Presumption of guilt in a European way
German Chancellor Angela Merkel said during her visit to Poland on March 19 that Russia must prove its innocence in the case of Skripal. According to her, European countries have true evidence of the Kremlin's involvement in the assassination and Moscow should refute it.
The Press Secretary of the Russian President Dmitry Peskov noted that the Federal Chancellor of Germany seems to forget about the existence of the fundamental legal norm - the presumption of innocence.
At the same time, the German leader had in mind the presentation of six slides which was a base for the British allies to expel Russian diplomats. However the materials do not contain any evidence of Moscow's involvement in incident. There were cited only evidence of other similarly contrived cases of "hostile actions by the Russian Federation". The official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry Maria Zakharova considered that the European authorities are trying to manipulate world public opinion.
The proof of London on which the charge is based also does not stand up to criticism. The British authority believes that Russia is to blame for Skrypal case because he was poisoned with chemical substance of Soviet manufacture. At the same time British investigators categorically refuse to consider the version that Moscow is just discredited.
In addition it is obvious that Russia completely lacks the motive.
Firstly Mr. Skripal absolutely did not pose a threat to Russia. He completely lost his information opportunities in 2004 when he was burned and arrested.
Secondly the moment for Russia is also absolutely unprofitable. The Kremlin could not risk its reputation for a few days before the presidential elections on March 18 and not long before the 2018 FIFA World Cup. During that period the stability situation in the country and in the region was vitally important for Moscow.
In fact the position of the EU leaders is quite understandable. In the absence of evidence a defendant must be compelled to justify himself which automatically proves his guilt. Apparently for this very reason all the facts quoted by the British authority are purely indirect.
The main goal of the organizers of the provocation is to force the Kremlin to come forward with a refutation. If Moscow goes on the occasion, it will automatically be recognized as guilty of all the crimes of humanity and made a global outcast. In this case who really benefits from setting up the international community against Russia?
Many experts believe that opponents of Russia and in particular of Vladimir Putin are to blame for the poisoning of Sergei Skripal. In this case it is likely that the British special services were involved in the attempt on the agent which became absolutely useless for them. In addition this provocation fits perfectly into the anti-Russian information campaign conducted by the West.
The Russian authorities verifying this version demanded the British leadership to prove the non-involvement of "British spies" in the poisoning of Sergei Skripal. However in the absence of evidence Moscow will regard this fact as an attempt on Russian citizens as a result of a massive political provocation.
Thus European countries should not have believed London's unreasonable evidence. Before imposing anti-Russian sanctions they should have conducted a thorough investigation because if Moscow was right they would have to apologize to Russian people.