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

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12410
• Author: Judge Mary W. Sheffield,Matthew D. Rowland
• Published date: 01 April 2019
• Date: 01 April 2019

INTERNATIONAL HAGUE NETWORK OF JUDGES: SIGNIFICANCE IN

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 1980 AND 1996 HAGUE CONVENTIONS

ON THE CIVIL ASPECTS OF INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION

Judge Mary W. Sheffield and Matthew D. Rowland

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.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:

Formation of the IHNJ.

Roles and functions of a network judge.

Direct judicial communication in 1980 Hague Convention cases.

Principles and safeguards for direct judicial communications.

Frequent subject matters of direct judicial communications.

Designation of IHNJ members.

Legal bases to conduct direct judicial communications.

Developments in IHNJ judicial communications.

Keywords: 1980 Hague Convention; 1996 Hague Convention; International; Judges; Liaison; Network; Return.

I. INTRODUCTION

Protecting the rights of children involved in international custody disputes is a difficult undertaking.

To assist in that effort, the United States has signed both the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on

the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (“the 1980 Convention”) and the Hague Convention

of 19 October 1996 on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Co-operation in

Respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children (“the 1996 Convention”)

(collectively, “the Conventions”).

1

The 1980 Convention provides for a prompt return to the country of habitual residence

2

for chil-

dren under the age of 16 unilaterally taken by a parent from one country to another and retained in

that country, resulting in harm to that child by being denied contact with the other parent.

3

The

1980 Convention was created to address the threshold problem of which country’s judicial system

should determine the custody and visitation rights regarding that child with the underlying premise

that it is in the best interest of the child to have his or her parenting arrangements quickly deter-

mined in the jurisdiction to which the child is most closely related.

4

It is one of the more successful

international treaties produced by The Hague Conference on Private International Law and has

98 Contracting States, including the United States, which became a signatory in 1988.

5

As can be expected with an international convention involving children and families, however,

problems arose. The aim of the 1996 Convention is to improve the protection of children in

Corresponding: mary.sheffield@courts.mo.gov

FAMILY COURT REVIEW, Vol. 57 No. 2, April 2019 175–185

© 2019 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts