21 January 2019
Moscow: 01:30
London: 22:30

Consular queries:  
+44 (0) 203 668 7474  
info@rusemb.org.uk  

 
323 days have passed since the Salisbury incident - no credible information or response from the British authorities                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     315 days have passed since the death of Nikolay Glushkov on British soil - no credible information or response from the British authorities

PRESS RELEASES AND NEWS

11.04.2018

Embassy comment in relation to the inquest into the death of Alexander Perepilichny

On 10 April 2018, the inquest into the death of Alexander Perepilichny, the Russian businessman who died in 2012 near London, have resumed after a long break. It is not a coincidence that this event is synchronized with a large-scale anti-Russian provocation by the British government, baselessly accusing Russia of the "attempt on lives" of two Russian nationals: Sergei and Yulia Skripal.

The methods of engagement of British authorities in the investigation of the inquest into the death of A.Perepilichny are based on the same blunt and bad-faith approach of the British government and secret services, as we have seen in the investigations of the deaths of A.Litvinenko, B.Berezovsky, N.Glushkov and the Skripals case.

As with the mentioned high-profile cases, in 2016 the British government officially closed access to special services’ documents associated with the case, as well as all materials related to their contacts with
A.Perepilichny, thus gaining control over the ongoing investigation. Such a withdrawal of important information related to the case from the legal domain, de facto hinders an impartial investigation. Instead, groundless versions and outright misinformation are being thrown-in. Witnesses and interested parties, who are, in one way or another, connected with the British secret services, are introduced into the inquest.

Interested persons is an issue worth further details. The representatives of W.Browder’s “Hermitage Capital Management” fund, included in the investigation as an interested person, have been challenging the results of the post-mortem examinations made by the Home Office, which did not find any involvement of a third party or a foul play in A.Perepilichny’s death. They tried to discredit Mr Perepilichny’s widow (by throwing in the theory of a poisoned sorrel soup) and even the police, who were all initially interested persons in the inquest.

Moreover, precisely the representatives of Mr Browder’s fund pressed the theory of A.Perepilichny having been poisoned by Gelsemium on the basis of a new test that was conducted upon their initiative by an expert of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, which gave rise to new insinuations against Russia.

On 10 April 2018, that same expert testified in court saying that she could not confirm the presence of Gelsemium after the second test.

According to witness testimonies voiced in Court, there is documented confirmation of Mr Browder’s relation to the MI6 and the CIA. In addition, there is no doubt in his motive for misleading the investigation: William Felix Browder has been sentenced in absentia by a Russian Court for committing serious financial crimes, his culpability was fully proved. The merger of the interests of an international criminal with the interests of the British government for the sake of further escalating the anti-Russian rhetoric by means of provocations against Russian nationals who reside in the UK and are dependent on the British secret services, is nothing but deplorable.

All these circumstances around the inquest into the death of A.Perepilichny and the foot-dragging since 2012 clearly indicate that British authorities want to get the most out of this in order to promote the idea of another “Russian connection” in the case of yet another Russian citizen murdered on the British soil.

The classification (“public interest immunity”) by the British government of the materials directly related to such high-profile cases, along with flooding the courts, the public and foreign partners with false information presented as indisputable “facts”, creates legal nihilism, fake news mayhem, and compromises the work of the police and judicial authorities. It also impedes impartial investigations of deaths of our nationals (we cannot rule out a possibility of the British secret services’ hand). All this is being driven by political interests of London in an attempt to delegitimize Russia, as well as by interests of fugitive criminals living in the UK.

The British political motives are easy to predict, and the tools of the British government, which include the derailing of an impartial investigation and classification of documents, have been revealed a long time ago, and is no longer news. All this causes grave concern given yet another sequence of crimes against our fellow citizens in the UK. 




LATEST EVENTS

21.01.2019 - Embassy’s Press Officer reply to a media question regarding a teenager receiving an award for administering first aid to Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury

Question: How would you comment on the media reports suggesting that it was Abigail McCourt, 16, who was the first to help Sergei and Yulia Skripal after they were poisoned? Answer: If this is true, let us express sincere admiration and gratitude to Abigail for having saved the lives of our two compatriots. At the same time, we have to say that these reports, as many others related to the Salisbury case, are unofficial and unverifiable. Moreover, the fact that Abigail was present at the crime scene together with her mother, Alison McCourt, who happens to be a Colonel and the Chief Nursing Officer of the British Army, adds to the numerous extraordinary coincidences characteristic of the Skripals poisoning. Furthermore, one has to wonder why this information, unusual as it is, has only been made public ten months after the incident.


