Megrahi was framed

John Pilger

Published 03 September 2009

The trial of the “Lockerbie bomber” was worse than a travesty of justice. Evidence that never came to court proves his innocence

The hysteria over the release of the so-called Lockerbie bomber reveals much about the political and media class on both sides of the Atlantic, especially Britain. From Gordon Brown's "repulsion" to Barack Obama's "outrage", the theatre of lies and hypocrisy is dutifully attended by those
who call themselves journalists. "But what if Megrahi lives longer than three months?" whined a BBC reporter to the Scottish First Minister, Alex Salmond. "What will you say to your constituents, then?"

Horror of horrors that a dying man should live longer than prescribed before he "pays" for his "heinous crime": the description of the Scottish justice minister, Kenny MacAskill, whose "compassion" allowed Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi to go home to Libya to "face justice from a higher power". Amen.

The American satirist Larry David once addressed a voluble crony as "a babbling brook of bullshit". Such eloquence summarises the circus of Megrahi's release.

No one in authority has had the guts to state the truth about the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 above the Scottish village of Lockerbie on 21 December 1988, in which 270 people were killed. The governments in England and Scotland in effect blackmailed Megrahi into dropping his appeal as a condition of his immediate release. Of course there were oil and arms deals under way with Libya; but had Megrahi proceeded with his appeal, some 600 pages of new and deliberately suppressed evidence would have set the seal on his innocence and given us more than a glimpse of how and why he was stitched up for the benefit of "strategic interests".

“The endgame came down to damage limitation," said the former CIA officer Robert Baer, who took part in the original investigation, "because the evidence amassed by [Megrahi's] appeal is explosive and extremely damning to the system of justice." New witnesses would show that it was impossible for Megrahi to have bought clothes that were found in the wreckage of the Pan Am aircraft - he was convicted on the word of a Maltese shopowner who claimed to have sold him the clothes, then gave a false description of him in 19 separate statements and even failed to recognise him in the courtroom.

The new evidence would have shown that a fragment of a circuit board and bomb timer, "discovered" in the Scottish countryside and said to have been in Megrahi's suitcase, was probably a plant. A forensic scientist found no trace of an explosion on it. The new evidence would demonstrate the impossibility of the bomb beginning its journey in Malta before it was "transferred" through two airports undetected to Flight 103.

A "key secret witness" at the original trial, who claimed to have seen Megrahi and his co-accused, al-Alim Khalifa Fahimah (who was acquitted), loading the bomb on to the plane at Frankfurt, was bribed by the US authorities holding him as a "protected witness". The defence exposed him as a CIA informer who stood to collect, on the Libyans' conviction, up to $4m as a reward.

Megrahi was convicted by three Scottish judges sitting in a courtroom in "neutral" Holland. There was no jury. One of the few reporters to sit through the long and often farcical proceedings was the late Paul Foot, whose landmark investigation in Private Eye exposed it as a cacophony of blunders, deceptions and lies: a whitewash. The Scottish judges, while admitting a "mass of conflicting evidence" and rejecting the fantasies of the CIA informer, found Megrahi guilty on hearsay and unproven circumstance. Their 90-page "opinion", wrote Foot, "is a remarkable document that claims an honoured place in the history of British miscarriages of justice". (His report, Lockerbie - the Flight from Justice, can be downloaded from www.private-eye.co.uk for £5.)

Foot reported that most of the staff of the US embassy in Moscow who had reserved seats on Pan Am flights from Frankfurt cancelled their bookings when they were alerted by US intelligence that a terrorist attack was planned. He named Margaret Thatcher the "architect" of the cover-up after revealing that she killed the independent inquiry her transport secretary Cecil Parkinson had promised the Lockerbie families; and in a phone call to President George Bush Sr on 11 January 1990, she agreed to "low-key" the disaster after their intelligence services had reported "beyond doubt" that the Lockerbie bomb had been placed by a Palestinian group, contracted by Tehran, as a reprisal for the shooting down of an Iranian airliner by a US warship in Iranian territorial waters. Among the 290 dead were 66 children. In 1990, the ship's captain was awarded the Legion of Merit by Bush Sr "for exceptionally meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding service as commanding officer".

