http://news.yahoo.com/indian-diplomat-tells-anguish-leaving-us-without-children-065233759.html
QuoteAn Indian diplomat at the centre of a bitter row with the United States told Sunday of her "immense stress" at leaving behind her young family in New York, and vowed to clear her name.
Khobragade was granted full diplomatic immunity and allowed to fly back to India -- just hours after charges were filed in court alleging she lodged false documents to obtain a visa for her servant and then underpaid her.
Khobragade, 39, told an Indian newspaper of her anguish at leaving behind her daughters, aged seven and four, in New York along with her husband, a US citizen, who works as an academic.
"I wonder if I will be able to ever reunite with my family, my husband, my little kids. I miss them," Khobragade told The Sunday Express.
"What if my children choose to study and work in the US? What if I can never return to the US, which I cannot now. Does it mean we will never be able to live together as a family again?" she said.
"I know I am honest, and I will come out clean. But we do not know how much time it will take and for how long my family will have to suffer due to this," she added.
Her arrest on December 12 outside her children's school and treatment in custody, where she said she was subjected to a cavity search, outraged India which claimed she benefited from full diplomatic immunity.
US prosecutors disputed this, and filed charges in New York accusing Khobragade of sometimes forcing the Indian maid to work 100-hour weeks, even when sick and often without a day off, for pay as little as $1.22 an hour.
Khobragade did obtain diplomatic immunity when last week New Delhi asked Washington to grant her a G1 visa given to diplomats at India's UN mission, which is also in New York.
The row between the two countries, which had embraced each other as strategic partners, saw weeks of feisty exchanges that strained bilateral ties and left resentment on both sides.
India has removed extra security barriers at the US embassy in New Delhi, demanded contract details for domestic staff employed by American diplomats and even stopped the mission importing duty-free food and alcohol.
On Wednesday, it ordered an embassy leisure centre popular with American expatriates in the capital to stop admitting non-diplomatic members, while scheduled visits by US officials to India have been cancelled.
In a fresh retaliatory measure late Friday, India asked the United States to withdraw an embassy official in New Delhi.
The expelled American diplomat was a "similar rank" to Khobragade and is thought to have helped the family of her maid travel to America where they were granted protection by prosecutors.
US prosecutors say the family of the maid were evacuated to the United States because of attempts to intimidate them.
In her newspaper interview, Khobragade said she would continue a legal fight to clear her name, including attempting to have her case in New York officially dismissed in a federal court.
"I have come to India but my stand still needs to be vindicated. And of course, I have been separated from my family, and I am under immense stress for my children," Khobragade said.
"I spoke to my kids for hours last night, and they are already missing me. The four-year-old asked me, 'Mommy, when will you be back home', and I had no answer."
She cannot return to the United States unless she surrenders to the court on arrival, and her name is being placed on US immigration watch lists "to prevent the routine issuance of any future visa", according to US officials.
I must be missing something as I don't know why yahoo would have an article that asks for sympathy for this despicable woman. Also, cue India acting childish.
Quote from: garbon on January 12, 2014, 11:41:13 PM
"I wonder if I will be able to ever reunite with my family, my husband, my little kids. I miss them," Khobragade told The Sunday Express.
:rolleyes:
An incredibly poorly-written story. She can, of course, bring her daughters to India whenever she wants, so the "will I ever see them again?" stuff is pure manipulation on her part, which the author fully allows. The fact is that she lied on the via application for her maid/nanny, and submitted a supposed employment contract that she knew was fraudulent.
I loved her comment to the effect that "you [the US] lost a friend and gained a maid." Talk about ego! Whatever India paid her to be a "diplomat" was way too much.
At last maids do something. :yes:
Quote"What if my children choose to study and work in the US? What if I can never return to the US, which I cannot now. Does it mean we will never be able to live together as a family again?" she said.
