Home  

Madonna is my new mum, New York here I come...

Madonna is my new mum, New York here I come...
By Barbara Jones
Last updated at 10:33 PM on 13th June 2009
Comments (0)
Add to My Stories
 
This is little Mercy James, pictured in Malawi last week on the day the country’s Appeal Court agreed that she can join Madonna and her family for a new life in New York.
The four-year-old girl, whose future has been hotly debated by children’s rights campaigners worldwide, has been leading a secret existence for the past two months while Malawi’s top judges weighed up arguments for and against her adoption.
Tomorrow, according to Madonna’s lawyer, the singer or one of her close aides will arrive to collect the girl. But Mercy will have less than three weeks with her new mother before she departs for a seven-week European tour, beginning on July 4.

Hidden away: Mercy has been living a life of luxury in preparation for her possible life with Madonna
During the long wait for the court’s decision it appears Madonna left nothing to chance. Mercy has been hidden away, ready to pack instantly if the adoption went Madonna’s way.
The girl, who used to live in an orphanage, was taken to a luxury bungalow on the day in April when Madonna left the country in tears after her first attempt at adoption failed.
The house, belonging to Lois Silo, programme co-ordinator of Madonna’s charity Raising Malawi,  is behind blue gates in a discreet suburb of the capital Lilongwe, called Area 47.
According to local sources, Mrs Silo and her husband have been caring for Mercy, helping her to speak English and teaching her Western manners.
Each morning she has been driven to the nearby Cherub nursery, a privately run fee-paying school. There she plays with other Malawian children who knew nothing of her special status until they heard on Friday that she was leaving the country.
Her teacher Bridget Kawiya said yesterday: ‘The staff and teachers are amazed. We had no idea this was the girl who Madonna wanted. She was registered under a different name and we knew her as Chifundo Moyo.’

Mercy's school teacher was Bridget Kawiya (in the black top)
Chifundo means Mercy in Malawi’s national language Chichewa, and she is used to being called by that name.
Mrs Kawiya said she was cheerful and intelligent, loved her schoolwork and got on well with her classmates.
Recalling Mercy’s first day, Mrs Kawiya said: ‘Many children are tearful and want to go home. But she blended straight in, playing with the others as if she had known them all her life. She’s such a sweet little girl, always happy, never crying.
‘Chifundo joined in all the games and we liked her very much in the brief two months she spent with us. She always arrived nicely dressed, happy to be with her pals.’
Mercy went to school most days with her hair in bunches, decorated with colourful ribbons. Her favourite school-bag was bright pink with a Barbie motif. Classes ended before noon and she would be taken home again where a nanny or cook made lunch for her before an afternoon nap, some children’s TV, then playtime, supper and an early night.
Mercy, a natural chatterbox, would run into school in the mornings to talk to her friends in Chichewa until corrected by teachers who encourage all the children to speak in English.

Long way away: Mercy with her uncles and her grandmother Lucy
‘That is important,’ said Mrs Kawiya. ‘English is the official language and you need it to make a good career.
'We had no idea that Mercy would need it more than the others if she is going to live in New York.
‘At our end-of-term ceremony in July we had planned that Mercy, who is so clever, would introduce herself and others from her group in French. Of course, now that isn’t going to happen. We are sorry to lose her.’
On Friday night a driver picked up Mercy from the Silos’ household and took her to Kumbali Lodge, the guesthouse where Madonna stays when in Malawi. There a Raising Malawi team from America was waiting.
Already familiar with life at the Lodge – she spent three weeks there during the first court hearing in April – Mercy tucked into supper and sought out the staff’s children who had become her friends on a previous visit.
She is expected to be flown by private jet to Johannesburg, then to New York to join Madonna’s daughter Lourdes, 12, son Rocco, eight, and David Banda, three, the Malawian orphan adopted two years ago.
Mercy’s mother Mwandida was 14 when she became pregnant by an older pupil at her school. She died days after giving birth. That left Mercy’s only relatives as her grandmother Lucy and two uncles, Peter and John. Her father James had
disappeared but claims he had been told that Mercy was also dead.

A publicity shot of Madonna with a sleeping Mercy
In spite of Mercy’s apparent happiness, charities fear she could face problems adapting to her new life.
Maxwell Matewere, of Malawi’s Eye of the Child group, said: ‘It’s hard to say how much damage may have been done to a girl who’s been moved from pillar to post because of one woman’s determination to have her.
‘Her first days were with her schoolgirl mother who then died, and she spent three years in an orphanage.
For the past two months she has been living like no other Malawian child, surrounded by toys and a bewildering array of luxury. We are pleased if she finds happiness in her new life, but we cannot approve of the stress she has already suffered.’
Others have accused Madonna of virtually bribing Malawi’s lawmakers and child protection officers into giving her what she wants by donating a reported £1.5million to the country through Raising Malawi.
But her lawyer Allan Chinula said: ‘It is a total fabrication to say that Madonna poured money into Malawi for the purposes of being able to adopt a child.’

Madonna 'donated £12 million to Malawi'

Madonna 'donated £12 million to Malawi'
Madonna donated £12 million to help children in the poverty-stricken African state of Malawi before being granted permission to adopt a second child from the country, it has been reported.
 
Published: 8:23AM BST 13 Jun 2009
Previous
1 of 2 Images
Next

Mercy's father, James Kambewa, has written a letter to lawyers asking for a permanent injunction against Madonna adopting his daughter Photo: REUTERS

Madonna and her adopted son David Banda Photo: REUTERS
The country's Supreme Court of Appeal overturned a previous ruling that stopped the pop star from taking four-year-old Mercy James to the United States.
The 50-year-old singer said she was ecstatic with the news and added: "My family and I look forward to sharing our lives with her."
 
Related Articles
·         Madonna allowed to adopt Mercy by Malawi court
·         Madonna's lawyers 'hopeful' of success in adoption appeal
·         Madonna adoption: Mercy's Malawian uncle condemns judge's decision
·         Madonna appeals failed adoption decision
·         Madonna allowed to adopt second child Mercy from Malawi
Madonna learned of the development in a 3am phone call from her lawyer in Malawi.
Alan Chinula rang her in New York after the supreme court overturned the previous ruling.
Speaking from outside the court, Mr Chinula, said: "I was just through to New York and it is the early hours but Madonna has been awake waiting for news. She was ecstatic.
"I'm now waiting for instructions to start preparing for Mercy's travel arrangements."
The Daily Mirror reported on Saturday that the singer has donated £12 million to fund six orphanages in Malawi as well as paying for shoes, clothes, books and mosquito nets for impoverished children in the country.
Madonna has already adopted her three-year-old son named David Banda from Malawi.
Malawi's Chief Justice Lovemore Munlo ruled that Mercy, whose Malawian name is Chifundo, will receive a better life with the star than remaining in the impoverished state.
Mercy's uncle Peter Baneti said the family welcomed the ruling and added: "We hope Mercy will be joining Madonna soon."
The judge said: "Madonna has been judge to be a compassionate, intelligent and articulate person. Her adoption of Mercy James is not a selfish act."
Madonna's previous attempt to adopt Mercy failed when a judge in a lower court said the singer did not satisfy rules that required the star to live in Malawi for 18-months before she could be allowed to adopt the youngster.

Adoption: Wunschkind um jeden Preis

Adoption: Wunschkind um jeden Preis

Text:
  • Thomas Angeli
Ausgabe:
9/00

Jedes dritte Adoptivkind aus dem Ausland kommt über inoffizielle Kanäle in die Schweiz. Das ist legal – öffnet aber dubiosen Geschäftemachern Tür und Tor.

Der Handel wäre einfach gewesen: «Mein Mann und ich hätten auf den Philippinen oder in Thailand problemlos ein Kind kaufen können», sagt Brigitte Anderhalden aus Lachen SZ. Carlo wurde ihnen schliesslich über eine Adoptionsstelle vermittelt. Der Knabe stammt aus Indien.


In der Schweiz bleibt jedes sechste Paar ungewollt kinderlos – und jedes zehnte versucht sich diesen Wunsch auf medizinischem Weg zu erfüllen. Oft erfolglos: Nur rund 20 Prozent der In-vitro-Fertilisationen führen zu einer Schwangerschaft.


Bleibt noch die Adoption. Viele Paare suchen ihr Familienglück im Ausland und wenden sich an eine der rund 20 anerkannten Vermittlungsstellen in der Schweiz. Diese sind auf einer Liste des Bundesamts für Justiz zu finden (siehe hier).


Die Kontrollen sind zu lasch

Doch was derart seriös daherkommt, ist nicht mehr als eine simple Zusammenstellung. Der Bund verfügt nämlich weder über eine Zentralstelle für Auslandsadoptionen noch über genaue Zahlen. Die Bewilligung für ihre Tätigkeit erhalten die Vermittlungsstellen vom jeweiligen Standortkanton. Mit dessen Segen darf eine Institution Kinder aus bestimmten Ländern in der ganzen Schweiz vermitteln.


Uber die Qualität der oft ehrenamtlich geführten Vermittlungsstellen sagt die Liste nichts aus. Je nach Kanton werden die Kriterien für die Bewilligung jedoch sehr unterschiedlich ausgelegt. So werden die Vermittlungsstellen in den Kantonen Bern und Zürich strenger kontrolliert als in anderen Kantonen.


Eine anerkannte Vermittlungsstelle bietet keine Gewähr für eine reibungslose Adoption. Diese Erfahrung mussten auch Brigitte und Kurt Anderhalden machen. Die Vermittlungsstelle teilte dem Paar mit, dass ihr künftiger Adoptivsohn eine Augenentzündung habe. Bei der Ankunft in der Schweiz stellte sich jedoch heraus, dass Carlo an einer unheilbaren Augenkrankheit leidet und – selbst für Laien offensichtlich – praktisch blind ist.


«Es besteht ein Nachfragedruck»

Wegen solcher Fehlleistungen haben sich 1998 neun Vermittlungsstellen, unter ihnen Terre des hommes und die Schweizerische Fachstelle für Adoption, zur Konferenz der Adoptionsvermittlungsstellen der Schweiz (KAVS) zusammengeschlossen. Eine für die Mitglieder verbindliche Charta soll Missbräuche und fragwürdige Geschäfte bei Adoptionen verhindern.


«Ein notwendiger Schritt», sagt KAVS-Präsidentin Marlène Hofstetter, «denn es besteht ein Nachfragedruck auf die Vermittlungsstellen.» Deutlich mehr Paare möchten adoptieren, als die Vermittlungsstellen Kinder anbieten können. Hofstetter: «Doch wir suchen Eltern für Kinder, nicht Kinder für Eltern.»


Die von der KAVS formulierten ethischen Mindeststandards für internationale Adoptionen können oder wollen nicht alle in der Schweiz anerkannten Vermittlungsstellen erfüllen. Einzelne Institutionen, die sich um eine Aufnahme bemühten, wurden abgelehnt, andere verzichteten von sich aus auf die Mitgliedschaft.


Mit Sicherheit keine Chance für eine Aufnahme in die KAVS hätte der New Yorker Anwalt Michael S. Goldstein. In einem Vortrag in Zürich erzählte er den rund 50 Zuhörerinnen und Zuhörern, wie einfach und schnell sich ein Kleinkind aus den USA adoptieren lässt.


Dank seiner Vermittlung, so der «Adoptionsanwalt» und «Sozialarbeiter», lassen sich in den USA werdende Mütter finden, die ihre Kinder schon vor der Geburt zur Adoption freigeben. Ein kurzes telefonisches Interview mit dem Anwalt genüge, und schon mache sich dieser auf die Suche nach einer geeigneten Mutter.


Ein weiteres Telefonat zwischen der leiblichen Mutter und den künftigen Adoptiveltern besiegelt schliesslich den «Handel»: Der leiblichen Mutter bleiben nur drei Tage, um ihren Entscheid zu widerrufen. In der Schweiz beträgt diese Frist drei Monate.


«Glücksbringer» ohne Ethik

Von ethischen Bedenken lässt sich Goldstein offensichtlich nicht irritieren. Auf die – fingierte – Anfrage eines angeblich 47-jährigen Ehepaars, dem das Prozedere in der Schweiz zu lange dauere, antwortete der Anwalt innert 24 Stunden mit konkreten Angaben zum Ablauf der von ihm vermittelten Adoptionen. Grundtenor: «No problem.» Vom Beobachter mit einigen unangenehmen Fragen zu seiner Praxis konfrontiert, wollte der selbst ernannte Glücksbringer (Motto: «Träume werden wahr») keine Stellung nehmen.


Wer nach schwarzen Schafen unter den Vermittlungsstellen sucht, stösst auf eisernes Schweigen. «Sie werden von mir nichts Negatives über diese Frau hören», sagt eine Mutter, deren Adoptivkind wesentlich älter war als von der Vermittlerin angegeben. «Ich verdanke ihr meine Tochter.»


Schmieren hilft beim Kinderkauf

In der Adoptionsszene kursieren auch Gerüchte, dass grosszügige Geldspenden an ausländische Kinderheime den Adoptionsprozess positiv beeinflussen können. Doch Beweise fehlen, und auch Fachleute sind kaum bereit, Namen und Vorkommnisse zu nennen.


«In den meisten Fällen sind die Vermittlungsstellen ernsthaft bemüht, dem Kind ein besseres Leben zu ermöglichen», sagt die Psychologin und Adoptionsspezialistin Sabine Högger-Maire (siehe Interview). Es gebe aber in der Schweiz durchaus Vermittlungsstellen, bei denen «die Verbindung von Spenden und Adoptionskosten sehr eng» sei, so Högger-Maire. «Ich rate den Eltern, sich die Kosten genau aufschlüsseln zu lassen.»


Hellhäutig, höchstens ein paar Monate alt, gesund: Paare, die derart konkrete Vorstellungen von ihrem künftigen Adoptivkind haben, müssen sich auf eine lange Wartezeit einstellen. Seriöse Vermittlungsstellen geben keine Garantie, dass der Kinderwunsch in Erfüllung geht. Zudem setzt sich in «klassischen» Herkunftsländern wie zum Beispiel Indien, Brasilien oder Kolumbien immer mehr die Erkenntnis durch, dass für Kinder, die zur Adoption freigegeben werden, zuerst im eigenen Land eine Lösung gesucht werden muss.


Viele Kinder sind traumatisiert

In Indien etwa werden bereits rund 60 Prozent der Kinder durch einheimische Paare adoptiert. Für eine Auslandsadoption werden Kinder oft erst freigegeben, wenn sich in ihrer Heimat keine «neuen» Eltern für sie finden – weil sie vielleicht schon fünf oder acht Jahre alt sind, eine dunkle Hautfarbe haben oder krank sind. Solche Kinder sind oft traumatisiert, was die Integration in eine neue Familie in einem fremden Land schwierig macht.


Nicht alle kinderlosen Paare wollen dieses Risiko eingehen – oder sich bei einer Adoptionsvermittlungsstelle mit unangenehmen Fragen konfrontieren lassen. Sie versuchen auf eigene Faust, im Ausland ein Kind zu finden.


Organisierter Kinderhandel

Rund 500 bis 600 ausländische Kinder werden jährlich von Schweizer Paaren adoptiert. Die in der KAVS zusammengeschlossenen Institutionen organisieren jährlich zirka 110 Auslandsadoptionen. Da fast die Hälfte aller anerkannten Vermittler KAVS-Mitglieder sind, gehen Fachleute davon aus, dass mindestens 30 Prozent aller Adoptiveltern selber gesucht und gefunden haben. Das ist legal, öffnet aber unlauteren Geschäftemachern und fragwürdigen Praktiken Tür und Tor.


Zwar haben einige der wichtigsten Herkunftsländer – allen voran Brasilien – in den vergangenen Jahren die Bedingungen für Auslandsadoption wesentlich verschärft und sind dem Haager Ubereinkommen zum Schutz des Kindes beigetreten. Dennoch gibt es nach wie vor Länder, in denen Fachleute einen mehr oder weniger organisierten Handel mit Kindern vermuten oder sogar nachweisen können.


«Privatadoptionen sind problematisch, weil sie schwierig zu überwachen sind», urteilt denn auch KAVS-Präsidentin Marlène Hofstetter. «Oft spielen sie sich im Herkunftsland des Kindes in einer rechtlichen Grauzone ab.»


Zum Beispiel Rumänien. Das osteuropäische Land machte nach dem Ende des Ceaucescu-Regimes seine Tore für adoptionswillige Paare mit genügend Kleingeld weit auf. Allein zwischen August 1990 und Juli 1991 wurden rund 10000 rumänische Kinder von Paaren aus westlichen Ländern adoptiert.


Auch Schweizerinnen und Schweizer profitierten vom schnellen Geschäft mit Kindern: Das Bundesamt für Ausländerfragen erteilte in diesen beiden Jahren 154 respektive 137 Einreisebewilligungen für rumänische Adoptivkinder. Nach der Verschärfung des rumänischen Adoptionsrechts sank die Zahl wieder auf rund 30 Bewilligungen pro Jahr.


Der Handel mit Kindern bewog unter anderem Terre des hommes, die Vermittlungstätigkeit einzustellen. 1998 unternahm das Kinderhilfswerk einen weiteren Versuch, zog sich aber bereits nach wenigen Monaten wieder zurück.


«Die vom rumänischen Staat bewilligten Adoptionsvermittlungsstellen verstehen ihre Aufgabe vor allem in der Devisenbeschaffung», kritisiert die Psychologin Marlène Hofstetter. «Für die Vermittlung eines gesunden Kindes werden bis zu 15000 Dollar verlangt.»


25000 Dollar für ein Kind

Noch dreister gehen die Vermittler von Adoptivkindern in Guatemala vor. In einer Ende März erschienenen Studie schreibt die Uno-Expertin Ofelia Calcetas-Santos in ungewohnt undiplomatischen Worten, dass «in Guatemala ein gross aufgezoge-ner Handel mit Babys und Kleinkindern existiert».


