Choksi was not allowed to renounce citizenship: India to Dominica court
NEW DELHI: India has informed the high court of justice in Dominica that Mehul Choksi, wanted in a bank fraud on the state-owned Punjab National Bank worth thousands of crores, was informed in March 2019 that the ministry of home affairs (MHA) had rejected his renunciation of Indian citizenship, and that he did not challenge this refusal.
The argument, cited in a government affidavit filed last week, revolves around one issue that will determine whether or not the court decides to send him to India — his citizenship. Choksi became a citizen of Antigua and Barbuda in 2016, but that country has been trying to revoke his citizenship (the matter is in the courts). Citing various legal deficiencies in Choksi’s declaration renouncing his citizenship, the government affidavit said the fact that Choksi never made this request “in person” but sent it directly to the Indian high commission in Georgetown, Guyana, is in contradiction with the rules under the Citizenship Act, 1955. Nor did Choksi present his request in the prescribed format, it added. Finally, Section 8 of India’s Citizenship Act says a person ceases to be a citizen of India only after registration of his/ her declaration by the prescribed authority, which is the home ministry in this case, the affidavit said.
That India would use this line of argument before the Dominican court was first reported by HT on May 30.
HT has reviewed the affidavit, filed by the ministry of external affairs consular officer Azad Singh, which seeks to “declare Choksi as an Indian citizen” and “deport him to India”.
Choksi, 62, went missing from Antigua on May 23 but his family and lawyers have alleged he was abducted and
taken to Dominica. Dominica has charged him with illegal entry. The magistrate’s court in Roseau on Monday adjourned the hearing to June 25.
HT reported on Saturday that the Indian government filed two affidavits in the Dominican court detailing serious fraud charges against Choksi and proof that he continues to be an Indian citizen. In the other affidavit, filed by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) deputy inspector general Sharda Raut, said Choksi was the main beneficiary of the fraud on Punjab National Bank and had not co-operated in the investigation, which revealed he laundered the money through a web of shell companies.
Choksi submitted an application to the Indian mission in Georgetown, Guyana, on December 14, 2018, renouncing his Indian citizenship after acquiring Antigua & Barbuda’s citizenship on November 16, 2017.
“After his application was submitted, the matter was examined at different levels within the government of India. On January 29, 2019, the ministry of home affairs found various deficiencies in the declaration provided, and also noted that Choksi was an economic offender, and thus advised the consular officer in the Indian mission in Georgetown to consider rejection of his declaration of renunciation,” the affidavit said.
A communication to this effect was sent to Choksi on March 15, 2019.
Citing Rule 23 of the Citizenship Act, the affidavit said, “declaration should be made in prescribed form XXII” for renunciation of citizenship and acknowledgement “should be issued in form XXIII”, which was not done. In fact, it was never acknowledged by the concerned officer as it was sent through post.
“Mehul Choksi has not brought proceedings in India to challenge this rejection. Therefore, he continues to be a citizen of India under the provisions of the Citizenship Act, 1955,” the affidavit stated.
Ministry of external affairs (MEA) has also contested the argument of Choksi’s lawyer Vijay Aggarwal, who has stated that “a person automatically ceases to be citizen in India if he acquires citizenship of another country, according to section 9 of the Citizenship Act”.
The government’s argument is that Choksi obtained Antigua’s citizenship “fraudulently”, a concern already raised with the island’s government; hence the claim under section 9 cannot be maintained.
Terming Choksi’s claim erroneous, the affidavit added: “It is pertinent to mention here that authority to determine citizenship of another country – whether when or how citizenship was acquired – is Central government under rule 40 of the Citizenship Rules of 2009.”
Choksi’s lawyer Vijay Aggarwal said, “Firstly, in bail proceedings the question for determination is not citizenship. So this affidavit is uncalled for. Moreover, as per section 9, subsection 1 of the Citizenship Act, Mr Mehul Choksi is not a citizen of India and the reliance in the affidavit on various rules is fractured understanding of law.”
World War II was a fertile period for innovation and development of technology and leadership frameworks. Understandably so, because humans are most imaginative when facing existential crises, as indeed, we are right now. However, developing or acquiring new technology is one thing, but creating the doctrines or operating principles to leverage them is another altogether.
