The Impact of Lockerbie decision by SCCRC

admin · The Impact of Lockerbie decision by SCCRC

Impact

This article for my money is one of the best i have read about Lockerbie and the impact of the decision by SCCRC.

http://www.time.com/time/world/ar...639065,00.html?xid=feed-cnn-world

Well worth keeping hence the full copy article at:

Re-Opening the Lockerbie Tragedy
Saturday, Jun. 30, 2007 By LAURA BLUE/LONDON 747 Pan Am Boeing that exploded, killing all 259 on board and 11 on the ground.
Roy Letkey / AFP / GettyArticle ToolsPrintEmailReprints Nearly 20 years after the terrorist bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 bound for New York City from London, the only man ever convicted of the attack may be headed back to court for an appeal. On Thursday, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) announced that it referred the case of former Libyan intelligence officer Abdel Basset Ali Al-Megrahi back to the country's High Court system. The SCCRC said Megrahi, currently serving a 27-year minimum sentence, is entitled to a new appeal because he may have suffered a miscarriage of justice in 2001 when he was convicted by a panel of three Scottish judges for the 270 murders resulting from the bombing.

There may be no more controversial terrorism case. Yesterday's SCCRC report has implications for the U.S., Libya, Iran, Syria, and, of course, Scotland, where Flight 103 crashed down on Dec. 21, 1988, killing everyone on board and 11 on the ground, spreading debris for miles around the small town of Lockerbie. Since that day, the case has been shrouded in mystery. A massive international investigation — run jointly by American and Scottish law-enforcement agencies — eventually nabbed two Libyan suspects. The motive: they were supposedly acting with their country's blessing in retaliation for 1986 U.S. air strikes that killed one of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi's adopted children.

Libya's recent return to the fold of nations depended on that country turning over its Lockerbie suspects in 1999, and then, after the trial, accepting responsibility and compensating the victims' families, a settlement hammered out in 2002 and 2003. Libya agreed to pay out $2.7 billion for the bombing. But only one of the Libyans, Megrahi, was convicted — a verdict several parties have disputed, including a U.N.-appointed observer who complained of a "political aura" at the initial trial.

The SCCRC's ruling is certain to fan that controversy, even though the Commission said nothing to support the view that political pressure influenced the judicial proceedings, and rejected allegations of CIA conspiracy during the investigation. After a three-year review, the Commission has produced a report more than 800 pages long, plus supplementary documents. The report is not public. But the Commission outlined its reasons for a new appeal in a 14-page public statement, identifying six grounds where a miscarriage of justice may have occurred.

All the criticism, in essence, centers on the identification of Megrahi by a Maltese shopkeeper, and whether the date of their alleged meeting is correct. According to the Commission, a combination of evidence not available at the trial and not adequately considered at the trial, sheds doubt on a cornerstone of the prosecution case: that Megrahi was in all the right places to have prepared the suitcase that carried the explosive device. The Edinburgh High Court will now review Megrahi's case — though it may take months, according to a High Court spokeswoman, to find the five judges needed to hear it. Even before they do, the fall-out of the new ruling is being felt around the world. Here's what a new Lockerbie appeal means for the major players.

FOR LIBYA:
Libya has always walked a fine line over its role on the bombing. Despite its official acceptance of some responsibility for the attack, its leaders have always maintained they had nothing to do with it, and that accepting blame was the political price for getting back into the U.S.'s good graces. "Until now the perpetrators are unknown," Gaddafi told TIME in 2006. The Libyans reiterated their denial of guilt following Thursday's SCCRC report. "We believe that our citizen is innocent and we have nothing to do with Lockerbie," Gaddafi's son, Seif al-Islam, told TIME. But accepting responsibility for Lockerbie in 2003 was a condition of the U.N. lifting sanctions and the U.S. removing Libya from its list of states sponsoring terrorism. The North African state is now a strategic partner for the U.S. in its anti-terrorism efforts and as a major oil producer. If Megrahi is acquitted, Libya and the U.S. will both likely tread carefully. Neither seems to have much to gain from upsetting their current relationship, but an exoneration of Megrahi would be a sign to the world that, perhaps, Libya has been unjustly penalized. Gaddafi's son claims that, for now, Libya has no plans to recoup the money it has paid out to compensate the victims.

