Unicef Netherlands position in Intercountry Adoption ?
From: Arun Dohle
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2021 at 11:26
Subject: Reminder: Fwd: Reminder: FW: Unicef Netherlands position in Intercountry Adoption ?
To: Cornelius Williams
Dear Mr. Williams,
I hope you are well during this difficult time.
Kindly reply to my email below. Given that children are affected by the crisis, we need to have the dialogue at least.
Sincerely
Arun Dohle
www.againstchildtrafficking.org
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Arun Dohle
Date: Tue, 4 May 2021 at 13:46
Subject: Re: Reminder: FW: Unicef Netherlands position in Intercountry Adoption ?
To: Kerry Neal
Cc: Cornelius Williams
Dear Kerry
Dear All,
I did not receive a reply to my email below. In the meantime ISS has made the english translation of the Joustra Report available which i attached herewith.
Kindly answer my questions below.
Thank you
Arun Dohle
www.againstchildtrafficking.org
from: Arun Dohle
to: Kerry Neal
date: 2 Mar 2021, 15:32
subject: Re: Reminder: FW: Unicef Netherlands position in Intercountry Adoption
Dear All,
I hope this email finds you well. 3 years ago Unicef was lobbying for continuation of Intercountry Adoptions. The position of UNICEF is still in breach of the UNCRC and resembles the position of the adoption agencies. Like for example here the dutch adoption agencies.
Their position is available here:
I assume that you all are aware that after a thorough investigation, the Dutch Joustra Committee came to the conclusion that intercountry adoptions should be stopped.
Their full report is available here.
https://www.commissieonderzoekinterlandelijkeadoptie.nl/het-rapport/
In the light of this, I would like to know whether UNICEF is going to adjust its position and interpretation of the UNCRC and if so, how ?
Kindly let me know at the earliest was we are working on an article about "Subsidiarity".
Sincerely
Arun Dohle
www.againstchildtrafficking.org
www.adopteerightscouncil.org
On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 at 02:35, Kerry Neal
Dear Mr. Dohle
With regards to the specific questions you raise below:
Does UNICEF agree with the fact, that the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of intercountry adoptions and the United Nations Convention on the rights of the Child do differ in particular when it comes to the principle of subsidiarity and the question whether inter-country adoption is a child protection measure ?
I believe our organizations have differing opinions with regards to this matter. Our understanding is that the CRC is operational in all countries where the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of intercountry adoptions (hereafter the Hage Convention) is applied, noting of course that the USA has not ratified the CRC but has ratified the Hague Convention, and that these 2 legal instruments act in a complementary manner in those countries which have ratified the Hague Convention. Both instruments clearly direct States to act in a manner consistent with upholding the best interests of the child when considering the possibility of inter-country adoption.
Could you also kindly provide me with the decision and agreement of the Executive Board of UNICEF for the position of UNICEF regarding inter- country adoption ?
To the best of my knowledge, this matter has not been debated / decided at the UNICEF Executive Board: organizational positions are developed by technical staff in the organization and then discussed and approved with senior management, including the Executive Director.
Is there any clear written decision to depart from the UNCRC and push / lobby for the Hague Adoption Convention ?
I would respectfully disagree with your characterization of UNICEF’s position here. As the position publicly available on our website states, ‘UNICEF supports intercountry adoption, when pursued in conformity with the standards and principles of the 1993 Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of intercountry Adoptions – currently ratified by 95 countries’. We do not regard this as departure from the CRC – as noted above, we regard these two legal instruments as acting in a complementary manner.
How and by whom was the decision taken to hire Nigel Cantwell to draft the UNICEF position in 2004 ?
I am afraid that this was a decision taken long before my time at HQ, and so it is not really possible for me to answer – and in any case, it concerns a personnel/contractual matter and as such would be covered by standard organizational human-resources policies guaranteeing confidentiality. As noted above, the final position would have been discussed and approved with senior management and technical staff within the organization.
I do note some changes over the years. What did cause the changes and by whom were those decisions taken ? In which context, or background ?
I am afraid that I do not have the ability to answer such a broad question (aside from anything, my tenure in HQ only covers the last 5 years). As with all organizations working in a changing environment, positions on matter such as this will not necessarily remain static – nor, I am sure you would agree, should they, as new evidence and practice emerges which can inform organizational learning and positioning. As noted above though, organizational positions are developed by technical staff in the organization and then discussed and approved with senior management, including the Executive Director, and this would include also substantive changes to existing positions.
Does UNICEF really agree with the outgoing adoption cases from the United States ?
Again, with respect, this is too broad and general a question for me to be able to respond to meaningfully. I would simply note that the United States is a signatory to the Hague Convention, and that we would advocate that adoptions to/from the US only take place with other countries that are also Hague signatories.
