The Russian embassy has posted this account of what ambassador Alexander Yakovenko told the foreign office during the meeting he was summoned to today:
1. We consider the Litvinenko case and the way it was disposed of a blatant provocation of the British authorities.
2. We will never accept anything arrived at in secret and based on the evidence not tested in an open court of law.
3. The length of time that it took to “close” this case in this way makes us to believe it to be a whitewash for British special services’ institutional incompetence.
4. We also noted that the British government suspended the coroner’s inquest which was open for public and media and where the Investigative Committee of Russia took part as an interested person, in favor of the public enquiry, which in fact is secret, at the height of political tension with Russia over Ukraine in July 2014. We view it as an attempt to put additional pressure on Russia in connection with existing differences over a number of international issues.
5. For us it is absolutely unacceptable that the report concludes that the Russian state was in any way involved in the death of Mr Litvinenko on British soil.
6. This gross provocation of the British authorities cannot help hurting our bilateral relationship.
Updated
Here’s a summary of what we know.
-
The former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko was probably murdered on the personal orders of Vladimir Putin, the UK public inquiry into his death has found. Sir Robert Owen the QC who conducted the inquiry said: “I have concluded the FSB operation to kill Mr Litvinenko was probably approved by Mr [Nikolai] Patrushev, then head of the FSB, and also by President Putin.”
- Marina Litvinenko, Alexander’s widow, welcomed the report and called for the UK to impose sanctions on Russia. “It is unthinkable that the Prime Minister would do nothing in the face of the damning findings of Sir Robert Owen”, she said. She said she was “very proud of British justice.”
- Ben Emmerson, Marina Litvinenko’s barrister, said the poisoning was a “mini act of nuclear terrorism on the streets of London”. He said it was inconceivable that Russian agents be allowed to stay in the UK.
- Downing Street said the government would have to weigh up any further actions in light of the need to work with Russia on tackling Isis. But it said the report was “extremely disturbing”.
- Home Secretary Theresa May announced that asset freezes have been imposed on Andrei Lugovoi and Dmitry Kovtun the men found by Owen to have administered the radioactive polonium poison in Litvinenko’s tea. She said she had written to the director of public prosecutions today “asking her to consider whether any further action should be taken.
- Opposition MPs and some Tory backbenchers said the government’s response didn’t go far enough. Shadow home secretary Andy Burnham said the UK’s response and “could send a dangerous signal to Russia that our response is too weak
-
Andrei Lugovoi, the former KGB agent turned Russian MP, dismissed the report as “absurd”. He said: “The results released to today just show London’s anti-Russian position once again”.
- Russia’s foreign ministry said the report was “politically motivated.” A spokeswoman said: “We regret that a purely criminal case has been politicised and has darkened the general atmosphere of our bilateral relations.”
- Russia’s ambassador to the UK, Alexander Yakovenko, was summoned to the foreign office over the inquiry’s finding. He said the report was an attempt to “exert pressure on Russia due to differences over international issues.”
That’s it for now. There will be more news and analysis on Alexander Litvinenko section of the Guardian’s site.
Carl Bildt Sweden’s former prime minister and its foreign minister at the time of the murder said the conclusion of the report were “truly scary”.
The full Litvinenko report. It's not fiction - it's reality in Europe in our time. Truly scary. https://t.co/6hTrEVW9FY
— Carl Bildt (@carlbildt) January 21, 2016
The foreign office minister David Liddington met the Russian Ambassador Alexander Yakovenko to assert that Russia had demonstrated “a flagrant disregard for UK law, international law and standards of conduct, and the safety of UK citizens”, writes Patrick Wintour.
Liddington added the Russian’s conduct “would further complicate bilateral relations, undermine trust, and damage Russia’s reputation internationally.”
Even though there is no prospect Russia will change its stance Liddington insisted it was unacceptable that Russia has not complied with the Crown Prosecution Service’s formal request to extradite Lugovoy.
Russia, Liddington said had “to provide answers to the questions raised by this report, to account for the actions of the Russian intelligence services in this case, and to provide an assurance that a similar crime would not be repeated.”
In practice Britain will now be waiting to see if Russia imposes any counter measures, or instead decides to show its contempt for the allegations against Putin by simply ignoring the issue, and focussing on its support for President Assad in Syria.
Shadow home secretary Andy Burnham said the government’s diplomatic response did not “go anywhere near enough in answering the seriousness of the findings”, writes Patrick Wintour.
Burham said the UK’s response and “could send a dangerous signal to Russia that our response is too weak”. He said the report was “one of the most shocking and disturbing reports ever presented to parliament”
He suggested the immediate expulsion of every FSB operative in the UK and strengthened economic sanctions.
The shadow home secretary at the time of the murder, David Davis ,said the report meant that in a civil UK court Putin would be found guilty of complicity in murder. He said “we need to go after the financial assets of Putin in the Bahamas and in Cyprus. Eventually you get to a point when with a dictator you have to draw a line as we did in the Thirties”.
The former Labour culture secretary Ben Bradshaw said: “When is the government going to take meaningful action against the dirty Russian money and property here in London that sustains the Putin kleptocracy, and when is the government going to implement the will of this House - passed overwhelmingly in 2012 - in favour of a Magnitsky-type legislation”.
Another former Labour shadow minister, Mary Creagh, urged the government to take action at the level of the United Nations Security Council, something that was rejected by May.
