JAMAICA197imprisonment. These penalties are sufficiently stringent andcommensurate with penalties prescribed for other seriousoffenses, such as rape. In 2010, the government reportedinvestigating 2,333 suspected trafficking offenders, comparedwith investigating 2,521 suspects in 2009. Italian prosecutorsbrought to trial 621 trafficking offenders, and trial courtsconvicted 174 trafficking offenders under Italy’s 2003trafficking law in 2010, compared to 166 convictions in 2009.The average sentence imposed on offenders convicted underthe country’s trafficking law was 6.5 years in prison. Traffickingoffenders convicted for exploitation of underage prostitutionand slavery laws were given sentences averaging 3.5 and 1.5years, respectively. The government did not disaggregate itsdata to demonstrate convictions of forced labor offenders.The government continued to investigate acts of trafficking-related complicity involving officials, including the April 2011arrest of two Palermo police officers for extorting womenin prostitution; the government indicted one of the twopolicemen on January 18, 2012, and the other entered a guiltyplea on January 25, 2012. The government did not report anyfurther information regarding a May 2010 case involving thearrest of two police officers suspected of trafficking-relatedcomplicity in a nightclub in Pisa and a December 2009 case inwhich authorities charged two prison guards with exploitationof women in prostitution. In April 2011, a trial began for formerPrime Minister Berlusconi for the alleged commercial sexualexploitation of a Moroccan minor. During the reporting period,the government continued to conduct specialized training onvictim identification and investigation of trafficking for lawenforcement agencies.ProtectionThe Italian government continued its strong efforts to identifyand protect victims of trafficking by promoting a flexible,victim-centered approach to identifying potential traffickingvictims. Although Italy does not have a formal reflection periodduring which trafficking victims can recuperate and decidewhether to assist law enforcement, authorities informallygrant this to victims and do not limit it to a finite number ofdays. NGOs praised the good results of this approach whencombined with comprehensive assistance. The governmentreported it identified and referred for care 724 new traffickingvictims in 2011, and it continued to provide comprehensiveassistance to 836 victims referred in previous years. Thegovernment reported 23 percent of all victims assisted in2011 were men, and 6.5 percent were children. Article 13 ofthe Law 228/2003 provides victims with three to six months’assistance while Article 18 of Law 286/1998 guarantees victimsshelter benefits for another 12 months and reintegrationassistance. Application of this article is renewable if the victimfinds employment or has enrolled in a training programand is sheltered in special facilities. Foreign child victims oftrafficking received an automatic residence permit until theyreached age 18. Government funding for victim assistance,primarily through the funding of NGOs by national, regionaland local authorities, was the equivalent of approximately$13 million in 2011.Victims are not required to cooperate with police in order toreceive a residence permit. The government reported it issued1,078 temporary residence visas in 2011; although this numberlikely includes victims of other forms of exploitation. Further,it reported it issued 608 renewals of residency permits in 2011.The top three countries of origin of assisted victims wereNigeria, Romania, and Morocco. The government reported that68 percent of assisted victims cooperated with police in theinvestigation of their exploiters. While there are arrangementsat the local level to help guide officials in identifying andreferring trafficking victims, the government has yet to adoptformal procedures on the national level for all front-lineresponders in Italy. NGOs reported the quality of the referralprocess for victims varied from region to region.During the reporting period, the government continuedto implement anti-immigration security laws and policiesresulting in fines for illegal migrants and their expeditedexpulsion from Italy. Italian authorities did not screen thesemigrants to identify trafficking victims. In February 2012,the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the Italiangovernment’s “push-back” policy, in effect for several monthsin 2009, of intercepting migrants on the high seas and sendingthem to detention camps in Libya violated the migrants’right to seek asylum and placed them at risk of hardship orretribution in Libya or in their country of origin.PreventionThe Government of Italy sustained its anti-traffickingprevention efforts in 2011. The Ministry for Equal Opportunity,through a committee that included independent expertsand NGOs, completed Italy’s first national action plan ontrafficking and submitted the draft plan to Parliament inJanuary 2012. According to country experts, the Eurozone crisisresulted in increased unemployment among foreign workersin Italy, thus increasing their vulnerability to exploitation. OnAugust 13, 2011 the government issued a decree to criminalizeand increase penalties for labor brokers who exploit vulnerableworkers. The law provides sentences of five to eight years andfines; sentences are increased to 10-24 years for child victimsor if victims are exposed to health hazards. The governmentdemonstrated some transparency in its anti-trafficking effortsby maintaining a monitoring system on the regional andnational level in conjunction with anti-trafficking NGOs in2011, but it did not monitor or report publicly on its variousmeasures to address the problem.The Ministry of Tourism implemented a program from 2010to 2011 to reduce child sex tourism by issuing certificatesof responsible tourism to travel agencies and tour operatorsfor their outreach to potential clients and implemented acountry-wide media campaign to promote awareness amongpotential clients of child sex tourism. The Italian armedforces regularly continued to organize training to preventthe trafficking or sexual exploitation of women and childrenby Italian troops who are deployed abroad on internationalpeacekeeping missions.JAMAICA (Tier 2 Watch List)Jamaica is a source, transit, and destination country for adultsand children subjected to sex trafficking and forced labor.The exploitation of local children in the sex trade, a form ofsex trafficking, remains a problem. The media has reportedthat pimps are luring Jamaican children under age 18 intoprostitution, especially in urban areas in Jamaica. NGOsand the government remain alarmed at the high numberof missing children and are concerned that some of thesechildren are falling prey to sex trafficking. Sex trafficking ofchildren and adults likely occurs on the street, in night clubs,bars, and private homes. In addition, massage parlors in
198JAMAICAJamaica reportedly often lure women into prostitution underthe false pretense of employment as massage therapists andthen withhold their wages and restrict their movement – keyindicators of human trafficking. People living in Jamaica’spoverty-stricken garrison communities, territories ruled bycriminal “dons” that are effectively outside of the government’scontrol, are especially at risk. An NGO working with streetchildren reported that forced labor of children in street vendingis prevalent. There is evidence that foreign nationals aresubjected to forced labor in Jamaica. There were reports thatJamaican citizens have been subjected to sex trafficking orforced labor abroad, including throughout the Caribbean,Canada, the United States, and the UK.The Government of Jamaica does not fully comply withthe minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking;however, it is making significant efforts to do so. Despitethese efforts, the government failed to demonstrate evidenceof increasing efforts to address human trafficking over theprevious reporting period; therefore Jamaica is placed onTier 2 Watch List. The government identified only one victimduring the reporting period and reported no convictions oftrafficking offenders, thus highlighting serious concernsabout a lack of accountability for trafficking offenders andany officials complicit in human trafficking.Recommendations for Jamaica: Vigorously prosecute,convict, and punish trafficking offenders, including officialscomplicit in forced labor or sex trafficking; ensure prescribedpenalties for human trafficking are commensurate withpenalties for other serious crimes, such as forcible sexualassault; implement standard operating procedures to guidepolice, labor inspectors, child welfare officials, health workers,and other government workers in the proactive identificationof local, as well as foreign victims, of forced labor and sextrafficking – including children under age 18 in prostitutionin night clubs, bars, and massage parlors – and their referralto adequate service providers; and explore using existingpartnerships with NGOs to expand awareness activities,particularly prevention campaigns directed at youth andpotential clients of the sex trade.ProsecutionThe government made limited progress in the prosecutionof trafficking offenders during the reporting period. Thegovernment prohibits all forms of trafficking through itscomprehensive Trafficking Act of Jamaica, which went intoeffect in 2007. Punishments prescribed for human traffickingunder the Act extend up to 10 years’ imprisonment, which aresufficiently stringent but do not appear to be commensuratewith penalties prescribed for other serious crimes, such as rape.The government initiated three new trafficking investigations,one new labor trafficking prosecution, and one new sextrafficking prosecution during the reporting period. Tenprosecutions from previous reporting periods, including fourinitiated during the preceding year, remained ongoing. Thegovernment reported no convictions of trafficking offendersduring the year; there were no convictions during the precedingyear. The government reported no investigations, prosecutions,or convictions of officials complicit in human trafficking. Inan effort to strengthen awareness and law enforcement efforts,the government funded and conducted in collaboration witha local NGO a human trafficking sensitization seminar inApril 2011 for approximately 32 members of the JamaicaConstabulary Force. In December 2011, the governmentfunded an NGO to implement training for hotline operatorson handling human trafficking cases.ProtectionThe government made limited progress in the protection oftrafficking victims during the reporting period. The governmentidentified only one new trafficking victim – an underage girlwhose family member was selling her for sex. The lack ofvictims identified raised concerns that the government didnot employ standard operating procedures to guide front-lineresponders, such as police, labor inspectors, child protectionofficials, and health officials, in proactive identification ofhuman trafficking and referral of suspected cases for assistance.The government placed the one identified victim in a temporaryshelter for abused girls, with a longer term plan of seekingplacement for the girl with extended family. Officials providedassistance and safe voluntary repatriation in cooperationwith IOM for four foreign labor trafficking victims identifiedin the previous reporting period. The government reportedspending the equivalent of approximately $12,700 on servicesfor trafficking victims including, shelter, counselling, clothing,and meals; this compares with the equivalent of $176,470that it spent on victim protection during the preceding year.A trafficking-specific shelter mentioned during previousreporting periods had yet to shelter any trafficking victims andreportedly was not operational. Jamaican officials encouragedvictims to participate in investigations and prosecutions oftrafficking offenders. The Trafficking Act of Jamaica guaranteesthat trafficking victims are immune from prosecution forimmigration or prostitution violations committed as a directresult of their being subjected to forced prostitution or forcedlabor; there were no allegations of victim punishment duringthe reporting period. In accordance with Jamaica’s anti-trafficking law, the government provided formal guidancefor immigration officials, advising them not to deport foreignvictims, and it provided temporary immigration relief to atleast four foreign trafficking victims during the reportingperiod.PreventionThe government demonstrated some trafficking preventionefforts during the reporting period. The government did notimplement a national trafficking awareness campaign butacknowledged Jamaica’s human trafficking problem. Thegovernment’s anti-trafficking task force, which met on amonthly basis, expanded its outreach efforts and includedmany more government organizations (including the education,tourism, and health ministries along with the Office of theChildren’s Advocate and the justice training institute) andNGOs. The task force also reached out to NGOs operatingin tourism hubs across Jamaica to establish collaborativerelationships that will lead to better understanding andpossible identification of child sex tourism on the island. Agovernment-operated general crime victim hotline offeredspecialized assistance to persons reporting human trafficking.
JAPAN199The government hosted a national plan of action workshop,including multiple stakeholders, and began work on a nationalplan of action against human trafficking. The government didnot report any efforts to reduce the demand for commercialsex acts.JAPAN (Tier 2)Japan is a destination, source, and transit country for menand women subjected to forced labor and sex trafficking, andfor children subjected to sex trafficking. Male and femalemigrant workers from China, Indonesia, the Philippines,Vietnam, and other Asian countries are sometimes subject toconditions of forced labor. Some women and children fromEast Asia, Southeast Asia, South America, and, in previousyears, Eastern Europe, Russia, and Central America who travelto Japan for employment or fraudulent marriage are forced intoprostitution. During the reporting period, Japanese nationals,particularly teenage girls and foreign-born children of Japanesecitizens who acquired nationality, were also subjected to sextrafficking. In addition, traffickers continued to use fraudulentmarriages between foreign women and Japanese men tofacilitate the entry of these women into Japan for forcedprostitution. Japanese organized crime syndicates (the Yakuza)are responsible for some trafficking in Japan, both directlyand indirectly. Traffickers strictly control the movements ofvictims, using debt bondage, threats of violence or deportation,blackmail, and other coercive psychological methods tocontrol victims. Victims of forced prostitution sometimes facedebts upon commencement of their contracts and most arerequired to pay employers additional fees for living expenses,medical care, and other necessities, leaving them predisposedto debt bondage. “Fines” for misbehavior are added to victims’original debt, and the process that brothel operators use tocalculate these debts was not transparent. Japan is also atransit country for persons in trafficking situations travelingfrom East Asia to North America. Japanese men continue tobe a significant source of demand for child sex tourism inSoutheast Asia, and, to a lesser extent, Mongolia.The Government of Japan has not officially recognized theexistence of forced labor within the Industrial Trainee andTechnical Internship Program, a government-run programdesigned to foster basic industrial skills and techniques and toprovide opportunities to acquire practical skills and techniques.However, the government made a number of efforts to addresslabor abuses in the program. Media and NGOs continued toreport on abuses in the program, though to a lesser extentthan in previous years, and abuses included debt bondage,restrictions on movement, unpaid wages and overtime, fraud,and contracting workers out to different employers – elementswhich may signal trafficking situations. The majority oftechnical interns are Chinese nationals, some of whom payfees of up to the equivalent of $1,400 to Chinese labor brokersor deposits of up to the equivalent of $4,000 prior to theirdeparture from China; these fees sometimes require aspiringworkers to take out loans or to place liens on their property,potentially leading to situations of debt bondage. Althoughbanned since 2010, these fees, deposits, and “punishment”contracts continue to be prevalent for Chinese participants inthe program. Reports of trainees having their passports andother travel documents taken from them and their movementscontrolled to prevent escape or communication declined, atrend that labor activists credited to increased governmentscrutiny of these practices.The Government of Japan does not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking;however, it is making significant efforts to do so. During theyear, the Japanese government did not develop or enact anti-trafficking legislation that would fill key gaps in facilitatinganti-trafficking prosecutions, and the government did notarrest, prosecute, or convict a single forced labor perpetratorin 2011. Increased enforcement of labor laws in the foreigntrainee program, however, led to a decline in reported abusesin the program according to non-governmental sources.During the year, the government published a manual forlaw enforcement and social service providers on protectingtrafficking victims and continued to mandate anti-traffickingtraining to law enforcement officials. While the governmentidentified 45 adult female sex trafficking victims and 619minor victims of child prostitution, it identified no malevictims for either forced labor or forced prostitution. Protectiveservices for trafficking victims remained limited, with noshelters purposed exclusively for trafficking victims in Japan.While the government made efforts to raise awareness toprevent trafficking, sources reported that some of the outreachcampaigns the government undertook were ineffective anddid not reach target audiences.PRecommendations for Japan: Draft and enact acomprehensive anti-trafficking law prohibiting all forms oftrafficking and prescribing sufficiently stringent penaltiesthat are commensurate with other serious crimes; significantlyincrease efforts to investigate and prosecute forced labor cases,and punish offenders with jail time; increase the enforcementof bans on deposits, punishment agreements, withholdingof passports, and other practices that contribute to forcedlabor in the foreign trainee program; continue to proactivelyinvestigate and, where warranted, punish governmentcomplicity in trafficking or trafficking-related offenses; furtherexpand and implement formal victim identification proceduresto guide officials in the identification of forced labor; continueto ensure victims are not punished for unlawful acts committedas a direct result of being in a human trafficking situation;establish protection policies for all victims of trafficking,including male victims and victims of forced labor; ensurethat protection services, including medical and legal services,are fully accessible to victims of trafficking regardless ofincome; and aggressively investigate, prosecute, and punishJapanese nationals who engage in child sex tourism.ProsecutionThe Japanese government continued to make progressin prosecutions and convictions of forced prostitution ofwomen and children; however, the government did notmake significant progress combating labor trafficking ortrafficking of male victims during the reporting period. Japan’s2005 amendment to its criminal code, which prohibits the
200JAPANbuying and selling of persons, provides a narrow definition oftrafficking that is not in line with the 2000 UN TIP Protocol,and it is not clear if the existing legal framework criminalizesall severe forms of trafficking in persons. These laws prescribepunishments ranging from one to 10 years’ imprisonment,which are sufficiently stringent and generally commensuratewith penalties prescribed for other serious crimes. In 2011,the government reported 25 investigations for offenses relatedto sex trafficking that resulted in 20 convictions, 18 of whichcarried prison sentences that ranged from 18 months to fouryears’ imprisonment. The government also reported 842investigations related to child prostitution and reported 470convictions on charges of child prostitution, 74 of which carriedprison sentences that ranged from less than a year to three years.Despite indications of forced labor in the Industrial Traineeand Technical Internship Program, the government reportedone forced labor investigation, and no labor trafficking arrests,prosecutions, or convictions during the reporting period. TheNational Police Agency (NPA), Ministry of Justice, Bureau ofImmigration, and the Public Prosecutor’s office continuedto train law enforcement officers on trafficking investigationand prosecution techniques. During the reporting period, allnew police officers, all senior officials from prefectural policedepartments, and all immigration officers received training ontrafficking investigation and identification techniques. Further,63 prosecutors received specialized training on conductingtrafficking prosecutions.Most allegations of abuse or forced labor involving workers inthe Trainee and Technical Internship Program were settled outof court or through administrative or civil hearings, resultingin penalties which would not be sufficiently stringent for casesinvolving trafficking offenses, such as forced labor. NGOsand labor activists report that the increased inspections oftrainee program worksites as well as labor standards seminarsprovided to employers participating in the program have beensuccessful in decreasing the incidence of abuse and forcedlabor in the program. The resolution of a civil compensationcase documented in the 2011 TIP Report involving a 31-year-old Chinese trainee who died due to overwork had not beenresolved by the end of the reporting period.In addition, while the government took some steps to preventgovernment complicity in trafficking offenses, includingprostitution, corruption remains a serious concern in thelarge entertainment industry in Japan. The government didnot report investigations, prosecutions, convictions, or jailsentences against any official for trafficking-related complicityduring the reporting period. The government activelyinvestigated a February 2012 case in which a retired policechief was arrested in Japan for soliciting child prostitution.ProtectionThe Government of Japan demonstrated modest efforts toprotect victims of human trafficking over the last year. Thegovernment increased identification of sex trafficking victimsin 2011, identifying 45 adult female victims, compared tothe 43 victims identified during 2010. One of these victimshad originally entered Japan as a participant in the IndustrialTrainee and Technical Internship Program. The governmenthas not identified a forced labor victim in Japan in 18 years,despite substantial evidence of abuses against workers in theIndustrial Trainee and Technical Internship Program. Japaneseauthorities produced and distributed to officials a manualentitled, “How to Treat Human Trafficking Cases: MeasuresRegarding the Identification of Victims.” The manual’sfocus, however, appears to be primarily on identifying theimmigration status of foreign migrants and their methodsof entering Japan, rather than identifying indicators of non-consensual exploitation of vulnerable populations. However,this manual led to the identification of trafficking victimsin four prefectures that had never before identified victims.The government reported no specific protection policy orspecialized services for victims of forced labor. Japan has nodedicated shelters for trafficking victims or clear shelteringresources for male victims. The government continued toprovide general (not specific to human trafficking) fundingfor Japan’s 43 Women’s Consulting Center shelters (WCCs),which largely care for Japanese domestic violence victims butalso served 37 foreign trafficking victims during the reportingperiod. Due to limitations on these shelters’ space, language,and counseling capabilities, WCCs sometimes referred victimsto government subsidized NGO shelters. Victims in WCCshelters are technically able to leave the facility at will; however,security concerns are often asserted as the basis for requiringthat facility personnel accompany the victims on outings.The government covers medical expenses in full for foreignand domestic victims while they shelter in government-runfacilities; however, according to several organizations andgovernment officials, referral to medical and psychologicalservices for trafficking victims was inconsistent, and somevictims were not referred to or offered these services in 2011.The government recognized and worked to correct thesedisparities, briefing victims prior to their arrival at the shelters,providing flyers at the shelters, and training WCC staff onavailable services.According to NGOs, many victims refused to seek governmentassistance, due both to a fear of government authorities instilledin them by their traffickers, and, in some instances, fear ofarrest and punishment for unlawful acts victims committedas a direct result of being trafficked. Some victims were alsoreluctant to seek government assistance due to the overalllack of protective services available to identified traffickingvictims. Some trafficking victims were successfully identifiedby law enforcement subsequent to arrest or detention. Thegovernment-funded Legal Support Center provided pro bonolegal services to destitute victims of crime, including traffickingvictims, though it was unclear how many trafficking victims,if any, received government-funded legal services duringthe reporting period. The Japanese government identified619 victims of child prostitution in the reporting periodand the government juvenile protection agency providedprotection services to these victims. Furthermore, whileauthorities reportedly encouraged victims’ participation in theinvestigation and prosecution of their traffickers, victims werenot allowed to work while participating in the investigativeand prosecutorial process. While long-term residency visas areavailable to persons identified as trafficking victims who fearreturning to their home country, only one person has soughtor received this benefit in the past. No trafficking victims weregranted long-term residency visas during the reporting period.PreventionThe Japanese government made limited efforts to preventtrafficking in persons during the reporting period. The NationalPolice Agency (NPA) and the Immigration Bureau updatedand expanded multilingual emergency contact informationfor potential victims of trafficking. While the governmentdistributed handbills with multilingual emergency contact
JORDAN201information for potential victims of trafficking at localimmigration offices and to governments of source countries,NGOs reported that many of these publicity efforts hadlittle impact and failed to engage their intended audiences.The Immigration Bureau continued to conduct an onlinecampaign to raise awareness of trafficking and used flyers toencourage local immigration offices to be alert for indicationsof trafficking.For years, Japan has served as a source of demand for childsex tourism. Japanese men have traveled to and engaged inthe commercial sexual exploitation of children in other Asiancountries – particularly Thailand, Indonesia, Cambodia, thePhilippines, and, to a lesser extent, Mongolia. During thereporting period, one person was convicted under a Japaneselaw that allows nationals to be tried in Japanese courts forengaging in sex with minors or producing child pornographyoverseas. Japan is not a party to the 2000 UN TIP Protocol,the only G-8 country that remains a non-party.JORDAN (Tier 2)Jordan is a destination and transit country for adults andchildren subjected to forced labor and, to a lesser extent,sex trafficking. Women from Sri Lanka, Indonesia, and thePhilippines voluntarily migrate to Jordan for employmentas domestic workers; some are subjected to conditions offorced labor after arrival, including through such practices asunlawful withholding of passports, restrictions on movement,nonpayment of wages, threats of imprisonment, and physicalor sexual abuse. Jordan’s sponsorship system binds foreignworkers to their designated employers without adequate accessto legal recourse when they face abuse and without the abilityto switch employers, thereby placing a significant amount ofpower in the hands of employers and recruitment agencies.Migrant workers are further rendered vulnerable to forcedlabor due to indebtedness to recruiters, negative societalattitudes toward foreign workers, and legal requirements thatforeign workers rely on employers to renew their work andresidency permits.Chinese, Taiwanese, Bangladeshi, Indian, Sri Lankan, Nepali,and Vietnamese men and women, in addition to an increasingnumber of Burmese and Malagasy workers, continue to migratefor work in factories in Jordan’s garment industry. Someof these workers encounter conditions indicative of forcedlabor, including unlawful withholding of passports, delayedpayment of wages, forced overtime, and verbal and physicalabuse; female factory workers are also vulnerable to sexualharassment. Egyptian migrant workers may experience forcedlabor in the construction and building maintenance sectors,while Egyptians and, to a lesser extent, Syrian workers alsoface conditions of forced labor in the agricultural sector.Over the last year, violence in Syria has caused thousandsof Syrians, as well as third country nationals living in Syria,to flee to neighboring countries, including Jordan; someof these migrants, which could include trafficking victims,may be further susceptible to situations of forced labor orforced prostitution in Jordan. Moroccan, Tunisian, andEastern European women are subjected to forced prostitutionafter migrating to Jordan to work in restaurants and nightclubs; moreover, some out-of-status Indonesian, Filipina,and Sri Lankan domestic workers are reportedly forced intoprostitution. NGO reporting suggests that some Egyptianwomen receive marriage offers from Jordanian men assecond wives, but are then subjected to conditions of forcedlabor. Small numbers of Jordanian adults are subjected toforced labor as low-skilled workers in Qatar and Kuwait,while Jordanian children employed within the countryas mechanics, agricultural laborers, and beggars may beexploited in situations of forced labor. Some Jordanian girlsare forced to drop out of school to perform domestic serviceunder conditions of forced labor; these “homebound girls”are confined to the home and denied their constitutionallyprotected right to complete their education.The Government of Jordan does not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however,it is making significant efforts to do so. During the year,the government sustained law enforcement efforts againsttrafficking offenders and police continued to refer traffickingvictims to shelter services. The government’s anti-traffickingefforts, however, continued to be hindered by severalgovernment reshuffles, limited capacity in key ministries, and ageneral lack of inter-ministerial coordination and cooperation.The government accomplished little to implement its nationalanti-trafficking action plan; however, the cabinet approvedby-laws to establish a shelter for victims of trafficking inMarch 2012. It also failed to enforce consistently its bylawsthat provide standards for employing domestic workers andoperating recruitment agencies, and did not launch an anti-trafficking public awareness campaign.Recommendations for Jordan: Using the anti-traffickingstatute, increase efforts to investigate, prosecute, convict, andsentence trafficking offenses; strengthen efforts to proactivelyidentify victims of forced labor and forced prostitution andcontinue to implement the National Screening Team; amendthe forced labor statute to increase prescribed penalties forforced labor offenses; implement an awareness campaign toeducate the general public and foreign migrant workers in allsectors on human trafficking, particularly forced labor andthe proper treatment of domestic workers under Jordanianlaw; issue regulations governing work in the agriculturalsector; enhance protective services for trafficking victims toinclude the availability of adequate shelter; ensure identifiedvictims are not punished for unlawful acts committed as adirect result of their being trafficked; ensure that identifiedtrafficking victims are promptly referred by law enforcement,social services, and labor officials to protection services usinga standardized procedure; and, where appropriate, increasebilateral partnerships and systematic information sharingwith governments of source countries to better protect migrantworkers from abuse and resolve cases of alleged exploitation.ProsecutionThe Government of Jordan made some efforts in responding toJordan’s human trafficking problem through law enforcementmeans, yet police officials did not always view withholdingpassports and nonpayment of wages as indicators of human
