Sentence from the Mn17 flight accident: was the guilt of Russia?

The Court in the Hague confirmed that in 2014, at the time of the crash of the MH17 flight, the territories of Donetsk and Luhansk regions were under the control of the Russian Federation. But the names of persons from the highest Russian military command involved in the disaster are not named. It is likely that in the spring in the Hague there will be another lawsuit. In the Hague in the protected court complex, after 2.

5 years of hearings, a sentence in the case of a downed Malaysian Boeing, which was heading from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, was heard after 2. 5 years. In July 2014, 298 people were killed in the sky above the Snizhny Donetsk region. As a result, three were guilty. Two citizens of the Russian Federation - Igor Girkin (call sign "Strelkov"), the so -called "Minister of Defense of the DNR" and Sergey Dubinsky (call sign "Khmury"), the so -called "Chief of Intelligence of the DNR".

And also a citizen of Ukraine Leonid Kharchenko (call sign "mole"), who transported the Anti-aircraft missile complex "Beech", which shot down the aircraft. All were sentenced to the highest punishment - life imprisonment, their property was arrested.

The court found that Girkin was in touch with Moscow, requested a weapon to control the airspace over the occupied territory and managed the whole process, Dubinsky was responsible for transportation from the Russian Federation of a specific "beech" and gave orders to Kharchenko.

At the same time, the court called the exact place of permanent deployment of the anti-aircraft complex (it belongs to the 53rd anti-aircraft missile brigade of the air defense of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, which is stationed in Kursk), its route territory of Ukraine, the place of launch. And he identified that the passenger plane was a random goal. But for Themis's servants, this fact did not matter.

In court, it was important to prove that all the planes at that time were a deliberate purpose that organized surgery of attacks on planes. The fourth suspect - Russian citizen Oleg Pulatov (call sign "Gurza"), subordinated to Dubinsky, knew about the movement of "beech". But he managed to avoid punishment - his court in Hague found innocent. Pulatov was more fortunate (and he was the only one who exercised his right of protection - his lawyers were present during the process).

And not because this citizen is not involved in the catastrophe. There was not enough evidence collected by the prosecutor's office regarding his direct involvement in the crime. The court stated that the role of Pulatov in these events was significantly exaggerated.

The fact is that if there are different types of complicity in Ukrainian criminal law - if someone just stood nearby, it can be a complicity, then in the Dutch - an important so -called functional complicity, which is punishable, is important. If human actions did not have a significant impact on the consequences, criminal liability does not occur. For example, in court they considered the episode of meetings of Pulatov and Kharchenko near the Furschet store in Snizhny.

According to the court, at that time Kharchenko had already received clear instructions on the transportation of "beech" and further actions. In other words, the actions of Kharchenko Pulatov could not influence. The court decided that the subordinate Dubinsky had no strength to change the course of events.

Although it sounds strange, but Pulatov's justification is a good sign, because the court not only said that there was no evidence of his role in the events in the Donbass, on the contrary - he confirmed his participation, simply not enough evidence. So the court further confirmed the involvement of the convicts. In addition, the court noted that Russia tried to shift responsibility to Ukraine, providing fabricated evidence and various unrealistic versions of the Ukrainian aircraft.

All such facts have been studied and rejected. The text of the sentence, that is, its resolutive part, was read for about one and a half hours. The full text will be published soon. Many international lawyers have refused to comment on the decision without reading it. The fact is that the sentence has words that were important to check with the original.

Namely, at the time of launch of "beech" by Pervomaisk Ukraine did not control the territory where this "beech" moved - part of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions was under the control of "DNR", which, for its part, was controlled by Russia. Lawyers insist that the Dutch court could talk about Russia's control in a particular situation, not full since 2014.

Moreover, the conclusion that an international armed conflict was held in the territory of Ukraine with the participation of the Russian Federation outside its jurisdiction. The fact is that the process took place at the national level - it was accused of specific articles of the Criminal Code of the Netherlands, namely murder. The circle of specific suspects was established, the involvement of each of them had no importance.

In other words, the state does not bear responsibility for the act of an individual citizen. The responsibility of the state would have come if they proved that the staffing Russian military, not conditional volunteer, which is recognized as three convicts, was proved before the launch of the Buk's missile. But to prove the latter, you need to continue the investigation and use other international instances.

What is important for them in the context of the Russian participation, is that the court in the Hague clearly stated: the installation of "beech", with the help of which the plane of the flight MN17 was shot down, was in service of the Russian army. That is, for its application, responsibility is borne by Russia. It is known that the International Investigation Team (JIT) worked in the Hague before the hearing.

It included representatives of the Office of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine and the Security Service of Ukraine. Their contribution was significant. During the process, Polutov's lawyers even said that the investigation is overly paying into information provided by Ukraine, and the court may be involved. In addition to the fact that the Ukrainian side provided all the interceptions of conversations, special groups penetrated the occupied territory to obtain evidence.

For example, a carrier that removed the traction of the tractor with "beech" without one rocket. This was necessary to confirm the authenticity of previously provided photos. Also, Ukrainian investigators detained a person who stole a trailer from the car company for transportation of the Buk anti-aircraft missile system. It is about the so -called "Chief of the Rear Service of Intelligence of the DNR" Dmitry Kupriyan with the call sign "Baty".

At the time of the process in Hague in 2020, he had already served a five -year sentence for participation in a terrorist organization - Kuprian was liberty on June 20, 2019. In the Netherlands, he witnessed personally, though not in public. Important - even during the hearing and after the sentence, the work of this group did not stop - the investigation is ongoing. These are only the first four persons to be under court.

Investigators are working on establishing the Malazian Boeing involved from the Russian command. It is important to name the names of those who ordered, formed a professional crew. In other words, experts are now studying who could give an order in the 53rd anti-aircraft missile brigade in Kursk to move the "beech" and who ordered from above. Therefore, the decision on November 17 is only the first step to determining Russia's responsibility at the Judgment level in the Netherlands.

A new process can start in the spring. In addition, the decisions that were made in Sziipgola are the foundation for further action in other processes against Russia. Recall that the episode of the Mn17 aircraft is also considered in the European Court of Human Rights and is part of the interstate case "Ukraine and the Netherlands against Russia".

On January 26, 2022, a month before a full -scale invasion, at hearings on acceptability in Strasbourg Ukraine and the Netherlands also demonstrated evidence of human rights violations, in particular in the case of MN17 catastrophe. The ECtHR decision is so expected. After the sentence, the relatives of the victims who came to the Hague from Australia and various cities of the Netherlands said they were satisfied with the decision. The main thing is that the role of Russia was determined in court.

Russia itself reacted to the sentence on the day of its release. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation said it did not recognize the verdict. It is believed that the investigation "lay political order", and the policies of the Netherlands, representatives of the prosecutor's office and the media were allegedly pressed into court. The charge has 14 days for appeal. But to give it to the lawyers of the only person who has exercised the right to defense - Pulatov - nothing.

At the same time, at the beginning of November, the Minister of Justice of the Netherlands wrote a letter to Parliament with information that the department is already preparing for appeal. Meanwhile, Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong said that Russia "hides the murderers" of the passengers of the aircraft and demanded that Moscow be issued convicts in the case of MN17.