Romania has violated the acquis communautaire and the law of the European Union

Romania has violated the acquis communautaire and the law of the European UnionWhistleblower, supported by Timmermans, forced to hide although they were right, Sorina case confirmed their warningsChildren adopted in the 1990s were not orphansONLINE EDITORIAL OFFICE4 commentsUpdated: 09.09.2019 - 04:32The case of Sorina, a 9-year-old girl, of Roma origin, tortured and forcibly taken from her family's foster home, shocked Romania and the Dutch Parliament.On September 4, 2019, Sorina's case was debated in The Hague, in the Parliament, in the context in which Roelie Post, the former official of the European Commission in charge of Romania's implementation of the Child Protection Law and the Adoption Law from the acquis communautaire, and currently a whistleblower, suffers "serious" consequences as a result of revelations about the danger that exists in Romania and about the fake of the acquis with the "Law of Adoptions based on the Hague Convention", dedicated more or less to "child traffickers" . Let's summarize the video from the Dutch Parliament, in which the member of the Parliament, Pieter Omtzigt asked the Dutch Prime Minister to address the issue of the practice of adoption of Romania but also the problems faced by Roelie Post, whistleblower, at the level of the European Commission with Frans Timmermans. Video here

"There is now a whistle-blower hiding somewhere: Roelie Post.Since ... (hides from) European Commission, due to child trafficking and I recently saw in Romania how a child was abducted from its foster parents, screaming and screaming, the scenes are very shocking, to be adopted in USA for tens of thousands of euros.How bizarre it can be. Roelie Post worked against these practices. These practices are not resolved.Worse, they are allowed again. " European Union law imposes as a basic law all adoptions in EU Member States - the United Nations Convention, and" vehemently "excludes the Hague Convention, even if it has been ratified by all EU member states. Romania Libera studied the two Conventions before addressing the officials of the European Commission, the difference is huge, the two being absolutely “incompatible” from two essential elements: a) The United Nations Convention excludes the variant “of international adoption”, being almost impossible to approve adoptions even outside the Member State where the child lives. Article 21: (b) States recognize that international adoption may be considered as an alternative means of child care if the child cannot be placed in an adoptive or foster family (Foster) or cannot be placed in foster care. cared for in any appropriate way in the child's country of origin; The best interests of the child are thus defined. According to this article, Sorina's adoption is illegal, the girl can never be taken from the family of foster parents. b) The Hague Convention is in the best interests of the child to have a family, a guide adopted in 2013 from “Cooperation on adoption between countries/introduction:“ The Convention recognizes that growing up in a family is of paramount importance and is essential for the happiness and healthy development of the child. - The Hague Convention practically violates the above-mentioned Article 21 (b), not permitted by the United Nations Convention and as we will disclose below, confirmed by a Wikileaks cable program. a) The United Nations Convention defines intermediation with payment by adoption agencies as child trafficking. "Protocol signed and ratified by Resolution A / RES / 54/263 of 25 May 2000 with effect from 18 January 2002: Article 2: "Sale of children" means any act or operation by which a child is transferred by any person or group of persons to another in return for remuneration or any other advantage. " B) The Hague Convention. private