The Khobragade incident: Undiplomatic conduct

Richard needs justice as well and we need to ask Khobragade and her ilk if it is okay to keep exploiting their domestic help by falsifying contracts.

Khaleej Times published a photograph of a protest rally by maids in the US, which again proves the revolt from within. The Khobragade incident is going to open a Pandora’s box, not only in the US but the world over.

Recommended For You

Thailand suspends Cambodia deal after landmine injures troops

Chrysalis International Academy breaks ground in Dubailand, setting new standards for British curriculum education in Dubai

Trump criticises BBC boss, head of news as 'very dishonest people' as both quit

Mashriq Elite breaks ground for fifth residential project Floarea Skies in JVC

Dubai sees high demand for furnished homes as newcomers seek seamless start

 

Each country has its own legal framework. Citizens and residents, whether they are diplomats or ordinary people, need to respect the law of the land they reside in. The issue of diplomatic immunity needs to be in sync with the protocol in place between the countries in question.

In the Khobragade case, any further damage control will only add to the damage already done. The foreign ministers of both countries need to sit down together and sort out the issue instead of covering up the case.

Olavo Fernandes, Dubai

• Disagreements between employers and domestic help are common in India. They result in frequent quitting and rehire. But consider the state of mind of a domestic employee in a foreign country working for a powerful officer in the Indian Foreign Service. What if she genuinely felt she was being mistreated? To whom could she turn for help? She was thousands of miles away from her country and family with no place to live in, and nowhere near enough money to either survive in one of the most expensive cities in the world or buy a plane ticket back home.

Khobragade clearly took steps to tighten the noose around her employee. It is said that she moved the Delhi court to seek an injunction against Sangeeta Richard to not file a complaint against her in a foreign land — as stipulated in her employment agreement. So Khobragade did believe that contractual language mattered — except when it applied to her. Next, she used her power as a visa officer and revoked her employee’s passport, further pushing her into the back alleys of the US. Khobragade took these steps before, during and after the US State Department made attempts to get her to resolve the dispute with her former employee. Khobragade had the ability to resolve this matter quickly and quietly, but her arrogance prevented her from doing so.

Richard had every right to demand the money that she had legally earned. Khobragade, though, had absolutely no right to cheat her employee out of her wages. That is theft. Khobragade also had no right to lie to the US government, especially as a consular official. She understands the importance of contracts and sworn applications when making visa applications. Quite simply, Khobragade had no right to decide which US laws she felt like following while on US soil.

Had she settled the complaint or produced the documents that she was required to show that she had fully paid her employee, she would have not got herself into this mess and would not have caused this diplomatic row. Indeed, through her arrogance and lack of foresight, Khobragade has shown that she is not fit to be a diplomat.

L.K., by email