A mother-of-four who watched two of her minor sons being allegedly forcefully dragged away by State officials enforcing a family court decision in favour of the father they refused to see, has described her traumatic experience in court.

The case unfolded on Tuesday when the 45-year-old mother accompanied her 11 and 7-year-old boys to the offices of the Child Protection Services agency to comply with a decree recently delivered by a family court.

That decree was the latest in an ongoing legal battle between the estranged parents of the two boys, who together with their 14 and 9-year-old siblings, have been caught up in the crossfire during the couple’s separation proceedings.

The main bone of contention between the estranged couple concerns access to the children since all four sons have refused to meet their father for reasons stemming from very negative past experiences.

In a judicial protest filed on Wednesday the mother’s lawyer, Edward Gatt, described how officers from the police Vice Squad, “very actively assisted” by a court-appointed psychotherapist together with agency officials, had resorted to “great force” to remove the two young children from their mother.

The boys were taken away to be handed to their father where they are expected to remain for the next month.

Whilst not divulging details about the boys’ reasons to refuse to see their father, “so as to spare them further harm,” the lawyer explained that the family court had authorised the Child Protection Services to take away the two brothers, through the assistance of police and court officials, if necessary.

Though well aware of the “great difficulties” awaiting the children, “at a time when they should be enjoying their summer holidays,” the family court judge had decreed in such manner, the lawyer said in the protest.

Since that traumatic episode, the mother was totally in the dark about whether her sons had suffered any injuries during the forceful removal, while plans to take away the other two siblings were in the pipeline.

It was inconceivable  how these children, who had been through past traumatic experiences, should end up being subjected to such treatment that could only result in “enormous psychological harm.”

All this had happened “with the blessing” of the parties against whom the judicial protest was being filed, namely Steve Libreri, in his own capacity and as manager at Child Protection Services, the Police Commissioner, Claire Francica as court expert and the father, the protest said.

Names of both parents were being withheld so as to safeguard the four minors.

Ever since their marriage breakdown in 2016, life for the estranged couple and their offspring has been an endless saga played out mainly before the family court which, after granting the father supervised access, had subsequently denied him all access.

After hearing the three elder children in chambers, the judge had suspended access unless the minors themselves wanted to see their father.

But the father filed constitutional proceedings claiming a breach of his right to family life.

His claim was upheld and the court directed both parents to attend family therapy sessions so as to pave the path to rebuilding access to the father.

The father also took his grievances before the European Court of Human Rights and although the case was filed against the State represented by the Attorney General, the mother was not notified and those proceedings were wrapped up without her being heard by that court.

The Family Court appointed a number of experts, including a psychotherapist, who reverted back that they could not fulfil their brief because the boys would not, in any way, go to their father.

The matter thus ended in the lap of the Child Protection Services, resulting in Tuesday’s incident, the judicial protest explained.

Whilst agreeing to the father’s access, the mother protested about the “force” used to achieve this, pointing out that such methods would certainly not draw the children any closer to their father, instilling in the minors a sense of mistrust towards the institutions.

The mother through her protest, asked the parties to immediately stop from causing further physical and psychological harm through their advice and deeds.

Lawyer Edward Gatt signed the judicial protest.