header-logo header-logo

25 February 2016 / Louis Flannery KC
Issue: 7688 / Categories: Opinion , Public , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Murder most foul

001_nlj_7688_flannery1

Louis Flannery examines the legal implications of the Litvinenko Report

After more than nine years since he fell asleep forever in a London hospital, overcome by a fatal dose of a highly toxic radioactive isotope, Alexander Litvinenko may perhaps rest in peace, in the knowledge that his deathbed statement, in which he directly accused Vladimir Putin of having ordered his murder by poisoning, was almost certainly correct.

Of course, we know that Putin, like all self-respecting and self-deluded monarchs, would have done his best to distance himself from the murder he probably personally ordered, with his aides ready to issue threats and rebuttals on his behalf against anyone who might dare suggest otherwise, in order to help conceal his close involvement. And of course, he would have trusted implicitly his beloved FSB (the modern acronym for the KGB) to do the job well enough to hide any traces leading back to them or him. After all, it had been done before, and with poison. But this time, it didn’t quite go to

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll