Professor Robert Black QC, who proposed the unique Zeist trial arrangements for the Pan Am 103 case and later co-founded the Justice For Megrahi Committee, has told The Firm that following the revelation that the key identification witness in the Crown’s discredited trial was bribed before giving his testimony, there is now “no excuse whatsoever for the Scottish Government to deny an independent inquiry into the Megrahi conviction.”

“If the career Crown Office civil servants who are currently Scotland’s law officers stand in the way, they must be sacked,” he added.

Black adds that the three Zeist Judges, Lords Maclean, Coulsfield and Sutherland, could not have convicted Megrahi if they had been aware the credibility of the key identification witness, Tony Gauci, had been so compromised.

“The acceptance by the Zeist court of that witness’s credibility and reliability was essential to their verdict of guilty and without his evidence there could have been no conviction,” he said.

“Had the judges known of the shady financial dealings going on behind the scenes, their assessment of the witness’s evidence must have been very different.”

Writing exclusively for The Firm, Black says the bribery revelations, disclosed in a documentary broadcast by Al-Jazeera, are the latest in a “series of hammer-blows” to the case, which he now describes as “the clearest and worst” example of the justice system having miscarried.

“The outraged reaction of Lord Fraser of Carmyllie QC -the Lord Advocate who brought the charges against Megrahi and Fhimah- to the evidence presented to him that the Crown’s principal witness was being offered monetary inducements will be shared by any lawyer who has the slightest concern for the probity of our criminal justice system,” he said.

“The acceptance by the Zeist court of that witness’s credibility and reliability was essential to their verdict of guilty and without his evidence there could have been no conviction. Had the judges known of the shady financial dealings going on behind the scenes, their assessment of the witness’s evidence must have been very different.

“There is now no excuse whatsoever for the Scottish Government to deny an independent inquiry into the Megrahi conviction. If the career Crown Office civil servants who are currently Scotland’s law officers stand in the way, they must be sacked.

“It is time that the Scottish criminal justice system regained its self-respect.”

A petition from the Justice for Megrahi Committee calling for an independent inquiry into the Pan Am 103 debacle will receive an unprecedented 4th hearing at the Holyrood Petitions Committee, the first under the new SNP administration.

The new Lord Advocate, Frank Mulholland, will be providing legal advice to the Scottish Government. He and Solicitor General Lesley Thomson are the two “career Crown Office civil servants” whom Black says should be sacked if they oppose an inquiry.

In January, after previously claiming to have no power to initiate an inquiry, the Scottish Government conceded that it did hold such power under the Inquiries Act 2005. However the Government blocked an earlier call for an inquiry into the affair. The then Lord Advocate Elish Angioini‘s “flawed” legal advice drew criticism from Black, who described the Government’s stance as a “wafer thin pretext for inaction.”

Others who have called for an inquiry into the affair include Archbishop Desmond Tutu, John Pilger, Professor Noam Chomsky, Gareth Peirce, Tam Dalyell and Father Patrick Keegans.

UN appointed special observer Hans Kochler said the trial verdict was a "negotiated outcome" of "diplomatic convenience" and said Megrahi's dropped appeal process appeared "more like an intelligence operation than a genuine undertaking of criminal justice."

Professor Blacks’ comments can be read in full, here.