The release of six British men, along with 29 other crew members of the MV Seaman Guard Ohio, intercepted by the Indian Coast Guard in 2013, by an Appeal Court in Chennai on Monday, was hailed by the British media, though some criticised the country’s Foreign Office for its handling of the issue.
The six Britons, who have come to be known as the ‘Chennai Six’ in Britain, were arrested along with 14 Estonians, three Ukrainians and 12 Indian nationals for failing to possess the right paperwork for carrying significant amounts of armaments (including automatic and semi-automatic weapons) while in Indian territory. They were jailed for five years in January 2016. Since then, the case has been constantly raised in discussions between Britain and India.
The defence had argued that they were simply involved in anti-piracy operations and were looking for fuel and provisions while in distress.
On Monday, they won their appeal against the charges, and were escorted out of the Puzhal Central Prison by British Consular officials on Tuesday.
British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said the case had been a “top priority” for everyone at the Foreign Office, and that the FCO [Foreign and Commonwealth Office] had worked tirelessly behind the scenes to reunite the men with their families.
However, ahead of the latest developments, the FCO faced criticism from the affected families as well as the Opposition parties. Earlier this month, Ian Lavery, the Chair of the Labour Party, wrote to the Foreign Secretary, urging him to refocus efforts on the “hellish situation” of the Chennai Six, as much attention was being paid to Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, a British-Iranian woman detained in Iran.
Over the years, officials of the Foreign Office have faced repeated questions on whether they were doing enough on the case, with one MP accusing them of “thumb twiddling and warm words” rather than devising a concrete strategy for ensuring the seamen’s return. Earlier this week, a sister of one of the accused told The Times that the Foreign Office had made many mistakes in its handling of the case, and that Mr. Johnson was “not fit for purpose.”
‘Rule of law followed’
Indian Deputy High Commissioner in London Dinesh Patnaik noted that the handling of the case highlighted how scrupulously the rule of law was followed in India. “In India, the government cannot pressure a court to withdraw a case…you have to go through the entire process of law and the government listens to what the court says,” he said.
He added that the handling of the case should offer reassurance to those in Britain voicing concerns about Jagtar Singh Johal, a British national currently in custody in Punjab over allegations that he was involved in targeted killings in the State. The case was within the court system and was for it to decide, he said, adding, “If the U.K. arrests an Indian citizen, we are not going to tell the U.K. government whether he should be set free or not…we leave it to the courts.”