What if you had chosen not to commit fraud? :hmm:
As an aside, I have had the pleasure of knowing a number of Americans working in Vancouver who have enjoyed diplomatic immunity. To a person they have been very respectful of local laws (more so than most of us).
Surely the kids will call support at some point in their lives.
Quote from: The Brain on January 13, 2014, 03:11:51 PM
Surely the kids will call support at some point in their lives.
:lmfao:
Quote from: crazy canuck on January 13, 2014, 02:29:39 PM
Quote"What if my children choose to study and work in the US? What if I can never return to the US, which I cannot now. Does it mean we will never be able to live together as a family again?" she said.
What if you had chosen not to commit fraud? :hmm:
As an aside, I have had the pleasure of knowing a number of Americans working in Vancouver who have enjoyed diplomatic immunity. To a person they have been very respectful of local laws (more so than most of us).
I know that Canadian diplomats abroad - and I assume it's similar for American ones - have pretty strict instructions on that matter. You pay your parking tickets, but ideally you don't get them to begin with; pulling some sort of "I'm a diplomat, I have IMMUNITY!" over your personal inability to follow reasonable local laws is likely to negatively impact the retention of said diplomatic immunity.
Quote from: crazy canuck on January 13, 2014, 02:29:39 PM
As an aside, I have had the pleasure of knowing a number of Americans working in Vancouver who have enjoyed diplomatic immunity.
They have it thanks to 1812. :)
Quote from: Jacob on January 13, 2014, 03:21:13 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on January 13, 2014, 02:29:39 PM
Quote"What if my children choose to study and work in the US? What if I can never return to the US, which I cannot now. Does it mean we will never be able to live together as a family again?" she said.
What if you had chosen not to commit fraud? :hmm:
As an aside, I have had the pleasure of knowing a number of Americans working in Vancouver who have enjoyed diplomatic immunity. To a person they have been very respectful of local laws (more so than most of us).
I know that Canadian diplomats abroad - and I assume it's similar for American ones - have pretty strict instructions on that matter. You pay your parking tickets, but ideally you don't get them to begin with; pulling some sort of "I'm a diplomat, I have IMMUNITY!" over your personal inability to follow reasonable local laws is likely to negatively impact the retention of said diplomatic immunity.
Yeah, but most of the minor stuff wouldnt really matter. I think it is a good revelation of character that they do worry about the little stuff even though it would probably not impact them at all.
What is it with third worlders and abusing maids? Besides, why are people in India upset? The US government was protecting an Indian citizen from abuse.
Quote from: Razgovory on January 13, 2014, 03:31:08 PM
What is it with third worlders and abusing maids? Besides, why are people in India upset? The US government was protecting an Indian citizen from abuse.
Well there was the strip search of the accused that they took umbrage with.
Nobody is allowed to rape Indian women except Indian men.
Quote from: crazy canuck on January 13, 2014, 03:26:58 PMYeah, but most of the minor stuff wouldnt really matter. I think it is a good revelation of character that they do worry about the little stuff even though it would probably not impact them at all.
Definitely. Not to minimize the good character of the people whom you've interacted with, but I expect that the good character of which you speak is fostered by the organizational culture and regulations of the American foreign service. Basically, I'm saying the credit goes not only to the individuals, but to the organization as well.
Back in the early 90s in Ottawa we'd hear semi-regularly of, say, Russian diplomats who'd repeatedly drive around completely drunk and nothing could be done due to their status. For a Canadian diplomat, similar incidents would have been if not career ending, at the very least posting ending and likely promotion-prospect-destroying. I expect it is similar in the American service.
Quote from: Jacob on January 13, 2014, 03:37:12 PM
I expect that the good character of which you speak is fostered by the organizational culture and regulations of the American foreign service. Basically, I'm saying the credit goes not only to the individuals, but to the organization as well.
Absolutely, It speaks volumes about the country that sends the diplomats.
