Will Alexander Litvinenko’s killers get away with it?

By Peter Oborne

It is almost five years since Alexander Litvinenko, the former KGB agent who had sought asylum in Britain, died of radiation poisoning at University College Hospital in central London. Though it has always seemed extremely likely that the FSB, the Russian state security service, was involved, the circumstances surrounding the death officially remain a mystery.
 

Russia has resolutely refused British requests for the extradition of the prime suspect, Andrey Lugovoy – another ex-KGB man, now an MP, who met Litvinenko on the morning of the day he was poisoned. Meanwhile, the Foreign Office has emphasised that Britain regards the death of Litvinenko as a “criminal case” rather than an assassination, still less an act of terrorism.
 

There matters have rested. It has, perhaps, been in the interests of neither country to press the issue, especially not with Britain trying hard to rebuild its damaged relationship with Russia. Last month, David Cameron took a group of senior businessmen on an official visit to Moscow. His joint press conference with President Medvedev was dominated by pointed questions from the British media about the Litvinenko case; the Prime Minister expressed concern, but gave no substantive answers.
 

As far as Mr Litvinenko’s widow, Marina, is concerned, there has been no prospect of justice – indeed, there hasn’t even been an inquest. Originally delayed in order not to interfere with police inquiries, five years have now passed without one. Tomorrow, at a public hearing in St Pancras, coroner Andrew Reid will at last put that right. But Dr Reid has a very difficult decision to make. He must decide whether to go ahead with a normal inquest, concentrating on the specific causes of death, or with a much wider inquiry, which will ask the big question: why?
 

In his preliminary hearings, Dr Reid has seemed to hint that he will focus on the narrower issues. Such a course might well suit certain allies of former president Vladimir Putin, who would rather the case were quietly forgotten – but there would be very little point to it. We already know that Litvinenko suddenly fell ill and died, poisoned by polonium-210, a radioactive substance that has reportedly been traced back to a nuclear reactor in Russia.
 

The key unanswered question is this: was the Russian state directly implicated in Litvinenko’s killing? Until recently, British officials – perhaps fearful of causing offence – have been careful not to point the finger. But last week, Lord Macdonald, who was Director of Public Prosecutions when Litvinenko was killed, made a dramatic and significant intervention, stating that the case “had all the hallmarks of a state-directed execution”. “This,” he said, “was a particularly disgusting and outrageous crime: the deliberate infliction in full world view of a lingering radioactive death upon a man who the Russians knew was under the protection of the British state.”
 
The forthcoming inquest is the last chance for Mrs Litvinenko to gain any sort of justice. As Lord Macdonald said: “Because of the possibility that a foreign government may have been complicit in this murder, very serious consideration should be given to drafting in a senior judicial figure to conduct the inquest.”
 
So a great burden falls on Dr Reid, for he finds himself at the heart of a great international and moral drama. He can opt for a quiet life – or he can call for a dramatic widening of the scope of the inquiry, which might expose the world’s first ever act of nuclear terrorism.
 
There are certainly precedents. The series of conspiracy theories that surrounded that tragic death of Diana, Princess of Wales and Dodi Fayed eventually led to a six-month inquest at the high court, overseen by Lord Justice Baker as coroner. It is all too easy to see why taking such a route would horrify both the Foreign Office and the Russian state. It would embarrass Mr Putin just as he prepares to bid once more for the presidency. It would expose secret Russian operations in London. And it would damage British relations with Russia – upon which so much depends in terms of trade and counter-terrorist co-operation. It is reasonable to argue that many British jobs, and even our national security, depend upon Dr Reid doing the sensible thing.
 
And yet, an appalling crime was carried out on the streets of London. Alexander Litvinenko was not just under our protection – he was a British citizen by the time he was killed. Are we really prepared to allow foreign powers to carry out such acts of cold-blooded murder on our streets? And do we really want them to get away with it? What sort of message does it send out, if we are prepared to tolerate and overlook such conduct?
 
As he prepares for his decision tomorrow morning, Dr Reid has a great deal to ponder. Telegraph