politics

U.S. House pressures countries on child abductions

38 Comments

The U.S. House of Representatives voted Wednesday to punish countries that do not promptly return abducted children, upping pressure in an issue that has soured relations with Japan and other allies.

With no dissenting votes, the House voted to create an annual report to assess every country's history of child abductions and to require President Barack Obama to take action against nations with poor records.

Potential U.S. measures include refusing export licenses for American technology, cutting development assistance and putting off scientific or cultural exchanges. The president would have the right to waive the punishment.

Representative Chris Smith, the author of the legislation, said it would put the force of the U.S. government behind solving the more than 1,000 cases each year in which US children are taken overseas, generally by a foreign parent after separation from an American partner.

"It is a full-court press to finally elevate this issue, where American children's human rights are being violated with impunity," Smith told reporters.

"Right now, it's like other human rights abuses, maybe on page five as an asterisk" in talks between the United States and other countries, he said.

Smith, a Republican from New Jersey, previously led legislation that set up annual reports on human trafficking and religious freedom, which have often caused discomfort for countries deemed to be lagging behind.

The child abduction legislation still needs approval in the Democratic-led Senate, but Smith voiced confidence at passage as the bill has been revised over several years to ensure support of both parties. The State Department had initially voiced concern at proposals to impose outright economic sanctions over child abductions.

By far, the greatest number of abduction cases takes place in Japan, the only major industrialized nation that has not ratified the 1980 Hague convention that requires countries to send abducted children back to the countries where they usually live.

Japanese courts virtually never grant custody to foreign parents or fathers.

Paul Toland, who served in the U.S. Navy in Japan, said that his daughter Erika was put in the care of her maternal grandmother and that he has no visitation rights after the girl's mother committed suicide.

"For me, this will be my 11th consecutive Christmas without my daughter," he told reporters.

In the wake of persistent U.S. and European criticism, Japan's parliament took key steps this year to join the Hague treaty. But critics say that the decision will not address past cases.

The House legislation calls on the United States to seek legal agreements with all nations not party to the Hague convention to lay out ways to return children within six weeks after abduction cases are reported to authorities.

Smith named the bill after David Goldman, who succeeded in bringing his son Sean back to the United States after a five-year fight with Brazilian courts.

"We won't stop until we get the children home, one by one, child by child," Goldman said.

Parents of children in countries including Brazil and Argentina said that they often had no recourse, even if individual officials in foreign countries are sympathetic to their cases.

Arvind Chawdra, whose two children were abducted to India, said he had no other option but to take out a newspaper advertisement because he does not know where they are.

© (c) 2013 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

38 Comments
Login to comment

bunka no chigai desu ne,,,

these guys are a lot tougher than me. after dealing with Japan life for so many years, if I lost my kids I probably wouldn't even bother wasting time or money in the court system because I know what would happen.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

By far, the greatest number of abduction cases takes place in Japan, the only major industrialized nation that has not ratified the 1980 Hague convention that requires countries to send abducted children back to the countries where they usually live.

This is untrue. Why don't we read the very congressional report in the article?

http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/2012HagueComplianceReport.pdf

The largest number of parental child abductions from the US takes place in or into Mexico.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

Paul Toland, who served in the U.S. Navy in Japan, said that his daughter Erika was put in the care of her maternal grandmother and that he has no visitation rights after the girl’s mother committed suicide.

This happened to one of my mates too. His wife killed herself and it was announced at the funeral service by her parents that the child would become their custody and he would be granted very limited access to his daughter, who was 8 years old at the time. We very quickly rallied all the fellas at the funeral and formed an action group. While the service was going we arranged airplane tickets, a couple of guys went to his house and got passports and packed a few suitcases. We snuck them out of the service as soon as it was finished, took them to Narita and they left Japan for good within two hours of the ceremony finishing. The Japanese grandparents had no idea what had happened and started to ask where they were. Within the next few days we went to his office and back to his house and cleaned out all the rest of his stuff. That was seven years ago. They are both living a very happy life together in Britain. It's a little sad from the GP's point of view, but if they had had their way he would have been lucky to see his daughter a few times a year.Thankfully, due to Japan's persistence and refusal to acknowledge any previous cases of abductions they cannot do anything about getting their granddaughter back. So, I guess in this case, the Japanese laws worked against themselves.