The impression I've always gotten of diplomatic immunity is that it's "immune from prosecution, provided you don't actively do something to be prosecuted." Always seemed to me more of a way to avoid the "ignorance of the (local) law is no excuse" hammer than a real legal shield to hide behind in the event of obvious malfeasance. :unsure:
Insert obligatory IANAL caveat here so Beeb doesn't have a coronary.
Nope. AFAIK, the only recourse you technically have with diplomats is to kick them out and/or complain to their country of origin. Of course, most countries will instruct their representatives to behave appropriately and comply with the local rules - because you generally don't send representatives to cause trouble, and riling up the locals counts as causing trouble.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on January 13, 2014, 10:55:13 PM
The impression I've always gotten of diplomatic immunity is that it's "immune from prosecution, provided you don't actively do something to be prosecuted." Always seemed to me more of a way to avoid the "ignorance of the (local) law is no excuse" hammer than a real legal shield to hide behind in the event of obvious malfeasance. :unsure:
Insert obligatory IANAL caveat here so Beeb doesn't have a coronary.
Diplomatic immunity can be waived by the foreign power should it wish. For the most part it is between civilized countries, which is why diplomats are for the most part law abiding persons. There is a reason Norwegian and Canadian diplomats at the UN pay the parking tickets and fines and Nigerian and Indian ones do not.
Did the US ask the Indian government to waive diplomatic immunity before making the arrest in this case?
Quote from: Viking on January 14, 2014, 12:07:26 AM
Diplomatic immunity can be waived by the foreign power should it wish. For the most part it is between civilized countries, which is why diplomats are for the most part law abiding persons. There is a reason Norwegian and Canadian diplomats at the UN pay the parking tickets and fines and Nigerian and Indian ones do not.
Low level third world diplomats probably can't afford to pay them.
QuoteNEW DELHI: India took a conscious decision not to act against American diplomats with same-sex partners even as it withdrew several privileges extended to these diplomats, amid the stand-off over the arrest of its deputy consul-general Devyani Khobragade in New York on charges of visa fraud.
India did not want to be seen singling out US diplomats when their counterparts from a few other western countries also have same-sex partners, officials said. India, therefore, decided against encroaching upon the privacy of US officials and risking an adverse reaction from the international community, they added.
The issue came up when the external affairs ministry and other departments held brainstorming sessions to decide on withdrawal of special privileges extended to US diplomats. BJP leader Yashwant Sinha had advocated such a measure, referring to the apex court ruling.
Aren't these idiots supposed to be our fucking allies?
Quote from: crazy canuck on January 13, 2014, 03:26:58 PM
Quote from: Jacob on January 13, 2014, 03:21:13 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on January 13, 2014, 02:29:39 PM
Quote"What if my children choose to study and work in the US? What if I can never return to the US, which I cannot now. Does it mean we will never be able to live together as a family again?" she said.
What if you had chosen not to commit fraud? :hmm:
As an aside, I have had the pleasure of knowing a number of Americans working in Vancouver who have enjoyed diplomatic immunity. To a person they have been very respectful of local laws (more so than most of us).
I know that Canadian diplomats abroad - and I assume it's similar for American ones - have pretty strict instructions on that matter. You pay your parking tickets, but ideally you don't get them to begin with; pulling some sort of "I'm a diplomat, I have IMMUNITY!" over your personal inability to follow reasonable local laws is likely to negatively impact the retention of said diplomatic immunity.
Yeah, but most of the minor stuff wouldnt really matter. I think it is a good revelation of character that they do worry about the little stuff even though it would probably not impact them at all.
Although Americans diplomats are the worst offenders for parking tickets in London.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23266149
Anyway, India has seriously jumped the shark with this. Seems to be one pathetic display after another with the Indian government. I never thought I'd start rooting for the BJP but its hard to imagine governance being any worse than it is now.
Quote from: Monoriu on January 14, 2014, 01:28:01 AM
Did the US ask the Indian government to waive diplomatic immunity before making the arrest in this case?
As far as I know the US asserted that she only had consular immunity or something like that. India disagreed but then upgraded her status just the other week.
Quote from: Monoriu on January 14, 2014, 01:28:01 AM
Did the US ask the Indian government to waive diplomatic immunity before making the arrest in this case?
The US asked India to waive diplomatic immunity after her arrest. Persons with diplomatic immunity (which Khobragade didn't have - she just had the more limited "consular immunity" which immunized her against acts she carried out as a consul) can be arrested and charged, just not held or prosecuted.
The Indians transferred her from their consulate to their UN delegation to upgrade her immunity and refused to waive it, and then the US declared her
persona non grata and kicked her out of the country. She could have chosen to take her kids with her, but didn't. Now she wants us to weep because she made that choice.
Quote from: Gups on January 14, 2014, 03:04:01 AM
Although Americans diplomats are the worst offenders for parking tickets in London.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23266149
If you read your source, you will find that your statement isn't true:
QuoteNigerian diplomats owed the most in 2012 parking fines - £84,000 - while Saudi Arabia was second on the list with £24,005.
The US owes the most on congestion charges, which US policy states is part of host nation services rendered, and thus not chargeable. I'd note that almost all (major, at least - data is lacking on smaller) diplomatic delegations agree with the US position. That the US would lead in congestion fees makes sense, since it has the largest diplomatic delegation in London.
QuoteAnyway, India has seriously jumped the shark with this. Seems to be one pathetic display after another with the Indian government. I never thought I'd start rooting for the BJP but its hard to imagine governance being any worse than it is now.
I think you grossly over-estimate the political reasonableness and governing abilities of the BJP! :lol:
I think you are a victim of the "grass is greener" syndrome.
BJP is the religious party, correct?
Yeah, Hindu Nationalist Party
Quote from: grumbler on January 14, 2014, 07:32:08 AM
I think you are a victim of the "grass is greener" syndrome.
More that the grass couldn't possibly be any worse. I'm afraid Congress is utterly unfit to rule. The economy is in a terrible state, the polity is corrupt, its oen cock up after another in foreign affairs, and socially (caste, gender, homosexuality) India seems to be going backwards as a disconcerting pace. Modi's role in the pograms remains highly suspect the say the least but he has a fantastic record in Gujarat. I know how close this is to saying at least Mussolini made the trains run on time!
Hindusight is 20/20.
I don't think India is going to become the 3rd economy by 2028.....
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.dailymail.co.uk%2Fi%2Fpix%2F2013%2F12%2F25%2Farticle-0-1A4A12B100000578-708_634x397.jpg&hash=9bb1fd2ec9910ff65d217f8e0dbdcf56209d2902)
(Shut up, Timmay)
Quote from: DontSayBanana on January 13, 2014, 10:55:13 PM
The impression I've always gotten of diplomatic immunity is that it's "immune from prosecution, provided you don't actively do something to be prosecuted." Always seemed to me more of a way to avoid the "ignorance of the (local) law is no excuse" hammer than a real legal shield to hide behind in the event of obvious malfeasance. :unsure:
Insert obligatory IANAL caveat here so Beeb doesn't have a coronary.
The original purpose of diplomatic immunity had nothing to do with diplomats committing crimes or being ignorant of local laws - it was, as I understand it, a historical extension of the notion that the persons of diplomats are not to be messed with by their host countries, so as to preserve lines of communication when those countries are squabbling. In plenty of places, if country X is having a fight with country Y, persons from country Y would not be safe from legal fuckwittery in country X (see: India's threats against US officials in this current squabble). Diplomats are
supposed to be exempt from that, as much in the interests of country X as of country Y (or the diplomats themselves) - if you mess with the diplomats, country X and country Y have effectively no way to talk to each other. It is usually in everyone's interests for that to happen.
As others have mentioned, the immunity belongs to the country and not to the diplomat. If a diplomat abuses it to commit crimes, the country who sent him or her can take it away - to "waive" it. If they don't, the host country can declare them
persona non grata and turf them out.
