This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/28/world/europe/alexander-litvinenko-inquiry.html

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 2 Version 3
Doubt Grips Litvinenko Inquiry Over Whether Russian Will Testify Delay at Litvinenko Inquiry Raises Doubts Over Whether Russian Will Testify
(35 minutes later)
LONDON — The long-running inquiry into the poisoning death in London of a former K.G.B. officer, Alexander V. Litvinenko, was set to find out on Monday whether a prominent Russian suspect had withdrawn from the case as part of what British lawyers have called a deliberate attempt by the Kremlin to undermine the investigation. LONDON — The long-running inquiry into the poisoning death in London of a former K.G.B. officer, Alexander V. Litvinenko, hit fresh delays on Monday over the failure of a key Russian suspect to testify by video link from Moscow.
If the inquiry confirms that the suspect, Dmitri V. Kovtun, declined to testify, the reversal would inject a sense of disarray into the proceedings, since his evidence by video link from Moscow would have represented the only direct Russian participation in the hearings, which opened in January. The suspect, Dmitri V. Kovtun, a former Red Army officer, had been scheduled to begin three days of testimony on Monday. But a lawyer for the inquiry, Robin Tam, said Mr. Kovtun was “not in a position to give oral evidence” because he felt bound by confidentiality agreements related to a separate, Russian inquiry into Mr. Litvinenko’s death.
Robert Owen, the senior British judge in charge of the inquiry, which opened in January, gave Mr. Kovtun until 9 a.m. on Tuesday to resolve purported legal obstacles in Russia. But, reflecting increasing exasperation with Mr. Kovtun’s behavior, Judge Owen said he had “the gravest suspicion” that an attempt was underway to “manipulate the situation.”
Ben Emmerson, a lawyer for Marina Litvinenko, Mr. Litvinenko’s wife, said the inquiry was being “manipulated in a coordinated way between Mr. Kovtun, the murderer, and the Russian state that sent him to commit murder.”
Mr. Kovtun and the Russian authorities have long denied complicity in the poisoning.
At the time of his death, Mr. Litvinenko was seen as a whistle-blower and a visceral opponent of President Vladimir V. Putin. Mr. Litvinenko’s family and legal team have accused Mr. Putin of being behind the poisoning, an accusation that Mr. Putin has dismissed. Mr. Litvinenko fled to Britain in 2000, seeking asylum, and he had secured British citizenship weeks before he died in November 2006.At the time of his death, Mr. Litvinenko was seen as a whistle-blower and a visceral opponent of President Vladimir V. Putin. Mr. Litvinenko’s family and legal team have accused Mr. Putin of being behind the poisoning, an accusation that Mr. Putin has dismissed. Mr. Litvinenko fled to Britain in 2000, seeking asylum, and he had secured British citizenship weeks before he died in November 2006.
The British authorities have accused Mr. Kovtun, a former Soviet Army officer, and Andrei K. Lugovoi, a former K.G.B. bodyguard, of murdering Mr. Litvinenko. He died after drinking tea from a pot laced with a rare radioactive isotope, polonium 210, at an encounter with Russians including Mr. Kovtun and Mr. Lugovoi at an upscale hotel in central London.The British authorities have accused Mr. Kovtun, a former Soviet Army officer, and Andrei K. Lugovoi, a former K.G.B. bodyguard, of murdering Mr. Litvinenko. He died after drinking tea from a pot laced with a rare radioactive isotope, polonium 210, at an encounter with Russians including Mr. Kovtun and Mr. Lugovoi at an upscale hotel in central London.
At first, it seemed the inquiry would unfold with no Russian rebuttal of the British prosecutors’ charges. Both suspects would be arrested on murder charges if they traveled to Britain.At first, it seemed the inquiry would unfold with no Russian rebuttal of the British prosecutors’ charges. Both suspects would be arrested on murder charges if they traveled to Britain.
But in late March, as the inquiry was set to finish public hearings, Mr. Kovtun signaled a last-minute desire to offer his own version of events.But in late March, as the inquiry was set to finish public hearings, Mr. Kovtun signaled a last-minute desire to offer his own version of events.
Mr. Kovtun’s video-link testimony on Monday had been widely anticipated as a dramatic finale before Judge Robert Owen, the head of the inquiry, begins collating his findings ahead of a formal report expected before the end of the year. Mr. Kovtun’s video-link testimony had been widely anticipated as a dramatic finale before Judge Owen begins collating his findings ahead of a formal report expected by the end of the year.
But Judge Owen said on Friday that Mr. Kovtun had sent a message saying he feared he “would be committing an offense, contrary to Russian law, were he to give evidence unless the Russian authorities gave him permission to do so.”
The judge adjourned the hearings until noon on Monday, to enable the Russian side to rule on whether Mr. Kovtun was permitted to testify.
Shortly before the hearing was to start, the BBC quoted Mr. Kovtun in an interview in Moscow as saying he would not testify because he had not been able to contact the appropriate Russian official to get permission.