Kinder würden «regelrecht für die Adoption produziert», stellt die Menschenrechtsspezialistin fest. «Das Wohl des Kindes wird oft völlig ignoriert, und die Adoption wird zu einer rein geschäftlichen Transaktion.» Ein Riesengeschäft für die Vermittler: Die Adoption eines Kleinkindes kostet laut Ofelia Calcetas-Santos bis zu 25000 Dollar.


Zwar vermittelt keine der anerkannten Schweizer Institutionen Kinder aus Guatemala. Dennoch erscheinen in der Statistik des Bundesamts für Ausländerfragen immer wieder Einreisebewilligungen für Kinder aus dem mittelamerikanischen Staat, die «im Hinblick auf eine spätere Adoption» erteilt werden: So suchten beispielsweise 1997 neun Schweizer Paare ihr Glück bei einer einschlägigen guatemaltekischen Anwaltskanzlei.




Eine wahre Fundgrube für adoptionswillige Paare mit grossem Geldbeutel und ohne moralische Skrupel ist auch das Internet. Dort finden sich unzählige – vorwiegend amerikanische – Websites, auf denen frischgebackene Adoptiveltern einander freimütig erzählen, auf welch verschlungenen Pfaden sie in Russland oder China zu ihren Kindern gekommen sind. Wenn die entsprechenden Papiere vorhanden sind, steht dieser fragwürdige Weg auch Schweizer Paaren offen.


Die Konferenz der Adoptionsvermittlungsstellen der Schweiz möchte solche ethisch fragwürdigen Praktiken wie auch Privatadoptionen insgesamt am liebsten verbieten lassen.


Bislang ohne Erfolg. Bei den Beratungen über die Ratifizierung des Haager Ubereinkommens zum Schutz des Kindes kam das Thema im Ständerat nicht einmal zur Sprache. Bereits die vorberatende Kommission hatte es abgelehnt, einen entsprechenden Passus ins Gesetz aufzunehmen.


Für die Adoptionsspezialistin Sabine Högger-Maire reichen Gesetze ohnehin nicht aus. Paare, die sich auf ein solches Geschäft einlassen, müssten sich eine einfache Frage stellen, findet sie: «Können wir unserem Adoptivkind noch in die Augen schauen, wenn es fragt, ob wir es gekauft haben?»

Een Marokkaanse Kafala is niet gelijk te stellen met een adoptie naar Nederlands recht en kan dus niet als zodanig erkend worden

Dossier 192066/FA RK 05-1255
LJN AU8343
Rechtbank Rechtbank Utrecht
Datum uitspraak 05-10-2005

Samenvatting
Een Marokkaanse Kafala is niet gelijk te stellen met een adoptie naar Nederlands recht en kan dus niet als zodanig erkend worden.


Uitspraak


Rechtbank Utrecht



BESCHIKKING


van de meervoudige kamer voor de behandeling van burgerlijke zaken in de zaak van:


[verzoekster],

hierna te noemen: verzoekster,

en

[verzoeker],

hierna te noemen: verzoeker,

echtelieden,

beiden wonende te Utrecht,

verzoekers,

procureur: mr. J.M. Walther,


- b e t r e f f e n d e -

[naam kind],

wonende in Marokko,

hierna te noemen: [naam kind].





1. Verloop van de procedure


Verzoekster heeft op 10 maart 2005 een verzoekschrift ingediend, strekkende tot erkenning van de Marokkaanse adoptie van [naam kind].


Nadien heeft zij nog enige stukken overgelegd.


De zaak is behandeld ter terechtzitting van de meervoudige kamer van 7 september 2005.



2. Vaststaande feiten


- Verzoekers zijn op 24 november 1989 te Nador, Marokko, met elkaar gehuwd. Uit hun huwelijk zijn twee kinderen geboren: een zoontje [naam zoon], op 1 december 1994, en een dochtertje [naam dochter], op 17 maart 1997.

- Verzoekster is geboren te (Duwar Ibouhitaachene) Beni Said, Marokko, op 5 juni 1968. Haar vader was de heer [naam vader] (in de stukken ook: [naam vader] of [naam vader]), geboren in 1943 (in de stukken ook: 1934), hierna te noemen: de vader.

- De vader is nadien hertrouwd met [naam echtgenote], geboren op 5 maart 1960. Uit dit huwelijk is [naam kind] geboren, op 11 mei 1993 te Duwar Ibouhitaachene Ait Mait Beni Said, Marokko. [naam kind] is derhalve het halfbroertje van verzoekster.

- [naam kind] is wees. Zijn vader is overleden te Duwar Ibouhitaachane Ait-Mait Beni-Said, Marokko, op 8 september 1992, derhalve nog voor de geboorte van [naam kind]. Zijn moeder is overleden te Beni Said op 3 juni 2002.

- [Naam kind] woont thans in Marokko bij een oom, [naam oom] of [(oom)], geboren in 1941.

- Verzoekster heeft de Nederlandse en de Marokkaanse nationaliteit. Verzoeker heeft de Nederlandse en kennelijk ook de Marokkaanse nationaliteit. [naam kind] heeft de Marokkaanse nationaliteit.

- Bij ?Acte de Kafala? van 1 augustus 2003 (gelegaliseerd door de president van de rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Nador op 4 augustus 2003), waarvan een Franse vertaling is overgelegd en tevens een Nederlandse vertaling uit het Frans, heeft de oom [naam oom], handelend als ?datieve voogd? van [naam kind], de zorg voor [naam kind] overgedragen aan verzoekers. De meest relevante gedeelten van de ?acte de kafala? luiden als volgt (in de Nederlandse vertaling):

?(?) De heer [naam oom] (?) , die handelt in zijn hoedanigheid van datieve voogd van het kind [naam kind] (?), heeft verklaard dat hij het voornoemde kind genoemd [naam kind] (?) overgedragen heeft aan de zus van de eerste genoemde, mevrouw [verzoekster] (?) en aan haar echtgenoot de heer [verzoeker] (?), zodat ze de zorg voor hem op hen nemen en zodat ze in al zijn dagelijkse levensbehoeften voorzien, te weten, voeding, kleding, huisvesting, scholing, medische zorg enz. ? en zodat ze hem mee op reis nemen zowel in het binnenland als naar het buitenland. (?)?



