Kidnapping and Terror in The Middle East and North Africa: Foreign Office raises Egypt terror threat


November 3, 2012

Source: The Guardian

Egypt terror threat raised from medium to high after series of deadly militant attacks across north Sinai.

The Foreign Office has raised its terrorism warning for visitors to Egypt from medium to high, particularly urging Britons against travel to the Sinai region, after a recent spate of militant attacks.

The change comes on the same day that a report revealed that police in Egypt had foiled a plot by al-Qaida-linked militants to attack tourists in the popular Red Sea coastal resort of Sharm el-Sheikh. The Mirror said the attack, involving firearms and rocket-propelled grenades, had been planned for Christmas.

A Foreign Office spokeswoman said she could not comment on any link, adding that changes to travel advice were based on “a number of sources”.

While Sharm el-Sheikh is on the southern tip of the Sinai peninsula, it and other nearby resorts, Taba, Nuweiba and Dahab, are excluded from the Foreign Office advice against travel to the region.

The Foreign Office spokeswoman said: “We can confirm that on 2 November we amended our travel advice for Egypt. Our advice makes clear that there is a high threat from terrorism in Egypt.”

Its website says: “Although security is tight throughout the country, especially in resort areas, there remains a high risk of attacks, which could be indiscriminate, including in public places frequented by expatriates and foreign travellers such as hotels and restaurants.”

The advice warns against all travel to north Sinai, where there have been attacks on security forces near the border with Gaza and Egypt, including one which killed 16 soldiers.

The advice says that even in south Sinai security has deteriorated this year, with a number of hijacks and kidnaps away from resort areas.

Egypt has been trying to rebuild its tourism industry after last year’s widespread unrest ended the long rule of Hosni Murbarak as president.

Last month the antiquities minister, Muhammad Ibrahim, reopened the restored pyramid of Chefren and six tombs at Giza, using the occasion to stress the country’s safety for tourists.

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

One key to ABP World Group`s successful recovery and re-unification of your loved one is to use all necessary means available

Contact us here: Mail

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

U.S Phone Number: (646) 502-7443

UK Phone Number: 020 3239 0013

Norway Phone Number: +47 45504271

Or you can call our 24h Emergency phone number: +370 610 44 447

Guarding Against International Parental Child Abduction: Part II


Source: divorcelawyerconnecticut

Two Parent Signature Law for a Passport

The United States does not have exit controls on its borders for holders of a valid passport. This makes preventing a passport from being issued to your child without your consent very important. Generally, if your child has a passport, it can be difficult to prevent the other parent from removing the child to another country without your permission.

U.S.law requires the signature of both parents, or the child’s legal guardians, prior to issuance of a U.S.passport to children under the age of 16. To obtain a U.S.passport for a child under the age of 16, both parents (or the child’s legal guardians) must execute the child’s passport application and provide documentary evidence demonstrating that they are the parents or guardians. If this cannot be done, the person executing the passport application must provide documentary evidence that he or she has sole custody of the child, has the consent of the other parent to the issuance of the passport, or is acting in place of the parents and has the consent of both parents (or of a parent/legal guardian with sole custody over the child to the issuance of the passport).

EXCEPTIONS: The law does provide two exceptions to this requirement: (1) for exigent circumstances, such as those involving the health or welfare of he child, or (2) when the Secretary of State determines that issuance of a passport is warranted by special family circumstances.

Children’s Passport Issuance Alert Program

You may also ask that your child’s name be entered into the State Department’s Children’s Passport Issuance Alert Program (CPIAP). Entering your child into the Children’s Passport Issuance Alert Program will enable the Department to notify you or your attorney if an application for a U.S.passport for the child is received anywhere in the United Statesor at any U.S.embassy or consulate abroad.

If you have a court order that either grants you sole custody, joint legal custody, or prohibits your child from traveling without your permission or the permission of the court, the Department may refuse to issue a new or renewal U.S.passport for your child. The Department may not, however, revoke a passport that has already been issued to the child. There is also no way to track the use of a passport once it has been issued, since there are no exit controls for people leaving the U.S.If your child already has a passport, you should take steps to ensure that it is kept from a potential abductor by asking the court or attorneys to hold it.

IMPORTANT TO KEEP IN MIND:

  1. The United Statesdoes not have exit controls.
  2. The Department of State may not revoke a passport that has been issued to a child, but you can ask a court to hold onto it.
  3. There is no way to track the use of a passport once it has been issued.
  4. Your child might also be a citizen of another country (dual nationality). Even if he/she does not have a U.S.passport, your child may be able to travel on the other country’s passport.

The Privacy Act and Passports

Passport information is protected by the provisions of the Privacy Act (PL 93-579) passed by Congress in 1974. Information regarding a minor’s passport is available to either parent. Information regarding adults may be available to law enforcement officials or pursuant to a court order issued by the court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with (22 CFR 51.27).

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

profile pic.jpg

 

ABP World Group Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

(646) 502-7443 United States

069 2547 2471 Germany

020 3239 0013 United Kingdom

01 442 9322 Ireland
031-753 83 77 Sweden

Philippines: Interpol arrests Norwegian mother wanted for parental child abduction


Source: U.S News

Joint operatives of the International Police (Interpol), Kalibo Philippine National Police, Aklan Provincial Police Office (APPO) and the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) here arrested a 44-year-old Norwegian national for allegedly abducting a minor in his country.

Police Officer 2 Nida Gregas, deputy public information officer of the APPO, said the Interpol was able to trace the whereabouts of the suspect after the 15-year-old victim (Daughter) posted her whereabouts at her facebook page.

“The complainant on this case was the mother of the victim who reported that her daughter had gone missing in Norway. The victim had been reported missing for several years already,” Gregas said.

Under the Philippine law, the identity of the suspect could not be revealed in accordance with the law on the abuse against children.

The suspect claimed that the victim is her daughter and that he and the victim’s mother have quarreled as to who will take custody of the daughter. The suspect then decided to hide the victim at their residence in Andagao Village, Kalibo, Aklan where they were found.

Currently, the police is awaiting for the representative of the Norway Embassy for the turnover of the suspect and the victim. 

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook
Join the Facebook Group: International Parental Child Abduction

Child Abduction to Thailand


Phuket Boy Ricardo Among Rising Number of Abductions

By Chutima Sidasathian,Phuketwan Friday, July 1, 2011

PHUKET: Figures show the number of British children abducted by a parent and taken abroad is increasing, with Thailand a favored destination. Pakistan and India rank first and third in numerical terms, sandwiching Thailand. The Foreign Office said that 161 children had been taken over the past 12 months to countries that are outside an international treaty designed to ensure the return of wrongfully removed minors.

On Phuket, parental abduction is known to be an issue. The most prominent case has been the twice-abducted Ricardo Choosaneh, a nine-year-old first taken by his Thai mother from his father in the Netherlands, then taken from Phuket by his foster mother earlier this year. His mother, Sumetra Choosaneh, told Phuketwan in an interview in Bangkok in March that she planned to go to Europe to regain her boy – but through the courts this time.

Khun Sumetra and her family say that the father has never been a good provider and continues to use possession of the boy as a means to extract money from others and to gain government housing in the Netherlands. Britain’s Foreign Office admitted that true figures on abductions are likely to be much higher because many cases go unreported. AFP reported that although Pakistan, Thailand and India topped the list of nations involved, there were cases in another 94 countries that are outside the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Foreign Office minister Jeremy Browne told the news agency: ”Finding a solution can be especially difficult if a child has been taken to a non-Hague country as there are no international systems in place to help you. This is why prevention is so important.” The Phuket case of young Ricardo has brought international attention, with a television show in the Netherlands encouraging support from viewers for the boy’s father, Michael Roland van Alphen. However, Khun Sumetra and her family maintain that Phuket-born Ricardo, abducted twice in the space of nine months, should never have been snatched on the second occasion by foster mother Kimberley Ching-Yong because the boy’s future is brighter on Phuket.

Only a court, having listened carefully to both sides, can settle the matter with the best interests of the child to the fore. As Sharon Cooke, advice line manager for Reunite International Child Abduction Centre, told AFP: ”The psychological impact on children can be traumatic and for the left-behind parent, the shock and loss are unbearable, particularly if they don’t know where their child is.”

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

One key to ABP World Group`s successful recovery and re-unification of your loved one is to use all necessary means available

Contact us here: Mail

Join the Facebook Group: International Parental Child Abduction

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

U.S Phone Number: (646) 502-7443

UK Phone Number: 020 3239 0013 –

Or you can call our 24h Emergency phone number: +47 45504271

A Father’s Day story


By David Story, Special to The Villager
Alabama June 17, 2011 

[PHOTO]

Contributed Auburn Villager

Luis Gallardo-Rivera and his daughter, Amaia

Last Father’s Day, Opelika city employee Luis Gallardo-Rivera didn’t know if he’d ever see his daughter Amaia again as he embarked on a desperate odyssey. His search ended up spanning two states, crossing the Atlantic Ocean, and including a trek across Bulgaria from Sofia to Burgas on the Black Sea.

A single man with visitation rights to see his 6-year-old daughter Amaia, Gallardo-Rivera says the disappearance of his daughter was unexpected. In the prior year, his relationship with her mother Beatriz had “settled down.”

“Things were rocky with Beatriz after Amaia’s birth, with visitation disagreements,” admits Gallardo-Rivera, a Columbus native. “I’d travel to Florida from Puerto Rico, where I was living and I’d first met Beatriz, and later to Florida from Columbus.”

Then Beatriz announced she had a real-estate job offer in Spain.

“Beatriz said she’d take Amaia for nine months,” says Gallardo-Rivera, who had joint custody. “It was temporary, and though I wouldn’t see Amaia for nine months, I could have her every summer per our new visitation arrangement.”

