[This is the headline over an article just published on the Telegraph website. The following are excerpts.]
More than two decades have passed since Britain’s worst terrorist attack but the relatives of those who died in the Lockerbie bombing remain united by a single common goal: the pursuit of the truth.
This weekend 11 of them descended on Downing Street to urge the Prime Minister to order a public inquiry into the atrocity that claimed 270 lives when Pan Am flight 103 from Heathrow to New York was brought down over Scotland.
Pam Dix, a prominent campaigner, handed over a letter addressed to Gordon Brown calling for a meeting with the Prime Minister to discuss the need for a public inquiry and the main issues that it must address.
The families of those who died on Dec 21 1988 – 259 on the flight and 11 on the ground in Lockerbie – have been spurred into renewed action by the release in August, on humanitarian grounds, of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, 57, the only man convicted of the bombing. Megrahi, who has returned to his homeland of Libya, has terminal prostate cancer and may only have weeks, or even days, to live.
The relatives believe that a public inquiry offers the last realistic hope of finding out how and why their loves ones perished.
They are worried that without it their chances of learning the truth could end when Megrahi dies.
Ms Dix, whose brother Peter Dix, 35, was on the doomed Pan Am jet, said: “One of the central purposes of a full inquiry would be finally to scotch the many, often outlandish, conspiracy theories that exist around Lockerbie and why and how it happened. To take Megrahi and the criminal investigation: there are those who believe he is innocent, those who believe he is guilty and those somewhere in the middle – like me – who believe that they simply don’t know.
“Our adversarial system [of criminal law] means that it all hangs on the balance of reasonable doubt – it is not really about getting to the bottom of the matter. I found the trial process [in the Netherlands from 2000-01] baffling and very disappointing – my expectations were that it would at least take us further along the road to who might have been responsible.
“The UK has a fine tradition of public, independent inquiries that have been watershed events in changing our approach to the way in which an individual murder as well as disaster – the Herald of Free Enterprise, Stephen Lawrence, the Marchioness – for example, is investigated and how people are treated. These inquiries have all resulted in highly significant recommendations. The sad and unacceptable fact, however, is that such inquiries usually come about only because of the efforts of the bereaved and survivors. This must be wrong.”
Ms Dix said that, like the other relatives, she feels she owes it to her late brother, an Irishman, to press for major breakthroughs in the Lockerbie story. (...)
The Rev John Mosey, whose daughter Helga, 19, died in the Lockerbie tragedy, said: “We are still waiting for answers to the big questions, notably why this happened despite 14 or 15 explicit warnings. This was a preventable disaster.”
Until Megrahi’s release, the relatives were pinning their hopes on the new evidence that had been due to be made public at his second appeal hearing.
The appeal had been permitted in 2007 after the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission uncovered six separate grounds for believing the conviction may have been a miscarriage of justice. However, Megrahi dropped his appeal two days before his release to improve his chances of being allowed to gain his freedom.
Those supporting the relatives’ call for a public inquiry include senior lawyers Gareth Peirce, Michael Mansfield QC, and Prof Robert Black QC, the “architect” of the Lockerbie trial.
Elaine Wright, a retired consultant psychiatrist whose son Andrew Gillies-Wright, 24, was another Lockerbie victim, said: “From our earliest meetings, all we wanted to establish was the truth.
“But we still haven’t found out what really happened and we must not allow this opportunity [the publicity resulting from the release of Megrahi] to slip away.” (...)
However, there was little encouragement for the relatives from Downing Street yesterday . A spokesman said: “We have received the letter and we will be responding to it. But in the past, the Foreign Office has said that the Scottish courts have made a decision in the case – and we still have a convicted individual. It is our belief that nothing can be gained from a public inquiry.”
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Pam Dix. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Pam Dix. Sort by date Show all posts
Sunday 25 October 2009
Sunday 27 July 2014
"We still don’t know why Pan Am 103 was bombed and who ordered it"
[What follows is an excerpt from a long article about the MH17 disaster in today’s edition of The Sunday Telegraph:]
For the relatives and friends of those who died, including ten British citizens and more than 80 children, the uncertainty and confusion will be deeply upsetting. While the most likely scenario points to the involvement of Russian-backed rebels, the question remains whether Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president, should also be held to account.
Pam Dix, whose brother died in the Lockerbie bombing, fears that victims’ relatives will suffer ongoing anxiety in the search for the truth.
In the case of Lockerbie, in which a Pan Am jet was blown up over the Scottish town, one Libyan intelligence official was jailed for murder but doubts remain 25 years on about the conviction with many blaming Iran rather than Libya for the atrocity.
“The situation for the families from MH17 is agonising – waiting for news of whether they can get the bodies back, for information about what happened, who did it and why,” said Mrs Dix.
“At least after Lockerbie we could travel to the site to see the debris for ourselves, and investigators could have access in order to establish as many facts as they could.
“Twenty-five years later we still don’t know why Pan Am 103 was bombed and who ordered it. For the MH17 families the investigation will be just if not more frustrating. The political situation in Ukraine and Russia means it could be years before any proper information or evidence emerges.”
[A detailed consideration of the available evidence can be found in this article from 21st Century Wire. Its conclusions are very different from The Telegraph’s.]
Monday 16 August 2010
Lockerbie families call for fresh investigation
I am grateful to a reader of this blog (and a welcome commentator) for drawing my attention to a video on the website of the Daily Record, one of Scotland's largest-circulation and fiercely Labour-supporting tabloids. In it Pam Dix, spokesman for the Lockerbie relatives group UK Families Flight 103 expresses the group's support for a full independent inquiry into the Lockerbie case.
I am grateful to another reader and welcome commentator for drawing my attention to an article by Joan Burnie headed "We must unlock truth on atrocity" in her Friday Column in the Daily Record on 23 July. The following are excerpts:
There is something distasteful about willing Abdelbaset al-Megrahi to die, no matter how evil he may or may not be.
As malignant as the cancer spreading through Megrahi's body is this baying for his corpse, with the bloodlust of a crowd at a public stoning.
It is understandable that the families of the victims want vengeance but let's not pretend that they matter a jot to the real players in all of this.
They are pawns in a game of global politics, duplicity and corporate might.
The main focus of the debate is ludicrous, anyway.
Doctors can't give a survival time in cancer cases. They are not gods.
From the moment of diagnosis, cancer is a waiting game. (...)
In the meantime, the elephant in the room - the real issue of whether Megrahi was even behind the bombing - has been pushed conveniently to one side.
It is barely mentioned and yet it is the most important issue of all.
Do we really want Megrahi to die when he will take the truth to his grave?
On June 28, 2007, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission completed their investigation, having concluded that there was evidence of a potential miscarriage of justice.
It is more than likely that Megrahi was innocent and, as someone who believes that, I am glad he will spend his dying days at home in Libya. (...)
It is a grave pity that, with all the backroom dealing, his appeal didn't go ahead.
And that's the key, because it was never in the interests of the UK or American governments to have the truth outed in a courtroom.
The US government, who now so piously condemn the release of Megrahi, forget their part in covering up the truth, the witnesses paid off, allegedly, with the authority of the FBI. (...)
If the families of the Lockerbie victims matter at all, why haven't their calls for a full public inquiry into the atrocity been answered?
Instead, they have been lied to and their need for answers has been ignored. What a tragedy. What an utter betrayal.
Pamela Dix, whose brother Peter was killed in the bombing of Pan Am 103, claims the families have "faced years of denials and obfuscation".
Jim Swire, whose beautiful young daughter Flora died in the disaster, is convinced the wrong man was jailed.
At the heart of all of this is not that Megrahi should lose his life but that on Wednesday, December 21, 1988, 270 victims of the Lockerbie bombing lost theirs.
Their families deserve to know why they died and, for all the millions thrown at them, that is the only compensation that counts.
I am grateful to another reader and welcome commentator for drawing my attention to an article by Joan Burnie headed "We must unlock truth on atrocity" in her Friday Column in the Daily Record on 23 July. The following are excerpts:
There is something distasteful about willing Abdelbaset al-Megrahi to die, no matter how evil he may or may not be.
As malignant as the cancer spreading through Megrahi's body is this baying for his corpse, with the bloodlust of a crowd at a public stoning.
It is understandable that the families of the victims want vengeance but let's not pretend that they matter a jot to the real players in all of this.
They are pawns in a game of global politics, duplicity and corporate might.
The main focus of the debate is ludicrous, anyway.
Doctors can't give a survival time in cancer cases. They are not gods.
From the moment of diagnosis, cancer is a waiting game. (...)
In the meantime, the elephant in the room - the real issue of whether Megrahi was even behind the bombing - has been pushed conveniently to one side.
It is barely mentioned and yet it is the most important issue of all.
Do we really want Megrahi to die when he will take the truth to his grave?
On June 28, 2007, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission completed their investigation, having concluded that there was evidence of a potential miscarriage of justice.
It is more than likely that Megrahi was innocent and, as someone who believes that, I am glad he will spend his dying days at home in Libya. (...)
It is a grave pity that, with all the backroom dealing, his appeal didn't go ahead.
And that's the key, because it was never in the interests of the UK or American governments to have the truth outed in a courtroom.
The US government, who now so piously condemn the release of Megrahi, forget their part in covering up the truth, the witnesses paid off, allegedly, with the authority of the FBI. (...)
If the families of the Lockerbie victims matter at all, why haven't their calls for a full public inquiry into the atrocity been answered?
Instead, they have been lied to and their need for answers has been ignored. What a tragedy. What an utter betrayal.
Pamela Dix, whose brother Peter was killed in the bombing of Pan Am 103, claims the families have "faced years of denials and obfuscation".
Jim Swire, whose beautiful young daughter Flora died in the disaster, is convinced the wrong man was jailed.
At the heart of all of this is not that Megrahi should lose his life but that on Wednesday, December 21, 1988, 270 victims of the Lockerbie bombing lost theirs.
Their families deserve to know why they died and, for all the millions thrown at them, that is the only compensation that counts.
Sunday 28 July 2013
"Dirty dealing" by UK Government over Megrahi prisoner transfer agreement
[An article in today’s edition of The Sunday Telegraph discloses that the UK Government linked its conclusion of a prisoner transfer agreement with Libya to an arms-export deal. It reads in part:]
An email sent by the then British ambassador in Tripoli details how a prisoner transfer agreement would be signed once Libya “fulfils its promise” to buy an air defence system.
The disclosure is embarrassing for members of the then Labour government, which always insisted that Abdelbaset al-Megrahi’s release was not linked to commercial deals.
The email, which contained a briefing on the UK’s relations with Colonel Muammar Gaddafi’s regime, was sent on June 8 2008 by Sir Vincent Fean, the then UK ambassador, to Tony Blair’s private office, ahead of a visit soon after he stepped down as prime minister.
Mr Blair flew to Tripoli to meet Gaddafi on June 10, in a private jet provided by the dictator, one of at least six visits Mr Blair made to Libya after quitting Downing Street.
The briefing, which runs to 1,300 words, contains revealing details about how keen Britain was to do deals with Gaddafi. It also suggests that:
Þ the UK made it a key objective for Libya to invest its £80 billion sovereign wealth fund through the City of London
Þ the UK was privately critical of then President George Bush for “shooting the US in the foot” by continuing to put a block on Libyan assets in America, in the process scuppering business deals
Þ the Department for International Development was eager to use another Libyan fund worth £130 million to pay for schemes in Sierra Leone and other poverty-stricken countries.
The release of Megrahi in August 2009 caused a huge furore, with the Government insisting he had been released on compassionate grounds because he was suffering from terminal cancer, and that the decision was taken solely by the Scottish government. (...)
Libya had been putting pressure on the UK to release Megrahi and in May 2007, just before he left Downing Street, Mr Blair travelled to Sirte to meet Gaddafi and Al-Baghdadi Ali al-Mahmoudi, Libya’s then prime minister.
At that meeting, according to Sir Vincent’s email, Mr Blair and Mr Baghdadi agreed that Libya would buy the missile defence system from MBDA, a weapons manufacturer part-owned by BAE Systems. The pair also signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) for a prisoner transfer agreement (PTA), which the Libyans believed would pave the way for Megrahi’s release.
The British government initially intended the agreement to explicitly exclude Megrahi. However, ministers relented under pressure from Libya.
In December 2007, Jack Straw, then justice secretary, told his Scottish counterpart that he had been unable to secure an exclusion, but said any application to transfer Megrahi under the agreement would still have to be signed off by Scottish ministers.
With Mr Blair returning a year later — as a guest of Gaddafi on his private jet — the government appears to have used the chance to press its case for the arms deal to be sealed. At the time, Britain was on the brink of an economic and banking crisis, and Libya, through the Libyan Investment Authority, had billions of pounds in reserves.
Sir Vincent wrote: “There is one bilateral issue which I hope TB [Tony Blair] can raise, as a legacy issue. On 29 May 07 in Sirte, he and Libya’s PM agreed that Libya would buy an air defence system (Jernas) from the UK (MBDA). One year on, MBDA are now back in Tripoli (since 8 June) aiming to agree and sign the contract now — worth £400 million, and up to 2,000 jobs in the UK. (...)
“Linked (by Libya) is the issue of the 4 bilateral Justice agreements about which TB signed an MoU with Baghdadi on 29 May. The MoU says they will be negotiated within the year: they have been. They are all ready for signature in London as soon as Libya fulfils its promise on Jernas.”
The PTA was signed in November 2008 by Bill Rammell, a foreign office minister.
The disclosure of the email, which was obtained by The Sunday Telegraph as a result of a Freedom of Information request, angered the relatives of victims of the bombing.
Pam Dix, whose brother Peter died at Lockerbie, said: “It appears from this email that the British government was making a clear correlation between arms dealing with Libya and the signing of the prisoner transfer agreement.
“We were told Megrahi’s release was a matter strictly for the Scottish government but this shows the dirty dealing that was going on behind the scenes.”
Lord Mandelson, who was business secretary when Megrahi was released, said he was unaware of any possible links between commercial deals and negotiations over a release.
He said: “Based on the information that I was given at the time, I made clear the government’s position. I was not aware of the correspondence covered in this FOI request.”
An email sent by the then British ambassador in Tripoli details how a prisoner transfer agreement would be signed once Libya “fulfils its promise” to buy an air defence system.
The disclosure is embarrassing for members of the then Labour government, which always insisted that Abdelbaset al-Megrahi’s release was not linked to commercial deals.
The email, which contained a briefing on the UK’s relations with Colonel Muammar Gaddafi’s regime, was sent on June 8 2008 by Sir Vincent Fean, the then UK ambassador, to Tony Blair’s private office, ahead of a visit soon after he stepped down as prime minister.
