The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, commonly referred to as the Hague Abduction Convention, is a multilateral treaty developed by the Hague Conference on Private International Law. The treaty provides an expeditious method of returning a child taken illegally from one country to another. It was concluded on October 25, 1980[1]

As the US State Department would not voluntarily inform relevant actors about non-compliance of foreign countries in adhering to the Convention, Congress enacted an annual reporting requirement obligating the State Department to publish a detailed annual report on the reliability and effectiveness of the Convention to protect and secure the return of abducted American children in foreign countries. It was hoped that the law would make available a unique and vitally important source of information to parents, courts, governments and attorneys worldwide.[2]

The Compliance Reports have been issued for each year since 1999 with years 2002 and 2003 combined in a single report.[3]

Initial reports were criticized for lack of information on what Congress sought. Over time the reporting of the US State Department improved until they began releasing a full accounting of the numbers of abductions reported to the State Department each year and the number of children recovered.

Congressional discord on reporting practices by the State Department

In April 1999, the US State Department, under congressional mandate, issued the 1999 Hague Compliance Report (1999 Report). Congress immediately, and harshly, criticized the State Department for violating nearly every paragraph of the law stating that State had violated their express intent in creating it.[2]

Congress imposed additional reporting requirements for the 2000 Hague Compliance Report (2000 Report) in section 202 of H.R. 3194, the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2000 declaring that State's April 1999 Report on the Abduction Convention had failed to provide information consistent with the intent of Congress in having a full accounting of cases and countries in violation of the Hague Convention and a listing of countries which were non-compliant with the Convention.[2]

Before submission of the 2000 Report to Congress, the Chairman of the Committee on International Relations, Congressman Benjamin A. Gilman of New York, wrote Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to remind her that the 1999 Report had "engendered a high level of criticism because of shortcomings in meeting the intent of Congress in mandating this report" adding that the amended Hague compliance legislation "emphasized the aspects that are of most importance to the Congress, and to the American people, in addressing the many concerns we have heard on this subject from our citizens." In similar fashion, the Chair and Founder of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children, Congressman Nick Lampson of Texas, also wrote Secretary Albright on September 15, 2000, to make it clear that "Congress takes this reporting requirement quite seriously" and express concern that "I have received word that the Department of State is considering submission of a 2000 report to Congress that I believe could be potentially more inaccurate and more incomplete with the statutory reporting requirements than the State Department's 1999 Report. Such a report would be unacceptable to Congress," and that, "I want to avoid any misunderstanding with the Department of State that might result in a deficient report and that would represent a step backward from the substantial efforts by Congress to improve compliance with the Hague Convention for the sake of American children and their parents, including major hearings by the Senate Foreign Relations (SFRC) and House International Relations Committees (HIRC), a unanimous Joint Resolution, statutory requirements to reform the Office of Children's Issues, the work of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus and individual senators and representatives, and a General Accounting Office investigation (showing very low return rates to the U.S. of abducted or retained American children)."[2]

In regards to the Hague compliance report specifically, Lampson declared to Secretary Albright "I sincerely regret the two-year struggle with the State Department over this reporting requirement. Congressional efforts in 1999 to clarify, broaden, and extend the reporting requirements were made substantially more difficult by State Department opposition. Nevertheless, the legislation was substantially amended in ways that should eliminate the Department's violations of many paragraphs of the reporting requirement last year." Ignoring Congressional leaders, the US State Department issued the 2000 report in early October of that year and was still in blatant violation of five of the seven paragraphs in the amended reporting law.[2]

2010 Compliance Report

2010 Report Cover
2010 Report Cover

The 2010 report covers the period from October 1, 2008, through September 30, 2009 (Fiscal Year of 2009.) During this period the US State Department received 1,135 new requests for assistance in the return of 1,621 children to the United States from other countries. In addition State received 324 Convention applications involving 454 children abducted to the United States from Convention partners of the United States.[4]