bodies, Article 32 (2) may be levied or paid only costs and expenses, including professional fees reasonable persons involved in adoption(3) the directors, administrators, and employees of bodies involved in an adoption shall not receive remuneration which is unjustifiably high in relation to the services provided. Romania faked the European Commission, ignoring the possible consequences and giving the coup de grace in the Ciolo? Government (2015-2016) Background: A huge scandal in the European Parliament but also in the European Commission was triggered, in 2004, after it was found that The Community (obligatory) for Romania, was accidentally deleted, the United Nations Convention and replaced with the "American" one: "The Hague Convention!", the United Nations Convention being repealed, the Hague Convention deleted. In 2012, it happened for the second time with the support and participation of the same person, Margarete Tuite, European coordinator for children's rights, who Since 2004, in a "humiliating" interview, she has admitted that she was the one who erased the United Nations Convention but immediately corrected the mistake [Sic. after a letter of ACT Against Child Trafficking].Video Here

Cables published by Wikileaks between the State Department and the European Commission, June 4, 2010, confirm the United Nations Convention.here in the original version on WikiLeakshttps://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/04BRUSSELS2496_a.html?fbclid=IwAR0rY-XavWMISSmoIqCS5z0jB1KjPUs5RXF9-C1ybA6W4fDvtIl46wZHNIA “Dear Secretary of State, Thank you for your letter of 4 May 2004 oninternational adoptions in Romania. I would like to clarify that the European Commission is not against international adoptions as such. However, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child provides that inter-country adoption can only be considered if the child cannot be placed in a foster family or in an adoptive family or cannot be adequately cared for. in the child's country of origin. This "last resort" provision is in line with the provisions of the UN Convention which refers to the desire for continuity in the child's education on the basis of ethnic, religious, cultural and linguistic criteria of the child.All EU Member States have ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and should therefore respect the above principles.The Commission therefore considers that a moratorium on international adoptions is necessary as long as there is no legislation in force that fully complies with this convention and as long as there is no administrative capacity to implement this legislation. "It is stated in the letter sent by the Commissioner for Enlargement, Gunter Verheugen on June 4, 2004. Moreover, it states that: “ Our primary objective must be to obtain the childcare system in Romania, so that we can obtain the usual situation in EU Member States where international adoptions are an exception. Therefore, the EU has supported Romania in its efforts to improve the quality of public childcare.”Gunter Verheugen Illegalities over illegalitiesThe Ciolo? Government butchered by Government Decision and by the law assumed the Adoption Law. The amendments brought to the Adoption Law by the Ciolo? Government are, as it were, “in the 100% interest of the adoptive family and are hallucinatory.Anyone who reads these changes and mirrors the case of the "S?c?rini adopters" will have a shock, as if they are written by their little hand or their representatives!Given that S?c?rinilor's lawyer is a USR-PLUS "Member", we begin to wonder "for whom did Ciolos give the Law?What an urgency so great to change Ciolos a law that was hard to be born: in 2004! Free Romania extracted the most odious changes or "non-changes" of the Ciolosi Government: Law 57/2016Thus, the basic law remained the Hague Convention, practically Romania during