The Modern Slave Trade? Not Quite

The trafficking of human being across the Mediterranean Sea into Europe has been on the news last month. The death of almost 900 people as they sought refuge and a better life in Europe so much pricked our collective conscience that at last there seems to be some movement to prevent these events from re-occuring. Former leaders of European countries for example described it as “a stain on the conscience of our continent”[1].  Continue reading

Smuggling of Migrants: A Search for New Land, New Home, New Life.

Written by Garima Tiwari
In this picture, victims of human smuggling are intercepted along the Southern border of the United States of America. Photo credit/Wordpress

In this picture, victims of human smuggling are intercepted along the Southern border of the United States of America. Photo credit/Wordpress

On May 16th, 2013 Ecuador smashed a ring that smuggled immigrants from India and Sri Lanka into the US through Ecuador. Among the six people were arrested including three Indian nationals and two members of Ecuador’s immigration police. They brought in nationals from India and Sri Lanka, and arranged refuge for them in various hotels. The smugglers charged USD 5000 per person and after entering Ecuador illegally, the migrants would be sent to Central America and from there to the United States.[i]   Continue reading

Children as Victims of Trafficking in India

Written by Garima Tiwari

sctnow india-child-labour_1570360i

( http://www.glogster.com and http://www.gandhiforchildren.org)

The recent case of an Indian new-born baby allegedly sold for 800,000 rupees ($ 14,750) over Facebook, opened up many questions on the prevalence and working of child trafficking racket in the country. The boy, born in a hospital in Ludhiana in the northern state of Punjab, was sold twice before the deal on the social networking site. The infant’s grandfather allegedly first snatched the child from his own daughter, telling her he had been stillborn, to sell him to a nurse for 45,000 rupees. The nurse, in turn, reportedly sold the baby for 300,000 rupees to a hospital lab assistant. The infant was then allegedly put up for sale on Facebook by the lab assistant, and a businessman from New Delhi is accused of offering 800,000 rupees for him after seeing photographs. The police raided the businessman’s house and recovered the child. They also arrested five people including the grandfather and another man accused of facilitating the deals. Tens of thousands of children in India are thought to be trafficked every year, some for adoption but also many for bonded labour, begging or sexual exploitation.[i] That is hardly the experience of most parents. Since 2007, when the exposure of a serial killer in Nithari, on the outskirts of New Delhi, revealed that local police had ignored parents’ pleas that their children had disappeared, evidence has piled up showing that officials continue to disregard complaints of missing children.[ii]

Many, many such incidents are repeatedly reported with multitude of reasons for trafficking and sad implications. Take for example, Smita a sixteen year old girl was taken from her village in Jharkhand, India and subjected to various forms of sexual abuse and exploitation at the hand of her employers including rape. When rescued her parents refused to take her back since she had been tainted by rape. Falling sex ratios in Haryana and Punjab has led to a need for trafficking of brides from villages in Orissa, Jharkhand, Bihar, Assam and West Bengal, who have been sold off by the parents. Jyoti, age fourteen, was sold and married to a 40-year old man for Rs 15,000 in order to produce a mail heir[iii]

This post highlights the need for urgent action by the authorities to fight child trafficking in India. A huge number of children from a place called Tarai in Nepal are trafficked to India everyday and they fall victims to child labor. Approximately 90,000 children went missing in India in 2011 alone. Nearly half of these cases remain unsolved. Thus, while there is movement of children through procurement and sale from one country to another, with India being both a supplier as well as a “consumer”, there is internal “movement” of children within the country itself – one town to another, one district to another and one state to another. It is undertaken in an organised manner, by organised syndicates or by individuals, and sometimes informal groups. Relatives and parents are part of this as well.[iv] Children as young as 5 years are sold to traffickers by their parents who are in need of money and brought to India.  These children are trafficked to various parts of India like Delhi, Mumbai and Kolkata and are made to work in cloth factories, have to stitch bags and perform various hazardous and odd jobs. [v] In 2012 about 250 Nepali children were rescued from the India-Nepal border. There are number of unregistered orphanages in Nepal which are trafficking children to different parts of the world and Indian human rights activists speculate that there are thousands of Nepali children who work in India. In March 2013, 38 tribal children, including 32 minors were rescued who were being taken by train for bonded labor. [vi]Their parents were given an advance amount of Rs 1,000 for a bonded labour of 40 days for the children, to work at the under construction site of railway tracks in Nagpur in India. The agents involved in trafficking usually give these minor girls the look of a married woman so that they are not easily caught. The boys were to be paid a daily wage of Rs 160 and girls Rs 150.

The chart below shows some of the methods of trafficking:

ct

Chart taken from the Manual For Social Workers : Dealing with child victims of trafficking and commercial sex exploitation[vii]

The Indian Constitution under Article 23 specifically prohibits human trafficking, asserting that all citizens have the right to be protected from exploitation. Article 36 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child provides for protection of children from exploitation and physical and psychological recovery and article 39 of the CRC provides for the social reintegration of child victims of exploitation. In India, various laws like Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act of 2000 (JJA), Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act of 1956 (ITPA) amended in 1986, and the like, are providing support, care, and protection to these children in various State Homes across the country.

In June 2011, India ratified the United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, which supplemented the 2000 UN Convention Against Transnational Organised Crime. India’s response to the problem of trafficking has been considerably influenced by its Trafficking in Person (TIP )Report rankings. The definition of trafficking under the UN TIP Protocol is the “recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons” by using “force[,] . . . coercion, abduction, fraud, [and] deception” to control and exploit another person, including, but not limited to, sex exploitation.Between 2001 and 2003, India figured in Tier Two of the TIP Report before being demoted to the Tier Two Watch List. It was only in May 2011 when India ratified the UN Protocol that it made its way once again into the Tier Two List. India’s response to the trafficking problem in terms of abolishing trafficking isn’t unique in the sub-continent. Indeed, the 2002 SAARC Convention on Preventing and Combating Trafficking in Women and Children defines trafficking as sex trafficking following a 1949 UN Convention, rather than the 2000 UN Protocol.[viii]

While India has ratified the UN Convention for the Suppression of the Trafficking in Persons, without reservation, and enacted ITPA in response showing its intention to fight trafficking, Section 7 of the said act which penalizes those who prostitute in or near public places, and Section 8, which penalizes the solicitation of sex, both of which have in practice justified the police’s arrest and imprisonment of trafficked women who have been forced into prostitution and who have no knowledge or control over the brothel’s proximity to public places. Amending the law to exclude Sections 7 and 8 would decriminalize the activities of trafficking victims who are forced to solicit for sex. In 2006, a bill to amend the ITPA was proposed by India’s Ministry of Women and Child Development, which would decriminalize prostitution and instead would penalize prostitutes’ clients. The law currently contains provisions that penalize brothel owners, managers, and traffickers. The Ministry of Home Affairs also set up specialized police units in major Indian cities in 2011 with the sole task of investigating sex trafficking cases and arresting traffickers and brothel owners and managers. These police officers were specially trained and sensitized to understand how trafficking rings operate. However, the police lack the resources to investigate and make arrests on every trafficking case. [ix] Even after arrest the judicial process is so slow that while one is being put under trial, the whole trafficking ring keeps flourishing.

The recent Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2013 recognises trafficking as an offence in the Section 370 of the Indian Penal Code . This is on the similar lines as the Palermo Protocol, also ratified by India in May 2011, following a Supreme Court judgement defining trafficking in a public interest litigation (PIL) field by Bachpan Bachao Andolan in 2011. The bill targets the entire process that leads to trafficking of a person and also makes the employment of a trafficked person and subsequent sexual exploitation a specific offence under Section 370 A.[x] While the old section 370 of Indian Penal Code dealt with only buying or disposing of any person as a slave the new section will take in its purview buying or disposing of any person for various kinds of exploitation including slavery. This provision includes organ trade as well. As the explanation further clarifies “exploitation” would also include prostitution. This is in addition to the ITP Act, 1956. The new section also ensures that persons involved at each and every stage of trafficking chain are brought within the criminal justice system.Also by specifically including that if a person is brought with his/her consent, where such consent is obtained through force, coercion, fraud, deception or under abuse of power, the same will amount to trafficking, the law has been substantially strengthened. This will cover all situations where girls who happen to be major are duped with promises of marriage and willingly accompany the traffickers who exploit them in various ways. While earlier no specific offence was made out for the mere bringing of the girl in question now that too is criminalized.  It has also been specifically added in the provision that consent of the victim is immaterial for the determination of the offence.The new section also differentiates the instances of trafficking major persons from minor persons. This differentiation is brought about by providing separate penalty for each with higher minimum sentence for trafficking minor persons.In addition the section also provides for enhanced punishment for repeated offender as well as where the offender traffics more than one person at the same time. By providing that trafficking in minor persons on a repeated conviction will attract imprisonment for life (meaning the remaining natural life) the law has been substantially changed.[xi] This will surely act as a big deterrent. Involvement of a public servant including a police officer shall entitle him to life imprisonment which shall mean the remaining natural life.[xii] Addition of the section 370 A further adds strength to trafficking related law by criminalizing employment of a trafficked (major/minor) person. A person who has even reason to believe or apprehension that the minor/major person employed by them has been trafficked will make them criminally liable. This places a huge responsibility on the employers who were till now, let off easily under the not so strict provisions of the child labour laws and juvenile related laws.  Here also a higher minimum prison term is prescribed where a minor person is involved. Also important is the fact that irrespective of age of the person employed, simply employing a trafficked person is an offence. This provision will go a long way in ensuring that people verify the antecedents of the placement agencies as also get the police verification of the persons employed. This will also aide in curbing the huge demand for labour who are victims of unsafe migration.[xiii]