For instance, while most of the aerial warfare was based on propellor engine fighter planes, jet engine fighters started their operational debut towards the latter period of the war. Existing fighter pilots of the propellor era were hurriedly retrained to fly the modern platforms. But the transition ran into challenges. Pilots who were used to top speeds of less than 500 miles per hour were catapulted into sub and supersonic speeds, literally overnight. Many of the aces couldn’t even withstand the exceeding G Force, let alone leverage their old world prowess in the new environment. While that challenge could be solved relatively easily by changing some pilots, the more subtle, yet important, problem was the inadequacy of existing combat decision-making frameworks, operational processes and strategic doctrines to support the paradigm shift.
Pilots of the legendary Spitfires, Messerschmitts, Zeros and Mustangs — the fighter backbone of the British, German, Japanese and American air forces respectively — were trained to think in seconds. Their radius of operation was barely 500 miles when fully armed, and almost all engagements required the pilot to identify the target visually, before being able to engage it. Jet fighter pilots, however, had to think in milliseconds, with operational speeds and ranges several times more than the propellor craft. And as the air forces discovered, a framework designed to support thinking in seconds cannot be improved to one that caters to thinking in milliseconds. Instead, a new framework of pilot selection, training, operational processes and strategic doctrines had to be developed from scratch.
The corporate world is facing a similar paradigm shift. In addition to customer behaviour, economic upheavals and extreme uncertainty, the new mode of hybrid working has changed the environment completely. Most of the real world corporate interactions have shifted to the virtual mode, and this new hybrid mode is here to stay. Yet, beyond some hygiene improvements, mostly around training on online interactions and equipment to enable that, little attention has been paid to the transition of leadership frameworks and organisational cultures.
Trust, psychologically safe communication, competence, mutual respect, conflict resolution mechanisms and camaraderie are essential building blocks of an efficient organisation. Transference of these elements from the physical to the virtual world creates dissonance. As pointed out by Harvard professor, Tsedal Neeley, while cognitive trust, or trust based on empirical evidence, may be transferrable to the virtual world, emotive trust or trust based on a series of personal experiences cannot be transferred easily. For instance, a basic covenant of respectful communication is that the speaker and listener look into each other’s eyes. During virtual meetings, most speakers look at the screen, not at the camera. Thus listeners would see the top of the speaker’s head or the side. While at a cognitive level, the listener knows that the speaker is looking at his face on the screen, at a subliminal level, it erodes emotive trust.
The pre-pandemic environment had a rich toolset for leaders to exercise their leadership. For example, in addition to paying attention to the speaker during meetings, a chief executive officer (CEO) would be scanning the body language of others as well. She would notice the chief financial officer wincing at numbers being projected by the sales head, or prod a hesitant young colleague to speak up. There was an opportunity to assuage bruised egos with a kind word, or a pat on the shoulder. Conflicts could be resolved with rituals that are impossible to replicate in a virtual environment. Most bottlenecks in organisational fluidity are unclogged during unofficial meetings in corridors, cafeterias, coffee and cigarette breaks.
Not only are unscripted interactions defunct, the nature of scripted virtual meetings is insipid compared to the richness of real-world interactions. A multiple-channel communication process, encompassing body language and side conversations, has been constricted into a single channel where only one person can speak at a time. Even in the 5G world, a lot is conveyed between colleagues with the raise of an eyebrow or subconscious nods of agreement, which no emoji can. All these tools have been denuded in the new hybrid environment. Almost 18 months into the pandemic, corporates may have lifted and shifted their old world processes into the new world, but that’s like forcing the throughput of an 18 -lane highway through a narrow alley of virtual interactions.
Efficiencies will be a fraction what they were before. Unless leaders realise the futility of using adapted versions of physical world processes in the virtual world, they will hamstring the transition of their organisations. Instead, they must recognise the imperative of recrafting Standard Operating Procedures, strategic plans, operating principles, and above all, organisational culture, in every aspect of their business from scratch. Otherwise, despite investing in upgradation of equipment and training, they will keep losing battles.
TRUST, PSYCHOLOGICALLY SAFE COMMUNICATION, COMPETENCE, RESPECT, CONFLICT RESOLUTION MECHANISMS AND CAMARADERIE ARE BUILDING BLOCKS OF AN EFFICIENT ORGANISATION. TRANSFERENCE OF THESE FROM THE PHYSICAL TO THE VIRTUAL WORLD CREATES DISSONANCE