‘Was treated as if I was a murderer, moving around streets of Canada… I’m still having that stigma’: Ex-India envoy Sanjay Verma

Q: Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney visited India this month. There has been a turnaround in India-Canada ties. You were in Ottawa when ties were frozen, what do you think necessitated this (turnaround)?

Whatever was happening in Canada when I was there was politically motivated. And the political motivation could linger long, or could be cut short depending on the person in the chair. So, that is what has happened (with PM Mark Carney coming in). Whenever there is a change, there is a window of opportunity. And that window was quickly claimed through the visit of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Canada. PM Carney is more of a global citizen, having served as governor of the British central bank. He has seen the world from a very different lens, which has a bit of geopolitics, but a lot of pragmatism.

Earlier, everything was being put in one basket, which was highly coloured by the views expressed by Khalistani extremists and terrorists there. Now, there are two containers. In one container, those areas where we have convergence, which is a very large container; those areas where we have not so much of convergence, which is a very small container. That will continue to be discussed.

I don’t use the word reset, but now it is being re-normalised. Both the countries are trying to establish a new normal.

Q: Were there external factors also nudging both countries to come together, especially with US President Donald Trump coming in and the subsequent tariff wars?

Ecosystem has certainly changed. If you look at Canada’s over-dependence on the US, in economic terms it was huge. In people-to-people it was very big. They were more or less one culture despite different ideologies. And later on, the strains became obvious due to change of ecosystem in Washington.

So, again, their philosophy of reducing over-dependence on the US started. So, when they started looking at where to diversify, they would look for the highest leverage. That, for them, was India and China, both for different reasons.

Q: Recently, the chief of Royal Canadian Mounted Police (conducting the Nijjar probe) has said that there is no evidence linking India to the case. What is your view of where it started, where it is now and what has to be done?

Everything started with (the bombing on Air India flight) Kanishka. All the evidence pointed towards the Khalistani terrorists and extremists having planted the bomb. So, that was the beginning of the tear. That tear moved ahead because there was no closure.

My own assessment is that some of the digital evidence was deleted, physical evidence was destroyed. So, therefore, in the court of law where you need to prove it, the prosecutors could not prove it. That episode gave rise to further radicalisation in Canada.

Q: Because there was no accountability?

Because they saw they could get away with it. And therefore, it went on, and in the meantime, they were able to form militant organisations and malicious advocacy organisations, in an effort to get a foothold into Canadian politics, into Canadian agencies which are responsible for immigration, border control, customs and policing.

And that really made them much stronger and allowed them to punch above their weight. And some other organisations which are anti-India also joined because the purpose converged.

What I had seen in Canada was that they also got involved in human trafficking, drug manufacturing, fentanyl in particular, and pushing it across the borders to the US and in Canada. I have also seen them using the trucking business for different purposes and getting into extortion rackets.

They would go and intimidate other individuals from their own community. Out of 8 lakh Sikhs who are there in Canada — both Indian nationals and those of Indian origin — about 5,000 are hardliners, Khalistani extremists. Rest are common citizens, wanting to live their normal lives. But what to do if they are intimidated? So, they don’t voice, but they show their presence in such protests. PM Carney is aware of this and he will try to create more orderliness for a safer Canada.

Q: I want to take you back to those days when the Nijjar case flared up, you were named and you had to return to India.

The situation was tense after Prime Minister Trudeau had given the statement, I believe he should not have given, in the Parliament. There was no evidence. That was September 2023. Till today, no evidence has been presented, which means it was premature. If there was a lead, probably the investigative agency should have been allowed to proceed first.

The RCMP commissioner still says there is no evidence of external linkages to transnational repression and transnational crimes in Canada. External linkages include India.

So, therefore, it is very clear. If he cannot see evidence now, what was the evidence there that he (PM Trudeau) had to come out. And in one of his statements he had said that, I said so to put a chill on India. That is not a mature statesman. After his statement in Canadian Parliament, it became a point of no return for both sides.

Q: Who called to inform you that you are a ‘person of interest’ in the Nijjar probe? How did you respond?

