Lawyers for the two accused Libyans in the Lockerbie trial have completed their defence. The verdict is now awaited of the special Scottish court that is sitting at the Dutch air force base Camp Zeist in Soesterberg. After 84 working days and the detailed cross-examination of 232 witnesses, the three Scottish Law Lords must reach a decision on the matter which has occupied the world's attention since flight PanAm 103 exploded above Lockerbie in Scotland on 21 December 1988,  with the loss of 270 lives.

The three Scottish Law Lords have the choice of three possible verdicts: guilty, not guilty, or not proven. For the two Libyan suspects, Al Amin Khalifa Fhimah and Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, it means the difference between life imprisonment in a Scottish jail, and returning as free men to Libya, where a heroes' welcome awaits them.

Flimsy Evidence
Not many people believe that Fhimah and Al Megrahi will miss out on the heroes' welcome. The evidence on which they could be convicted ultimately appeared flimsy. The two prosecutors, Colin Boyd and Alistair Campbell, have even admitted themselves that the evidence is only circumstantial. To find Fhimah and Al Megrahi guilty would require more than circumstantial evidence. The prosecutors have mentioned a lot of small threads that together form a convincing thick cable. On that basis they claim that the two Libyans smuggled a case containing a bomb onto the aircraft in Malta. But the only fact that has definitely been established is that Fhimah and Al Megrahi had flown to Malta from the Libyan capital, Tripoli, the day before the incident.

Unreliable Witness
In Fhima's agenda it was also noted a couple of days before the incident that he needed to take extra baggage labels with him. The prosecution alleges that these were the baggage labels of the case containing the bomb that caused the fatal crash of PanAm 103. The most important accusation against the two Libyans came from crown witness Abdel Giaka, who testified that he had seen Fhimah and Al Megrahi with the said case on the airfield in Malta. At the time, Giaka was working for the Libyan Secret Service ISO, but spying for the American CIA. In exchange for valuable information about the Libyan Secret Service, he was promised a new life in the United States. Very little can be believed of Giaka's testimony, because during the trial it became evident that he had told the CIA a lot of lies in order to ensure that he was given the promised new life in America. It seems unlikely that the Scottish Law Lords will take this man seriously.

Difficult Task
But the biggest thing in favour of the two Libyan suspects is the well nigh impossible task of smuggling a suitcase containing a bomb on board an airliner in Malta, and ensuring that the case ended up in precisely the right spot in the aircraft, even after two stopovers in Frankfurt and London. For the relatively light bomb would have had to be placed next to the wall of the baggage hold in order to do its deadly work. In the middle of the baggage hold, the explosion would be smothered by the surrounding baggage, and may not have had a disastrous effect on the aircraft.

Time Required
According to the defence, it's therefore much more likely that the bomb was placed on board PanAm 103 in London, or possibly in Frankfurt, as safety procedures at that airport left a great deal to be desired. It would be very difficult for the Law Lords to sentence the two Libyans to life imprisonment on so little evidence. Nevertheless, the President of the Scottish Court, Lord Sutherland, has said that considerable time will be needed to study all the evidence. On 30 January he will reveal when he plans to announce the verdict.