The end of the UN sanctions against Libya ?
Come
and join the discussion: Should the US and the UK agree to an international
trial in the Netherlands ?
The end of the UN sanctions against Libya ?Start: 24/08/1998 *** Updated: 23. October 1998 This page will keep you informed about the latest news in the recent change of view in regards to the acceptance of the UK and the USA to allow trial of the two accused Libyans in a neutral country. Read about the latest developments, comments, articles, interviews, letters and proposals. Latest and updated news at bottom of page. For the period between the first rumors on the 24th July 1988 to the very official announcemenet on the 24th August, please go to THIS PAGE ! And should Libya extradite the two suspects for trial ? Who was behind the crash of Pan Am 103 ? Lockerbie Crisis Discussion Room - your opinion !
UK and US agree on Lockerbie-trial in the Netherlands!
24/8/1998 The UK and US governments have agreed on the terms for a trial of two Libyans suspected of the bombing of an American airliner over Lockerbie in Scotland 10 years ago.They have jointly chosen what has been referred to as the "third country option", under which the Libyans would be tried in the Netherlands under Scottish law. The UK Prime Minister's official spokesman said: "The position of the government the whole way through is that we don't see any impediment in Scottish law and won't accept any criticisms of it by the Libyans or anyone else. "But it is incumbent on the government to do whatever it can to bring those people to trial.
"That is something the families, not least, have impressed on us." He stressed that whatever was announced was not a framework for negotiation, but had been deemed the best way to bring the suspects to trial. US Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, made similar comments in a televised news conference shortly after British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook and Scotland’s chief law officer, Lord Advocate Lord Hardie, made the announcement of the trial plan in a statement released in London.
View TV-clip from CNN (Albright)(video-file...you must have Real Player ver. 5.0) View TV-clip from CNN (Cook) (video-file...you must have Real Player ver. 5.0) Listen to first reports from the BBC (audio-file...you must have Real Player ver. 5.0) Libya said on Tuesday (25/8) it would respond officially on Wednesday to a U.S. and British plan for a trial in The Hague of two Libyans accused of bombing a U.S. airliner over Lockerbie in Scotland in 1988, killing 270 people.
Libyan state-run television said foreign ministry and justice ministry officials as well as experts had been studying the U.S. and British proposal since it was received through the U.N. secretary-general.
It quoted foreign ministry sources for the timing of Libya's expected reply.
Transcripts from CNN 24/08/1998 Transcript from National Public Radio (US) 24/08/1998 Transcript from National Public Radio (US) 25/08/1998 US State Dept.Background Briefing 24/08/1998
Lord Hardie expects trial already next yearScottish law officer Lord Hardie, the Lord Advocate, said the agreement could lead to the trial being held next year. That would depend on swift delivery by Libya of the two suspects, the need to extradite them from one part of Holland to the Scottish facility, and committal proceedings.
He said: "The decision to go down this road has not been an easy one "I am satisfied that without an initiative of this sort, there is no prospect of these men being tried before a Scottish court.
"I am also satisfied that if they are delivered to the Netherlands they can be tried fairly and that neither they nor the prosecution will be disadvantaged by the fact that the trial is in the Netherlands and before judges, rather than in Scotland and before a judge and jury."
The messages from Cook and Albright:
US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said it was time for Libya to turn its promises into deeds and surrender the suspects for trial immediately. She said the proposed plan was not negotiable.
She said: "Let me be clear. The plan the US and the UK are putting forward is a 'take it or leave it' proposition. "It is not subject to negotiation or change. Nor should it be subject to additional foot dragging or delay."
Listen to mrs. Albright (audio-file...you must have Real Player ver. 5.0) The official statement of mrs. Albright at the US State dept. 24/08/1998 The court, which Mr Robin Cook said represented "an historic innovation in international legal practice", would be presided over by a panel of Scottish judges, but it would not be a trial by jury. Mr Cook urged Libya to co-operate "quickly and without equivocation".
Mr Cook has asked UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to inform Libya of the agreement and seek arrangements for the transfer of the two accused pending trial. He added: "As soon as they are handed over for trial, we will support action in the Security Council to suspend the international sanctions against Libya.’
Mr Cook said: "For years, Libya has promised that it would accept a court without jury, meeting in a third country. That way forward is now open to them. "It is a way forward that holds out the prospect of lifting the hardship of sanctions on the people of Libya - and ending the long wait for justice of the relatives of those who were murdered.
"It is now up to Libya to honour their undertakings to hand over the two accused for trial." The Foreign Secretary said that nearly 10 years on from the bombing, the families of the victims deserved to see those accused of the crime brought to trial.
