Home  

Paedophiles `exploiting turmoil in Romania'

Paedophiles `exploiting turmoil in Romania'

DANNY PENMAN MONDAY 03 APRIL 1995

i

Caretaker Austin Kelly jailed over child abuse

Sarah's Law reveals identities of 160 sex offenders with access to children

To Romania With Love: Four Years Coming Home

To Romania With Love: Four Years Coming Home

e-mailprintbookmark

Currently 5/5 Stars.12345You may use the stars on the left to rate and leave feedback for the current article. No registration is required.Waiting for 5 votes

The train leaves Bucharest in the evening, and as night falls the last views of modern Romania fade from view. We are carried through the night, across the Transylvanian Alps, and fifty years into the past. As dawn comes to Transylvania, farmers are seen riding high atop horse and ox-drawn wagons piled with straw and firewood. The wagons are stopped at rail crossings by manually operated gates, rigged with extensive cables and pulleys so that a solitary man can close the gates on both sides of the track from one spot. The smell of smoke from fireplaces and wood stoves is carried in the air. As the train slowly pulls to its last stop on the long journey, I listen intently, wondering whether the modern diesel engine which pulled us out of Bucharest had been transformed into a coal-fired steam locomotive during the night. Within a few hours I am greeting the director of the Camin Spital pentru Minori Deficient (literally, the Home for Deficient Children) in Sighetu Marmatiei, Romania. After a cool welcome, I a m given permission to see the children.

A few moments later, as I climbed the stairs to the second floor, I remembered the pledge Anne had made four years ago to Alex and Costica, and which I had repeated to them two years ago: "we will come back for you." I wondered whether Alex and Costica would even remember me after this time, and whether they would believe I was really going to take them with me this time. I slowly opened the door and stepped in. As with any outsider, my entrance immediately commanded the attention of all the children in the room. Whatever activities had been going on ceased, and an aura of excitement spread through the room. Children began running in from adjacent rooms to see who was here, and in a very short time I saw Costica's face appear for the briefest of moments. As he disappeared back into the other room, I heard his overpowering screams of "Alex! Alex! Alex!"

INTERNATIONAL ADOPTION IN THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA

Return to: Index of "International Adoptions Reports" Index of "Population, Refugees and Migration" || Electronic Research Collections Index || ERC Homepage U.S. Department of State 1995: International Adoption -- Former Yugoslavia Bureau of Consular Affairs INTERNATIONAL ADOPTION IN THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA DISCLAIMER: THE INFORMATION IN THIS CIRCULAR RELATING TO THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS OF SPECIFIC FOREIGN COUNTRIES IS PROVIDED FOR GENERAL INFORMATION ONLY. QUESTIONS INVOLVING INTERPRETATION OF SPECIFIC FOREIGN LAW SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO FOREIGN COUNSEL. PLEASE NOTE The Department of State shares your humanitarian concern for the children of the former Yugoslavia and applauds your desire to assist them in their time of need. However, at this point in time, adopting children from this region is not a feasible way to assist them. In particular, Bosnian children are not adoptable. There are a number of reasons for this. In general, adoptions are private legal matters governed by the rules of the nation where the child resides. The laws in the former Yugoslavia gave priority to adoptions by Yugoslavians, and made the adoption of Yugoslavian children by foreigners very difficult. This has not changed. All of the republics of the former Yugoslavia permit foreigners to adopt children only in exceptional and compelling circumstances. In practice, such circumstances are limited to cases involving either step-parent/step-child relationships or handicapped children. We are not aware of any indications at present that the new states plan to liberalize their laws on adoptions to make it easier for foreigners to adopt. Also, in a country which is in turmoil, it can be difficult to determine whether children whose parents are missing are truly orphans according to adoption and immigration regulations. It is not uncommon in a war situation for parents and children to become separated when parents place their children in institutions or send them out of the area in an effort to ensure their safety. In such instances, the children are not orphans. Even when children have been truly orphaned or abandoned by their parents, they are often taken in by relatives. It is our understanding that efforts are being made to avoid uprooting the children. AVAILABILITY OF CHILDREN FOR ADOPTION Recent U.S. immigrant visa statistics reflect the following pattern for visa issuance to orphans: IR-3 Immigrant Visas IR-4 Immigrant Visas Fiscal Issued to Yugoslav Issued to Yugoslav Year Orphans Adopted Abroad Orphans Adopted in U.S. FY-1988 3 0 FY-1989 8 1 FY-1990 9 0 FY-1991 9 3 FY-1992 7 0 FY-1993 9 3 UNITED NATIONS HIGH COMMISSIONER ON REFUGEES (UNHCR) POLICY ON EVACUATION Evacuation of children from former Yugoslavia: 1. There continues to be well meant efforts by government and non-government organizations to evacuate children from conflict areas, particularly Sarajevo. UNHCR presents the following key considerations which must be taken into account when evacuation of children is being contemplated. 2. There are not more than 600,000 children under six years of age in Bosnia-Herzegovina, 281,000 of whom are in besieged cities, including 80,000 in Sarajevo. Given these numbers, it is clear that all children cannot be evacuated. Any evacuation which selects some children over others should be based on clear criteria regarding compelling need and should not be done in such a way to exacerbate ethnic tensions and conflict. 3. The primary mission of the airlifts is to bring desperately needed food and relief into Sarajevo for the besieged population. Furthermore, sufficient security between the city and airport does not exist for the use of the airlift for evacuation. In light of this security situation and in an effort to maintain the fragile airlift operation, United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) and UNHCR have delineated a policy that only those persons whose medical situation is life-threatening and who cannot be treated with the facilities available in Sarajevo should be considered for evacuation by the airlift. Procedural guidelines for evacuation by airlift of such medical referral cases, including children, have been distributed. 4. Several factors indicate that evacuation is not the most appropriate solution. In fact, evaluations of past evacuations have shown that evacuation often is more harmful that helpful to the children involved. These are some of the reasons: The trauma of being separated from the family is often greater than the trauma of remaining with the family in an area affected by hostilities and conflict. Initiative for evacuation often come from evacuation organizers rather than from parents whose emotional stress in the duress of the situation may result in decisions which might not have been taken otherwise. Evacuations of children are often conceived as mainly logistical operation and may not necessarily be carried out by groups that have a proven record in child welfare, including assessing the best interest of the child, and in-placement experience. There is great risk, particularly where large numbers are involved and there is lack of resources, that the situation of the child will not be adequately documented and monitored. Children may become "lost" without the possibility of eventual return to their families. Length of separation is usually much longer than expected and may lead to estrangement of families and a loss of ethnic and cultural identity. Where displacement and ethnic relocation are goals of the hostilities, parties might be pressured to evacuate children for this purpose. Unexpected political complications may prejudice the outcome of evacuations. Whether the children are invited into a country, and when and if they return may become political issues, particularly where proper groundwork has not been done. 5. No child should be moved without his/her primary caretaker. Respect for family unity is a guiding principle, clearly stated in the convention on the rights of the child. Every effort must be made so that the family unit remains intact and the child is not separated from the family. 6. Every effort should be made to trace the parents or other close relatives of unaccompanied minors before evacuation is considered. Unaccompanied minors are minors who are separated from both parents and are not being cared for by an adult who has responsibility to do so. 7. Adoption should not be considered if (a) there is hope of successful tracing or evidence that the parents are still alive, (b) it is against the expressed wishes of the child or the parent, or (c) unless a reasonable time (at least two years) was passed to allow for tracing information to be gathered. Staying with relatives in extended family units may be a better solution than uprooting the child completely. 8. The issue of children occupying orphanages before the outbreak of hostilities and who can be clearly documented as orphans deserves special attention. Thorough assessment of the status of these children is very important and very difficult. Recent incidents have shown that alleged orphans proved to have parents. Many unaccompanied children have living parents or close relatives with whom they may one day be reunited. If the status of an alleged orphan cannot be clearly documented, there is a risk of creating further problems of family reunification and tracing across country borders after hostilities have ended. 9. To be clarified before any evacuation of a child: A. Conditions of release and custody placement (identity of the child, documentation, family history, issuance and preservation of records); B. Conditions of admission and care in receiving country; C. Measures to ensure/preserve relationships and communication with original family/original care taker; D. Provisions for family reunion in the context of a durable solution. 10. Unless the above factors are carefully considered and implemented, UNHCR will not endorse evacuations and/or request or advise governments or non-government organizations to evacuate children. UNHCR, with other humanitarian agencies on the ground, will continue to do everything possible to improve medical and social conditions locally so that the safety and integrity of the child is preserved within his or her family and community. (###)

)

First countries ratifying Hague Adoption Convention (article Van Loon)

As of 15 December 1995 the Convention had been signed by twenty-three States and ratified by Mexico, Romania, Sri Lanka, Cyprus, Poland, Spain, Equador, Peru and Costa Rica. It entered into force on 1 May 1995.

.

Issues in Implementing the 1993 Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption

Intercountry Adoption

Some Issues in Implementing and Supplementing the 1993 Hague

Convention on Protection of Children and Cooperation in

Respect of Intercountry Adoption.

(Paper presented by Professor William Duncan at the International Conference.

