A piece of India in San Francisco

Last month I got an opportunity to visit the Indian Consulate in San Francisco.  I was accompanying my son who had to get some document apostilled (Read here more about apostil.)   It is a tall building in a not-so-posh area of San Francisco.  The Tricolour flying high on its rooftop made a pretty sight.  The only parking available to the visitors is alongside the road.  Fortunately, we found an empty slot.

We were ushered in by the security guard, took a token from a dispensing machine and waited in the customer area.  We could see a split AC on the other side of the counters, i.e., in the office area but none in the customer lounge.  That was not a problem given the normally chilly weather in San Francisco.

The lady at the counter for accepting documents was having a break.  She soon returned and and a little later our token number was called out.  The lady didn't sound too friendly and said that we needed to get a photocopy of the document to be apostilled.  My son's objection that this requirement was not listed on the Consulate's website was curtly brushed aside.  His enquiry whether the photocopy could be done in the office on payment of charges met with a vigorous no.  We were told that there was a shop nearby and given general directions.  It seems that this confusion was a routine one and later we discovered a notice in the customer lounge stating the requirement of photocopies.

It was close to the closing time (the window opens only from 9 am to 12 noon.)  I accompanied my son as he nearly ran to the Office Supply shop down and across the road.  Some other harassed looking visitors, some of whom we had seen in the consulate earlier, were also there hurriedly making photocopies on self-service machines.  My son made copies and we ran back to the consulate where we were asked to get a fresh token.  We were able to deposit the documents in time and moved to the payment window.

The payment window was manned by a very courteous woman.  A notice was prominently displayed saying that Cash / Debit & Credit Cards / Personal cheques were NOT allowed and that all payments had to be made only through a Bankers' Cheques.  She first pointed out that the Bankers' Cheque (more about it later) was for two USD more than what was required.  The prospect of having to get it cancelled and another BC issued made us very uncomfortable, but the lady said that if it was okay with us the extra $2 could go to Indian Community Welfare Fund.  We readily agreed with a sigh of relief.

While the requirement of having an apostilled document countersigned by the consulate itself is superfluous as pointed out in my earlier post for which a link appears in the first para, there are a few questions as follows:

1. Why are debit and credit cards not accepted?
2. In a country where even a barber who doesn't know you is willing to accept a personal cheque, why is the consulate averse to doing so?  Their insistence on a Bankers' Cheque for petty amounts is a harassment to customers who are forced to visit their Bank.
3. Why does the consulate want a photocopy of the document for its records?  They can very well scan the original and store the digital copy or ask the customer to upload scanned image  online.
4. If they must have a photocopy why can't they do it on their office machine and add the charges to the fee payable?

The questions point towards towards import of bureaucratic practices from India even though these do not fit into the milieu abroad.  The consulate needs to look into these practices.

Ignorance of Law excused?

Ordinary mortals are often told in stern words that ignorance of law is no excuse.  However it seems that this dictum is not applicable to higher mortals who are in the business of enforcing laws!  Here is an example.  India has subscribed to Hague convention, an international convention.  Under this a legal document executed in a foreign country and meant to be used in another country can be certified (apostilled, a French word, as used in the treaty) by recognized state authorities in the country of execution and then the documents become legal.  There is no need for any further legalization in the country where it is to be used.

Normally a document to be apostilled is first notarized in the country where it is executed and then apostilled by the recognized government authorities there.

However my personal experience in the state of Uttar Pradesh shows that at least two more layers are added post apostille.  The first layer is the requirement of an apostilled document being certified / countersigned by the local Indian consulate.  Here is what the site of the Indian Consulate at San Francisco says:

• Apostille Convention: the Hague Convention, to which India and USA are signatories, abolishes the requirement of legalization for Foreign Public Documents. With the certification by the Hague Convention 'Apostille', the document is entitled to recognition in India and vice versa and no certification by the Embassy/Consulates of India is required. The convention applies to public documents which have been executed in the territory of one Contracting State and which have to be produced in the territory of another Contracting State.   
• However in many places in India, they would easily recognize 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.    
• The Consulate will attest the documents only after they have been first apostilled by the state authorities concerned in the US. Apostilling is done at the offices of the Secretary of State where the applicant resides.

Emphasis added by the author. Does this not condone the ignorance of authorities in India?

Things don't end at this.  Once the documents are received in India you have to approach the local revenue authorities.  The envelope containing the document has to be opened in their presence.  The idea is to make sure that the documents were actually shipped from abroad and not fabricated locally!  On top of this you submit an affidavit to the effect that the documents are truly genuine, submit an application requesting legalization, grease appropriate palms for sanction and finally pay a stamp duty of Rs.50/=.  The payment is certified by the Superintendent of Stamps.  Only now will the document be accepted as valid in India by authorities in India.

Apart from questions of harassment, does this requirement of countersignature and payment of stamp duty not violate the Hague convention to which the country is a signatory.