Maureen Dabbagh Executive Director, P.A.R.E.N.T.. 308 General Gage Rd. Virginia Beach, V A 23462 USA

An Old Problem
 
 

International Child Abduction is not a new problem. As with many social ills, the kidnapping or retention of a child by a parent or family member in marital or custody disputes is not a phenomena that has developed with modern society. Parental Abductions associated with memorable historical events include the kidnapping of Michael and Edwin Navratil by their Slovakian born father, Michel Navratil. Navratil abducted his 2 and 4 year old sons from their mother in France, a French National, during an Easter visitation. Navratil boarded the Titanic with the intent of bring the children to the USA. He had used the alias Louis Hoffman and told fellow passengers his wife was dead.

While the boys survived the Titanic disaster at sea, Navratil Perished. The boys were reunited with their mother.
 
 

A worldwide Problem
 
 

Countries on all continents have addressed international abduction through a variety of ways including international treaty and criminal law. i.e. The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, The European Convention, The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
 
 

Current Issues creating obstacles to remedies
 
 

Nationalism

Gender Bias

Financial burden

Criminalizing abduction
 
 

Nationalism
 
 

It is not uncommon for a National of a particular country to be proud of their heritage, tradition and cultural practices above those of any other Nation to the extent of not recognizing, or refusing to recognize the heritage, tradition or cultural practices of the other parents country.

Nationalism can be expressed in a country's refusal to recognize the duel or tri-nationality of a child. (Example: Saudi Arabia, Oman, Germany)

Nationalism can be expressed in a countrys refusal to recognize the lawful obligations in regards to individual child abduction cases as outlined in international, national and/or criminal in returning a child that has been internationally abducted by a parent. (See Report to the United Nations, June 9, 1999, by Joe Howard, Director of German Affairs for P.A.R.E.N.T.).

Nationalism can be expressed in beliefs, whether born socially, legally, religiously or culturally, when the country allows, perpetuates or fails to discourage or ignors nationalistic attitudes manifested in these areas:

a. A child does not need both parents in order to reap the utmost benefits of family life. (Example: German policy of not granting access or custody to non-German parents. Saudi Arabias practice of denying access or custody to non-Saudi mothers, non-Muslim mothers)

b. A system, body or country that considers cultural, social, religious and traditional practices of other countries to be detrimental to a child without regard to a particular practice. (Example: The right of a child to know their parent and extended from another country and/or culture).

c. Maintains, supports, ignores or allows their legal systems to practice "reciprocal return policies, automatically orders judgments in favor of its own nationals, and violates international, national, religious, legal or other laws that country has agreed to uphold. (Example: USA, Saudi Arabia, Germany, Syria, Austria, Sweden, Jordan)
 
 

GENDER BIAS
 
 

Gender Bias constitutes a great obstacle in seeking remedies to international child abduction. Specific country, cultural, traditional and/or religious practices do not uphold the right of a parent to be a part of a child' life based on gender.

Gender bias can readily be seen all over the world, particularly strong in certain geographical locations.

Example: Countries which are Islamic or are influenced by Islamic law give preference always to the father. While the actual legal decision on custody is based on the age of a child, this is often times ignored and gender bias against women usually prevents effective and successful resolution of abductions committed by fathers from Middle East, Gulf and North African countries. Gender bias against females of their own nationality in international abduction cases is also reported. The efforts to remedy these cases are also exacerbated by a strong sense of nationalism. Together, gender bias and nationalism in these countries present such a significant problem that abductions are rarely resolved in these countries. It should be noted also that fathers almost exclusively commit abductions to these countries.

EXAMPLE: Syrian fathers abduct and even with court orders allowing the mother custody, go uninforced. Reports from Egypt on unenforceable court orders are also available. In these cases, the abductors were always national fathers. The mothers were both Muslim and Christian. (Dabbagh vs. Dabbagh/Syria, El-Mergawi vs. El-Margo/Egypt, Zaazhoa vs. Zaazhoa/Egypt)

Gender bias against fathers can readily bee seen in countries such as Germany, Austria, and Sweden. (Example: Sylvester Vs Sylvester /Austria, Howard Vs Howard/Germany, Johnson Vs Johnson/Sweden)
 
 

Financial Burden

The Financial burdens often imposed on the searching parent prevent effective recovery efforts and even the ability for that parent to seek relief in a countries legal system. Currently there are no international uniformed guidelines that provide relief for a parent wishing to litigate abroad for the recovery of an illegally abducted child, which would make available legal financial assistance.

Exceptions to this are the United Kingdom, which does provide not only legal services to a searching parent, but also provides funding for travel expenses to litigate.

Canada and Germany also make pro bono legal services available to those individuals that qualify under their guidelines.

Many countries do not have any fee structure regarding legal fees. It is not uncommon for a searching parent entering a foreign country to pay up to 1,000 times the normal rate charge for a custody hearing.

Example: In Syria, the average cost of litigating custody equals about $300 US dollars. Western parents litigating in Syrian courts are often required to provide retainers to attorneys of $25,000 to $50,000.

