Victims of labour exploitation also expressed the need to be treated with respect and be taken seriously. They often feel discriminated against while in the exploitative working situation and need to deal with that afterwards. They more often express anger, and do not feel welcome in the Netherlands.
Compensation
Compensation for victims is still very difficult to obtain in many countries. However, in the Netherlands, compensation is ordered in an increasing number of cases. Compensation of unpaid wages and back pay is a widely mentioned need, especially by victims of labour exploitation.35
Psychological support
Brunovskis and Surtees indicate that a considerable number of victims ask for assistance and support only after a few years, and after they have tried themselves to deal with their experiences.36 In general, victims indicated that they were able to give a more accurate and coherent picture of what had happened after some time had elapsed – preferably after specialised psychological support, and not immediately after they were out of the exploitative situation. One victim stated: “If you want to file a complaint to the police it is not helpful if I tell an incoherent story. It was good I had told my story before to my boyfriend”.37 Many victims experience difficulties in their daily life because they have not received tailor-made and sufficient psychological treatment after the trafficking. Difficulties can consist of fear of leaving the house, the establishment of intimate relations, suspicion. One victim, for instance, received treatment for depression, but did not feel safe and comfortable enough to talk about her trafficking experiences. Many victims of sexual exploitation have experienced a lack of psychological support, which in some cases has led to re-victimisation. If specialised assistance, including psychological support, has been received, victims are better able to get their lives back on track. They are often supported by the care institutions with practical issues and building a future (work, housing, education). Some victims had bad experiences with support organisations in their childhood, which led to a lack of trust. The ambivalent relationship of the victims with the trafficker, especially in sexual exploitation cases, makes it difficult to motivate victims to undergo therapy, especially long-term therapy. Victims often have to re-learn how to think and decide for themselves. One victim said: “the freedom I feel to have my own thoughts is what keeps me going and what makes me happy”.38 This is fully in line with theoretical discourse that autonomy is decisive for one’s wellbeing.39 If victims did not receive appropriate treatment, the need for such treatment remained for a number of them, who wanted to understand both why they had been trafficked, and how to learn to live with the negative experience. It seems that such treatment cannot be successful if criminal proceedings are ongoing, or if victims are terrified about the residence permit and whether they will be allowed to stay in the country. Again, Maslow’s needs hierarchy helps us to understand why such therapy can only be successfully started once other needs (safety and security) are fulfilled.
In the long run, the ideal situation for trafficking victims is to live an ordinary life and have an ordinary job. Study, work, and a healthy relationship help victims to achieve this, and are important to gaining positive experiences and recovery of self-confidence. For victims of labour exploitation these needs seem to be more important than psychological assistance. Uncertainty about the outcome of the criminal procedure, and consequently about the residence permit for third-country nationals, remains a source of stress and a burden for recovery. Only incidentally do victims express a desire for revenge.
Dutch victims described sometimes feeling mistreated compared to non-EU victims, as non-EU victims are granted treatment in specialised facilities, which are not open to them. They are expected to use ordinary health facilities, which do not necessarily specialise in the counselling of trafficking victims. Furthermore, the safety of victims cannot always be guaranteed in ordinary care facilities.
Needs of victims vary over time
Victims of sexual exploitation are distressed immediately after leaving the situation of exploitation. In many cases, a situation or event triggered the action to leave, such as a police raid or extreme violence. Understandably, victims in this situation are in need of rest and reflection, which is essential to allow them to untangle themselves from the traffickers, regain their physical strength, and regain control over their lives. In this period, victims can still feel some affection for the traffickers (due to the so-called Stockholm syndrome). These victims often lack a social network, as the traffickers have intentionally socially isolated them and the trafficking network is the only environment they know. Other primary needs for victims are safety, protection against further physical violence, and an environment in which there are people they can trust. Not surprisingly, many victims experience psychological problems. If they are heavily traumatised, they are especially in need of long-term psychological assistance and, also, a safe environment to prevent re-victimisation. Furthermore, feelings of hate, as well as fear that their children might be removed by the welfare authorities, are feelings of victims noted by experts.
