@Everyonesinvited if you can't see how you've taken a ridiculous tangent in making any correlation between OP situation and Rotherham you clearly have no sense of comprehension.
Rotherham- safeguarding issues took place in the U.K, all the organisations that let them were enhanced DBS checked employees, some of these girls were in care (once again their carers let them down), some at home (parents let them down), the Rotherham girls (as a result of institutional failures) then fell victim to peadophiles.
OP situation- DC father who until a few months ago was married to and living in the family home wants to take his DC to visit his family, ExH is excited for his children to visit the country of his birth, ExH has financial means to ensure DC have a great holiday, ExH has booked a return flight for him and the kids plus has significant ties to the U.K. ExH also offered that OP could come on the trip but potentially would need to cover her flight.
Please explain the correlation to the two scenarios?
Let's be clear OPs concern was never about Cameroon, her ex treatment of DC or anything nefarious. She was upset about the duration of the visit.
Let's also be clear if a parent wanted to abduct DC they could just as easily say we're going to furtaventura or Disney land for the weekend then absconded. This is not the case for OP.
Finally, all this spouting about The Hague convention. There have been plenty of stories of kids being spirited away by parents from the U.K. to the US and Canada. Nobody seems concerned about that.
Your comments are ridiculous and routed in racist stereotypes and statements that are spout as fact. Shame on you