The SNP’s Peter Grant said “The report I think leads to only one possible conclusion - we now have to regard the Russian government, the Russian state as an organisation actively involved in the commission, funding, supporting and directing acts of terrorism against UK citizens within the United Kingdom.”
Photograph: Jonathan Brady/PA
Shaun Walker in Moscow has more reaction from Russia, on much the same lines as before.
Russia’s ambassador to the UK, Alexander Yakovenko, who has been summoned to the foreign office over the inquiry’s findings, told Russian news agency RIA Novosti he believes the findings were “an attempt to exert pressure on Russia due to differences over international issues”.
A statement from Russia’s investigative committee, which has been accused of carrying out politicised investigations in a number of high-profile murders in Russia, including that of Boris Nemtsov last February, also lambasted the British inquiry.
“The guilty party had been determined from the start, and the inquiry was just set up to bring up some supposedly secret ‘facts’. The very idea of a public inquiry with secret facts which can be manipulated in any way is absurd”.
Putin himself has been chairing a meeting of Russia’s science and education council this afternoon, and has not made any comment on the inquiry. His spokesman Dmitry Peskov has also not commented.
In Sir Robert Owen’s report under a section about possible motives for the murder, the QC points out that Litvinenko accused President Putin of being a paedophile.
It says: “Litvinenko made repeated highly personal attacks on President Putin, culminating in the allegation of paedophilia in July 2006.”
The report carries this text from the article:
“A few days ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin walked from the Big Kremlin Palace to his Residence. At one of the Kremlin squares, the president stopped to chat with the tourists. Among them was a boy aged 4 or 5.
“What is your name?’ Putin asked. ’Nikita,’ the boy replied.
Putin knee[le]d, lifted the boy’s T-shirt and kissed his stomach.
The world public is shocked. Nobody can understand why the Russian president did such a strange thing as kissing the stomach of an unfamiliar small boy.
The explanation may be found if we look carefully at the so-called ‘blank spots’ in Putin’s biography.
After graduating from the Andropov Institute, which prepares officers for the KGB intelligence service, Putin was not accepted into the foreign intelligence. Instead, he was sent to a junior position in KGB Leningrad Directorate.
This was a very unusual twist for a career of an Andropov Institute’s graduate with fluent German. Why did that happen with Putin?
Because, shortly before his graduation, his bosses learned that Putin was a pedophile [sic]. So say some people who knew Putin as a student at the Institute.
The Institute officials feared to report this to their own superiors, which would cause an unpleasant investigation. They decided it was easier just to avoid sending Putin abroad under some pretext. Such a solution is not unusual for the secret services.
Many years later, when Putin became the FSB director and was preparing for the presidency, he began to seek and destroy any compromising materials collected against him by the secret services over earlier years. It was not difficult, provided he himself was the FSB director. Among other things, Putin found videotapes in the FSB Internal Security directorate, which showed him making sex with some underage boys.
Interestingly, the video was recorded in the same conspiratorial flat in Polyanka Street in Moscow where Russian Prosecutor-General Yuri Skuratov was secretly video-taped with two prostitutes. Later, in the famous scandal, Putin (on Roman Abramovich’s instructions) blackmailed Skuratov with these tapes and tried to persuade the Prosecutor-General to resign. In that conversation, Putin mentioned to Skuratov that he himself was also secretly video-taped making sex at the same bed. (But of course, he did not tell it was pedophilia [sic] rather than normal sex.) Later, Skuratov wrote about this in his book Variant Drakona (pp.153-154).”
Tory backbencher David Davis said the government’s response did not go far enough.
He said the findings of the report were “astonishing.” Speaking to the World at One he said: “I do not know of a judicial inquiry which has ever come to the conclusion that a foreign head of state has probably authorised murder on the British streets.”
Asked about the government’s response he said: “It is in the right direction but it is not enough.” He pointed out that Lugovoi and Kovtum were not leave Russia and have been rewarded by the Russian state. “So what we have done so far is gesture. I think we need to expel the intelligence officer at the Russian embassy here. And I think we need to take financial action against Mr Patrushev and Mr Putin.”
“You eventually get to the point with a dictator when you have to draw a line. It is a lesson we learnt in the 30s with Hitler.”
Former shadow home secretary @DavidDavisMP on #LitvinenkoInquiry #wato pic.twitter.com/0PqiFuvH0e
— The World at One (@BBCWorldatOne) January 21, 2016
Marina Litvinenko 'very proud of British justice'
Marina Litvinenko said she was “very proud of British justice”.
Speaking to the BBC Radio 4’s World at One programme she welcomed the imposition of asset freezes on Lugovoi and Kovtum. Asked if Britain’s response was adequate she said: “Yes I believe so.”
She confirmed she would be pursuing Russia and the suspects for damages in the courts.
Amnesty urged the UK to push for Russia’s prosecution.
John Dalhueisen, Amnesty’s Europe programme director, said:
“There is more than enough evidence here for an investigation to be opened in Russia. This is though, sadly, unlikely to happen. But it definitely won’t if the UK government fails to make the case for it forcefully. Otherwise this looks likely to remain a case of justice half done.”
One of Litvinenko’s alleged killers sent a T-shirt bearing the words “nuclear death is knocking on your door” to Britain years after the dissident’s death, PA notes.
Lugovoi was said to have given the T-shirt to an associate in Moscow and asked for it be delivered as a “gift” to billionaire Boris Berezovsky, a friend of the poisoned spy, in 2010.
