European Parliament resolution on international adoption in the European Union

Adoptie in de EU: belangen van kinderen beschermen en de rechten van ouders verdedigen

Het recht van ouders om een kind uit een ander Europees land te adopteren moet worden verdedigd, terwijl de kinderen die door Europese burgers geadopteerd worden, beschermd moeten worden. Daarom willen Europarlementsleden de Commissie maandag naar maatregelen vragen, om het recht op internationale adoptie binnen de EU te waarborgen. Zo zou voorkomen moeten worden dat in de steek gelaten kinderen noodgedwongen in weeshuizen leven. Woensdag stemmen de leden over een resolutie over dit onderwerp.

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

B7‑0029/2011

12.1.2011

further to Question for Oral Answer B7‑0670/2010

pursuant to Rule 115(5) of the Rules of Procedure

on international adoption in the European Union

Roberta Angelilli, Manfred Weber, Simon Busuttil, Edit Bauer on behalf of the PPE Group

The European Parliament,

– having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted by the UN General Assembly on 20 November 1989, in particular Article 21,

– having regard to the

Convention on the Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect of Inter-Country Adoption (signed at The Hague in 1993) and to the European Convention 25 January 1996 on the Exercise of Children's Rights (ETS No. 160),

– having regard to the European Parliament Resolution on improving legislation and cooperation among member states on adoption of children (A4-0392/1996),

– having regard to the European Parliament Resolution 16 January 2008 on an EU strategy on children's rights (2007/2093 (INI)),

– having regard to the question of 16 December 2010 to the Commission on international adoption in the European Union (O-0193/2010 – B7 0670/2010),

– having regard to Rules 115(5) and 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A. whereas the views differ throughout the Member States as to the principles which should govern child adoption, the adoption procedures and the legal consequences of adoption,

B. whereas the acceptance of common revised principles and practices with respect to the adoption of children would help to reduce the difficulties caused by the differences in national legislations and at the same time promote the interests of children who are adopted,

C. whereas in Europe the problem of abandoned children is becoming more serious and urgent and to meet this emergency it is important to protect the right of a child to be adopted also at international level to prevent children from being forced to live in orphanages,

D. whereas there are conventions in force on child protection and parental responsibilities, notably: the European Convention of 1967 on the adoption of minors, aiming to approach the laws of Member States where adoption involves moving the child from one country to another, and the 1993 Convention on the Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect of Inter-Country Adoption,

E. whereas, with the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the European Charter of Fundamental Rights has become binding: according to Article 24, 'Children shall have the right to such protection and care as is necessary for their well-being'. Furthermore, Article 3 of the Lisbon Treaty states that the 'protection of the rights of the child' falls within the objectives of the Union,

F. whereas the violation of the rights of children, violence against them and child trafficking for illegal adoption, prostitution, illegal labour, forced marriage, and begging on the streets or for any other illegal purpose, remain a problem in the EU,

G. whereas the best interests of the children are of paramount importance,

1. Calls on exploring the possibility of coordinating at European level the politics and strategies related to the instrument of the international adoption, in accordance with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and other international standards, to improve assistance in information services, preparation for inter-country adoption, processing of application procedures for international adoption, and post-adoption services, bearing in mind that all international conventions relating to the protection of the rights of the child recognises the right of orphaned or abandoned children to have a family and be protected;

2. Calls for a creation of a monitoring mechanism at European level to provide an overview of the functioning of the national systems;

3. Considers that adoption in the child’s country of origin or by finding a family through international adoption, must be performed in accordance with relevant national legislation and international conventions, and that placement in an institution should be used only as a temporary solution; an alternative family care solution, such as foster care, could be taken into consideration;

4. Urges Member States and the Commission, in cooperation with the Hague Conference, the Council of Europe, and children’s organisations to develop a framework to ensure transparency and effective monitoring of the development of the abandoned and the adopted children and to coordinate their actions so as to prevent child trafficking;

5. Urges Member States to pay particular attention to children with special needs, such as children who require medical care and disabled children;

6. Recognises that birth certificates help to protect a child against violations based on doubts over age or identity; believes that a reliable system of birth registration can curb illegal adoption;

7. Calls on all EU institutions and all Member States to participate actively in the fight against illegal adoption;

8. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the President of the European Council, the Council, the Commission and the parliaments and governments of the Member States.

Celstraffen voor adoptiefraude

Susan en Jan krijgen celstraffen

De rechtbank Zwolle heeft drie mensen veroordeeld voor illegale adoptie. Ze probeerden een kind uit Sri Lanka met valse papieren naar Nederland te halen.

De hoofdverdachte, een vrouw uit Stegeren, kreeg een celstraf van 189 dagen, waarvan een deel voorwaardelijk. Haar ex-vriend uit Ommen kreeg 134 dagen, ook voor een deel voorwaardelijk. Een handlanger die adoptiepapieren had vervalst, kreeg 6 dagen gevangenisstraf.