FOR SYRIA AND IRAN:
The decision also threatens the West's distinctly less comfortable relationship with Syria and Iran. Shedding doubt on Megrahi's guilt automatically shifts public attention back to the original Lockerbie suspects: the Syrian-based Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC). Before investigators uncovered a Libyan connection, they seriously considered that PFLP-GC members carried out the attack at the behest of Iran. Iran had vowed revenge for the 1988 U.S. downing of an Iran Air flight and, according to statements from a now-retired CIA agent that were submitted by the defense to the SCCRC, transferred $11 million to the PFLP-GC just days after the attack on Flight 103. A wide range of conspiracy theorists speculate that U.S. authorities somehow pushed the investigation away from Syria and Iran in exchange for cooperation during the first Gulf War. Libya, the skeptics claim, was just a convenient political target at the time. The Scottish Commission considered and rejected this scenario. No one now expects that Western governments will seriously entertain the idea again. But by calling into question the evidence in the case, the SCCRC left the door open to the ever-popular and persistent conspiracy theories.

FOR THE U.S.:
The Lockerbie attack is still a raw wound in the U.S.: Killing 189 American citizens, it was the deadliest terror attack on U.S. civilians until 9/11. The SCCRC report — issued just one day after staunch Bush ally Tony Blair stepped down as U.K. Prime Minister — may prove to be bad news for U.S.-British relations. The Scots' report pokes holes in evidence pieced together under the FBI-led investigation. "This was the first major international terrorist investigation where countries had to work together. This was a model," says Richard Marquise, the former FBI agent, now retired, who led the U.S. task force on Lockerbie. If Megrahi now goes free, it raises new questions about how efficiently American investigators can work with local authorities elsewhere to pursue terrorist suspects to all corners of the globe. To a greater extent than in the U.K., Americans involved in the case stand behind the conviction. "I am convinced of Mr. Megrahi's guilt," says Marquise. "It would have been great to have DNA, to have 10 eyewitnesses. Unfortunately, there's no such thing as a perfect case," An FBI spokesman in Washington says the Bureau will not comment on the SCCRC report as the matter is now pending in court.

FOR SCOTLAND:
However careful the wording of the SCCRC report, it's hard not to take "miscarriage of justice" as criticism of the three-judge panel that convicted Megrahi. Robert Black, the Scottish lawyer who designed the court structure at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands (a political compromise between Scotland, the U.S. and Libya so the case could be heard) calls Megrahi's 2001 conviction "an absolute and utter outrage." But if, indeed, Megrahi has suffered a miscarriage of justice, the appeal may be a chance for Scotland to redeem itself, says Black. Some changes have been made already. First, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, the official judicial scrutinizer that issued yesterday's report, did not even exist when the Camp Zeist trial was planned. Second, judges are now nominated by an independent board. The judges at Megrahi's trial would have been nominated by the Lord Advocate, who is also the chief adviser to Scotland's public prosecution — a system that may have made it hard in the past for judges to avoid the appearance of conflict of interest. Both moves, says Black, were brought in largely to help Scotland comply with the European Convention on Human Rights. Since the Scottish National Party is now in power in Scotland, favoring greater autonomy from the central United Kingdom government in London, Scotland may jump at the chance to demonstrate renewed independence and competence — or at least distance itself from past controversy.

FOR THE ACCUSED:
Megrahi's fate is unclear. Former FBI investigator Marquise readily admits the case against him is based on "a series of circumstances," and all must be true for Megrahi to be guilty. With a tiny fragment of circuit board found at the crash site, investigators pinned the bomber to an unusual style of Swiss timer, manufactured by a firm that claimed to supply the Libyan military. Clothing scraps from the suitcase carrying the explosive device were linked to a source in Malta. And the Maltese shopkeeper identified Megrahi (many months after the bombing) as the Libyan who bought the clothes. According to the prosecution, Megrahi then sent the bomb-laden suitcase from Malta, via Frankfurt, to London Heathrow airport, where it was loaded onto Pan Am Flight 103 to New York's JFK Airport. Many skeptics find that storyline implausible: too complicated, and too dependent on a charitable reading of evidence and witness testimony. That's why the PFLP-GC theory has never died and why some even believe, as the defense suggested at Megrahi's original trial and asked the SCCRC to consider, that the circuit board so crucial to the Crown case could have been fabricated. The Commission examined the claim, and found no reason to believe the circuit board had been planted.

