Child abduction agreement too late for many parents


Staff Writer

To some parents, Japan’s official entry Tuesday into the Hague convention on cross-border child abductions doesn’t represent the light at the end of the tunnel, but the arrival of more obstacles in the prolonged effort to retrieve their children, experts say.

The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction was drafted in 1980 to ensure that children abducted and taken overseas by a parent involved in a failed international marriage will be promptly returned to their country of habitual residence.

Japan’s refusal to sign the convention earned it a reputation as a “safe haven” for international child abductions. But from now on, the Foreign Ministry will be legally bound to locate abducted kids and facilitate their return at the request of parents abroad. The same will apply to children whisked away from Japan, as long as the country where the child is staying is a signatory of the convention.

While widely hailed as a breakthrough, participation in the pact does not satisfy everyone.

For one thing, the treaty is not retroactive, meaning repatriation is possible only in cases that take place from Tuesday on.

Regardless of the date of the abduction, however, the government can still assist parents seeking visitation opportunities, such as by trying to locate their children, according to the treaty. But these benefits can only be given to parents whose kids were under 16 years of age as of Tuesday. Anyone else does not benefit from the treaty.

A group of parents trapped in this legislative limbo went to the Foreign Ministry on Wednesday to explain their plight.

Miho Watanabe, a 53-year-old Japanese citizen, said she took refuge in a women’s shelter in United States in 1995 with her 3-year-old daughter to escape alleged mistreatment by her husband, an American, whom she married in Japan.

Shortly afterward, she took their daughter back to Japan and got divorced with the help of international lawyers in 1999. But in 2005, after she sent her 13-year-old daughter to the U.S. for a visit at the request of her ex-husband, he spirited her away and has refused to let Watanabe have access.

The daughter visited her once in Japan recently, but Watanabe said she has no clue about her current whereabouts.

“I was told (by the American family) I would become a ‘kidnapper’ if I ever tried to bring back my own girl to Japan,” Watanabe said.

Watanabe, who campaigned for Japan to join the Hague convention for years, said she was vaguely aware the pact only applies to children under 16. But she had always held out hope that she might benefit from it somehow, she said, noting that her faintest hopes were dashed on Wednesday, when ministry officials told her there was nothing they could do. Her daughter is now 21 and living independently of her father in the U.S.

“In my case, the abduction took place ages ago. At that time, she was still a little kid. It’s so unfair, after all these years that I waited, that my case is not considered eligible,” Watanabe said.

Masako Akeo, head of Left Behind Parents Japan, a group of Japan-based parents separated from their children, expressed outrage over the government’s ingrained “tardiness.”

Akeo’s husband, who is also Japanese, took their son, raised in Canada, to Japan in 2006 without her consent. A Japanese family court later granted him sole custody of the boy, effectively denying Akeo any visitation rights. She has no idea where he is today.

“We all looked very much forward to this day. But now we’re devastated to find out we’re not even eligible to ask for the government’s support to locate and help us visit our kids,” Akeo said.

While acknowledging that their situation is a pity, legal experts argue that the convention’s current framework does not allow such parents to be helped.

“It’s not like there is absolutely nothing they can do. They could go to the U.S. and litigate a case themselves. But I understand it will be a very, very laborious task,” said lawyer Masami Kittaka.

“The sad reality is that Japan’s accession to the convention does nothing to directly improve their situation,” she said.

  • Tim Johnston

    It’s definitely not the light at the end of the tunnel.
    As Japan has finally acceded to the Hague Convention.
    There are way too many loopholes.
    As it is good news indeed. Many of us foreign Parents in Japan feel the court system within japan is one sided and will continue to be unfair. The Japanese Government has gone around in circles about how they plan to deal with the parents.

  • Tim Johnston

    (In the third paragraph from the bottom)

    This article hits the nail on the head:

    legal experts argue that the convention’s current framework does not allow such parents to be helped.

    Tim Johnston Japan
    Kai endo Japan

  • disqus_78r6IPfptX

    Staff writer Tomohiro Osaki is trying to portray Miho Watanabe, divorced from an allegedly abusive American husband as the kind of Japanese woman the government has always protected in these international child custody situations: the victim of domestic violence by their foreign spouses who flee to Japan with the children for safety. Ms. Watanabe suffered a reverse loss when she sent her teenaged daughter to America on a visit in 2005 and the girl was kept there, not to return. I disagree with this portrayal. It might be true, but it is not proven. What is proven is that Ms. Watanabe was the first to illegally flee American legal jurisdiction with her underage child. That was a crime making her the kidnapping criminal terrorist, not her former foreign husband. Watanabe laments, “I was told by the American family I would become a ‘kidnapper’ if I ever tried to bring back my own girl to Japan.” It doesn’t seem to occur to her that that is exactly what she is. She sounds sincerely ignorant that she is the wrong doer in this situation. Saying “my own girl” indicates faulty logic as well. It indicates the view of young children as the physical property of their mothers.

    Now, Watanabe’s daughter is a legal adult and beyond the age covered by the Hague Convention on International Child Abduction, so Ms. Watanabe is beyond help offered by the convention to deprived parents. She doesn’t realize it but that is a good thing because if her daughter was still a minor then the mother would be subject to the prescribed legal penalties. I suggest imprisonment for life as an international terrorist. That’s what I suggest for all Japanese parents of minors who illegally secret their children away from divorced foreign spouses. In these situations it is overwhelmingly the case that the foreign ex-husbands have been wronged by vengeful Japanese women and they deserve redress. If Japanese mothers who brought their children to Japan
    as refugees from bad and even dangerous family situations abroad want my sympathy and support they will have to do more to earn it than this article
    describes. In almost all cases the Japanese ex-spouses are the criminal
    wrong doers.