The enactment of the law on paper with no real training and support to the functionaries would be futile and therefore, what is needed now is “actual”, “planned” and “effective” implementation. Involving the community participation in the whole implementation process would create a greater impact. The procedures and technicalities should not reduce the ambitious legislations to empty words, because at stake here are the children- the future of the nation.

(For those who want to get a deeper understand of the brutality of the child trafficking rackets I recommend the movie recently screened at the Cannes Film Festival on May 22 titled: “Oass- The Dew Drop”, which is inspired by a real-life story of abduction of an 11-year-old Nepalese girl who is sold to a brothel in Delhi by her aunt. (http://www.youtube.com/user/OassTheFilm))


[i] Police Rescue Indian baby allegedly sold on facebook, April 24, 2013 available at http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/police-rescue-indian-baby-allegedly-sold-on-facebook/article4650168.ece

[ii] Jason Overdorf, Indian Chilld Trafficking on the Rise, May 5, 2013 available at http://www.salon.com/2013/05/05/child_trafficking_in_india_on_the_rise_partner/

[iv] Child Trafficking in India available at http://www.haqcrc.org/publications/child-trafficking-india

[v] Darker Side of India: Child Trafficking on the Rise,27th March 2013, available at  http://www.siliconindia.com/news/general/Darker-Side-of-India-Child-Trafficking-on-the-Rise-nid-144134-cid-1.html

[vi] Rashmi Drolia,Child Trafficking: 38 Children Rescued from Railway Station, 15th March 2013,available at  http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-03-15/raipur/37744973_1_railway-station-tribal-children-needy-children

[viii] Prabha Kotiswaran, India has to rethink human trafficking, The Hindu Business Line, march 27th 2012, available at http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/india-has-to-rethink-human-trafficking/article3251458.ece

[ix] Anusree Garg, Anti Trafficking Legislation Inadequately Combatting Sex Trafficking in India, March 2013, The Human Rights Brief, available at The Human Rights Brief, http://hrbrief.org/2013/03/anti-trafficking-legislation-inadequately-combating-sex-trafficking-in-india/

[x] India Prohibits All forms of Trafficking, March 21st, 2013, Bachpan Bachao Andolan available at http://www.bba.org.in/news/210313.php

[xiii] Ibid

A New Frontier: Community Prosecution and Human Trafficking

Regina Paulose

One of the greatest challenges in combating human trafficking is developing holistic solutions that truly prevent and eradicate this crime in all of its forms. As discussed by the A CONTRARIO team this month, human trafficking represents a multi-billion dollar industry in which hundreds of thousands of people become victims to this brutal slave trade.

