Cablegate

[SageDad]

As many of you are probably aware Wikileaks has said that they will be releasing over 200,000 US State Dept. Cables (confidential memos) that they have obtained.  So far they have only released 2000.

I have been watching them for cables related to international child abduction.

One interesting one can be found here:

http://213.251.145.96/cable/2007/05/07MADRID1021.html

About the Carrascosa abduction case from NJ.

This memo was sent by the US Ambassador to Spain in preparation of, then, Secretary Condoleeza Rice's visit.

SUBJECT: SCENESETTER FOR SECRETARY RICE'S JUNE 1 VISIT TO MADRID

Summary
....
Moratinos will raise a thorny child-custody case involving a
Spanish woman currently jailed for contempt of court in New
Jersey.
....

Dealing with Moratinos
....

 Two important bilateral issues fall in the judicial
area. Moratinos has said he will raise with you the child
custody involving Spanish citizen Maria Jos Carrascosa who
is currently jailed for contempt of court in Bergen County,
New Jersey for failure to return her child to the US as
required by a New Jersey court decision. During this
political season in Madrid, the case has become a cause
celebre, with pictures of Carrascosa ) viewed as a mother
separated from her child - in handcuffs entering the New
Jersey prison. The GOS agrees that this is a case for the
courts and both governments agree that mediation of the
dispute is the appropriate response. However, Moratinos for
political reasons has to show the government is doing
something about the case. On our side, you should note
continued USG concern about the court case against the three
US servicemen charged with alleged &war crimes8 in the case
of the death of Spanish TV camerman Jose Couse in the
Palestine Hotel in Baghdad in 2003. The GOS has been helpful
behind the scenes in getting the case appealed by the Spanish
Prosecutor. The case now moves to the appeals tribunal of
the National Court, which will rule on the substance of the
charges. We want continued vigilance and cooperation by the
GOS until the case is dropped.
....

Anyone else notice how absolutely no thought or mention was ever given to asking for the abducted child to be returned to the US? 

[Jara]

With respect C, this is over 3.5 years old correspondence.  In that time period we have seen the awareness grow on the Child Abduction/Retention issue.  Granted, a lot of work needs to be done. 

I've dealt with Spain for going on 5 years now.  The laws of Spain and their sovereign governments, as put in the words from the US Consulate General in Spain; "I've been here for 20 years, do not try to understand the correlation between our laws (US) and Spanish law, I don't even understand the logic after 20 years as a diplomat"). 

Sovereign governments of Spain adapt the Spanish creed of judicial process.  The logic and process is VERY different, as you know. 

But from 2007, from when this was written, to today, is different.  Thanks to Sean and the efforts of this Team, awareness is happening.  That is critical to change.  Albeit a slow process.

Biko said" Change the way people think, and you change the world".  So true.  We are making awareness happen and it is very different from 2007. 

Thanks for this share.  I think it illuminates the thought process of the Spanish government and the sovereign judicial system. 

[SageDad]

The Bring Sean Home Foundation is not the first organization to address international child abduction and Sean was not the first child to make national or international news for international child abduction.  He was not the first child to have a resolution passed in Congress demanding his return and will almost certainly not be the last.

I would love to be able to say that I see real sustainable progress taking place, but I don't.  What I see are very impressive efforts being undertaken that have the potential to enact real reforms and progress but these efforts are not new and wholly original or meritorious of irrational exuberance.  Believing that they are reflects an ignorance of history that threatens to convert current efforts into the historical anecdotes that all previous efforts have become.

The now defunct PARENT International did some serious organizing in the late 90's and early part of this decade including a conference in Washington DC.  Dozens of non-profits have started and closed without achieving much worth writing about.

Senate Resolution 239 in 1999 was "A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that Nadia Dabbagh, who was abducted from the United States, should be returned home to her mother, Ms. Maureen Dabbagh."   That same year saw House Resolution 215 "Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives with regard to the return of Saif Ahmed."  In 2001 HR 237 was introduced "Expressing the sense of the Congress urging the Republic of Italy to safely and immediately return Ludwig Maximilian Koons to the custody of his father in New York."  In 2004 House Resolution 821 passed "Condemning the abduction of Dylan Benwell from the United States and calling for his return."

Some of the very best articles on international child abduction were published over a decade ago by Timothy Maier.

Chris Smith champions this issue in Congress today but 10 years ago it was former Congressman Nick Lampson, the founder of the Missing and Exploited Children Caucus, who pushed the "Bring Our Children Home Act" for years across multiple sessions of Congress (it never passed.)