However, the action in the article only addresses the international abductions. There are many more foreign fathers still living within Japan that have no access to their kids and no avenues or rights to gain access to their kids. I am divorced with kids and had to fight hand over fist to get any sort of visitation with my kids. Even now, there is no formal agreement. It is just whatever she agrees to and that can vary from day to day mood swings. Japan still lives in the dark ages when it comes to joint custody, child support and property settlements. My ex told me I was lucky because Japan has no strict child support laws, but I told her she was lucky because if there were strict laws she would not be able to stop me seeing my kids on an emotional whim.

10 ( +13 / -4 )

Are "the abducted children" really American? If they are under 20 years old, they have dual citizenships, don't they? And if they have Japanese citizenship, don't they have right to live in Japan too? So, they can better choose which citizenship they want at 20.

-14 ( +2 / -16 )

Here is the world child abduction ranking. http://www.hcch.net/upload/wop/abduct2011pd08ae.pdf

See page 9 and 10. The USA is the world leader of international child abduction with 283 alleged cases just in 1 year, followed by UK with 200 alleged cases. The US should do something to themselves rather than to point fingers to others.

-12 ( +4 / -16 )

I think Disillusioned above makes a good point that access rights are a bigger issue than 'abductions'. (I'm not sure abduction is the right word. Can a parent abduct their own child?)

The details are not clear, but the article suggests that the US is seeking automatic return of the children. I'd like to think that the interests and wishes of the children are taken into account before a child is returned. The wiki article below documents a case where a child was not returned, but where the courts in both countries appeared to place the interests and wishes of the child first.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misbah_Rana

I know of two cases of messy marriages between a Japanese and UK national. One, like Disillusioned, involves a divorce and subsequent difficulties of access for the father. The father can no longer get a visa to work in Japan, furthering his difficulties. Abduction is not an issue. The second involves someone in an abusive marriage in the UK. (Alcoholic, sometimes violent father.) For whatever reasons, the mother continues to live with him. But her friends in Scotland (both Japanese and Scottish) suggest she take the child back to Japan. I also think it would be the wisest move. So it would seem I am supporting abduction.

I imagine all cases are messy, and will not be solved by any automatic requirements placed on countries and courts to return children.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Here is the world child abduction ranking. http://www.hcch.net/upload/wop/abduct2011pd08ae.pdf

See page 9 and 10. The USA is the world leader of international child abduction with 283 alleged cases just in 1 year, followed by UK with 200 alleged cases. The US should do something to themselves rather than to point fingers to others.

What....? Doesn't that data mean the US is the leader of filling out applications to have abducted children returned?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

DisillusionedDec. 12, 2013 - 04:52PM JST

Abducting a child out of Japan is a criminal offence in Japan. I am afraid all the friends took part in the abduction are potentially guilty of the crime. What Japan does not recognize is retroactive enforcement of the Hague Convention. Be careful.

JessensteinDec. 12, 2013 - 06:19PM JST

An incoming return application means an alleged abduction into that country.

-10 ( +3 / -13 )

@Disillusioned

It is not only the father who doesn't get visitation rights in Japan... Luckily I managed to "get hold of" our younger boy (not yet three years old at the time) but the elder one stayed with his father in the Kansai area while we moved to Tokyo.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

@Disillusioned. You and your friends are heroes.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

disillusioned - We very quickly rallied all the fellas at the funeral and formed an action group. While the service was going we arranged airplane tickets, a couple of guys went to his house and got passports and packed a few suitcases. We snuck them out of the service as soon as it was finished, took them to Narita and they left Japan for good within two hours of the ceremony finishing. The Japanese grandparents had no idea what had happened and started to ask where they were.

So instead of calling a lawyer - who would have told you very calmly that unless the wife stipulated custody in her will that it's a matter for the family courts to decide - you and your friends ABDUCTED A CHILD FROM HER MOTHER'S FUNERAL and SENT HER TO LIVE IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY.

Yeah, I'm sure that wasn't traumatic at all for the child.

You and your friends are criminals - and what's worse you're one of the posters on hear screaming the loudest about the abduction issue. Here it turns out you've actually helped abduct a child. I hope there's a few Japanese cops trolling this site and they track you down.

-14 ( +2 / -15 )

who would have told you very calmly that unless the wife stipulated custody in her will that it's a matter for the family courts to decide

this is the key part. youre assuming foreigners are treated equally and the child would naturally remain with the remaining parent. i wouldnt take my chances in the japanese courts against my kids japanese grandparents. id be on the next thing smoking.

Here it turns out you've actually helped abduct a child.

abduct a child from whom? the girl is his daughter. the mother is dead.

11 ( +13 / -2 )

Here is the world child abduction ranking. http://www.hcch.net/upload/wop/abduct2011pd08ae.pdf

See page 9 and 10. The USA is the world leader of international child abduction with 283 alleged cases just in 1 year, followed by UK with 200 alleged cases. The US should do something to themselves rather than to point fingers to others. The US is good for reasonably resolving the great majority of those cases but bad for having a glacially slow judicial process- one of the worst in world- 283 days on average just to get a result. A large percentage just give up- that report does not cover why but you can guess massive delay is a part. The issue is reasonable resolving of child custody cases following the Hague Convention- not simply returning children due to an application to return.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Let's get the discussion back on track and not dwell on which country has more child abductions. It would be nice if Japan would ratify the Hague Convention follow international norms.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

I hope Japan can get their ducks in a row on this... I hope America follows through on this

2 ( +4 / -2 )

If the Japanese politicians ratify the Hague Convention, then they will eventually have to address custody and child support law. Assuming that child support law would be similar to that in the US, 94 percent of all Japanese divorced fathers without custody would become criminals. (based on the fact that 94 percent of Japanese fathers without custody fail to pay child support in part of in full).

Japan is the only developed country where a guy can make babies like a stray cat and never suffer legal consequences for abandonment. This is why the law will not change. There are people in parliament who have abandoned or kidnapped their own children. This country looks nice and cute on the outside, but it has a disease and the people need to wake up to it. There are a lot of anti-social Japanese children and a lot of them don't know about one of their parents.

10 ( +9 / -0 )

Here is the world child abduction ranking. http://www.hcch.net/upload/wop/abduct2011pd08ae.pdf

See page 9 and 10. The USA is the world leader of international child abduction with 283 alleged cases just in 1 year, followed by UK with 200 alleged cases. The US should do something to themselves rather than to point fingers to others.

The data in the very report you quote does not support your claim that "The USA is the world leader of international child abduction" because that's not what this report is detailing. Pages 9 and 10 show how many applications were received by MEMBER STATES ONLY and therefore doesn't include ANY data on states who have not signed the Hague Convention. Go ahead, try and find Japan in that table. The work "Japan" cannot even be FOUND in the report because it is not a member country who was invited to respond. Even amongst member states, only 74% of the member states (60 of 81) responded to the questionnaire that this data is generated from. So this report can in no way be considered comprehensive. It represents a subset (those who responded) of a subset (Hague Convention signatory states) of world states.

The data on pages 9 and 10 only show how many applications were initially received, not how many were being contested. I refer you to the table starting on page 22 and continuing to page 23. Of the applications received by the USA in 2008, here are the statuses of those applications (data valid as of 2010 when the statuses were last updated):

Rejected: 1 Voluntary Return: 51 Judicial Return By Consent: 8 Judicial Return Not By Consent: 60 Judicial Refusal: 20 Access Agreed or Ordered:12 Pending: 34 Withdrawn: 87 Other: 10
9 ( +9 / -0 )

Some sort of regulation or law must be implemented when a child is born to parents that have different nationality regardless of the country they were born in. It's easier to clarify the rules at birth than deal with mess when one parent flees to home country. Japan is like a third world country when dealing and implementing any kind of law that deals with the psych & emotion. To Japanese judicial system, if they can't physically see something, it doesn't exist. They have no capabilities of regulating "intent" or any complex human rights issues for that matter.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

(continuing from previous)

