Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/216204
10 News maltatoday, SUNDAY, 24 NOVEMBER 2013 Adoptions from Russia hinge on bilateral agreement MIRIAM DALLI THERE are currently no legal obstacles for Maltese heterosexual couples to adopt children from Russia, Russian Ambassador Boris Marchuk has told MaltaToday. The ambassador's comments come in the wake of local media reports that parents waiting to adopt from Russia have been informed that adoptions have been "put on hold". Russian President Vladimir Putin in summer signed a law banning the adoption of children by same-sex couples, as part of an increasingly conservative agenda the Kremlin has "Only heterosexual couples will be able to adopt" – Russian Ambassador Boris Marchuk pursued since Putin's return to power. The consequential effects of this law means that citizens of countries allowing same-sex marriages will not be able to adopt children from Russia, unless permitted by a bilateral agreement. With the Maltese parliament in the process of legalising civil unions, Russia and Malta embarked on bilateral talks. Most likely, once civil unions legislation comes into force, adoptions by heterosexual couples in Malta would depend on a bilateral agreement. "At an international level, issues of adoption are normally regulated by intergovernmental agreements," the Russian ambassador said. "Such an agreement between Russia and Malta is currently being negotiated." According to Marchuk, if the law on civil unions is approved by the Maltese parliament, amendments to this draft agreement have to be carried out in order to reflect the new legal norms in Russia. "As for now there are no legal obstacles for the Maltese to adopt children from Russia. Malta so far is not on any restrictive lists of countries with regard to international adoptions," the ambassador said. "But if same-sex civil unions are legalised in Malta, Russian courts, which have the final say in the matters of adoption, will have to act in compliance with our legislation and the bilateral agreement between our countries when it enters into force." Marchuk said he was "confident" that Malta and Russia would seek a solution. "I am confident that common ground will be sought so that the process of adoption of Russian children by Maltese families continues in compliance with the Russian laws and international obligations by our two governments," he said. The Russian legislation also means that no homosexual couple will be able to adopt children from Russia. "Only heterosexual couples will be able to adopt. Any other option will be in violation of the Russian legislation," Marchuk said. The Russian embassy could not provide the numbers of Maltese couples who were currently in the process of adopting from Russia. Such information, it said, could not be disclosed until the Russian courts pass their final judgments on adoption cases. It however confirmed that a total of 23 children have been adopted by Maltese families over the past two years. Putin, who has embraced the Russian Orthodox Church as a moral authority and harnessed its influence as a source of political support, has championed socially conservative values since starting a new, six-year term in May 2012. According to the Russian embassy, the legislation signed by Putin on 2 July – Federal Law No 167 – "reflects the predominant sentiments" in the Russian society. According to public opinion polls, more than 90% of Russian parents are opposed to any exposure of their children "to propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations", the embassy said. It argued that, historically, Russia has developed its own religious and cultural values which both coincide and differ from those in the rest of Europe. "That's why our legislators and authorities cannot ignore the voice of the majority. Their inaction could have opened the floodgates for mass protests as seen, for example, in France when it legalised same-sex marriages," Marchuk said. The Russian embassy insisted that the amendments to the Russia law "deal with the well-being of orphans and children without parental guardians". It also declared that the legislation's purpose was "to ensure that children are guaranteed a harmonious and adequate upbringing in adopted families and to safeguard their psychological and mental health from harmful influences". Russia considers "nontraditional sexual behavior" as "harmful influences". "The law protects children from psychological complexes, mental suffering and stressful conditions which are often experienced by children raised by same-sex parents, as many medical research findings explicitly show," the Russian embassy said. Constitution does not oblige state to uphold citizens' rights PAGE 1 Law professor Mangion said that despite legislation increasing the compulsory educational age to 16, the Constitution had yet to acknowledge this advancement. He said that if MPs did not strengthen the Constitution, citizens' rights would be trampled upon, adding that the constitutional provisions were in themselves "limited and indirect rights". "The Constitution is treating social, economical and cultural rights – amongst which are the right of work, terms of employment, minimum wage limitations and education – merely as principles not rights. "This is compounded by the fact that such rights are not enforceable by the courts and the state is in no way legally bound to implement them, but conversely, the parliament can repeal them by absolute majority." Mangion said this was "the last nail in the coffin" depreciating citizens' rights by not equating them to those fundamental human rights that cannot be repealed, and which are themselves enforceable in any court in Malta. Outlining this distinction between "human rights" and "citizens' rights", Mangion said it was evident that the rights of a person as a citizen should be treated better. Mangion in fact pointed out that while people's human rights created an obligation upon the state to guarantee them, the same could not be said about these "citizens' rights". "These rights are treated from the state's perspective, towards the citizen; rather than the other way Ray Mangion round, because it does not mention the state's responsibility to the citizens." He also complained that the law still uses a language and terminology belonging to 1964, representing the social rights of citizens differently from their rights as a human being. He applied the same reasoning to health and safety laws. "Although health tops the citizenry's interests… the Constitution is silent about the implementation of health and safety laws." Mangion pointed out that the Constitution had yet to even make reference to the advances of the last 50 years where healthcare was being provided for free and equally accessible to everyone as a right. He also said MPs had to amend the Constitution to ensure equal social and economic rights for homosexuals. "Just as Parliament eliminated all forms of discrimination between men and women, the law should how ensure that those of a diverse sexual orientation enjoy equal rights as heterosexuals."