Goldman Forums > Main Forum (Goldman)

Suggestions to bring the US Hague court into the 21th Century

(1/93) > >>

Now this is Carlos' fault.  He writes something and I get out of my lurker stage and start new threads.
See his Judge Sotomayer thread concerning Abbott v Abbott.  This a court case where I think the Texas Federal judges are just WRONG.  They say since the father (in Chile) did not have physical custody, he has no custody at all - dispite what Chile says.
Due to cronic insomnia, I mentally design things in bed.  Here is my suggestion to getting the US Hague court into the 21th Century.
The president should appoint a single Federal judge (or more if needed) as the "Federal Hague Convention Court Judge" with a staff of expert Hague attornies.  The judge can be located in Washington DC or anywhere in the US - we do have webcam in our world now.
The judge assigns a Hague attorney to the US taking parent and other one the foreign LBP (ever watch JAG? - the attorney's can be for the defense one week and the prosecution the next).  These Hague attorneys comunicate with the parents and their attorneys.  The judge has an initial case to hear arguments as in a standard divorce case with either all parents in attendance or all on webcam (lets make them equal in access to the judge).  All paperwork can be e-mailed to him during this case or to his office for evauation.  The judge has a timelimit in which to make his decision or ask for additional information.  The judge's decisions are evaluated every 2 years by an oversite committee.
I don't have an idea whether the judge, the currect organization or some other organization should be the one to determine whether or not a case qualifies as a Hague case.
Should I send my suggestion to the President?  Got a better idea?

Good job thinking outside the box...


--- Quote from: dmdaven2;22822 ---Good job thinking outside the box...
--- End quote ---

Great Idea!!! And while you're at it  Who knows more about the pitfalls and boobytraps of the Hague than people who have experienced it. Why not have an "advisory committee" made up of only people who have been down that road. Kind of like a "civilian advisory group", volunteers (again past members) to work with victims (on either side), the way people volunteer to be Guardian ad Litem.

Sounds good to me.....not an expert, but I like what I read, and Sashia's idea is great and compliments idea well. (I too mentally design things in my head due to a combo of insomnia & other annoying

Your idea is an evolution of suggestions that have been proposed repeatedly over the years to improve compliance with the Convention.


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version