Devayani Khobragade’s
arrest – Some facts to
understand
A lot has been said on this issue by the Indian politician,
the Indian media, the American who told their side of the story and the people
on the net. But very few comments on the net were free from the emotional
outrage. I am writing this article to put forward the plain facts w/o the emotional
story.
There are lots of misconceptions, lack of understanding, cultural
barriers and the undiplomatic, rash and politically motivated statements from
Indian leaders that is adding gas to the fire. The question is was this all necessary?
Could it have been avoided by taking action on time and keeping a low profile?
Let us address all the major concerns about this case and analyze
them with factual information (no emotions)
Fact # 1 – US justice
department has sent a letter to Devayani in
September 2013 with all the charges
that they were probing.
Action taken - At
that stage itself, India should have approached the US State Department and
tried to resolve the issue amicably using diplomatic channels. But instead of
doing that, Indian authorities used other means to silence the maid. They resorted to get Delhi High Court order
declaring maid Sangeeta Richards as “Absconding in US” and then slamming her
with the robbery charges with NYPD.
Effect of this action
– Americans who were already probing the case of Visa fraud and some other
charges against Devayani with respect to the same maid, viewed these actions as
a bullying tactics to silence the maid. This arrogance of power and disrespect to
the American laws has complicated the matter for the Indians. Now this has
become an ego issue between the two countries, personality issues between the
officials from both countries and strong anti-American sentiment in India.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fact # 2 –Was Devayani
entitled to get full diplomatic immunity at the time of arrest?
Action Taken -The
Indians protested Devayani’s arrest by saying she is a diplomat and she enjoys
FULL diplomatic immunity.
Whereas US say; the immunity to the councilor is restricted
only to her work related matters. She does not enjoy blanket immunity or in
other words she does not enjoy “License To Kill” kind of immunity.
What is the truth?
– The UN Geneva Summit clearly states the difference in immunities that a Diplomat
enjoys verses the Councilor enjoys. The Diplomat has full and complete immunity
but councilor has limited immunity that is restricted to the work.
Please read the original document from the Geneva Summit.
Refer article 37 on page 12. This should clear any doubt of the kind of
immunity different levels enjoy.
Devayani, being a counselor at the time of arrest, enjoyed
only limited immunity as per the Geneva Convention. The crimes that she is
charged with are non-work related hence US government is entitled to take legal
action.
Past case references to
prove this law of immunity - in 2011, US councilor Raymond Davis was
arrested in Pakistan for killing two people in the streets of Lahore. US claimed
that Richard has a diplomatic immunity and should not be arrested. But Pakistan
pointed out that he is a counselor and not a diplomat and must stand the trial.
Mr. Davis had to go through the trial, had to pay the Blood-Money to the family
of the victim (which is legal in Pakistani laws) and then he was released.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fact # 3 – The way in
which Devayani was arrested was against the protocol.
Indian side of the
story - Devayani was arrested when
she went to drop her daughter to the school; she was handcuffed in front of her
daughter and was not treated properly. Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA)
too raised objections with the same story line.
Americans side of the
story – Mr. Preet Bharara, the NY District Attorney who made this arrest
gives a different version. His statement posted on the official government
website says;
Devayani was arrested after she had dropped her daughter to
the school.
She was not arrested near the school but at a discrete place
where it will not be noticed.
She was not handcuffed after she was arrested.
She was allowed to keep her cell phone (usually, police do
not allow the arrested person to keep the cell phone) and was allowed to call
anyone she wanted to call.
As it was cold outside, she was allowed to sit inside the
police car and make all the phone calls.
She was offered tea/coffee while she was making the calls.
Hence Preet says she was extended unusual courtesy that is not given to the
other arrested people.
Please read the official statement from Preet Bharara.
What is the truth?
In US, all police cars have dash cam video cameras, which
record everything. If Preet Bharar’s version is true then we should have the video
recording to prove that Devayani was indeed not hand cuffed and she was allowed
to make phone calls while she was sitting in the police car. This can be very
easy to prove.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fact # 4 – Was it
appropriate to do a body search after the arrest?
US side of the story
- In US, police strip search everyone who is arrested. This is just to make
sure the arrested person is not carrying any weapons, drugs or having
infectious open wounds etc. It is done as a safety precaution so that the
arrested person does not become a danger to the other inmates. This is done to
every arrested person, irrespective of whether that person is rich, poor,
black, white, Asian, Hispanic etc.
Indian side of the
story – Indians maintained that Devayani enjoyed full diplomatic immunity
and there was no need to conduct a body reach like a criminal. This treatment
to a diplomat is against the Geneva Convention agreement.
