The Child Welfare Services in the Norwegian city of Stavanger has denied an NRI couple, Anurup and Sagarika Bhattacharya, the legal custody of their children by alleging gross neglect on the part of parents in bringing them up.
Norway is the first country in the world to have an ombudsman for children and the office has been voicing children's concerns for the past 25 years now. The Norwegian King appoints an independent, non-partisan and politically neutral ombudsman for 4 years at a time. This policy is keeping in tune with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child which states that children have the right to feel safe and be heard. In 1997, the Norwegian ombudsman set up EUOC, a part of the council of Europe headquartered in Strasbourg to establish a network of 25 countries who have an ombudsman of children. Following the Norwegian suit, 70 countries have had respective offices for an ombudsman to safeguard Child Rights within their territory.
In the aforementioned case, it is pertinent to note that despite the fact that the parents might have faltered in the standards set up by the Norwegian government regarding child care, biologically and culturally, to alienate a child from the care and love of his/her parents in the growing up years is a case of gross violation of human rights, per se. While it is understandable that each society and culture has its own version of legal and social security, this fact and aspect is not exclusive of the specific uniqueness of any other culture or milieu. And this is what is being totally ignored in this case at hand. To feed the child with hands and sleep in the same bed with the child are habits laced with maternal and parental affection in India and can not be traced as valid grounds to deny the couple, and in turn the children, Abhigyan and Aishwarya, their share of family bonhomie. This case, therefore, should not be seen only via the lens of a Norwegian dictates on Child Rights initiatives but consider the Indian context to gain a comprehensive picture of the status quo.
In this regard, to set up an independent panel comprising of Indian and Norwegian cultural, Child Rights and legal experts, supervised by a UN monitored group to investigate the nature of charges laid by the ombudsman may be an affirmative measure. Also, since the latter swears by the clause on confidentiality of the issue and therefore is reluctant to make the findings of the 'abuse' public, an exception needs to be made in this regard to see if the couple actually violated the dictates as alleged in the Indian culture specific context. Afterall, India and Norway share a common ground of democracy and as a corollary, transparency of public office in public interest, and Norway has believed in securing a safe network among various nationalities and therefore societies and cultures in ensuring dignity in children's lives. Therefore, such an exception would go a long way in securing and strengthening Norwegian commitment towards its humanitarian and democratic principles on a wider platform.
The logical fallout of the investigation may be thus :
(A) The couple is found guilty of child abuse in a universal way, in which case suitable punishment has already been meted out. The uncles or the grandparents (a proposition as of now) shall take over the custody of the children
(B)The couple is found guilty in a Norwegian specific context and innocent in the Indian one, in which case the couple may be penalised and be allowed take the subsequent decision to either adhere to the Norwegian way or leave the country and and settle in India if at all the cultural demands of their child care gain due precedence over Norway's legal climate.
(C) Norwegian ombudsman is found guilty of misinformation and/or manhandling of the issue, in which case the UN take up the issue of Human Rights violation and harassment not just against the NRI couple but also the children in question whose basic life to dignity and sovereignty has been grossly compromised among the uncalled for media attention and unnecessary personal hassle.