3. Beoordeling van het verzochte


3.1

Verzoekster heeft gevraagd voor recht te verklaren dat de naar het recht van Marokko door de President van het Tribunaal van Eerste Aanleg te Nador op 4 augustus 2003 uitgesproken adoptie van [naam kind] door verzoekers rechtswerking binnen het Nederlandse recht toekomt, met alle wettelijke rechtsgevolgen van dien. Zij heeft zich daarvoor beroepen op artikel 6 en verder van de Wet Conflictenrecht Adopties (WCA).


3.2

Ter terechtzitting heeft mr. Walther verklaard dat hij het verzoek heeft willen indienen namens beide verzoekers, dat ook de echtgenoot als verzoeker wil worden aangemerkt en dat hij zich ook namens deze als procureur wenst te stellen. De rechtbank ziet in het onderhavige geval geen overwegende bezwaren tegen inwilliging van deze wens, zodat de zaak verder behandeld zal worden alsof het verzoekschrift vanaf het begin namens verzoekster en haar echtgenoot was ingediend. De naam van verzoeker is daarom ook in de kop van deze beschikking opgenomen. De procureur heeft tevens verklaard dat verzoeker geen behoefte heeft om nader te worden gehoord.


3.3

Verzoekers vragen erkenning van een adoptie uitgesproken door ?de President van het Tribunaal van Eerste Aanleg te Nador op 4 augustus 2003?. Een uitspraak van deze President is niet overgelegd. Onderaan de overgelegde vertaling van de ?acte de kafala? echter wordt, onder de handtekeningen van de getuigen-notarissen en de tekst van de bekrachtiging door de legalisatierechter te Nador, onder het kopje ?Legalisaties? vermeld: ?Gezien door de president van de rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Nador op 04-08-2003?. De rechtbank begrijpt het verzoek dan ook als een verzoek tot erkenning van de aldus gelegaliseerde ?kafala?.


3.4

Bij de beoordeling van dat verzoek stelt de rechtbank voorop dat ingevolge artikel 10 WCA deze wet niet van toepassing is op een adoptie tot stand gekomen buiten Nederland in 2003, terwijl ook de door deze Wet (in samenhang met de Wet opneming buitenlandse pleegkinderen ter adoptie) voorgeschreven beginseltoestemming van de Minister van .Justitie niet is overgelegd.


3.5

Alvorens in te gaan op de vraag of er gronden bestaan aan deze beletselen voorbij te gaan en op andere gronden tot erkenning over te gaan, zal de rechtbank eerst ingaan op de vraag of deze ?kafala? beschouwd kan worden als een adoptiebeslissing. Verzoekers hebben dat bepleit en daarvoor verwezen naar de uitspraak van de rechtbank Rotterdam van 30 augustus 1999 (NIPR 2000 nr. 19), waarin volgens hen een ?acte de kafala? als een Marokkaanse adoptiebeslissing is aangemerkt.

De rechtbank merkt op dat de zaak die aan de rechtbank Rotterdam was voorgelegd in essentiële opzichten afweek van de onderhavige en daarmee niet op één lijn valt te stellen. De rechtbank zal deze zaak derhalve afzonderlijk dienen te beoordelen.


3.6

Bij die beoordeling stelt de rechtbank het volgende voorop. De strekking van een adoptie is dat zij familierechtelijke betrekkingen tot stand brengt tussen het kind en de adoptanten en wel zo, dat het te adopteren kind door de adoptie in alle opzichten (ook erfrechtelijk) wordt gelijkgesteld met een eigen kind van de adoptanten. De adoptie brengt derhalve wijziging in de afstammingsrelaties van het kind: de verzoekers worden de vader en de moeder van het kind. Een in het buitenland uitgesproken, zogenaamde ?zwakke? adoptie, die de banden met de oorspronkelijke ouders niet geheel doorsnijdt, kan naar Nederlands recht in beginsel wel in aanmerking komen voor erkenning als zodanig; een rechtshandeling echter die in het geheel niet strekt tot wijziging van de afstammingsrelatie is niet meer als adoptie te beschouwen.


3.7

In de thans overgelegde vertaling is de term ?acte de kafala? vertaald als: ?Akte omtrent de zorg voor iemand op zich nemen?. Ook uit de bewoordingen van de akte blijkt dat de ?kafala? kennelijk de strekking heeft van een zorgvoorziening of een voorziening in het gezag, die als zodanig mogelijk voor erkenning in aanmerking zou kunnen komen, hetgeen evenwel niet is verzocht. De strekking van een adoptie valt in deze ?acte de kafala? niet te lezen. Dit strookt ook met artikel 149 van het Marokkaanse wetboek van familierecht, de Mudawwana, waar is bepaald:


?Art. 149 - Adoptie is nietig, en daaruit vloeit geen van de rechtsgevolgen van de wettige verwantschap voort.

- De gedeeltelijke adoptie, ofwel de aanwijzing van het kind als erfgenaam is geen vaststelling van de afstamming. Hierop zijn de bepalingen inzake testament van toepassing.? (Nederlandse vertaling van M.S. Berger)


3.8

Uit het bovenstaande, met name de bewoordingen van de acte en de eerste volzin van artikel 149 Mudawwana, moet worden afgeleid dat de ?kafala? niet gelijkgesteld kan worden met een adoptie. Verzoekers hebben hun standpunt dat zulks wel zou kunnen onvoldoende aannemelijk gemaakt. De rechtbank is dan ook van oordeel dat de kafala als adoptie niet erkend kan worden, zodat het verzoek dient te worden afgewezen.



4. Beslissing


De rechtbank wijst af het verzoek tot erkenning als adoptie van de Marokkaanse ?acte de kafala? van 1 augustus 2003.




Deze beschikking is gegeven door mr. J.F. Dekking, kinderrechter, voorzitter van de meervoudige kamer, en mrs. H.A. Gerritse en A.P.A. Bisscheroux, kinderrechters, leden van de meervoudige kamer, in tegenwoordigheid van mr. N.I. Ganzevoort, griffier, en uitgesproken ter openbare terechtzitting van 5 oktober 2005.



w.g. griffier w.g. rechter


Dit document is afkomstig uit het attenderingsdeel van jongbloedonline.nl en bevat gratis informatie.
 