The front of the black T-shirt had the words “POLONIUM-210 CSKA LONDON, HAMBURG To Be Continued”, while “CSKA Moscow Nuclear Death Is Knocking Your Door” was printed on the back.
Sir Robert Owen’s report said the writing was “in extraordinary terms”.
It said: “Taken on its own (and without, of course, the benefit of oral evidence from Mr Lugovoi), it would be difficult to know what to make of this T-shirt.
“On any view, it demonstrates that Mr Lugovoi approved of Mr Litvinenko’s murder. It was also, clearly, a threat to Mr Berezovsky.
“Further than that, the T-shirt could be seen as an admission by Mr Lugovoi that he had poisoned Mr Litvinenko, made at a time when he was confident that he would never be extradited from Russia, and wished to taunt Mr Berezovsky with that fact.
“Alternatively, it could, perhaps, be seen as an extraordinarily tasteless joke.”
Berezovsky died at his Berkshire home in 2013.
Brave man. The BBC’s Daniel Sandford posts a picture of himself drinking tea with Andrei Lugovoi.
Another opportunity to post one of my more bizarre pictures - me drinking tea with Litvinenko killer Andrei Lugovoi pic.twitter.com/OKk39JCaBt
— Daniel Sandford (@BBCDanielS) January 21, 2016
The Guardian’s Alec Luhn highlights the murder weapon.
The schematics of the murder weapon in the Litvinenko inquiry: Pot full of radioactive tea https://t.co/IdUtJUWeTh pic.twitter.com/jn7jxUKMnT
— Alec Luhn (@ASLuhn) January 21, 2016
Updated
Moscow says report aimed 'demonising' Russia
The Russia news site Sputnik has video of Russia’s foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova responding to the report. It quotes her saying that the report was aimed a “demonising Russia and its leadership.”
#Litvinenko inquiry was not in the least transparent, so we bowed out of it - @mfa_russia https://t.co/PAWlaSnXPK pic.twitter.com/78uf8rXIQf
— Sputnik (@SputnikInt) January 21, 2016
Crispin Blunt, the Tory chairman of the foreign affairs select committee, said working with Russia over Syria was a higher priority than reprisals over Litvinenko’s murder.
Speaking to BBC News he said: “The government has known this was a state-sponsored murder since 2007 ... Unfortunately we have no choice but to deal with the Russians where serious national and common interests are at stake. With hundreds of thousands of people now dead in Syria, bringing that civil war to an end is a clear common interest of both our states.”
He added: “The world has to engage with him [Vladimir Putin]. We are dealing with unsavoury partners all over the world. That is part of the necessity of diplomacy.”
Updated
Theresa May's statement - Summary
Here are the main points from Theresa May’s statement.
As others have said, in rhetorical terms it was robust. But May’s combative language distracted attention from the lack of substance in what she was announcing. The practical measures she unveiled in retaliation against Russia were minimal.
Here are the main points.
- May accused Russia of “a blatant and unacceptable breach of the most fundamental tenets of international law and of civilised behaviour”.
The Government takes these findings extremely seriously – as I am sure does every member of this House. We are carefully considering the report’s findings in detail, and their implications. In particular, the conclusion that the Russian state was probably involved in the murder of Mr Litvinenko is deeply disturbing. It goes without saying that this was a blatant and unacceptable breach of the most fundamental tenets of international law and of civilised behaviour. But we have to accept this does not come as a surprise. The Inquiry confirms the assessment of successive governments that this was a state sponsored act. This assessment has informed the Government’s approach to date.
- She said the government was imposing new asset freezes on Andrei Lugovoi and Dmitry Kovturn, the two killers.
In light of the report’s findings the Government will go further, and Treasury Ministers have today agreed to put in place asset freezes against the two individuals.
- She said she had written to the director of public prosecutions today “asking her to consider whether any further action should be taken, both in terms of extradition and freezing criminal assets”.
- She said the government was protesting to Russia “in the strongest possible terms”.
We have always made our position clear to the Russian government and in the strongest possible terms and we are doing so again today. We are making senior representations to the Russian Government in Moscow. And at the same time we will be summoning the Russian Ambassador in London to the Foreign Office, where we will express our profound displeasure at Russia’s failure to co-operate and provide satisfactory answers. Specifically, we have, and will continue to demand that the Russian Government account for the role of the FSB in this case.
- She said the government was warning its international allies about Russia.
This Government is clear that we must protect the UK and her interests from Russia- based threats, working closely with our allies in the EU and NATO. This morning I have written to my counterparts in EU, NATO and 5 Eyes countries drawing their attention to both the report and the need to take steps to prevent such a murder being committed on their streets.
- She said today’s measures were in addition to action already taken by the government since 2007.
Since 2007 that approach has comprised a series of steps to respond to Russia and its provovation. Some of these measures were immediate, such as the expulsion of a number of Russian embassy officials from the UK. Others are ongoing, such as the tightening of visa restrictions on Russian officials in the UK. The Metropolitan Police Service’s investigation into Mr Litvinenko’s murder remains open. And I can tell the House today Interpol notices and European Arrest Warrants are in place so that the main suspects, Andrey Lugovoy and Dmitri Kovtun, can be arrested if they travel abroad.
Matthew is taking over the blog again now.
