The expanding role of expert psychological evaluations and testimony in Hague child abduction litigation

Hague Convention cases are a growing niche in forensic assessments. These cases focus on returning children, or preventing their return, after international abductions, by one of the parents, has occurred. This article focuses on the legal underpinnings of the Hague Abduction Convention, the “affirmative defenses” that may be invoked to prevent a return order, including “grave risk of harm,” “mature objection”, and the “well settled defense.” The article will also focus on the increasing roles that forensic evaluators play in these matters, the distinction between the role of forensic experts in custody proceedings and Hague cases, and the inherent limitations present in these unique kinds of evaluations.     

TO REGULATE OR NOT TO REGULATE: THE NEED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL NORMS BY GUATEMALA AND COOPERATION BY THE UNITED STATES IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN INTERCOUNTRY ADOPTIONS

The United States will be entering into force the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption by the end of 2007. At this time, all intercountry adoptions that occur between the United States and one of the 70 other countries that also have entered the Hague Convention into force must be done according to Hague protocol. Guatemala has entered the Convention into force but its adoption practices do not currently align themselves with Convention requirements. The U.S. State Department has threatened that intercountry adoptions between the United States and Guatemala will come to a complete stop if Guatemala's conditions are not reformed. One out of every 100 children born in Guatemala is adopted by an American family and in the 2006 fiscal year, the United States adopted 4,135 Guatemalan babies. This high number placed Guatemala as the second country from which the United States adopted the most children in 2006 second only to China. A structured compromise must be established between the United States and Guatemala in order to ensure the continued provision of homes to Guatemala babies in America while Guatemala reforms its malignant adoption practices.     

International Hague Network of Judges: Significance in Implementation of the 1980 and 1996 Hague Conventions on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction

The 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (“the Convention”) provides for the prompt return to the country of habitual residence of children taken by a parent from one country to another. It was created to address the threshold problem in such cases, that is, which court should determine the rights of the parties involved. In a case under the Convention, the court's concern is which country is the country of habitual residence and practical aspects of the return to ensure the safety of the child and the taking parent. This article will discuss the formation of the International Hague Network of Judges (IHNJ), why it is crucial in the advancement of the Convention's goals, and, specifically, what it does to educate judges and facilitate communication between judges, and how the IHNJ can facilitate the return, including providing information on services, procedures, and protections offered in the countries of return.     

Domestic violence and child participation: contemporary challenges for the 1980 hague child abduction convention

ABSTRACT

This article addresses two contemporary challenges for the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention: (i) domestic violence and (ii) child participation. It also outlines three components of a global socio-legal policy and research initiative undertaken to address these issues and, where relevant, their intersection. The published literature on these topics, including the children’s objections exception, is explored, as are the ways in which these challenges are addressed within some of the 101 Contracting States to the Convention and through the Guide to Good Practice on Article 13(1)(b) of the Convention. Regard is paid to the data provided by the statistical analysis of applications made under the Convention in 2015 by Lowe and Stephens, and the changes which will occur once the Recast of The European Brussels 11a Regulation comes into operation. The likely impact for 1980 Hague Convention abduction proceedings of the UK having left the European Union at 23.00 GMT on 31 January 2020 is contemplated. Other current international initiatives are discussed, including the development of a child-friendly version of the Convention through The International Association of Child Law Researchers. Training is a key to changing attitudes and upskilling family justice professionals to ensure the Convention operates in a fully child-centric way. This will maintain and strengthen the Convention by keeping it ‘fit for purpose’.     

What Is “Law,” if “the Law” Is not Something that “Is”? A Modest Contribution to a Major Question

After proposing an alternative definition of what “law” (jurisprudential concept) is, this article demonstrates the impossibility of identifying “the law” (what law‐makers announce, relative to a particular jurisdiction) as something that is in a particular way. Rather, the law is a more or less abstract range of options. Drawing upon this conclusion, the article calls for a reassessment of how we view the role of law‐makers. We need to remove the mystery that surrounds the law so as to provide for greater transparency. This transparency can be gained by requiring law‐makers to declare their inescapable biases where they influence their lawmaking.     