Madonna allowed to adopt second child

Madonna allowed to adopt second child
Malawi's Supreme Court rules singer an adopt 3-year-old girl in light of her charitable donations

Share with friends
Close
Email

Please enter a valid e-mail address


Please enter a comma delimited list of valid e-mail addresses


Other ways of sharing:
- via @globeandmail: Madonna allowed to adopt second childTweet this on twitter
Share on Facebook
Add to Delicious
Submit post to Digg.com
Seed this post at Newsvine
Print this page
Recommend |
0 Times

Article

Comments
(2)

Geoffrey York

Johannesburg — From Saturday's Globe and Mail, Saturday, Jun. 13, 2009 04:12AM EDT

For anyone who wants to adopt a child in Malawi without the legally required 18 months of residency, here is a tip from pop star Madonna: donate money to orphanages to expedite the process.

Madonna's financial contributions to Malawian orphanages have persuaded a court to declare her a “resident” of the country, allowing her to adopt another African child, but sparking accusations that her wealth is buying her an exemption from the law.

The pop star was ecstatic at the ruling by Malawi's highest court Friday, but Malawian rights groups are worried the ruling could open the floodgates to foreign adoptions from their AIDS-ravaged country.

The court ruled that Madonna could be considered a “resident” of the country because of her charity work in Malawian orphanages, allowing her to bypass – for a second time – the normal requirement that she live in the country for 18 months before adopting a child.

The ruling sets the stage for the celebrity singer to adopt 3-year-old Chifundo “Mercy” James, whose mother is dead, but whose biological father has claimed the right to keep her. “I am ecstatic,” Madonna said in a statement from New York Friday. “My family and I look forward to sharing our lives with her.”

The three-judge panel said the court must consider Madonna's financial support for orphanages in Malawi when interpreting the residency rule. “In this global village, a man can have more than one place at which he resides,” said Chief Justice Lovemore Munlo, reading the court's decision.

“In this case, Madonna was in Malawi not by chance, but by intention. She is looking after several orphans whose welfare depends on her. She can therefore not be described as a sojourner.”

For three-year-old Chifundo, the only options were the potential “destitution” of an orphanage or the love of Madonna, the judge said. He also pointed to the pop star's “latest income tax returns” as proof of her “financial stability.”

Undule Mwakasungura, chairman of the Human Rights Consultative Committee, a coalition of Malawian groups that opposed the Madonna adoptions, said he was surprised and disappointed the court allowed Madonna to be considered a resident of Malawi.

“It means that anyone can come here tomorrow and give money to an orphanage and then say that they want two or three children from that orphanage,” he said.

“As long as you're supporting some projects in Malawi, even if you're not a resident, you'll be entitled to any child that you want. As long as you have money, you can bypass the rules, and that's what Madonna has done.”

Africa is already one of the fastest-growing sources of international adoptions by Canadians. The latest Madonna saga is likely to stimulate more interest in Africa by prospective parents in Canada, experts say.

“Next week, we will probably get a number of calls from people wondering whether they can do this,” said Roberta Galbraith, executive director of a Manitoba-based adoption agency, Canadian Advocate for the Adoption of Children.

Her agency has helped many Canadians adopt children from Ethiopia, where film star Angelina Jolie adopted a daughter in 2005. The latest statistics show that Ethiopia has become the second-biggest foreign source of adoptions by Canadians, behind China.

“There's a celebrity factor associated with Africa, and I don't think that's necessarily good,” Ms. Galbraith said. “Before Angelina Jolie and Madonna, did anyone think of those countries? Some people even have the mentality of going in to ‘rescue' children. We have to be really careful with that. You have to think of the child.”

Because of the AIDS epidemic, an estimated 560,000 children in Malawi have lost at least one of their parents. But many Malawians object to the notion that these children would benefit if they were sent abroad to wealthier parents, far from their home culture. If poverty is the justification for adoption, almost the entire country could be adopted, they say.

Madonna, who adopted 13-month-old David Banda from Malawi in 2006, lost a lower court ruling in April when she first tried to adopt Chifundo. But she appealed to the country's highest court and Friday won the appeal.

Chifundo's biological father, James Kabewa, was unhappy with the ruling. “No one wants to listen to me,” he told the Reuter news agency. “I have protested this all along…. I want my child back, but I don't know what to do now.”

Maxwell Matewere, executive director of a children's rights group called Eye of the Child, said he was disturbed by the court's ruling. There was no evidence that the government had looked for local families who might be willing to adopt Chifundo, and the court had failed to consider this point, he said.

“They should be able to show that adoption is the last resort,” he said. “Exporting these children is not the best solution.”

The court ruling will discourage local families from adopting, while making it easier for foreigners to adopt Malawi's children, Mr. Matewere said. “Orphanages could look at it as a business, and it could encourage child-trafficking. The demand could be very high. There could be a process of auctioneering.”

