Bharat Rakshak

Hitesh wrote: In that case, why would Snowden want to go back to US and face trumped up charges arranged by NSA et al?

TSJones wrote:

Hitesh wrote: In that case, why would Snowden want to go back to US and face trumped up charges arranged by NSA et al?

For abusing his passport?

UlanBatori wrote: Is her hubby a USC? .

TKiran wrote:.. I think it would be ideal if she wins her case based on merits, but for that ...'

TKiran wrote: Technically, even if DK was UN advisor, she was in that role temporarily, ...

ArmenT wrote:Ok, I generally stayed out of this thread because of high noise ratio, but that last sentence has got me curious. Why did SR think that DK has the miraculous power to grant an American work visa to her?

TKiran wrote:The most likely scene on 31st would be that PB would argue that, DK was on A1 visa and not on G1 visa. So she dis not have immunity on 12th Dec. The judge will grant 7 days to reply to DK's lawyer.

Technically, even if DK was UN advisor, she was in that role temporarily, for PM's visit in Sept 13. She did not ask US to issue different visa, nor did UN ask GOTUS change her status to UN advisor. So the immunity does not accrew for her role as UN Advisor, as she was only dealing with Indian Consulate Business on the day of her arrest. So they followed the book for her arrest. So the dropping of charges does not arise, let the case be hanginng till DK becomes 55 years old and lands in US, so that she can be strip searched again

Amber G. wrote:

TKiran wrote: Technically, even if DK was UN advisor, she was in that role temporarily, ...

According to DK's lawyers, and other legal experts.. it does not make difference, the article is VERY clear that she had immunity at the time of arrest. PB did not know it (that she was assigned to UN as an adviser) at the time of arrest. (that was his biggest goof). Actually even DK did not realize it, it was only later. But it is not DK's responsibility. PB knows this and it will be interesting to see how he tries to wriggle out of this without making a complete fool of himself. (PB railroaded the indictment through Grand Jury.. don't expect the Judge and DK's lawyer to be that ignorant about the law)

We will know soon enough.

UBji - practically speaking, unfortunately the Hon. Judge, (no matter how annoyed (s)he is) could not complain about wastage of time, (lack of judgment, or being ignorant, or doing stupid things on the part of the prosecutor, is all covered under "prosecutor immunity))... I do hope if there were l any legal misconduct (eg not sharing of Exculpatory evidence) judge takes the required actions.

Driving 36 mph in a 35 mph zone

ramana wrote:MEA better get the charges ready to file in Delhi if they want to see a proper outcome in New york.
"Overfeed on hope leads to death by starvation!"

VikasRaina wrote:If you ever talk to the ones who are MUTU, you will know that they genuinely believe that India is a thurd rate country and
US is a benign power and everything in US is nice and sweet and Indians deserve "THIS" <Fill in the issue at that time>.
Engaging them in discussion doesn't help. I tried it post DK incidence and all I could hear was ,"PB is following the law of the land, you Injuns can't prosecute people in power"
Funny that in the end most of them end up becoming Uncle Tom who are useful as long as they don't ask questions or go against the white wishes lest there loyalty be doubted.

Amber G. wrote:

UlanBatori wrote: Is her hubby a USC? .

Yes, it seems ,by all (newspapers reports etc) accounts. The children, according to reports, were born in India but have USC (which I presume is automatic, if the father had USC at the time of birth)

merlin wrote:Nirupama Menon/Rao appears to have been bought and paid for. Why would she resign her cushy brown position? SSM's incompetence has been proven on more than one occasion before so there's nothing new in that.

A_Gupta wrote:I should point out again, the grand jury indictment of DK
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1 ... 3600801454
(emphasis added)

42. Beginning in or about February 2013, the Victim told KHOBRAGADE on several occasions that the Victim wished to end the Victim's employment and return to India because the Victim felt she was being mistreated. KHOBRAGADE denied her requests.

43. In or about June 2013, the Victim went to KHOBRAGADE's office and said....wanted to go home. .....The Victim......could not return home to India without KHOBRAGADE's consent.

And note,

6. .....Following the Victim's decision to leave KHOBRAGADE's employ, KHOBRAGADE caused..... in an attempt to persuade the Victim to return to India and not report her experience with KHOBRAGADE.

