"Rights As Indian Being Violated": Centre On Baby In German Foster Care

In a strong statement on 28-month-old Ariha Shah, who has been in foster care in Germany since 2021, the centre said today that her cultural rights and rights as an Indian are being violated. 

German Ambassador Philipp Ackermann was summoned this week and these concerns were conveyed to him, Ministry of External Affairs Spokesperson Arindam Bagchi said.

"We have asked the Ambassador to ensure Ariha's return at the earliest. We will be in constant touch with German authorities and will keep pressing them to send her to India," Mr Bagchi added.

On June 16, a court in Berlin had denied Ariha's custody to her parents and Indian Welfare Services, and had handed her over to Germany's Youth Welfare Office (Jugendamt). The baby has been in the custody of the Jugendamt since September 2021.

Some MPs had met External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar yesterday and requested him to intervene in Ariha's case. The parliamentarians included NCP leaders Supriya Sule and Vandana Chavan, Samajwadi Party leader Jaya Bachchan, Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Priyanka Chaturvedi, and Congress Rajya Sabha MP Rajani Patil. 

Ms Bachchan had also addressed reporters, along with Ariha's mother, Dhara Shah.  

Dhara Shah had said earlier that, when they were living in Germany, she and her husband had taken Ariha to a doctor in September 2021, after spotting blood in her diaper.

They had taken Ariha back home when the doctor gave the all-clear, but when she was taken for a follow-up, the hospital handed the baby over to German child services and an attempt was made to accuse the parents of sexually abusing her. 

Ms Shah added that, in December 2021, sexual abuse was ruled out by the same hospital, and a German police case on the incident was closed in February 2022. The Jugendamt had, however, pressed ahead with the case to terminate the couple's parental custody.

While granting Ariha's custody to the German state in June this year, the court had dismissed her parents' claim that the injury sustained by her was accidental.

The court had said parental care was being denied to "avert the existing danger to the child" and that her parents were unable to "explain the events in question in a sufficiently consistent manner".