FOR THE VICTIMS' FAMILIES:
For many of those who lost family or friends in the bombing, this ruling is a sharp reminder that their doubts and questions are still not laid to rest. "I was one of the only relatives who sat through the trial," says Jim Swire, an English doctor whose daughter, Flora, died in the crash. "I went into that court expecting to be convinced those two men were guilty; I emerged thinking it was a cock and bull story." Like some other family members, he is calling for an independent inquiry — not just into the Megrahi conviction, but into the attack itself and all the investigative and judicial tangles that followed. "I am very concerned it will cause anguish to people who thought they had closure, but I don't think you can have closure based on false information," says Swire. But is there any chance now the truth could be uncovered, nearly two decades after the attack, with possible witnesses dead, original investigators retired, and a several-hundred-square-kilometer crime scene? Lockerbie was perhaps the first truly global terrorism investigation. If nothing else, it shows that such a case could never be free of political consequences — and that means the truth will not be easy to find. With reporting by Brian Bennett/Washington and Scott MacLeod/Cairo

admin · Scotland on Sunday 14 Oct 2007

Top Stories

Sun 14 Oct 2007
Printer friendly
Send to friend
Comments (9)
Lockerbie witness 'given £2m reward'
MARCELLO MEGA

DAMNING new evidence that a key witness in the Lockerbie case was paid a £2m reward by US investigators will form part of the court appeal by the Libyan convicted of the attack.

Sources close to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) have revealed that the cash was paid to Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci as a direct reward for giving crucial prosecution evidence but was disguised as "compensation".

Scotland on Sunday can also reveal that another key plank in the appeal will be new evidence that the type of timer used in the bomb was available "all over the place" and not just sold to Libya as claimed in court.

The reward and timer evidence can today be confirmed as the two "missing" appeal grounds submitted by the SCCRC. The Commission said earlier this year it had discovered six grounds of appeal but only gave details of four.

Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi has been granted a second appeal against his conviction for the December 1988 Lockerbie bombing, in which 270 people died. The Libyan, who is serving life in Greenock Prison, is expected to have his case heard next year.

The SCCRC spent three years examining Megrahi's conviction and earlier this year referred the case back for appeal after concluding there could have been a miscarriage of justice.

Tony Gauci was an absolutely crucial witness at the original trial, giving "reliable" evidence that Megrahi bought clothes in his shop that were later used to wrap the bomb. Gauci's evidence has long been considered controversial and there have already been claims that he received rewards and treats from investigators.

Now, a source close to the SCCRC has provided the first confirmation that Gauci received a substantial reward and that it formed part of the grounds for appealing the case.

The Commission has thoroughly checked out the claims and found he received 'a phenomenal sum of money' from the US. Sources close to Megrahi's defence put the sum at $4m, or approximately £2m at current exchange rates.

The source close to the SCCRC told Scotland on Sunday: "It [the reward] has been dressed up as compensation for the impact on his life and business of his close involvement in the case.

"But it clear that it is actually a reward. The US and UK governments needed a conviction in the case and the fact that the key witness was rewarded for his testimony casts doubts on its value.

"It is not acceptable to pay a witness as that practice is likely to make him anxious to please."

Gauci is understood to be planning to use his newfound wealth to fund a move to Australia with his brother, Paul, who was also on the witness list but was not called to give evidence.

Maltese sources have also revealed that Gauci has stepped up security at the home in Swieqi which he shares with his brother. He rarely ventures out other than to the shop.

One source said: "He used to like the feeling of importance that being a major witness in such a big case gave him, but now he realises he could be a target for some people. He knows doubts have been expressed about his evidence. He gets very jumpy when anyone he doesn't know approaches, and if the press call him he hangs up."

The source claimed the reward had caused a split in the Gauci family.

The brothers have five surviving siblings, as well as one who died, and the others have a stake in the shop, Mary's House, which was founded by their father. Although other family members had little or nothing to do with the investigation, the fact that it was presented as 'compensation' which related in part to the impact on the business has led the other siblings to demand a share.