Such is the story of the prosecution.

Even if they had to establish "Justice" all they had to do was expel DK. But then teaching Indians a lesson was on the cards obviously.

ramana wrote:Note to the Mays.
Lord Swaraj Paul of UK is a strict vegetarian.

ramana wrote:MEA better get the charges ready to file in Delhi if they want to see a proper outcome in New york.
"Overfeed on hope leads to death by starvation!"

matrimc wrote:.... OT fact - they [ DK's children] are ineligible to take the post of Potus and VPotus and any other posts in Gotus that require the person to be born in US.

..the term "natural born" citizen would mean a person who is entitled to U.S. citizenship "by birth" or "at birth", either by being born "in" the United States and under its jurisdiction, even those born to foreign parents; by being born abroad to U.S. citizen-parents; (Only one parent is necessary) ... or by being born in other situations meeting legal requirements for U.S. citizenship "at birth".

Amber G. wrote: People like John McCain (or Ted Cruz) who were born outside US are eligible to run for Potus etc..
(Even if Obama was not born in US, the mere fact that her mother was a US citizen will qualify him to be eligible for POTUS)

matrimc wrote:In February DCG denied. IBDA went back in June. Was she wearing a wire in June? She could have brought up the February denial and DCG would have repeated the same. If such an evidence exists should attorney of ny PB should have presented during the indictment or he had to present just enough to get an indictment and can present it during the trial? After all they have to put the IBDA on the witness stand for that.

VijayKM wrote:...


It looks like Ambassador Nirupama Rao and the Indian Govt strongly felt the previous 2 cases were outright extortionist demands (which they are) and had a moral conviction to defend their staff this time. http://www.asianage.com/columnists/bigger-picture-183

That's why they have advised DK to extensively document everything. They were prepared to handle law suits, but NOT the hatchet job/ backstabbing of prosecution with 15 year prison sentence and public arrest, strip search etc. The letter the SD sent in Sep 2013 is a lame excuse, it did not indicate what was coming. Even if they had to establish "Justice" all they had to do was expel DK. But then teaching Indians a lesson was on the cards obviously.

Obviously IFS was not prepared to realize they will be quickly downgraded from the status of "friend" to "gotcha nation" as MJ Akbar called it. It takes many years long time to build trust, takes a single treacherous act to evaporate it.

The bigger picture
Dec 24, 2013 ...
Nirupama Rao

Our officers are paid a higher proportion in US, but that does not imply they get US salaries. Similarly, the domestic assistants’ wages are significantly more than they would get in India.


With the benefit of hindsight, a plethora of wise words surrounds us on how the Khobragade case should have been handled by the government — our embassy included — and how, once the case surfaced, Ms Khobragade should have been immediately posted out of the US. While this seems to be an easily administered solution, it was not seen as necessary at the time of the advent of the case. Based on the previous instances of former consul-general Prabhu Dayal, and consul Neena Malhotra, there was enough to suggest that our officers were the target of a well-orchestrated campaign that involved NGOs, anti-trafficking lawyers and the domestic assistants of these officers to extract maximum concessions from the latter and obtain immigration for the domestic assistants concerned.

{Ok dear. Then how was India the target of so many T visas if it was a IBDA-NGO-lawyers racket? I think you were misled into thinking the DK case is same as earlier ones despite so many red flags of Richards family working for US embassy in Delhi. This is a Type three error. Solving the wrong problem correctly.}

Furthermore, in the case of Ms Khobragade, she had just arrived in the United States a few months prior to the case, she had very young children who were still adjusting to life in New York and, additionally, her spouse was also based, permanently, in the US. Despatching her back to New Delhi was not considered a serious option (unless the officer had sought it, herself, which was not the case).

{{In a mnner of speaking as your were the ambasador, DK works for you and you were her two levels above manager. You did not understad the problem as you were in your own miasma due to who kows what.. Did you at any time take it up with your counterparts in SD to show your apprehension? This is managerial negligence. Worse than passive oversight.}

It was never anticipated that the case would assume ramifications that would be different from the Prabhu Dayal and Neena Malhotra cases. There, both cases had been fought in the courts, the officers in question did not face physical manhandling at the hands of US law enforcement authorities, although they had to deal with judgments that weighed heavily in favour of their erstwhile domestic assistants.