Listen to UK's Robin Cook (audio-file...you must have Real Player ver. 5.0) The official statement of mr. Cook at the UK Foreign Affairs office 24/08/1998
Jimmy Carter and Lord Steel of Etrick: "Lobbying for Lockerbie Trial in Holland"
Not all consensus in American governmentNot everyone is pleased about the reported deal to try the two suspects under Scottish law in the Hague. NEWSWEEK PERISCOPE has learned that the US Justice Department opposed the deal. Sources said Attorney General Janet Reno, backed by FBI director Louis Freeh, opposed any deal with Kaddafi but ultimately was cut out of negotions. "We have a crime against the United States and the murder of US citizens", says a Justice official. "We think it ought to be in the American justice system."
Some victims´families are outraged. "This is a disaster.", says Susan Cohen of NY, whose daughter died in the crash. "They told us they would never cave."
(Thanks to Dan Cohen, NY, for this note from NEWSWEEK, Washington, 07/09/1998)
Message from the ex-Lord AdvocateLord Advocate at the time of the Lockerbie disaster, Lord Fraser of Carmyllie, said: "We believe that it is important that the terrorist suspects in this atrocity are brought to trial and justice is, and is seen, to be done. "For this reason we support the decision of the Lord Advocate to agree to a trial in the Netherlands.
"We urge the Government to demand a swift end to the prevarication we have seen to date from the Libyans. "The Libyans must now follow through this proposal, which they have previously agreed to, or be exposed as having no interest whatsoever in seeing justice done."
Listen to Lord Fraser of Carm. (audio-file...you must have Real Player ver. 5.0) According to the reported agreement, the two men would be extradicted to face trial on Dutch Government premises in the Hague not in the International Court of Justice, before a panel of Scottish judges.
Scottish lawyer wants guarantees
It is an unprecedented legal move that is seen by many as an attempt to call Colonel Gadaffi's bluff. The Scottish lawyer for the two Libyan suspects, Alistair Duff, said: "As soon as possible there is going to be a meeting of the defence team with the two suspects in Tripoli in order to discuss any proposal which is put forward. Mr Duff added that the suspects believed they would be acquitted and were keen to clear their names and put the whole issue behind them. He added that the proposals would have to come with guarantees for his clients.
"There are a number of guarantees that are going to have to be in place before the two suspects will agree to leave Tripoli. If they are acquitted there will also have to be guarantees about their safe custody back.
"What will the conditions of their detention be, what access will they have to their legal team? How long are they expected to remain in custody before the trial takes place?" Mr Duff said.
"What access will the defence be given to the prosecution evidence? How long will the defence have in order to get properly prepared? "The prosecution have had 10 years to organise this case. We obviously will need some time. So there are issues to be debated. Having said that, none of these things are insuperable."
Listen to mr. A. Duff (audio-file...you must have Real Player ver. 5.0)
Libyan defense lawyer preparing for trial
The Libyan lawyer for the suspects said he has already received information about the U.S.-British offer.
``We have just received the documents and we are now studying them carefully,'' Ibrahim Legwell told The Associated Press, speaking from his office in the Libyan capital of Tripoli.The Libyan lawyer for the two men suspected of bringing down the airliner said on Tuesday the defence team would meet in Tripoli within a week or, at most, two weeks to discuss conditions for a fair trial and consult the suspects.
``We need to consult with my colleagues (the defence team) and with the two suspects to set up the legal point of view that would lead to a just trial with all conditions that secure the rights of our clients,'' Ibrahim Legwell told Reuters.
``We are considering things positively and want to remove any obstacle in front of such a trial that we have been looking for for a long time,'' added Legwell, talking by telephone from Tripoli.
The defence team includes lawyers from England, Scotland and the United States.
Legwell, who insisted he was not talking on behalf of the Libyan authorities, said he would not announce a formal acceptance of a trial at The Hague before these consultations.
From the recent archives:
Setup for a possible trial by dr. Robert Black Lockerbie evidence 'fatally flawed' says QC About the evidence in a possible Lockerbie Case 22 December 1997: Law chief 'should stand aside' in Lockerbie talks The Trial of Going Dutch - from THE SCOTSMAN 31/08/1998
The relatives: euphoria and reserveThose connected with the Lockerbie bombing have cautiously welcomed proposals for a trial of the two suspects in the Netherlands. Albright and National Security Adviser Sandy Berger sounded out opinion
among American relatives of the victims in a conference call earlier on Monday and found that most of them were supportive of the Hague proposal."Certainly the overwhelming majority of the families on the phone call were clearly behind this. I feel we have taken a very positive step forward and I applaud Albright and Berger," said Jane Schultz of Ridgefield,
Connecticut, whose son Thomas was killed aboard the Pan Am Boeing 747.