Bulgarian connection

The only hitch, adds Gallardo-Rivera, was that Amaia’s mother was engaged to a Bulgarian national.

“The day before they left for Spain, Beatriz called and said they were making a pit stop in Bulgaria to meet the fiancé’s family and get married,” he says.

Gallardo-Rivera admits resenting the fact that Beatriz’s fiancé was a father figure to Amaia. But he appreciated that Amaia got along with the man who might become her stepfather. He says he was glad his daughter had a chance to travel, and he understood the fiancé’s wanting to see his home and family.

But weeks passed and then a couple of months went by with only email and webcam communications between Gallardo-Rivera and his daughter. Beatriz explained that there were visa problems delaying their departure for Spain. Because he has a friend who’s an immigration lawyer, Gallardo-Rivera says this didn’t sound improbable.

The first warning bell rang when Beatriz said Amaia couldn’t come back to visit her father, adding that it wasn’t feasible for the child to leave Bulgaria and try to get back in. She said Gallardo-Rivera could come and visit, however.

“I was frustrated, but not entirely suspicious,” he says. “Now, I look back and think, how could I have been so stupid!”

By February, Gallardo-Rivera was planning a visit. Shortly afterwards, his story took an alarming turn.

Arrest warrant

“On March 16 of last year, I found an arrest warrant online for Beatriz on federal charges of mortgage fraud,” he says. “A 50-plus-page document from the federal Department of Justice initiated by the FBI, which had first interviewed Beatriz the day before she called me with the Spain story.”

Gallardo-Rivera says he didn’t care so much about the bank’s allegations of mortgage fraud as he did about what Beatriz had done to him and his daughter.

“Everything fell into place, so, I called the FBI,” he says. “They had no news of her whereabouts—she and Amaia had boarded a flight from Atlanta to Amsterdam—so I gave the Bureau an address.”

Gallardo-Rivera immediately tried to obtain emergency full custody, filing in Florida.

“It was denied for lack of jurisdiction, and their court ruling said I could file in Alabama or Puerto Rico,” he says. “My lawyer said not to file in Alabama, so I filed in Puerto Rico, and the request was denied.”

Months pass

Months passed and Gallardo-Rivera still communicated with Amaia via webcam, watching what he said to avoid giving away anything. Then, things began to turn in his favor.

“The FBI had to go through the State Department to work with the Bulgarian embassy in Sofia” he says. “I had called the embassy repeatedly, having written to the U.S. ambassador to Bulgaria, Nancy McEldowney.”

Gallardo-Rivera finally got in touch with a female official, Kimberly Atkinson of the embassy’s American Citizens Services, who became his contact. The search for Amaia evolved from a federal case to an Interpol case.

“Atkinson was very proactive,” says Gallardo-Rivera, who had been assured that once Beatriz was apprehended the American embassy would hold his daughter.

“I was sitting tight, and in mid-October I received a call from Atkinson,” he says. “The embassy had just finished a legal consultation and said they couldn’t hold Amaia overnight if they found her. ‘Are you going to get her soon?’ I asked, and Atkinson said she couldn’t answer that.”

Atkinson said she could pass Amaia on to an American missionary couple, the Ridgways, pending Gallardo-Rivera’s arrival.

“‘Should I come?’ I asked,” recalls Gallardo-Rivera, “and Atkinson couldn’t give me a definitive answer. So I slept on it, decided to go, and bought a ticket for Bulgaria.”

Gallardo-Rivera flew into Letishte Sofia-Vrazhdebna airport in Sofia, arriving on a Friday. He checked into the Kempinski Hotel Zografski in the Lozenets neighborhood near downtown Sofia. As Gallardo-Rivera strolled past the hotel’s lake, he contemplated his situation.

“The Kempinski Hotel was next to the embassy,” he explains, “and by Monday I was frustrated when Atkinson informed me Beatriz still wasn’t in custody. I didn’t know what to do, so I went back to the hotel and tried to contact the Bulgarian police. Then my sister told me about a private investigation agency she’d found online,”

A private detective

Korona AIK Detective Agency at 14 Budapeshta St. is known for tracking hiding or missing persons, and the agency had a 10-year for reputation working with foreign clients.

“I gave Korona’s Alexandra Karmanska my daughter’s last address in Bulgaria, plus the name of the Drita School,” says Gallardo-Rivera, “She arranged surveillance of the school and learned Amaia was abruptly checked out by her mother’s fiancé on the same day I’d gotten the call from the U.S. Embassy about the American couple, the Ridgways.”

Gallardo-Rivera moved to a less expensive hotel, the Hotel Maxim, close to downtown Sofia and the Vitosha Street commercial district. He stayed till the end of the second week but was on leave without pay.

“I was trying to email Beatriz because the webcam communication had suddenly stopped,” he explains, “but there were no email responses.”

