Government likely to junk inter-parental child abduction bill


November 8, 2016

Source: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com

NEW DELHI: Despite international pressure, the Centre is likely to junk the bill on inter-parental child abduction, which deals with child custody issues for NRI couples and would have paved the way for India’s accession to the Hague Convention.

Child_Abduction_India.jpg

The Law Commission, though, recently submitted its report to the Law Ministry and stuck to its 2007 stand advising the government to accede to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspect of International Child Abduction (1980).

“We are very clear that we are not signing the Hague Convention. This is a decision collectively arrived at by the Women and Child Development (WCD) Ministry, Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) and the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA),” said a senior WCD Ministry official.

On June 22, 2016, the WCD Ministry had uploaded on its website a proposal to enact a draft of the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction Bill, 2016. Subsequently, the draft bill was placed on the website seeking comments.

The draft bill was prepared following a reference made by the Punjab and Haryana High Court to the Law Commission of India and the WCD Ministry to examine the issue and consider whether recommendations should be made to enact a suitable law and for signing the Hague Convention.

However, the bill has since been removed from the ministry’s website.

The draft envisaged “prompt return of children wrongfully removed or retained in a contracting state, and to ensure that rights of custody and of access under the law of one contracting state are respected in other contracting states.”

It also proposed a central authority to discover the whereabouts of the child, to prevent further harm to any such child and to secure the voluntary return of the child to the signatory nation.
WCD Minister Maneka Gandhi has expressed apprehension over acceding to the Convention at several forums, primarily on two grounds – that taking such a decision will not be in the interest of aggrieved women and because the government maintains that there are fewer instances of Indian children being abducted and taken abroad.

At an event last month she had said, “Personally, in the beginning, when I was new, I thought we should join the Convention because we get protection. But with time and after interacting with women who have been abandoned by their husbands abroad, had their passports snatched from them, been beaten up, and have somehow scraped the money and are in terrible fear, I wonder whether we should join or not.”

Contact us for assistance. We help clients worldwide

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

Ironboyzz-FacebookTwitter-Ironboyzz

ABP World Group™ Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail  ( contact@abpworld.com )

Skype: abpworld

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

Japan denies being ’black hole’ for children abducted by estranged parent


October 5, 2016

Source: torontosun.com

TORONTO — The Japanese government insists it has been complying with international child-abduction rules despite criticism to the contrary from Canadian parents who have been unable to gain access to their children in Japan.

tim_terstege

Tim Terstege holds his son Liefie at a lawyer’s office in Yokohama, Japan, in February 2015, the last time they were together. Terstege is one of dozens of Canadian parents deprived of access to their children in Japan

In a statement, the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs said its top priority is to protect the interests of the children involved in such disputes.

“It is not right to see Japan as having legitimized child abduction in custody disputes, or of being a black hole for children whose parents are separated/divorced,” the ministry said.

“We consider it highly important to deal with international child abduction in accordance with internationally standardized rules.”

Earlier this week, The Canadian Press reported on the difficulties Canadian and other non-Japanese parents — mostly fathers — have in accessing their children in Japan after marital breakdowns. In some cases and despite court orders, the mothers have abducted the children and fled to Japan, where they remain with impunity, leaving the other parent frozen out.

Japan signed on to the Hague Convention on international child abductions in 2014 but parents say it has been of little help in getting their children returned to Canada, or even in getting access to them.

Colin Jones, a Canadian lawyer in Kyoto, said in an interview Wednesday that the problem isn’t so much with adherence to the Hague Convention, but rather with a Japanese court system that lacks tools for forcing people to return children. Police will typically not get involved in custody battles, he said, and no one will use force to separate a child from a parent unwilling to hand them over.

“Even if you win, you have trouble getting the child back,” Jones said. “A really recalcitrant parent can frustrate the process.”

In its 2016 annual report in international parental child abductions, the U.S. State Department praised the Japanese central authority for how it manages the convention process and said the courts had processed cases and issued orders in a timely manner.

However, the report did fault the country for failing to comply with its obligations in terms of the enforcement of return orders.

“A Japanese court issued the first convention return order to United States in early 2015,” the report states.

“Authorities attempted, but were unable to effectuate enforcement of the court order by Dec. 31, 2015, exposing what may be a systemic flaw in Japan’s ability to enforce return orders.”