Once you remove the applications to the USA that were withdrawn, those whose children were voluntarily returned, and the one rejection (probably was improperly filled out), you're left with 283 - 87 - 51 - 1 = 144 cases that were sent to the courts for resolution. Of those cases, 68 cases were found in favor of the person making the application and the child ordered back to the originating country. Only 20 cases (14% of the cases seen by the courts) resulted in the courts refusing the applicant. Contrast this with Japan where it practically requires an act of God for the family courts to side with the non-Japanese parent. They HAVE sided with the non-Japanese parent before, but even when they do there's no mechanism to enforce the family court's decision. The Japanese parent typically just ignores the court's ruling.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@ hokkaidoguy

LMAO

You wrote " You and your friends are criminals - and what's worse you're one of the posters on hear screaming the loudest about the abduction issue. Here it turns out you've actually helped abduct a child. I hope there's a few Japanese cops trolling this site and they track you down".

LMAO, don't hate the players hate the game. It just so happen the GP were left holding memories instead of wanting to share them. They bite off too much and couldn't swallow it all whole!

1 ( +3 / -2 )

You people yelling and screaming at Disillusioned - you do realize dont you, that had they not done what they did, yet another loving parent would have been permanently separated from their child? Disillusioned and his buddies did what they did because they had no other choice if a parent was not to be cut off from their child. They had no other choice because the JAPAN side gave them no other choice.

Hire a lawyer? Are you kidding??! We all know from the many many many stories on here and elsewhere how that goes. How dare those grandparents automatically take custody away from the father without even consulting him. How is separating the child from the father in her best interests?

Disillusioned - you and your buddies are heroes in my and many others books.

Tinawatanabe - of course a dual national child has the right to experience both cultures. That is not the issue here. The issue is the forcible cutting off of contact from a loving parent who wants to be part of a childs life. I feel very strongly that if Japan actually ordered joint access AND enforced it with penalties for non-compliance, the vast majority of these issues would go away.

Fadamor - you rocked it!

3 ( +5 / -2 )

The Japanese who live in the United States don't receive any legal assistance on a private matter (even it is a human right issue) from the U. S. government. Why the U.S. House of Representatives have anything to do with this private matter of the Americans? This may be just another "political" agenda against Japan.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

The Japanese who live in the United States don't receive any legal assistance on a private matter (even it is a human right issue) from the U. S. government. Why the U.S. House of Representatives have anything to do with this private matter of the Americans? This may be just another "political" agenda against Japan.

You seem to be confusing terms, here. "Legal assistance" is getting a lawyer to handle your case and is completely separate from talking to your Congressman.

The U.S. House of Representatives is there to represent the people the Congressmen serve - the citizens living in their Congressional Districts. If a constituent is having a "beef" with a foreign country over a personal matter, they are within their rights to ask the Congressman to step in and try to remedy the situation. If enough citizens are having a beef with that country and the country is unresponsive to Congressional inquiry (which is the country's right), then the Congressman will band together and draft legislation attempting to remedy the situation through various sanctions of the country. In that respect you can call it a "political agenda", but the agenda was created by the country in question's lack of suitable response. It boils down to what the country values more: maintaining the status quo, or addressing the concerns of some foreign politicians.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Additional comment: Probably I should have said, "Why the U.S. House of Representatives have anything to do with this private matter of the Americans? AND, WHY MUST THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT GET INVOLVED WITH THIS PRIVATE MATTER. This may be just another "political" agenda against Japan. Beside, my feeling is that if this American father was a reasonably nice person, the Japanese mother would not have removed her child from him. I would imagine that the mother would have wanted her child to be close to the American father for the child's sake. There must be a significant reason why she ended up separating her child from the American father.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I would imagine that the mother would have wanted her child to be close to the American father for the child's sake. There must be a significant reason why she ended up separating her child from the American father.

You've obviously never encountered the hatred towards an ex when divorce happens. People do lots of stuff just to spite their ex. They don't care about the welfare of the kid, it's just a pawn to help get back at the ex

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Very upsetting article. There is no doubt that japanese wives had committed suicides over marital disputes. Can you think of any other that would drives married women to commit suicides? Its reasonable for any courts to not grant permission to a access the kids by neglectful and abusive husbands who were never there for his wives. And that american politicians would abuse their political power to force japanese court in granting the permission when the more important political issues are at their hands. The american politicians never worry about womans issue in japan or other aduction issues involving real children. However when it comes to western men and their u resolved issues,they exaggrate and abuse their political power in unreasonable manner. Using sanctions over family matter is laughable at best, same goes for using words like aduction over divorce.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Ill have to stand with Disillusioned on this. The whole abduction issue with the Japanese is one of the dirtiest things in this world. Cold + slimy + heartless + selfish + ignorant + xenophobic= dirtbag. All the Japan apologists seemed to be very narrow minded and lack reasoning. Theres really no debate needed.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

FadamorDec. 12, 2013 - 10:59PM JST

It is just amazing that there are so many people here who cannot accept the simple fact that America is the largest child abductor in the world. Who would give thumbs up to the apologist?

