[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 132 (Tuesday, September 28, 2010)]
[House]
[Pages H7043-H7048]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CALLING ON JAPAN TO ADDRESS CHILD ABDUCTION CASES
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the
resolution (H. Res. 1326) calling on the Government of Japan to
immediately address the growing problem of abduction to and retention
of United States citizen minor children in Japan, to work closely with
the Government of the United States to return these children to their
custodial parent or to the original jurisdiction for a custody
determination in the United States, to provide left-behind parents
immediate access to their children, and to adopt without delay the 1980
Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction,
as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The text of the resolution is as follows:
H. Res. 1326
Whereas Japan is an important partner with the United
States and shares interests in the areas of economy, defense,
global peace and prosperity, and the protection of the human
rights of the two nations' respective citizens in an
increasingly integrated global society;
Whereas the Government of Japan acceded in 1979 to the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that
states ``States Parties to the present Covenant shall take
appropriate steps to ensure equality of rights and
responsibilities of spouses as to marriage, during marriage
and at its dissolution. In the case of dissolution, provision
shall be made for the necessary protection of any children
[Article 23]'';
Whereas since 1994, the Office of Children's Issues (OCI)
at the United States Department of State had opened over 214
cases involving 300 United States citizen children abducted
to or wrongfully retained in Japan, and as of September 17,
2010, OCI had 95 open cases involving 136 United States
citizen children abducted to or wrongfully retained in Japan;
Whereas the United States Congress is not aware of any
legal decision that has been issued and enforced by the
Government of Japan to return a single abducted child to the
United States;
Whereas Japan has not acceded to the 1980 Hague Convention
on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (the
Hague Convention), resulting in the continued absence of an
immediate civil remedy that as a matter of urgency would
enable the expedited return of abducted children to their
custodial parent in the United States where appropriate, or
otherwise immediately allow access to their United States
parent;
Whereas the Government of Japan is the only G-7 country
that has not acceded to the Hague Convention;
Whereas the Hague Convention would not apply to most
abductions occurring before Japan's ratification of the Hague
Convention, requiring, therefore, that Japan create a
separate parallel process to resolve the abductions of all
United States citizen children who currently remain
wrongfully removed to or retained in Japan, including the 136
United States citizen children who have been reported to the
United States Department of State and who are being held in
Japan against the wishes of their parent in the United States
and, in many cases, in direct violation of a valid United
States court order;
Whereas the Hague Convention provides enumerated defenses
designed to provide protection to children alleged to be
subjected to a grave risk of physical or psychological harm
in the left-behind country;
Whereas United States laws against domestic violence extend
protection and redress to Japanese spouses;
Whereas there are cases of Japanese consulates located
within the United States issuing or reissuing travel
documents of dual-national children notwithstanding United
States court orders restricting travel;
Whereas Japanese family courts may not actively enforce
parental access and joint custody arrangements for either a
Japanese national or a foreigner, there is little hope for
children to have contact with the noncustodial parent;
Whereas the Government of Japan has not prosecuted an
abducting parent or relative
[[Page H7044]]
criminally when that parent or relative abducts the child
into Japan, but has prosecuted cases of foreign nationals
removing Japanese children from Japan;
Whereas according to the United States Department of
State's April 2009 Report on Compliance with the Hague
Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child
Abduction, abducted children are at risk of serious emotional
and psychological problems and have been found to experience
anxiety, eating problems, nightmares, mood swings, sleep
disturbances, aggressive behavior, resentment, guilt, and
fearfulness, and as adults may struggle with identity issues,
their own personal relationships, and parenting;
Whereas left-behind parents may encounter substantial
psychological, emotional, and financial problems, and many
may not have the financial resources to pursue civil or
criminal remedies for the return of their children in foreign
courts or political systems;
Whereas, on October 16, 2009, the Ambassadors to Japan of
Australia, Canada, France, Italy, New Zealand, Spain, the
United Kingdom, and the United States, all parties to the
Hague Convention, called upon Japan to accede to the Hague
Convention and to identify and implement measures to enable
parents who are separated from their children to establish
contact with them and to visit them;
Whereas, on January 30, 2010, the Ambassadors to Japan of
Australia, France, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the
United States, the Charges d'Affaires ad interim of Canada
and Spain, and the Deputy Head of Mission of Italy, called on
Japan's Minister of Foreign Affairs, submitted their concerns
over the increase in international parental abduction cases
involving Japan and affecting their nationals, and again
urged Japan to sign the Hague Convention;
Whereas the Government of Japan has recently created a new
office within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to address
parental child abduction and a bilateral commission with the
Government of the United States to share information on and
seek resolution of outstanding Japanese parental child
abduction cases; and
Whereas it is critical for the Governments of the United
States and Japan to work together to prevent future incidents
of international parental child abduction to Japan, which
damages children, families, and Japan's national image with
the United States: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That--
(1) the House of Representatives--
(A) condemns the abduction and wrongful retention of all
children being held in Japan away from their United States
parents;
(B) calls on the Government of Japan to immediately
facilitate the resolution of all abduction cases, to
recognize United States court orders governing persons
subject to jurisdiction in a United States court, and to make
immediately possible access and communication for all
children with their left-behind parents;
(C) calls on the Government of Japan to include Japan's
Ministry of Justice in work with the Government of the United
States to facilitate the identification and location of all
United States citizen children alleged to have been
wrongfully removed to or retained in Japan and for the
immediate establishment of procedures and a timetable for the
resolution of existing cases of abduction, interference with
parental access to children, and violations of United States
court orders;
(D) calls on the Government of Japan to review and amend
its consular procedures to ensure that travel documents for
children are issued with due consideration to any orders by a
court of competent jurisdiction and with notarized signatures
from both parents;
(E) calls on Japan to accede to the 1980 Hague Convention
on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction without
delay and to promptly establish judicial and enforcement
procedures to facilitate the immediate return of children to
their habitual residence and to establish procedures for
recognizing rights of parental access; and
(F) calls on the President of the United States and the
Secretary of State to continue raising the issue of abduction
and wrongful retention of those United States citizen
children in Japan with Japanese officials and domestic and
international press; and
(2) it is the sense of the House of Representatives that
the United States should--
(A) recognize the issue of child abduction to and retention
of United States citizen children in Japan as an issue of
paramount importance to the United States within the context
of its bilateral relationship with Japan;
(B) work with the Government of Japan to enact consular and
passport procedures and legal agreements to prevent parental
abduction to and retention of United States citizen children
in Japan;
(C) review its advisory services made available to United
States citizens domestically and internationally from the
Department of State, the Department of Defense, the
Department of Justice, and other government agencies to
ensure that effective and timely assistance is given to
United States citizens in preventing the incidence of
wrongful retention or removal of children and acting to
obtain the expeditious return of their children from Japan;
(D) review its advisory services for members of the United
States Armed Forces, particularly those stationed in Japan by
the Department of Defense and the United States Armed Forces,
to ensure that preventive education and timely legal
assistance are made available; and
(E) call upon the Secretary of State to establish
procedures with the Government of Japan to resolve
immediately any parental child abduction or access issue
reported to the United States Department of State.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Berman) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
General Leave
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I am in strong support of this resolution. It is a
bipartisan resolution, and if I might just take a second to mention
that the two real leaders in the movement to this resolution and in
pushing the underlying issue, a very important one, Mr. Moran of
Virginia and Mr. Smith of New Jersey, are on the floor, both I believe
to speak on this resolution.
What it does is it addresses the abduction of American citizen
children to Japan, as you might imagine, a very, very important issue
for the families involved and for the governments of both the United
States and Japan.
Japan is a vital partner and a friend of the United States, but on
the issue of international parental child abduction our two countries's
viewpoints are substantially different and progress has been painfully
slow. Once American children are abducted to Japan, the left-behind
parents have little or no access to them, even though their children
are dual U.S. and Japanese citizens. Currently there are 136 U.S.
citizen children abducted to and held in Japan.
Japan is the only G-7 country that is not a signatory to the Hague
Convention that governs international parental child abduction. We urge
the Japanese government to ratify the convention as quickly as
possible.
The Japanese government also needs to create a process to resolve
existing cases of American children who are being held in Japan against
the wishes of their parents in the United States, and in many cases in
direct violation of a valid U.S. court order. Steps need to be taken
immediately to help facilitate dialogue, visitation, and greater access
for the left-behind parents with their children.
Our children are the most important and cherished resource, and it is
a tragedy for everyone involved when they are taken away and denied
access to one of their parents. These children have a right to enjoy
the love of both parents and the benefits of both their Japanese and
American cultures.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Speaker, first of all let me thank Chairman Berman and Ileana
Ros-Lehtinen, our Ranking Member, for their leadership in helping to
shepherd this legislation to the floor today, and I want to thank my
good friend and colleague Mr. Moran for his sponsorship. I am very
proud to join him as the original cosponsor of this very important and
very timely resolution.
