Amended Child Protection Act

Original Language Title: Grozījumi Bērnu tiesību aizsardzības likumā

Subscribe to a Global-Regulation Premium Membership Today!

Key Benefits:

Subscribe Now

Read the untranslated law here: https://www.vestnesis.lv/ta/id/206960

The Saeima has adopted and the President promulgated the following laws: law on protection of the rights of the child in the Child Protection Act (Republic of Latvia Saeima and the Cabinet of Ministers rapporteur, 1998, no. 15; 2000, no. 8, 12; 2001, 24 No; 2002; 2003, 23, the No. 12. No; 2004, nr. 12; 2005; 2006, 8. No, No 22; 2007, nr. 9, No 15; 2008; 2009, 14, no. 23; Latvian journal, 2009, 193. No.) the amendments are as follows: 1. Article 27: make the first part of paragraph 1 by the following: "the life of the child, 1) health or development is seriously endangered because of violence or has a reasonable suspicion of child abuse, as well as the lack of care or home conditions (social environment);";
make the third paragraph as follows: "(3) a child of the family, he is assured of care at the guardian ārpusģimen, audžuģimen or child care institution, as well as State-funded emergency medical assistance or medical assistance, social rehabilitation institutions.";
Add to article 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 of the part as follows: "(41) If the police class child of the family in the context of the first subparagraph of this article referred to in paragraph 1 and pending the decision on his ārpusģimen care, police can refuse to announce the location of the child, his parents, and brothers, sisters, grandparents and the people with whom the child has lived a long time in a single farm. If a child is separated from the family in the context of the first subparagraph of this article referred to in paragraph 1 and pending the decision on his ārpusģimen care, child care institution, educational institution, medical institution or social rehabilitation authority may prohibit the child's parents, as well as brothers, sisters, grandparents and the people with whom the child has lived a long time do not share holding, meet with the child, if the appointment with that person : 1) detrimental to the child's health, development and security;
2) constitutes a danger to the child or the other authorities mentioned in this paragraph to the existing children.
(42) the decision on the refusal of the police to announce the location of the child and the child care institution, educational institution, medical institution or social rehabilitation authority decision on ban to meet with a child can communicate orally. These decisions may be requested in writing, as well as design appeal to the administrative procedure law. Appeal shall not suspend the decision action.
(43) if the child is separated from the family for this article, in the case referred to in 4.1, on the next working day at the latest, inform the family courts, which are competent to rule on the disqualification of care parents. Family courts, receive this information no later than the next working day, shall decide on childcare disqualification of parents. "
2. Express article 33, second and third subparagraph by the following: "(2) where it is referred to in the first paragraph the circumstances, family courts, which adopted a decision on the ārpusģimen of the child's care, can refuse to notify the child's parents and other first part of this article, the persons referred to in the introductory part to the location of the child or to take a decision on the prohibition of the meet.
(3) the decision on refusal to notify the child's parents and other first part of this article, the persons referred to in the introductory part to the location of the child and the decision on the ban to meet interested parties can appeal to a Court of law. The court filing does not suspend the operation of that decision. "
3. in article 72: turn off the sixth part of the third sentence;
to supplement the article with the seventh and eighth by the following: "(7) the employer has a duty to impeach an employee or Manager of the authority, where there is a reasonable suspicion about the possible infringement on the rights of the child and to require State children rights protection Inspectorate. National child protection inspection request is not negotiable and appealable, it executes immediately.
(8) disputes concerning employee's or manager's suspension of the authority to review the law of civil procedure. The Court, in considering these issues, you can evaluate the State of protection of the rights of the child at the request of the inspection. "
The Parliament adopted the law of 4 March 2010.
President Valdis Zatlers in Riga V 2010 24 March