Numerous articles and reports on human trafficking in the United States as well as survivor's stories have indicated that there are places along the human trafficking transportation network where a public awareness and education campaign and law enforcement would make a significant impact and could rescue victims before they are exploited.
A recent article in The Charlotte Observer, noted that a human trafficker would routinely pick up women outside of a McDonald's near the interstate where other traffickers had dropped them off. A 2005 Department of Justice Report noted that human traffickers stopped at fast food restaurants, discount retail stores and gas stations in particular as they transported victims to their final destination to be exploited.
A public awareness campaign to educate the employees of these businesses on how to identify potential victims of human trafficking, the placement of brochures in public areas and restrooms that inform potential victims of their rights and give the phone numbers of victim assistance providers, and having law enforcement "on the lookout" at these places would all be effective measures to combat human trafficking.
Friday, October 23, 2009
Thursday, October 22, 2009
The U.S. Department of Labor Gets It Wrong
The United States Department of Labor(DOL) recently released its report on goods produced by child labor or forced labor. In the report, DOL defines child labor in relevant part, as "(A) All forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery, such as the sale or trafficking of children, debt bondage and serfdom, or forced or compulsory labor, including forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict; (B) the use, procuring, or offering of a child for prostitution, for the production of pornography or pornographic purposes; and (C) the use, procuring, or offering a child for illicit activities in particular for the production and trafficking in drugs."
Forced labor is defined as "work provided or obtained by force, fraud, or coercion, including: (1) By threats of serious harm to, or physical restraint against any person; (2) by means of any scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause the person to believe that, if the person did not perform such labor or services, that person or another person would suffer serious harm or physical restraint; or (3) by means of abuse or threatened abuse of law or the legal process."
The DOL concludes that "The majority of forced labor and child labor victims are not trafficked into their situations of exploitation." [Emphasis mine]
This statement is not only patently false, it is absolutely outrageous. The definition of forced labor is taken from the U.S. Trafficking Victims Protection Act(TVPA), any act that satisfies this definition is human trafficking by law. Furthermore, the definition of child labor includes elements found in the TVPA. It is clear that DOL mistakenly equates human trafficking with forced migration, which human trafficking is not. Movement across borders or State lines does not define human trafficking. It is the state of exploitation that defines human trafficking. The Department of Labor must learn what defines human trafficking in order to effectively fight it.
Forced labor is defined as "work provided or obtained by force, fraud, or coercion, including: (1) By threats of serious harm to, or physical restraint against any person; (2) by means of any scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause the person to believe that, if the person did not perform such labor or services, that person or another person would suffer serious harm or physical restraint; or (3) by means of abuse or threatened abuse of law or the legal process."
The DOL concludes that "The majority of forced labor and child labor victims are not trafficked into their situations of exploitation." [Emphasis mine]
This statement is not only patently false, it is absolutely outrageous. The definition of forced labor is taken from the U.S. Trafficking Victims Protection Act(TVPA), any act that satisfies this definition is human trafficking by law. Furthermore, the definition of child labor includes elements found in the TVPA. It is clear that DOL mistakenly equates human trafficking with forced migration, which human trafficking is not. Movement across borders or State lines does not define human trafficking. It is the state of exploitation that defines human trafficking. The Department of Labor must learn what defines human trafficking in order to effectively fight it.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Falling Through The Cracks: Child Pornography
It will surprise many to learn that child pornography is considered a form of commercial sexual exploitation of children (CSEC) but not human trafficking. In the 2009 Trafficking in Persons Report, the United States Department of State proclaimed that "CSEC includes all child prostitution as well as child pornography. This is not human trafficking per se, as some forms of CSEC such as child pornography are not always a form of human trafficking."
Sadly, the Department of State is right as far as pertaining to child trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation. The United States Trafficking Victims Protection Act 2000, as amended, (TVPA) defines severe forms of trafficking in persons as:
"sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of age"
The TVPA further defines a commercial sex act as:
"any sex act on account of which anything of value is given to or received by any person."
