Disclaimer: This site has been first put up 15 years ago. Since then I would probably do a couple things differently, but because I've noticed this site had been linked from news outlets, PhD theses and peer rewieved papers and because I really hate the concept of "digital dark age" I've decided to put it back up. There's no chance it can produce any harm now.
| Identifier: | 03HANOI218 |
|---|---|
| Wikileaks: | View 03HANOI218 at Wikileaks.org |
| Origin: | Embassy Hanoi |
| Created: | 2003-01-28 08:41:00 |
| Classification: | UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY |
| Tags: | KOCI CVIS CASC PREL VM |
| Redacted: | This cable was not redacted by Wikileaks. |
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 HANOI 000218 SIPDIS DEPT FOR CA/OCS/CI, CA/OCS/ACS/EAP, CA/OCS/PRI, CA/VO/F/P AND EAP/BCLTV, L/EAP, Bangkok for INS/DD, Ho Chi Minh City for CONS and INS OIC SENSITIVE E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: KOCI, CVIS, CASC, PREL, VM SUBJECT: VIETNAM: MEETING WITH JUSTICE MINISTRY ON ADOPTIONS REFS: A) OI 49.02, Dec 16, 2002, to EAP/BCLTV, B) 02 State 244073, C) 02 Hanoi 3027, D) 02 State 263467, E) Hanoi 25, F) Hanoi 64, G) Bernier-Toth/Savage telcon 11/22 1. (SBU) Summary. Consul met with Justice Ministry (MOJ) officials regarding a MOU on adoptions on January 23. Specifics were not negotiated, but several elements, which are seen as "must-haves" for an MOU, were identified. Parties with the "authority" to transmit cases to the Vietnamese central authority will be have to identified; foreign adoption agencies will have to be licensed by the Vietnamese central authority in order to operate or support adoptions in Vietnam; and any MOU must allow for the decree's clauses governing the child's citizenship and protection of not only the adopted child, but also the biological and adoptive parents. The MOJ provided the implementing regulations resulting from the decree and agreed to provide the list of adoptions pending under the old rules. The GVN flagged the issue of who will sign the MOU. Consul agreed that USG would review the implementing regulations as provided. A second USG draft MOU should be more specific. End Summary. ---------- DISCLAIMER ---------- 2. (U) On January 23, 2003, Consul met again with Nguyen Quoc Cuong, Vice Director of the Department for Public Notarial, Legal Expertise, Civil Registration, Nationality, and Criminal Records, at the Ministry of Justice. Consul and Cuong were not able to discuss the draft MOU provided ref D, or any other specifics regarding an MOU as Cuong had not received cleared guidance. Cuong prefaced the discussion by saying that any comments about what might or might not be included in the MOU were his own and not the official comments of the Ministry. ----------------------------------- GENERALLY SPEAKING - THE ESSENTIALS ----------------------------------- 3. (U) Cuong pointed out that the decree parallels the Hague Convention on Adoptions of 1993 and requested that we highlight the positive and good-intentions of the decree in media statements. He reiterated that international adoptions will only take place if a bi-lateral agreement of some form has been signed between the two countries. He then went on to note that adoption procedures are different following the new decree, and highlighted some elements that he feels must be included in any MOU. The adoption application dossiers will have to be forwarded from the "authority" of the country of the Prospective Adoptive Parents (PAPs) to the Vietnamese central authority. Cuong acknowledged that adoption processing is not centralized in the US and commented that we would have to work out in our MOU to whom that authority would be delegated. He later mentioned that in agreements recently signed with Italy, Denmark, and Sweden, that authority was granted to adoption agencies. Consul pressed to see if that authority might be granted directly to parents or their representatives, particularly in cases where parents are not using an agency, but Cuong could not go into this level of detail without clearance. 4. (U) Cuong then continued that the Vietnamese Central Authority would forward adoption application dossiers to the provinces, and the provinces would have the authority to approve a dossier only after the central authority had approved it. The final critical element of an MOU that Cuong identified is that US adoption agencies would have to be licensed by the Vietnamese central authority in order to operate or support adoptions in Vietnam. He could not comment further on what licensing would entail, and simply said that `the details would come later.' He later identified one additional element of the decree which he feels must be allowed for in any MOU - the decree governs citizenship issues and protects the interests of not only the adopted child, but also the biological and adoptive parents. (Comment: Mission believes this