The father of a Lockerbie victim, Martin Cadman, said: "I think we feel cautious optimism. "There's a need to congratulate the government in what they have acheived in the last nine months, something the previous government didn't seem to want to attempt to start.
"This government has had the courage and the will to break the impasse that the previous administration did absolutely nothing about."
Listen to mr. Cadman (audio-file...you must have Real Player ver. 5.0) American Bill Merrick's sister was one of those travelling to New York on flight 103. He says he doubts that a trial will ever take place. "I think it's a step in the right direction, but personally I don't think it will ever be resolved because I don't think Gadaffi will turn the suspects over."
Listen to mr. Merrick (audio-file...you must have Real Player ver. 5.0)
Jean and Barry Barclay lost their son Alistair in the tragedy. "For many years we have had just a stalemate," Mrs Barclay told BBC News. "Although we have used our best efforts to persuade the government to change and do something to move things along.
"We are delighted to see some movement."
Listen to the Barclays (audio-file...you must have Real Player ver. 5.0) More about the Barclays from THE JOURNAL 25/08/1998
Dr Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was killed, said he was "euphoric" at the improving prospects of a trial.
He said: "We are 75% of the way towards a fair trial."Dr. Swire, head of a UK based relative organization, has fought for this the last many years. Just recently, this spring (1998), dr. Swire travelled to Egypt and Libya for talks with the involved parts and their lawyers. The fight for justice has turned the modest county doctor into a world diplomat and negotiator. It seems, he finally got, what he bargained for the last 7 years...
Dr Jim Swire welcomed the latest developments but said he still thought it was "highly unlikely" a prosecution against the Libyan pair would succeed. He said: "The evidence is very weak. But we still need this trial to go ahead. It is what we have fought for all these years."
As for the UN SC resolution from 28/8 and the call for quick extradition:
Dr Swire warned: "There is no point, after all these years, in trying to hurry the Libyans up and hassle them into a trial if the first thing the defence does at the beginning of the trial is to stand up and say they will not get a fair hearing."
For more about dr. Swire and his effort for justice Others are more reserved about the upcoming trial:
“The US dept. of State tried to stress to us that this is an unnegotiable position, that if the Libyans turn this down they (the U.S. government) will seek other methods,” said Daniel Cohen, whose daughter Theodora was one of the 270 people killed when the plane exploded over the Scottish town of Lockerbie.
Cohen said the reactions of the families were mixed. “Some applauded the plan ... but I was surprised by the degree of skepticism. There was a great deal of talk about the deadline,” he said, speaking by telephone from Cape May, New Jersey.
"Our opposition is firm, for reasons that go beyond the personal," said Daniel Cohen. "It sets a very bad precedent for the country. Sandy Berger kind of agreed it was a small precedent but they thought the advantages outweighed the disadvantages," he told Reuters.
"This compromise is a slippery slope," said Daniel Cohen, "My wife Susan and I oppose a compromise and we are sceptical of the administration keeping its word. "Any terrorist can now say: 'I don't want to be tried in the US, I want to be tried in Bosnia', or wherever. With British corporate pressure high to resume business with Libya, I have the terrible feeling we are being hustled here and that sanctions against Libya will be lifted prematurely.
"Too much is being made of these two individuals and not enough is made of the fact that they are part of a government apparatus in Libya. The government have told us they can't move unilaterally against a terrorist country like Libya, yet we did just that against Afghanistan and Sudan which makes this all the more bizarre."
His wife, Susan, said: "It is appalling. It is a desecration of my daughter's memory and of all those murdered by these men who have lived freely and comfortably for years."
Rosemary Wolfe, the president of the group, who lost her stepdaughter on Pan Am flight 103, said: "I believe this is being done for political reasons. Their friends in other countries want to go on with doing business in Libya. What we should be doing is going in and getting them because international law has not worked. "The only thing that will solve it is unilateral action."
But Glenn Johnson, an official of Victims of Pan Am 103 , which represents about 80% of the families, says, ''We feel something has to be done. ''It's been nearly 10 years, and this is the way we can allow a trial to be held elsewhere but still held under Scottish law,'' says Johnson, whose daughter, Beth Ann, 21, died on 103.
Many of the families who support Albright's plan say military action now would merely add to tensions without bringing justice. The U.S. proposal ''will really hold Gadhafi's feet to the fire,'' says Elizabeth Philipps, whose daughter Sarah, 20, was killed in the crash.