Child's Rights Act: The cure for trafficking

Child's Rights Act: The cure for trafficking
THE Child's Rights Act, which was passed into law in 2003 and adopted by 23 states including the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), is yet to create the impact for which it was intended.
Child trafficking is still going on unabated with its attendant negative influence on children. Child abuse and child labour, street -begging, early marriage of the girl-child and widespread rape of children, are still the order of the day, despite the Act.
Why have some states refused to adopt the Act and why is it that in some states where the Act is adopted, it is not effectively enforced. Institutions are not built to consolidate the enforceability of the law.
In this interview granted by the National Co-ordinator of Legal Defence and Assistance Project (LEDAP), a non-governmental organisation, an expert in Family Law, Mr. Chino Obiagwu, gave reasons why the Act was yet to create the desired impact to protect children in Nigeria and what should be done to strengthen it to achieve the objective.
He spoke to THE GUARDIAN'S IBE UWALEKE and BLESSING EGHAGHA. Excerpts.
WHY has the Child's Right Act not been adopted by all the states of the federation?
The Child's Rights Act 2003 was adopted with the intention of domesticating the convention on the rights of the child. The legislation made a very wide provision for certain rights of children. They border on children justice and family. It falls under Concurrent List. The National Assembly cannot make laws that are binding on states on those issues. Therefore, the Child's Rights Act enacted by the National Assembly is only application in the Federal Capital Territory and with respect to capital offences.
It is the responsibility of the State Houses of Assembly in compliance with Section 12 of the constitution to adopt and make their own state laws. It is unfortunate that the process has been very slow and in some cases, very controversial.
Last week, Cross River State became the 23rd state to adopt the Child's Rights Law. So, we are making progress.
Other states in the core North, particularly Kano State, are resisting the law. Jigawa has adopted it despite the fact it has a Sharia civil law in place. There is a pass mark in the area of adoption of the Child's Rights Act. So now, what is left is: to what extent are those Child's Rights laws being passed by the states implemented.
I can tell you with all sense of responsibility, that very few states, particularly Lagos State and the FCT, are making efforts to set up what is truly a Family Court and children rehabilitation centres as required by the law.
You said there are some critical areas in the Act, can you expatiate more on that?
The first is the issue of age of the child. The Act provides that a child is somebody under the age of 18.
In some states, that is a problem because it affects the minimum age of marriage. If you say no child shall be given out in marriage, it means that a child below the age of 18 should not be given out in marriage. Some states are agitating that it should be reduced to 16.
Then, who is an adolescent? At what age can one say someone is an adolescent?
Well, 18 naturally. But remember that maturity as defined changes from context to context. The age of maturity in Constitutional Law is 18. That is the age you can aspire for political office. But in respect to Criminal Law, it is different.
In Criminal Law, it is 17. That is when you become criminally liable. In Family Law, it is different. Age of consent is different and the minimum age of marriage changes.
What is the age of maturity in Family Law?
It is still very controversial in Nigeria because the family law from one state to another changes. In some states there is no fixed minimum age of marriage.
Does this have to do with the culture of a particular tribe or does it depend on ethnic consideration?
It has to do with the culture of some tribes and the conflict of laws in Nigeria. We have three sources of laws in Nigeria that are in practice today. The customary laws, the sharia law and the common law. It depends on which law you are contracting a marriage. If you are contracting a marriage under the common law, the minimum age of marriage, which is 16, under common law, has applied. If you are contracting a marriage under customary law, the rules of that custom of the people apply, so the same with sharia. That is why in some places, children of 12 or 13 are married. But if you do that under the Marriage Act, it is invalid because it doesn't meet the requirement of common law. That's what the Child's Rights Act wants to put to rest. The Act wants to set the minimum age of marriage so that it would be universal, because a 12-year-old in Lagos State has the same biological features as a 12-year-old in Kano.
Now, the controversy concerning this minimum age of marriage, for obvious reasons, is defeating that purpose.
What is the seal in that Act?
Eighteen years. But under the United Nations Convention on the rights of the child, a child is anyone below the age of 18.
Now, what some states have done is to use that age and some are saying we are not going to touch that document at all, because it is going to affect some of those people that are betrothed.
So, it is not just political but this also creates a huge stumbling block in protecting the rights of children in this country. If you give out a child of 12 in marriage under the purist tradition, it is not for you to consummate the marriage, but to bring up that child to an age when she is biologically prepared for child-bearing. But those days when you do that, the man simply puts the child in the family way and she is not biologically prepared for child-bearing and that results in the rupture of her uterus that gives rise to Vesico-Vagina Fistula (VVF) and other complications. So there is the need in standardising the age of marriage.
Why is it that some states in the North particularly Kano are resisting the adoption of this Act?
I have listened to so many state officials whose states that are yet to adopt this argue that the reason is that there was no consultation between the National Assembly and these states' authorities, before the decision was made.
Secondly, the Federal Government, the National Assembly cannot make laws for the states. The argument is that making a uniform rule to apply nationally is contrary to the principles of federalism. So, they are using federalism as a defence. That is the main reason. But nobody talks about other political undertones. For instance, the pressure not to adopt some of those provisions. The minimum age of marriage is one; the second is the issue of being the child. Child's Rights Act has given children some level of rights and they are feeling that it would make parents lose control of their wards. So, they say the law is too liberal. But children have some rights.
Can you mention a few of these rights?
The children have a right to a choice of career; they have a right to determine their own future, affecting their own psychological upbringing and their lives. The rights define what is the paramount interest of the child. What is in their own best interest? Every child knows what he wants. It is simply the duty of the parents to guide the child to make the right decision and provide the moral guidance. That is not to say they should not moderate their child's decision.
Recently, a 14-year- old boy was sentenced to death for murder. He is to be kept in prison until he reaches the age when he would be executed. Is it right?
It is not right. The law says unless a child reaches a certain age, that is 17, he cannot be criminally liable. He cannot be criminally liable like an adult. He can only be charged under the Juvenile Criminal Justice System, which the Child's Rights Law regulates or the children and young persons' law. If a child was under the age of 17 as at the time of committing the offence, then he cannot be sentenced to death. But if he had attained 17 at the time of trial, the question is: what was the age at the time of committing the offence. If a child is 14, and commits an offence, you cannot sentence him to death because the law says you cannot. He can only be tried under a juvenile system and getting him to confinement. Under our law, children, pregnant women, people who are insane, cannot be sentenced to death. They can only be kept at the pleasure of the government. Sometimes, you have this conflict in situation where children participate in violent crimes like where children under 17 are gun- carrying criminals.
In this situation, you will find out the reason they go into crime. The essence of juvenile justice is to reform and rehabilitate a child. You just can't sentence a child to death like that court did in Imo State. You have to reform him and bring him back to the society.
But recently, an 11- year- old boy was burnt alive in Surulere area of Lagos State. With that kind of reaction from that mob, don't you think this is another provision of the law that is observed in the breach rather than in compliance?
In every society, there is jungle justice, there is killing of children. But we should let the society know that children are a special breed. Because of their vulnerability, they should be protected, no matter how wrong they've been. Some of them may have been misled into crime or into misconduct. They must be pardoned. So, Nigeria is of out of place in directing jungle justice on children.
As a matter of fact, when there is increase in crime, society's response to crime fighting is always drastic. When children are involved in robbery, the society loses sympathy for them.
It is the case in Nigeria. The laws have been made over centuries. Children offenders are always being treated with kid-gloves because the intention is that they have lost a part in their development. It is better for a society to bring back a child and reform him than to punish that child and let him back into the society. He becomes hardened, vengeful against the society.
Don't you think the provisions of the child's rights have infringed on the customs and traditions of some of those resisting its adoption?
Culture is a way of life of a people and therefore oblige changes. The culture of a society in the 19th Century cannot be the culture in the 20th Century. It's a way of life. It is dynamic when societal value was agrarian people had to go to farm, now the economic dynamics have changed. The culture in respect of family holding has changed. It is no longer fashionable to be polygamous. The Act recognises the core value of African society. The African society respects and protects the child, women. The Armajiri system in the north for example, is a system where children are put in the hands of mentors, Islamic teachers, who are supposed to teach them and bring them up in core Islamic education, which is a very rich education. These teachers, who are supposed to be their mentors, now send the children to the street to solicit for alms. It has become a permanent means of income. Look at the issue of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), it was set out to achieve certain purpose.
So, as we are in the 20th Century, there are certain practices that are no longer in vogue. When you talk about culture, you have to be careful. There has been a lot of abuse of cultural principles that can no longer stand the test of time. There was a time twins were being killed. We have advanced so much in science that we can no longer justify this. Our culture must be questioned with our current knowledge of science and technology. The Child's Rights Act does not undermine the culture of our people. A child in Nigeria is just like a child in China, New York or anywhere.
 