Abductions between Hague Convention partners
OUTGOING CASES INCOMING CASES
Convention CountryNew Cases# of ChildrenNew Cases# of Children
 Argentina1011812
 Australia16291422
 Austria4546
 Bahamas78712
 Belgium2223
 Belize5811
 Bosnia-Herzegovina1125
 Brazil243179
 Bulgaria6600
 Canada741042939
 Chile4556
 Colombia23311010
 Costa Rica111335
 Cyprus1200
 Czech Republic3400
 Denmark1247
 Dominican Republic1621810
 Ecuador182447
 El Salvador131633
 Estonia2300
 Finland1200
 France9121215
 Germany50711820
 Greece5733
 Guatemala71212
 Honduras182612
 Hungary3522
 Iceland1100
 Ireland1111
 Israel141933
 Italy91467
 Macedonia3411
 Mexico30947475120
 Netherlands47710
 New Zealand7911
 Norway5711
 Panama101623
 Peru101477
 Poland141722
 Portugal2222
 Romania2500
 Slovakia2333
 South Africa1213711
 Spain8967
 Sweden61057
  Switzerland68510
 Turkey4622
 Ukraine2445
 Uruguay3411
 Venezuela101545
Totals8281194324488
Abductions Between non-Convention countries
OUTGOING CASES
Non-Convention Country# of New Cases# of Children
 Algeria11
 Bangladesh57
 Barbados33
 Belarus11
 Bolivia33
 Cambodia11
 China99
 Egypt1218
 Ethiopia33
 Ghana1217
 Guinea11
 Guyana33
 Haiti58
 India3441
 Iraq58
 Jamaica1620
 Japan2334
 Jordan1223
 Kenya910
 Lebanon68
 Malaysia23
 Morocco78
 Netherlands Antilles12
 Nicaragua68
 Nigeria914
 Pakistan1424
 Philippines2025
 Russia1621
 Saudi Arabia512
 Senegal23
 Sierra Leone44
 Singapore35
 South Korea67
 Syria58
 Taiwan36
 Thailand44
 The Gambia46
 Trinidad and Tobago914
 Tunisia45
 United Arab Emirates79
 West Bank13
 Yemen49
 Zambia11
Totals307427

The report also included a summary of the State's efforts to resolve 81 unresolved applications for the return of abducted American children under the Convention from 18 treaty partner countries that remained unresolved in spite of having been prior to April 1, 2008.

Countries with unresolved applications filed before April 1, 2008
Country# unresolved
Argentina1
Austria1
Bermuda1
Brazil7
Canada1
Colombia1
Czech Republic1
Ecuador1
France1
Greece1
Honduras1
Israel2
Mexico53
New Zealand1
Spain1
Switzerland3
Turkey1
Venezuela1

In a sharp departure from previous practice the State Department listed three countries as not compliant and only one country as "Demonstrating Patterns of Noncompliance," whereas, in the 2009 report, it listed seven countries in the latter category. Commenting on this "astonishing" occurrence, international family law authority Jeremy Morley noted

Does this mean that our treaty partners are becoming more compliant with the terms of the treaty? Or that the State Department is backing off from criticising other countries in this regard? I wish it were the former but suspect that it is the latter."[5]

The report itself did not explain or acknowledge this dramatic shift in the status of "Country Noncompliance Placement."

Countries Not Compliant
Brazil
Honduras
Mexico
Countries Demonstrating Patterns of Noncompliance
Bulgaria

2009 Compliance Report

2010 Report Cover
2009 Report Cover

The 2009 report covers the period from October 1, 2007, through September 30, 2008 (Fiscal Year 2008.) During this period the United States Department of State was notified of 1,082 new outgoing IPCA cases involving 1,615 children. Of these, 776 were abductions to Convention partner countries. Additionally State received 344 Convention applications concerning abductions to the United States involving 484 children.

[6]

Top ten destinations for abducted American children in 2009
OUTGOING CASES
Convention Country# of New Cases# of Children
Mexico316533
Canada5783
United Kingdom4152
Japan3757
India3545
Germany3449
Dominican Republic2539
Brazil2125
Australia1826
Colombia1722

As in years 2007 and 2008 the report included Honduras as fully "Not Compliant" with a list of countries "Demonstrating Patterns of Noncompliance."

