Mr.Rebates

Mr. Rebates
Showing posts with label Brazil. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Brazil. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

No surprises this time

Brazil's new Female President has some tough shoes to fill, Ms.Dilma Rousseff has never help any political office and will be taking over from a very successful Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva the present President of Brazil, she was chosen and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva successor. 


WITH 93% of the votes for president counted, Dilma Rousseff, the candidate of the ruling Workers’ Party and the chosen successor of the current president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, has defeated José Serra of the Party of Brazilian Social Democracy by 55.5% to 45.5%. Ms Rousseff had never before run for elected office. Her entire political life had been behind the scenes. Little was known of either her politics or her personality. Mr Serra was vastly more experienced and better known. But Lula campaigned beside Ms Rousseff, toured the country with her and was at least as visible in her television advertising as she was. Asked to choose between continuity and experience, Brazilians chose continuity.

So on January 1st Ms Rousseff will become Brazil’s next president, and its first female one. In the end, it was the poor and those in the less-developed northern regions who swung it her way. Richer and better-educated folk preferred Mr Serra, but Brazil has fewer of them.

Ms Rousseff now has some time before she must put together a government—but also the freedom to announce important appointments as soon as she wishes. Her choice of foreign minister will be a clue to whether she intends to rein back on Lula’s foreign-policy adventurism. And her pick for finance minister will show whether she is serious about getting public spending back under control. Despite a strong economy and galloping tax receipts, the government’s spending is rising even faster than its income. Under Lula, Brazil’s central bank was granted de facto independence over monetary policy, which means high interest rates to counter the government’s fiscal laxness—one of the root causes of Brazil’s over-valued currency. A strong, fiscally conservative appointment to the bank’s governership would reassure investors that the new president does not plan to intervene directly to push rates down.

Back in June, when campaigning kicked off, Lula told the nation that without him there would be a void on the ballot papers. He has stood in every presidential election since 1989. To fill that void, he said, he planned to change his name to Dilma Rousseff and run again. Brazilians will soon find out whether Ms Rousseff is her own woman, or just Lula in lipstick.

Sunday, October 10, 2010

BRAZIL: Land of No Divorce

 This is just an informational article of how things where in Brazil in 1951, I found this article and thought it would be an interesting read. Brazil is no longer a No Divorce Land today in 2010.

Sept. 10, 1951


In most Western nations divorce is legal on grounds of adultery or desertion; various countries have also permitted divorce for sundry other reasons: attending the theater, conspiring against the government, gambling, apostasy, vagrancy, ill humor at the breakfast table. Brazil has always prohibited-divorce for any reason whatever. Its constitution makes a legal marriage an-indissoluble contract.

Last week, in the Congress at Rio, Deputy Nelson Carneiro argued for a bill which would punch a loophole in the constitution by providing annulments for incompatibility—under strict controls. The impossibility of legally ending a marriage, he believed, was the root of intolerable matrimonial tangles in Brazil. At every pause in his 98-page speech, Carneiro was rebutted by a sharp-witted Roman Catholic priest, Monsignor Arruda Camara, who is also a Deputy. Monsignor Arruda held out against the slightest relaxation of the constitutional provision. Cried he to Carneiro: "Where the constitution says 'marriage is an indissoluble tie,' Your Excellency says 'dissoluble.' Where the constitution says 'no,' Your Excellency says 'yes.'"

In arguing for loosening the law, Carneiro had in mind the evasions which estranged Brazilians have practiced for years. The rich are frequently divorced and remarried abroad. Those who cannot afford to travel often get Uruguayan and Mexican divorces through Rio lawyers. Other Brazilians separated from their spouses simply move a new "wife" into the house without any semblance of divorce or new marriage. This happens even in top society. A decade ago, Francisco Campos, a cabinet minister, split from his wife and living with another woman, offered a bril liant formal reception, held his mistress' arm, and announced, "From now on our friends will consider us married." The friends did.

Because Brazil is 95% Roman Catholic, the disagreement over divorce was within the religious family. Carneiro himself is a Catholic. He and those who favor his annulment plan simply see a distressing picture of Brazil's matrimonial affairs and propose a cure—legal annulments after five years of legal separation. Those who oppose divorce say that "if it is bad without divorce, it would be worse with it." The church points to relatively successful divorceless societies in Argentina and Colombia, remembers that it fought down divorce proposals in Brazil in 1937 and 1946. Bishop Vicente Scherer of the state of Rio Grande do Sul called for "prayers to God to take away from Brazil the calamity which threatens Christian families." Defeat seemed likely for Carneiro's bill.

