Key Challenges in the Combat of Human Trafficking: Evaluating the EU Trafficking Strategy and EU Trafficking Directive
| Author | Conny Rijken,Alice Bosma |
| DOI | 10.1177/203228441600700306 |
| Date | 01 September 2016 |
| Published date | 01 September 2016 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
New Journal of Eu ropean Crimina l Law, Vol. 7, Issue 3, 2016 315
ARTICLES
KEY CHALLENGES IN THE COMBAT OF
HUMAN TRAFFICKING
Evaluating the EU Traffi cking Strategy and
EU Traffi cking Directive
A B and C R*
ABSTRACT
e problem of tra cking in human beings (THB) is still omnipresent in Europe, despite
the numerous preventive and retributive actions tak en. is articl e evaluates the two most
important EU-instruments to combat tra cking: the EU Directive and the EU Strategy.
Based on secondary analysis of repor ts, policy reviews and scholarly writings from
organisations, EU institutions and academics, key challenges in combating human
tra cking are identi ed and an evaluation of the extent to which the se instruments have
addressed these challenges is made. e key ch allenges are subdivided following the three-P
paradigm (prosecution, protection and prevention) and are the following: de ning THB,
non-punishment, low number of persons c onvicted of THB, cor porate liability, identi cation
of THB and victims of THB, cond itional protection, prevention and neglect of vulnerable
groups. In addition a multi-disciplinary approach and the current migration ow were
identi ed as k ey challenges and the two instruments are also e valuated on these aspects.
Keywords: EU Tra cking Directive; EU Tra cking Strateg y; human tra cking
1. INTRODUCTION
Despite numerous national, European and international preventive measures,
tra cking in human beings (THB) remains a pervasive form of cri minal activ ity,
resulting in large sc ale victimisation. e International Labour O ce (ILO) indicated
in 2012 that some 20.9 million people are victim of forced labour (including forced
sexual exploitation) worldwide at any given time.1 In 2010, Eurostat reported 5,535
* Alice Bosma is Ph .D. candidate and C onny Rijken is profess or of Human Tra cking and
Globalisat ion. Both work at INTERVICT, Tilburg Univer sity.
1 ILO, ILO Global Estimate of Forced Labour (ILO 2012). e average ratio for women i s 2.6, for men
it is 0.8.
Alice Bosma a nd Conny Rijken
316 Intersentia
registered identi ed and presumed victims in 24 EU Member States. Two years later
in 2012 this number rose to 10,998 registered identi ed a nd presumed victims in 28
EU Member States. Over the years 2 010–2012, 30,146 victims were registered in t he 28
Member States .2 On average, this amounts to 2 persons per 100,000 i nhabitants in the
28 Member States, with a st rong overrepresentation of women. e gures show t hat
the number of identi ed repor ted and presumed victims is on the rise. Remarkably,
the majority of these victims (64%) originate from the EU and in particular from
Romania, Bulgar ia, the Netherlands, Hungary a nd Poland.3
Given the di culties in identi cation of victims and prosecution of tra cking
cases, as will be discussed below, one always has to be careful in interpreting these
numbers. It is widely acknowledged that t here is a large dark number of non-registered
and unidenti ed victims.4 But even if we only look at the reports ment ioned, the number
of conviction s of human tra ckers seems to lag behind and even decrease over the
years. Eurostat data over 2010–2012 reports a total of 8,551 prosecuted and 3,786 persons
convicted for THB. Given the increase i n the number of victims registered and thus a n
increase in the number of identi ed tra cking cases, one would expect an increase in
the number of prosecutions; nonetheless the number of prosecutions is still relatively
low.5 us, despite the numerous e orts to combat human tra cking, Member States
have not been able to transpose these e orts into a signi cant number of convictions.
Based on a secondary a nalysis of reports,6 policy reviews7 and scholarly writings
key challenges in the combat of human t ra cking were identi ed based on which the
two major instruments that are designed to combat human tra cking in the EU are
evaluated. ose instruments are the EU Strateg y towards the Eradicat ion of Tra cking
in Human Beings 2012–20168 (hereina er: the Str ategy) and EU Directive 2011/36 on
preventing and combating tra cking in huma n beings and protecting its victim s, and
replacing Council Framework Decision 20 02/629/JHA (hereina er: the Directive).
METHODOLOGY
is article is mainly based on a research report issued by the EU-research project
TRACE (Tra cking as a Cri minal Enterprise), and aims to identif y the main obstacles
2 Eurostat, Tra cking in human beings (Publications O c e of the European Union 2014).
3 Ibid.
4 J. Goodey, Human Tra cking, Sketchy d ata and policy res ponses, Crimino logy and Crimin al
Justice, Novemb er [2008] vol. 8 no. 4 421–442.
5 A. Farrell, et.al., Identifying Ch allenges to Improve the Investigation a nd Prosecution of St ate and
Local Human Tra cking Cases, Northeastern Universit y and Urban Institute , (2012).
6 Commission, ‘Mid-t erm report on the implementation of t he EU strategy towards t he eradication
of tra cking in human beings’ S WD (2014) 318 nal. e evaluation of Directive 2 011/36 by the
European Com mission was scheduled for 2 015 but has been postponed until t he end of 2016.
7 E.g. the GRETA cou ntry reports a nd GRETA annual re ports; https: //www.coe.int/t/dgh l/
monitoring/tra cki ng/Docs/Monitori ng/GRETA_en.asp a nd reports from variou s NGO´s.
8 Commission, ‘ e EU Strategy towards t he Eradication of Tra cki ng in Human Beings 2 012–2016
(the Strategy)’ COM (2012) 286 na l. Consultations for the fol low-up of the Strategy took place in
the rst half of 2016. e follow-up of the Str ategy will be pre sented later in 2016.
To continue reading
Request your trial