Whitney Shinkle
"PREVENTING HUMAN TRAFFICKING:
AN EVALUATION OF CURRENT
EFFORTS"
Transatlantic Perspectives on Migration
Policy Brief #3 August 2007
Institute for the Study of International Migration,
Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University
Original Title
"PREVENTING HUMAN TRAFFICKING: AN EVALUATION OF CURRENT EFFORTS", 2007
Whitney Shinkle
"PREVENTING HUMAN TRAFFICKING:
AN EVALUATION OF CURRENT
EFFORTS"
Transatlantic Perspectives on Migration
Policy Brief #3 August 2007
Institute for the Study of International Migration,
Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University
Whitney Shinkle
"PREVENTING HUMAN TRAFFICKING:
AN EVALUATION OF CURRENT
EFFORTS"
Transatlantic Perspectives on Migration
Policy Brief #3 August 2007
Institute for the Study of International Migration,
Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University
Institute for the Study of International Migration,
Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University
Transatlantic Perspectives on Migration Policy Brief #3 August 2007 The publication of Transatlantic Perspectives on Migration is made possible by a grant from the German Marshall Fund of the United States PREVENTING HUMAN TRAFFICKING: AN EVALUATION OF CURRENT EFFORTS Whitney Shinkle * * Whitney Shinkle is a Research Associate at the Institute for the Study of International Migration at the Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. Preventing Human Traffcking 1 INTRODUCTION Tracking entails the recruiting, transporting, or harboring of a person, by means of force, fraud, coercion, or other threats, for the purposes of exploiting that person in subsequent forced labor. Unlike traditional cases of human smuggling, in tracking the relationship between the victim and the tracker may or may not cease after the victim has been transported; in many cases the victim may be passed from one tracker to another. Tracking is fed by two reciprocal forces: the demand for cheap labor and the supply of people willing to leave home in search of better economic opportunities. It is further fueled by the nancial gains that accrue to the trackers. Governments have begun confronting the problem through a combination of policies and programs designed to prevent the phenomena, protect victims and vulnerable populations, and prosecute smugglers and trackers. Tis brief evaluates the methods of prevention employed by governments in North America and Europe, including both demand-based and supply-based techniques, as well as preventative instruments targeted at reducing the nancial gains accrued by trackers and smugglers. Despite the growing attention to human tracking and the increasing number of policies directed at its elimination, knowledge about the phenomenon is very limited. Credible qualitative and quantitative data are in short supply. Due to the clandestine nature of the practice, information on the characteristics of victims and their experiences, as well as the characteristics and networks of trackers is mostly anecdotal and often hard to generalize. Te data that do exist come from a variety of governmental, nongovernmental, and limited academic sources. Perhaps most striking about the developing picture of tracking is its complexity. Experiences are diverse and vary by region. Dominant cultural practices, family structures, community support systems, and the closed or openness of the society, among other factors, all may impact the shape and prevalence of tracking and eorts to prevent its occurrence. Further complicating the picture, evidence has emerged indicating that the ows of human smuggling and human tracking are overlapping. What have, to date, been conceptualized as two distinct and separate activities tracking and smuggling may in actuality interact. Several cases have been diagnosed as having started o as cases of human smuggling and winding up as cases of human tracking when the migrant arrived in the destination country. Te recent tightening of border areas and immigration policies in the United States and many Western European countries, has caused speculation that the greater diculty in migrating may increase the desperation of individuals looking abroad for economic opportunities and consequently enhance the power and position of human smugglers to take advantage of and exploit these individuals. 2 Whitney Shinkle What has become clear is that in general the movement of tracked people shifts from less developed to more developed countries as individuals seek to improve their economic opportunities. Estimates set the number of tracked people annually at approximately 800,000 a year (US Department of State, 2007) and calculate that 2.5 million people are in situations of forced labor due to tracking at any given time (Belser, 2005). A study from the International Labor Organization has calculated that the potential annual prots from human tracking could top $31 billion placing it among the top three sources of illegal income worldwide (Belser, 2005). LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORKS FOR COMBATING TRAFFICKING At the international level, the legal framework for addressing human tracking (and the related issue of human smuggling) is primarily constructed by the United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime and its protocols: the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress, and Punish Tracking in Persons, Especially Women and Children; and the Protocol Against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Air, and Sea. Individual national legislation takes its cues from this document though every country makes its own specic provisions. US Legislation In the United