Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Scottish Home Awards

Straw: Lockerbie bomber's fate may be out of ministers' hands

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 15 February 2008
SCOTTISH ministers may not have the final say on the fate of the Lockerbie bomber, Jack Straw, the UK Justice Minister, has admitted.
Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi can appeal under a prisoner transfer agreement (PTA) between Libya and the UK to serve the remainder of his sentence in his home country.

And although Scottish ministers will view the application in the first in
stance, Megrahi could ask for a judicial review of their decision – placing it in the hands of the courts.

Mr Straw had previously insisted the final decision would lie with Holyrood – but it has emerged that, in a letter to Alex Salmond, the First Minister, he wrote: "A decision in relation to the transfer of a prisoner under the terms of the PTA may be subject to a judicial review."

Last night, Professor Robert Black – who was instrumental in organising the trial which saw Megrahi convicted of bombing Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie on 21 December, 1988 – said if the exemption had been included, there would be no chance of a judicial review.

He said that because of the agreement, Scottish ministers would have to give serious consideration to an application from Megrahi and, if they rejected it, he could go to the courts.

However, Prof Black added that, for a successful judicial review, the court would have to believe no reasonable government could have refused the application.

Last autumn, a spokesman for the Scottish Government said that Mr Straw had agreed with Mr Salmond that such a clause should be included, but in December it emerged the UK government had "changed its mind".

The row between Westminster and Holyrood has been ongoing since, and was further inflamed yesterday when Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish justice secretary, claimed the Scottish Government had been "undermined" in negotiations over the PTA.

Meanwhile, Mr Salmond called on all correspondence between Westminster and Holyrood to be made public.

Mr Straw said the Scottish Government's argument that the decision was open to review was "curious if not desperate", adding: "Alex Salmond seems to be arguing he doesn't want discretion over this. Any ministerial decision is susceptible to judicial review, but courts are not there to make decisions for ministers. They are there to make sure decisions are made lawfully."





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 14 February 2008 10:03 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Lockerbie
 
1

The poster formerly known as "A with circumflex",

. . . McKey Locharby 15/02/2008 00:26:24
Will this be the deleted thread of the day?
2

The poster formerly known as "A with circumflex",

. . . Ma Printz-Alloverasite 15/02/2008 00:35:38
Less said the better. Nudge nudge, wink, wink.

Will this be the deleted thread of the day?
3

,

15/02/2008 03:26:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
4

Bridged and tunnelled,

overground 15/02/2008 04:04:17
Meghrabi might ask for a judicial review, but asking for one doesn't mean the courts would grant the application, nor that they would rescind Ministers' decision if they decided to grant a review.

Unless we think it is better for Ministers to be above the law, we should all be happy that decisions are judically reviewable.
5

,

15/02/2008 04:30:33
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
6

Pundit,

Glasgow 15/02/2008 05:45:23
Lets keep on tack with this. This is as a direct result of the agreement Blair made to win an Oil contract, he was caught out on this, assurances were made that Al Megrahi would be excluded, no such thing happened. Basically this will be a matter for the courts, as this agreement will require the UK parliament to give effect to the PTA, in effect making it UK law. Courts will then decide, all of which is dependant on AL Megrahi applying. I suspect he will if his current appeal is unsuccesful.
Scottish Government attempted to act to represent the views of people in Scotland, especially as criminal justice is a develoved matter. They have in essence been completely over ruled by UK government on a matter that is devolved.
7

Finnking,

Lempäälä 15/02/2008 06:10:05
So, the CIA plant evidence to implicate the Libyans, they admit it and a Scottish policeman confirms it and here we are talking about a judicial review!

Let the poor s*d out of jail, have another full inquiry into the bombing (the biggest mass murder in British history-you would think it would be important enough), have some external legal system to oversee the case (not the USA who seem to exert too much influence of the Scottish courts) and actually find out who was responsible for this tragedy even if that means uncovering CIA/syrian drug connections.

