This article suggests a cross-cultural consideration is needed when trying to devise policy concerning the trafficking of humans.
Human Trafficking and the Terms of Engagement
The trafficking of people is the new slavery: commentators acknowledge that it is a global concern. Trafficking effects the majority of nations as is evidenced by the growing reports coming out from across the world including Eastern Europe, Africa, Asia and Latin America. The majority of the countries in these regions tend to be the countries that transport people – transport them, in the main, to Europe and the USA. So, no nation or community is free from this abhorrent and harmful practice. No one is safe, not children, women or men. Children are, more often than not, trafficked into sexual and domestic slavery; women into prostitution and men into cheap labour. Pharoh Talib from Harvard University estimates that trafficking generates some $9.5 billion per year in the U.S. Figures for the U.K. are vague. The figures we have demonstrate the huge profits that can be made from this illegal trade – trafficking is big business. Estimates on the number of people being trafficked vary widely. EPCAT place the figure around the 2.5 million mark, the International Labour Organisation at 12.3 million and the U.S. State Department at 600,000 – 800,000. Whatever the figure there is a clear disregard for human freedom.
Confusion exists over just what constitutes a trafficked person and this confusion has the potential to feed into policy and the public’s perception of the trafficked so it needs to be resolved: All too often the trafficked and the smuggled are seen as one of the same thing. However, the smuggled have given their consent and have usually paid to be transported whereas those trafficked have not. The United Nations is firm on this point but many media reports cite the smuggled as being trafficked. The UN itself is not free from criticism particularly concerning smuggling; only in August did we read reports from Eritrea where UN personnel were aiding the smuggling of people. It is corruption that sustains the mechanisms of trafficking and governments throughout the world are required, by international law, to sort out internal corruption whether that corruption is found at government level or via the agencies of government (boarder/passport/visa control/police).
The UK government has recognised trafficking as a problem and has commissioned research into it. The state of play at the moment is one of confusion. Many of those trafficked into this country are being placed within our rather draconian immigration system so trafficked persons are perceived as illegal immigrants. There needs to be a clear delineation made between the smuggled and the trafficked. It’s only when we can really see a clear difference between these two groupings that we can start to debate and construct policy around issue of care and/or control. Two positive things are happening: the government is publishing a consultation paper this autumn and last week The United Kingdom Human Trafficking Centre (UKHTC) was opened in Sheffield. The centre’s main focus will be on the sex trade and the trafficking gangs that transport women. This focus is unsurprising as the sexual exploitation of trafficked women is the most visible side of trafficking that we see. We need to remember the invisible side of trafficking – the children that are working in cannabis farms or domestic slavery in this country. The notion of invisibility is crucial as invisibility together with corruption keeps the traffickers in business.
Trafficking is an extremely difficult and complex issue not least because there are cross cultural aspects to consider. In many countries there are cultural traditions and practices of the exchange of people. These practices are seen as functional for some societies. We can not assume that just because we do not have these traditions then others shouldn’t – that would be naïve in the extreme and would not help us tackle the issue of invisibility. We know, for example, that the informal adoption of children is carried through to this country. The issue of the exchange of people within countries and between countries is of international concern: one form can be viewed as cultural the other we would term as trafficking. Recognising the cultural meanings attached to the exchange of people would be a way in to fundamentally understanding this practice.
With the publication of the Governments consultation document imminent and the creation of the UKHTC things are looking hopeful. We will have to wait until the outcome of the consultation process before evaluating whether the balance is right between a focus on the criminality of trafficking and the very human side of trafficking and whether we are in a position to devise policy that, at its heart, minimises harm for the trafficked. The Joint Human Rights Committee are of the same opinion – it’s a waiting game.
The trafficking of people is the new slavery: commentators acknowledge that it is a global concern. Trafficking effects the majority of nations as is evidenced by the growing reports coming out from across the world including Eastern Europe, Africa, Asia and Latin America. The majority of the countries in these regions tend to be the countries that transport people – transport them, in the main, to Europe and the USA. So, no nation or community is free from this abhorrent and harmful practice. No one is safe, not children, women or men. Children are, more often than not, trafficked into sexual and domestic slavery; women into prostitution and men into cheap labour. Pharoh Talib from Harvard University estimates that trafficking generates some $9.5 billion per year in the U.S. Figures for the U.K. are vague. The figures we have demonstrate the huge profits that can be made from this illegal trade – trafficking is big business. Estimates on the number of people being trafficked vary widely. EPCAT place the figure around the 2.5 million mark, the International Labour Organisation at 12.3 million and the U.S. State Department at 600,000 – 800,000. Whatever the figure there is a clear disregard for human freedom.
Confusion exists over just what constitutes a trafficked person and this confusion has the potential to feed into policy and the public’s perception of the trafficked so it needs to be resolved: All too often the trafficked and the smuggled are seen as one of the same thing. However, the smuggled have given their consent and have usually paid to be transported whereas those trafficked have not. The United Nations is firm on this point but many media reports cite the smuggled as being trafficked. The UN itself is not free from criticism particularly concerning smuggling; only in August did we read reports from Eritrea where UN personnel were aiding the smuggling of people. It is corruption that sustains the mechanisms of trafficking and governments throughout the world are required, by international law, to sort out internal corruption whether that corruption is found at government level or via the agencies of government (boarder/passport/visa control/police).
The UK government has recognised trafficking as a problem and has commissioned research into it. The state of play at the moment is one of confusion. Many of those trafficked into this country are being placed within our rather draconian immigration system so trafficked persons are perceived as illegal immigrants. There needs to be a clear delineation made between the smuggled and the trafficked. It’s only when we can really see a clear difference between these two groupings that we can start to debate and construct policy around issue of care and/or control. Two positive things are happening: the government is publishing a consultation paper this autumn and last week The United Kingdom Human Trafficking Centre (UKHTC) was opened in Sheffield. The centre’s main focus will be on the sex trade and the trafficking gangs that transport women. This focus is unsurprising as the sexual exploitation of trafficked women is the most visible side of trafficking that we see. We need to remember the invisible side of trafficking – the children that are working in cannabis farms or domestic slavery in this country. The notion of invisibility is crucial as invisibility together with corruption keeps the traffickers in business.
Trafficking is an extremely difficult and complex issue not least because there are cross cultural aspects to consider. In many countries there are cultural traditions and practices of the exchange of people. These practices are seen as functional for some societies. We can not assume that just because we do not have these traditions then others shouldn’t – that would be naïve in the extreme and would not help us tackle the issue of invisibility. We know, for example, that the informal adoption of children is carried through to this country. The issue of the exchange of people within countries and between countries is of international concern: one form can be viewed as cultural the other we would term as trafficking. Recognising the cultural meanings attached to the exchange of people would be a way in to fundamentally understanding this practice.
With the publication of the Governments consultation document imminent and the creation of the UKHTC things are looking hopeful. We will have to wait until the outcome of the consultation process before evaluating whether the balance is right between a focus on the criminality of trafficking and the very human side of trafficking and whether we are in a position to devise policy that, at its heart, minimises harm for the trafficked. The Joint Human Rights Committee are of the same opinion – it’s a waiting game.