States, the Tracking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) of 2000, and its reauthorizations of 2003 and 2005, provide comprehensive anti-tracking laws. Te TVPA departed from the prior patchwork legislative approach, which attempted to address tracking using a variety of other related laws. Te most elemental change wrought by the passage of the TVPA was to acknowledge that those caught up in human tracking, although often illegally present in the country of destination, are victims to be protected, not criminals to be punished and deported. In brief, the multi-faceted TVPA and its reauthorizations create policy and mechanisms for preventative measures to forestall tracking across US borders; increase protection and services to tracking victims already in the United States, including access to the T-Visa allowing victims to stay in the United States in exchange for assisting with investigation or prosecution of their tracker; enhance prosecution of trackers and their accomplices; and monitor other nations anti-tracking activities. Te TVPA also established the Oce to Monitor and Combat Tracking in Persons (TIP Oce) and instituted provisions to monitor and eliminate tracking in countries outside the United States. Of note, the TVPA distinguishes between smuggling which it depicts as a victimless crime in which migrants cross borders without authorization and tracking, which violates the rights of the victim. Preventing Human Traffcking 3 European Legislation Te guiding documentation for European human-tracking legislation comes from the European Union. Te critical EU legislation against tracking is embodied in the European Council Framework Decision of 19 July 2002 on Combating Tracking in Human Beings. Tis decision criminalizes tracking, outlines penalties for punishing a tracking oense, mandates protective measures (including a provision that investigations into tracking oenses not be dependent on the victim), invokes preventive action, and establishes reporting requirements for Member States. Tis decision is binding on all EU members as of August 2004, although individual Member States demonstrate a range of approaches to countering human tracking within these parameters. Some countries have passed legislation explicitly criminalizing tracking while others continue to address it through a patchwork of other related instruments. Te Council of Europe Convention on Action against Tracking in Human Beings establishes the minimum standards of protection for victims, but as of June 2007 this Convention had only been ratied by 7 states (36 have signed) and has not yet entered into force. Nonetheless, over the past several years a number of countries have passed more comprehensive national anti- tracking legislation or adopted national action plans to be implemented in the coming year, including Bulgaria, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, and Kazakhstan. Tese improvements consist of regulations pertaining to governmental responsibilities on preventing and combating human tracking, assisting and protecting victims of tracking, increasing investigation and prosecution capabilities, enhancing cooperation between governmental and non-governmental authorities, and international cooperation with other states as well as international and regional organizations. While these laws provide a credible framework, they and other, more limited, reforms are still relatively new and their implementation remains in question. PREVENTION POLICIES AND PROGRAMS Although prevention is the most long-term avenue for reducing or eliminating human tracking, it has been governments least employed tactic. Part of this inattention results from the lack of mechanisms by which to measure the impacts and success of prevention programs in achieving their intended results. Nonetheless, partly due to the urging of anti-tracking advocates and service providers, both governments and NGOs are developing stronger policies and practices for prevention activities. Tese policies fall into three categories: supply-based, demand-based, and reducing nancial gains. 4 Whitney Shinkle Supply-based Policies Supply-based prevention policies attempt to stem the supply of individuals falling victim to human tracking. Tese programs target vulnerable populations and avenues of recruitment and transport. Te programs fall into four principal areas: 1) raising popular awareness of human tracking; 2) building the political will and capacity of national governments and civil society to combat tracking in their countries; 3) providing legal alternatives for migration; and 4) reducing the conditions of poverty and gender inequality thought to constitute primary push factors making people vulnerable to trackers. Awareness-Raising Awareness-raising constitutes one of the most prevalent activities in the prevention arsenal. It takes many forms, targeting not only key policymakers and the public at-large, but also potential future victims. Within the United States, the Department of Health and Human Services Oce of Refugee Resettlement has awarded grants to numerous nongovernmental organizations to conduct awareness-raising eorts among homeless and other groups considered vulnerable to tracking, including youth, migrant farm workers, and prostitutes, in order to familiarize them with possible scams and techniques that have been used by trackers. However, US policymakers have determined that stemming the supply of victims also requires building up awareness in the countries of origin. Consequently, it has supported awareness- raising and/or child education and training programs in