Public opinion in Sri Lanka inflamed by sensational articles in popular morning newspaper
9 minutes reading time Turn off hatching
Police investigations into illegal adoptions in Sri Lanka have not uncovered any criminal offences. Even if a Sri Lankan mother accepts money when she gives up her child for adoption, she is not committing a crime. A mass outcry fuelled by rumours cannot be used in court as evidence of alleged baby trafficking.
The life of Sri Lankan police inspector B. Sumanadasa has taken a cheerless turn. After raiding a beach hotel where, the police officer assumed, a lively baby trade was flourishing and Western tourists were paying a lot of money for a newborn child, he is unable to provide evidence of illegal adoptions. The natural mothers of twenty babies deny that they were forced to give their children up for adoption. Their persistence has aroused the inspector's displeasure, but he has become really worried since these women filed a lawsuit against him for violating their constitutional rights as citizens. The concerned police officer has not been assigned a lawyer by his superiors. In the meantime, he has put a small fortune on the table to pay for his defense in this civil case. He fears that his actions will leave him financially ruined. The controversial adoption center is located in the town of Wadduwa, thirty kilometers south of Colombo, the capital of Sri Lanka. Owner Dawn de Silva takes in mostly unmarried mothers in the resort who want to give up their child for adoption. She also offers shelter to Western European couples who are staying in Sri Lanka to take in these children. Through the mediation of the foundation Kind en Toekomst in Brummen, some 200 Dutch couples stayed last year in the centre of "miss Dawn", as she is called by her guests. Doubts The West German weekly Stern had
doubts
about the sincerity with which Dawn de Silva cares for the unwanted babies and their mothers at the end of last year. The magazine reported extensively on dubious adoption practices, which were said to be based on profit motives. In a shortened version of the Stern article, Nieuwe Revu worried adoptive parents in the Netherlands, who had received their child through the mediation of the foundation Kind en Toekomst. In the donor country, the popular English-language morning newspaper Sun shocked the public on 9 January with the headline: Unmasked: Million-dollar scam involving Sri Lankan babies". A day later, inspector Sumanadasa parked his police jeep in front of the steel gate of the adoption centre in Wadduwa. The inspector thought he had intercepted 22 babies who were about to be sold to European couples, including ten Dutch adoptive parents. Inspector Sumanadasa arrested Dawn de Silva and 21 Sri Lankan women. "Most of the women turned out to be unmarried and came from different parts of the island," says the policeman. "They claim that they wanted to give their children up for adoption voluntarily and completely legally." The police inspector still cannot accept that explanation,but his disbelief seems to be mainly motivated by public opinion and newspaper reports that lead the Sri Lankan population to believe that adoption is identical to a reprehensible baby trade.
Experiments
Any evidence of the alleged trade was of no importance in shaping public opinion in Sri Lanka. It took the form of a national popular anger, which demanded redress. People thought they could see the shadows of the old slave trade and urged an immediate end to "this devilish traffic in human flesh and blood". Trembling with horror, rumours were spread that adoptive parents were enslaving Sri Lankan children or, worse, abusing them for organ transplants. Some cynically added the supposed infant trade as a modern export product to a range of traditional goods such as tea, rubber and coconuts. The horror stories spread like an epidemic from the bottom to the top of society. The head of the Colombo district police, deputy inspector-general WB Rajaguru, and his personal assistant, superintendent JW Jayasuriya, ask me in all seriousness whether Sri Lankan children are being used in the Netherlands for medical experiments.
For the reliability of their gruesome stories, many refer to the tabloid columns of the Sun. This newspaper fuels the national frenzy with articles on "babygate" based on unknown sources. The Stern article has led the Sun to launch a crusade against the "baby mafia". "Even abortion, a crime, may have mitigating circumstances in some cases," said a Sun commentary, "but the widespread, diabolical, cold-blooded trade in innocent babies is sinful through and through."
Mourn
The Sun demanded that "baby tourists" be thrown out of the country to save the island's moral and ethical values. "Sri Lanka's Rachel cannot continue to mourn her innocent babies," raged a Sun commentator. "Our moral traditions will not allow a modern-day 'maniacal Herod' to run riot."
It is clear that Inspector Sumanadasa felt supported in his actions by a public opinion that was favourably disposed towards him. However, fabrications from the Sun could not be used as evidence in court. The natural mothers of the babies spent several weeks in prison and were then released on bail. An adoption judge put an end to the anxious uncertainty in which the Dutch couples found themselves. He gave them permission to take the adopted children home with them.
No evidence
Inspector Sumanadasa has been given until 5 May to gather evidence against Dawn de Silva and the mothers he suspects. If he appears in court empty-handed again, all those involved will be acquitted of further prosecution.
