Question of Human Right

There are three critical ­questions surrounding the release of Megrahi:
1: Was it right for the justice secretary to give compassionate release to Megrahi? Yes, he made the right call for the right reasons. But it should not have been in his gift to do so. Allowing a politician to be the final decision maker over the liberty or detention of any individual is a serious weakness in the system. An independent and impartial tribunal or court would be far better placed to consider the evidence and make a transparent ruling.
2: Have the human rights of the victims, their families and Megrahi been recognised and respected over the past two decades? No. The relatives of the 270 people who lost their lives are entitled to an independent and effective investigation into the circumstances of the tragedy - the state has a duty to investigate the circumstances and prosecute alleged perpetrators. Here is where the unfulfilled rights of the families meet the unfilled rights of Megrahi. Compassionate release wasn't recognition of his "human rights"; it was due process under Scottish law.
3: The idea of an inquiry has been raised. An inquiry would only fulfil the rights of the families and Megrahi if it was independent and impartial from the UK government and had sufficient scope and powers.
At the very least, the concerns highlighted by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission should be revisited. Political influence over decisions on detentions should also be scrutinised, and the UK government opposition to releasing crucial documents should be dropped. The key lesson is that the human rights of all parties need to be at the centre of the legal process and decision making if the public interest is to be served, and if justice is to be done and be seen to be done.Professor Alan Miller, chair of the Scottish Human Rights Commission