By . Matt Chorley, Mailonline Political Editor . PUBLISHED: . 10:52 EST, 19 July 2013 . | . UPDATED: . 16:34 EST, 19 July 2013 . A public inquiry into the poisoning of ex-KGB spy Alexander Litvinenko was rejected because the government did not want to fall out with Russia, it emerged today. Home Secretary Theresa May said protecting 'international relations' had played a part in the decision to reject the request  to hold a full probe. Coroner Sir Robert Owen had warned a public inquiry was needed because he could not consider vital secret evidence as part of a normal inquest. Ex-Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko died in 2006 in London's University College Hospital after being poisoned . This was backed by Mr Litvinenko’s widow Marina, who said she and her legal team were ‘shocked and disappointed’ by the Government’s refusal. But in a letter to Sir Robert the Home Secretary revealed part of the reason for turning down the request was the desire not to upset Russian President Vladamir Putin. Mrs May wrote: ‘It is true that international relations have been a factor in the Government’s decision-making. ‘An inquest managed and run by an independent coroner is more readily explainable to some of our foreign partners, and the integrity of the process more readily grasped, than an inquiry, established by the Government, under a chairman appointed by the Government, which has the power to see Government material potentially relevant to their interests, in secret. ‘However this has not been a decisive factor and it if had stood alone would not have led the Government to refuse an inquiry.’ Home Secretary Theresa May suggested Russian President Vladimir Putin would not think a public inquiry was independent . Mrs May said that the Government is anxious that Mr Litvinenko’s death is properly investigated, and accepts that there are ‘important factors’ in favour of establishing an inquiry. She wrote: ‘May I begin by assuring you that the Government shares your concern to make certain that the tragic death of Mr Litvinenko is properly investigated. ‘Like you, the Government is anxious that as much as possible of the investigation is conducted in public, and in such a way that Mr Litvinenko’s family are as closely involved in the process as is consistent with the public interest.’ Marina Litvinenko, the widow of Alexander Llitvinenko, has vowed to continue her fight for the truth . Mr Litvinenko, 43, was poisoned with . radioactive polonium-210 while drinking tea at the Millennium Hotel in . London’s Grosvenor Square in 2006. Since his death his widow and son Anatoly have battled to discover the truth about what led to his killing. Mrs May told Sir Robert the inquest will be able to address key concerns. ‘It is the view of the Government that, despite the serious concerns you express, an inquest will go a substantial way to addressing or allaying public concern about this incident,’ she said. ‘It will be able to use open material, for example, to explore the circumstances in which the polonium was brought into this country, to ascertain the likely movement of the polonium and those who were apparently carrying it around the country; to expose the evidence about the events leading up to the murder.’ She said that an inquiry would take longer and cost more than a normal inquest, and that ministers could address any remaining concerns over Mr Litvinenko’s death after legal proceedings had finished, possibly with an independent review. ‘The question whether or not public concern remains at the end of that process is a matter primarily for ministers and one best judged at the conclusion of the inquest.’ Any secret evidence presented during a public inquiry would have to be held in closed session and would remain private, she said. ‘The result would be that an inquiry would reveal publicly only that which the inquest would reveal publicly. The persons perhaps most closely concerned with the investigation, namely Marina and Anatoly Litvinenko, would learn no more from an inquiry than they would from the inquest.’
Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko was poisoned in London hotel in 2006 .
Coroner Sir Robert Owen asked for public inquiry instead of an inquest .
But UK government rejected the idea to the dismay of ex-spy's family .
Theresa May admits 'international relations' played a part in refusal .
By . Matt Chorley, Mailonline Political Editor . PUBLISHED: . 10:52 EST, 19 July 2013 . | . UPDATED: . 16:34 EST, 19 July 2013 . A public inquiry into the poisoning of ex-KGB spy Alexander Litvinenko was rejected because the government did not want to fall out with Russia, it emerged today. Home Secretary Theresa May said protecting 'international relations' had played a part in the decision to reject the request  to hold a full probe. Coroner Sir Robert Owen had warned a public inquiry was needed because he could not consider vital secret evidence as part of a normal inquest. Ex-Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko died in 2006 in London's University College Hospital after being poisoned . This was backed by Mr Litvinenko’s widow Marina, who said she and her legal team were ‘shocked and disappointed’ by the Government’s refusal. But in a letter to Sir Robert the Home Secretary revealed part of the reason for turning down the request was the desire not to upset Russian President Vladamir Putin. Mrs May wrote: ‘It is true that international relations have been a factor in the Government’s decision-making. ‘An inquest managed and run by an independent coroner is more readily explainable to some of our foreign partners, and the integrity of the process more readily grasped, than an inquiry, established by the Government, under a chairman appointed by the Government, which has the power to see Government material potentially relevant to their interests, in secret. ‘However this has not been a decisive factor and it if had stood alone would not have led the Government to refuse an inquiry.’ Home Secretary Theresa May suggested Russian President Vladimir Putin would not think a public inquiry was independent . Mrs May said that the Government is anxious that Mr Litvinenko’s death is properly investigated, and accepts that there are ‘important factors’ in favour of establishing an inquiry. She wrote: ‘May I begin by assuring you that the Government shares your concern to make certain that the tragic death of Mr Litvinenko is properly investigated. ‘Like you, the Government is anxious that as much as possible of the investigation is conducted in public, and in such a way that Mr Litvinenko’s family are as closely involved in the process as is consistent with the public interest.’ Marina Litvinenko, the widow of Alexander Llitvinenko, has vowed to continue her fight for the truth . Mr Litvinenko, 43, was poisoned with . radioactive polonium-210 while drinking tea at the Millennium Hotel in . London’s Grosvenor Square in 2006. Since his death his widow and son Anatoly have battled to discover the truth about what led to his killing. Mrs May told Sir Robert the inquest will be able to address key concerns. ‘It is the view of the Government that, despite the serious concerns you express, an inquest will go a substantial way to addressing or allaying public concern about this incident,’ she said. ‘It will be able to use open material, for example, to explore the circumstances in which the polonium was brought into this country, to ascertain the likely movement of the polonium and those who were apparently carrying it around the country; to expose the evidence about the events leading up to the murder.’ She said that an inquiry would take longer and cost more than a normal inquest, and that ministers could address any remaining concerns over Mr Litvinenko’s death after legal proceedings had finished, possibly with an independent review. ‘The question whether or not public concern remains at the end of that process is a matter primarily for ministers and one best judged at the conclusion of the inquest.’ Any secret evidence presented during a public inquiry would have to be held in closed session and would remain private, she said. ‘The result would be that an inquiry would reveal publicly only that which the inquest would reveal publicly. The persons perhaps most closely concerned with the investigation, namely Marina and Anatoly Litvinenko, would learn no more from an inquiry than they would from the inquest.’
Alexander Litvinenko was rejected because the protecting 'international relations' had played a part in the decision to reject the request  to hold a full probe. Coroner Sir Robert Owen had of a normal inquest. Ex-Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko died in 2006 in London's University an inquiry.’ Home Secretary Theresa May suggested