One of the architects of the original Lockerbie bombing trial at Camp Zeist is looking to amend Scots law to allow the appeal judgment decision to be made more quickly, it has been reported.
Professor Robert Black, an expert in Scots law, has written an amendment to the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 which would allow the judges to make a judgment after hearing just one part of the appeal.
Alex Neil, SNP MSP for Central Scotland, has offered to table the amendment and speak to Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill about the issue.
Mr Black hopes the amendment would mean judges could release Megrahi after just two or three "chapters" rather than waiting until the summer of 2010 for a decision.
Speaking to The Herald, he said: "If the court is satisfied there has been a miscarriage of justice after just two chapters, why not decide it there and then?
"As far as I am aware this is the first time in Scotland an appeal has been broken down like this into such specific, separate chapters.
“Once they have heard enough, I want them to be able to say they quash the conviction and release Megrahi to allow him to die as a free man.
"To ensure the rest of the evidence cannot then be swept under the carpet, I would want them to hear the rest of the chapters in open court afterwards."
Megrahi's original appeal was rejected at Camp Zeist in 2002.
In 2003 his defence team appealed to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission with new evidence, asking it to investigate.
In June 2007, it concluded there may have been a miscarriage of justice on six different grounds.
The new section to be inserted into Part VIII of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 (c 46), written by Professor Robert Black is as follows:
Staged Appeals
(1) Where an appeal is heard in stages with specific grounds of appeal allocated to each stage and there is an interval of more than four weeks between the end of any stage and the beginning of the next, the court, if the appellant at or before the end of any stage requests, shall (a) give judgment on such grounds of appeal as have been argued, and (b) exercise such of its powers under section 118(1) as it deems appropriate before the commencement of argument on the grounds of appeal allocated to the succeeding stage.
(2) Where the interval between the end of any stage and the beginning of the next is less than four weeks, the court may, if it thinks fit and the appellant requests, exercise the powers conferred in subsection (1).
(3) Where the court exercises the power conferred in subsection (1) or subsection (2), it shall continue to hear and shall give judgment upon the grounds of appeal allocated to the remaining stages of the appeal unless the appellant intimates his abandonment thereof.
(4) Where, in respect of each individual stage, the court has disposed of the grounds of appeal allocated thereto by affirming the verdict of the trial court, the court shall, at the conclusion of the appeal, consider whether, having regard to the whole grounds of appeal, a miscarriage of justice occurred in the proceedings in which the appellant was convicted.
Posts
