Background History
16.The parties met online in about 2013 when M was living in The Gambia and the father in England. F is 57 and M is 34. He has 3 daughters, now adult, from an earlier relationship: PHS2, PHS3 and PHS. He travelled to The Gambia with a friend of his who already had a partner from The Gambia in order to meet M for the first time on about 13 April 2013. A sexual relationship started and the parties married in The Gambia on 18 April 2013 just a few days after they met. F converted to Islam, the religion of M, taking the Islamic name of O which is also the name of M’s father. F then returned to England alone but worked towards bringing M to England. He was able to obtain a visa for M to enter in the UK in December 2014 when she was already pregnant with H who was born the following May. 17.The birth was very painful for the mother because she had been subjected to FGM as a 12-month old baby. On 11 May 2015, the midwifery services referred the family to local social services (UK City County Council) because of the risk of FGM. It appears that no further action was taken. Nothing was done to prevent M, F and H travelling to The Gambia in 2016 for a short break to visit the maternal family. They all returned safely to England.18.The parties separated in January 2017 when M and H were placed in a refuge. H had no direct contact with F and so proceedings were issued by F. In those proceedings, M made serious allegations of domestic abuse against F in respect of herself and H. 19.The nature of the parties’ relationship was investigated by Her Honour Judge Smith at a fact-finding hearing in 2019 as a prelude to determining F’s application for a contact/spends time order. Despite the vehement denials of F and his case of fabrication against M, the judge made serious findings of sexual abuse against F including vaginal, anal and oral rape, sexual abuse, physical violence and psychological abuse, but absolved him of physically or emotionally abusing H. I have read her judgment. It has not been appealed and no-one has suggested I should re-visit her findings which I therefore adopt in their entirety. However F continues to deny the findings made against him, particularly that of rape.20.The father appears to have raised the issue of paternity in those earlier proceedings but only very late on and as a challenge to the Child Maintenance Service when he was assessed for child support. He did not pursue the issue in the court proceedings as to do so was inconsistent with his plea for contact as H’s father. No paternity tests were therefore directed. 21.Those proceedings concluded on 16 August 2019 with an order providing for H to have supervised time with F for a minimum of 2 hours every fortnight. 22.In September 2020 F issued a fresh application for a child arrangements order because he alleged contact was not happening. H was joined as a party following reports from Cafcass identifying a risk of FGM leading to the extant FGM protection orders and worldwide travel ban. The risk assessment which was carried out on 24 May 2021 does not identify any particular development since H’s birth but identifies a number of risk factors linked to the propensity of FGM in The Gambia and concern about the inability of M to protect H.23.Accordingly the children’s guardian made an application for an FGM protection order with the result that orders were made as was outlined above.24.H has remained living in England with M. They are both British citizens and both have British passports. Neither has any travel document issued by The Gambia. She attends a local school. She shares a bedroom in a two-bedroomed property with her mother; the other bedroom is currently occupied by her maternal uncle, MU, who is 18 and in England for educational purposes. M works as a part-time housekeeper at a local hotel. In her evidence she disclosed to me that she had a boyfriend, a Portuguese national who was born in The Gambia. He has met H but does not live with her. 25.H had some contact with F in December 2021 until February 2022 supervised by PHS2. Sadly there was a huge family argument between him and PHS2 which stopped her agreeing to supervise contact. He has tried to re-start contact, but no alternative suggestions for a supervisor appear to have been made on behalf of M. I have not investigated why this happened but I accept it was not for want of trying by F. Following a hearing before me, it was agreed that contact should re-start by remote contact. H has now had 2 remote contacts by video in December 2022 and one in January 2023.26.F has undertaken a DAPP (Domestic Abuse Perpetrator Programme) with a local agency and has engaged positively. The guardian reports that he was able to demonstrate insight into his domestic abuse, despite denying the findings to me27.H has continued to see PHS2 and PHS3 who she sees as her sisters. PHS2 in particular has provided support to H and M, but remains estranged from her father.28.M has undertaken a FGM awareness course.