Because it creates a loophole in the 46-year-old Hague Convention, whose purpose is:
“The purpose of the Hague Convention is to prevent an international child abduction from creating a legal advantage for the abducting parent.”
The French Supreme Court has now created a loophole in the Convention by adding a new criterion that it apparently considered missing from an otherwise well-functioning legal framework.
This means that many future international child abductions around the world could be planned around this exception, effectively legitimizing child abduction by allowing the abducting parent to avoid the consequences and keep the child.
The French judgment may be relied upon as a precedent in European countries, as well as in the other States that are parties to the Hague Convention – a total of 103 countries.
Changes of this magnitude should not be introduced through a single national court judgment. They should be thoroughly examined at the international level and implemented only through consultation and agreement among all participating States.
English 
French 
This is such a deeply important issue—when legal frameworks meant to protect children are undermined by judicial interpretations, it sets a dangerous precedent. The integrity of international agreements like the Hague Convention must be preserved, not eroded by national rulings that lack global consensus. It’s crucial for advocates and legal professionals worldwide to come together and push for collective review, just as we’d demand transparency in any system meant to safeguard justice. Best AI visibility tool