Divorce Laws in Brazil



In Brazil, divorce was forbidden until 1977.

Since January 2007, Brazilian couples can request a divorce at a notary's office when there is a consensus, the couple has been separated for more than a year and have no underage or special-needs children. The divorcees need only present their national IDs, marriage certificate and pay a small fee to initiate the process, which is completed in one or two weeks.

BRAZIL AND CHILD ABDUCTION

The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction was adopted on October 25, 1980, during the 14th Session of the Hague Conference on Private International Law. Brazil acceded to the Convention on October 19, 1999, effective January 1, 2000. Decree No. 3413/00 promulgated the Convention in Brazil on April 14, 2000.

Other parties to the Convention have accepted the accession of Brazil, and the Convention has gone into force between Brazil and other 38 members. The United States of America accepted the accession of Brazil to the Convention on September 29, 2003, effective December 1, 2003.
Domestic Laws and Regulations Implementing the Hague Convention 
The Central Authority for the Convention in Brazil is the Secretariat of State on Human Rights (Secretaria de Estado dos Direitos Humanos) of the Ministry of Justice. Decree No. 3951/01, effective January 7, 2002, provides for the competence and powers of the Secretariat, and it also creates the National Program for Cooperation on the Return of Internationally Abducted Brazilian Children. 
A. Return Requested From Abroad 
The Central Authority has only administrative and informational competence, as established by Decree 3951. Brazilian Courts decide the cases of parental kidnapping and the return and visitation schedules for abducted children. 
The application for the return of an abducted minor to Brazil must be directed to the Brazilian Central Authority, which will, upon receipt of the return application, analyze and verify all the information and decide whether it complies with the requirements provided for under the Convention. 
Because the activities of the Central Authority are informational and administrative only, a lawyer will be necessary for the judicial request, and the Central Authority must take the necessary measures in order to facilitate public funded assistance to those in a need of legal aid.
The Central Authority must take the necessary precautions closely with the Federal Police of the Ministry of Justice, through the division of the International Criminal Police (Interpol), to assure the location and the return of a minor illegally taken to Brazil. 
B. Return Requested from Brazil 
If the Central Authority receives an application, which meets all the requirements under the Convention, from a requester parent, it will send the return or visitation petition to the Central Authority of the requested country, which will act under its own procedural norms. Under the Convention, the courts of the requested country must order the immediate return of the minor to his country of origin. 
According to Decree No. 3951/01, the Brazilian Central Authority must take the necessary precautions, jointly with the Ministry of the Foreign Affairs of Brazil and with the Federal Police, through Interpol, for the safe return of Brazilian minors illegally taken out of the country. There is no central police file to report cases of missing children in Brazil. State Police (at the regional level) and Interpol (at the international level) are the responsible authorities to take actions in cases involving missing persons. If there is no substantial proof that a minor has been taken abroad from his residence, the abduction must first be reported at the regional level (State Police), and it will be reported internationally (to Interpol), only a year later. If such proof exists, the case is directly reported to Interpol. 
Brazil has also become a member to the Inter-American Convention on International Return of Children, adopted in Montevideo, Uruguay, on July 15, 1989, and ratified by Brazil on May 3, 1994. 
The purpose of this Convention is to secure the safe and prompt return of a child,  whose permanent residence is in one of the Member countries17 and who has been wrongfully removed from one Member country to another or who has been lawfully removed, but has been wrongfully retained. It also provides for the enforcement of visitation and custody rights.  In addition, article 34 of the Convention states that in cases involving Members of the Organization of American States (OAS) that are also Members to this Convention and to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, this Convention must prevail, unless stated otherwise through bilateral agreements between the parties. 
Domestic Laws Regarding Child Abduction and Parental Visitation 
The Federal Constitution of Brazil19 and Law No. 8069/90 (the Statute of Children and Adolescents (ECA)) are the main pieces of legislation regarding the protection of childrens rights in Brazil. The Constitution provides that one of the purposes of the social assistance in the country is to protect underprivileged children and adolescents, and it also sets forth that the protection of children must occur through government incentives, in accordance with the law.
The ECA regularizes the constitutional rules on the guarantee of childrens rights in the country, emphasizing the basic rights of children23 and adolescents, such as the right to be raised and educated among the childs family (and in some cases, in a substitute family) and the right to have the support of both parents for the custody and education of their young child. 
A. Child Abduction 
Under the Brazilian Penal Code, the punishment for any person who takes and keeps a minor28 from the control of his parents or guardian, or from any other person in charge of him, is imprisonment from 2 months to 2 years. Any parent who takes and keeps the child away of the control of the other parent, who has been judicially assigned the custody of the child, is also committing a crime. The judge may, however, decide not to apply the penalties provided for in this article in case the child has been returned to his residence with no evidence of bad treatment during the period of abduction. 