Gallardo-Rivera decided to return home. Once he was back in Alabama, the emails started again and were forwarded by him to the FBI, which forwarded them to Bulgaria. There, authorities traced the IP address to the seaside town of Burgas.

Gallardo-Rivera was still trying to arrange a trip without letting Beatriz know he knew where she was. He said he was going to visit his brother in Ibiza, Spain, and wanted to make side trip to Bulgaria.

“No, don’t come,” Beatriz said. “Amaia is going to winter camp with her school.”

The Hague Treaty

The emails slacked off, and when they came again, Beatriz was elusive about her address. Gallardo-Rivera tried to get Amaia on the Missing Children’s List, a process that only local authorities can initiate. The Florida police wouldn’t follow through, however, so Gallardo-Rivera turned to the International Missing Children’s List and made a petition through the Hague Treaty.

The Hague’s Office of Children’s Issues provides direction to foreign service posts on international parental child abduction and fulfills U.S. treaty obligations relating to the abduction of children.

The Hague Treaty, a multilateral treaty protecting children from abduction and retention across international boundaries, provides guidelines for an application process to have a child returned under the treaty.

“In the week or two leading up to finally getting Amaia back in November, I made calls and wrote letters to my congressmen, the State Department, Bulgarian Minister of Interior Tsvetan Tsvetanov, the International Missing Children’s List and Interpol’s Bulgarian office,” says Gallardo-Rivera. “I got flooded with calls in response.”

Then Atkinson called from Sofia, saying the embassy had Amaia. She and Beatriz had been in the home of a friend of the fiancé’s in Burgas. Gallardo-Rivera drove straight to the Atlanta airport, thinking his daughter was en route to the Ridgways. There were complications, however.

“It was alleged that Beatriz said I’d given up custody rights or they’d been revoked,” according to Gallardo-Rivera. “But I had my documents when an embassy car with a translator picked me up at the airport.”

Gallardo-Rivera’s documents showed he had never relinquished joint custody, and he immediately became custodial parent as soon as Beatriz was incarcerated.

The embassy got Gallardo-Rivera to the Social Assistance Office, but Amaia wasn’t with the Ridgways; she was at the Dragalevtsi Shelter for Children because Beatriz claimed Gallardo-Rivera had relinquished custody.

When Gallardo-Rivera saw Amaia there she hugged him. The embassy staff drove them to the airport, and they were out of the country three hours after his arrival.

Home at last

Amaia’s aunt and paternal grandfather were waiting when they landed in Atlanta.

“I am grateful I’d always tried to communicate with Amaia, because she was comfortable with me,” says here dad. “Amaia took it all like a champ.”

Amaia started school at Jeter Primary in Opelika the following Wednesday.

“Amaia was smiling and acting like a little girl,” recalls Sandra Gallardo, Amaia’s aunt, of their airport reunion. “She’d say little things in reference to her time in Bulgaria, and it caught us off guard and was hard to respond to. Amaia has a strong sense of leadership and a deep need to understand things but is as silly as any young girl.”

Her aunt adds that Amaia has always been extremely social, makes friends quickly and never forgets names.

“Folks stop me and tell me they can’t believe Amaia’s only been with me for a few months,” says Gallardo-Rivera. “She’s resilient and integrated into school. She’s gotten used to new rules; it’s like we’ve always lived together.”

Be careful with whom you have children, sums up Gallardo-Rivera.

“It’s a challenge—going from bachelor to full-time single Dad with the ‘technical’ aspects of health plans,” he says. “Nothing can prepare you for day-to-day parenthood. It’s not like when you could eat a bowl of cereal for dinner or skip a meal; you have another mouth to feed.”

The ‘big picture’

His sleep was the first thing affected. He wakes up an hour early and stays up at night to make dinner and help with homework.

“All of these things are peanuts compared to the big picture, so it’s worth it,” he muses.

Amaia and her dad even make it down to Florida so she can see her maternal grandparents, who knew nothing about Beatriz’a legal troubles.

“I’ve learned so many things about Amaia,” says her dad. “She is into art. Her drawings are very detailed. I signed her up with 4-H club at school, and we visit different parks and go to Opelika’s Sportsplex to swim.”

The one thing he hasn’t figured out yet is how to fix a little girl’s hair, confesses Gallardo-Rivera.

“I try to convince her to go with a short haircut, but with the movie Tangled, that hasn’t been successful,” he says. “You can tell when my sister or a female co-worker has helped with my Amaia’s hair and when ‘Daddy’ did it.”

This is the first Father’s Day Amaia will spend with Gallardo-Rivera, his father and all his siblings.

“My family has showered her with so much love,” he says. “She adores them, and they love her. They’ve grown so close so fast; she calls my dad ‘abuelo.'”

Gallardo-Rivera’s father Orlando—Amaia’s grandfather, says she is totally different from when she first arrived.

“When we are together, she is very affectionate and talks of things she does with her Dad; she loves being with him,” he says. “My son has a unique way with her. He’s always there for Amaia.”

