Speaking in Birmingham, Mr Brown reiterated that the decision was one for the Scottish Government alone.
He rejected suggestions that his government put pressure on Scotland to release al-Megrahi early in an attempt to improve Britain’s trade links with Libya.
“On our part, there was no conspiracy, no cover-up, no double-dealing, no deal on oil, no attempt to instruct Scottish ministers, no private assurances by me to (Libyan leader) Colonel (Muammar) Gaddafi,” Brown said at an employment summit.
“We were absolutely clear throughout with the Libyans and everyone else that this was a decision for the Scottish government.”
Mr Brown described the scenes accompanying the bomber’s return as “despicable”.
A video of Megrahi being feted on his arrival in Tripoli was shown in the Libyan capital, as part of the celebrations of leader Colonel Gaddafi’s 40 years in power.
Mr Brown’s comments came as MSPs debated the bomber’s release. Scotland Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill defended his decision to turn down Megrahi’s bid to be transferred to Libya, and to grant his request for compassionate early release.
“Based on the values, beliefs and common humanity that defines us as Scots, I allowed him to return home to die,” said Mr MacAskill.
Mr Brown defended his refusal to voice publicly his opinion on Megrahi’s release, and said he had “minimised” the pain for Lockerbie families.
He insisted: “Would it have been right to have spoken publicly about the issue before the decision when it was a matter for the Scottish government? No, we would have been wrong to intervene when it was a quasi judicial decision for the Scottish Government.
“After the decision was made, and after the despicable scenes at Tripoli airport, was I right to use my energies to minimise further unnecessary suffering for the relatives of Lockerbie victims and to prevent Libyan independence day being made into a celebration of Megrahi’s return? Yes, and as we saw yesterday, he did not appear at those events.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article