0
A Nigerian woman resident in Germany, Mrs. Emem Hoffmann, married to a German, Mr. Jan Hoffmann, has continued demand to ascertain that her son, Uriah Hoffmann, forced into a foster care in Germany, about four years ago, is still alive and in good health.
The German authorities, at various levels of law enforcement and justice administration, have been using diverse decoy to frustrate Mrs. Emem Hoffmann from having access to her son, Uriah, to confirm the child’s health status or condition.
Mrs. Emem Hoffmann is demanding “proof of life of the child, with witnesses also viewing”; and “the release of the child according to the German and international law”; which stipulates that ‘a child having gone through such a horrific incident be immediately released’.
Emem was married to Mr. Jan Hoffmann, a German citizen, in 2017. Two years into the marriage, they had a male child, Uriah. Thereafter, the Nigerian woman began to notice strange and unethical attitude from the German husband. The husband indulged in pornography, sexual abuse of the baby, excessive alcoholic, leading to the breakup of the marriage, and divorce.
Mr. Jan Hoffmann, in …-divorce battle for the custody of their son, lied to the Pediatrician that their son, Uriah, had autism and deafness. He also lied that his wife, Emem, had mental ailment.
The false information made the German authorities take away Uriah from the mother, at the age of three years, and confined him to a foster care, inhabited by disabled children, on the order of the father, Jan Hoffmann, who has been manipulating the judicial processes to frustrate the Nigerian wife from accessing the child, who is now seven years.
The Bremen Ministry of Health conducted analysis and examination on the child, and the result showed that Uriah neither had autism nor deafness.
The Ministry of Health sent the report to pediatrician, Claudia Karstein, but the report is missing in the Family Court File.
Uriah has been at the foster care without parental care, or formal education.
Mr. Jan Hoffmann has failed to show fatherly responsibility for the child’s welfare over the years, but insisted on confining Uriah to the foster care.
Mrs. Emem Hoffmann, in April 2026, requested audience with her son in foster care. The administrators of the care home told her to allow them seek the consent of the boy to see his mother first before they will allow her access.
The email from Miranda Moshe, care home manager, thereafter, was that Emem’s child said “maybe”. Therefore, she cannot have access to her son; and they will try the question again after one month.
The questioning of the boy was sheer cover up story to prevent Mrs. Emem Hoffmann from seeing how skinny her child looks, and so, the child abuses can continue.
Curiously, Mr. Jan Hoffmann was never subjected to such questioning of the child and he is given access to him.
The mother is so much perturbed that she asks: “Where is my child?
“All these hiding I am experiencing, is my child still alive or still in good health?”
The compendium of the administrative manipulation of institutions against Mrs. Emem Hoffmann is reflected in the UN case: JAL 4/2025; Germany: 454/2025, Family court of Bremen 66 F 709/22 SO, 66 F 2142/22 UG, so documented.
Un Special Rapporteurs on Sale, Sexual exploitation and sexual abuse of children, in response to a petition by the Civil Liberties Organization, CLO, signed by Princewill Akpakpan, Head of Legal/Litigation Unit, referencing the Clause on Working Group Discrimination Against Women and Girls Based on Resolution 52/26,50/17 and 50/18, expressed concerns over allegations of sexual abuse against the then 6-year old child; lack of access to care and rehabilitation services; lack of access to justice, and neglect of general wellbeing of the child in alternative care placement.
The UN expressed concerns of “a strong allegation of violation of the child right to safety and protection from sexual abuse and right to maternity and access to justice – relevant authorities not doing enough to protect the child and stop abuse;” as well as “discrimination against the mother” because she raised accusation against the father but nothing was done to investigate the accusation.
Subsequently, the Federal Constitution court of Germany on the 8th of April 2026 issued a decision to an appeal, sent in by 3 judges, but not signed nor stamped. They refused to even hear the case; it was rejected at the admission stage. An appeal has been sent to a Judge but was never mentioned for adjudication.
The jugendamt – Youth Welfare Office – officer in charge of the child, Ms. Miranda-Mieske, was contacted to arrange a video meeting, she said she needs to ask Uriah, a 7-year-old child, if he wants to see his mother. This same question was not used when Uriah was forced to see his father two months after the incest assault in November 2022.
Meanwhile, Mr. Jan Hoffmann was given unsupervised access to Uriah, but the Nigerian mother was not.
On the 30th of April, 2026, Ms. Miranda-Mieske wrote that when Uriah was asked if he wants to see his mother -he said – “maybe” – and as such, she declined to arrange for a video meeting between Mrs. Emem Hoffmann and her son. This “maybe” statement was not verified as no proof of Uriah saying this was submitted, no video record. This questions the transparency of the process.
These questions were raised before Ms. Miranda-Mieske and are still outstanding, no response has been received.
