Ms Maud de Boer-Buquicchio:

I really appreciate the Senator’s question. If only I could answer by giving her one example of the perfect country but it simply does not exist. We can find good elements here and there. Sheer prohibition is not a solution. There are examples of countries, and I will give one, that safeguards best interests, the determination and the fact the transfer is not pre-established pre-birth. That country is Israel. I referred already to the need for a reflection period, which exists under law in Israel. I think that period is seven days. During that time, there is the appointment from birth of a legal guardian. That is an additional safeguard. It is only after that reflection period that the birth mother can decide, with all the guarantees. In the meantime, there is a best-interest determination. This is not just an assessment, but a determination. Then everything should be fine. I refer only to this aspect. There are other aspects in Israel’s legislation that are perhaps not so satisfactory. I do not remember the details, but there is the issue as to whether this should be limited to citizens of Israel only. There may be conditions that do not meet other requirements that the Senator might consider to be essential.

There is no perfect country. As legislators, the members have a huge responsibility. If they try to analyse what situations they would like to avoid, I think that will guide them. Hopefully, my reports that go into detail, including on the identity issue, may provide that guidance. However, who am I? I am no longer the special rapporteur. I did it a few years ago. It is important to note also that the committee on the rights of the child identified a number of situations, in particular where the contractual enforceability is part of the legislative framework, that are against the rights of the child to not be sold.