Note: Gallardo-Rivera said Amaia’s mom Beatriz was extradited and is awaiting trial in Florida. Gallardo-Rivera now has full legal and physical custody, and Beatriz will have to request visitation in court. So far, she has not. The facility she is in does not allow visitors, so Amaia has only seen her mom via webcam since leaving Bulgaria. Beatriz’s fiancé is still in Bulgaria, and since he didn’t formally sign anything or directly commit any mortgage fraud, he is not facing charges.

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

Parental Child Abduction – A Mother`s story


Published by: Bortført.no

My story

Foto: Marie von Krogh

ABDUCTED TO NORWAY

During a visit to Jersey UK where I lived with my three children for whom I had custody, I made the fatal mistake of letting my Norwegian ex husband take them to school on day. They never arrived. Instead they were abducted by him and his father and smuggled off the Island by private boat to France some 10 miles away by sea, where the grandfather had cunningly placed his Norwegian registered car ready to travel through Europe up to Denmark where they would all take the ferry to Norway the next evening. The children had no passports or ID, and my ex husband admitted that he had planned it all. He had also forged my signature to register the children in the Folk register in Norway. He did not submit the Court Order or the true documents.

The Jersey Court immediately issued an Order for the return of the children with an attached Arrest Warrant, which was faxed to the Police after Kristiansand Port Authority had confirmed they had arrived in Norway.

A false petition made by his Norwegian lawyer was also submitted to the Court prior to their arrival in Norway, and this petition was completely untrue, false in everyway, made with the sole intention to deceive the Court. Attached to it were the illegal registration forms from the Folk register and a forged letter that he claimed I had signed to give him custody of my children. Again, he did not mention or submit the valid Court Order or the Agreement he signed. He knew he would not have been able to register the children if he had.

The British Embassy in Oslo, UK Foreign Affairs Office and the Jersey Royal Court requested Norway to respect my Court Order and return the children. Norway dismissed this. The Attorney General in Jersey contacted the Justice Department in Norway requesting it take into account that the Hague Convention on child abduction in Jersey was about to be ratified, again all requests were rejected. When his next letter asked for the case to be resolved through “Judicial comity”, an action between countries to try to resolve disputes in diplomatic ways, this request did not even receive a reply.

During a hearing in the District Court, the judge concluded that there was no reason to return the children to Jersey, and no evidence or documents suggesting they should be. It was clear the judge failed to read the requests, Court Order and all other evidence, but it is my view that this was all deliberately ignored.

During a hearing in the Court some months later, his Norwegian lawyer stated that she knew of my ex husband’s intention to abduct the children and had drawn up the petition with him prior to him leaving Norway. He himself also stated that he had planned it all for a long period with the help of his lawyer and the Norwegian Consul in Jersey, and he had also had taken advice from the Norwegian Ministry, whom he stated all advised him that the best way to get custody of the children was to ensure he got them to Norway as quick as possible and applied for custody there as he would be favored.

Evidence of the statements they made were submitted to another Court later, which further showed the extent of the Norwegian Consul’s involvement, and proved that my ex and his father had kept the Consul fully informed of the progress of the abduction as they headed to Norway after abducting, and further to inform him they arrived in Norway, and again months later, to inform him of the progress.

The Consul, who was fully aware that there was an existing High Court Order in Jersey for which my ex husband had no rights of custody and no right to remove the children from my care, did nothing. He alerted no police and no authorities Instead, he chose state to my lawyers that although he was informed during many meetings with my ex husband that he wanted to abduct them, and he said he was in Jersey to help Norwegians, not Jersey people. Even after being told of the abduction and knowing my ex husband’s whereabouts, he failed to advise the Police who could have detained him and my children at that point, and prevented them traveling further.

In Court he also lied at first stating quite strongly that he was annoyed his name had been mentioned as he did not know who my ex husband or his father were. He said he had ever had any contact with either of them and had actually never heard of them…. Until however, when confronted with transcripts of his own written evidence by way of letter to me, and also in documents submitted by my Jersey lawyers, his memory returned very quickly and precise.

The judge however, even being aware of all the lies told in Court from my ex’s side, against all the extensive evidence proving my case, against the Court Orders, and also after hearing my ex husband’s own statement of how he had carefully planned the abduction with the help of his lawyer and the Norwegian Consul, took my children and dismissed me as the children’s Mother.

He gave me only 4 hours a week visitation under strict supervision, stating that the FATHER had to be safeguarded against me taking my children home!

And so began a 6 year battle in the Norwegian Courts at all levels, judges who persistently refused to take into account any evidence or background of my children’s lives before Norway. Judges who continuously deprived not only me but my children of their Mother, and made it impossible for me and my children to have any real relationship like we once had or any decent contact for that matter, against all the evidence of what my ex husband did. They did not care he forged my signature, prevented my access, or how he used the children for his own gain, the law was “irrelevant” to him.