202JORDANtrafficking. The 2008 Anti-Human Trafficking Law prohibitsall forms of trafficking and prescribes penalties of six monthsto 10 years’ imprisonment for forced prostitution, childtrafficking, and trafficking of women and girls; these penaltiesare sufficiently stringent, but not commensurate with thosefor other serious crimes, such as rape. Penalties prescribedfor labor trafficking offenses against men that do not involveaggravating circumstances are limited to a minimum of sixmonths’ imprisonment and a maximum fine of the equivalentof $7,000 – penalties that are not sufficiently stringent. Jordan’slabor law assigns administrative penalties for labor violationscommitted against Jordanian or foreign workers, yet thesepenalties also are not sufficiently stringent to deter the seriouscrime of human trafficking. In 2011, the Public SecurityDirectorate’s (PSD) anti-trafficking unit, housed within theCriminal Investigations Division, reported its investigationand referral to prosecutors of 13 cases of trafficking, seven ofwhich involved domestic workers, five involving workers fromgarment factories, and one involving sexual exploitation; these13 cases involved a total of 38 victims. As the PSD did notprovide information on the details of these cases, it is unclearwhether they constitute human trafficking crimes. In 2011,the government prosecuted 14 cases of forced labor involvingdomestic workers and six cases of sex trafficking under the anti-trafficking law. Although 37 individuals were apprehended forsuspected trafficking offenses, the government convicted fourtrafficking offenders under the anti-trafficking law, comparedto six convictions achieved in 2010; the offenders receivedsentences ranging from one year to three years’ imprisonment.In December 2011, Guatemalan authorities arrested andcharged two Jordanian nationals with human traffickingoffenses and forging documents for allegedly operating aninternational sex trafficking ring. Guatemalan prosecutorsreportedly sought, but could not obtain, cooperation fromthe Jordanian government to investigate this case. Two casesremained pending from 2010, including the prosecution of twosuspected trafficking offenders for forcing two Tunisian womeninto prostitution and the prosecution of a man charged withthe sexual assault of his domestic worker. The 2010 prosecutionof an employer who allegedly confined a Sri Lankan domesticworker to the house without pay for more than 10 years resultedin the employers conviction in September 2010 under the anti-trafficking law, though the employer was only sentenced topay a fine; the victim was awarded compensation for her lostsalary. The Jordanian police, in cooperation with INTERPOLand Prince Nayef University, provided anti-trafficking trainingto Saudi Arabian officials in Riyadh at the request of the Saudigovernment in January 2012. The government did not fundanti-trafficking training for Jordanian officials, though PSD’santi-trafficking unit received 22 training courses from localand international organizations during 2011.ProtectionThe government made minimal efforts to protect victims oftrafficking during the reporting period and did not provideany specialized services to trafficking victims. It did, however,identify and refer trafficking victims to shelter services, andit took initial steps to identify victims of trafficking shelteredwithin foreign embassies. The police reportedly referred 26potential female trafficking victims to a local NGO-operatedshelter, a noted improvement compared with the previousreporting period when the government did not refer anyvictims. While the anti-trafficking law contains a provisionfor the opening of shelters, the country continued to lackdirect shelter services for victims of trafficking; however, inMarch 2012, the Cabinet approved by-laws under which thegovernment could establish a shelter for victims of trafficking.There was no government shelter available for male victimsof trafficking, although the police and the Ministry of Labor(MOL) sometimes paid for male victims involved in labordisputes, some of whom may be trafficking victims, to resideat a hotel; it is unknown how many trafficking victimsreceived this type of assistance in 2011. Victims who werenot officially identified by authorities were generally kept inadministrative detention pending deportation or, in the case ofdomestic workers, sometimes sought refuge at their respectiveembassies. Labor regulations prevented the three-person laborinspectorate dedicated to addressing abuses against domesticworkers from investigating abuses in private homes, whichcontinues to isolate domestic workers and “homebound girls.”Additionally, the government lacked specific regulations togovern the agriculture sector, which left abuses and traffickingvictims in this sector largely undetected.For the first time, National Committee members andrepresentatives of the Ministries of Interior (MOI), Justice,Labor, and the police, in conjunction with IOM, formed aNational Screening Team which conducted its first set ofinterviews with over 30 girls at the Indonesian embassyshelter in January 2012 to determine if they were traffickingvictims. As a result of these interviews, IOM provided a list ofofficial recommendations to the government, which includedprocedures to identify, assist, and protect victims and thecreation of a national evaluation team, which would be amulti-ministerial group. A national evaluation team had notbeen created at the end of this reporting period. The policeprovided temporary residency permits to nine traffickingvictims in this reporting period, though this permit did notallow victims to seek employment. The police anti-traffickingunit employed eight women, who could offer specializedassistance to female victims of trafficking; however, NGOsreport these officers only performed escort duties for victimsand did not conduct interviews.The government did not adequately ensure that identifiedvictims were not penalized for unlawful acts committed asa direct result of being trafficked. Victims continued to bevulnerable to arrest and detention – sometimes for extendedperiods of time – if found without valid residency documents,and some foreign domestic workers fleeing abusive employerswere incarcerated after their employers filed false claims oftheft against them. The government did not attempt to identifytrafficking victims among detained foreign domestic workersand out-of-status migrant workers, even those who claimedabuse. The government did not actively encourage victims topursue the investigation or prosecution of trafficking offensescommitted against them. The fining of foreign workers withoutvalid residency documents – including identified traffickingvictims – on a per day basis for being out-of-status served asa strong disincentive to remain in Jordan and pursue legalaction against traffickers. During the previous reporting period,the cabinet announced a short-term amnesty for Filipina, SriLankan, and Indonesian domestic workers whose immigrationdocuments had expired – granting them waivers of the entiretyof their accumulated overstay fines and new work permits.This amnesty program, which extended through mid-June2011, regularized the status of 12,555 domestic workers. It isunknown how many of these workers were trafficking victims,as there appears to have been no effort made to identify and
KAZAKHSTAN203assist trafficking victims among this large group of domesticworkers.While foreign workers in garment sector factories were notliable for overstay fines, the MOI reportedly deported foreignfactory workers rather than investigating their claims of laborviolations. The MOL made some progress in limiting thispractice during the reporting period, successfully reversingdeportation orders in a small number of cases to allow timefor investigation or by placing some workers with differentfactories while investigations were pending.PreventionThe government’s efforts to prevent trafficking stagnated duringthe reporting period. It did not conduct any information oreducation campaigns for the public and, as a result, awarenessof human trafficking and the appropriate treatment of domesticworkers remained low among the general population. TheNational Committee did little to implement its NationalStrategy and Action Plan to Combat Human Trafficking (2010– 2012) that was launched in March 2010. The committee isrequired by law to meet quarterly, but it only met once in thereporting period due to repeated cabinet reshuffles in 2011.The government made minimal efforts to rectify weaknessesin the bylaws that provide standards for employing domesticworkers; however, in November 2011, the government officiallyrevised regulations that had restricted a domestic worker tothe employer’s home so that a worker may simply inform heremployer if she intends to leave the home, rather than seekingpermission. The government has not raised public awarenessof this new regulation. Beginning in July 2011, the MOL issueda directive that requires employers of domestic workers todeposit their salaries into bank accounts. The labor inspectorateenforced this directive by requiring all employers to provideproof of the bank account and payment of wages when theycomplete the annual renewal process for their employees’ workpermits; however, the MOL reported that some workers refusedto open accounts to avoid bank fees. Despite these efforts, thelegally required standardized contract for the employmentof domestic workers was not consistently implemented. Inresponse to either domestic workers’ or employers’ complaints,in 2011 the MOL’s inspectorate division investigated thepractices of nine recruitment agencies, suspended 20 offices,and forwarded four cases to the Magistrates’ Court with arecommendation for closure; the government effectivelyclosed these four offices.The MOL continued to operate a hotline to receive laborcomplaints, which received 1,116 calls in 2011; however, thelabor inspectorate did not maintain complete records of callsreceived, the hotline was only operational during daytimehours, and translation services available in source-countrylanguages remained lacking. During the majority of thereporting period, Jordan continued to recruit domestic workersfrom the Philippines and Indonesia despite both governments’imposed bans on employment of their nationals in Jordan;however, in a positive effort in January 2012, the MOL agreedto halt the issuance of work permits to Indonesian domesticworkers at the request of the Indonesian ambassador. In thesame month, the Philippine government negotiated a newMemorandum of Understanding on domestic worker rightswith the Government of Jordan as a first step toward liftingthe ban against employment of Philippine domestic workersin Jordan. The Government of Jordan did not undertake anydiscernible measures to reduce the demand for commercial sexacts during the reporting period. Jordan’s Peace OperationsTraining Center provided anti-trafficking training as part ofthe standard training regimen for peacekeepers being deployedabroad as part of international peacekeeping missions.KAZAKHSTAN (Tier 2)Kazakhstan is a destination and to a lesser extent, sourceand transit country for women and girls subjected to sextrafficking and for men, women, and children subjectedto forced labor. There is also a large trafficking problemwithin the country. Kazakhstani women and children aresubjected to sex trafficking in the United Arab Emirates andLebanon, and to a lesser extent, in Russia, China, Turkey,and Azerbaijan. Women and girls from Uzbekistan, Russia,Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Moldova, and Ukraine are subjectedto sex trafficking in Kazakhstan. Women and girls from ruralKazakhstan are subject to sex trafficking in urban areas ofthe country. Kazakhstani men, women, and children as wellas men and children from Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, China,Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Mongolia, and Nigeria are subjectedto conditions of forced labor in domestic service, cattlebreeding, and pasturing, and also in the harvest of agriculturalproducts in Kazakhstan. Civil society groups continued toreport a significant reduction in the use of forced labor in thetobacco harvest, in large part due to the efforts of a privatecompany and a gradual phasing out of the tobacco industryin Kazakhstan. NGOs report sporadic cases of children whoare forced to beg. Traffickers commonly confiscated victims’identity documents, prohibited victims’ freedom of movement,and isolated victims. Traffickers often used inflated debts,justified by purported costs in “purchasing,” housing, ortransporting the migrant workers to coerce them to work.The Government of Kazakhstan does not fully comply withthe minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking;however, it is making significant efforts to do so. Thegovernment maintained its law enforcement efforts againsthuman trafficking, including by training law enforcementofficials. However, it failed to screen migrants effectively toidentify potential victims of trafficking and only identified twoforeign victims of labor trafficking, despite being a significantdestination country for foreign victims of forced labor. Officialcomplicity in trafficking remained a serious but unaddressedproblem.Recommendations for Kazakhstan: Increase efforts toidentify foreign victims of both forced labor and forcedprostitution, including by ensuring that authorities makeefforts to proactively identify victims of forced labor amongthose detained during immigration raids and refer thoseidentified as victims for assistance; work to ensure that foreignvictims of trafficking receive assistance; investigate andprosecute police officers suspected of complicity in trafficking;continue to increase the number of victims who receive
204KAZAKHSTANgovernment-funded assistance by increasing funding to anti-trafficking NGOs and establishing trafficking shelters;promptly provide foreign trafficking victims with their identitydocuments, in order to facilitate repatriation of those whochoose to return to their countries of origin; continue tostrengthen the capacity of police, prosecutors, and judges toinvestigate, prosecute, and adjudicate trafficking cases; andintroduce professional ethics training for police officers inorder to foster a culture of empathy for and assistance totrafficking victims.ProsecutionThe Government of Kazakhstan maintained modest progressin its anti-trafficking law enforcement efforts during thereporting period, but did not address official complicity intrafficking. Kazakhstan prohibits trafficking in persons forboth labor and sexual exploitation through Articles 128, 133,125(3b), 126(3b), 270, and 132-1 of its penal code, whichprescribe penalties of up to 15 years’ imprisonment – penaltiessufficiently stringent and commensurate with those prescribedfor other serious crimes, such as rape. Police investigated 111trafficking cases in 2011, compared with 88 investigations in2010. Authorities prosecuted 82 cases in 2011, an increase from48 cases prosecuted in 2010. A total of 30 trafficking offenderswere convicted in 2011, compared with 32 offenders convictedin 2010. The government convicted 26 offenders for sextrafficking offences in 2011, a decrease from 29 convictions in2010, and convicted four offenders for forced labor offences in2011, compared with three in 2010. Four convicted traffickersreceived conditional sentences and two others were penalizedwith substantial fines. Sentences for the remaining 24 offendersranged from two to 17 years’ imprisonment, in addition tothe confiscation of their assets.The government provided specialized training courses inthe recognition, investigation, and prosecution of traffickingcrimes for police, prosecutors, and judges through the TrainingCenters of the Office of the Procurator General, the SupremeCourt, and the Karaganda Legal Academy’s Trafficking inPersons Training Center, and funded police participationin anti-trafficking events in four countries. Police jointlyinvestigated seven trafficking cases with officials from fivecountries. Some trafficking victims complained that policeofficers did not take their assertions of being trafficked seriously.Some trafficking victims also complained that individualpolice officers were complicit in trafficking, including byprotecting traffickers and raping trafficking victims, and thatsome officers facilitated trafficking by bringing girls to brothels.However, the government did not report any investigationsor prosecutions of government officials or police officerssuspected of complicity in trafficking.ProtectionThe Government of Kazakhstan maintained its modestefforts in protecting trafficking victims in 2011; however, thegovernment identified only two foreign labor trafficking victims,despite being a recognized destination for foreign victims offorced labor. Although migration police reported screeningundocumented migrants detained during immigrationraids, these efforts did not result in the identification of anytrafficking victims. In 2011, thousands of migrants weredeported without being screened for potential victims oftrafficking. Government officials had a formal system to guideofficials in the proactive identification of trafficking victimsamong the at-risk people they may encounter, but there wasno information about how many trafficking victims wereidentified using these procedures. Identified victims were notpunished for unlawful acts committed as a direct result ofbeing trafficked, though victims not identified by authoritiesmay have been deported or prosecuted for immigration orother violations, and some child sex trafficking victimswere placed in detention centers. In 2011, the governmentidentified 84 victims of trafficking, including 13 victims offorced labor, compared with 83 victims of trafficking – 13 ofwhom were also labor trafficking victims – identified in 2010.Of those identified in 2011, six were foreigners – includingtwo victims of forced labor – a decrease from nine foreignvictims identified in 2010. Police referred 68 traffickingvictims to IOM for assistance. The government provided atleast the equivalent of $42,000 in funding for the provisionof food, shelter, clothing, transportation, and other servicesfor all identified victims. In total, 141 trafficking victims, 74of whom were victims of forced labor, were identified andassisted by IOM, privately funded NGOs, and government-funded programs in 2011. The government continued tofund fully one NGO-run shelter for trafficking victims. Thelocal government of Almaty no longer funds another NGO-shelter, as it did in the previous year. The government hasnot, despite stated intentions, established trafficking sheltersbeyond the government-funded shelter in Astana. This hasbeen due in large part to the lack of a policy that establishesshelter standards; the government is currently developingsuch standards. Shelters are open to all trafficking victimsand provide legal, psychological, and medical assistance.However, some foreign victims of trafficking are unable toget access to medical assistance due to a lack of identificationdocuments, health insurance, or temporary residency permits.Adult trafficking victims were permitted to enter and leave theshelters freely. The Ministries of Justice and Interior operatedtwo counter-trafficking hotlines; five criminal cases wereinvestigated in 2011 based on phone calls to these hotlines.There was no information as to whether any victim receivedgovernment compensation, as envisioned by a regulationadopted in 2010 permitting victims to receive compensationfrom the government. The government encouraged all victimsto participate in investigations and prosecutions by providingwitness protection during court proceedings and access topre-trial shelter services. The government did not reporthow many trafficking victims cooperated in investigationsand prosecutions in 2011. Foreign victims who agreed tocooperate with law enforcement were requested to remain inKazakhstan for the duration of the criminal investigation butwere not permitted to work. The government did not reporthow many foreign victims received temporary residencepermits in 2011. The government did not offer other legalalternatives to foreign victims’ removal to countries wherethey faced retribution or hardship; all victims were forciblyrepatriated, either after a short recuperation period or aftertheir service as a prosecution witness was completed.PreventionThe government continued its prevention efforts during thereporting period. The Interagency Trafficking in PersonsWorking Group, chaired by the Minister of Justice, metquarterly; each responsible agency reported on its anti-trafficking activities assigned under the Trafficking in PersonsNational Plan. The national government supported someanti-trafficking efforts, including information and educationalcampaigns. The government also co-funded or provided
KENYA205in-kind contributions to activities organized by NGOs orinternational organizations, such as the posting of billboardsadvertising anti-trafficking hotlines. NGOs also received grantsfrom the government to implement prevention activities. Thegovernment continued to provide in-kind contributions for aprogram designed to reduce the demand for commercial sexacts. In 2011, the government completed implementation ofits National Trafficking in Persons Plan for 2009-2011 andadopted the new National Trafficking in Persons Plan for2012-2014. The government failed to implement one task ofthe 2009-2011 plan concerning development of standardsfor shelter assistance; the new plan rectifies this by assigningresponsible agencies to develop the standards.KENYA (Tier 2 Watch List)Kenya is a source, transit, and destination country formen, women, and children subjected to forced labor andsex trafficking. Traffickers, who gain poor families’ trustthrough familial, ethnic, or religious ties, falsely offer toraise and educate children in towns or to place adults inlucrative employment. Within the country, Kenyan children areforced to labor in domestic service, agriculture, fishing, cattleherding, street vending, begging, and the sale of illicit brews.Children are also exploited in prostitution throughout Kenya,including in the coastal sex tourism industry, in the easternkhat cultivation areas, and near Nyanza’s gold mines. Childrenare lured into brothels by promises of jobs as domestic workersin cities, while others are introduced by their families to the sextrade. Brothel-based child prostitution is reportedly increasingin Migori, Homa Bay, and Kisii counties, particularly aroundmarkets along the border with Tanzania. Vehicles transportingkhat to Somalia return carrying Somali girls and women whooften end up in brothels in Nairobi or Mombasa. Both womenand “beach boys” as young as 14 pimp children in coastal areasand receive commissions as high as the equivalent of $240from tourists for each girl secured. Some Kenyan tenant ricefarmers work in situations of debt bondage to farm ownersor supervisors, often to repay funds that were provided as anadvance – for school fees, food, or medical needs – by theiremployers. Kenyan men, women, and children voluntarilymigrate to other East African nations, South Sudan, Europe,the United States, and the Middle East – particularly SaudiArabia, but also Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates(UAE), Lebanon, and Oman – in search of employment, wherethey are at times exploited in domestic servitude, massageparlors and brothels, or forced manual labor, including in theconstruction industry. Officials at the Saudi Arabian embassyin Nairobi allegedly collude with unlicensed recruitmentagents to place Kenyans into situations of forced labor in SaudiArabia. Recruitment of women for overseas domestic workreportedly increased during the year in Mombasa, Nairobi’sEastleigh area, and major towns in Central Province. In 2011,gay and bisexual Kenyan men recounted being lured fromuniversities with promises of overseas jobs, only to be forcedinto prostitution in Qatar. Children from Burundi, Ethiopia,Somalia, South Sudan, Tanzania, and Uganda are subjectedto forced labor and prostitution in Kenya.The Government of Kenya does not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking;however, it is making significant efforts to do so. Duringthe reporting period, the government’s children’s officerscontinued admirable efforts to identify and protect childtrafficking victims throughout the country. The governmentfailed, however, to fully enact its anti-trafficking law’simplementing regulations, finalize its national plan ofaction, take tangible action against trafficking complicityamong law enforcement officials, provide shelter and otherprotective services for adult victims, take concrete actionagainst alleged incidences of child sex tourism, monitorthe work of overseas labor recruitment agencies, or provideadequate anti-trafficking training to its officials, includingdiplomats, police, labor inspectors, and children’s officers.The government held few trafficking offenders accountablefor their crimes in comparison to the significant number ofchild trafficking victims identified. Therefore, Kenya is placedon Tier 2 Watch List as it did not show evidence of increasingefforts to combat human trafficking. The government’s effortsremained uncoordinated and lacked strong oversight, creatingan environment conducive to trafficking.Recommendations for Kenya: Finalize necessary regulationsand put in place appropriate structures to fully implementthe anti-trafficking statute; use the anti-trafficking law toprosecute trafficking offenses and convict and punishtrafficking offenders, including government officials suspectedof complicity in human trafficking; use the anti-traffickinglaw or Section 14 of the Sexual Offenses Act to prosecute andpunish child sex tourists; provide additional training to alllevels of the government, particularly law enforcement officialsand diplomats, on identifying and responding to traffickingcrimes; establish an official process for law enforcementofficials to refer trafficking victims for assistance; continueto increase oversight of and accountability for overseasrecruitment agencies; increase protective services availableto adult trafficking victims, particularly those identified inand returned from the Middle East; and approve and implementthe national action plan.ProsecutionThe government maintained its anti-trafficking lawenforcement efforts during the reporting period, thoughcorruption, the absence of an implemented anti-traffickinglaw, and lack of understanding of human trafficking amongpolice and other public officials continued to prevent mosttraffickers from being brought to justice. Section 1 of theCounter-Trafficking in Persons Act (Act 8 of 2010) prohibits allforms of trafficking and Section 3(5) prescribes a sufficientlystringent minimum punishment of 15 years’ imprisonment,which is commensurate with those for other serious crimes,such as rape. Section 3(6) prescribes a minimum punishmentof 30 years’ imprisonment for the aggravated offenses ofcontrolling or financing the commission of human traffickingcrimes. In 2011, however, the government did not take thefinal necessary steps, such as publishing this act in the KenyaGazette, or enacting necessary implementing regulations, tobring the law into effect. As a result, no trafficking cases havebeen prosecuted under this law. Sections 14, 15, and 17 ofthe Sexual Offenses Act of 2006 prohibit the facilitation of
206KENYAchild sex tourism (prescribed punishment of at least 10 years’imprisonment), child prostitution (prescribed punishmentof at least 10 years’ imprisonment), and forced prostitution(prescribed punishment of at least five years’ imprisonment).However, prosecutors do not widely use these sections.The Kenyan Police Service’s anti-trafficking unit did notprovide information on efforts to investigate traffickingcrimes during the reporting period. The government reportedinitiating 15 human trafficking prosecutions in Mombasa,Kwale, Kajiado, Nairobi, and Kisumu in 2011, but providedno additional information to substantiate that they involvedhuman trafficking offenses rather than smuggling or othertypes of crimes.Many trafficking cases did not result in judgments due toweak preparation for prosecution or court officials’ receipt ofbribes to alter records of testimony. Though the governmentincreased the Ministry of Gender’s budget by 43 percent in 2011,funding remained insufficient to provide the transportationnecessary for children’s officers to carry out quarterly childlabor inspections, especially in remote areas. The Ministryof Labor’s 30 inspectors did not conduct any child laborinspections and lacked training to identify and addresssituations of forced labor.Corruption among law enforcement authorities and otherpublic officials continued to hamper efforts to bring traffickersto justice; in certain regions, corrupt police (including membersof the Tourist Police Unit), immigration, or labor officialswere reportedly complicit in, received bribes to overlookor confer lesser charges for, or obstructed investigations ofhuman trafficking crimes. Local observers indicated that somesuspected traffickers apprehended in police operations werequickly released under dubious circumstances. The governmentmade no efforts to investigate or prosecute officials suspectedof involvement in or facilitation of human trafficking duringthe reporting period. It did not provide anti-trafficking trainingto law enforcement and other public officials; inadequateunderstanding of human trafficking by police resulted in, attimes, suspects being improperly charged under Kenyan law.ProtectionThe government’s efforts to identify and protect childtrafficking victims continued during the year, butcommensurate protection was unavailable for adults, includingthe increasing number of victims in the overseas migrantworker population. As guidelines for implementing the victimprotection provisions of the anti-trafficking statute have yetto be developed, the government continued to lack a formalmechanism for identifying victims of trafficking amongvulnerable populations. Nevertheless, government officialsidentified 99 child trafficking victims (23 of whom were inprostitution) in 2011 and provided protective services to all ofthese victims. The Ministry of Gender, Children, and SocialDevelopment’s children’s officers coordinated local Children’sAdvisory Committees that, as part of their protective mission,monitored service providers and advanced awareness of humantrafficking at the local level. During the reporting period,children’s officers rescued child trafficking victims, providedthem with counseling and referrals to service providers, andparticipated in investigations. The Ministry of Gender and alocal NGO continued to jointly operate a national 24-hour toll-free hotline for reporting cases of child trafficking, labor, andabuse, which received more than 40,000 calls each month. Thehotline is located in a government-owned building in Nairobiand staffed, in part, by three children’s officers who facilitatedrescues and made referrals to appropriate district officials, aswell as to health and legal aid organizations, in other provinces.During the reporting period, the hotline received 46 reportsof child trafficking, 19 concerning child prostitution, and497 related to child labor. The hotline’s call center in Eldoretconnected children with locally-available services in westernKenya. The Ministry of Gender’s Children’s Department alsooperated four drop-in referral centers in Mombasa, Malindi,Eldoret, and Garissa that provided counseling and guidanceservices, as well as referrals to other centers for victimizedchildren that could not be returned home. This departmentalso funded and operated rescue centers in Garissa, Malindi,Thika, and Machakos where child victims of violence couldstay for three months before returning home or being referredto NGO facilities. The government did not provide data onhow many trafficking victims were afforded such servicesduring the year.While efforts to assist and care for child trafficking victimsremained strong, the government provided relatively fewservices – including shelter, medical care, or psycho-socialcounseling – to trafficked adults identified within the countryor abroad. Most of Kenya’s overseas diplomatic missions failedto provide any assistance to trafficked Kenyan nationals.The Kenyan embassy in Riyadh, however, provided limitedrepatriation assistance by issuing new travel documents to460 victims of domestic servitude during the reporting period;other victims, however, complained that the embassy wasslow to intervene in their cases, did not expeditiously processtravel documents and did not provide material support. TheMinistry of Immigration spent the equivalent of $26,500to return 60 abused migrant workers from Saudi Arabia in2011. While the government reports it encouraged Kenyanvictims’ assistance in the investigation and prosecution oftrafficking crimes during the reporting period, it did notprovide information on such instances. There were no reportsthat the government inappropriately incarcerated or otherwisepenalized Kenyan victims for unlawful acts committed asa direct result of being trafficked. Police, however, arrestedforeign women for engaging in prostitution or being in Kenyawithout valid identity documents, but did not screen themfor trafficking victimization; in most cases, the women pledguilty to immigration violations and were quickly deported.Under the 2010 anti-trafficking law, the Minister of Gendermay grant permission for foreign trafficking victims to remainindefinitely in Kenya if it is believed they would face hardshipor retribution upon repatriation; the government did not usethis provision during the year.PreventionThe government made some progress in preventing humantrafficking. The National Steering Committee to CombatHuman Trafficking, chaired by the Minister of Gender, metthree times during the reporting period. The five-year NationalAction Plan on Human Trafficking, drafted in previousreporting periods, remained without Cabinet approval, as theCounter-Trafficking Act’s implementing regulations have notbeen finalized. District child labor committees, which existin 30 out of 180 districts, together with children’s advisorycommittees, raised awareness of child trafficking and laboramong local populations. Many of these committees, however,existed only nominally, did not meet regularly, and werelargely ineffective.
KIRIBATI207In June 2011, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) issueda directive requiring foreign companies or employmentagencies to submit to Kenyan recruitment agencies informationregarding the jobs offered, the perspective employers, theterms of service, and remuneration before hiring Kenyansto work abroad. Recruitment agencies’ sending of domesticworkers for jobs in Saudi Arabia and the UAE received increasedattention with parliamentary hearings in July, October, andNovember 2011. In September 2011, MFA’s Department of HostCountry and Consular Division, with the Kenya Associationof Employment Agents and the Ministry of Youth, providedan awareness session to 1,500 workers migrating to the MiddleEast, many to be private security guards. In November 2011,the Ministries of Youth, Foreign Affairs, and Labor conducteda sensitization session to provide an unknown number oflabor migrants departing for the Middle East with informationabout their country of destination, their legal rights andemployment benefits, and the skills necessary for successfuladaptation to the society of their destination. The Ministry ofLabor, which is required by law to monitor the operations oflabor recruitment agencies and attest to employment contracts,verified 133 contracts in 2011; migrant workers, however,often left Kenya before their contracts had been approved.The ministry’s vetting procedures were inconsistently appliedand efforts, in conjunction with the MFA, to monitor laborrecruitment agencies to prevent fraudulent job offers and otherillegal practices were poorly coordinated. The governmentneither made efforts to close down unlicensed agencies nor topunish agencies utilizing illegal recruitment methods. Briberyof government officials by recruitment agencies reportedlyhindered efforts to stop fraudulent recruitment. In late 2011,the Ministry of Labor ceased without explanation its yearlyrenewal of these agencies’ accreditation certificates, resulting inall members of the Kenya Association of Private EmploymentAgencies operating without valid licenses in early 2012. Thisalso resulted in these agencies’ sending workers overseaswithout governmental attestation and vetting of workers’foreign contracts, which left migrant workers increasinglyvulnerable to trafficking.The government reported that it prosecuted and extraditedtwo foreign pedophiles for child sexual abuse in the Coastregion in 2011, but provided no details to confirm whetherthese cases involved child sex tourism. Police provided noinformation regarding the investigations of four suspectedchild sex tourism cases pending at the close of 2010. In October2011, local organizations and media outlets decried Kisaunipolice for releasing a German tourist alleged to have sexuallyexploited a prostituted child; the German was not charged dueto lack of evidence. Out of court settlements, however, werecommon, with tourists paying girls’ families to avoid legalaction. The government made efforts to reduce the demandfor commercial sex acts. In February 2011, the city of Nairobiformed a taskforce to recommend measures to address thegrowing sex trade. The Kenyan government’s provision oftraining to troops deploying on international peacekeepingmissions included a module on human rights that addressedhuman trafficking.KIRIBATI (Tier 2)Kiribati is a source country for girls subjected to sex traffickingwithin the country. Crew members on foreign fishing vessels inKiribati or in its territorial waters around Tarawa and KiritimatiIsland allegedly exploit prostituted children, some reportedlyas young as 14, in local hotels and aboard their vessels. LocalI-Kiribati, sometimes family members of potential victims,but also hotel and bar workers or owners of small boats, mayfacilitate trafficking by transporting underage girls to the boatsfor the purpose of prostitution or by failing to intervene inthe situation. The girls generally received cash, food, alcohol,or goods in exchange for sexual services. Women and girlswho frequent bars and foreign fishing vessels are collectivelyreferred to by the term ainen matawa and are stigmatized inI-Kiribati society.The Government of Kiribati does not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however,it is making significant efforts to do so. During the year,government officials acknowledged the existence of child sextrafficking and expressed their commitment to combatingthe crime. Although the government did not initiate anycriminal prosecutions against traffickers, it cited three captainsof foreign fishing vessels found harboring unauthorizedI-Kirbati persons – some of whom may have been traffickingvictims – aboard their boats. The government did not employpolicies to proactively identify trafficking victims among theainen matawa population. The government’s anti-traffickingactivities were organized around thwarting the activities ofainen matawa and did not adequately prioritize protectingvictims or prosecuting and punishing those who exploit orfacilitate the commercial sexual exploitation of children.Recommendations for Kiribati: Investigate, prosecute, andpunish foreign crewmen for the commercial sexual exploitationof children; develop procedures for law enforcement officersand social service providers to interview those in vulnerablegroups, such as those intercepted aboard international vessels,for evidence of trafficking; establish formal procedures toidentify and refer trafficking victims to protective services;train front-line officers in victim identification techniquesand procedures for referral to domestic violence and sexualviolence officers; proactively identify and assist victims oftrafficking, prioritizing establishment of a safe environmentfor victims and trust between victims and officers; work withlocal or international organizations, including religiousorganizations, to provide protective services to victims; ensurevictims are not punished for crimes committed as a result ofbeing trafficked; hold parents accountable, as appropriateunder I-Kiribati law, for the commercial sexual exploitationof their children; and expand efforts to raise awareness aboutthe dangers of human trafficking, with a specific focus onincreasing public recognition that children in the commercialsex industry are victims rather than social deviants.ProsecutionThe Government of Kiribati demonstrated limited lawenforcement efforts to combat human trafficking during thereporting period. Kiribati’s 2005 Measures to Combat Terrorismand Transnational Organised Crime Act, as amended in 2008,
208KOREA,DEMOCRATICPEOPLE’SREPUBLICOFdefines and criminalizes trafficking and prescribes penalties ofup to 15 years’ imprisonment for the trafficking of adults and20 years’ imprisonment for the trafficking of children. Thesepenalties are sufficiently stringent, but not commensuratewith those prescribed for other serious crimes, such as rape.The law’s provisions focus on the international movementof people for exploitation, a form of trafficking not knownto occur in Kiribati. The law’s victim protection provisionsshield victims from prosecution for immigration crimescommitted as a direct result of being trafficked. Althoughthere is no legal precedent, government officials have reportedthat domestic trafficking could be prosecuted under this law.The government reported identifying three cases in whichunauthorized I-Kiribati persons – some of whom may havebeen trafficking victims – were discovered on foreign fishingvessels, but it did not identify any confirmed cases of traffickingor conduct any prosecutions for trafficking offenses duringthe year. In September 2011, the government coordinated aday of training for 19 law enforcement officers and judicialofficials on the identification and protection of traffickingvictims and investigation and prosecution of trafficking cases.Members of the Domestic Violence and Sexual Offenses Unitof the police were responsible for investigations and victimcare in suspected trafficking cases. However, governmentofficials did not sufficiently prioritize identification of victimsamong the vulnerable populations, particularly ainen matawa,with whom they came in contact. No government officialswere suspected of, investigated, prosecuted, or convicted fortrafficking or trafficking-related criminal activities duringthe reporting period.ProtectionThe Government of Kiribati made little discernible progressin identifying or protecting trafficking victims duringthe reporting period. Police reported identifying, aboardinternational fishing vessels, several females who may havebeen trafficking victims, but their ages and status werenot confirmed and the government did not provide themwith any protective services. Law enforcement and socialservices personnel did not develop or implement systematicprocedures for proactively identifying victims of traffickingamong vulnerable persons with whom they came in contact.The government did not provide any victim care facilities fortrafficking victims, but it reported victims could be referredto religious organizations to access medical and psychologicalservices on an ad hoc basis. Law enforcement efforts to combatprostitution potentially resulted in some trafficking victimsbeing treated as law violators; individuals detained for relatedcrimes were not screened to determine whether they weretrafficking victims, and their ages were not verified. Thegovernment has not developed or implemented a referralprocess to transfer potential victims who are detained, arrested,or placed in protective custody by law enforcement authoritiesto institutions that provide short or long-term care. It has alimited capacity to protect victims of trafficking or victims ofother crimes, and partners with local religious organizationsthat provide services to victims of crime.PreventionThe government increased its efforts to prevent humantrafficking during the year. The Ministry of Internal andSocial Affairs, in partnership with an internationalorganization, continued to produce a weekly radio showon child protection issues, including the commercial sexualexploitation of children. The same ministry, with supportfrom an international organization, conducted workshops forcommunity leaders and in schools on issues of child protectionand the sexual exploitation of children. The police partneredwith the Ministry of Fisheries to enhance the monitoringof shores for unauthorized persons attempting to accessinternational fishing vessels and to dissuade women andgirls from entering situations in which they could becomevictims of exploitation. The government continued to patrolits maritime territory with its one patrol boat and, duringthe year, in an effort to decrease the demand for commercialsex acts, it began to enforce a 2010 amendment to its foreignfishing license regulations holding ship captains accountablefor unauthorized persons discovered on their vessels. Thegovernment cited three captains of foreign fishing vesselsfor harboring unauthorized persons aboard their boats,and one captain received a fine in an amount equivalentto approximately $30,000. The government maintainedbillboards cautioning against engaging in commercial sex acts.KOREA, DEMOCRATICPEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF (Tier 3)The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK or NorthKorea) is a source country for men, women, and childrenwho are subjected to forced labor, forced marriage, and sextrafficking. Within North Korea, forced labor is part of anestablished system of political repression. The North Koreangovernment is directly involved in subjecting its nationalsto forced labor in prison camps. North Koreans do not havea choice in the work the government assigns them and arenot free to change jobs at will. North Korea is estimated tohold between 130,000 and 200,000 prisoners in politicalprison camps in remote areas of the country. Many of theseprisoners were not actually convicted of a criminal offense. Inprison camps, all prisoners, including children, are subject toforced labor, including logging, mining, and farming for longhours under harsh conditions. Reports indicate that politicalprisoners endure severe conditions, including little food ormedical care, and brutal punishments; many are not expectedto survive. Many prisoners fell ill or died due to harsh laborconditions, inadequate food, beatings, lack of medical care,and unhygienic conditions.The North Korean government recruited laborers to workabroad under bilateral contracts with foreign governments,including in Russia; Africa, Central and Eastern Europe, Eastand Southeast Asia, including especially Mongolia, and theMiddle East. Credible reports showed that many North Koreanworkers sent abroad under these contracts were subjectedto forced labor, with their movement and communicationsconstantly under surveillance and restricted by North Koreangovernment “minders.” There were also credible reports thatthese workers faced threats of government reprisals againstthem or their relatives in North Korea if they attempted toescape or complain to outside parties. Workers’ salaries aredeposited into accounts controlled by the North Koreangovernment, which keeps most of the money, claimingfees for various “voluntary” contributions to governmentendeavors. Workers reportedly only received a fraction ofthe money paid to the North Korean government for theirwork. Between 10,000 and 15,000 North Korean workers areestimated to be employed in logging camps in Russia’s FarEast, where they reportedly have only two days of rest per year
KOREA,DEMOCRATICPEOPLE’SREPUBLICOF209and face punishments if they fail to meet production targets.Over the past year, reports indicated that the North Koreangovernment worked harder to place North Korean workersin Russia, particularly in the Far East. Wages of some NorthKorean workers employed in Russia reportedly were withhelduntil the laborers returned home. North Korean workers atjoint ventures with foreign investors within the DPRK areemployed under arrangements similar to those that apply tooverseas contract workers.NGOs and researchers estimate that thousands ofundocumented North Koreans currently live in northeastChina, and as many as 70 percent of them are women. Thereis no reliable information on how many of these NorthKoreans have been trafficked, but their status in China asillegal economic migrants who may be deported to NorthKorea makes them particularly vulnerable to trafficking.North Korean women and girls commonly migrate to China,often with the help of a facilitator, seeking food, work,freedom, and better life prospects, but may then be forcedinto marriage, prostitution, or labor. Trafficking networks ofKorean-Chinese and North Koreans (usually men) operatealong the China-North Korea border, reportedly workingwith border guards from both countries to recruit women formarriage or prostitution in China. North Korean women oftenpass through many hands, with multiple brokers involved intheir trafficking. Reports indicate that security along the NorthKorea-China border increased during the reporting period. Itis unclear what impact this change had on trafficking trends.Some North Korean women who make their own way to Chinaare lured, drugged, or kidnapped by traffickers upon arrival.Others are offered jobs, but are subsequently compelled intodomestic service through forced marriages to Chinese men,often of Korean ethnicity, or are forced into prostitution inbrothels or through the Internet sex trade. Some are forcedto serve as hostesses in nightclubs and karaoke bars. If foundby Chinese authorities, victims are deported to North Koreawhere they are subject to harsh punishment, including forcedlabor in DPRK labor camps.The North Korean government does not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking and isnot making significant efforts to do so. The government didnot demonstrate any efforts to address human traffickingthrough prosecution, protection, or prevention measures. Thegovernment contributed to the human trafficking problemthrough its ban on emigration, its failure to address its pooreconomic and food situation, and through its forced laborcamps, where North Koreans live in conditions of servitude,receiving little food and little, if any, medical care.PRecommendations for the Democratic People’s Republicof Korea: Recognize human trafficking as a problem in NorthKorea, and one that is distinct from human smuggling; workwith the international community to close forced labor camps;work with the international community to allow NorthKoreans to choose their form of work and leave theiremployment at will, and with fair wages; work with theinternational community to improve the social, political,economic, and human rights conditions that render NorthKoreans vulnerable to trafficking; provide assistance totrafficking victims and forge partnerships with internationalorganizations and NGOs to aid in this effort; and allow NGOsto operate freely within North Korea to assist traffickingvictims.ProsecutionThe North Korean government made no discernible lawenforcement efforts to combat trafficking in persons duringthe reporting period. The government continued to deny thathuman trafficking was a problem. Article 233 of the penal codecriminalizes border crossing and Article 234 prohibits borderguards from assisting border crossers; both carry a penaltyof up to 25 years of detention in a labor facility. Article 289of the penal code prohibits the abduction of children andArticle 290 prohibits the abduction of individuals or groups.Both statutes prescribe penalties of three to 10 years of “laborcorrection.” Article 7 of the 1946 Law on Equality of the Sexesforbids trafficking in women. However, fair trials did not occurin North Korea and the government was not transparent withits law enforcement data, so it remained unclear under whatprovisions of the law, if any, traffickers were prosecuted. Duringthe reporting period, there were no known prosecutions orconvictions of trafficking offenders or officials complicit inforced labor or forced prostitution. The government did notreport whether it provided any anti-trafficking training to itsofficials. Reports indicate that repatriated North Koreans weresubjected to harsh punishments during the reporting period.North Korean defectors reported instances of the governmentpunishing traffickers, including execution.ProtectionThe North Korean government did not make any knownattempts to protect trafficking victims during the reportingperiod. The government reported no efforts to identify orassist trafficking victims. Government authorities provided nodiscernible protection services to trafficking victims, nor didit permit indigenous NGOs to operate freely in North Korea.The few international NGOs allowed into the DPRK werenot permitted to assist trafficking victims. The governmentprovided no assurances to trafficking victims that they wouldbe exempt from being penalized for unlawful acts committedas a direct result of their being trafficked. DPRK authoritiescontinued to screen North Koreans for contacts with SouthKoreans and exposure to South Korean cultural influences,but did not distinguish between trafficking victims and illegalmigrants. Article 233 of the penal code criminalizes bordercrossing and Article 234 prohibits border guards from assistingborder crossers; both articles carry a penalty of up to two tofive years of forced labor. North Koreans forcibly repatriatedby Chinese authorities, including women believed to betrafficking victims, were sent to prison camps, where theymay have been subjected to forced labor, torture, sexual abuseby prison guards, or other severe punishment. Repatriatedvictims who were suspected of having become pregnantwith a child of possible Chinese paternity may be subject toforced abortions and infanticide. Reports indicate that prisonauthorities brutally killed infants born to repatriated victimswhile in prison.