One Canadian father, Tim Terstege, said custody in Japan is effectively determined by whichever parent abducts the child first, and the courts appear powerless to do anything about it. In his case, Terstege has had problems accessing his son even for the minimal court-ordered 24 hours a year.

Global Affairs Canada said it was currently dealing with 25 cases involving Canadian children in Japan but refused to comment.

Jones said Japan’s legal system differs from that in North America in that judges may not necessarily have the same kind of powers to issue orders to give up a child or allow a parent access.

“One parent ends up having control of the child and (Japanese) courts just want to defer to that parent,” Jones said.

While Japan has returned some abducted children to their home countries, parents might expect too much of a system that isn’t designed to intercede in a way that might happen in Canada or the United States, Jones said.

“They expect some magical child-recapture organization to spring into being but it doesn’t,” he said. “You’re basically left with what the domestic institutions already have.”

Contact us for assistance. We help clients worldwide

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

Ironboyzz-FacebookTwitter-Ironboyzz

profile pic.jpgdroppedImage_7TM

ABP World Group™ Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail  ( contact@abpworld.com )

Skype: abpworld

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

Canadian parents face ‘hostile Japanese system’ when trying to access abducted children


October 3, 2016

Source: thestar.com

The Japanese system is sometimes described as a black hole for children.

A Canadian father is hoping a mountain hike will help ease his distress and draw attention to the insurmountable roadblocks countless parents like him face in trying to access their children in Japan after their marriages fall apart.

Kris_Morness.png

Tim Terstege is planning to climb Mount Fuji on Oct. 13, the day four years ago his wife disappeared with his then-four-year-old son.

“That’s kind of a dark time for me; it’s a positive way of just dealing with it,” Terstege said in an interview from Himeji, Japan.

“When you go through this type of situation, you have to deal with a lot of pain. It’s just really hard. Climbing Mount Fuji is for me just a way of breaking out of the sorrow.”

Terstege, 42, formerly of Barrie, Ont., officially has 24 hours a year access to his son, Liefie, a dual Canadian-Japanese citizen. But he doesn’t know exactly where his wife or child are and the courts have not been of help. It’s the Japanese way, he said.

“Whoever abducts the child first is going to get custody,” he said.

The Canadian father is far from alone in trying to navigate a seemingly impenetrable and hostile Japanese system sometimes described as a black hole for children. Figures indicate dozens of Canadians — mostly fathers — are among thousands of foreigners faced with the gut-wrenching loss of their children in Japan. Some parents are reported to have killed themselves in despair. Others have ended up in jail after trying to snatch back their children.

The Japanese embassy in Ottawa said it was “unable to express (its) viewpoints” and referred questions to the Foreign Ministry in Tokyo, which had no immediate comment. Global Affairs Canada, which said it was currently dealing with 25 cases, offered only general observations about consular assistance.

However, in a letter to Terstege this past week, a senior official said the issue was important to the Canadian government, and embassy officials in Japan had, among other things, discussed his case with the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

“We recognize the need to continue to raise the issue of parental child abduction cases with Japanese authorities,” the letter states.

In a briefing note last year, one Canadian consular official noted the “reality of the Japanese system” but said Canada was not pressing Tokyo for change, as former prime minister Stephen Harper did years ago.

In 2014, Japan finally signed on to the Hague Convention, which aims to provide legal recourse against international child abductions. However, enforcement is woefully inadequate and a parent can frustrate court orders to return a child simply by refusing to comply, experts say.

“While the process of implementing the Hague Convention has brought some clarity to the theory and practice of enforcing returns, without sanctions for contempt — which Japanese judges lack in these cases — or other police-like powers to back them up, court orders can end up being meaningless pieces of paper,” Colin Jones, a lawyer from Calgary, wrote in a recent article in The Japan Times.

Visitation restrictions, draconian by Canadian standards, can leave parents feeling like they have been treated like criminals, Jones said.

parental_kidnapping_japan

Kris Morness, of Vancouver, considers himself lucky in that he is usually able to Skype weekly with his son, Max, 5, believed to be in Tokyo.

Despite obtaining full custody and an American arrest warrant for his wife, who abducted Max three years ago from Seattle, Wash., where they were living, Morness said there’s little point in trying to litigate in Japan.

