THE LOCKERBIE PATSY
It
was the terrorist attack that led to
the biggest criminal
investigation of our time.
When on the 21st of December
1988 a bomb exploded on a Pan
Am flight flying from London to New York over the village of Lockerbie Scotland,
270 innocent civilians lost their lives. Two decades after the tragedy Abdel Baset Al-Megrahi, the man convicted of the crime and dying from
prostate cancer, was sent home by Scottish officials on compassionate grounds. Al-Megrahi had served only eight years of his 27 year to life sentence for murder. As the outrage and fallout from the decision to release
him continues, questions surround every facet of this emotionally
charged and compelling case. Apart from the queries regarding the reason for
his release, uncertainty and lingering doubts still surrounds the evidence on
which he was convicted in the original
case.
After the Lockerbie bombing, years had
passed before Al-Megrahi,
together with another Libyan,
Lamin Khalifah Fhimah, was charged for the
crime. On the 31st of
January 2001, Al-Megrahi was
eventually found guilty and sentenced to life, while Fhimah was aquitted. Al-Megrahi appealed
his conviction but lost. However, after a series of reports issued by Hans
Köchler, the special observer
nominated by Kofi Annan, described
the decisions of the courts as ‘a
spectacular miscarriage of justice’,
Al-Megrahi applied to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission for a fresh appeal. In a scathing indictment, Mr
Köchler accused the west of double
standards in criminal justice in the Lockerbie trial and
called for an independent international inquiry into the case. Other independent observers, including the
legal architect of the special
trial and the spokesperson
for the families of the British victims, have declared that Al-Megrahi
was wrongfully convicted. In 2007,
a Scottish court ruled that Al-Megrahi is entitled to a second
appeal because he ‘may have suffered a miscarriage of
justice’ and in an article published
on the 31st of October 2008 in The Times
of London, it was wrtten that Al-Megrahi was the ‘victim of one of
the most spectacular and expensive miscarriages of justice in history’.
Many who followed the trial argue that the basis
for attaching the blame on this single man was political rather than judicial. They claim Al-Megrahi was a scapegoat for concerned authorites who needed to steer
the investigation away from the real
perpetrators. Reports that Al-Megrahi has
withdrawn his appeal despite
compelling evidence in his favour, in exchange for his release lends itself to
the assumption that some authority cut a deal with him to drop his appeal in
fear of what might be exposed had the appeal been successfull. Had Al-Megrahi
been acquitted, there would have been a clamour for an investigation to find
another culprit, but the discontinuance of an appeal truncates any further
investigation. This and other hypothesis may just be the fantasy of a conspiracy
theory, where a coverup is required to neccesitate the commission of some grand
design. But another account implies that in light of the global nature of the
crime, the political pressure
to identify a culprit overrode all reservations about the suspect’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Many analysts believe the case was
a weak mixture of suppositions that would have been thrown out in any other
court.
During the trial, the
prosecution presented evidence that showed Al-Megrahi used a false passport to travel to Malta days before the bombing. In Malta, Al-Magrahi was accused of placing the bomb in
a suitcase and checking it in for a New York journey that was destined to start
from Malta, transit to Germany and go through London. After the plane arrived
in London, the unaccompanied suitcase was transferred onto the Pan Am plane
that was destined for New York. It blew up over the village of Lockerbie,
Scotland before leaving the shores of the United Kingdom.
The conviction of Al-Megrahi was based largely on
a chain of circumstancial evidence. The key witness at the trial was a Maltese shopkeeper named Tony Gauci who
picked Al-Megrahi out of a police line up and testified that the accused had
bought a shirt in his store
two days before the bombing. Scraps of a similar shirt were later found wrapped around a timing device in
the wreckage. Apart from the fact
that Mr Gauci gave a string of contradictory statements in the 17 interviews he
had, there is an inconsistency about the date he says the accused bought the clothing. Also, new evidence suggests Mr Gauci saw a picture of Al
Megrahi in a magazine linking him to the bombing four days prior to picking him in the identity parade, making it likely for him to pick out that
specific suspect. It was also
alledged that the CIA offered Mr Gauci more than £1million to be placed in a witness protection programme, a fact that was never disclosed at trial.
