Two girls abducted from Spain to Poland by their mother, have been ordered to be returned to their father by court in Suwalki, before the appeal process is finished.
This story is an example where a Polish court did something right and decided to order the return of two girls from Poland to Spain. The mother of 7 year old Nicole and 4 year old Daria, Iwona Czygier, decided to “return” to Poland, claiming to have received the permission of the Spanish father. The court decided differently.
As this case indicates, both girls CAN be returned to Spain immediately, and the need for the appeal process to be finished is not required. This is something new, as far as I know. The case seems to be very typical: mother could not find herself in a new country, and after problems with the father of her children reached “the point of no return”, she packed both daughters and left Spain for Poland. The parents are not married, but still, the Polish court in Suwalki decided that both girls must return back to Spain. Ms. Iwona Czygier, the mother, refuses to return with the girls back to Spain, as she sees no future for herself there.
The article claims that both girls want to stay with the mother, and since she refused to go back with them, this qualifies as an exception included in article 13b of the Hague Convention. Article 13b gives courts right to refuse the order to return if
there is a grave risk that his or her return would expose the child to physical or psychological
harm or otherwise place the child in an intolerable situation
It is the most abused article of the convention by all countries, since its clearly vague wording seem to leave a lot of room for interpretation[…and boy, most judges in EU are VERY loose on over-interpreting the above sentence]. However, this gentleman has not done his homework, and did not learn what the Polish and worldwide legal practices and precedents say about rules in application of article 13b. All legal scholars and high courts insist on a very narrow and strict application of the exception included in article 13b. As the decision of court in Suwalki proved, the mere refusal to return with the children by the abducting parent cannot be used as a valid condition for 13b. Same goes for alleged psychological harm being done due to the separation of the children from the abducting parent. The stupidity of this argument is so unbelievable, that it shows how irrational the person invoking it is: “separating my children from me is harmful, but separating from the father is … good, actually, very good!“.
Few thoughts on corruption in Poland and its effect on parental child abductions; case of Steven Watkins still not resolved.
As I did my periodical google search on news about international abductions today, one of the old and familiar cases popped out. The case of Stephen Watkins of Canada and his two abducted boys, who were illegally retained by a corrupt Polish judges with their national socialist mentality that considers every child abducted to their country to be a “Polish” child. Sounds familiar (can you spell P-u-t-i-n)?
According to the article I found today, there are still 240 unresolved cases of international parental child kidnappings in Canada. There are thousands in USA. Poland after being a signatory to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction since 1995 is still in the top of offenders in international rankings of the implementation of this law.
It is a major problem, but it is only a reflection of a bigger issue that is facing my native Poland.
British government starts a media educational campaign to prevent international parental abductions, when the Polish officials sit on their hands, and do nothing.
Another example of a country where the government bureaucrats noticed a problem and decided to do something about it. They inform the public about the consequences of a child abduction: emotional, psychological and (yes) legal as well.
British government, after noticing a 100% increase of international child abductions from their country, started a media campaign. They created a short video, which found its way to Youtube.com
Marek Michalak, Rzecznik Praw Dziecka w Polsce promuje uprowadzanie dzieci do Polski: domaga się kasacji w sprawach Konwencji Haskiej odnośnie cywilnych aspektów uprowadzenia dziecka zagranicę. Czyżby nastał czas na zweryfikowanie celowości istnienia tego urzędu?
Z wielkim niedowierzaniem przeczytałem dzisiaj artykuł w Rzeczpospolita.pl o tym, że Rzecznik Praw Dziecka w Polsce, Marek Michalak, stara się przywrócić możliwość kasacyjną w sprawach uprowadzanych dzieci do Polski, a których nakaz powrotu został wydany przed sądami polskimi w oparciu o Konwencję Haską.
To dopiero w połowie 2001 roku polski Sejm, po wielkich naciskach obcych rządów, zdecydował się zmienić odpowiednie prawo, i uniemożliwił możliwość wnoszenia kasacji w tych sprawach. Również, w tej samej ustawie, prawo zostało znowelizowane tak, aby obowiązek wyegzekwowania nakazów powrotu w ramach Konwencji Haskiej spoczywał na organach państwowych, a nie poszkodowanym rodzicu. Przyświecającym (i chlubnym wg mnie) celem było wyeliminowanie dotychczasowych legalnych manewrów, niepotrzebnie przedłużających czas procesowy, narażający dzieci na długoletnie potyczki prawne przed sądami w polskich sądach. Przypomnijmy, że niektóre kasacje trwały w sądach prawie DWANAŚCIE miesięcy. Prawdą również jest to, że Continue reading “Rzecznik praw dziecka w Polsce chce chronić polskich rodziców porywaczy”
Another example of little child to Poland by a Polish mother. As usual the press and the local prosecutor are up at arms after the Regional Court in Czestochowa issued an order for the return of Olivia to her dad in Spain.
Another “drive by” article from Polish newspaper by Marek Mamoń, where the journalist sides with another Polish mother, the child kidnapper. This time, little girl, Olivia, was illegally removed from Spain. Her mother took her to Poland on a Christmas Holiday, “visit the family” trip. I call it “wow-deja-vu-excuse” trip.
It seems that Gazeta.pl and se.pl have been pretty much consistent in supporting parents who decided to kidnap their children to Poland. I wrote few posts on the subject. To this day, I have yet to find even one article that these newspapers (rags, would be more appropriate, but lately I was told, that I am way to bitter) would support a foreign parent in such cases.
It is simply amazing how script-like articles follow the same formula: one sided title, story excusing kidnapper’s action based on fabrications and slander; CYA part, i.e “quotes (usually, full of omissions, or straight down misleading citations (I’ve been there experienced it first-hand ) from the left behind parent, with the final, standard accusation of “subservient, heartless stand of the judge” towards the law.