An Indian orphanage, which supplied a large number of children to Denmark in the years 1988-2006, is accused of child trafficking and falsification of documents.
The orphanage Shejar Chhaya, located an hour’s drive outside the metropolis Mumbai, was for many years AC International Child principal partner in India. – Private Foto (archive)
Children who were sold for thousands of dollars for foreign adoption. Children who were taken from their helpless parents. Children of unknown origin. And children who died and was cremated in secret, without the police or other authorities being informed.
That is, according to the newspaper Mumbai Mirror, a variety of charges against the orphanage Shejar Chhaya near Mumbai in India. The newspaper also tells of missing records and forged signatures on the adoption papers.
The orphanage has been under investigation for months , and in a major action Monday 10 February authorities collected 42 children , most of whom were under six years , and accused the institution of numerous violations of the law , which together paint a picture of organized child trafficking .
Alarm lamps lit for years
The case comes as unwelcome news in the midst of the struggle for survival , as the largest adoption agency AC International Child experiencing during these months. For Shejar Chhaya was for many years AC International Child main partner and largest single supplier of children from India to Danish parents.
280 children joined us in the years 1988-2005 – children , youth and adults adoptees who today are in Denmark and now may fear that too in their cases is rigged or that the records have disappeared.
It has , despite repeated requests not been possible to get a comment from AC International Child current management of the case . But internal documents and records show that the alarm lamps lit , well before the cooperation stopped in 2006 when the orphanage asked for ‘black money ‘ of AC International Child Support , it appears .
Orphanages were 2.2 million
Already in July 2000, during which were taken 26 children into Danish families’ documentation regarding children’s background were inadequate, “writes AC International Child Support in a statement handed to the Danish authorities in 2007.
As soon as you begin to scratch the surface, you will find private organizations that are out and visit orphanages that are willing to give up children, says Yong Sun Goulash, of the Adoption Political Forum
In November 2001, ‘ continued discussion on document processing’ , and again three years later , in November 2004 , it is stated that ‘document processing from Shejar Chhayas page is not satisfactory ‘, the orphanage lacks an understanding that there should be transparency in the paper paths .
In the 2000-2005 period paid AC International Child Support 2.2 million Kroner to the orphanage , including a permanent contribution of approximately 25,000 Danish kroner a month.
Despite the considerable amount of money, it appears that the lag with the children’s care and AC International Child was under pressure to pay more.
It also appears from the minutes that both AC International Child and its sister organization DanAdopt in 2005 lacked confidence in the central Indian adoption authority CARA which they suspected of being involved in corruption and that ‘ kickbacks ‘ are gradually becoming required throughout the adoption process .
The Danish authorities did not address the situation, but dismissed it on the contrary for criticism when a DR Documentary in 2007 documented a wide range of unethical behavior in India .
Many errors in papers
Yong Sun Gullach from the association Adoption Political Forum founded by adult adoptees calls the case of the Indian orphanage ‘catastrophic ‘.
“This shows that as soon as one begins to scratch the surface of the various sending countries, one finds private organizations that are out on market conditions and seek orphanages who are willing to give up children ,”she says .
» From South Korea, where I come from , it is the rule rather than the exception that many papers have failed. Orphanages have produced the papers that the recipient country wanted and often declared the children suitable for adoption under the claim that they were submitted anonymously, found on the street or in fact orphans. Often they have given the wrong name , wrong date of birth and place of origin wrong , ” she says .
Cases should be reviewed
For those adoptees from India , now a further 280 cases could be in doubt if their cases are properly informed ,s he calls the authorities and organizations to assume their responsibilities .
“They should proactively go in and inspect all cases. But they should also look at the whole of India which gives country where many cases we have in total – once one of the largest orphanages caught with his fingers in the pot , what about the other orphanage ? “She asks .
The Board’s family law department , which oversees adoptions and has known about problems of cooperation with Shejar Chhayya will not answer at what it will take to determine whether the 280 adoptions from the orphanage have proceeded correctly . The information on Shejar Chhaya ‘ is part of our oversight to identify whether communication to Denmark has been affected , “wrote Appeals Board in an email response.
If there is ‘ uncertainty about specific adoptions , we will naturally react against these ”
Something is fundamentally wrong
Social Rapporteur for the Left, Eyvind Vesselbo , believes that the new case emphasizes that there is something fundamentally wrong with both adoption system and with supervision , which should control it :
“Even though we have repeatedly had knowledge that there was something wrong , then continued it all quite unaltered , without train children’s party and said: There ‘s something we have to investigate ,” said Eyvind Vesselbo .
The case emphasizes that a long-term reform of the adoption system requires more than tinkering .
“The whole analysis , all now talking about as something to be falling from heaven , does not solve the problems if we just continue driving along the same path as before. So we have not learned anything . ”