>> Rahul no one earns their bread from any economy , people just work to earn their bread
split hairs if you want to but the fact remains that an IT worker is working 'in' US while a diplomat is working for GOI 'in' India(embassy). the difference is considerable. that is why US laws do not apply to him or her in the same way it does to an IT worker.
>> To your point about quid pro I will take it for time being for I do not know how different is the process for diplomats but there is one thing I can tell you from personal experience i.e. if this quid pro you talk about was not in a form of some waiver document then I don't see how any legal body would take someone's word for it, Massa is a country where even a father has to produce a certificate for proving that a kid is his child , child's testimony is not considered .
you are putting far too much faith on the infallibility of US legal system than is warranted. they broke their own regulations in this case itself ! US breaks the laws often enough if it suits its interests. there was no reason for MEA to assume that US SD would disrupt the quid pro quo and out its own staff at risk.
(personally, I think US SD simply assumed that India under MMS won't *dare* move against their staff in any way. in fact GOI has done *much*, *much* less than what it could do. believe me, there exists enough material to put half US govt staff in India behind bars if GOI wants to)
>> Just bring back Mrs Devayani ? Well if GOI indeed thinks that it did no wrong then why not pursue this to end of it ?
err, what ? haven't your friends/parents ever advised you on the lines of "avoid so and so area after dark".
was it because
a) they thought you might indulge in criminal activity
or
b) they were afraid you would come in harms way irrespective of what you did (IOW even if you were a good boy who listened to mummy and parted his hair after applying copious amount of hair oil) ?
GOI is not convinced of the ability of US system to play fair, as it has already demonstrated the propensity to forget its own and international rules in its vindictive run to punish dirty heathens. why risk her again ?
it might have been different if DK was from an euro country, say germany. (whose diplomats are going to get an waiver regarding wages for domestic helps)
>> Let's see how the wheels of justice roll in so called most powerful democracy , na ?
clearly they have a much lower opinion of the quality of justice than you do.
First I am serious, the reason is things get out in the open by going down that route , behind the scenes no one comes to know about the truth. It is like this if they don't have a case against her what would happen in worse case ? You cannot just frame someone for VISA fraud without EVIDENCE , she was charged alright but not convicted .
they can and probably would, given half a chance.
I am sorry, I do not share your opinion of US legal system. a country whose supreme court upholds custodial rape as a legitimate police procedure for virtually all scenarios, however minor, can be expected to adopt any and all unfair means to frame a targeted individual.
Point is they have made it a legal battle, if there is nothing wrong indeed on our end then why would we shy from that fight ? This is not a pre 1947 era British court where people would give a verdict without any evidence.
it may be worse than a pre 1947 era brit court, esp. for a dark skinned heathen diplomat whom all and sundry has already 'convicted' (not in legal sense) for slavery.