The al-Megrahi Muddle

(c) The Prime Minister's Office

What have BP and the Lockerbie bomber got in common? Well, not much it would seem. Contrary to any hard evidence produced thus far allegations abound that the much maligned oil giant has played a pivotal role in lobbying the British government to release Abdel Basset al-Megrahi on compassionate grounds in an attempt to ease relations with Libya as it endeavoured to secure lucrative oil contracts with the north African country.  The allegations are being perpetrated, seemingly exclusively, by a couple of US senators.

What we actually have here are a number of different issues that have somehow become intertwined to form an exceedingly complicated conspiracy theory but must be kept apart until credible evidence informs us otherwise.

Protagonist number one, BP, the British oil company responsible for a gargantuan oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico making them persona non grata amongst many Americans. Its saving grace is the devastating effect its collapse could have on both the UK and US economies.

Protagonist number two, al-Megrahi, the convicted Lockerbie bomber. Responsible for the deaths of 270 people al-Megrahi was serving time in a Scottish prison (at the Libyan government’s behest) until his release was sanctioned last year by the Scottish Justice Secretary on compassionate grounds. He has terminal prostate cancer and was given three months to live by Scottish medical officials; he has outlived this estimation and will soon be celebrating 12 months as a free man.

Finally protagonist number three, the special relationship, the truly special relationship which now manifests itself as Dave and Barack.

All eyes were on the White House yesterday as the rookie prime minister made his first official visit to the White House. Inevitably the BP-Megrahi debacle was raised quickly and directly. How Cameron conducted himself in answer to these questions was impressive.

First and foremost the prime minister denounced the decision to release al-Megrahi as “profoundly misguided” but more importantly he under-scored his opinion with the often over-looked fact that the decision was taken by the Scottish executive in accordance with powers devolved to them by UK law. The prime minister not only showed a great respect for the Scottish executive but compounded his deference by publicly denouncing their decision to release al-Megrahi without as much as a nod towards any attempts at retrospective action.

If the US senators, indeed if President Obama, truly believe that the al-Megrahi decision was not made in good faith with full adherence to the law then it is an issue they must take up directly with the Scottish parliament, should they feel this to be appropriate. If roles were reversed it would be akin to the British government lobbying for full inquests into individual state laws on the death penalty, for example. It is not our place to do so and I can’t for a second entertain the thought that any British government would ever pursue such a campaign.

The loss of American lives in the Lockerbie bombings, however, has given the aforementioned senators cause, and at least in their minds justification, to call for a full autopsy of al-Megrahi’s release. To use David Cameron’s clumsy and not completely historically accurate terminology, it is important that Britain, in whatever way it chooses to delegate its judicial powers, does not become a “junior partner” in this issue. We are not an insubordinate entity that must justify its decisions for the satisfaction of the US and tricky though the special relationship might make it, we must protect our sovereignty at all costs. Allowing the US to take an interventionist tact of probing and picking at the Scottish executive in attempts to effect a repeal is unacceptable and however unlikely it may seem, could prove to be the biggest threat to the special relationship that arises from this fiasco.

To his further credit Cameron offered to release any relevant papers that may shed light on any potential wrong doings and although its likely this may prove to be an unnecessary step it showed both transparency and confidence, important qualities indeed in these uncertain times.

Important also was both leaders’ agreement that the decision to release al-Megrahi was wrong. Concurring on this issue showed an ideological unity whose validity was established with the ease by which it was expressed, an ease which dominated the whole of the White House press conference and which bodes very well for the special relationship.

Now if a handful of senators can resist further mud-slinging and drop a vendetta clouded by anger at recent BP failings in a completely unrelated arena they might be able to deal with the more important issues of safeguarding the Gulf of Mexico’s ecosystem and tackling their structural deficit. Their President seems to have been able to, I suggest they follow suit.