International reactionsUnited Nations:
The Secretary General of the United Nations Kofi Annan issued a press release through his spokesman the very same day. He was extremely pleased about today's announcement and hopes that all sides will cooperate in order to reach an early resolution of this long-standing issue, and he thanked the Dutch Government for its willingness to help solve the Lockerbie Crisis.Kofi Annan´s press release 24/08/1998 Arab League:
The Arab League was one of the first international organizations to utter their content with the recent acceptance of a trial in the Netherlands.``The American-British proposal is compatible with the previous Arab suggestions, which Libya has accepted,'' Esmat Abdel Meguid said after a meeting with British Ambassador David Blatherwick.Abdel Meguid said Blatherwick briefed him about the proposals, which he later conveyed in a letter to Libyan Foreign Minister Omar al-Muntasser.
The Netherlands/Holland:
The Dutch Cabinet council agreed to allow the Lockerbie trial to be heard in The Hague, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said on Monday in a press release. The Dutch Ministry said the trial was expected to take "several years."
The Dutch Foreign Office press release Scotland:
The Scottish National Party and the Scottish Liberal Democrats both broadly welcomed yesterday's announcement. However, SNP justice and equality spokesperson, Perth and Kinross MP Roseanna Cunningham, said, "We believe, however, that the compromise option devised by Professor Robert Black for a trial at The Hague under Scottish legal procedure is the one most likely to lead to a trial, so that at long last the truth can come out."
Scottish Lib Dem (Liberal Democrats) leader Jim Wallace said: "After 10 long years, justice must be done."SNP spokeswoman Roseanna Cunningham argued the UK Government should be prepared to show flexibility over the nationality of the judges.
Sudan:
Sudan on Tuesday welcomed a U.S.-British offer that could allow two Libyans to stand trial in The Hague for the 1988 Lockerbie airliner bombing.``I think that is a great success for Libya and we have been supportive of Libya in this case,'' Information Minister Ghazi Salahuddin told Reuters.
``We are happy that the United States and Britain have ultimately yielded to international pressure to accept that solution,'' he said.
Egypt:
Egypt welcomes U.S.-British agreement on Lockerbie. Egyptian Foreign Minister Amr Moussa on Tuesday described as a ``definite improvement'' a U.S.-British agreement to allow two Libyans to stand trial in The Hague for the 1988 airliner bombing over Lockerbie.``The offer is more flexible than earlier ones and fulfils one of Libya's demands for a trial in a third country,'' Moussa told reporters. ``The issue is now in Libya's hands but we see a definite improvement...We hope the offer will lead to a lifting of the embargo,'' he added.
Libya's eastern neighbour Egypt has lobbied the United Nations and other countries to end the embargo which has been crippling Libya for the past six years.
South Africa:
South African President Nelson Mandela, a close ally of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, on Tuesday welcomed a U.S.-British plan to prosecute two Libyans in The Hague for the 1988 Lockerbie airliner bombing.``President Mandela...is confident that (the plan) should lead to the resolution of this matter, knowing that Colonel Gaddafi shares his concern that this matter should have a just solution as soon as possible,'' Mandela's office said in a statement.
``President Mandela reiterates his concern that justice should be done in a way that avoids the humiliation of any party,'' the statement added.
New Zealand:
New Zealand has welcomed the announcement by Britain and the United States that they will agree to the Lockerbie bombing trial being held in the Netherlands, Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Simon Upton said today."New Zealand strongly supports this compromise proposal," Mr Upton said. "It is vital that suspected terrorists should be brought to trial. This matter has already dragged on for almost a decade. That is far too long for the families of the Lockerbie victims to wait for a resolution."
China:
Beijing, 28 Aug (Xinhua) -- Foreign Ministry spokesman Tang Guoqiang today commented on the passage of the UN Security Council resolution about the Lockerbie issue.He said: China always stands for settling international disputes through dialogue and negotiations in accordance with the United Nations Charter and guiding principles of international law, and supports all the
efforts for a just and rational settlement of the Lockerbie issue. We welcome the decision made by the United States and Britain to concur that the two suspects involved in the plane crash in Lockerbie be tried in the Netherlands according to Scottish law, and Libya's positive response to this decision.Tang Guoqiang hoped the resolution which the UN Security Council adopted today would help settle the Lockerbie issue properly and lift the sanctions against Libya at an early date. He said: "We hope all relevant parties will continue to work hard so that, through consultations on equal footing, a consensus on specific arrangements for examining the Lockerbie issue can be reached as quickly as possible."
The Libyan American Friendship Association welcomes the Great News from the United States of America and Great Britian
Message from LAFA, August 24, 1998
On behalf of all the members of the Libyan American Friendship Association, we welcome the United States of America and Great Britian's decision regarding the trial of the two Libyan suspects in the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing. We believe, and strongly support, the decision to try the two in a neutral country and bring an end to the long agony of waiting and help heal the suffering of the victim's families and the suffering of the Libyan people due to the embargo that was imposed on Libya since 1992.We hope this will bring an end to an era of isolation and start a new era of relations based on respect, cooperation and doing what serves the interest of humanity and to promote peace in the world.
