Second, Mr MacAskill needlessly scored a nationalist point in his condemnation of the United Kingdom Government. The families of the American victims believed they had an assurance that al-Megrahi would serve his time in Scotland but the Government in London said that no such undertaking was given and there was, accordingly, no legal inihibition to al-Megrahi being considered as a candidate for the PTA struck between Britain and Libya. Given that Mr MacAskill went on to reject the request of the Libyan Government under the PTA, this was a rather gratuitious political shot, which will be met with incomprehension by the American families to whom his decision will cause genuine pain.
Because finally, all of this is, to a grieving family, a technicality. To those who lost family members 20 years ago, this is binary: al-Megrahi is either in jail or not. With him released to go to Tripoli, Mr MacAskill effectively defended his ground. All prisoners are, as he said, indeed eligible to be considered for compassionate release. But not all prisoners are thereby entitled to have that request granted and al-Megrahi’s crime is such that he ought to have served out the full term of his life in prison. There is some nobility in Mr MacAskill’s sentiment that “our beliefs dictate that justice be served, but mercy be shown”. The Scottish Justice Minister’s account of the argument from compassion was eloquent but, on this occasion, misplaced.
Read it all.
A (London) Times Editorial on the Scottish Decision: Return Flight
Second, Mr MacAskill needlessly scored a nationalist point in his condemnation of the United Kingdom Government. The families of the American victims believed they had an assurance that al-Megrahi would serve his time in Scotland but the Government in London said that no such undertaking was given and there was, accordingly, no legal inihibition to al-Megrahi being considered as a candidate for the PTA struck between Britain and Libya. Given that Mr MacAskill went on to reject the request of the Libyan Government under the PTA, this was a rather gratuitious political shot, which will be met with incomprehension by the American families to whom his decision will cause genuine pain.
Because finally, all of this is, to a grieving family, a technicality. To those who lost family members 20 years ago, this is binary: al-Megrahi is either in jail or not. With him released to go to Tripoli, Mr MacAskill effectively defended his ground. All prisoners are, as he said, indeed eligible to be considered for compassionate release. But not all prisoners are thereby entitled to have that request granted and al-Megrahi’s crime is such that he ought to have served out the full term of his life in prison. There is some nobility in Mr MacAskill’s sentiment that “our beliefs dictate that justice be served, but mercy be shown”. The Scottish Justice Minister’s account of the argument from compassion was eloquent but, on this occasion, misplaced.
Read it all.