210KOREA,REPUBLICOFPreventionNorth Korean authorities made no discernable efforts toprevent human trafficking during the reporting period.Internal conditions in the DPRK prompted many NorthKoreans to flee the country, making them vulnerable to humantrafficking. Although press reports indicated that bordersecurity increased during the reporting period, there was noevidence that the DPRK government attempted to preventhuman trafficking by screening migrants along the border.DPRK authorities made no discernible efforts to reduce thedemand for commercial sex acts. North Korea is not a partyto the 2000 UN TIP Protocol.KOREA, REPUBLIC OF (Tier 1)The Republic of Korea (ROK or South Korea) is a source, transit,and destination country for men and women subjected toforced prostitution and forced labor. Some men and womenfrom Russia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Morocco, Colombia,Mongolia, China, the Philippines, Thailand, Cambodia,North Korea, Vietnam, Japan, and other Southeast Asiancountries are subjected to forced labor, and some womenare subjected to forced prostitution. Some foreign womenwho entered the country on E-6 entertainment visas wereforced into prostitution. Some women from less developedcountries recruited for marriage with South Korean menthrough international marriage brokers are subjected toforced prostitution or forced labor subsequent to their arrivalin the ROK, or when running away from abusive spouses.South Korean women were subjected to forced prostitutiondomestically and abroad in destinations including theUnited States, Canada, Japan, and Australia, many coercedby traffickers to whom they owed debts. Commercial sexualexploitation of South Korean teenagers within the countryremains a problem. Migrant workers who travel to the ROKfor employment may incur thousands of dollars in debts,contributing to their vulnerability to debt bondage. There areapproximately 500,000 low-skilled migrant workers in the ROKfrom elsewhere in Asia, many of whom were working underthe government’s Employment Permit System (EPS). Migrantworkers sometimes face conditions indicative of forced labor,including nonpayment of wages, withholding of passports,and work upon arrival in the ROK that differs from the jobdescription offered to them in their country of origin.The Government of the Republic of Korea fully complies withthe minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking. Thegovernment reported an increased number of sex traffickingconvictions during the reporting period and sustained servicesfor sex trafficking victims. Labor trafficking prosecutions mayhave occurred; such cases have not been reported in severalprior reporting periods. The government did not instituteformal procedures to identify proactively trafficking victimsand refer them to available services. More centers provideservices for female than for male trafficking victims.Recommendations for the Republic of Korea: Enact draftedcomprehensive anti-trafficking legislation that defines andprohibits trafficking in persons; increase efforts to investigate,prosecute, and convict trafficking offenders, including thoseinvolved in labor trafficking; develop and implement formalvictim identification procedures to identify proactivelytrafficking victims among vulnerable populations, includingwomen arrested for prostitution, migrants in the EPS, andillegal immigrants; make greater efforts to identify victimsof forced labor among migrant workers, such as those whofile complaints of unpaid wages; conduct a study or regularsurveys to explore the scope and manifestations of labortrafficking in South Korea, similar to the triennial surveyon sex trafficking; proactively grant victims permission towork pending investigations and prosecutions against theirtraffickers; and take steps to increase awareness of child sextourism and enforce laws against South Koreans engagingin such acts.ProsecutionThe ROK government took adequate steps to prosecutetrafficking offenses during the reporting period, but its effortscontinued to be hampered by the lack of a clear law prohibitingall forms of trafficking. South Korea prohibits most aspectsof trafficking through its 2004 Act on the Punishment ofActs of Arranging Sexual Traffic and its Labor Standards Act,which prescribe up to 10 years’ and five years’ imprisonment,respectively; these penalties are sufficiently stringent andcommensurate with those prescribed penalties for other seriouscrimes, such as rape. The government reports using othercriminal statutes related to kidnapping and juvenile protectionto prosecute and punish trafficking offenses. The Republicof Korea does not have a comprehensive trafficking law thatfully complies with international norms. During the reportingperiod, government authorities reported investigating 53sex-trafficking cases, compared with 40 during the previousreporting period, under the Act on the Punishment of Actsof Arranging Sexual Traffic. These investigations resulted in atotal of 11 convictions, an increase from six convictions underthis statute during the previous reporting period. Sentencesfor sex trafficking offenders ranged from 16 months to fiveyears. Because there is no comprehensive anti-trafficking law inSouth Korea, disaggregating data as to whether the convictionswere, in fact, trafficking convictions is difficult. Since April2011, there were allegations of forced labor abuses and unpaidand underpayment of wages on South Korean-flagged fishingvessels in New Zealand waters. At the end of the reportingperiod, these allegations remained under investigation. Thegovernment’s National Human Rights Commission launchedan investigation into allegations of forced labor on these SouthKorean flagged fishing vessels. Despite conducting 34 labortrafficking investigations and obtaining eight indictmentsin the past year, the government did not report any labortrafficking convictions under the Labor Standards Act orany other statutes for several years, raising concerns thatthe current legal structure for addressing labor trafficking isinsufficient. In June 2012, Korean authorities asserted that anumber of labor trafficking offenders were prosecuted duringthe reporting period; these claims could not be confirmed. Inaddition, there have been no convictions of Korean child sextourists or labor trafficking offenders in the past five years.In April 2011, the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agencyannounced that they had arrested a 40-year-old North Koreanfemale refugee and three additional individuals for forcing
KOSOVO21170 North Korean women into prostitution. The perpetratorspaid the equivalent of $32,139 to Chinese brokers to bringthe women to South Korea and investigators believe Chinesebrothels may have been involved in trafficking the victims.The victims received shelter, counseling, education services,and South Korean citizenship. The 40-year-old North Koreanfemale refugee pleaded guilty to lesser charges related to thecommercial sex trade and paid an the equivalent of $1,800 fine;as of the end of the reporting period, the case against the threeother defendants remained pending. During the reportingperiod, the government funded training on investigating sextrafficking crimes against women and children for 274 newlyappointed prosecutors and prosecutors designated to handlesex trafficking cases.ProtectionThe ROK government sustained strong efforts to protecttrafficking victims during the reporting period, but it lacksformal proactive victim identification procedures. There werefewer services available for labor trafficking victims thansex trafficking victims. The government identified 15 forcedprostitution victims; it is unclear how many labor traffickingvictims were identified. The government did not have a formalmechanism to guide front-line responders, such as police,social workers, and labor and health officials, in how toidentify human trafficking and refer potential victims toavailable services. In 2011, the government spent the equivalentof approximately $16.9 million, mainly by providing financialsupport to NGOs offering shelter, counseling, medical andlegal assistance, vocational training, educational programs,and rehabilitation services to a variety of persons in need,including sex trafficking victims. The Ministry of GenderEquality and Family (MOGEF) operated 18 shelters for Koreanvictims of sex trafficking, sexual assault, and domestic violence,offering medical and legal services. The government alsosustained its operation of one specialized shelter for foreignvictims of sex trafficking, but it did not report the number ofvictims assisted at this facility during the reporting period.The government continued to fund an extensive networkof support centers for foreign wives and runaway teenagers,two groups vulnerable to trafficking in South Korea. Thesesupport centers offer services such as counseling in a numberof languages, legal advice, and referrals to medical services andshelters. The government did not operate specific programsfor forced labor victims or shelters for male trafficking victims.Observers claimed that the EPS continued to assign excessivepower to employers over workers’ mobility and legal status,making them vulnerable to trafficking. The governmentoffered foreign victims of trafficking legal alternatives totheir removal to countries in which they may face hardshipor retribution. The government’s G-1 visa system allowed forforeign trafficking victims to remain in South Korea for up toone year to participate in investigations against their traffickers,and three G-1 visa holders that were trafficking victims wereworking. Victims of trafficking are not punished for crimescommitted as a direct result of being in a trafficking situation.PreventionThe ROK government took steps to prevent trafficking duringthe reporting period, though similar to the year before, theseefforts focused almost exclusively on sex trafficking. Thegovernment continued to conduct a wide variety of campaignsto raise awareness of sex trafficking in South Korea, targetingparticularly vulnerable groups such as teenagers and foreignwives. In an effort to add safeguards to the marriage brokerprocess, South Korea passed legislation last year compellingmen marrying foreign brides to take classes prior to marriage.During the reporting period, MOGEF publicized on buses,electronic billboards, subways, and in foreign languagepublications the Emergency Support Center for Migrant Womenhotline, which had operators trained to assist traffickingvictims. In an effort to educate potential clients of the sex trade,MOGEF produced and distributed guidelines on preventingtrafficking to 1,500 public institutions, and conducted Internetcampaigns to prevent involvement of juveniles in the sextrade. In an effort to reduce demand for commercial sex acts,the Ministry of Justice continued to run 39 “Johns Schools,”requiring convicted male clients of prostitution to attend one-day seminars on the risks of prostitution and sex trafficking inlieu of criminal punishment. As part of the 2008 revisions tothe anti-sex trafficking legislation, the government is requiredto conduct research every three years on the status of sextrafficking in South Korea. The MOGEF conducted a triennialnationwide survey on prostitution in 2010 and publishedthe results of the survey in early 2011. Korean authoritiescontinued to train law enforcement and other governmentofficials on trafficking and used a standardized trainingprogram on preventing forced prostitution. Korean menremain a source of demand for child sex tourism in SoutheastAsia and the Pacific Islands. The South Korean governmentaired television commercials to discourage participation inchild sex tourism, and Korean embassies abroad posted childsex tourism warnings and information on their homepagesand provided pamphlets at airports and travel agencies. Thegovernment has not reported any prosecutions or convictionsof child sex tourists in the past five years. The ROK governmentcontinued to provide anti-trafficking training to troops priorto their deployment abroad on international peacekeepingmissions.KOSOVO (Tier 2)Kosovo is a source, destination, and possibly a transit countryfor women and children who are subjected to sex trafficking,and children subjected to forced begging. The majority ofvictims of sex trafficking exploited in Kosovo are femaleKosovo citizens. Children from Kosovo and neighboringcountries are exploited in forced begging within Kosovo. Mostforeign victims of forced prostitution are young women fromEastern Europe including Moldova, Albania, Poland, andSerbia. Kosovar women and children are subjected to forcedprostitution, servile marriages, and forced labor throughoutEurope. Kosovo police report that traffickers less frequentlyexploited sex trafficking victims in bars and cafes, relyinginstead on private residences.The Government of Kosovo does not fully comply withthe minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking;however, it is making significant efforts to do so. Thegovernment continued to implement its victim-centeredStandard Operating Procedures and Minimum Standards forthe care of trafficking victims. The government’s traffickingprevention efforts continued to be very strong, incorporatingbroad based media appeals, focus on youth, and multi-levelgovernmental coordination. Nevertheless, internationalorganizations observed that the judiciary and prosecutorsremained ill-equipped to prosecute trafficking cases, resultingin weak accountability for trafficking offenders. Despite several
212KOSOVOreports of government employees’ complicity in trafficking,no government officials were convicted of complicity. Finally,certain trafficking protections need to be implemented,including open shelters, adequately funded social servicesupport, and effective long-term rehabilitation options fortrafficking victims.Recommendations for Kosovo: Make more vigorous effortsto prosecute, convict, and sentence sex and labor traffickingoffenders, including officials complicit in trafficking; enhancetrafficking-specific training for prosecutors and the judiciary;ensure that the social work protection for trafficking victimsis fully funded; implement the National Strategy and ActionPlan against Trafficking in Human Beings for 2011-2014;enhance investigation of forced labor offenses; increasedetection of and protection for victims of forced begging inKosovo; ensure that all trafficking victims are allowed to leaveshelters unchaperoned and at will; appropriately fundmunicipal-level social work care for trafficking victims;continue evaluations of trafficking programs to ensure theirefficacy; ensure that undocumented migrants are screenedfor potential victims of trafficking prior to deportation;improve restitution procedure to enable victims of traffickingto have access to restitution; disaggregate anti-trafficking lawenforcement data between sex and labor trafficking; andcontinue public awareness campaigns, including campaignsabout the risks of begging.ProsecutionThe Government of Kosovo improved its anti-trafficking lawenforcement efforts in 2011, despite a continuing backlogof cases in the courts and problems with holding officialscomplicit in trafficking accountable. Kosovo prohibits allforms of trafficking in persons in articles 137 and 139 of the2004 criminal code, and prescribes a maximum sentence of12 years’ imprisonment. These punishments are sufficientlystringent and commensurate with punishments prescribed forother serious crimes, such as rape. The Kosovo government’srestructured anti-trafficking directorate continued to serve asthe specialist law enforcement agency on trafficking, addingexpertise to trafficking investigations, though the directoratelacks adequate equipment. The Kosovo government madeefforts to recruit minority Serb officers for the anti-traffickingpolice force and had some successes, but was hindered byunderlying political tensions.In 2011, Kosovo police coordinated other Kosovo governmentauthorities on 199 trafficking activities, all but two of whichconcerned sex trafficking. The Kosovo police conductedinvestigations of 88 suspected trafficking offenders; 79 ofthese individuals were referred to the prosecutor’s office.Kosovo’s judiciary continued to face serious challenges in2011, including a long backlog of cases. Such limitationsaffected convictions and sentences. In 2011, authorities beganprosecutions of 79 suspected offenders in 22 new cases; in2010, there were 81 offenders in 28 new cases in 2010. Thegovernment did not report how many of these cases were sextrafficking or labor trafficking. The government’s convictionrate increased in 2011. The government reported that Kosovocourts convicted 37 trafficking offenders, a significant increasefrom 11 offenders convicted in 2010. These offenders weresentenced to terms between five months and 5.5 years; 21of these offenders received prison terms less than two years.In addition to the convictions in Kosovo district courts, amixed panel of European Union Rule of Law Mission andKosovo Judges in the District Court of Prizren convicted sevenKosovars for trafficking offenses, among other crimes. Theseseven offenders were sentenced to prison terms of betweenone year and four years, one month. All officially identifiedtrafficking victims cooperated with investigations and gavestatements to the police.Nevertheless, the OSCE raised concerns about the qualityof trafficking investigations and prosecutions, noting thatKosovo legal practitioners often failed to properly apply thelaw to the established facts in potential trafficking cases.The report concluded that the judges sometimes convicteddefendants on charges of “attempted” trafficking when aconviction for trafficking would have been supported bythe facts. Judges and prosecutors were reportedly not welltrained to prosecute trafficking cases. The Kosovo governmentcollaborated with foreign governments in 16 internationaltrafficking investigations. The government provided 173 policeofficers trafficking in persons training as part of the criminalinvestigation course. Kosovo law enforcement authoritiesinvestigated four cases involving four government officialsin trafficking-related criminal charges during the reportingperiod. In two cases, the Kosovo Police dropped the chargesafter consultations with the Kosovo district prosecutor’s office.The other two cases involving government officials remainedunder investigation. There were no prosecutions or convictionsof government officials suspected of trafficking-related crimes.ProtectionThe Kosovo government sustained its efforts to protectvictims of trafficking, employing formal guidelines for theidentification of trafficking victims. The government employed“Minimum Standards of Care for Victims of Trafficking” and“Standard Operating Procedures” outlining obligations of stateofficials and NGOs for the care and treatment of traffickingvictims. These guidelines set victim-centered standards forinvestigations and protection, such as the provision of a victimadvocate for every victim brought to police stations. Accordingto NGOs and international governmental organizations, theKosovo government referral process was generally followed.NGOs observed that children who were identified as traffickingvictims were correctly treated by authorities. Children involvedin begging, however, were generally not identified as traffickingvictims. Kosovo government officials traced problems withidentifying children in begging as trafficking victims to thefact that begging is classified as a misdemeanor rather thana trafficking offense; proposed revisions of the criminal codewould ameliorate the classification.The Kosovo government supported nine shelters thataccommodated trafficking victims, including a government-run high security trafficking-specific shelter, a specializedshelter for children, and a shelter dedicated to the long-termrehabilitation of trafficking victims. Through these shelters,the government provided care such as housing, medical care,clothing, counseling, and legal and educational assistance.
KUWAIT213In all but one shelter, victims of trafficking could not leavewithout a chaperone. The shelters did not offer care forany male victims of trafficking, but the government haddeveloped a plan for a new shelter in 2013, anticipated tooffer shelter for males and trafficking victims with disabilities.The government provided funding for 50 percent of all directservices to all trafficking victims at all shelters, but not alloperational costs of the NGO-run shelters. The Kosovo policeidentified 39 victims of trafficking and referred 29 of themto shelters. The government identified the same number ofvictims in 2009. In 2011, the Kosovo government providedthe equivalent of $153,000 for trafficking victim assistance,down from the equivalent of $216,234 provided for victimcare in 2010. Following the transfer to municipal authoritiesof the responsibility for social work services, there has beeninsufficient social work capacity to support victims and victimadvocates’ offices are underfunded. The Kosovo governmentcontinued to provide tax incentives to businesses that offeredemployment opportunities to victims of trafficking, thoughnone were employed during 2011. Although Kosovo’s criminalprocedure code provides for victim restitution, which couldin theory compensate victims of trafficking, it has never beenfunded, nor has an administrator ever been appointed tomanage the fund. Similarly, although the criminal procedurecode permits asset seizure, the mechanism has rarely beenused. Despite a government study identifying approximately100 children in begging, the government identified few ofthese highly vulnerable children in begging as victims oftrafficking. The Kosovo government participated in NGO-run task forces to discuss cases of children at risk, includingchildren in begging.PreventionThe Government of Kosovo demonstrated strong effortsto prevent human trafficking this year, launching an anti-trafficking hotline and continuing a number of creative publicawareness campaigns. The Government of Kosovo partneredwith the OSCE to launch an anti-trafficking and domesticviolence help line in October 2011. Since its launch, helpline operators have received around 80 telephone calls fromindividuals requesting information on trafficking and domesticviolence and seeking referrals in potential trafficking anddomestic violence cases. In September and October 2011, theKosovo government again held an intensive month-long anti-trafficking campaign with television and radio spots, youthanti-trafficking art and essay competitions, school outreach,and poster campaigns. In the spring of 2011, the Ministryof Education, Science and Technology continued its anti-trafficking civic education program “Skills for Life” in Kosovoschools. In August 2011, the Kosovo government adopted ananti-trafficking action plan for 2011-2014. The governmentcollaborated with NGOs and international organizations onthe development of this plan. The Government of Kosovo’sinter-ministerial working group met monthly to coordinategovernment efforts to combat trafficking; sub-workinggroups addressing prevention, protection, prosecution, andthe trafficking of children also met regularly. The Kosovogovernment reported that it attempted to reduce the demandfor commercial sex acts through its arrests of clients ofprostitution.KUWAIT (Tier 3)Kuwait is a destination country for men and women whoare subjected to forced labor and, to a lesser degree, forcedprostitution. Men and women migrate from India, Egypt,Bangladesh, Syria, Pakistan, the Philippines, Sri Lanka,Indonesia, Nepal, Iran, Jordan, Ethiopia, and Iraq to work inKuwait, mainly in the domestic service, construction, andsanitation sectors. Although most of these migrants enterKuwait voluntarily, upon arrival their sponsors and laboragents subject some migrants to conditions of forced labor,including nonpayment of wages, long working hours withoutrest, deprivation of food, threats, physical or sexual abuse,and restrictions on movement, such as confinement to theworkplace and the withholding of passports. While Kuwaitrequires a standard contract for domestic workers delineatingtheir rights, many workers report work conditions that aresubstantially different from those described in the contract;some workers never see the contract at all. Many of the migrantworkers arriving for work in Kuwait have paid exorbitant feesto recruiters in their home countries or are coerced into payinglabor broker fees in Kuwait that, by Kuwaiti law, should be paidfor by the employer – a practice that makes workers highlyvulnerable to forced labor once in Kuwait. Due to provisions ofKuwait’s sponsorship law that restrict workers’ movements andpenalize workers for running away from abusive workplaces,domestic workers are particularly vulnerable to forced laborinside private homes. In addition, media sources report thatrunaway domestic workers fall prey to forced prostitution byagents who exploit their illegal status.The Government of Kuwait does not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking and isnot making sufficient efforts to do so. The parliament has stillnot enacted a draft comprehensive anti-trafficking law. Whilevarious government ministries are tasked with addressingtrafficking-related issues, there is no lead official, ministry, nornational coordinating body that focused on anti-traffickingefforts. The governement’s victim protection measuresremain weak, particularly due to the lack of proactive victimidentification and referral procedures and continued relianceon the sponsorship system, which inherently punishes, ratherthan protects, trafficking victims for immigration violations.The government continues to operate a temporary shelter forrunaway female domestic workers, established in September2007, though it offers no such facility accommodating malevictims of trafficking. The government also did not makesignificant progress in fulfilling other commitments made since2007, such as enacting a law to provide domestic workers withthe same rights as other workers or completing the constructionof a large-capacity permanent shelter for victims of trafficking.The government similarly made insufficient efforts to preventtrafficking in persons during the reporting period. For thesereasons, Kuwait is placed on Tier 3 for a sixth consecutive year.
