Justice Now for the Lockerbie Bomber

It’s not necessary to have a conspiratorial mind, to be suspicious or cynical about Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, the convicted Lockerbie bomber, still being alive--albeit not thriving--in Libya.

The guy was supposed to be dead within three months of being released to Libya and Moammar Qaddafi in 2009 from a life sentence in Scotland on curious compassionate grounds.

Like the Energizer Bunny, al-Megrahi seems to keep ticking two years past his expiry date.

At the time the gesture of compassion was controversial – seen by some as a slap in the face to the families of the 270 people who died when the bomb went off in PanAm Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland.

Why was any “compassion” being shown to this guy – unless it was for questionable oil and trade deals worked out with Qaddafi at the time?

In those days the West was squirming to accommodate Qaddafi, who was in the process of pretending to transform himself into a pacifist  --banning weapons of mass destruction, foregoing his lust for nuclear weapons, and becoming a voice of moderation on the UN Human Rights Commission.

When freed and shipped to Libya, al-Megrahi looked frail and had to be aided to board the plane. But when he arrived in Tripoli, to be met by an exultant Qaddafi, he was able to wave and appear as a hero.

And now we learn he is still alive, in-and-out of a coma we are told, and not long for this world. The same refrain as two years ago.

It could be argued he’s long past his “use before” date.

Is he truly as sick as Scottish doctors once proclaimed him to be?

Should anything be done about him now that Qaddafi has been ousted from power, and has become something of a historical asterisk?

Mitt Romney, Republican contender for next year’s presidential nomination, thinks the new Transitional National Council (TNC) should show good faith with its Western partners in bouncing Qaddafi, by extraditing al-Megrahi  “so justice can finally be done.”

Mr. Romney seems to be pandering to public distaste for the previous compassion release of al-Megrahi, since most of those who died over Lockerbie were Americans. He knows in his heart that this is unlikely to happen.

The Globe and Mail editorially opines that the demand to return al-Megrahi to custody “looks like revenge, not justice.”

Oh? So what?

What’s wrong with a bit of revenge for a heinous act perpetrated against one’s countrymen? Sometimes the knowledge that “revenge” will occur, can deter violent acts; that violent acts entail consequences.

The Globe says taking revenge on al-Megrahi “would make Western justice look bad in the eyes of the very people who we wish will embrace it.”

That sentence alone reveals flawed thinking. In the Middle East and elsewhere, Western justice, not to mention values, often looks weak and indecisive, and invites abuse.

None of the countries involved in the “Arab Spring” has any experience with democracy, and none are likely to adopt “Western justice” as a way of life. Don’t mess with us, seems a more valid message.

Of course we can’t revoke the Scottish decision to free al-Megrahi. But we surely can keep an eye on him and perhaps confirm that he doesn’t have to wait much longer before encountering those 72 virgins in Paradise.