In 2011, the Cable News Network (CNN) launched a media campaign against human trafficking, named the Freedom Project . This media programme not only brought the reality of modern slavery to the doorstep of the global public, but undoubtedly, it significantly added value to the global anti-trafficking movement. The sad stories of victims were continually being told in different ways beyond the media. The difficulties that frontline workers face to take their work further to save victims and enforce laws are nothing new. The laws and policies that are often not enough to prosecute offenders is a continuous story told by law enforcement and the criminal justice agents. The existing factors, including cultural practices that trigger or keep trafficking alive, are gradually becoming known and well understood by many in the field. The diversity in the trafficking processes and the emerging forms of trafficking are illuminated gradually, while social actors are continually putting pressure on statesâ obligation to evolve and act accordingly. Essentially, the world is becoming awake to the fact that slavery still lives amongst us despite the notion that transatlantic slave trade ended centuries ago.
In the last decade, the anti-trafficking movement has gained significant momentum not just in placing the discourse of human trafficking at the top of the global agenda, but also in leading the shift towards finding real solutions to the growing new discoveries of modern slavery today. Such shifts are evident in recent literature assessing anti-trafficking and the role of key actors in eradicating this contemporary form of slavery . Notwithstanding, there is still more to uncover not only in terms of the stories of victims which are well known but by exploring key case studies that may help us understand how measures for anti-trafficking have addressed the problem as we see it today and the key factors driving the status quo. This includes exploring how international cooperation has evoked the collaboration of states, especially bilaterally. It also includes how states and other social actors have worked together to adopt key anti-trafficking approaches to tackle the problem domestically and across their borders. This book was born out of the need to explore the diversity in understanding human trafficking as a problem, but it also considers the best approaches that have been suggested and utilised by many to address the problem in a cross-border context, which often makes diversity more complex.
The critical analysis in this book was founded on the premise that human rights violations are the major causes and consequences of trafficking and that the anti-trafficking measures will continue to fall short until the concerns of those whom it intends to protect are placed at the forefront of current approaches. Whilst a rights-based approach is still giving rise to burgeoning amount of literature within the anti-trafficking discourse, this study contends that it can only be proficient if broadened to cover the diverse nature and interpretations of human trafficking across various cultural traditions that often transcends legality. Hence, a human-centred approach, which in many respects aligns with a cosmopolitan ideology, is introduced to surpass the objective of human rights in the context of this study. It is emphasised that adopting such a âbeyond lawâ approach during interaction amongst states can be useful to international cooperation in this instance.
A case study of human trafficking from Nigeria to the United Kingdom (UK) is utilised as part of moving away from popular cross-border contexts that can often be limited in scope, but also explores a source country that offers more insight into other related destination countries. Hence, this study sheds more light on the contextual nature of trafficking that warrants better intervention, including how both states have cooperated in this regard. Ongoing socioeconomic and political factors within Nigeria and the UK are crucial to understanding the modus operandi (MO) of human trafficking. Furtherance to the MO, the extent to which both countries have addressed the current realities of the problem across their territories, in terms of internalising anti-trafficking measures and operationalising their 2004 bilateral cooperation , is also analysed. This study concludes that anti-trafficking approaches need to move on from those which are currently identified with the political interest of states to one geared towards achieving the best outcomes for those at risk/victims/survivors of trafficking.
A Global Perspective of Human Trafficking: The Definition
In response to the global quandary as to what human trafficking truly is and what it may constitute, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly established an intergovernmental , ad hoc committee in December 1998 and charged it with developing a new international regime to fight transnational organised crime.1 After 11 sessions involving over 120 participating states, the ad hoc committee concluded its work in October 2000 with a regime against human trafficking.2 In order to enable cooperation amongst states in this issue area, there was a need to agree on what human trafficking constitutes, so that all states operate on the same basis. Therefore, the United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children (hereafter, Trafficking Protocol), supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (hereafter, Organized Crime Convention), define human trafficking as follows:
Three major elements emerge from this definition. First, the âactâ, which stipulates what was done; second, the âmeansâ, which simply illustrates how it was done. The means is omitted in a situation where a child is involved4; and third, the âpurposeâ, which specifies why it was done. Whilst it is crucial to know these key elements, identifying human trafficking is not that simplistic. In reality, it is often difficult to build a case out of these elements as situations that amount to trafficking are subtle and may not have clear links, which makes proving human trafficking difficult for prosecution . In a situation where law enforcement authorities intercept a potential case of trafficking, before it gets to the âpurposeâ, they are unable to build a case based on intent. The same is also the case where there is often no link between recruitment and exploitation.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.3
Despite the gaps in these key elements within the definition, the Trafficking Protocol provides the first international definition of trafficking as an explicit law enforcement regime.5 It is certainly an upgrade from past anti-trafficking laws, which just focused on women and children. It marks a significant milestone in the international efforts to combat the problem of human trafficking and to date has attracted I47 signatories.6 The actualisation of its definition was not engendered without critical analysis from scholars and activists. The definition has led to an increase in literature from scholars in different disciplines who have critically debated the contents and implications of the Protocol from different perspectives. Scholars such as Gallagher offer several critical analysis on the process involved in articulating the Trafficking Protocol.7 This has exposed the uneasiness in reaching a consensus on such a complex issue. The agreed definition was not achieved without states underlining key factors that cater to their own interests, most of which were border security issues, as opposed to the actual human rights issues it instigates.8 Similarly, scholars such as Jordan further criticise the Trafficking Protocol for its âintentional ambiguityâ as some of the vagueness within the definition does not prevent governments from making their own definitions.9
While the definition of human trafficking can be viewed as a sign of progress in addressing the issue, some scholars and activists contend that the way in which the definition has been framed is vague and problematic.10 There have been several debates on the trafficking definition across its different elements. For instance, it has continually proven difficult to reach an international consensus regarding the interpretation of âexploitation â, given that its severity varies, generating a range of experiences across victims of trafficking.11 For rescuers of trafficked victims, exploitation may mean one thing, and to the victim , it means something else. This is often difficult where victims claim to be aware of the purpose of their recruitment and do not see their exploitative situation as exploitation .
There is the ongoing issue of measuring coercion for adult migrants who might have been trafficked for sexual exploitation . As it stands, the Protocol does not break ânew grounds or grant new rightsâ nor significantly guarantee the responsibility of states to protect trafficked victims.12 It has also given ammunition to longstanding debates, including the ongoing feminist discourse on prostitution /sex work. According to Lee, despite the constant discussions on the definition, there is very little input from trafficked survivors as state officials and other powerful groups remain dominant social actors.13
Notwithstanding, the Trafficking Protocol remains the same with other regional and national institutions adapting it to suit their various priorities surrounding their domain. Despite the longstanding debate on the definition, the exist...