Stichting verliest geding van FIOM

Het Parool

19-10-1994

4

■ Two years in prison for baby smuggling in Romania :A baby for $6,000

■ Two years in prison for baby smuggling in Romania
:A baby for $6,000
 

Bucharest (taz) – The British media were shocked by the “harsh verdict” and defended the Mooney couple. They only wanted to free orphans from a miserable life - now they have to go behind Romanian bars for their good intentions.

In Romania, on the other hand, the British couple attracted little pity - but their case caused even more of a stir: while trying to smuggle the three-month-old baby Monica across the Hungarian-Romanian border, which they had previously bought for $6,000, Adrian and Bernadette Mooney caught. Last Friday, a Bucharest court sentenced the couple to 24 months in prison for illegal border crossing and illegal adoption. The parents, Florin Baiaram and Florina Dimir, both 17 years old, each received a one-year prison sentence, which they will have to serve when they come of age. The broker of the deal, an acquaintance of the parents, has to be behind bars for 28 months.

Although the two Brits are the first foreigners to be convicted of child trafficking in Romania, the adoption business is booming. After the relevant legal regulations were generously relaxed in the summer of 1990, the Romanian Ministry of Justice registered around 10,000 adoptions abroad in the following 12 months - a third of all adoptions in the world. However, the authorities once again put a stop to the “child transfer”, which was only loosely controlled by the state-run “Romanian Committee for Adoptions” (CRA): foreign citizens are now only allowed to adopt children who are on the CRA’s list, and only then if no Romanian parents have been found for them within six months.

Child trafficking is now illegal. In southern Hungary, for example, two years ago the police discovered a Romanian smuggling ring that was selling Romanian children to western countries. According to the Romanian Ministry of Justice, traffickers also use legal tricks to obtain adoption papers. Under the pretext that these are children suffering from AIDS or disabled and therefore in need of humanitarian aid, in reality healthy children are being “exported”.

Baby couple stunned by jail sentence: Romanian court's 28-month penalty is intended to deter traffic in children, reports Adrian

Baby couple stunned by jail sentence: Romanian court's 28-month penalty is intended to deter traffic in children, reports Adrian Bridge ADRIAN BRIDGE Saturday 15 October 1994 Shares: 0 Print A A A A BRITISH couple were yesterday jailed for two years and four months for attempting to buy a Romanian baby and to smuggle her out of the country for adoption. Adrian and Bernadette Mooney were not in court to hear the verdict. A spokesman for the British embassy in Bucharest said they were 'deeply distressed' when they found out. The Mooneys' lawyer, Ioana Floca, lodged an appeal against the sentences, which she described as 'unfair and unnecessarily harsh'. Announcing the verdict, Judge Madalina Buta ordered that the Mooneys should be arrested. The court later agreed that the couple could remain free on bail pending the outcome of the appeal. Laurie Bristow, spokesman for the British embassy in Bucharest, said the Mooneys were 'deeply disappointed' at the verdict and felt unable to make an immediate comment. He said it was unclear how long the appeal process would last. The trial, which lasted six weeks, is the first involving westerners accused of breaking Romania's strict adoption laws. The couple admitted paying dollars 6,000 ( pounds 4,000) to a Romanian middleman for a five-month-old baby girl in July. They also admitted trying to cross the border into Hungary with the baby, Monica, concealed in a cardboard box in the back of their car. But they denied knowingly having broken the law. 'The Mooneys only wanted to do a good thing for the child,' Mrs Floca told the court this week in a final plea for clemency. Denouncing yesterday's verdict as 'hard and drastic', she said that Judge Buta 'should have considered the Mooneys' motivation - not just the facts'. In addition to the 28- month sentences for breaking adoption laws, the Mooneys, of Wokingham, Berkshire, were given two-year sentences for violating border laws. The latter sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Judge Buta ordered that on completion of the jail term the Mooneys be deported. The three middlemen involved in the case were each jailed for two years and eight months, while the baby's natural parents, both 17-year-old gypsies, were sentenced to one year's jail, to begin when they reach 18. Judge Buta was expressionless as she read out the verdict, for which she offered no explanation. Others, however, saw its harshness as a clear indication of Romania's determination to clamp down on the illegal trafficking of babies. 'Naturally, one never likes to think of people going to jail. But no matter how sorry you feel for the couple, it is pleasing to see that Romanians are serious about stopping illegal adoptions,' said Anne Arthur, head of the Bucharest branch of the British- funded Romanian Orphanage Trust. 'This should certainly deter anyone else thinking of adopting illegally.' Mr Mooney's brother, Kevin, said: 'They are absolutely devastated. I am worried that they are both on the edge of a nervous breakdown and I can't see suicide being far away from their thoughts.'

'