Patrick Haseldine
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Patrick Haseldine (born July 11, 1942 in Leytonstone) is a former British diplomat who was dismissed by foreign secretary, John Major, in August 1989. Haseldine's dismissal resulted from his public criticism of prime minister, Margaret Thatcher, and from what he regarded as her government's acqiescence in the face of state-sponsored terrorism by apartheid South Africa, in particular in relation to the December 1988 Lockerbie bombing.
Contents |
[edit] Diplomatic service
Haseldine attended St Ignatius' College (1953–58), a grammar school in north London. After employment in banking and commerce, he was recruited as a late entrant to HM Diplomatic Service on May 3, 1971 through the 1970 Civil Service Open Competition. He enrolled in the Open University's first-year (1971) intake, and graduated in 1974. His first diplomatic posting was to Paris in 1975, from where he was transferred in January 1978 to the British High Commission in Freetown, Sierra Leone until November 1982.
He returned to the FCO in London in January 1983, joining the Southern African Department (SAfD) as the desk officer responsible for monitoring the voluntary cultural and sports boycott of South Africa, and enforcing the mandatory arms embargo imposed by the United Nations (UN) Security Council. His over-zealous enforcement of the arms embargo soon led to his removal from SAfD and to a two-year secondment to the Office of Fair Trading's International Division, where he was required to enforce the European Community Competition Rules (Articles 85 & 86 of the Treaty of Rome).
[edit] Question Time
Haseldine rejoined the FCO's Defence Department in 1987. He was a member of the invited studio audience of the BBC television topical program Question Time on February 25, 1988 which began transmission at 22:00. Fifteen minutes into the program a student raised a question about that day's outlawing of 17 anti-apartheid organisations, and asked whether the British government was justified in its opposition of economic sanctions against South Africa in the face of calls for sanctions by Nelson Mandela, Bishop Tutu and by most of the European Community. The Question Time panel (Shirley Goodwin of the Health Visitors Association, Sir Russell Johnston - Liberal party spokesman on foreign affairs, Michael Meacher MP - Labour's shadow employment secretary and Michael Portillo MP junior minister at the DHSS) discussed the matter for nine minutes before the host Sir Robin Day asked if anyone in the audience had anything to add. Without identifying himself, Haseldine intervened in the discussion and debated with Sir Robin for just over one minute. The panel's discussion was then prolonged by a further three minutes until 22:30 when Sir Robin asked the audience to raise their hands if they were in favour of economic sanctions against South Africa. Haseldine was on camera as a large majority of the audience voted for sanctions. As a result of his Question Time appearance, he was suspended from his job in the Defence Department for five months.
[edit] Thatcher critic
FCO Personnel Department invited him back to join Information Department on September 3, 1988.
Three months later, he wrote a letter on FCO notepaper to The Guardian newspaper which was published on December 7, 1988 under the heading "The double standards on terrorism", in which he criticised prime minister Margaret Thatcher for being soft on South African state-sponsored terrorism.[1]The day before publication, journalist Richard Norton-Taylor rang Haseldine at work to verify his identity and confirm his intention for the letter to be published. Publication came just 14 days before the Lockerbie bombing, responsibility for which Haseldine would later attribute to apartheid South Africa. This is the text of Haseldine's letter:
- "It is all very well for Mrs Thatcher to inveigh against the Belgians and the Irish with such self-righteous invective. Naturally, she would not care to admit it but in the not too distant past her allegations of being soft on terrorism and allowing political considerations to override the due legal process could have been levelled at Mrs Thatcher herself.
- Remember the Coventry Four? These were the four (white) South Africans brought before Coventry magistrates in March 1984 and remanded in custody on arms embargo charges. Rumour has it that Mrs Thatcher was rather annoyed with the over-zealous officials who caused the four military personnel to be arrested in Britain. Rightly, she refused to accede to the South African embassy's demand for the case to be dropped but she was keen for the embassy to know precisely how the legal hurdles governing their release and the return of their passports could be swiftly overcome. Thus the First Secretary at the embassy stood bail for the "Coventry Four", having declared in court that he was waiving his diplomatic immunity. (The embassy did not, however, formally confirm the waiver.) Then a petition to an English Judge in Chambers secured the repatriation of the four accused.
- Clearly, Mrs Thatcher wanted the four high-profile detainees safely out of UK jurisdiction, back in South Africa and off the agenda well before her June 1984 talks at Chequers with the two visiting Bothas (P.W. Botha and Pik Botha). Strange that Pik Botha, the foreign minister, was able to find an excuse for not allowing the "Coventry Four" to stand trial in the Autumn of 1984.
