Al-Megrahi: the dilemma

Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, who was convicted of the slaughter of 270 people by blowing up an airliner over the town almost 20 years ago, is understood to have been given weeks to live by doctors, after hospital tests confirmed he had "advanced stage" prostate cancer.

Prisoners thought to have less than three months to live in Scotland can apply for early release on compassionate grounds.

Such decisions rest with the justice secretary, who normally has to weigh up medical evidence and the likelihood of the inmate reoffending.

But in the case of Megrahi, the dilemma facing Mr MacAskill would be massive.

The Scottish Government would face a serious backlash if the minister granted early release and Megrahi survived for longer than anticipated. That backlash would be more severe if he lost his appeal – a move that, for many, would seal his guilt once and for all.

A Scottish Government source confirmed that the unprecedented scale of the crime in Scottish and, indeed, UK terms would have to be considered by the justice secretary.

Mr MacAskill is also facing the prospect of political pressure being brought to bear from the United States, where many families of the victims insist Megrahi should die behind bars.

Megrahi's lawyer, Tony Kelly, refused to comment on whether he would be pushing the Scottish Prison Service and the Scottish Government to release the 56-year-old Libyan agent from jail on compassionate grounds. But the families of British casualties called on ministers to release Megrahi if that – as seems likely – proves to be his wish.

Megrahi was convicted in 2001 of the Lockerbie bombing and was initially locked up in Barlinnie Prison in Glasgow, before being transferred to Greenock Prison three years ago.

He was taken under tight security from his prison cell to Inverclyde Royal Hospital in Greenock to undergo tests last month. It is believed he underwent a scan during an outpatient appointment, before being taken back to jail.

The Scotsman understands that two consultants' reports have been written on Megrahi's condition and that they both conclude the Libyan is likely to survive for "weeks rather than months".

Megrahi is awaiting his second appeal against his conviction, and it is expected to take place next year. Mr Kelly confirmed yesterday that his client wanted to continue his fight against the conviction.

He went on: "Unfortunately, the disease has spread to other parts of his body and is therefore at an advanced stage. Mr al-Megrahi asks that the privacy of his family is respected at this difficult time.

"He wishes me to make clear that the fight to overturn his wrongful conviction for the Lockerbie bombing will go on. We on his legal team are continuing to prepare his appeal, which we hope will take place some time next year."

It is understood no application has so far been made by Megrahi's lawyers for compassionate release or transfer to Libya to finish his sentence.

But Tam Dalyell, the former Labour MP who is convinced of Megrahi's innocence, said Mr MacAskill faced an unprecedented decision on whether to release Megrahi, if such a request was lodged.

"I understand perfectly well the dilemma faced by anyone in the position of Kenny MacAskill," Mr Dalyell said. "I would say it is a huge dilemma. This is a completely new decision."

While any decision on early release would rest with the Scottish Government, the question of transferring Megrahi to Libya rests with both Holyrood and UK ministers.

Britain has yet to sign a prisoner-transfer agreement with Libya. A spokeswoman for the Ministry of Justice in London yesterday said: "The negotiation of international agreements is a matter for the UK government.

"The draft agreement makes clear that a prisoner cannot be transferred without the consent of both states. In the case of a prisoner detained in Scotland, the decision would be a matter for the Scottish Government."

It is understood that Jack Straw, the UK Justice Secretary, and Alex Salmond, the First Minister, have been kept informed of the situation.

Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, told The Scotsman last night that he believed Megrahi should be released. "Yes, I very much hope that that will happen," he said. "If that's what he wants, then I hope that's what he gets. But I think that, for medical reasons, it would probably be better for him to stay in Scotland than return to Libya."

Dr Swire, who is a spokesman for the UK Families Flight 103 group, also called for Megrahi's appeal to be speeded up.

He said: "I feel it is a very serious threat to his life and it would be a tragedy if he is to spend the rest of his life in a Scottish prison, particularly if he is not guilty of the crime of which he was found guilty. I'm not satisfied that the verdict against him is correct. It sounds to me like an unfolding human tragedy."

Jean Berkley, 78, from Northumberland, who lost her son Alistair, 29, in the bombing, said: "I don't want anything inhumane to happen to him. It may be in his best interests to stay in Scotland, where he will probably receive better medical treatment, but I don't think he should be left in prison. I don't feel vindictive towards him at all."

Mr Dalyell said he was "100 per cent convinced" that neither Megrahi nor the Libyan state was responsible for the Lockerbie bombing. "I believe he ought to be released to the bosom of his family," he said.

But Susan Cohen, 70, from New Jersey in the US, whose daughter Theo was killed in the bombing, reacted angrily to the possibility Megrahi would seek early release. "I don't give a damn about this," she said. "As far as I'm concerned, he should see out his time in prison. He should stay in prison – I've always said that. He should die in prison."

She also questioned the timing of the news about Megrahi's declining health. "I think he should be examined by UK and US doctors, and that information should be made public," Mrs Cohen said. "I find it very strange this is coming out now when they want to get on with this appeal. I don't trust the Libyans, and I don't trust the lawyers."

PROFILE

ABDELBASET Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi has consistently denied being responsible for the Lockerbie bombing in 1988.

The former Libyan Airlines security steward and Libyan intelligence agent was first indicted for the outrage in 1991 after a lengthy investigation by UK and US police forces. He was accused with compatriot Al Amin Khalifa Fhimah.

Megrahi, 56, had spent years on the FBI's "most wanted" list, with US detectives claiming his airline work was cover for a role with the Libyan Secret Service.

After the formal accusation, there followed years of diplomatic bargaining with Libyan leader Colonel Gaddafi before the suspects were handed over for trial. Megrahi and Fhimah eventually faced a trial in 2000, conducted under Scottish law in the Netherlands. It was one of the most complex trials ever, involving 84 days of evidence from 230 witnesses, lasting nearly seven months and costing around 75 million.

Married Megrahi was watched by his then-teenage son and daughter, who were at the front of the public gallery, separated by a glass wall.

Judges were convinced by prosecutors that Megrahi bought clothes from a shop in Malta which were packed round the bomb before it was placed on board. He got 27 years and has faced a string of health problems in recent years.

BACKGROUND

A FIRST appeal by Megrahi against his conviction was rejected in March 2002.

His lawyers then applied to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) to re-examine his case.

He was given a fresh chance to clear his name in June last year, when the SCCRC referred his case back to appeal judges for a second time.

The review body said there were six grounds – some put forward by the defence, and others resulting from its own investigations – where it believed a miscarriage of justice may have occurred.

Last week, Megrahi won a legal victory in the latest stage of his bid to have his conviction overturned.

Judges at the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh ruled that the Libyan's appeal could have a wide-ranging focus, looking beyond the issues raised by the SCCRC, when it suggested he might have suffered a miscarriage of justice.

The SCCRC's grounds include the undermining of the prosecution star witness's credibility by evidence not disclosed by the Crown to the defence.