The Al-Megrahi Case

Abstract

DERRIDA ON LAW, JUSTICE, AND VIOLENCE Much been written about Jacques Derrida's ethical turn. Textual evidence for claim that Derrida made this turn, late in his career, includes his writings on gift, hospitality, forgiveness, terrorism, violence and In this essay I will explore Derrida's thoughts on law and and related issue of terrorism using Al-Megrahi case as illustration. The Al-Megrahi case particularly apt because AlMegrahi was found guilty of act of terrorism and his release in August 2009 raises issues of law and The Al Megrahi Case Al-Megrahi was accused of planting bomb in Pan Am plane that exploded over Lockerbie in December 1988, killing 259 passengers and crew members and eleven Lockerbie residents. In January 2001 he was convicted and sentenced to twenty-seven years in prison to be served in Scotland. In August 2009, he was released on compassionate grounds and permitted to return to Libya. In statement explaining his decision to release Al-Megrahi, Scottish Justice Secretary MacAskill says that decision based on the medical advice I have before me, that Al-Megrahi suffering from prostate cancer and that a three-month prognosis now reasonable estimate.1 He goes on to say that Scottish justice system demands that judgment be imposed but compassion be available, that justice be but be shown. MacAskill concludes his statement with following: For these reasons, and these reasons alone, it my decision that Mr. Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, convicted in 2001 for Lockerbie bombing, now terminally ill with prostate cancer, be released on compassionate grounds and allowed to return to Libya to die. MacAskill clearly implies that conviction satisfies demand that justice be served, and release that mercy be shown. The decision to release Al-Megrahi was met with outcry, particularly from victims' relatives and from United States Government. Perhaps reflecting fact that 190 of victims came from US, not to mention post-9/ 1 1 state of mind, 82% of Americans opposed release, according to Rasmussen poll.2 From President down, prominent American politicians denounced decision. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton described it as absolutely wrong; Senator Frank Lautenberg called it an outrage; Attorney General Eric Holder said that was justification for it; Senator John Kerry claimed that it turned the word 'compassion' on its head. Beneath emotional language general belief that decision to release Al-Megrahi travesty of According to FBI director Robert Mueller, decision is detrimental to cause of justice. In United Kingdom, particularly in Scotland, reaction to MacAskill's decision was much less hostile. Still, many prominent commentators believe it to be unjust. The Scottish Labour leader Iain Gray claimed that decision has damaged Scottish system. The then Leader of Opposition, now Prime Minister, David Cameron said that he saw in affording to someone who showed no to his victims. The Al-Megrahi case controversial for number of reasons. There is, to begin with, fact that enormous scale of loss, 270 victims in all, bound to generate strong emotional feelings that can preclude any rational judgment. Also, question mark over conviction itself. According to one commentator, AlMegrahi was scapegoat and his conviction convenient untruth.3 Indeed, before his release, Al-Megrahi had appealed against his conviction and grounds for appeal were strong enough for Scottish Criminal Cases Review Committee (SCCRC) to refer case to Court of Criminal Appeal. In particular, SCCRC cast doubt on one key piece of evidence, declaring (on 28 June 2007) that there no reasonable basis in trial court's judgment for its conclusion that purchase of items [clothes that were found in wreckage of plane] from Mary's House [in Malta] took place on 7 December 1988. …