We are sharing this open letter in solidarity with mothers across the world who are being failed by a justice system which is no longer fit for purpose.
‘Instead of protecting my children the system targeted me, the protective mother, branding me as an alienating mother without foundation and sentencing me to six months of suspended prison for refusing to hand over my children to their abuser. This sentence forces me to comply with dangerous visitation rights or face imprisonment and loss of custody.’
‘Hundreds of mothers across France face similar injustices, our voices are drowned out by a system that protects abusers over victims. I appeal to the international community, human rights organizations, and world leaders to provide asylum for French mothers and children who need protection from a system that endangers their lives.’
‘My plea is simple: we seek safety, justice, and the right to live free from fear. We call upon you to recognize our plight and advocate for systemic changes that prioritize victim protection over perpetrators’ rights. Our fight is for the future of countless children who deserve to grow up in a world where their rights and well-being are safeguarded.’
Please share the Open Letter to help raise awareness of this appalling injustice, one which is replicated across the world.
Patricia Alvarez of The Hague Papers reports on a potentially groundbreaking declaration by the Brazilian Government – one which could be a first step towards safeguarding victims of domestic violence, both mothers and children, who are caught up in Hague proceedings.
An historic Forum on Domestic Violence and the Operation of Article 13(1)(b) was held in South Africa last month (18-21 June 2024). We believe and hope that this unprecedented event will mark a turning point in the implementation of the Convention. Our sincere thanks to Secretary-General Christophe Bernasconi and his colleagues at the HCCH for organising the Forum, and for enabling mothers’ voices to be heard for the first time. It was powerful and profoundly moving.
The whole event was also an inspiring example of the global sisterhood in action.
Fifteen FiLiA Hague Mothers (FHM) members, advisors and partners attended in person, the majority of them as presenters and panel members; others presented online; many contributed to our expert papers that were circulated to attendees; Hague mothers shared their stories; volunteers and staff from FHM, GlobalARRK and Revibra live-tweeted key sessions; online attendees submitted questions and amplified our social media accounts. Every one of you helped to make a difference.
In his opening address, Secretary-General Bernasconi offered the hope that the Forum was ‘just a beginning’. The Brazilian Government’s offer to host a follow-up Forum in 2025 has made that hope a reality. In the interim, and with your help, we will continue to do all we can to raise awareness of the injustices caused by the Convention in cases of domestic violence and to advocate for those affected.
When we formally launched FiLiA Hague Mothers in 2022, we set out to ‘build an international movement for justice’. That international movement came together in South Africa last month. Thank you to every single one of you who made that possible. Together we will make change happen.
HCCH Forum on Domestic Violence and the Operation of Article 13(1)(b) of the 1980 Child Abduction Convention, South Africa
Our member Donna Johnson summarised each day of the Forum from Johannesburg
Opening session summary June 18th
A strong opening session at the Johannesburg forum with remarks from Elsabe Schoeman, Dean of the Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria; John Jeffery, Deputy Minister of Justice, South Africa; and Christophe Bernasconi, Secretary General of the Hague Conference on Private International Law (HCCH).
For me, the remarks spoke to the gravity of the issue that we are here to address. We were told it is going to be a hard four days.
The ‘landmark’ nature of this huge, interdisciplinary forum was stressed by Dr. Bernasconi. He referred to the moment as ‘truly historic’ as representatives from all perspectives (legal, academic, judicial, women who have fled intimate partner violence, DV advocates, psychological experts, left behind parents, Central Authorities, NGOs and researchers) come together for a crucial dialogue.
He reflected on the journey that led us to this forum. It was through emails from domestic violence survivors and their advocates that he became aware of problems with The Hague Convention when it comes to women fleeing intimate partner violence. Roz Osborne and Ruth Dineen were named as two of the individuals who convinced him of the need for a ‘dialogue among many voices’, in order that continuing, meaningful evolution of the Convention can occur. He said that at the time the Convention was established, gender based violence was not taken into account. He said that now, too often, we hear of women being ‘Hagued’ and that he is disturbed by this phrase. He believes that the convention needs to evolve. To be effective it must be inclusive, it must evolve. Hence this forum.
