[ad_1]
The couple took the baby home for three consecutive weekends and named him Santigo. (Photo: Playback / Instagram)
A Association of Magistrates of Cearense (ACM) is he Ceará Public Ministry (MPCE) published notes on Thursday afternoon 17, indicating that the couple Tianguá who claims to have returned a baby to a shelter after a mistake by a judge does not have custody of the child. The agencies also argue that Municipal Reception from Tianguá acted illegally by allowing the child to go to the couple’s residence for three consecutive weekends.
The case gained repercussion on social networks on the night of this Wednesday 16, after the businesswoman Gabriela Fernandes Moreira, 23, sharing a video report about the baby adoption process. The woman says that she stayed with the girl for a few weekends and that later the judge responsible for the adoption process made a mistake and requested that the baby be returned to the shelter for children and adolescents.
According to the Association, the municipality of Tianguá illegally allowed the baby to stay with the couple. Legally, when informed that a baby would be available locally, the couple would have judicial permission to meet him alone inside the shelter, which corresponds to the “bonding” period, when the family first met the child.
“The direction of the municipal reception allowed the child to go to the suitors’ house for three weekends, as the suitors themselves affirm in the judicial process, which is a totally illegal procedure, which occurred by default and without the knowledge of the Judicial Power ”, he says. the Association in note.
In the note released by the MPCE, the agency states that the shelter coordinator authorized the minor’s departure to spend, in addition to the three weekends, an entire week in the applicants’ residence, without judicial authorization and without the consent of the judicial authority and the Public Ministry. . The note alleges that the attitude is contrary to the hypotheses provided by law and that the fact only came to the attention of the MP on December 16, 2020, after the video of the businesswoman was published on social networks.
The ACM also claims that the physical health certificate was not delivered by the couple, even after two citations were issued, one in 2018 and the other in 2019. The note also reports that, following the couple’s omission, the Qualification process for adoption was terminated due to abandonment of the case.
The Association argues that, even without the certificate presented, the applicants were able to participate in the adoption course, but that the qualification of the applicants requires a series of mandatory documents for the insertion of the couple in the National Adoption System (SNA). According to the MPCE, although it was reported that a child was available for adoption at the Tianguá Municipal Refuge, the couple was not formally qualified because no documents were presented at that time.
The report of THE VILLAGE He contacted the municipality of Tianguá and awaits clarification on the position of the Municipal Reception on the case.
Consult the full text of the Association of Judges Cearense:
Regarding the video broadcast on social networks at dawn on Thursday (12/17) about the adoption process underway in Tianguá, in the Serra da Ibiapaba, which raised questions about the work of the Judge in that region, clarifies the Associação Cearense of Magistrates what:
1. In accordance with the Adoption Law (nº 12.010 / 2009), each and every one of the children in institutional care can only be delivered to potential adopters, after a judicial decision;
2. The fact that the applicant is registered as qualified in the National Adoption System (SNA) does not give him the right to detain the child;
3. Regarding the specific case, in 2018 the process of qualifying applicants for adoption began. Even in that year, the applicants were summoned in person to present a certificate of physical health and did not respond. In June 2019, the plaintiffs were again summoned to personally declare whether there was still interest in the process and, again, they remained silent, which is why, on December 2, 2019, after the manifestation of the Public Ministry of Ceará (MP -CE), the qualification process was terminated due to abandonment of the case.
4. Even so, applicants were allowed to participate in the adoption course, with their names included in the National Adoption System (SNA);
5. With the appearance of a child sheltered in the Tianguá Municipal Shelter, under the responsibility of the municipality, the “strengthening of ties” was authorized, which consists solely and exclusively in meeting the minor in the municipal shelter itself. It happens that, without any judicial authorization, the municipal reception department allowed the minor to go to the plaintiffs’ homes for three weekends, as the plaintiffs themselves affirm in the judicial process, which is a totally illegal procedure, which that it happened by default and without the knowledge of the Judicial Power;
6. During the process, the absence of mandatory requirements was verified, even with the termination of the qualification process due to inertia of the applicants, the reception was communicated and the minor returned to the place, from where he should not have left by absence. judicial decision. Later, the plaintiffs requested custody of the minor and the request was rejected, according to the ministerial opinion;
7. An appeal was lodged against said decision, pending analysis by the Court of Justice;
8. The qualification of applicants for adoption requires, even in accordance with the Adoption Law, a series of mandatory documents for the inclusion of the applicant in said system, including proof of income and address, certificates of physical and mental health, certificate of background. criminal, among others;
9. Once this applicant for adoption is excluded from the system and reinserted, the law determines that it must go to the end of the queue;
10. Likewise, the ACM reinforces the magistrates’ commitment to the best interests of childhood and the National Adoption System, at which point it recalls that the adoption processes of children and adolescents in Ceará are a priority. In 2019 alone, 63 children and adolescents were adopted in Fortaleza. In 2020, even with the new coronavirus pandemic, both psychosocial and legal courses, a mandatory step in the process, did not stop. The Judicial Power gave a total of ten courses, in which 79 provinces, 165 public officials and 514 applicants for adoption participated.