My children were happy children. There has never been any history of abuse, alcoholism, drugs or anything untoward in our family. My children had a nice home, a close family, many friends, they were settled in school and most of all, they had a Mother who loved them but all of this accounted for nothing in the Norwegian Courts.


In Norway, it’s okay to abduct children – as long as you are Norwegian”. You can forge documents and give them to authorities because its “irrelevant” or “not valid for the question”. There is no law for Norwegians. The Norwegian authorities actually help their citizens abduct children from abroad, regardless of circumstances or other countries Court Orders.

For 6 years I have been treated like a criminal and subjected to horrific injustice. Many Christmas’s and birthdays with gifts only exchanged in front of impersonal visitors and mostly behind a locked door, never alone. No cuddling or talking with my children as this was seen as me manipulating my children with love. The emotional stress of hearing your child whisper in your ear “take me home Mummy”.

The Court said this was how it had to be as there was a risk I would take my children home to Jersey. Yet I never abducted my children to Norway. He did. But as I was not Norwegian, I was put under strict and extreme conditions, the type of interaction I was allowed with my children is the same given to parents in severe child welfare cases, incest, molestation, family violence, alcoholism and drug addicts, murderers. And all because I had legal custody of my children and we lived in Jersey, but the father wanted them to live in Norway.

I was convicted on assumptions and presumptions by the Courts, penalized by so called “experts” named psychologists and child welfare services who did not have a clue about the situation at all, all who said my children’s lives were “irrelevant” before they got to Norway, and all  who sided with my ex husband and his lies. They all wiped out my children’s previous life. All that mattered was Norway. Their background was unimportant, not relevant they all said. Anything and everything was used against me, yet nothing was said about him or what he did or how he was manipulating the children to his advantage with extreme Parental Alienation… Nothing was either mentioned about his lies. The Court said he did nothing wrong in abducting my children against a Court Order. They looked for ways to praise him instead of seeing him for the calculating lying manipulative abductor that he was.

Legal witnesses were dismissed as irrelevant with judges stating that I had been given too much advice, was focused on the law instead of the fact my children were in Norway, referring to me being the abductor for taking my children home after my marriage failed, having spent only some 200 days in Norway during a temporary reconciliation of marriage period, all despite the fact that I had rights of custody and legal agreements in place.

I moved to Norway to be near my children after they were abducted. Even then I never got a fair hearing. There has been no equality in the law for me.

What is very clear however is that if you’re Norwegian it’s accepted by the Courts, the Norwegian Ministry, the authorities, the psychologists, everywhere you look, it’s accepted for you to go to other countries and abduct your children against your spouse’s custody rights and Court Orders without any fear of repercussion in the Norwegian Courts for doing it. And we only have to look at the Skah case to see this.

Sadly for me, there were no Jersey Elite Soldiers with ties to the UK Intelligence Service to smuggle my children out of Norway back to Jersey on a sailboat. I took the legal route and abided by the law… did it help me?… NO!

Norway took my children regardless of the law. They ripped a Mother out of the lives of three small children whom they had lived with all their life, a happy life full of love and security. They gave them to their abductor on a silver plate after a well planned and calculated abduction by their Norwegian father and grandfather!

This is how Norway treats foreign parents.

Published by: ABP World Group International Child Recovery Services

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

 

Er det greit å bortføre egne barn til Norge?


Kilde: Bortført.no

Britiske Christines tre barn, 10, 9 and 5 år gamle, ble bortført fra Jersey til Norge i 2005 av sin norske far. Christines ublide møte med norske myndigheter skildres i A-magasinets artikkel ”Dømt til å tape” 11.03.11.


Etter borføringen valgte Christine å flytte til Norge for å være nær barna. Henne ubeskjedne ønske om 50 % omsorg for barna ble avslått av norsk rettsvesen, og domstolen valgte i stedet å gi henne noen usle timers samvær under rigid tilsyn av farens venner, av frykt for at moren skulle ta med seg barna tilbake til Jersey. Barnebortføreren fikk altså rettens beskyttelse, mens moren som ble frarøvet barna ble straffet. Gerard Baudains, tidligere parlamentariker i House of Lords, sier til Aftenposten: ”Det norske rettsystemet er like korrupt som et hvilket som helst land i den tredje verden.” Foto: Marie Von Krogh

I norske domstoler blir familiesaker hemmeligholdt som om rikets sikkerhet skulle stå på spill. Angivelig er årsaken at individet skal skjermes, men når man ser hvilke represalier mennesker som prøver å eksponere domstolene blir utsatt for,synes det som om det egentlige målet er å beskytte domstolene.

Når britiske parlamentarikere sammenligner det norske rettsystemet med tilstander man finner i Uganda, maner det til ettertanke. For eksempel er det uforståelig for briter at norske domstoler ikke benytter stenografer eller lydopptak. Like ubegripelig er det at sakkyndige psykologer skriver lange rapporter med bombastiske konklusjoner etter kun å ha snakket med et menneske i 45 minutter. Der er også problematisk at den samme gjengen sakkyndige begår liknende overgrep i sak etter sak. I Storbritannia og andre vestlige land finnes det standardiserte rutiner for bruk av sakkyndige, men altså ikke i annerledeslandet Norge.