He stressed the challenge faced over the next days. The program is rich and designed to engage, but the issue is hard and complex. He urged participants to maintain a safe and respectful environment in order that the dialogue be productive, fruitful, and enforce understanding. It is his hope that at the end of the day we all have the same goal: the appropriate use of The Hague Convention.
Day 2 summary June 19th
For those of us who work with women fleeing domestic violence, the conversation got hard very quickly today.
We know that mothers who risk life and limb to extricate themselves and their children from abusive homes are not abductors, but protectors.
Those of us with long experience accompanying women in situations of intimate partner violence know that mothers are between a rock and a hard place.
In every country they face enormous barriers to leaving their batterers. It takes massive courage to leave an abusive man. It’s terrifying. Women turn to the courts in good faith, too often to find their situations treated with indifference.
Too often to find themselves abandoned and opposed by the very organizations with a mandate to protect them and their children.
Their abusers are rarely effectively sanctioned and restrained by their own domestic courts, leaving them as sitting ducks.
For such mothers, fleeing across international borders with their child or children is a desperate last resort.
It is hard to hear these acts of desperation and courage framed as acts of violence.
It’s hard to hear mothers chastised for ‘taking matters into their own hands,’ when it is precisely the lack of protection in their own jurisdictions that leads to the very difficult decision to flee the country.
It is hard to see the power dynamics of the abusive relationship, and a patriarchal society, rendered invisible. The words ‘power’ and ‘control’ were infrequently used, if at all. How is it that abusive men get to run the show? How is it that women and children are made to pay the price for men’s violence? For what other crime are victims forced to stay in contact with the perpetrator? These are questions we need to be asking.
The afternoon session, “Lived experiences of abduction cases involving DV” was profound, honest, brave and riveting. It went off like a bomb in the room, exploding any safe intellectual distance from the subject. We heard voice after voice after voice of abused mothers who have been revictimized, first by the courts, then by the Hague Convention.
Some mothers appeared by video. Some came in person. All spoke at incredible cost to themselves in order that we might be moved in our hearts to recognize the plight of the battered mother and take action to protect her and her children.
Why is it such a big ask?
Some of the words I heard today from ‘Hagued’ mothers:
“It was never about my son. It was all about power and control over me.”
“Women are encouraged to leave, but then set straight back.”
“It’s the strength of the mother that causes her to fight.“
“What is the line that needs to be crossed in order for a woman to get protection?”
“If there are children, they know they can still control us.“
“The safety of children depends on the courts believing mothers.”
“‘Grave risk of harm?’ These are active war zones.”
“Men who abuse women should not be able to dictate where the victims of their abuse live.”
“It is clear a war is being waged against mothers, and the battlefield is the Hague Convention.”
“These cases are not outliers.”
Day 3 summary June 20th
Here are some of the points that stood out for me today:
A man can win custody of a child even though he has
a) kept his pregnant partner in a shed
b) stopped to do a drug deal on the way to the hospital when his pregnant partner is in labour
c) beaten the mother of his child.
It is not necessarily traumatic for a child not to have a relationship with two parents. It is essential to have one solid attachment.
It is harmful to separate a child from his or her primary attachment.
Abuse is not linear, it is not always physical, and there is not always physical evidence to point to.
Domestic violence amounts to inhuman and degrading treatment of women. It is a human rights issue.
What about the human rights of mothers? Do mothers have a right to lives of safety? Do we have obligations to mothers in their own right? It’s not only a matter of the impact on the kids.
Training in intimate partner violence must include understanding abusive men’s tactics, which include counter-allegations, parental alienation claims, and accusing their partners of having mental health problems and being unfit mothers.
Women who are doing everything in their power to protect their children are quite unjustly being named as criminals. ‘Taking’ mothers are criminalized and stigmatized.
The options for women are to stay in the country and take the abuse, or flee and be labelled a criminal and an abductor.
Migrant women are particularly vulnerable to criminalization.
Some of the words I heard today:
“How much risk is acceptable when it comes to women and children’s lives? How much abuse is too much abuse? How much is acceptable? Where is the line?”
“The Hague Convention is the worst human rights violation I’ve ever seen. Maybe it worked 40 years ago, but it’s not working now. The Hague Convention is not fit for purpose.”
“The convention is now being used as a tool to abuse victims. Women are being hung like witches in the Salem witch trials.”
“I would like to see a revolution come out of this conference.”
Day 4 summary June 21st
The Johannesburg Forum has put the plight of ‘Hagued Mothers’ before the world.
The forum showed us that we have at hand all the evidence, expertise and goodwill required to turn this situation around.
But it seems to me we haven’t yet grasped the power structure. Until we start to recognize and confront the patriarchal power structure bearing down upon women’s lives, this injustice will continue. Because we don’t know how to read it. Failing to see it, we will be unable to stop it.
Men’s abuse of women via The Hague Convention is just another form of male violence against women, albeit a particularly cruel form.
Until we start to recognize the fundamental rights of women and begin to protect them as women, and in their central role as mothers, these injustices will continue.
“Men their rights and nothing more; women their rights and nothing less.” –Susan B. Anthony.
In a hugely significant interview for Uruguayan newspaper La Diaria, one of the originators of the treaty Judge Elisa Pérez-Vera told journalist Patrícia Álvares:
“If I had to write it today, I would think that one of the circumstances that judges can take into account when affirming that there is an exception to the return of the child to the place of habitual residence, is precisely the existence of an abuser, of a father who exercises gender violence on the mother, and normally also in a vicarious way, on the abducted child.”
Pérez-Vera also acknowledged the lack of equality of arms for mothers forced to fight for custody in a foreign country, even before court costs are taken in to account:
“Indeed, litigating in one’s own country, before one’s own court, has an extra bonus of advantage over the foreigner. I think xenophobia is latent in many of us, even if we don’t realise it, even if we believe we are not xenophobic, in the end, there is more tendency to believe the national than the foreigner. I think it works at all levels. Not only before a judge but also before the police, before any institution. Let’s think: the national plays at home. It is like football. Playing at home is always an advantage.”
We very much hope that attendees at the Pretoria Forum (June 19-21) which will consider issues of domestic abuse and the Hague Convention, will take account of this thoughtful and important interview. Mothers and children who are victims of abuse need to be safeguarded by the Convention, not further abused.
Our thanks to La Diaria for permission to republish, and to Patrícia Álvares for the original article and the English translation. Patrícia Álvares can be contacted via The Hague Papers website.
“Sometimes going back [to Brazil] is the only way to ensure that they will stay alive and to protect their children. If you are in a place where you don’t have a support system, you don’t have a network, you don’t know that you can stay there … they can’t file a complaint. They are stigmatised by the system, by the government, by the courts, by the state.”
Sally Jackson in conversation with Janaina Albuquerque of Revibra Europa, a network of legal experts and psychologists who provide advice and support to Brazilian victims of domestic abuse. They have considerable experience of Hague cases, and of the additional barriers faced by migrant women in negotiating the court hearing and the aftermath. We’re delighted to be working in partnership with them – thank you for your time and expertise Janaina!
Reem Alsalem, the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls recently completed a fact-finding visit to the UK. Our submission included the stories of two Hague mothers whose lives and freedom of movement are now entirely controlled by their abusive ex-partners, enabled by international law.
“I fear that freedom from his abuse may never come. If there are children involved, abusers know that they can still manipulate and control our lives through the legal system, finances, and the children themselves.”
