In particular, in the case of Article 13/b of the Convention, which determines the circumstances in which the return of a child may be refused, the Turkish courts have repeatedly interpreted this Article broadly, which is contrary to the objectives of the Convention. However, such judgments are often overturned by the Court of Appeal, which has the advantage of being known and informed of the Convention, given that all disputed return cases from The Hague are seen by the same circle of courts of appeal, i.e. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. The Criminal Code of the Republic of Moldova, adopted on 18 April 2002, does not recognize the abduction of relatives as a crime. However, the Code stipulates that the abduction of a child by a close relative is an offence punishable by a fine, community service for a maximum of 240 days or six months in prison. In addition, it is not uncommon for the prosecutor involved in the case to be transferred to another position in the middle of the proceedings, resulting in the appointment of a new prosecutor for the case, which prolongs and interrupts the trial. If the child is sufficiently old and mature to take into account his or her views under article 13/2, the court shall appoint an expert who may not be aware of the parental alienation syndrome that will frequently occur in cases of abduction, which should be taken into account in taking into account the child`s point of view. It is therefore important that the abandoned parent is represented by a legal expert who can follow the process on an ongoing and committed basis. If a child is abducted in Iran in violation of a foreign custody order and that foreign order is already registered with the Iranian consulate, the enforcement process and investigation can begin immediately.
. . .