Criminal Liability of Corporations for Trafficking in Human Beings for Labour Exploitation
| Date | 01 November 2017 |
| Author | Julia Planitzer,Nora Katona |
| Published date | 01 November 2017 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12510 |
Criminal Liability of Corporations for Trafficking
in Human Beings for Labour Exploitation
Julia Planitzer and Nora Katona
Ludwig Boltzmann Institute of Human Rights
Abstract
Legal instruments at the European level clearly define that States have an obligation to establish corporate liability for traffick-
ing in human beings (THB). The monitoring of the implementation of the Council of Europe Convention on Action against
Trafficking in Human Beings shows that, in general, the respective legislation for corporate criminal liability already largely
exists in the States’Parties. However, application of the legislation seems to lag behind, since relevant cases were identified in
only a few States. By analysing these legal mechanisms with a focus on Austria, studying case law in Belgium and Cyprus, and
conducting interviews with stakeholders, the authors identify obstacles for the application of corporate criminal liability in the
context of THB. Based on case law, the paper analyses the potential of corporate criminal liability for exploited persons to
have access to compensation and describes challenges in this field. Cases on corporate criminal liability for THB seem to focus
on sanctioning the companies and ensuring compensation might be seen as a rather secondary priority.
Policy Implications
•Enhancing the application of corporate criminal liability could potentially improve access to compensation.
•Monetary sanctions for corporate criminal liability are seen as too low and might not have the desired deterring effect.
Hence, non-monetary sanction measures for corporations are equally as important.
•In order to increase the number of cases in which a contractor can be held liable for THB by a subcontractor, conditions
for chain-liability have to be further determined and clarified by law.
•Litigating against the natural person and the legal person committing THB in parallel would be highly important in order
to ensure holding a legal or natural person accountable.
•The cooperation and exchange between relevant public and non-public actors dealing with general working conditions,
trafficking in human beings, labour exploitation or underpayment, continues to be highly relevant in order to improve
access to unpaid wages for exploited workers.
Introduction
This paper analyses to which extent corporate criminal liabil-
ity for trafficking in human beings (THB) is currently applied
in Europe and whether its application has an impact on the
access to compensation for exploited persons. Besides ana-
lysing relevant legal mechanisms and case law, the authors
also conducted interviews with different stakeholders such
as state prosecutors, researchers and lawyers. Based on this
data, the paper discusses the potential of corporate criminal
liability for exploited persons to have access to compensa-
tion and describes challenges in this field. The paper starts
with a brief overview of the relevant European legal frame-
work on corporate criminal liability and shows its actual
application in three States: Austria, Belgium and Cyprus. The
authors focus on Austria and examine relevant and available
case law in Belgium and Cyprus. An analysis of the reports
of the CoE’s monitoring body GRETA showed that relevant
cases can be found in Belgium and Cyprus (Council of Eur-
ope - GRETA, 2013, para.208, Council of Europe - GRETA,
2015, para.135). The second part of the paper discusses the
identified obstacles in the application of corporate criminal
liability for THB. It also outlines the challenges concerning
access to compensation when companies are being held
liable. The final part of the paper formulates conclusions
and recommendations, which could contribute to improved
access to compensation.
Corporate criminal liability concerning trafficking
in human beings and its application in three EU
member states
Legal instruments at the European level clearly define that
States have an obligation to establish corporate liability for
THB. The Council of Europe Convention on Action against
Trafficking in Human Beings (thereinafter 2005 CoE Conven-
tion against THB, CETS No. 197) and the EU Directive 2011/36
on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings
and protecting its victims both further define this obligation.
Art. 22 of the 2005 CoE Convention against THB sets following
Global Policy (2017) 8:4 doi: 10.1111/1758-5899.12510 ©2017 University of Durham and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Global Policy Volume 8 . Issue 4 . November 2017 505
Special Section Article
To continue reading
Request your trial