Ciolos has time and means to amend an entire law, because almost every article is amended by law 203/2004 but not with the "provisions of European Union law" as it is shown in the cable program between the State Department and the European Commission in 2004 .The Ciolos government not only did not amend the law in accordance with that of the European Union, but even grossly violated the "Rights of the Child", below, the new provisions: · Article 8, approves adoption without consent (introduction paragraph 4) · Article 64 is modified and will have the following content: "Art. 64 Based on the final judgment declaration of adoption ANPDCA issued at the request of the adopter / adoptive family, within 5 working days, a certificate of adoption complies with the rules of the Hague Convention. " · Article 67, which r Udel· Article 71 (1) and (3) on the termination of adoption on the finding of nullity as well as court decisions have been REPEALED· Article 78 paragraph 1 by which the Court may administer any evidence permitted by law has been repealed. abrogated! Craiova Court of Appeal! Illegality even on Ciolos' law: (3)If listening to the child is not mandatory, he is asked for his opinion, as far as possible. (4) The opinion of the child expressed when judging the applications provided by the present law shall be taken into account and shall be given due importance, taking into account his age and degree of maturity. If the court decides in contradiction with the opinion expressed by the child, it is obliged to motivate the reasons that led to the removal of the child's opinion. It is well known that Sorina, the 9-year-old girl, was not asked for her opinion by the Craiova Court of Appeal , she being only one year away - Sorina must have been 10 years old in order to be able to give her consent for adoption. Collaboration protocols, we do not get rid of them would beat them!Dacian Ciolo? applied the partnership between “private bodies”, ie “Adoption Agencies” with the ROMANIAN STATE . DECISION No. 579/2016 of 10 August 2016 on the methodological norms in Adoption: 2. Article 4, is amended and will have the following content: "ART. 4 (1) For the effective provision / development of services and activities for which it has been authorized, the private body has the obligation to conclude collaboration protocols with the general directorates of social assistance and child protection, hereinafter referred to as DGASPC, in whose administrative-territorial area it is to carry out its activity.Dacian Ciolo? confirms that he is a prime minister of “protocols”!If we have protocols with the services and courts, why not also with the Adoption Agencies.A Romanian word says "whoever shares part does it!". Which could be translated simply: business-child trafficking! On Tuesday, Ursula Von Der Leyen is expected to name her team from the European Commission, Frans Timmermans is in the books for the post of First Vice-President of the Commission .It is interesting to see if the President of the Commission, a mother of 7, a child rights fighter, will get over the "closing eyes" "but also vehement" with which Frans Timmermans "punishes a defender of children's rights such as Roelie Post and " accepts tacit ”a Convention in total contradiction with the laws of the European Union, supported by America, the only country that has not ratified the UN convention.From the team coordinated by him, there was also Tuite, who "deleted" twice in a row "by mistake" the Convention on the Rights of the Child - the United Nations Convention, without any consequences, if not criminal at least "sanctioned".