The Paper Trail: Obama’s Indonesian Background

By Judah Benjamin, Guest Author

[Revised 7/30/08 5:00 PM EST: The author has revised the Conclusion section]

——————————————————————————–

FOREWORD by TexasDarlin

In summary, this article contends that: Barack Obama was adopted by Lolo Soetoro, his Indonesian step-father, and as a result of that adoption, his original Birth Certificate was modified to reflect his new name and the name of his new father. Obama may actually have at least TWO different Birth Certificates from Hawaii. Further, Judah Benjamin asserts that “Barry Soetoro” acquired Indonesian citizenship as a result of that adoption AND that he (Soetoro/Obama) may STILL hold Indonesian citizenship today.

I have said many times that Barack Obama probably has a Birth Certificate in Hawaii, but that he’s hiding something. I have also said that I have doubts about whether Polarik and Techdude are correct in concluding that the Certificate of Live Birth (COLB) published on Obama’s official campaign website is a fake, even though they have both adamantly stuck to their guns.

I STILL don’t know whether the COLB on Obama’s website is a true reflection of his current Birth Certificate, but I now believe I know exactly what he’s trying to hide, thanks to Judah Benjamin’s research. And once you read his new article below, you will see that it’s not hard to believe that the COLB is indeed fake, or a misrepresentation of his current record.

Regardless of whether Obama holds Indonesian citizenship today, and regardless of whether the legal arguments set forth by Judah Benjamin in his previous 2-part story would be upheld by the Supreme Court — Regardless, if Sen. Obama has withheld from the public information related to his identity, or misled the public about his background in any way — he should step aside as a candidate.

——————————————————————————–

By Judah Benjamin, Guest Author

PROLOGUE

I have to warn those of you who decide to read this article that it contains a very large number of Legal Citations and Quotes. I couldn’t help it because it seemed to be the only way to present the information so that you don’t have to read the books for yourself. The Citations, etc are in italics. Bear with me folks, its worth it. — Judah Benjamin

The Primary Document: The Kartu Keluarga

Senator Obama seems intent upon eliminating all trace of paperwork relating to his youth and then asking people just to take his word for things and not investigate too far.

Well, as much as I might like to oblige him, I’m too cynical for that to be possible, so I’ve kept digging, not directly into his background but into the Legal tangentials. Every day now I find something new and every time I do I’ll let you all know what it is, and if it happens to conflict with anything I’ve said previously this is because an honest researcher can only admit faults or contradictions exist.

I have said before that I neither read nor speak Bahasa Indonesian and so I am forced to rely upon secondary sources in English and Dutch, therefore it is possible that I may draw incorrect conclusions or misread data as I did in the case of the KTP.

The next piece of information however appears to be amenable to no variants:

Kartu Keluarga:
“As the children of Indonesian men married to foreign women are, in most cases, Indonesian citizens, all the children and the foreign wife need to be listed on the husband’s Kartu Keluarga (family card). The Indonesian husband is considered to be the Kepala Keluarga….Foreign wives of Indonesian men SHOULD be listed on the Kartu Keluarga, but their documentation (visa number) appears under the heading Kewarganegaraan. It has two columns W.N.R.I./Keturunan and Orang Asing. Be sure to have your children added to the Kartu Keluarga after birth.” — Indonesian Lawyer’s statement: Asep A. Wijaya of Wijaya&Co, Jakarta

Here we have a Document which would answer all of my questions about Obama’s years in Indonesia as nothing else can. There must also be a second KK for Stanley Ann Dunham’s Household after she and Soetoro separated and then divorced; whether there is anything of interest on that we cannot know.

Indonesia was a Police State and I would hesitate before I was convinced it is not still. One characteristic of countries of that type is obsessive record keeping. While Lolo Soetoro has been dead since 1987 and Stanley Ann Dunham since 1995 it is unlikely that the various offices, Police and Civil Government, who had copies of the Soetoro KKs have disposed of them in the interim, they also have most likely not disposed of their copies of any other documents. In fact bearing in mind that these documents are a Fundamental Vital Record I don’t believe any country would dispose of them; it would be like burning Federal Census Returns or Voter registration Lists.