De rechter gaf de vrouw en de ex-vriend een hogere straf dan het OM had geëist. De rechtbank liet meewegen dat de twee al eens eerder waren veroordeeld voor een poging tot illegale adoptie.

NOS

PAPs receives punishment for trying to traffic a child from Sri Lanka in 2007 for adoption in the Netherlands . Not the act itself is penalised but the fraud of papers. None the less, the judge decided to punish heavier as the public prosecutor asked for due to the fact that the two tried earlier to traffic a child for adoption.

Illegal Adoption now legalised by Dutch Ministry ?

Dutch Ministry admits risks of Haitian adoptions

The Dutch minister of Justice Mr. E.M.H. Hirsch Ballin explains in a letter to the House of Representatives how and why the decision was made regarding the airlift of Haitian children for adoption to the Netherlands.

In this letter he divides the 109 Haitian children into three groups. The first group (56) of them which the Haitian court in Haiti finalised the procedure for adoption and the Dutch Central Authorities gave consent for the adoptions. Only they where waiting for visa to get out of Haiti.

The second group (44) are the children whereof the procedure from the Dutch side was finalised but the Haitian authorities did not agreed upon yet. Nor the ministries of internal and foreign affairs of Haiti. Factly the Dutch government accept these adoptions on Humanitarian grounds. But legally these adoption are illegal (because there is no parental authority given) but overruled by the concept of the Humanitarian Aid. A statement which is incorrect while adoptions was never meant as an act of Humanitarian Aid but as a last resort for children without parents and family.

For the third group (9) was not matched yet with Dutch prospective adopters but the minister said that these children were selected and agreed upon by Haitian authorities for the Netherlands but not finished within the legal framework of Haiti nor the protocol within the ministries at Haiti. The Dutch council for youth protection therefore will advise the Dutch court to put the children under temporary custody of Nidos, a foundation for youth protection for refugees. This means that the adoption agency NAS probably wont get the children directly for their clients as fixed adoptees but as temporary 'custodians under' formal custody of foundation Nidos.

Risky Adoptions

The Minister also admits that these adoptions will be accompanied with uncertainty and risks. But finds it agreeable due to the situation in Haiti. He also states in his letter that the consent of the Haitian Authorities was explicitly the basis of his decision.

International Hague Adoption Convention

While Haiti is not a member of the Hague Adoption Convention the minister states also that in the case of the Haitian adoptions he will follow the 'principles' of the convention.

Missing Children

The minister continues by saying that his decision is also made on the information provided by involved adoption agencies but numbers of children can differ due to the uncertain situation and possible missing children.

Dutch Ministry of Justice supports 'Babylift' Haiti for Luxembourg

On request by his colleague from Luxembourg miss Marie Josee Jacobs he agreed upon fourteen Haitian children to be flown for Luxembourg. The argument for this consent is given based on the comparison of these Haitian children destined for Luxembourg as the group 1 and 2 as stated above.

Minister of Justice says: no inter-country adoption when major risks

Dutch Minister of Justice says:
no inter-country adoption when there are major risks

News | 14/01/2010

If inter-country adoption are proceed by incomplete or unreliable information and the risks are too great irregularity, licensors may terminate relations with a country. That says Minister of Justice Hirsch Ballin in a letter to the House of Representatives during the presentation of various reports of the Youth Care Inspectorate on intercountry adoption.

The Youth Care Inspectorate notes that a tension exists between the legitimate expectations of the Hague Adoption Convention and the responsibility of the adoption intermediary organizations (licensees) to the reliability of the data to check.

The Inspection licensees do not always have the possibility to check data reliability. This is because the principle of trust, which insists, that one must trust that the other State treaty functions effectively, does limit the possibilities to check data.

Minister Hirsch Ballin confirmed the tension and has also presented this issue earlier in the House of Representatives. He insists that licensees inform him when doubts about the reliability of the information occurs and says that the Central Authority (the section within the Ministry of Justice dealing with intercountry adoption) should continue to play an active role in the appeal to those countries from where the Netherlands get adoptive children.

In risky situations there will always be consultation between the Central Authority and the licensee (s). If necessary contacts licensees can terminate the contact with sending countries. The Central Authority intensified, since 2007 the contacts with other central authorities of sending and receiving countries .

Research on licensees

The Youth Care Inspectorate also investigated the two licensees, requested by the minister, who are dealing with adoptions from China. Adoption Agencies: Wereldkinderen (Children of the World) and Stichting Kind en Toekomst (Foundation Child and Future) have mediated a total of seven children for Dutch families from Zhenyuan orphanage in the province of Guizhou in China. According to media reports in July 2009 in the period 2001-2007 children where incorrectly registered as a orphan and adopted on improper grounds.