In 2009 David Goldman's struggle directly lead to a Congressional Hearing on international child abduction before the Tom Lantos Comission on Human Rights, but there were well over a dozen such hearings that have held in the 30 years prior.

To clarify, this cable does very little to illuminate Spain's position at all.  It illuminates what has been, and REMAINS, the US State Department position on international child abduction for the past 30 years.  Specifically, that these cases are a non-issue.  The only role they play is that of a potential political and diplomatic irritant that needs to be managed and resolved (irrespective of whether or not American children are returned.)  They didn't seek the return of this child in 2007 and continue to fail to do so today, 3 years later, while she remains abducted in Spain.  Their only goal is to "resolve" these cases and keep them from ever making it into the news.  They have all the facts, all the statistics and understand the demographics and dynamics better than any other organization on earth, but they choose to sit on this data and obfuscate or hide it.  They have never proposed any legislative changes and have fought the changes proposed by others.  They only produce the annual Compliance Reports because a lot of people fought like hell for them to do so and kept fighting them when they did a crap job of even that.  When they were invited to testify at the 2009 Congressional hearing they DECLINED altogether.  They have nothing to say because they are happy with the way things are today.

If you have evidence that suggests that the State Dept. has changed their stance on this issue in the last 30 years (a stance they have been criticized for over that entire time,) much less the last 3 years, I'd be delighted to see it because, in both my own studies and personal experiences working with directly, I only see more of the same.

[SageDad]

The Cables keep slowly trickling out.  At present some 3000 have been released out of 250,000 or so. 

A new one was just released that talks about the Goldman case.  I have to admit I am a bit surprised, and pleased, by the language which actually calls the abduction an abduction (though it's pretty sad when it makes me happy to see the State Dept. call a spade a spade.)

http://cablesearch.org/?id=09BRASILIA671&v

ID: 09BRASILIA671
SUBJECT: BRAZIL SCENESETTER: CODEL THOMPSON MAY 27-28
DATE: 2009-05-27 15:03:00
CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED
ORIGIN: Embassy Brasilia

....

---------------------- Goldman Abduction Case ---------------------- 

¶36. (U) American David Goldman is currently pursuing a Hague Abduction Case, involving his son Sean who was brought to Brazil by his mother and wrongfully retained here over 4 years ago. The case has been remanded to the 16th Federal Court in Rio de Janeiro. The Court has two cases before it: the return motion from Mr. Goldman under the Hague Convention on International Child Abduction, and the custody motion by Sean's Brazilian stepfather which was originally filed in a Rio state court. The Ambassador and numerous elements within the Mission have been working firmly but quietly behind the 

BRASILIA 00000671 007 OF 007 

scenes to remind the GOB of its obligations under the Hague Convention. We are cautiously optimistic that the move to the Federal Court will result in a more just decision on the Hague case. We remain in constant touch with David Goldman and his Brazilian attorney to ensure that their interests are represented effectively in Brasilia. A decision may be announced soon.

[SageDad]

And another cable about a parental kidnapper.  This is another one we've talked about here before:

ID 08SANJOSE695
SUBJECT COSTA RICA GRANTS REFUGEE STATUS TO CHERE LYN TOMAYKO; MAY
DATE  2008-08-26 21:09:00
CLASSIFICATION UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
ORIGIN Embassy San Jose
TEXT UNCLAS SAN JOSE 000695

DEPT FOR WHA/CEN PRM, DRL, CA and DS/CR/CIL; DOJ for OIA; Panama for
LEGAT

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: CASC ASEC PREL PGOV PREF PHUM CS
SUBJECT: COSTA RICA GRANTS REFUGEE STATUS TO CHERE LYN TOMAYKO; MAY
SET PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE CLAIMS

REF: A. San Jose 524
¶B. 07 San Jose 1746
¶C. 07 San Jose 1604

¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY: In an unprecedented move that may have long term
repercussions, Minister of Public Security Del Vecchio granted U.S.
fugitive, Chere Lyn Tomayko, refugee status on July 23, thereby
halting her extradition to the U.S. Tomayko, wanted in Texas to
answer to international child abduction charges, claimed (without
substantiation) that she was a victim of domestic violence and that
the U.S. legal system would be unable to protect her from future
violence if she were extradited. Manipulating the Costa Rican media
and playing to Costa Rica's self-image as a protector of human
rights, Tomayko and her team of supporters were able to persuade Del
Vecchio to confer refugee status even before the Supreme Court had
issued its ruling on Tomayko's extradition. In doing so, the
Minister unilaterally contradicted the long standing extradition
treaty between Costa Rica and the U.S., and opened the GOCR to a
possible avalanche of spurious refugee status requests. The
following is our wrap-up on this case, for the record. END
SUMMARY.