Here is the paper trail that can prove whether or not Senator Obama WAS an Indonesian Citizen. Somewhere in Jakarta, Indonesia. The trouble is that while I know it must exist I can think of no way to obtain it except a request from the US Legal Authorities.

But, as I have discovered hunting around in my articles, texts and sources, there may be other documents to add to the trail. I was sticking too closely to one set of Laws when I wrote the original article and failing to see that there were some peripheral Laws that could also have relevance here and which MIGHT produce a paper trail in the USA. What these documents are will appear as we go along. IF the US Documents exist they are more than important, they spell the finish of Obama’s run for POTUS.

How to have Dual Nationality in a country that doesn’t allow it!

Here is an English text on Indonesian Citizenship Law, by Asep Wijaya:

“The citizenship law is designed to prevent apatride or bipatride. Indonesian regulations recognize neither apatride nor bipatride citizenship.”

OK, that’s simple enough. Indonesian Law doesn’t allow Dual Nationality/Citizenship.

Unfortunately it isn’t that simple:

“The existing citizenship law adopts universal principles: First, the state has the ultimate right to determine who can be granted citizenship, and who will lose it; second, the state cannot interfere with the citizenship regulations of other countries; and third, citizenship must be granted based on certain criteria.”

So if US Law said Obama was a US Citizen, which it did, from 1966 to 1979, the Indonesians accepted that HE HAD Dual Citizenship in reality, even though their own Law insisted that he DID NOT. I had not formerly realized this. Once again a clash of Legal systems. This peculiarly scrambled approach seems to have been introduced when the Indonesian Law was updated in 1974 but it may always have been there. In fact it seems to be a mirror image of US Law.

Here is Ko Swan Sik’s observation:

“The prevention of dual nationality is, however, not absolute. In a number of cases the law provides for the acquisition, or retention, of Indonesian nationality in spite of the emergence of dual nationality. In some of these cases the ground for the acquisition of Indonesian nationality is of such a fundamental character that it is considered unacceptable to cede to the application of the law of a foreign State. To this category belongs the acquisition on grounds of jus sanguinis, adoption and inclusion in the acquisition of a parent.”

Note that phrase “adoption and inclusion in the acquisition of a parent”.

Adoption and Acquisition of a Parent, Indonesia and Hawaii: The Smoking Gun.

Here are some excerpts about Indonesian Adoption.

“Foreign persons under age of five who are adopted by Indonesian Citizens obtain Indonesian Citizenship following legalization of adoption process by District Court of general jurisdiction with jurisdiction over adoptive parents [Id at Art. 2 (1)]“

And:

“It is stipulated that an adopted child has the same status as a natural child, and that his or her relationship to the birth parents is severed by adoption”

And:

“Article 2: on the condition of ratification of the adoption by the District Court:

The law stipulates that children of mixed couples automatically assume their father’s citizenship, and a divorced wife cannot take custody of her children because they have different citizenship.”

And:

“The principles upon which one holds Indonesian Citizenship are universally known.

The first principle, ius sanguinis, states that a person’s citizenship, regardless of where they were born, is dependent upon the citizenship of their parents.

The second principle, ius soli, determines citizenship on a person’s birthplace.”

Note that in Indonesian Law the Jus Sanguinis principle comes first (Jus and Ius are alternate spellings) and Jus Soli second, which is to say that it is the direct reverse of US Law. Under this reading of the Law he would be firmly in the Jus Sanguinis bracket.

Now in my original article I made a statement which I believed to be true but which wasn’t quite. In Indonesia the Law says, or seems to say, that one cannot adopt a child over the age of five. The Law says:

“Foreign persons under age of five who are adopted by Indonesian Citizens obtain Indonesian Citizenship following legalization of adoption process by District Court of general jurisdiction with jurisdiction over adoptive parents [Id at Art. 2 (1)]“

Now while Indonesia does not allow children over the age of five to be adopted, so far as I can tell, it does recognize that other countries do so. There is a provision covering that:

“A foreign child aged below 21 and unmarried, who is adopted by an Indonesian, will be eligible for Indonesian citizenship if the process does not cause dual citizenship.”

