[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 81 (Friday, June 23, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5730-S5731]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             INTERNATIONAL PARENTAL KIDNAPPING AND GERMANY

  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I am troubled--deeply troubled. I am 
troubled by a report in the Washington Post that--yet again--
illustrates Germany's reluctance to return American

[[Page S5731]]

children who have been kidnapped by a parent and taken to Germany. The 
Post article details the latest event in the continuing international 
struggle that American Joseph Cooke has endured as he seeks the return 
of his children. As my colleagues may recall, German Chancellor Gerhard 
Schroeder recently promised President Clinton during the President's 
visit to Europe that Germany would help Mr. Cooke and grant him and his 
family visitation rights. Well, despite this promise at the highest 
levels government, the Kostanz Special Service for Foster Children now 
is limiting the access that Joseph Cooke's mother has to visiting her 
grandchildren--apparently as a punishment for all the recent media 
attention the case has received. This is outrageous, Mr. President. And 
it simply cannot be tolerated.
  Let me take a moment to review the events that have led to where we 
are today on this issue. At the recent European conference on ``Modern 
Governance in the 21st Century,'' President Clinton met with Chancellor 
Schroeder to discuss several pressing international concerns. One 
issue, in particular--one I had urged President Clinton to raise with 
the Chancellor--was the tragic situation of U.S. children being 
abducted by a parent and taken to Germany.
  It was necessary to raise this issue with Chancellor Schroeder 
because parents--and not just American parents, either--have had a very 
difficult time getting their children back when they have been abducted 
and taken to Germany. Although Germany has signed the Hague Convention, 
our ally--yes, our ally--has not taken their obligations under the 
Convention seriously. In fact, from 1990 to 1998, only 22 percent of 
American children for whom Hague applications were filed were returned 
to the United States from Germany--and that percentage includes those 
who were voluntarily returned by the abducting parent.
  Last month, I spoke on the floor about the Joseph Cooke case--a case 
that illustrates perfectly Germany's reluctance to return kidnapped 
children. In Mr. Cooke's case, his wife took their two children to 
Germany, and without his knowledge, turned them over to the German 
Youth Authority. Despite Mr. Cooke's desperate attempts to get his 
children back, a German court decided that they were better off with a 
German foster family than with their American father. Only after 
President Clinton's meeting with Chancellor Schroeder and only after 
Mr. Cooke's case received considerable publicity and media attention, 
did Germany agree to help Joseph Cooke.
  The Germans promised to allow Mr. Cooke and his family visitation 
with his children. The Germans also promised to form a working group 
with the United States to examine pending abduction cases. Chancellor 
Schroeder agreed to ``think about organizational and institutional 
consequences to be taken'' to speed up the German court process and 
make changes in German law to allow visitation rights for those parents 
previously prevented from seeing their children at all. Although the 
Chancellor acknowledged that it would be difficult to reverse German 
custody decisions, he assured President Clinton that this soon-to-be-
created commission would work on providing the so-called left-behind 
parents access to their children.
  But now, as the Washington Post reports, Germany is restricting 
visitation of the Cooke children's American grandmother from open, six-
hour visits to supervised, two-hour visits in a psychologist's office. 
We must take a very tough stance against this, Mr. President. We must 
judge Germany by its recent actions--not its recent words--recent, 
empty words. We must hold Germany to its promises and see to it their 
government matches words with deeds and returns every single American 
child.
  Given Germany's reversal on the visitation agreement, I am even more 
skeptical now about the sincerity of Germany's commitment to return 
kidnapped children. I say that partly because German officials have 
repeatedly blamed their non-compliance on the independence of their 
judiciary system. They say that they are reluctant to challenge court 
rulings because the courts are separate and independent from the 
parliament. Chancellor Schroeder even likened such interference to the 
days of Nazi Germany, when he told a German newspaper that: ``We have 
always fought for the well-being of the children to be at the core of 
divorce and custody cases. That is the only standard. The times in 
which Germany would routinely change the decisions of the courts 
[during the Nazi era] are over, thank God'' (Reuters, 6/1/00).

  I find that argument very interesting since the United States has a 
very independent judiciary branch, yet we return children in 90% of all 
international abduction cases. And, our return rate of German children, 
specifically, is equally high. Even according to the German Justice 
Ministry's own figures, from 1995 to 1999, there were 116 cases of 
German parents demanding children back from the United States. Of those 
cases, the U.S. courts refused to return the children in only four 
cases. During those same five-years, there were 165 known cases in 
which a parent living in the United States wanted his or her children 
returned from Germany. Yet, in 33 of those cases, German courts 
declined to return the children (AP Worldstream, 6/2/00).
  Mr. President, I am also concerned about Germany's offer to create a 
``working group'' with the United States given the result of a similar 
promise Germany made to France. French President Jacques Chirac, who 
has characterized Germany as applying ``the law of the jungle'' in 
abduction cases (The London Evening Standard, 6/1/00), repeatedly asked 
Germany to address the difficulty his country is having in getting 
French children returned. In response, Chancellor Schroeder agreed to 
create a ``working group'' between the two nations to reach some 
resolution. While this working group was created a year ago, results 
have yet to come in on its effectiveness. Given France's experience, it 
is crucial that we hold Chancellor Schroeder to his word and see to it 
that his words are not just empty promises made in an attempt to 
improve a tarnished image in the international community.
  Assistant Secretary of State for consular affairs, Mary Ryan will be 
in Germany this weekend where, according to the Washington Post, ``she 
will be raising this specific issue with every person she meets in the 
German government.'' I am encouraged to see that our State Department 
has indicated that it is outraged by Germany's action--perhaps now, 
they will take these kinds of cases seriously and take some type of 
significant action against Germany. Never-the-less, I urge her and our 
State Department and President Clinton to not take Germany's broken 
promises lightly. We must insist that the Germans reverse these 
restrictions on visitation, otherwise there is absolutely no reason to 
set up the commission.
  Mr. President, we cannot tolerate lip service from our allies. We 
must hold the German government's feet to the fire. No excuses should 
be accepted by the parents of these children, nor by this Senate, nor 
by this Congress, nor by the American people. This must be a priority.

                          ____________________