Testimony Completed in Eagle S Sabotage Trial in Finland
Prosecutors and defense lawyers made their final statements on Friday, September 12, in Helsinki District Court in the trial of the captain and two officers from the product tanker Eagle S on charges that their negligence caused the damage on December 25, 2024, of five subsea cables running between Finland and Estonia. After broad speculation that it was a case of sabotage, the prosecution centered on the command responsibilities, citing negligence and not pursuing charges of intentional damage to the cables.
The captain, first, and second officers of the product tanker were charged with aggravated sabotage and aggravated interference with telecommunications as a result of the anchor-dragging incident. The trial began on August 25, and the court is now scheduled to issue its ruling on October 3.
The three officers of the vessel have been subjected to a travel ban since January 2025 that did not permit them to leave Finland. Others from the crew that had initially been under investigation were removed from the travel ban. The court, however, today, also ruled to lift the travel ban on the captain and two officers. Prosecutors had argued it should remain in place until the verdict.
The case centered on whether the captain and officers should have realized that the anchor dropped and was being dragged. Investigators concluded it dropped because of poor maintenance and a broken safety pin on the chain stopper. The defense lawyers countered that the anchor windless had been serviced and tested, and further, it had withstood violent storms before the ship entered the Gulf of Finland.
The prosecution contended that they should have realized there was a problem because the vessel’s speed dropped when the anchor began dragging. The defense was that they believed it was an engine problem that caused the speed drop. In their closing remarks, the prosecution contended to the court that no evidence was presented of engine problems.
The captain, they said, is responsible for the management and condition of the ship while the two officers were on navigation watch during the time the anchor dragged 90 kilometers (55 miles) along the seabed and broke five cables. Defense said it was the chief engineer, who was not on trial, who was responsible for the condition of the machinery, including the anchor. Further, they questioned why the Finnish authorities had not informed the vessel sooner when they suspected it was dragging the anchor.
There also remains an issue of jurisdiction, and whether the vessel voluntarily entered Finnish waters. The defense argues that Finland lacked the authority because the damage occurred in international waters and the ship only entered Finnish waters when it was commanded by the police.
Prosecutors are still asking the court to sentence each of the three officers to a minimum of two and a half years in prison. The Finnish news outlet Yle says the leniency of the proposed sentences is because the cables were not intentionally broken and the overall damage was “quite minor.” The companies reported it took a few months to complete repairs at a cost of approximately €55 million ($65 million).
The incident, however, raised concerns over the safety of key infrastructure. It was followed by several other suspicious events, which led to allegations that it was part of an orchestrated plot by Russia. NATO and the Scandinavian countries increased monitoring of key assets as a result of the suspicions regarding the actions of the Eagle S.