So it is possible to adopt a child abroad under the Laws of another country, for example the USA, and that child could be of any age. But, you say, if you adopt an American child that IS causing Dual Citizenship. In the real world the rest of us live in, yes, but in Indonesian Law:

“his or her relationship to the birth parents is severed by adoption”

So we find ourselves back at:

“It is stipulated that an adopted child has the same status as a natural child”

The adoptee becomes an Indonesian Citizen if the father is an Indonesian, a Muslim if the father is Muslim, etc. Obviously in terms of how this Law acts and interacts with other Laws, the age of the child becomes functionally irrelevant.

The Indonesian Code has a section which looks a lot like 8 USC 1401:

“Indonesian citizenship is given to:

A child born of the marriage of an Indonesian couple;
A child born of the marriage of an Indonesian man and foreign woman — the status of which does not cause dual citizenship…”
[See End Note 1 for rest of this section]

This list ignores adopted children but consider:

“It is stipulated that an adopted child has the same status as a natural child, and that his or her relationship to the birth parents is severed by adoption”

This would put Obama, if adopted, into category (2) above (born of the marriage of an Indonesian man and foreign woman — the status of which does not cause dual citizenship), and all of the statements about Dual Nationality become simply double speak because if another Legal System says you have another Nationality, you do the minute you leave Indonesian Territory, Territorial Waters or Airspace. That you do not have Dual Nationality, according to Indonesian Law, becomes a mere technicality.

Now those of you who read my previous Articles will probably have realized the implications of these Legal Passages. Previously I had made certain basic assumptions about dates which would not, in fact, REQUIRE to be correct, which is not to say that they weren’t.

The original thesis, based on my original reading of Law No 62/1958, was that Soetoro would have needed to adopt the boy before he was five, which based on the text of “Dreams of my Father”, still seems likely. BUT if the adoption took place in Hawaii, under US Law, he could have been older than five. Indonesian Law would still go into effect as soon as he arrived in Indonesia.

The acute reader will realize that this would mean a paper trail in the State of Hawaii because if the Adoption took place under Chapter 578 of the Hawaii State Code the following sections would have been followed:

www.capitol.hawaii.gov

A fairly large paper trail, actually, and particularly interesting are these sections:

§578-13 Change of name. The court may fix or change the given name and the family name of an adoptive minor child to the name stipulated by the adoptive parents or that name which is in the best interest of the child….”
Case Notes
Change of family name is mandatory. 45 H. 69, 361 P.2d 1054.”

§578-14 Record of adoption.] (a) A certified copy of the decree of adoption, or a certified abstract thereof on a form approved by the department of health, after the decree has become effective, shall be sent to the department. The department shall cause to be made a new record of the birth in the name of the individual, as fixed or changed by the decree, with the names of the adoptive parents and, upon request of both adoptive parents, or the sole adoptive parent if there is only one, that the name or names of either or both of the natural parents appear on the certificate, with the name of a natural parent who consents to be named on the certificate.
(b) If a new birth certificate is issued, the original birth certificate shall be sealed and filed with the decree or the abstract thereof, and the sealed package shall be opened only as provided in section 578-15(b)….”
[See End Note 2 for language on out-of-state births]

All that I can say about this is that it gives me a very strong interest in seeing the Senator’s Birth Certificate, and I think it probably has the same effect on you.

Because it would appear that in the State of Hawaii you can have more than one Birth Certificate, if you happen to have been Adopted.

All I will say is this there exists a possibility that the Birth Certificate on File in Hawaii contains information other than that which appears on the Document that we have all seen. If it does and if it lists Father’s Name as Lolo Soetoro and the Senator’s Surname as Soetoro he has some explaining to do. It would tend to suggest that he possesses, or possessed, a copy of his Original Certificate of Live Birth and that he has been using that in place of his amended Certificate of Live Birth. I do not know if that is Illegal but I shall try to find out.

You may also find “§578-15 Secrecy of proceedings and records” interesting but I find this section more interesting still:

Ҥ578-16 Effect of adoption. (a) A legally adopted individual shall be considered to be a natural child of the whole blood of the adopting parent or parents as provided in the Uniform Probate Code, relating to the descent of property.
(b) The former legal parent or parents of an adopted individual and any other former legal kindred shall not be considered to be related to the individual as provided in the Uniform Probate Code except as provided in this section.”
[See End Note 3 for remainder of this section]

In short the Hawaiian Legal Code and the Indonesian Legal Code read for all intents and purposes identically.