You know, Mr. Speaker, last year we learned and really the country
learned a great deal about this growing problem of international child
abduction with the case of David Goldman, whose son was abducted for 5
years at the time, to Brazil. Thankfully, after a full court press, he
was not only reunited, but he is now safe, father and son, in New
Jersey.
But what we learned, the lessons learned from that, was that far too
little has been done to help the other 2,800 American children who have
been abducted to foreign countries, often in defiance of court orders
that had said you cannot leave.
This resolution that we are considering today, H. Res. 1326, is an
urgent
[[Page H7045]]
appeal to the government of Japan to end its complicity and/or its
indifference to international child abduction.
{time} 1530
Frankly, Mr. Speaker, American patience has finally run out. At
present, at least 136 American children are being held in Japan against
the wishes of their American parent, and in many cases, in violation of
valid U.S. court orders. According to the Department of Defense, in
2009 alone--and we just got this by way of a report--10 American
children were abducted to Japan from members of the U.S. Armed Forces.
That's in 2009 alone. It is simply unacceptable and unconscionable that
today Japan still has no mechanism to equitably issue and enforce a
return or visitation order for children. It is intolerable that the
lawless and damaging act of child abduction goes unpunished in a
civilized nation. When an American parent who has taken every legal
precaution to ensure their child is not abducted realizes that his or
her child has disappeared, their heart breaks and a lifetime of waiting
and pleading for action by both the U.S. and the Japanese Government
begins.
Patrick Braden is one such father. Mr. Braden took every possible
legal precaution to protect his daughter from abduction and to maintain
his presence in her life as her father. However, in 2006, Mr. Braden's
infant daughter, Melissa, was abducted from her home by her mother, in
violation of a Los Angeles Superior Court order giving both parents
access to the child and prohibiting international travel with the child
by either parent. Mr. Braden has been unjustly cut off from his
daughter by the covert illegal actions of the mom and daily worries
that his daughter is being abused by a grandparent who has a history of
such abuse.
Likewise, Sergeant Michael Elias hopes and waits and pleads with two
governments, the U.S. Government and the Japanese Government, because
we haven't done enough to work out some way of reuniting his family.
While stationed in Japan, he met the woman who would become his wife.
She came to the United States and they were married in New Jersey in
2005. Jade was born in 2006 and Michael in 2007. Sadly, his wife
started an affair while Michael was on active duty in Iraq.
Their marriage came to an end in 2008, with a judge granting both
parents custody and requiring the surrender of the children's American
and Japanese passports because their mother had threatened to abduct
the children. Tragically, the Japanese consulate reissued Japanese
passports for the children in violation of the valid U.S. court orders
restricting travel and in violation of U.S. federal criminal parental
kidnapping statutes. Sergeant Elias has not seen his children since
2008. And the Japanese Government has done nothing to assist in their
return or in the return of Patrick Braden's daughter.
And the list goes on. Chris Savoie's children, Isaac and Rebecca
Savoie, were abducted in 2009 to Japan by their mother, in violation of
a Tennessee State order of joint custody and in violation of Tennessee
statutes. As a result of the mother's selfish actions, Mr. Savoie has
been awarded sole custody of the children, but Japan will not recognize
either the joint custody or the sole custody award. Although Chris is
the children's father, the Japanese Government will not enforce any
access or communication with his children.
Mr. Speaker, for 50 years we have seen all talk and no action on the
part of the Japanese Government. Japan has never issued and enforced a
legal decision to return a single American child. The circumstances of
each particular abduction seem not to matter. Once in Japan, the
abducting parent is untouchable and the children are bereft of their
American parent for the rest of their childhood. France, Canada, Italy,
New Zealand, Spain, and the United Kingdom have all repeatedly asked
Japan to work with them on returning their abducted children. Japan's
inaction on the issue is a thorn in the side of their relations with
the entire international community.
Japan's current inaction violates its duties under the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 23, completely and
unjustly ignoring the equal rights of one parent. H. Res. 1326 calls
upon Japan to immediately and urgently establish a process for the
resolution of abduction and wrongful retention of American children.
Japan must find the will to establish today a process that would justly
and equitably end the cruel separation currently endured by parents and
children alike.