----------
THE ARREST
----------

¶2. (SBU) Tomayko has been wanted since 2000 under a federal
indictment for parental child abduction. She fled to Costa Rica in
1997 with her daughter Alexandria after a protracted custody battle
with the father of the child, Amcit Roger Cyprian. Of note, during
the battle, Tomayko did not allege any domestic violence; she first
raised the issue just before she received refugee status in July
2008, and there is no record of prior domestic violence complaints
against Cyprian. A provisional warrant was obtained when she was
located in the summer of 2007, and she was arrested by Costa Rican
authorities in September 2007 (Refs. A-C). Soon after her arrest
and the start of extradition proceedings, Tomayko and her team of
supporters went into high gear to block her return to the U.S.

----------------------------------------
THE MARRIAGE (TO A COSTA RICAN NATIONAL)
----------------------------------------

¶3. (SBU) Tomayko first attempted to avoid extradition by marrying
her live-in Costa Rican partner (and father of two of her children).
The Costa Rican constitution forbids the extradition of Costa Rican
citizens and an expedited naturalization process exists for the
spouses of Costa Ricans. Marriage is thus often used by individuals
in extremis wishing to avoid having to leave the country. Tomayko
and her partner, after a courtship of five plus years and the birth
of two children, were married inside her prison in April 2008.
However, as the extradition treaty between Costa Rica and the U.S.
stipulates that naturalization proceedings for fugitives must be
suspended while requests for extradition are pending, Tomayko's
position was still insecure.

---------------
THE ALLEGATIONS
---------------

¶4. (SBU) Then, Tomayko shared her story widely and publicly,
building a coalition to help her avoid extradition. With the help
of her legal team, she gained the ear of several sympathetic
governmental and non-governmental groups, including the Public
Defender's Office, the National Women's Institute (Spanish acronym
INAMU), and the Ombudsman's Office of the GOCR. Local media helped
by painting the extradition request as a callous move which would
"separate an abused mother from her children." To all the parties
involved, Tomayko repeated her unsubstantiated allegations of
domestic violence suffered at the hands of Cyprian and her fear that
she and her daughter would be in danger if they were returned to the
U.S.

¶5. (U) NOTE: Tomayko's case already had enjoyed some notoriety in
the local media. This was due to expatriate media outlets
(ironically) claiming that the U.S. Embassy had "protected" Tomayko
from Cyprian since 2002 by allegedly dragging its feet in passing
information to the FBI regarding Tomayko's whereabouts. These
allegations are untrue. END NOTE.

----------------------
THE REQUEST FOR REFUGE
----------------------

¶6. (SBU) Having put together her strategy and her team, Tomayko
formally requested refugee status from the Immigration Director.
However, the Director was unwilling to act on unsubstantiated

allegations of abuse or the idea that the U.S. legal system was
unable to protect her. Finding no legal basis under Costa Rican law
or international law for granting her request, the Director refused
her application and a subsequent appeal.

--------------
THE FINAL PUSH
--------------

¶7. (SBU) With her scheduled July 17, 2008, extradition date drawing
near, Tomayko and her team filed three habeas corpus petitions to
the Supreme Court, postponing her extradition until the Court could
rule. Regrettably, a carnival-like atmosphere prevailed as her
family, supporters, and the Costa Rican media set up shop outside
the prison where she was being held. Meanwhile, more and more
pressure was brought to bear on Minister Janina Del Vecchio to
overrule the Director of Immigration (who reports to her) and grant
refugee status.

¶8. (SBU) Tomayko and her supporters continued to use the domestic
violence issue to portray her and her daughter as victims being
punished unfairly by the U.S. judicial system. None of Tomayko's
supporters questioned the lack of evidence of domestic violence at
the hands of ex-partner Cyprian. Del Vecchio herself acknowledged
to reporters that no inquires were made to the federal judge in
Texas who originally handled the child custody case, to the FBI, or
to any other U.S. authority to verify the abuse allegations, and
offers of assistance from the U.S. Embassy to help establish the
facts were ignored.

¶9. (U) On July 21, the Embassy sent a Diplomatic Note (our third on
the Tomayko case since August 2007) reiterating that there were no
allegations of domestic abuse against Cyprian, and that he had no
police or criminal record. The Note also stressed that Tomayko
could present her arguments before the appropriate U.S. court, and
that there were many legal and social organizations in the U.S. that
could provide protection against domestic violence or abuse, if any
were proven. The Note expressed our concern about the implications
from the habeas corpus petitions which could (if accepted) make
Costa Rica a safehaven for law breakers from other countries.
Finally, the Note reminded the GOCR that per our bilateral
extradition treaty, naturalization proceedings should be suspended
until any related extradition request had been adjudicated. (Note
No. 123 emailed to WHA/CEN on August 18.)