Mr Blair flew to Tripoli to meet Gaddafi on June 10, in a private jet provided by the dictator, one of at least six visits Mr Blair made to Libya after quitting Downing Street.
The briefing, which runs to 1,300 words, contains revealing details about how keen Britain was to do deals with Gaddafi. It also suggests that:
Þ the UK made it a key objective for Libya to invest its £80 billion sovereign wealth fund through the City of London
Þ the UK was privately critical of then President George Bush for “shooting the US in the foot” by continuing to put a block on Libyan assets in America, in the process scuppering business deals
Þ the Department for International Development was eager to use another Libyan fund worth £130 million to pay for schemes in Sierra Leone and other poverty-stricken countries.
The release of Megrahi in August 2009 caused a huge furore, with the Government insisting he had been released on compassionate grounds because he was suffering from terminal cancer, and that the decision was taken solely by the Scottish government. (...)
Libya had been putting pressure on the UK to release Megrahi and in May 2007, just before he left Downing Street, Mr Blair travelled to Sirte to meet Gaddafi and Al-Baghdadi Ali al-Mahmoudi, Libya’s then prime minister.
At that meeting, according to Sir Vincent’s email, Mr Blair and Mr Baghdadi agreed that Libya would buy the missile defence system from MBDA, a weapons manufacturer part-owned by BAE Systems. The pair also signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) for a prisoner transfer agreement (PTA), which the Libyans believed would pave the way for Megrahi’s release.
The British government initially intended the agreement to explicitly exclude Megrahi. However, ministers relented under pressure from Libya.
In December 2007, Jack Straw, then justice secretary, told his Scottish counterpart that he had been unable to secure an exclusion, but said any application to transfer Megrahi under the agreement would still have to be signed off by Scottish ministers.
With Mr Blair returning a year later — as a guest of Gaddafi on his private jet — the government appears to have used the chance to press its case for the arms deal to be sealed. At the time, Britain was on the brink of an economic and banking crisis, and Libya, through the Libyan Investment Authority, had billions of pounds in reserves.
Sir Vincent wrote: “There is one bilateral issue which I hope TB [Tony Blair] can raise, as a legacy issue. On 29 May 07 in Sirte, he and Libya’s PM agreed that Libya would buy an air defence system (Jernas) from the UK (MBDA). One year on, MBDA are now back in Tripoli (since 8 June) aiming to agree and sign the contract now — worth £400 million, and up to 2,000 jobs in the UK. (...)
“Linked (by Libya) is the issue of the 4 bilateral Justice agreements about which TB signed an MoU with Baghdadi on 29 May. The MoU says they will be negotiated within the year: they have been. They are all ready for signature in London as soon as Libya fulfils its promise on Jernas.”
The PTA was signed in November 2008 by Bill Rammell, a foreign office minister.
The disclosure of the email, which was obtained by The Sunday Telegraph as a result of a Freedom of Information request, angered the relatives of victims of the bombing.
Pam Dix, whose brother Peter died at Lockerbie, said: “It appears from this email that the British government was making a clear correlation between arms dealing with Libya and the signing of the prisoner transfer agreement.
“We were told Megrahi’s release was a matter strictly for the Scottish government but this shows the dirty dealing that was going on behind the scenes.”
Lord Mandelson, who was business secretary when Megrahi was released, said he was unaware of any possible links between commercial deals and negotiations over a release.
He said: “Based on the information that I was given at the time, I made clear the government’s position. I was not aware of the correspondence covered in this FOI request.”
Saturday 14 May 2016
UK Court quest for Lockerbie facts
[This is the heading over an item dated 14 May 1998 on The Pan Am 103 Crash Website. The subheading reads “Ian Black on a mother's search for truth behind PanAm tragedy” which is a strong indication that the article was published in The Guardian, though I can find no trace of it on the newspaper’s website. It reads as follows:]
The mother of a British victim of the Lockerbie disaster is going to the High Court after failing to force an inquest to reveal more about the case.
Nearly 10 years after PanAm flight 103 exploded, killing 270 people, Elizabeth Wright, a London psychiatrist, is seeking judicial review of the decision of a Sussex coroner that he could not conduct an inquest on her son Andrew.
Andrew Gillies-Wright, then 24, was flying to New York for Christmas when he died on December 21, 1988. He was cremated and his ashes interred in South Lancing, West Sussex. Dr Wright, like other Lockerbie relatives seeking movement after years of impasse, agreed to act as a test case, but was told "the lawfully cremated remains of a person (that is that person's ashes) do not constitute 'a body' for the purpose of... jurisdiction."
The British families want an inquest to raise questions which were not answered in the Scottish fatal accident inquiry in Dumfries.Those include events on the ground after the incident, whether intelligence agencies had warned of an attack, and how it was that initial suspicions that Iran, Syria or Palestinians were responsible gave way to charges against Libya.
Gareth Peirce, Dr Wright's solicitor, said: "There is potentially clear and compelling evidence setting out a scenario so different from the one that has been officially presented that it's a continuing national and international disgrace that it remains hidden, and that it falls to the families of the victims to unravel it."
Behind the legal arguments being prepared by Ms Peirce and Michael Mansfield, QC, lies the pain of bereaved families whose hope of seeing justice is diminishing almost a decade after the crime. "It shows what sort of position we find ourselves in when we have to discuss whether a cremated human being is a body," said Pam Dix, spokesperson for UK Families Flight 103.
She added: "We were not satisfied with the fatal accident inquiry, and we see the inquest as one way to further our quest to find out exactly what happened... We want information, not blame.
"We know intelligence won't be openly discussed in any court, but we would like to see how far we could go in getting these matters aired."
Jim Swire, whose daughter, Flora, died in the bombing, returned from Libya last month with "strong assurances" that the suspects would be handed over for trial in a neutral country. He accused the Government of "following slavishly in America's slipstream", despite the comment by Nelson Mandela that no nation should be "complainant, prosecutor and judge".
Roger Stone, the West Sussex coroner, wrote after refusing an inquest on Mr Gillies-Wright: "I hope, given time, that Dr Wright and other members of the family will find it possible to come to terms with their son's tragic death and take comfort from the loving memories they no doubt hold of him."
[RB: If a judicial review was in fact applied for (on which I can find no information) it clearly did not succeed.]
Saturday 14 June 2014
Collective Conviction: The Story of Disaster Action
[This is the title of a book due out in August. One of the authors is Pam Dix of UK Families Flight 103. The publisher, Liverpool University Press, describes the book as follows:]
Collective Conviction tells the story of Disaster Action, a small charity founded in 1991 by survivors and bereaved people from the disasters of the late 1980s, including Zeebrugge, King’s Cross, Clapham, Lockerbie, Hillsborough and the Marchioness. The aims were to create a health and safety culture in which disasters were less likely to occur and to support others affected by similar events. The founders could not have anticipated the degree to which they would influence emergency planning and management and the way people are treated after disasters.
Aware of the value of lessons learned over 22 years, the trustees felt that this corporate memory should be captured. Collective Conviction encapsulates that memory, so that it can be called upon by survivors, bereaved, government and others for years to come.
The book sets out the chronology of Disaster Action’s history, with first-person accounts and case studies of disasters interweaved with chapters on the needs and rights of individuals, the treatment of bereaved and survivors, inquests and inquiries, the law, the media, memorials and commemorations, and the importance of corporate memory. Additionally, the book contains guidance notes for survivors and bereaved on dealing with a disaster, and best practice guidance for responders and the media.
