The parents must change their attitude and break down the "wall of mistrust" they displayed before the order suspending parental responsibility and subsequently removing their children. This, in short, is the hope of the L'Aquila Court of Appeal, which yesterday rejected the appeal of the lawyers of the "family in the woods," while also noting "appreciable progress" by the Anglo-Australian couple. However, the judges of the L'Aquila Juvenile Court, who signed the order a month ago, will decide whether this is sufficient to revoke the order.
A response could arrive early next week, but if not, a family Christmas would be seriously jeopardized. Meanwhile, the Abruzzo judges—once again in the spotlight— are defending themselves, calling the government's latest attack, launched initially by Ministers Salvini and Roccella, "uncoordinated and offensive." In their ruling, the appeal judges simply upheld the findings of their first-instance colleagues, rejecting all the lawyers' complaints, from alleged linguistic "misunderstanding" to the failure to listen to the minors, as required by the UN convention.
"The appellants," the Court writes, "have an adequate knowledge of the Italian language, certainly sufficient to exercise the minimum defense prerogatives during the hearing before the Juvenile Court, as well as sufficient to interact, during the initial phase of the proceedings, with social workers and other professionals involved in the attempted implementation of the child protection process."
Having dismantled the defense and confirmed "all the critical issues identified in the order," the judges are passing the case back to the Juvenile Court of L'Aquila, hoping that the parents will "finally overcome the wall of mistrust they previously erected against interventions and offers of support." This call also came from the president of the Abruzzo Juvenile Court, Carla Lettere. "The court," she argues, "expects parents to change their prejudicial behavior, requesting positive action in the minors' best interests, and provides the minors and their parents with the support of social services so that a plan can be developed for the entire family." "Juvenile proceedings," she emphasizes, "must always take into account the minor's 'best interests,' which, according to case law, translates into the best interests of that minor at that particular moment." Without media hype or political pressure.
(Unioneonline)