There is another question behind the one asked. It goes like this: "Should the Brits ask the Russian authorities to hand over the man accused by them of assassinating the ex-KGB agent?" I am not sure that this is a good idea. If the man really killed Alexander Litvinenko and there is enough evidence to prove it, the Russian authorities and courts can certainly handle the case (I presume the defendant is a Russian citizen) when they receive the files. Who would believe that any jury in Britain would treat more serious such a man than a Russian court? Of course, we do not know why the British authorities want the man. Do they think that on the British soil he may get a more severe verdict, or the other way around?

Are there such romantic dreamers who still believe that an English jury could or would be more objective? Well, I do not belong to this minor group of people (although I envy them). But don’t listen to me. I don’t believe that the justice of a state institution can make the situation right. The killed man, even if he was a spy, should rest in peace, and he cannot be resuscitated by any verdict. From that point of view, the answer sounds natural: It is all the same on which soil the defendant is tried.

The British police should have defended Mr. Litvinenko from his murderer. But now it is too late to talk about that. However, there may be other targeted persons in Britain. Why don’t they focus on them?