Did investigators destroy a Tupolev during the work of the Smolensk subcommittee? The investigation was discontinued

The spokesman for the National Prosecutor's Office, Prosecutor Przemysław Nowak, announced on Wednesday that the investigation into the destruction of the Tu-154M aircraft No. 102 during the work carried out by the Subcommittee for Re-Investigation of the Aircraft Accident had been discontinued.

The investigation concerned the abuse of powers by the members of the subcommittee to re-examine the Smolensk disaster, including its chairman – Antoni Macierewicz, which involved the destruction of the Tu-154M aircraft No. 102, as well as the failure to fulfill the duties of the Minister of National Defense by failing to prevent the destruction of this aircraft.

“The proceedings were discontinued due to the lack of elements of a prohibited act,” said prosecutor Nowak in a message published on the PK website.

In December 2023, the investigation into this case was excluded from the investigation into the Smolensk disaster. In November this year the proceedings were taken over by an investigative team appointed at the National Prosecutor's Office.

The PK spokesman informed that during the investigation, multiple inspections of the Tu-154M aircraft No. 102 were carried out, including with the participation of specialists, documentation regarding its operation, storage and work carried out by the Aircraft Accident Re-Investigation Subcommittee was secured and analyzed, materials were obtained from the National Prosecutor's Office, the Ministry of National Defense, military units and cooperating institutions, and numerous witnesses were interviewed, including soldiers, aviation technicians, specialists and persons performing activities on the aircraft, and also took into account the positions and opinions of specialists in the field of aviation technology and aviation accident investigations.

Investigators determined that the Tu-154M aircraft No. 102 – structurally identical to the Tu-154M No. 101 crashed in the Smolensk crash – last flew in August 2011. Since October 2011, it was stored in a hangar in Mińsk Mazowiecki.

“The subcommittee gained access to the aircraft to conduct research, which began on March 11, 2016. Initially, non-invasive research was carried out, which did not require any interference in the aircraft's structure,” noted the PK spokesman. Then – as he pointed out – selected elements were dismantled and samples were taken for laboratory tests. “As a result of these actions, some of the aircraft's structural elements were damaged” – noted prosecutor Nowak.

It was also established – as we read – that the plane has not had operational capabilities for a long time due to the expiration of its technical maintenance, and since 2011 it has been unfit to fly; eventually it was also reclassified to the category corresponding to scrap in the military records.

“The prosecutor discontinued the proceedings, finding that the members of the subcommittee did not exceed their powers,” said prosecutor Nowak.

He explained that the applicable regulations, in particular the Aviation Law Act and implementing acts regulating the activities of commissions investigating air accidents, granted the subcommittee the authority to conduct technical research, including research interfering with the structure of the aircraft, as long as it served to achieve the research goal.

“The prosecutor did not assess the substantive quality of the results of these tests, because this circumstance had no impact on the determination that the tests conducted were within the limits of the Subcommittee's powers and were permissible under aviation law,” he added.

After secondas he said, investigators determined that the plane had been out of service before the subcommittee's work began. “The impossibility of restoring it to use did not result solely from the subsequent work of the subcommittee,” explained Attorney Nowak.

He added that after third“the actions taken were not motivated by the intention to cause damage or obstruct criminal proceedings, but to carry out tasks related to determining the causes and circumstances of the plane crash.”

He noted that they were conducted within the framework of applicable procedures and powers, and the collected evidence did not confirm the existence of the intention required to assign criminal liability.

“In view of the above circumstances, the prosecutor decided to discontinue the proceedings due to the lack of elements of a prohibited act,” emphasized prosecutor Nowak.

He explained that on the same basis, the proceedings regarding the second act, i.e. failure to fulfill duties by the Minister of National Defense, were discontinued. “Since it was established that the members of the subcommittee acted within the limits of their powers, there were no grounds to assume that the Minister of National Defense had failed to fulfill his duties by failing to take actions to prevent the destruction of the aircraft or actions aimed at restoring it to its previous condition,” the PK spokesman noted.

Prosecutors from Investigation Team No. 4 continue their work. They are still conducting four investigations regarding several dozen threads. (PAP)

mas/sdd/