Court/Judicial body: Supreme Court of the Czech Republic
Date: December 8, 2010 CRC
Provisions: Article 12: The child’s opinion
Domestic provisions: Act no. 94/1963 Coll., on Family: Section 46(1)
Case summary
Background: Finding that lower courts were inconsistently interpreting the Family Act’s provisions relating to the placement of children in institutional care, the Supreme Court reviewed a number of decisions to provide further guidance. In particular, the Court clarified under what circumstances children living with disadvantaged families or in poor housing conditions could be removed from the home.
Issue and resolution: Child protection; institutionalisation. The Court found that poverty and poor housing conditions were not adequate reasons to place a child in institutional care.
Court reasoning: If parents are unable to ensure a child’s sound upbringing or education, courts may order that this child be placed in institutional or emergency child care facilities. If necessary in the best interests of the child, institutional care may be ordered even where other, less invasive protective measures have not been taken. Regardless, however, the Government must provide adequate evidence to justify removing a child from home. Poverty alone does not suffice as a reason, especially as it may be resolved with the Government’s help. In addition, courts must seek the opinion of children involved in protective proceedings and take that opinion into consideration as required by Article 12 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Excerpt citing CRC and other relevant human rights instrumentsas in full-text Czech decision: V řízení o nařízení ústavní výchovy je třeba rovněž dodržovat závazek plynoucí z čl. 12 Úmluvy o právech dítěte (sdělení federálního ministerstva zahraničních věcí č. 104/1991 Sb.) a zjišťovat názor dítěte postupem stanoveným v § 100 odst. 4 o. s. ř. Správně tak postupoval Okresní soud v Ústí nad Labem ve věci sp. zn. 16 P 11/2001, který nezletilou (14 let) při jednání vyslechl, nebo Obvodní soudu pro Prahu 8 ve věci sp. zn. P 265/2006, přihlédl-li ke stanovisku nezletilé, která péči matky a prostředí, v němž vyrůstá, hodnotila tak, že se jí stýská po ústavním zařízení, kam byla dříve rozhodnutím soudu umístěna.
CRIN comments: CRIN believes this decision is consistent with the CRC. Children have the right to be raised by their parents unless it is necessary in their best interests that they be removed from the home, and poor living conditions do not alone amount to child abuse or neglect. As noted by the Court, children must also have the opportunity to express their views in child protective proceedings that affect them, and courts must take these views into consideration in line with Article 12 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Citation: Cpjn 202/2010 Link to Full Judgment: Download here via http://nalus.usoud.cz/Search/Search.aspx