As I asked the regarding the DRC and the UNICEF position under the European equivalent to FOIA, would you agree to make it all public ?
As I noted in my previous mail, having checked with our office in DRC, no notes were taken and no official record was prepared/shared with participants of the meeting with the EU; therefore all I was able to share was the document which outlined UNICEF’s position on intercountry adoption. I cannot make any statement regarding the response of the EEAS to your enquiry.
I hope this provides some further clarity regarding our position on this matter. I realize that there is a difference of opinion between our two organizations on some matters related to the Hague Convention; however, I believe that we are both focused on ensuring that the best interests of the child is always the paramount consideration when identifying care options available for children deprived of parental care.
Sincerely,
K
Kerry L. Neal
Child Protection Specialist, Justice for Children
UNICEF HQ
Tel: +1 212 326 7650
Email: kneal@unicef.org
From: Arun Dohle [mailto:arundohle@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2018 8:11 AM
To: Kerry Neal
Cc: Roger Pearson
Subject: RE: Reminder: FW: Unicef Netherlands position in Intercountry Adoption ?
Dear Kerry,
thanks for your reply. I´m though still very puzzled and have a few more questions.
Does UNICEF agree with the fact, that the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of intercountry adoptions and the United Nations Convention on the rights of the Child do differ in particular when it comes to the principle of subsidiarity and the question whether inter-country adoption is a child protection measure ?
Could you also kindly provide me with the decision and agreement of the Executive Board of UNICEF for the position of UNICEF regarding inter- country adoption ?
Is there any clear written decision to depart from the UNCRC and push / lobby for the Hague Adoption Convention ?
How and by whom was the decision taken to hire Nigel Cantwell to draft the UNICEF position in 2004 ?
I do note some changes over the years.
What did cause the changes and by whom were those decisions taken ? In which context, or background ?
I´d like to really understand on which basis the position of UNICEF on intercountry adoptions was formed.
So far as I can see, there was no clear written uniform position until Nigel Cantwell drafted the position in 2004.
Does UNICEF really agree with the outgoing adoption cases from the United States ?
As I asked the regarding the DRC and the UNICEF position under the European equivalent to FOIA, would you agree to make it all public ?
Access was denied to me. What is there to hide ?
The full request is available here:
https://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/blocked_adoption_of_congolese_ch
I hope you took the time and watched the documentary “ The Traffickers “.
What you see is a direct result of policies, which are contrary to the UNCRC.
Thanking you in advance.
Sincerely
Arun Dohle
www.againstchildtrafficking.org
From: Kerry Neal [mailto:kneal@unicef.org]
Sent: Mittwoch, 7. Februar 2018 21:52
To: Arun Dohle; Cornelius Williams
Cc: Roger Pearson; Sumaira A Chowdhury
Subject: RE: Reminder: FW: Unicef Netherlands position in Intercountry Adoption ?
Dear Arun
My apologies for the delay in finally getting back to you – I was out of the office on duty travel and then a short leave.
Thank you for your mails about this matter. The role of UNICEF National Committees also includes the possibility advocacy, campaigning and policy work at a national level, and whilst some National Committees do indeed focus predominantly on fund raising, some, such as the Committee in the Netherlands, take an active role in addressing child rights issues nationally. When addressing issues such as inter-country adoption, the National Committees rely upon global guidance issued from UNICEF Headquarters.
UNICEF’s position on Intercountry Adoption is available at https://www.unicef.org/media/media_41918.html . As noted, UNICEF does not oppose inter-country adoption, provided it takes place in conformity with the standards and principles of the 1993 Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of intercountry Adoptions. As I am sure you are aware, UNICEF also works in many countries to help build the capacities of local social welfare, child-care and alternative care systems to prevent family separation and support vulnerable families as well as ensure that countries have the adequate tools, safeguards and resources to meet the Hague Convention obligations for the authorities of countries from which children leave for adoption, and those that are receiving these children.
Regarding your request specific to the meeting referred to in the DRC, we have verified with the office there that no notes were taken and no official record was prepared/shared with participants. What was shared with participants was the attached briefing summarizing UNICEF’s position with regards to inter-country adoption processes, which, as you can see, elaborates on the above stated position in some detail, including emphasizing that UNICEF cannot support inter-country adoptions unless they are undertaken in conformity with the requirements and obligations of the Hague Convention.
Should you require further information regarding our work on alternative care and/or inter-country adoptions, please do not hesitate to contact me for further elaboration.