Law No. 8242/91 created the Conselho Nacional dos Direitos da Criança e do Adolescente (CONANDA)  in an effort to increase the protection of childrens rights and fight child abduction in Brazil. The ECA does not provide for a classification of missing children categories, and according to Interpol, cases of parental abductions are considered in Brazil to be cases of missing children, and therefore, statistics are sometimes misleading, because other cases of missing children, such as abduction by unknown persons, may be included in the available data in Brazil. The Ministry of Justice35 reports that although it is very difficult to predict the real number of missing persons in Brazil, it estimates that there are 10,000 cases annually involving missing children and adolescents. 
B. Parental Visitation 
The Brazilian Civil Code and the ECA38 establishes that minors are under the supervision of their families (paternal power), and that both the father and mother may exercise such power under equal conditions. Usually a custody agreement is reached at the time of the separation of the parents. However, in case of disagreement between the parents, both the father and mother may turn to the proper judicial authority to solve the disagreement, in which case the best interest of the child must prevail, and the physical custody of the minor, assigned to one or both parents, may be determined by the competent judge. 
The Civil Code, in article 1584, states that if no agreement was reached with regard to the custody of the minor, the judge must determine the custody rights, taking into consideration the person who will be able to provide for the best environment and conditions for the development of the child. The visitation rights may be modified at any time by the competent judge, as long as there is a well-founded judicial act, and the Office of the Attorney General has been heard.42 Such a modification must represent the best interest of the child, and it must account for the best environment for the social and physical development of the minor as well. 
Court System and Structure Courts Handling the Hague Convention 
Brazil is a federated republic, with a civil law system, and according to article 92 of the Constitution, its judicial powers are vested in the Federal Supreme Court (Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF)), in the Superior Court of Justice (Superior Tribunal de Justiça (STJ)), in the Federal Regional Courts of second and first instance, as well as in the Special Courts (Labor, Electoral and Military) of second and first instance. The sole paragraph of this same article states that the STF and the STJ have their seat in Brasilia (Federal Capital) and their jurisdictions over the entire Brazilian territory. 
The Constitution defines the competency of the Federal Courts in articles 106 - 110. In the first instance, the federal judges act in the Judicial Sections (Seções Judiciárias), with seats in the capital of each state of Brazil, as well as in some states, the Federal Courts of first instance (Varas Federais), with jurisdiction over specific municipalities. The second instance, with 5 Federal Regional Tribunals (Tribunais Regionais Federais (TRFs)), located in Brasilia, DF; Rio de Janeiro, RJ; Sao Paulo, SP; Porto Alegre, RS; and Recife, PE, oversees the first instance.
When Brazil is the requested country under the Convention, and there is no voluntary return of the minor, the competent courts for the return proceedings are the Federal Regional Courts of first and second instance. Before Brazil became a party to the Convention, judicial petitions were decided by the ordinary State Courts (Family Courts) in Brazil. 
In 2001, the judge of the Federal Court of Santos granted the first court decision in Brazil under the Convention that called for the return of a child to his habitual residence in Sweden, making it a leading case in the matter in the country. The parents of the child lived in Brazil until January of 1996, and the child was born in September 1991 in the city of Santos, Brazil. The couple separated in 1999 under the laws of Sweden, their country of residence at the time. The alternate custody rights of the child were granted to both parents under the Swedish legislation. In 2000, mother and the 9-year old child traveled to Brazil with authorization from the father. However, the mother retained the child in Brazil after the expiration of the authorized travel period, ignoring the custody decision already established by the Swedish court. The father of the child filed a judicial return petition before the Brazilian court on the grounds of the Convention, informing the Brazilian judge of the custody decision determined by the competent court in Sweden. 
The Brazilian federal judge granted a verdict favorable to the return of the child to the country of his habitual residence (at the time of his removal), and the decision considered that the retention of the child in Brazil by his mother was illegal, applying articles 3 and 4 of the Convention. The child returned to Sweden on the same day that the federal judge issued the court order to return the child (June 23, 2001). 
No records of appellate remedies have been found in this case, and no records of other cases in the appellate level have been found at this time. 
Law Enforcement System 
To locate children and to secure and enforce orders, the Central Authority, as well as the Judicial Courts, have requested the assistance of the local police and Interpol. Both play an important role in the prevention of child abduction and the protection of childrens rights. 
In an effort to prevent international child abduction, the Brazilian government requires valid documentation to identify the minors and the persons who are accompanying them in and out of the country, as well as judicial authorization under special circumstances. 
The ECA emphasizes that only when the minor is accompanied by both parents, or by the guardian, or if traveling with one of the parents, with the express authorization of the other (stated in a document that holds the official signature of the absent parent), the authorization to travel abroad may be granted. Also, a minor that was born in the national territory of Brazil may only leave the country with express judicial authorization, if in company of a foreign resident or a person domiciled abroad. 