I wouldn't mind strip-searching her.
Quote from: grumbler on January 14, 2014, 07:19:54 AM
Quote from: Monoriu on January 14, 2014, 01:28:01 AM
Did the US ask the Indian government to waive diplomatic immunity before making the arrest in this case?
The US asked India to waive diplomatic immunity after her arrest. Persons with diplomatic immunity (which Khobragade didn't have - she just had the more limited "consular immunity" which immunized her against acts she carried out as a consul) can be arrested and charged, just not held or prosecuted.
Interesting. I didn't realize that there are differing degrees of diplomatic immunity.
I remember the time when Mugebe's wife punched someone in HK. She happened to be wearing a huge diamond ring at the time, so the punch caused quite a bit of damage. She claimed diplomatic immunity, and we had to let her go. For some reason his family seems to enjoy coming over.
Quote from: Monoriu on January 14, 2014, 10:39:20 PM
I remember the time when Mugebe's wife punched someone in HK. She happened to be wearing a huge diamond ring at the time, so the punch caused quite a bit of damage. She claimed diplomatic immunity, and we had to let her go. For some reason his family seems to enjoy coming over.
I think that is Sovereign immunity, which applies to heads of state and their dependents.
Quote from: Siege on January 14, 2014, 09:08:46 AM
I don't think India is going to become the 3rd economy by 2028.....
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.dailymail.co.uk%2Fi%2Fpix%2F2013%2F12%2F25%2Farticle-0-1A4A12B100000578-708_634x397.jpg&hash=9bb1fd2ec9910ff65d217f8e0dbdcf56209d2902)
(Shut up, Timmay)
I'm kinda curious why everyone's economy is expected to increase so dramatically. The US and Canada are both nearly doubling in GDP.
Quote from: Viking on January 14, 2014, 10:43:17 PM
I think that is Sovereign immunity, which applies to heads of state and their dependents.
Ugh. Yeah, now that one I do remember, and that's a bitch, since if the miscreant's home country doesn't want to prosecute, the only way to get to a sitting head of state is through the ICC.
Quote from: Razgovory on January 14, 2014, 10:48:19 PM
I'm kinda curious why everyone's economy is expected to increase so dramatically. The US and Canada are both nearly doubling in GDP.
Combination of economic growth, inflation and population growth can easily make that happen. Just 2.5% economic growth will increase the economy 41% over 14 years. That's the beauty of compound interest.
Quote from: Razgovory on January 14, 2014, 10:48:19 PM
I'm kinda curious why everyone's economy is expected to increase so dramatically. The US and Canada are both nearly doubling in GDP.
Raz, it is over 15 years. A complete doubling is a growth rate of 4.7%.
It also seems to be showing nominal amounts--depending on your forecast of worldwide inflation, the values can change a lot. Also, the values are expressed in British pounds--projected depreciation of the pound could significantly impact the numbers.
I don't get it, if she had diplomatic immunity when the act occured, then why are they able to refile the charges?
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/judge-dismisses-charges-against-indian-diplomat-n51391
QuoteJudge Dismisses Charges Against Indian Diplomat
A federal judge has dismissed charges against an Indian deputy consul-general whose New York City arrest and strip-search set off a diplomatic spat that strained relations between the United States and India.
A ruling filed Wednesday concluded that Devyani Khobragade had diplomatic immunity — and therefore could not be prosecuted — when she was charged in December with submitting false documents to get a work visa for her Manhattan housekeeper and making false statements about that housekeeper's compensation.
Prosecutors had alleged that Khobragade paid the maid, an Indian national, around $3 per hour.
After being indicted, Khobragade followed a State Department order to leave the country. The Indian government, in turn, then asked Washington to remove a diplomat from the U.S. Embassy in New Delhi. The State Department complied — but tensions flared.
The ruling Wednesday by Judge Shira Scheindlin, however, doesn't close the door on a new indictment against Khobragade.
The prosecution is able to pursue a new indictment now or in the future since Khobragade no longer possesses diplomatic status or immunity, the ruling said.
Daniel Arshack, Khobragade's lawyer, said he and his client "are heartened that the court agreed with our legal analysis and rejected the prosecution's arguments by dismissing the case."
Although prosecutors are free to re-indict her, "the decision to do so might well be viewed as an aggressive and unnecessary act," according to Arshack.
"This current circumstance might well present the best opportunity for a lasting and final diplomatic resolution," he added.
But a statement from the U.S. Attorney's Office in Manhattan seemed to suggest that they would indeed seek a new indictment.
"As the court indicated in its decision, and as Devyani Khobragade has conceded, there is currently no bar to a new indictment against her for her alleged criminal conduct, and we intend to proceed accordingly," James Margolin, a spokesman for U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara in Manhattan, told the AP.
I'd still like to give her a cavity search.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 12, 2014, 10:32:41 PM
I don't get it, if she had diplomatic immunity when the act occured, then why are they able to refile the charges?
Look at the article someone posted in this thread, which clearly stated that
QuoteThe prosecution is able to pursue a new indictment now or in the future since Khobragade no longer possesses diplomatic status or immunity, the ruling said.
That's why. It is meaningless unless she returns to the US.
Quote from: grumbler on March 13, 2014, 06:39:31 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 12, 2014, 10:32:41 PM
I don't get it, if she had diplomatic immunity when the act occurred, then why are they able to refile the charges?
Look at the article someone posted in this thread, which clearly stated that QuoteThe prosecution is able to pursue a new indictment now or in the future since Khobragade no longer possesses diplomatic status or immunity, the ruling said.
That's why. It is meaningless unless she returns to the US.
I read it, I don't get it. That's why I asked the question.
What is the point of diplomatic immunity if you can just refile charges once it has been revoked? If it happened while the person had diplomatic immunity that should be the end off it.
Tim, I think the idea behind it is that it's supposed to protect the diplomatic relationship between two countries that the diplomat is fulfilling while in that role, not to give the diplomat carte blanche to do whatever they want to with no consequences, ever.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 13, 2014, 06:46:25 AM
I read it, I don't get it. That's why I asked the question.
What is the point of diplomatic immunity if you can just refile charges once it has been revoked? If it happened while the person had diplomatic immunity that should be the end off it.
Diplomatic immunity is immunity from prosecution, not
carte blanc to commit any crime and get away with it. Once a person leaves (voluntarily or otherwise) the position for which immunity has been granted by the host nation, the immunity no longer applies. Again, this only matters if the person returns to a country which has declared them persona non grata.
Quote from: Jacob on January 14, 2014, 12:01:37 AM
Nope. AFAIK, the only recourse you technically have with diplomats is to kick them out and/or complain to their country of origin. Of course, most countries will instruct their representatives to behave appropriately and comply with the local rules - because you generally don't send representatives to cause trouble, and riling up the locals counts as causing trouble.
There's different types. IIRC the Indian bitch in question had a type of "transactional immunity" that is sort of like a Congressman's immunity from arrest--it only applies while they are traveling to the Congress for a vote (exceptions exception blah blah), she was immune from prosecution relating to her duties. Which means she was a relatively lower ranking official, like the Indian Ambassador to the United States has full diplomatic immunity. If he seriously crossed the boundaries he would be expelled formally and sent back to India, and India might be expected to prosecute him under Indian law (which typically if you're an Ambassador who commits a serious crime in a host country there's a decent chance of this happening since you've really shamed your country.)
You also have to accept someone into your country with diplomatic credentials or whatever. It's not like India would try, but if they wanted to send her back as an official with diplomatic immunity the U.S. would decline to accept her credentials, and if she came to the country anyway would be perfectly valid under U.S./international law for arrest since we did not agree to extend her any form of diplomatic recognition.