TRADE‐OFFS IN FORMULATING A CONSISTENT NATIONAL POLICY ON ADOPTION*

Just as the courts must consider the trade‐off between the best interest of the child and parental rights in involuntary termination of parental rights, policy on international adoption must consider the trade‐offs between the best interest of the child and the long‐term interests of the nation. We argue that countries that suspend international adoptions do not maximize social welfare. A consistent national policy to maximize the well‐being of the children and society at large would be to devote resources today to the oversight of international adoption in accord with child protections under the Hague Convention, while at the same time developing a domestic system of care that provides for the physical and developmental needs of orphaned children in the context of permanent families.     

Reason of State and Public Reason

“Reason of state” is a concept that is rarely used in contemporary legal and political philosophy, compared to everyday parlance; “public reason,” in contrast, is ubiquitous, especially in liberal philosophy, as a legitimacy‐conferring device. In this article it is argued that the unpopularity of the notion of “reason of state” is partly due to its notorious ambiguity. Three different usages of the notion can be identified: a “thin” usage (where “reason of state” is equivalent to the common good); an “ironical” usage (where it is used pejoratively to denounce it as a pretext for application of illegitimate or illegal means); and a “pre‐emptive” usage (where “reason of state” functions as a legitimate second‐order exclusionary reason used to override otherwise mandatory first‐order rules of action). It is argued that only the “thin” usage is helpful in a by‐and‐large liberal‐democratic context. The article then discusses the main dilemmas related to the concept of public reason, especially in its most influential, Rawlsian interpretation, and defends the concept against common critiques. Finally, the two concepts of “reason of state” and public reason are compared, and it is argued that a “thin” usage of “reason of state” is functionally equivalent to public reason, and that both resonate with the theory of “input democracy” (focusing, as it does, on the legitimacy of reasons—or motivations—for applying coercive rules to individuals). The article also identifies a problematic feature of “reason of state”: its emphasis on the state as a privileged interpreter of such reasons and/or as identifying the pool of actors within which the “constituency” of public reason is ascertained. There are good reasons to resist both of these consequences: the former because of its potentially authoritarian consequences, the latter because of reasons provided by cosmopolitan political conceptions.     

When Federal Law Goes Unnoticed: Assessing the CISG's Applicability Across U.S. Courts Based on an Empirical Research of Decisions from 1988 to 2020

The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) has reached the level of acceptance that it can be recognized as the face of international sales law. Over a century ago, the late Roscoe Pound drew attention to the dichotomy between the law as written and the law as experienced in practice. The law of the CISG “on the books” is the law of the United States. With the growth of international trade, one might expect its importance to grow in the realm of law “in action.” This article explores the CISG in action in U.S. courts during its almost four decades of being the law on the books in the United States. To this end, the authors built an original dataset based on their Westlaw search of all decisions mentioning the CISG across all U.S. federal and state courts from 1988 (when the CISG entered into force) through 2019. The dataset provides unprecedented insights into: (1) how parties raise the issue of the applicability of the CISG, (2) how courts have ruled on the Convention's applicability, and (3) the provisions of the Convention that appear most frequently in these disputes. This article empirically assesses, through logistic regressions, which factors are statistically significant for predicting if a court will apply (or decline to apply) the Convention to a disputed transaction. Finally, the article highlights many ways in which the law in action may not be as robust or comprehensive as it appears on the books.     

INTERNATIONAL ABDUCTION OF CHILDREN

Justice Kay discusses the abduction of children and the application of the Hague Convention from the Australian perspective. The article begins with an outline of the common law and the appropriate legislation. Signatory nations to the Hague Convention are listed and Australian case law reviewed. Statistics are also given regarding children who have been taken to what nations.     

Concurrent application of the Hague and Hamburg rules: ascertaining the applicable law to contracts for the carriage of goods by sea in Nigeria

Misuse of ship-owners’ stronger bargaining power during the nineteenth century resulted in the formulation of rules to regulate carriage of goods by sea contracts. The adoption of the Hague Rules in 1924 was followed by that of the Hamburg Rules in 1978. Nigeria has domesticated both Rules – the Hague Rules under the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA), 2004 and The Hamburg Rules by the United Nations Convention on the Carriage of Goods by Sea (Ratification and Enforcement) Act (UNCCGSA), 2005. In order to bring the Hamburg Rules into force, article 31 of the same Rules enjoins parties to denounce the 1924 Convention. Since the domestication of the Hamburg Rules in Nigeria, the COGSA has neither been denounced nor repealed, leading to confusion as to the applicable law in this area. This paper sets out to evaluate whether the enactment of the UNCCGSA has repealed the COGSA or whether the two legislation apply concurrently in Nigeria. Through analysis of case law, it contends that the enactment of the UNCCGSA has impliedly repealed the COGSA in Nigeria. Finally, the paper offers further suggestions which will aid in bringing certainty and uniformity to this area of law in the country.     