Albania, Bangladesh, Belarus, Benin, Brazil, Cambodia, Croatia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Liberia, Madagascar, Mali, Moldova, Mongolia, Mozambique, Russia, Serbia and Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, and Ukraine among others (USAID, 2006). Tese programs have included the establishment and promotion of national tracking information hotlines; local and national television, radio, and poster campaigns; inclusion of education materials on exploitation and tracking in school curricula; workshops for key service personnel who might come into contact with victims; and introduction of local and cross-border theater and folk song productions, featuring popular TV and cinema artists. Europe, incorporating countries of origin, transit, and destination, has been both the sponsor and the recipient of awareness-raising campaigns. Past activities have included broad, public media campaigns (sometimes government sponsored), intensive training programs for key audiences (reporters, teachers, health professionals, etc.), and school-based education programs. Awareness-raising programs have become more targeted to those at risk, often tailoring and distributing the messages for the most at-risk populations or for those individuals best-positioned to assist them (teachers, doctors, police, border guards, etc.) (Rosenberg, 2004: 4). One training Preventing Human Traffcking 5 program for local government ocials not only resulted in increased interest in tracking but also in continued collaborative eorts between local government and the community to ght tracking. Recently, however, evidence that awareness-raising campaigns have been eective at educating populations about tracking, has been tempered by evidence that such campaigns simultaneously resulted in some unexpected and unintended consequences. Awareness-raising programs are based on the assumption that high risk populations would avoid the dangerous behaviors leading to tracking if they understood the threat. One unexpected consequence of awareness-raising has been to increase interest in working abroad among some of the populations receiving the anti-tracking training. Having been educated about tracking, some individuals feel better equipped to avoid its perils and therefore are less fearful about traveling abroad for work. A second unintended consequence was increased restrictions on women and girls whose families fear their abduction, deception, and exploitation (Rosenberg, 2004: 14). Building Political Will and Capacity Te use of carrots and sticks to encourage countries of origin and transit to take measures to prevent tracking is another technique. One prevention instrument employed by the TIP Oce in the United States is the annual Tracking in Persons Report, which is deployed as a means to name and shame countries that are not adequately addressing tracking. Te Report details the eorts of countries to prevent tracking, protect victims, and prosecute trackers. Te Report ranks countries into three tiers (and a watch list category) according to the strength of their initiatives in relation to the standards set out by the TVPA and TVRPA. Tose countries which meet US standards, or are making signicant eorts towards them, are grouped within the rst two tiers, while those taking insucient steps are ranked in Tier Tree. Countries from the third tier who are judged to be initiating programs but whose implementation or credibility have yet to be proven may be moved up to the Tier Two Watch List. Similarly, countries from the second tier who fail to improve upon previous years eorts, or who relax their eorts, may be downgraded to the Watch List. Te Report utilizes two tactics to encourage compliance with anti-tracking standards: shame and sanctions. Tis public revelation of countries commitments has shamed several countries into improving their counter-tracking record. Since 2001 when the Report was instituted, the total number of countries evaluated and ranked has risen yet the number of countries in Tier Tree has dropped. As a nal incentive, the TVPA empowers the US president to impose sanctions on countries that so badly fail in these eorts that they fall into the Tier Tree category. Te TIP Report has been a critical lever to gain the attention of high level policymakers and ensure that human tracking made the international agenda. It also provides a single framework 6 Whitney Shinkle based on the tenets of prevention, protection, and prosecution within which to measure the anti-tracking eorts of the worlds countries on an ongoing basis. On the other hand, the TIP Report has been criticized as unilateral, non-transparent, and inconsistent. Other governments have complained particularly loudly that the criteria for determining the rankings are not well explained and that the United States does not apply its ranking system to judging how well its own eorts meet the designated standards. One disadvantage of the focus on the TIP Report has been the heavy emphasis on prosecution. Although a vital and necessary part of a comprehensive anti-tracking program, eective prosecution requires a well-developed legal system, free from rampant corruption, and possessing the components necessary to ensuring a safe and credible trial, including witness protection capabilities, adequate detention facilities, and access to fair and timely processes. Many of the developing countries from which tracking victims originate simply do not have these capacities as yet. However, since prosecutions remain one of the more measurable elements of anti-tracking eorts, and given US threats to sanction countries that fail to improve their eorts, the legal approach has been prioritized over protection and prevention in various national eorts.
Capacity building is seen as an important component of prevention. Both US and European agencies have undertaken their own education and outreach eorts, as well as similar eorts with their international counterparts in law enforcement, justice, and tourism ministries. Within the U.S., ocials in the Departments of Justice (including the FBI, and Civil Rights Division), Homeland Security (particularly Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Customs and Border Protection, and Citizenship and Immigration Services), and state and local law enforcement ocers have been targeted for additional training intended to assist them in identifying and rescuing victims of human tracking and to provide the appropriate referrals for victims. Abroad, US experts have provided training to local judges, public prosecutors, lawyers, and Bar Council members, organized and trained community watch groups of local ocials and law enforcements agencies, consulted on ways to improve witness protection programs, and provided and trained ocials to use equipment for video testimony (Rosenberg, 2004; USAID, 2006). Similarly, many European countries are undertaking the same initiatives with regard to improving their own capacity to detect and prevent tracking, and a select few are also assisting countries of origin to combat tracking as well. Te UK, for example, has taken eorts to train ocials in victim identication in Turkey, enhance operational investigation capacity on the Serbia-Croatia border, support increased law enforcement agency cooperation and coordination eorts in Bulgaria and Romania, and to both demonstrate and enforce zero-tolerance policies for the exploitation of women and children in conict zones where UK troops are deployed Preventing Human Traffcking 7 (Home Oce, 2007: 25-6). Te French government created new positions in six French overseas embassies, in countries viewed as most susceptible to child sex tourism, to educate country ocials in combating child sex tourism, and assist with prosecuting French nationals involved in such crimes (US Department of State, 2006). Given that many European countries serve as a combination of source, transit, and destination countries, some even playing all three roles, it is unsurprising that much of their energy may be directed inwards, or to coordinating with their neighbors. Legal Alternatives Migrant advocates have called for providing legal means of migration as a way of preventing many forms of exploitation aecting transnational migration. According to this argument, the number of individuals who feel it necessary to work abroad remains stable, regardless of whether or not their migration will be legal or illegal. Making it dicult for people to migrate legally, therefore, forces would-be migrants to take greater risks in order to seek work abroad, potentially pushing them into the hands of smugglers or trackers. By eliminating the need for migrants to take such risks to sneak across borders, providing legal alternative routes for migration or temporary work abroad is viewed as one way to diminish the role of, and opportunities for, tracking. In the meantime, safe migration programs constitute one method of providing at-risk groups with the information necessary to make informed decisions about the jobs they accept, and of empowering individuals to migrate safely and to seek assistance in case of diculties. However, a large assumption behind these programs is that there is sucient information available to judge the safety of job oers. Taking the opposing side, critics argue that providing further means for migrants to enter the country only provides more options of which trackers can take advantage, particularly if there are little or no investigations of labor abuses in countries of destination. A service that trackers can oer prospective migrants is help in gaining legitimate work visas. Appearing to be legitimate labor recruiters, the trackers oer this service at high fees. Upon arrival in the destination country, the migrants then nd themselves in debt bondage, unable to leave the arranged employment even if the wages and working conditions are far below what had been promised. Reducing Push Factor Conditions Long-term eorts are directed at reducing the push factor conditions such as poverty, gender inequality, and lack of education or economic opportunity estimated to motivate people to undertake the risks that result in their bring tracked. In a variety of source countries, the United States, through USAID, has sponsored poverty reduction programs, domestic violence victim assistance programs and shelters, HIV/AIDS prevention initiatives for prostitutes, job training 8 Whitney Shinkle and entrepreneurship development, and reintegration programs for demobilized ex-soldiers. USAID has also sponsored programs to ght corruption in government on the assumption that reduced corruption might improve the distribution of state resources and increase the available opportunities for a broader group of people (Rosenberg, 2004; USAID, 2006). In Europe, prevention is explicitly understood as both awareness-raising and active prevention activities that primarily address the root causes of tracking. Te partners of the Stability Pact (which includes the United States) agreed to address the demand for sex services and cheap, unprotected labor; promote safe means of migration; and address the involvement of authorities in human tracking. Te UK, for example, pledged in its 2007 Action Plan on Addressing Human Tracking, to continue to increase [its] development program budget to reach the UN target of 0.7% of national income by 2013 which supports country-led approaches to improve governance and security, health