Indians in US face problems in consular services

 Suffering from advance stage of Alzheimer and living in the US, 82-year-old Maitri Singh can't withdraw her pension from a bank in India, where she was a physician before retiring.

This is because the Indian Embassy here has refused to attest Singh's (name changed) duly notarised affidavit, which authorises her only son to sign necessary documents on her behalf, because due to medical reasons she can't sign the application form, which Indian officials argue is a must according to rules of the Indian government.

Had, Singh, been a resident of any of the States -- Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wisconsin -- falling under the jurisdiction of Indian Consulate in Chicago, this would not have been a problem as even a thumb impression of her would have met the criteria for the Consulate to attest the necessary affidavit.

"In case of those who cannot sign, thumb impression," say the website of the Indian Consulate in Chicago in its rules for miscellaneous services including power of attorney.
Had Singh been a resident of American States like California falling under Indian Consulate in San Francisco, there would have been a different set of rules.
San Francisco Consulate rules stipulates that her power of attorney should have been first notarised and then "apostilled" by the Secretary of State of California, before the documents were considered for attestation.

"All consulates have different versions of rules and regulations and interpret them in their own way," Inder Singh, chairman of Global Organisation of People of Indian Origin (GOIPO), told PTI.

"When people go to the website from one consulate to another, they get more confused when they read the same rules differently interpreted," Singh said.
According to latest census figures there are about three million Indian Americans living here. "This causes a lot of inconvenience to Indian-Americans," Singh said.
PTI spoke to a dozen Indian-Americans, whose applications for attesting affidavits or other services were turned down either by the Indian Embassy or the four Consulates.

In all these cases they would have got their documents attested had their residences been in a different State.

All of them requested that their names not be published, fearing that this might jeopardise their case in the future.

The Indian Embassy here did not respond to the questions sent regarding what rules govern these consular services and why there were different set of rules and conditions for same services by its different diplomatic posts.

A study of the guidelines posted on websites by the Indian Embassy and its four Consulates in New York, Chicago, Houston and San Francisco – gives a confusing and different pictures; which very often results in undue inconvenience and harassment to Indian-Americans here, said Inder Singh.

Whereas the San Francisco Consulate encourages applicants to have their affidavits and other documents attested even it is apostallised, the embassy website says: "Embassy of India will not re-authenticate a public document that has been apostilled by the authorities of the country of origin."

New York consulate offers a middle path. Incidentally, all of them refer to the Hague convention.

"Apostille Convention: the Hague Convention, to which India and USA are signatories, abolishes the requirement of legalisation for Foreign Public Documents. However in smany places in India, they would easily recognise the attestation by the Indian Embassy/Consulate and hence may ask for attested copy despite the document already being apostilled.

"Hence, to avoid any inconvenience, if you wish to have the apostilled document also attested by the Consulate, you may apply to the Consulate," says the website of the Indian Consulate in San Francisco.

"All consulates and embassies should implement uniform policies regarding passport surrender and visa issuance and this information should be identical on consular websites," GOPIO said in a recent memorandum submitted to the government.
Even the application form required to be filled up by Indian-Americans for these services are different; so is the case with the fees associated with these services.
While the Indian Consulate in San Francisco accepts debit cards, besides money order and cashier's cheque, the Chicago Consulate and the embassy says it will not accept payments through debit cards.

While the embassy says it will read the content of the affidavits and power of attorney's before attesting it, other consulates say its role is simply to attest the signature.

"Role of the Consulate is restricted to the attestation of applicant's signature with no responsibility of contents," says the Chicago Consulate website.
"Please note that POA or another document that has monetary implication will not be accepted at counter only if the applicant is himself/herself present and no family member is allowed to submit on behalf of others," says the embassy website in capital and bold letters.

"The Consulate reserves the right to reject attestation of documents the contents of which are objectionable or contrary to the Rules," says the San Francisco Consulate.

The Chicago Consulate requires presence of the applicant at the Consulate for attestation of the POA; whereas this provision is waived off by the Indian Embassy in Washington, which has a different set of rules.

"For attestation of the POA the applicant has to come in person in the Consulate and has to sign in front of the Consular Officer. Hence POA attestation application by mail will not (repeat NOT) be accepted/entertained by the Consulate. POA document(s) is/are attested by the Consulate only if these are to be produced in INDIA only," the Chicago Consulate says.

"If the application is submitted in person by the applicant at the counter, notarization is not necessary but the applicant has to sign the document at the counter," says the embassy.