{Let me remind you of an English saying "One does not have to eat the whole egg to know its rotten!" Look at the US SD regulations discarding the room and board as not counting towards the wages. Slowly pawns were being moved and you and your staff didn't note despite there being 14 IBDAs in US right now. Do you still have legal counsel position in the Indian Embassy or its outsourced?}

In the case of Ms Khobragade, the government justifiably took the stand that the case should be fought, that there was every reason to dispute the allegations and to resist, rightly, unfair and extortionist demands being made by her domestic assistant, Sangeeta Richards. So we took specific steps after legal vetting, to defend our officer against the steps being taken under US law, because we felt the action by the Americans was disproportionate and unreasonable.

{Dear it is about preventing the disaster not after action. Indo-US ties have swung backwards quite a bit due to this negligent oversight. DK was hung out to dry and then all sorts of motions were taken to retrieve the action. The parking lot was closed in September 2013 what did you communicate to MEA in Delhi about prompt reciprocity? What was your advice or are you going to claim priviliged information!}


Looking to the future, we should put on hold sending domestic assistants with our officers going to the United States till a viable solution is achieved, ensuring that Indian sovereignty applies over these individuals who are sent abroad by the government with official travel documents, valid visas, 100 per cent health coverage, and are paid at rates far above the wage rates for similar work in India and which are fully compliant with Indian law. A domestic worker in the United States is, very often, an individual whose visa status is indeterminate, who pays his/her house rent, transportation and incurs expenditure on food. A major proportion of their wage is spent for these purposes.

{You are asking for the moon as US has already passed legislation on the subject. Instead try to negotiate an addendum with US to observe the Vienna Protocols, for the crucial thing is not maids/IBDAs but diplomats being arrested and cavity searched by US govt for one reason or the other. Or ensure US recognizes Diplomatic Immunity to all Indian govt officers posted in Consulates also.}

Obviously, reason demands that some weight should be given to the facilities extended by the government to our domestic assistants instead of arbitrarily ruling that none of these will apply, instead of a blanket determination whether the individual concerned is paid according to US standards.

{i]{If reason had any bearing DK would have been PNGed and not arrested and cavity searched in breach of the spirit if not letter of Vienna protocols.}[/i]

Our officers are paid a higher proportion than what they would get in India, but that does not imply they get US salaries. Similarly, the domestic assistants’ wages are significantly more than they would get in India, but to expect them to be paid US salaries is unreal and untenable. You cannot make it impossible for our officers to function in their place of posting by imposing untenable demands on them. I am aware that in the ministry of external affairs there was already thinking along these lines and serious moves were afoot to work out a credible and viable solution that would obviate such demands. The wheels of government machinery did not turn fast enough to settle this once for all. Learning from the past, we must ensure that in future we insist on the application of our sovereignty and not a second country’s in such cases. Otherwise, the problem will only reoccur.

[i}{Again seeking something not achievable. Instead negotiate an agreement with US to observe the Vienna Protocols for consular officials also. The problem is the arbitrary arrest and search of diplomats. The IBDA pay issues in another thing. You can make them all official GOI employees and none of this Contract employee bull. Also so far a miniscule number have absconded. Better vetting and getting IB to screen the individuals before employment is a good idea.}[/i]

Most of our officers are scrupulously careful about treating their domestic assistants humanely and fairly. Working hours are reasonable, they are paid well, they are in regular touch with their families, they receive a holiday passage once during the posting which they are eligible to use within eight months of arrival, their medical needs are fully addressed, and they are never confined to their work place. In a place far from home, they are often welcomed into the bosom of the employer’s family and affection, mutual trust and loyalty determine these relationships. Somehow the debate, particularly in the Western media, seems to suggest that the situation replicates what the West historically went through with the terrible stain of slavery and where segregation and racial exclusion continued until recent times. Indian democracy has shown how social mobility has redefined caste and class barriers and established new definitions of power and prestige in the national arena. This is ignored in the Western debate on the issue. We say no to Kipling-esque missions air-dropped on us from outside. As Indians, we are determined to remove the barriers of the past, and to build the India of our dreams.