Top down approaches implemented by governments in the status quo are not adequate enough. Prosecution of this particular crime has proven particularly difficult.[1]  A recent report indicates that “additional proactive approaches (e.g., expanding outreach to additional law enforcement agencies and nongovernmental organizations and pursuing multijurisdictional and international trafficking investigations and prosecutions), requiring strategic collaboration among agencies, to enhance agency efforts to investigate and prosecute these crimes” is needed.[2]

One approach that could prove useful to the global community, is utilizing a new paradigm, such as community prosecution. Community prosecution allows all stakeholders : the general community, civic organizations, faith communities, and business people to contribute to the wellbeing of their communities. It allows these groups to shape policy and discuss preventative strategies that law enforcement and prosecutors can employ. Community prosecution shifts the prosecutorial paradigm from looking at cases as statistics and applying formulaic approaches and instead weaves the philosophy of deterrence and punishment in a proactive and collaborative manner. It promotes four key principles: (1) recognizing the community’s role in public safety (2) engaging in proactive problem solving (3) establishing and maintaining partnerships and (4) evaluating activities in the community.[3] The strategies employed depend on the needs of that specific locality.[4]   Community prosecution is restorative justice. Its true beauty  lies in the fact that there is “no self-defining vision or unitary meaning inherent to the concept of community prosecution.”[5]  It is not a one size fits all solution.

How can community prosecution combat global human trafficking? People become prey to human traffickers because of various “push-pull” factors. A “push” factor that is commonly discussed is that people become susceptible to trafficking because of dire economic circumstances/impoverishment. Therefore, the accompanying “pull” factor that is used is the promise of gainful employment or better opportunities in another country. Under a community prosecution paradigm, prosecutors and law enforcement would educate their assigned localities regarding human trafficking and encourage reporting of poor labor conditions, sexual violence, and prostitution.  In addition, prosecutors, the community, and law enforcement would come up with particular programs to address this problem in their localities. These methods are of course, fused with the regular prosecution of individuals who commit crimes. It therefore prevents the legal system from applying band aid solutions. 

A method like community prosecution also serves to enhance the rule of law. It undermines corrupt governments who profit from human trafficking and it weakens organized criminal groups who ruin the very fabric of society and the rule of law. Idealistically, it creates society where no criminal is given a safe haven for their crimes. It also creates reforms in many places in need of a strong rule of law because the public actively participates. It gives people a voice and gives people  power in becoming part of a solution.

If the movement in combating human trafficking is to gain more momentum, it is necessary for prosecutors to have a more dynamic role within  the community. The function of a prosecutor should not be to serve as a wizard behind a curtain (inaccessible to the public) but to champion justice, to promote and aid in dispensing the rule of law, and to work with law enforcement in deterring crime for the safety of the community.

A full publication on Community Prosecution by this author can be found here.


[1] Ellie Bogue, Human Traffickers Tough to Prosecute, (may 7, 2011), available at: http://www.news-sentinel.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110507/NEWS/105070327. See also ICF International, Prosecuting Human Trafficking Cases: Lessons Learned and Promising Practices, Executive Summary, June 30, 2008, viii, available at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/223972.pdf

[2] GAO, HUMAN TRAFFICKING A Strategic Framework Could Help Enhance the Interagency Collaboration Needed to Effectively Combat Trafficking Crimes, GAO -07-917,  33,34, (July 2007), available at: http://www.gao.gov/assets/270/264645.pdf

[3] National District Attorneys Association, National Center for Community Prosecution, available at: http://www.ndaa.org/nccp_home.html

[4] Goldcamp, Irons-Guynn, and Weiland, Community Prosecution Strategies: Measuring Impact” Bureau of Justice Assistance Bulletin, 6, (November 2002) available at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bja/192826.pdf

[5] Anthony Alfieri, Community Prosecutors, 90 Cal. L. Rev. 1465, 1476 (2002), citing Anthony C. Thompson, It Takes a Community to Prosecute, 77 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 321,324 (2002), who also argues that the lack of structure also creates a problem because there is no unifying vision.

EU Response to the Crime of Human Trafficking

Written by Lina Laurinaviciute

“Trafficking in human beings is the slavery of our times” stresses the European Commission.[1] This position is largely reflected in the European Union (hereinafter EU) political interventions, which are usually seen in the international arena as exemplary with regard to fighting the crime of human trafficking in Europe. Indeed, the political commitment at the EU level to address this problem was established with large number of initiatives, measures and funding programmes both within the EU and external countries since the 1990s.[2]

However, the current economic situation faced by the EU countries raises business opportunities for traffickers. Human trafficking is considered to be one of the most profitable criminal activities worldwide, which estimated global annual profits are 31.6 billion U.S. dollars[3]. The warning of a dramatic increase in human trafficking put this complex issue involving criminality and law enforcement back on the political agenda of the EU and its Member States. Despite the lack of the reliable data, which makes it very problematic to develop comprehensive and effective measures to fight human trafficking, the estimated number of people trafficked to or within the EU amounts to several hundred thousand a year.[4]