Contrast this with Japan where it practically requires an act of God for the family courts to side with the non-Japanese parent.

Wrong. There are so many Chinese, Korean and Philippine mothers who got child custody in Japan.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

ch3ch0Apparently when white people do it it's not "abduction", it's a heroic protest against the system.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

ch3ch0Apparently when white people do it it's not "abduction", it's a heroic protest against the system.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

@CH3CHO:

congressman - "By far, the greatest number of abduction cases takes place in Japan..."

CH3CHO: The largest number of parental child abductions from the US takes place in or into Mexico.

What the congressman was referring to was unresolved cases. There is actually a mechanism to resolve cases with Mexico. However, there is no such mechanism to resolve cases with Japan.

The USA is the world leader of international child abduction...

Nonsense. As someone else pointed out, you are representing the report; both in meaning and context.

Abducting a child out of Japan is a criminal offence in Japan....

Then Japan is in violation of yet another treaty agreement. I mean, they are already in violation of several UN human rights treaties -- like the UNCERD, UNCRC, UNCAT, etc (which I know you like to ignore). But if "Abducting a child out of Japan is a 'criminal offense' in Japan" that means that Japan is also in violation of the 1980 extradition treaty that they entered into with the US. Because Japan has been claiming for over a decade that parental abduction is not a crime. That has been the Government of Japan's "excuse" for refusing to extradite parental abductors back to the US.

SO... either it isn't a crime. Or the Government is lying (in violation of their treaty obligations). You can't have it both ways.

@CH3CHO & @hokkaidoguy

It is just amazing that there are so many people here who cannot accept the simple fact that America is the largest child abductor in the world.

Apparently when white people do it it's not "abduction"...

I'm sorry, how many abducted children has the Japanese government returned? Oh yeah... ZERO. How many foreign parents has the Japanese government ensured have access to their children after a Japanese spouse abducts them? Oh yeah... ZERO.

@Jaeae An

There is no doubt that japanese wives had committed suicides over marital disputes.

a) This points to mental issues -- mental issues that very likely led to the original "marital disputes".

b) I know of several Japanese fathers who committed suicide due to the depression they suffered after having their Japanese wives abduct their children.

c) Shouldn't the children, and what is best for them, actually matter? Because all the research shows that they benefit most from maintaining a relationship with both parents (except in extreme circumstances).

@SpeaklikeGandhi

Why the U.S. House of Representatives have anything to do with this private matter of the Americans?

Because is ceased being a "private matter" once the Japanese government started participating in the process. It is the Japanese Government that is condoning, 'rubber stamping', defending and, in some cases, even proactively assisting in abductions from the US.

@ to all of you defending the practice of "parental abduction" to/within Japan:

Don't you people actually care about the victim children involved? Don't they matter?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

@Patrick McPike No one is mentally ILL. Human beings simply have various mental conditions and brain functions.

No, Japanese wives commit suicide due to marital disputes. if they were Happy in relationship, fulfilled, loved by Non-Neglectful husbands, why would anyone commit suicides? Are you As simple-minded as to point figers to Unhappy wives and tell them to take their drugs and keep their mouth shut? No one is mentally ILL. Mental illness are caused by external factors. such as being around abusive, husbands. Depression is caused by lack of love and understanding. the last thing you have to do when dealing with so called, Mentally ill( depressed) people is lock them up and tell them to take the Unncessary drugs.

there are literally thousands of ways to make woman happy in life. and if you have to resort to name calling, telling them how they are mentally ill, Obviously you don't have much resourses or desires to make these women happy.

