The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has blamed the Russian state for the death of former FSB officer Alexander Litvinenko.
According to the press release, which was published on the website of the court, ECHR judges concluded that the Russian side had not provided necessary materials to investigators nor had it conducted a thorough independent investigation. This is considered a violation of international conventions, in connection with which Moscow was ordered to pay a compensation in the amount of 100,000 euros. In addition, the ECHR ordered Russia to compensate legal costs for Litvinenko's widow Marina, who filed the complaint (22,500 euros).
The court's ruling says that the investigation had strong evidence to prove that two Russian nationals – Andrei Lugovoy and Dmitry Kovtun – were involved in Litvinenko's murder. It was also said that there was "prima facie case" proving that they acted on behalf of the Russian state.
Former FSB officer Alexander Litvinenko died in 2006 in London, where he had received political asylum. The cause of security officer's death was identified as poisoning with radioactive substance polonium-210. British investigators came to the conclusion that the Russian authorities were involved in the crime, while the Kremlin denies the accusations.
Andrei Lugovoy, a Russian MP, ex-chairman of the group of security companies "The Ninth Wave", responded to ruling made by the Strasbourg court, which blamed the Russian state for the death of former FSB officer Alexander Litvinenko.
According to Lugovoy, the decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) was idiotic and stupid.
The decision of the Strasbourg court shall not be called legitimate, the MP said.
“I would call it [the decision] quite stupid. It is not entirely clear on what grounds they made the decision. If they made that decision proceeding from what Litvinenko's widow had told them, then this simply undermines the authority and reputation of the ECHR,” the politician said, lenta.ru publication said.
He said that the main argument, on the basis of which the ECHR issued its verdict, was an overwhelming lie. The Russian law enforcement system had done everything to conduct a detailed investigation, while the British side had interfered with the investigation in every possible way.
“The Russian prosecutor's office and the Investigative Committee had done everything to find out the truth. I draw your attention to the fact that the London justice system had never responded to all inquiries from the Russian Prosecutor General's Office, although the Russian law enforcement system had responded to inquiries from British counterparts. Moreover, let me remind you that back in November 2006, a group of British specialists was in Moscow, they had meetings with me, absolutely calmly, and took all the testimony. At the same time, the British justice hindered an objective investigation in every possible way,” he said.
“I consider this decision politically biased, absolutely, having nothing to do with any kind of legality, not at least simply with the legality of the investigation. Therefore, I am very skeptical about this decision, I consider it as idiotic as possible and as it undermines the reputation of the European Court of Human Rights,” Lugovoy said.
NATO has no plans to deploy troops on the Ukrainian territory, Jens Stoltenberg said. French President Emmanuel Macron earlier did not rule out a possibility to send Western military forces there