“It’s really traumatizing when you lose a child like this,” Morness, 43, said. “All I can do is wait. It is the worst bureaucratic nightmare I’ve ever experienced.”

In an effort to effect change, Bruce Gherbetti co-founded the activist organization Kizuna Child-Parent Reunion after his own experience. In 2009, his wife accused him of domestic abuse and, while he was in pretrial custody in Vancouver, she took their three girls now aged 9, 11, and 13 and left for Japan.

Among other things, Kizuna aims to educate the Japanese about the potential harm to children deprived of access to one parent.

“Your child is akin to a table or an automobile (in Japan),” Gherbetti said from Australia where he now lives. “If someone takes one of those from you, you have a better chance of obtaining its possession again than you do a child.”

Terstege said he’s given up on the Japanese court system. Even though he and his wife are still married, it’s highly unlikely he could ever regain custody, so his goal is to try to see his son for the 24 hours a year in the presence of a third party organization as per court order.

“I’m not going to give up,” Terstege said. “Climbing Mount Fuji is just another thing for me for motivation.”

Contact us for assistance. We help clients worldwide

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

Ironboyzz-FacebookTwitter-Ironboyzz

profile pic.jpgdroppedImage_7TM

ABP World Group™ Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail  ( contact@abpworld.com )

Skype: abpworld

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

Virginia man convicted in Vermont same-sex kidnap case


September 30, 2016

Source: dailyastorian.com

A Virginia businessman has been found guilty of international parental kidnapping after getting involved in a Vermont same-sex couple’s child custody fight.
Philip_Zodhiates.png

 

A Virginia businessman was convicted Thursday of international parental kidnapping and conspiracy for helping a mother take her daughter out of the country to avoid losing custody to her former partner.

A federal jury in Buffalo returned the verdict against Philip Zodhiates, of Waynesboro, on Thursday after hearing during a weeklong trial how he had driven Lisa Miller and 7-year-old Isabella Miller-Jenkins from Virginia to the Canadian border in 2009 so they could fly from Toronto to Nicaragua, and had helped with their living arrangements in the Central American nation.

Neither Miller nor Isabella, now 14, have been seen in the United States since.

Lawyers for Zodhiates, the owner of a direct mail business that serves conservative Christian groups, denied that he was trying to obstruct the other mother’s parental rights by helping Miller, who became an evangelical Christian after dissolving her civil union with Janet Jenkins in Vermont.

Miller, who gave birth to Isabella during the civil union, defied court orders granting Jenkins visitation and left the country shortly before a court shifted custody to Jenkins, Assistant U.S. Attorney Paul Van de Graaf said.

Zodhiates, the prosecutor said, enlisted the help of a number of Mennonites in the United States and Nicaragua in arranging Miller’s trip and a place to stay.

Miller also is charged with international parental kidnapping and conspiracy and is considered a fugitive.

A third defendant, Timothy Miller, recently was arrested after being deported by Nicaragua, U.S. Attorney William Hochul’s office said Thursday.

A fourth defendant, Kenneth Miller, a Mennonite pastor, was convicted of international parental kidnapping in Vermont in 2012.

None of the Millers are related.

Kenneth Miller, of Stuarts Draft, Virginia, is serving a 27-month prison sentence.

Zodhiates faces up to eight years in prison when he is sentenced Jan. 30.

Contact us for assistance. We help clients worldwide

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

Ironboyzz-FacebookTwitter-Ironboyzz

profile pic.jpgdroppedImage_7TM

ABP World Group™ Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail  ( contact@abpworld.com )

Skype: abpworld

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

Father Fights to Have His Kidnapped Child Returned From Guatemala


September 27, 2016

Source: Newswire.com

Wilmington, North Carolina – September 27, 2016 – (Newswire.com)

It was a day he has replayed in his head thousands of times. In 2012, Don Seagraves arrived at his ex-wife’s house for his scheduled visitation with his three-year-old son, Urijah. But when he got there, Urijah and Don’s ex-wife, Ivonne, were gone. Don suspected that Ivonne had taken their son to Guatemala without following the judge’s order.

don-seagraves

Don and Ivonne had a joint custodial agreement, which Don had faithfully upheld. But even though Ivonne committed a crime when she violated the Court’s custody order, Don faces an uphill battle to be reunited with his son.