and education, and decent work opportunities for poor people (Home Oce, 2007: 23). In practice, however, most countries continue to address prevention by clamping down on migration, prostitution, and organized crime. Additionally, in Europe, a great proportion of this work is carried out by NGOs whose restricted budgets and geographic coverage limit their ability to reach a signicant portion of vulnerable populations. Despite rhetoric about the need for comprehensive approaches to prevention, awareness- raising is by far the most common instrument of prevention in both the United States and Europe. Anecdotal evidence indicates that awareness-raising campaigns in Albania, Bulgaria, Moldovia, and Romania may be responsible for reducing levels of tracking though the inability to accurately measure the eectiveness of awareness-raising activities makes this dicult to prove (Rosenberg, 2004: 13). A signicant weakness in supply-based anti-tracking eorts is the lack of direct research on human tracking underpinning policy decisions. As a result, the linkages between the awareness-raising campaigns and reductions in numbers of persons tracked are indirect and assumed. Te content and targeting of awareness-raising eorts, whether focused on potential victims or key governmental and NGO ocials, depends on a reasonable assessment of who is at risk and why. However, the scarcity of victims combined with legitimate concerns about victim protection has resulted in a dearth of robust research and policies based on the experiences of the victims themselves. A dedicated eort must be made to ensure that the voices of victims contribute to the formulation of preventative programming. Demand-based Prevention Policies Despite continuing debate over the causal and enabling factors of human tracking, a study for the International Organization of Migration concluded that there is a clear demand for exploitable workers in many countries in various industries which is often satised through tracking Preventing Human Traffcking 9 (Anderson and Davidson, 2003). Demand-based programs are based on the assumption that informing consumers about tracking and its victims, imposing criminal sanctions against consumers, making the use of these services socially unacceptable, or educating potential trackers or beneciaries about prostitution, gender violence, human rights, and other issues, will reduce demand. Te Tracking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA) clearly criminalized any attempts to engage in forced labor. It also ratcheted up the existing penalties for those crimes and provided for mandatory restitution and forfeiture in proven tracking oenses. Te United States Department of Justice also increased the number of successful prosecutions from 5 in 2001 to 79 in 2006, an increase of more than 1,400 percent (US Department of Justice, 2007: 17). Tese measures are designed to puncture trackers sense of impunity and deter future tracking by demonstrating the increased risk associated with tracking to or within the United States. Te US government has also implemented measures designed to increase the cost and/ or consequences imposed on purchasers or employers of tracked labor, with the intent of decreasing the demand for such persons, particularly for sex tracking. Te United States has also expanded its area of jurisdiction over crimes of sex tourism through the Prosecutorial Remedies and Other Tools to End the Exploitation of Children Today Act of 2003 (PROTECT Act). Te PROTECT Act improves on the Child Sexual Abuse Prevention Act of 1994 by: Broadening the list of activities considered criminal; Eliminating the requirement that the defendant have had intent to commit such an act before or upon leaving the United States; Including operators of sex tours as viable targets of criminal prosecution; Increasing the maximum sentence upon conviction to 30 years per sexual act. Further, the Tracking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005 (TVPRA 2005) mandated research on the connection between tracking and conict, requiring greater investigation into the connection between deployments of peacekeepers and humanitarian workers and the increase in the number of women and girls tracked. It further required that USAID and the Departments of State and Defense incorporate anti tracking and protection measures into all post-conict and humanitarian assistance activities. European regional organizations have taken similar measures to address expatriate demand. In 2005, the OSCE Ministerial Council Decision No. 16/05 called on member states to ensure that their national laws and regulations could be enforced with respect to their nationals on peacekeeping forces or other international missions, provide training on policies and 10 Whitney Shinkle consequences regarding human tracking when instructing military and civilian personnel abroad, and to prevent, enforce, and punish cases of tracking among such personnel (OSCE, 2005). One of the more experimental demand-reduction eorts in the EU has been undertaken by Sweden. Te 1999 Act Prohibiting the Purchase of Sexual Services shifts the burden of criminality to the people who buy sex, and o of the prostitutes. Buyers of sex can receive a six months prison sentence. During the laws rst ve years, charges were brought against some 750 men and approximately two-thirds of those charged are expected to be sentenced. Supporters attest that street prostitution has decreased dramatically, foreign women have mostly disappeared from the streets and men have become scared and more cautious. However, critics posit that more than two-thirds of prostitutes have simply begun working indoors: at home, in a brothel, in a