==================================================Roelie Post, fost functionar al Comisiei EuropeneRomania a înc?lcat aquis-ul comunitar si legea Uniunii EuropeneAvertizorii de integritate sus?inu?i de Timmermans, nevoi?i sa se ascund? de?i au avut dreptate, Cazul Sorina le-a confirmat avertismenteleSHARERECOMAND?RICopiii adoptati in anii 90 nu erau orfaniREDAC?IA ONLINE comentariiActualizat: 09.09.2019 - 04:32Cazul Sorina o feti?? de 9 ani, de origina roma, schingiuit? si luata cu for?a din casa familiei sale de asisten?i maternali, a cutremurat Romania dar si Parlamentul Olandez.In data de 4 Septembrie 2019, s-a dezb?tut cazul Sorinei la Haga, in Parlament, in contextul in care Roelie Post, fostul func?ionar al Comisiei Europene îns?rcinat cu implementarea de c?tre Romania a legii Protec?iei Copilului si a legii Adop?iei din aquis-ul comunitar, si in prezent avertizor de integritate, suporta consecin?e „grave” ca urmare a dezv?luirilor despre pericolul care exista in Romania si despre fentarea aquis-ului cu„legea Adop?iilor bazata pe Conven?ia de la Haga”, dedicata mai mult sau mai pu?in „trafican?ilor de copii” . Rezum?m videoclipul din Parlamentul olandez, în care membrul Parlamentului, Pieter Omtzigt a cerut premierului olandez s? abordeze problema practicii de adop?ie a României dar ?i problemele cu care se confrunt? Roelie Post , avertizor de intergritate, la nivelul Comisiei Europene cu Frans Timmermans. Video aici „Exist? acum un whistle-blower (avertizor de integritate) care se ascunde undeva: Roelie Post.De ...(se ascunde de) Comisia European?, din cauza traficului de copii ?i am v?zut recent în România cum un copil a fost r?pit de la p?rin?ii s?i de plasament, urlând ?i ?ipând, scenele sunt foarte ?ocante, urmând a fi adoptat în SUA pentru câteva zeci de mii de euro.Cât de bizar poate fi.Împotriva acestor practici a lucrat Roelie Post. Aceste practici nu sunt rezolvate.Mai r?u, li se permite din nou. ” Legea Uniunii Europene, impune ca lege de baza a tuturor adop?iilor din Statele Membre UE - Conven?ia Na?iunilor Unite, si exclude in mod „vehement” Conven?ia de la Haga, chiar daca aceasta a fost ratificata de toate statele membre UE. Romania Libera a studiat cele doua Conven?ii înainte de a se adresa oficialilor Comisiei Europene, diferen?a este uria??, cele doua fiind absolut „incompatibile” din doua elemente esen?iale: a) Conven?ia Na?iunilor Unite exclude varianta „ de adop?ie interna?ional?” , fiind aproape imposibil sa po?i aproba adop?ii chiar si in afara Statului Membru in care copilul tr?ie?te. Articolul 21: (b) Statele s? recunoasc? faptul c? adop?ia interna?ional? poate fi considerat? ca un mijloc alternativ de îngrijire a copilului, în cazul în care copilul nu poate fi plasat într-o familie adoptiv? sau de asisten?i maternali (Foster) sau nu poate fi îngrijit în orice mod adecvat în ?ara de origine a copilului; Interesul superior al copilului este astfel definit. Conform acestui articol, adop?ia Sorinei este ilegal?, fata nu poate niciodat? sa fie luata de la familia asisten?ilor maternali. b) Conven?ia de la Haga este pentru interesul copilului de a avea o familie, ghid adoptat in 2013 din „Cooperarea în ceea ce prive?te adoptarea între ??ri/ introducere : „Conven?ia recunoa?te c? cre?terea într-o familie are o importan?? primordial? ?i este esen?ial? pentru fericirea ?i dezvoltarea s?n?toas? a copilului. – Conven?ia de la Haga practic calca in picioare Articolul 21(b) mai sus men?ionat, nepermis de Conven?ia Na?iunilor Unite si a?a cum vom dezv?lui in continuare, confirmata de o cablograma din wikileaks. a) Conven?ia Na?iunilor Unite define?te intermedierea cu plata de agen?iile de adop?ii drept trafic de copii . „Protocolul semnat si ratificat prin rezolu?ia A/RES/54/263 din 25 May 2000 cu aplicare in 18 ianuarie 2002: Articolul 2: (a) "Vânzare de copii" înseamn? orice act sau opera?iune prin care un copil este transferat de orice persoan? sau grup de persoane într-un altul în schimbul unei remunera?ii sau a oric?rui alt avantaj” b) Conven?ia de la Haga total opusa: Se încuviin?eaz? pl??i de la organisme private, articolul 32 : (2) Pot