Norge dømt i 9 nye barnevernssaker i EMD

Den europeiske menneskerettsdomstolen (EMD) traff en felles avgjørelse i 9 nye barnevernssaker mot Norge den 12. september. Sakene gjaldt tvangsadopsjon i etterkant av omsorgsovertakelse. Norge ble igjen dømt for brudd på EMK artikkel 8, retten til familieliv. EMD baserte sine vurderinger på den tidligere storkammeravgjørelsen mot Norge i Strand-Lobben-saken fra september 2019. Norske barnevernsmyndigheter ble nok en gang felt for ikke å ha gjort en tilstrekkelig innsats i å bevare familiebåndene med de biologiske foreldrene og tilrettelegge for en gjenforening med foreldrene mens barnet var under det offentliges omsorg. Herunder var samværene mellom barnet og biologiske foreldre altfor begrenset. EMD kom derfor til at det svært alvorlige inngrepet i retten til familieliv som adopsjon representerer, ikke var forholdsmessig.

Klagerne ble tilkjent 25 000 hver i oppreisning.

Dommen er nok et eksempel på at norske barnevernsmyndigheter har en lang vei å gå hva gjelder kompetanse og ressurser til å følge opp barnevernssaker. Vi noterer oss at barneverntjenesten i større grad enn tidligere viser til de rettslige utgangspunktene fra EMDs praksis, men at argumentene fortsatt kan mangle substans. Det er for eksempel ikke tilstrekkelig å skrive at hjelpetiltak ikke er egnet eller at hyppigere samvær ikke vil være til barnets beste. Barneverntjenesten må kunne begrunne hvorfor det er tilfellet. Dessverre ser vi fortsatt at nærmere begrunnelsene enten er fraværende eller altfor spinkle veid opp mot hvilket betydelig inngrep en omsorgsovertakelse representerer i retten til familieliv.

Her er noen sentrale utdrag fra EMDs dom i K.F. and others v. Norway av 12.09.23:

10.   The Court also emphasises that, in light of the fact that the proceedings

at issue concerning parental responsibilities and adoption were preceded by

proceedings concerning care orders and contact rights, it follows from its

relevant case-law that the Court must to some degree have regard to such

previous proceedings in order to put the proceedings complained of in context

(ibid., § 148). On several occasions the Court has taken into account whether

decisions to replace foster home arrangements with adoptions were taken in

situations where, following a placement in care, only very limited parent

child contact had been allowed

[…]

Furthermore, the Court’s case-law on such

issues may be read in conjunction with its case-law relating to complaints

about limitations on parent-child contact imposed during foster care

arrangements

[…]

13. In particular, the proceedings through which the adoption of the

applicants’ children was ultimately authorised and the reasons advanced for

the measures decided in those proceedings reflected the fact that

(i) insufficient importance was attached to the aim that placement in care be

temporary and an affected family be reunited, and (ii) insufficient regard was

paid to the positive duty to take measures to preserve family bonds to the

extent reasonably feasible (compare also Strand Lobben and Others, cited

above, § 220; Pedersen and Others, cited above, § 71; and M.L. v. Norway,

cited above, § 99). It follows that the Court is not persuaded that the

procedures to which the instant applications relate were accompanied by

safeguards proportionate to the gravity of the interferences and the

seriousness of the interests that were at stake.

[…]

14. Accordingly, the Court finds that that there has been a violation of

Article 8 of the Convention on account of the withdrawal of the applicant

parents’ parental responsibilities in respect of the children in question and the

authorisation of the adoption of the children against the parents’ wishes.

Hele dommen kan leses her.

EMDs storkammerdom fra september 2019 i Strand-Lobben and others v. Norway kan leses her.