-----------------------
THE UNILATERAL DECISION
-----------------------

¶10. (SBU) On July 23, with the expected Supreme Court ruling just
days away, Del Vecchio held a press conference to announce that she
was granting refugee status to Tomayko in order to protect her human
rights. Del Vecchio implied that Costa Rica "had" to take this
action because 1) it was their duty as a world leader in the
protection of human rights; and 2) the U.S. legal system would not,
or could not, protect Tomayko from her ex-partner. Little thought
was given to the rights of the left-behind parent, Roger Cyprian, or
the arguments presented in our Diplomatic Note. In fact, during a
phone conversation earlier that day on the Tomayko case, Del Vecchio
gave the DCM no hint of what she planned to do.

¶11. (SBU) Del Vecchio held firm when the Ambassador and DCM met with
her and Vice Minister Ana Duran on July 24. The Ambassador and DCM
expressed USG disappointment with her ruling, and concern about the
damaging precedent it could set for Costa Rica. Del Vecchio stood
by her decision (and her right as Minister, to act unilaterally,
without consulting more widely in the government). She maintained,
as she had said in her press conference, that the Tomayko ruling was
a "one-time decision".

¶12. (SBU) Late on July 24, the Embassy issued a strongly-worded
statement echoing what the Ambassador and DCM had told the Minister
in private, i.e., expressing disappointment in the Minister's
decision, defending U.S. commitment to human rights, and raising
concern about the implications of the legal precedent being set
(text forwarded to WHA that day). However, the die was cast. Given
the Minister's decision, the Supreme Court ruled on July 25 that
Tomayko could not be extradited as a refugee and she was freed. On
July 26, even President Arias was applauding the decision as a
"sovereign" act to "protect human rights," while supportive
commentators were noting the "historic" nature of the decision.

-------------------------------
COMMENT: A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT?
-------------------------------

¶13. (SBU) Despite the legal arguments, Del Vecchio made a clearly

political decision, which resonated with the Costa Rican body
politic, including the President. In a later conversation with the
Ambassador, Del Vecchio made it clear she had strong personal
reasons to be receptive to Tomayko's concerns. However, as some
Costa Rican legal commentators have already noted (and as MFA staff
have worried to us in private), her ruling may have set a dangerous
precedent, leading to spurious refugee claims in the future. (In
fact, in another child abduction case, Amcit Nicole Kater has filed
a refugee claim here on behalf of her daughter, Tierra Kater-Gehl,
to prevent Tierra's father from returning the girl to the United
States.) Having established that a petitioner can merely state that
they have been the victim of domestic violence without offering
proof could bring the GOCR more than it bargained for.
Additionally, we are concerned that this case represents a
disservice to those who have legitimate claims to protection from
domestic violence.

¶14. (SBU) We will continue to monitor this situation carefully, and
stronger follow-up action may be required if future extraditions are
placed in jeopardy by the "refugee gambit". Sadly, although Tomayko
has avoided returning to the U.S. to answer for her crime, she
remains a fugitive with outstanding international arrest warrants
against her. She has thus effectively made herself a "prisoner for
life" in Costa Rica.

CIANCHETTE

[SageDad]

Another Cable about international parental kidnapping.  This time by a princess (literally.)

The full cable is:

http://213.251.145.96/cable/2010/01/10TASHKENT27.html

but the section that mentions the abduction ("custody case") is:

 (SBU) Founded in 1999 under the name Zeromax LLC in Delaware, \
USA, Zeromax re-domiciled as a Swiss entity in the Zug Canton in \
2005 (now Zeromax GmbH), presumably to take advantage of the \
country's tax and finance laws. Other observers note that this move \
coincided with a downtown in U.S.- Uzbek relations following the \
U.S.'s condemnation of events in Andijon in May 2005. At this time, \
Karimova was also subject to an arrest warrant in the U.S. for \
refusing to obey a New Jersey court ruling granting her husband, an \
American-Afghan citizen, shared custody of their children. \


I found a good article about the full story:

Battle Royal
The Daughter of Uzbekistan's President Took Her Children and Ran, Opening a Custody War That Has Entangled Two New Allies

By Peter Baker
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, April 13, 2004; Page C01

....