After examining the inspection concludes that the licensees have carefully conducted the mediation of the seven children from the orphanagewithin the capabilities they have.

Furthermore, the Deputy Director-General of the Chinese Central Authority reported during a recent visit to the Netherlands, that none of the children from the Zhenyuan orphanage adopted by Dutch families, where involved in the abuses. (translation UAI)

Comments from the UAI

The statement of the Ministry of Justice in the Netherlands does effectively not show any real change in policy and execution of the adoption procedure.

• The Ministry will not close any adoption channel and leave this decision to the adoption agency.
• The Dutch Agencies will not structural be controlled by the Ministry unless this is requested by the agency itself or by a major structural flaw in their proceedings or international signal of abuses like the China cases.
  
• Adoptive parents who found problems during their adoption procedure can complain to a so called Complaint Committee Agencies regarding Intercountry Adoption.
• Adoptees have no organisation where they can address their issues.
  
• No Agency has been pointed on an ethical standard which should refer to protection the rights and interests of parents and adopted children and later grown up adoptees. Like we have seen in the Banking world, the agencies can dictate their own ethical perception of adoption never the less the so called 'handbook on qualitative adoption procedures'.
• Conclusion: FOR ADOPTEES AND THEIR PARENTS OF ORIGIN NOTHING WILL CHANGE AND EVENTUAL CONSEQUENCES, COSTS AND LEGAL SUPPORT DUE TO MISGUIDED ADOPTIONS WILL BE ALWAYS ON THE ACCOUNT OF THE ADOPTEES AND THEIR FAMILIES OF ORIGIN. IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD ENDS EFFECTIVELY WHEN THE CHILD AS BEEN SHIPPED TO THE RECEIVING COUNTRIES.
  

Prosecution of IIlegal Adoption in the Netherlands

Justice investigates illegal adoptions

By Anneke Stoffelen, November 19 2009

AMSTERDAM - Justice is currently examining nine couples in recent years who bought a child abroad. Although the adoptive parents of baby Donna, in a similar case, in early 2009, were immune from prosecution, the Public Proscutioner (OM) is nevertheless planning to prosecute those couples by criminal law.

Illegal adoption is a growing problem, claims director Marie-Louise van Kleef of the Council for Childprotection. "That is because the supply of adopted children from abroad decreases. Then parents find alternatives. And the Internet gives you easily access to find a child. "The past two years ten cases of which children where taken illegally from abroad for adoption appeared.

Baby Donna

The case surrounding baby Donna, who in 2005 was bought by Dutch parents in Belgium, sparked a lot of commotion. Last year a same case of the Belgian baby Jayden, was also illegally taken to the Netherlands for adoption. But there are so many more similar cases which did not appeared in the publicity. "We maintain anonymity, trying to handle those cases with care to keep the interest of the child as main perspective," says Van Kleef. "Imagine what will happen when Donna is 18 and she reads all these things about herself at the internet. That is tragic."

Addition to those Belgian children, it goes also for babies from India, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Nicaragua, Bolivia and Cambodia. The possibility exists that these kind of children will be going back to the country of origin in the future. In the case of baby Jayden, this has already happened. When the cases of the other children appeared, they immediately where placed in a Dutch foster home.

Limitation period two years

The Council for Childprotection stated, that they do that to prevent the repetition like in the case of Baby Donna: The ‘foster parents’ got Donna by court ruling, nevertheless the way they got her, because the girl stayed so long in the family (Family Life EVRM article 8) . It would not be in the interest of Donna's to move her away from this couple.

The period the OM can prosecute in cases of illegal adoptions is limitated to a period of two years . According to Van Kleef, adopters know this very well and often calculate how to handle these situations.

Ministry of Justice said earlier, to tackle illegal adoption much harder. Now the maximum fine is 6.700,- euro. Child trafficking is punished more heavily, but that only counts due regard child exploitation.

UAI Comment: International Private and Criminal Law, do not see and respect the child - located for adoption - as a human being with a physical and mental integrity who should have the ability to stay in their own family and environment, and be protected for such an assault on personal life and history. Abduction and Trafficking of the child for the purpose of adoption, even-though, the adoption procedures, regulations and international human rights are severed, the international law does not protect any child in this circumstance, unless there has been paper-fraud or an act against State Laws. Taking babies/children away in an illegal manner is not punishable due regard that the final result; Adoption, is seen as an act in the best interest of the child. Legally, no questions asked what the consequences for the family of origin and the Adoptee will be in the future. With this statement the UAI wants to present again, that the best interest of children and Adoptees is not served by present adoption laws and treaties but those of adopters and their organisations and legal systems.