What does Geneva
Convention says about this?
Article # 29 in the Geneva Convention document (Link given
above) states as follows.
Quote –
The receiving State shall treat him with due respect and shall take all
appropriate steps to prevent any attack on his person, freedom or dignity.
Unquote –
But as you can see, the interpretation of these words can
vary by the government in each country and the culture in that part of the
country.
For example – In Indian
culture, stripping naked an Indian citizen is considered as an ultimate insult.
And if it is done to a woman then it is an ultimate crime. This would be never
done to a lady diplomat in India. That is Indian culture! Hence Indians feel
really offended by the US action.
But as per US culture, strip searching an arrested person is
common practice. They don’t feel anything bad in that.
In Indian culture, police beat up every arrested person in
the custody and sometimes they also give third degree treatment too. This is
very common and is acceptable in the Indian culture. Applying the same
standards, if an American diplomat is arrested in India and if he/she is given
few thrashes then Americans should not complain about this!
What was reasonable in this case?
American justice department should have exercised some
restrain and applied some common sense in this act. Devayani is not a hardcore
criminal. And most important, she is on a diplomatic mission. Americans should
have treated her with respect by not doing a body search. That would have
meant, keeping the true spirit of the Geneva Accord.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fact # 5 – Was there
any conspiracy in this whole episode?
Stories reported in
the Indian media
Indian Side of the story -Devayani’s father
Mr. Uttam Khobragade has stated that the maid, Sangeeta Richards was a US spy
and asked Indian home misister to probe this aspect. Even Indian Ministry of External
Affairs (MEA) also made a statement indirectly hinting at the same theory.
This story was widely
publicized in the Indian media. It further stated that Sangeeta Richards was giving
sensitive information to US. Sangeeta’s cover was about to be blown off hence
Americans have played this dirty game of arresting Devayani. Under the pretest
of this case, Americans could smuggle out Sangeeta’s family from India and give
them political Asylum. The arrest, case etc. was just a cover to safeguard
Sangeeta’s involvement in the spy operation.
What Americans have
to say on this – There is no official statement from US on these
allegations.
What is the truth?
It is difficult to believe in this theory. In today’s
technologically advanced world, is there a need to put a physical mole in a
councilor’s house?
Americans have the capability to tap into the cell phones of
important world leaders. Do you think they will use age old, World War II
technique of putting a mole in a councilor’s home to gather information?
Another point, what kind of intelligence she could have
collected from Devayani’s house? It would have made sense if this maid was working
in the Indian Consulate, but in somebody’s house…??? Unless Indians were
storing some vital information in Devayani’s house, I don’t see why there
should be a mole in her house.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fact # 6 – Are these
charges valid? Will they stand the trial?
Charges registered - Devayani
is charged with giving false information to obtain visa, unsolicited human trafficking,
not paying wages to Sangeeta as per the US hourly rate and forcing Sangeeta to
work additional long hours without paying overtime.
What Indians have to
say? Indians have said these charges are false but have not given the details
as why they think these charges are false? But in most of the statements Indian
Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has shown outrage over the arrests rather
than giving evidence to prove Devayani’s innocence.
What is the truth? It
is difficult to say the truth at this stage as the case has not gone for
hearing. But it is hard to believe Americans would be stupid enough to arrest
Devayani if they did not have irrefutable evidence. Attorney, Mr. Bharara could
not have acted independently in arresting a foreign diplomat. The case must
have been thoroughly scrutinized by the higher ups in the justice department
and the state department before giving a green signal. It will be really shameful
for America if they lose the case due to the flimsy evidence! Hence let
Americans pray, they solid case against Devayani.
Fact # 7 – Was India
aware about the US laws on A3 visa? Did they comply with these rules?
Logical approach -
We have seen lot of passionate discussions on this topic. Mostly filled with
emotions (anger, insult, deprivation etc.) and vengeance. Let’s cut all that
part from the analysis and check this with pure logical approach. Let’s see the
flow chart below.
The
above analysis shows that case against Devayani does not stand only in one situation.
If Government of India was paying the salary to the maid.But if MEA paid the complete salary of the maid to Devayani as a perk or as a reimbursement of expenses then she has to stand trial.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other aspects of this issue –
Possible reason for India’s tough stand - India as a retaliatory measure, took some visibly strong measures, which will hurt US embassy in India. Though these measures appear to be strong but if you really see, these are meant to give a strong message to the Indian public rather than hurting US embassy in India!Congress party lost elections in the recent state level elections and is worried that the same story may repeat in the general election, which are due in next 3-4 months. Hence they wanted to send a strong message to the Indian public that congress government at the center is not weak and is capable of taking strong action even against US. But US government is aware about this political compulsion of the congress leaders. Hence US government might have said that it would not say “Sorry” and would not repeal the cases against Devayani.Now that both the sides have hardened their positions, it is going to be a tough diplomatic tug of war. It is really a shame that such a minor issue has turned into a major diplomatic problem between the two countries.
