FRESH evidence on the Lockerbie bombing has been lodged with MSPs as part of the most comprehensive dossier on the atrocity to go before the Scottish Parliament.
The report to the Justice Committee, which will include evidence thrown up by the recent conflict in Libya, will make the case for a full judicial inquiry into the case.
One of its key findings is that even at the time of the indictment of two Libyans, intelligence was suggesting the bomb had been provided by a Syrian terror group.
The report includes a document from Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter died in the 1988 tragedy, which provides a summary of a new academic report citing major inconsistencies in the public and private views of the intelligence community.
The paper also raises concerns about major anomalies in the forensic evidence. The paper, submitted by the Justice for Megrahi group, in advance of Tuesday’s debate in the committee, argues the wealth of new evidence from the UK and abroad makes a full public inquiry essential.
The group believes there are serious anomalies in the conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi.
Dr Swire says the report from the internationally renowned Centre for Conflict Resolution at Bradford University makes it clear the investigation into the case was “deeply dependent upon the intelligence agencies of Britain and America”.
He says: “The paper shows that even by the time of the issue of the indictments against the two Libyans by Scotland and America at the end of 1991, American intelligence still believed the Lockerbie bomb had been provided by a Syrian terror group.
“American intelligence also knew the Syrian bombs could be kept at ground level indefinitely without exploding, but that once in an aircraft, they sensed the drop in air pressure following take-off and would then inevitably explode within 35-45 minutes after leaving the ground, this timing not being adjustable. The Lockerbie plane had flown for 38 minutes before being destroyed.
“The paper records that throughout most of the intervening months America had therefore been pressing for the expulsion of the leader (Ahmed Jibril) of a Syrian terrorist group (the PFLP-GC) in the belief they had supplied the bomb that destroyed the Lockerbie aircraft. Bombs of this type were unique to the Syrian PFLP-GC group.”
Robert Black, one of the original architects of the trial at camp Zeist, told The Herald: “The fact they were trying to extradite Megrahi when they still believed another man was responsible, shows that privately they were saying Jibril was responsible yet publicly they wanted to blame someone else.
“The Libyan scenario was never intended to stand up in court. It was simply intended to be good enough to convince the media in the US and UK someone had been caught. But lo and behold they were lucky enough to get a bench of judges that swallowed it hook line and sinker.”
The submission also includes a supplement from John Ashton who is Megrahi’s official biographer.
He states: “I have had access to all the disclosed Crown evidence; the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission’s statement of reasons, on the basis of which it granted him a second appeal against conviction; and all the evidence that would have been aired at Mr Megrahi’s second appeal. Uniquely, I have interviewed Mr Megrahi numerous times, both in prison and in Tripoli. On the basis of everything that I have learned, I am convinced, not only that Mr Megrahi was wrongly convicted, but, more importantly, that the case is a huge scandal for the Scottish criminal justice system.”
A Crown Office spokesman said: “In light of recent developments in Libya, and the ongoing criminal investigation in relation to the bombing of Pan Am 103, the Lord Advocate, Frank Mulholland QC, has written to request a meeting with the Foreign Secretary, William Hague, to discuss the most recent developments in Libya and the opportunity this may present for the ongoing investigation.
“The declaration last weekend that hostilities have come to an end presents an opportunity to make progress with the criminal investigation as regards to the involvement of others with Megrahi in the act of state sponsored terrorism.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article