Christine flyttet etter de bortførte barna sine, og norsk rett straffet henne med en samværsordning som ikke kan kalle noe annet enn nedverdigende og en belastende for både mor og barn. Aftenpostens journalist Karine Østtveit beskriver det slik: “Det er denne typen samvær foreldre i tunge barnevernssaker får; de samme smulene av familieliv som rusmissbrukere og voldsdømte kan bli tilkjent. I Christines tilfelle var det aldri snakk om rus eller vold. Dommerens frykt for at hun skulle ta med barna ut av landet, førte til at hun mistet både foreldreansvaret og normalt helgesamvær. – En vanlig ressurssterk norsk mor ville aldri fått så lite samvær . Det er ingen tvil om det, mener advokat Tone  Linn Thingvold.”

Norsk rettsvesen like korrupt som i Uganda?

Jersey er en kronbesittelse av Storbritannia, og innbyggerne har britiske pass. Selv om Jersey har sitt eget innenriksstyre, styres utenrikspolitikken fra London. Jersey er en av De Britiske Øyer og Storbritannia har tiltrådt Haagkonvensjonen, slik at det ville være naturlig om norske myndigheter betraktet disse tre barna som britiske statsborgere (hvilket de er) og returnere dem i samsvar konvensjonen. I stedet har Justisdepartementet og domstolen drevet juridisk flisespikkeri og definert Jersey utenfor britisk konvensjonsområde, uten å begrunne hvorfor – et trekk som gjerne deles med land vi helst ikke liker å sammenlikne oss med.

Christine forteller at barnas farfar, som foretok selve bortføringen sammen med sønnen, er en innflytelsesrik mann pensjonert fra ledende stilling i Statoil. Det er også påfallende at farens prosesskriv var forfattet, og at barna var registrert i Folkeregisteret, med morens forfalskede underskrift, i god tid før bortføringen fant sted. Barnebortførerne hadde også drevet lobbyvirksomhet hos Justisdepartementet.

Den britiske parlamentarikeren Gerard Baudains (bildet) sendte en diplomatisk note til Justisdepartementet hvor han anmodet om at departementet anerkjente kjennelsen fra britisk rett som slår fast at Christines er tilkjent daglig omsorg, og at barna derfor ble ulovlig bortført fra britisk territorium. Justisdepartementet avslo anmodningen. Og som det ikke det var nok ble Baudains nektet å vitne da saken ble behandlet i domstolen!

Justisdepartementets stassekretær Astri Aas-Hansen understreker ovenfor Aftenposten at Christines sak ikke er en konvensjonssak, og at det derfor er opp til norske domstoler å avgjøre saken.  Slik unngår hun selve kardinalspørsmålet, nemlig hvordan Justisdepartementet makter å definere barn med fullt britisk statsborgerskap som ikke tilhørende Haagkonvensjonen.

Tradisjonen tro begrunner ikke Aas-Hansen sin tolkning, men andre gjør: Statsadvokaten på Jersey informerte Justisdepartementet allerede i 2005 at ”Jersey er en av De Britiske Øyer og at Hennes Majestets Regjering i Storbritannia representerer Jersey i utenriksspørsmål”.  Heller ikke finner norsk Høyesterett eller Justisdepartementet det interessant at morens signatur til Folkeregisteret var forfalsket, igjen et trekk som gjerne assosieres med U-land, og ikke siviliserte rettsstater.

Kjell Schevig

Les også Christines egen beskrivelse: “ABDUCTED TO
NORWAY”

Les også Aftenpostens artikkel: Fortvilte foreldre ber om hjelp


Published by: ABP World Group International Child Recovery Services

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook


Mexico’s kidnapping nightmare


In 2008, a thousand people were kidnapped in Mexico according to official data, though the real figure is claimed to be at least three times more, and the phenomenon is increasing dramatically.

Three years ago, Hugo Wallace was kidnapped. Kidnappers wanted his money so they led him into a trap and killed him.

And Hugo Wallace is not an isolated case. In Mexico, kidnapping is big business. As France and Mexico negotiate the case of Florence Cassez, a French woman convicted of kidnapping, FRANCE 24 takes you to a country were over a thousand were kidnapped last year.

In Mexico, a country rife with corruption, our reporters met the victims as well as the authorities who are meant to be fighting this plague. Families who have a lost a member to kdinapping assaults must cope with an inefficient and sometimes complicit police.