Kovtum is keeping schtumm, writes Shaun Walker in Moscow
As is their usual dynamic, Andrei Lugovoi has been giving plenty of comment to Russian news agencies on the British inquiry, while the man named as his accomplice in the poisoning, Dmitry Kovtun, has been staying quiet.
Since the murder, Lugovoi has led a public life, as an MP for a nationalist party and outspoken critic of the west, while Kovtun is rarely seen in public. Kovtun told Interfax on Thursday he did not want to comment until he had the chance to read the report thoroughly.
In the Commons Labour’s Clive Efford says holding sports events in Russia is a propaganda coup for Russia. What is the government doing to stop this?
May says decisions about sporting events are for other bodies.
Marina Litvinenko's lawyer says all Russian spies in London should be expelled
My colleague Luke Harding has more from Marina Litvinenko’s press conference.
Ben Emmerson, Marina's lawyer, says it would be "craven" of UK government not to give tough response to act of nuclear terrorism in London
— Luke Harding (@lukeharding1968) January 21, 2016
Emmerson says no prospect of two murderers standing trial in Uk until after "the final fall of Vladimir Putin"
— Luke Harding (@lukeharding1968) January 21, 2016
Emmerson: "It's inconceivable Putin would send them for trial after he sent them to London to commit a murder"
— Luke Harding (@lukeharding1968) January 21, 2016
Emmerson won't say who he wants sanctioned but says it includes "individuals associated" with the murder plus institutions
— Luke Harding (@lukeharding1968) January 21, 2016
Won't confirm Putin is on list. But it's inconceivable in my view that he isn't
— Luke Harding (@lukeharding1968) January 21, 2016
Emmerson says he expects expulsions. Says it inconceivable #FSB and other agents based at #Russian embassy in London can be allowed to stay
— Luke Harding (@lukeharding1968) January 21, 2016
Emmerson says it's not clear how many FSB and SVR foreign intelligence agents are based at Rus embassy. But stresses 'all"should be expelled
— Luke Harding (@lukeharding1968) January 21, 2016
Presser over. My take: the ball is now in David Cameron's court. If he doesn't expel Russian diplomats he will look weak on state terrorism
— Luke Harding (@lukeharding1968) January 21, 2016
But if he does he can expect nasty and probably asymmetric reaction from the Kremlin and years of Anglo-Russian deep freeze
— Luke Harding (@lukeharding1968) January 21, 2016
Labour’s Ian Austin says Putin is “an unreconstructed KGB thug and gangster who murders his opponents” and that “nothing announced today will make the blindest bit of difference”. He calls for a Magnitsky Act.
May says the government can already exclude people from the UK if it wants to do so. It does not need a Magnitsky Act, she says. And she repeats the point about the government wanting Lugovoi and Kovtun to come to the UK so they can face justice.
Labour’s Ben Bradshaw says this shows Russia is a “rogue state”. He says people will be aghast that the government is only announcing asset freezes on Lugovoi and Kovtun today?
May says action was first taken in 2007. At that time asset freezes were not imposed, but they have been imposed today.
David Davis, the Conservative backbencher, says although the report says President Putin probably approved the murder of Litvinenko, the word “proabably” is redundant. Putin’s regime has killed more than 100 opponents, he says. What will be done about Putin and Nikolai Patrushev? Will FSB officers be expelled from London? And what action will be taken to freeze Russian bank accounts around the world?
May says she said in her statement that the findings about Russian state involvement were no surprise.
It is not “business as usual” with Russia, she says.
Sanctions have already been taken against Patrushev, she says.
But taking action against a head of state would be a different matter.
Here’s a clip of Marina Litvinenko’s barrister Ben Emmerson reacting to the report. “This was a mini act of nuclear terrorism on the streets of London,” he said.
Ian Austin, the Labour former minister, has denounced May’s statement as “weak and pusillanimous nonsense”.
Statement by @andyburnhammp on Litvinenko murder was about a million times better than Teresa May's weak & pusillanimous nonsense
— Ian Austin (@IanAustinMP) January 21, 2016
Updated
Dr Liam Fox, the Conservative former defence secretary, says Lugovoi has been lionised in Russia. That amounts to a snub to the UK. While this continues, Russia should never be treated as an equal partner, he says.
May says the treatment of Lugovoi in Russia (he is an MP) tells you everything you need to know.
She says that the government needs to engage with Russia, on issues like Syria.
But, where it does engage with Moscow, it does so “guardedly”.
Summary
Here’s a summary of what we know:
-
The former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko was probably murdered on the personal orders of Vladimir Putin, the UK public inquiry into his death has found. Sir Robert Owen the QC who conducted the inquiry said: “I have concluded the FSB operation to kill Mr Litvinenko was probably approved by Mr [Nikolai] Patrushev, then head of the FSB, and also by President Putin.”
- Marina Litvinenko, Alexander’s widow, welcomed the report and called for the UK to impose sanctions on Russia. “It is unthinkable that the Prime Minister would do nothing in the face of the damning findings of Sir Robert Owen”, she said.
- Downing Street said the government would have to weigh up any further actions in light of the need to work with Russia on tackling Isis. But it said the report was “extremely disturbing”.
-
Home Secretary Theresa May announced that asset freezes have been imposed on Andrei Lugovoi and Dmitry Kovtun the men found by Owen to have administered the radioactive polonium poison in Litvinenko’s tea. She also told the Commons that Russia’s ambassador to the UK has been summoned.
