Benyam Dawit Mezmur

Intercountry adoption as a measure of last resort in Africa: advancing the rights of a child rather than a right to a child

The increased popularity of intercountry adoption is not anything recent. What is recent, however, is the increased attention African children are attracting from prospective adoptive parents living in other parts of the world, as exemplified by the adoptions by Angelina Jolie and Madonna. Opinions are divided over the necessity and propriety of intercountry adoption, but considering the practice as a panacea for children without parents and parents without children is a prevalent view. On the other hand, some sending states have resisted placing Third World children deprived of their family environment in homes outside of their native countries – a purportedly “imperialistic” practice. The operative language that has emerged in recent times has been that intercountry adoption should be used as a measure of last resort, but one can hardly find any research on what it actually means (or should mean), and what its implications are for child welfare policy and law in Africa. This paper intends to contribute to filling this gap.

A Dutiful Child: The Implications of Article 31 of the African Children's Charter

Each right has a corresponding duty. The African Childrens Charter, under article 31, imposes a range of duties on children. Understandably, it could become contentious when an instrument on the rights and welfare of children expressly imposes duties on them. After setting the platform for discussion by highlighting international experiences and outlining the African concept of human rights, this article critically examines and attempts to clarify the precise meaning, content, conditions of compliance and application of those duties for children. By way of conclusion, it suggests that article 31 represents a valuable addition to the international human rights agenda, and that a purposeful interpretation of its constituent parts reveals that children should be required to play a role at family, community, national and continental levels, in accordance with their age and maturity as they grow up, as part and parcel of their heritage, empowerment and developing citizenship.

2 + 2 = 5? Exploring the Domestication of the CRC in South African Jurisprudence (2002-2006)

Introduction South Africa commenced transition to a constitutional democracy with the adoption of an interim constitution in 1994, followed by national elections based, for the first time, on universal adult sufferage. A justiciable Bill of Rights, containing some rights accorded to children, was at the core of our new society based on values of dignity, equality and respect for the freedom and security of the person, in sharp contrast to the violence and legalised discrimination that had characterised the apartheid regime. The two years that followed the adoption of the Interim Constitution were a period of intense negotiations by a multi-party constitutional assembly to finalise the text of a final constitution, in accordance with the principles set out in the Interim Constitution. As has previously been pointed out (Sloth-Nielsen, 1996, p.326), there was a high degree of consensus amongst political parties about the children’s rights to be included, to the extent that four of the six party submissions supported the extension of the children’s rights clause, and indeed a number of additional rights were fashioned and ultimately adopted.

Adoção internacional como medida de último recurso na África: promover os direitos de uma criança ao invés do direito a uma criança

The increased popularity of intercountry adoption is not anything recent. What is recent, however, is the increased attention African children are attracting from prospective adoptive parents living in other parts of the world, as exemplified by the adoptions by Angelina Jolie and Madonna. Opinions are divided over the necessity and propriety of intercountry adoption, but considering the practice as a panacea for children without parents and parents without children is a prevalent view. On the other hand, some sending states have resisted placing Third World children deprived of their family environment in homes outside of their native countries – a purportedly “imperialistic” practice. The operative language that has emerged in recent times has been that intercountry adoption should be used as a measure of last resort, but one can hardly find any research on what it actually means (or should mean), and what its implications are for child welfare policy and law in Africa. This paper intends to contribute to filling this gap.

“Acting Like a Rich Bully”?: Madonna, Mercy, Malawi, and international children’s rights law in adoption

Although it may seem ironic that a policy affecting so few children should engage so much political and social attention, the symbolic significance of intercountry adoption far outweighs its practical import. A recent reminder of this fact on the African continent is the 2009 Madonna adoption case. This note considers Madonna’s second adoption of a child from Malawi in the light of international children’s rights laws. Although human rights groups have alleged that Madonna was “acting like a rich bully” in the main, Madonna’s adoption can withstand the scrutiny of children’s rights, and in fact, has contributed towards helping the discourse of children’s rights in Malawi “stumble” forward.

La adopción internacional como medida de último recurso em África: promover los derechos de un niño y no el derecho a un niño

The increased popularity of intercountry adoption is not anything recent. What is recent, however, is the increased attention African children are attracting from prospective adoptive parents living in other parts of the world, as exemplified by the adoptions by Angelina Jolie and Madonna. Opinions are divided over the necessity and propriety of intercountry adoption, but considering the practice as a panacea for children without parents and parents without children is a prevalent view. On the other hand, some sending states have resisted placing Third World children deprived of their family environment in homes outside of their native countries – a purportedly “imperialistic” practice. The operative language that has emerged in recent times has been that intercountry adoption should be used as a measure of last resort, but one can hardly find any research on what it actually means (or should mean), and what its implications are for child welfare policy and law in Africa. This paper intends to contribute to filling this gap.