may be a request for language similar to a clause in the draft framework agreement which calls for adopted children to not lose Vietnamese citizenship unless they choose to renounce after reaching legal age. End Comment) -------------- MAKE THE LIST? -------------- 5. (SBU) Consul asked about the status of lists of cases that had been accepted by the provinces by December 31, 2002 for processing under the old rules. Despite the deadline set for provinces to submit these lists to the MOJ by January 10th, only about two-thirds of the provinces (about 40 of 57) have submitted those lists. The lists received to date amount to almost 70 cases, including 27 from Hanoi and 27 from Ho Chi Minh City. Cuong guessed that a few (perhaps 10) of these cases being processed under the old rules may run into difficulties - not because of the decree or new procedures, but because they were filed by agencies which have bad reputations and may not be legal adoptions. Cuong agreed to provide the list, with names and not just numbers, when it is complete. He also agreed to indicate which cases he anticipates will be problematic for internal use only, not to share with PAPs. ------------------------ IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS ------------------------ 6. (U) Consul then requested the implementing regulations which will govern the implementation of the decree. Cuong provided a copy of 07/2002/TT-BTP, issued on December 16, 2002, titled: The Instructions for Implementation of Some Items of Decree 68/2002/ND-CP July 10, 2002 of the Government's Regulations on Some Articles of Marriage and Family Law on Marriage and Family Relations with Foreign Characteristics. Mission has just received a translation which it will fax separately. Mission has yet to review the document but, on first glance, it appears to be broad- ranged, covering legalization and notarials of family- related documents. It addresses the marriage of Vietnamese nationals to foreigners, and illegitimate children, as well as international adoption of Vietnamese children. Topic headers pertaining to adoption include: Registration of Adoption with Foreign Factors, Procedures for Submitting Adoption Dossiers, Order of Introduction of Children for Adoption, and Procedures for Processing Adoption Dossiers. --------------- A/S HARTY VISIT --------------- 7. (U) Consul raised A/S Harty's upcoming visit and asked that the Minister of Justice and Vice Minister Cuong be alerted to the possible requests for meetings. (Note: Vice Minister Cuong is Vice Director Cuong's supervisor.) Vice Director Cuong said that he would mention it to Vice Minister Cuong immediately but urged that any requests for meetings be made as soon as possible through the International Relations Department, as March is a very busy month. 8. (U) Consul recalled Cuong's earlier indication that reaching agreement on an MOU in time for A/S Harty to sign during her visit to Vietnam would be impossible, and asked that he be open to the possibility. Cuong indicated that if we were to work from the draft MOU as presented, it would be impossible to reach agreement by early March. However, if a new draft were presented, detailing how the US would proceed in cooperation with the July decree and December implementing procedures, Cuong feels that agreement would be possible with a lot of hard work. He added that the three agreements which have been successfully negotiated so far, have included 90% of the proposed ideas in the Vietnamese draft framework agreement. He stated that a successful MOU must indicate cooperation on both sides and agree with the basic principles of the draft framework agreement. Following on, he acknowledged that the US system and adoption procedures are very different from Vietnam's, and particularly mentioned the de-centralization of the United States system where matters are governed at the State level. He suggested that these differences should be talked through. ----------------------- SIGN ON THE DOTTED LINE ----------------------- 9. (U) Cuong raised the issue of who would be signing the MOU. He indicated that "the President" would have to authorize whoever did the signing. (He seemed to be indicating a direct authorization specific to this MOU.) Cuong asked that the USG begin now to determine who will sign and then authorize that person to sign. He was pleased that the Ambassador was discussing the MOU at a high level in Washington, D.C. at that very moment. ---------------- MORE SPECIFICITY ---------------- 10. (SBU) Comment. Cuong's comments focused on a key GVN point: The GVN considers that our first draft MOU was overly-simplified and thus cannot comment on that first draft. Mission recommends that our next draft be substantive, and address specific points where the US will cooperate and comply with the decree and implementing regulations. BURGHARDT
Latest source of this page is cablebrowser-2, released 2011-10-04