Data collected by the European Commission in September 2011 shows that 76 % of registered victims of human trafficking were trafficked for sexual exploitation,14 % for forced labour, 3 % for forced begging,1 % for domestic servitude and the rest 6 % for criminal activities, removal of organs, etc. It also shows that women and girls are the main victims of this crime (79 %). Most Member States reported that majority of victims from within the EU come mainly from Romania, Bulgaria, Poland and Hungary, whereas most victims from non-EU countries are from Nigeria, Vietnam, Ukraine, Russia and China.[5]

While systematically collected and managed data on human trafficking remains essential for the efficient response to this crime, legal instruments to approach human trafficking need be harmonized within the EU Member States.

Human Trafficking is specifically prohibited by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which states that: “Trafficking in human beings is prohibited.”[6] A lot of attention has also been paid to the United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (hereinafter Palermo Protocol) and the Council of Europe Convention on Actions against Trafficking in Human Beings.[7] Indeed, in the EU human trafficking is defined uniformly according to the Palermo Protocol: “Trafficking in persons shall mean the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs”.[8]

In the case of Rantsev v Cyprus and Russia the European Court of Human Rights provided a decisive human rights benchmark with clear obligations for the EU Member States to take the necessary steps to address different areas of human trafficking. These include recruitment, investigation, prosecution, protection of human rights, and providing assistance to victims. If the authorities are aware of a case of human trafficking, or that an individual risks being a victim of this crime, they are obliged to take appropriate measures.[9]

However, despite the obligations for the Member States to criminalise all possible acts that constitute human trafficking and to provide an adequate framework to protect victims of this crime, not all Member States have ratified the above mentioned legal instruments. As well, there are still legislative gaps in their transposition into domestic legislation. Therefore, “the elements determining Trafficking in Human Beings vary considerably across EU Member States.”[10]

A major step forward was the adoption of the new Directive on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings, in 2011.[11] The Directive adopts a comprehensive approach to human trafficking from a gender (as beforehand mentioned, women and children are particularly affected) and human rights perspective. It supports the harmonisation of the EU Member States’ criminal laws, possibility not to prosecute and apply penalties to victims for unlawful activities they were forced to commit by the traffickers, possibility to prosecute the EU nationals for human trafficking offences committed in another EU State or outside the EU. It also includes robust provisions on victim’s protection, including special measures for children as well as victims’ support, such as shelters, medical and psychological assistance, translation services.[12] The new Directive also requires Member States to set up a ‘National Rapporteur’ responsible for monitoring and implementation of anti-trafficking policy at national level. Whereas the European Commission has already appointed an EU Anti-trafficking Coordinator who will oversee the implementation of the EU Strategy towards the eradication of trafficking in human beings 2012-2016 (hereinafter the EU Strategy).[13]

The EU Strategy focuses on prevention, protection, prosecution, partnerships and also increasing knowledge on emerging concerns related to human trafficking.[14] This instrument reflects a number of EU initiatives in various policy areas which contribute to addressing human trafficking. For instance, the development of guidelines to improve identification of victims; the guidelines on child protection systems; the improvement of access to information for victims of their rights and support for them to exercise these rights effectively; the measures to reduce the demand for and supply of services and goods by victims of human trafficking; the development of the EU-wide guidance on future prevention measures and gender-sensitive information campaigns, as the awareness-raising campaigns already implemented in the Member States were evaluated as insufficient in their scale and impact.

These and others EU instruments determine that any approach to human trafficking must be based on the needs of victims. This also means that the measures against this crime must involve work in countries of origin, transit and destination. As an example, the case of Siliadin v. France in 2005, was the first human trafficking case considered by the European Court of Human Rights. The applicant, a female Togolese national who lived in Paris, had served as an unpaid servant for several years as minor and her passport was confiscated. In this case the Court held that it could not be considered that the applicant had been held in slavery in the traditional sense of that concept but considered that the applicant had, at the least, been subjected to forced labour.[15]