-
Andrei Lugovoi, the former KGB agent turned Russian MP, dismissed the report as “absurd”. He said: “The results released to today just show London’s anti-Russian position once again”.
-
Russia’s foreign ministry said the report was “politically motivated.” A spokeswoman said: “We regret that a purely criminal case has been politicised and has darkened the general atmosphere of our bilateral relations.”
Updated
May is responding to Burnham.
She says she would be happy to meet Marina Litvinenko.
On the subject of a Magnitsky Act, she says the government has a number of actions that can be taken. But the government wants Lugovoi and Kovtun to come to the UK so they can face justice. It does not want them to be excluded.
If they travel outside Russia, there are warrants in place that would led to their being arrested.
She says David Cameron will raise this with Putin at the next available opportunity.
The UK has been leading on sanctions against Russia in the EU, she says.
She says she wants to see justice for the family.
Andy Burnham, the shadow home secretary, is responding on behalf of Labour.
He says this is one of the most “shocking and disturbing” reports presented to parliament. It reveals an “unprecedented act of state sponsored terrorism that must be met with a commensurate response”.
He says the government should ask its allies to cooperate with Britain in trying to extradite Lugovoi and Kovtun.
He asks if the security of other Russians in the UK who could be at risk has been reviewed.
He says Marina Litvinenko has a list of people who helped Lugovoi and Kovtun. Will the government consider sanctions on people on this list, affecting their travel, their property and their assets?
Will the government consider the case for a Magnitsky Act?
Has the prime minister raised this case with Vladimir Putin?
Burnham asks about parliament’s relationship with the Russian parliament.
He says the government should consider expelling all FSB officers from Britain.
And he says the government should now consider the case for trying to stop the World Cup being held in Russia in 2018.
Burnham recalls Litvinenko’s last words to his son; he said he should defend Britain to his last breath.
And this is from the Daily Mail’s Jason Groves.
Theresa May confirms Britain's impotence in #Litvinenko case. Raging against 'unacceptable' assassination, but almost no real consequences
— Jason Groves (@JasonGroves1) January 21, 2016
Here’s my colleague Rowena Mason’s verdict on Theresa May’s statement.
Theresa May says UK will engage "guardedly" with Russia where it is strictly necessary to do so for national security
— Rowena Mason (@rowenamason) January 21, 2016
May says the closed version of the Owen report - the secret one - includes a recommendation to the government. She cannot discuss that, she says, but the government will respond in due course.
May says the government has threat out the range of threats facing the UK, including from Russia, in its strategic security and defence review.
Since the last SSDR Russia has become more authoritarian, aggressive and nationalist, she says. It is a threat to European security.
Updated
May says the technological advances are changing the threats facing Britain.
More money has been allocated to the intelligence agencies, she says.
May says the Russian ambassador will be summoned to the Foreign Office to be told about the government’s anger about this case.
May says the Treasury is imposing asset freezes on Lugovoi and Kovtun.
May says the inquiry found that Litvinenko was deliberately poisoned by Andrei Lugovoi and Dmitry Kovtun, acting on behalf of others. The operation was probably approved by President Putin, she says.
She says the government takes this “extremely seriously”.
The conclusion that the Russian state was probably involved is extremely disturbing, she says. This was “a blatant and fundamental breach of the most fundamental tenents of international law and civilised behaviour”.
But it was not a surprise, she says, in the light of Russia’s behaviour.
She says international arrest warrants are still out for Lugovoi and Kovtun.
- May says the Treasury is imposing asset freezes on Lugovoi and Kovtun.
Theresa May's statement
Theresa May, the home secretary, is making her statement now.
She says the death of Litvinenko was shocking. She set up the inquiry, and welcomes its report, she says.
She hopes the findings provide some “clarity” for Litvinenko’s family and friends. She pays tribute to his widow Marina for her “tireless” efforts to find the truth about his death.
I’m Andrew Sparrow and I will be taking over from Matthew for a while, covering Theresa May’s Commons statement about the inquiry findings. May is due to start in the next few minutes.
Earlier in the Commons Chris Bryant, the shadow leader of the Commons, and a persistent critic of Putin’s Russia, urged the government to implement a Magnitsky Act. He said:
Of course I fully understand why the government wants to engage with Russia, she is a key player in Iran and in Syria.
But the one thing we know for certain about the murderous kleptomaniac regime in Russia is that it walks all over the weak.
Putin has no respect for those who let him do what he wants.
On March 7 2012 this House declared unanimously that it wanted the government to introduce a Magnitsky Act, ensuring that nobody involved in the murder of Sergei Magnitsky or the corruption that he unveiled should be able to enter this country.
The USA has such an act - is it not time that we made absolutely clear that Russian murderers are not welcome in this country and that the likes of Andrei Lugovoi and Dmitri Kovtun can only enter the country if they are prepared to stand trial?”
Downing Street says findings are 'extremely disturbing'
Downing Street said the findings were “extremely disturbing” but the government would have to weigh up any further actions in light of the need to work with Russia on tackling Isis, writes Rowena Mason.
David Cameron’s official spokeswoman said the report “regrettably confirms what we and previous governments already believed to date”, which is why action were already taken against Russia in 2007.
“We have to weigh carefully need to take measures with the broader need to work with Russia on certain issues,” she said.
The spokeswoman added: “When you look at the threat from Daesh, it is an example of where you put... national security first.”