One of the main concerns following from this research is that the primary focus of current policy to combat human trafficking is on the contribution of victims to the criminal investigation and prosecution of the perpetrators.40 In the Netherlands, no organisation has been officially tasked with identifying the victims of human trafficking; the police and the military police are required to provide a ‘reflection period’ to victims if there is the ‘slightest indication’ of human trafficking. As such, the police and military police are indirectly involved in the identification of victims of trafficking. Before the reflection period or a residence permit is granted, the story of the (possible) victim is objectified from the perspective of the existence of the necessary elements to start an investigation, not from the perspective of the needs of the victim (or victimhood, as such). In general, a residence permit is only granted if the victim co-operates with the authorities and a criminal investigation has commenced. The primary focus on the victim’s contribution to the criminal proceedings is an obstacle to recovery, as it does not allow the victim time to reflect or recover, and can lead to fear of reprisals from the traffickers. Furthermore, victims experience the hearings by the police and the (investigative) judge as onerous and even threatening. Health workers providing support to trafficking victims have indicated that repeated hearings by the police, investigative judge, or prosecutor are stressful for the victims and can be detrimental to their wellbeing. For those reasons, police should not have the exclusive mandate, albeit indirectly, to identify victims of trafficking. The police are responsible for law enforcement and are, therefore, biased in this task, and primarily focused on a victim’s contribution to the criminal proceedings.
Although understandable from a police perspective, involving the police in the identification of victims entails the risk of false negatives (victims not being identified while they are victims), as the lack of law enforcement indications does not necessarily reflect a lack of victimhood. Some victims are afraid of the police and do not trust them. In addition, if they stay illegally in the Netherlands, victims run the risk of being expelled to their home country, which puts them at risk of being re-trafficked by the perpetrators, who often know where to find them. Victims might be more inclined to co-operate after they have been given time to recover and regain control over their lives. Therefore, given the hesitancy of victims to co-operate with the police, other options for identifying victims of trafficking, other than by the police and military police as part of criminal investigations, should be considered; for instance, by involving more disciplines in the identification of victims of trafficking, including institutions involved in the provision of care and assistance to victims, to make the identification procedure more objective. It is to be applauded that a pilot to this end will start in the Netherlands in 2017.
Conclusion
From the literature and the study discussed in this chapter, it
was found that the protection and assistance offered to victims of trafficking in many countries is not adapted to the differentiated and phased nature of the victims’ needs. The timing of the hearings and criminal proceedings needs to be co-ordinated with the time needed by victims to recover. Ideally, co-operation would only be required after the victim has been given some time to recover and reflect on the situation and has regained control over her/his life, not immediately after leaving the situation of exploitation. Law enforcement authorities oppose such practices on the ground that they consider that it would influence the victims’ testimonies and statement. They would rather start the hearings as soon as possible after the end of the exploitation. Here, a tension exists between the interests of the law enforcement authorities and a victim-centred approach to human trafficking.
Furthermore, some may argue that the proposed changes will make victims less inclined to report trafficking or act as witnesses, particularly if they are not rewarded with a residence permit. However, it is contended that this is unlikely to materialise in practice. The current system (in which a residence permit is linked to the willingness to co-operate, and indicators to start criminal investigation are collected during the reflection period) creates pressure on victims to make a statement against the trafficker at an early stage in the process. Such pressure is undesirable given the needs, problems, and fears of the victims immediately after they have left the situation of exploitation. These needs, problems, and fears should prevail over the law enforcement interest – to the benefit of a victim-centred approach.
Notes
1 Zimmerman, C., Hossain, M., Yun, K., Roche, B., Morison, L., and Watts, C., Stolen Smiles: The Physical and Psychological Health Consequences of Women and Adolescents Trafficked in Europe (London: The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, 2006).
2 Rijken, C., Dijk, J. van, and Klerx-van Mierlo, F., Mensenhandel: het slachtofferperspectief (Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publisher, 2013).
3 Srikantiah, J., “Perfect Victims and Real Survivors: The Iconic Victim in Domestic Human Trafficking Law” (2007) 87 Boston University Law Review 157.
