Thursday, December 19, 2013
Timeline of articles in The Hindu (from Washington) on the #Khobragade case
December 12, 2013: Devyani Khobragade, India's Deputy Consul General in New York, is arrested by the State Department's Diplomatic Security Service not far from the school where she just dropped off her daughter. Felony charge details are given in the criminal complaint publicly released by Southern District Court of New York: http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/world/indian-diplomat-arrested-on-visa-fraud-charges/article5452670.ece
December 13, 2013: The Hindu learns of Ms. Khobragade's conditions of bail from the SDNY, the plaintiff in the criminal case against the Indian diplomat. No luck yet reaching the attorneys of the domestic worker, Sangeeta Richard, allegedly defrauded of her dues by Khobragade: http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/world/diplomat-had-to-pay-250000-bond/article5456731.ece
December 13, 2013: The Hindu speaks with Ms. Khobragade's father, Mumbai-based former bureaucrat Uttam, whose early comments cast doubt on whether, as many were already arguing, the Deputy Consul General had been handcuffed. That allegation was later described as false, by U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara: http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/domestic-assistant-had-no-complaints-earlier-says-diplomats-father/article5456905.ece
December 13, 2013: The Hindu gets the first official reaction of the State Department on the matter of whether Ms. Khobragade's consular immunity granted vide the 1963 Vienna Convention protected her from personal acts. Answer: No. http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/world/consular-immunity-doesnt-cover-personal-acts-state-department/article5457356.ece
December 14, 2013: The Hindu speaks with Daniel Arshack, Ms. Khobragade's attorney, who offers further clarifications on the conditions of her release and bail and also on her treatment during the arrest. He says that although she was “treated incredibly shabbily” and was not presented with the opportunity to surrender, he was “confident of her complete vindication.” Meanwhile Indian officials give the U.S. a "strong demarche." http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/india-reiterates-objections-to-diplomats-treatment/article5459582.ece
December 16, 2013: Meanwhile as India comes to grips with the arrest, a sense of outrage spreads through the establishment and visiting U.S. Congressional heads are snubbed. Simultaneously reports start surfacing that Ms. Khobragade was strip-searched while in the custody of U.S. Marshals: http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/speaker-cancels-meeting-with-us-congressional-team-over-envoy-arrest/article5467236.ece
December 16, 2013: As outrage mounts and allegations, some apparently deliberately misleading, start to fly about, The Hindu clarifies some important facts on the accuracy 'strip-search' reports, the question of consular immunity and the circumstances of Ms. Khobragade's arrest: http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/world/doubt-hangs-over-conditions-of-indian-diplomats-detention/article5467249.ece
December 17, 2013: Cognisant of the intricacies of multi-agency operations in such cases, here involving the State and Justice Departments and the U.S. Marshals Service, the State Department takes a cautious approach to judging how Ms. Khobragade was treated during her detention. If only others were as circumspect! http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/world/us-looking-into-arrest-procedures/article5471102.ece
December 17, 2013: After the State Department refers us to the U.S. Marshals Service on what happened to Ms. Khobragade while she was in detention, and the USMS simply referenced its standard protocols, The Hindu sought to fill this important blank spot in knowledge by getting deeper into these protocols: http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/world/detention-procedures-applicable-to-khobragade-us-clarifies/article5473109.ece
December 18, 2013: Even as India undertakes strong retaliatory measures, including removing protective barriers at the U.S. embassy in New Delhi, U.S. Secretary of State seeks to de-escalate the crisis with an expression of regret. Meanwhile more attention focuses on Ms. Khobragade's treatment and reaction in New York: http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/issue-must-not-be-allowed-to-hurt-ties/article5476892.ece
December 19, 2013: After a week of intense, fast-paced developments, multiple statements and diplomatic repartee, The Hindu parses the two broad narratives that have emerged, with a generous helping of factual recount thrown in, in the interest of clarity and balance. Context on the U.S.' fight against human trafficking-related crime is provided too: http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/world/laffair-khobragade-a-tale-of-two-narratives/article5479354.ece
December 19 2013: Facts are important. In his statement on Wednesday evening Mr. Bharara refutes the claim, made by so many (and questioned by The Hindu on December 13), that Ms. Khobragade was handcuffed upon arrest: http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/prosecutor-denies-devyani-was-handcuffed/article5480186.ece