She said measures against Russia including expelling four embassy officials, tighter visa controls on diplomatic staff and limiting cooperation with the FSB were still in place.
Theresa May is due to give a statement in the Commons at around 11.30. At that point our political live blogger Andrew Sparrow will take over this blog.
Statement from Home Secretary Theresa May on #Litvinenko Inquiry follows Business Questions at approx 11.30am https://t.co/pgUk9c51S4
— House of Commons (@HouseofCommons) January 21, 2016
Updated
What are the prospects of Lugovoi and Kovtun being extradited, Emmerson is asked. He says this will only happen if Putin falls from power. He pointed out that Lugovoi was given a medal by Putin.
Emmerson accuses Russia of “political bluster” in its response to the report. He said those implicated had commented on the report without reading it.
Marina Litvinenko’s QC said Ben Emmerson there was so much radioactive material released into London during the murder that it should be a matter of public safety to respond.
He said a list of names has been supplied to the British government who should be sanctioned. “It would be craven for the prime minister to do nothing in response,” Emmerson said. The first function of the state is to keep its citizen safe, he said.
Updated
Yesterday I spoke to Viktor Ivanov, a close Putin ally who had been implicated in ordering the hit by lawyers for Marina Litvinenko during the inquiry, writes Shaun Walker.
He was angry and said the inquiry had not contacted him to give evidence.
The report finds that a damning report Litvinenko wrote into Ivanov’s background, which may have found its way back into his hands, was drafted too soon before the operation began to kill him to have served as the trigger for the assassination.
“I do not therefore think that either of these matters was a fundamental cause of the decision to kill Mr Litvinenko,” says page 228 of the report. However, the judge concluded that there is a possibility that “these considerations may have provided extra motivation and impetus to a plan that had already been conceived.
We have already heard that there will be “serious consequences” for bilateral relationship with Britain, but any Russian actions are likely to be calibrated according to how tough Britain’s political response to the inquiry’s findings turns out to be, writes Shaun Walker in Moscow.
We can expect some aggressive rhetoric over the “illegitimate” and “politicised” nature of the hearing today, but the ideal outcome for Moscow will be to brush the results under the carpet. Moscow is already under sanctions for its actions in Crimea and Ukraine, and has no appetite to get into another round of reciprocal measures. However, if London does decide the allegations are so serious that there has to be a robust response, we can expect indignation and some kind of symmetrical action from Moscow.
While the inquiry was clear that Andrei Lugovoi and Dmitry Kovtun carried out the attack with the backing of the Russian state, for now the Russian focus is likely to be on the inquiry’s formulation that the hit was “probably” ordered by Vladimir Putin and the lack of any certain conclusions as to who ordered the hit.
Numerous officials have told me they believe the inquiry to be a purely politicised process, and the first official responses we have been hearing from the foreign ministry and other official sources are taking the same line today.
The new British ambassador in Moscow, Laurie Bristow, arrived in Russia just ten days ago, and has a challenging start to his tenure. With Britain eager to keep contacts with Russia over Syria and other issues, he is likely to be working to smooth over the effects of the report with various Russian contacts.
Updated
Here’s the key clip from Owen’s statement.
Updated
Marina Litvinenko is giving a press conference. She starts by rereading the statement she gave earlier outside the High Court.
Here’s the key passage from Owen’s statement:
“All the evidence points in one direction namely that when they [Lugovoi and Kovtun] killed Mr Litvinenko they were acting on behalf of someone else. I have concluded that there is a strong probability that when Mr Lugovoi poisoned Mr Litvinenko he did so under the direction of the FSB - the Federal Security Service of the Russia Federation ...
I have further concluded the FSB operation to kill Mr Litvinenko was probably approved by Mr [Nikolai] Patrushev, then head of the FSB, and also by President Putin.
Here’s audio of Sir Robert Owen’s statement on Litvinenko’s death.
Owen said that Litvinenko did not poison himself as Lugovoi claimed. He said the evidence showed there can be no doubt that Litvinenko was killed by Lugovoi and Kovtun.
Neither had any personal reason to kill Litvinenko. He said there was “strong probability” than when Lugovoi and Kovtun poisoned him they were acting on the orders of the Russian state.
Sir Robert Owen reminds us that the home secretery Theresa May initially refused to have public inquiry. He said this had to be challenged in court by Marina Litvinenko.
Russia dismisses report as 'politically motivated'
Russia’s foreign ministry has dismissed the inquiry as “politically motivated” and complained that it lacked transparency.
Maria Zakharova, spokeswoman for the Russian foreign ministry, gave this statement translated by Shaun Walker.
Of course we need time to carefully study this document, after which we’ll give a proper evaluation.
However, I can say that the Russian position on this issue is well known and unchanged. We regret that a purely criminal case has been politicised and has darkened the general atmosphere of our bilateral relations. It’s obvious that the decision to end the coroner’s investigation and start the public hearing had a clear political subtext. The process, despite its name, was not transparent either for Russia or for the general public, given the fact that some material was heard in closed session under the pretext of its secret nature.
Taking this into account, there was little grounds to expect that the final report of a process that was politically motivated and highly opaque, and prepared with a pre-determined “correct” result in mind, would suddenly turn out to be objective and balanced.
Updated
Sir Robert Owen is giving a press conference at the Royal Courts of Justice on his report.