This Link will take you to a .pdf file of the Hawaiian Form for Change of Name. The process looks to be simple enough. Again, of course it leaves a paper trail.

www.hawaii.gov

How many times has he changed his name, if I’m right? I don’t know — more than once anyway, that’s a certainty. Are any of his papers in the correct name? I don’t know, but if they aren’t he could lose everything.

These factors taken together can hardly do other than cause someone to suspect there might be reason to think there is a paper trail in the Hawaiian Archives and possibly a large one.

You may care, at this point, to Google US Code: Title 18 § 4. Misprision of felony. It seems to me that if one is aware that a fraud is being perpetrated and does nothing about it this applies. In New York State, of course, misprision also covers “intent to cause a false impression.”, hmm. “Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea”, look it up folks. And while you are at it look up “mens rea”. Try wikipedia, maybe. The US Code also contains Misprision of Treason, I think, hmm.

In Part 2 of the first Article I discussed why I think Senator Obama was an Indonesian Citizen when he was young. Now I want to venture into the far more troubled waters of exactly why I think he still could be.

IF I am correct in my assumption that Senator Obama was adopted by Lolo Soetoro, and I don’t see an alternative that fits, he would have been an Indonesian Citizen until he was 21 years old, unless he made a formal Renunciation. But Indonesia is not Kenya and you do not AUTOMATICALLY lose citizenship, at any point. In fact Indonesian Law reads a lot like US Law. There exist strict rules about Loss of Citizenship once you have it. Like INA 1952 and subsequent US Code Law Indonesia has Expatriating Clauses in its Law:

“Indonesian citizens can lose their nationality under certain conditions. These include:
a)Naturalization in another country.
b) Joining the Military, or Civil, Service of another country.
c) Living outside of the Republic of Indonesia for a consecutive period of five years without declaring the intention to remain an Indonesian Citizen.
However all of these grounds may be overridden by ministerial order.”

Note the all important word “CAN”, not “Will”, or “Shall”. I checked this against a Dutch version; Dutch differentiates in the same way as English between these words. The first Dutch version said the same thing as the English; a second Dutch version gave the reading of “it is possible for”.

In other words as with US Law you would not necessarily lose your Citizenship by doing any of these things if there was no Court Action and if the Indonesian Government did not wish to act in the matter for some reason. I had previously assumed that this was automatic expatriation, it isn’t.

Asep Wijaya gives this warning:

“Be advised that all Indonesians living overseas must register their presence with the nearest Indonesian consular office. The penalty if you do not do this within two years of your arrival is certain complications in the renewal of passports, and could even entail loss of Indonesian citizenship.”

Again notice the use of “could” not “will”, or “should”. In other words it does not necessarily happen, it is simply a possibility.

If you do not deliberately expatriate yourself and if you do not indulge in conduct obnoxious to the Indonesian Government there is no specific reason whereby you would lose Citizenship, once you have it. It might be very difficult to renew your passport but that would be as far as it went.

According to the Indonesian Consulate General in Chicago, Indonesian passports need to be renewed every five years. At the same time you can change the name on your passport by handing over copies of the appropriate documents.

www.indonesiachicago.org

Oddly I didn’t set out to find the Consulate General in Chicago when I looked up passprt regulations; it was simply the first thing that came up. As I say, odd. There is also a Consulate in Honolulu, and Consulates General in New York and Los Angeles, among other places.

According to Ko Swan Sik, page 156, all that an individual would need to do to retain Nationality while living abroad would be to regularly visit a Consulate to renew one’s passport and, at that time, express the intention to remain an Indonesian Citizen.

In short I have no means of knowing whether or not Senator Obama is currently an Indonesian Citizen. I only know that he shouldn’t be, but he could be either by action or inaction. Only the Government of Indonesia could deprive him of Citizenship if he did not choose to Renounce it.

Conclusion.