I was in Toronto on the weekend just before I left Canada to receive the award for global IIT-ian. I came to the Toronto airport to go back to Ottawa, where I got a phone call from the (Canadian) foreign ministry, saying ‘We want you to come to the Global Affairs office’. The next day when I went there — I didn’t know what was going to be conveyed — but the room where I used to go, giggle, laugh, share a cup of coffee, was quite sterilised, stern looking. I sensed there was something wrong.

And I was read out a statement by my counterpart, which said, ‘you are a person of interest, along with five others, and you must submit yourself to interrogation’. That’s not normal diplomatic practice.

I spoke to Delhi. That is when everything started happening in Delhi (Delhi expelled six Canadian diplomats in a tit-for-tat move). They spoke to the Canadian High Commissioner in Delhi saying this was not done, and Mr Verma will not submit. And we will not be able to waive the diplomatic immunity of him and other colleagues.

All of a sudden, there was a statement by the then foreign minister, Melanie Joly, who said we are declaring him and five others as persona non-grata. But then Delhi asked me to come back. So, technically speaking, I came back on the orders of my government. But by then Canada had already declared me persona non-grata.

Q: How was the time in-between?

Those five days were not easy. I could not say goodbyes to my friends. I had to pack the entire household. Once you are persona non-grata, things can happen. So, I was escorted to Ottawa airport and to the aircraft by RCMP. In fact, they were always there with me. I started getting RCMP details even before the statement was made in Parliament.

As a High Commissioner I would have loved to see better days. But as a patriot Indian, my statements there, which were not to the liking of the Canadian authorities, but safeguarded my national interest, were must. The red lines and red flags should be clearly articulated.

Q: India has also communicated a lot of things to Ottawa — particularly about freedom of expression being taken too far.

Every time we saw any harm coming to India’s national interest, it was conveyed. And as a matter of format, they always received it. Not that we got responses every time, but sometimes we did. We sometimes also flagged vandalism of Hindu temples there. But we did not see much result coming out of it.

In fact, some of these activities increased. When the government starts becoming an echo chamber for propaganda, those who are originating the propaganda will get emboldened. And that is what happened.

Q: So while the Nijjar case was going on, simultaneously in the US, there was this Gurpatwant Singh Pannun assassination plot case, and there was an effort by the US Department of Justice to link the two… How did you view that?

Law does not listen to emotions or intelligence. I have not seen any evidence so far where they are connected. The link has been talked about, but no evidence has come forward. I would maintain that they remain disconnected till the time evidence can be there.

Q: One Indian citizen in the US (Nikhil Gupta) has already pleaded guilty. Will that give any credence to the theories?

I will not be able to comment much about the US case. But as far as Canada is concerned, there was a crime committed. And we always maintain that since the crime has been committed in Canada, that of a murder of their citizen, you should take corrective action. But before reaching the finality, do not start blaming.

Four Indian nationals have been arrested and the case is in pre-trial stage. So, till the time the case is not decided, we really do not know. But don’t equate Indian nationals with the Indian government. Evidence for that linkage has never been presented.

Q: Do you think that (Nijjar) episode is behind us?

The new normal does not erase what has happened earlier. My colleagues, our families, had to undergo such emotional trauma. Some of their spouses had to leave jobs, children had to leave university to come back with their parents. The human side of it is huge.

If I have a family member in Canada today, I still can’t go and visit. Of course, I am not challenging the prerogative of the host government. I was treated as a criminal, as if I am a murderer who is moving around on the streets of Canada. Till today, which is about 18 months later, they have not been able to prove anything against me. I’m still having that stigma — in the otherwise very successful, 37 years of public service — of being called a criminal.

I am the first ever serving Indian ambassador to be declared persona non-grata. No other Indian ambassador had been declared persona non grata, not even by Pakistan.

Q: Now coming to the present context of this war in West Asia. What do you think India should be most worried about?

As the second largest importer of energy, India should be worried about energy supplies. It should be worried about the safety of its one crore people who are living in the affected region, the PM has already spoken about it in Parliament.

Q: Do you think India could have played a bigger role considering how Pakistan is now giving them a platform for talks?

A country of India’s size will talk to leaders, and convey the desire that we look forward to a diplomatic solution, to peace returning in the region. There could be other players who can grandstand. We fall in the first category. In fact, most of the diplomacy is backroom.