Like Urijah, more than 1,000 outgoing international child abductions are reported to the U.S. State Department each year.  According to findings by the U.S. Congress in 2014, only one of every two abducted children taken from the U.S. to a foreign country with which the U.S. has reciprocal obligations under the Hague Child Abduction Convention are ever returned to the U.S.[1]

According to Don and Ivonne’s custody agreement, neither party was allowed to leave the State of North Carolina with Urijah, pursuant to a Court order.  Then Ivonne filed a motion for permission to take Urijah to visit her family in Guatemala.

Don objected. But Judge James H. Faison, III granted Ivonne permission, on the condition that she return to the United States by July 31, 2012.  Judge Faison’s court order also required Ivonne to share the telephone and mailing address where she and Urijah would be in Guatemala. But Ivonne left the U.S. in secret, leaving no information about her whereabouts. Soon after, an arrest warrant was issued by the Pender County Sheriff’s Office against Ivonne for felony parental kidnapping.

“In North Carolina, state law makes it a felony to keep a child under the age of 16 outside the state in violation of a court order,” says Mark Spencer Williams, attorney for Don Seagraves.  See N.C. GEN. STAT. § 14-320.1.  “There is also a federal law, the International Parental Kidnapping Crime Act (IPKCA) codified at 18 U.S.C. § 1204, which makes what Ivonne did a criminal act.”

The Court awarded Don sole custody as a result of the kidnapping, but Don has still not been able to locate his son. He has spent the past four years searching for him, despite his limited financial and professional resources; Don is a high school graduate who works in the construction industry, and he does not speak Spanish. He could not afford an attorney, let alone the extraordinary costs associated with civil and criminal remedies in a foreign country.

Then Don made contact with Rice Law, a Wilmington North Carolina law firm. The firm took on Don’s case on a pro bono basis. With their help, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, Interpol, the CUE Center for Missing Persons, law enforcement, and private investigators were used to locate Urijah. The U.S. State Department asked the government of Guatemala to issue an “Alerta Alba Kenneth” which is its equivalent of an “Amber Alert.”  On August 19, 2016, after a four-year search, Don was notified that Urijah had been found, living with Ivonne in Guatemala. Ivonne was served with legal documents under the Hague Treaty, which will require her to appear in court in Guatemala on Don’s petition seeking the return of Urijah.

Kidnapping_Guatemala.jpg

But there is another obstacle— Guatemala has a history of noncompliance with this Treaty and the U.S. State Department has not taken action to enforce the treaty in Urijah’s case.

The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (the Hague Convention) provides that a child who has been a habitual resident of the United States before being removed to a foreign country, and who has been wrongfully retained in another country in violation of the left-behind parent’s custodial rights, should be promptly returned to the country of habitual residence.

One of the responsibilities of the U.S. Secretary of State is to address countries with a pattern of noncompliance, which can include withdrawal of U.S. assistance and requests for extradition of the kidnapper.[2]  However, even though the Hague Convention requires a hearing to be scheduled within six weeks, no hearing has even been scheduled in Don’s case. The State Department indicates it has not even been able to conduct a welfare and safety check on Urijah because “our Consular staff is restricted from entering the district where the child was located, due to security concerns.”

Kevin Brosnahan, spokesperson, Bureau of Consular Affairs at the U.S. State Department, indicated that, “due to privacy considerations, we are not able to discuss this case specifically.” However, Brosnahan notes that the State Department annual reports show that since joining the Hague Convention in 2008, Guatemala has been cited five times for patterns of noncompliance.

As a result of Guatemala’s non-compliance and the U.S. State Department’s silence on the case, Don Seagraves has sought assistance from his elected officials, including Congressman David Rouzer (R-NC), Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Senator Richard Burr (R-NC). Seagraves is asking that the State Department implement the sanctions required by the Goldman act against Guatemala until it complies with the Hague Treaty. Don is also asking that Ivonne be extradited to the U.S. on the kidnapping charge.

According to foreignassistance.gov, $225 Million in U.S. Aid is sent to Guatemala, yet it is one of only three countries listed as non-compliant with the treaty by the U.S. State Department[3]. To date, Don is not aware of any specific action that the State Department has taken for Guatemala’s pattern of non-compliance.

