Documents expose deep divisions between Canberra and Tokyo on abducted children

The Australian government raised the abduction of dozens of Australian children in meetings with Japan at the Quad and rejected the Japanese ambassador’s objection to using the term abduction, highlighting the deep division between Tokyo and Canberra on one of their most sensitive diplomatic disputes.

New documents released under freedom of information laws show Australian officials slapped down claims by former Japanese ambassador Shingo Yamagami that the removal of the Australian children by a Japanese parent was not abduction or in breach of Japan’s international obligations.

Former Japanese ambassador Shingo Yamagami. Credit: Alex Ellinghausen

“We have reviewed the use of the terminology ‘abduction’,” the documents state. “The term is appropriate for both the Australian domestic context and is consistent with international legal definitions and The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.”

Yamagami was replaced as ambassador in April.

Briefing documents for the fourth Quad foreign ministers meeting in February last year reveal that Australian officials had grown frustrated with Tokyo’s inertia on the abduction issue.

“What we want: co-operation on child abduction and custody issues,” the briefing states.

The blunt assessment was made ahead of the foreign ministers meeting at Japan’s highest-profile international forum, the Quad, established by former prime minister Shinzo Abe to bring together the leaders of Japan, Australia, the United States and India.

The rebuke is a further blow to Japan’s international standing on the issue after Japanese government MPs labelled the situation embarrassing.

In March, this masthead and 60 Minutes revealed at least 82 Australian children had been taken by their Japanese parents under the country’s sole-custody laws, which give one parent total control over a child’s future, triggering a race to snatch children both inside and outside Japan. The reporting was raised in the US Congress before a House foreign affairs committee hearing in May.

“We owe it to the children and their families to resolve these abductions and to work to prevent them,” said Michelle Bernier-Toth, the US State Department’s special adviser for children’s issues.

US officials estimate more than 400 American children have been taken by their Japanese parent over the past two decades, while hundreds more have come from Europe and the United Kingdom.

The new documents also reveal that the Australian embassy has been co-ordinating its response to the child abductions with other Japanese partners and with the European Union’s embassy in Tokyo, a move that could be seen as interfering in Japan’s internal affairs.

The Japanese embassy in Canberra said it was not in a position to comment on the documents or refer to the details of diplomatic exchange with the government of Australia.

“The government of Japan will continue discussions on the custody system after divorce while listening to a wide range of diverse opinions both domestically and internationally,” a spokesman said.

It has previously denied that Japan’s sole-custody laws facilitated child abduction and said they were designed to protect partners fleeing abusive relationships. The Japanese government has announced a review of the system, and recommendations are expected to be handed down by the end of this year.

Australian mothers and fathers say they are running out of time to see their children again.

“The Japanese government are on the beat. The day after my son turned 16 they sent me a letter saying nothing with regards to The Hague Convention is applicable any more,” said Australian parent Scott Ellis, who has not seen his children, Mera and Telina, since they were taken to Japan from his home in Queensland four years ago.

The international treaty to return abducted children to their home country was signed by Japan in 2014, three decades after it was first enacted.

Scott Ellis with his children, Mera and Telina

“It was Christmas Day. I rang, rang, rang, rang, no answer, no answer. So, I rang the police in the local town over there, and I got them to do a welfare check on the kids. At 8pm that night, the police got back to me, the kids are fine, but you’re gonna need a lawyer,” Ellis said.

“I would never have dreamt that anything like this could possibly have ever happened to me.”

Ellis, who ran outdoor education camps and his own security firm on the Sunshine Coast, rang the Australian government for advice.

“They said it happens with Japan. It’s a child abduction case. And I’ll tell you, man, it will be the worst time of your life. We will have no success,” he said. “But these are the processes you can go through.”

Four years later, Ellis does not know where his children are. His ex-wife was contacted for comment.

“I’ve taken thousands of children on school camps and I cannot speak to nor see my own two children,” he said. “It’s devastating, absolutely devastating there’s no other way of putting it.”

Ellis and Australian mother Catherine Henderson, who has not seen her children in four years, want the Australian government to publicly condemn the Japanese government’s actions after years of quiet diplomacy.

“Albo, get on it,” said Ellis, referring to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. “Don’t avoid this topic. These are little Aussie kids. Why is this happening? It’s not just my case. There are so many cases of this. Japan’s laws are just out of touch with today’s world. It’s 100 per cent wrong.”

The newly released documents show the Australian government wrestling with questions about how to handle the fallout over a landmark military reciprocal access agreement with Japan signed in 2021.

“Why did Australia sign a significant defence agreement with Japan while our children are still missing?” the DFAT talking points asked.

The briefing notes also formulate responses to why Canberra has been less vocal on the issue than other governments.

“Why doesn’t Australia make a public statement on this issue when other countries (such as France, Italy, Lithuania and now the US) are publicly supporting affected parents? Why won’t the Australian ambassador meet with us?”

The documents advised former foreign minister Marise Payne to respond: “We consider targeted and sustained advocacy on child custody with the Japanese government and other stakeholders is the best approach to support favourable outcomes for parents – and will be more effective in seeking family law reform.

“This issue remains a priority for the Australian government”

But the documents also reveal the department and the embassy in Tokyo implemented one blanket response for all individual cases.

“What is the government doing to assist Mr X/Ms X (whose children have been abducted by their spouse in Japan)? Due to privacy, it is not appropriate to comment on individual cases.”

The documents show the department and embassy cancelled group meetings with parents after recordings of Australian officials criticising the Japanese government were leaked to this masthead in 2021 and later posted on TikTok.

“Due to privacy considerations of consular clients, as well as in relation to our staff, we are not planning to continue group sessions at this stage,” the internal emails show.

Get a note directly from our foreign correspondents on what’s making headlines around the world. Sign up for the weekly What in the World newsletter here.