Whether that was prophecy or threat, a war soon broke out. It turns out that divorcing Gulnora Karimova, known as "the Uzbek princess," is no simple matter. Her father is Islam Karimov, president of Uzbekistan and autocrat nonpareil, who rules over a repressive Central Asian country where prisoners have been boiled alive.

....

Mansur Maqsudi, an Afghan American businessman, he has learned the price of crossing his powerful father-in-law. Since Maqsudi and his wife split up, the Uzbek government has effectively taken away his Coca-Cola bottling plant, imprisoned three of his relatives and deported 24 more of them at gunpoint to war-torn Afghanistan.

"She said if I do divorce her she was going to destroy my family, destroy my business and make sure I could never see my kids," Maqsudi, 37, says by telephone from New Jersey. "And if you look at it, that's exactly what happened."

Full Story:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A6874-2004Apr12&notFound=true

[lovellboys]

Did I read correctly that an unofficial US representative called this case an 'irritant'  Seriously?

[SageDad]

Did I read correctly that an unofficial US representative called this case an 'irritant'  Seriously?

"Unnecessary irritant" actually.  That's what we all are to them.  They want these cases to go away quietly.  Whether or not children return home or have a relationship with their American parents is a non-issue.  It really doesn't factor into their decision making process at all except insofar as children not coming home, in and of itself, can create a public uproar (eg Sean Goldman.)

[SageDad]

http://www.wikileaks.org/Guardian-journalist-negligentl...

Global - Guardian journalist negligently disclosed Cablegate passwords

1 September 2011

WIKILEAKS EDITORIAL

A Guardian journalist has negligently disclosed top secret WikiLeaks’ decryption passwords to hundreds of thousands of unredacted unpublished US diplomatic cables.

Knowledge of the Guardian disclosure has spread privately over several months but reached critical mass last week. The unpublished WikiLeaks’ material includes over 100,000 classified unredacted cables that were being analyzed, in parts, by over 50 media and human rights organizations from around the world.

For the past month WikiLeaks has been in the unenviable position of not being able to comment on what has happened, since to do so would be to draw attention to the decryption passwords in the Guardian book. Now that the connection has been made public by others we can explain what happened and what we intend to do.

WikiLeaks has commenced pre-litigation action against the Guardian and an individual in Germany who was distributing the Guardian passwords for personal gain.

MORE AT LINK

[SageDad]

Lot's of new cables released all at once...

Here's one on Turkey's non-compliance with the Hague Convention.  As many will recall, Sara Edwards, who recently gave Congressional testimony, son was also abducted to Turkey.  The relevant section of the cable titled "SUBJECT: SCENESETTER FOR TURKISH FONMIN GUL'S JULY 24 VISIT  TO WASHINGTON" is called "Child Custody"


Reference id    aka Wikileaks id #55258  ? 
Subject   Scenesetter For Secretary's Visit To Chile
Origin   Embassy Santiago (Chile)
Cable time   Fri, 3 Mar 2006 17:30 UTC
Classification   CONFIDENTIAL
Source   http://wikileaks.org/cable/2006/03/06SANTIAGO446.html
History   First published on Thu, 1 Sep 2011 23:24 UTC

...

-------------  Child Custody  -------------   

¶21. (C) The Hague Convention on Child Abduction requires the  expeditious return of a child to its country of residence so  the courts in that country can decide on custody. Turkey has  been a signatory to the Hague Convention since August 2000.  During that period of time, we are unaware of any children  being returned to any country without the agreement of the  abducting parent. There are systemic problems: 1) Court  meets for 10 minutes monthly and does not focus on Hague  issues; 2) judges do not understand the Hague Convention  requirment and rule on custody rather than Hague issues,  thereby requiring a lengthy appeal process; 3) the legal  process lasts between 2-3 years total; and 4) the Ministry of  Interior does not focus resources on finding the abducted  child and the parent. The US currently has four applications  pending for return of a child to the US. In one case the  child has now been in Turkey over a year due to the slow  court process and the judge used that delay to rule the child  should stay in Turkey. In another case, the Government of  Turkey has been unable to locate a child abducted to Turkey  in October 2002. Due to physical abuse by the abducting  father, the Turkish court ordered the child returned to the  mother immediately. The Interior Ministry places a low  priority on these types of cases and has been unable to 

...