18.01.2019 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question regarding the UK position on the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty

Question: Minister of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office Sir Alan Duncan, addressing the Commons Defence Committee, has once again accused Russia of violating the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and of the planned US withdrawal from it. He found it difficult to explain the Russian position, calling it a “mystery”. How could you comment on that? Answer: Indeed, the discussion between the FCO Minister of State in charge of Russia and members of Parliament’s Defence Committee was startling. After repeating a standard set of accusations against Russia widely used by the US to cover its urge to unilaterally withdraw from the INF Treaty, Sir Alan visibly struggled to explain the Russian position, not to mention our well-known concerns with regard to the US compliance. Moreover, in order to understand our motives the Minister, referring to the Beatles, suggested one would need to take “a magical mystery tour”.


17.01.2019 - Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks and answers to media questions at a news conference on the results of Russian diplomacy

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks and answers to media questions at a news conference on the results of Russian diplomacy in 2018 Moscow, January 16, 2019


08.01.2019 - Embassy Press Officer comments on the latest media publication on the Salisbury incident

Question: How would you comment on the Daily Telegraph publications alleging that British authorities have established full details of the assassination attempt of Sergei and Yulia Skripal and describing their current life in England? Answer: We are dealing with yet another media leak, unofficial and unverifiable. It provides no new facts on the Salisbury incident, let alone evidence. The circumstances of the incident remain as confusing as ever.


05.01.2019 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question regarding recent statements on Russia by Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt

Question: How would you comment on Jeremy Hunt’s speech in Singapore, in which he named Russia’s actions on the international arena as the prime example of a threat to the rules-based international system? Answer: Such rhetoric of British officials is not new. It again combines manipulation of international norms with distortion of facts. As stated repeatedly, Russia does not accept the concept of a “rules-based international system”. The international order is based on international law, i.e. legally binding norms that have been agreed on and accepted by all states. By substituting “international law” with obscure “rules”, the UK and other Western countries aim to shed the responsibility for their unlawful behaviour, while assuming the right to randomly blame other countries of breaking “rules” to which they had never signed up.


04.01.2019 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question regarding recent statements by UK Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt on Syria

Question: How could you comment on the statements by the UK Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt in a “Sky News” interview on President Assad’s future and the role of Russia in the Syrian peace settlement? Answer: We have taken note of Mr Hunt saying that “regretfully” Bashar al-Assad “is going to be around for a while and that is because of the support that he’s had from Russia” and “Russia may think that it’s gained a sphere of influence [but] you’ve also gained a responsibility”.


31.12.2018 - Interview with Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Sergey Lavrov for the show, Moscow. Kremlin. Putin, Moscow, December 30, 2018

Question: What is the main outcome of the year for you? Sergey Lavrov: It is difficult to highlight something specific. If we speak about foreign policy, I cannot make an evaluation myself. We have tried to do everything that is necessary in order to fulfill the instructions of President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin, to implement the foreign political course set by him. It is not for me to judge how successful we were. This should be left to the people to decide, of course, and to the leadership of the Russian Federation.


28.12.2018 - Embassy Press Officer replies to a media question regarding the situation with the staffing of the Russian and British diplomatic missions

Question: Could you comment on the statement by Ambassador Yakovenko regarding the forthcoming restoration of the number of Russian and British diplomats, which was subsequently denied by the UK Foreign Office? Answer: We saw the rebuttal by the British side. Here are the facts. In December Russia and the UK have, for the first time since March, issued a number of visas for future employees of the diplomatic missions of the two countries, on the basis of reciprocity.


25.12.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question concerning the Prime Minister’s 2018 Christmas Message to the Armed Forces

Question: How would you comment on Theresa May thanking the UK Armed Forces for “protecting our waters and our skies from Russian intrusion” in her Christmas Message? Answer: We were utterly surprised by the Prime Minister’s rhetoric. An uninitiated reader may fall under the impression that Russia has made attempts to violate the UK air space or territorial waters. This has never been happened.


24.12.2018 - Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s interview with Rossiya Segodnya

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s interview with the international news agency Rossiya Segodnya, December 24, 2018



all messages