The report is is unlikely to have a significant impact on bilateral relations or on UK policy towards Russia, according to Alex Nice, analyst at the Economist Intelligence Unit.
A few years ago, during the period of the US “reset” when much of the West was trying to rebuild relations with Russia, the findings of the inquiry could have put the UK government in an awkward position. Indeed, this may be why the inquiry was delayed for so many years. But relations are now so bad that it is difficult to see how this will have a major impact. Once the UK had imposed sanctions on Russia over Ukraine, the diplomatic risks of publicly accusing the Kremlin of murder were much reduced. Having said that, the argument that the UK should try to “re-engage” with Russia will inevitably return at some point. When that happens, the Litvenenko findings will strengthen the case of the sceptics.
The report says the operation to kill Litvinenko was probably approved by Nikolai Patrushev and President Putin.
Shaun Walker has more on Patrushev.
Nikolai Patrushev is one of the key figures in Putin’s system; he is one of many close to the Russian president who came through the ranks of the KGB in Leningrad, like Putin himself.
Patrushev succeeded Putin as head of the FSB when Putin left in 1999 to become prime minister, and held the post for nearly a decade. In 2008, he was replaced and became head of Russia’s security council. He rarely makes public appearances but is known for hawkish statements on Nato and the west. He remains one of the few people with close, frequent access to Putin.
We published this interview with him last year.
Marina Litvinenko said travel bans and asset freezes should be imposed on Patrushev as well as Putin.
The end of Marina Litvinenko’s oral statement was difficult to make out. The text reveals that it said: “It is unthinkable that the Prime Minister would do nothing in the face of the damning findings of Sir Robert Owen”.
Marina litvinenko wants all Russian spies thrown out of the UK and travel bans. She's not giving up pic.twitter.com/u268ZTmrLY
— Oliver Bullough (@OliverBullough) January 21, 2016
Lugovoi dismisses report as 'absurd'
Photograph: Misha Japaridze/AP
Andrei Lugovoi is reported to have dismissed the report as “absurd”.
Owen’s report said: “I am sure that Mr Lugovoi and Mr Kovtun placed the polonium 210 in the teapot at the Pine Bar on 1 November 2006”.
It added that it was “probable” Lugovoi poisoned Litvinenko under direction from the FSB, with Dmitry Kovtun “also acting under FSB direction”.
Lugovoi, who is now an MP with a nationalist political party, said: “The allegations against me are absurd,” writes Shaun Walker.
He added: “As we expected, there was no sensation. The results released to today just show London’s anti-Russian position once again; the narrow-mindedness and lack of desire among the British to find the real reason for the death of Litvinenko.”
“The 2014 events in Ukraine, which coincided with the resumption of the investigation into the Litvinenko case even though previously it had been declared secret, look like a pathetic attempt by London to use a ‘skeleton in the cupboard’ to support their political ambitions. I hope this ‘polonium process’ will once and for all dispel the myth about the impartiality of British justice.”
The Liberal Democrat party has backed Marina Litvinenko’s call for travel bans and the freezing of assets for those involved in the death.
Leader Tim Farron said: “A UK citizen was killed on the streets of London with polonium. It was an attack on the heart of Britain, our values and our society.
“I call for EU travel bans, asset freezes and coordinated action to deal with those who committed this evil assassination. I have called for a new Magnitsky Law to make sure that these people are held to account for what they did.
“These assassins trampled over British sovereignty and we cannot let this go unanswered.”
Updated
Russia rejects inquiry
Russia has rejected the inquiry, writes Shaun Walker.
The first reaction from Moscow came from an unnamed source speaking to the state-owned news agency RIA: “Moscow will not accept the verdict of the British court in the Litvinenko case, London has violated the principle of presumption of innocence”.
The source also said what a number of officials have said in recent days, that Moscow finds it “illegitimate” that parts of the trial were kept secret, and predicts “serious consequences” for relations between London and Moscow.
Here’s audio of Marina Litvinenko’s statement outside the High Court.
Marina Litvinenko welcomes report
More from Litvinenko’s widow.
Speaking outside the High Court Marina Litvinenko said she was “very pleased that the words my husband spoke on his deathbed when he accused Mr Putin have been proved by an English court.”
She added: “I’m also calling for the imposing of targeted economic sanctions and travel bans against named individuals ... including Mr Putin. I received a letter last night from the home secretary promising action. It is unthinkable that the Prime Minister would do nothing in the face of the damning findings of Sir Robert Owen”.
Updated
Owen’s goes further than expected in raising Putin’s probable involvement, according to Luke Harding.
My take: Owen's report much stronger than we expected. His conclusion – that President Putin “probably approved” Litvinenko – based on...
— Luke Harding (@lukeharding1968) January 21, 2016
... secret evidence from British government agencies, including Litvinenko's old employer MI6
— Luke Harding (@lukeharding1968) January 21, 2016
Journalist Oliver Bullough tweets an image of a key paragraph from the report on Putin’s probable involvement.
#Litvinenko: the paragraph that blames Putin pic.twitter.com/tI5fqofSkb
— Oliver Bullough (@OliverBullough) January 21, 2016
Owen concluded that Andrei Lugovoi, a former KGG agent and now a Russia MP, “probably” poisoned Litvinenko.