H. Res. 1326 also calls on Japan to join the Hague Convention on the
Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The Convention sets out
the international norms for resolution of abduction and wrongful
retention cases and would create a framework to quickly resolve future
cases--and would act as a deterrent to parents who now feel that they
can abduct their child to Japan and never be caught. In light of the
misuse of Japanese consulates in the Elias case, H. Res. 1326 also
calls on Japan to ensure that its consulates are not accessories to
parental kidnapping. Japan must put into place a system that stops the
issuing or reissuing of passports without the explicit and verifiable
consent of the American parent.
Finally, Japan must recognize the terrible damage to children and
families caused by international child abduction. Children who have
suffered an abduction are at risk of serious emotional and
psychological problems and have been found to experience anxiety,
eating problems, nightmares, mood swings, sleep disturbances,
aggressive behavior, resentment, guilt, and fearfulness, and as adults
may struggle with identity issues, their own personal relationships,
and parenting.
I urge my colleagues to support H. Res. 1326, calling on Japan to end
the child abuse of international child abduction.
I reserve the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman from
Tennessee will control the time.
There was no objection.
Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased at this time to yield 10
minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Tennessee;
I thank my colleague from New Jersey (Mr. Smith); and, of course,
Chairman Berman.
Mr. Speaker, the United States and Japan have a strong and critical
alliance. It is based on shared interests and values and our common
support for political and economic freedoms, human rights, and
international law. Japan, for example, is second to none in supporting
President Barack Obama's vision of a ``world without nuclear weapons,''
and advocating for nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation. Japan has
also recently doubled its civilian aid to Afghanistan, helping in our
mission there to a great and important extent.
But, Mr. Speaker, this resolution involves 214 cases involving more
than 300 American children who have been abducted to Japan and/or
wrongfully retained in Japan since 1994. These American children are in
Japan because they were kidnapped by a parent with Japanese
citizenship. Despite a shared concern within the international
community, the Japanese Government has yet to accede to the 1980 Hague
Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction or
create any other mechanism to resolve international child abductions.
Japan's existing family law system, which dates back to the 1600s,
neither recognizes joint custody nor actively enforces parental access
agreements that have been adjudicated by United States courts.
Essentially, American parents must beg to see their abducted children
and have no legal recourse if the taking parent decides to deny them
access. That's wrong. In no case has the Japanese Government
facilitated the return to a parent outside their country.
So the intent of this resolution is to bring the plight of these
parents to the forefront of the public consciousness. It calls on the
Japanese Government to ratify the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil
Aspects of International Child Abduction so that Japan will commit to a
process that will return abducted children to their custodial parent in
the United States and elsewhere, where appropriate, or otherwise
immediately at least allow access to their non-Japanese parent.
The Japanese Government doesn't consider it a crime and will not
prosecute a Japanese citizen that abducts a
[[Page H7046]]
child and moves the child across national borders, which essentially
makes Japan complicit in what many foreign governments consider to be a
crime, including the United States Government, which considers it
kidnapping.
{time} 1540
Japan does, however, prosecute cases of foreign nationals who remove
Japanese children from Japan, which violates any basic sense of
fairness. So they apply a different law if somebody abducts a child
from Japan than they apply if somebody abducts a child from the United
States or from another foreign country and brings the child to Japan,
where they have haven from the law. It is infuriating to learn,
frankly, that Japanese officials have issued travel documents and
passports to these abductors in defiance of previously established U.S.
custody orders. In some cases, they have given false names to the
children being kidnapped to Japan, issuing false passports so that they
are directly complicit in these abductions.
Now, there are numerous heartbreaking abduction stories, and I am
just going to mention a few because Mr. Smith went into several.
One case, though, in particular, which I want to underscore involves
a case from my district in Virginia, which is right across the river
from the Nation's Capital. It involves a Japanese mother who, for fear
of what might happen to her child, has to request that her name not be
used. Her husband, who is not Japanese, fled to Japan because he is a
lawyer, and he knew that he would find safe haven from Virginia court
orders in violation of U.S. law. So, here, he kidnapped a child from a
Japanese mother, knowing that he could take the child to Japan and that
he would find haven there from any prosecution under U.S. laws and not
even have to allow access of the child to the mother.
It gets even worse.
Despite having no contact with her children, this woman has to
continue to pay child support, and the address on the payment statement
is the only connection she has with her children. That is wrong.