[SageDad]

Reference id    aka Wikileaks id #230034  ? 
Subject   Monterrey Hosts Successful Hague Seminar
Origin   Consulate Monterrey (Mexico)
Cable time   Fri, 16 Oct 2009 14:33 UTC
Classification   UNCLASSIFIED
Source   http://wikileaks.org/cable/2009/10/09MONTERREY385.html
History   First published on Fri, 26 Aug 2011 02:34 UTC
Modified on Thu, 1 Sep 2011 23:24 UTC

SUMMARY: On September 28-29, 2009, the U.S. Consulate General  of Monterrey, the Tribunal Superior de Justicia of Nuevo Leon  (State Supreme Court), and Desarrollo Integral de la Familia  (DIF), co-sponsored the Sixth International Seminar `Mexico-U.S.  Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child  Abduction.' The event in Monterrey was highly successful with  over 150 Mexican and U.S. judges, prosecutors, child protection  specialists, lawyers, law students and diplomats in attendance.  This seminar, the sixth to be held in Mexico, was particularly  relevant as both Mexico and the U.S. struggle to deal with the  rising numbers of parental child abductions that in 2008 totaled  1,614 children. Regional news media covered the seminar  extensively in newspaper articles and television reporting and  interviewed speakers from the U.S. including staff from the  Office of Children's Issues. The Tribunal and DIF were extremely  pleased by the effectiveness of the seminar, and the Tribunal  Executive Director stated that he is interested in planning  future, joint events that focus on family law. END SUMMARY   

¶2. The problem of international parental child abduction from  the U.S. to Mexico is significant. During 2008, 1,614 children  were reported to have been abducted or illicitly retained from  the U.S., a thirty-seven percent increase over 2007 numbers.  Although Mexico is a signatory to the Hague Convention On The  Civil Aspects Of International Child Abduction, post's  assessment of the handling of Hague cases in Monterrey's  consular district suggests that there is a wide variance in  understanding of and adherence to the provisions of the  convention by Mexican authorities.   

¶3. In an effort to educate GOM stakeholders on the convention,  the consular section in Monterrey worked closely with Public  Affairs Section staff in Embassy Mexico City and the Consulate  General to develop a plan for a seminar on the Hague Convention  for Mexican judges, prosecutors, child protection specialists,  lawyers and law students. The Nuevo Leon state government  agreed to co-sponsor the event and provided significant  assistance.   

¶4. Throughout the planning process Conoff and post public  affairs staff met regularly with the designated representatives  at the Tribunal and DIF. Conoff worked with the Office of  Children's Issues to identify five speakers from relevant  offices in the U.S. and one speaker from the Embassy who liaises  with the Mexican Central Authority on child abductions. Post  also took responsibility for the seminar program schedule and  for inviting all speakers and moderators on the Program. The  Tribunal provided the venue, graphic design work, and  established a web site with seminar information and registration  page. Both the Tribunal and DIF committed to inviting family  judges and social case workers (about 60 people) to the seminar.  Post also invited judges and DIF specialists from four  neighboring states in the consular district: San Luis Potosi,  Zacatecas, Coahuila and Tamaulipas as well as three ACS  officials from Ciudad Juarez and Nuevo Laredo. The target  audience size for the seminar was between 100 to 120 people, but  over 150 attended.   

¶5. Attendees noted that the seminar was highly effective in  explaining the Hague convention and how it applies to the types  of abduction cases regularly encountered in Mexico. Many  participants commented that the format of the seminar, with  presentations on day one and round table discussions on  hypothetical cases on day two, greatly enhanced the value of the  event. The round table groups were intentionally mixed so that  judges, child protection case workers, lawyers, diplomats,  prosecutors and students were distributed evenly among the  tables. This arrangement allowed participants gain a greater  appreciation of the various perspectives involved in handling a  Hague case. In addition, several Mexican participants commented  that the contacts made through the seminar and the information  provided by the presenters will yield dividends by improving the  way in which these cases will be handled.   

¶6. Press Coverage: The seminar was widely covered by local and  regional news media. The event generated at least nine  newspaper articles and one TV interview. In addition, Conoff  gave two, five-minute radio interviews for shows in Zacatecas  and San Luis Potosi the week preceding the seminar.   

¶7. Lessons Learned: The Nuevo Leon Tribunal is a capable,  reliable partner with adequate resources to carry out  high-quality seminars. DIF Nuevo Leon was also very supportive,  and both organizations delivered the numbers of promised  participants. Despite the well-executed success of the seminar,  more than six weeks lead time should be allotted to future,  similar seminars. Final U.S. speaker commitments and funding  were still not confirmed three weeks out from the seminar start  date. Travel itineraries should be confirmed at least three  weeks in advance of seminar, not one week. The invitations of   MONTERREY 00000385 002.2 OF 002    law school professors with up to nine students were deeply  appreciated. Holding a reception at the Consul General's  residence the evening of the day the seminar closed was a  wonderful way to thank the co-sponsors for all the work and  cooperation that they provided.   

