The Litvinenko Inquiry

The Litvinenko Inquiry
substantial and trustworthy who could sell this information without the source of
the information coming back to himself.”
6.148 I have previously referred to these two accounts in chapter 4 of Part 5 above. I have
set them out here again in order to demonstrate the very significant discrepancies
that exist between the accounts that have been given by Mr Lugovoy and Mr Kovtun
over the years, ending in the statement that Mr Kovtun provided to the Inquiry in June
2015. Clearly, had Mr Kovtun (or, for that matter, Mr Lugovoy) given oral evidence to
the Inquiry, these discrepancies would have been addressed. Equally clearly, in the
absence of any explanation from either of the men, I am not in a position to place
any weight on these parts of their accounts. Arguably, the matter goes further than
that. The differences between the accounts are so marked that I might be driven
to conclude that Mr Lugovoy and Mr Kovtun have been deliberately attempting to
mislead those attempting to discover the truth about these events, including myself. I
shall return to this matter in due course.
6.149 I add in passing that the freedom with which Mr Lugovoy and Mr Kovtun have
previously provided these detailed accounts, both to the press and in evidence in UK
court proceedings, stands in stark contrast to what I was told was the legal prohibition
on Mr Kovtun giving evidence about the same matters to this Inquiry. 135
18 October: return to Moscow
6.150 I heard evidence from Ms Rondoni that Mr Lugovoy and Mr Kovtun checked out of the
Parkes Hotel at about 10.00am the following morning, Wednesday 18 October 2006.
Mr Lugovoy paid the bill for both rooms. They told her that they were going to Gatwick
and she saw the porter call a taxi for them. 136
6.151 Later that day, Mr Lugovoy and Mr Kovtun flew back to Moscow from Gatwick aboard
Transaero flight UN444. 137 The bus on which they travelled from the terminal to the
aeroplane was tested and no radiation was detected. 138 The aircraft used for the flight
that day was registration number EI-DNM. As I have already described, that aircraft
was tested by UK authorities and was found to contain secondary contamination in
the area of the seats on which Mr Lugovoy and Mr Kovtun sat on 18 October. 139
135
Chairman 32/3-19
136
Rondoni 10/193-195
137
Mascall 11/139-140
138
Mascall 9/65-66 see paragraphs 6.21-6.24 above for discussion regarding the value of such findings.
139
Mascall 9/35-37
140