Won’t accept Kerry’s ‘regret’; asks how dare US ‘evacuate’ Indian citizens
India and US remained engaged in bitter war of words on Thursday as New Delhi refused to accept “regret” from the US over indignity inflicted on its diplomat Devyani Khobragade and tore into US Attorney Preet Bharara’s argument justifying her arrest.
New Delhi also accused Bharara of interfering in the Indian legal system and reasserted that the arrest was not in keeping with the Vienna Convention on diplomatic immunity. “Just regretting and completing a formality is not acceptable. We are not happy. The way they have handled this case, their behaviour and attitude... they will have to apologise,” Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kamala Nath told the media here.
Nath was reacting to call made by US Secretary of State John Kerry to India’s National Security Adviser Shivshankar Menon on Wednesday to express his “regret” over the situation in a bid to end the standoff between the two countries over the issue.
The Indian reactions on Wednesday clearly showed that the Government was not ready to buy peace with the US without making the Americans understand that the bilateral relation cannot be a one-way affair. The UPA Government also realises that the country was emotionally surcharged and any backtracking could be politically suicidal ahead of the lok Sabha polls. Against this backdrop, either the US will tender an apology, as demanded by India, and withdraw the cases against Devyani or the standoff could worsen.
Criticising the US prosecutor for making statement for "post facto rationalisation" for an action that should never have taken place in the first instance, External Affairs Ministry Spokesperson said there were no courtesies extended to Khobragade, who is the "only victim" in this case.
He said despite acknowledging that legal process were in place in India, the US attorney’s statement talks why it was necessary to evacuate the family of absconding maid Sangeeta Richard, thereby, making "implicit comment" about the Indian legal system, its enforcement authorities, and the responsibility that legal officials of a foreign Government seem to "arrogate upon" themselves with regard to nationals of another country.
“We need to keep in mind the simple fact that there is only one victim in this case. That victim is Devyani Khobragade — a serving Indian diplomat on mission in the United States.
“The action taken against her was not in keeping with the Vienna Convention. There were no courtesies in the treatment that was meted out to the diplomat, under the normal definition of that word in English language," he said.
Taking a jibe at Bharara’s statement about equality before the law of both the rich and the poor, the MEA Spokesperson said, "Not only is this a rhetorical remark that is not conducive to resolving ‘inaccuracies’, it is also not a feature of the law that is exclusive to the office of the US Attorney."
Reacting to Bharara’s justification of evacution Devyani’s maid, MEA said, "The statement in question acknowledges that legal processes were in place in India. Yet, incredibly, it invites speculation about why it was necessary to evacuate the family of Ms Richards and about the action purportedly being taken against them.
“The implication of this remarkable admission needs to be considered very carefully with regard to the implicit comment it makes about the Indian legal system, Indian law enforcement authorities, and the responsibility that legal officials of a foreign Government seem to arrogate upon themselves with regard to the nationals of another country.”