The issue turned into a stand-off between the two countries when the two accused were allowed by Indian Supreme Court to go home for four weeks to vote in a parliamentary election, February 24-25, but on the written guarantee of the Italian Ambassador to India, Daniele Mancini, that they would return.

In early March, Italy advised the Indian government that the two would not return on the pretext that India had failed to respond to Italian requests to seek a diplomatic solution to the case and that it was against subjecting its nationals to jurisdiction of Indian courts and therefore would take the matter to the international court.

The two nations are known to have disagreed over application of terms of the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea.

But India too stuck to its position demanding for the return of the marines much as it watched the astonishing welcome the accused received when they went back to Italy and were feted by the Italian President and other political leaders.

Subhash Kashyap, eminent legal expert in India comments that as there were no grounds on which the accused could be sentenced to death in India and with the ratification of Indo-Italian agreement in November 2012 that rules that if the Italian nationals are convicted then they can serve their jail terms in respective countries there is no reason why the Italian government should not have trusted the Indian government by sending back its nationals for a speedy and fair trial.

From the beginning, the case has been extraordinary as the marines have been allowed to inhabit relatively comfortable guest houses and not holed up in the miserable Indian jails and allowed to visit their countries to celebrate Christmas (though it is against the norm) and hence there is no an iota of doubt that Indian authorities would have most certainly accorded all human rights to the alleged offenders.

Quite naturally, the Indian media came down heavily upon the ruling coalition for not taking the betrayal of India by Italy.

That Mancini had not lived up to his written assurances to the Supreme Court tantamount to contempt of the apex court they alleged.

As per Kashyap, “When an ambassador gives a guarantee, it means the Italian government is giving an undertaking. And since he has voluntarily given a guarantee for the two Marines, the Supreme Court can take it up as a matter of contempt of court and decide whether in such a case he is allowed the benefit of the diplomatic immunity provisions or not. Also Mancini stands a chance to be declared persona non-grata.”

Most legal experts opine that an ambassador’s diplomatic immunity as per the Vienna Convention is not an absolute immunity and it is subject to certain restrictions.

Noted jurist V.R. Krishna Iyer states that in such a case of violation of the orders of the apex court, the Indian President has powers to take action against Mancini who can be held responsible for his government’s decision as he chose to stand as surety to the marines.

Following such developments the Indian Supreme Court issued a restraining order, for the first time in Indian history that banned Mancini from leaving India and Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy filed a contempt petition asking Chief Justice of India to take suo motu cognisance of the matter and prevent the Ambassador from leaving the country.

The escalation took political dimensions as the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party leader Arun Jaitley accused the Congress of treason and double standards, “How could the Italian marines be given special privilege of going home to Italy to vote in elections when under-trials in Indian prisons did not have the right to do so? Also, how could the two Italian marines get parole for Christmas, when Indian under-trials did not have the same benefits…It looks like a “first case of state-sponsored deception or abduction!”

Significantly, Italy is the country of origin of Sonia Gandhi and Ottavio Quattrocchi, an Italian businessman and close family associate of Sonia, who was allowed to leave India in 1980s even though he was wanted in the Bofors kickback case.

Also very recently the Indian government had drawn flak for its inability of obtaining details of the Agusta Westland VVIP helicopter graft investigations from Rome.

The beleaguered UPA mindful of how the opposition could use the marine issue as a potential mass mobilizer in the run up to 2014 General Elections decided to act, determined in sending the right signal to the media and public by taking up the Italian betrayal strongly.

Significantly, Sonia’s public vocal intervention was followed by a tough minder to Mancini and Indian Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh’s speech in Parliament: “Our government has already made it clear that these actions of the government of Italy are not acceptable. They violate every rule of diplomatic discourse and call into question the solemn commitments given by accredited representatives of a sovereign government to our Supreme Court. This cannot, by any standards, be in the interests of any bilateral relationship that has to function on the basis of trust. Our government has, therefore, insisted that the Italian authorities respect the undertakings they have given to the Supreme Court and return the two accused persons to stand trial in India. If they do not keep their word there will be consequences for our relations with Italy.”

The consequences signaled a possible blacklisting of Italian firms who might bid for tenders brought out by India’s defense establishment.

Sources in the government say that the Indian government also indulged in some backroom negotiations to procure the return of marines by guaranteeing extraordinary concessions in writing, though India’s External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid squashed all such theories saying that, “All channels of communication were kept open with Italy despite public pressure from public and all hopes were kept alive for return of the Italian marines.”

“If the government’s diplomacy succeeds and the BJP (opposition political party) takes credit, I have no problem. But, ultimately it’s the government’s diplomacy which has succeeded,” retorted P. Chidambaram when the marines returned.

Presently as matters stand, the Supreme Court has ordered the government of India to set up a special court in accordance with its directive of January to ensure speedy and fair trial and hear the case based on Maritime Zones Act, Indian Penal Code, Criminal Penal Code and United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and then, depending on who has the jurisdiction, the trial will proceed in India or Italy.

For sure the victory is no mean an achievement and there is every reason to celebrate the first win of the country’s officialdom in the international arena.

All that can be said is that in the best interest of India this singular win must translate into a trend.