This book is essential reading for those in a wide range of disciplines with an interest in: planning for, responding to, reporting on and dealing with the aftermath of disaster. And importantly, people affected by disaster should find solace and support in the personal stories of others.
Saturday 24 September 2011
More on Hana Gaddafi
[The Sunday Telegraph is running a story headed Emails show British Government knew Hana Gaddafi was still alive. It reads in part:]
Documents found in the British embassy in Tripoli and seen by The Sunday
Telegraph show that Hana Gaddafi, supposedly killed 25 years ago, was
actually granted a two-year visa to come to Britain as recently as October
last year. The UK even paid her application fee.
For the relatives of the Lockerbie victims it is a terrible betrayal. Gaddafi
had used Hana’s alleged death, aged 18 months, as a propaganda coup and to
suggest to the British families that he too had suffered as they had.
Dr Jim Swire, whose 24-year-old daughter Flora was blown up on Pan Am flight
103, was even shown — by Gaddafi himself — a photograph of Hana, covered in
blood and on the verge of death, lying on a hospital trolley. That meeting
took place in Tripoli 20 years ago and had a profound effect on Dr Swire and
his attitude towards the Libyan dictator.
That the British Government never bothered to inform Dr Swire and the other
Lockerbie relatives what really happened to Hana has simply added to the
sense of betrayal.
“If the Government knew the story about Hana was phoney then it makes me
angry,” said Dr Swire. “The Foreign Office has always kept me in the dark.
In an ideal world the CIA and the people from MI6 should have sat down with
relatives and said 'we cannot make this public, but this is what really
happened’. But nothing of that sort ever happened. That is a source of
considerable anger for me.”
Dr Swire flew to Tripoli in 1991 to persuade Gaddafi to hand over Abdelbaset
al-Megrahi for trial for the Lockerbie bombing – still the biggest single
terrorist atrocity committed in the UK. Dr Swire, incidentally, no longer
believes al-Megrahi is guilty and is convinced of his innocence.
“It may well be Gaddafi was lying when he talked to me about Hana. The fable I was asked to believe was she was killed not outright but that she died of shrapnel injuries. I have no idea if it was true or false,” said Dr Swire.
He had even taken with him on the trip a photograph of Flora at 18 months – the same age as Hana when she was purportedly killed – as a kind of emotional leverage in his appeal to Gaddafi to hand over Megrahi. With the photograph of Flora, he gave Gaddafi an inscription in English and Arabic which read: “The consequence of the use of violence is the death of innocent people” which was placed on a wall beside a photograph of Hana in what was said to be Hana’s bedroom. The inscription was still there when Dr Swire revisited Libya last year, though the picture of Hana had been replaced by one of Gaddafi’s mother.
Pam Dix, whose brother died on the Pan Am flight, said: “If the British authorities knew Hana had not been killed it is yet another example of them creating a story to suit themselves. For some unknown reason they decided to allow this mystery to continue. Why was this kept a secret?
“The whole thing smells badly of a cover-up. It is deeply hurtful. The British
Government has been buying into Gaddafi’s deceit.” (...)
[The same newspaper also publishes reports headlined Tony Blair's six secret visits to Gaddafi and Series of talks before Megrahi’s release about trips to Libya in the three years following Blair's departure from Downing Street.
The Mail on Sunday jumps on the bandwagon with a report headlined Blair had secret meeting with Gaddafi aide at his home... a month before Lockerbie bomber’s release.]
Sunday 7 February 2016
Kenny MacAskill accused of ‘cashing in’ with book on Lockerbie bomber release
This is the headline over a report in today’s edition of the Sunday Post. It reads in part:]
The former Justice Secretary has been accused of cashing in after he signed a publishing deal which will see him give his account of the decision to release Abdelbaset al-Megrahi on compassionate grounds.
Megrahi is the only person convicted of the 1988 Lockerbie bombing but served just eight years of his sentence before being freed in 2009 because he had cancer and doctors said he would be dead within three months.
It is understood the book will see MacAskill give his version of the period building up to releasing Megrahi and the international condemnation of the decision to free the Libyan intelligence agent, who went on to live for three more years.
MacAskill’s move last night sparked outrage from American Susan Cohen, who lost her 20-year-old daughter Theodora.
She said: “I view this book with extreme scepticism. Do we really think MacAskill will tell us the truth? It will just be an exercise in self-serving and some attempt to protect what he thinks is his legacy.
“I don’t care what he has to say, how tough the decision was or any of that.
“There has been this sort of industry grown up around Lockerbie, much like we see with many other disasters or terrorist incidents, where people make money from books or films.
“I find it disgusting frankly.”
She added: “I stand by my view that the release of Megrahi was a disgusting capitulation.
“The man murdered 270 people and lived on for years after we were told he was at death’s door, it was an embarrassment to your government.”
Scottish Conservative chief whip John Lamont added: “The SNP bent over backwards to set Megrahi free and a lot of people are still angry about that fact.
“It’s scandalous that Kenny MacAskill now feels the need to make money out of this case. Once again, it’s the victims’ families and friends who are set to suffer.” (...)
Megrahi, who always maintained his innocence, was found guilty of the bombing in 2001 and seven years later it was revealed the Libyan had “advanced stage” prostate cancer.
The then Justice Secretary MacAskill released Megrahi on compassionate grounds in 2009, sparking international condemnation with US president Barack Obama branding the decision “a mistake”.
MacAskill said he stood by his decision and would “live with the consequences”.
The veteran SNP figure and former lawyer is stepping down from Holyrood next month after 17 years as an MSP to pursue a “third career”. (...)
One SNP insider said: “Kenny couldn’t speak about the issue as frankly and freely as he would have liked at the time because he was in government.
“Any suggestion he is cashing in is wide of the mark.
“There is a lot to tell, much of which couldn’t be told at the time, so I think it is right that people get to hear the back story to such a momentous decision.”
Mr MacAskill confirmed the book deal when approached by the Sunday Post on Friday but declined to comment further.
[RB: I find it mildly amusing that UK news media seeking comments from Lockerbie victims’ families always approach US families (and usually one particular person, whose comments can be guaranteed to be colourful) rather than UK relatives whose contributions are usually more measured.
A report on the Daily Record website contains the following quote from a UK relative:]
Pam Dix, whose brother Peter died in the atrocity, yesterday said: “I am baffled as to what he can add to the extensive debate on Lockerbie and what his own investigation could consist of that could be of any substance.”
The former Justice Secretary has been accused of cashing in after he signed a publishing deal which will see him give his account of the decision to release Abdelbaset al-Megrahi on compassionate grounds.
Megrahi is the only person convicted of the 1988 Lockerbie bombing but served just eight years of his sentence before being freed in 2009 because he had cancer and doctors said he would be dead within three months.
It is understood the book will see MacAskill give his version of the period building up to releasing Megrahi and the international condemnation of the decision to free the Libyan intelligence agent, who went on to live for three more years.
MacAskill’s move last night sparked outrage from American Susan Cohen, who lost her 20-year-old daughter Theodora.
She said: “I view this book with extreme scepticism. Do we really think MacAskill will tell us the truth? It will just be an exercise in self-serving and some attempt to protect what he thinks is his legacy.
“I don’t care what he has to say, how tough the decision was or any of that.
