Hague Convention Enforcement Puts Lives At Risk

Rigid Hague Convention Enforcement Placing Lives At Risk

Women's Refuge says an Appeal Court ruling upholding the return to Australia of two children whose father has a protection order against him, highlights serious concerns about the use of the Hague Convention.

The woman, "Sally", and her husband are both New Zealanders and have two young children – one was born here and the other in Australia.

Sally also has custody of two older children from a previous relationship.

Last year she separated from her husband, who remains in Australia, after a five-year relationship, during which she suffered physical, emotional and psychological abuse.

Her children also suffered physical abuse.

Sally obtained a Domestic Violence Order in Australia, and successfully obtained a Protection Order in New Zealand, after returning here in March last year.

However, courts here have ruled that under the Hague Convention, the two younger children must return to Australia where court action over their custody is pending.

The Hague Convention is an international treaty, aimed at ensuring children abducted or wrongfully retained by a parent are returned to their country of residence as soon as possible, for any issues of parental responsibility to be dealt with under that jurisdiction.

But Women's Refuge says there has been a growing trend in New Zealand for the Convention to be used against women escaping violence, in an attempt to force them back to the country where their abuser is living.

It says it has dealt with many women in this situation and believes that by following the Hague Convention so rigidly, the Government in New Zealand is allowing women and children to be effectively placed in danger.

It says in Australia, cases of domestic violence are not typically dealt with under the Hague Convention, and is urging the New Zealand Government to adopt the same approach

A police officer who dealt with Sally's case in Australia said he believed her life would be in danger if she had to return to Australia with her two young children.

An assessment of Sally's case has been done by the Christchurch Family Safety Team, a multi-agency group incorporating police, Child Youth and Family and local community organisations. It used a "Risk and Lethality" scale, which assesses levels of previous violence experienced, severity of violence, fear experienced, additional risk of lethality factors such as problem drug and alcohol abuse, and the risk to children.

When a family scores over 24 on this scale, it is deemed to be at high risk of possible homicide and is fast-tracked into the Family Safety Team system. Sally and her family score 34 on this scale if they are to return to Australia.

Requiring women and children to return to another country in which it is known they may not be safe due to previous violence fails other human rights standards such as the United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women and the Convention for the Rights of the Child.

When the police in two countries think a family will be at risk of potentially lethal violence if it returns, why are we following the Hague Convention?

Women's Refuge is calling for a qualification to be developed to the Convention which disqualifies its use in cases of domestic violence that have been verified by statutory and community organisations.

It notes that concern about the application of the Hague Convention in such cases has also been aired by lawyers working in this country (see attached article from the Auckland District Law Society newsletter).

ENDS

© Scoop Media