Finnish court says it can’t prosecute crew of Russian-linked ship for cable damage
A Finnish court has dismissed criminal charges against the crew of the Russian-linked tanker Eagle S over the cutting of undersea cables in the Baltic Sea, ruling that Finland lacks jurisdiction because the incident constituted a navigation matter under international law.
The Helsinki District Court found that while the tanker’s anchor dragged along the seabed and severed several submarine cables on 25 December last year, causing ‘very serious economic losses’ in Finland, the incident fell under the exclusive jurisdiction of the ship’s flag state or the defendants’ home countries under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Prosecutors had demanded unconditional prison sentences of at least two and a half years for the ship’s captain Davit Vadatchkoria and first officers Robert Egizaryan and Santosh Kumar Chaurasia. The charges alleged that the ship’s crew was aware of defects in the anchor windlass but intentionally neglected their duties, causing the anchor to fall into the sea and drag across the seabed in international waters within Finland’s exclusive economic zone. Prosecutors did not allege the defendants intentionally damaged the cables.
Finnish authorities had pursued charges of criminal mischief, aggravated criminal mischief, and aggravated criminal damage, arguing that Finnish criminal law applied because the consequences of the offences materialised in Finland.
The court rejected the first two charges, finding that the act did not result in the kinds of consequences to Finland’s energy supply or telecommunications required under those statutes. However, it accepted that the incident caused very serious economic losses qualifying under the definition of aggravated criminal damage.
Despite finding economic harm in Finland, the court ruled that because the defendants’ alleged negligence related to their duties on board the ship, the incident must be classified as a navigation matter. Under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, criminal jurisdiction over navigation incidents rests with the flag state or the defendants’ countries of nationality, not the coastal state where consequences occurred.
The court determined that the anchor loss resulted from a failure of the anchor-securing mechanism rather than deliberate sabotage.
The Eagle S, registered under the Cook Islands flag, was detained by Finnish authorities on 26 December 2024 after Finnish customs vessels intercepted it in the Gulf of Finland. Finnish investigators suspected the vessel was part of Russia’s ‘shadow fleet’ of aging tankers used to evade Western sanctions on Russian oil exports.
The incident severed the Estlink 2 power cable connecting Finland and Estonia, as well as multiple telecommunications cables, causing widespread disruption. Finnish authorities described the damage as potentially deliberate sabotage amid heightened concerns about hybrid threats following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
The dismissal of charges represents a significant setback for Finnish authorities seeking to prosecute what they suspected was deliberate infrastructure sabotage. The ruling suggests that even when undersea cable damage causes substantial harm to a coastal state, international maritime law limits that state’s ability to pursue criminal charges if the incident can be characterised as a navigation matter.
The judgment is not final and can be appealed. The court dismissed all civil damages claims arising from the criminal charges.
The Eagle S was carrying Russian oil products from the port of Ust-Luga when the cables were severed. Finnish investigators determined the vessel is leased to a major Russian oil company and linked to a network of shadowy tankers created to transport sanctioned Russian oil.