If Brazilian judicial courts issue a prohibition for the child or adolescent to leave the country, all cross-border authorities are advised of such a determination. 
Legal Assistance Programs 
The Constitution of Brazil establishes that the state shall provide full and free-of-charge legal assistance to all who prove insufficiency of funds54 and that the Public Legal Defense is an essential institution to the jurisdictional function of the state and is responsible for the judicial guidance and the defense, in all levels, of the needy, under the terms of article 5, LXXIV. Also, according to the ECA, article 206 states that full and gratuitous judicial assistance will be rendered to all in need of it, and article 111.IV states that the adolescents are ensured, among other things, gratuitous and full legal assistance to those in need, according to the terms of the law.
Law No. 1060/5056 establishes rules for the concession of judicial assistance to those in need in Brazil. The Law determines in article 4 that legal assistance must be provided for the person who demonstrates the need for legal aid simply through an assertion in the initial petition that he cannot afford to pay for the legal expenses and lawyers fees without affecting the financial ability to support his own family. Under the Law, those who affirm such a condition, until it is proven contrary, are considered to be under this needy status.57 Article 5 establishes that the judge must decide the legal aid request within a period of 72 hours, and if the state does not have judicial assistance available, the Brazilian Bar Association (through its regional sections) will be responsible and designated by the judge to provide for such legal aid.
The Federal Court Council (Conselho da Justiça Federal - CJF) designated the gratuitous legal assistance in the Federal Courts of first instance through Approval No. 210/81. The Approval determines that the Direction of each Judicial Section (Seção Judiciária) of the Federal Courts organizes the lists of lawyers annually for each respective section of the Brazilian Bar Association to provide pro bono services to needy persons.
The Brazilian Bar Association and the State of Brazil provide for gratuitous legal assistance to those in need of it, and such aid may be provided for any type of legal question or judicial battle, as long as proof of financial necessity is demonstrated. For instance, the Brazilian Bar Association, Sao Paulo Section, has a Legal Assistance Committee59 that may be reached through assistencia.judiciaria@oabsp.org. br, and has a comprehensive set of information on the issue, including legislation, and other assistance programs available through it.
It appears that there is no current partnership or agreement available between the Central Authority and any other institution in Brazil with regard to legal assistance programs at this time. However, under its administrative and informative roles, the Central Authority may promptly direct interested persons to the available legal assistance sources in the country. 
A. Information Resources 
There is no national system in Brazil that supports parents in their search for their missing children. There are, however, visible government and private-oriented efforts on the matter.
There is a Federal Government website, where official placement information of missing children is possible, which is later submitted to the Specialized State Police Departments in the country. The Sector of Missing Kids (Setor de Crianças e Adolescentes Desaparecidos), a service of the State Secretariat of Social Assistance and Development of the State of Sao Paulo,  in partnership with ComputerAssociates do Brasil (CA), focuses on family reintegration of missing children, as well as provides for information and parental orientation through specialized professionals to prevent child abduction. The Sector is also structured to provide parents of missing children with digitally enhanced photos that show how their child would physically age, in order to assist in the search. The website works on an integrated basis with Missing Kids websites in more than 10 countries, and it receives, on a daily basis, more than 2 million visits.
The State Secretariat of the Social Action (Secretaria do Estado de Ação Social (SEAS)) of the Government of the Federal District of Brazil maintains a service called SOS Criança, which functions 24 hours a day, 7 days a week through a hot line (61) 346-1407 that receives information on alleged cases of childrens rights violations in the Federal District. The SOS Criança receives around 800 calls per month, including around 5 missing children calls per month. 
Non-profit organizations also play an important role as a complementary source in the fight against violation of childrens rights. NGOs, such as Mmes. da Sé, located in the city of Sao Paulo, have been dedicated to fighting child abduction for many years, Specifically, there is the Hague Convention Center for Brazil (Centro da Convenção de Haia Brasil), a website that examines the application and enforcement of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction in the country. There is substantial material on this issue, including cases and studies, as well as local and international legislation on the subject that are available in Portuguese and, in some cases, in English as well. 
There is also an international peace organization called Children in Brazil (Crianças no Brasil) with offices in Brazil and in the United States, created to assist parents of American abducted children taken from their habitual residence to Brazil. All the materials on their website are available in Portuguese and English, and it discloses pictures of missing children to the public. Upon special request, it may also provide assistance to parents of non-American children abducted to Brazil. 
Conclusion 
Local legislation, judicial, and administrative authorities, as well as government and private funded organizations, are demonstrating visible support of the terms of the Convention, which is surely an example of international protection of childrens welfare. Brazil appears to be implementing the Convention correctly; it is, however, a fairly new member to the Convention, and it might be, perhaps, too soon to draw any further conclusions on the outcome of the application of the Convention in the country.

