 2001, a German court convicted a former Libyan diplomat and three accomplices over the attack.

[RB: A last throw of the dice over Lockerbie by William Barr before he demits office as US Attorney General. Abu Agila Masud's name has long featured in speculation about the Lockerbie case. The most balanced consideration of his position comes in (a) John Ashton's article about the Ken Dornstein film in the Scottish Review "The coverage of the film is more notable for what it omits than what it reveals" and (b) Kevin Bannon's A response to the Dornstein documentary, both in November 2015.]