¶8. COMMENT: Post is aware of U.S. couples who have been  frustrated by delays and bureaucratic hurdles in adopting  Mexican children through the Hague Convention mechanism for  international adoptions. This may be a good, follow-on topic for  future collaboration with our GOM partners. A seminar on this  issue would be useful in clarifying adoption procedures between  Mexico and the United States. END COMMENT 

[SageDad]

Reference id    aka Wikileaks id #227755  ? 
Subject   Consular Issues Cable -- September 2009
Origin   Secretary of State (United States)
Cable time   Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:47 UTC
Classification   UNCLASSIFIED
Source   http://wikileaks.org/cable/2009/09/09STATE102018.html
History   First published on Fri, 26 Aug 2011 02:34 UTC
Modified on Thu, 1 Sep 2011 23:24 UTC

...

--------------------------------------------- ------------  Seeking Hague Abduction Convention Compliance Assessments  --------------------------------------------- ------------   

¶15. We need your help! The Office of Children's Issues  (CI) relies heavily on posts' assessments of host country  performance under the Hague Abduction Convention to  produce our Congressionally mandated compliance report.  Since the fiscal year just ended, CI needs assistance  from posts to assess FY 2009 performance. If the United  States partners with your country under the Hague  Abduction Convention (country list found on  travel.state.gov/childabduction), and post believes the  country has systemic compliance problems or its  compliance practices have otherwise substantially  changed, please provide an analysis to CI by October 31,  2009. Assessments and/or questions can be addressed to  CI's Management Analyst, Margery Gehan, at 

...

[SageDad]

Reference id    aka Wikileaks id #212643  ? 
Subject   Brazil Scenesetter: Dr. Michael Froman, Deputy National Security Advisor For International Economic Affairs, June 18-19
Origin   Embassy Brasilia (Brazil)
Cable time   Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:16 UTC
Classification   UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Source   http://wikileaks.org/cable/2009/06/09BRASILIA766.html
History   First published on Mon, 11 Jul 2011 23:11 UTC
Modified on Thu, 1 Sep 2011 23:24 UTC

...

SPECIFIC ISSUES: THE SEAN GOLDMAN CASE   

¶32. (SBU) American David Goldman is currently pursuing a Hague  Abduction case, involving his son Sean, who was brought to Brazil by  his mother and wrongfully retained here 5 years ago. The case has a  high profile in U.S. and Brazilian media and was raised by both  Secretary Clinton and President Obama during their first meetings  with their Brazilian counterparts. The case is currently in  Brazilian federal court after the maternal family appealed the June  1 decision of the lower court to return Sean to the U.S. Despite  being a party to the Hague Convention on International Child  Abduction, which includes an obligation to resolve all child  abduction cases in a timely manner, the United States currently has  51 open cases with Brazil involving more than 60 children. A recent  op-ed in the Wall Street Journal authored by former State Department  Western Hemisphere Affairs Assistant Secretary Bernie Aronson was  headlined "Brazil Helps Kidnap American Children". Should  interlocutors raise the case, we emphasize that Sean's best interest  would be served by a rapid appeals process in Brazil, and we look  forward to a prompt resolution granting Sean's expeditious return to the United States.

[SageDad]

Reference id    aka Wikileaks id #205099  ? 
Subject   Consular Issues Cable -- April 2009
Origin   Secretary of State (United States)
Cable time   Fri, 1 May 2009 01:06 UTC
Classification   UNCLASSIFIED
Source   http://wikileaks.org/cable/2009/05/09STATE44280.html
History   First published on Fri, 26 Aug 2011 02:34 UTC

...

--------------------------------------------- ------  Upcoming Release of 2009 Hague Abduction Convention  Compliance Report  --------------------------------------------- ------   ¶4. The 2009 Report on Compliance with the Hague  Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child  Abduction will be available online in May. The report  describes specific compliance problems the Department  identified in Convention partner countries and describes  the status of longstanding, unresolved return  applications. To prepare for the report's release, CI's  case officers will contact posts in countries cited in  the report, and CI will transmit an ALDAC with talking  points. After the report's release, we encourage posts  to review the contents of the report with their  respective host governments. Previous reports, as well  as the current list of Convention partner countries, can be found at http://travel.state.gov/childabduction.

...

