How Many Victims Of Human Trafficking Inwards The Eu? A Statistical Quagmire

Dr. Vladislava Stoyanova

Postdoctoral Fellow, Faculty of Law, Lund University; Author of Human Trafficking too Slavery Reconsidered. Conceptual Limits too States’ Positive Obligations inward Europe (Cambridge University Press, 2017)

On nineteen May 2016 the Commission issued its showtime study (COM(2016) 267 final)) on the progress made inward the struggle against trafficking inward human beings. As its championship suggests, the study is based on Article twenty of the 2011 European Union Trafficking Directive (Directive 2011/36/EU). The study has the objective to examine the progress made concerning prosecution of trafficking, protection of victims too prevention. It shows trends inward trafficking, including statistical information. It is accompanied past times a staff working document (SWD(2016) 159 final) that provides detailed factual information complementing the report.

Notably, this is non a study on the extent to which Member States receive got complied alongside the directive. Such a study is indeed required past times Article 23 of the directive; however, despite the laid deadline of vi Apr 2015, too so far the Commission has non issued a document assessing compliance. The Commission is belatedly alongside its assessment alongside to a greater extent than than a year. H5N1 farther study was due past times vi Apr 2016 on the circumstances of the piece of work of services of trafficking victims. It has non been issued yet.

Focusing on the higher upward mentioned progress report, it shows that according to the information submitted past times Member States for the menses 2013 – 2014 in that location were xv 846 registered victims of human trafficking. It is noted that this number is lower than the number recorded for the previous menses 2010 – 2012. H5N1 clarification is forthwith offered that ‘[a]lthough the information collection methods used for both periods are similar, it would non live on advisable at this phase to compare the data, either betwixt the 2 exercises or across private years, due to possible differences inward recording methods too legal definitions. For this reason, the discrepancy inward the annual totals, too inward exceptional the reasons why fewer victims of trafficking were registered, are issues that involve to live on explored too analysed further’ (page 5).

Indeed, the number equally to who is too who is non a victim of trafficking too who is registered too who is non registered equally a victim of human trafficking are issues that receive got to live on explored too analysed further. I innovation to produce this below. The Commission is right that in that location mightiness live on differences inward recording methods too legal definitions; however, the supposition that these differences volition live on somehow remedied too so that nosotros tin larn a clearer moving painting is far from warranted.

The number xv 846 refers to registered victims. Who are these registered victims? These are victims who are ‘both identified too presumed’ (page iv of the report). It is clarified that around Member States receive got included both categories inward their information collection, whereas others receive got solely included i of the 2 categories. Already at this phase i starts to larn suspicious most the information since it conflates unlike categories. Footnote xv of the Commission study is indented to clarify the term ‘identified victim’: ‘[i]n accordance alongside the definition inward the anti-trafficking Directive, the term “identified victim” refers to a soul who has been formally identified past times relevant regime equally a victim of trafficking.’ The text of the directive sure does non deploy the term ‘identified victim’. It merely refers to victims too its Article 11(4) obliges the Member States to ‘take the necessary measures to constitute appropriate mechanisms aimed at the early on identification.’ The directive does non constitute a split legal condition called ‘identified victim of human trafficking.’

The text of the before Directive 2004/81/EC (which concerns the immigration condition of trafficking victims) does non refer to ‘identified victims’ either. It refers to victims who are holders of residence permits since they cooperate alongside the regime inward the struggle against trafficking. Strangely, the Commission study does non fifty-fifty comprise information most the number of such victims. This is really of import information because when it comes to tertiary province nationals, their formal identification equally victims of human trafficking mightiness non hateful much too the assistance measures mightiness non hateful much if they cannot stay on the territory of the Member States. It should live on equally good reminded hither that the primary European Union Trafficking Directive (ie, the 2011 Directive) does non regulate the number of the presence of victims on the territory of the Member States.

Footnote xv of the Commission study continues to say that ‘[t]he term “presumed victim” is used for a victim of trafficking who has met the criteria of the European Union Trafficking Directive but has non formally been identified past times the competent regime equally a victim, or has declined to live on formally too legally identified equally a victim of trafficking [emphasis added].’ The term ‘presumed victims’ does non seem to live on used hither inward the feel of Article 11(2) of the European Union Trafficking Directive. The latter provision refers to individuals who receive got to live on assisted too supported ‘as shortly equally the competent regime receive got a reasonable-grounds indication for believing’ that they are victims. Neither is it used inward the feel of Articles v too vi of Directive 2004/81/EC, which refer to circumstances when the national regime ‘take the thought that a tertiary province national may autumn into the reach of this directive [i.e. may live on a victim of trafficking]’ too extend a reflection menses to this person. Rather ‘presumed victims’ appears hard to decide category inward the means that it has been used inward the report. In addition, it appears illogical how i tin live on a register victim (which implies around shape of official recognition of one’s status) without existence formally identified past times the competent national authorities. As mentioned above, ‘presumed victims’ are included inward the category of ‘registered victims’.

How produce Member States afterwards all formally position individuals equally victims of human trafficking? This is an of import inquiry if the Commission wants to ‘improve the reliability too comparability of data’ equally stated on page v of its report. The Trafficking Directive does non stipulate which national authorisation has to live on mandated alongside victim identification; its Article 11(4) merely says that ‘Member States should accept the necessary measures to constitute appropriate mechanisms aimed at the early on identification of, assistance to too back upward for victims, inward cooperation alongside relevant back upward organizations.’ Directive 2004/81/EC does non fifty-fifty receive got a provision most victim identification. It tin live on assumed from its provisions though that the national regime responsible for criminal investigations too prosecutions position victims past times granting them a reflection menses ‘so that they tin accept an informed determination equally to whether to cooperate alongside the competent authorities’. Thus, inward many European Union Member States the regime responsible for law-breaking investigation too prosecution are mandated to position victims. This is sure problematic since eventually victim identification is intimately linked alongside law-breaking investigation.

This results inward refusals to formally position victims if in that location is no solid soil for initiation or continuation of criminal proceedings, a job exposed alongside the recent judgment L.E. v. Greece Application No. 71545/12 delivered past times the European Court of Human Rights on 21 Jan 2016.[1] In other Member States, the immigration regime mightiness live on mandated to position victims of human trafficking. H5N1 relevant illustration inward this honor is the United Kingdom, where the UK Border Agency identifies migrants equally victims of human trafficking. In this way, law-breaking investigation too victim identification are clearly separated. Against this multifariousness of national practices, it mightiness live on hard to larn a comparable appointment too fifty-fifty clear thought who is a registered victim of human trafficking inward the EU.

Certainly, the job is non solely i of procedure, but equally good of substance. The European Union Trafficking Directive defines human trafficking too determines the minimum reach of criminalization. However, the Member States tin translate trafficking to a greater extent than expansively. An illustration to this effect is Republic of Bulgaria where the law-breaking of human trafficking is interpreted inward an exceedingly broad means which leads to high number of prosecutions too victims.[2] The Commission itself does non seem to live on peculiarly clear most the conceptual limits of trafficking either. It defines it equally ‘the buying, selling too exploitation of adults too children [emphasis added]’ (page 2 of the report). In this way, it subsumes exploitation nether the definition of human trafficking.

However, on page seven of the study the Commission observes that ‘[w]hile it is of import to stress that non all exploitative situations inward the European Union labour marketplace are a resultant of trafficking inward human beings, around may be. In these cases all victims of trafficking for labour exploitation must live on properly identified too helped.’ Here, a distinction appears to live on made betwixt trafficking too exploitative situations. Overall, though, in that location is no clear distinction betwixt the two. It is thence hard to advance measures which tin tackle each phenomenon. Perhaps, fifty-fifty to a greater extent than disturbingly, all the efforts receive got been focused on human trafficking (in whichever means it is interpreted inward unlike jurisdictions). Little attending has been paid on severe forms of labour exploitation. As a consequence, the European Union Fundamental Rights Agency inward its 2015 study Severe Labour Exploitation: Workers Moving inside or into the European Union. States’ Obligations too Victims’ Rights warned that

While trafficking has attracted much attention, the severe exploitation of workers inward job relationships – which may or may non occur inward a context of trafficking – has not. This divergence inward the degree of attending is reflected past times an institutional setting inward which specialised actors are available to bargain alongside trafficking cases but non alongside cases of severe labour exploitation.    

Finally, what has been the comport on of the newest trafficking instrument, i.e. the 2011 Trafficking Directive? Is it indeed the case, equally the Commission suggests, that ‘with the right too total implementation of the European Union Directive, Member States volition ensure the prevention of the crime, the prosecution of the perpetrators too most importantly, the protection of victims’ (page xv of the report)? This is highly doubtful. The information from the study is non peculiarly promising. In addition, the information itself is really confusing which hampers clear agreement of the phenomenon that nosotros receive got to address.   

Barnard & Peers: chapter 25

JHA4: chapter I:7

Photo credit: notitarde.com

---

[1] Vladislava Stoyanova, ‘L.E. v. Greece: Human Trafficking too the Scope of States' Positive Obligations nether the ECHR’ three European Human Rights Law Review (2016) 290.

[2] Vladislava Stoyanova, ‘The Crisis of a Legal Framework: Protection of Victims of Human Trafficking inward the Bulgarian Legislation’ The International Journal of Human Rights (2013); Vladislava Stoyanova, ‘The Crisis of a Definition: Human Trafficking inward Bulgarian Law’ 15(1) Amsterdam Law Forum (2013).

Share this post