Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 2497 / 251,287

Articles

Browse latest releases

Browse by creation date

Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
QA
YE YM YI

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 06BUCHAREST576, ADOPTIONS: ROMANIA OFFICIALLY REJECTS ALL PENDING

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs

Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
  • The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
  • The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
  • The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #06BUCHAREST576.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
06BUCHAREST576 2006-04-05 16:04 2010-11-30 16:04 CONFIDENTIAL Embassy Bucharest
VZCZCXRO3212
PP RUEHFL RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHROV RUEHSR
DE RUEHBM #0576 0951604
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 051604Z APR 06
FM AMEMBASSY BUCHAREST
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 4119
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE
RUEHTV/AMEMBASSY TEL AVIV 2190
C O N F I D E N T I A L BUCHAREST 000576 

SIPDIS 

SIPDIS 

DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/NCE BILL SILKWORTH; 
AND CA/OCS/CI CHRIS LAMORA AND SCOTT BOSWELL 

E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/05/2026 
TAGS: CASC PREL PGOV PHUM RO
SUBJECT: ADOPTIONS: ROMANIA OFFICIALLY REJECTS ALL PENDING 
INTERCOUNTRY ADOPTION CASES 

REF: A) BUCHAREST 0536 B) 2005 BUCHAREST 2550 

Classified By: DCM Mark Taplin, Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) 

1. (U) On April 5, Embassy received by mail a letter from 
Theodora Bertzi, Secretary of State for the Government of 
Romania,s (GOR) Romanian Office for Adoptions (ROA), dated 
March 29 and including the final report of the GOR Working 
Group established in June 2005 to audit pending petitions by 
foreign families to adopt Romanian orphans and abandoned 
children. Post has faxed the letter to EUR/NCE and CA/OCS/CI. 

2. (U) The report shows that none of the 1,092 children 
identified in the pending petitions will be available for 
inter-country adoption, ostensibly for the following reasons: 

-- 41 reintegrated into biological family 

-- 12 integrated within extended family 

-- 227 adopted by Romanian families 

-- 17 adopted by other foreign families by the rules of the 
adoption moratorium (2001-04) 

-- 8 under legal guardianship in Romania 

-- 12 reached or will soon reach age 18 

-- 47 petitioned after a February 6, 2004 emergency ordinance 
suspended even exceptional approval of intercountry adoptions 
during the moratorium 

-- 2 died 

-- 6 not found in GOR,s database of orphans or abandoned 
children 

-- 90 had petitions withdrawn by the foreign families (1 from 
the U.S.) 

-- 132 in process of final domestic adoption 

-- 415 not adoptable, protected within substitutive (sic) 
families 

-- 83 not adoptable, placed in the protection system (their 
biological family did not consent to adoption before Court or 
the Court did not approve the opening of the domestic 
adoption procedure). 

3. (C) Comment: The Working Group had been expected to issue 
its report by the end of March, and Bertzi had announced 
publicly in December 2005 that none of the cases would be 
approved for inter-country adoption. However, the utterly 
non-transparent process of the Working Group and the opaque 
quality of the report suggest some of the children may in 
fact remain in non-permanent situations in which their 
welfare is not being adequately protected. Post believes we 
should continue to press the GOR to open up the Working 
Group,s "conclusions" for a transparent, objective 
international review and to establish a legal framework that 
would allow inter-country adoption for appropriate pending 
cases. We will provide Department with our updated 
recommendations soon. End comment. 

TAUBMAN