Cursed are the merciful? Megrahi and the collision of legal worldviews

"Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy".

I suppose we've grown used to so reconfiguring these words of Jesus in our minds and hearts that we have lost the sense of the aboslute nonsense they can sound. I too was embarrassed and angry at the Scottish saltire being used to celebrate the return of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi to Libya, his homeland.

• Because the St Andrews Cross is a powerful and culturally embedded symbol of a Scottish nation whose positive contribution to the world is out of all proportion to our size.
• Because Scottish lives were also lost when the plane fell from the skies on a rural Scottish town, which means Scottish people also have an interest in ensuring justice is done.
• Because the assumption is being made by many in the watching world that there was some kind of collusion between Libya and Scotland, a fact and a motivation denied by the Scottish Government.
• Because undoubtedly many families affected by the Lockerbie atrocity genuinely feel let down, betrayed, denied closure of their grief and desire for justice, by what they see as an act of weakness and injustice.

But on the other hand, I am neither embarrassed nor angry that the Scottish saltire is linked to an act of mercy, and to a form of justice that incorporates the option of compassionate release - not as a negation of justice as we are accused, but as its proper expression by a people whose legal system operates on different principles from the United States, and under whose legal system there was international agreement Megrahi should be tried and if guilty sentenced. That our judicial system is not the American way is a reality of history, of politics, of social ethics and of unarguable legal fact. If Megrahi is to be treated in a way that is just and legally defensible, then he must bear the full weight of the law, and be afforded the full range of options to which he is entitled under Scots Law. And Scots Law provides for compassionate release, which is not an act of pardon, which is not a statement of forgiveness, poltically, nationally or privately, which is not a declaration of any kind about the prisoner's legal status of guilt or innocence. It is, pure and simple, an act of compassion to a dying human being.

However it's more than a pure and simple act. Far from being an absolute mistake as Senator Clinton asserted, it is a demonstration by a small country that law doesn't have to be as savage as those it punishes. Far from being outrageous in the sense that FBI Director Robert Mueller meant, it is outrageous that the head of a law enforcement agency should presume to criticise the legal processes of a sovereign nation acting within its own judicial and legal traditions. It can just as cogently be argued that this act of compassion under the provisions of Scots Law, as it encounters the terrorist mindset, breaks the eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth mentality which is a primary driver in cycles of violence. Far from being regrettable as President Obama has claimed, it would have been more regrettable still if an entire legal tradition of a small country, with its humane provisions that have stood for centuries, were to be overturned because of political pressure from a powerful ally.

That pressure, overtly exerted by the United States, is entirely understandable. The American Government represents the interests and human rights of its own citizens, and the release of Megrahi seems to fly in the face of law, friendship and the realities of the 21st Century so called "war on terror". The truth is, nothing can compensate for the years of anguish and the enormous loss experienced by those families whose relatives were on the airliner that was blown out of the skies over Scotland twenty years ago. Nor the similar loss of other nations, including Scotland.

  But I would offer one further observation. Acts of compassion and mercy are far too often portrayed as weakness. They are not. They are acts of strength. Enacted statements of mercy publicly recognise the humanity even of those who may have acted inhumanely. Tne Scottish Saltire is the St Andrew's Cross, a symbol of crucifixion, and an embedded declaration of our rootedness in the Christian tradition as a major source and influence in the development and principles of Scots Law. To be accused of compassion, to be condemned for showing mercy, to be politically vilified for upholding our own judicial provisions with their humane instincts, perhaps we should expect no less, and simply be prepared to be misunderstood, though seeking to act justly. Compassion it seems, is expensive in our polarised world, and may cost friendships. But I still think that Scotland as a nation would carry a more just shame had our Government denied Megrahi his legal right to be treated within the legal provisions for compassionate release, to avoid offending powerful and vocal friends whose own judicial system operates on quite different principles. The clash of legal worldviews makes mutual understanding all but impossible.

And to the questions, "Why should we show compassion? What compassion did he show"? The answer is because enacted implacability and denial of humanity are precisely the crime for which Megrahi has been convicted. Scotland, still indebted to the Christian faith for some of our pivotal legal principles, operates on a different level of human responsiveness. I doubt if Jesus intended the Beatitudes as a political platform for nations - but "Blessed are the merciful" seems to me to be a better basis for human relations than "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". But I do recognise, that if my children had been on that plane, my own hermeneutic would be under enormous pressure to give priority in law to the Old Testament injunction. Which is why it will always be wisest not to allow the victim to write, or re-write the law.  

Comments

[Robert Parkinson]

I thought you'd have something to say about this and you said what I hoped you would. I heard Brian Haymes make some similar remarks in an excellent sermon yesterday. Thank you for a very helpful and though-provoking reflection.

[Catriona]

Thank you Jim, a very helpful post

[Craig]

Good to have solid reflection from Scotland on this, much appreciated ... it has caused much soul searching with me this week. Of course not all the OT hermeneutic was eye for eye stuff ... this all happened in the week that I was preparing the next in a series on the Minor Prophets, step up Mr Jonah and the compassionate God. I've blogged on it this morning, inc part of the sermon given yesterday, but then I went on to think about U2!

[Jim Gordon]

Thanks for comments. Craig, I referred specifically to the 'eye for eye' lex talionis stance because that is the strand of OT law being cited as argument against the decision to allow a compassionate release. Much of the rhetoric about showing no mercy to those who showed no mercy is implacably retributive, and demands a way of treating Megrahi that while satisfying political pressures,does so by denying him the humane consideration available within the judicial system under which he was tried and convicted. This of course is discretionary, and is the decision of the Justice Minister - who chose to demonstrate a humane response to one who didn't deserve it. But the complexity of such a decision raises all kinds of questions about cultural, moral, religious, political and national interests and values. The debate in Parliament on Monday afternoon (today) will be an interesting next stage in the discussion.

[Graeme Clark]

Jesus' words question the right of any of us to erect boundaries, theological or otherwise, around compassionate care for others. Maybe there's a conversion of heart needed so we can hear more clearly Jesus' reply, - generously inclusive, ministry affirming, and welcoming compassion wherever it rears its beautiful head …”whoever is not against us is for us.” These words represent Jesus' permission to celebrate compassion, to defend and support those who take on the powers and social forces that diminish human lives - wherever, whenever.

Jim Gordon January 24, 2009

[Graeme Clark]

the churches must become Christian . . . . They must discover the meaning of suffering and sorrow, and spread abroad the spirit of compassion, sympathy, and love, They must confront successful and despairing man with the truth of the cross in his situation, so that man may become a compassionate, joyous, and thereby free being.

Jurgen Moltmann, The Crucified God, Theology Today, Vol. 31. No. 1 (April 1974)