Informant ‘got $47m reward’ for clues on MH17 downing over Ukraine
June 18, 2015 1 Comment
A German investigator, who is probing the downing of a civilian airliner over Ukraine nearly a year ago, says that an informant has claimed a multimillion reward for information pointing to those responsible for the attack. The investigator, Josef Resch, of Lübeck, Germany, says that a binding non-disclosure agreement does not allow him to reveal his client, who offered the $47 million reward. But he told German business magazine Capital that he is hopeful his client will soon reveal the details, since “people who pay that kind of money in exchange for information do not keep it for themselves”. However, he also hinted that his client may be an intelligence agency, who may decide to “deal with the matter without fanfare”.
Resch was speaking in reference to the murder of 295 people in July 2014, who died when the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200 they were on was shot down 1 near the Ukrainian city of Donetsk. The city has a large Russian population and constitutes a major front in the current War in Donbass, which is being fought between the Ukrainian government and pro-Russian Ukrainians. For that reason, the downing of MH17 has become politically contentious: the United States claims 2 that it was shot down by Russian-supported rebels, while Russia accuses 3 the Ukrainian Air Force of deliberately firing on the airliner in order to blame the rebels.
If Resch’s claim is accurate, it would mean that someone with inside knowledge about the identity of the shooters has has come forward with crucial information about the killing of nearly 300 civilians over Donetsk. The size of the award also implies that those offering it are prepared to take some form of action in response to the information. Capital notes 4 that the multimillion award is higher than the amount offered in the past by the government of the United States for information leading to the capture of Osama bin Laden.
Resch told Capital that he is not certain whether the anonymous informant was able to claim the entire reward amount, or just part of it. He also said that he never came in direct contact with the informant, as the latter was represented “by a Swiss middleman” throughout the negotiations.
► Author: Ian Allen | Date: 18 June 2015 | Permalink: https://intelnews.org/2015/06/18/01-1717/
- J. FITSANAKIS “Ukraine rebels ‘admit downing Malaysia plane’ in phone intercepts” intelNews [18jul2014] ↩
- I. ALLEN “US spies say incriminating flight MA17 recordings are genuine” intelNews [24jul2014] ↩
- I. ALLEN “Russia says it traced Ukraine fighter jet near downed Malaysia plane” intelNews [22jul2014 ↩
- J. BRAMBUSCH “Informant zu MH 17 packt aus” Capital [15jun2015] ↩
Australian law enforcement and intelligence agencies routinely use paid informants in Indonesia and Pakistan as part of a decade-old covert war against human traffickers in the Indian Ocean. This information has been revealed by The Australian newspaper in response to 






By JOSEPH FITSANAKIS | intelNews.org |

By TIMOTHY W. COLEMAN | intelNews.org |







IRA spy’s lawsuit against MI5 to be judged in secret, UK court decides
July 15, 2015 by intelNews Leave a comment
However, McGartland’s cover was dramatically blown in 1991, when the IRA began suspecting that he might be an MI5 mole. After several hours of interrogation by the IRA’s Internal Security Unit, McGartland managed to escape his captors by throwing himself out of a third-floor window. He survived serious injuries and was taken into hiding by MI5, living in a series of safe houses across Britain for nearly a decade. In 1999 the IRA caught up with him at an MI5 safe house in North Tyneside, in the northeast of England, where he was shot and left for dead by an IRA hit team while walking to his car.
McGartland is now suing MI5 and its institutional patron, the British Home Office, claiming that they failed to support him after he was shot by the IRA. In his lawsuit, McGartland claims that the government funding he was receiving for treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder was withdrawn after he publicly criticized the British government’s counterterrorism policies. In May of 2013, it emerged that Home Office solicitors had filed a formal request to hold the trial as a Closed Material Procedure (CMP) hearing. This type of practice, which became law in Britain under the 2013 Justice and Security Act, allows the court to decide a case without giving the plaintiff party any details of the information against them.
In many cases, the government resorts to CMP ostensibly to protect ‘sources and methods’. But McGartland’s legal team said that the secret hearing was designed “solely to cover up [MI5’s] own embarrassment and wrongdoing and not, as the Government has been claiming, to protect national security”. Moreover, civil rights groups warned that applying CMP to McGartland’s lawsuit would open the way for the imposition of wider restrictions on the principle of open justice and would normalize secret hearings in the civil courts.
After the judge hearing the case decided to impose CMP on the proceedings, McGartland’s legal team filed an appeal. Now the appeal judges seem to have sided with the Home Office. In a decision published on Tuesday, the judges opined that the imposition of CMP was “a case management decision properly open to the judge and there is no proper basis for this court to interfere with it”. They added that their decision did not represent a blanket approval of secret legal proceedings, but that they expected court judges to scrutinize future CMP applications “with care”.
The ruling means that McGartland’s legal team will not be allowed to hear testimony by certain MI5 witnesses or view court material designated as “sensitive” by the government. Lawyers for the former IRA informant said on Tuesday that the approval of the imposition of CMP represented “a serious aberration from the tradition of open justice”. But lawyers for the Home Office said that the ability to protect sensitive information was central to the proper function of a national security service.
► Author: Joseph Fitsanakis | Date: 15 July 2015 | Permalink: https://intelnews.org/2015/07/15/01-1735/
Filed under Expert news and commentary on intelligence, espionage, spies and spying Tagged with 2013 Justice and Security Act (UK), Closed Material Procedure, government secrecy, informants, lawsuits, Martin McGartland, MI5, News, Provisional IRA, Provisional IRA Internal Security Unit, UK, UK Home Office