Brazil's Compliance with the Hague Abduction Convention is Questioned

January 31, 2009

Francois Larivee is fighting for the return of his five-year-old son from Brazil. But being on the right side of the law is cold comfort to the 38-year-old businessman. He has won two court decisions in Brazil, and has followed The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction to the letter of the law, but Mr. Larivee's custody battle, which has stretched over four years, shows no signs of being resolved.

"It's a nightmare," says Mr. Larivee, who works in finance in Montreal and has seen his son only three times since his former partner kidnapped his son and moved back to Rio de Janeiro. "Every day you wake up you think of this," he adds. Every time I call, it takes me days to recover it's so traumatic, says Mr. Larivee. "It's sad because [my son] always asks: 'Daddy, why are you not here with me?' "

Cross-border custody battles are on the rise in Canada. With more people working and travelling around the globe, there is an explosion in divorces that have an international dimension, says Jeremy Morley, who runs an international family law office in New York. "The world is getting smaller and there is mixing of different backgrounds," he adds. But with the growth of bicultural marriage comes cross-border divorce.

Money and alimony is one thing, but as Mr. Larivee discovered, the worst part of separating from a spouse who no longer wants to live in the same country as you is the tragic problem of custody.


In 2001, Mr. Larivee started dating Ione, a Brazilian woman who had been working five years as an architect in Montreal. Two years later, after learning she was pregnant, the couple bought a house and moved in together. But their relationship turned "tense" following the birth of their son. In January, 2004, she travelled to Brazil for an extended 12-week trip. But when she returned to Montreal two months later, their relationship fell apart.

By August, Mr. Larivee had moved out, arranging visits with his young son three to four times a week. Before they even had a chance to explore custody arrangements, his ex-partner, on the ruse of taking a short trip to the U. S., fled illegally to Brazil with their son. Mr. Larivee learned of her deception only when he showed up at their former home after a long weekend and found his son's belongings were missing.

Mr. Larivee called the police, but his attempts to have his son returned to Montreal -- even for a basic custody hearing -- have been thwarted. "At the time, I thought it would take a month or two to bring him back," he says. I never wanted it to be public, but now I think there is nothing to do but to turn to the media, he adds.

