The Litvinenko Inquiry

Background

What it found

1. Litvinenko died of acute radiation syndrome after ingesting a fatal dose of polonium 210 on 1 November 2006. The report finds he was not the victim of an accident, and did not take the poison himself. p. 245 p. 246

   “I am sure that Mr Litvinenko did not ingest the polonium 210 either by accident or to commit suicide. I am sure, rather, that he was deliberately poisoned by others.”

2. The report finds that Andrey Lugovoy and Dmitri Kovtun placed the polonium 210 in the teapot Litvinenko drank from at the Pine Bar, intending to kill him, and that they had made an earlier attempt with the same poison two weeks before. p. 246 p. 246

   “I am sure that Mr Lugovoy and Mr Kovtun placed the polonium 210 in the teapot at the Pine Bar on 1 November 2006. I am also sure that they did this with the intention of poisoning Mr Litvinenko.”

3. The most important evidence against the two men, the report finds, is forensic - polonium 210 contamination in the plughole of Kovtun's bathroom at the Millennium Hotel, in lavatories near the Pine Bar that both men visited and Litvinenko did not, and in hotel bathrooms they used on earlier visits to London. That evidence alone, the Chairman writes, would have satisfied him that they were responsible. p. 193 p. 193 p. 193 p. 193 p. 193

4. Lugovoy and Kovtun were acting on behalf of others, the report finds, and it is probable that Lugovoy poisoned Litvinenko under the direction of the FSB, Russia's security service, with Kovtun acting under the same direction. p. 246 p. 246

   “When Mr Lugovoy poisoned Mr Litvinenko, it is probable that he did so under the direction of the FSB. I would add that I regard that as a strong probability. I have found that Mr Kovtun also took part in the poisoning. I conclude therefore that he was also acting under FSB direction, possibly indirectly through Mr Lugovoy but probably to his knowledge.”

5. The report's final conclusion goes to the top of the Russian state, finding that the FSB operation to kill Litvinenko was probably approved by Nikolai Patrushev, then head of the FSB, and by President Putin. p. 244 p. 246

   “The FSB operation to kill Mr Litvinenko was probably approved by Mr Patrushev and also by President Putin.”

6. The report sets out powerful motives within the Russian state for wanting Litvinenko dead - he was regarded as having betrayed the FSB, was reported to have been identified as working for British intelligence, and had repeatedly and personally attacked President Putin in public. p. 239

7. The polonium's origin could not be traced conclusively to Russia, the report finds, but its use is itself a strong indicator of state involvement, since the isotope must come from a nuclear reactor and such reactors are, in general, under state control. p. 225 p. 225

8. Russia has refused UK requests to extradite Lugovoy and Kovtun, citing its constitution's bar on extraditing its own citizens. Lugovoy has denied involvement, was elected to the Russian parliament, and received a state honour from President Putin during the Inquiry's hearings. p. 237 p. 238

Where to start reading

Short on time? These sections carry the report's argument. Each opens at the start of the section.

1. Part 10: Summary of conclusions p. 246 · Read →

   The whole chain of findings in a couple of pages - how Litvinenko died, who poisoned him, and on whose orders.

   “I am sure that Mr Litvinenko ingested the fatal dose of polonium 210 whilst drinking tea in the Pine Bar of the Millennium Hotel during the afternoon of 1 November 2006.”

2. Chapter 6: Who administered the poison? p. 193 · Read →

   The forensic case against Lugovoy and Kovtun - the polonium trail through three hotel bathrooms, and the inconsistencies in the two men's own accounts of that afternoon.

   “Mr Lugovoy initially declined to give an account of the meeting at the Pine Bar because, he said, the room had been covered by, ‘high quality video equipment, which doubtless recorded the meeting’. In fact, there was no such video equipment in the Pine Bar, and it is not credible that Mr Lugovoy, as a security professional, could have mistakenly thought that there was.”

3. Chapter 11: Conclusions regarding Russian State responsibility p. 240 · Read →

   Why the Chairman found a Russian State operation rather than a private killing - the polonium's likely source, Litvinenko's enemies within the FSB, and how Putin has treated Lugovoy since 2006.

   “The fact that Mr Litvinenko was poisoned with polonium 210 that had been manufactured in a nuclear reactor suggests that Mr Lugovoy and Mr Kovtun were acting for a state body, rather than (say) a criminal organisation.”

4. Chapter 12: Russian State responsibility – involvement of Nikolai Patrushev and President Vladimir Putin p. 242 · Read →

   How the Chairman reached "probably approved" specifically for Patrushev and Putin, weighing expert evidence on who controls the FSB.

   “‘The conclusion must be’, Professor Service stated: ‘that Putin generally endorsed what the agency got up to in the years through to 2006 and beyond and that Patrushev as its Director knew that he had his President's support in its operations.’”

5. Part 2: Introduction p. 10 · Read →

   Why an inquest became a public inquiry, and the standards of proof - "sure", "find", "probable" - that run through the whole report.

   “I add that where in this Report I state that 'I am sure' I will have found a fact to the criminal standard. When I use such expressions as 'I find' or 'I am satisfied' the standard of proof will have been the ordinary civil standard of proof, namely the balance of probabilities.”