Update December 5th, 2003

(Posted with permission from Susana Luarca, Attorney at Law, ADA)

Dear Friends,

This is a brief summary of recent events.

1. UNICEF CONFERENCE

On December 3, 2003, took place the conference sponsored by UNICEF, to present to the two presidential candidates and to the recently elected 331 mayors and 158 congressmen, the plan of UNICEF to solve all the problems of the Guatemalan childhood and adolescence.

The conference was held at the Conventions Center of the Westin Camino Real. Although it is a very large room, it was packed. The guests were also invited to a night at the hotel and meals, aside from the cocktail at the end of the conference. That, and the opportunity to rub shoulders with the new figures in the political scene made many of them to attend.

Five of us went to see what the conference was about (Dina Castro, Carlota Torres, Jorge and Feliciano Carrillo Gudiel and I). The first speaker was Gladys Acosta, the Peruvian delegate of UNICEF in Guatemala. Her message was well delivered. She stated that the situation of the children and the youth in Guatemala could not be worse and that UNICEF has studied how it can be improved, but the actual solution is in the hands of the local government. It requires over 917 million dollars in a four year period, and the political willpower to do it. There was no offer of financial collaboration by UNICEF. Just the "wise guidance" of the supranational entity. Each guest got a booklet made of thick glossy paper, with beautiful pictures of children of all races, where the different problems of the children of Guatemalan were outlined. The chapter of "Protection", states in its first paragraph: "In the year of 2002, there were authorized 2933 adoptions. Only 62 of those adoptions were
national, and all the rest were international adoptions, that were authorized without controls or guaranties to protect the rights of the adopted children."

The problem is that so much of what was said by the different UNICEF speakers is true, because we can't deny that the situation of the children is terrible. UNICEF asserts once again its position as "the expert" in the problems of the Guatemalan childhood. Therefore, when such entity maligns adoptions, everybody believes it, because what they say is true about everything else.

The conference was very effective to assert UNICEF's power, to display its unlimited resources and to tell the new president and authorities what does UNICEF expect from them. Needless to say, both presidential candidates thanked UNICEF "for the opportunity of being there and for caring for the Guatemalan children".
How does one explain to the already "brainwashed" new authorities that UNICEF is not the benevolent and truly concerned entity that it pretends to be?

We left the conference after the candidates spoke, just before the director of UNICEF for the area started his lecture. My personal impression is that Berger is the next president of Guatemala and that this coming year will be extremely tough for adoptions. We will have to fight every day to keep adoptions open, because UNICEF is not taking no for an answer. If it is not the law, they will use other means to try to stop the children from being adopted internationally. Who wins the presidential elections is irrelevant for adoptions, because the real threat comes from UNICEF, who will influence the new president with whatever it takes.

2. THE ADOPTIONS LAW

The second reading of the adoption law was held two weeks ago, but the quorum was insufficient, so it can be challenged. The same goes for the first reading, when the FRG did it without the required opinion of one of the two committees. The new congress will have to decide if they go ahead with a law that has been accused of violating at least seven constitutional provisions or to start fresh with a new project.We believe that there is a chance that the current project will not be accepted by the new congress.

We do not oppose an adoption law. The problem is that we want a law that allows adoptions to continue and UNICEF wants a law that does exactly the opposite. During the "Reign of terror of the Hague Convention" UNICEF remained silent about the decrease in the number of adoptions. It was until the Hague was totally and completely defeated, that UNICEF includes international adoptions in its agenda.

More important than a new law, are the controls that all of have to use to protect the interests of everybody involved in the process. The adoption agencies should oversee the work of the adoption professionals in Guatemala and discontinue the services of those who do not perform their work with honesty and responsibility. The children must go to the adoptive parents well cared for, the communication during the process must be fluid and the mistakes and delays must be kept to a minimum. Adoption does not have to be painful. Should not be.