8

williamx,

canada 15/02/2008 06:18:41
I presume the CIA have only admitted this in order to win oil contracts with Libya for the US which due to oil demand "is going down the tubes"
But then again are the CIA lying? who knows!
9

brownlie,

Penang 15/02/2008 07:46:43
Can anyone be in any doubt that in order to patch up a deal with Libya that the Labour Government will over-ride any consideration for law and order. They have already condoned bribery and corruption in order to facilitate an arms deal with Saudi Arabia. How many ministers etc will benefit, as Blair does, from this when they give up politics?
10

Edwin & Mahnaz Bollier, Mebo Ltd,

Zurich/Switzerland 15/02/2008 08:36:40

No secret deal over Mr. Al Megrahi’s prison exchange to Libya.

The only correct way that Mr. Al Megrahi can prove his innocence is via the decision from the Scottish Appeal Court expect on February 20 and trough the Scottish legal System!

This is the real way (if Mr. Al Megrahi is cleared) to go back in his homeland Libya. Al-Megrahi has consistently maintained his innocence and has vowed to stay in Scotland and win his freedom through the appeal courts.

For more details, pls visit our webpage:
http://www.lockerbie.ch
11

Blarney,

lesmahagow 15/02/2008 09:27:01
Publish the correspondence Alex. Show the lies and deceit at every opportunity. This is not picking fights it's standing up for your Country.
It certainly seems that Labour cannot do enough to alienate themselves from the Scottish people, it's a joy to watch this house of cards crumble.
Looking forward in anticipation to the unionists posters squirming and squealing.
12

puskas,

East Kilbride 15/02/2008 09:43:11
More to come on this one.

I predict that Westminster shall be found wanting again.

13

megz,

glasgow 15/02/2008 10:24:41
It was claimed on newsnight scotland last night that the BP guy was in the tent with tone when the MoU was signed. Does anyone believe a word the UK government has to say on this? Clearly all they are about is money and oil. First they roll over in the case of bae and now they have sold out the scottish judicial system for and oil deal. Are there no end to the depths to which they will plumb?

Of course that aside, i personally never thought he was resposnible for the attrocity and hopefully through due process he will be cleared and allowed to go home a free and innocent man. It is more the principle of the acts of the uk government that are the problem. Add to that the fact that it is most likely that scottish law has already been compromised by others wishing libya to be at fault. (allegedly)
14

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 15/02/2008 10:54:09
If Labour had won the last election then as sure as sh*t their would be no judicial review necessary on this case. If Labour cant control the decision then it will be taken out of the hand of the Scottish Government.

AM2 yer full of sh*t as usual. what happened to the judicial review over the cash for honours or the decision not to investigate the Saudi affair? or the Wendygate affair for that matter.
Away and take yer lying sh*te elsewhere.
15

Il Penseroso,

Inverurie 15/02/2008 11:02:52
AM2 "checks and balances in our democracy" (?). If it is a democracy why will the Westminster, known liars, refuse to divulge all the evidence. National Security my @rse! Blair's tainted hands are all over this one too, and you know it. Yet again his double dealing is being protected as are his co-conspirators.
16

Glaswegian,

GLASGOW 15/02/2008 11:15:02
1 AM2

I may be wrong, but isn't it the very existence of the Prisoner Transfer Agreement which might give Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi grounds to seek Judicial Review, hence the Scottish Government's desire to have him specifically excluded.

Does anyone know the procedure following a successful Judicial Review? Who has the last say?
17

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 15/02/2008 11:58:40
17

Parliament decides whether or not something is passed over for judicial review actually its the Prime Minister not Parliament at all.
18

Bridged and tunnelled,

correcting mistakes 15/02/2008 18:36:19
#18 - it's the courts who decide whether an application for judicial review is heard, and if heard, granted, based on established rules of procedure (which is not second guess the decision Government has taken, but to ensure it follows proper procedure or does not reach decisions so irrationally that no reasonable person could have made it.

The Prime Minister, or indeed First Minister in Scotland, has nothing to do with the process.
19

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 15/02/2008 19:56:29
19

No thats the theory but the practice has been shown with the cash for honours, The dismissal of the Saudi bribes scandal, The party funding and cash donations scandals oh you get the point.
20

Terrier2,

15/02/2008 22:06:39
Im afraid im with the nats on this one. Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi committed his crimes in Scotland. If there was any justice in the world he should have died on the end of a Scottish rope. However given the limitations of the Scottish legal system - death in a Scottish prision will do.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.