Written question asked by Tam Dalyell (Labour), in the House of Commons. It was due for an answer on Thursday, 6 June 1996. It was answered by John Major (Conservative) on Thursday, 6 June 1996 on behalf of the Prime Minister.

Prime Minister

Question: Pursuant to his oral Answer of 14th May, Official Report, columns 762-3, what consideration he has given to the issue addressed to him by the Chairman of United Kingdom Families Flight 103, in a letter of 13th May, as to (a) whether the criminal investigationfindings were reliable and complete and (b) whether there has been a fabrication of evidence to conceal certain matters therein set out. (Failed OPQ)

Answer: Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his oral answer of 14 May, Official Report, columns 762-63, what consideration he has given to the issue addressed to him by the chairman of United Kingdom Families Flight 103, in a letter of 13 May, as to (a) whether the criminal investigation findings were reliable and complete and (b) whether there has been a fabrication of evidence to conceal certain matters therein set out.[30298] The Prime Minister: My noble and learned Friend, the then Lord Advocate, concluded after the most intensive investigation in United Kingdom history that there was evidence to support charges against the nationals of any other country. The alleged involvement of a Palestinian terrorist group was closely investigated during the early stages of the investigation, but no credible evidence emerged to substantiate its involvement in the Lockerbie crime. It is for a jury to decide how reliable the evidence is, but successive Lord Adovcates would not have brought and maintained charges if they had believed that the evidence on which they were based was unreliable, incomplete or fabricated.

Secondary information