fi percepute sau pl?tite numai costurile ?i cheltuielile, inclusiv taxele profesionale rezonabile ale persoanelor implicate în adop?ie(3) Directorii, administratorii ?i angaja?ii organismelor implicate într-o adop?ie nu vor primi o remunera?ie care este nejustificat de mare în raport cu serviciile prestate. Romania a fentat Comisia Europeana, ignorând posibilele consecin?e si dând lovitura de gratie in Guvernul Ciolo? (2015-2016) Context:Un scandal imens in Parlamentul European dar si in Comisia Europeana a fost declan?at, in 2004, dup? ce s-a aflat ca in aquis-ul comunitar (obligatoriu) pentru Romania, a fost „?tears?, din gre?eal?, Conven?ia Na?iunilor Unite si înlocuit? cu cea "americana" : „ Conven?ia de la Haga!”, Conven?ia Na?iunilor Unite fiind repusa, cea de la Haga stearsa.In 2012, s-a întâmplat a doua oara cu sprijinul si participa?ia acelea?i persoane, Margarete Tuite,coordonator european pe drepturile copiilor, care înc? din anul 2004 intr-un interviu „umilitor” a recunoscut ca ea a fost cea care a ?ters Conven?ia Na?iunilor Unite dar ca imediat a reparat gre?eal?.Video Aici Cablograma publicata de Wikileaks dintre Departamentul de Stat si Comisia Europeana, 4 iunie 2010, care confirma Conven?ia Na?iunilor Unite.aici in varianta originala de pe wikileaks „Stimate domnule secretar de stat, V? mul?umim pentru scrisoarea dvs. din 4 mai 2004 cu privire laadop?iile interna?ionale din Romania. A? dori s? clarific faptul c? Comisia European? nu este împotriva adop?iilor interna?ionale ca atare. Cu toate acestea, ONU, Conven?ia privind drepturile copilului prevede c? adop?ia inter-?ar? poate fi considerat? numai dac? copilul nu poate fi plasat într-o familie de asisten?i maternali sau într-o familie adoptiv? sau nu poate în orice mod adecvat, s? fie îngrijit în ?ara copilului de origine. Aceast? prevedere „ultima solu?ie”, este în concordan?? cu prevederile dispozi?iei din conven?ia ONU care se refer? la dorin?a continuit??ii în educa?ia copilului pe criterii etnice, religioase, culturale ?i lingvistice al copilului.Toate statele membre ale UE au ratificat Conven?ia ONU privind drepturile copilului ?i, prin urmare, ar trebui s? respecte principiile mai sus men?ionate.Prin urmare, Comisia consider? c? Moratoriul pentru adop?iile interna?ionale este necesar atâta timp cât nu exist? nicio legisla?ie în vigoare care s? respecte pe deplin aceast? conven?ie ?i atâta timp cât nu exist? o capacitate administrativ? pentru a implementa aceast? legisla?ie.”Se arata in scrisoarea transmisa de c?tre Comisarul de Extindere, Gunter Verheugen in data de 4 iunie iunie 2004. Mai mult, acesta arata ca:“Obiectivul nostru primordial trebuie s? fie pentru ob?inerea sistemului de îngrijire copii în România, astfel încât s? ob?inem situa?ia obi?nuit? in statele membre ale UE unde adop?iile interna?ionale sunt o excep?ie. Prin urmare, UE a sprijinit România în eforturile sale de a îmbun?t??i calitatea îngrijirii publice a copiilor”.Gunter Verheugen Ilegalit??i peste ilegalit??iGuvernul Ciolo? a m?cel?rit prin Hot?râre de Guvern si prin lege asumata Legea Adop?iei. Modific?rile aduse Legii Adop?iei de c?tre Gurvernul Ciolo?, sunt, parca „ in interesul 100 % al familiei adoptive si sunt halucinante.Oricine cite?te aceste modific?ri si pune in oglinda cazul „adoptatorilor S?c?rini” va avea un soc, parca sunt scrise de mânu?a lor sau a reprezentan?ilor lor!?inând cont ca avocata S?c?rinilor este o „Membra” USR-PLUS, începem sa ne întreb?m „ pentru cine a dat Ciolos Legea?Ce urgenta a?a de mare încât sa schimbe Ciolos o lege care iat? era greu „de n?scut:” in 2004! Romania libera a extras cele mai odioase modific?ri sau „nemodific?ri” ale Guvernului Ciolosi: Legea 57/2016Astfel, legea de baza a r?mas Conven?ia de la Haga, practic Romania in timpul lui Ciolo? are timp si mijloace sa modifice o întreag? lege, caci aproape fiecare articol