A few weeks ago, a Sunday newspaper makes headlines with the story of a baby girl ?kidnapped? by her biological father. The man is quoted as saying ?if the authorities attempt to take my child away from me, I will kill her and then commit suicide.? Shocking? Wait, it doesn?t stop there. Now, any department of Social Services in a decent country would have jumped and gone straight to the father?s house to take away the child and appropriate judicial authorities would have revoked the father?s visiting rights. Not so in this country. No one thinks this is out of order and the courts give the ?father? three one-hour visiting rights a week. In the meantime, the man thinks he will attract attention to his pathetic cause and goes on a hunger strike. He didn?t carry it off because somewhere, somehow he must have been bluffing.

Now we hear that this same man, whose wife calls a woman beater, has again ?kidnapped? his daughter and both were no-where to be seen for a few days. I ask myself the question: how could this have happened? The man gave us signs that something wasn?t quite right with him; for goodness sake he threatened to kill his daughter that he?s meant to love so much! Shouldn?t he have been sent to Brown Sequard for treatment? Shouldn?t his visiting rights have been revoked? Apparently not.

Is this how we will go about protecting our children in this society? But thank God the runaway father has been found since. And the baby is back with her mother. So far. Because guess what? The father still has visiting rights?

There are many sick people in the world today. Mauritius is no exception. Sick people should be treated; social services should protect the rights of the children. The judiciary has a duty to order the protection of victims. Even if they also have a duty to protect the rights of the accused. Balancing is their responsibility. Not issuing contradictory orders.

Will anybody explain to us why a man against whom there are allegations of domestic violence, against whom a protection order has been issued, still has visiting rights to a little baby? Will anybody care to explain why the erratic behaviour of this man hasn?t rung any alarm bells? The Ombudsperson for Children can only act in accordance with court orders. There has been a request for the creation of a family court for a while now. Up until due consideration is given to the wellbeing of children and of the family and the necessary system set rolling, we will continue to put the future generation at risk. Those children are tomorrow?s adults. If their interests are overlooked, it is the future of this society that is being jeopardised. For the sake of a healthy Mauritius, we need to look out for today?s children. If values are lost, then all is lost.