4 A/RES/40/34, 29 November 1985, Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power.
5 See, for instance, debates in Anti-Trafficking Review, Issue 4, 2015.
6 Farrell, A., McDevitt, J., and Fahy, S., “Where Are All the Victims? Understanding the Determinants of Official Identification of Human Trafficking Incidents” (2010) 9 American Society of Criminology, 201–233.
7 Brunovskis, A. and Surtees, R., “Agency or Illness – The Conceptualization of Trafficking Victims’ Choices and Behaviors in the Assistance System” (2008) 12(1) Gender, Technology and Development 12, 53–76; Jordan, A., “Human Rights or Wrongs? The Struggle for a Rights Based Response to Trafficking in Human Beings”, in Masika, R. (ed.), Gender, Trafficking and Slavery (Oxford: Oxfam, 2002), pp. 28–37; van Dijk, J., van Kesteren, J., and Smit, P., Criminal Victimization in International Perspective (The Hague: Boom Juridische uitgevers, 2008).
8 Hoyle, C., Bosworth, M., and Dempsey, M., “Labelling the Victims of Sex trafficking: Exploring the Borderland between Rhetoric and Reality” (2011) 20(3) Social & Legal Studies 313–330; de Pérez, J.L., “Analysing the Use of the Trafficking Victim Archetype by Brazil and the Iberian Countries”, in Persak, N. and Vermeulen, G. (eds.), Reframing Prostitution: From Discourse to Description, From Moralisation to Normalisation? (Antwerp: Maklu, 2014).
9 van Dijk et al. (2008) (n.7).
10 Brunovskis, A. and Surtees, R., Leaving the Past Behind? When Victims of Trafficking Decline Assistance (Norway: Allpoki AS, Fafo/Nexus Institute, 2007); Srikantiah (2007) (n.3).
11 Brunovskis, A. and Surtees, R., A Fuller Picture: Addressing Trafficking-Related Assistance Needs and Socio-Economic Vulnerabilities (Norway, Allpoki AS, Fafo/Nexus Institute, 2012).
12 Ibid.
13 van Londen, M., Hagen, L., and m.m.v. Brenninkmeijer, N., Evaluatie van de pilot ‘Categorale Opvang voor Slachtoffers van Mensenhandel’ (The Hague: WODC, 2013); Rijken, C., Combating Trafficking in Human Beings for Labour Exploitation (Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers, 2011).
14 Willemsen, E., Uitbuiting in andere sectoren dan de seksindustrie (Amsterdam: Fairwork, 2010).
15 Clawson, H. and Dutch, N., Addressing the Needs of Victims of Human Trafficking: Challenges, Barriers, and Promising Practices (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2007).
16 Winkel, F., Posttraumatic Anger: Missing Link in the Wheel of Fortune (Universiteit van Tilburg, Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers, 2007).
17 Winkel (2007) (n.16); Zimmerman et al. (2006) (n.1).
18 Zimmerman et al. (2006) (n.1). See also: Hossain, M., Zimmerman, C., Abas, M., Light, M., and Watts, C., “The Relationship of Trauma to Mental Disorders Among Trafficked and Sexually Exploited Girls and Women” (2010) 100(12) American Journal of Public Health 2442–2449.
19 Zimmerman et al. (2006) (n.1), p. 22, summary report.
20 Regioplan, Vooronderzoek oneigenlijk gebruik verblijfsregeling mensenhandel (Amsterdam: Regioplan, 2013).
21 Clawson and Dutch (2007) (n.15); Rijken et al. (2013) (n.2).
22 Regioplan (2013) (n.20).
23 Pemberton, A., “The Needs of Victims of Terrorism”, in Letschert, R.M., Staiger, I., Pemberton, A., and Ammerlaan, V.C. (eds.), Victims of Terrorism (Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers, 2008); Pemberton, A., Winkel, F.W., and Groenhuijsen, M.S., “Evaluating Victims’ Experiences in Restorative Justice” (2008) 6(2) British Journal of Community Justice 98–119; van Mierlo, F. et al. (2009) Van tevredenheid naar kwaliteit: Een meetinstrument voor de slachtofferzorg.