este modificat din legea 203/2004 dar nu cu „prevederile legii Uniunii Europene” a?a cum se arata in cablograma dintre Departamentul De stat si Comisia Europeana in 2004.Guvernul Ciolos nu numai ca nu a modificat legea in acord cu cea a Uniunii Europene, ba chiar a înc?lcat grosolan „ Drepturile Copilului”, mai jos, noile prevederi: · Articolul 8, încuviin?eaz? adop?ia f?r? consim??mânt (introducere alin.4)· Articolul 64 se modifica si va avea urm?torul cuprins: "Art. 64Pe baza hot?rârii judec?tore?ti definitive de încuviin?are a adop?iei A.N.P.D.C.A. elibereaz?, la cererea adoptatorului/familiei adoptatoare, in termen de 5 zile lucr?toare, un certificat care atesta ca adop?ia este conforma cu normele Conven?iei de la Haga." · Articolul 67, prin care rudele puteau cere informa?ii, a fost abrogat.· Articolul 71 alineatele (1) si (3) privind încetarea adop?iei pe constatarea nulit??ii precum si hot?rârile judec?tore?ti au fost ABROGATE.· Articolul 78 alin 1 prin care Instan?a poate administra orice probe admise de lege a fost abrogat! Curtea de Apel Craiova! Ilegalitate chiar pe legea lui Ciolos: (3) In cazul in care ascultarea copilului nu este obligatorie, acestuia i se solicita opinia, in m?sura in care este posibil. (4) Opinia copilului exprimata la judecarea cererilor prev?zute de prezenta lege va fi luata in considerare si i se va acorda importanta cuvenita, avându-se in vedere vârsta si gradul acestuia de maturitate. In situa?ia in care instan?a hot?r??te in contradictoriu cu opinia exprimata de copil, aceasta este obligata sa motiveze ra?iunile care au condus la înl?turarea opiniei copilului. Este bine cunoscut faptul ca Sorinei, feti?ei de 9 ani?ori nu i s-a cerut opinia de c?tre Curtea de Apel Craiova, ea fiind doar la distanta de un ani?or – 10 ani trebuie sa fi avut Sorina ca sa poat? sa-si dea consim??mântul spre adop?ie. Protocoalele de colaborare, nu sc?p?m de ele bate-le-ar vina!Dacian Ciolo? aplica parteneriatul dinte “organismele private” adic? “ Agen?iile de Adop?ii” cu STATUL ROMAN. HOT?RÂREA Nr. 579/2016 din 10 august 2016 privind normele metodologice in Adop?ie: 2. Articolul 4, se modific? ?i va avea urm?torul cuprins:"ART. 4 (1) Pentru prestarea/desf??urarea efectiv? a serviciilor ?i activit??ilor pentru care a fost autorizat, organismul privat are obliga?ia de a încheia protocoale de colaborare cu direc?iile generale de asisten?? social? ?i protec?ia copilului, denumite în continuare DGASPC, în a c?ror raz? administrativ-teritorial? urmeaz? s? î?i desf??oare activitatea. Dacian Ciolo? confirma ca este un prim ministru “al protocoalelor”!Daca avem protocoale cu serviciile si instan?ele de judecata de ce sa nu avem si cu Agen?iile de Adop?ii.O vorba româneasc? spune “ cine împarte parte î?i face!”. Care s-ar putea traduce simplu: business -trafic de copii! Mar?i, Ursula Von Der Leyen este a?teptat? sa-si numeasc? echipa din Comisia Europeana, Frans Timmermans este in c?r?i pentru postul de Prim Vicepre?edinte al Comisiei.Este interesant de v?zut, daca Pre?edintele Comisiei, o mama cu 7 copii, lupt?toare a drepturilor copiilor, va trece peste „închiderea ochilor” „dar si vehementa” cu care Frans Timmermans „pedepse?te un ap?r?tor al drepturilor copiilor cum este Roelie Post si „accepta tacit” o Conven?ie in totala contradic?ie cu legile Uniunii Europene, sus?inut? de America, singura tara care nu a ratificat conven?ia ONU.Din echipa coordonata de acesta, se afla si Tuite, cea care a “?ters” de doua ori consecutiv „din gre?eal?” Conven?ia Drepturilor Copiilor - Conven?ia Na?iunilor Unite, f?r? nici o consecin??, daca nu penala m?car „sanc?ionar?”. Cite?te totul despre:#comisia european? #usr #ursula von der leyen #plus #haga #dacian ciolos #frans timmermans #sorina #sacarin #child trafficking #Roelie Post #European Commission #Dutch Parliament #Whistleblower #adoption #UN convention #MArgaret Tuite