Letter from First Minister Alex Salmond to Senator Kerry
5 October 2010
Dear Senator Kerry,
It is with regret that I find it necessary to write to you again in connection with the hearing of
the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the al-Megrahi case on 29 September 2010.
I understand that you were not present at the hearing, but there is a matter of concern that I
would wish to raise with you as Chairman of the Committee.
On 28 September, the Scottish Government was approached by a journalist representing the
Wall Street Journal seeking clarification about certain allegations that had been made about
the case. These allegations concerned comments said to have been made by an official of
the Scottish Government at the meeting offered by the Scottish Government as a courtesy to
a representative of Senator Menendez. They were completely without foundation.
In order to ensure that the Committee was in possession of correct information in advance of
its hearing, the Scottish Government's representative in Washington wrote to your office on
28 September to set the record straight. I understand that a copy of his letter, which I attach
for your information, was passed to the office of Senator Menendez, who was chairing the
hearing.
It was therefore with intense disappointment that I noted that the same misinformation was
presented to the hearing, unsupported by any evidence whatsoever, and no reference was
made to the correction provided well in advance by the Scottish Government. The Scottish
Government has made every effort to provide members of the US Senate and their staff with
information to assist their understanding of the matter, and it is extremely unfortunate that
the concerns that I expressed in my letter of 10 September 2010 to Senators Menendez,
Gillibrand, Lautenberg and Schumer about the prospects for a credible and impartial
investigation have been realised.
I should therefore be grateful if you would investigate, as a matter of urgency, how the
Committee came to be misled in this manner at its hearing. I would also request that you
arrange for the letter of correction from the Scottish Government to be entered into the
official record of the Committee.
ALEX SALMOND
ATTACHMENT
Doug Frantz
Deputy Staff Director
Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Dear Doug,
28 September 2010
In advance of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's hearing tomorrow on
the AI-Megrahi case, the Scottish Government has been approached by a
journalist representing the Wall Street Journal for comment on the issue.
Specifically, the journalist has asked about statements that are alleged to
have been made by Scottish Government officials in a meeting with a Senate
representative. Presumably he is referring to the meeting with officials that
the Scottish Government offered as a courtesy to a staffer of Senator
Menendez's office during his recent visit to Edinburgh.
It is a cause of deep disappointment to the Scottish Government that points
discussed at the meeting have been passed to the Wall Street Journal in a
totally inaccurate manner and in breach of the terms on which the request for
a meeting with Scottish Government representatives was made by Senator
Menendez's office. This clearly raises a question about the objectivity of
Senator Menendez's investigation.
Of greater concern, however, is that the information passed to the Wall Street
Journal is simply wrong. May I set the record straight on the two points we
I have been asked about today?
First, a s has been stated many times, and was said several times at the
meeting between Scottish Government officials and Senator Menendez's
staffer, the medical report to the Justice Secretary came from Dr Andrew
Fraser, Director of Health and Care of the Scottish Prison Service, and the
prognosis was his. It was Dr Fraser's responsibility to prepare the medical
report for Mr MacAskill, and Dr Fraser who concluded that his clinical
assessment was that a three month prognosis was a reasonable estimate,
drawing on the work of a range of specialists and other Scottish Health
Service professionals involved in AI-Megrahi's care from when he was first
diagnosed with cancer in 2008.
Given the importance of this case, it was appropriate that the most senior
health professional in the Scottish Prison Service, Dr Fraser, was responsible
for providing the medical report which formed part of the consideration of the
application for compassionate release. With the exception of this point, ie the
most senior SPS health professional providing the report, this is exactly the
same process which has been followed in the over 60 cases considered
underlthe relevant legislation which was passed in 1993.
Second, it is a matter of public record that AI-Megrahi was not on
chemotherapy treatment in Scotland at any point, and it is also a matter of
record that his hormone treatment had failed as the firm consensus of
specialists was that his condition had become 'hormone resistant'.
I should be grateful if you would draw this clarification to the attention of the
Committee in advance of its hearing tomorrow, which I understand may
include consideration of these points.
Yours
ROBIN NAYSMITH
Scottish Government Counsellor, North America