CEARENSE MAGISTRATES ASSOCIATION
Verify in its entirety the note released by the Public Ministry of Ceará (MPCE)
The Public Ministry of the State of Ceará goes to the public opinion to clarify the facts about an adoption request that is being processed in the Tianguá district and that has had repercussions on social networks in recent days.
1. On August 13, 2020, the Public Ministry of the State of Ceará filed a lawsuit requesting the removal of the family power of a baby that had been voluntarily delivered by the mother, in Tianguá. The child was institutionalized in the municipality. The mother, although formally notified, did not attend any act of the process;
2. In October, with prior authorization from the Judicial Power to strengthen ties (visits by applicants to the reception and, therefore, without the baby being born) between the minor referred and the first couple (applicant) qualified in the National System of Adoptions (SNA)) of the district, the coordinator of the institution made contacts with the couple Gabriela Fernandes Moreira and Thallys Antônio Bevilaqua de Lima, resident in Tianguá. The care coordinator, in turn, authorized the minor’s departure to spend weekends and even a whole week at the applicants’ residence, without judicial authorization and without the consent of the judicial authority and the Public Ministry, that is, against hypotheses. provided by law. This fact only caught the attention of the MP on December 16, 2020, through a video posted on social networks.
3. It should be noted that custody is only granted by the competent court, after hearing a member of the Public Ministry (Article 33, § 1, of Law 8069/90). It should be noted, however, that even with the judicial authorization to only strengthen the child’s ties with the partner, without leaving the child from the institutional care atria and in the company of a qualified professional, the care coordinator failed to comply with the planned procedure in arts. 46 and 197-C, provided for in the ECA.
4. Also, later, there was an error. The communicated couple was not formally qualified, since documents were missing that the couple, although notified, did not access the process at that time. The couple was summoned to collect all the missing documents and regularize the process, which they did not do, leading to the correct termination of the process without a resolution of merit.
5. Communication of the error that occurred (bad registration of applicants) and subsequent correction, and in view of the irregularity found, when consulted, the Public Ministry was positioned by the attentive call of those qualified in the registration of the adoption of the region, according to the provisions of article 50, § 12 of Law 8069/90;
6. It should be noted that, even with the regularization of the documentation of the adoption applicants and subsequent reincorporation to the National Adoption Registry, the decision to cease the family power of the baby was taken on 12/15/2020, so custody it could only have been granted after this date, when the couple no longer held a higher position in the registry, being entered as the sixth in the adoption queue.
7. It is also urgent to highlight the importance of correct and legal monitoring of the adoption procedure and, despite the solidarity of the Public Ministry with the pain of the suitors, it is necessary that the Ministerial Body, as an inspector of the law, act accordingly with the legal precepts. , taking into account that as a body with the responsibility of ensuring compliance with the chronological order of the adoption registry and the best interests of the child (working so that only the formally qualified person surrenders, avoiding even future and habitual “returns” of children to generate irreparable trauma).
8. Furthermore, it should be noted that without custody of the baby or judicial authorization, the suitors or any other person cannot expose the child’s image, since according to article 17 of the Statute of the Child and Adolescent (Law 8069/90), the right to respect consists of the inviolability of the physical, psychological and moral integrity of children and adolescents, encompassing the preservation of the image, identity, autonomy, values, ideas and beliefs, spaces and personal objects, a fact that is being verified and that all measures will be taken to hold the reception coordinator responsible for granting custody without authorization from the competent authorities.