It is cases like Urijah’s that have resulted in significant changes to our laws about international child abduction.  In 2004, Sean Goldman was abducted by his Brazilian mom, Bruna Bianchi, from her U.S. husband David. The case garnered national attention[4].  Ultimately, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton became involved in negotiations for the return of Sean Goldman[5]. Congressman Chris Smith (R-NJ) put financial pressure on Brazil through his efforts to stop aid to Brazil until Sean Goldman was returned[6].  After nearly six years, Sean Goldman returned home and in 2014, President Obama signed into law the Sean and David Goldman International Child Abduction Prevention and Return Act (P.L. 113-150).  The new law requires the U.S. Secretary of State to take action against countries like Guatemala that have a pattern of non-compliance, which can include the suspension of assistance and request for extradition of the parent who kidnapped the child.

The attorneys and staff of Rice Law, PLLC have provided pro bono assistance to Mr. Seagraves since 2012.  According to Mark Spencer Williams, the Managing Partner at Rice Law, “the U.S. has an extradition treaty with Guatemala that would extend to child kidnapping, but our local law enforcement has indicated that Guatemala is not likely to extradite Ivonne Seagraves back to the U.S. to face criminal prosecution.”  According to Williams, “it is especially frustrating that countries sign these agreements but then do not abide by them.”

To help Seagraves with some of the expenses associated with this, the Missing Children’s Defense Fund, a North Carolina non-profit 501(c)(3) will hold a charity golf tournament Saturday, 22 October 2016 at Echo Farms Golf & Country Club in Wilmington, North Carolina.

Many local businesses and individuals are working to support the effort to reunite Don Seagraves with his son Urijah.  Neuwirth Motors has donated a new Jeep as a hole-in-one prize, and Buffalo Wild Wings is providing food and prizes. Numerous other sponsors have come forward to help Seagraves.

“Our goal is to raise enough money that Mr. Seagraves can hire an attorney in Guatemala to help seek enforcement of the Hague Treaty and so he can travel to Guatemala for these hearings,” said Williams.

For more information or to register for the charity golf tournament, see http://www.planmygolfevent.com/29883-BringUrijahHome/index.html.  Supporters of Seagraves have also setup a GoFundme page at https://www.gofundme.com/bringbackurijah for donations.

Contact us for assistance. We help clients worldwide

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

Ironboyzz-FacebookTwitter-Ironboyzz

profile pic.jpgdroppedImage_7TM

ABP World Group™ Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail  ( contact@abpworld.com )

Skype: abpworld

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

The Hague Convention: need of the hour


September 9, 2016

Source: http://dailytimes.com.pk

Throughout the world, the ‘best interests of the child’ is the gold standard by which courts make determinations on custody, visitation and relocation.

Parental Kidnapping Rescue abducted children recovery

A surge in transnational marriages has led to a corresponding surge in cases of international child abduction. In these cases one parent, unhappy with a court’s custody order, flees to another country with the child, and either attempts to have local courts issue a new custody order or simply goes into hiding with the child. There are never any winners in these heartbreaking cases; the children are denied the love and affection of both parents, and the parents spend years embroiled in venomous court battles.

To address the menace of child abduction, the international community formulated what is known as The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction in 1980. Through this instrument, member states agree to uphold existing custody orders from other jurisdictions, and to return children wrongfully removed from one country to another. The Hague Convention does recognise that in some cases a parent might be fleeing an abusive environment, resorting to abduction in an attempt to protect their child; local courts are given the authority to make appropriate determinations in these special cases. In a nutshell, The Hague Convention provides a reasonable remedy for the bad behaviour of parents engaging in the act of international child abduction.

International parental kidnapping cases have been quite prominent in media over the years, and protecting children is one benefit for Pakistan becoming a member of The Hague Convention. There is, however, another benefit that goes largely unnoticed by the authorities and media: by signing The Hague Convention, Pakistan will give courts throughout the world the confidence to allow law-abiding parents to relocate to Pakistan with
their children.