Yours Sincerely,
K
Kerry L. Neal
Child Protection Specialist, Justice for Children
UNICEF HQ
Tel: +1 212 326 7650
Email: kneal@unicef.org
From: Arun Dohle [mailto:arundohle@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 1, 2018 11:40 AM
To: Cornelius Williams
Cc: Kerry Neal
Subject: RE: Reminder: FW: Unicef Netherlands position in Intercountry Adoption ?
Thank you Mr. Williams,
In this regard i also kindly request as suggested in the attached letter from EEAS, the report of the meeting organised by UNICEF on children legally adopted and
detained in the Democratic Republic of Congo, dated 26/11/2015.
This meeting relates to, as far as I know, to the children and families which can be seen in the documentary “ The Traffickers “. ( It is also now available in the US on Netflix)
The Italian agency caught trafficking in the DRC is Amici dei Bambini.
Given the fact that the accredited adoption agencies all are time and again involved in gross adoption trafficking scandals, I m shocked to see that UNICEF Netherlands is listed as speaker in the upcoming Euradopt 2018 conference.
http://www.euradopt2018.org/our-speakers.html
The dutch agency Wereldkinderen had trafficked children from Ethiopia. We exposed this.
Adoptionscentrum , the large swedish agency trafficked children from India and we exposed that as well.
( Manufactured Orphans : https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/video-on-demand/undercover-asia-s4/manufactured-orphans-8864316 )
In Manufacted Orphans, you can see the story of “Indira”. She lost her son to an Italian family. The agency is CIAI.
Now currently Adoptionscentrum is embroiled in the scandal regarding adoptions from Chile.
In 2004, Nigel Cantwell, founder of Defence for children and member of the advisory committee, drafted the UNICEF position on intercountry adoption.
This position was contrary to the opinion of the independent panel established by the European Commission to advice Romania on it´s new laws.
UNICEF´s position hardly changed since then and is aligned with the Hague Adoption Convention. ( see also our previous communication)
We take positive note of the fact, that DCI , now clearly says “stop” to intercountry adoptions and backs up the RSJ advice.
“ Defense for Children, like the Council for Criminal Justice and Youth Protection (RSJ), is convinced that intercountry adoption is not the best way to protect children without a family. It is important that children can grow up with their original family, and can be protected in the country of origin. In practice, compliance with the subsidiarity principle (inter-country adoption as last resort measure) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child can not be properly implemented. For the RSJ this is a valid argument to stop intercountry adoption. Defense for Children endorses this. “
I hope that UNICEF fully backs up the RSJ advice in the Netherlands, adhere´s strictly to the standards of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and doesn´t associate or engage with traffickers.
Sincerely
Arun Dohle
www.againstchildtrafficking.org
“
From: Cornelius Williams [mailto:cowilliams@unicef.org]
Sent: Mittwoch, 31. Januar 2018 14:34
To: Arun Dohle
Cc: Kerry Neal; Roger Pearson; Sumaira A Chowdhury
Subject: Re: Reminder: FW: Unicef Netherlands position in Intercountry Adoption ?
Dear Arun,
Apologies if you have not received a response from us. My colleague Kerry Neal copied into this email will be in touch soon.
Best regards
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 28, 2018, at 7:35 AM, Arun Dohle
Dear Mr. Williams,
sadly i have not received any reply to my below email.
Kindly do reply to us, failing so I will have to turn to a higher level.
Sincerely
Arun Dohle
www.againstchildtrafficking.org
From: Arun Dohle [mailto:arundohle@gmail.com]
Sent: Dienstag, 5. Dezember 2017 10:30
To: cowilliams@unicef.org
Subject: Unicef Netherlands position in Intercountry Adoption ?
Dear Mr. Williams,
Beginning this year UNICEF Netherlands spoke in the Parliament and took a position regarding intercountry adoptions.
Honestly I m a bit confused, whether the UNICEF position Netherlands had been coordinated with Headquarters or not.
https://www.unicef.nl/files/Notitie%20UNICEF%20Nederland%20over%20interlandelijke%20adoptie.pdf
My understanding is also that UNICEF Netherlands is mainly a fundraising organisation.
Is it coordinated with the UNICEF Headquarters that they lobby and take influence in the current debate in the Netherlands, which was kicked off by the advice of the RSJ to stop with intercountry adoptions ?
Available here:
I would also like to know the current position on Intercountry Adoptions of UNICEF Headquarters in the light of this significant advice to stop intercountry adoptions.
I note that in the DRC, Unicef didn´t say “ STOP” and the result can be viewed in this documentary here.
The Traffickers:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2GzR8-1T63bU3h2NndiNlRyZzQ/view?usp=sharing
Further Vietnam was reformed in line with the Hague Adoption Convention, however Denmark now stopped adoptions due to serious concerns.
Sincerely
Arun Dohle
www.againstchildtrafficking.org