Countries Not Compliant
Honduras
Countries Demonstrating Patterns of Noncompliance
Brazil
Chile
Greece
Mexico
Slovakia
Switzerland
Venezuela

2008 Compliance Report

2008 Report Cover
2008 Report Cover

[7]

Countries Not Compliant
Honduras
Countries Demonstrating Patterns of Noncompliance
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
Ecuador
Germany
Greece
Mexico
Poland
Venezuela

2007 Compliance Report

2007 Report Cover
2007 Report Cover

[8]

Countries Not Compliant
Honduras
Countries Demonstrating Patterns of Noncompliance
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
Colombia
Germany
Greece
Mexico
Poland

2006 Compliance Report

[9]

Noncompliant Countries
Austria
Ecuador
Honduras
Mauritius
Venezuela
Countries Not Fully Compliant
Brazil
Chile
Colombia
Greece
Mexico
Panama
Turkey
Countries of Concern
Hungary
Poland
Romania
Spain
The Bahamas
Enforcement Problems
Germany
Israel
Poland
Sweden
Switzerland

2005 Compliance Report

[10]

Noncompliant Countries
Austria
Colombia
Ecuador
Honduras
Mauritius
Panama
Turkey
Countries Not Fully Compliant
Chile
Greece
Mexico
Countries of Concern
Hungary
Poland
Romania
Switzerland
The Bahamas
Enforcement Problems
France
Germany
Greece
Israel
Poland
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland

2004 Compliance Report

[11]

Noncompliant Countries
Austria
Colombia
Ecuador
Honduras
Mauritius
Mexico
Turkey
Countries Not Fully Compliant
Romania
Switzerland
Countries of Concern
Greece
Hungary
Israel
Panama
Poland
The Bahamas
Enforcement Problems
Germany
Israel
Poland
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland

2002 and 2003 Compliance Report

[12]

Noncompliant Countries
Austria
Honduras
Mauritius
Mexico
Panama
Countries Not Fully Compliant
Switzerland
Countries of Concern
The Bahamas
Colombia
Germany
Poland
Spain
Enforcement Problems
Germany
Israel
Spain
Switzerland

2001 Compliance Report

[13]

Noncompliant Countries
Austria
Honduras
Mauritius
Panama
Countries Not Fully Compliant
Mexico
Countries of Concern
The Bahamas
Colombia
Germany
Poland
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland

2000 Compliance Report

[14]

Noncompliant Countries
Austria
Honduras
Mauritius
Panama
Countries Not Fully Compliant
Germany
Mexico
Sweden
Countries of Concern
Colombia
Poland
Switzerland
Enforcement Problems
Canada
Germany
Israel
Spain
Switzerland

1999 Compliance Report

Noncompliant Countries[15]
Austria
Honduras
Mauritius
Mexico
Sweden

See also

References

  1. "Hague Abduction Convention text". Hcch.net. Retrieved April 20, 2010.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 "THE HAGUE CHILD ABDUCTION CONVENTION: DIMINISHING RETURNS AND LITTLE TO CELEBRATE FOR AMERICANS" (PDF). NYU Journal of International Law and Politics, 33 N.Y.U. J. Int ' l L. & Pol. 125. 2000. Retrieved April 20, 2010.
  3. "US State Dept. Compliance Reports". Travel.state.gov. Archived from the original on April 8, 2010. Retrieved April 20, 2010.
  4. "2010 Compliance Report" (PDF). Travel.state.gov. Archived from the original (PDF) on May 28, 2010. Retrieved May 23, 2010.
  5. "2010 Hague Abduction Convention Compliance Report". internationalfamilylawfirm.com. May 21, 2010. Retrieved October 9, 2010.
  6. "2009 Compliance Report" (PDF). Retrieved April 20, 2010.
  7. "2008 Compliance Report" (PDF). Retrieved April 20, 2010.
  8. "2007 Compliance Report" (PDF). Retrieved April 20, 2010.
  9. "2006 Compliance Report" (PDF). Travel.state.gov. Retrieved April 20, 2010.
  10. "2005 Compliance Report" (PDF). Travel.state.gov. Retrieved April 20, 2010.
  11. "2004 Compliance Report" (PDF). Travel.state.gov. Retrieved April 20, 2010.
  12. "2002,2003 Compliance Report" (PDF). Travel.state.gov. Retrieved April 20, 2010.
  13. "2001 Compliance Report" (PDF). Travel.state.gov. Retrieved April 20, 2010.
  14. "2000 Compliance Report" (PDF). Travel.state.gov. Retrieved April 20, 2010.
  15. "1999 Compliance Report" (PDF). Travel.state.gov. Retrieved April 20, 2010.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.