Parental abductions are on the rise globally. The U.S. has the highest reported number of incidents in the world with 169 applications filed in 2003 -- according to the most recent statistics compiled by The Hague Abduction Convention. This represents a 13% rise since 1999. The U. S. also received 286 applications to have children returned to another country, representing a 23% rise during the same period. By contrast, Canada received 56 requests from another country seeking to have a child returned and has made 43 applications to have a child returned from another country, representing a 3% rise in cases over that four year period. The Hague convention on child abduction was drafted in 1980 to deal with the issue of parental kidnappings in cases in which the parent has rightful custody and the child in question has been taken out of the country where she/he has been residing. Since the convention was created, 74 countries have become signatories.

Under the rules of the convention, the child must be returned to their country of residence within six weeks. The convention does not decide child access. Its goal is to ensure that the courts where the child was living will have the right to make that decision.

Mr. Larivee's ex-partner, Ione, had been granted a custody judgment by a family court in Rio de Janeiro, claiming the father had abandoned them. Ms. Harnois had to fight to have the case extracted from family court and heard at the federal court level. By March, 2007 -- almost 2½ years after their first filing -- the federal court ruled that the child should be returned to Canada. The child could not leave until any appeals were heard. By October, 2007, the Federal court of appeal threw out Ione's arguments and demanded that the child be returned to Canada. Mr. Larivee's heart lifted as he flew to Rio to pick up his son. It was supposed to be a stealth operation, but when the court officers arrived to take custody of his son, Ione had taken the boy and fled once again. Her lawyer, however, sat parked in front of the house and informed the officers that the door was open. According to Ms. Harnois, Ione's father, who was also at home, told the officers: "Francois is a good guy, but my daughter is a lioness and she'll fight until the end; you'll never have that child."

Two days later, Ione obtained a decision from the vice-president of the federal court of appeal suspending the decision to have the child removed to Canada. Not only did she get another reprieve, she's working on two more appeals -- one with the Supreme Court of Justice in Brasilia and the second at the Federal Supreme Court in Rio. She's seeking to have the previous judgments overturned. The revolving doors of Brazil's justice system have not stopped turning.Mr. Larivee's case, while unusual, is not the only one pending in Brazil. David Goldman, a father from New Jersey, has also been fighting Brazilian courts for the return of his son, Sean. In June, 2004, Mr. Goldman's wife, Bruna Bianchi Carneiro Ribeiro, travelled to Brazil on vacation with their son. The day they arrived, she called back home and informed her husband she was not returning. He has never been permitted to see his son, and a panel of five judges at the Superior Court in Brazil awarded custody to Bruna in a three-to-two decision.

The Goldman case has made media headlines in the U. S., and he's gone on talk shows such as Dr. Phil to present his story. Mr. Goldman did not get the same positive court outcomes in Brazil that Mr. Larivee has had to date, but he was certain he would finally get custody of his son after learning his ex-wife, who had remarried in Brazil, had died in childbirth in August, 2008. But the case has since taken an ugly twist. In September, Mr. Goldman learned that his wife's widower, Joao Paulo Lins e Silva, ironically a family lawyer in Brazil, had filed to get Mr. Goldman's name taken off his son Sean's birth certificate and have it replaced with his own so the child could remain with him in Brazil. Mr. Silva was awarded temporary guardianship. "He's from an influential family and they are using their power and connections to make it more difficult [for me]," says Mr. Goldman who argues that his case is a basic violation of human rights. "It seems this far in Brazil, possession is nine-tenths of the law," he adds.

Mr. Larivee is holding out hope that his son will one day be returned. He's burned through $150,000, and still there is no end in sight. Brazil's record on judgments on The Hague cases has been spotty. In addition to the Goldman case, a return to Israel was refused, a return to Norway was partly granted--for summer periods only -- and the outcome of another request from the U. S. remains indeterminate.

Mr. Larivee has been learning Portuguese to better communicate with his growing son who's not been taught English or French, although his ex-partner is fluent in both languages. Although he hasn't seen his son much over the years, Mr. Larivee is inspired by the affection the little boy apparently holds for him.

When it comes to love and custody, the Brazilian courts are not playing fair. Mr. Larivee is worried that even if he does eventually win his case, the court won't send the child back to Canada on the grounds that too much time has passed and it would not be humanitarian to remove him from the country he's grown up in. Mr. Larivee is haunted by his ordeal, yet he only shrugs when asked if there was anything he would do differently. "I've done everything I could do, everything right," he says. "Maybe, don't marry a Brazilian."