Perversely, when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1991, Bush needed Iran's support as he built a "coalition" to expel his wayward client from an American oil colony. The only country that defied Bush and backed Iraq was Libya. "Like lazy and overfed fish," wrote Foot, "the British media jumped to the bait. In almost unanimous chorus, they engaged in furious vilification and open warmongering against Libya." The framing of Libya for the Lockerbie crime was inevitable. Since then, a US defence intelligence agency report, obtained under Freedom of Information, has confirmed these truths and identified the likely bomber; it was to be the centrepiece of Megrahi's defence.

In 2007, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission referred Megrahi's case for appeal. "The commission is of the view," said its chairman, Graham Forbes, "based upon our lengthy investigations, the new evidence we have found and other evidence which was not before the trial court, that the applicant may have suffered a miscarriage of justice."

The words "miscarriage of justice" are entirely missing from the current furore, with Kenny MacAskill reassuring the baying mob that the scapegoat will soon face justice from that "higher power". What a disgrace.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

5 comments from readers

George Pumphrey
06 September 2009 at 10:29

Dear Mr. Pilger,

I have been enjoying your articles for nearly 3 decades now. I must say that I have particularly appreciated the steadfastness of your writing over the last two decades. At the beginning of the 90s many enlightened journalists began to be more obscurantist than enlightened. Some may have changed directions simply to be able to keep publishing, others possible because it takes more intestinal fortitude to continue to stand up for truth in a smaller minority, than they felt they could produce.

Thank you for sticking with us.

Thanks also for your recent "New Statesman" article on the release of Mr. al-Megrahi. Much of the information in the article is not new, but that doesn't matter, you pulled it together again for us in a very concise way.

But I would like to warn of one possible pitfall in your article:

You hint at an Iranian – rather than a Libyan – connection. But you also have nothing more than the others to go on, to back up this allegation. Given the serious attempts afoot at the moment to put Iran under pressure, you may be – unwittingly – falling for the bait set to make the case of blocking relations with Iran.

Earlier rumor had it that Syria was behind the attack. There is as little tangible evidence that any of these Muslim states was involved with the attack.

When one looks at the efforts to criminalize Libya – the murder of the Bobbie Yvonne Fletcher in front of the Libyan Embassy in London, causing the UK to break diplomatic ties to Tripoli, the bomb attack of Berlin's LaBelle club, frequented mainly by Black GIs, an excuse for the Reagan administration to bomb Libya – without the slightest proof of Libyan authorship – See Victor Ostrovski's "The Other Side Of Deception" (pg. 113 hardback), as but two examples – one notices a similar pattern today targeting Iran. (...)

George Pumphrey
06 September 2009 at 10:29

(...) It is clear that Mr. al-Megrahi's conviction (as well as Mr. al-Alim Khalifa Fahimah's acquittal) was a "compromise". His release is also a compromise. The West is protecting the real culprits. This is why the bone is now being tossed in the direction of Teheran. Other elements played into the Lockerbie bombing, that do not have their origins in the Muslim world. This was what is being covered up. Since the Lockerbie bombing, irreversible facts have been created on the ground.

The former CIA officer, R. Baer, says something very interesting. He first of all admits that he knew all along that Mr. al-Megrahi was not responsible for the explosion over Lockerbie. Yet he reiterates a couple of times, "that doesn't mean Megrahi is innocent." (http://www.sundaymail.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2009/08/23/ci...).This is a racist quirk in what has become the US notion of "justice." One is born innocent or guilty. Though one may not be personally responsible for this or that infraction – not guilty – it is still IMPOSSIBLE for one to be "innocent."

This has been made a ground rule in the US "justice" system. A Black or an Arab – regardless of how little evidence exists that (s)he actually committed the crime for which (s)he is accused – it is impossible that (s)he could be innocent. So the person will be charged – and even convicted! – "because who knows what he might be guilty of." (See the cases of all the Arabs and Muslims kidnapped to Guantanamo, or the Afromericans languishing in US prisons, who never had a trial.) None of the US "debriefers" or policemen is guilty of violating any one's rights. They simply don't have rights. These folks are tortured into confessions of things they know absolutely nothing about.

As far as Baer and the Freedom of Information files are concerned, they are both to be taken with a grain of salt. Baer admits having sent a man to prison for something that

Gideon Polya
08 September 2009 at 00:47

All those involved in mass murder of human beings should be brought to justice via properly conducted, transparent, authoritative judicial processes.