- Stranger still that Mrs Thatcher failed to denounce Mr Botha's refusal to surrender the four "terrorists" (cf. declaration by US Governor Dukakis that South Africa is a "terrorist state")."
Questions about Haseldine's letter to The Guardian were asked in Parliament by eight Labour MPs: Richard Cabourn, Dale Campbell-Savours, Bob Cryer, Tam Dalyell, Tony Lloyd, Dennis Skinner, Alan Williams and David Winnick. The latter asked the Leader of the House (Mr Wakeham) on December 8, 1988:
- "Is it not a matter of public anxiety that there is so much prime ministerial pressure on the FCO to appease the apartheid regime that an information officer at the FCO came to the conclusion that he was willing to sacrifice his career because he believed that the truth ought to be told? Should not the prime minister, or at least the foreign secretary, make a statement before the recess, and is it not the case that, when the new Official Secrets Bill becomes law, the official in question will have no defence in claiming public interest?"
In a House of Commons debate on December 13, 1988 Tam Dalyell asked the Prime Minister:
- "when she expects to receive the report from Sir Robin Butler on the case of Mr P J Haseldine and his letter to The Guardian; and if she will make a statement."
Mrs Thatcher replied:
- "I do not expect to receive such a report. This case is being considered in accordance with procedures laid down in diplomatic service regulations. These regulations are made under powers vested in the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary by the Diplomatic Service Order in Council 1964 which established the diplomatic service as a separate service under the Crown."
[edit] Media reaction
National and international media followed up the story.
- On December 9, 1988, the Daily Mirror sent him a hand-written letter:
- "Dear Mr Haseldine, This is just a note to congratulate you in the warmest possible way on your quite wonderful letter to The Guardian this week. It was an act full of defiance and democracy - two rather scarce qualities these days. And I can tell you that there are lots of journalists around who raised a hearty cheer. If there is ever anything I can do to help or support you, just get in touch. All the very best to you, [signed] Paul Foot."
- Time Magazine reported:
- "Few doubt that the Thatcher government has grown more rigid as it has aged. Last month, for example, the government revealed a revised version of the Official Secrets Act: one clause outlaws disclosure of any information by a member or former member of the security or intelligence services and rules out the claim of a higher national interest as a defense in a court of law. Even revelations of criminal behavior by officials would be illegal, and journalists who publish such material could be prosecuted. So determined is the government to silence leakers that a senior Foreign Office official was suspended last week and faces dismissal for writing a letter to a newspaper accusing Thatcher of 'self-righteous invective'."
- The Guardian reported on December 17, 1988, that a fifth man had been arrested in March 1984 at the same time as the Coventry Four but was quickly released without charge on instructions from senior Whitehall officials. Professor Johannes Cloete of Stellenbosch University admitted he was the fifth man but denied that he or the Kentron employees arrested with him had broken any British law.
[edit] FCO inquiry and appeal
Upon publication of the Guardian letter Personnel Department again suspended Haseldine, sent him a letter of complaint in accordance with diplomatic service regulation (DSR) number 20 and scheduled an internal FCO disciplinary hearing to take place on February 28, 1989. In advance of this hearing, Haseldine wrote on January 23, 1989 to Sir Robin Day asking for a video recording of the program in which he had appeared. The editor of Question Time, Barbara Maxwell, sent him Sir Robin's own VHS copy together with a covering letter sympathizing with his predicament.
Haseldine attended the FCO hearing with his solicitor, Pamela Walsh, and brought along the video – extracts of which were screened there. The disciplinary board's questioning was largely focused on the Guardian letter and Haseldine was repeatedly asked to divulge the source of the information in the letter. However, because he had been led to believe he was under an Official Secrets Act, 1911 criminal investigation, he refused to be drawn on the matter lest he incriminate himself in advance of the trial.
The disclipinary board reported on March 7, 1989 to the Permanent Under-Secretary (PUS) at the FCO. In the unpublished report, the board said its task was defined solely by DSR 20 and the letter of complaint, which excluded consideration of the Question Time issue, and it agreed unanimously that the only appropriate penalty in Haseldine's case was enforced resignation or dismissal. On March 21, 1989 the PUS wrote to Haseldine saying he should resign by - or be dismissed on - April 4, 1989, when payment of his salary would cease.
