Adoptees from Sri Lanka hold the state liable for abuses

Eight adoptees sued the State for negligence in their adoption from Sri Lanka in the 1980s. They argue that the government did not intervene even though it should have known about the many abuses. The adoptees want the government to recognize this negligence and reimburse the costs they incurred to trace their origins.

"We want the judge to determine that the government is liable for the damage suffered by these eight people," says lawyer Mark de Hek, who started the legal proceedings on behalf of the victims. The hope is that there will also be justice for other adoptees in a similar situation.

Child theft and baby farming

It has been known for decades that many things went wrong with adoptions from Sri Lanka. The first signals date from 1979. Since then, stories have regularly emerged about incorrect files, baby theft, so-called baby farms and human trafficking. In 1987, a Sri Lankan study found that the vast majority of adoptions were illegal.

The fact that the Dutch state was repeatedly informed of abuses from Sri Lanka from the early 1980s was evident from the report of the Joustra committee in 2021. At the request of the government, that committee investigated the role of the Netherlands in international adoption. The abuses included baby farming and child theft. According to the committee, the Netherlands did not intervene and the government did not come up with solutions.

It was not until 1997 that these adoptions came to an end. Between 1973 and 1997, a total of around 3,400 children from Sri Lanka were brought to the Netherlands. More than 2,400 children came to the Netherlands through the Flash mediation agency, which, according to experts, was the leader in illegal adoption practices.

Fake mother in photo

As a result of these practices, many adoptees have questions about their origins. For example, 31-year-old Serani van der Helm from Helmond has a photo of himself in the arms of a woman, taken in Colombo during the adoption in 1986. "My file states that it was my mother who voluntarily gave me up. But that turned out to be a fake mother."

Van der Helm talks about her search for her biological parents, whom she never found:

Sam van den Haak from Zevenaar also has many questions about her adoption. In her adoption file her date of birth is April 7, her passport says July 4, exactly the opposite. The pen in her old Sri Lankan passport has been tampered with, making it unclear what the correct date is. "That should have been enough reason for the State to smell trouble." Only when she managed to track down her family on her own much later did her grandmother tell her that she was actually born on December 17.

Van den Haak herself calls it painful that there is an incorrect date of birth in her passport. "Do you know how often people ask for your date of birth to identify you? Then I am confronted with that painful error again and again." But changing that data is almost impossible in the Netherlands. With the lawsuit she hopes that the government will help her get her real date of birth in her passport.

'Government failed'

Lawyer De Hek calls this clear indications of government negligence. The government previously rejected all liability. "The embassy must ensure that an adoption is legally in order before a residence permit is granted," says De Hek. "By ignoring the signals about this, the government has failed as a regulator and visa issuer."