AN independent investigation should be launched into the DCD's handling of an international custody battle, State Parliament has been told.

And the timing of the Family Court decision to send the children overseas has been criticised by Leschenault MP Dan Sullivan.

The case involves a 10-year-old girl and her eight-year-old brother who were in Department of Community Development care for 20 months after being brought back secretly to Perth on the orders of the High Court of Zurich.

They had been abducted to Switzerland on false passports by their mother five years earlier.

Earlier this year, Justice Julienne Penny ruled they should be returned to their Swiss-born mother.

Mr Sullivan said DCD case officers and psychologists should be suspended if there was any suspicion of conspiracy.

He told parliament that if there was no evidence that the father had abused the children there could only be one conclusion.

``That is that officers from the Department for Community Development deliberately contrived to prevent (the father) from developing a normal relationship and strong parental bonds with his children in order to jeopardise his chances of gaining fair access to his children through the Family Court,'' he said.

Mr Sullivan said the Shared Parenting Council of Australia claimed there was firm evidence that at least one, if not two, of the 23 DCD employees or consultants involved in the case had committed serious breaches of procedure.

``Concerns have been raised that these officers conducted a seemingly personal vendetta of revenge for allegations made about the department by (the father),'' he said.

``Despite allegations from (the mother), the Family Court judge has repeatedly determined that (the father) has committed no offence.''

He said an officer from the DCD told the court that department actions were because ``where there is smoke there is fire''.

``This appears to have been sole reason given by the Department for Community Development for its extraordinary actions in this matter,'' Mr Sullivan said.

He asked the Community Development Minister David Templeman questions about the case to determine whether the department had acted properly or whether its officers had acted in a ``biased, destructive and vindictive way''.

If that was the case, he said the minister had no option but to suspend the officers and instigate an independent inquiry.

He understood that the department placed the children in foster care largely because it believed they did not speak good English.

``I have in my hands a DVD of the daughter's recent birthday party. It shows clearly both children thoroughly enjoying themselves, with lots of friends and extended family members and, guess what, they both speak fluent English,'' he told parliament.

In the first week of July, amendments made to the Family Law Act introduced an equal and shared parenting responsibility.

``Amazingly, just days before the amended law came into effect, Justice Penny ordered that the children be returned to their mother in Switzerland,'' Mr Sullivan said.

``It seems that decision was made on that date quite deliberately to ensure that (the father) could not benefit from the new shared parenting, or father-friendly, components of the amended Family Law Act.''

Mr Sullivan said Justice Penny never met or interviewed the children. He also questioned why the DCD, or the judge, never explored the option of bringing the mother back to Perth ``so the children could be brought up in a shared parenting environment''.

SOURCE: The Sunday Times Newspaper - Western Australia

Reporter: Nick Taylor

September 02, 2006 04:00pm

http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,20339257-2761,00.html

Comments (5)

Show/Hide comments Another stuff up by those empowered to 'manipulate' justice in Australia written by Malcolm Town on December 27, 2006 The family Court's power has to be taken away from the judiciary and given to the rank and file, by anarchy if necessary. It is time to overthrow the power of this Court by the people. Know the kids written by school mum on September 3, 2006 I actually know of the children involved as the daughter is in my own daughters class. The daughter is bubbly and talkative and does not seem outwardly to have any major problems. She has a number of friends. In the past few weeks the class has been having weekly excursions which I on an occasion I accompanied the class as did the Father involved in this case. The daughter was beaming and outwardly proud to have her Dad there. She simply glowed and showed that she was very happy to have him there as she is when her Dad and step-mum pick her and her brother up from school. Her little brother always is smiling and chatty both of the children speak English incredibly well. On Friday I actually spoke to the step-mum when she picked up the daughter and whilst my own daughter was wishing the daughter all the best. I said to the step-mum that i hoped she was okay and that her husband and herself would be able to see the children. Her reply is that she hoped they would be able to, but that it is very unlikely that the Mother would comply to any court orders and that most likely she would cease contact, when the children return to Switzerland. There we tears in this step-mums eyes and my heart went out to her, you could tell she truly loved these children. I spoke to my own daughter later and she informed me that the daughter had told her that she couldn't find her step-sister at lunch and found out that she (step-sister) had to go home from school early as she was really upset and was crying about them (the children) leaving and that her mum had to come and get her from school. Many parents at the school have been speaking about this case and are puzzled to the courts decision, to remove two Australian children from a Father and an environment where they are happy and content. Immediate Investigation required written by Wayne on September 3, 2006 I cannot believe what DCD has been able to get away with in this case! It is totally appaling the way this father and the children have been treated. The children were not given a chance to reunify with their father and instead himself and his family treated like they had done something wrong when it is THE MOTHER THAT IS THE CRIMINAL. CD wre never working withthe father and instead worked against him and conspired with the Mother to ensure that the children would be returned to her. I read in last weekends Sunday paper that the DCD were trying to get the children flown out before fathers day. I only hope that they were not succesfull and that the children get to spend Father's day with their Dad. the departure of the children needs to be stopped immediately leaving Australia whilst an investigation is sought into DCD and maybe an appeal or retrial whatever is deemed the correct proceedure. Again this shows the contempt of DCD and how they were not going to allow the children to spend their last fathers day with their Dad. Given the Mother's past history I really doubt if he and his extended family will ever again have contact with the children. CD Have a lot to answer for! Also what has the children's lawyer/representative done in this case, it seems that the judge and the child representatvie, have let DCD rule this whole case DCD / Family Court conspiracy written by glenda on September 3, 2006 I was in court during this trial for a personal matter and actually sat in court when the DCD psychologist was on the witness stand, I can only comment that she was extremely arrogant, and I believed herself and DCD believe they are a law untoi themselves. The DCD psych ADMITTED TO DESTROYING (SHREDDED) EVDIENCE ON THE MOTHERS BEHALF WHICH SHE CONSPIRED WITH THE MOTHER. It also came out in evidence which mind you had to be suponead by the department of this action and the toal bias toward the Mother. I was confused in court as to who was th emother's representative and the DCD lawyer as they worked together for the Mother passing questions to each other to ask. I believe that this should have been a mistrial for the conspiracy between the Mother legal team and DCD's legal team. Again this shows the bias of our family court and that the fAther never had a chance. DCd even handed up a reunification plan for the return of the children to the Mother. But guess what one did not exist was for the reunification of the children to the Father. there needs to be an enquiry into DCd's handling of this case, they seem to be wasting precious staff on a vendetta against this father whilst letting little babies drown in a bath tub with a known criminal, but look at the DCD's history give the children yet again to the abuser, this time the emotional/ psychological abusing Mother.!!!!!!! Who knows maybe the DCD are waitng for these children to be also physically abused by their Mother. DCD = DESTROY CAPABLE DECENT DAD'S written by Narelle on September 3, 2006 I cannot believe what lengths the biased DCD organisation go through to destroy a father!! I actually am quite appalled by the handling of this case and basically the Dad did not have a chance when DCd were determined that the children were to be with the Mother and did everything to destroy the development of a normal relationship. Realistically it is only in the last few months that the Father has had a normal unsupervised relationship with the children, and I guarantee if the trial was held now or the childen asked what they wanted without the brainwashing and manipulating of DCD workers they would want to stay in a loving stable relationship with their Dad, step mum and step siblings. The judge has a lot to answer for obvioulsy she believed all the crap DCd told her OR WAS SHE COMPLACENT FOR ANOTHER REASON!!

Write comment

Name:

Email:

Title:

Comment:

Write the displayed characters Add Comment