The Danish ambassador, Freddy Svane, completed his second tenure in India on January 31. In all, he spent over 10 years in this post; he was ambassador in 2010-2015 and again from 2019. He would look back on his assignments in India with satisfaction for he imparted a positive trajectory to India-Denmark relations despite the difficulties of the Kim Davy (known in Denmark as Niels Holck) extradition matter. The Indian establishment rated Svane highly for he was allowed a rare farewell call on the external affairs minister, S. Jaishankar. Svane was also popular with some members of the ruling party as their social media posts reveal.
The problem is that while Svane achieved his purpose, the Narendra Modi government’s record in the Kim Davy matter is dubious for it has failed to get Denmark to extradite him to India to stand trial for his crimes. It can, therefore, be said that on this issue, till now, it has failed to uphold India’s honour and dignity. Hence, Jaishankar and the political and the foreign policy establishments have to consider — and inform Parliament and the country — of how they intend to retrieve the situation. Instead, it seems they do not consider it a serious issue.
Jaishankar’s attitude towards the Danish system — its executive and judiciary taken together — is in complete contrast to that of the late external affairs minister, S.M. Krishna, who dealt with the issue firmly as a true, if quiet, nationalist. When the Indian ambassador in Copenhagen asked if indirect contact could be established with Davy because he may be giving signals of coming to India for trial under appropriate conditions, Krishna told him that India did not do deals with criminals.
Kim Davy was a prime actor in the 1996 Purulia arms drop case. Much has been written on that matter. At issue here is not the arms drop but India allowing Denmark to run rings around it on the Kim Davy extradition. It would be sufficient to state on the arms drop that it was a crime and Davy has made no secret of his involvement in it. India first asked for his extradition in 2002. Initially, the Danes prevaricated but India persisted and as the decade progressed, they imposed conditions and sought assurances. These included that Davy would not be given a death sentence, his security in India would be ensured, and that he would serve his sentence, if convicted, in Denmark. These demands were made in stages. Consequently, the matter went to the cabinet twice which agreed with them. Still, Denmark dragged its feet. The ministry of external affairs strongly told the Danish ambassador in 2009 that Davy should be extradited as all his country’s demands had been met.
Under Indian pressure, Denmark issued an extradition order against Davy in April 2010. He appealed to the District Court, which quashed the order in November that year. For the sake of formality, the Danes appealed this Court’s order to the High Court. Officials from the Central Bureau of Investigation who went to assist the Danish prosecutors reported to Delhi that they were treated shabbily by them. The High Court dismissed the Indian government’s assurances and relying on the testimony of non-governmental organisations that Davy would not receive justice in India upheld the District Court order. The Danish prosecutor, despite the protests of the Indian ambassador backed by Delhi, refused to appeal the High Court decision in the Supreme Court.
The Danish executive and judiciary’s cavalier approach offended the senior official levels in Delhi, including the then home secretary, R.K. Singh, who later served as a minister in the Modi government. Denmark’s handling of the issue was considered an affront to the Indian judiciary and to the country’s dignity. It was also realised that if India did not respond forcefully, it would become a template that other European countries would follow on extraditions. Krishna completely accepted official recommendations that relations with Denmark be frozen. Despite all of Denmark’s attempts, Delhi did not budge from this position during the Manmohan Singh government.
Svane as the Danish ambassador in Delhi watched as the bilateral relations went into a meltdown. A senior Indian journalist publicly revealed in 2021 what was earlier believed in some Indian diplomatic circles. Thwarted in Delhi, Svane cultivated the Modi government in Gujarat. He persuaded European Union ambassadors in Delhi to ‘break’ their ‘ban’ on Modi. When Modi became prime minister in 2014, Svane moved to change the course of India-Danish ties but the Manmohan Singh government’s decision on Kim Davy was a stumbling block. No substantial public change in India’s position was made for about two years. Svane left India in 2015 but he had prepared the ground for the obstacles to the Kim Davy extradition to be removed.
Denmark pressed India that the judicial and the political tracks be separated. Denmark also offered that India could apply for Davy’s extradition again. Strangely, the Modi government agreed with Denmark. In 2016, India applied for Davy’s extradition again but as the future revealed its interest in securing Davy’s extradition had clearly waned. Perhaps it thought that the Kim Davy matter had gone out of public memory.
Once the political track was re-opened, Denmark, with Delhi’s cooperation, pursued the path of high-level visits. Denmark also pushed its commercial and economic interests. To shepherd this process, Svane returned to India in 2019 as ambassador. In 2021, the Danish prime minister visited India. Modi went to Copenhagen next year for a bilateral visit and a summit for Indo-Nordic countries.
With ties blooming and the Modi government putting no pressure, Denmark was in no hurry to issue a second extradition order against Davy. It did so after a full seven years in 2023 and only after a Danish team had visited India and secured further unprecedented concessions. These included that he would stay in Calcutta in government accommodation, which was selected by the team, and an escort of Danish policemen would provide security to him in India. Davy appealed against the extradition order. The District Court upheld his appeal. Its ruling “emphasized, among other things, that the extradition of A [Kim Davy] for prosecution in India, despite the additional diplomatic guarantees, would be in breach of Section 6(2) of the Extradition Act, as there is a real risk that A will be subjected to treatment in India that is contrary to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.” Thus, the Danish court, once again, insultingly held that Indian guarantees amount to nothing. Surprisingly, there was no reaction to this in Delhi.
The Danish prosecutors have appealed to the Eastern High Court against this court’s decision. India is believed to have been informed that the court will hear the matter only in November 2026! India is maintaining business as usual with Denmark in the meantime.
Experience shows that European governments always find ways of influencing their courts on foreign policy issues. India is no tin pot country whose assurances should be disregarded as the Danish courts have done. Krishna showed the path but Jaishankar has not walked it. Should he not, at least, pay heed to Modi’s commitment that he will never let down the nation’s dignity which Denmark continues to contemptuously play with in the Kim Davy extradition matter?
Vivek Katju is a retired Indian Foreign Service officer
