Crown Office justifies 'lawyer switch' hearing in Lockerbie appeal

It seems the Crown Office are a wee bit desperate to justify their stance, or maybe 'distance themselves' from the forthcoming Appeal Court hearing this week where the Advocate General, will seek to have the court spectacularly switch the defence team of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi for one of their own.

A letter appearing in Friday's Herald newspaper from the Deputy Crown Agent John A Dunn seeks to 'allay' the concerns of readers & the public in Scotland ...

"It wisnae me" comes to mind ? .... and perish the thought the Lord Advocate or Crown Office would ever consider using such a power if granted later on ... !

The Herald reports :

Lockerbie appeal

YOUR LETTERS

I am concerned your readers may have been misled as to the position of the Crown in a matter of considerable public importance (Bid to ban lawyers in secret hearings, and accompanying editorial, May 22).

The Appeal Court has set three days aside next week to hear proposals from the Advocate General, representing the United Kingdom Government, the Crown and the representatives of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi, on the procedure the court should follow when hearing arguments on the issue of Public Interest Immunity (PII) which has arisen in the appeal.

The claim of PII in the Lockerbie appeal has been taken by the UK Government, not by the Lord Advocate. The UK Government is represented by the Advocate General.

The court hearings next week will take place in public and it will be entirely a matter for the court to determine whether any future hearings in private are required.

The Lord Advocate, as public prosecutor, has a responsibility to ensure that all criminal proceedings in Scotland, including appeals, are conducted fairly.

It is the UK Government, and not the Crown, that has raised the issue of PII. Next week's hearing will enable the court to decide what further procedure is necessary, but there is no question of the Crown seeking to have next week's hearing in private, far less excluding the appellant's legal team from participating, as suggested in your editorial.

The purpose and nature of next week's court hearing had already been discussed in open court, with journalists present, in February 2008.

John A Dunn, Deputy Crown Agent, Crown Office, 25 Chambers Street, Edinburgh.

Crown Office seeking ruling to change Lockerbie defence team lawyers in secret hearing

Its hardly safe to go outside these days, and the Crown Office is intent on making sure you wont even be safe in court with a legal team with their forthcoming attempt to change the defence team of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi for "special security vetted advocates" they will vet themselves ...

After gaining this 'dream power' to use, no doubt the Lord Advocate will seek to apply it to any case which might just bring the Government or simply the Crown Office into disrepute .... tough times ahead for us all.

The Herald reports :

Bid to ban Lockerbie lawyers in secrets hearing

LUCY ADAMS, Chief Reporter

Prosecutors will next week attempt to throw an unprecedented veil of secrecy over the appeal of the Lockerbie bomber.

The Crown Office will ask judges to bypass the defence team of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi and appoint special security-vetted advocates to represent him in a court hearing to decide whether a previously confidential document should be made public.

If the bid for a closed-door session is successful, it would be the first time in Scotland that such a step has been taken in a criminal case.

However, the tactic will fuel suspicions that the Crown is going to unusual lengths to preserve the UK's current diplomatic relations with other nations.

The paperwork, which originated in an unknown foreign country, is thought to contain vital information about the electronic timer which detonated the bomb that killed 270 people in the skies over Lockerbie.

It is not known if political pressure has been exercised directly on the Crown, but there have been previous instances in the Megrahi case where Britain's changed attitudes to foreign states since 1988 have played a key role in the legal process.

Foreign Secretary David Miliband has already said the document should remain confidential.

It was uncovered during the three-year investigation of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, which resulted in the case being referred back to the courts for a new appeal last summer. The commission concluded the failure during the original trial to disclose the document could constitute a miscarriage of justice. Although the Crown allowed the commission to see the material, it has refused to disclose it to Megrahi's defence team.

The Crown's latest move is expected to anger further his lawyers, who believe the failure to disclose the document calls into question the ultimate right to a fair appeal.

The request will be made on Tuesday at the Court of Criminal Appeal when the decision on whether to grant the defence access to the document is to be debated.

The Crown is expected to ask for the hearing to be held behind closed doors in the absence of the defence, who would be represented by special advocates. Public Interest Immunity hearings of this kind in criminal cases have previously been held only south of the border, where there is a statutory system in place, and a list of special advocates.

Megrahi's defence team has made it clear that it needs to see the document in order to proceed with the appeal, and has accused the UK Government of "interference" in the appeal.

If the prosecution denies access to the paper, Megrahi's lawyers are expected to argue that the conviction should be quashed because, without it, their client's right to a fair trial would be breached.

One legal expert said: "This is entirely unprecedented in Scotland."

A spokesman for the Crown Office said the court hearing is to be from from May 27 to 29 in Edinburgh. "It is not possible to provide further comment," he said.