Lib Dem MP and member of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee Ming Campbell has been commenting on the revelations about the Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi case:
The Labour government completely failed to take into account the horrific nature of the crime, the consequences and the sentence imposed when it took the view that it could assist the release of Mr Megrahi.
Equally in Scotland, the Justice Secretary failed to take account of these three significant factors when reaching a conclusion about the exercise of compassion.
If both had paid proper attention, the Labour government would not have been so embroiled and the Scottish Justice Secretary would not have been so easily persuaded.
Neither Westminster nor Holyrood comes out of this affair with much credit.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Knaptoft: The very heart of England
We do have a two-tier policing system but it is not what our homegrown racists think it is.
From Norman settlement to a civic square
Tom Arms
Ruth Bright
Tom Bailey
Alex Macfie
9 Comments
What does Charles Kennedy think?
https://www.libdemvoice.org/kennedy-speaks-out-on-megrahi-15979.html
Anyone foolish enough to try and make this an election issue in Scotland in May will regret it.
Scots have experienced all the tragedy, twists and turns of Lockerbie and Megrahi in great detail on their TVs, Radios and Newspapers since it happened in 1988. Which is why most Scots are well aware that Megrahi is not the culprit, or as Charles Kennedy wisely puts it, “there are few who believe we have established a complete and truthful account of what happened and why.”
Most will put their trust in honourable men like Jim Swire, who has tirelessly campaigned for the truth, rather than the obnoxious sight of grandstanding politicians trying to transform the dead victims into votes.
@I see no Iceberg
Certainly it is mainstream thinking that the full facts of Lockerbie were concealed. But there are present day disturbing behaviours by politicians with respect to this issue. Both the US and UK have signed multi-Bn dollar trade deals with Libya, with a dictator they assert often and with anger, caused the deaths of hundreds of their citizens. They cry revulsion and moral horror at the actions of the Scottish government yet not one of them explains why a footsoldier of Libya should suffer greatly for following orders, while the man who gave those orders quells demands for democracy from his restless citizenry with the benefits of trading with his victims.
There is no moral highground in this argument.
I think Cameron was quite selective in his quotes yesterday, but he is a politician. I think it is also clear that the last government wanted the guy released and that this was for them apolitical judgement not a matter of justice or compassion.
I tend to agree with Kennedy that the truth is yet to come out regarding the bombing and am sceptical that the guy was anything other than a scapegoat.
The people who should bear no blame are the Scottish authorities. If the system puts a single person in a position of making a decision within a set of guidelines than no one should be suprised if that decision is not always the popular or even the correct one. They were clear it was not a political decision and although no fan of the SNP I tend to believe them.
@g
“There is no moral highground in this argument.”
Very true as anyone who thinks a Conservative Government would have no truck with Libyan Oil Deals has a very short memory when it comes to such matters. I do find Charles words measured, intelligent and a welcome memory of when Liberal Democrats were Liberal Democrats.
For myself at least, the only moral highground would be a full public inquiry into Lockerbie and Megrahi and even the refusal to release all the documents was a disappointing one which does Clegg and Cameron no credit.
The Labour government completely failed … ect ect
Nothing to do with the Labour Government as it was not their decision. So I have no idea what he is banging on about.
“Equally in Scotland, the Justice Secretary failed to take account of these three significant factors ….
The man is meant to be an advocate in the Scottish legal system. Yet he does not seem to understand the basics of “compassionate release”. The clue is in the word “compassionate” , if he somehow deserved it (even by lesser degrees), then the act would not be a “compassionate” act.
He also seems to display an ignorance of the history between the SNP and labour (unfortunately hate is often not too strong a word).
There may be many reasons for his release – lets just say I was shocked by a panel of judges finding him guilty on the flimsiest of evidence.
However, the above by Cambell is nothing more than tawdry poitical point scoring.
All three sides are covering the Megrahi affair up for different reasons
Scottish gvt – to protect the integrity of the Scottish legal system in case Megrahi is innocent
British gvt – due to relationship with Gadaffi
American gvt – possibly because they know Iran is guilty of the affair and do not want to inflame tensions.
I can’t believe Ming Campbell of all people would say something as head-banging as this. Is he not aware of one of the gravest miscarriages of justice in recent times? Disgusting.
Deeply disappointed in Ming. (not the first time I’ve had to use that phrase). If he won’t stand up for compassionate liberalism and the rule of law who will?
P.S. Personally I’ve always had my doubts about Megrahi’s guilt. Gadaffi was very keen to help secure a conviction in exchange for international brownie points, yet there is a disturbing body of evidence to suggest Libya weren’t even involved – it looked at the time, and to me it still looks, like the work of a radical Shia group who are far more likely to have ties to Syria or Iran than Libya.