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

profile pic.jpg

ABP World Group Risk Management

Contact us here: Mail

NOTE: We are always available 24/7

(646) 502-7443 United States

069 2547 2471 Germany

020 3239 0013 United Kingdom

01 442 9322 Ireland

031-753 83 77 Sweden

Barn bortføres til Norge – Aftenposten 13 Mars


Fortvilte foreldre ber om hjelp

Av: Roald Ramsdal, Aftenposten.no

Norske ekspartnere bortfører barn fra blant annet USA og Sverige – til Norge. fortvilte foreldre i utlandet ber sikkerhetseksperter om råd for å få barna tilbake. 30 barn ble bortført til Norge ifjor. i 2009 og 2008 var tallet henholdsvis 28 barn og 15 barn viser tall fra Justisdepartementet og Utenriksdepartementet. antallet barnebortføringssaker til Norge i 2010 er det høyeste siden JD og UD startet å føre felles statistikk i 2004.

A-Magasinet skrev Fredag om Christine fra Jersey, som opplevde at hennes to barn ble bortført til Norge av hennes norske eksmann. Til tross for at britisk rett har gitt henne foreldreansvaret for barna, støtter flere norske rettsinnstanser den norske faren.

Vi har fått flere forespørsler fra foreldre i utlandet som har opplevd at barna deres har blitt bortført til Norge av den andre forelderen, sier Martin Waage. Han er  Europasjef  for det internasjonelle sikkerhetsselskapet ABP World Group Ltd., som blant annet har spesialisert seg på å hente hjem bortførte barn. Pr. dags dato er det ikke blitt noen oppdrag etter henvendelsene. Når det eventuelt blir aktuell, vil vi nok behandle disse sakene på lik linje med saker der barn er bortført fra Norge til utlandet forteller Waage.

Dårlig rettssikkerhet

Han forteller om henvendelser både fra Europe, land i midtøsten og Nord Afrika. De fortvilede foreldrene spør Waage hva de kan gjøre for å vinne frem med sakene sine i det norske rettssystemet. Det er vanskelig å gi gode råd. Jeg råder dem til å skaffe seg en så god advokat som mulig. Advokaten må ha kompetanse på barnebortføringssaker, og helst være profilert sier Waage. Han mener rettssikkerheten til utenlandske statsborgere ikke er god i barnebortføringssaker der den som har bortført barnet er norsk statsborger, – Utenlanddske statsborgere får ofte ingen rettferdig behandling i det norske rettssystemet i disse sakene. De har egentlig ikke så mye annet valg enn å skaffe seg en veldig bra norsk advokat  – eller å få hentet ut ungene fra Norge. Sjansen for å vinne gjennom i rettssystemet er veldig liten sier Waage.

Han mener selv om både Norge og eventuelt det landet barnet er bortført fra har signert Haagkonvensjonen, så hjelper det lite. Han forteller at ABP World Group forholder seg til internasjonelle lover, konvensjoner og rettskraftige dommer når de vurderer om de skal takke ja til et oppdrag. Ifølge Waage ville det ha vært uaktuellt for ABP å hjelpe faren med å hente Christines to barn til Norge. – Vi er nødt til å forholde oss til gjeldende rettsavgjørelser. Det hadde være mer aktuelt for oss å hjelpe moren med å få barna tilbake til Jersey sier Waage.

Les hele historien i Aftenpostens papirutgave idag.

Les mer om Christines sak her: Det Norske rettssystemet er korrupt

Published by: ABP World Group International Child Recovery Services

Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook


Det Norske rettssystemet er korrupt


Kilde: A-Magasinet, Karine Østtveit 11.3.2011

Opprørte politikere: “Jeg kan nesten ikke tro det. Dette er ting man forventer av land som Uganda – ikke fra Norge”

På telefon fra Jersey er tidligere parlamentsmedlem Gerard Baudains opprørt.

Tidligere samme dag har han sendt en e-post: “Det norske rettsystemet er like korrupt som hvilket som helst land i den tredje verden.. Ring meg.”


Jeg tror jeg har brukt flere hundre timer på denne saken. Vi har forøkt alt. Reiser, møter, brev, telefoner –  ingenting har nyttet. norske myndigheter vil ikke høre. Hvem har ellers engasjert seg på Jersey? – Mange, svært mange. Lederen for parlamentet på Jersey og jeg har flere ganger diskutert denne saken spesifikt. Jeg tror de fleste parlaments-medlemmene er klar over den sier Baudains.

På ett tidspunkt var han også innkalt som vitne, for å redegjøre for Jerseys holdning i saken. Politikeren reiste til Norge for å foklare Jerseys standpunkt – men da han kom hit, ville ikke dommeren tillate vitnesbyrdet hans. Også ved den britiske ambassaden har man jobbet mye med Christines sak. – I denne saken ble det faktisk vurdert å sende en formell note til det norske justisdepartementet for å klage på behandlingen Christine fikk.

Les hele historien i A-Magasinet sin reportasje i dag.

Published by: ABP World Group International Child Recovery Services
Follow our updates on Twitter and Facebook

NOTE: We are always available. 24/7

U.S Phone Number: (646) 502-7443
UK Phone Number: 020 3239 0013 –
Or you can call our 24h Emergency phone number: +47 45504271