High Court has ordered the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) to arrange a video conference with Major (Retd) V. K. Jaitly, brother of actress Celina Jaitly, who has been detained in the UAE. The court said it required his personal assurance for legal and consular support.
Court leaves scope for direct interaction and legal aid
Justice P. K. Kaurav said some interaction is needed with Vicky Jaitly to understand who he would like to seek help from, his wife or his sister. The court directed the Solicitor General to ensure that services of a lawyer are made available and that it can call him for video conferencing provided they abide by FEMA rules.
Court pointed out in no uncertain terms that life and liberty of an Indian-citizen are never less important. If family members have been able to talk to the detainee, there is no reason for the Court not to speak to the detainee under the parameters inscribed in the Cooperation Agreement between India and UAE.
Senior counsel Ms. Celina Jaitly´s argument was that it is the responsibility of the state to enable legal access for an Indian detainee abroad under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. The bench then seemingly agreed that no family member could independently object to legal representation for the detainee if he needs an attorney.
Ground for Detention and Family Disagreement
Vikrant Jaitly, an ex-Army officer and UN peacekeeping veteran, has been detained in the UAE for more than a year. He was employed with a consultancy in the gulf when he was allegedly abducted from a mall, which was made in his sister’s filing.
After the alleged incident, Celina Jaitly filed a complaint on the government’s MADAD portal, seeking consular assistance. She later approached the Delhi High Court, maintaining that the Indian Embassy or Consulate in Dubai had not provided her with a meaningful update.
As Celina’s plea has gravely pitted her against Vikrant’s wife, Charul Jaitly announced through a counsel that Celina informed her there was some contact between her and Vikrant. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is giving support, she added. Vikrant has asked Celina not to get in touch with a particular firm, which the petitioner talks about.
Charul also claimed that relations between Vikrant and Celina have fractured. She said she alone can engage a lawyer for Vikrant. The court demanded that she file a note in a sealed cover and requested both sides to work together in Vikrant’s interest.
The Power of Attorney and the choice of legal firm
In its earlier order, the High Court asked the MEA to talk with Vikrant to issue a power of attorney. The initial order was based on the availability of Emirati law firm Khalid Al Maree for the pro bono representation of Vikrant before any Dubai or Abu Dhabi court.
According to submissions, as the Government has issued a letter empowering the firm to represent, the Court expressly stated that if Vikrant does not wish to hire this firm, he will be at his liberty to suggest any other. “The intention is to provide timely and effective help in the conflict,” it further stated.
The AMAJI also reported that the name of Khalid Al Maree appears in a list of legal firms previously associated with the matter. There are discrepancies as to whether this firm should be privy to the quarms, but the final say, in light of the accused’s choice, remains with Vikrant.
Further, the bench ordered that a copy of Celina Jaitly’s application be shown to Vikrant-to find out whether he is interested in meeting his sister within the confines imposed at the detention center.
Treaty constraints and measures for consular access
The bench was surprised that they did not understand when Vikrant did not desire to give instructions to anyone. The counsel replied that there was no provision in the treaty under which a connection could be maintained between Vikrant and lawyers. The bench sensing something sinister asked the court-appointed officer to check on the custody and well-being of Vikrant as to whether he was talking freely or not. The officer responded that Vikrant was quiet, and he did not speak to him.
When taken note of the official version, the court requested the MEA to coordinate the exchange of views between the Ministry of Law and Justice on the said treaty and for making an application for the legal arrangement for video conferencing. However, the attorney informed the officials of the Indian embassy of this issue and expressed his hope that their request pursuant to this need would be moved at the earliest for consular access.
The court noted that if the embassy applies for consular access, such an application may be transmitted as soon as possible; it was further noted that the embassies were informed by the local authorities that under the law, they also should inform Vikrant about the modalities of the legal representation. This was a repetition of the observation-containing-directions in regards to the media that were mentioned earlier.
What the consular protection entails- due process
The proceedings have touched upon resultant questions and emphasized the boundaries and responsibilities of consular protection. To connect with consular officers is a right given by the Vienna Convention, but they have to comply with host-country rules to provide full access to consular officials and legal representation. The Court has attempted to place itself between these two rules.
In aiming at a direct video conference with the detainee, the bench clamps down on mixed feelings over authority and consent. It clarifies that even a spouse cannot prevent a detainee from legal representation if the client wants legal representation or court mandates due process.
The case underscores the necessity of fast-acting teamwork for an Indian national under arrest abroad, particularly under trial. It also founded on fostering clear communication between family, along with the embassy in such hard situations.
Timeline, collaboration, and the road ahead
The Court ordered the MEA on 3 of February to have a Dubai-Abu Dhabi law firm, acting for Vikrant; and on 10 February, the Court had ordered for further steps to be taken to facilitate interaction between Vikrant and the Court. The recent order refers to having a video-conference link with power of attorney.
The High Court assigned Celina and Charul Jaitly to sit across the table and work in tandem to obtain the release of Vikrant along with the legal defence. The Court exhorted Vikrant to confirm the choice if he had any preference otherwise himself at the earliest.
The matter shall now be heard on 17 February. The Ministry of External Affairs has been ordered to seek consular access by that date, explore treaty options for court interaction, update Vikrant about legal representation, and seek instructions from him as to the appointment of counsel.