Our proposals included:
an automatic right to legal aid for ‘taking parents’
mandated training in domestic abuse for both judges and lawyers dealing with Hague cases.
changes to the implementation of the Convention in the UK to ensure that the Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 is compatible with the Domestic Abuse Act 2021. This particularly relates to the definition of domestic abuse, and the recognition that children living with domestic abuse are victims in their own right.
UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls Reem Alsalem has declared violence against women a ‘national threat’ in the UK. That includes the ‘institutional violence’ of the courts. In a statement at the end of a 10-day visit to the country she goes on to say:
‘Entrenched patriarchy at almost every level of society, combined with a rise in misogyny that permeates the physical and online world, is denying thousands of women and girls across the UK the right to live in safety, free from fear and violence.’
FiLiA Hague Mothers came in to being almost two years ago, inspired by a chance meeting with a formidable Hague mum, and the realisation that the well-intentioned Hague Abduction Convention is being used to further control domestic abuse victims. That understanding led to a conversation with FiLiA’s CEO Lisa-Marie. And that conversation resulted in the subsequent launch of our campaign to end the injustices of the Convention, specifically for mothers and children who are victims of domestic abuse.
The campaign is now active, and increasingly influential, across the world. All participants contribute their knowledge, time, and passion on a voluntary basis and, other than support from FiLiA to set up and maintain our website, we remain unfunded.
Our members include Hague mothers, lawyers, academics, domestic abuse professionals, women’s rights and children’s rights experts, psychologists, media specialists, and feminist activists. We advocate for victim/survivors, raise awareness through presentations, webinars, media articles and research papers, create resources for mothers and professionals, lobby politicians, and signpost mothers to both formal and informal survivor-led support groups.
We have grown organically – and somewhat randomly! Now we need to establish a sustainable and democratic structure that will enable all participants to contribute fully, and ensure that we remain true to FiLiA’s mission: to build sisterhood and solidarity; amplify the voices of women: and defend women’s human rights. Soooo…
We have expanded our International Strategy Group to include Hague mothers from three continents and a wider range of international expertise.
We have created a ten-strong Mother’s Expert Group who will advise on strategic decisions and initiate actions in their own right.
All members have been asked to commit to the FiLiA values, foregrounding the importance of sisterhood and solidarity.
The three ‘country-based’ members’ groups have expanded to reflect our growing international membership. To enable greater autonomy and democratic participation, all members will have an equal say in deciding what actions need to be taken in their part of the world. The first set of what will be regular, minuted meetings, take place this month.
We are already part of a formidable network of grassroots groups and NGOs with expertise in a broad range of issues including, women’s and children’s rights, women’s access to justice, and male violence against women & girls. We are now working to formalise our international partnerships and strengthen these – mutually-beneficial – connections.
We are also expanding our informal network of expert supporters; individuals who signed our Open Letter to the Hague Special Commission, those who have reached out to us to suggest other contacts or to provide advice, and those working in related fields but who share our desire for justice.
Last but not least, the fabulous Sally Jackson (FiLiA’s chair of trustees, MVAWG Lead and Safeguarding Lead) has agreed to oversee the HM campaign under the auspices of FiLiA’s MVAWG workstream. Her experience and expert guidance will be invaluable.Thanks, as ever, for all your contributions.
Especial thanks to the many Hague mothers who are working with us to end the injustices of the Hague. You continue to inspire us with your courage and determination.
A BBC documentary – ‘Mums on the Run: failed by the Family Court’ revealed the desperation of mothers who flee to Northern Cyprus in an attempt to safeguard themselves and their children. In doing so, they leave their families and friends, their homes, and their jobs. Many end up in poverty, trapped in the country they have fled to. They are criminalised, labelled as abductors.
This article, co-authored by HM team members Dr Elizabeth Dalgarno, Dr Rima Hussein, and Ruth Dineen, looks at what has gone so wrong in our courts that exile is seen as a solution.