December 19, 2013: Finally, a week after Ms. Khobragade's arrest the story of her alleged victim, Ms. Richard, starts to get told. The Hindu adds information on legal precedents in the U.S.' fight in 'maid abuse' cases: http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/world/devyani-grossly-underpaid-domestic-worker-say-lawyers/article5478013.ece
December 19, 2013: Although India's Ministry of External Affairs was trying to be creative in having Ms. Khobragade reassigned to the Permanent Mission of India to the United Nations (with full diplomatic immunity) the State Department (which has to sign off on any potential transfer) pours cold water on that prospect: http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/world/us-says-un-immunity-for-khobragade-not-retroactive/article5481901.ece
December 19, 2013: Even as Indian leaders are quoted calling for the charges against Ms. Khobragade to be dropped after Secretary Kerry expressed regret, the State Department makes clear that that is unlikely and stands in solidarity with Mr. Bharara's office: http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/world/us-rules-out-dropping-charges-against-khobragade/article5482080.ece
December 19, 2013: Although India's Ministry of External Affairs was trying to be creative in having Ms. Khobragade reassigned to the Permanent Mission of India to the United Nations (with full diplomatic immunity) the State Department (which has to sign off on any potential transfer) pours cold water on that prospect: http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/world/us-says-un-immunity-for-khobragade-not-retroactive/article5481901.ece
December 19, 2013: Even as Indian leaders are quoted calling for the charges against Ms. Khobragade to be dropped after Secretary Kerry expressed regret, the State Department makes clear that that is unlikely and stands in solidarity with Mr. Bharara's office: http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/world/us-rules-out-dropping-charges-against-khobragade/article5482080.ece
Labels: Department of Justice, Devyani, diplomatic immunity, domestic worker, human trafficking, India, Khobragade, Preet Bharara, Richard, Sangeeta, State Department, strip-search, U.S. Marshals
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
500 Indians allegedly trafficked to U.S.
From The Hindu
Over 500 Indian citizens who were brought to the United States to work in shipyards, following Hurricane Katrina in 2005, have initiated what might well become the largest class action lawsuit for human trafficking in U.S. history.
According to a statement by the American Civil Liberties Union, which has joined in the lawsuit in support of the plaintiffs, the workers were trafficked into the U.S. through the federal government's H-2B guest-worker scheme “with dishonest assurances of becoming lawful permanent U.S. residents and subjected to squalid living conditions, fraudulent payment practices, and threats of serious harm upon their arrival.”
The court filing by the plaintiffs alleges that recruiting agents employed by the marine industry company Signal International withheld the guest-workers' passports, forced them to pay exorbitant fees for recruitment, immigration processing and travel, and threatened the workers with serious legal and physical consequences if they did not abide by restrictive employment conditions imposed by the company.
Psychological abuse
Further, the complaint against Signal International alleges that after they arrived in the U.S., the men were compelled to live in the company's “guarded, overcrowded labour camps, subjected to psychological abuse and defrauded out of adequate payment for their work.”
In a statement, the ACLU said it was also charging the federal government with falling short of its responsibility to protect the rights of guest-workers in the country. According to the lawsuit that it filed along with the workers, the treatment of the workers violated the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act (TVPA) and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
In comments made to the ACLU, Kurian David, a class representative in the lawsuit, said: “We hope the court will give us all a chance to make our voices heard and to right the wrongs that were done against us. Signal and the other defendants should be held accountable for what they did to so many guest-workers who worked for them.”
Further, the ACLU quoted Murugan Kandhasamy, a class representative in the lawsuit, as saying: “I speak on behalf of hundreds of Indian guest-workers subjected to abuse by Signal and its co-conspirators. We came to America for good jobs and opportunity, which we were denied, and now we are asking for justice.”
An ACLU Human Rights Programme attorney, Chandra Bhatnagar, noted that the workers had been “victimised by systemic deficiencies in the U.S. guest-worker program and subjected to trafficking and racketeering at the hands of the defendants,” adding that they would be seeking to assert their fundamental human rights.
Over 500 Indian citizens who were brought to the United States to work in shipyards, following Hurricane Katrina in 2005, have initiated what might well become the largest class action lawsuit for human trafficking in U.S. history.
According to a statement by the American Civil Liberties Union, which has joined in the lawsuit in support of the plaintiffs, the workers were trafficked into the U.S. through the federal government's H-2B guest-worker scheme “with dishonest assurances of becoming lawful permanent U.S. residents and subjected to squalid living conditions, fraudulent payment practices, and threats of serious harm upon their arrival.”