Despite a decade of efforts, the statistical figures show that a total number of cases related to human trafficking prosecuted in the EU remains low (1534 cases in 2008,1445-  in 2009, 1144 in 2010).[16] It is also clear, that human trafficking extends beyond individual Member States. Therefore the investigation and prosecution of human trafficking face additional problems. For instance, in the case Kodos v. Prosecutor General’s Office of the Republic of Lithuania (2010) the Prosecutor General’s Office sought the defendant from another Member State for the purpose of prosecution for sexual exploitation of 8 Lithuanian women in the United Kingdom.[17]

Furthermore, “the trends, patterns and working methods of traffickers are changing in all the different forms of trafficking in human beings, adapting to changing patterns of demand and supply”.[18] For example, in the Roma father casein Italy (2010), the father who sold his underage daughter for 200,000 Euros to people who were exploiting her for criminal activities (forcing her to steal) was charged with enslavement.[19]

Thus to better investigate and prosecute traffickers and further increase cross-border cooperation and centralise knowledge on human trafficking, Member States are required to establish national multidisciplinary law-enforcement units on human trafficking. Such units would function as contact points for the EU agencies, in particular Europol.[20] The national authorities of Member States and the EU agencies are also encouraged to create where relevant joint investigation teams and involve Europol and Eurojust in all cross-border trafficking cases.[21]

Further, in accordance with the new Directive for monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of measures addressing human trafficking in the EU, the European Commission will present report every two years to the European Council and the European Parliament. The first report is to be issued in 2014,[22] while the attention to the problems and possible actions by the EU agencies and Member States is brought every year on 18th October, the EU Anti-Trafficking Day.

All the EU existing and intended legal instruments and measures seem to establish a holistic system on preventing and combating human trafficking and protecting its victims. However, the effect of these efforts will depend to a large extent on the will of the Member States to implement those instruments in domestic laws in a harmonized and fair manner, cooperation of all the provided actors within and outside the EU, as well as funding opportunities for these actions.


[1]The European Commission, Communication From the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, The EU Strategy towards the Eradication of Trafficking in Human Beings 2012–2016, COM(2012) 286 final, 19 June 2012, [hereinafter The EU Strategy], p. 3.

[2]TheEuropean Commission, Communication on trafficking in women for the purpose of sexual exploitation, COM(96) 567 final; European Commission, Communication on Fighting trafficking in human beings: an integrated approach and proposals for an action plan, COM(2005) 514 final; The EU Plan on best practices, standards and procedures for combating and preventing trafficking in human beings, 2005/C 311/01; European Commission, Commission working document on the Evaluation and monitoring of the implementation of the EU plan, COM(2008) 657, final.

[3] Patrick Besler, Forced Labour and Human Trafficking: Estimating the Profits, working paper, International Labour Office, 2005.

[4]The European Commission, Trafficking in human beings, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/organized-crime-and-human-trafficking/trafficking-in-human-beings/index_en.htm, [accessed 5 November 2012].

[5]The EU Strategy, supra note 1, p. 2.

[6]The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 2000/C 364/01, Article 5.

[7]United Nations, Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children,

supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, 2000, [hereinafter Palermo Protocol]; The Council of Europe, Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, CETS No.197, 16 May 2005.

[8]Palermo Protocol, Article 3.

[9]European Court of Human Rights, Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, Application No 25965/04, Judgment (final), 10 May 2010.

[10]International Centre for Migration Policy Development, Study on the Assessment of the Extent of Different Types of Trafficking in Human Beings in EU Countries, April 2010, p. 2.

[11]Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and the Council on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims, L 101/1, 15 April 2011.

[13]The EU Strategy, supra note 1, p. 4.

[14]Supra note 12.

[15]European Court of Human Rights, Siliadin v. France , Application No. 73316/01 , Judgment (final), 26 October 2005.

[16]The EU Strategy, supra note 1, p. 9.

[17]Royal Courts of Justice, Kodos v. Prosecutor General’s Office of the Republic of Lithuania, Case No: CO/12374/2009, Judgment, 28 April 2010.

[18]The EU Strategy, supra note 1, p. 14.

[19]Supreme Court of Cassation, V. Criminal Section, The Roma father case, Case No. 35923, Judgment, 6 October 2010.

[20]The EU Strategy, supra note 1, p. 9.

[21]Ibid., p. 10.

[22]Ibid., p. 14.

* The poster is designed by RJDaae: http://rjdaae.deviantart.com.