wpu.nu

Sida:Pol-2020-05-14 DA21183-04-M Camarate-air-crash.pdf/11

Från wpu.nu

Den här sidan har inte korrekturlästs


part of officials involved in the Lockerbie enquiry).

The theory purported to show conclusively that the suitcase containing the bomb that destroyed PA 103 had entered the airline luggage chain at Heathrow Airport.

In other words, it purported to show that the bomb had not entered airline luggage in Malta. If accepted, this would fatally undermine the Crown case.

Having excluded various other possibilities, the Commission considered that the submissions could be relevant only as a claim of defective representation.

As the Commission understood them, the applicants were arguing that the failure of the defence to demonstrate that the bomb was ingested in Heathrow amounted to a failure to present the defence.

The Commission concentrated on what it considered to be the most important aspect of the submissions.

The theory lacked certain important information, which the Sandwood report had highlighted.

In light of this, it was not arguable that the Justice for Megrahi theory could show conclusively that the bomb had entered the airline luggage in Heathrow.

The Commission was satisfied that the defence team had good tactical reasons for approaching this part of the evidence in the way in which it did. It was not thus arguable that counsel had failed to present Mr Megrahi's defence.

Interests of Justice

The test that the Commission must apply in the exercise of its primary statutory function is in two parts.

The first part of the test, as applied above, is whether or not the Commission believes that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred.

But before it may refer a case to the High Court, the Commission must also believe that it is in the interests of justice to do so.

In this case the Commission identified during the review two issues of particular relevance to the interests of justice test.

The first major issue addressed by the Commission at the outset was whether to accept the application for review at all, given Mr Megrahi's decision in 2009 to abandon his appeal.

Part of the submissions in support of the request to the Commission to accept a further application from the family was an allegation that there had been an effort on the part of the Scottish Government to induce Mr Megrahi to drop his appeal in exchange for his return to Libya.

After fully investigating the matter the Commission did not accept this allegation, concluding that throughout the process the message from the Scottish Government had been both consistent and uncompromising in its outward-facing neutrality.

It did, however, accept that Mr Megrahi genuinely believed that his chances of being returned to Libya rested upon him dropping his appeal.

Mr Megrahi's source of information for this belief was a member of the Libyan Government under Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.

The Commission

7