3. VISITS TO THE PGN

Although many cases have exited PGN with approvals, the PGN lawyers continue to raise objections that lack legal foundation. That should not be allowed. With my sister Ana Rosa, who is also a lawyer, we went yesterday and the day before to the PGN to talk to the lawyers about the many cases that are being delayed. The nicest and easiest to approach of the PGN lawyers was Hugo Mendoza Campos, who is also the lawyer who has a criminal process pending for five different felonies in connection to the adoption of a five year old boy (abuse of power, disobedience, negligence in the performance of his official duties, usurpation of powers and violation of the Constitution). The rest of them were like Mendoza Campos used to be before the criminal lawsuit. As soon as one mentions that they have no right to delay the cases they say that they are working non stop, and that thy cannot do it any faster. When we told them that the role of the PGN is to give an opinion based on law,
they say that the Convention for the Rights of the Child enables them to do it for the "best interest of the child. We told them that the "best interest of the child" is not a "carte blanche" to do as they please and to disregard the laws and that we fail to understand how that superior interest is protected by delaying unnecessarily the moment when the child - at last - will get a permanent and loving family. We told them that if they insist in delaying the files or in making up reasons to reject them, we will file criminal charges against them. We expect that since they would loose their legal practice (automatic disbarment), their jobs and their freedom, they would be more eager to fulfill the law. But it seems that they do not believe that we will do it.

We tried to talk to Merida but he was out. Although he claims that he signs files only on Thursdays and Fridays, he was not at his office neither yesterday nor today..

I left message with lawyer Epifanio Monterroso that we will continue filing criminal lawsuits against him for not doing his work. It is terrible that the files keep piling up in his office and he does not sign them, because he has another job -also paid by the State, which also is against the law - .

4. THE TRIAL OF BRUCE HARRIS

Emerging after a long time of keeping a low profile with regard to adoptions, Bruce Harris spearheaded the raid of the house for children in Costa Riva, where they found some children who were being adopted. He is again accusing the adoptions lawyers and the US parents of working together to get a child, at any cost, no matter how.

His trial for defamation of my person will be held on January 22, 2004 at nine in the morning. The trial will be public and the admittance is free. You are welcome to attend. If the trial actually takes place, Bruce Harris will be found guilty and will be sent to prison. It has been six years since he defamed me at a press conference and he keeps doing it, every time that he repeats his lies about me. That will be taken into account by the court.

Bruce Harris keeps trying to be judged as a journalist. On three separate occasions the Constitutional Court has dismissed the amparos that he has filed, stating that he cannot be protected by the special privileges of those who work in the media because he is not a journalist, he is a private citizen defaming another private citizen and that is why he should be tried as any common person.

Based on the interview that I gave to a newspaper where the reporter put words in my mouth, , Bruce Harris filed a lawsuit against methree years ago, for defamation. Bruce Harris keeps saying that when he accused me of doing adoptions of stolen children, (although all the adoptions that I did were of children already declared abandoned by the Court of Minors), he was " rightfully using his right of expression", but at the same time, when he accuses me of defaming him, he demands that the court " applies all the weight of the law to punish me for the serious damage that I did to his good name" His lawsuit does not worry me because I never said what the reporter wrote, and because the statement is not slanderous anyway. The only defense that Bruce Harris could argue is truth. But is is obvious that he has no proof of his false allegations and that is why he is trying to avoid going to trial.

I filed a complaint a year ago, before the Inter American Commission of Human Rights against the State of Guatemala, to get a ruling ordering Guatemala to pass laws that effectively protect the good name of the people, because with the current laws, people like Bruce Harris can maneuver the legal system during years in order to avoid being tried. I am still waiting to hear from them, although I talked personally to the lawyer in charge of the Guatemalan affairs when I went to Wahsington DC in April and she offered to look into it.

For all of you who exited PGN, my heartfelt congratulations and for the ones still waiting, be assured that we are committed to get all the cases out as soon as possible.

Best regards,

Susana Luarca
Attorney at Law
Asociacion Defensores de la Adopcion

Posted by Kelly at December 5, 2003 02:29 PM