Reviewers of the case continue to present a
torrent of elements that casts serious doubts on Al-Megrahi’s guilt, including a
secret document provided to the UK by a foreign government and seen only by the prosecution, the discrediting of one of the FBI’s principal forensic
experts and claims by high-ranking Scottish police officers that vital evidence was fabricated. Another piece of evidence used to convict Al-Megrahi
was the presentation of a circuit board fragment found at the scene that was latter identified
as part of an electronic timer. The owner of the company that
manufactures this timer claimed that the FBI had offered him millions of dollars to say that the
timer fragment was of a type
specifically supplied to Libya. Another
witness latter swore an affidavit admitting he had lied under oath and admitted
stealing and giving a similar device
to an official investigating the case. A thorough assesment of the issues show that the major elements of
the prosecution’s case were so unsubstantiated that it’s
difficult to believe a conviction was able to be sustained in such a high
profile case.
But if Al-Megrahi and the Libyan intelligence were
truely not guilty, one wonders why their government accepted responsibility. In
a letter to the UN, Libya offered to pay $1.7 billion to the families of the victims for the actions of its officials. With the escalating tensions between the west and Libya in the 1980’s,
the nation was not short of motive to attack American interests. In 1985, a confrontation in the Mediterranean between the US and Libya left scores of Libiyans dead. This was followed
with a bombing at a Berlin disco by a Libyan diplomat, where US service
personnel were killed. The American government paid Libya back by launching a
bomb at one of Ghadaffi’s palaces, killing his daughter, to which the Libyan
leader vowed revenge. Despite such motivations,
top officials in Libya have continueally denied responsibility and maintain
that their government accepted responsibility solely because it was the
only way of ending the
sanctions imposed on them. Since the
Libyan government accepted responsibility, sanctions against Libya have been
lifted and the US has granted
Libya immunity from further terrorism-related lawsuits. If the Libyan denials are to be believed, then it
may be established that Tripolli offered up Al-Megrahi in an attempt to intigrate
itself with the west and satisfy the west’s need to finger someone for the Lockerbie
plane disaster. Though very insensitive to the victims, this would explain the
jubilations displayed in Libya last week when Al-Megrahi was released.
Notwithstanding these implications against Libya, there were
numerous other entities with the
motive to attack the US during that period. In the initial investigation, experts suspected a Palestinian terrorist
group backed by Iran or Syria. But
the investigators were more convinced with the involvement of Iran. Five months before the Lockerbie air disaster, a U.S. warship accidently shot down an Iranian Airbus in the
Persian Gulf, killing all 290
aboard. Although the American
government appologised for the act, many believe that Iran had not accepted the
appologies and the Islamic Revolution had destroyed the plane in
retaliation. However, in the late
80’s and early 90’s, having complications with Syria or Iran would not have
been in the best interest of America because apart from the fact
that Iran was
a well-armed nation of 70 million and Syria was a
key factor to Arab-Israeli peace, the United States did not need more regional
enemies in the run up to the first Gulf war.
The pain
and suffering of the bereaved family
members will never go away. When such a senseless loss is
caused intentionally, the desire for justice comes naturally. But
true justice is not served by yielding to the propensity for unquestioning
condemnation despite compelling
evidence to the contrary. If Abdel Baset Al-Megrahi is not the true culprit, then true justice requires that he be sent home to his wife and five
children to die. If on the other hand he planted the
bomb on the Pan Am Flight 103, then justice for the victims can only come in the hereafter as Al-Megrahi
embarks on his final journey
of life.
After he was arrested for the assassination of
President John.F.Kennedy, Lee Harvey Oswald repeatedly claimed that he was the
sacrificial lamb; “I am just a patsy! I am just a patsy!” he exclaimed. Whether
he was or not, history has condemned his memory forever. Only God and those
involved know if Al-Megrahi was the
lone bomb planter or a co-conspirator. But whatever he was, the full truth is
now unlikely to ever be revealed. So while we wait and watch history describes Abdel Baset Al-Megrahi as the Lockerbie bomber, from all
indications, he is also the Lockerbie Patsy!
Article Written by
Hannatu Musawa
No comments:
Post a Comment