club, or as escorts. Some attest that exposing, investigating, and prosecuting sex purchases that occur indoors is more dicult, proponents maintain that the numbers of casual oenders have been signicantly reduced (Rosenberg, 2004: 27). Other countries are reportedly considering similar laws to criminalize the buyers of sex, rather than legalizing prostitution, and Finland passed legislation in 2006 prohibiting the purchase of sexual services in situations linked to human tracking (Legislation Online, 2006). Countries including Ukraine, Russia, Moldova, and Belarus have also taken steps to license companies that provide services to facilitate employment, travel, or marriage overseas. In theory, such licensing agreements allow governments to regulate company activities and prevent them from engaging, knowingly or otherwise, in tracking in persons by investigating companies and sanctioning violators (Rosenberg, 2004: 24). Citizens now also should be able to verify the legitimacy of companies and their oers. Te credibility of these eorts remains to be seen. Policymakers on both sides of the Atlantic recognize the need for stronger instruments available to investigators and prosecutors addressing the demand for exploitable labor. However, legal systems continue to disproportionately favor trackers over victims and laborers. In the U.S., labor laws do not dene household or agricultural workers as employees under the National Labor Relations Act (NRLA). Not only does this deny them certain protections, it provides refuge for employers who are free from troublesome inspections. In addition, domestic workers who are brought to the United States on visas are generally required to remain with their original employer or risk deportation. Employers can easily manipulate such threats against tracked or smuggled persons who fear the ramications of discovery and deportation. Employers of agricultural workers benet from the additional fact that labor contractors, not growers, are responsible for the legal rights of workers, eectively providing them with a deniability clause. Preventing Human Traffcking 11 Furthermore, in general, the implementation of the law has been inconsistent. For example, the TVPA allows the United States to sanction governments that are not making recognizable progress towards combating tracking. However, to date, the United States has chosen only to sanction those few countries against which it had already instituted a sanctions regime, undermining the TVPAs deterrent or preventative function. Most importantly, many countries have not explicitly or openly acknowledged the fact that some industries, particularly labor-intensive ones, might not survive in the absence of cheap, unprotected labor. Tis connection needs to be publicly recognized and the necessary resources allocated to agencies which are responsible for ensuring that illicit and criminal labor practices are prevented, investigated, and prosecuted. Reducing the Financial-Gains from Tracking Some advocates have begun designing policies to undercut the nancial gains enjoyed by trackers, smugglers, and corrupt ocials which sustain criminal operations, although few credible eorts have applied this approach. To date, US eorts have focused on imposing costs at both the national and individual level. As mentioned above, the TVPA contains international monitoring and sanctions provisions enabling the US government to impose sanctions on those countries which are ranked in Tier Tree by the annual Tracking in Persons Report. Tough rare, such sanctions have been applied in a few cases. Such sanctions can withhold non-humanitarian, non-trade-related assistance or, if a country does not receive such assistance, withhold funding for participation in educational and cultural exchange programs. Te United States might also choose to oppose a countrys application for assistance from international nancial institutions (excepting applications for humanitarian, trade-related, or some development-related assistance). At the individual level, the TVPA established mandatory restitution from convicted trackers. Te TVPRA of 2003 also allows survivors to sue their former trackers for damages in civil court. Tese initiatives are intended to discourage would-be trackers by raising the cost of human tracking relative to its potential gains. It is hoped that in light of the heightened numbers of arrests and prosecutions, trackers will be forced to re-evaluate their cost/benet analysis. Few European counterparts have taken steps to impose greater deterrent costs on the trackers themselves. Te UK, however, has implemented a similar series of nancial deterrent mechanisms to those of the United States, seeking to conscate any proceeds of crime under the Proceeds of Crime Act or 2002. Te Home Oce is also evaluating recommendations to try and 12 Whitney Shinkle prevent re-tracking by giving victims the option to claim compensation from their trackers by requesting a compensation order upon conviction, suing the oender in civil courts, or, in certain circumstances, through the UK Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme. CONCLUSION Anti-tracking campaigns have gained much needed momentum over the past several years, nonetheless, the global progress against tracking has been uneven and inconsistent and generally dicult to measure. To date, much work reects the emphasis on prosecution that is so dominant in the United States. In the long-term, however, prevention is likely to be a much more eective way to avert the exploitation of vulnerable women, men, boys, and girls than seeking to identify and extract victims from their clandestine circumstances once their tracking experience is underway. ISIM