The Libyan American Friendship Association condemns all acts of terrorism and we believe the fight against terrorists should be done by the international community and it is the responsibility of all countries, organizations and individuals to fight the evil act.
Again, we thank the United States Administration for making the right decision and God Bless all peace loving people.
Sincerely,
Asiddeg Al-Jarani
President of LAFA
The trial: legal difficultiesAccording to Mike McConville, head of Warwick university's law school, the trial could last up to 12 months, cost more than £10 million and would probably fail to result in convictions. "The prosecution task is not impossible but it is still going to be formidable," he said.
"The evidence would have to be extremely persuasive and it would have to be stronger than the material which has so far come into the public domain."
A lack of forensic evidence taken from the suspects in the immediate aftermath of the bombing would appear to be one of the main difficulties the prosecution will face.
Professor McConville said: "Evidence such as traces of explosives on a suspect's hands is compelling and is the sort of thing which can lead to a conviction.
"Circumstantial evidence about the suspects - their characters, their political connections - is very rarely so compelling and it seems that the prosecution will be relying on that to an important degree."
From a legal perspective, the trial would be unique. The only comparable cases have been war crimes trials but they have all been held under general international legislation, often provided by the United Nations.
But the Lockerbie suspects would have to be tried under a one-off set of agreed rules tailored to their case alone, albeit with reference, perhaps, to war crimes legislation.
More about the evidence in a possible Lockerbie Trial From THE INDEPENDENT (UK) 25/8/98 "Why the truth never may be known"
Safeguard against justice murder in Scottish LawThe Scottish justice system, under which the Lockerbie bomb suspects could be judged, is
notable for giving defendants in the dock more chance of being acquitted.Unlike the rest of the United Kingdom, juries in Scotland can reach a verdict of "not proven" if they cannot decide on the standard verdicts of guilty or not guilty.
Scotland has a separate legal system from England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and includes other differences which could be crucial in an eventual trial at The Hague. Defendants cannot be sentenced on confessions they made to police or to the court. Extra evidence must be submitted by the prosecution.
The system is regarded by many lawyers as a safe-guard against the numerous miscarriages of justice which have shamed the English justice system in recent years. Experts believe cases where members of the Irish Republican Army have been sentenced on faulty evidence, such as those involving the "Guildford Four" and "Birmingham Six", could never have happened in Scotland.
In addition Scottish judges have a reputation for extreme independence, and are highly-paid ex-lawyers who reached the top of their profession. In contrast to England, Scottish judges liaise closely with police during the investigation and are often present when suspects are charged.
The fact that Scottish juries consist of 15 members, three more than elsewhere in Britain, is irrelevant in this case. The British government wants it to be heard by an international panel of judges presided over by a Scottish judge rather than by a jury.
International legal expert M. Cherif Bassiouni says that means there is evidence of guilt but not proof beyond ''a reasonable doubt.'' A U.S. ''analogy would be with the O.J. Simpson case,'' he said. In criminal court, Simpson was found not guilty of two murders, but he was found liable in a civil trial.
Bassiouni says that cross-examination of witnesses is more limited in the Scottish system, and judges ask more direct questions than in U.S. courts. ''There is more of search for the truth than there is sparring.''
Listen to UK-lawyer Stephen Mitchell: "My clients are innocent." 26/08/1998 (audio-file...you must have Real Player ver. 5.0)
CIA ex-investigator: "Too late for bombing Libya!"Vincent Cannistraro, a counterterrorism expert who directed the Central Intelligence Agency's investigation of the Lockerbie bombing for two years after the attack, called it a``double standard.''
Cannistraro, himself an expert of "double standards", explained his governments recent change of mind with a rare, sudden pragmatic burst of insight:
``You can't tomorrow go bomb Tripoli -- it's too late for that, it's been 10 years,'' Cannistraro said, referring to the Libyan capital. ``But for a long time, our policy has been to use judicial means to go after terrorists. The bombings in Afghanistan and Sudan are a complete and utter change in our policy, and to the families of the Pan Am victims, those excuses we made over the years on why we couldn't get tougher are going to sound empty now.''
By way of deception: Cannistraro, Pan Am 103 and the US press
Libya Accepts Pan Am 103 Trial Plan
Wednesday, August 26, 1998; 3:47 p.m. EDTCAIRO, Egypt (AP) -- Libya today accepted a U.S.-British proposal to try two suspects in the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 in the Netherlands, the Libyan Foreign Ministry said.