JURISDICTION FRICTION AND THE FRUSTRATION OF THE HAGUE CONVENTION: WHY INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION CASES SHOULD BE HEARD EXCLUSIVELY BY FEDERAL COURTS

The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction confronts the growing problem of international parental child abduction by providing for the prompt return of the child to their home country. However, the legislation that implements the Hague Convention in the United States confers concurrent state and federal court jurisdiction for cases brought under the Treaty. This vast jurisdictional grant has contributed to delay in case resolution, inconsistent interpretation, and unresolved cases and has frustrated the original intent of the Hague Convention which seeks to expedite the child's return. At their core, Hague Convention proceedings are choice of forum cases in an international context and the Convention depends on reciprocity and respect for the rule of law among Contracting States. Consolidating Hague Convention proceedings within the federal system would encourage uniform interpretation of Treaty provisions and allow expertise to develop among judges. This will promote the interests of parent and child victims by facilitating the prompt return and eventual resolution of the underlying custody controversy while strengthening the effectiveness of performance under the Hague Convention.     

Asking the Sovereignty Question in Global Legal Pluralism: From “Weak” Jurisprudence to “Strong” Socio‐Legal Theories of Constitutional Power Operations

The article examines recent theories of legal and constitutional pluralism, especially their adoption of sociological perspectives and criticisms of the concept of sovereignty. The author argues that John Griffiths's original dichotomy of “weak” and “strong” pluralism has to be reassessed because “weak” jurisprudential theories contain useful sociological analyses of the internal differentiation and operations of specific legal orders, their overlapping, parallel validity and collisions in global society. Using the sociological methodology of legal pluralism theories and critically elaborating on Teubner's societal constitutionalism, the author subsequently reformulates the question of sovereignty as a sociological problem of complex power operations communicated through the constitutional state's organization and reconfigured within the global legal and political framework.     

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION FOR HAGUE CONVENTION CHILD CUSTODY DISPUTES*

This note explains that an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) protocol should be adopted as part of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction to facilitate the amicable resolution of cross‐border child custody cases. It suggests that national ADR models should be used as a guide to improve this treaty. First, this note brings to light the negative effect of cross‐border litigation on children as well as the complexities and the deficiencies of this international treaty. Second, it examines mediation and arbitration systems employed in the United States, Europe, and Australia and how these can be transposed on the international scale. Third, it proposes how the ADR protocol should be drafted and implemented. A sound ADR mechanism would alleviate the unfortunate conditions of children trapped in long and destructive international child custody battles.     

Power,National Security and Transparency: Judicial Decision Making and Social Architecture in the Federal Courts

Even in a democratic society, the need for transparency must be balanced with an important countervailing interest: the occasional, legitimate need for government secrecy. This article, based on an examination of opinions in federal cases dealing with national security and transparency, explores how judges identified the main legal issues presented by a case and the legal factors or mode of legal interpretation used to reach or justify their conclusions. The article concludes that many of these opinions are as much about judges’ attempts to balance the judicial branch's power with the powers of the executive and legislative branches as they are about national security and transparency. Furthermore, the article contends these opinions have created an “architecture of power” that determines how national security information is controlled. The final section also suggests that judges should be mindful of the original architecture of power established by the Constitution and the First Amendment when writing their opinions.     

Parental Child Abduction in Singapore: The Experience of a Non-Convention Country

This article gives an exploratory picture of the landscape oninternational parental child abduction cases in a non-HagueConvention country, Singapore. It presents data and analyseson unpublished cases and materials in the past five years fromthe Singapore Family Court Registry (SFCR) and discusses theways in which the disputes are resolved (or unresolved) withoutthe machinery of the Hague Convention. It also examines thewelfare principle in the context of cross-border child abductionas well as how a non-Convention country can cooperate in theelimination of child abduction while applying the welfare principle.     