214KUWAITRecommendations for Kuwait: Enact the draft anti-trafficking bill to specifically prohibit and punish all humantrafficking offenses; significantly increase efforts to prosecute,punish, and stringently sentence traffickers, particularlysponsors who force domestic workers into involuntaryservitude; enact and enforce the draft domestic workers billto provide domestic workers with the same rights as otherworkers, including the establishment of a minimum wage, thedeposit of salaries into employee bank accounts, maximumworking hours, overtime compensation, a clear job description,a contract provided in the domestic worker’s native language,and the right to annual and sick leave; establish procedures toproactively identify all victims of human trafficking, especiallyamong the female domestic worker population; establish andoperate a large-scale shelter for trafficking victims; revisesponsorship provisions that make workers vulnerable toabuse, including domestic workers; enforce existing lawsagainst sponsors and employers who illegally hold migrantworkers’ passports; continue to expand on existing anti-trafficking training to law enforcement and judicial officials;and significantly increase efforts to prevent trafficking.ProsecutionThe Government of Kuwait made few discernible effortsto improve its law enforcement efforts against traffickingduring the reporting period. The government has yet toenact a comprehensive anti-trafficking bill that has beenon the parliament’s agenda since November 2009. Despitethe continued absence of a comprehensive anti-traffickinglaw, the government could prosecute and punish traffickingoffenses under other provisions of the Kuwaiti CriminalCode, but there is little evidence it has done so in a systematicfashion. Limited forms of transnational slavery are prohibitedthrough Article 185, which prescribes a maximum penaltyof five years’ imprisonment. Law 16/1960 criminalizes forcedlabor or exploitation, while maltreatment that amounts totorture and leads to death is considered first-degree murder.Article 201, which prohibits forced prostitution, prescribes amaximum sentence of five years’ imprisonment if the victimis an adult and seven years’ if the victim is under the ageof 18. These prescribed penalties are sufficiently stringentand commensurate with those prescribed for other seriousoffenses, such as rape. Nonetheless, the government did notreport any arrests, prosecutions, convictions, or sentences oftraffickers during the reporting period for either forced laboror sex trafficking. Media sources report that in mid-2011,Kuwaiti security officials arrested a total of nine individualsfor allegedly kidnapping women, some of whom were domesticworkers, and selling the victims into forced prostitution. Allcases were referred to the Public Prosecutor, but it remainsunclear if these arrests resulted in prosecutions. Althoughthe withholding of workers’ passports is prohibited underKuwaiti law, this practice remains common among sponsorsand employers of foreign workers, and the Government ofKuwait has demonstrated no genuine efforts to enforce thisprohibition. Almost none of the domestic workers who takerefuge in their home-country embassy shelters have passportsin their possession. The government remains reluctant toprosecute Kuwaiti citizens for trafficking offenses despiteallegations that the majority of offenses involved Kuwaitiemployers in private residences. When Kuwaiti nationals areinvestigated for trafficking offenses, they tend to receive lessscrutiny than foreigners. Kuwaiti law enforcement generallytakes an administrative or civil approach in addressingcases of forced labor, such as assessing fines, shutting downemployment firms, issuing orders for employers to returnwithheld passports, or requiring employers to pay back-wages. In June 2011, various government ministries receivedtraining on victim protection and best practices from foreigngovernment and IOM officials. Also during this reportingperiod, the government provided funding to IOM to conductanti-trafficking training for police, judges, and other officialsin Kuwait.ProtectionDuring the year, the Kuwaiti government made inadequateefforts to protect victims of trafficking. It did not develop orimplement formal procedures for the proactive identificationof trafficking victims among vulnerable populations, such asforeign domestic workers and women in prostitution. Kuwait’smigrant sponsorship law effectively dissuades foreign workersfrom reporting abuses committed by their employers togovernment authorities; workers who flee from their employersface criminal and financial penalties of up to six months’imprisonment, the equivalent of over $2,000 in fines, anddeportation for leaving without their employers’ permission,even if they ran away from an abusive sponsor. The threat ofthese consequences discouraged workers from appealing topolice or other government authorities for protection andfrom obtaining adequate legal redress for their exploitation.The Government of Kuwait did not encourage victims oftrafficking to assist in the investigation and prosecution oftrafficking cases, and it did not offer foreign trafficking victimslegal alternatives to their removal to countries in whichthey may face hardship or retribution. Moreover, victimswere not offered legal aid by the government. Some foreignvictims of trafficking received monetary settlements fromtheir employers, though trafficking-related charges werenot pursued against the employer. The Ministry of SocialAffairs and Labor continued to operate a short-term shelterfor runaway domestic workers with a maximum capacity of40. The shelter detained victims involuntarily until their legalor immigration cases were resolved. The government also didnot report the actual number of trafficking victims assisted atthis shelter during the reporting period. It is unclear whethervictims of forced prostitution can access the government’stemporary shelter, and there continued to be no shelter or otherprotective services afforded for male victims of trafficking.In 2007, the government announced it would open a high-capacity shelter for runaway domestic workers; this shelterwas under construction, but was not yet complete at the endof the reporting period. The Kuwaiti government providedsource countries with funds to pay for the repatriation of somerunaway domestic workers sheltered at their embassies inKuwait. The Ministry of Interior continued to offer training ontrafficking issues for government employees, including IOM-sponsored training courses on trafficking victim recognitionand protection. The government does not, however, providefunding to domestic NGOs or international organizationsthat provide direct services to trafficking victims.PreventionThe Government of Kuwait made minimal progress inpreventing trafficking in persons during the past year. ThePrivate Sector Labor Law, enacted in February 2010, mandatedthe formation of a government-run sponsorship system fornon-domestic laborers, which would replace the currentsponsorship system. During the reporting period, the Minister
KYRGYZREPUBLIC215of Social Affairs and Labor worked to implement this legalrequirement by creating the Public Authority for Manpower;however, parliament has not yet ratified the creation of thisentity, so it has not become operational. A governmentprovision set in April 2010 to increase the minimum wagefor workers in the private sector continues to exclude Kuwait’smore than a half-million domestic workers – the group mostvulnerable to human trafficking – and does not establishmechanisms to monitor implementation of this rule. As inpast years, the Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs madea nationwide effort to reduce overseas child sex tourism byrequiring some Sunni mosques to deliver Friday sermons onthe danger of sex abroad and Islam’s strict teachings againstimproper sexual relations.KYRGYZ REPUBLIC (Tier 2)The Kyrgyz Republic (or Kyrgyzstan) is a source and transitcountry for men, women, and children subjected to forcedlabor, and for women subjected to forced prostitution. Kyrgyzmen, women, and children are subjected to bonded laborin China and to conditions of forced labor in Russia andKazakhstan, and to a lesser extent the Czech Republic, Turkey,and within the country, specifically in the agricultural, forestry,construction, and textile industries, and in domestic servitudeand forced child care. Kyrgyz victims were recently identifiedfor the first time in Angola and the United States. Women fromthe Kyrgyz Republic are subjected to forced prostitution inTurkey, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Kazakhstan, China,South Korea, Greece, Cyprus, Thailand, Germany, and Syria.Some men and women from Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, andTurkmenistan transit the Kyrgyz Republic as they migrate toRussia, the UAE, and Turkey, where they are subsequentlysubjected to forced labor and forced prostitution. Kyrgyz boysand girls are subjected to forced prostitution within the country.An NGO study estimated that over 60,000 Kyrgyz citizens arevictims of trafficking, both within the country and abroad.The Government of the Kyrgyz Republic does not fullycomply with the minimum standards for the eliminationof trafficking; however, it is making significant efforts to doso. The government continued to prosecute trafficking casesand convict offenders, and identified more victims than inthe previous year. Despite continued reports of corruption,however, the government did not investigate or prosecuteany officials suspected of complicity in human trafficking.PRecommendations for the Kyrgyz Republic: Increaseefforts to investigate and prosecute suspected traffickingoffenses and convict and punish trafficking offenders, ensuringthat a majority of those convicted of trafficking offenses servetime in prison; vigorously investigate and prosecute governmentofficials suspected of being complicit in trafficking and convictand punish complicit government officials; continue traffickingsensitivity and awareness training for police, prosecutors, andjudges; and work to ensure that identified victims of traffickingare not punished for unlawful acts committed as a direct resultof being trafficked.ProsecutionThe Kyrgyz government demonstrated some progress in its anti-trafficking law enforcement efforts during the reporting period.In November 2011, the government amended its 2005 Lawon Prevention and Combating Trafficking in Persons, whichcriminalizes both sex and labor trafficking, to define humantrafficking more broadly and clearly to include the use of force,fraud, or coercion for the purpose of exploitation. The law alsocovers a non-trafficking offense – child adoption for commercialpurposes. Through this amendment, the government alsoraised the minimum penalty for trafficking in persons to fiveyears’ imprisonment from three; the maximum is 20 years.These penalties are sufficiently stringent and commensuratewith prescribed penalties for other serious crimes, such as rape.In 2011, the government reported conducting seven traffickinginvestigations, compared with 11 trafficking investigationsin 2010. The government prosecuted 13 suspected traffickersin six cases and convicted nine traffickers in three cases in2011, compared with eight suspected traffickers prosecutedand three convicted in 2010. The government did not reportinformation about the punishments of the convicted traffickers.The Ministry of Internal Affairs, along with several Kyrgyzacademic institutions, conducted some training courses andseminars on fighting human trafficking. NGOs contendedthat some low-level law enforcement officials are complicitin human trafficking and accept bribes from traffickers; otherlow-level police failed to investigate potential traffickingoffenses due to a lack of awareness. The government reportedno efforts to investigate or prosecute any government officialssuspected of being complicit in trafficking or convict or punishany complicit officials.ProtectionThe Kyrgyz government sustained limited efforts to assistvictims during the reporting period. The government did nothave formal written procedures to guide officials in proactiveidentification of trafficking victims among high-risk personswith whom they came into contact. The government identified38 victims and referred them to protective services in 2011,compared with 15 victims identified in 2010. Thirteen ofthese 38 victims were identified by Kyrgyz consular officialsin destination countries. NGOs identified and assisted 164victims in 2011. Of these 202 total victims, approximately80 percent were victims of labor trafficking and 20 percentvictims of sex trafficking. Fifteen percent of the 202 victimswere trafficked within the country. Although the governmentdid not provide funding to any organization that providedvictim assistance in 2011, it continued to provide in-kindassistance to anti-trafficking NGOs, including facilities forthree NGO-run shelters for victims of trafficking. Victims wereable to leave the shelters freely. There was no information onwhether the government encouraged victims to participate intrafficking investigations and prosecutions; no victims assistedlaw enforcement during the reporting period. During thereporting period, identified victims may have been penalizedfor unlawful acts committed as a direct result of their beingtrafficked, such as prostitution offenses.
216LAOSPreventionThe Kyrgyz government sustained limited progress intrafficking prevention efforts. Government officials continuedto provide Kyrgyz migrants with informational fliers andother trafficking awareness materials prepared by IOM andfunded by a foreign government. The government continuedto provide in-kind assistance to an NGO-run labor migrationhotline which provided legal advice and assistance to potentialvictims of trafficking. The Ministry of Education continuedto provide anti-trafficking awareness training to students aspart of a program to educate students about potential dangerswhen working abroad. Building on its existing 2008-2011national anti-trafficking action plan, the Kyrgyz governmentdrafted a plan for 2011-2015 with the contribution of NGOs.The government continued its program to digitize passportrecords and expanded the program to include the digitizationof birth records. The government did not undertake effortsto reduce the demand for commercial sex acts.LAOS (Tier 2)Laos is a source, and to a much lesser extent, a transit anddestination country for women, children, and men whoare subjected to forced prostitution and forced labor. Laotrafficking victims often are migrants seeking work outsideof the country who encounter conditions of involuntaryexploitation only after arriving in their destination countries,most often Thailand. Many Lao migrants, particularly women,pay broker fees, normally ranging from the equivalents of $70to $200, to obtain jobs in Thailand, but after their arrivalare subjected to conditions of sexual servitude in Thailand’scommercial sex trade, and sometimes to forced labor indomestic service, garment factories, or agricultural industries.Lao men and boys are also victims of forced labor in Thailand,especially in the fishing and construction industries. Ethnicminority populations of Laos often are vulnerable to traffickingin Thailand, due to their lack of Thai language skills andunfamiliarity with Thai society. Members of the lowlandLao majority ethnic group are drawn to Thailand because ofthe cultural similarities and their ability to speak Thai, bothof which allow them to acculturate with ease. Unfortunately,this also makes locating and identifying Lao victims moredifficult. Small number of Lao women and girls are reportedlysold as brides in China.Given its porous borders, Laos is increasingly a transit countryfor Vietnamese, Chinese, and Burmese women who aresubjected to sex trafficking and forced labor in neighboringcountries. Some Vietnamese and Chinese women are alsosubjected to forced prostitution in Laos, usually in closeproximity to casinos or Special Economic Zones. Althoughthere are fewer reported instances of internal trafficking,sex trafficking of Lao women and girls within the countryremained a problem. Additionally, children, especially girls,are also vulnerable to the worst forms of trafficking, bothdomestically and internationally.The Government of Laos does not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however,it is making significant efforts to do so. During the currentreporting period, the government reported investigating49 trafficking cases and convicting 37 trafficking offenders.While the victims received temporary services from thegovernment, the trafficking laws do not fully protect all victims.Neither proactive identification measures nor systematicmonitoring efforts were implemented during the currentyear. The immigration police, who operate a trafficking inpersons division at the Lao-Thai border, have reported minimalidentification of victims among Lao who have returned or beendeported from Thailand. The Government of Laos continuedto operate a transit center in Vientiane, provided funding forthe Lao Women’s Union shelter, and continued to rely heavilyon foreign donor support for long-term victim assistance. Inmid-2011 the Ministry of Public Security (MOPS) upgraded itsanti-trafficking division to a department in order to elevate itsprofile status within other government entities. Inefficiencieswithin the Lao bureaucracy, however, continued to delayapprovals for local and international NGOs to implementanti-trafficking projects and agreements. The prime ministerhas yet to approve a final draft of the anti-trafficking nationalplan of action.Recommendations for Laos: Increase efforts to addressinternal trafficking by identifying and assisting Lao citizenstrafficked within the country and prosecuting their traffickers;demonstrate greater efforts to combat the trafficking complicityof public officials, especially on the local level, through thecriminal prosecution of officials involved in trafficking crimes;develop monitoring mechanisms for labor recruiters taskedwith processing work permits and contracts to prevent thetrafficking of migrant workers; develop and implement formalvictim identification procedures and train police and borderofficials to systematically identify trafficking victims,particularly among migrants returning from Thailand; increaseresources and vocational trainings to support victims inreintegration after returning to their home communities;develop a victims’ protection framework to increase thenumber of victims willing to testify or assist in investigations;approve memoranda of understanding with NGOs andinternational organizations in a more timely manner; increasecountry-wide awareness of court proceedings and legal avenuesfor trafficking matters; continue to implement visible anti-trafficking awareness campaigns directed at clients of the sexand labor trade; reduce the demand for sex tourism bypromulgating awareness and enforcing criminal penalties;disseminate anti-trafficking educational materials to thosedwelling in rural or minority areas of Laos, including theNorthern provinces; sustain progress on the proposed nationaldatabase system on trafficking cases; and continue to developa comprehensive anti-trafficking law.ProsecutionThe Lao government made progress in its anti-trafficking lawenforcement efforts during the current year. The governmentprohibits all forms of human trafficking through its 2006revision of penal code Article 134, which prescribes penaltiesranging from five years’ to life imprisonment, fines rangingfrom the equivalent of $1,250 to $12,500, and confiscationof assets, which are sufficiently stringent punishments andcommensurate with those prescribed for other serious crimes,
LATVIA217such as rape. In the fall of 2011, the government approved theestablishment of a committee tasked with assessing currenttrafficking laws to locate and address gaps. Within the currentreporting period, authorities reported investigating 49 cases ofsuspected trafficking, involving 69 alleged offenders, resultingin 37 convictions, compared with 20 cases investigated and 33convictions in 2010. The government did not, however, providedetails on punishment or sentences for the individual cases.Court proceedings still lacked due process and transparency,and the Lao judicial sector remained weak and inefficient.The general public’s continued reluctance to work withlaw enforcement hampered the government’s ability toeffectively investigate internal or cross-border traffickingcases. Corruption remained an endemic problem in Laos.Anti-trafficking organizations reported that some villageofficials received payment to facilitate the immigration ortransportation of girls to Thailand. The government did notreport any investigations, prosecutions, or convictions ofofficials allegedly complicit in human trafficking.ProtectionThe Government of Laos made modest efforts to identify andprotect trafficking victims during the current reporting period.The government has yet to develop or implement formalvictim identification procedures to proactively identify victimsof trafficking among vulnerable groups. Upon their returnfrom Thailand, victims identified by Thai or Lao authoritieswere referred to shelters or other providers of medical care,counseling services, and vocational training. During the year,195 trafficking victims were returned to Laos under the officialrepatriation system, but more victims were among those“pushed back” unofficially by Thai authorities as undocumentedmigrants. The government continued to rely almost completelyon NGOs and international organizations to provide or fundvictim services. However, the central government fundedand operated a transit center in Vientiane where identifiedvictims of trafficking returning from Thailand stayed whileassessments were conducted by the authorities. The LaoWomen’s Union continued to operate a hotline for reportingsuspected cases of domestic violence and trafficking; althoughtrafficking-related calls have been received, the number hasnot been recorded. Through the Law on Development andProtection of Women, women and children identified astrafficking victims are exempted from criminal prosecutionfor unlawful acts committed as a direct result of trafficking.The government reported encouraging victims to cooperatewith prosecutions, and provided them privacy protections, butdid not implement a framework for witness protection. Mostanti-trafficking organizations focus on women and children,leaving male victims of trafficking without similar support.Anti-trafficking organizations also identified Northern Laosas a region that lacks much-needed victim assistance services.While the government depended on NGOs to provide resourcesfor many trafficking initiatives, its own internal inefficienciescaused lengthy delays in granting approvals to NGOs andinternational organizations to implement anti-traffickingefforts in Laos. The government did not approve victimprotection guidelines that were drafted during the previousreporting period with support from the UN and NGOs. Victimaccess to legal redress is undercut by unfamiliarity with courtprocedures. Laos does not provide legal alternatives to theremoval of foreign victims to countries where they may faceretribution or hardship.PreventionDuring the past year with assistance from internationalorganizations and NGOs, the Lao government made moderateprogress with its prevention efforts. The Lao Tourism Authority,a government agency, led workshops for hotel and othertourism professionals on how to recognize suspected childtrafficking cases. Also, the People’s Supreme Court, publicprosecutors, and the MOPS trained village chiefs and districtofficials on trafficking investigations, and the Ministry ofJustice disseminated information related to trafficking laws andvictims’ rights. Government authorities funded the equivalentof an estimated $31,000 for other trainings facilitated by theLao Women’s Union. The Ministry of Information, Culture,and Tourism assisted in the sponsorship of a concert thatraised awareness of human trafficking, and the government-controlled media continued to report on human trafficking.Although the National Assembly approved a national plan ofaction on human trafficking in 2007, it has yet to be approvedby the prime minister’s office. The Lao government publicizeda national poster campaign against child sex tourism and alsoinitiated a national hotline for callers to report suspectedacts of child exploitation. However, due to a lack of humanand physical resources, and an insufficient understanding ofthe scope and details of sex tourism in Laos, the governmentremained unable to sustain the implementation of theseprevention efforts aimed at Lao or foreign nationals whoparticipate in such activity.LATVIA (Tier 2)Latvia is a source and destination country for women subjectedto sex trafficking and a source country for women, men, andchildren subjected to sex trafficking and forced labor. Latvianwomen are forced into prostitution in Italy, Spain, Ireland,Cyprus, Greece, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, andGermany. Latvian men and women have been subjected toconditions of forced labor in the United Kingdom and Italy, andthere were reports that Latvian men may have been subjectedto conditions of forced labor in Sweden. Latvian women inbrokered marriages in Western Europe, particularly Ireland,were vulnerable to domestic servitude and sex trafficking. AdultLatvian women are subject to internal sex trafficking. In prioryears, there were unofficial reports that some Latvian teenagegirls were subjected to sex trafficking within the country.The Government of Latvia does not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however,it is making significant efforts to do so. The governmentcontinued to improve its anti-trafficking efforts, including bydeveloping criteria for the identification of labor traffickingvictims, by improving mechanisms to ensure that the foreignministry referred trafficking victims to state-funded care, andby strengthening efforts to address sham marriages, whichcreate a vulnerability to trafficking. The Latvian anti-traffickingworking group provided strong leadership of the government’santi-trafficking policy and enhanced transparency of thegovernment’s efforts through reporting. The governmentincreased its funding for NGO-provided victim assistance.The government investigated and prosecuted several formeranti-trafficking police officers for corruption. Nevertheless,anti-trafficking law enforcement efforts faltered. Eventhough NGOs identified domestic victims of trafficking, lawenforcement authorities did not identify similar cases. Thenumber of trafficking prosecutions and convictions, as well
218LATVIAas the length of sentences in trafficking cases, all declined.Latvian authorities continued to prosecute cases under anon-trafficking statute (Section 165-1 of the Latvian CriminalLaw) generally through the use of undercover officers, leadingto concerns that the Latvian law enforcement efforts againstthe trafficking cases involving actual victims were low. Onlytwo out of 11 convicted trafficking offenders were sentencedto any time in prison.Recommendations for Latvia: Increase efforts to identifyvictims, particularly victims of labor trafficking and Latvianvictims exploited within the country; vigorously investigate,prosecute, and convict trafficking cases; use the traffickingstatute (Section 154-1 of the Latvian Criminal Law) toprosecute trafficking cases involving Latvian victims exploitedabroad and domestically; explore ways to collaborate moreclosely with other European counterparts so that Latvia isempowered to better protect Latvian trafficking victims abroadand to prosecute their recruiters; impose criminal penaltieson convicted trafficking offenders commensurate with thegravity of the crime committed; implement new labortrafficking identification guidelines; implement the recentlydesigned repatriation mechanism to make state-fundedtrafficking victim assistance more accessible; continue effortsto ensure that all victims of trafficking are provided appropriateprotections throughout the investigation and prosecution oftrafficking offenses; continue implementing the 2009-2013National Anti-Trafficking Program; consider centralizinganti-trafficking hotlines to enhance trafficking preventionand identification of trafficking victims; update key outreachefforts, such as the government’s centralized anti-traffickingwebsite; continue efforts to systematically monitor traffickingtrends; and increase efforts to raise awareness about both sexand labor trafficking.ProsecutionThe Latvian government demonstrated decreased lawenforcement efforts to combat trafficking in persons. Althoughthe government instituted new procedures for conductingtrafficking investigations and pursued corruption cases, itsoverall prosecution and conviction statistics decreased in2011, resulting in fewer trafficking offenders receiving time inprison for their crimes. Latvia prohibits all forms of traffickingthrough Section 154-1 of its criminal law, which prescribepenalties ranging from a fine to 15 years’ imprisonment.These prescribed penalties are sufficiently stringent andcommensurate with penalties prescribed for other seriouscrimes, such as rape. The government used Section 165-1prohibiting the transfer of individuals for the purpose of sexualexploitation to investigate and prosecute most traffickingcases during the reporting period. The Government of Latviaclaimed that this statute is easier for prosecutors to apply thanSection 154-1 because the elements of force, fraud, or coercionare not required in prosecuting an offense under Section165-1. Most of these cases involved the use of undercoverofficers posing as potential trafficking victims. While theLatvian government portrayed these cases, to some degree,as “prevention” of trafficking, the targeting of cases involvingundercover officers rather than real trafficking victims gaverise to concerns that the Latvian government did not takesufficient law enforcement action against traffickers exploitingactual victims in Latvia. Both the police and the prosecutors’offices have specialized anti-trafficking units. Regional policeinspectors trained local officers on anti-trafficking measures.The number of trafficking cases the government investigatedand prosecuted decreased in 2011, although the number ofsuspected offenders investigated remained approximately level.The government reported investigating 34 suspected offendersin 21 new sex trafficking cases, in contrast to 38 offenders in 31cases investigated in 2010. Although the Government of Latviadid not investigate new labor trafficking cases, it continuedan investigation in an older labor trafficking case and assistedforeign counterparts in the investigation of new cases. Latvianauthorities prosecuted 27 suspected sex trafficking offendersin 2011, a decrease from 39 offenders prosecuted in 2010, butlevel with the 26 suspected offenders prosecuted in 2009.In 2011, 11 trafficking offenders received final convictionsfrom the Courts of First Instance, a 48 percent decrease fromthe 21 who received final convictions from these courts in2010. These figures do not include appealed convictions. Also,accountability for trafficking crimes remained a problem. Onlytwo of the 11 convicted trafficking offenders were sentenced totime in prison, with each receiving sentences between one andthree years’ imprisonment. In 2010, five out of 21 convictedoffenders were sentenced to prison terms. To enable specialistsin the state police’s anti-trafficking unit to screen criminal casesfor potential trafficking violations, the Latvian regional policedepartments continued to provide monthly reports on crimespotentially involving trafficking in persons, pimping, andother prostitution offenses. However, in light of the reducedidentification of trafficking cases, it was unclear whether thescreening mechanism was effective. Latvian governmentofficials trained law enforcement colleagues on identifyinghuman trafficking. In January 2012, the government finalizedofficial guidelines on the identification of labor traffickingvictims, providing guidance to police and the labor inspectorateon how to differentiate labor exploitation and trafficking. TheGovernment of Latvia collaborated with law enforcementofficials in several countries, including Sweden, Germany,and the United Kingdom, on anti-trafficking investigations.The Latvian police investigated a number of trafficking-relatedcorruption cases this year. Latvian prosecutors investigated twoformer anti-trafficking police officers on corruption chargesand indicted one. In the fall of 2011, Latvian state televisiondocumented a case in which seven of fifteen defendantscharged with pimping had been donors to two influentialpolitical parties. The Latvian Corruption Preventing andCombating Bureau investigated these suspected trafficking-related corruption cases.ProtectionThe Latvian government improved its victim protectionefforts over the previous reporting period. In addition toincreasing victim protection funding, the Government ofLatvia identified and assisted a greater number of victims ofmore diverse forms of trafficking and designed an improvedmechanism to ensure that victims of trafficking identifiedabroad are referred to state-funded assistance in Latvia. For2012, the Ministry of Welfare obligated the equivalent ofapproximately $78,000 to a designated NGO to provide