Earlier, a letter was made public in which Libya asked the U.N. Security Council to delay any decision to give it more time to study the proposal, which calls for the suspects to be tried under Scottish law. The letter represented the first official reaction from Tripoli on the plan for the Netherlands trial.
But later in the day, the Libyan ministry released a statement saying it ``announces its acceptance of ... the new position of the United Kingdom and the United States.''
Official press release from Libya regarding the acceptance of American/British proposal 26/08/1998 Reactions:
Alistair Duff, the Scottish lawyer for the accused, said it was unclear if the final decision about whether they surrender for trial rests with the Libyan government or his clients.
Mr Duff said: "It is difficult to know exactly what the Libyan government means when they say they accept the new position of Britain and the United States. "If it means my two clients are being parcelled up to be transported to The Hague, then that is fairly dramatic and I would want to discuss the situation with my clients.
"But, on the other hand, the Libyans could mean they are simply accepting the British and US proposal in principle, but may not accept it fully. It would still mean that the decision to go to trial at The Hague would be with the accused."
A Clinton administration official traveling with the president in Edgarton, Mass., reacted cautiously to Libya's announcement. ``If this means that the Libyans are willing to turn over the two suspects to Dutch authorities, we would consider this a positive development,'' said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Britain also gave a cautious reaction to Libya's announcement, which was carried by the official Libyan news agency, JANA. ``I welcome this statement, which looks like a positive development,'' Foreign Secretary Robin Cook said.
Rosemary Wolfe, spokeswoman for an American PA103-victim committee remained suspicious to whether Libya actually would surrender the two suspect for trial in the Netherlands. "I am believing it, when I see it", she said on CNN late Wednesday.
Reactions from American relatives to the news have been quite negative. In an interview with CNN late Wednesday, British relative dr. Jim Swire was asked why the American relatives seemed so suspicious of Libyas recent response. Dr. Swire answered:"Because they are Americans! For years they have been listening to their Governments propaganda about Libya. It dates back to the Reagan administration, who fabricated lies and propaganda about Gaddafi, that he was supposed to be the Devil himself. I have met and spoken to Gaddafi several times myself, and he is no devil. I guess, if you treat Gaddafi like the devil, he will behave like the devil."
Gadhafi to CNN: 'No objection' to turning over Lockerbie suspects
August 27, 1998Moammar Gadhafi says his country has "no objection" to turning over two suspects in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 for trial in the Netherlands -- if a detailed agreement is reached beforehand outlining trial procedures and if the U.N. Security Council doesn't impose any additional conditions.
But in an exclusive interview with CNN on Thursday, the Libyan leader also said the Security Council must "immediately" lift sanctions imposed on his country for previously refusing to turn over Abdel Basset al-Megrahi and Lamen Khalifa Fhimah. He did not elaborate on whether lifting the sanctions would have to be part of the pretrial agreement between Libya, Britain and the United States.
"There are procedures, arrangements, guarantees that the whole world should know before these two suspects should be handed over -- before the handing over," said Gadhafi. He also said his government would be willing to negotiate the details directly with the United States and Britain, although "I am not sure America and [Britain] have good intentions to solve this problem."
CNN transcript for full Gaddafi-interview 27/08/1998 Until now, Britain and the United States have insisted that the suspects be brought to trial in one of the two countries. But on Monday, they offered a new initiative under which the men would be tried in the Netherlands, before Scottish judges using Scottish law. "Libya has no objection as far as the initiative itself is concerned," Gadhafi told CNN. "But our objection is in the pitfalls or the tricks that may be attached to any Security Council resolutions."
Gadhafi cautioned that imposing any additional conditions on Libya could cause the agreement to disintegrate -- and that Libya would not be responsible. "We should warn that the Security Council should not be fooled and adopt a resolution that is full of pitfalls and mines because Libya is not responsible for that," he said. "Libya can only be committed to things it knows very well and that it has signed and agreed upon."
Speaking alternately in English and Arabic, Gadhafi answered questions while sitting in a wheelchair. He explained that he had broken his leg in a sports accident and was using the chair to get around while he healed.
Asked if he thought the two suspects, who are Libyan nationals, would be acquitted, he demurred, saying, "This is left to the court." "I am not discussing whether they are guilty or not," he said.
UN Ready to End Sanctions on Libya
August 28, 1998; 1:21 a.m. EDTUNITED NATIONS (AP) -- Seeking to bring about justice in the Pan Am bombing case, the U.N. Security Council voted unanimously Thursday to suspend sanctions against Libya once it hands over two nationals for trial in the Netherlands. The resolution, approved 15-0, also threatens additional measures against Libya if the suspects fail to appear for trial before a panel of three Scottish judges under Scottish law.