Japense wives or people or Asians do not commit suicides over mental illness. Do you honestly think Samurais commit suicides themselves over mental illness? if your logic is true, the entire population of Japan or Korea should be on some heavy drugs. the fact that people abuse political powers in helping their country men getting the custody over their children is ACT OF BULLYING.

Children, by the time they get old and mature enough to decide their future, should be able to choose which parent or country they would like to reside with. and I believe Children should stay with mothers except for some extreme circumstances which are often caused by the husbands.

Using words like children aduction is wrong in every sense. Do you have any idea where all the hundreds and thousands of chinese adupted babies end up? USA!

this article talks about these angry powerful western men who are extremely bitter with foreign courts for not granting them a custody, because in their minds, they should be able to get everything they want in this world even the children that they probably don't deserve.

This news article has absolutely nothingn to do with REAL CHILD KIDNAPPING AND ABDUCTION which happens a lot more in US and other nations.

This article is only about ANGRY WESTERN DIVORCED HUSBANDS WHO DESTROY lives of foreign wives and still want to still the children.

and they are using the political connection and power to get their ways..

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@Jaeae An

You obviously do not understand mental illness and its various forms.

No, Japanese wives commit suicide due to marital disputes.

Huh? You are contradicting yourself. Previously you specifically stated:

There is no doubt that japanese wives had committed suicides over marital disputes.

So were you "correct" when you said that they did? Or are you "correct" now that you say that they don't?

.... why would anyone commit suicides?

Already answered: Mental disorders. I suggest that you do some research into mental health issues.... Or do you dispute that such things exist? Have you heard of postpartum-depression? How about other forms of mental disorders?

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2012/02/12/commentary/depression-is-a-national-ailment-that-demands-open-recognition-in-japan/

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3184569/

How about mothers that kill their children? Or abandon them to die? Are they acting "normal" too?

http://www.japantoday.com/category/crime/view/mother-gets-30-years-for-letting-kids-starve-to-death

Japense wives or people or Asians do not commit suicides over mental illness.

Really? Then why are they committing suicide? Because they are bastions of mental health?

the fact that people abuse political powers in helping their country men getting the custody over their children is ACT OF BULLYING.

That you for acknowledging that Japan is a bully on this issue.

Children, by the time they get old and mature enough to decide their future, should be able to choose which parent or country they would like to reside with.

By then the damage is already done. Again, I suggest that you do some research:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/06/120612101338.htm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2518247/Growing-father-permanently-alter-BRAIN-Fatherless-children-likely-grow-angry-turn-drugs.html

I believe Children should stay with mothers except for some extreme circumstances which are often caused by the husbands.

It is nice to have opinions. Unfortunately, your opinion is based on logical fallacy. This is not an "either or" situation, except for people who are too selfish to actually act mature and put what is actually best for their children first. Mature adults can actually work together to both support and mutually raise children despite being separated. It is immature parents who have to have complete control, shut out the other parent, and ignore what is actually in the best interests of the child.

This article is only about ANGRY WESTERN DIVORCED HUSBANDS WHO DESTROY lives of foreign wives and still want to still the children.

Again, I suggest that you do some actual research. There are many Japanese parents, both mothers and fathers, who are asking for Gaiatsu in order to fix what is fundamentally a Japan problem.

Check out the Kimidori Ribbon Project ( http://kimidori-ribbon.org/ ), and other Japan-based groups. Like those started by Japanese mothers like Masako:

< http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Japan+black+hole+abducted+children/8801632/story.html>

Fundamentally, this is about a Japanese system that is still stuck in the dark ages, ignores science, and doesn't live up to it's international and human right commitments.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Patrick McPikeDec. 13, 2013 - 12:44PM JST

Then Japan is in violation of yet another treaty agreement. I mean, they are already in violation of several UN human rights treaties -- like the UNCERD, UNCRC, UNCAT, etc (which I know you like to ignore). But if "Abducting a child out of Japan is a 'criminal offense' in Japan" that means that Japan is also in violation of the 1980 extradition treaty that they entered into with the US. Because Japan has been claiming for over a decade that parental abduction is not a crime.

You are doubly wrong.