The term sexual act is defined in Title 18 of the United States Criminal Code Section 2246 as penetration, oral sex and intentional touching. So what of instances of child pornography that involve naked pictures of children who are posing and not engaged in sex acts? Under the TVPA these would not be instances of severe forms of trafficking in persons!
Although child pornography is a form of child trafficking for the purpose of forced labor, it should also be included in the definition of child trafficking for sexual exploitation. Congress should amend the TVPA (now called the William Wilberforce Act) to specifically include child pornography in the definition of severe forms of trafficking in persons for sexual exploitation.
Regardless of any change in the William Wilberforce Act, the Department of State must understand that trafficking children for the purpose of producing pornography is human trafficking.
Sadly, the Department of State is right as far as pertaining to child trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation. The United States Trafficking Victims Protection Act 2000, as amended, (TVPA) defines severe forms of trafficking in persons as:
"sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of age"
The TVPA further defines a commercial sex act as:
"any sex act on account of which anything of value is given to or received by any person."
The term sexual act is defined in Title 18 of the United States Criminal Code Section 2246 as penetration, oral sex and intentional touching. So what of instances of child pornography that involve naked pictures of children who are posing and not engaged in sex acts? Under the TVPA these would not be instances of severe forms of trafficking in persons!
Although child pornography is a form of child trafficking for the purpose of forced labor, it should also be included in the definition of child trafficking for sexual exploitation. Congress should amend the TVPA (now called the William Wilberforce Act) to specifically include child pornography in the definition of severe forms of trafficking in persons for sexual exploitation.
Regardless of any change in the William Wilberforce Act, the Department of State must understand that trafficking children for the purpose of producing pornography is human trafficking.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Human Trafficking for the Purpose of Ritual Sacrifice
The UN Protocol prohibits trafficking for the purpose of organ removal. Organ removal not only means the removal of kidneys for sale on the black market, it also includes the removal of organs and body parts for use in traditional medicine. In South Africa this practice is called "muti", in West Africa it is called "huju" or "juju". No matter what it is called, in all cases it is the same: the abduction of men, women and children for the ritual removal of organs and body parts while the victim is still alive. Traditional healers who use human muti believe that the organs and body parts must be removed while the victim is still alive because the screams of the victim infuses the body parts with the victim's life force, thus increasing the potency of the muti.
People pay traditional healers for muti to increase their luck, prosperity, business opportunities or their chances of wining an election or some one's heart. The traditional healer will choose a victim and remove the body parts or will pay a muti syndicate to abduct a victim and harvest the body parts. Genitals are used to increase virility, body fat to increase luck, lips or the tongue to seduce a lover, hands are buried near businesses to bring in customers, eyes to see into the future, brains to improve performance in college. Ears, eyelids and legs are also used for muti. The organs and body parts are eaten, drunk, smeared over the person using the muti or buried near the person's home or business in order to secure the desired results.
People are afraid to come forward with information against traditional healers who use human muti and the police are reluctant to investigate these crimes out of fear of having a curse placed upon them by the traditional healer.
Human trafficking for the purpose of ritual organ removal occurs in many African countries and is on the rise. Countries must enact and implement anti-trafficking laws to stop this terrible practice.
People pay traditional healers for muti to increase their luck, prosperity, business opportunities or their chances of wining an election or some one's heart. The traditional healer will choose a victim and remove the body parts or will pay a muti syndicate to abduct a victim and harvest the body parts. Genitals are used to increase virility, body fat to increase luck, lips or the tongue to seduce a lover, hands are buried near businesses to bring in customers, eyes to see into the future, brains to improve performance in college. Ears, eyelids and legs are also used for muti. The organs and body parts are eaten, drunk, smeared over the person using the muti or buried near the person's home or business in order to secure the desired results.