《海牙取证公约》在我国的实施分析

我国自1997年批准《海牙取证公约》以来,公约已经对我国生效12年。不过,从实践来看,《海牙取证公约》在我国的实施存在很多问题,如对公约实施的程序不清,实践不统一;我国法院及当事人对公约的利用不够等。为了改进《海牙取证公约》的实施,我国应该采取丰富域外取证的方式,制定公约的实施细则,合理利用信息技术等措施。     

Japan's Research Whaling Is Not Unlawful and Does Not Violate CITES Trade Rules

This article is a critique of two reports of “independent legal experts” sponsored by the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW); the “Paris Panel” and the “London Panel.” The article shows that the Paris Panel's conclusion that Japan's research whaling in the Antarctic is unlawful and an abuse of rights under the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW) is based on misuse of evidence and failure to properly interpret Article VIII of the Convention and the legal status of recommendatory non-binding resolutions. It also shows that the London Panel's conclusion that the import of humpback whales from Japan's research program in the Antarctic and sei whales from its research program in the North Pacific are a violation of trade rules under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora is based on incorrect interpretation of that Convention's trade rules. It is concluded that the two independent legal experts panel reports are, from a legal perspective, seriously flawed, rendering their conclusions invalid and relegating the reports to the status of IFAW propaganda.     

A contingency theory of policy innovation: how different theories explain the ratification of the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol

This article tests theories, elaborated by rationalists, constructivists, and network theorists, that explain the ratification of international environmental treaties. Rationalists argue that countries’ material self-interest and political and economic conditions affect the likelihood of countries ratifying treaties. Constructivists argue that countries are influenced by exposure to world society. Structural embeddedness theory argues that countries are influenced by neighboring countries, religion, language, and economic peers, and those whom they have network ties to via diplomatic relations and IGO memberships. The article is a study of how these factors affected the ratification of two environmental treaties: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol. The results show that political and economic factors, peer behavior, and network ties were more important in explaining the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol than the UNFCCC. Similar to von Stein (J Conflict Resolut 52:243–268, 2008), it found that exposure to world society was important in the UNFCCC. The authors suggested that the differences were due to the demands which the Kyoto Protocol placed on countries in contrast to the “softness” of the UNFCCC. They also discussed how social influence—based on a variety of inter-governmental relations and affiliations—may signal a change in the structure of the global environmental regime and how it conducts its business.     

Adoption among the Qing nobility and its implications for Chinese demographic behavior

The article draws on a source of unusual completeness and accuracy—the genealogical archives of the Qing imperial lineage—to provide an initial quantitative study of son adoption among the Qing nobility during the last imperial dynasty (1644–1911). Adoption was used rather frequently not only for genealogical purposes to continue the ancestral line, but also for economic security. Adoption was also an integral component of the Chinese historical demographic system and therefore varied in frequency according to the level of fertility and mortality. After a discussion of the sources for lineage population history, the article calculates the levels of son adoption over time and highlight the demographic and economic circumstances leading to adoption. It then analyzes the social relationships between biological and adoptive parents as a function of noble status and generational distance, and comments on the role of adoption as a means of social mobility within the lineage population.     

Managing fragmentation in global environmental governance: the REDD+ Partnership as bridge organization

This article analyzes the increasing institutional and organizational complexity and fragmentation surrounding the international financing mechanism REDD+ (reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries and related forest activities), now being negotiated within the UNFCCC. We focus, in particular, on critically assessing the prospects of managing such fragmentation. We do so by analyzing whether and how (what we conceptualize here as) a “bridge organization”—the voluntary, multi-stakeholder REDD+ Partnership bringing together state and non-state actors from global to local scales—has aided in managing fragmentation in this realm, through exercising four enabling functions (enhancing transparency, participation, knowledge sharing, and coordination). Our analysis shows that the REDD+ Partnership has partially succeeded in furthering such procedural aims, but that this has not resulted in a “scaling up of REDD+ action and finance,” its overarching substantive aim. In contrast to dominant views of a bridge organization’s modus operandi, we conclude, based on our analysis, that its value lies not in overcoming persisting geopolitical conflicts around climate mitigation and providing a “depoliticized” context within which to manage fragmentation. Instead, its success lies in permitting dialogue and exchange even in the face of persisting political conflicts over its raison d’être and functions. In making these arguments, the article extends recent debates on the prospects to manage fragmentation in global environmental governance and provides a critical assessment of the role therein for bridge organizations.