Throughout the world, the “best interests of the child” is the gold standard by which courts make determinations on custody, visitation and relocation. Given the trend of international marriages, courts have recognised that in many cases custodial parents may wish to move back to their home countries where they have family support, career opportunities, cultural ties, and facilities by which they can provide better lives for their children. However, before allowing an international relocation by one parent, the courts must be confident that the other parent will not be denied access to the children. The Hague Convention provides courts with this confidence.

pakistan Child Abduction

An alarming number of Pakistanis, mostly women, presently living abroad are denied the ability to move back home with their children because Pakistan is not a signatory to The Hague Convention. For the most part, Pakistani women move to foreign countries due to arranged marriages. When their marriages fall apart, these women who have no employable skills and limited finances find themselves abandoned by their spouses far from their families and homeland. To make matters worse, foreign courts will not allow them to move their children to Pakistan, leaving them with no choice but to live off the charity of others in foreign countries. The plight of these desperate Pakistani women and their children will undoubtedly improve when Pakistan becomes a member of The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

I hope Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Advisor to Prime Minister on Foreign Affairs Sartaj Aziz take notice of such situation, and initiate the much needed step of becoming the member of The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. It is responsibility of the state to ensure justice for its citizens not only in the boundaries of the state and all over the world.

The Hague Convention does not alter any substantive rights. The Convention requires that a court in which a Hague Convention action is filed should not consider the merits of any underlying child custody dispute, but should determine only that country in which those issues should be heard. Return of the child is to the member country rather than specifically to the left-behind parent.

Until March this year, more than 94 countries including, United States, China, Germany, France, Canada and Australia are party to the convention, and even India has been the signatory of Convention since 2008.

Mr Prime Minister, when all our major neighbours and important countries of the world are the signatories to this important convention, why not Pakistan. Isn’t this a lack of interest in the welfare of overseas Pakistanis who send millions of dollars to Pakistan every year?

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

Testimonials from our clients

profile pic.jpgdroppedImage_7TM

download (2)

ABP World Group™ Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail ( contact@abpworld.com )

Skype: abpworld

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

Department Of State’s Annual Report Highlights Risk Of Parental Child Abduction


July 14, 2016

Source: mondaq.com

The U.S. Department of State reported yesterday that more than 600 children were abducted by parents from the United States to another country in 2015.

US-Department-of-State-Logo.jpg

A substantial number of those children may never be returned to their parents in the United States. The Department of State’s 2016 Annual Report on International Parental Child Abduction released yesterday reported that only 299 children whose habitual residence was in the United States were returned in 2015.

The staggering numbers contained in the Report make it clear that parents must proceed with caution if they believe the other parent has any intention of abducting their child from the United States. Any parent who has concerns about the other parent abducting their child should immediately consult with an attorney who has knowledge and experience handling proceedings brought pursuant to the Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, done at the Hague on October 25, 1980.

An experienced attorney may be able to advise the parent on preventive measures such as enrolling the child in the Children’s Passport Issuance Alert Program and seeking a court order enjoining the other parent from traveling abroad. If the child has already been abducted, an experienced attorney can assist with submitting the necessary papers to request the return of the child, liaise with counsel in the country to which the child has been abducted, and provide assistance to that foreign counsel as necessary to seek the return of the child to the United States.

Parental child abduction united states.jpg

In addition to identifying the number of children abducted by a parent from the United States to another country in 2015, the 2016 Annual Report assesses the extent to which certain Hague Convention partners have complied with the Convention. The Department of State reported that the following countries have not complied with the Convention: Argentina, the Bahamas, Brazil, Columbia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Peru, and Romania. In determining whether the Hague Convention partner countries were in compliance, the criteria examined by the Department of State included the following: the number of unresolved cases; the extent to which the judicial authority implemented and complied with the Hague Convention provisions; the failure of law enforcement to locate abducted children; failure to enforce return orders; and the amount of time devoted to the appeals process.

The 2016 Annual Report also details the extreme difficulties in attempting to seek the return of abducted children from countries that are not Hague Convention partners. According to the Report, countries that demonstrated a pattern of noncompliance in 2015 were: Egypt, India, Jordan, Lebanon, Nicaragua, Oman, Pakistan, and Tunisia. For each of those countries, the Department of State examined the extent to which the country did or did not adhere to any protocols with respect to international child abduction.

The 2016 Annual Report is available here.

Visit our web site at: www.abpworld.com

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

profile pic.jpgdroppedImage_7TM

download (2)

ABP World Group™ Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail ( contact@abpworld.com )

Skype: abpworld

NOTE: We are always available 24/7