Malaysia tror inte att Ryssland sköt ned MH17-planet

Förråden i vilket den angivna missilen skulle finnas i, brann ner efter det att Ryssland lämnade detaljerade info

Det hade varit bra om man hade länkat till till tidigare artiklar om dessa påstående.

Artikeln är full av lögner/okunskap. Man skiljer inte mellan Dutch Safety Board utredning och IJT utredning.

Det har aldrig erbjudits Malaysia att leda någon utredning, vare sig DSB eller JIT.
Detta framgår mycket tydligt av en artikeln från den 3 dec 2014, globalresearch.ca

”At Ukraine’s request, the Netherlands is conducting the investigation through the Dutch Safety Board. This is not a breach of protocol, since the State of Occurrence, in this case Ukraine, “may delegate the whole or any part of the conducting of such investigation to another State by mutual arrangement and consent.” (Annex 13 To the Convention on International Civil Aviation, paragraph 5.1)
Article 26 of the Chicago Convention also says:
“The State in which the aircraft is registered [Malaysia] shall be given the opportunity to appoint observers to be present at the inquiry and the State holding the inquiry shall communicate the report and findings in the matter to that State.”
DSB utredning är inte en kriminell utredning.

…/ the specific objective of the joint investigation team (JIT): to conduct a criminal investigation and “apportion blame”. It is a European entity conducting a criminal investigation under a European legal framework and which, unlike the Dutch Safety Board, does not have to abide by the rules of the ICAO. The JIT can include anyone or any state, but most importantly, and contrary to the DSB investigation, it is under no obligation to include Malaysia.

What exactly is a joint investigation team?
Under the auspices of Europol and Eurojust:
A joint investigation team (JIT) is a team consisting of judges, prosecutors and law enforcement authorities, established for a fixed period and a specific purpose by way of a written agreement between the States involved, to carry out criminal investigations in one or more of the involved States. (Joint Investigation Teams, Historical background, Eurojust)

The team will be led by a person from the State in which the JIT operates. Although the members of the team may originate from various jurisdictions they are to carry out their duties in accordance with the national law of the territory where the investigation is taking place. (General Legal Basis for JITs)

JITs can be set up with countries outside of the European Union as well, provided that a legal basis for the creation of such a JIT exists between the countries involved. The legal basis can take the form of an international legal instrument, a bi- or multilateral agreement or national legislation (e.g. respective Article(s) in the code of criminal procedure). (Ibid.)

Participants may come not only from EU bodies/agencies, e.g. Europol, Eurojust, OLAF, etc., but also from third States and their agencies, e.g. the FBI (Joint Investigation Teams Manual)

Ukraine has acceded to the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters and thus may set up a JIT. In Ukraine the authority “which decides on setting up a joint investigation team shall be the General Prosecutor’s Office in Ukraine”. The rules and regulations of JITs can be found in the Article 20 of the Second Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters.

Establishment of a JIT in the Hague: Who is Leading this Criminal Investigation?
The JIT was created in late July, when “public prosecutors and investigators from the 12 countries that are involved in the investigation into the crash of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 met at Eurojust in The Hague to discuss their judicial cooperation strategy.” (Eurojust coordination meeting: investigations into Flight MH17, Eurojust, The Hague, July 28, 2014)

…/the Dutch Public Prosecution Service, which “started the coordination of international cooperation” is a governmental agency. The Eurojust press release states that the investigation, initiated by the Dutch, will take place in Ukraine. Is it being conducted under Ukrainian or Dutch national law? Remember, according to General Legal Basis for JITs, the “team will be led by a person from the State in which the JIT operates” and even though “the members of the team may originate from various jurisdictions they are to carry out their duties in accordance with the national law of the territory where the investigation is taking place.”

What the press release above does not mention is that the Ukrainian “Prosecutor General’s Office was one of those who initiated the formation of an international investigative group,” according to an article by Interfax.

Does it mean that, since the JIT investigation is taking place in Ukraine, it is ruled by Ukrainian law and that Ukraine, one of the suspects, is leading the investigation? If so, this JIT investigation has no credibility whatsoever and is absolutely not independent. It is a parody of justice.

