Chapter 11: Conclusions regarding Russian State responsibility

¶9.187 The open evidence that I have set out above establishes a strong circumstantial case that the Russian State was responsible for Mr Litvinenko's death.

¶9.188 I draw attention in particular to the following points.

¶9.189 I have found that Mr Litvinenko was killed by Mr Lugovoy and Mr Kovtun. They had

no personal animus against Mr Litvinenko. I am sure that they killed him on behalf of others.

¶9.190 Mr Lugovoy and Mr Kovtun are both Russian citizens, who were living in Russia in

They were both former members of Russian armed forces. Mr Lugovoy had been a member of the KGB and latterly the Federal Protection Service. Mr Kovtun had been an officer in the Russian army.

¶9.191 The evidence of Mr Glushkov and others raises questions as to a possible relationship

between Mr Lugovoy (who was clearly the leader of the two men) and the FSB in the years up to and including 2006.

¶9.192 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.

¶9.193 Although it cannot be said that the polonium 210 with which Mr Litvinenko was

poisoned must have come from the Avangard facility in Russia, it certainly could have come from there.

¶9.194 There were powerful motives for organisations and individuals within the Russian

State to take action against Mr Litvinenko, including killing him. Mr Litvinenko was, as a result of his actions both before and after leaving Russia, regarded as having betrayed the FSB. Moreover, according to Mr Lugovoy, the FSB had received information that Mr Litvinenko was working for British intelligence. Mr Litvinenko was an associate of leading opponents of the Putin regime, and he had repeatedly targeted President Putin himself with highly personal public criticism.

¶9.195 I note in this context that Mr Kovtun told D3 during their conversation in Hamburg that

Mr Litvinenko was to be poisoned rather than shot because, "It is meant to set an example".

¶9.196 There is evidence suggesting that in the years prior to Mr Litvinenko's death the

Russian State had been involved in the killing of a number of opponents of President Putin's administration, including those, like Mr Litvinenko, who had publicly blamed the FSB for the 1999 apartment bombings. The pattern was of killings both inside and outside Russia. There was evidence of poisons, including radioactive poisons, being used in some cases. Professor Dombey expressed the view that the FSB had tested radioactive poisons on humans, including in one case on a prisoner.

¶9.197 Although the strict terms of the 2006 laws did not permit the FSB to take action against

extremists (as opposed to terrorists) outside the borders of Russia, the evidence of Professor Service was that the laws had a wider effect. He said that: "the authorities

240

¶The Litvinenko Inquiry

wanted to fudge that distinction [i.e. the distinction between extremists and terrorists] and just create a new feeling for the FSB to feel free to act without constraint."

¶9.198 Since 2006 President Putin has supported and protected Mr Lugovoy, notwithstanding

the fact that Mr Lugovoy has been publicly accused of killing Mr Litvinenko. During the course of the Inquiry hearings, President Putin awarded Mr Lugovoy an honour for services to the fatherland. Whilst it does not follow that Mr Lugovoy must have been acting on behalf of the Russian State when he killed Mr Litvinenko, the way in which President Putin has treated Mr Lugovoy is certainly consistent with that hypothesis. Moreover, President Putin's conduct towards Mr Lugovoy suggests a level of approval for the killing of Mr Litvinenko.

¶9.199 In my judgement, these matters amount to strong circumstantial evidence of Russian

State responsibility for the killing of Mr Litvinenko. Having additionally taken into account the closed evidence, my findings are as follows.

¶9.200 When Mr Lugovoy poisoned Mr Litvinenko (as I have found that he did), 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.

241

¶Part 9 | Chapters 1 to 12 | Who directed the killing?