Maturity of the Indian media - The Indian media too has played a very irresponsible role. They bombarded the news of her arrest, strip search and handcuffing in typical Indian style. It was basically very cheap level of presentation with an emotional story, which said; “Indian lady diplomat arrested, handcuffed and strip searched in US.”
None of these reporters had done any study of US laws, US civic culture and the Geneva Convention laws for the diplomatic immunity. This type of message is bound to raise the tempers of the common public who don’t understand much about foreign relationship.
Please see some of the reports below…note the kind of language that was used to explain details of her arrest.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pT6sMzxstXIhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjcQwuhcnmghttp://www.ndtv.com/video/player/news/indian-diplomat-in-us-was-strip-searched-kept-in-jail-with-drug-addicts-sources/30163.
Indian news media needs to mature with more knowledgeable and balanced reporting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concluding remarks -Another aspect that needs to be looked into is why US went ahead with this arrest? They certainly knew, India would retaliate then why did they go with the arrest? They could have solved this issue through diplomatic channels.
Is it because Indian embassy in US is the biggest offender of US laws related to the A3 visas? And Americans wanted to send a clear message to Indians and other third world country embassies that such violations will not be tolerated?
Or was America forced into this situation by the events triggered by the outside agencies?
Whatever may be the reason, but it looks very strange that US government would take such an action with a friendly country.
It needs to be seen how this row is resolved? Will Indian leaders take more matured approach to resolve the issue through diplomatic channels or still go through the news media channels to communicate with the US government?
But for now, it is a shame that a very trivial matter has taken a proportion of a mega scale diplomatic row. The matter that should have been resolved by the two countries under the diplomatic cover is now being discussed by the media.
If Government of India was paying the salary to the maid.But if MEA paid the complete salary of the maid to Devayani as a perk or as a reimbursement of expenses then she has to stand trial.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other aspects of this issue –
Possible reason for India’s tough stand - India as a retaliatory measure, took some visibly strong measures, which will hurt US embassy in India. Though these measures appear to be strong but if you really see, these are meant to give a strong message to the Indian public rather than hurting US embassy in India!Congress party lost elections in the recent state level elections and is worried that the same story may repeat in the general election, which are due in next 3-4 months. Hence they wanted to send a strong message to the Indian public that congress government at the center is not weak and is capable of taking strong action even against US. But US government is aware about this political compulsion of the congress leaders. Hence US government might have said that it would not say “Sorry” and would not repeal the cases against Devayani.Now that both the sides have hardened their positions, it is going to be a tough diplomatic tug of war. It is really a shame that such a minor issue has turned into a major diplomatic problem between the two countries.
Maturity of the Indian media - The Indian media too has played a very irresponsible role. They bombarded the news of her arrest, strip search and handcuffing in typical Indian style. It was basically very cheap level of presentation with an emotional story, which said; “Indian lady diplomat arrested, handcuffed and strip searched in US.”
None of these reporters had done any study of US laws, US civic culture and the Geneva Convention laws for the diplomatic immunity. This type of message is bound to raise the tempers of the common public who don’t understand much about foreign relationship.
Please see some of the reports below…note the kind of language that was used to explain details of her arrest.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pT6sMzxstXIhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjcQwuhcnmghttp://www.ndtv.com/video/player/news/indian-diplomat-in-us-was-strip-searched-kept-in-jail-with-drug-addicts-sources/30163.
Indian news media needs to mature with more knowledgeable and balanced reporting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concluding remarks -Another aspect that needs to be looked into is why US went ahead with this arrest? They certainly knew, India would retaliate then why did they go with the arrest? They could have solved this issue through diplomatic channels.
Is it because Indian embassy in US is the biggest offender of US laws related to the A3 visas? And Americans wanted to send a clear message to Indians and other third world country embassies that such violations will not be tolerated?
Or was America forced into this situation by the events triggered by the outside agencies?
Whatever may be the reason, but it looks very strange that US government would take such an action with a friendly country.
It needs to be seen how this row is resolved? Will Indian leaders take more matured approach to resolve the issue through diplomatic channels or still go through the news media channels to communicate with the US government?
But for now, it is a shame that a very trivial matter has taken a proportion of a mega scale diplomatic row. The matter that should have been resolved by the two countries under the diplomatic cover is now being discussed by the media.
No comments:
Post a Comment