“There has been this sort of industry grown up around Lockerbie, much like we see with many other disasters or terrorist incidents, where people make money from books or films.
“I find it disgusting frankly.”
She added: “I stand by my view that the release of Megrahi was a disgusting capitulation.
“The man murdered 270 people and lived on for years after we were told he was at death’s door, it was an embarrassment to your government.”
Scottish Conservative chief whip John Lamont added: “The SNP bent over backwards to set Megrahi free and a lot of people are still angry about that fact.
“It’s scandalous that Kenny MacAskill now feels the need to make money out of this case. Once again, it’s the victims’ families and friends who are set to suffer.” (...)
Megrahi, who always maintained his innocence, was found guilty of the bombing in 2001 and seven years later it was revealed the Libyan had “advanced stage” prostate cancer.
The then Justice Secretary MacAskill released Megrahi on compassionate grounds in 2009, sparking international condemnation with US president Barack Obama branding the decision “a mistake”.
MacAskill said he stood by his decision and would “live with the consequences”.
The veteran SNP figure and former lawyer is stepping down from Holyrood next month after 17 years as an MSP to pursue a “third career”. (...)
One SNP insider said: “Kenny couldn’t speak about the issue as frankly and freely as he would have liked at the time because he was in government.
“Any suggestion he is cashing in is wide of the mark.
“There is a lot to tell, much of which couldn’t be told at the time, so I think it is right that people get to hear the back story to such a momentous decision.”
Mr MacAskill confirmed the book deal when approached by the Sunday Post on Friday but declined to comment further.
[RB: I find it mildly amusing that UK news media seeking comments from Lockerbie victims’ families always approach US families (and usually one particular person, whose comments can be guaranteed to be colourful) rather than UK relatives whose contributions are usually more measured.
A report on the Daily Record website contains the following quote from a UK relative:]
Pam Dix, whose brother Peter died in the atrocity, yesterday said: “I am baffled as to what he can add to the extensive debate on Lockerbie and what his own investigation could consist of that could be of any substance.”
Friday 18 May 2012
Private Eye on the on-going Lockerbie investigation
[This is the headline over an item posted today on John
Ashton’s Megrahi: You are my Jury
website. It reads as follows:]
The following brief article appears in the current issue of Private Eye. My [ie John Ashton’s] comments follow.
Disappointment among the relatives of those who died in the Lockerbie atrocity: Ed Miliband is not blocking [sic; presumably “backing” is what is meant] their call for a public inquiry following the release “on compassionate grounds” of Abdelbaset Al-Megrahi in 2009.
The following brief article appears in the current issue of Private Eye. My [ie John Ashton’s] comments follow.
Disappointment among the relatives of those who died in the Lockerbie atrocity: Ed Miliband is not blocking [sic; presumably “backing” is what is meant] their call for a public inquiry following the release “on compassionate grounds” of Abdelbaset Al-Megrahi in 2009.
The Labour leader has written to Pam Dix, whose brother was one of
the 270 who died when Pan Am flight 103 was blown out of the skies in December
1988, saying that while criminal investigations continue “nothing should be
done to undermine them”.
Miliband must be aware that the Levenson inquiry is doing an
extraordinary job unearthing material that may aid a now very active criminal
investigation, where hacks, police and a member of the armed forces have all
been arrested. But how “active” is the Lockerbie investigation?
The Scottish Crown Office told the Eye
that six legal staff “have been involved and continue to be involved”. But when
asked whether anyone who had spoken to the two forensic experts who have cast
doubt on the scientific evidence used to incriminate Megrahi, a spokeswoman
said: “As the investigation remains live, it would not be appropriate to offer
further comment.” In other words, er, no.
Miliband appears to be adopting the same position towards the UK’s
biggest terrorist mass murder as the rest of the political establishment.
The fact that the Lockerbie investigation
remains open was, of course, recently underlined by the Lord Advocate Frank
Mulholland’s visit to Tripoli with
FBI director Robert Mueller. Back in December,
Mulholland said: “I think I would be failing in my duty if I didn’t properly
seek to take advantage of the opportunity that has opened up with the fall of
Gaddafi.” However, it seems that he does not regard it as a failure of duty to
ignore the two scientists (Dr Jess Cawley and Dr Chris McArdle), whose work
demonstrates that the circuit board fragment, PT/35b, could not have been from
one of the 20 timers supplied to Libya by the Swiss firm Mebo. This new
evidence destroys the case against Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, yet the Crown is
acting like nothing has happened.
Sunday 18 September 2011
Evidence grows of Blair's links with Gaddafi
[This is the headline over a report in today's edition of The Independent on Sunday. It reads in part:]
Tony Blair's shadowy links with Muammar Gaddafi
were thrust into the spotlight again last night after it emerged that he
met the former Libyan dictator twice for secret talks in the run-up to
the release of the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing.
A collection of documents found in Tripoli have revealed that Mr Blair was flown to Libya twice on one of Colonel Gaddafi's private jets after he left office in the UK, according to a report in The Sunday Telegraph. In the letters and emails, Mr Blair's private office repeatedly refers to Gaddafi as "The Leader".
The
meetings, in 2008 and 2009, came at a time when Libya was threatening
to cut all business links with the UK if Abdelbaset al-Megrahi stayed in
a British jail.
The correspondence, between Mr Blair's office, the
British ambassador in Tripoli and the Libyan ambassador in London, raise
possible conflicts of interest regarding his roles as Middle East peace
envoy, philanthropist and consultant.
The
former prime minister, who brought a US billionaire to one of the
meetings, makes no reference to the trips on any of his websites.
Mr
Blair's office last night denied that the visits were business-related.
A spokesman confirmed that Megrahi's situation was raised at the
meetings, but insisted that Mr Blair always told the Libyans that the
prisoner's status was a matter for the Scottish Executive. Megrahi, who
has cancer, was eventually released on health grounds in August 2009
after doctors judged that he had only three months to live.
But
Pam Dix, whose brother died in the Lockerbie bombing, said yesterday:
"These meetings ... are disturbing, and details of what was discussed
should now be made public. I am astonished Tony Blair continued to have
meetings like this out of office."
The meetings took place at a time of intense negotiations with Colonel Gaddafi's regime over Megrahi's release (...)
A spokesman for Tony Blair said last night: "Tony
Blair has never had any role, either formal or informal, paid or unpaid,
with the Libyan Investment Authority or the Government of Libya and he
has no commercial relationship with any Libyan company or entity.
"The
subject of the conversations during Mr Blair's occasional visits was
primarily Africa, as Libya was for a time head of the African Union; but
also the Middle East and how Libya should reform and open up. At the
time, governments around the world were engaging with Libya."
[It appears that the story on The Independent website is in fact a re-hash of a longer report that appeared on the website of The Telegraph on Saturday evening. The original report can be read here. It contains the following paragraph:]
Mr Blair has always denied involvement in Megrahi's release – saying it was a decision taken by the Scottish Executive alone. Last night a spokesman admitted Megrahi's release was raised by Gaddafi.
[The report in The Scotsman of Monday, 19 September contains the following:]
Yesterday justice secretary Kenny MacAskill, who made the decision to release Megrahi, insisted that the meetings played no part in his decision.
He said: "Al-Megrahi is dying of terminal prostate cancer, and was released on compassionate grounds. These reports underline the extent of Labour's hypocrisy over al-Megrahi. It was Tony Blair who rode roughshod over Scotland by secretly negotiating a prisoner transfer agreement with Col Gaddafi in the first place, for reasons of trade and politics.
"As all the documentation and inquiries demonstrate, only the SNP government played with a straight bat on this matter."
[A similar but longer report in Monday's edition of The Herald can be read here.]
[It appears that the story on The Independent website is in fact a re-hash of a longer report that appeared on the website of The Telegraph on Saturday evening. The original report can be read here. It contains the following paragraph:]
Mr Blair has always denied involvement in Megrahi's release – saying it was a decision taken by the Scottish Executive alone. Last night a spokesman admitted Megrahi's release was raised by Gaddafi.
[The report in The Scotsman of Monday, 19 September contains the following:]
Yesterday justice secretary Kenny MacAskill, who made the decision to release Megrahi, insisted that the meetings played no part in his decision.
He said: "Al-Megrahi is dying of terminal prostate cancer, and was released on compassionate grounds. These reports underline the extent of Labour's hypocrisy over al-Megrahi. It was Tony Blair who rode roughshod over Scotland by secretly negotiating a prisoner transfer agreement with Col Gaddafi in the first place, for reasons of trade and politics.
"As all the documentation and inquiries demonstrate, only the SNP government played with a straight bat on this matter."
[A similar but longer report in Monday's edition of The Herald can be read here.]
Saturday 24 October 2009
Why the Lockerbie families deserve an inquiry
[This is the heading over an editorial in the current edition of The Sunday Telegraph. It reads as follows:]
Telegraph View: There are strong grounds for a thorough and independent investigation into Britain's worst terrorist atrocity
Lockerbie is a name burned into the consciousness of the British public. Like Omagh and other places associated with atrocious terrorist outrages, it retains a grim resonance, more than 20 years after this vicious mass murder that saw 270 innocent people, including 51 British citizens, subjected to an exceptionally cruel death. To this day it remains the worst act of terrorism perpetrated on British soil. For the victims' families it is a wound that can never heal. The trauma would be alleviated, however, if the bereaved and the wider public could confidently feel that the circumstances had been investigated to the core and the truth established.
Today, therefore, we are proud to support the campaign being launched by relations of the victims to demand an independent inquiry into who ordered and carried out the bombing. This weekend, the families have written to Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, requesting such a step. The demand is well founded: the Crown Office, the prosecuting authority in Scotland, is already pursuing fresh inquiries, following the withdrawal of a second appeal by Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, in order to secure his release.
Particularly welcome is the assurance by Scottish authorities that this is no token gesture, but a thorough investigation, focusing partly on forensic evidence and with a full-time team of detectives assigned to it. The fact that the Scottish judiciary had given Megrahi permission to appeal for a second time testifies that experienced judges believed there was merit in further consideration of the case. This businesslike response by prosecutors and police requires to be supported by the Government ordering an independent inquiry.
Virtually nobody believes that the true facts about the destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 have been revealed. Alongside the inevitable conspiracy theories, there are substantive allegations regarding possible Iranian and Palestinian involvement that have never been properly investigated, not to mention a suspicious break-in that occurred at Heathrow Airport 17 hours before Flight 103 took off from there.
Potential scrutiny of such evidence was aborted by Megrahi's abandonment of his appeal. An independent inquiry would effectively test his appeal in absentia.
It would also go some way to restoring the reputations of the Scottish and British justice systems. The decision taken by the Scottish justice minister, Kenny MacAskill, to release Megrahi from prison on compassionate grounds and allow him to return to Libya, was the wrong one. The role of the British Government – the murky rumours of oil-related deals – was shameful. American officials remain angry at how the matter was handled.
If the authorities had investigated the case more rigorously and placed all the evidence in the public domain, an inquiry would not now be necessary. Considering the history of obfuscation surrounding the Lockerbie case, however, the details must be brought into the light of day. Nobody is asking for an open-ended, Bloody Sunday-style inquiry; but a full, detailed and public investigation of all the available evidence is now essential, if any kind of closure is to be achieved for the victims' families and the country.
[The same newspaper contains a report headed "Police relaunch Lockerbie bombing investigation" which reads in part:]
Authorities secretly ordered the re-examination of all evidence following the decision by Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi to drop his appeal against his conviction for mass murder. (...)
The Sunday Telegraph has seen the email sent by the Crown Office, Scotland's prosecuting authority, to British relatives of victims informing them of the new investigation, which includes a review of forensic evidence.
In the email, Lindsey Miller, a senior Procurator Fiscal who was involved in preparing evidence for Megrahi's trial, wrote: "Throughout the investigation we have, at various times, taken stock of the evidence as a whole with a view to identifying further lines of inquiry that can be pursued.
"Now that the appeal proceedings are at an end a further review of the case is under way and several potential lines of inquiry, both through a 'desktop' (paper) exercise and consultation with forensic science colleagues are being considered.
"You will of course appreciate that it would not be appropriate for me to elaborate on these lines but please be assured that this is not simply paying lip service to the idea of an 'open case'."
The investigation is understood to be headed by Detective Chief Inspector Michael Dalgleish, a senior officer who was part of the original team that brought the case against Megrahi. Four detectives from Dumfries and Galloway police, which covers the Lockerbie area, are working full-time on the case. (...)
Pam Dix, whose brother Peter died in the explosion, said last night: "This new investigation gives us new hope. It has to be right that police don't see this as concluded.
"Even if Megrahi was guilty, he could not possibly have carried out the bombing unaided and if he is not guilty then not a single one of the conspirators of the Lockerbie bombing have been brought to justice.
"This email implies they are looking at all the forensics again and that has to be a good thing. Police have always said the case is open and not closed as such but they have never said they are looking at all the evidence afresh."
[Note by RB: As the editorial in The Sunday Telegraph recognises, what is needed is an independent inquiry. But the police open case review is at least a start. However, it is difficult to disagree with Dr Jim Swire, as quoted on the heraldscotland website:
“I think that if they are really going to a meaningful investigation then that is all well and good and long overdue. I would be all for it.
“But if it is just a dodge to prevent an investigation into why the lives of those killed were not protected then I would be livid."
As regards the scope of this investigation, the Crown Office is quoted in Scotland on Sunday as saying:
"There is no question of reopening the case against Megrahi. The open case concerns only the involvement of others with Megrahi in the murder of 270 people and the Crown will continue to pursue such lines of inquiry that become available.
"The trial court accepted the Crown's position that Mr Megrahi acted on in furtherance of the Libyan intelligence services and did not act alone.
"The Crown stood ready, willing and able to support his conviction throughout the appeal process which he abandoned."]
Telegraph View: There are strong grounds for a thorough and independent investigation into Britain's worst terrorist atrocity
Lockerbie is a name burned into the consciousness of the British public. Like Omagh and other places associated with atrocious terrorist outrages, it retains a grim resonance, more than 20 years after this vicious mass murder that saw 270 innocent people, including 51 British citizens, subjected to an exceptionally cruel death. To this day it remains the worst act of terrorism perpetrated on British soil. For the victims' families it is a wound that can never heal. The trauma would be alleviated, however, if the bereaved and the wider public could confidently feel that the circumstances had been investigated to the core and the truth established.
Today, therefore, we are proud to support the campaign being launched by relations of the victims to demand an independent inquiry into who ordered and carried out the bombing. This weekend, the families have written to Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, requesting such a step. The demand is well founded: the Crown Office, the prosecuting authority in Scotland, is already pursuing fresh inquiries, following the withdrawal of a second appeal by Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, in order to secure his release.