It was not clear how Libya would react to the resolution. Earlier in the day, Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi had said he would not surrender the two men until receiving guarantees that the United States and Britain will not play ``tricks.''
At the United Nations, Britain, which co-sponsored the resolution with the United States, came out strongly for Libya to make good on its pledge to cooperate. ``This unanimous signal from the Security Council to the authorities of Libya could not have been stronger,'' said Britain's deputy ambassador, Stephen Gomersall. ``This is now the moment of truth for Libya to come good on the commitments it has made.''
Before the vote, Libyan U.N. ambassador Abuzed Omar Dorda harshly criticized the 6-year-old U.N. sanctions and the speed with which Libya was asked to respond to the U.S.-British proposal.
Full text of UN SC Resolution Listen to Abuzed Dourda´s statement in the UNSC 27/08/1998 (audio-file...you must have Real Player ver. 5.0) For more on the latest UN move, UN press releases regarding Lockerbie, pictures and reactions, look HERE Alistair Duff: "Preparations for trial will take at least one year!"
Alistair Duff, one of the law experts on the defence team of Fhima and Megrahi appeared on ABCNEWS the 27/08/1998 for a live chat session and interview. He said it would take at least a year for him to prepare for a trial of his clients.
Below is a transcript of a live chat on ABCNEWS with Duff from his office in Edinburgh, Scotland.
Adam from adlittle.com at 11:29am ET
Will it be difficult to represent two of the most hated people in the Western world? Did you have any hesitation in taking on this case?
Alistair Duff at 11:31am ET
I had absolutely no hesitation in taking the case on. As a criminal defense lawyer it is the kind of case which would come along only once in a lifetime if at all. On the point of the two accused being hated, that is an interesting concept given that they enjoy the presumption of innocence.
Jay from nwrk.grid.net at 11:32am ET
Do you believe that the conditions for the trial are now fair?
Alistair Duff at 11:32am ET
That is a question which I expect my clients will want to ask me and therefore for reasons of confidentiality I'd prefer not to answer.
Chuck from carrier.utc.com at 11:33am ET
Do you fear for your life now that you are representing these 2 murderers?
Alistair Duff at 11:34am ET
I don't fear for my life particularly because of the case. But traveling to Libya is a hazardous venture. I certainly feel fairly isolated when I am in Libya.
Michael from [90.64.113.38] at 11:34am ET
Have you had an opportunity to review the case? Do you have ideas for a possible defense? And will the venue in the Netherlands help or hinder your presentation of the case?
Alistair Duff at 11:35am ET
As far as reviewing the evidence in the case, so far I haven't been permitted access to the evidence, so I do not know what it is. I think the venue will make no difference because the judges will be Scottish judges and the procedure will be Scottish procedure.
jkeiner from [209.36.59.4] at 11:36am ET
is this a jury trial? how is the panel selected? what law applies? what is the applicable standard of proof..beyond reasonable doubt?? thx/jdk
Alistair Duff at 11:38am ET
It is not a jury trial. Scottish law applies. Proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Kent from [38.185.159.21] at 11:39am ET
Are you concerned that the questions you are being asked suggest that the public has already made up its mind about the guilt of your clients?
Alistair Duff at 11:39am ET
Absolutely.
Chuck from carrier.utc.com at 11:39am ET
What,do you believe,are the possible outcomes should your two clients be proven guilty?
Alistair Duff at 11:39am ET
There's only one outcome, life in prison.
Dennis from [209.126.80.165] at 11:40am ET
If you knew they were guilty, would you defend them anyway? If so, would your defense attempt to set them free or minimize their punishment?
Alistair Duff at 11:41am ET
If I know they were guilty, I'd still defend them. Knowing they were guilty would restrict the basis on which I could represent them. But I could still try to have the accused acquitted even if they had admitted their guilt to me.
Monica from [209.137.120.97] at 11:41am ET
The victims families have waited so long to "see justice" in this case...is it justified to make them wait at least one year longer as you prepare your case? And who decides how long you are permitted to prepare?
Alistair Duff at 11:43am ET
My function is to represent the interests of the accused and I cannot allow the interests of other people to intrude on that so long as I behave ethically. It would be up to the court to decide eventually when the trial actually went ahead, if I needed more time to prepare.
Kent from [38.185.159.21] at 11:43am ET
Is there any right of appeal?
Alistair Duff at 11:43am ET
There is a right of appeal under Scottish law anyway. That has been preserved for this case in the Netherlands.
Matt from dhcp2.washington.edu at 11:44am ET
How do you think this case will play out in the broader arena of anti-terrorism, particularly with all the publicity of bin Laden and the recent bombinbs?
