South African mother ordered to return son to Denmark after midnight escape

A mother, who clandestinely took her six-year-old child in the middle of the night from where she and her now estranged husband lived in Denmark, has now been forced, through a court order, to return the child to her husband in Denmark.

The Central Authority of South Africa and the father of the child turned to the Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg, to enforce the terms of the Hague Convention relating to international child abduction, to which South Africa is a signatory.

The father told the court that the child should be returned to his country of habitual residence in Fredericia, Denmark, from where he was unlawfully removed in August and wrongfully retained by his mother.

The mother, on the other hand, claimed the father gave consent for her to bring the child with her to South Africa. She further argued that if returned, the child would be exposed to a grave risk of physical and psychological harm.

She relied heavily on the fact that the father, who has been diagnosed with bipolar mood disorder and who is in full-time employment as a civil engineer and travels extensively for work, does not have the capacity to look after a six-year-old boy.

According to the mother, she has always been the primary caregiver of the child and, in her view, her son would be completely lost without her.

She told the court that her husband consented that she give birth to their second child in South Africa and that she and the newborn, as well as her son, could return to Denmark in a few months. The man, on the other hand, said he insisted that she give birth in Denmark.

The husband is a South African currently living and working in Denmark as an engineer. The woman is a Zimbabwean national, and the two got married in South Africa in May 2018. They have been living in Denmark since 2019, where their son was born. She gave birth in South Africa to their second child a month ago.

While the wife claimed her husband gave consent to her via an email message to travel to South Africa, Judge Leicester Adams rejected this.

He pointed out that in both versions of the wife and the husband, they were at loggerheads at that time.

He pointed at evidence from the husband that the Denmark police were called to their home as the husband claimed his wife was “intoxicating him with illegal substances and trying to kill him”.

Shortly afterwards, the Family Court in Denmark, on request of the husband, issued a so-called notice of guidance against foreign travel and child abduction to both parents pending a custody case relating to the boy.

Judge Adams frowned upon the wife’s claims that, in the midst of all of the strife between them, the husband would suddenly give consent for her to remove the child from Denmark.

The judge ordered that the mother hand the child back to her husband within 10 days. If she failed to do so, the sheriff was given permission to find the child and execute this order.

The father, on the other hand, must ensure that his wife has a place to stay if she wants to return to Denmark in a few months.

When and if she returned, the boy may stay with her until final custody arrangements were made by the Danish legal authorities, the judge concluded.

Cape Times