The family split has further reinforced the determination of the brothers to seek a new life.

Another source, a Scottish investigator who worked with the brothers over a number of years, said: "Paul was always going off to Australia and it became a bit of a dream for them that they would move there."

Contacted at their home, Paul Gauci said: "We are under very heavy pressure here. The press want to photograph us, everybody wants to interview my brother, we have no privacy. When we step out the door, there are people with cameras. Our lives are intolerable here."

The second "missing" appeal ground relates to a fragment of timer found in a shirt collar and later confirmed as part of the mechanism which detonated the bomb above Lockerbie. The original court case heard evidence the Swiss-made MST13 timers were only supplied to Libya.

At a preliminary hearing on Thursday, Megrahi's lawyers demanded the release of a document in the possession of the Crown and believed to have come from a foreign intelligence agency they believe will disprove that part of the case.

Much has been made of the importance of that document since its existence was leaked to the media by Megrahi's legal team. But informed sources close to the SCCRC have confirmed that an abundance of evidence has already emerged to show the MST13s, made by the Swiss firm Mebo, 'were all over the place'.

It was established long ago that they were also supplied to the Stasi, the East German secret police, but it has now emerged that they had a much wider penetration than the Crown's case implied.

Related topic

Lockerbie
http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=184
This article: http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1641412007

Last updated: 13-Oct-07 00:08 BST

Comments Add your comment1. Jacqueline Hyde / 12:49am 14 Oct 2007 If this is true, the people responsible should be extradited from the US to stand trial and their organisations should be financially liable for reimbursement of the costs of the investigation, trial, imprisonment and, as seems more and more likely, Mr al-Megrahi's compensation.

Report as unsuitable 2. Peter Cherbi, Edinburgh / 1:00am 14 Oct 2007 It almost sounds like bribing witnesses ...

The Crown Office probably knew this all along, so would a few of the key politicians in Scotland, but are now too busy closing their ears to the cry for a proper inquiry & no doubt busy working out what to say if one takes place.

Meanwhile the Crown Office and interested parties will be working on (perhaps a soft) Scottish Government to severely restrict any inquiry remit, in the interests of protecting their grasp on our Justice system.

I think Hans Kochler put it well in last week's Sunday Times - saying Scotland's justice system would rival that of a 'banana republic' and that we need to clean it up before Scotland can progress as a country, and so far, no one in Government seems to be doing much about that ... almost a continuation of policy of old, which many are quick to accuse the previous lot of ....

An inquiry and reform of the Scots justice system much needed, but due when ?

Report as unsuitable 3. Edwin & Mahnaz Bollier, Mebo Ltd, Zurich/Switzerland / 1:02am 14 Oct 2007 Re: Appeal Mr. Abdelbaset al Megrahi 10am in the Appeal Court at the High Court of Justiciary in Parliament House, Parliament Square, Edinburgh

I am the ex witness no.548, Edwin Bollier, Zurich/Switzerland in the "Lockerbie-Trial" at Kamp van Zeist.

By the following Appeal (Megrahi) I will help again as a witness in a key role (MEBO MST-13 Timer) for clarify Megrahi’s decision.

As head of the Zurich-based MeBo AG, I have received from our ex Engeneer mr. Ulrich Lumpert (ex witness no.550 in Zeist) a second Affidavit, dated from July 18th 2007. This document has taken the Lockerbie-Affair yet in another extraordinary twist.
I will send you a copy of a German original of an Affidavit (notarial attested) as addition to the top secret document.

Libya and Mr Abdelbaset have nothing todu with the "Lockerbie-Tragedy"!

Please read the "Lockerbie-Fraud" on URL:
http://www.lockerbie.ch

Report as unsuitable 4. Edwin & Mahnaz Bollier, Mebo Ltd, Zurich/Switzerland / 1:05am 14 Oct 2007 Translated from german to english by YAHOO
Until today into the dark.