LEBANON219comprehensive services for victims of trafficking, an increasefrom the equivalent of approximately $58,000 provided in2011 and the equivalent of $70,000 provided in 2010. Thegovernment offered each trafficking victim up to 6 months ofrehabilitative care, including psychological assistance, medicalaid, legal representation, housing, and reintegration services.While the government’s allocation of increased funding inresponse to victim needs reflected a significant commitment,NGOs observed that the state-designed assistance mechanismwas unduly bureaucratic; the assistance tender for 2011 wasinitially fixed to fund the care of seven victims, even thoughthe number of victims from Latvia generally exceeded sevenper year. The government certified 11 new victims for the state-funded victim assistance program in 2011, in contrast to ninenew victims certified in 2010. Four victims certified in previousyears also continued to receive trafficking victim services in2011. All victims who received services were of Latvian origin.In contrast to prior years, two male labor trafficking victimsreceived state-funded trafficking victim services. The Ministryof Interior reported that the police identified 29 victims oftrafficking who agreed to assist in investigation procedures aswitnesses but refused victim status and services because theydid not consider themselves to be victims of a crime. LocalNGOs identified and assisted an additional four victims of sexand labor trafficking, none of whom participated in the state-funded program. NGOs attributed the lack of participation inthe government program to distrust of the police or concernsabout confidentiality. The government did not identify eitherforeign or domestic victims within Latvia, although threeof the victims identified by NGOs were victims of domesticsex trafficking. The Latvian government faced challengesin providing repatriation assistance to potential victimsidentified outside Latvia. In response, government agencieshave proposed a mechanism for issuing repatriation loansto Latvians abroad. If approved, certified trafficking victimswill not be required to repay those loans. The Ministry ofForeign Affairs (MFA) instituted a procedure to track potentialtrafficking victims identified abroad and to refer them to carein Latvia. The MFA reported a total of 101 potential traffickinginstances identified by Latvian diplomats in Ireland, Germany,the United Kingdom, Netherlands, Italy, and Sweden in 2011as a result of this new monitoring. The government employedsome efforts to protect victims during trial, including throughallowing written substitutes for victim testimony in cases oftrauma and allowing victims to be absent from trial. There wereno reports that identified victims were penalized for unlawfulacts committed as a direct result of their being trafficked.PreventionThe Latvian government demonstrated strong preventionefforts in 2011, displaying creative and diverse measuresto prevent trafficking. The anti-trafficking working groupcontinued to meet to coordinate the government’s anti-trafficking activities. It incorporated new civil society members,such as the Free Trade Union Confederation, to join its ranks.The Latvian Ministry of Education and Science trained 55teachers on trafficking in persons and integrated traffickingquestions into a mandatory test for elementary school students.The Riga City local government also spent the equivalentof approximately $20,000 for anti-trafficking efforts, suchas distributing an anti-trafficking brochure, conductingtrainings for 60 individuals in the Riga local government,and conducting outreach to school children on trafficking. TheGovernment of Latvia collaborated with an NGO to deliveranti-trafficking messages at libraries throughout Latvia; 237librarians and 118 young people from Latvia participated inthe workshops. The Latvian government worked to reduce thedemand for commercial sex by producing and publicizing ananti-trafficking video titled Reestablish Values in Your Life. TheLatvian government continued to maintain various hotlinesfor the exchange of trafficking information with the generalpublic, but it did not have a centralized trafficking hotline.It was not clear that the various government hotlines wereeffective in publicizing their anti-trafficking role. WhereasNGOs that do not receive state funding for anti-traffickingprevention efforts received more than 90 telephone inquirieson trafficking-related matters, the government reported onlythree cases in which trafficking victims called the governmenthotlines for assistance. In 2011, officials announced thatthe number of sham marriages between Latvian citizensand citizens of third countries in Ireland decreased by half;sham marriages continued to render some women highlyvulnerable to trafficking. The MFA attributed the decreaseto the government’s recently improved marriage registrationprocedures. Despite these prevention efforts, there wereanecdotal reports that there was low public awareness orminimal public disapproval of trafficking.LEBANON (Tier 2 Watch List)Lebanon is a source and destination country for women andchildren who are subjected to forced labor and sex trafficking.The country is also a transit point for Eastern European womenand children subjected to sex trafficking in other Middle Easterncountries. Women from Sri Lanka, the Philippines, Ethiopia,Kenya, Bangladesh, Nepal, and Madagascar who travel toLebanon with the assistance of recruitment agencies to work indomestic service are often subjected to conditions indicative offorced labor, including withholding of passports, nonpaymentof wages, threat of arrest and deportation, restrictions onmovement, verbal abuse, and physical assault. Workers wholeave their employers’ house without permission or a “releasepaper” automatically lose their legal status unless a change intheir sponsorship is pre-arranged and approved by the GeneralDirectorate for General Security (SG), the government agencyresponsible for the entry, residency, and departure of foreignworkers. Some employers in Lebanon threaten workers withthe loss of this legal immigration status in order to keep themin forced labor and, in some cases, have kept foreign domesticworkers confined in residences for years. A highly publicizedcase of an Ethiopian domestic worker who was publicly beatenby a Lebanese recruitment agent in March 2012 exemplifiedthe abuse suffered by domestic workers in Lebanon; the workercommitted suicide shortly after the incident was reported inthe media.The government’s artiste visa program facilitates the entry ofwomen from Eastern Europe, Morocco, and Tunisia on three-month visas to work as dancers in Lebanon’s adult entertainmentindustry; 6,024 women entered Lebanon in 2011 under thisvisa program, which sustains a significant sex trade and enablesforced prostitution through such practices as withholding ofpassports and restrictions on movement. Some Syrian women instreet prostitution may be forced to engage in prostitution, andSyrian girls are reportedly brought to Lebanon for the purposeof prostitution, including through the guise of early marriage.Anecdotal information indicates that Lebanese children arevictims of forced labor within the country, particularly in streetbegging as well as commercial sexual exploitation facilitated by
220LEBANONmale pimps, husbands, and “boyfriends,” and at times throughearly marriage. Small numbers of Lebanese girls may be takento other Arab countries for exploitation in prostitution.The Government of Lebanon does not fully comply withthe minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking;however, it is making significant efforts to do so. During thereporting period, the government enacted an anti-traffickinglaw, implemented awareness campaigns for foreign workers,increased investigations into allegations of abuse, and referredan increased number of victims for assistance. The governmentmade combating human trafficking a national priority anddemonstrated concerted efforts to educate the public on humantrafficking. The government failed to show substantial progressin identifying foreign or Lebanese victims of trafficking –particularly victims of domestic servitude and commercialsexual exploitation – and allocated minimal resources toprotecting victims. The government also failed to bring specificcharges of forced labor or forced prostitution in cases involvingabuses against migrant workers and did not assign adequatepunishment to deter such crimes.Recommendations for Lebanon: Implement the new anti-trafficking law by investigating and prosecuting traffickingoffenses, and convicting and punishing trafficking offenders;enact the labor law amendment extending legal protectionsto foreign workers and the draft law providing increased laborprotections to domestic workers, including foreign domesticworkers; enforce the law prohibiting the confiscation ofpassports belonging to foreign migrants arriving in Lebanon;provide protection to victims, as stipulated in the anti-trafficking law; train police, judges, prosecutors, and othergovernment officials about the new anti-trafficking law andhow to enforce it; provide services such as shelter, access tolegal aid and interpretation, and counseling to migrant workersand Lebanese nationals who are victims of forced labor andforced prostitution; develop and institute formal proceduresto identify victims of trafficking among vulnerable populations,such as women holding artiste visas and domestic workerswho have escaped abusive employers; ensure that identifiedvictims of trafficking are promptly referred to protectionservices rather than detained for unlawful acts committed asa direct result of being trafficked, such as immigrationviolations or prostitution; raise awareness about the existenceand uses of the Ministry of Labor’s complaints office andhotline, and enhance the quality of services provided; andamend the unified employment contract for domestic workersto recognize the worker’s right to leave his or her employer’shouse during time off and retain his or her passport.ProsecutionThe government increased its capacity to conduct anti-trafficking law enforcement efforts by enacting comprehensivelegislation and investigating some suspected trafficking cases.The government did not report any prosecutions or convictionsof sex trafficking or forced labor per se, but it did report twoconvictions that may have involved forced labor. In August2011, Parliament passed Anti-Trafficking Law Number 164,which prohibits and punishes all forms of trafficking. Theprescribed penalties for sex trafficking and forced labor rangefrom five to 15 years’ imprisonment, which are sufficientlystringent and commensurate with those prescribed for otherserious crimes, such as rape. Lebanon’s criminal code alsoprohibits all forms of human trafficking, though prosecutionsusually rely on Article 554 (personal injuries) rather thanarticles prohibiting forced labor, slavery, or forced prostitution.A labor law amendment that would extend legal protectionsto foreign workers has not yet been submitted to the cabinetby the Ministry of Labor; as drafted, however, the amendmentdid not cover foreign domestic workers, who constitute themajority of foreign migrant workers in Lebanon.There is no evidence that a sex trafficking case has everbeen prosecuted in Lebanon, and the government hasyet to prosecute a case of forced labor using the existingforced labor statutes in Lebanon’s penal code. Pursuit ofsuch cases appeared to have been hampered by bureaucraticindifference and inefficiency, limited coordination betweenrelevant ministries, court backlogs, and a lack of sufficientanti-trafficking training among police and judges, as well ascultural biases, particularly against foreign domestic workers.Given the significant hurdles to pursuing criminal complaintsin the Lebanese court system and victims’ lack of adequatelegal representation and knowledge of their rights, manyforeign victims opted for quick administrative settlementsfollowed by repatriation. Evidence suggests, however, thatmany cases were not resolved, and trafficking victims weredeported without receiving their due wages. The Ministries ofLabor and Justice and the SG provided information on theiranti-trafficking efforts, but because of poor recordkeeping,data was incomplete and may be unreliable. The InternalSecurity Forces (ISF) and the SG reportedly investigated 16suspected trafficking cases involving sexual exploitation,forced prostitution, physical abuse, unpaid wages, andexploitation of others in prostitution in 2011; fifteen of thesewere determined to constitute trafficking, and investigationsinto all 15 cases were ongoing at the end of the reporting period.Two of these investigations involved four Tunisian womenholding artiste visas who were allegedly falsely promisedjobs as secretaries, but forced into prostitution in a nightclubin Lebanon; while the SG notified the Tunisian embassy ofthe case, the SG deported the four artistes without providingthem protective services. In 2011, the government reportedtwo convictions that may have involved forced labor, yet thecourts failed to prosecute the offenders under forced laborstatutes. In October 2011, pursuant to Article 554 (personalinjuries) of the criminal code, the employer of a Filipinadomestic worker was convicted of physical abuse, sentencedto 10 days’ imprisonment, and required to pay the victim theequivalent of $666 in compensation. The other conviction,rendered in July 2011 pursuant to Article 624 of the criminalcode, required the employer to pay the domestic worker for theperiod worked, which was the equivalent of $700. Althoughthe SG reportedly investigated the incident of a recruitmentagent who publicly beat an Ethiopian domestic worker inMarch 2012, the agent was briefly arrested and then releasedwithout charge. The government did not provide or fundspecialized training for its officials to recognize, investigate, orprosecute cases of trafficking; however, government officials,including from the SG and ISF, social workers, judges, laborinspectors, and prosecutors participated in numerous NGO-run anti-trafficking trainings in 2011.
LESOTHO221ProtectionThe government improved protection efforts, but did notmake sufficient efforts to ensure trafficking victims receivedaccess to protective services or had resources to provide fortheir care during the reporting period. The new anti-traffickinglaw stipulates that the Ministry of Justice subcontract NGOsto provide victim assistance and protection; implementationdecrees for the relevant article are pending cabinet approval.Law enforcement, immigration, and social services officialscurrently lack, but are working to develop, a formal system forproactively identifying trafficking victims among vulnerablepopulations with which they come in contact. This continuedlack of systematic procedures led to the deportation of mostdomestic workers who fled their employers and those holdingartiste visas who complained of abuse. Out-of-status migrantworkers were generally not prosecuted or fined, but weretypically arrested, detained, and deported without beingscreened for indicators of trafficking. Detention typicallylasted for one to two months, but NGOs report some casesof arbitrary detention lasted longer. The SG continued tofund and operate a prison-style detention center in Beirutfor up to 500 migrant workers in violation of their visa statusor awaiting disposition of their cases. While the SG used aregistration and identification system in the detention centerto notify embassies from source countries of the presence oftheir nationals in detention, this system failed to providespecific guidance for identifying which detainees were victimsof trafficking. The SG, however, permitted an NGO to interviewdetainees to identify trafficking victims among them. In2010, a joint government-NGO working committee on victimprotection issued standard operating procedures to guide theSG in the handling of irregular migrants held at its detentioncenter, many of whom are foreign domestic workers, to enablemore efficient and timely processing. An NGO observed thatthe SG began processing cases more quickly and efficientlythis year.The government did not provide or fund shelters for traffickingvictims, though it relied on an NGO safe house to providea range of victim services to female victims of trafficking.Pursuant to a 2005 memorandum of understanding betweenthe SG and the NGO, the SG was required to refer traffickingvictims to the safe house and to provide security for thelocation. Of the 214 cases of trafficking received by the safehouse in 2011, the SG and the ISF referred 17, an increasefrom the seven victims the two agencies referred the previousyear. The NGO noted improved cooperation with the SGover the last year in referring trafficking victims. Victimswere neither encouraged to bring their cases to the attentionof public prosecutors, nor offered residency status or otherlegal alternatives to removal to countries where they mightface hardship or retribution.PreventionAlthough the Government of Lebanon made improved effortsto prevent trafficking over the last year through informationawareness campaigns, deficiencies remained that put foreignmigrant workers, particularly domestic workers, at risk offorced labor and other exploitation. In February 2012, SGofficers at Beirut National Airport began distributing twobooklets to migrant domestic workers upon their arrival atthe airport; one booklet includes information on the anti-trafficking law and is printed in six languages, while the other isa booklet on rights and obligations printed in eight languages.Despite this awareness campaign and a law prohibiting theconfiscation of passports belonging to foreign migrants arrivingin Lebanon, the SG required that, upon arrival to the country,foreign migrants surrender their passports to their sponsors,which limits workers’ freedom of movement and makes themvulnerable to situations of human trafficking. The standardunified employment contract for migrant workers, in use sinceFebruary 2009, is still not available in the 12 most commonlanguages of migrant laborers; domestic workers must signthe contract in Arabic, a language that very few can read. Thelabor ministry continues to operate a hotline, established inApril 2010, to receive labor complaints from foreign workers;however, it is unknown how many calls it received during thereporting period. The Ministry of Labor provided no statisticsdocumenting the work of its 130 inspectors charged withinvestigating situations of forced adult and child labor, andLebanon’s 501 licensed employment agencies received littleoversight by the ministry. The SG continued to implementits pilot program that distributed brochures to an unknownnumber of departing Moldovan artistes containing informationon NGO resources available to trafficking victims in Moldova;however, Lebanese authorities did not provide protectiveservices to Moldovan victims of sex trafficking. In September2011, the Office of the Prime Minister established and conveneda national anti-trafficking stakeholders group, which includedexperts from Lebanese government ministries, civil society,and international organizations, to discuss integrating achapter on human trafficking within the national humanrights draft action plan. The government’s two national humantrafficking steering committees, established in 2006, advisedthe government on draft laws and decrees and preventioncampaigns; however, neither committee met during thisreporting period. The government did not take any steps toreduce the demand for forced labor or commercial sex actsduring the year.LESOTHO (Tier 2)Lesotho is a source and transit country for women and childrensubjected to conditions of forced labor and sex trafficking, andfor men subjected to conditions of forced labor. Within Lesotho,women and children are subjected to domestic servitude andchildren, to a lesser extent, to commercial sexual exploitation.Basotho women and children are exploited in South Africain domestic servitude and some girls brought to South Africafor forced marriages may subsequently encounter situationsof domestic servitude or forced prostitution. Long-distancetruck drivers offer to transport women and girls looking forlegitimate employment. En route, the drivers rape some ofthese women and girls before forcing them into prostitutionin South Africa. Others voluntarily migrate to South Africaseeking work in domestic service and are detained in prison-likeconditions and forced to engage in prostitution. Some Basothomen who migrate voluntarily, though illegally, to South Africato work in agriculture and mining become victims of forcedlabor; many work for weeks or months without pay, with theiremployer turning them over to authorities to be deported forimmigration violations just before their promised pay day.Evidence exists that Basotho residents in South Africa returnedto Lesotho as labor recruiters for farms in South Africa. Basothonationals are also coerced into committing crimes, includingtheft, drug dealing, and drug smuggling under threats of violence,through forced drug use, or with promises of food. Chineseand Nigerian organized crime rings reportedly acquire some
222LESOTHOBasotho victims while transporting foreign victims throughLesotho to Johannesburg. During the reporting period, newtrafficking trends emerged, including the forced prostitutionof Chinese women in Lesotho by Chinese men, as well as thetrafficking of Ethiopian nationals by Ethiopian traffickers fordomestic servitude in Lesotho.The Government of Lesotho does not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however,it is making significant efforts to do so. During the year, thegovernment convicted its first trafficking offender under its 2011anti-trafficking act, although this conviction was reversed onappeal. It also began an additional five trafficking prosecutions.Although the government made efforts to prosecute offendersand protect victims, systematic weaknesses remain, as it hasnot begun drafting implementing regulations for the 2011 anti-trafficking act or developing formal identification and referralprocedures. The greatest weakness in the government’s effortsremains the provision of protective services, as it relies on NGOswithout providing support via funding or in-kind assistance.Recommendations for Lesotho: Complete implementingregulations for the 2011 anti-trafficking act; finalize andimplement the national anti-trafficking action plan; continueto investigate and prosecute trafficking offenses under the2011 act, including both internal and transnational cases;provide care to victims of trafficking via government centersor in partnership with international organizations or NGOsand develop a formal mechanism, in line with the 2011 act,to refer victims to such care; develop a formal system toproactively identify trafficking victims among vulnerablepopulations; increase training for law enforcement officersin victim identification; forge a partnership with South Africanpolice to investigate reports of Basotho citizens forced to laboron farms in South Africa and prosecute exploitative farmowners; establish a system to collect and analyze data onvictims identified and assisted, trafficking offenses investigatedand prosecuted, and trafficking offenders convicted andpunished; and launch a national anti-trafficking awarenesscampaign.ProsecutionThe government made progress in its anti-trafficking lawenforcement efforts during the year. The Anti-Trafficking inPersons Act, which came into effect in January 2011, prohibitsand punishes all forms of trafficking in persons. It prescribespenalties of 25 years’ imprisonment or a fine the equivalentof $125,000 under Section 5(1) for the trafficking of adultsand life imprisonment or a fine the equivalent of $250,000under Section 5(2) for the trafficking of children; thesepenalties are sufficiently stringent and commensurate withother serious crimes. Labor recruiters who knowingly recruitworkers for forced labor are liable for the same penaltiesas those who hold them in servitude. The government hasyet to begin drafting implementing regulations necessaryto enforce the legislation in full. The Child Protection andWelfare Act, enacted in March 2011, provides penalties of lifeimprisonment or a fine the equivalent of $125,000 for childtrafficking. In October 2011, the Lesotho Mounted PoliceService (LMPS) created an anti-trafficking unit within itsChild and Gender Protection Unit (CGPU). In January 2012,the magistrate court convicted and sentenced a Chinesenational to 15 years’ imprisonment under the 2011 anti-trafficking act for the sex and labor trafficking of a Chinesewoman in Lesotho. In May 2012, following the Chineseoffender’s successful appeal of his conviction, authoritiesreleased him from jail; the director of public prosecutions iscurrently appealing that decision. Two additional suspects inthis case, whom authorities believe to have been the principalorchestrators of the crime, have fled the country. An additionalfive cases remained pending prosecution, including a domesticservitude case involving two Ethiopians charged with thelabor trafficking of one Ethiopian national. The governmentincreased regional cooperative efforts through the drafting ofa memorandum of understanding with Mozambique to jointlyinvestigate transnational crimes and share best practices. TheLMPS initiated joint investigations with the South AfricanPolice Service (SAPS) into 21 potential trafficking cases, anincrease over seven joint investigations in 2010; the LMPSand SAPS continued their periodic meetings to discusscross-border crimes, which started in the previous reportingperiod. The government did not provide data on investigations,prosecutions, convictions, or sentences of public officialscomplicit in human trafficking, though there was no evidenceof government involvement in or tolerance of trafficking on alocal or institutional level. In 2011, the LMPS began inclusionof a trafficking-specific module in its basic training coursesfor new recruits, with 210 recruits trained during the year.ProtectionThe government made modest efforts to protect victims duringthe reporting period. The CGPU identified 24 traffickingvictims in 2011, but was unable to provide details on all ofthese cases, which included 15 Basotho nationals between theages of 16 and 27 brought into South Africa for the purposes ofsexual exploitation and forced labor. However, the governmenthas not yet established care centers for trafficking victims,as set forth in the 2011 act. The government referred allidentified victims to NGO-run care centers for assistance, butit did not provide funding or in-kind support to these centers.Although the government has not yet developed a formalprocess to refer victims to care, NGOs involved in the currentad hoc referral process indicated that it works well in practice.Medical services were provided to victims free of charge atgovernment hospitals and clinics and the CGPU providedlimited counseling to victims before referring them to NGOsfor more comprehensive care. The Department of Health andSocial Welfare entered into an agreement with a trafficking-specific victim shelter in November 2011, allowing for officialreferral of victims to the shelter; however, the governmentdid not provide financial or in-kind support to the shelterfor the services it provided to victims during the year. Thegovernment continued its operation of a one-stop drop-incenter in Maseru for the protection of victims of gender-basedviolence that includes specialized – though limited – servicesfor both male and female victims of trafficking; the center’sstaff are primarily funded by private sector entities, but includesome government social workers.The 2011 act protects victims from prosecution for unlawfulacts committed as a direct result of being trafficked, provides
