It was a year ago that the Scottish government released the Lockerbie Bomber, Abdelbaset Al Megrahi, on compassionate grounds to die in his home country, Libya. He had three months or so to live we were told. A passionate debate erupted on the streets and in the media, of the rights and wrongs of the decision, and that debate has never really gone away.
He has outlived his original estimate by a factor of four, and although in ill health, he is with his family, in his home country, and treated as a hero in the fight against 'the western culture and religion'. Kenny McAskill saw fit to release him, because he felt 'compassion' for him. Compassion is good and right, but I am not sure we have struck the right balance of justice and compassion here.
Given that this terrorist was released on compassionate grounds, I can only assume that there will be other prisoners who merit that same compassion. Maybe they are terminally ill. Maybe they are gravely ill. Maybe it is a young mother who desperately needs to be with her children. Where do we draw the line of who should benefit from our compassion, and who should not. Strangely, I have not heard of any other prisoners who have been released for the same reason. That alone makes me question the kind of compassion Kenny McAskill used in his decision.
We do not want to drop to the level of vengeance which Cardinal Keith O'Brien accuses the USA of adopting in its justice system, but neither should we free mass murderers because they are very ill. Also, since we don't like it when the USA meddles in our justice system, we should not meddle in theirs. I think the Cardinal stepped outside his bounds with his comments. Since our lifespan is not determined by a doctor, but by that higher power which Mr McAskill talked about, we cannot afford to use compassion as a reason for freedom. If that was truly the case, there would have been many others who would benefit from freedom from prison.
If a terrorist is given compassion, what then do we give to the families of the 270 people who died at his hands? It must be more than compassion, but what is it? A pat on the back, and a 'there there, you will feel better soon' platitude? Because that is what it is, just words, and that same compassion is missing. So what do I think? I reckon Al Megrahi should have lived out the rest of his natural life in prison, or in a prison hospital, no matter the cost. That's not because I do not have compassion, but that justice means I also have compassion for the other innocents who are still living with this terrorists actions, and I have more of it for them.
No comments:
Post a Comment