Haseldine appealed against this decision in a letter dated March 22, 1989 to the foreign secretary, Sir Geoffrey Howe. He also wrote on April 5, 1989 to his MP, Robert McCrindle, firstly complaining that the FCO had just ceased paying his salary and secondly accusing South Africa of responsibility for the Lockerbie bombing. The No 2 Diplomatic Service Appeal Board (comprising Dame Gillian Brown, Mr N H Young, Mr W Jones and Mr J P R Oliver) met on May 5, 1989. Accompanied this time by his wife, Haseldine attended the meeting still expecting to be charged under the Official Secrets Act, and therefore again constrained in what he could say about the source of the information in his Guardian letter. The Appeal Board had before it the correspondence with Mr McCrindle and stated in its unpublished written record (paragraph 67):
- "Mr Jones said Mr Haseldine had raised the point of South Africa being the cause of his problems. He often referred to South Africa eg he had himself linked South Africa to the Lockerbie disaster."
At the start of the summer parliamentary recess on July 19, 1989 Sir Geoffrey Howe's private secretary, Stephen Wall, wrote informing Haseldine that his appeal had been rejected and that he should submit his resignation by August 2, 1989 or be dismissed on that date. He did not resign and the private secretary wrote again on August 4, 1989 (four days after Sir Geoffrey Howe had been demoted and replaced as foreign secretary by John Major) confirming that Haseldine had in fact been dismissed from the Diplomatic Service on August 2, 1989.
[edit] ECHR application
The Guardian of August 3, 1989, in an editorial entitled Just out of court, argued that Haseldine's dismissal could well have been a breach of Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human Rights. Encouraged by this editorial, he and his solicitor began preparing an application to the European Commission of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg. The Haseldine v United Kingdom application – which on his solicitor's advice made no reference to the Lockerbie bombing – was eventually submitted in 1991. The ECHR declared it inadmissible the following year.[2](tick Decisions box, Case Title Haseldine, Respondent State United Kingdom, Application Number 18957, Article 10, and click on Search: result is a clickable link on Haseldine v United Kingdom).
[edit] Finger of suspicion
Haseldine first suspected the apartheid regime was involved in the Lockerbie bombing when he heard South African foreign minister Pik Botha's interview with the BBC Radio 4 Today Programme on January 11, 1989. On that day Botha – along with other international representatives including UN secretary general Javier Pérez de Cuéllar – was in Stockholm to attend the memorial service for Bernt Carlsson, UN Commissioner for Namibia. Botha told the BBC that he had been forced to make a last-minute change in his own booking on PA 103 because of a warning by an intelligence source that he (Botha) was being targeted by the African National Congress.
Using this information, which had not been reported elsewhere in the media, Haseldine wrote another letter to The Guardian on December 7, 1989:
- "Finger of suspicion
- Exactly one year ago, you published my letter suggesting that Mrs Thatcher might have a blind spot as far as South African terrorism is concerned. Fourteen days after publication, Pan Am Flight 103 was blown out of the sky upon Lockerbie. Of the 270 victims, the most prominent person was the Swede Mr Bernt Carlsson – UN Commissioner for Namibia – whose obituary appeared on page 29 of your December 23, 1988 edition.
- I cannot be the only puzzled observer of this tragedy to wonder why police attention did not immediately focus on a South African connection. The question to be put (probably to Mrs Thatcher) is: given the South African proclivity to using the diplomatic bag for conveying explosives and the likelihood that the bomb was loaded aboard the aircraft at Heathrow (vide David Pallister, The Guardian, November 9, 1989) why has it taken so long for the finger of suspicion to point towards South Africa?
- Were police inquiries into Lockerbie subject to any political guidance or imperatives?
- Patrick Haseldine (Address supplied)."
His media campaign continued with The Guardian publishing a further eight letters linking South Africa to the sabotage of PA 103.
The judicial route started on September 26, 1990 when he sent a 3-page letter to Sheriff Principal John Mowatt QC (who presided over the Fatal Accident Inquiry that was to start on October 1, 1990), outlining the case against South Africa. In reply the Regional Sheriff Clerk at Dumfries wrote on October 2, 1990:
- "The criminal investigation into the Lockerbie air disaster is a matter for the Lord Advocate alone and cannot in any way be influenced by the Court."