LIBERIA223foreign victims with permanent residency as a legal alternativeto their removal, and encourages victims to assist in theinvestigation of traffickers. The CGPU provided security fortwo victims who assisted in the investigation and prosecutionof their traffickers during the year. There is no evidence thatvictims were penalized for unlawful acts committed as a directresult of being trafficked.PreventionThe Government of Lesotho maintained its efforts to preventtrafficking. Its multi-sectoral committee on trafficking metmonthly during the year. In 2011, the committee hired aconsultant to assist in the drafting of a national plan ofaction; however, due to an apparent conflict with theconsultant, the government has yet to receive a copy of thefinalized plan. Although the government did not budgetfunding specifically for anti-trafficking efforts, it dedicatedthe equivalent of approximately $125,000 to anti-traffickingtrainings, sensitization efforts, and the printing of awarenessmaterials. The government sponsored a number of anti-trafficking awareness campaigns during the reporting period.The Ministry of Home Affairs held public awareness campaignsthat targeted women’s groups, principal and ward chiefs, 720herd boys nationwide, and 36 trainers; for example, the ThabaTseka campus of the Lesotho College of Education trained 54teachers on how to recognize and prevent trafficking amongtheir students and within their communities. The LMPS,SAPS, and NGOs partnered to raise awareness through threecampaigns along the Lesotho-South Africa border, involvingradio broadcasts and community events during the reportingperiod. The Ministry of Labor and Employment conducted1,000 labor inspections during the year, but did not report theidentification of any child labor violations. The government didnot take action to reduce the demand for commercial sex acts.LIBERIA (Tier 2 Watch List)Liberia is a source, transit, and destination country foryoung women and children subjected to forced labor andsex trafficking. Most trafficking victims originate from andare exploited within the country’s borders, and are subjectedto domestic servitude, forced begging, sex trafficking, orforced labor in street vending, rubber plantations, andalluvial diamond mines. Traffickers operate independentlyand are commonly family members who may promise poorerrelatives a better life for their children. Children sent towork as domestic servants for their wealthier relatives arevulnerable to forced labor or, to a lesser extent, commercialsexual exploitation. Orphaned children remain susceptibleto exploitation, including in street selling and prostitution.A small number of Liberian men, women, and children aresubjected to human trafficking in Cote d’Ivoire, Guinea, SierraLeone, Nigeria, and the United States. Victims of transnationaltrafficking come to Liberia from Sierra Leone, Guinea, Coted’Ivoire, and Nigeria and are subjected to the same types ofexploitation as internally trafficked victims.The Government of Liberia does not fully comply withthe minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking;however, it is making significant efforts to do so. The Liberiangovernment has never convicted a trafficking offender usingits 2005 anti-trafficking law, and it made only minimal effortsto protect trafficking victims and was inconsistent in referringvictims to NGO service providers. It did provide limited anti-trafficking training to law enforcement officials, magistrates,and officers of the Liberia National Police’s Women andChildren’s Protection Unit received additional training inwomen and children-related crimes like gender-based violence,domestic violence, and trafficking. The Anti-Human TraffickingTask Force finalized, but did not implement, standard operatingprocedures that establish the roles and responsibilities incoordinating and referring trafficking victims to care. InSeptember 2011, the government enacted the NationalChildren’s Act – which reportedly addresses child trafficking,but the government did not implement the law during thereporting period. Many members of the government continueto conflate kidnapping and smuggling offenses with humantrafficking crimes. In sum, the Government of Liberia did notdemonstrate evidence of overall increasing efforts to addresshuman trafficking; therefore, Liberia is placed on Tier 2 WatchList for a second consecutive year.Recommendations for Liberia: Start prosecuting traffickingoffenses and convicting and punishing trafficking offenders;train law enforcement officials and magistrates to apply theanti-trafficking law and to distinguish trafficking crimes fromcases of human smuggling or kidnapping; allocate fundingfor regular, continued activities of the Anti-Human TraffickingTask Force; finalize, implement and educate NGOs, governmentofficials, law enforcement, and magistrates on the “DirectAssistance and Support to Trafficked Victims StandardOperating Procedures” such that these officials learn toproactively identify and provide protective services totrafficking victims; publish, disseminate, and implement theNational Children’s Act; and increase efforts to educate thepublic about the dangers of human trafficking.ProsecutionThe Government of Liberia demonstrated minimal anti-trafficking law enforcement efforts during the reporting period.Liberia’s 2005 Act to Ban Trafficking in Persons specificallyprohibits all forms of transnational as well as internaltrafficking. The law prescribes a minimum sentence of oneyear’s imprisonment for the trafficking of adults and six years’imprisonment for the trafficking of children. The penaltyfor the sex and labor trafficking of children is sufficientlystringent, but the penalty for sex and labor trafficking of adultsis not, nor is it commensurate with the prescribed penaltiesfor other serious offenses, such as rape. In September 2011,the government passed the National Children’s Act, whichstrengthens provisions of the 2005 Act to Ban Trafficking inPersons. The text of the National Children’s Act has not yetbeen disseminated, as handbills and awaits implementation.The Women and Children Protection Section of the LiberianNational Police reported that it investigated one trafficking caseduring the year and referred it for prosecution. The governmentdid not prosecute, convict, or sentence any trafficking offendersin 2011. The government has yet to convict a trafficking
224LIBYAoffender under the Act to Ban Trafficking in Persons. Duringthe reporting period, 150 new national police officers receivedtraining on how to report suspected trafficking cases to theWomen and Children Protection Section. While there were noofficial allegations of law enforcement complicity in traffickingduring the reporting period, issues with bribery at borderstations and a lack of capacity and corruption in the judicialsystem were reported.ProtectionDuring the past year, the government provided limitedprotective services to victims and was inconsistent in referringvictims to NGOs for protective services. No specialized servicesexist for trafficking victims in Liberia. During the reportingperiod, the government identified only one traffickingvictim, indicating that law enforcement officials have yet toconsistently employ procedures for the proactive identificationof trafficking victims among vulnerable populations, such aschildren in begging situations or individuals in prostitution.In November 2010, the Anti-Human Trafficking Task Forceproduced the “Direct Assistance and Support to TraffickedVictims Standard Operation Procedures,” which establishesthe basic roles and responsibilities of various stakeholdersin coordinating referrals of trafficking victims to assistance.Although the standard operating procedures were thought tohave been finalized, as of the end of the reporting period, anew process was underway to update and approve the standardoperating procedures. The 2005 Act to Ban Trafficking inPersons absolves victims from responsibility for unlawfulacts committed as a result of their being trafficked, and therewere no reports that this practice was ignored in the case ofthe one victim identified during the year. The governmentcontinued to claim that it encouraged victims to assist withthe investigation and prosecution of traffickers, although onlyone forced labor victim was identified and no prosecutionswere initiated during the year.PreventionThe Liberian government sustained modest efforts to preventtrafficking in persons throughout the reporting period.The Anti-Human Trafficking Task Force, the government’scoordinating body, resumed meeting in September of 2011following funding and internal issues during the prior year.When the Liberian National Police discovered two casesinvolving the potential exploitation of children relocated foreducational purposes, officers embarked on an “investigativetour” in western Liberia to warn parents of the dangers offorced labor and exploitation among children entrusted toothers for education. The Ministry of Labor continued to runanti-trafficking radio campaigns throughout the country, aswell as billboard campaigns in the capitol city, Monrovia, inpartnership with a foreign donor. The Ministry of Labor’sNational Commission on Child Labor, which is responsible forimplementing and advocating for national policies to addressthe worst forms of child labor, investigated allegations of childlabor used in street selling. The Child Protection Network,which is located in the Ministry of Gender and Development,conducted monthly meetings to coordinate and discuss childprotection, labor, and trafficking issues and lobbied legislatorsfor the passage of the National Children’s Act. In March 2012,the government launched a public dialogue campaign to betterunderstand why young girls and women may be drawn intoor exploited by the commercial sex trade.LIBYA (Tier 3)Libya is a destination and transit country for men and womenfrom sub-Saharan Africa and Asia subjected to forced laborand forced prostitution. Migrants typically seek employmentin Libya as laborers and domestic workers or transit Libya enroute to Europe. Due to the violent nature of the conflict thatseized Libya from February to October 2011, there are noaccurate figures available regarding the number of foreignersin Libya. Prior to the February 17, 2011 revolution, therewere an estimated 1.5 to 2 million foreigners in Libya, mostof whom subsequently fled the country. Many of those thatremained in the country, especially migrants from Sub-SaharanAfrica, were detained by both pro- and anti-Qadhafi forcesas suspected mercenaries; some of these migrants may betrafficking victims. The government estimates that there arecurrently 8,300 people in prisons and detention centers, manyof whom are migrants. Of those, 2,300 are held in Ministryof Justice-controlled prisons, and nearly 6,000 detaineesremain outside of government control. Some militia-controlleddetention centers have begun to sell detained migrants intoconditions of forced labor. NGOs have reported that migrantflows are steadily returning to their pre-revolutionary levels.Government officials report there were approximately 6,500children under the age of 18 who identified themselves as“revolutionaries,” some of whom may have supported militiasduring the revolution, though their roles were unclear at theend of the reporting period. International organizations andNGOs report that adolescent males were involved in supportroles for forces associated with the Transitional NationalCouncil (TNC), including manning checkpoints, securingstrategic buildings, and driving cars; some were armed anduniformed, while others took part in active fighting. Thereare also reports of the recruitment and use of children bythe Qadhafi-controlled armed forces and other pro-regimeelements, including paramilitary forces from neighboringcountries such as Chad.Trafficking networks from Niger, Nigeria, and other sub-Saharan states have also returned to Libya. These networksuse a variety of techniques to hold people in conditions offorced labor and forced prostitution, including fraudulentrecruitment practices, confiscation of identity and traveldocuments, withholding or nonpayment of wages, and debtbondage. While most migrants are typically destined forEurope, a combination of continued civil unrest, disruptedshipping lanes, and European coastal patrols have resulted intrafficked persons remaining in Libya for extended periods oftime. While in Libya, many of the trafficked men are forcedinto manual labor, and there are credible reports of prostitutionrings involved in trafficking sub-Saharan women into brothels,particularly in southern Libya.The Government of Libya does not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking and isnot making significant efforts to do so; therefore Libya is placedon Tier 3. During the reporting period, the Government ofLibya – both the former Qadhafi regime and the TNC, whichcame to power after the fall of the Qadhafi regime in October2011 – failed to demonstrate significant efforts to investigateand prosecute trafficking offenses or to protect traffickingvictims. Moreover, both governments’ policies and practiceswith respect to undocumented migrant workers resultedin Libyan authorities detaining and punishing traffickingvictims for unlawful acts that were committed as a result of
LITHUANIA225their being trafficked. There were reports that some detainedforeign migrants were sold into conditions of forced laborby militias running detention centers. During the reportingperiod, the TNC functioned as a purely interim body with verylimited legislative and executive mandates and lacked controlover all of Libya’s territory before October 2011. There is alsosignificant confusion within the government as to which lawsare still valid and which have been rendered void since the fallof the Qadhafi regime. Due to the civil unrest and politicalsituation in Libya during the majority of this reporting period,accurate information regarding the trafficking situation inLibya is somewhat limited.Recommendations for Libya: Draft, pass, and enactlegislation that prohibits all forms of trafficking; increase lawenforcement efforts to investigate and prosecute traffickingoffenses; develop and implement standard procedures onidentifying trafficking victims and provide victims withprotection; investigate and prosecute officials who are complicitin human trafficking; ensure that victims are not susceptibleto detention, deportation, or punishment for their unlawfulpresence in Libya; ensure that trafficking victims are notpunished for unlawful acts that were committed as a resultof their being trafficked; protect detained migrants from beingsold into conditions of forced labor; and undertake aninformation campaign to raise public awareness about humantrafficking.ProsecutionNeither the Qadhafi regime nor the TNC demonstrated anydiscernible anti-trafficking law enforcement efforts over thepast year. Libyan law does not prohibit all forms of trafficking.In November 2010, the General People’s Committee forJustice drafted amendments to articles 336-339 of the Libyancriminal code, which would have criminalized trafficking inpersons, although some of the definitions, as drafted, appearoverly broad. The draft anti-trafficking legislation has notbeen adopted. While articles in the criminal code prohibitprostitution, sexual exploitation, slavery, and traffickingin women, there was no indication that the governmentused these statutes to prosecute trafficking offenses duringthe reporting period. In March 2012, Libyan security forcesreportedly investigated a trafficking ring that was movingBangladeshi and Somali victims across the Egypt-Libyaborder and placing them in slave-like conditions on a Libyanfarm. Following the revolution, the TNC had limited judicialcapacity; little prosecution of Libyan laws occurred and courts,lawyers, and defendants faced security challenges. Reportingalso suggests that some police were complicit in or failed tocombat human trafficking.ProtectionThe Libyan government took no discernible steps to improvethe protection of trafficking victims during the reportingperiod. The government did not develop or implementprocedures for authorities to identify trafficking victims,nor did it demonstrate efforts to refer victims detained byauthorities to protective facilities. Furthermore, some reportingindicates that detained foreign migrants, some of whom maybe trafficking victims, are further vulnerable to being soldinto conditions of forced labor. During the reporting period,the government worked with international organizationsto repatriate foreign migrants. As in the previous reportingperiod, the government has shown no effort to encouragevictims to participate in the investigation and prosecution oftrafficking offenders. The government did not have proceduresto identify trafficking victims among undocumented migrants;thus, trafficking victims were frequently subject to detention,deportation, or punishment for their unlawful presence inLibya as a result of being trafficked. The government also didnot provide foreign victims of trafficking with legal alternativesto their removal to countries where they faced hardship orretribution.PreventionThe Government of Libya made no efforts to prevent humantrafficking. Public awareness of human trafficking – as aphenomenon distinct from illegal immigration and smuggling– remained low in Libya, including among government officials.During the reporting period, the government did not conductany public anti-trafficking awareness or information campaigns,nor did it train officials on trafficking issues. Libya did nottake actions to reduce demand for commercial sex acts or toprevent child sex tourism abroad.LITHUANIA (Tier 1)Lithuania is a source, transit, and destination country forwomen and girls subjected to sex trafficking. There were alsogovernment reports that Lithuanian boys and girls were forcedto steal in foreign countries and that Lithuanian men weresubjected to forced labor. NGOs estimated that 40 percent ofidentified Lithuanian trafficking victims are women and girlssubjected to sex trafficking within the country. Lithuanianwomen are also victims of sex trafficking in the UnitedKingdom (UK), Germany, Spain, the Netherlands, Greece, Italy,France, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Norway, and the CzechRepublic. Prosecutors estimate that over 1,200 women fromLithuania become victims of trafficking each year. Lithuanianwomen and girls from orphanages and state-run foster homes,as well as women with mental or psychological disabilities, arevictims of trafficking in persons. A small number of womenfrom Russia and Belarus are transported through Lithuaniaen route to Western Europe, where they are subsequentlysubjected to forced prostitution.The Government of Lithuania fully complies with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking. In 2011,the Lithuanian government doubled its victim identifications,tripled its anti-trafficking investigations, and ensured thatall convicted trafficking offenders were sentenced to time inprison. The government also significantly increased fundingfor victim care and provided in-kind assistance to NGOsproviding services to trafficking victims. Nevertheless, fundingremained low for the extent of the trafficking problem inLithuania and the government still struggled to providesustainable support to NGOs administering care to victimsof trafficking. Law enforcement actions increased in quantity
226LITHUANIAbut were uneven in practice, and NGOs reported that victimidentification procedures were generally ineffective. Some lawenforcement officials remained unaware that child prostitutionis considered a form of human trafficking under Lithuanianand international law. Efforts to address labor traffickinglagged behind efforts to combat sex trafficking; the governmentdid not begin any labor trafficking investigations in 2011.Recommendations for Lithuania: Amend criminal law toprohibit forced begging and forced criminal behavior underthe trafficking statute; continue to intensify efforts toproactively identify victims of trafficking, particularly victimsof labor trafficking and children in prostitution; vigorouslyinvestigate and prosecute trafficking offenses, including labortrafficking offenses; ensure effective training of lawenforcement officers, prosecutors, and judges on anti-trafficking principles; sustainably fund NGOs to providevictim protection; integrate an anti-trafficking module intothe basic training of the police; improve consular efforts toensure that victims identified abroad are referred to care inLithuania, including by ensuring sensitivity of consular officersto trafficking victims; ensure that victims of trafficking areprovided with stronger protection during the course of trial;ensure that victims of trafficking are never required to fundtheir own travel to trial; monitor trials to ensure that traffickingvictims are treated sensitively in the course of trial; ensurethat male trafficking victims are offered equal access to careand treatment; intensify efforts to increase public awarenessand disapproval of trafficking in persons; intensify publicawareness to help the general population understand thatLithuanians can be victims of trafficking within their owncountry; and fund an anti-trafficking hotline.ProsecutionThe Government of Lithuania demonstrated improved anti-trafficking law enforcement efforts during the reporting periodby increasing investigations and prosecutions, although therewere reports that the Lithuanian prosecution efforts werehampered by inconsistencies in investigative skills and in thelevel of sensitivity shown to trafficking victims. Lithuaniaprohibits most forms of human trafficking through articles147 and 157 of its criminal code, which prescribe penaltiesranging from a fine to 12 years’ imprisonment. These penaltiesare sufficiently stringent and commensurate with penaltiesprescribed for other serious crimes, such as rape. Anothersection of the criminal code covers the forced criminal behaviorof children; the Ministry of Justice initiated amendments tothe anti-trafficking statute to incorporate forced criminalbehavior in order to comply with the EU Trafficking Directive.Lithuanian authorities initiated 21 sex trafficking investigationsin 2011, compared with seven such investigations initiated in2010. The government did not investigate any labor traffickingcases in 2011. During the last year, authorities prosecuted37 offenders, an increase from the 20 offenders prosecutedin 2010. Seventeen trafficking offenders were convicted in2011, an increase from nine trafficking offenders convictedin 2010. All convicted trafficking offenders were sentencedto time in prison, with terms ranging from two to 10 years’imprisonment. In 2010, the government punished offenderswith sentences ranging from seven to 11 years in prison.Expertise in the investigation and prosecution of humantrafficking cases remained uneven throughout Lithuania;while specialized units in Lithuania were skilled in traffickinginvestigations, law enforcement officers and investigatorsin rural areas sometimes lacked experience in investigatingtrafficking cases and identifying trafficking victims. Lawenforcement officers inconsistently understood that third-partyinvolvement in child prostitution should be prosecuted underthe trafficking statute. Prosecutions were also hampered byvictims’ reluctance to seek help or participate in the criminalprocess. NGOs observed that some judges’ discriminationagainst victims of trafficking made the victims hesitant totestify in criminal trials. Trafficking in persons has not beenintegrated into basic police training. In 2011, the Lithuaniangovernment collaborated with foreign governments, includingUkraine, in six international trafficking investigations. TheGovernment of Lithuania extradited one person for humantrafficking. The government did not report the investigation,prosecution, conviction, or sentencing of any public officialcomplicit in human trafficking.ProtectionThe Lithuanian government demonstrated improved efforts toassist victims of human trafficking during the reporting period.The government allocated the equivalent of $60,000 to NGOsfor trafficking victim assistance in 2011, a significant increasefrom the 2010 financial allocation of the equivalent to $35,000.The government also provided in-kind support to NGOscaring for trafficking victims, including the use of governmentbuildings. Despite the increase, funding for victim care wasstill low for the number of Lithuanian victims of traffickingidentified. The Lithuanian government identified 45 traffickingvictims during the reporting period, more than double the 22victims of trafficking identified in 2010. The government didnot report identifying labor trafficking victims. All identifiedtrafficking victims were referred to NGOs for care. Duringthe reporting period, NGOs reported assisting approximately130 victims of trafficking, approximately level with the 150victims of trafficking assisted in 2010. Lithuania’s victim carefacilities are primarily operated by NGOs, sometimes withmunicipal funding. Most of these are mixed-use facilitiesthat also serve domestic violence victims. Victims couldleave the government-funded shelters at their own will andwithout a chaperone. There were no shelters available formen or boys; men’s crisis centers were available to provideother victim services to abused men, including any traffickingvictims. NGOs complained about the lack of sufficient fundingprovided by the government to fully carry out their obligationsof victim care. Although government officials employed formalprocedures to identify trafficking victims among vulnerablepopulations – such as women in prostitution, street children,and undocumented migrants – NGOs reported that theseprocedures were generally ineffective. The Law on the LegalStatus of Aliens allows officials to grant foreign traffickingvictims a six-month temporary residency permit if they agreeto participate in criminal proceedings. However, only onetrafficking victim received a temporary residence permitin 2011. The government reported that Lithuanian victimswere encouraged to participate in trafficking investigations;the majority of the 45 identified victims participated in theprosecution of trafficking offenders in 2011. Nevertheless,
LUXEMBOURG227NGOs reported that victims of trafficking were sometimesreluctant to participate in trials because, at times, they wereobliged to fund their own travel to trial. In November 2011,the government organized a two-day training program ontrafficking victim assistance for approximately 50 socialworkers from Vilnius and Kaunas. There were no reports thatany identified trafficking victims were detained, fined, orjailed for unlawful acts committed as a result of their beingtrafficked; concerns persisted that, to the extent that lawenforcement officials did not fully understand that childrenin prostitution were considered to be trafficking victims,these children may have been subject to penalties for theirparticipation in prostitution.PreventionThe Lithuanian government improved its prevention effortsduring the reporting period. The government sustainedpartnerships with NGOs through joint organization ofapproximately 35 anti-trafficking events, including seminarsand public lectures, involving over 400 specialists. Thegovernment did not undertake any broad-based publicawareness campaigns to raise the profile of its traffickingproblem. There was reportedly low public awareness oftrafficking. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs organized anti-trafficking training for 36 consular officials. Lithuanianpolice continued their outreach to school children to educatethem on trafficking. The government continued to conveneits multiagency working group to address trafficking. TheGovernment of Lithuania reported that not all plannedactivities from the national action plan of 2009-2012 wereimplemented in 2011 because of budget constraints. NGOsclaimed that the national action plan was not implementedeffectively in 2011. The Lithuanian government made someefforts to reduce the demand for commercial sex, includingby penalizing the purchasers of sexual services with fines.LUXEMBOURG (Tier 1)Luxembourg is a destination country for men, women, andchildren from Nigeria and other African countries, as well asEstonia, Kazakhstan, Bulgaria, Russia, Ukraine, Brazil, France,and Belgium who are subjected to sex trafficking and forcedlabor, including forced criminal activities. According to localexperts, unaccompanied and undocumented children whoare asylum seekers or refugees are particularly vulnerable tocommercial sexual exploitation. Adult victims of sex traffickingin Luxembourg can be recruited by agents in their homecountries for work in Luxembourg’s cabarets and subsequentlyforced into prostitution in cabarets, private apartments, andin street prostitution. Forced labor, sometimes involvingChinese men, women, and children, occurs in sectors includingconstruction and restaurants. According to past media reports,women in prostitution in Luxembourg are often controlledby pimps and some of these women are likely traffickingvictims; the majority of women in street prostitution areNigerian. According to country experts, traffickers utilizednon-physical coercion to control victims in prostitution andto operate within the country’s legal prostitution regime andevade law enforcement. According to a report issued by ECPAT,the commercial sexual exploitation of children in Luxembourgprimarily involves prostitution through illegal escort services,and in hotels, parked cars, private houses, and illegal privateclubs in the country.The Government of Luxembourg fully complies with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking. Thegovernment increased its detection of forced labor in 2011 and,for the first time, identified victims of this form of trafficking inthe country. While the government prosecuted and convictedother trafficking offenders during the year, courts held onlyone trafficking offender accountable with actual jail time in2011. The government sustained its efforts to protect traffickingvictims, but it has yet to address a long-standing deficiencyby formalizing and implementing comprehensive protectionsfor trafficking victims, including proactive national-levelidentification procedures.Recommendations for Luxembourg: Vigorously prosecute,convict, and punish trafficking offenders; establish formalprocedures to proactively identify victims among vulnerablegroups, such as women in the commercial sex trade andundocumented migrants; finalize implementation regulationsfor the March 2009 protection law – that would assist inimplementing a more victim-centered approach – to codifyand improve assistance to victims; formalize the role of NGOsand others in the identification process and fund them toprovide comprehensive assistance to all trafficking victims,including victims of forced labor, child victims, and malevictims; and implement an awareness campaign aimed atdemand reduction to educate authorities and the generalpublic about sex trafficking and its links with prostitution, aswell as the existence of forced labor in Luxembourg.ProsecutionThe Luxembourg government continued to investigate andprosecute trafficking offenders in 2011. Luxembourg prohibitsall forms of trafficking through Article 382 of the 2009 Lawon Trafficking in Human Beings, which prescribes penaltiesfor convicted offenders ranging from three to 10 years’imprisonment. These penalties are sufficiently stringent andcommensurate with penalties prescribed for other seriouscrimes, such as rape. Under this statute, courts can sentenceoffenders below the prescribed minimum sentence of threeyears’ imprisonment. During the year, the government did notinitiate any new prosecutions for trafficking and sentencedonly one trafficking offender to jail time. It continued itsprosecutions of six trafficking offenders initiated in theprevious year, resulting in one acquittal and the convictionof four offenders, the same number convicted in 2010. Onlyone convicted offender received a sentence that was notsuspended during the reporting period; a court sentenced aBrazilian offender to five years’ imprisonment for coercingthree Brazilian women into prostitution after promising themjobs as waitresses or nurses in Luxembourg. The remainingconvicted offenders, sentenced to prison terms of nine months,15 months, and two years, received suspended sentences andthus served no time in jail. In July 2011, the governmentenacted amendments to its Article 375 that increased penaltiesfor the “pimping of children in prostitution” from two tofive years’ imprisonment if the victim is below the age of
