Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Endinburgh Council
 
 
Monday, 2nd November 2009 Change Date Latest Issue

Ian Swanson: Questions remain over Lockerbie bomber

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 21 August 2009
THE eyes of the world were on justice secretary Kenny MacAskill yesterday as he stood in St Andrew's House to announce his decision on the fate of the Lockerbie bomber.
The question of whether Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al-Megrahi – said to be in the final stages of terminal prostate cancer – should be allowed to spend his dying days with his family back home in Libya had sparked a bitter international debate.

Relativ
es of the 270 people who died in the 1988 bombing were divided on the issue, the UK Government was consulted behind the scenes, and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton phoned Mr MacAskill to argue against release.

But in the end, the buck stopped with the MSP for Edinburgh East & Musselburgh.

The outcome – Mr Megrahi's release on compassionate grounds so he can fly home to Libya to die – came as no surprise after the spate of stories and speculation over the last week.

But the decision – and the way it was handled – will affect the way Scotland is viewed around the globe for years to come.

Labour's Iain Gray was quick to condemn it. "If I was First Minister, Megrahi would not be going back to Libya," he said. "The decision to release him is wrong. Kenny MacAskill's conduct has damaged the Scottish justice system and, in turn, Scotland's international reputation."

Tory leader David Cameron branded it "a very bad decision". He said: "I think this is wrong and it's the product of some completely nonsensical thinking."

Others praised Mr MacAskill. The Church of Scotland hailed the decision as "a message to the world about what it is to be Scottish" and the Scottish Episcopal Church calling it "a brave political decision".

It was always going to be a controversial decision and whichever way it went, people would be upset and angry. But as Mr MacAskill pointed out, some decision had to be made – and he carefully spelled out how he had reached it.

The Justice Secretary had two applications to deal with – one from the Libyan government for Megrahi to be sent home under a prisoner transfer, the other from Megrahi himself for compassionate release.

The prisoner transfer option never seemed likely. The Scottish Government complained bitterly when the then Prime Minister Tony Blair did his "deal in the desert" with Colonel Gaddafi in 2007 to set up such transfers, without consulting ministers here.

In ruling out a transfer in his statement, Mr MacAskill went out of his way to highlight the UK Government's unwillingness to discuss US claims they had been given assurances before the Lockerbie trial that anyone convicted of the bombing would serve their sentence in a Scottish jail.

He said this "highly regrettable" lack of co-operation by the UK Government meant he could only accept that the US had been left with the impression there would be no prisoner transfer – and so he refused it.

Announcing his granting of compassionate release, Mr MacAskill spoke of humanity as a "defining characteristic of the Scottish people" and mercy and compassion as "beliefs we seek to live by".

"Our justice system demands that judgement be imposed, but compassion be available," he said.

Mr MacAskill has been criticised for the handling of the case. Opposition politicians said his visit to Megrahi in Greenock prison was a "dangerous precedent", though Mr MacAskill insisted he was obliged to hear the prisoner's representations in person if he requested it.

The leaks and speculation over the past week gave the impression of a government not in control. But with Mr MacAskill's statement yesterday, Scotland has at least shown it can make a difficult decision and not buckle under pressure from the world's biggest superpower.

However, behind the issue of Megrahi's release lies the bigger question about whether he was really responsible for the deaths of 270 people on 21 December, 1988.

Such doubts could not form any part of Mr MacAskill's consideration – and he said in his statement he stood by the conviction. But up until this week, Megrahi was pursuing an appeal, based on a report by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) which cast doubt on some of the evidence which led to the guilty verdict.

Megrahi formally abandoned his appeal on Tuesday. His defence team said he did so because he believed it would speed up the decision to allow him to return to Libya.

The move sparked suspicion that pressure had been brought on Megrahi. SNP MSP Christine Grahame, who visited him in prison, said Megrahi had told her just a few weeks earlier of his determination to clear his name.

Now, the evidence considered by the SCCRC will not be heard in public and the chances of any further inquiry into the Lockerbie bombing look slim.

Mr MacAskill acknowledged there remained concerns about "wider issues" surrounding the atrocity, but insisted they were beyond the jurisdiction of Scots law and the remit of the Scottish Government.

Despite the US government's comment that it "deeply regrets" the decision to release Megrahi, Washington will be mightily relieved that there is unlikely to be further public scrutiny of the Lockerbie saga.

Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died on Pan Am Flight 103, said after yesterday's decision: "I feel despondent that the west and Scotland didn't have the guts to allow this man's second appeal to continue because I am convinced had they done so it would have overturned the verdict against him.

"It's a blow to those of us who seek the truth but it is not an ending. As time goes by it will become clear that he had nothing to do with it."





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 21 August 2009 9:16 AM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Ian Swanson
 
1

Mikey,

Carstairs Junction 21/08/2009 12:17:33
i agree with Jim Swire. At the first appeal the US and Brit gevernments refused to let certain individuals appear and refused to release documents. If Megrahi really did do it, why didn't they accede to these requests?

I rest my case, m'lud!
2

emperor tomato ketchup,

21/08/2009 12:51:18
Until the PIIC on the Lockerbie papers is lifted, it is all conjecture.

But I bet you £10 that not only is Megrahi innocent, he was framed.

No conspiracy theories or any of that f***ing nonsense from me - this is one of the (thankfully few) cases where the official line is more outlandish than the alternative explanations.
3

Linda,

Edinburgh 21/08/2009 13:06:08
Any inquiry is a complete waste of money if Milliband and British government fails to release the secret documents papers they are holding surrounding the bombing of the Pan Am flight.
Criticism by opposition politicians of Kenny MacAskill’s handling of the Libyan request to release Megrahi ignores the role of the UK government in this difficult decision.
Brown and Blair have been fawning over Gaddafi for the last few years, despite
massive human rights violations, to try to get into Libya's vast Oil fields.
Following Blair’s prisoner transfer deal without consulting the Scottish legal system in 2007, at the recent G8 meeting in Italy, Gordon Brown granted Gaddafi a private meeting and this was closely followed by Peter Mandelson 'accidentally' meeting with Gadaffi's son last week in Corfu just before news of Megrahi’s released was leaked to the BBC in London which was no doubt done to increase pressure on the Scottish government.
Even many Labour MPs including Andrew Dismore, believe that the prisoner transfer deal treaty was rushed through by Jack Straw to pave the way for the release of Megrahi.
Imagine their outrage if MacAskill had allowed Megrahi to die in prison and jeopardised Prince Andrew’s trade mission.
4

Gruntfuttock,

21/08/2009 14:41:32
, Mr MacAskill spoke of humanity as a "defining characteristic of the Scottish people" and mercy and compassion as "beliefs we seek to live by".

Since when? What a preposterous deluded statement.

Tell that to the Black ex-slaves of Jamaica. Tell that to the Chinese forced to guzzle opium sold by Scots. Tell that to the Inuit destroyed by Scotch Whisky traded for furs. Tell that to the Highlanders expelled by their fellow countrymen....I could go on and on.

We have no right as a nation to claim the moral high ground.
5

Bored,

21/08/2009 15:24:49
#4 Grumpyfutnock

All the examples you quote were carried out by individuals long since dead. Are you suggesting that both todays and all future scots be forever tarnished by the acts of those in the distant past.

We have every right, as a nation, to both develop and take a moral high ground
6

abner doubleday,

The Binns 21/08/2009 15:45:38
#5 - agree wholeheartedly

Many Africans were sold by their own people/tribes they were at war with.

How far do you want to go back?

Norman attrocities against the Picts? Even the Bruce and Wallace were descended from the Normans.

And wasn't Ronnie Biggs sentenced to 30 years and is now out on compassionate grounds?
7

Pantaloon,

21/08/2009 15:45:43
#5

Scotland is no position to take the moral high ground.

This country has limited morals after yesterdays escapade by the joke of a justice minister McAskill. (What a joke, a justice minister who doesn't believe in justice)

Where is the moral right in putting the needs of a mass murderer before the needs of the victims of this countries worse terror attack?
8

Pantaloon,

21/08/2009 15:47:03

And Ronnie Biggs shouldn't be out either.

If you commit a crime, you should be prepared to take the punishment that comes with it.

Its this soft approach to criminal justice that has reduced this country to the state it is in.
9

Linda,

Edinburgh 21/08/2009 16:00:03
From the Guardian to-day.

Gordon Brown was accused today of adopting double standards on Libya because of the government's arm's-length involvement in the release of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.

Labour was accused of "facing two ways" when the party condemned the release of the Lockerbie bomber months after rushing through a treaty with Tripoli on the transfer of prisoners. Critics said Labour wanted to protect oil interests in Libya, by establishing a framework for the transfer of prisoners, while reaching out to the US by condemning the decision of the SNP's justice secretary to free Megrahi.

The row broke out after Labour condemned the release as wrong and said the bomber would still be in jail if it were still in power in Scotland. Iain Gray, leader of the Scottish Labour party, said: "This whole sorry affair shows the SNP as unfit when it comes to the tough decisions of government."

Sir Menzies Campbell, a former Lib Dem leader, said: "Labour is clearly facing two ways on this issue: wanting to enhance relations with Libya but at the same time determined to criticise the SNP for an American audience."

Lord Owen, foreign secretary in the late 1970s when British intelligence learned that Libya was arming the IRA, said: "It is very hard to get at the truth and yet Lord Mandelson is seen with the Libyan president's son. It is very clear that the British government are in this up to their neck. I view all this noise as party politics in a rather crude way."He said he supported the SNP's decision. "I am a humanitarian. Wherever you can you come down in the final analysis to looking at the individual. Are they entitled to die at home or die in prison? If it is humanely possible you should allow them to die at home."

Libya applied for the transfer of Megrahi under the UK/Libya prisoner transfer agreement on 5 May. Jack Straw, the justice secretary, rushed through the ratification of the treaty warning that a delay would damage relations with Libya.
10

Pilrig.,

Livingston 22/08/2009 00:39:42
7 - perhaps you'd care to ask messrs Blair and Broon who were happy to shake hands with Megrahi's boss, and of course Lord Mandelson had a friendly chat with Gaddafi's son a few weeks ago.
I doubt the words 'Yvonne Fletcher' were mentioned.
Perhaps the above honourable gentlemen aren't quite convinced of Megrahi's guilt ?
11

Jings MacCrivvens,

22/08/2009 08:10:14
Whilst I deplore the scenes at Tripoli, I applaud Kenny MacAskill's decision to release Megrahi on compassionate grounds; demonstrating that modern Scotland is a civilised country.
The near hysteria of many of the posters above shows that the US and its Britnat poodles have yet to rise above the hypocrisy preached by Reagan, Thatcher and her ardent disciples Blair and Brown.

The US which stalks the world stage looking to act out its role as world bully.
The US which shoots innocent civilians out of the sky and awards its naval personnel medals for so doing.
The US which acts as it wishes with rendition flights rounding up those it does not care for.
The US which illegally and immorally imprisons people without trial in Gitmo.
Perhaps one day the US will become a civilised country too.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.