Lockerbie:
Libya accepts responsibility?
In January 2001, Abdelbaset Ali
Mohmed al-Megrahi, a member of the Libyan intelligence service, was convicted of the Lockerbie
bombing by three Scottish judges sitting in the Netherlands. In March the following year, his appeal
against conviction was turned down by another five Scottish judges.
Al-Megrahi’s conviction was an obvious miscarriage
of justice (see Lockerbie:
A Perverse Verdict, Problems of Capitalism & Socialism, No 64-5, March 2001). His conviction was an expression of trade
union like solidarity within the Scottish legal profession.
The Scottish prosecuting authorities should never
have indicted him in the first place.
They did so without investigating the credibility of their “star
witness”, a CIA asset, and his credibility was destroyed during the trial. Nevertheless, as an act of solidarity with
their fellow Scottish legal professionals, who had made such a balls up of the
prosecution of such an important case, three Scottish judges convicted
al-Megrahi in the Netherlands, and five more turned down his appeal.
Al-Megrahi’s lawyers are about to present a
submission to the Scottish criminal cases review commission, in an attempt to
get his conviction re-examined on appeal.
$2.7 billion compensation
Why then has Libya accepted responsibility for the
Lockerbie bombing, and agreed to pay compensation of $2.7 billion to the
families of the 270 victims? The answer
is that, despite universal press reports to the contrary, Libya has not
accepted responsibility for the bombing, nor has it accepted that al-Megrahi is
guilty. As usual, journalists have
repeated what has been fed to them by government.
What Libya has said is contained in a long letter
to the President of the Security Council dated 15 August 2003. The text of the letter is appended to a
press statement
issued by Foreign Office Minister, Denis MacShane, on the same date.
The letter is concerned mainly with stating
Libya’s opposition to “terrorism” and support for international measures to
combat “terrorism”. But the first three
paragraphs report the resolution of Libya’s dispute with the US/UK arising from
the Lockerbie incident:
“I am pleased to inform you
that the remaining issues relating to fulfillment of all Security Council
resolutions resulting from the Lockerbie incident have been resolved. I am also
pleased to inform you that my country is confident that Representatives of the
United Kingdom and of the United States of America will be confirming this
development to you and to members of the Council as well.” (paragraph 1)
For Libya to accept responsibility
for the Lockerbie bombing, it would have to state clearly that al-Megrahi is guilty of the Lockerbie bombing, and that he
was acting on behalf of the Libyan state when he carried it out. All the letter says about Libya accepting
responsibility is that Libya
“has facilitated the bringing to justice
of the two suspects charged with the bombing of Pan Am 103, and accepts
responsibility for the actions of its officials” (paragraph 3)
That does not say anything about al-Megrahi’s guilt,
nor even that he was one of Libya’s “officials”. Libya has not accepted responsibility for the Lockerbie bombing
at all.
McShane’s press statement began:
“In 1988, the worst terrorist incident on UK
territory took place over Lockerbie. 270 people were killed when Pan Am 103 was
blown out of the sky. Libya has today accepted responsibility for that
outrage.”
The
last sentence is simply a lie.
An
elaborate game is being played by the US/UK, which will most likely end up in
all economic sanctions against Libya being lifted, and Libya being taken off
the US list of states that support terrorism.
UN
sanctions were imposed on Libya in 1992, because it refused to hand over
al-Megrahi, and his alleged partner in crime Al Amin
Khalifa Fhimah, for trial in the US or the UK.
Those sanctions were suspended in 1999 when they were handed over for
trial by a Scottish court sitting in the Netherlands, and they have not been in
operation since.
For the UN sanctions to be lifted
permanently, Libya is required to accept responsibility for the Lockerbie
bombing, to pay compensation to the victims’ families, and to renounce
“terrorism”. The US/UK are obviously
prepared to pretend that Libya has accepted responsibility for the Lockerbie
bombing with the words quoted above.
Libya has agreed to pay compensation of up to $10 million to each of the
victims’ families, and is making all the right noises about “terrorism”.
So, it can be taken for granted
that the UN sanctions are going to be lifted permanently – though France is
threatening to veto the process, because Libya paid a mere $30 million in total
to the families of the 170 victims of the French UTA flight 772, brought down
over Niger in 1989, that is, less than a fiftieth of the amount for each
Lockerbie victim.
Since the
UN sanctions have not been in operation since 1999, it is not obvious why Libya
is prepared to pay the substantial sum of $2.7 billion to get them lifted
permanently, especially since it wasn’t responsible for the bombing. The answer seems to be that separate US
sanctions imposed in 1986 are going to be lifted as well.
At the
moment, the US administration is saying that this is not going to happen,
because Libya doesn’t yet deserve a clean bill of health. The White House
spokesman, Scott McClellan, said
on 15 August:
“The Libyan regime's behavior – including its poor human rights record
and lack of democratic institutions, its disruptive role in perpetuating
regional conflicts in Africa, and its continued and worrisome pursuit of
weapons of mass destruction and their related delivery systems – remains a
cause for serious concern.”
The story
from the US administration at the moment is that it is only going along with
the present arrangement so that the victims’ families can receive compensation.
However,
there are two factors, which make it almost certain that US sanctions will be
lifted within months.
First, the
compensation package is not a simple matter of each victim’s family getting $10
million when the UN sanctions are lifted permanently. Only 40% of that will be paid at that point, and the total amount
will only be paid (a) if US sanctions are lifted, and (b) if Libya is removed
from the US list of states that support terrorism.
The full
story is that if UN sanctions are lifted, each family will receive $4
million. If US sanctions are lifted,
each will receive another $4 million, and if the US removes Libya from its list
of states that support terrorism, each will receive another $2 million.
But, if the latter two events
don't take place within an eight-month period, although another million will go
to each family (which means that each family will receive at least $5 million
in the deal), the rest of the money will then revert to
Libya, that is, 50% of the original $2.7 billion.
It is odd that the US has agreed to this bizarre
arrangement, which makes the payment of compensation to victims conditional
upon US policy decisions. But, now that
it has so agreed, can it maintain sanctions against Libya past the eight-month
deadline, and by so doing deprive victims’ families of further
compensation? Surely, not.
And with this US administration,
what the oil industry wants, the oil industry usually gets.
September 2003