Particularly welcome is the assurance by Scottish authorities that this is no token gesture, but a thorough investigation, focusing partly on forensic evidence and with a full-time team of detectives assigned to it. The fact that the Scottish judiciary had given Megrahi permission to appeal for a second time testifies that experienced judges believed there was merit in further consideration of the case. This businesslike response by prosecutors and police requires to be supported by the Government ordering an independent inquiry.
Virtually nobody believes that the true facts about the destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 have been revealed. Alongside the inevitable conspiracy theories, there are substantive allegations regarding possible Iranian and Palestinian involvement that have never been properly investigated, not to mention a suspicious break-in that occurred at Heathrow Airport 17 hours before Flight 103 took off from there.
Potential scrutiny of such evidence was aborted by Megrahi's abandonment of his appeal. An independent inquiry would effectively test his appeal in absentia.
It would also go some way to restoring the reputations of the Scottish and British justice systems. The decision taken by the Scottish justice minister, Kenny MacAskill, to release Megrahi from prison on compassionate grounds and allow him to return to Libya, was the wrong one. The role of the British Government – the murky rumours of oil-related deals – was shameful. American officials remain angry at how the matter was handled.
If the authorities had investigated the case more rigorously and placed all the evidence in the public domain, an inquiry would not now be necessary. Considering the history of obfuscation surrounding the Lockerbie case, however, the details must be brought into the light of day. Nobody is asking for an open-ended, Bloody Sunday-style inquiry; but a full, detailed and public investigation of all the available evidence is now essential, if any kind of closure is to be achieved for the victims' families and the country.
[The same newspaper contains a report headed "Police relaunch Lockerbie bombing investigation" which reads in part:]
Authorities secretly ordered the re-examination of all evidence following the decision by Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi to drop his appeal against his conviction for mass murder. (...)
The Sunday Telegraph has seen the email sent by the Crown Office, Scotland's prosecuting authority, to British relatives of victims informing them of the new investigation, which includes a review of forensic evidence.
In the email, Lindsey Miller, a senior Procurator Fiscal who was involved in preparing evidence for Megrahi's trial, wrote: "Throughout the investigation we have, at various times, taken stock of the evidence as a whole with a view to identifying further lines of inquiry that can be pursued.
"Now that the appeal proceedings are at an end a further review of the case is under way and several potential lines of inquiry, both through a 'desktop' (paper) exercise and consultation with forensic science colleagues are being considered.
"You will of course appreciate that it would not be appropriate for me to elaborate on these lines but please be assured that this is not simply paying lip service to the idea of an 'open case'."
The investigation is understood to be headed by Detective Chief Inspector Michael Dalgleish, a senior officer who was part of the original team that brought the case against Megrahi. Four detectives from Dumfries and Galloway police, which covers the Lockerbie area, are working full-time on the case. (...)
Pam Dix, whose brother Peter died in the explosion, said last night: "This new investigation gives us new hope. It has to be right that police don't see this as concluded.
"Even if Megrahi was guilty, he could not possibly have carried out the bombing unaided and if he is not guilty then not a single one of the conspirators of the Lockerbie bombing have been brought to justice.
"This email implies they are looking at all the forensics again and that has to be a good thing. Police have always said the case is open and not closed as such but they have never said they are looking at all the evidence afresh."
[Note by RB: As the editorial in The Sunday Telegraph recognises, what is needed is an independent inquiry. But the police open case review is at least a start. However, it is difficult to disagree with Dr Jim Swire, as quoted on the heraldscotland website:
“I think that if they are really going to a meaningful investigation then that is all well and good and long overdue. I would be all for it.
“But if it is just a dodge to prevent an investigation into why the lives of those killed were not protected then I would be livid."
As regards the scope of this investigation, the Crown Office is quoted in Scotland on Sunday as saying:
"There is no question of reopening the case against Megrahi. The open case concerns only the involvement of others with Megrahi in the murder of 270 people and the Crown will continue to pursue such lines of inquiry that become available.
"The trial court accepted the Crown's position that Mr Megrahi acted on in furtherance of the Libyan intelligence services and did not act alone.
"The Crown stood ready, willing and able to support his conviction throughout the appeal process which he abandoned."]
Friday 24 October 2014
Virtually nobody believes the true facts about the destruction of Pan Am 103 have been revealed
Five years ago on this date an item headed Why the Lockerbie families deserve an inquiry was posted on this blog. The families still deserve one. The item reads as follows:
[This is the heading over an editorial in the current edition of The Sunday Telegraph. It reads as follows:]
Telegraph View: There are strong grounds for a thorough and independent investigation into Britain's worst terrorist atrocity
Lockerbie is a name burned into the consciousness of the British public. Like Omagh and other places associated with atrocious terrorist outrages, it retains a grim resonance, more than 20 years after this vicious mass murder that saw 270 innocent people, including 51 British citizens, subjected to an exceptionally cruel death. To this day it remains the worst act of terrorism perpetrated on British soil. For the victims' families it is a wound that can never heal. The trauma would be alleviated, however, if the bereaved and the wider public could confidently feel that the circumstances had been investigated to the core and the truth established.
Today, therefore, we are proud to support the campaign being launched by relations of the victims to demand an independent inquiry into who ordered and carried out the bombing. This weekend, the families have written to Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, requesting such a step. The demand is well founded: the Crown Office, the prosecuting authority in Scotland, is already pursuing fresh inquiries, following the withdrawal of a second appeal by Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, in order to secure his release.
Particularly welcome is the assurance by Scottish authorities that this is no token gesture, but a thorough investigation, focusing partly on forensic evidence and with a full-time team of detectives assigned to it. The fact that the Scottish judiciary had given Megrahi permission to appeal for a second time testifies that experienced judges believed there was merit in further consideration of the case. This businesslike response by prosecutors and police requires to be supported by the Government ordering an independent inquiry.
Virtually nobody believes that the true facts about the destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 have been revealed. Alongside the inevitable conspiracy theories, there are substantive allegations regarding possible Iranian and Palestinian involvement that have never been properly investigated, not to mention a suspicious break-in that occurred at Heathrow Airport 17 hours before Flight 103 took off from there.
Potential scrutiny of such evidence was aborted by Megrahi's abandonment of his appeal. An independent inquiry would effectively test his appeal in absentia.
It would also go some way to restoring the reputations of the Scottish and British justice systems. The decision taken by the Scottish justice minister, Kenny MacAskill, to release Megrahi from prison on compassionate grounds and allow him to return to Libya, was the wrong one. The role of the British Government – the murky rumours of oil-related deals – was shameful. American officials remain angry at how the matter was handled.
If the authorities had investigated the case more rigorously and placed all the evidence in the public domain, an inquiry would not now be necessary. Considering the history of obfuscation surrounding the Lockerbie case, however, the details must be brought into the light of day. Nobody is asking for an open-ended, Bloody Sunday-style inquiry; but a full, detailed and public investigation of all the available evidence is now essential, if any kind of closure is to be achieved for the victims' families and the country.
[The same newspaper contains a report headed "Police relaunch Lockerbie bombing investigation" which reads in part:]
Authorities secretly ordered the re-examination of all evidence following the decision by Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi to drop his appeal against his conviction for mass murder. (...)
The Sunday Telegraph has seen the email sent by the Crown Office, Scotland's prosecuting authority, to British relatives of victims informing them of the new investigation, which includes a review of forensic evidence.