Here is a Japanese Supreme Court ruling that parental child abduction is criminal offence. http://www.courts.go.jp/search/jhsp0030?hanreiid=50081&hanreiKbn=02 I know there are American activists who are desperately spreading lies. You had better choose who to believe.

Read 1980 extradition treaty. http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/gaiko/treaty/pdfs/A-S55-1543.pdf

Article V

The requested party shall not be bound to extradite its own nationals, but it shall have the power to extradite them in its discretion.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

@CH3CHO

You are doubly wrong.

No. As usual, you are merely ignoring 90% of what I said and creating a strawman argument.

I didn't say that it wasn't illegal, I was sarcastically pointing out that Japan was playing games. Japan's "official" position to the US State Department is that it is not a crime, and therefore the Department of Justice cannot make a extradition request under the treaty. I'm fully aware that this is a game and that Japan picks and chooses to apply or ignore laws when it is convenient for Japan to do so.

But thank you for the specific case reference. I sincerely hope that the details of the case are what you imply. I will be sure to pass it along to folks who can verify such and, if so, use it to get the State Department to push back on Japan's continued misrepresentation of Japanese law.

Thanks again! :D

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@CH3CHO,

It is just amazing that there are so many people here who cannot accept the simple fact that America is the largest child abductor in the world. Who would give thumbs up to the apologist?

Call me cynical, but I don't accept something as a "simple fact" just because some stranger SAYS it is a "simple fact" - ESPECIALLY when the report that stranger uses to back their claim was proven beyond a doubt to not be reporting what the stranger was claiming it to be reporting. I require actual proof to support the "fact". You haven't provided any data to support your "simple fact". In order to do so, you need data covering ALL the countries in the world, not just a subset of the countries who have signed the Hague Convention Treaty. So far, the only thing you've provided is data saying that: in 2008 the U.S. received the most applications for the return of a child out of the 60 countries who responded to a questionnaire. As there's anywhere from 192 to 196 countries in the world (depending on your source) that means that less than a third of the countries in the world are represented in the report you provide as "proof". You're going to have to do a whole lot better than that before you can call something a "simple fact".

Wrong. There are so many Chinese, Korean and Philippine mothers who got child custody in Japan.

And that means what, exactly? There were "so many" non-Japanese parents who were denied the right to see their children as well, but I wouldn't use that statement as a fact. "So many" is meaningless as a fact. If you want to support your claim, you provide actual numbers: The number of petitions submitted placed against the number of petitions approved by the courts. For instance, I can say that by 2010 it is a FACT that 47.2% of the child abduction cases submitted in 2008 and heard by U.S. courts resulted in the courts ordering the children returned to their originating country. Of those same cases, by 2010 only 13.8% had been denied by the courts. That's an approval / denial ratio of 3.42:1. Those are specific numbers. What's the ratio for Japan? I'll accept any one year in the last decade if you can provide the source.

This is just a guess because I have no data to back it up, but I would not be surprised if Japan's ratio was the reverse - an approval / denial ratio of around 1:4.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

If a child is taken to the US, or any number of other countries, there are court and enforcement mechanisms in place to ensure the childs best interests and access to both parents. In Japan there is no enforcement in these cases, let alone equal standing in the courts. This issue affects Japanese and non-Japanese parents. I saw someone talking about this being a personal issue. The issue is ptotecting children and not catering to wagamama parents who selfishly keep the other parent out of their childs' life. The US legislation is an effort to level the playing field and protect kids. In the us if domestic abuse is demonstrated the custody is modified. In Japan if there is domestic abuse the courts and police can do nothing. Thos has to change.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think Any courts should side with the mothers, Japanesr or non-Japanese. Children were meant to be raised with mothers for the most part. Can men Breastfeed babies? NO. if men can't breastfeed babies or properly change their diapers, there must be reason behind this. Perhaps God had granted the woman a role to be the main care-taker of the babies. and Women also have every right to take the babies away from someone they deem to be dangerous as well. If a biological mother removes their children from surroundings or people she deems to be dangerous, how would that be considered as abduction? Why don't people focus on "real abduction issues" in other countires?

Have you googled, babies kidnapping in China? that every year, 70,000 children are kidnapped and sold to other countries like USA by organized kidnapping rings. Don't you think that's much bigger issue that people should be discussing and focusing on?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites