A court of this State may refuse to apply this Act when the child custody law of the other country violates basic principles relating to the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. The same concept is found in of the Section 20 of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (return of the child may be refused if this would not be permitted by the fundamental principles of the requested State relating to the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms). In applying subsection (3), the court's scrutiny should be on the child custody law of the foreign country and not on other aspects of the other legal system. This Act takes no position on what laws relating to child custody would violate fundamental freedoms. While the provision is a traditional one in international agreements, it is invoked only in the most egregious cases.

This section is derived from Section 23 of the UCCJA.

Law reviews. For article, "The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act and the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act", see 11 Colo. Law. 1224 (1982). For article, "Interstate Custody Problems Revisited", see 11 Colo. Law. 2596 (1982).

Annotator's note. Since § 14-13-104 is similar to § 14-13-124 as it existed prior to the 2000 repeal and reenactment of this article, relevant cases construing that provision have been included in the annotations to this section.

The general policies of the UCCJA apply to recognition and enforcement of custody decrees from other countries. In re Jeffers and Makropoulos, 992 P.2d 686 (Colo. App. 1999).

Applied in Woodhouse v. District Court, 196 Colo. 558, 587 P.2d 1199 (1978).