View previous stories
	Make traffickers pay for victim justice, OSCE and CoE say by FRA, Anti-Slavery International   Nov. 2012   An Agenda for the Prevention of Human Trafficking: Non-Discrimination and Empowerment, by Morten Kjærum. (Fundamental Rights Agency - FRA)   The 12th High-level Alliance against Trafficking in Persons conference “An Agenda for Prevention of Human Trafficking: Non-Discrimination and Empowerment” aims to shed light on an important area of prevention that deserves further attention and to explore how anti-trafficking and anti-discrimination measures can enhance each other.   I would like to start my remarks with a quote: “After a month I was making €500 a day, but if I wanted a cigarette or a bar of chocolate I had to ask”. This was said by a young woman forced to leave her home country and into the sex trade in Europe by traffickers who then split her earnings with the so-called massage parlours and saunas she worked in, leaving her nothing.   In some EU countries more than 2/3 of the migrant women involved in prostitution are either trafficked or are vulnerable to the practice, according to a police study. At the same time, more than half of these women are from another European country. So we are not talking about countries thousands of kilometres from here.   There are many vulnerable people who are EU citizens and who are disappearing from their home villages and towns, only to reappear further west, or south, sometimes with a new identity and sometimes with no identity at all. What is the root of their vulnerability? Poverty. Lack of education. Or being part of a group that is looked down on in their home countries, such as Roma or other ethnic minorities.   Trafficking is not just an issue that affects young girls sold into the sex industry. Severe forms of labour exploitation – for example in areas such as agriculture, the construction industry and domestic work – are increasingly coming to the attention of those working to combat trafficking.   FRA’s research has shown that a general climate of criminalisation among illegal migrants and the fear of being arrested, as well as the risk of being deported, often fuel the belief among victims that they do not have any rights. And although many countries across the EU have broadened the definition of trafficking to include severe migrant labour exploitation, the substantial disparities between definitions in different Member States hinder cross-border cooperation to reduce such practices.   And the longer the economic crisis continues, the more cases we see of acute labour exploitation, or what one might call modern-day slavery. This makes such workers, who are already accustomed to discrimination and are afraid of seeking redress for their unfair treatment due to a lack of awareness of their rights, still more vulnerable to traffickers. That is why we at FRA are building on the work we have already done on the situation of irregular migrants and will next year begin new research examining severe forms of labour exploitation from a human rights perspective.   Often, the chains binding the victim to the traffickers are underestimated. One factor is, of course, the victims’ fear of being subjected to retaliation if they try to escape, or that their family members could be harmed. Another important factor is a lack of trust in the willingness of the police to help victims. Their low expectations are nurtured by the stories they hear from the offenders, as well as by their own experiences in their countries of origin.   In order to overcome this scepticism, it is crucial that the police convey clearly and unambiguously from the very first contact onwards that their task is to protect victims’ rights.   But we don’t only need to rethink our assumptions about the victims of trafficking.   We also have to rethink the solutions. These should not be theoretical, but practical and effective. I would like to make some suggestions here that could take us forward.   1) Important steps have been made in recent years to recognise and respond to the problem of trafficking, not only through the prism of law enforcement, but also acknowledging the central needs and rights of the victim in this process. The 2011 EU Trafficking Directive has taken positive steps in this direction. However, there is still much that needs to be done to ensure that victims are effectively responded to and their rights upheld.   2) A change in mentality is needed. Trafficking is primarily a human rights abuse, and not only security problem – and it has to be understood and addressed as such. At present, we witness a tendency to regard trafficking as just another form of organised crime, as if to say: “as well as having to tackle the illicit drugs business and illegal arms trading, we need to deal with trafficking in human beings too”. But victims of trafficking are not ‘dangerous commodities’.   They are human beings entitled to respect and compassion. Victims should not be overlooked or marginalised because they are unwilling participants in organised crime. Another dimension of the mental shift is that far too often we hear the statement that these “persons are probably better off here than at home”. This easily becomes a pratical mental construction which gives legitimacy for turning the blind eye to these attrocities. This has to be adressed as well.   3) A vital component in addressing trafficking is close scrutiny of professions in which exploitation and trafficking are prevalent. This would have to combine efforts from labour inspectorates, health agencies, trade unions, employers associations, authorities supervising commerce and industry, financial police and other law enforcement institutions. And to be successful, all of these organisations would have to cooperate closely and share information and knowledge with each other. Additionally, professionally staffed and well-funded victim support services are needed.   4) And finally, comprehensive training of everyone involved in countering trafficking is a precondition. Greater specialisation among labour inspectors, the police, prosecutors and judges would improve victims’ chances of putting their rights into practice.   The fact that trafficking is taking place here, in the Europe today, must spur us all on to greater efforts to end this practice and the suffering it brings. And we must encourage the victims to come forward and give the support needed when they do so.   http://fra.europa.eu/en/news-and-events/speeches   http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/feb/06/sex-traffick-romania-britain   Oct 2012   Make traffickers pay for victim justice, OSCE and CoE say. (Anti-Slavery International)   European governments must confiscate the assets of traffickers to fund compensation for victims to keep them safe from re-trafficking, say the OSCE Special Representative and Co-ordinator for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings and the Executive Secretary of the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings.   