The row over the release of the Lockerbie bomber was reignited last night when Jack Straw, the justice secretary, directly contradicted Gordon Brown by saying Britain had been partly motivated by the need to secure fresh oil contracts when ministers tried, in 2007, to make it easier to release Abdelbaset al-Megrahi. Straw accepted in an interview that he had decided in 2007 to drop his plan to exclude the bomber from a prisoner transfer agreement (PTA) with Libya after lobbying by UK oil interests, notably BP and the Libyan government. Straw was lobbied on 15 October and 9 November 2007 by Sir Mark Allen, a former MI6 officer, who was by then working for BP as a consultant. Libya was stalling on a £500m-plus oil deal with BP. Brown, in a statement on Wednesday, said Megrahi's release had nothing to do with oil and was solely motivated by the desire to bring Libya back into the international fold after the country agreed to abandon its programme of weapons of mass destruction. The revelation will be damaging for the prime minister who has been accused by Lockerbie victims' families and by some American politicians of putting Britain's trade interests before justice. In the face of international criticism, Brown said on Wednesday: "There was no conspiracy, no cover-up, no double dealing, no deal on oil, no attempt to instruct Scottish ministers, no private assurances." The prime minister can argue his remarks were correct in that the decision to release the terminally ill Megrahi on compassionate grounds, and not through the prisoner transfer agreement, was taken independently by the Scottish government, but his account is partial in that Straw has conceded that the British government's efforts to facilitate his release were motivated by an oil deal. Documents published this week showed Straw originally promised a PTA would only be reached with Libya if Megrahi was excluded. But he later acceded to Libyan demands to include Megrahi. The change followed a warning from BP that a failure to include the bomber could hurt its business interests. When asked in a Daily Telegraph interview last night if trade and BP were factors, Straw said: "Yes, [it was] a very big part of that. I'm unapologetic about that … Libya was a rogue state. "We wanted to bring it back into the fold. And yes, that included trade because trade is an essential part of it and subsequently there was the BP deal. "But he said he made the decision without conferring directly with Brown adding: "I certainly didn't talk to the PM. There is no paper trail to suggest he was involved at all." A spokesman for BP said the company had raised concerns with the government about the slow progress in concluding the PTA, but denied mentioning Megrahi. Sir MarkAllen, a vital figure in the dramatic negotiations leading to Libya's renunciation of weapons of mass destruction in 2003 overseen by Tony Blair was also instrumental in securing the BP oil deal. In 2005 he flew to Libya with Lord Browne , then the BP chief executive, to meet Colonel Gaddafi and oil chiefs. It has been pointed out that a former BP executive Nick Butler now works as an economic adviser to Brown but there is no evidence he was directly involved in the recent discussions. A spokesman for Straw said: "Jack's position has been on the record for some days. "He has never denied that seeking an agreement with Libya over a prisoner transfer agreement was connected to a wider process of normalising relations with Libya, including on trade, which is in the interests of us all. Jack took this position in the certain knowledge that there was an absolute veto on Megrahi being transferred to Libya because the decision was always in the hands of the Scottish Executive. That was a lock which only they could break if they chose to. In the event they did not because they rejected the application under the PTA."Libya oil deals were factor in Megrahi talks, says Straw
Saturday, 5 September 2009
Posts
