Opinion: Releasing Megrahi was the right thing to do

The release of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the only person convicted of the Lockerbie Bombing in which 270 people died,  on compassionate grounds is almost always described in the media as a controversial decision but I think it was the right one.

I accept the cynical case that his release was convenient to the Scottish government in many ways: it prevented his “martyrdom” in a Scottish prison; it may have helped the lucrative business of trading with Libya; it was helpful to the SNP government’s wider aims to
remind everyone about ways in which Scottish and English law (and, by extension, Scotland and England) differ. But none of these influence my opinion that his release was justified on the stated grounds of compassion.

To justify this, I think we only need to ask one question: what would have been gained by keeping him in prison for the last three years? Among the purposes of prison are protecting the public from further crimes by the same criminal, rehabilitating the offender, deterring others from committing similar crimes, and retribution for the crimes already ommitted.  The first purpose had already been served. This terminally-ill man was clearly of no danger to the public in any country.  He was also clearly beyond any point of rehabilitation.  We can reasonably assume that the prospect of being released once terminally ill doesn’t much influence the decisions of those who seek to blow up airliners. And so we are left with retribution.

The desire for retribution is an understandable human response, but it seems to me to be to be an overwhelmingly negative one. Indeed, it’s one that all the major religions urge their followers to resist. Even if there were an equivalent punishment – in the sense of “an eye for an eye” – for the murder of 270 people, carrying it out wouldn’t bring them back to life, nor necessarily even give any meaningful comfort to their families.

An alternative option is mercy, and in a case like this, where it simply involves allowing a terminally-ill man to die in his own country, it comes at no real cost to anyone. It shouldn’t be confused with forgiveness; he’s still a murderer and his conviction still stands. One definition of mercy is this: the exercise of self-control by people who possess power over others. That is the sort of thing that I think we should encourage, from our elected leaders as much as from anyone.  And that is why I believe that, even though he wasn’t as close to death as it seemed at the time, and despite the ugly spectacle of his welcome back to Libya, releasing al-Magrahi was the right thing to do.

* Malcolm Wood is a LibDem member in Edinburgh West, and former GE candidate in Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath.

Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in Op-eds.
Advert

6 Comments

  • To my mind he enjoyed far too much mercy given the crime for which he was convicted.

    But I’m saying that with hindsight. The medical opinion at the time was that he would only live another 3 months, not another 3 years. The decision was the right one at the time.

  • The case against him was fairly thin..
    The forensic evidence was suspect, the identification (12 years later by a Maltese shopkeeper, who ‘thought’ he recognised him but couldn’t even remember the year he sold him the clothing), a key witness who later admitted he’d lied, etc.
    Had the appeal proceeded there was a strong possibility that the verdict would have been overturned; that would not have politically acceptable (certainly to the USA).

    I’m with Joe Otten on this.

  • “The medical opinion at the time …….”

    Actually, we don’t know exactly what the medical opinion was at the time, the SNP govenment has never released it. It was based on the prison service’s director of health’s assessment , however the 4 cancer specialists he consulted refused to back his 3 month prognosis (which would have been known by the SNP govenment).

    But I am also with Joe Otten, if the conviction was sound he should have been kept in prison but the evidence was certainly questionable.

  • ‘The punishment wasn’t severe enough’ crowd need to ask themselves if they think he was acting alone, if not they should then ask themselves why those who set the whole thing up, possible Gaddaffi, were never properly punished and it was taken out on al-Megrahi, a foot soldier if he was guilty, a miscarriage of justice if he was not?

    And that goes for all those Americans who criticised Scotland while their own government was trading oil with Libya.

  • I read in this week’s Bromsgrove Standard a moving interview with a local former GP, Dr Jim Swires, whose daughter Flora died in the bombed aircraft. Dr Swire explained how sad he feels at the death of a friend, Megrahi, whom he last visited in the early spring to say his farewells. The two hurt men had been in touch regularly since the trial and Dr Swire believes that an innocent man was convicted of teh bombing. He tried repaetedly to reopen the case, pintin gout that evidence such as the break in at Heathrow airport where the plane was housed overnight, had not been pr4esented in court. Surely a dying man would have told (maybe in his will?) if he had known who did it /therefor I suppose that he did not know and was not involved. The friendship of two men, apparently on opposite sides, says far more than any of us can say.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • David Evershed
    The price of houses is set by supply and demand in the market - not by the cost of land. It is the land cost which is driven by the market price of houses,...
  • Peter Martin
    @ Joe, "......house prices in Australia and the UK have continued to rise during the pandemic despite a massive increase in government borrowing and an...
  • William Francis
    @Peter Davies Why exactly is taxing the poor necessary at all? What possible social utility is there in taking 20% of the income of someone making £5k, ...
  • Manfarang
    Charles The deadly violence against protesters continues. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-56277165...
  • Roland
    @Marco cont. >the ethics are all wrong. Inflicting medical treatment against someones will goes against the Nuremberg codes No one is being force...
Thu 11th Mar 2021