{SR letters show she was treated well by DK. Yet once the matter is in the maid-NGO-lawyer nexus it blew up. You need to cutoff the possibility of the nexus invoking criminal statutes against Indian consular officials. As the Ambassador you could have used you bully pulpit in DC to socialize this message in the US Press Corps. Not one US Press club member spoke up for India that shows the outreach has been pathetic if it exists. Only the Embassy Press Secy wrote an oped that was published.}

The India-US strategic partnership has made considerable strides in the last few years, acquiring strength and substance. A critical breach of trust has occurred over the Khobragade case. Both governments must ensure a fair, reasonable solution. For India that will mean cooling tempers and ensuring that our fundamental concerns are met. For the US it will entail a more sensitive appreciation of the value of the partnership with India and rebuilding trust destroyed after the fissures created in the last few days. Crucially, the US must account for the manner in which the family of Ms Richards was spirited out of the country in disregard of the functioning of Indian institutions and the rule of law of an open, stable, viable and well-grounded democracy.
The writer is a former foreign secretary and former ambassador to the United States

“If you look at our defense purchases, a lot of it is centered around U.S. sourcing,” Ambassador S. Jaishankar said in an interview at Bloomberg’s Washington office. “Frankly, the U.S. system was so difficult to navigate,” he said of his role in negotiating arms purchases from the U.S. “When you’re selling me something, you’re the salesman and I’m the customer, and I’m supposed to be the difficult one.”

India and the US are engaged in talks to repair ties damaged by the Khobragade issue, which "should never have happened", Indian envoy S Jaishankar has said.
...
"What I have encountered since my arrival is the sense that this situation should never have happened. But since it did, we will now have to work through this problem. That is part of the conversations underway," said Jaishankar, who took over as the envoy last month.
"It is important to understand that negotiations on some of the more difficult issues are independent of our bilateral ties," he told a Washington audience yesterday.

According to the Indian side, she gamed the system right from the start with an intent to emigrate, went on the lam with an official Indian passport and tried to extract money from Khobragade. The diplomat was left with no alternative but to report the matter to NYPD and the State Department, and take legal recourse in India. Even then, according to the Indian side, US authorities initially promised to help trace her and deport her. It was only when Richard tapped into her family connection in the US embassy in New Delhi, where her in-laws had worked for a succession of Americans that the tone changed.
<snip>
But what has also disappointed the Indian side is that as the higher levels of the US embassy and the State Department signed off on the arrest - either because they underestimated the pushback from the Indian government and its foreign service cadre or because they were so wrapped-up in the primacy of American law - forgot diplomatic niceties, conventions, protocol, and worse, simply didn't weigh the long-term consequences on bilateral ties, including America's own interests in India.

Among the most provocative US actions during the nearly month-long fraught episode - besides the criminalization of a simple wage dispute, the barbaric treatment of a woman diplomat during arrest, and the use of human trafficking provisions to spirit away the housekeeper's family - was the dilly-dallying over the matter of diplomatic immunity. It is the very bedrock of our profession, said a senior Indian government source who reviewed the whole month-long spat; when you challenge that you are undermining the whole edifice of diplomacy.

It is universally recognized that Americans are quick to seek immunity and privileges, but reluctant to grant it. That time has now ended. At least in India.

{Ok dear. Then how was India the target of so many T visas if it was a IBDA-NGO-lawyers racket? I think you were misled into thinking the DK case is same as earlier ones despite so many red flags of Richards family working for US embassy in Delhi. This is a Type three error. Solving the wrong problem correctly.}

Plaintiffs: Kurian David, Sony Vasudevan Sulekha, Palanyandi Thangamani, Maruganantham Kandhasamy, Hemant Khuttan, Andrews Issac Padaveettiyl, Dhananjaya Kechuru, Sabulal Vijayan, Krishnan Kumar, Jacob Joseph Kadakkarappally, Kuldeep Singh, and Thanasekar Chellappan

Defendants: Signal International LLC, Malvern C. Burnett, Gulf Coast Immigration Law Center, L.L.C., Law Offices of Malvern C. Burnett, A.P.C., Indo-Ameri Soft L.L.C., Kurella Rao, J & M Associates, Inc. of Mississippi, Global Resources, Inc., Michael Pol, Sachin Dewan, and Dewan Consultants Pvt. Ltd. (a/k/a Medtech Consultants)