Mr. Smith mentioned the Braden case. Melissa Braden was secretly
abducted from her home in 2006 by her mother and brought to Japan in
violation of previous Los Angeles Superior Court orders, which gave
both parents access to the child and prohibited international travel
with the child by either parent. Yet the mother was able to take the
child from the father in violation of court orders, and she is
protected by the Japanese Government.
There is the case of Erika Toland, who was abducted in 2003 from
Negishi United States Navy Family housing in Yokohama to Tokyo, Japan,
by her now-deceased mother. So the mother is deceased, but she is being
held by her Japanese maternal grandmother and is denied access by her
father. So her father is living and wants to be with his child. The
mother is deceased, and he can't even see the child because of the
protection provided by the Japanese Government.
There is the case of Isaac and Rebecca Savoie. This was mentioned by
Mr. Smith. They were abducted just last year by their mother in
violation of a Tennessee State court order. You shouldn't be messing
with Tennessee State courts. In violation of a Tennessee State court
order of joint custody and Tennessee statutes, they were taken to
Japan. Both children have been denied any communication by and access
to their father. So the mother is holding them in Japan, and the father
cannot have access to either child even though the court has ordered
it.
There is one other case. Again, this is typical of so many other
cases--more than 100. Lastly, the Eliases--one child aged 4, the other
aged 2. They were abducted just about a year and a half ago, in
December of 2008, from New Jersey. It was in violation of another court
order prohibiting the removal of the children from the State of New
Jersey. Yet they were taken out of the country. The children's father
tries desperately to have contact with his children, but he is
forbidden to have that contact. This father needs to be mentioned
specifically.
Here is an Iraqi war veteran. He was shot twice in the service of our
country. He was dragged from a vehicle that had been destroyed by a
mine, and he returned home only to find an empty home and his children
abducted. Right now, without this resolution's achieving its objective,
he will have very little hope in ever seeing or hearing from his
children again.
So, as tragic as these cases are, more are developing as we speak.
According to this year's statistics provided by the U.S. Embassy in
Japan, the number of cases of parental child abduction to Japan has
doubled in the past 2 years and has more than quadrupled in the past 4
years. The problem of abduction isn't going away. It's only getting
worse. These children who have been abducted to Japan have not only
lost their previous precious connections with their parents, but they
have been deprived of their full heritage, their families and culture.
American parents are calling on the U.S. Government to urgently
intervene and to quickly find a diplomatic solution. They have no other
voice in this convoluted process. That's what we are asking for. These
parents are not going to give up.
I want to thank Chairman Berman and particularly two of his staff
members, JJ Ong and Jessica Lee, for their tireless efforts; Mr. Smith
and his staff; and my own staff--Tim Aiken, legislative director;
Yasmine Taeb; and Shai Tamari. They have worked diligently with these
parents. I thank them for their efforts.
I particularly thank the parents who have committed themselves,
devoted themselves to reuniting with their children. Who would not do
that? That is why this resolution is so important. I trust that it will
be passed unanimously.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I yield myself 2 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, after all of the publicity surrounding David Goldman,
several people, including Patrick Braden, walked into my office and
said that they had been totally frustrated not just by the Japanese
Government but, to some extent, by our own.
We need the tools at the State Department, at the Office of
Children's Issues, to more effectively promote the interests of
American parents and of American abducted children. I've introduced
legislation, and my good friend Jim Moran is one of the cosponsors. It
is legislation which would comprehensively give the Administration real
tools to make this a government-to-government fight rather than a David
versus Goliath fight, where it is one individual fighting a court
system and a government in a faraway land.
Paul Toland walked into my office, who is Jim Moran's constituent--he
walked into his office as well--and we have both been trying to help
him. Here is a man who served honorably as a commander in the United
States Navy; and for over 6 years, close to 7 years, he has not seen
his daughter. As my good friend and colleague pointed out, the
grandmother has custody. Just like David Goldman, his wife had passed
away, the man whose son was abducted to Brazil, and somebody else had
custody of his child. Paul Toland's case is similar.
Patrick Braden invited me down to the Japanese Embassy. I have to
tell you, as a father of four, I was moved to tears when a group of
left-behind parents and people concerned about left-behind parents and
abducted children gathered in front of the Japanese Embassy.
So what did Patrick do?