Alistair Duff at 11:44am ET
No comment.
Kent from [38.185.159.21] at 11:45am ET
How were the Scottish judges chosen?
Alistair Duff at 11:46am ET
Again, this is provided for in the legislation to set up the court in the Netherlands. The judges will be chosen by the Scottish Lord Justice Clerk who is the second in command of the Scottish judiciary.
Dorian Benkoil from [204.128.192.59] at 11:47am ET
How many times have you met your clients? How did they strike you and what were their primary concerns?
Alistair Duff at 11:48am ET
I met them several times over a period three or four weeks in 1993. They appeared to be reasonably intelligent and articulate men, both with a command of some English although one better than the other.
Bruce from [204.215.0.62], at 11:48am ET
Do you think that maybe you are possibly headed into a kangaroo court? and if so that the hangman
is waiting just around the corner?
Alistair Duff at 11:49am ET
The accused are certainly concerned that any court which hears the case should not be a Kangaroo Court. It is worrisome that some people seem to think that it is only a question of the two suspects turning to be found guilty and sentenced.
Mick from real3d.com at 11:49am ET
How does Scotch law differ from English law wrt/this case?
Alistair Duff at 11:50am ET
Impossible to give an easy answer. Scottish law as different from English law as it is from French law.
Wally from uchicago.edu at 11:50am ET
You indicate that, hypothetically, you would represent someone you knew to be guilty. How can you justify this ethically?
Alistair Duff at 11:52am ET
If an accused person tells me he is guilty I am permitted to defend him on a plea of not guilty but I cannot put forward a substantive defense, in other words I cannot allow my client to go into the witness box to tell lies. Since the burden of proof is on the prosecution I am permitted to test the prosecution case by cross examination.
Lois from [208.10.2.125], at 11:52am ET
Any physical evidence in this case is nearly 10 years old, as is the memory of any potential witness, do you think that this will be of any help or hinderence to your clients?
Alistair Duff at 11:54am ET
Difficult to answer, eyewitness evidence usually suffers with the passage of time. In relation to forensic evidence samples usually deteriorate over time so the defense can be prejudiced becasue the samples can sometimes no longer be tested by defense experts.
Richie from [208.16.32.15], at 11:55am ET
How can it take a year to prepare for such a case?
Are you not devoting all of your time this this case?
Alistair Duff at 11:55am ET
The prosecution has refused to allow us access to the evidence until the accused are in custody.
Ernie from feist.com at 11:56am ET
What is the reason that has been given as to why these two are not willing to be tried in Scotland? Will that reason be responded to by a trial in another European country?
Alistair Duff at 11:57am ET
They believe that a jury in Scotland would be unable to consider the evidence in the case without being prejudiced or effected by publicity that has taken place in British media of the accused.
Mick from real3d.com at 11:57am ET
What treaty dictated that Scottish law would handle these terrorists?
Alistair Duff at 11:57am ET
There wasn't a treaty, there was an agreement.
Susan from [198.247.195.126], at 11:57am ET
How long do you expect the trial to last? Who is paying your fee?
Alistair Duff at 11:58am ET
No idea, a long time. Months, rather than years. No comment on the fee.
Lee from pdrpip.com at 11:58am ET
Do you feel that the people of Scottland may fear
retaliation if the verdict come in guilty
Alistair Duff at 11:58am ET
I do not fear that.
Rey from tch.tmc.edu at 11:59am ET
do your clients actually portray innocence or are they just going to sit back and let you do your job?
Alistair Duff at 11:59am ET
My clients say they are innocent.
Richie from mcleod.net at 12:00pm ET
You mentioned about the British publicity... Do you think there is a place on this planet where these two can be tried with a jury that has not been affected by publicity?
Alistair Duff at 12:00pm ET
Almost certainly not, which is why we prefer a panel of judges.
Moderator at 12:02pm ET
The chat is over. Thank you for your questions.
Reactions to UNSC-Res. and Gadhafi-interview:
The UK Prime Minister, Tony Blair, has welcomed the "noises" coming out of Libya over the Lockerbie affair but has called on Colonel Muammar Gaddafi to back words up with action.Mr Blair told BBC Radio Scotland's Good Morning Scotland programme: "The United Nations has made it quite clear now that it supports this way forward. Mr Blair said: "It is obviously important that Libya complies. The noises appear to be welcoming, but they have to be followed by the action of actually delivering up the suspects."
The prime minister, who is on a tour of Scotland, said: "We took this decision to go for the third country option after a lot of debate and hesitation because we believed it really was the only way of securing us a chance of bringing these people to justice."
He said he felt it was important for the relatives to have the opportunity of justice because the lack of it was "a big part of their continuing anguish over their lost o