Lebanon also does not have any type of fee regulations. There appears to be a view in many countries that westerners, particularly Americans, are wealthy and can tolerate incredible legal fees. This attitude has created a deterrent in parents ability to litigate abroad as a result of huge legal fee demands.

Germany, Austria the USA and other western countries have demonstrated that legal fees can easily amount to $100,000- to $200,000 through vexatious litigation without resolution in a particular case.

It is also not unusual for a parent to be required to pay bribes, graft and other monies to officials, especially in Mexico, Honduras, Costa Rica and Syria as part of the normal litigation process.

Parents in Western countries are reporting that these enormous financial burdens have created an obstacle in their efforts to remedy abduction.

Parents from third world countries are unable to pay the enormous legal expenses normally commanded to litigate in countries such as the USA, Germany and Austria.

Parents in Western countries are reporting that they have employed alternative methods of recovery as a result of incredibly high legal fees. Their option of choice is to hire Private Detectives, mercenaries, recovery specialists, etc, to re-abduct. While this method is also expensive (fees ranging from $5,000 to $175,000) it is fast becoming the more preferred method of recovery, especially in countries that present all three of the above obstacles in remedying abduction, i.e. nationalism, gender bias, financial burdens.

The recovery of children through the employment of such individuals is not illegal in many countries. However, the majority of parents employing such individuals also report their efforts were unsuccessful. Of grave concern is the danger involved in such attempts.

Example: Sarah Anderson Noman dies in Yemen as she attempted to recover her two children by hiring such individuals.

Don Feeney was jailed in Finland for taking money form a parent and attempting to recover a child from that country.

Two men from the Sudan were shot and killed in Saudi Arabia after being hired to recover two children in the Kingdom.

The obstacles placed on parents have lead to life threatening situations in their desperate attempts to recover their children.
 
 

SOLUTIONS

Criminalizing international child abduction

While arguments have been made both for and against the criminalization of international parental abduction in individual countries, any move to do so without remedying to the issues of gender bias and nationalism would most likely result in the outcomes similar to those seen when utilizing the civil processes in those countries.

Many countries have already criminalized parental abduction. In Jordan, an abductor can receive from 3 months in jail to 3 years and a fine. In the USA a parental abductor can receive up to 3 years in jail and a fine. (18 U.S.C. 1204). Both countries have demonstrated an unwillingness to prosecute except in a very few cases.

The NGOs and legal bodies of some countries, such as the United Kingdom, have expressed (unofficially) that they do not support criminalization of kidnappers, particularly their own nationals. The United Kingdom is not alone in this opinion.

Therefore, if criminalization were to be enacted in all countries, with a view towards successful application, it would be necessary for each country to not only cooperate and implement these criminal processes when applicable, i.e. outside of Hague Convention cases, but also to lend sensitivity to this area. Sensitively could be viewed as a country lodging complaints on their own nationals with a view that they would deal with them in the criminal forum, vs. their nationals being extradited to be dealt with in another countrys forum.
 
 

Relieving financial burden

Countries which adopt guidelines of the cost of litigating and provide financial relief by way of establishing or setting legal fees, providing legal aid or pro bono legal services, can enable a parent to move forward to litigate in the proper forum of the country which has jurisdiction in an international child abduction case. This relief may also deter parents from seeking alternative methods to recovery that can be dangerous and illegal.
 
 

Understanding Nationalism

Children born of parents from different countries can benefit from the knowledge and understanding of two different cultures. By denying a child the benefit of one of his/her inherited nationalities, that child is being denied part of which he/she is. All cultures and societies have elements of strength as well as elements of weakness. Parents working together to provide their child(ren) with the best of both worlds can bring to a child an understanding that may greatly enhance their ability to succeed in our ever growing mullet-cultural communities. Nationalism can hamper the well being of a child by making a child feel that part of them is unacceptable or inferior. I keeping with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, a child deserves the right to know whom he/she is, where they come from, and know their extended family.

Governments instituting programs that would allow for children to be introduced to various cultures and the positive contributions of those nations can serve to re-inforce a positive self-image in the developing child.
 
 

Gender Bias

There appears to be differing views in the world as to the importance and role of both the mother and the father. Those supporting gender bias positions can easily provide valuable arguments for both genders.

However, a child will benefit from a healthy interaction from both mother and father, each playing a special role in the developing childs life.

Reports and studies on the effects of children raised in homes without either a father or a mother should be utilized in each country in order to determine the affects on a child when deprived from either the mother or the father. In those countries that have not had these types of research studies conducted, the government can, provide for those studies with a view to provide the child with the best environment as a result of those studies.

In conclusion, those countries which are signatories to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, obligated to provide to the Commission updated reports on their efforts to implement means by which the articles of that convention are being observed, should be encouraged strongly to address those articles of the Convention which deal with parental abduction, particularly Article 11, and their efforts to implement means by which that article is being observed.