|
||||
| Home | | | Opinion | | | Features | | | International | | | In Dutch | | | Dictionary | | | What's On | | | Jobs | | | Housing | | | Expats | | | Blogs | | | Books |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Refused refugee children cannot be put on street: courtTuesday 27 July 2010 Three children whose Angolan mother has lost her claim for asylum cannot be evicted from the refugee centre where they are living, the appeal court in The Hague ruled on Tuesday. The court ruled that the Dutch state is required under international law to protect the children. Their mother, however, is refusing to work towards her repatriation to Angola and can be evicted, the court said. 'This decision by the mother cannot count against the children,' the court said. They cannot be evicted as long as there are no measures in place to ensure they have access to healthcare, education and a roof over their heads. In April, a lower court ruled the woman and her children, who have lived in the Netherlands for over eight years, could be evicted. The Council of Europe has ordered the Netherlands to stop evicting families with young children from asylum seekers centres because this conflicts with the European social charter and other human rights legislation.
© DutchNews.nl
Why should any country be obliged to take in any and every person who us miserable in their homeland, and provide for their dependent family - however awful reality is, there have to be limits. The truth is rarely politically correct. By Janka | July 27, 2010 10:05 PM @Janka: If the Netherlands and other countries don't want to take in refugees, then they shouldn't contribute to making their homelands miserable. Stop invading other countries, supporting oppressive regimes and contributing to war efforts. You can't have it both ways. By Chi | July 28, 2010 11:10 AM What if it were you, Janka? How would you feel if everybody thought you were a liar and a criminal and should risk your life and go home to a place they wouldn't be caught dead in? Just because they weren't lucky enough to be born elsewhere? By CW | July 28, 2010 1:04 PM we have forgotten too soon that some of our citizens were in the same situation in the 1940s. even our queen were given protection in a foreign land. Country without history is deem to fail. Look if we all learn to help when the table turns we will also be helped even if not we our children's children. By kwabena | July 28, 2010 2:38 PM There have never been any perfect countries. There have never been any perfect people. And most have victimized their own people as well as having been opportunists in others, at some point in time. The question is: who decides when enough is enough. Does that make anyone, or anyone's descendant permanently responsible for everyone else's woes? By Janka | July 28, 2010 10:46 PM I believe all developed countries should strive towards accepting their respective shares of genuine asylum seekers. Notwithstanding, if a child is being granted sanctuary in any country, the mother (and the father, where applicable)should be allowed to stay on in the interest of the child. Parents and child should either stay together or go together. By Karmenu of Malta | July 29, 2010 10:19 AM Janka should be better informed. As a Dutch citizen I was told that I could go live elsewhere if I wanted to keep my multinational family together. Unless, of course, I could get a permanent job, which is kind of impossible for some. By Anonymous | July 29, 2010 10:37 PM
Comments have been closed for this article. |
| Newsletter | | | RSS | | | Advertising | | | Business services | | | Mobile | | | Friends | | | Contact | | | About us | | | Tell a Friend |
|
||||||||
So, then the children have no parent in the centre? So the mother gets kicked out and the children go with her so the difference is the same?
By Todd Edelman | July 27, 2010 4:22 PM