The court filing by the plaintiffs alleges that recruiting agents employed by the marine industry company Signal International withheld the guest-workers' passports, forced them to pay exorbitant fees for recruitment, immigration processing and travel, and threatened the workers with serious legal and physical consequences if they did not abide by restrictive employment conditions imposed by the company.
Psychological abuse
Further, the complaint against Signal International alleges that after they arrived in the U.S., the men were compelled to live in the company's “guarded, overcrowded labour camps, subjected to psychological abuse and defrauded out of adequate payment for their work.”
In a statement, the ACLU said it was also charging the federal government with falling short of its responsibility to protect the rights of guest-workers in the country. According to the lawsuit that it filed along with the workers, the treatment of the workers violated the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act (TVPA) and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
In comments made to the ACLU, Kurian David, a class representative in the lawsuit, said: “We hope the court will give us all a chance to make our voices heard and to right the wrongs that were done against us. Signal and the other defendants should be held accountable for what they did to so many guest-workers who worked for them.”
Further, the ACLU quoted Murugan Kandhasamy, a class representative in the lawsuit, as saying: “I speak on behalf of hundreds of Indian guest-workers subjected to abuse by Signal and its co-conspirators. We came to America for good jobs and opportunity, which we were denied, and now we are asking for justice.”
An ACLU Human Rights Programme attorney, Chandra Bhatnagar, noted that the workers had been “victimised by systemic deficiencies in the U.S. guest-worker program and subjected to trafficking and racketeering at the hands of the defendants,” adding that they would be seeking to assert their fundamental human rights.
Labels: American Civil Liberties Union, H-2B visa, human trafficking
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Anti-trafficking aid to India drops
From The Hindu
The United States' support to India and other countries for the purpose of combating the trafficking in persons (TIP) has dropped from its highs in 2004 and 2005, a recent report has revealed.
A Congressional Research Service report, ‘Trafficking in Persons: U.S. Policy and Issues for Congress,' said that India was among several of the countries selected in 2004 by former President George W. Bush as being eligible to receive “a combined total of $50 million in strategic anti-TIP assistance.”
However, the aid to the countries, which in addition to India included Brazil, Cambodia, Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova, Sierra Leone, and Tanzania, “is now on a downward trajectory,” the report argued. It added that the anti-TIP aid had “spiked in FY2004 and FY2005.”
According to the study, Mr. Bush had chosen the countries based on the severity of their trafficking programs, as well as their willingness to cooperate with U.S. agencies to combat the problem.
The United States' support to India and other countries for the purpose of combating the trafficking in persons (TIP) has dropped from its highs in 2004 and 2005, a recent report has revealed.
A Congressional Research Service report, ‘Trafficking in Persons: U.S. Policy and Issues for Congress,' said that India was among several of the countries selected in 2004 by former President George W. Bush as being eligible to receive “a combined total of $50 million in strategic anti-TIP assistance.”
However, the aid to the countries, which in addition to India included Brazil, Cambodia, Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova, Sierra Leone, and Tanzania, “is now on a downward trajectory,” the report argued. It added that the anti-TIP aid had “spiked in FY2004 and FY2005.”
According to the study, Mr. Bush had chosen the countries based on the severity of their trafficking programs, as well as their willingness to cooperate with U.S. agencies to combat the problem.
Labels: human trafficking
Sunday, June 20, 2010
India among worst ranked countries in tackling human trafficking
From The Hindu
India has been ranked as a “Tier II Watch List” country – only one level better than worst-performing Tier III countries such as Saudi Arabia and Zimbabwe – in the 2010 Trafficking in Persons Report (TIP) compiled by the State Department.
Given the definition of Tier II Watch List in the TIP, this implies that India ranks among those countries whose governments “do not fully comply with the Trafficking Victims Protection Act’s (TVPA) minimum standards, but are making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with those standards.”
Additionally, one of the three following conditions was found in India: first, that the absolute number of victims of severe forms of trafficking was very significant or was significantly increasing; second, that there was a failure to provide evidence of increasing efforts to combat severe forms of trafficking in persons from the previous year; or, third, that the determination that India was making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with minimum standards was based on commitments by India itself, to take additional future steps over the next year.
In terms of the definition of trafficking under the TVPA, a person may be a trafficking victim “regardless of whether they once consented, participated in a crime as a direct result of being trafficked, were transported into the exploitative situation, or were simply born into a state of servitude.”
