By the end of April, the relatives were caught up in a legal battle to obtain the images captured by Schiphol airport’s security cameras on 17 July 2014. The victims had been caught on camera and these moving images were the last recordings of the MH17 passengers. For three years the relatives had begged the prosecution, which had this footage in its possession, to let them see what the security cameras had filmed. But the prosecution had bluntly refused to share the footage from the thirty-four security cameras that had been operating in the departure hall and lounge. The prosecution claimed that the images were not clear enough for anyone to be recognisable.
However, two families had received footage during the first days after the crash. They had obtained this through the efforts of the family counsellor. As part of a help program for the relatives, counsellors had been appointed to each family who had lost a loved family member. These two families had been able to witness the last moments of their loved ones before they boarded the plane, and now the other relatives wanted the consolation those last images had brought to the two families—they wanted to see their loved ones alive and strolling around the departure hall, happy to be going on holidays.
Important as this was, it raised a question of privacy, as is always the case whenever footage is shared, as there were also images of other passengers at Schiphol, passengers who had nothing to do with MH17. Nonetheless, many relatives expressed their wish to view the footage, indicating they would be willing to sign a privacy statement. They were not going to back down.
In May 2017, as the war dribbled on, Kiev hosted the Euro-vision Song Contest. Russia had at first declined to send an entrant but then at the last moment it changed its mind. But Ukraine barred Russia’s contestant—Yulia Samoylova, who uses a wheelchair—from entering the country because she had once visited Crimea and sang for an audience there. Travel to Crimea by foreign nationals without prior authorisation from the Kiev government had been regarded as a crime in Ukraine since Russia’s 2014 annexation of the region. The year before in 2016, Russia had accused Ukraine of politicising the song festival by choosing a Crimean Tatar as its contestant. Russian foreign ministry official Grigory Karasin, speaking to Interfax news agency, called the decision to bar Samoylova ‘another outrageous, cynical and inhuman act by the Kiev authorities’.
In the meantime, Ukraine’s claim that Russia had violated two UN conventions was considered by the chairman of the UN International Court of Justice, Ronny Abraham. Ukraine was now given a further thirteen months to submit evidence of Russia’s violations, with that opportunity expiring on 12 June 2018. After that, the Russian side would have exactly the same period of time to submit objections and counter-arguments. Thus the complete position of both parties would come before the court no earlier than 12 July 2019.
Just days before the third anniversary of the MH17 tragedy, the G7 foreign ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States, as well as the high representative of the European Union, called on Russia to cooperate with MH17 investigators. They found the JIT’s findings on Russia’s role in the downing of MH17 compelling, significant and deeply disturbing. The G7 recalled that UN Security Council Resolution 2166 demanded that all states cooperate fully with efforts to establish accountability.
As 17 July approached, suspects were being named and traced. The five countries that were working together in the investigation of the shooting chose the Netherlands as the country where suspects would eventually be prosecuted. ‘With this decision we are taking a next step on the way to uncover the truth, the prosecution of suspects and satisfaction for the bereaved,’ Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte said in a statement posted on Facebook. ‘This remains the highest priority for the Dutch government.’
Announcing a venue for a future trial without felons to try as the disaster’s third anniversary approached was nothing more than a sign of recognition that closure was needed and that the relatives needed to know a resolution was still being pursued. Whether it would ever be reached was still very uncertain. The whole inquiry had been grinding forward at a glacial pace, thanks to the difficulty in ascertaining who exactly directed the missile system from the battlefields of eastern Ukraine.
To back the choice of the Netherlands as the country where a trial would be held, Australian prime minister Malcolm Turnbull and Australian foreign minister Julie Bishop issued a joint statement: ‘The investigation team’s decision to support a Dutch national prosecution will ensure that results from the investigation are taken into account and that justice for the victims and their families, including the 38 people who called Australia home, is delivered. While we cannot take away the grief of those who lost their loved ones because of this atrocious act, we are committed to holding the perpetrators to account and achieving justice for all the victims.’
As far as Australia was concerned, the choice for the Dutch legal system was an ‘important step’ in the prosecution process. The probe into who could be held responsible was extensive although still no suspect had been officially identified so far. Washington also welcomed the decision to grant jurisdiction to the Dutch courts for the prosecution of those responsible for the tragedy. The US had full confidence in the ability of the Dutch criminal justice system to conduct a prosecution that would not only be comprehensive but also objective and just.
The memory of the crash remained an open wound for the people of the Netherlands. Three years after MH17 was shot down, the disaster’s memorial day in Amsterdam brought together families from around the world. Some two thousand people attended the opening of a new memorial at Vijfhuizen, near Schiphol airport. The monument—a curved steel wall and an eye-shaped sculpture engraved with the victims’ names—was placed in an amphitheatre surrounded by 298 trees, still saplings, planted in the form of a commemorative ribbon. The memorial was attended by the Dutch King and Queen. All 298 names of the victims were read out during the ceremony.
Earlier in March families had come together to each plant a sapling to commemorate their loved ones. The forest was to take on the shape of the black memorial ribbon that is often worn as a symbol for the disaster. Relatives were asked to choose a tree to represent their loved ones from ten different species. Around the forest thousands of sunflowers were planted.
Fifteen lime trees were planted for the Malaysia Airlines crew members, and in the following months family members of the victims each planted their own trees for their missing relatives. Some buried their loved one’s ashes at the base of the tree. Some relatives planted just one tree, but those who had lost more than one family member would plant a tree for each of the family’s victims. All 298 saplings had a plaque bearing the name of a MH17 passenger. Many branches of the different trees bore cards and ribbons sent by grandparents, friends, cousins and brothers and sisters.
Jon and Meryn O’Brien, who lost their 25-year-old son, Jack, in the disaster, had come to Amsterdam from their home in Sydney to attend the memorial. Jack’s mother shed tears as she looked at the photograph pinned to the tree of her only son, his smiling face looking out over the memorial park. Three years down the track, the O’Briens, like many others, had still not come to terms with their son’s death. There was a life before Jack died, and another after Jack died.