Proposition 53K0622

Projet de loi modifiant diverses dispositions afin de prévenir l'enlèvement parental international d'enfants.

General information ¶

Authors

MR Corinne De Permentier, Denis Ducarme, Jacqueline Galant

Submission date

Nov. 18, 2010

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

civil status identity document child illegal restraint

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP ∉ Open Vld N-VA LDD MR

Abstained from voting

VB

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

April 22, 2014 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

by Mr. Jan Van Esbroeck, rapporteur, refers to the written report.

Ms. De Permentier’s bill aims to counter international child abductions. Last year, 50 children were abducted by one of their parents. This year, we expect even more.

We are aware that the bill does not provide a solution to all child abductions. There is still no solution for children who are not abducted outside the Schengen area or for cases of actual separation. We will support the bill. If it can help stop a child abduction, it’s worth it for us. After all, we must not forget the impact such cases have on the lives of those involved. The parent who is left behind in our country will have to live a long, difficult and above all unequal struggle to see his or her children back. The child is used as a weapon in a battle that is not his or her. It ends up in a strange country where it does not speak the language, does not know the habits and of which it does not know why it is there.

Any legislative initiative that can prevent those human dramas, which inflict great emotional damage on children and parents, can count on our approval. However, it is up to the government and our successors in the hemisphere to take further steps and address the problem further.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, I would like to thank all my colleagues for allowing me to advance this text that was very important to me. There has been a lot of support for this text that will still need to be improved over the years; we have discussed it. But this is already a first step.

You will all remember the case of the little Aida who defrauded the chronicle. For more than a year, this three-year-old girl lived away from her mother who resided in Belgium, after being abducted against her will in Morocco by the family of her father, detained in our country.

We are facing a classic example of parental rape. This concept is defined as such by Article 1 of the 1980 Hague Convention on International Child Abduction: the displacement or non-return of a child is considered unlawful when the State in which the child had its habitual residence immediately before the displacement has granted custody to the abandoned parent. This right must have been effectively exercised immediately before the move or non-return. The right of custody may result from a judicial decision but also from a full-right assignment or an administrative decision under the law of that State.

The case of the little Aida was not a unique case. Today, according to Child Focus, every year between 70 and 80 children are abducted in Belgium by one of their parents who has no guardianship. Unfortunately, this number is constantly increasing. Three years ago, the police announced the number of 50 to 60 cases annually. Today, these figures are increasing in total.

To address this problem, our country already has a legislative arsenal. There is now a Federal Contact Point "International Child Abduction" which is responsible for handling individual cases relating to international child abductions or cross-border visitor rights under international instruments. In addition, our country has drastically increased the severity of the criminal punishment for abduction perpetrators with now a minimum sentence of one year imprisonment for this crime and a maximum sentence of five years. Finally, Belgium is bound by international conventions governing the subject, such as the European Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Decisions in Matters of Custody of Children and the Restoration of Custody of Children and finally, the Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

However, figures show that these tools do not solve all cases of parental abductions. It is therefore necessary to supplement them with new provisions.

Through the bill on which we will vote, our intention is to strengthen the legislative arsenal, in such a way as to address current shortcomings and gaps and to provide new tools to the competent authorities. Its objective is to introduce a measure to detect the existence of an attempted abduction during identity checks carried out when the abductor wishes to cross with the child an external border of the Schengen area. To this end, it facilitates border controls at the Schengen area by mentioning, on the electronic identity card or passport, the status of the child whose parents have divorced, in order to clarify the conditions under which the child may cross the border.

This document will not address all cases. I am well aware of this. Nevertheless, it will be able to prevent a number of abductions, which makes it relevant. A avoided parental abduction is a mother or father of family who should not live in uncertainty depending on the type of case.

This proposal has been the subject of numerous discussions in the committee. It has gone through all the meanders of the legislative path: opinions from the Committee on Justice, the Minister of the Interior, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, as well as an opinion from the Committee on the Protection of Privacy. We made all the changes that were recommended in the various opinions.

I take advantage of the passage to thank the Internal SPF that has made us benefit from its skills to complete the device so that it is fully effective. I also thank all my colleagues who have actively contributed to the debate, both in the opposition and in the majority. In this regard, I would just like to regret that this proposal did not obtain the unanimous vote in the committee of the Interior and that, despite the amendments made. I will not formalize it. However, I have some questions about the justification of this abstinence. We, what interests us today, is that the struggle we are waging on the subject has no political color and allows us to move forward. He has no ideology and in no way should be sacrificed on the altar of the political game!

My dear colleagues, this will probably be my last speech at this tribune since I’m leaving you, but I still want to thank you in my name for making things go forward and also in the name of families who will be able to feel relieved thanks to this important advance. (The applause)