After the official passenger list C-140V from 21.12.1988 of PanAm the feeder flight PA-103/A (Frankfurt > Heathrow) checkin only 3 passengers with 3 each luggage items. The codings numbers of the 3 time 3 luggage items, to be able can be assigned following to the free of doubts 3 passengers. With the examination of MEBO it turned out clearly that 4 times 3 luggage items were loaded on PA103/A and were transferred from Kuwait with Lufthansa flight LH-631. Not 3 luggage items but 6 luggage items (2 times 3 pieces) came with Lufthansa LH-631 which were checkin and transfere on PA-103/A. The additional unaccompanied 3 luggage items came from Kuwait LH-631 and was transfered on PA-103/A and haved the ex Tray *No. B-4809, B-6001, B-7418 The fatal effects of the unsatisfactory fine averaging of the German FEDERAL CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION OFFICE culminates at negligence because by the Federal Bureau of Criminal Investigations one did not notice, that 3 unknown and unaccompanied inter-line luggage items were transferred by flight LH-631 from KUWAIT on the flight PA-103/A, which could be assigned to no person and over these to anhin a silence exists! See: * 3 inter-line of luggage items of feeder flight LH-631 from KUWAIT ex Tray No. B-4809, B-6001, B-7418. These 3 luggage items wrongproves assigned by the Federal Bureau of Criminal Investigations following, see text: After determinations it can have concerned here with high probability only the three luggage items checkin by the passenger WALKER in KUWAIT * wrongly. (Ref. page 16, Federal Bureau of Criminal Investigations rapport) MEBO clearing-up: The passenger T. WALKER traveled with his 3 luggage items with the same flight LH-631 of KUWAIT to FRANFURT. WALKER had itself at 15:57 o'clock at the head Checking Counter in FRANKFURT with its 3 luggage items ex Tray No. B-7056, B-9531, and B-11366 checking again. MEBO EXAMINATION. Importantly: Of the 124 passengers, who in FRANKFURT on flight PA-103/A had checking gave it according to passenger list C140V, only 3 passengers with 3 luggage items each: Passenger NR. 143 T.WALKER had 3 luggage items (3 M): ex Tray No. B-7056, B-9531, B-11366; Passenger NR. 99 K.NOONAN had 3 luggage items (3 M): ex Tray No. B-3546, B-10773, B-10467 these luggage items became over the inter-line Counter NR. 203 reforwards; Passenger NR. 152 J.WAIDO at the head Checking Counter of 3 luggage items (3 M) had checkin: ex Tray No. B-3593, B-4120, B-11511; Thus it is certain clearly that the *3 other inter-line luggage items, by flight LH-631 from KUWAIT, may be likewise assigned which however over the inter-line Counter HM-3 was coded and transfered, not from T. WALKER, as considered by the Federal Bureau. ! ???

Report as unsuitable 5. Edwin & Mahnaz Bollier, Mebo Ltd, Zurich/Switzerland / 1:06am 14 Oct 2007 #4 Continuation:

It could not be cleared up until today whether this Baggage in LONDON Heatrow "Mainflight" on; PA-103 after JFK was transferred. After testimony by Federal Bureau of Criminal Investigations commissioner Hans Juergen FUHL (Crown a witness NO. 566) in Heathrow of documents were destroyed! Org.Text Crown/ over Federal Bureau of Criminal Investigations commissioner FUHL: He commented that OTHER organization who were investigating the bombing had taken some OF the documentation before the Federal Bureau of Criminal Investigations could GET their hands on it. He thus noted that PanAm had apparently instructed staff RK HEATHROW tons destroy documentation. [ Ref. Doc.1 CHAPTER 13 PAGE 38]
Probably these documents would have brought to clarity over the 3 luggage items from KUWAIT, particularly over the most important question whether these 3 unknown luggage items in LONDON Heathrow on would have "Mainflight" PA-103 after JFK were transferred?
RESULT: On the feeder flight PA-103/A from FRANKFURT to London Heathrow a Bag did not become; from AIR MALTA on PA-103/A transfers, but, flight LH-631 transfers 3 unknown strange luggage items from KUWAIT on PA-103/A from LUFTHANSA LH-631!

EDWIN BOLLIER

Report as unsuitable 6. bill2 / 1:20am 14 Oct 2007 Looks more and more like a stitch up.

Report as unsuitable 7. 'Suck' - McCrunchie, the eighth / 2:08am 14 Oct 2007 2. Peter Cherbi

"almost"??!!??