http://www.ngrguardiannews.com/law/article01/indexn2_html?pdate=090609&ptitle=Child%27s%20Rights%20Act:%20The%20cure%20for%20trafficking

Judges to show Madge Mercy

Judges to show Madge Mercy

David to get his African sister as Madonna 'is allowed to adopt Mercy James'

David to get his African sister as Madonna 'is allowed to adopt Mercy James'
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 10:28 AM on 09th June 2009
Comments (0)
Add to My Stories
Enlarge   
Madonna will be allowed to adopt baby  Chifundo 'Mercy' James says a report

Madonna will be allowed to adopt Malawian toddler Mercy James, 4, reversing the decision to block her initial bid, it was claimed today.

The singer's lawyer Alan Chinula passed on the news, after she is said to have persuaded two of the three appeal judges to reverse the decision made back in March.
Madonna's adoption application was originally rejected because she had not lived in the east African state for 18 months, as required.
A ruling which her lawyer argued was out of date.
Madonna, 50, is now said to have the backing of two of the judges with the third said to be 'in complete unison with them'.

The official ruling will be announced next Sunday at Malawi's Supreme Court of Appeal, the Sun reported today.

A source told The Sun: 'The paperwork is being typed up now.

Adoption law couple leave country

Adoption law couple leave country

John Hemming MP is concerned about adoption law in England
A couple have left their home in Essex and moved to Ireland after being warned that their child would be taken into care as soon as it was born.
John Hemming, Liberal Democrat MP for Birmingham Yardley, has revealed that the couple have sought his advice after concern over English adoption law.
Mr Hemming called for reform of the law saying the legal system handed "all the aces" to social workers
He said he advises couples to move abroad before legal action is taken.
They (foreign authorities) often know how mad the system is here.

John Hemming MP
"I don't advise people to break the law," he said.
"But I do advise them to go abroad before a court hearing and present all paperwork - because they will get a fairer hearing .
"They (foreign authorities) often know how mad the system is here."
He said the couple who moved to Ireland had lived in Essex and had sought his advice.
The woman is understood to have given birth in Wexford and the child is understood to have been taken into care pending court hearings.
Mr Hemming said: "I want to see reform. In public family law all the aces are held by the local authority and it is very, very difficult to win - and the statistics prove it."
He said Ministry of Justice figures showed that local authority attempts to pursue a care order failed in 0.27% of cases.
A spokeswoman for the unitary authority Southend-on-Sea Borough Council said: "We are committed to making plans that are in children's best interests but we do not comment on individual social care cases."

Rescue centre offers Kenyan orphans a good future

Rescue centre offers Kenyan orphans a good future
2:20pm Thursday 4th June 2009
Comments (1)   Have your say »
By Tom Shepherd »


A RESCUE centre and health clinic for orphaned girls in Kenya has officially opened after years of fundraising by people in Oxfordshire.
Kenya Children Centres chief fundraiser Gay Goodall, 61, from Warborough, near Wallingford, flew out to Ngoingwa, 40 miles north of Nairobi, to mark the event last month.
'At last, all our efforts are beginning to pay off'
Gay Goodall
The Ngoingwa Centre for Good Future provides round-the-clock care for 120 girls and includes a health clinic and community centre for local people.
The accommodation is a lifeline for the orphans, who could otherwise end up abused, uneducated and destitute. Many of their counterparts are forced to work in the sex industry.
During her visit Ms Goodall unveiled a plaque in memory of her late husband Bernard Goodall, one of the first supporters of the project, who died in 2005.
Fellow trustees and Warborough residents Wilf and Liz Eaton also unveiled a plaque in one of the accommodation blocks to mark their contribution to the centre.
Ms Goodall helped raise £25,000 of the £80,000 it cost to build the centre. She became involved in the campaign after a family friend, married to a Kenyan, highlighted the problems of orphaned girls in the country.
She said: “At last, all our efforts are beginning to pay off, and thanks to some fantastic work from our supporters and local companies, the girls can now start to build themselves a decent future, and when they leave our centre can help other, local orphan girls near Nairobi who are suffering.”
The opening ceremony was attended by more than 200 people, including the mayor of Ngoingwa, and attracted national press and TV coverage. The girls sang, danced and read poetry for the occasion.
The girls are accommodated two to a room and mentored by a house ‘mother’ who follows their development until they are ready to leave.
Businesswoman Ms Goodall said: “By building up their confidence and offering regular medical attention and schooling, the young girls get a lifeline and a decent start in life. It’s something often unavailable for many of their peers who are forced to live in degrading circumstances on the margins of society, facing abuse and exploitation in a country riven by poverty and social conflict.”
To sponsor a child at the orphanage, call Ms Goodall on 01865 258651. Any donations to the charity will be used to feed, care for and educate the orphans.
For further information, visit kenyachildrencentres.com