The Ukrainian Prosecutor General Vitaliy Yarema said:
“It is our priority or even our duty to the international community to hold a detailed inquiry into this tragedy and restore justice…”(Ukrainian Prosecutor General: Intl probe into MH17 flight crash to go on, Interfax, October 29, 2014)

The Interfax article stated further:
The Prosecutor General’s Office recalled that an agreement setting up the joint investigative group of the Netherlands, Belgium, Australia, Ukraine, Malaysia and Eurojust was signed on August 7, 2014.

That JIT agreement, initiated at The Hague on July 28, 2014, includes a non-disclosure agreement between all the countries except Malaysia, which was only granted a “participant” status:
In the framework of the 4-country agreement signed on 8 August between Ukraine, the Netherlands, Belgium and Australia, information on the progress and results of the investigation of the disaster will remain classified.

This was confirmed at a briefing in Kiev under the auspices of the office of the Prosecutor General Yuri Boychenko. In his words, the results of the investigation will be published once completed only if a consensus agreement of all parties that have signed the agreement prevails.
Any one of the signatories has the right to veto the publication of the results of the investigation without explanation.

The JIT investigation, on the other hand, is under no obligation to “communicate the report and findings” to Malaysia.

…/ Malaysian officials have complained in late November that the were excluded from the JIT and are headed to the Netherlands on December 3 to discuss their status:
Come Dec 3, Malaysia’s inspector-general of police (IGP) and the attorney-general (A-G) will head for the Netherlands to discuss among others, the role of the Malaysian team in the joint international investigations into the downing of Malaysia Airlines (MAS) Flight MH17 in July…
“At the moment, Malaysia is not in the joint investigation team. We are merely, a participant. We must be included in the joint investigation team,” he said…
…/ During his visit to Malaysia earlier this month, Netherlands Prime Minister Mark Rutte had agreed to Malaysia’s participation in the international investigation. (MH17: IGP, A-G Off To The Netherlands On Dec 3, Bernama, November 19, 2014)

It poses a serious problem that Ukraine is part of an investigation into an incident for which it is a suspect, when the main victim, Malaysia, is excluded. The investigation should either include all the suspects as well as the victims or none of them. But most importantly, Ukraine should not lead an investigation into a crime for which it is a suspect.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/mh17-what-is-the-joint-investigation-team-what-is-it-for-whos-leading-it-and-why-is-malaysia-excluded/5417589

Det har framkommit å ena sidan att expertis i Nederländerna kommit fram till att ifall av en Buk-explosion, splitter från missilen kommer att tränga in i offrens kroppar. Australiska obducenter har skannat offrens kroppar men inte kunnat finna några splitter från missilen i dessa. De malaysiska piloternas kroppar undersöktes aldrig i Malaysien och de anhöriga förbjöds att öppna likkistorna.

I Australien har man inte heller aktiverat den klausul för ersättning till offrens anhöriga som föranleds av en terrorhandling. Enligt australiensiska myndighetsutlåtanden som hemlighållits saknas dels sådana bevis som internationell rätt kräver för att fastställa själva händelseförloppet och i tillägg saknas belägg för avsiktlighet som även förutsätts.

Australiens statsledning sitter på två stolar. På den ena deklarerar man rysk skuld och till de anhöriga deklarerar man frånvaron av tillräckliga bevis.

Ingen bör förvåna sig över att obducenternas protokoll hemligstämplats och att det inlägg av professor Jones som John Helmer publicerat vägrats publikation av medier i Australien.

Finns det någon som verkligen tror att Ryssland sköt ner planet på riktigt? Om man bortser från propagandan och lögnmedias påhitt så håller ju inte åklagarens framställan alls måttet! Alla spår ledet mot ukrainarna själva och deras agerande efter att de skjutit ner planet visar väl på att en hel kennel är begraven i lögnerna och bortförklaringarna för att dölja den egna skulden! Världens ”nyhetsförmedling” befinner sig i ett miserabelt skick där agendan sätts av ägarna och politikerna som styr fulmedia! Och som ett brev på posten minskar allmänhetens förtroende för den traditionella nyhetsförmedlingen dag för dag…senast i Sverige där propagandacentralen nummer 1 TT ska göra sig av med personal! Folk har helt enkelt fått nog av lögnerna som presenteras!