[Note: When I wrote the original version of my conclusion I was both in the grip of outrage and in a hurry, it was therefore intemperate. Here, then, is my new version.]

My research is ongoing and it may be either (a) That I will discover my conclusions are wrong, or (b) That Senator Obama will produce documentation proving that I am wrong. In either of these events I will issue a formal written apology and sleep better at night. I am not holding my breath because if Senator Obama had, at any point, been open, transparent and honest about his past I would not have had to undertake this research in the first place and I would not have reached the conclusions I have. The DNC should never have accepted his candidacy/nomination/call it what you will in the first place because from the time he wrote “Dreams of my Father” he has been romanticizing and embroidering his family history to specifically eliminate his Indonesian boyhood from public consciousness. It is self apparent that he is not telling the whole truth.

Let us be clear, even if my theories were facts, and I may be wrong, NO FEDERAL FELONY HAS occurred here (so far as I can tell), the Senator was not responsible for the mess that was made of his Citizenship when he was a child, if it was. But Arnold Schwarzenegger isn’t responsible for the fact that he was born in Austria either. The Law wouldn’t have been broken but it would have been bent as far as it could bend in two countries at least.

If my conclusions on Article II are correct he would be ineligible for the Office of POTUS.

If he had and still has Indonesian Citizenship he still would not be committing a Felony or be guilty of a Misdemeanor under Federal Law, so far as I can tell, nor would either be true under Indonesian Law, again as far as I can tell. He would be breaking the Spirit of the Law and defying its intentions, in both countries, but not the Letter of the Law.

If my conclusions on Article II are correct he would be ineligible for the Office of POTUS.

If what I suspect is true, and it may not be, he would not be guilty of Perjury because he has said nothing on Oath, he would not have broken INA 1952 but he would simply have broken State Department Guidelines. He would have deceived the American People, he would have done grave and heinous disservice to the Democratic Party, the African American Community, the Congress, the State of Illinois and every Educational Institution he has ever attended as student or teacher but he would not have broken the Letter of the Law.

I cannot be the only person in the world who has these suspicions, and in fact I know that I am not, but there are people who must know the truth because his paper trail cannot have been simultaneously eliminated all over the world two years ago. If my suspicions are correct, some of these people are American and some of them must have an interest in revealing the information at a time of their own choosing. If that is correct, the Truth would emerge in October and there would be THE REPUBLICAN LANDSLIDE of all time.

More than that, though, at least four FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS must know the truth:

(a) The Government of the UK. His father was a “person of concern” to British Intelligence and Counter Intelligence from before his arrival in the USA until his death and bearing in mind her travels within the British Commonwealth so was his mother. The Senator must therefore also have been the subject of British investigation.

(b) The Government of Australia. Australian Intelligence and Counter Intelligence maintain a large Network in Indonesia and could not have failed to investigate Stanley Ann Dunham and all of her connections.

(c) The Government of Indonesia. This goes without saying.

(d) The Government of Kenya. This goes without saying.

All of these Governments would be in a position to Blackmail Senator Obama now, or in the future, IF my suspicions were true. How many other Governments know the truth I do not know.

I hope I am wrong, I pray that I am wrong. I DO NOT KNOW ANYTHING. If Senator Obama would just release his records we could all sleep happier and safer.

BUT if there is any substance to my speculations he would be Ineligible.

Once he is actually the nominee, it would appear that the Texas Secretary of State is REQUIRED by Law to establish his Bona Fides, under both Texas and Federal Law, BEYOND ALL REASONABLE DOUBT. The New York Secretary of State appears to have the same Legal Duty. Should they fail to do so, a Federal Writ of Mandamus could be used to compel them to do so. It is hard to see, given the circumstances, that they could certify him. If he failed to disclose any and all information to the Texas Secretary of State, he would be guilty of an offense. Again, given the circumstances, I can see no way in which he could hope to establish beyond all reasonable doubt his eligibility for the Office of POTUS. Indeed, it’s hard to see how McCain could hope to do so were it not for the Senate Resolution. Obama has no such Resolution, I have reasonable doubts, TD has reasonable doubts, Polarik has reasonable doubts, Techdude has reasonable doubts, and so do a number of other people.

——————————————————————————–

AUTHOR’s NOTE, added 7/31/08

My articles were recently made the subject of three comments by a poster called “tigerjohn” who is apparently an expat living in Indonesia who holds a Degree in Southeast Asian Studies.

I have to make certain comments about his posts.

a) His argument on Article II is wholly wrong, as any consideration of the Laws governing the Eligibility of Naturalized Citizens will show. Were he correct, nobody could even have raised the argument about Senator McCain in Court regardless of whether that argument has merit or not. SO, what tigerjohn claims to be the main thrust of his argument is incorrect. Additionally, he seems to believe that the Burden of Proof lies on the Plaintiff in this issue when in Fact and Law it lies on Senator Obama.

b) He claims, with some justification, that I may have overstated the efficiency of the Indonesian State Machine. However, he produces no actual evidence that any point I made was wrong. In fact, he tacitly accepts that I have taken my evidence from sources as valid as his own experience.

c) He has asserted that records I believe to be true MAY be false. Firstly, I have at no point claimed that these records ARE TRUE, simply that on the Burden of Evidence and under Indonesian Law there is a high level of probability that they ARE. The poster has utterly failed to give any concrete, or even reasonable, evidence that they are NOT TRUE, or that Indonesian Law is other than I think it to be. As an incidental, I have always admitted that I could be incorrect in my reading of that Law because I have to work from Secondary Sources.

d) Neither the poster nor I lived in Indonesia in the 1960s and 70s and I have never lived in Indonesia at all. Neither of us has any direct evidence for conditions and neither of us has any specific knowledge of the particular case. If my evidence is “deductive and circumstantial”, which is exactly what I have repeatedly stated that it is, so is that of tigerjohn. The fact that he currently lives in Indonesia does not change that. If his knowledge and grasp of Indonesian Law is on a par with that he has of American Law he is no expert, I know that I’m not.

e) According to tigerjohn only experience in Indonesia would give one grounds to draw conclusions about Indonesia. I have two responses:

i) Given he were correct, which I doubt, ONLY EXPERIENCE OF INDONESIA BETWEEN 1965 and 1971 would allow one to draw conclusions.

ii) I base my assumptions upon observational experience of two inherently similar and inherently corrupt Systems. Why should I presume that Indonesia will behave in a radically dissimilar way? I drew my specific conclusions from a variety of expatriate and Indonesian sources. There may well be exceptions, what worries me is the rule.

f) Neither tigerjohn nor myself have any concrete knowledge of the particular case, or of the circumstances on the ground in Jakarta at the time. I have advanced a Logical and Legal Scenario which gives me grave and reasonable doubts in regard to Senator Obama’s Status, the commenter has, in fact, said and proven nothing that shows my concerns are in any way invalid.

g) His views on religion are as incorrect in Law and Logic as his views on Allegiance. If one’s papers in, say, Lebanon say that one is a Maronite Christian and as a child one attended Maronite Services, one then emigrates to Canada and becomes a Buddhist, one cannot claim never to have been a Maronite, no matter what reservations one may, or may not, have had on the Theology of the Maronite Church. The argument is nonsense. (I do not know if Lebanese Papers list Religion, I’m just using this as an example.)

I may be wrong in my suspicions but only some kind of Legal Action will prove the point. Tigerjohn’s statements or assertions prove nothing beyond that he does not wish Senator Obama to be the subject of any kind of Inquiry.

——————————————————————————–

END NOTE 1
“A child born in Indonesian territory that is not provided with citizenship by his or her parents;
A child born in Indonesian territory whose parents are unknown;
A child born in Indonesian territory whose parents have no citizenship.
A child born of the marriage of a foreign man and Indonesian woman, both of whom request Indonesian citizenship for their child — the status of which does not cause dual citizenship;
A child born to an unmarried Indonesian woman, the status of which does not cause dual citizenship;
A child born in Indonesian territory that is not provided with citizenship by his or her parents;
A child born in Indonesian territory whose parents are unknown;
A child born in Indonesian territory whose parents have no citizenship.”

