Lockerbie inquiry calls grow
Crown Office criticised over its conduct at bombing trial
FRESH calls for an inquiry into the Crown Office handling of the Lockerbie bombing trial were made after The Herald’s sister paper published the full report of the legal grounds for the second appeal of the man convicted of the atrocity.
First Minister Alex Salmond praised the Sunday Herald for publishing the full 800-page report by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, which investigates potential miscarriages of justice, on our heraldscotland.com website.
The publication has sparked hopes of a new appeal in the name of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi, the Libyan convicted of the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103.
Gerard Sinclair, the SCCRC’S chief executive, said: “The commission has always been willing to allow for publication of the outcome of our inquiries into Mr Megrahi’s conviction.”
However, the Crown Office said some actions of those fighting to clear Megrahi were “to be deplored” while insisting they have “every confidence” of defending the conviction in the event of an appeal.
The Herald recently carried a summary of the SCCRC report, but the Sunday Herald said that having cleared full publication with Megrahi himself, who had sent a copy to Justice Secretary Kenny Macaskill, it had been decided to publish the document in full with only a small number of deletions.
Mr Salmond said: “I welcome the publication in full of this report, which is something the Scottish Government has been doing everything in our powers to facilitate.”
He added that while the report showed six grounds on which it believed a miscarriage of justice may have occurred, it also rejected 45 of the 48 grounds submitted by Megrahi – while upholding the forensic basis of the case.
The First Minister added: “This report provides valuable information, from an independent body acting without fear or favour, and while we cannot expect it to resolve all the issues, it does however lay the basis for narrowing the areas of dispute and in many ways is far more comprehensive than any inquiry could ever hope to be.”
Holyrood Justice Committee convener Christine Grahame said: “There are allegations in the report that the Crown Office withheld crucial evidence that might have been substantive evidence to assist the defence.
“Where we have an allegation, I would wish the Crown to be able to establish that this is unfounded.”
The Crown Office responded by stating that “unauthorised publication” did not deal with any of the data protection and confidentiality issues which “rightly constrain all public authorities by law”.
In preparing for Megrahi’s second appeal, the Crown Office said it had considered all the information in the statement of r e a s o ns and had “e ve r y confidence in successfully defending the conviction”.