In a very dignified and very respectful way, he requested that he at
least get to see his child. It was her birthday that day. There was a
birthday cake to Melissa, who was halfway around the world. We all sang
Happy Birthday, and he blew out the candles. He was missing her again
for another year. It goes on and on.
This has to be resolved, Mr. Speaker. We need our President, our
Secretary of State and the Congress to get behind these left-behind
parents and to get behind bringing back our abducted children. If there
is a custody issue, resolve it in the courts of habitual residence.
{time} 1550
That's where those custody issues need to be fought out, not in a
land like Japan where abduction is treated with kid gloves and actually
embraced. I said previously, ``with indifference.'' Sometimes I wonder
if it's indifference
[[Page H7047]]
in the way the Japanese Government deals with this. They are a safe
harbor for child abductors, and that brings dishonor to the government,
in my opinion.
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. I appreciate your mentioning Mr. Toland. He,
for 2 years, has worked with our office day in and day out. He will not
give up on his child, but he has made it clear we now are his only hope
and that of more than 100 parents who are desperate to see their
children. They have been denied. Thank you for particularly mentioning
Mr. Toland.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I yield myself the balance of my time to
conclude.
I want to thank my friend for his leadership on this. This is a
bipartisan issue. This is a human rights issue of American parents and
of American children. We rightfully speak out on human rights abuses in
China and Darfur and all over the world wherever and whenever they
occur. This is a human rights abuse that's occurring against our own
families, and our government--and this goes through successive
administrations, Republican and Democrat--does not do enough.
You know, I don't know how many you have ever seen that Seinfeld
episode with the Penske file which gets moved around from left to right
and George doesn't do anything of, really, substance with it. We have
very good people at the State Department who have these files in hand
that would love to do more but they lack the tools. They lack the
ability authorized by this Congress and by law to take it to the next
level.
This is a government-to-government fight. Had it not been for the
Congress rallying around David Goldman, Sean Goldman would still be in
Brazil today because there would have been another appeal in the court
and another appeal. They run out the clock and then the child is an
adult. That's what is happening to all 2,800 American abducted
children. The abductors are playing a game, a very dangerous game; and
in Japan, as Mr. Moran and I know so well, nobody comes back.
Our government has to get serious. This resolution puts all of us on
record and says we mean business. This is only the first step.
Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my support and
sympathy for U.S. parents who are not able to see their children, when
those children are in the custody of other family members in another
country. I am committed to doing everything I can to help these parents
be reunited with their children. However, I believe strongly that if we
adopt H. Res. 1326 today, we will undermine the progress that has been
made by our Government and the Government of Japan on this extremely
important matter.
On April 5, I cosigned a letter to Japan's Foreign Minister, a letter
authored by our Committee's distinguished Chairman, Mr. Berman,
requesting that the Government of Japan provide us a status report on
its actions in this matter. Then, on May 12, I chose to cosponsor H.
Res. 1326.
My intention was--by cosigning the Chairman's letter and co-
sponsoring this resolution--to provide additional incentive to the
Government of Japan to work with our government in trying to find ways
to bring U.S. parents together with their children in Japan.
I am pleased to inform you that in the past four months--thanks in
large part to the leadership and dedication of my colleagues and
friends, Mr. Moran and Mr. Smith--significant progress has been made.
In that time, the Government of Japan has taken serious steps to
address this matter and to lay the groundwork for an ongoing process,
in close cooperation with the Government of the United States.
On August 11, I received a copy of Japan's response to our letter.
The response makes it clear that a great deal more remains to be done
by both of our governments, but the response also shows Japan has
certainly taken some significant first steps.
I seek unanimous consent to submit for the Record a copy of Japan's
response describing those steps. The letter is detailed and specific.
It reflects a willingness by the Government of Japan first to
reorganize itself to deal more effectively with this matter and, even
more importantly, a clear readiness to take concrete actions to prevent
future cases where parents are unable to be with their children.
For these reasons, it is very clear that the Government of Japan is
taking seriously the expressions of concern from Members of this body,
and I believe those efforts should be recognized.
Embassy of Japan,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Eni F.H. Faleomavaega,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Faleomavaega: I am sending this letter under
the instruction of Minister for Foreign Affairs of Japan in
response to your letter dated April 5th, 2010.
The child custody issues are complex and each parent may
claim his/her own assertion. The Government of Japan is
making sincere efforts to deal with this issue, from the
standpoint that the welfare of the child should be of utmost
importance. We are well aware of and sympathetic to the
plight of children and families who have been affected by
unfortunate child custody disputes involving Japanese and
American citizens.