Maria Grazia Giammarinaro (OSCE) and Petya Nestorova (Council of Europe) were speaking at a Special Event at the Alliance against Trafficking in Persons Conference in Vienna. The event is organised by COMPACT, the European Action for Compensation for Trafficked Persons, led by Anti-Slavery International and La Strada International, and hosted by the OSCE Special Representative and Co-ordinator for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings.   As highlighted by Maria Grazia Giammarinaro, “compensation enables trafficked persons to rebuild their lives and start a process of social inclusion, either in the country of origin or destination. Ensuring access to rights and effective remedies, including compensation, is part of an empowerment strategy, and an important tool in the fight against discrimination which underlies human trafficking - the focus of this year’s Alliance Conference.”   Giammarinaro also emphasized that freezing assets and seizing the proceeds of crime is not only essential to ensure compensation to trafficked persons, it also deters and prevents the crime.   Petya Nestorova underlined that “the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings is the first treaty that includes the right to compensation for trafficked people, however, our findings from the implementation of the Convention reveal that compensation remains rare. We need to move from paper to action because there can be no justice for trafficking victims without compensation. Compensation is crucial in the fight against trafficking. Not only is it an instrument of restorative justice and prevention of re-trafficking, but also as recognition by the authorities of the violation of a victim’s rights and the damages they have suffered.”   Compensation includes remuneration of unpaid wages and payment in restitution for both general damages and special damages suffered by a victim of crime. General damages compensate the claimant for the non-monetary aspects of the specific harm suffered, such as physical or emotional pain and suffering.   It is still extremely difficult for trafficking victims to gain compensation, despite existing laws in most European countries that allow crime victims to make claims. Across Europe there are barriers that currently prevent victims from claiming compensation including victims leaving, or being removed from, the country before a verdict, or traffickers moving their assets abroad.   In order to ensure that victims of trafficking receive compensation, the COMPACT campaign recommends that evaluations of countries’ efforts to implement the Council of Europe Trafficking Convention also assess availability of compensation, as well as ensure that access to compensation is included in national referral mechanisms and victim assistance programmes. In addition COMPACT calls for a widening of confiscation legislation across Europe in order to use seized assets to compensate victims as well as ensure ‘portable justice’ so returned/deported trafficked people are still able to claim and receive compensation. Visit the related web page
	US companies accused of seeking to weaken regulation of conflict minerals by Global Witness Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)   October 2012   Global Witness has condemned the attempt by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) to use a lawsuit to overturn a law that compels companies to disclose whether they use conflict minerals.   It emerged last week that the industry pressure groups are attempting to sue the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) over the rule accompanying Section 1502 of the Dodd Frank Act. The law and the rule, issued in August, are designed to prevent vicious rebels, militia and military units in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) from financing their activities via the trade in tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold. The area’s civilian population has suffered horrific human rights violations at the hands of all the warring parties.   “This is a blatant attempt to undermine the democratic process by a group of self-interested and irresponsible companies and the Court of Appeals should strike it down without delay,” said Global Witness Director.   “If the companies behind this were remotely honest they would admit their primary interest is being allowed to continue making money at the expense of Congolese citizens.”   In the application they filed with the District of Columbia Court of Appeals last Friday, the Chamber and NAM request that the SEC rule issued on 22 August “be modified or set aside in whole or in part”. The suit appears designed to help their members dodge the law’s requirement to come clean about what is in their supply chains and the impacts their use of minerals has on people in Congo.   It is imperative that responsible companies take a stand against the lawsuit, both through public statements and via rapid implementation of the regulation.   “The companies financing this action that the Chamber and NAM are fronting should have the courage to say who they are,” said Patrick Alley. “If they really thought this was a case of unwarranted regulation that costs jobs, why wouldn’t they publicly identify themselves with such a noble cause? Why the need to hide behind corporate lobby groups?”   The SEC rule for Dodd Frank Section 1502 was originally scheduled to be published in April 2011. However, aggressive lobbying and legal threats by the Chamber and NAM resulted in a severe delay and watering down of the regulation that finally emerged. The new lawsuit is the latest in a catalogue of efforts by unaccountable companies and their lobbyist proxies to thwart efforts by elected lawmakers to address an urgent humanitarian crisis.   The latest round of fighting in eastern Congo has been triggered by a new rebellion known as the M23, which is led by indicted alleged war criminal Bosco Ntaganda and backed by the Rwandan government. Bosco Ntaganda, a career warlord, reportedly made a fortune trading conflict minerals in the years leading up to his latest insurrection. According to UN investigators, the M23 has also been receiving financial support from minerals traders in Rwanda. Since April this year the fighting has displaced nearly half a million people. Visit the related web page
	View more stories