END NOTE 2
(c) If the birthof the individual occurred outside of the State and a record of birth exists, the certified copy of the decree or the abstract thereof, shall be transmitted by the department of healthto the birth registration authorities of the place of the individual’s birth witha request that those authorities take appropriate action with respect to the record of the individual’s birth. If the birthof the individual occurred outside of the State, or if the birthof an individual born in the State has not been registered with the department of health, or if other good cause exists, the clerk of the court, upon request, and with the approval of the family court, upon the finding of the court that the action is for the best interests of the individual involved, shall furnish to the adoptive parents, or to the individual, or to any proper person acting in their behalf, a certified copy or abstract of the decree of adoption or a certificate of adoption in a form approved by the court. If the parental rights of a parent or the parents of a minor child have been judicially terminated under chapter 571 prior to the entry of the decree, a certified copy of the decree shall be filed in the termination proceeding. [L 1945, c 40, pt of §2; am L 1947, c 47, §3; am L 1949, c 328, §1; am L 1953, c 115, pt of §1; RL 1955, §331-14; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §578-14; am L 1973, c 211, §3(l); am L 1976, c 194, §1(8); am L 1980, c 153, §7; am L 1990, c 338, §4

END NOTE 3
"c) An adopted individual and the individual's adopting parent or parents shall sustain towards each other the legal relationship of parents and child and shall have all the rights and be subject to all the duties of that relationship, including the rights of inheritance from and through each other and the legal kindred of the adoptive parent or parents, the same as if the individual were the natural child of the adopting parent or parents.
(d) Except as provided in subsection (e), all legal duties and rights between the individual and the individual's former legal parent or parents shall cease from the time of the adoption; provided that if the individual is adopted by a person married to a legal parent of the individual, the full reciprocal rights and duties which theretofore existed between the legal parent and the individual, and the rights of inheritance as between the individual and the legal parent and the legal relatives of the parent, as provided in chapter 560, shall continue, notwithstanding the adoption, subject only to the rights acquired by and the duties imposed upon the adoptive parents by reason of the adoption.
(e) Notwithstanding subsections (b) and (d), if an individual is adopted before that individual attains the age of majority and:
(1) The individual is adopted by a spouse of a natural parent of the individual; or
(2) The individual is adopted by a natural grandparent, aunt, uncle, or sibling of the individual or the spouse of a natural grandparent, aunt, uncle, or sibling;
then for the purposes of interpretation or construction of a disposition in any will, trust, or other lifetime instrument, whether executed before or after the order of adoption, and for purposes of determining heirs at law, the rights of the adopted individual and the individual'sdescendants with respect to the individual's natural family shall not be affected by the adoption, and they shall be included in any determination of heirs or members of any class, unless specifically excluded by name or class.
(f) An adopted individual, who by reason of subsection (e) would be a member of two or more designations or classes pursuant to a single instrument, both by relationship through a natural parent and through an adoptive parent, shall be entitled to benefit by membership in only one of these designations or classes, which shall be the larger share.
(g) For purposes of this section, if a person has been adopted more than once, the term "natural parent" includes an adopting parent by an earlier adoption.
(h) An individual legally adopted under the laws of any state or territory of the United States or under the laws of any nation shall be accorded the same rights and benefits in all respects as an individual adopted under this chapter. [L 1905, c 83, §1; am L 1915, c 47, §3; am L 1919, c 3, §1; RL 1925, §3041; RL 1935, §4527; RL 1945, §12278; am L 1953, c 115, pt of §1; RL 1955, §331-16; HRS §578-16; am L 1976, c 194, §1(10) and c 200, pt of §1; gen ch 1985; am L 1992, c 148, §2]“

——————————————————————————–

DISCLAIMERS/COPYRIGHT:

This article presents draft and preliminary viewpoints and information, all of which is subject to change; and presents theories and hypotheses regarding the background, qualifications, and eligibility for U.S. President of a serious candidate and public figure who is standing for that office. It should not be quoted, cited, copied, or otherwise shared in whole or part without providing a link to this original source and acknowledging the author, Judah Benjamin, which is a pseudonym.
The draft viewpoints and the information presented herein are the sole responsibility of the guest author Judah Benjamin and do not necessarily reflect the views of this blog or its owner.