Atiya Law recently won a victory in a Michigan court that gave a mother a pathway to reunite with her children after their father fled the mother and children’s home country more than 12 years ago.
International kidnapping— when a child is taken across borders by a parent or family member without legal authorization—raises complex legal, emotional, and jurisdictional issues. These cases demand prompt action, careful legal strategy, and a thorough understanding of both international treaties and domestic law.
What Is International Kidnapping?
In legal terms, international kidnapping often refers to the wrongful removal or retention of a child across international borders in violation of a custodial parent’s rights. This is not just a family dispute; it is a cross-border legal issue involving multiple legal systems, treaties, and government agencies.
Under U.S. federal law, international parental kidnapping can also constitute a criminal offense (for example under 18 U.S.C. § 1204), though most of the legal tools for resolution are civil in nature. A criminal case and a civil custody case may proceed in parallel, but they serve different purposes. Civil remedies focus on returning the child or resolving custody, while criminal charges aim to punish the unlawful conduct of the kidnapping parent.
The Hague Convention
The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction provides a legal framework for the prompt return of children wrongfully removed or retained in foreign countries. The United States and many other nations have ratified or acceded to this treaty, which is designed to:
- Protect children from the harmful effects of international abduction by a parent or guardian;
- Encourage cooperation between treaty partners through Central Authorities in each country; and
- Ensure that custody questions are decided in the child’s country of habitual residence, not based on where the child was taken.
In a Hague Convention case, the court does not decide custody merits; instead, it determines whether the child was habitually resident in one country and was wrongfully removed to another. If wrongful removal or retention is established, the default remedy under the Convention is to return the child to the country of habitual residence.
Atiya Law has spent a lot of time in court educating judges and legal staff about the very important differences between a custody case and a Hague case because it matters the most here.
Often, family law judges will want to apply their Michigan custody framework to an international kidnapping case. That is usually the wrong approach. We cannot reward the kidnapper and give them the benefit of establishing a new environment for the child only for it be used against the left-behind parent.
Defenses and Exceptions
Although the Convention emphasizes return, there are limited defenses that a respondent may raise, including:
- Grave risk of harm to the child if returned;
- The child objects to returning and is of sufficient age and maturity; and
- More than one year has passed since the wrongful removal and the child is now settled in the new environment.
If you do not file your case within one year of the kidnapping, you only have the right to request access to your children and you will not be able to argue for their return. Evidence of the kidnaping timeline is essential to prove this element.
Here is a list of Hague Convention Treaty Partners and Countries.
Countries Not Part of the Hague Convention
In Michigan, kidnapping cases may includes parties from countries that are NOT a part of the Hague Convention. This includes Middle East and North African countries such as Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran and Jordan.
Many Asian and South Asian counties are also not on the list, including India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Thailand.
When a child is taken to a non-Hague country, neither parent can rely on the Hague Convention’s streamlined return procedures. Instead, legal options might include:
- Domestic custody proceedings in the foreign country (often under their local law).
- Bilateral agreements or diplomatic channels (where available).
- Negotiated settlements between parents or through authorities in both states.
Because there is no universal enforcement mechanism outside the Convention, cases involving non-signatory countries are often slower, more uncertain, and legally complex.
How Michigan Courts Handle International Kidnapping Cases
In Michigan, international child abduction cases may be addressed through multiple legal mechanisms alongside the Hague Convention Proceedings.
Like nearly every other state, Michigan has adopted the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA). The UCCJEA helps determine when Michigan courts have jurisdiction to enforce foreign custody orders or to act when a custody order exists from another state or foreign country that substantially conforms with jurisdictional standards.
The Michigan Compiled Laws (MCLs) also authorize local prosecutors or the Michigan Attorney General to take action to locate a child, obtain their return, or enforce a custody determination when there is reason to believe a child has been wrongfully removed or retained in violation of the Hague Convention or state law.
Complex Jurisdictional Issues
When a child has lived in multiple countries or when custody proceedings are active in another nation, Michigan courts must assess whether jurisdiction is proper under the Hague Convention and the UCCJEA. Courts will consider where the child has lived most recently and most significantly, and whether another country’s court has already acted.
Why It Is Critical to Retain an Attorney
International kidnapping cases operate at the intersection of international treaties, state law, federal law, and foreign legal systems. These matters have important timelines, move quickly and require precise legal strategy:
- Time Sensitivity: Hague Convention cases emphasize prompt action; delays can result in defenses like “settled child” becoming harder to overcome.
- Complex Procedures: Filing Hague applications involves specialized documentation and coordination with Central Authorities.
- Jurisdictional Complexity: Determining which court has the authority to act involves nuanced analysis of habitual residence, prior proceedings, and statutory mandates.
- Multiple Legal Fronts: In some cases, separate criminal and civil actions may proceed concurrently; coordination across jurisdictions is essential.
- International Law Nuances: Differences in foreign legal systems and treaty implementation can impact strategy and outcomes.
An experienced attorney guides you through these legal labyrinths, minimizes procedural missteps, advocates effectively in court, and helps you work with federal and international authorities. Atiya Law is one of the only firms on the State Department list of attorneys in the state of Michigan who represent parents of kidnapped children.
If you or a family member need information regarding a specific case or the assistance of experienced attorneys fighting for people like you every day, call our 24-7 English/Spanish line at 248-951-2450 or reach out to us at Atiya Law.