The health status of Uriah has been a contentious issue since the mother last saw him in 2024. The perturbation is often watered down with general statement, like “he is doing well”. Such is not sufficient to explain the situation.
The authorities have failed to provide concrete information on the child such as: His daily routine – morning, afternoon, evening; rducational activities – school, kindergarten, or others; medical updates and full doctors’ reports from Berlin and Bremen – A copy of his U-Heft (medical booklet which contains hospital visits and immunizations – every page); Any developmental or psychological change/assessments which the mother needs to know, which her child did not have in her care in 2022, before the unlawful removal on September 15, 2022.
Furthermore, on the 19. March 2026, a court in Berlin-Tiergarten, where the family court of Bremen case officer, Ms. Tonia Martens, filed a report against Mrs. Emem Hofffmann for posting Uriah’s situations online. Berlin issued a decision, saying what Emem posted was classified as child pornography.
This is the same evidence Emem submitted to Bremen police and Bremen family court in 2022, and it was dismissed as age appropriate for a 3-year-old to be fingering his anus, while simultaneously, massaging his penis sexually and making sexual moans, mimicking a pornography scene with body gestures, which he was obviously exposed to by the father. This incident was observed and recorded immediately after contact with the German father on July 23, 2022.
According to Mrs. Hoffmann, “Mr. Jan Hoffmann has an addiction for pornography, alcohol and cigarettes, this is part of the cause for the separation and divorce”.
Since this incest report was made to the German authorities in Bremen, Emem has been on target for intimidation, harassment; she has been persecuted, and literally tortured psychologically by the Bremen authorities, who have done everything, including seizure of Uriah – the living evidence of the abuse.
To conceal the sex crime, and evade prosecution; the German national, Mr. Jan Hoffmann, born on the 5th February 1965, manipulates the entire process.
An application was filed for the re-opening of the case in Bremen with the new re-classification of the evidences previously submitted and dismissed, and also for the use of this new classification in the family court custody, visitation, alimony and divorce cases in Bremen, Germany.
A sharp retaliatory move was made after this, and it was the Bremen family court Judge, the 3rd Judge on the case, on the 7th of April 2026, Ms. Heiland, who issued a decision to partially withdraw Uriah ‘custody from me and the father (he does not want the child anyway) with reasons that Uriah has developmental problems and should remain is state custody.
This decision has been rejected by Mrs. Hoffmann, who appealed against it at the Bremen family Court. No response has been received to date.
According to Mrs. Emem Hoffmann, “Uriah is a child born on the 11th February 2019, with no development problem, his health score at birth was 10/10. His last health checks at the Bremen Ministry of Health in 2022, before the removal, which revealed same no development problems, has been concealed by the family court of Bremen and youth office-jugendamt Bremen.
“Jugendamt case files access has been denied me, and my seven lawyers.”
She protested that Uriah has been subjected to several forms of abuses, even the placement in state custody in 2022, was in a disabled home for children.
“Since then, there has been strong advocacy to send Uriah permanently to a special needs home. “As children in these homes receive extra large sum of money from European Commission, the federal, and state government.
“Before my very eyes, my own child is being used as a cash cow by German State greedy government officers, while every documents. medical and otherwise, which expose their cruelty, lies and abuses, are concealed from the court case files, never used for court decisions, and never referenced in court protocols” Emem declared.
There is the insinuation that the case is highly criminal, while the Nigerian mother seeks not only the release of her child, who has been severely traumatized, she seeks the prosecution of the officers involved in the crime. Emem said that a U.S. case has been filed in this regard.
The family court of Bremen has also withheld all her rights duly hers. According to law, for instance, she filed for divorce since 2022, no decision has been issued, as this will mandate the sharing of property of the man – Jan Hoffmann – with his divorced wife in a 50/50 ratio.
The alimony of Mrs. Hoffmann since 2022, has also been systematically denied, no decision on alimony has been issued to her, evading payments from Jan Hoffmann to her as her spousal maintenance claims, even when he and the family court were responsible for her loss of two major job positions with multinationals, rendering her financially exhausted, her business bankrupt, and above all, endangering her life existence and that of her little child.
According to Emem, “I see this as an attempt to eradicate us without the use of weapons.”
It may be a paradox to say that such act is not new, but was used by the Nazis, during Hitler’s regime; and it still goes on in the 21st Century civilization, especially, in closed institutions like the German family courts treatment to foreigners, particularly, of the African heritage.
The mother laments that Uriah has been denied formal school, parental care, medical care, as the trauma is concealed and not treated, and his health has deteriorated overtime.
According to Emem, “His wishes, as documented, is that he wants to go home with me. But this is ignored, and the child is lied upon by racist Germans and the child is still detained unlawfully.”
Mrs. Hoffmann, solemnly, demanded, “I seek the child to be examined anally, especially, and his statements officially taken, which would definitely be a deviation from all written by court appointed actors on the case. I seek justice for Uriah.”