Haseldine then wrote to the Lord Advocate, Lord Fraser of Carmyllie, on October 18 and again on November 5, 1990. The Crown Office replied on November 21, 1990 saying:
- "It is not the practice of the Lord Advocate to make statements in relation to the direction of a criminal investigation. Your letters have, however, been passed to the Procurator Fiscal who is responsible not only for the conduct of the Fatal Accident Inquiry but also for the conduct of the criminal investigation."
[edit] Political activity
Seeking a political home for his anti-apartheid views, Haseldine joined the Labour Party in 1990 and, as soon as the party rules permitted, became a Labour candidate for the Ongar Division in the May 6, 1993 Essex County Council elections. He came third, but with a respectable vote. In the build-up to the 1994 European Parliament elections, he narrowly failed in his attempt to secure the nomination in his local Essex West & Hertfordshire East constituency. Instead, he became press officer to the successful nominee, Hugh Kerr. The subsequent tightly fought contest in this rural euro-constituency (not Labour's natural territory) resulted in Kerr's surprise election as a Member of the European Parliament (MEP) and the defeat of the Conservative incumbent Patricia Rawlings.
At about the same time, Haseldine was elected as Chipping Ongar's first Labour parish councillor. As the proprietor of the Clock Tower Café in Ongar, he hosted a number of annual dinners for local Labour Party members. Among the guest speakers there, were Hugh Kerr MEP and Bill Rammell prospective Labour candidate and, from 1997, Member of Parliament for the Harlow constituency.
[edit] "Sacking the PM"
With the demise of the apartheid regime in South Africa and the election there of Nelson Mandela in April 1994, Haseldine decided to seek reinstatement in HM Diplomatic Service. On the fifth anniversary of his dismissal by John Major – who was foreign secretary in 1989 and had since become Prime Minister – Haseldine decided he would present an 'ultimatum' to N°10 Downing Street. His letter of July 19, 1994 offered Prime Minister Major the choice of either agreeing to reinstate him or, failing such agreement, the alternative of resigning as PM within 14 days or of being dismissed at the next election.
In the event, he was not re-employed and the PM did not resign. Therefore Haseldine had to consider how best he could dismiss the PM. After deliberating upon the options, he chose to stand as Labour party candidate against the Conservative John Major in his Huntingdon constituency at the next General Election. He did not realistically expect to overturn Major's 36,230-vote majority, one of the largest in the country, but thought he could make a sizeable dent in it. Haseldine contacted the Huntingdon constituency Labour party (CLP) and was invited with four other candidates to address the CLP parliamentary selection meeting on March 14, 1995. He attended the Huntingdon selection meeting but a young local school teacher, Jason Reece, was preferred and adopted as Labour's candidate.
(Unsurprisingly, Reece could not overturn Major's majority at Huntingdon but he did hit the headlines during the election campaign when his school sacked him for standing against the PM. Reece sued the Jack Hunt School in Peterborough for breach of contract and was awarded £700. Reece told The Guardian of December 2, 1996:
- "I hope this has established the right of any citizen to stand for Parliament without having to worry whether their employer approves."
John Major easily retained his Huntingdon seat in the 1997 General Election, but his majority was halved to 18,140 (Labour's Jason Reece came 2nd with 13,361 votes). Although Haseldine was unsuccessful in sacking John Major MP, he helped play a small but significant part in "sacking the PM" since Major's Tory government was resoundingly defeated by a resurgent Labour party headed by Tony Blair in 1997.)
[edit] Dossier of evidence
After this flurry of political activity in 1995, Haseldine devoted his time to assembling a dossier of evidence to incriminate South Africa for the Lockerbie bombing – rather than the two Libyans (Megrahi and Fhimah) who had been indicted in 1991. He had already noted from the 1994 documentary film The Maltese Double Cross – Lockerbie that foreign minister Pik Botha as well as a South African delegation had been booked on PA 103, and had cancelled at the last minute. To find out more, he contacted Reuters in London and obtained a copy of the news agency's press release issued in Johannesburg on November 12, 1994 in which Botha had confirmed being booked on PA 103 but denied any foreknowledge of a bomb on the aircraft.
Haseldine got in touch with Swedish journalist Jan-Olof Bengtsson about three articles Bengtsson had written in the iDAG newspaper in March 1990 about UN Commissioner for Namibia, Bernt Carlsson. The main thrust of these Swedish articles appeared to be that South African pressure had been applied to Carlsson so that he would take Pan Am Flight 103. Bengtsson mailed the articles to him from Malmö following a fax dated November 23, 1995:
- "Dear Mr Haseldine, Have just received your fax and you'll have copies of my three articles published in iDAG in the mail at once. As you understand they are in Swedish so you have to translate them.
- The articles were published as follows – 1990-03-12, 1990-03-13 and 1990-03-14.
- I would very much like to have the articles/letters you've published in The Guardian before and after the explosion.
- I don't know the British regulations of how to use articles and press materials in your court system as evidence. But if you find my articles and 'digging' helpful supporting your theories, you have my permission to use them in any way you want.
- Yours sincerely,
- Jan-Olof Bengtsson"
In December 1995, Haseldine incorporated this and other evidence he had accumulated into his dossier, and presented it to the Scottish Lord Advocate; the U.S. embassy; the South African High Commission; Dr Jim Swire of UK Families Flight 103; his MEP, Hugh Kerr; his MP, Eric Pickles and Robin Cook, shadow foreign secretary. All, except the latter, acknowledged receipt.
[edit] Congratulating New Labour
On May 5, 1997, Haseldine wrote congratulating new foreign secretary Robin Cook on his appointment, after the landslide election victory of the New Labour government, and asking for reinstatement in the FCO. The foreign secretary replied in a letter dated May 16, 1997:
- "It is now a decade since your dismissal. At the time you exhausted the agreed appeal procedures, but all members of the Appeal Board, including staff and independent members, concurred that your dismissal was appropriate. In the circumstances I do not believe it would be right for me now to overturn their conclusion. There is no prospect of your reinstatement."
Undaunted, he then asked his MP and MEP to intercede with Robin Cook on his behalf. When neither representative managed to elicit a positive response from the foreign secretary, Haseldine sent a letter via the South African High Commission addressed to President Nelson Mandela, who was visiting London in July 1997 for talks with PM Tony Blair. The letter, which he copied to N°10 Downing Street, dealt with his twin concerns: Lockerbie/South Africa and reinstatement in the FCO. N°10 did not respond and it was not until August 22, 1997, that Mandela's administrative secretary wrote from Cape Town acknowledging receipt of Haseldine's letter, and saying:
- "The matter will be brought to [the President's] attention as soon as possible."
At which point Haseldine decided to abandon political activity and to concentrate on pursuing the former apartheid regime by the judicial route.
[edit] Bringing South Africa to book
He continued to update the dossier of Lockerbie evidence and eventually e-mailed it in March 2000 – two months before the start of the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial – to the newly-appointed Lord Advocate, Colin Boyd QC, and to the defence lawyers for the two accused Libyans. He became a regular contributor to the Pan Am 103/Lockerbie Discussion Forum website (now defunct) and published an article there entitled Lockerbie trial : a better defence of incrimination in December 2000.[3] The trial resulted in the acquittal of Al Amin Khalifa Fhimah and the conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi on January 31, 2001. Megrahi's appeal against his conviction was rejected on March 14, 2002.
Haseldine heard in 2004 that the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) had been asked to undertake a thorough and impartial review of the case. As a result, he made an extensive submission to the SCCRC in 2005 of all the evidence he had accumulated since December 21, 1988 to support the theory that the apartheid regime was responsible for the Lockerbie bombing. The SCCRC is expected to conclude its review in the first half of 2007.
On May 4, 2006, the Scottish Executive announced that a panel of five Judges sitting in Edinburgh would hear Megrahi's appeal against his 27-year minimum jail sentence on July 11, 2006. However, defence lawyers and others, including PA 103 relatives, have expressed concern about the timing of this appeal against sentence, and are keen for any appeal against conviction (that the SCCRC might decide upon) to be heard at the same time. Addressing these concerns, a court spokesman said:
- "There might be a referral from the commission [SCCRC], but there might not be."[4]
Lawyers for Megrahi later insisted that both appeals (against sentence and conviction) ought to take place at the special Scottish court at Camp Zeist, Netherlands – where his trial and first appeal against conviction were held – rather than in Edinburgh. The Crown disputed the move on security and cost grounds and, on June 8, 2006, the Scottish Court of Criminal Appeal decided to postpone the July appeal against sentence.[5]In November 2006, Megrahi was reported to have withdrawn the demand for the appeal to be heard at Camp Zeist.[6]
[edit] Pensioned off
Having unsuccessfully appealed against his dismissal in 1989 to foreign secretary Sir Geoffrey Howe, Haseldine enlisted the support of his former MPs (Robert McCrindle, Eric Pickles and Ivan Henderson) for his reinstatement in the diplomatic service from each of Howe's successors: John Major, Douglas Hurd, Malcolm Rifkind, Robin Cook and Jack Straw. All rejected his reinstatement request but Robin Cook wrote on May 16, 1997:
- "At the time of your dismissal, you were informed of your entitlement to a preserved pension and preserved lump sum, both payable on your sixtieth birthday. This remains the position. I have asked my officials in the FCO Superannuation Section to write to you shortly to let you know the current value of your preserved benefits."
A week later, Haseldine was informed that on July 11, 2002, he would qualify for a pension – based on 18 years' service – of 25 per cent of his final year (1989) salary, equivalent to about £5,000 per year.
In May 2006, finding it increasingly difficult to manage on this small sum, Haseldine wrote the first of a series of letters asking his current MP, Douglas Carswell, to apply on his behalf to the new Foreign Secretary, Margaret Beckett, for a fourfold increase in his civil service pension. He also claimed compensation of £750,000 – equivalent to the out-of-court settlement by the Scottish Executive to former police detective, Shirley McKie. Ms McKie had sued the Scottish Executive and the SCRO fingerprint service for wrongly accusing her of being at a crime scene in 1997. As a result of the accusation, she lost her job, was charged with perjury and was acquitted in 1999. The compensation payment in February 2006 came just two days before Ms McKie's case was due to have been heard in court. Haseldine justified his claim as follows:
- "Had I been charged under the 1911 Official Secrets Act for writing to The Guardian, the likelihood is that I too would have been acquitted (cf. Clive Ponting). I therefore claim an ex gratia compensation payment from the FCO, similar to Ms McKie's."
In November 2006, Douglas Carswell MP wrote:
- "I appreciate that this case is a long running one, and a number of MPs and Foreign Secretaries have been involved in trying to resolve it. I will continue to do what I can to help, but have to say that I may not be able to solve it immediately."
To which Haseldine responded:
- "The Wikipedia article, Patrick Haseldine, setting out the full background and justification for increasing my FCO pension and paying compensation to me, was not available to any of my former MPs. You now have the opportunity to ask the Foreign Secretary to reconsider my case in the light of this Wikipedia article, and I should be grateful for your confirmation that the enclosed copy of it has in fact been submitted to Mrs Beckett."
[edit] References
- The Guardian December 7, 1988 - Letters: The double standards on terrorism
- The Guardian December 9, 1988 - page 24, Richard Norton-Taylor and David Pallister: Commons test for SA arms row - Letters:Clive Ponting The burden of conscience in the civil service
- Observer December 11, 1988 - Richard Ingrams: splendid kamikaze attack on Mrs Thatcher
- The Guardian December 17, 1988 "Fifth man" professor identified in South African weapons ring
- TIME December 19, 1988 - page 22: Sour Land of Liberty
- The Guardian May 6, 1989 - Richard Norton-Taylor: Thatcher's Whitehall critic to appeal against loss of job
- The Guardian July 27, 1989 - Richard Norton-Taylor: Thatcher critic faces dismissal
- The Guardian August 3, 1989 - Editorial: Just out of court - David Pallister: FO to dismiss official in Pretoria row
- The Daily Telegraph August 4, 1989 - Alan Osborn: Foreign Office sacks Thatcher attack diplomat
- The Guardian December 7, 1989 - Letters: Finger of suspicion
- The Guardian May 16, 1990 - Letters: Lockerbie and beyond
- The Guardian December 11, 1990 - Letters: Whistles that blow through the corridors of power
- The Independent on Sunday June 9, 1991 - Rosie Waterhouse: Sacked Thatcher critic sues ministry
- The Guardian August 5, 1991 - Letters: Missing diplomatic links and the Lockerbie tragedy
- The Guardian August 10, 1991 - Letters: The bearer of strange tidings from Islamic Jihad
- The Guardian December 21, 1991 - Letters: Justice after Lockerbie
- The Guardian March 16, 1992 - Letters: Motives and a Libyan connection that's far too neat
- The Guardian April 22, 1992 - Letters: ANC as the fall-guys for Lockerbie bombing
- The Guardian December 22, 1993 - Letters: Flight Path
- Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission
- European Commission of Human Rights [7] Tick Decisions box, Case Title Haseldine, Respondent State United Kingdom, Application Number 18957, Article 10 and click on Search.
[edit] See also
- Clive Ponting
- Sarah Tisdall
- Alternative theories into the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103#South-West Africa (Namibia)