[SageDad]

Reference id    aka Wikileaks id #147071  ? 
Subject   Child Abduction: New Central Authority Director Discusses Santana, Cca Mission
Origin   Embassy Prague (Czech Republic)
Cable time   Tue, 25 Mar 2008 06:34 UTC
Classification   UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Source   http://wikileaks.org/cable/2008/03/08PRAGUE202.html
History   First published on Thu, 25 Aug 2011 03:30 UTC
Modified on Thu, 1 Sep 2011 23:24 UTC

SUBJECT: CHILD ABDUCTION: NEW CENTRAL AUTHORITY DIRECTOR DISCUSSES  SANTANA, CCA MISSION   

¶1. CG met March 19, 2008, with the new head of the Czech Office for  International Legal Protection of Children (the Czech Central  Authority or CCA), Lenka Pavlova. Pavlova was previously a lawyer  in private general practice with a focus on family law. She said  she applied for her present position at the urging of then Acting  Director, longtime Embassy and Office of Children's Issues contact,  Marketa Novakova. Pavlova speaks English.   

¶2. Pavlova said she was instituting some changes to the CCA. There  would, for example, be a new focus on moving cases along quickly.  She also wants to educate citizens, social workers and others about  child abduction issues with the goal of trying to prevent cases from  arising. Finally, she wants to strongly emphasize mediation as a  way to resolve cases.   

¶3. As an example of the new approach Pavlova cited the Santana  case. She said she met personally with Mr. Santana and with Ms.  Horvathova (the taking parent in the case) to offer her services as  a mediator to find a way for Mr. Santana to have regular access to  his son. Unfortunately, she said, both parents rejected the idea of  mediation, at least for the time being. She did arrange for Mr.  Santana to have access to his son (Pablito) while he was here in  February, and said they saw each other almost every day. She also  arranged for him to see the pre-school where Pablito goes, and to  meet with the pre-school director. She said Pablito was  unfortunately absent from school that day due to illness, according  to the mother (who she said lives in Prague 13). She said Mr.  Santana did not want to press for mediation because he was afraid of  upsetting the mother and thus losing the access he was able to have.  She said Ms. Horvathova did not want to mediate access to Pablito  in the U.S. because she was still afraid she might be arrested and  prosecuted if she went there. Indeed, Pavlova said that Diane  Kenney from the California prosecutor's office was unable to provide  unequivocal assurance that Horvathova would not be arrested.   

¶4. With regard to the Santana court case, she confirmed that there  is as yet no written opinion of the decision the court made on  February 25. She also confirmed the decision was based on Article  XIII (best interests of the child) and that the CCA, in an advisory  capacity to the court, had supported this interpretation. She said  that in general she supports speedy return of children, but viewed  this as an exceptional case for several reasons: the age of the  child, the passage of time, the fact that the child has bonded with  his mother, and the fact that the child does not speak English. She  emphasized that she wanted to continue to work to mediate regular  visitation for Mr. Santana.   

¶5. In more general discussion of the Hague Convention, Pavlova  referred several times to the importance of the best interests of  the child, and noted that her office title had the words "protection  of children" in it. She also referred to the importance of the  mother- child bond during the child's first three years of life, and  said it was important to consider this as well. When asked a  hypothetical question - female taking parent, two-year-old boy,  court decision within three months of abduction, would she support  return or not - she sidestepped an explicit answer, but referred to  the importance of maintaining the close mother-child bond. CG  pointed out that the Hague Convention was designed to return  children quickly to their habitual place of residence, in part  because it was courts in the habitual place of residence who were  best situated to evaluate the best interests of the child. Pavlova  agreed with this, but then cited the Santana case where, she said,  so much time had passed that the court best situated to evaluate  best interests was in the Czech Republic. She acknowledged that the  delay was in fact the fault of the Czechs - she mentioned this  several times - and said she hoped to prevent such delays from  happening in future cases. She noted that a legislative package  proposed by the Ministry of Justice (setting up a special court of  experts, among other things) was still under active consideration,  and both she and Novakova expected it to succeed at some point.   

¶6. Comment: Some aspects of Pavlova's statements could portend  difficulties for future Czech Hague cases. Her mother-centric views  and focus on "best interests" may indicate a serious misreading of  the language and intent of the Convention. At the same time her  acknowledgment of Czech failures, her vow to speed things up, and  her explicitly expressed desire to work closely with the U.S.  Embassy and the Office of Children's Issues signal some openness to  dialogue. She noted that the visit of CG was the first official  visit of any foreign diplomat to her office in Brno, and she seemed  eager to meet and establish contact with Office of Children's Issues  representatives. Post believes an effort to make these contacts  early on could prove fruitful in the long run. Post notes that  Acting A/S Jacobs will be in Prague May 6 - a meeting with Pavlova  might be useful. Pavlova indicated a willingness to come to Prague,  where she lives, for such a meeting. End Comment.