Wikileaks: Viewing cable 06BUCHAREST576, ADOPTIONS: ROMANIA OFFICIALLY REJECTS ALL PENDING
5 April 2006
Viewing cable 06BUCHAREST576, ADOPTIONS: ROMANIA OFFICIALLY REJECTS ALL PENDING
If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
·The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
·The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
·The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.
Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags#cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #06BUCHAREST576.
| Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin |
VZCZCXRO3212PP RUEHFL RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHROV RUEHSRDE RUEHBM #0576 0951604ZNY CCCCC ZZHP 051604Z APR 06FM AMEMBASSY BUCHARESTTO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 4119INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVERUEHTV/AMEMBASSY TEL AVIV 2190C O N F I D E N T I A L BUCHAREST 000576 SIPDIS SIPDIS DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/NCE BILL SILKWORTH; AND CA/OCS/CI CHRIS LAMORA AND SCOTT BOSWELL E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/05/2026 TAGS: CASC PREL PGOV PHUM ROSUBJECT: ADOPTIONS: ROMANIA OFFICIALLY REJECTS ALL PENDING INTERCOUNTRY ADOPTION CASES REF: A) BUCHAREST 0536 B) 2005 BUCHAREST 2550 Classified By: DCM Mark Taplin, Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) ¶1. (U) On April 5, Embassy received by mail a letter from Theodora Bertzi, Secretary of State for the Government of Romania,s (GOR) Romanian Office for Adoptions (ROA), dated
March 29 and including the final report of the GOR Working Group established in June 2005 to audit pending petitions by foreign families to adopt Romanian orphans and abandoned children. Post has faxed the letter to EUR/NCE and CA/OCS/CI. ¶2. (U) The report shows that none of the 1,092 children identified in the pending petitions will be available for inter-country adoption, ostensibly for the following reasons: -- 41 reintegrated into biological family -- 12 integrated within extended family -- 227 adopted by Romanian families -- 17 adopted by other foreign families by the rules of the adoption moratorium (2001-04) -- 8 under legal guardianship in Romania -- 12 reached or will soon reach age 18 -- 47 petitioned after a February 6, 2004 emergency ordinance suspended even exceptional approval of intercountry adoptions during the moratorium -- 2 died -- 6 not found in GOR,s database of orphans or abandoned children -- 90 had petitions withdrawn by the foreign families (1 from the U.S.) -- 132 in process of final domestic adoption -- 415 not adoptable, protected within substitutive (sic) families -- 83 not adoptable, placed in the protection system (their biological family did not consent to adoption before Court or the Court did not approve the opening of the domestic adoption procedure). ¶3. (C) Comment: The Working Group had been expected to issue its report by the end of March, and Bertzi had announced publicly in December 2005 that none of the cases would be approved for inter-country adoption. However, the utterly non-transparent process of the Working Group and the opaque quality of the report suggest some of the children may in fact remain in non-permanent situations in which their welfare is not being adequately protected. Post believes we should continue to press the GOR to open up the Working Group,s "conclusions" for a transparent, objective international review and to establish a legal framework that would allow inter-country adoption for appropriate pending cases. We will provide Department with our updated recommendations soon. End comment. TAUBMAN