New Delhi: The parents of Baby A — the Indian child taken by German authorities from her parents over alleged injuries she suffered in their care — plan to appeal two 13 June judgments of a Berlin court that denied them custody of the 28-month-old.
At a press conference in New Delhi Wednesday Baby A’s mother observed that the trial was unfair while stating their plans to appeal to a higher court on both the custody and visitation judgments.
Baby A was taken from her parents when she was 7 months old and the case has caused a diplomatic row between India and Germany. India has called for the child to be returned to the country.
Speaking to ThePrint regarding the case, German Ambassador to India Dr Philipp Ackermann said, “Bilateral relations should not be decided by the decision of the court because the court is not part of the government.”
On India’s concerns regarding protecting the child’s cultural, religious and linguistic background, the German ambassador said, “We see the concern of many people when it comes to this child. The child has experienced unspeakable harshness in her life. My ministry is working very closely with MEA [Indian Ministry of External Affairs] to ensure the Indianness of the child is safeguarded.”
Ackermann said he knew “it’s a difficult task and I understand that many people of faith here feel this is not acceptable but we have to abide by the court’s decision”.
“You get shocked to hear about what the child went through,” Ackermann added.
Baby A’s mother also expressed her concerns regarding their child’s visa which is set to expire on 26 June. “…We are worried that since Jugendamt (German Youth Services) has been given full custody of Baby A, they will use it to change her nationality and make her German.”
Also Read: Rani Mukerji’s powerful comeback in Mrs Chatterjee Vs Norway is marred by a loose plot
What the court said
In two judgments dated 13 June, a court in Berlin’s Pankow denied the custody of Baby A to her biological parents on the grounds that the child suffered “deliberate injuries” while in their care.
The court cited two injuries that she had suffered — on the head and back in April 2021, allegedly caused while she was being bathed, and one on the genitals dating to September 2021.
The parents had told the court it was the child’s grandmother who had caused the injury to her genitals, by penetrating her digitally (using her fingers) “in order to check whether everything was alright with the child’s vagina”.
However, the court relied on two experts and opined that the insertion of a finger into the vagina “could not justify the nature of the injuries caused”.
The court, therefore, found the grandmother’s affidavit “unsuitable”, and said this was “a protective allegation by the parents”. It then concluded that if the grandmother did not cause the penetration injuries, only the mother and/or the father could be considered responsible, since the child was in their care while the penetration injuries were being caused.
The court said that while it cannot determine as to whether the “intentional injuries to the child were caused by the mother and/or the father”, it would still have to reproach the other parent who ostensibly covered up the “serious physical and mental abuse by one parent to the child”.
The court said that “the parents have so far not been able to explain the events in question in a sufficiently consistent manner, which led to the damage to the child so far”.
Citing “the physical and thus at the same time psychological abuse of the child by the mother and/or father”, the court said the “custodial parents are to be deprived of parental care to avert the existing danger to the child”.
“There is a well-founded concern that the best interests of the child will be impaired if the court does not intervene,” it added.
Mother’s allegations
At the press conference Wednesday, the child’s mother said Baby A had been removed from the care of the 62-year-old foster mother she was living with for the past two years, and transferred to a institution for children with mental illness before the court gave its judgment on 13 June.
She said the German Youth Services cancelled their visit with Baby A, scheduled for Tuesday, on the grounds that there was no one to bring the child. They allegedly also refused to give the parents an alternative date.
Inputs from Pia Krishnankutty
Also Read: MEA calls for baby A’s return. How parents got stuck in custody battle with German authorities