Downing Street mum on Sushma Swaraj’s remark on British courts

Britain has refused to respond to external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj’s remarks that PM Narendra Modi had expressed irritation at British courts questioning the condition of Indian jails in extradition hearings during his April visit here.

Poor conditions in Indian jails are a key objection raised by fugitives whose extradition is sought by India, including businessman Vijay Mallya. Several judgements of Indian courts and campaign groups have been cited to support their claim that there is a risk to human rights if extradited.

At a news briefing on Tuesday, Swaraj reportedly quoted Modi as saying to Prime Minister Theresa May during his visit for the Commonwealth summit: “I need to say that these are the same jails where you had kept Mahatma Gandhi, Pandit Nehru and India’s big leaders. So, it’s not right for your courts to raise questions about those jails.”

Asked to comment on the interaction between the two prime ministers, a Downing Street spokesperson wrote to Hindustan Times: “We have nothing to add to the readout of the PM’s talks with PM Modi.”

Extradition is a judicial process and British courts have an obligation under the European Convention of Human Rights to ensure that the human rights of the person sought are not breached after extradition to India. Soon after meeting Modi on April 18, May responded to a query in the House of Commons about the extradition of one Aman Vyas from India, wanted by London in connection with a murder in 2009. May said: “There are a number of issues of extradition between the two countries — the UK and India. We raise a number of cases with the Indian government, as I did this morning. It is important that we recognise the independence of the judiciary in both countries.” The readout issued by Downing Street after the meeting on April 18 did not explicitly mention extraditions, but officials accompanying Modi had confirmed the issue had figured in the talks with May.

LONDON:

DEBATE

The change in policy has been welcomed on the grounds that it will check the misuse of money by unscrupulous institutions, but concern is also being expressed over its implementation. A few institutions and scholars, in their feedback to the ministry, have pointed out that the revision means students will now have to pay fees upfront while seeking admission. They have expressed concern that if students are not able to raise money to pay the fees, the institutions might deny them admission. The ministry, on its part, has underlined that the process will allow for greater transparency in registration, verification of eligibility credentials and weed out fake admissions and wrongful claims by institutions.

It has also clarified that the scheme will be monitored routinely and state and union territory governments will frame procedures for periodic and timely release of scholarship amounts, including fees ,to ensure that it works.