The TIP adds that at the heart of this phenomenon are the myriad forms of enslavement including forced labour, sex trafficking, bonded labour debt bondage among migrant labourers, involuntary domestic servitude, forced child labour, child soldiers and child sex trafficking.
While most of South Asia ranks along with India as a Tier II Watch List country, Pakistan is notably ranked as Tier II – one level better than India. Thus while Pakistan’s government did not fully comply with the TVPA’s minimum standards, it was making significant efforts to bring itself into compliance with those standards – with none of the three additional conditions found in the case of India applicable to Pakistan.
Most developed countries, but even some developing countries such as Colombia and Nigeria, were ranked as Tier I countries in the TIP, that is countries whose governments fully complied with the TVPA’s minimum standards.
Commenting further on the case of India, the TIP noted that the Government of India “does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however, it is making significant efforts to do so, particularly with regard to the law enforcement response to sex trafficking.”
Yet, the TIP argues, the Indian government did not demonstrate sufficient progress in its law enforcement, protection, or prevention efforts to address labour trafficking, particularly bonded labour. “Therefore India is placed on Tier 2 Watch List for the seventh consecutive year,” the report said.
The TIP also noted that there were few criminal convictions of forced labour during the reporting period and police raids of brick kilns, rice mills, factories, brothels, and other places of human trafficking were usually prompted by NGO activists, as were efforts to provide rehabilitation and protective services to the victims removed from human trafficking.
Further, national and state government anti-trafficking infrastructure, and the implementation of the Bonded Labour (System) Abolition Act (BLSA), “remained weak,” the TIP observed, and the number of government shelters increased but some continued to be of poor quality. Some public officials’ complicity in trafficking remained a major problem, the report noted.
India has been ranked as a “Tier II Watch List” country – only one level better than worst-performing Tier III countries such as Saudi Arabia and Zimbabwe – in the 2010 Trafficking in Persons Report (TIP) compiled by the State Department.
Given the definition of Tier II Watch List in the TIP, this implies that India ranks among those countries whose governments “do not fully comply with the Trafficking Victims Protection Act’s (TVPA) minimum standards, but are making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with those standards.”
Additionally, one of the three following conditions was found in India: first, that the absolute number of victims of severe forms of trafficking was very significant or was significantly increasing; second, that there was a failure to provide evidence of increasing efforts to combat severe forms of trafficking in persons from the previous year; or, third, that the determination that India was making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with minimum standards was based on commitments by India itself, to take additional future steps over the next year.
In terms of the definition of trafficking under the TVPA, a person may be a trafficking victim “regardless of whether they once consented, participated in a crime as a direct result of being trafficked, were transported into the exploitative situation, or were simply born into a state of servitude.”
The TIP adds that at the heart of this phenomenon are the myriad forms of enslavement including forced labour, sex trafficking, bonded labour debt bondage among migrant labourers, involuntary domestic servitude, forced child labour, child soldiers and child sex trafficking.
While most of South Asia ranks along with India as a Tier II Watch List country, Pakistan is notably ranked as Tier II – one level better than India. Thus while Pakistan’s government did not fully comply with the TVPA’s minimum standards, it was making significant efforts to bring itself into compliance with those standards – with none of the three additional conditions found in the case of India applicable to Pakistan.
Most developed countries, but even some developing countries such as Colombia and Nigeria, were ranked as Tier I countries in the TIP, that is countries whose governments fully complied with the TVPA’s minimum standards.
Commenting further on the case of India, the TIP noted that the Government of India “does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however, it is making significant efforts to do so, particularly with regard to the law enforcement response to sex trafficking.”
Yet, the TIP argues, the Indian government did not demonstrate sufficient progress in its law enforcement, protection, or prevention efforts to address labour trafficking, particularly bonded labour. “Therefore India is placed on Tier 2 Watch List for the seventh consecutive year,” the report said.
The TIP also noted that there were few criminal convictions of forced labour during the reporting period and police raids of brick kilns, rice mills, factories, brothels, and other places of human trafficking were usually prompted by NGO activists, as were efforts to provide rehabilitation and protective services to the victims removed from human trafficking.
Further, national and state government anti-trafficking infrastructure, and the implementation of the Bonded Labour (System) Abolition Act (BLSA), “remained weak,” the TIP observed, and the number of government shelters increased but some continued to be of poor quality. Some public officials’ complicity in trafficking remained a major problem, the report noted.
Labels: human trafficking, Trafficking in Persons Report
Subscribe to Comments [Atom]
