was the libyans that carried out the attacks, my own personal view was that it was not enough just to go and seek to try the individual agents who were acting on behalf of libya. obviously the intelligence service doesn t go off on its own and do these things. so i felt we had to take direct action against libya and i felt that we should establish the precedent at that point that if you attack, if you engage in this kind of mass atrocity, terroristic attack on the united states that you will be signing your own death warrant. while masud was in custody in libya on separate charges, he confessed to his part in the lockerbie attack. are you convinced there is enough evidence to guarantee a conviction? that is the standard we use in the department ofjustice which is we don t bring charges unless we feel we have admissible evidence sufficient to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the individual is guilty. we know there was an interview he gave that to libyan
abi agila masud was told in court what the charges against him are and that he could face life in prison if convicted. he s accused of making the bomb that killed 270 people when it blew up pan am flight 103, over lockerbie in 1988. two years ago, that then us attorney general, william barr, announced formal criminal charges against masud. why is it important that masud is brought to the us and tried in american court? from a policy standpoint, i think it s important to let it be known that if you attack americans, you are going to be brought to justice, even if it takes 30 years. when we learned in november of 1991, when we came to the determination that this was the libyans that carried out the attacks, my own personal view was that it was not enough just to go and seek to try the individual agents who were acting on behalf of libya. obviously, the intelligence service doesn t go off on its own and do these things.
attack on the united states that you will be signing your own death warrant. while masud was in custody in libya on separate charges, he confessed to his part in the lockerbie attack. are you convinced there is enough evidence to guarantee a conviction? that is the standard we use in the department ofjustice which is we don t bring charges unless we feel we have admissible evidence sufficient to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the individual is guilty. we know there was an interview he gave that to libyan law enforcement in which he described his involvement in the lockerbie bombing. do you have evidence beyond that? have you seen evidence beyond that? i can t get into talking about the evidence i saw while i was attorney general, and i certainly don t know what evidence has been developed in the subsequent time. but there is additional evidence? we did spend time developing additional evidence beyond his interview with libyan law enforcement. abi agila masud will appear
live from our studio in singapore this is bbc news. it s newsday. welcome to the programme. libyan man accused of making the bomb that destroyed a us bound passenger plane over lockerbie in scotland in 1988 has appeared in court. the explosion killed 270 people. the suspect, abi agila masud, is alleged to have been a member of the libyan intelligence service. he has been told he will not face the death penalty. our north america editor sarah smith reports. abi agila masud was told in court what the charges against him are and he could face life in prison if convicted. he s accused of making the bomb that killed 270 people when it blew
103, over lockerbie in 1988. two years ago, that then us attorney general, william barr, announced formal criminal charges against masud. why is it important that masud is brought to the us and tried in american court? in an american court? from a policy standpoint, i think it s important to let it be known that if you attack americans, you are going to be brought to justice, even if it takes 30 years. when we learned in november of 1991, when we came to the determination that this was the libyans that carried out the attacks, my own personal view was that it was not enough just to go and seek to try the individual agents who were acting on behalf of libya. obviously the intelligence service doesn t go off on its own and do these things. so i felt we had to take direct action against libya and i felt that we should establish the precedent at that point that if you attack, if you engage in this kind of mass atrocity, terroristic