People are afraid to come forward with information against traditional healers who use human muti and the police are reluctant to investigate these crimes out of fear of having a curse placed upon them by the traditional healer.
Human trafficking for the purpose of ritual organ removal occurs in many African countries and is on the rise. Countries must enact and implement anti-trafficking laws to stop this terrible practice.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Do Not Forget The Men
Human trafficking literature focuses primarily on women and girls as the only victims of human trafficking to the detriment of men and boys who also fall victim to human trafficking. Anti-trafficking laws, awareness raising and rehabilitation programs are specifically tailored to women and girls. Anti-trafficking laws in many countries limit the definition of a victim of human trafficking to women and girls. As a result, awareness raising programs are designed to raise awareness solely among women and girls about the dangers of human trafficking. Shelters only accept victims of human trafficking. Education and job skills programs are only available to women and girls.
The International Herald Tribune recently reported on the trafficking of Cambodian men for forced labor on Thai fishing boats at sea. The men were kept at sea for long periods, in some cases years, and often received severe beatings.
There were obstacles to rescuing the men and prosecuting the traffickers. The anti-trafficking laws of both Thailand and Cambodia were written to specifically protect women and children from being trafficked into prostitution and forced labor. Men who may have been victims of human trafficking were treated as illegal immigrants under the law and were deported back to their home countries. Understandably, the men were reluctant to come forward and cooperate with authorities out of fear of being treated as criminals.
Another obstacle is the problem of jurisdiction. Jurisdiction over crimes committed at sea is determined by a complex patchwork of international treaties. Countries are only able to assert jurisdiction in specific circumstances. For example, the United States asserts jurisdiction if four instances: (1) if the ship is U.S. owned, regardless of the nationality of the victim or perpetrator; (2) if the crime occurs in U.S. territorial waters; (3) if the victim or perpetrator is a U.S. national on a ship that departed or is arriving at a U.S. port; or (4) an act of terrorism against the U.S.
It is easy to see how U.S. jurisdiction can be circumvented by traffickers. If the crime of human trafficking occurs on a ship that is not U.S. owned, not in U.S. territorial waters, and neither the victim nor the perpetrator are U.S. nationals, the traffickers cannot be prosecuted by the U.S.
In order to end human trafficking, anti-trafficking laws must include men, women and children in the definition of a victim of human trafficking, and international treaties must allow countries to assert jurisdiction over cases of human trafficking at sea.
The International Herald Tribune recently reported on the trafficking of Cambodian men for forced labor on Thai fishing boats at sea. The men were kept at sea for long periods, in some cases years, and often received severe beatings.
There were obstacles to rescuing the men and prosecuting the traffickers. The anti-trafficking laws of both Thailand and Cambodia were written to specifically protect women and children from being trafficked into prostitution and forced labor. Men who may have been victims of human trafficking were treated as illegal immigrants under the law and were deported back to their home countries. Understandably, the men were reluctant to come forward and cooperate with authorities out of fear of being treated as criminals.
Another obstacle is the problem of jurisdiction. Jurisdiction over crimes committed at sea is determined by a complex patchwork of international treaties. Countries are only able to assert jurisdiction in specific circumstances. For example, the United States asserts jurisdiction if four instances: (1) if the ship is U.S. owned, regardless of the nationality of the victim or perpetrator; (2) if the crime occurs in U.S. territorial waters; (3) if the victim or perpetrator is a U.S. national on a ship that departed or is arriving at a U.S. port; or (4) an act of terrorism against the U.S.
It is easy to see how U.S. jurisdiction can be circumvented by traffickers. If the crime of human trafficking occurs on a ship that is not U.S. owned, not in U.S. territorial waters, and neither the victim nor the perpetrator are U.S. nationals, the traffickers cannot be prosecuted by the U.S.
In order to end human trafficking, anti-trafficking laws must include men, women and children in the definition of a victim of human trafficking, and international treaties must allow countries to assert jurisdiction over cases of human trafficking at sea.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)