Owen says “it's probable” Lugovoi poisoned Litvinenko under direction from the FSB, with Kovtun “also acting under FSB direction”
— Luke Harding (@lukeharding1968) January 21, 2016
Marina Litvinenko welcomes the report’s “damning finding” and calls for the UK to impose sanctions on Russia. She also called on the UK to expel Russian diplomats, but had been given indications that the UK would do nothing.
Report finds Russia ordered the murder
The report has been published and concludes that Russia ordered the murder of Alexander Litvinenko in Britain and that President Putin probably gave his personal approval.
Russian state guilty of Alexander #Litvinenko's murder in operation "probably approved" by Vladimir #Putin and #FSB chief Nikolai Patrushev
— Luke Harding (@lukeharding1968) January 21, 2016
Inquiry judge Sir Robert Owen finds that Dmitry Kovtun and Andrei Lugovoi murdered Litvinenko “acting on behalf of others”
— Luke Harding (@lukeharding1968) January 21, 2016
Selected journalists, including the Guardian’s Luke Harding, are being given an early look at the report ahead of publication at 9.35am.
Harding provides a rough time table of the order of play.
Today's #Litvinenko timetable: 8am lock-in; 9.35am inquiry report published; 10am statement from Robert Owen; 11am Marina L press conference
— Luke Harding (@lukeharding1968) January 21, 2016
There will then be statements in the Commons by the Home Secretary Theresa May at around 11.30.
2 Statements confirmed at 11.30: 1. Litvinenko Inquiry - May; 2. Infected Blood: reform of financial and other support @JaneEllison
— Labour Whips (@labourwhips) January 21, 2016
Anatoly Litvinenko, the son of murdered Russian exile, talked on Wednesday about his last memories of his father. He said he wants the truth to be established.
Alexander Goldfarb, head of the Litvinenko Justice Foundation, called on the UK to urge the UN to condemn Russia’s over his friend’s killing.
Interviewed on the Today programme he insisted there is “proof” of Russia’s involvement. But he conceded there is no direct proof of any involvement of Russian president Vladimir Putin.
He said: “The British government should go to the [UN] security council and demand a resolution to censure Russia – to have Russia accept responsibility and pay compensation to the victims.”
Goldfarb also called for UK sanctions to be imposed on Russia. He said Russia’s “atomic enterprises” should be particularly targeted.
He dismissed former Russian ambassador Tony Brenton’s suggestion that diplomatic pressures meant Britain could not take tough action against Russia.
“Appeasing this kind of regime only invites more and more aggression,” he said
Updated
Tony Brenton, who was British ambassador to Russia at the time of the killing, said it was “unlikely” any proof about who authorised the murder had turned up.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme he said: “Our reaction was that it was likely to have been authorised at quite a high level in the Russian system because they wouldn’t do something so potentially damaging for a major power without high authorisation.
But at my time there was no slam-dunk proof and I think it’s quite unlikely any real evidence has turned up as to where the authorisation has come from.”
Brenton said that while the UK must react “strongly” to the murder, “tearing up” diplomatic relations with Russia was “not in Britain’s interests”.
“We have quite important other fish to fry with the Russians. They are very important in carrying the Iran de-nuclearisation through, they are absolutely crucial in sorting out the mess in Syria.”
Welcome to live coverage of the publication of the results of the public inquiry into the polonium poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko.
Here’s the start of Luke Harding’s curtain raiser to the publication of the hearing:
Almost 10 years after he drank a cup of poisoned green tea in a Mayfair bar, the report into the murder of Alexander Litvinenko is due to be published, amid strong signs that the British government is reluctant to impose further sanctions on Russia.
The report will be released at 9.35am on Thursday, with Theresa May making a statement to parliament soon after. Litvinenko’s widow, Marina, who received a copy of the report on Wednesday morning, will give her reaction at a press conference with her barrister, Ben Emmerson QC, and solicitor, Elena Tsirlina.
David Cameron received the report, which follows a public inquiry chaired by high court judge Sir Robert Owen, on Tuesday. It is widely believed that Owen will conclude that Litvinenko – who died in November 2006 after sipping radioactive polonium – was the victim of a Russian state assassination.
If, as expected, the Kremlin is blamed directly, Litvinenko’s widow will demand a firm response from Downing Street. She is likely to call for fresh sanctions to be imposed on Russian politicians involved in the murder, as well as against state entities – a tough line that is also backed by the Liberal Democrats.
Last year, Emmerson described Litvinenko as the victim of a “state-sponsored act of nuclear terrorism” on the streets of London, adding that “the trail of polonium led directly to the door of Vladimir Putin’s office”. Emmerson dubbed the Russian president “a common criminal dressed up as a head of state.”
At the time of his murder Litvinenko was a British citizen – and a part-time MI6 spy. Marina Litvinenko is understood to view the report as a major test for Cameron. The government’s response, she believes, will show whether Downing Street is tough on all forms of terrorism, or only tough on terrorism carried out by non-state groups.
Luke has also put together a guide to six of the key players: Andrei Lugovoi, Marina Litvinenko, Sir Robert Owen, Dmitry Kovtun, Ben Emmerson and Vladimir Putin.
And here are six key questions for the inquiry to answer:
- Who was responsible for Litvinenko’s murder?
- Did Putin order Litvinenko’s death?
- Might the two Russians charged with the murder – Dmitry Kovtun and Andrei Lugovoi – be innocent?
- Should MI6 have done more to protect Litvinenko, a British agent?
- Will Lugovoi and Kovtun ever go on trial?
- What was the motive?