Wink

Report as unsuitable 8. Guga II, Rockall / 2:13am 14 Oct 2007 #6 Bill2. It doesn't look like a stitch up, it was a stitch up. And peter #2, it doesn't almost sound like bribing witnesses, it was bribing witnesses, plain and simple.

The Americans were so determined to convict a Libyan, any Libyan, that they were prepared to go to any lengths to get it, including manipulating evidence, withholding evidence, and bribing witnesses.

The crown then withheld evidence from the defence, another stitch up.

The whole trial was a farce, and a dark day for Scottish justice.

Report as unsuitable 9. 2Right, On Location / 2:28am 14 Oct 2007 No New News Here.

It is already known he was rewarded with £2M for his evidence:
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.1730667....

Scott Law · Jim Swire Herald 29th May 2008

Zeist appeal must be seen to be fair Comment The Crown Office is quite right in saying that the Westminster Government is responsible for the imposition of a Public Interest Immunity (PII) certificate over this "document from a Foreign Power".

The Westminster decision over the PII certificate followed representations to it from Scotland's Advocate General, after discussions in the High Court in Edinburgh: that is what he is there for, rightly or wrongly, under the rules of devolution.

The information in the document, whether important or not to the case, appears to have influenced the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) into declaring that the Zeist Lockerbie bombing trial might not have been fair. So long as that information continues to be available to the prosecution, but not the defence, the whole process will continue to be seen as unfairly biased towards the prosecution.

advertisement
The Crown Office does not mention that it is opposing, in the High Court, the defence request to widen the grounds for this appeal to include all material now available, rather than simply the grounds presented by the SCCRC. Nor does it mention that it opposes in the High Court the defence's request for full access to all the material from Zeist, for forensic and other purposes.

Can any of these three issues be denied to the defence, if the appeal is to be seen as fair?

There is no way that such obstruction from Westminster via a PII certificate can be seen as in the interests of the Scottish public, but the High Court will hold diets on all three issues, two out of the three are opposed by the Crown Office, not Westminster.

Dr Jim Swire, Father of Flora, murdered at Lockerbie, Rowans Corner, Calf Lane, Chipping Campden, Gloucestershire.

Scott Law · Herald Article Lockerbie

Crown Office and Advocate General clash over Lockerbie document May 29 2008
The defence team for the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing should get limited access to a confidential document providing national security is not put at risk, Scottish prosecutors said yesterday.

The Crown Office move appeared to differ from the position of the Advocate General, who represents the UK Government and has said that disclosure would cause "real harm".

Ronald Clancy, QC, told three appeal judges that the Crown would be prepared for Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi's lawyers to see a "summarised or redacted" version of the material.

At the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh, Mr Clancy acknowledged that the Advocate General Lord Davidson, QC, may be "less enthusiastic" about partial disclosure.

But he added: "Limited disclosure by way of a summarised or redacted version, or for that matter both, is the best option if this can be given to the petitioner without damaging the national security interests which give rise to the plea."

The document, which is thought to contain information about the electronic timer used to detonate the bomb, was uncovered by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission.

The commission concluded that failure to disclose the document could constitute a miscarriage of justice, resulting in the case being referred back to the courts for a second appeal.

Megrahi's defence team is arguing that they need "full disclosure" of the document "in order to exercise his right of appeal".

But Foreign Secretary David Miliband has signed a certificate of "public interest immunity", claiming that disclosure would cause "real harm" to national security and international relations.

Yesterday was the second day of a hearing to decide the procedure for a future hearing on whether to grant the defence team access to the document.

The Crown Office and Advocate General have said that judges will have access to the full document, but they want a closed court hearing to discuss the issues surrounding its disclosure.

Mr Clancy said that if full disclosure was not granted, special security-vetted counsel should be appointed to replace the defence team in the hearing. He admitted that the use of special advocates, who would in this case represent the interests of Megrahi, was "unchartered territory" in Scotland.

Margaret Scott, QC, for the defence, told the court that she did not object in principle to a closed hearing nor to the appointment of a special advocate. The hearing continues today.

The Impact of Lockerbie decision by SCCRC

Scotland on Sunday 14 Oct 2007

Jim Swire Herald 29th May 2008

Herald Article Lockerbie