[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.

                          ____________________