John Pilger's article explains how this has apparently not happened in the case of the Megrahi trial i.e. justice has apparently NOT been delivered.

Of course, while the perpetrators ARE unequivocally known, nobody has yet been arraigned for the Israeli fording down down of a Libyan passenger plane over Egyptian air space in 1973 with 110 killed [Apartheid Israeli government and miiltary], the shooting down of an Iranian air liner and killing of 290 passengers by US off the coast of Iran in 1990 [the US Government and miltary] ...

The World is also awaiting Justice over the ongoing Palestinian Genocide, Iraqi Genocide and Afghan Genocide.

Thus in the Occupied Palestinian, Iraqi and Afghan Territories post-invasion non-violent excess deaths total 0.3 million, 1.0 million and 3.2 million, respectively; post-invasion violent deaths total about 11,000, 1.3 million and up to 4 million, respectively ; post-invasion under-5 infant deaths total 0.2 million, 0.6 million and 2.3 million, respectively; and refugees total 7 million, 5-6 million and 3-4 million, respectively plus a further 2.5 million Pashtun refugees from NW Pakistan – this constituting a Palestinian Holocaust, an Iraqi Holocaust and an Afghan Holocaust and a Palestinian Genocide, Iraqi Genocide and Afghan Genocide as defined by Article 2 of the UN Genocide Convention and egregious war crimes due in part to Occupier war criminal non-supply of life-sustaining food and medical requisites demanded unequivocally by Articles 55 and 56 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (see "Obama's Afghan War": http://mwcnews.net/content/view/29546/42/ ).

Bring on war crimes trials for Bush, Blair, Brown, Obama, Howard, Rudd, Sarkozy, Merkel at the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Camus
15 September 2009 at 08:18

An informative article with some defects. Too much surmise, not enough hard facts. It won't do to claim that it was a revenge bombing for the deaths of Iranian civilians if you don't produce some evidence. From what I have read it is quite probable that the culprits are still at large. But this is not a new way of culling enemies.

jednightingale
16 September 2009 at 04:07

I am quite shocked by Britain's and Scottland's judicial incompetence. If Gadafi's regime was not responsible for the bombing of Pan Am flight over Scottland, then why couldn't Britain find the correct culprit to this vile mass crime? If Mr. al-Megrahi was innocent, why couldn't he launch his legal battles earlier and prove his innocence. It seems quite suspect that the only way that Mr. Al-Megrahi could get out of jail was through a bogus compassion plea. Personally, I am not aware that Britain issues compassion releases to all of its life sentence convicts. I have always been under the impression that a life imprisonment sentence meant that the prisoner would die behind bars. I guess that in Britain and Scotland that legal term is not applied when juicy oil deals are in the hoffing. Why has Britain/Scottland done so in the case of Mr. Al-Megrahi's sentence - I guess that you just cannot erase the smell of oil in this whole deal.

What is remarkable about this case, it is the hypocrisy with which the British press presents this case. Clearly the manner in which this whole case has been misrepresented is more appropriate for a third world nation ruled under a tyrant who manipulates the press and public opinion. Sadly enough Britain and

Scotland are assuming their infamous positions in the pantheon of world losers. Sorry to see that the

founders of constitutional law dating back to the days of king Arthur are sinking into the mud. Where is

Queen Elizabeth encouraging her troops - ". . . therefore I am come amongst you, as you see, at

this time, not for my recreation and disport, but being resolved, in the midst and heat of the battle, to live and die amongst you all; to lay down for my God, and for my kingdom, and my people, my honour and my

blood, even in the dust. I know I have the body but of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart and

stomach of a king, and of a king of England too, and think foul scorn that Parma or Spain, or any prince of Europe.

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before you can comment on the website

About the writer

John Pilger

John Pilger, renowned investigative journalist and documentary film-maker, is one of only two to have twice won British journalism's top award; his documentaries have won academy awards in both the UK and the US. In a New Statesman survey of the 50 heroes of our time, Pilger came fourth behind Aung San Suu Kyi and Nelson Mandela. "John Pilger," wrote Harold Pinter, "unearths, with steely attention facts, the filthy truth. I salute him."

Read More

Vote!

Will Baroness Ashton be an effective EU foreign minister?

Suggest a question

View comments

© New Statesman 1913 – 2009

Tracker