The Curious Case of the Consul’s Maid*

The Curious Case of the Consul’s Maid*

Top-tier diplobloggers TSB (here and here) and Domani Spero both have covered the facts of this case in a thorough and sober manner, so I won’t belabor all of that again; you either know about this situation and the second- and third-order effects or you can follow some linky-love and ensmarten yourself.

See also Patricia Sharpe at Whirled View.

A non-consular colleague asked me for my opinion of this case, noting her own misgivings about how this will likely effect how she or her family members might find themselves treated should she take a non-embassy assignment, such as one to a consulate or other constituent post, where she and her family would not have full diplomatic immunity.

One of the issues in this case is that as a deputy consul general stationed in New York, the accused Indian diplomat doesn’t have diplomatic immunity.  Instead, she has what’s called consular immunity, which is limited to legal immunity only for official acts as a consular official.

As someone who’s conducted visa interviews for domestic staff accompanying travelers and other visitors to the U.S., I’ll admit to being fresh out of sympathy for the accused.  Falsifying employment contracts in connection with this sort of visa fraud is the gateway crime to worker exploitation, mistreatment, human trafficking, enslavement, and even physical or sexual abuse.

Like a lot of Americans from middle-class backgrounds, my own pre-Foreign Service experiences with domestic help were fairly limited.  I do recall, when I was perhaps elementary school age, that the Mother-at-Arms had a very nice lady come in once a week to do house-cleaning.  I also recall how much cleaning my mother did before the cleaning lady got there, so she wouldn’t be embarrassed by a dirty house.  (I can’t explain it, it’s a middle-class thing.)

(Being posted abroad as a diplomat, I’ve been at two Third World posts where it was considered very usual to have a “helper” either full-time or one-or-two days a week.  But I digress.)

Once the Bureau of Diplomatic Security became aware of the alleged victim’s accusations, they had no option but to investigate.  Of course, the federal prosecutor has something called “prosecutorial discretion” but that is, oddly enough, at his discretion and he has discreeded to proceed with prosecution.

So yeah, I’m fine with the Indian deputy CG being charged and arrested rather than given notice to get out of Dodge (and not come back), a.k.a. being declared Persona Non Grata (PNG).

Where I depart in judgment as to how all of this was handled was the planning, or lack-thereof, of the post-arrest phase of this exercise.

They waited until she’d dropped off her children at school.  Good so far.

They let her keep her cell phone and make several calls to arrange for child-care, &tc.  Also good.

They didn’t handcuff her until they had arrived at the federal building for booking.  Right up until now is all good.

They then proceeded with what is being (accurately) defended as being “standard procedure” in terms of arrest, search (including a cavity search), booking, and confinement.

Yes, I get that, in defense, from the perch of a federal prosecutor in New York City this may seem defensible and even laudatory, but it’s really not.

It’s not about treating a foreign diplomat differently or giving her special treatment better than our own citizens.  That misses the point.

The reaction of the Indian press and even the Indian government illustrates part of the real point.

The issue, instead, is one of reciprocity.

Let’s just say that exposing our own consular officials (and their families and children) to the local versions of “standard procedure” is a road we don’t wish to travel.

In some countries, “standard procedure” (whether it’s written down or not), involves subjecting victims of sexual assault to gang rape by police.  So let’s just not go there.

If the object, when the accused Indian diplomat was arrested, was to get her booked (fingerprinted and photographed) and in front of a judge to be charged, then the “standard procedure” could easily enough have been modified.  Run her through metal detectors, the same as anyone entering a courtroom might encounter, skip the whole holding cell circus, and then get her the Hell out of custody.

After all, the charges in this case don’t extend to crimes of violence, in which case the thorough body search would certainly have been appropriate as a safety measure.  This one-size-fits-all process has potentially endangered hundreds of Americans and their family members by exposing them to local versions of “standard procedure” that can be injurious to the point of fatality.

* Yes, I’m aware that she’s actually a Deputy Consul General.