commends the past reforms and encourages governments to devote more of their energies to prevention eorts in seeking more eective ways to combat human tracking. RECOMMENDATIONS Despite recent increases in the attention to and prevalence of prevention activities in human tracking campaigns, prevention-based eorts remain the least utilized of the anti-tracking techniques, in large part because credible means of measuring their eectiveness are still under- developed. Until the links are better proven between awareness-raising, or other prevention activities, and a reduction in tracking, prevention will be poorly explored. Nevertheless, given the diculty in identifying and extracting tracking victims once they are immersed in this clandestine practice, eective prevention could be the most eective way to protect vulnerable populations. Te following recommendations are suggested means of improving prevention eorts: Overall Recommendations Governments should apportion resources for dedicated research and consultation with survivors to solicit their opinions and experiences for eective means of prevention. Governments must dedicate resources to developing evaluation metrics to measure the eectiveness of prevention techniques, particularly the popular awareness-raising campaigns. For whatever programs governments choose to rely on to deter tracking, Preventing Human Traffcking 13 they need improved measures to monitor the eectiveness of these programs so that successful campaigns can be tailored to be relevant in local communities and best practices can be replicated. Western governments should also seek to assist developing source countries in designing measuring instruments to track the progress of their own prevention programs. Recommendations for Supply-based Eorts Awareness-Raising Awareness-raising initiatives should target consular and immigration ocials abroad in addition to law enforcement and immigration ocials at home. It is important that government ocials in overseas visa-issuing posts and ports of exit be able to identify potential tracking victims before they leave their own countries and enter new transit or destination countries. Ocials also need to be made aware of available service and assistance programs for victims, and referral mechanisms, as well as safe ways to question and inform potential victims of these options outside the presence of their tracker. Public awareness campaigns must do a better job of identifying high risk target communities, including recent immigrant populations. Trackers appear to target their own ethnic groups for both victims and associates, suggesting that these groups are in positions of both particular vulnerability and opportunity. Past examples suggest that broad public awareness campaigns might increase the number of victims identied and the pressure on employers not to use tracked labor, but these campaigns need to be more comprehensive in accessing and educating vulnerable communities, not only beneciary communities. Governments should further encourage the development of early warning systems wherein NGOs and labor organizations monitor high risk and vulnerable populations, the families of witnesses, or repatriated victims for threats, risks, and possible tracking activity. Building Political Will and Capacity National and international monitoring bodies should look for ways to emphasize prevention in annual evaluations of tracking eorts, including recognition of best practices and identication of measurement instruments and indicators. Training and education for agency ocials must be provided to local and district level law enforcement ocials. To date, most anti-tracking eorts have been limited to the national level, although much of the work in identifying and investigating tracking cases could be best conducted at the local level. Without basic training to identify tracking or 14 Whitney Shinkle smuggling, protect victims, and prosecute the criminals, local law enforcement ocers may in fact harm their eorts to identify and prosecute trackers, sometimes deporting or criminalizing the victims they need as eyewitnesses to successfully try their targets. Legal Alternatives Countries need to engage in a sincere dialogue about labor migration and the demand/ supply needs of the country. Signicant work is needed to promote legal immigration avenues and regulations based on a credible assessment of the labor requirements and migration policies of each country. Reducing Push Factors Perhaps most importantly, governments must address deep-seated inequalities within their own countries. Deep and intractable social issues appear to underlay many victims decisions to undertake or accept risky or unspecied oers of work that end up in tracking. Common sense would imply that if individuals are moving from impoverished to wealthier countries, they would be less likely to seek, participate, or tolerate many of the underground, unregulated, or irregular employment which leaves them open to exploitation if they had other means of providing for themselves and their families in their home countries. Governments must devote more resources to researching the linkages between inequalities and tracking in order to implement more eective prevention policies. UNIFEM and other researchers have suggested that women or certain minority populations (ethnic, religious, etc.) are more vulnerable to tracking as a result of discriminatory policies (see UNIEFEM, womenwarpeace.org). Te consequences of these conditions must be more thoroughly understood in order to ecaciously address deep-seated inequalities underlying human tracking. Recommendations for Demand-based Eorts Governments need to strengthen the framework of labor laws regarding the employment of illegal workers and impose greater costs on those employers who choose to employ and/or exploit illegal laborers. Governments need to strengthen the capacity and ability of investigative forces, like those among the Department/Ministry of Labor, to legitimize the threat of discovery for employers hiring or exploiting illegal workers and enhance the deterrent factor of labor laws. Existing legal codes and procedures need to be better promoted and enforced to increase Preventing Human Traffcking 15 their deterrent factor. Department/Ministries of Justice need to eliminate loop holes which favor trackers over their victims and seek more humane and creative court practices to ensure that victims, who may be abroad, facing legitimate security threats, or physically or mentally unable to appear at trial, have safe and legitimate means of testifying or participating in investigations and prosecutions. Such alternatives might make use of video-conferencing capabilities, closed circuit TV, or other technological advances. Recommendations for Financial Gains-Reduction Eorts Institute and streamline the process by which victims can demand restitution or sue for damages in civil court. 16 Whitney Shinkle REFERENCES Anderson, B., and J.O. Davidson 2003 Is Tracking in Human Beings Demand Driven? A Multi-Country Pilot Study, IOM Migration Research Series, No. 15, Geneva: IOM. Belser, P. 2005 Forced Labour and Human Trafficking: Estimating the Profits, Working Paper, Geneva: International Labour Organization Oce. Home Oce and Scottish Executive 2007 Action Plan on Tackling Human Tracking, Internet, http://www.homeoce.gov.uk/documents/ human-track-action-plan?view=Binary. Legislation Online 2006 Finland Passes Law on Criminalisation on the Purchase of Sexual Services of Victims of Tracking, Legislation Online, 21 June 2006, http://www.legislationline.org/news.php?tid=1&jid=17. Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) 2005 Decision No. 16/05 Ensuring the Highest Standards of Conduct and Accountability of Persons Serving on International Forces and Missions, OSCE Ministerial Council (13) Journal No. 2, 6 December, http://194.8.63.155/documents/mcs/2005/12/17372_en.pdf. Rosenberg, R. 2004 Best Practices for Programming to Prevent Tracking in Human Beings in Europe and Eurasia, Maryland: Development Alternatives, Inc. UNIFEM 2007 Women, War, Peace and Tracking, online fact sheet, Womenwarpeace.org, http://www. womenwarpeace.org/issues/tracking/tracking.htm, (accessed: August 2007). US Agency for International Development (USAID) 2006 Tracking in Persons: USAIDs Response, Washington, DC: USAID. US Department of Justice 2007 Attorney Generals Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government Activities to Combat Tracking in Persons Fiscal Year 2006, Washington, DC: Department of Justice. US Department of State 2007 Introduction, Tracking in Persons Report 2007, Internet, http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/ tiprpt/2007/82799.htm. 2006 Tracking in Persons Report 2006, Internet, http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/tiprpt/2006/65988. htm. Policy Brief #1: Women, Migration and Development By Susan F. Martin Policy Brief #2: Transatlantic Perspectives on Migration: Protecting Tracking Victims: Inadequate Measures? By Whitney Shinkle Policy Brief #3: Preventing Human Tracking: An Evaluation of Current Eorts By Whitney Shinkle Policy Brief #4: International Migration and Anti-Terrorism Laws and Policies: Balancing Security and Refugee Protection By Andrew I. Schoenholtz and Jennifer Hojaiban For more information on the Transatlantic Perspectives on Migration Policy Brief Series and other ISIM initiatives, please visit: h t t p : / i s i m . g e o r g e t o w n . e d u Transatlantic Perspectives on Migration Policy Brief Series Te Institute for the Study of International Migration (ISIM) is part of the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service and aliated with the Law Center at Georgetown University. ISIM brings the best social science, legal and policy expertise to the complex and controversial issues raised by international migration. Staed by leading experts on immigration and refugee policy, the Institute draws upon the resources of Georgetown University faculty working on international migration and related issues on the main campus and in the law center. http://isim.georgetown.edu Te German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF) is a nonpartisan American public policy and grantmaking institution dedicated to promoting greater cooperation and understanding between the United States and Europe. GMF does this by supporting individuals and institutions working on transatlantic issues, by convening leaders to discuss the most pressing transatlantic themes, and by examining ways in which transatlantic cooperation can address a variety of global policy challenges. Founded in 1972 through a gift from Germany as a permanent memorial to Marshall Plan assistance, GMFs headquarters is in Washington, DC. GMF has seven oces in Europe: Berlin, Bratislava, Paris, Brussels, Belgrade, Ankara, and Bucharest. http://www.gmfus.org N o n - P r o t O r g a n i z a t i o n U S P o s t a g e P A I D P e r m i t N o . 3 9 0 1 W a s h i n g t o n , D C 3 3 0 0 W h i t e h a v e n S t N W S u i t e 3 1 0 0 W a s h i n g t o n , D C 2 0 0 0 7 2 0 2 - 6 8 7 - 2 2 5 8 2 0 2 - 6 8 7 - 2 5 4 1 ( f a x ) h t t p : / i s i m . g e o r g e t o w n . e d u
Wolfgang Benedek, Christopher Daase, Vojin Dimitrijević, Petrus van Duyne (eds.) - Transnational Terrorism, Organized Crime and Peace-Building_ Human Security in the Western Balkans-Palgrave Macmillan