Save children from the negative consequences that the Hague Abduction Convention creates for them

Addressed to:

All contracting countries of the Hague Abduction Convention, European Commission, European Parliament, European Parliament – Petition Committee,
European Parliament - Mediator for International Parental Child Abduction.

The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction („Hague Abduction Convention”) was initially created in the 80’s and intent to protect a children from the harm of the abduction as well the custodial parents from having the other parent unlawfully remove or retain the child in another country…

But today the convention is often used to against mothers who are the primary custodian of their children. Today the “abductions” are occurred in order for the “abductor” to escape family violence, or in other cases where serious and credible child abuse allegations are made against the left-behind parent, but the court in the “abducted-to” nation returns the child anyway to their abusive parents or place them into foster care believing that the foster care in the child’s “habitual residence” is an appropriate placement until the allegations are resolved.
 

In cases where mothers cross international borders with their children to escape abuse, domestic violence, are treated as criminals, they are prosecuted and risks prison, rather than a women seeking for safety for their children or their own life. Often such mothers are seen as “crazy,” and as “alienating” the child from their father. Most of mothers lost custody of their children to their batterers. Many battered mothers lost their children when they alleged their violent husbands had also been sexually abusing their child. 

I’m one of these women. A mother, primary custodian of her child who fled for her daughter’s safety. But my child was returned by police forces against her will, bound in an ambulance during 20 hours, than placed in foster home for a long time. I haven’t seen her and have had any contact with her for 2 years now and I was declared guilty of “abduction” “and “alienation”, sentenced 1 year in jail in first instance and was placed twice in jail waiting for extradition.
 

One country in Europe, Switzerland, took a decisive action to protect children who were being harmed by the application of the Hague Abduction Convention giving important and necessary guidance to their courts about the phrase “intolerable situation” in Article 13(b) of the Hague Convention and also directs courts to appoint representatives for children in Hague child abduction proceedings (“The Swiss Act”).
 

This country proposed to the international community (Special Commission to Review the Operation of the Hague Convention) to supplement Article 13 (b) entitled “Return and best interest of the child”, would allow a court to refuse to return a child if the following criteria were met: (1) the placement with the applicant is manifestly not in the best interest of the child, (2) the (abducting parent) cannot care for the child in the child’s habitual residence (or cannot reasonably be required to do), and (3) the placement in foster care is manifestly not in the best interest of the child. They demonstrated in their working document that the Hague Convention defenses are interpreted too narrowly in various scenarios, resulting in harsh outcomes for the children involved.
 

But the proposal was rejected. 

A guide to the implementation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights stipulate: “The state must take all measures reasonably necessary in the circumstances to enforce a parent’s rights to custody or access… Article 8 applies automatically to the relationship between mother and her child. Such relation will always require the protection of Article 8 of the European Convention”…”When taking the best interest into consideration, both short term and long term considerations affecting the child must be taken into account. Any interpretation of the best interest must be in accordance with the spirit of the Convention (Rights of the Child), especially its standpoint of recognizing children as human beings with their own opinions and feelings, having civil rights, entitled to special protection. The ratifying countries may not use an interpretation of the best interest that denies children the rights the Convention itself provides to them”…But the Hague Abduction Convention permits to use police forces when it’s enforced.
 

International authorities must take the initiative to improve the application of the Hague Abduction Convention by defining “intolerable situation” and requiring the appointment of counsel for children.
 

We all like to make understand to policy makers, that children, when Hague Abduction Convention is misused, are also illegally stripped from the constituting elements of their identity (nationality), their other family ties (like grand-parents), and are deprived of the use of their mother language. 

Child abduction is a bad thing, but in some cases, mothers are taking children to protect them from greater harm. When the Hague Abduction Convention is misused can cause harsh outcomes for the children involved.
 

There is another side of the “abduction stories” and the Hague Abduction Convention.

We all like to make understand to policy makers, that there is an important difference between abduction and a flight to safety.

The Hague Abduction Convention has a paradoxical effect: forcibly separate children from their mothers for many years, which place children in an "intolerable situation" and cause a "grave risk of harm".