24 Zimmerman et al. (2006) (n.1).
25 Maslow, A., “A Theory of Human Motivation” (1943) 50(4) Psychological Review, 370–396.
26 Goodey, J., “An Overview of Key Themes”, in Crawford, A. and Goodey, J. (eds.), Integrating a Victim Perspective Within Criminal Justice; International Debates (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000), pp. 13–34.
27 van Londen et al. (2013) (n.13); Brunovskis and Surtees (2012) (n.11).
28 Clawson and Dutch (2007) (n.15).
29 Translated from Rijken et al. (2013) (n.2), p. 99.
30 Ibid.
31 Ibid., p. 100.
32 Ibid., p. 107.
33 Ibid., p. 106.
34 Ibid., p. 102.
35 See, for instance: GRETA, Second General Report on GRETA’s Activities (October 2012), p. 16.
36 Brunovskis and Surtees (2008) (n.7).
37 Translated from Rijken et al. (2013) (n.2), p. 109.
38 Ibid., p. 105.
39 Reis, H.T, Sheldon, K.M., Gable, S.L., Roscoe, J., and Ryan, R.M., “Daily Well-Being: The Role of Autonomy, Competence, and Relatedness” (2000) 26(4) Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 419–435.
40 See Shrikantiah (2007) (n.3).
20
Child trafficking – a call for rights-based integrated approaches
Helmut Sax*
Introduction
Fleeing conflicts in Syria, Iraq, or Libya, more than one million people arrived in Europe in 2015, including children with families, as well as children separated from them.1 Several institutions have raised serious concerns about the risks of trafficking for children migrating to Europe.2 These developments have revealed weaknesses not only in the European Union’s asylum regime, but also in child protection systems in the region;3 while GRETA, the Council of Europe’s anti-trafficking monitoring body, kept reminding governments of their obligations to prevent child trafficking and to protect migrant children from exploitation.4 Nevertheless, also outside the turmoil of conflict, children5 are tricked into, and trapped in, situations of dependency and exploitation: ending up as domestic servants in private households, on cannabis farms, in the hospitality and cleaning business, or in the clothing industry; promising job offers in major cities or abroad turn into prostitution; children are exploited through forced begging in the s
treets or pressured into criminal activities, such as pick-pocketing or drug dealing; girls are forced into marriage, followed by sexual exploitation.
These are just some of the reasons children are trafficked. Care should be taken to avoid stereotypes – child trafficking is not mere ‘buying and selling’ of children, nor does it necessarily involve organised ‘mafia-style’ groups: it may happen also through family members or trusted community and religious leaders. And we should be aware of difficulties in capturing the dimensions: no society may claim to be immune to trafficking and exploitation of children, while at the same time reliable data and statistics are rare.6 UNODC’s Global Reports on Trafficking in Persons deliberately refrain from giving absolute numbers, but focus rather on proportions. During the 2010–12 period, for instance, 33% of reported trafficked persons globally were children below the age of 18, about twice as many girls as boys, and with huge regional differences: children account for 62% of the total of reported trafficking cases in the Africa/Middle East region, contrasting with 18% in Europe/Central Asia.7 A 2015 EUROSTAT Report, however, revealed that by just adding the age group of 18–24 years, in fact a majority (55%) of all cases of trafficked persons registered in the EU would be young people below 25. Moreover, the report showed the scarcity of disaggregated data: only 17 Member States out of 28 could actually produce figures along age groups; only 13 have data on trafficked children and citizenship; and only seven offer information on age-related assistance services provided.8
Child trafficking is prevalent not only because of poor law enforcement or poverty; it runs deeper, into questions of the weaker status of children in society, images of childhood and trafficking, questions of availability and effectiveness of mechanisms for child protection, and, ultimately, of societies’ readiness to ensure children’s human rights. Children must be recognised as a distinctive social group, with particular interests and rights, acknowledging their agency and competence as well as unique vulnerabilities related to children’s development.9 Structurally, it requires approaches supporting protective environments and involving additional actors in anti-trafficking responses, such as child protection and child welfare authorities, professional groups such as social pedagogues, paediatricians, teachers and school bodies, child ombudsper-sons, as well as child rights organisations and networks.
Routledge Handbook of Human Trafficking Page 51