In the email, Lindsey Miller, a senior Procurator Fiscal who was involved in preparing evidence for Megrahi's trial, wrote: "Throughout the investigation we have, at various times, taken stock of the evidence as a whole with a view to identifying further lines of inquiry that can be pursued.
"Now that the appeal proceedings are at an end a further review of the case is under way and several potential lines of inquiry, both through a 'desktop' (paper) exercise and consultation with forensic science colleagues are being considered.
"You will of course appreciate that it would not be appropriate for me to elaborate on these lines but please be assured that this is not simply paying lip service to the idea of an 'open case'."
The investigation is understood to be headed by Detective Chief Inspector Michael Dalgleish, a senior officer who was part of the original team that brought the case against Megrahi. Four detectives from Dumfries and Galloway police, which covers the Lockerbie area, are working full-time on the case. (...)
Pam Dix, whose brother Peter died in the explosion, said last night: "This new investigation gives us new hope. It has to be right that police don't see this as concluded.
"Even if Megrahi was guilty, he could not possibly have carried out the bombing unaided and if he is not guilty then not a single one of the conspirators of the Lockerbie bombing have been brought to justice.
"This email implies they are looking at all the forensics again and that has to be a good thing. Police have always said the case is open and not closed as such but they have never said they are looking at all the evidence afresh."
[Note by RB: As the editorial in The Sunday Telegraph recognises, what is needed is an independent inquiry. But the police open case review is at least a start. However, it is difficult to disagree with Dr Jim Swire, as quoted on the heraldscotland website:
“I think that if they are really going to a meaningful investigation then that is all well and good and long overdue. I would be all for it.
“But if it is just a dodge to prevent an investigation into why the lives of those killed were not protected then I would be livid."
As regards the scope of this investigation, the Crown Office is quoted in Scotland on Sunday as saying:
"There is no question of reopening the case against Megrahi. The open case concerns only the involvement of others with Megrahi in the murder of 270 people and the Crown will continue to pursue such lines of inquiry that become available.
"The trial court accepted the Crown's position that Mr Megrahi acted on in furtherance of the Libyan intelligence services and did not act alone.
"The Crown stood ready, willing and able to support his conviction throughout the appeal process which he abandoned."]
[This is the heading over an editorial in the current edition of The Sunday Telegraph. It reads as follows:]
Telegraph View: There are strong grounds for a thorough and independent investigation into Britain's worst terrorist atrocity
Lockerbie is a name burned into the consciousness of the British public. Like Omagh and other places associated with atrocious terrorist outrages, it retains a grim resonance, more than 20 years after this vicious mass murder that saw 270 innocent people, including 51 British citizens, subjected to an exceptionally cruel death. To this day it remains the worst act of terrorism perpetrated on British soil. For the victims' families it is a wound that can never heal. The trauma would be alleviated, however, if the bereaved and the wider public could confidently feel that the circumstances had been investigated to the core and the truth established.
Today, therefore, we are proud to support the campaign being launched by relations of the victims to demand an independent inquiry into who ordered and carried out the bombing. This weekend, the families have written to Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, requesting such a step. The demand is well founded: the Crown Office, the prosecuting authority in Scotland, is already pursuing fresh inquiries, following the withdrawal of a second appeal by Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, in order to secure his release.
Particularly welcome is the assurance by Scottish authorities that this is no token gesture, but a thorough investigation, focusing partly on forensic evidence and with a full-time team of detectives assigned to it. The fact that the Scottish judiciary had given Megrahi permission to appeal for a second time testifies that experienced judges believed there was merit in further consideration of the case. This businesslike response by prosecutors and police requires to be supported by the Government ordering an independent inquiry.
Virtually nobody believes that the true facts about the destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 have been revealed. Alongside the inevitable conspiracy theories, there are substantive allegations regarding possible Iranian and Palestinian involvement that have never been properly investigated, not to mention a suspicious break-in that occurred at Heathrow Airport 17 hours before Flight 103 took off from there.
Potential scrutiny of such evidence was aborted by Megrahi's abandonment of his appeal. An independent inquiry would effectively test his appeal in absentia.
It would also go some way to restoring the reputations of the Scottish and British justice systems. The decision taken by the Scottish justice minister, Kenny MacAskill, to release Megrahi from prison on compassionate grounds and allow him to return to Libya, was the wrong one. The role of the British Government – the murky rumours of oil-related deals – was shameful. American officials remain angry at how the matter was handled.
If the authorities had investigated the case more rigorously and placed all the evidence in the public domain, an inquiry would not now be necessary. Considering the history of obfuscation surrounding the Lockerbie case, however, the details must be brought into the light of day. Nobody is asking for an open-ended, Bloody Sunday-style inquiry; but a full, detailed and public investigation of all the available evidence is now essential, if any kind of closure is to be achieved for the victims' families and the country.
[The same newspaper contains a report headed "Police relaunch Lockerbie bombing investigation" which reads in part:]
Authorities secretly ordered the re-examination of all evidence following the decision by Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi to drop his appeal against his conviction for mass murder. (...)
The Sunday Telegraph has seen the email sent by the Crown Office, Scotland's prosecuting authority, to British relatives of victims informing them of the new investigation, which includes a review of forensic evidence.
In the email, Lindsey Miller, a senior Procurator Fiscal who was involved in preparing evidence for Megrahi's trial, wrote: "Throughout the investigation we have, at various times, taken stock of the evidence as a whole with a view to identifying further lines of inquiry that can be pursued.
"Now that the appeal proceedings are at an end a further review of the case is under way and several potential lines of inquiry, both through a 'desktop' (paper) exercise and consultation with forensic science colleagues are being considered.
"You will of course appreciate that it would not be appropriate for me to elaborate on these lines but please be assured that this is not simply paying lip service to the idea of an 'open case'."
The investigation is understood to be headed by Detective Chief Inspector Michael Dalgleish, a senior officer who was part of the original team that brought the case against Megrahi. Four detectives from Dumfries and Galloway police, which covers the Lockerbie area, are working full-time on the case. (...)
Pam Dix, whose brother Peter died in the explosion, said last night: "This new investigation gives us new hope. It has to be right that police don't see this as concluded.
"Even if Megrahi was guilty, he could not possibly have carried out the bombing unaided and if he is not guilty then not a single one of the conspirators of the Lockerbie bombing have been brought to justice.
"This email implies they are looking at all the forensics again and that has to be a good thing. Police have always said the case is open and not closed as such but they have never said they are looking at all the evidence afresh."
[Note by RB: As the editorial in The Sunday Telegraph recognises, what is needed is an independent inquiry. But the police open case review is at least a start. However, it is difficult to disagree with Dr Jim Swire, as quoted on the heraldscotland website:
“I think that if they are really going to a meaningful investigation then that is all well and good and long overdue. I would be all for it.
“But if it is just a dodge to prevent an investigation into why the lives of those killed were not protected then I would be livid."
As regards the scope of this investigation, the Crown Office is quoted in Scotland on Sunday as saying:
"There is no question of reopening the case against Megrahi. The open case concerns only the involvement of others with Megrahi in the murder of 270 people and the Crown will continue to pursue such lines of inquiry that become available.
"The trial court accepted the Crown's position that Mr Megrahi acted on in furtherance of the Libyan intelligence services and did not act alone.
"The Crown stood ready, willing and able to support his conviction throughout the appeal process which he abandoned."]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)