Call Us: US - +1 845 478 5244 | UK - +44 20 7193 7850 | AUS - +61 2 8005 4826

international obligations of the Member States

It is submitted that a concept of judicial jurisdiction over matters as closely identified with child welfare as are custody and adoption should be based on factors which relate to the ability of a judge to fulfill the functions for which judicial intervention is provided. These functions consist primarily of the exercise of discretion in such a manner as to provide a proper environment for the child whose custody or adoption is in issue. It is believed that the purposes of judicial control can be best fulfilled at the actual residence of the child or at the residence of the petitioner because a court sitting at either place is likely to have greater facilities for proper investigation than the courts at any other place. It is possible, however, that conditions may be such as would enable the courts at some other place to make the proper investigation. But, in any event, the boundary lines of jurisdiction to adopt or to award custody, if they are to be at all satisfactory, should be drawn with the thought in mind that the objective of the proceedings in both instances is the welfare of the child.