The officials at the political level in the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs are in close contact with their counterparts
in the Ministry of Justice to address this issue. As for the
Hague Convention, which you also raised in your letter, the
Government of Japan is seriously considering the possibility
of joining the Convention, and we are accelerating our
consideration process, which was initiated by Prime Minister
Hatoyama. Aside from the Convention, we are also discussing
possible ways for the consular officers of the U.S. in Japan
and parents who claim that their children were taken to Japan
to have better access to their children.
Please find attached an information sheet that responds to
other points referred in your letter. The Ministry will
continue to have close consultation with the State Department
on this issue. I would appreciate your kind understanding and
your support towards our continued efforts.
Identical letters will be sent to each member signatory of
your April 5, 2010 letter.
Sincerely,
Ichiro Fujisaki,
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Japan to
the United States of America.
``We understand that your government established a new
Office of Child Custody within the Foreign Ministry. We would
like to learn more about the new office, including who and
how many staff are dedicated to this office; the mission of
the office and duties of its staff; and how this new office
intends to address the systemic challenges and resolve
existing cases of international parental child abduction.''
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs established the Division
for Issues related to Child Custody in December 2009. The
Division is to supervise various efforts regarding child
custody issues within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The Division was established within the Foreign Policy
Bureau, which is the head bureau in the Ministry. The Senior
Foreign Policy Coordinator is assigned to be the Division's
director. Ten staff, including officials of the related
divisions, are assigned to the Division and a full time staff
was added in May 2010 to strengthen its function.
The Division is closely working with related divisions on
major issues related to international child custody. For
example, the Division is coordinating following endeavors in
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; considering the possibility
of joining the Convention; informing Japanese nationals
residing in foreign countries of local laws and regulations;
and considering possible measures to facilitate consular
visits and child visitations, etc. Also, the Division is
working on facilitating discussions with related ministries
like the Ministry of Justice, timely explaining developments
on international child custody issues to Diet members and
liaising with media, etc. The Division is also promoting
public awareness on this issue in Japan, and as a part of its
exercise, it is cooperating with the Japan Federation of Bar
Associations to hold a symposium on the Convention.
Besides the consideration process of the Hague Convention,
existing cases of cross-border removal of children have to be
addressed, including visitation issues. As a part of such an
effort, we established a US-Japan consultative group and
started the discussion.
Under the current Japanese legal system, the Japanese
government does not have the authority to order or instruct a
parent who is alleged to have taken away a child to permit
his or her child to meet with the child's other parent, or
U.S. consular officers. Meanwhile, regardless of their
nationalities, under Japanese law, parents who claim their
children were taken improperly may seek redress--including
possibly gaining custody of their children and their
children's return or asserting other rights regarding their
children, like visitations--by availing themselves of
established judicial proceedings (conciliation/determination)
based on the Domestic Relations Procedure Act. In instances
where a party violates an agreement relating to custody or
visitation obtained through such proceedings, or does not
comply with orders issued in such proceedings which relate to
custody, visitation, etc., the aggrieved party may request
the family courts to recommend the other parties to fulfill
their obligations. Also, although there
[[Page H7048]]
are some restrictions from the viewpoint of the child's best
interest, the parties may request the family court to force
direct compliance or order compulsory payment to enforce an
order on return of child, and request the court to order
compulsory payment to enforce court order on visitation,
depending on the facts of each case. There have been many
cases where return of children and visitation were
successfully implemented under the current system.
In addition, there have been cases where US embassy or
consular officials were unable to resolve child custody
matters but sought and received assistance from Ministry of
Foreign Affairs of Japan (MOFA). In these instances, MOFA
officials made diligent and even intensive efforts to convey
the US government's request to the Japanese parents in
question and/or their lawyers through all appropriate
measures, including making telephone calls and sending
letters. Because parents, children and their families usually
have very complicated feelings in such matters, the
Ministry's contacts are often rejected at first. However, the
MOFA officials make repeated efforts to contact them and to
hold sincere talks with them.
In the US-Japan consultative group, we would like to
exchange information about the current situation regarding
consular visits and child visitations and discuss effective
and appropriate means and methods and points to be improved
with regard to these systems.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. TANNER. I yield back the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) that the House suspend the rules
and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 1326, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and
nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.
____________________