Hitherto unknown documented damage in “Estonia” shipwreck – risk of two years in prison – VG

Evertsson is part of the Monster and Dplay documentary team, which over five episodes investigates the circumstances surrounding the tragedy that claimed 852 lives. Dplay’s series “Estonia: The Finding That Changes Everything” premiered on Monday.

After the ship sank in a storm in the Baltic Sea 26 years ago, authorities decided that it was unjustifiable to collect the wreck and the dead passengers.

The area of ​​the shipwreck was defined as a cemetery. Eight countries signed a treaty to prevent grave robbing and private diving in the wreck.

That didn’t stop Evertsson and his crew. In September 2019, they went into the Baltic Sea in a German-registered submarine in search of answers.

With an underwater drone, they filmed the ship and made a discovery that had never been documented before. Drone videos revealed one large crack in the hull on the starboard side of the ship.

But the discovery came at a price.

In July, the Swedish prosecution indicted director Henrik Evertsson and the operator of the ROV (operator of the underwater drone, journal. Note) Linus Andersson. They are now under investigation for violating the peace of the grave in “Estonia”.

The penalty is two years in prison.

also read

Hjørund (6) is buried in “Estonia” – father demands an answer after a shock find in the shipwreck

I never meant to offend the victims

Both Evertsson and Andersson deny criminal guilt. Former defender Johan Eriksson explains that his client for several years has been dedicated to getting to the bottom of what caused the “Estonia” accident.

“Even before carrying out the diving operation, he was in contact with experts who were clear that the act is not classified as a crime if it is carried out from a German flag boat,” says the defender.

– But can the Swedish authorities enforce national legislation on their citizens?

– The prosecution thinks so, but when it was carried out, it was of the firm opinion that it did not do anything that was prohibited.

Eriksson adds that the Finnish Coast Guard ship let Evertsson and the rest of the film crew lay down on the wreck area after they explained what their intentions were. It strengthened the perception that what they did was not criminal, the defender believes.

– You have never intended to offend dead relatives or passengers in any way. He has never done anything that goes against the intent of the law, but he has had good journalistic motive and believes it is important that the public know about this, says Eriksson.

– A good action even if it is wrong.

Andersson’s defender, Hans Gæstadius, notes that the dive operation was carried out from a German-registered ship in international waters. Whether Swedish national law takes precedence over international law in this case is a question that he believes should be answered by the Supreme Court.

Gæstadius, however, doubts that the case will go that far.

– The new information in the documentary may render the prosecution’s question uninteresting. In that case, it is about the motives they had when they committed the crime with which they are charged. When you see the result that we can expect to be the consequences of the discovery they have made, you may wonder if it is really interesting to continue the question.

The defendant points out that in some cases the courts recognize that the case sanctifies the media. In such a scenario, you can avoid punishment even if the court believes you have committed a crime.

– There may be a consequence if the prosecution doubts the prosecution, something I doubt it will do when it becomes familiar with the new information, he says.

The Grave Peace Treaty has never been tried in court since it entered into force in 1995. Gæstadius agrees that this is not a simple question.

– But you have to face it in another way, not prosecute two people who have made an effort that can mean a lot to many people. They have done a good deed even though it may be wrong.

So far, VG has been unable to obtain a comment from the prosecution.

See photos from the dramatic rescue operation of September 29, 1994:

Teacher: It can be enforced against the citizens themselves

Henrik Ringbom, a professor at the Nordic Institute of Maritime Law at the University of Oslo, explains that the wreck area was international waters when Estonia sank. Later, the sea surface of Finland has been expanded, so that today the ship is on the Finnish platform and the water in front belongs to the economic zone of the country.

– This in itself does not prevent vessels from having freedom of navigation and being allowed to dive in the area. But it gives Finland, for example, certain rights and responsibilities with regard to shelving, says Ringbom.

He believes that the peace treaty still applies even if Evertsson and Andersson carried out the operation from a ship registered in Germany, but does not want to speculate on what the outcome of the case will be. The teacher is supported by his colleague Erik Røsæg at UiO.

– The Swedish state can always enforce its rules against its citizens, but it is difficult to imagine that it can be enforced against the German ship, he says.

See the illustration of the ship and the damage in the photo gallery: