“It did not extend to the crimes charged in the indictment, private acts taken in relation to the employment of a domestic worker and a visa application submitted to the U.S. government in connection with that employment,” he said.
Bharara has alleged that the indictment charges offenses based on Khobragade's private conduct and not her official conduct. “Her domestic worker was not an employee of the Consulate General of India and did not perform work related to consular functions,” he added.
He said Khobragade's motion is an attempt to “concoct a theory of immunity” by using a U.N. accreditation that she had for a brief time during the visit of the Indian Prime Minister for the annual session of the General Assembly last year.
“That attempt fails both factually and legally and it gives her no added immunity from the charges here,” Bharara said, adding that her motion is based exclusively on the “unsupportable claim” that she “somehow obtained and retains” full diplomatic immunity from supposedly assuming a position as ‘Special advisor to the U.N.' on August 26, 2013.
Khobragade's assertion that the U.N. card gave her immunity is “both convoluted and baseless”, Bharara added.
He said that Khobragade's claims that she had diplomatic immunity from August to December 2013 as a member of India's delegation to the U.N. is “incorrect and is flatly rejected by the State Department”.
The State Department declaration notes that Khobragade was “not exercising any function” related to the U.N. at or immediately before or after the time of her arrest.