"I have no evidence," Sumanadasa admits, but for the time being he is more concerned about the civil trial in which he is involved. Sumanadasa sighs somberly: "It costs me all my savings, while I have only fulfilled my duty as a police officer." The lawyer Mr. Manilal Fernando is sharply critical of the inspector's performance of duty. The name and address of this lawyer and his colleague Mr. Daya R. Perera are stated on a copied letter that a guard of the adoption center in Wadduma hands to me through a small hatch in the wall around the complex. The heavy gate remains firmly closed. Later, Mr. Fernando will apologize to the owner: it is only on medical advice that she refuses to speak to reporters.
Illegal
"The police only tried to justify the raid on the adoption center afterwards," Mr. Fernando believes. "Inspector Sumanadasa did not even have a search warrant. Without bothering to formulate a charge, he rounded up everyone and took them to the cell. So far, the police have not been able to find anything that violates the Sri Lankan adoption law. On the contrary, the police action was completely illegal. For that reason, Inspector Sumanadasa, who personally led the raid, has been prosecuted. He is believed to have been driven crazy by the Sun newspaper article."
Mr. Perera is convinced that Sumanadasa acted contrary to his instructions and that is why he must pay his own lawyer. The lawyer describes Dawn de Silva's activities as "very sensible." Mr. Perera: "Pending the legal proceedings, this woman is bringing the natural mothers and their babies and the adoptive parents together in a complex." Stories about the trafficking of babies are dismissed as absurd by Mr. Fernando and Mr. Perera. Perera: "Even if a mother were to receive money for giving up her baby, that is not an offence under our law. You can call it immoral, but it is not illegal. I refuse to talk about baby trafficking until the adoption law is changed. Moreover, as a lawyer, I am not interested in the moral aspect of this practice. Only the question of whether it is illegal or not is important."
Even more shocking
Ten days after the sensational raid on Dawn de Silva's adoption centre, the police made "an even more shocking discovery" in the fishing village of Negombo, 30 kilometres north of Colombo. The police surprised 23 children and their carers in a Swedish children's home, which in reality was supposed to be a front for a profitable trade in newborn babies. Behind the scenes, the Swedish nurse Inga Lill-Lundström was supposedly responsible for the fraudulent practices.
Police inspector KDL Dalpatadu suspects the Scandinavian nurse of kidnapping Sri Lankan children. One day before the court rules on Friday 27 March that she is not to blame, the inspector gives his suspicious version of the facts. His people are said to have prevented 23 children from being sold to Swedish couples with the unexpected raid. The inspector reluctantly admits that "we are not able to prove anything".
Only thanks to her willpower did Inga Lill manage to look the world in the eye with a smile when her name was dragged through the mud on the front page of the Sun. She thinks back with horror to the police raid, which followed an anonymous complaint to the Department of Child Welfare. The Swede has been living in Sri Lanka since 1984, where she works as a nurse in the home for disabled children, which was founded by the Maria Aid Association in Negombo.
Happier childhood
"When the home for disabled children was established here, many other, often poor parents and unmarried mothers also came to us for help for their children. That is why we opened a second home, where children stay who return to their parents after a short or long time," says Inga Lill. "Personally, I do not see adoption as an easy and quick solution for unwanted children. In many cases, in my experience, it is possible after much discussion for the parents or other family members to take care of such a child. If that proves impossible and the child is waiting for a future in a shelter, I am convinced that it will have a happier childhood in an adoptive family."
According to the nurse, 20 to 25 children are adopted by Swedish couples each year through the mediation of a government-controlled organization. Inga Lill: "Three of the 23 children who were staying in the home during the police raid were intended for adoption. They have now been taken to Sweden by their adoptive parents with the permission of the judge."
Mediators
The Swedish nurse's lawyer, Mr. Nimal Senanayake, has the impression that a handful of lawyers and a few dozen Sri Lankan mediators earn quite a lot of money from adoptions. Mr. Senanayake: "They know the ways to make an adoption go smoothly. They know how much bribe money has to be paid to the officials involved, because if you don't pay you will face long delays. That's what happens in this country. The European adoptive parents probably like to pay for services."
Mr. Senanayake, who was president of the Sri Lanka Bar Association until the end of March, suspects that a commission of inquiry set up by the Minister of Justice will press for the removal of commercial intermediaries from adoption channels. "But it would be much better if Sri Lankans themselves would take care of our unwanted children and protest less loudly against adoptions by foreign couples."
The second article on the adoption of children from Sri Lanka, which will appear on Tuesday, will highlight the role of the intermediaries on the island and their earnings.