228MACAU16. However, the government has yet to identify a childvictim of sex trafficking in Luxembourg or initiate a criminalprosecution for this offense. The government failed to initiate,conduct, or participate in any anti-trafficking law enforcementtraining in 2011. There were no reports of the governmentinvestigating, prosecuting, convicting, or sentencing publicofficials for trafficking complicity.ProtectionThe Government of Luxembourg sustained its efforts toprotect trafficking victims in 2011. The government has yetto implement a March 2009 law that codifies procedures forthe identification, referral, and provision of comprehensiveassistance to trafficking victims; nor has it adopted systematicprocedures for the proactive identification of victims. Thegovernment’s vice squad did not employ any guidelines orprocedures to proactively identify victims among womenin prostitution in Luxembourg’s legalized or illegal sextrade. According to a 2010 NGO report, the police reliedprimarily on self-identification by the victims rather thantheir own proactive measures. Furthermore, police werethe only authorities permitted to carry out formal victimidentification. The government reported that all of the 25trafficking victims it identified subsequently cooperated inthe investigation of their traffickers; however, only three ofthese 25 victims officially received the government-offeredrecovery and reflection period of 90 days. The governmentdid not confirm whether any victims received temporaryresidency permits in 2011, whereas it had reported that threevictims were provided with these permits in 2010. Most victimcooperation occurred immediately after arrest or in a post-raid environment. The government identified two Chinesechild victims subjected to forced labor in restaurants in 2011.The government continued to fund two NGOs providingservices for women in distress, including adult femaletrafficking victims. However, because parliament had notapproved implementing regulations for the 2009 protectionlaw, NGOs were unable to benefit from the assistance systemthat law established, which would provide specialized care topotential and confirmed trafficking victims. The governmentdid not provide or fund specialized services or shelters forchild victims of trafficking. The government retained a statedpolicy of ensuring that victims are not punished for unlawfulacts committed as a direct result of their being trafficked; itwas unclear whether the government attempted to identifytrafficking victims among all women found in vulnerablegroups, such as those in prostitution or those detained asundocumented migrants in the country.PreventionThe government took few concrete steps to proactively addressits trafficking problem through public awareness activitiesduring the year. The government did not initiate or contributeto the development of any anti-trafficking prevention effortsin 2011. Local experts previously noted that authorities inLuxembourg have only recently begun acknowledging theproblem of human trafficking within the country, and theynoted that the general public is not aware of trafficking asan issue of importance. During the year, an NGO initiated apetition calling on the government to develop anti-traffickingcampaigns in national high schools focused on the sextrafficking of children. The government has not adopted anational action plan specifically on trafficking, and while itreported publicly on a range of issues that included trafficking,it did not report explicitly on its anti-trafficking efforts duringthe year. The government did not report any child sex tourismprosecutions or prevention efforts during the reporting period.MACAU (Tier 2 Watch List)The Macau Special Administrative Region (MSAR) of thePeople’s Republic of China is primarily a destination and,to a much lesser extent, a source territory for women andchildren subjected to sex trafficking and possibly forced labor.Victims originate primarily from the Chinese mainland, withmany from inland Chinese provinces who travel to the borderprovince of Guangdong in search of better employment.Sex trafficking victims in Macau also include women fromMongolia, Vietnam, Thailand, and Russia. Many traffickingvictims fall prey to false advertisements for jobs in casinosand other legitimate employment in Macau, but upon arrival,are forced into prostitution. Foreign and mainland Chinesewomen are sometimes passed to local organized crime groupsupon arrival, held captive, and forced into sexual servitude.Victims are sometimes confined in massage parlors and illegalbrothels, where they are closely monitored, forced to worklong hours, have their identity documents confiscated, andare threatened with violence. Chinese, Russian, and Thaicriminal syndicates are believed to be involved in recruitingwomen for Macau’s commercial sex industry. Macau madeno changes to the immigration regulation structure whichrenders foreign migrants vulnerable to forced labor; thoseforeign migrants who are fired for cause or quit must wait sixmonths to obtain another work permit. In one documentedcase, Macau also has been a source territory for women whoare subjected to sex trafficking elsewhere in Asia.The MSAR does not fully comply with the minimum standardsfor the elimination of trafficking; however, it is makingsignificant efforts to do so. Despite these efforts, the MSARauthorities did not demonstrate evidence of increasing effortsto address human trafficking; therefore, Macau is placed on Tier2 Watch List. The government made no discernible progress inprosecuting sex trafficking or forced labor offenders, obtainingno human trafficking convictions during the reporting period.It identified and assisted 13 victims, a decline from 17 victimsthe previous year, and did not have a clear policy in place toprotect trafficking victims from future hardship.Recommendations for Macau: Expand capacity to prosecutetrafficking cases by increasing the number of prosecutorsresponsible for criminal cases and devoting a prosecutorspecifically to trafficking crimes; significantly increase effortsto investigate and prosecute trafficking offenders, includingperpetrators of forced labor; make efforts to investigate andprosecute official complicity in trafficking; continue to conductworksite inspections for evidence of forced labor and applyappropriate protective measures when victims are identified,
MACEDONIA229including offering them legal alternatives to their removalcountries where they may face hardship and retribution;implement proactive victim identification methods,particularly among vulnerable populations such as migrantworkers; end the six-month waiting period for migrant workersto obtain new work; and continue to educate law enforcement,other government officials, and the public on forced labor aswell as sex trafficking.ProsecutionDuring the reporting period, Macau authorities decreased theirtrafficking investigations and did not report any prosecutionsor convictions. Macau’s anti-trafficking law, Law Number6/2008, prohibits all forms of trafficking in persons andprescribes penalties of three to 15 years’ imprisonment, whichare sufficiently stringent punishments and commensuratewith those prescribed for other serious crimes, such asrape. Macau authorities conducted 13 forced prostitutioninvestigations and no forced labor investigations during thereporting period, a slight decrease in investigations fromthe previous period in which the government conducted 15forced prostitution investigations. The government did notreport any prosecutions or convictions of trafficking offendersduring the reporting period, whereas in the previous year thegovernment prosecuted two cases and secured one conviction.The government initiated no investigations or convictions ofofficials either complicit or responsible for human trafficking.The judiciary remained ill-equipped to address trafficking andhad just 11 prosecutors to handle all criminal cases in Macau.Many cases investigated were closed due to lack of evidence orwitnesses who were unwilling to cooperate with governmentauthorities. In October 2011, the judicial police held a trainingseminar for 68 officers on Macau’s anti-trafficking law andcase studies. Additionally, in November 2011, the HumanTrafficking Deterrent Measures Concern Committee (whichserves as Macau’s anti-trafficking committee) organizeda seminar for participants from various law enforcementagencies in Macau on how to define, investigate, and prosecutetrafficking cases. The government continued to providetrafficking awareness training to all new judicial and publicsecurity police officers.ProtectionMacau authorities made modest efforts to protect traffickingvictims during the reporting period. The government identified13 victims of forced prostitution in 2011 compared with17 victims of forced prostitution in 2010. The governmentidentified no victims of forced labor in 2011. Twelve ofthe victims identified in 2011 were from China and oneof the victims was from Russia. The Social Welfare Bureauassisted and offered shelter to all of the identified victims.The government reported using a standardized screeningquestionnaire to guide law enforcement, immigration, andsocial services personnel in identifying trafficking victims.The government designated 21 beds for female traffickingvictims of any nationality at a shelter managed by the SocialWelfare Bureau. An NGO-operated shelter for children 16 yearsold and under continued to operate; it served three victimsof trafficking during the reporting period. The governmentsustained an existing partnership with a local NGO in order toidentify interpreters to assist in interviewing foreign traffickingvictims. The government did not report providing any servicesto male or female forced labor victims, or male victims offorced prostitution. In March 2011, the government trained30 officers from the Health Bureau on procedures for medicalprofessionals caring for trafficking victims. During seminars inMay, September, and November 2011, Health Bureau officerstrained 212 fellow officers on behavioral and psychologicalindicators of trafficking. Immigration regulations continued tocreate vulnerabilities for foreign workers during the reportingperiod. The government encouraged victims to assist in theinvestigation and prosecution of trafficking crimes and nine ofthe 13 trafficking victims did so during the reporting period.Victims were not allowed to work during the reporting period.Although the government had a policy in place for generalforeign crime victims, offering them legal alternatives toremoval to countries in which they would face retribution orhardship, it was unclear whether this policy applied specificallyto trafficking victims.PreventionThe Government of Macau made efforts to prevent forcedprostitution and some efforts to prevent forced labor during thereporting period. The Human Trafficking Deterrent MeasuresConcern Committee is the government’s anti-traffickingcommittee. The committee is comprised of representativesfrom eight different government agencies and met monthlyduring the reporting period to coordinate the government’sresponse to trafficking among the various agencies in thecommittee. The Legal Affairs Bureau, assisted by an NGO,produced and disseminated two new pamphlets on trafficking,with one pamphlet aimed at clients and the other at victimsof the sex trade. The client-oriented pamphlet focused onlegal ramifications of participating in the commercial sextrade, and offered mechanisms to report suspected trafficking,whereas the victim-oriented pamphlet discussed assistanceand rights for victims. Both pamphlets were available inmultiple languages. These did not, however, attempt to reducethe demand for commercial sex acts. An NGO was fundedby the government to place 4,000 posters on the dangers ofchild trafficking in public buses, taxis, and public places. TheSocial Welfare Bureau partnered with the Women’s Associationof Macau to organize four community education events onhuman trafficking. Recommendations released in 2011 from agovernment-commissioned study conducted by the Universityof Macau led the government to increase efforts to raisepublic awareness of trafficking. The government reported noinvestigations or prosecutions of child sex tourism during thereporting period.MACEDONIA (Tier 1)Macedonia is a source, destination, and transit country for men,women, and children subjected to sex trafficking and forcedlabor. Macedonian women and children are trafficked withinthe country. Foreign victims subjected to forced prostitutionor forced labor in Macedonia originate in Albania, Bulgaria,Serbia, Ukraine, and Kosovo; and Macedonians are subjected toforced labor and sex trafficking in Europe. Children, includingethnic Roma, are subjected to forced begging in streets andpublic markets. During the year, authorities reported anincrease in undocumented foreign migrants in the country, agroup vulnerable to trafficking. A 2011 labor sector assessmentfound the prevalence of labor exploitation to be greatest inMacedonia’s textile sector, mostly in southeast Macedonia, andsignificantly prevalent in civil engineering, tourism, catering,and agriculture. Trafficking offenders increasingly used false
230MACEDONIAmarriage, particularly among the ethnic Roma population, asa tactic to lure victims into forced prostitution.TheGovernmentofMacedoniafullycomplieswiththeminimumstandards for the elimination of trafficking. The governmentsustained its vigorous prosecution and conviction of traffickingoffenders, and proactively investigated trafficking complicity.The government effectively partnered with NGOs providingvictim assistance in its domestic shelter and demonstrateda sensitive approach to victim-witnesses. The governmentfailed, however, to provide adequate financial resources forvictim care in the shelter, and did not provide critically neededresources for reintegration. The government continued toidentify only a small number of victims relative to the rest ofthe region. The lack of results in victim identification continuedto suggest some front-line responders and other officials lacka full understanding of the complexities of trafficking andthe required skills to identify potential victims, thus failingto ensure victims’ full access to their rights and protectionunder Macedonian law.Recommendations for Macedonia: Proactively improvevictim identification efforts to locate potential domestic andforeign trafficking victims in Macedonia; ensure that victimsare not deported and punished as a result of their trafficking;ensure that foreign women entering the country onentertainment visas receive information on trafficking andtheir rights in Macedonia; pursue potential cases of traffickingthat involve non-physical forms of coercion; institutionalizeand increase funding to ensure comprehensive care,sustainability of the shelter, and reintegration services forvictims; continue to build the anti-trafficking expertise ofsocial workers to ensure their engagement in reintegration;follow through on plans to establish local commissions todecentralize and improve victim identification throughoutthe country; provide more incentives, including not detainingpotential victims in the transit shelter, for foreign traffickedchildren and adults to stay in Macedonia long enough to assistin bringing their traffickers to justice; streamline interagencyreporting and advance the use of an automated casemanagement system in courts to produce final traffickingcase statistics, including data of jailed convicted offenders;and continue to use the national rapporteur report as a toolfor centralized reporting, including more self-critical analysisand making clear distinctions between trafficking and migrantsmuggling.ProsecutionThe Government of Macedonia sustained its efforts toprosecute and punish trafficking offenders during the reportingperiod. The government prohibits sex and labor traffickingthrough articles 418(a) and (d) of its 2004 criminal code.The minimum penalty prescribed for sex trafficking is fouryears’ imprisonment, which is sufficiently stringent andcommensurate with penalties prescribed for other seriouscrimes, such as rape. In 2011, the government completed fourtrafficking investigations involving 29 suspects, includingtwo public officials. During the year, Macedonian courtsalso convicted nine trafficking offenders, compared with21 convicted offenders in 2010. Sentences for the nineconvicted offenders ranged from two to nine years in prison.The government convicted all but one of these offendersunder its anti-trafficking law. Courts convicted two offendersfor sex trafficking, two offenders for labor trafficking, andfive offenders on charges of both. Macedonian law preventsthe imposition of jail sentences until the appeal process iscomplete; authorities confirmed that of the nine convicted,six are currently in jail. In April 2011, a court of appealsupheld the convictions of six trafficking offenders, includinga complicit government official noted in the previous TIPReport. According to the government, trafficking offenders,complicit local police officers, and nightclub owners arefamiliar with the standard questions used by officials toidentify trafficking victims and have thus modified theirmodus operandi to keep victims in a state of servitude and evadelaw enforcement. Observers reported concerns of complicityamong local officials and police, specifically involving bars andnightclubs in western Macedonia. In April 2011, the SkopjeCourt of Appeals upheld a conviction and sentence of a policeofficer to 8.5 years in prison for facilitating the sex traffickingof children. It also investigated two other local police officersfor trafficking-related complicity during the year.ProtectionThe Government of Macedonia maintained protections foridentified domestic trafficking victims during the reportingperiod,specificallybyincludingNGOsasprimarycareprovidersin its domestic trafficking shelter and funding the shelter’sbasic operating costs. The government, however, did not makecritically needed improvements in victim identification nor didit ensure adequate funding for comprehensive victim care andreintegration. It reported identifying 12 trafficking victims in2011, the same number it identified in 2010. Country expertsraised concerns during the year about local police conductingraids in bars without coordinating with the anti-traffickingunit. Police reportedly transferred foreign national womenworking illegally in these establishments to immigrationpolice for immediate deportation without a proper assessmentof trafficking indicators. In 2011, authorities in Ukraine andBulgaria identified victims subjected to forced prostitution inMacedonia. According to local experts, the government’s focuson victims’ initial consent to be smuggled into Macedonia aswell as on the lack of limitations on foreign victims’ freedomof movement suggests serious misunderstandings about thedefinition of trafficking, risking victims’ punishment for crimescommitted as a direct result of being trafficked. According toan anti-trafficking report issued by the Belgian governmentin 2011, a Macedonian sex trafficking victim was grantedrefugee status in Belgium in October 2010. The Belgian courtbased its determination on the trafficking offender’s allegedcollusion with Macedonian authorities, the victim’s well-founded fear of reprisal, and the Macedonian government’sinability to protect her.The government sustained partnerships with two NGOs thatprovided victims with social assistance, legal aid, vocationaltraining, and psychosocial support in the domestic traffickingshelter in 2011. The government provided a total funding theequivalent of $14,000 to two NGOs providing victim servicesin this shelter. Other than the annual grant, however, NGOsmust secure outside funding for all other assistance for victims,
MADAGASCAR231including food and medical services. Although the governmentappointed four social workers to assist with critical victimreintegration in 2011, NGOs report little concrete engagementfrom this sector. According to one NGO, authorities referreddomestic victims directly to the shelter post-raid, and policedemonstrated a victim-sensitive approach in victims’ cases.Twelve trafficking victims testified before an investigativejudge in 2011, five of whom testified in a trial. The governmentcontinued its good practice of assigning a guardian to eachidentified child trafficking victim to help ensure a continuumof care and trust.The government continued to operate a reception center forforeign migrants and trafficking victims, in which traffickingvictims were detained during the recovery and reflectionperiod. The government did not ensure an NGO presencein the transit shelter to assist with the identification processnor ensure potential trafficking victims awaiting deportationprocedures received specialized care and assistance. Thegovernment offers temporary residency permits to foreigntrafficking victims only if they cooperate in the investigationand prosecution of their traffickers, though no such residencypermits were granted to trafficking victims during the reportingperiod. Authorities referred four suspected foreign victimsfrom Albania, Bulgaria, and Kosovo to the government’sreception center in 2011; however, it determined that twopotential victims from Kosovo, including a child, were nottrafficking victims. The Bulgarian victim testified in front ofan investigative judge within days of her identification andonly stayed at the reception center for seven days.PreventionThe Government of Macedonia sustained its anti-traffickingprevention efforts during the reporting period. It providedthe equivalent of $14,000 to two anti-trafficking NGOs toimplement anti-trafficking prevention campaigns primarilyaimed at school children and college students. The government,through the national commission and in partnership withNGOs, organized anti-trafficking workshops and presentations,including some implemented though local traffickingprevention councils in some cities in 2011. The governmentundertook some measures to prevent child begging in 2011,including removing children from the streets and placing somein orphanages; it reportedly prosecuted and sentenced someparents to jail time for forcing their children to beg. Accordingto one NGO, however, the heavy media attention surroundingthese operations resulted in sensationalizing the issue ofchild begging, with little positive impact on the children. InJanuary 2012, the government’s national rapporteur publishedMacedonia’s third annual report on trafficking; the reportcontained useful case-based analyses and some pragmatic,self-critical recommendations for future progress.MADAGASCAR (Tier 3)Madagascar is a source country for women and childrensubjected to forced labor and sex trafficking. Reports indicatethat sex and labor trafficking of Madagascar’s citizens hasincreased, particularly due to a lack of economic developmentand a decline in the rule of law since the current political crisisbegan in March 2009. An estimated 4,000 Malagasy womenare employed as domestic workers in Lebanon. Many are singlemothers that come from rural areas and are illiterate or poorlyeducated, making them vulnerable to deception and abuseat the hands of recruitment agencies and employers. At leastfive deaths were reported in this population during the year.Trafficking victims returning from Lebanon also reportedrape, psychological abuse, physical torture and violence,sexual harassment and assault, harsh working conditions,confinement to the home, confiscation of travel documents,and withholding of salaries. Recent reports indicate thatMalagasy citizens are fraudulently recruited for jobs in China,only to be forced into marriage or debt bondage upon theirrefusal to marry.Malagasy children, mostly from rural areas, are subjected todomestic servitude, prostitution, forced begging, and forcedlabor in mining, fishing, and agriculture within the country.In addition, children are used in the commission of crimes,such as drug trafficking. Most child trafficking occurs withthe involvement of family members, but friends, transportoperators, tour guides, and hotel workers also facilitate theexploitation of children. Parents in the southern regions sendgirls to local markets without money for groceries, forcing themto prostitute themselves in what is known as Tsenan’Ampela or“girls market” to earn enough to buy food for the family. In apractice known as Miletra, parents in the northeastern regionsforce their daughters into prostitution, directly negotiating theprice and duration in advance. A child sex tourism problemexists in coastal cities, including Tamatave, Nosy Be, DiegoSuarez, and Majunga, as well as the capital, Antananarivo.Some children are fraudulently recruited for work in the capitalas waitresses, maids, and masseuses before being coerced intoprostitution on the coast. Most child sex tourists are Frenchnationals with some reports of German and Italian nationals.The main clients of prostituted boys and girls, however, areMalagasy men.The de facto Government of Madagascar does not fully complywith the minimum standards for the elimination of traffickingand is not making significant efforts to do so. Since the March2009 coup, combating human trafficking has not been a priority,despite the growing size of the problem both internally andtransnationally. Anti-trafficking efforts remained negligibleduring the year. Despite widespread allegations of childsex tourism and sex trafficking, the government failed toprosecute or convict trafficking offenders and did not identifyor refer victims to necessary services. Pervasive corruptionand minimal capacity throughout the entire justice system,lack of awareness of the anti-trafficking law, and officialcomplicity in trafficking crimes, including allegations of policeprotection of clients of children in prostitution, contributedto the dismal state of anti-trafficking law enforcement effortsin Madagascar. The de facto government for a third year didnot engage the Government of Lebanon regarding protectionof and legal remedies for exploited Malagasy workers andfailed to coordinate the repatriation of Malagasy citizens fromLebanon during the reporting period.
232MALAWIRecommendations for Madagascar: Utilize the anti-trafficking law, including at the provincial level, to investigateand prosecute trafficking offenses, including those involvingforced labor and public officials suspected of trafficking-relatedcomplicity; amend the anti-trafficking law to provide sufficientlystringent penalties for labor trafficking; open a dialogue withthe Government of Lebanon on improving protections forMalagasy workers and jointly addressing cases of abuse; considerestablishing a consulate in Lebanon to provide consular and,when needed, protective services to Malagasy workers; institutea process for law enforcement officials to document traffickingcases, interview potential victims, and refer trafficking victimsfor assistance; increase efforts to raise public awareness oflabor trafficking; and provide anti-trafficking training to lawenforcement, labor, and social welfare officials.ProsecutionThe Malagasy de facto government’s anti-trafficking lawenforcement efforts diminished over the year, as it completedno investigations or prosecutions of trafficking offenders. Anti-Trafficking Law No. 2007-038 prohibits all forms of humantrafficking but prescribes punishments only for sex trafficking.Penalties for violation of the law range from two years’ to lifeimprisonment and are sufficiently stringent and commensuratewith those prescribed for other serious crimes, such as rape.Article 262 of the labor code criminalizes labor trafficking,for which it prescribes insufficiently stringent penalties ofone to three years’ imprisonment. Decree 2007-563 prohibitsand prescribes insufficiently stringent punishments of up totwo years’ imprisonment for various forms of child trafficking,including prostitution, domestic servitude, and forced labor.The de facto government has never used its anti-traffickinglaw to punish traffickers. Authorities neither investigated norprosecuted cases of forced labor during the reporting period and,despite widely publicized allegations against two French childsex tourists during the year, made minimal efforts to investigateallegations of sex trafficking. Public officials’ complicity inhuman trafficking remained a significant problem. In May2011, one French national resident paid and procured two girlsfor another French national resident of Madagascar and latersold film footage of the girls engaged in sex acts. Despite publiccalls for the investigation of the case, authorities apprehendedonly one suspect whose current location cannot be confirmed.Credible reports indicate that the other suspect met with thede facto Minister of Justice, who assigned police officers toguard his residence to prevent his arrest. In remote parts ofMadagascar, local authorities reportedly procured underagegirls for sexual exploitation by visiting Malagasy dignitaries.Corrupt police permitted organized child prostitution ringsto operate, particularly in Nosy Be. Local police generallyremained hesitant to pursue child sex trafficking and child sextourism offenses because of deep-rooted corruption, pressuresfrom the local community, or lack of knowledge of the anti-trafficking law. The regime reported no efforts to investigate,prosecute, convict, or sentence public officials complicit inhuman trafficking.ProtectionThe de facto Malagasy government made negligible efforts toprotect victims. One of the few de facto government officialsto demonstrate commitment to working on trafficking, the defacto Minister of Population and Social Affairs who formerlycoordinated the repatriation of victims from Lebanon, diedin an accident in August 2011. Following the March 2011repatriation of 85 women, government officials – includingthe honorary Malagasy consul in Lebanon – failed to organizeany additional repatriations or support repatriations organizedby NGOs during the year. In March 2011, over 600 Malagasyawaited repatriation from Lebanon, 140 of which were classifiedas victims in need of emergency repatriation. In 2011, anNGO organized the repatriation of 427 Malagasy citizens, 153of whom reported physical, psychological, or sexual abuse.For a third year, the de facto government did not engage theGovernment of Lebanon regarding the protection of and legalremedies for exploited workers. Madagascar’s honorary consulin Beirut was ineffective in addressing the needs of Malagasytrafficking victims, often encouraging victims to return to theiremployment agencies and not advocating for victim protectionor investigations into allegations of abuse.The de facto government lacked procedures to proactivelyidentify trafficking victims among vulnerable populations anddid not provide services or refer victims for care in a systematicway. NGOs provided counseling, legal services, and medicalcare to victims, and referred them to government hospitals. Thede facto government provided medical and psychiatric care ona case-by-case basis at one public hospital in Befelatanana. Noother hospitals provide such services free of charge. Services andfacilities are insufficient and often nonexistent in areas beyondAntananarivo. The de facto government may arrest and punishinternal trafficking victims for unlawful acts committed as adirect result of being trafficked. It did not encourage victims toassist in the investigation and prosecution of their exploiters.PreventionThe de facto government made negligible efforts to preventtrafficking during the reporting period. It maintained thesuspension of several employment agencies implicated inhuman trafficking and continued the November 2009 ban onsending domestic workers to Lebanon. However, many agenciesreportedly continued to send workers directly to Lebanon, andunofficial networks now reportedly send Malagasy migrantworkers through Mauritius, South Africa, Kuwait, Egypt,France, or the Seychelles to circumvent the ban. The de factogovernment officially began a labor recruitment program tosend Malagasy garment sector workers to Jordan and Kuwait.Although conditions were reported to be acceptable, the de factogovernment did not make an effort to improve its oversightof recruitment agencies before beginning the new program.MALAWI (Tier 2 Watch List)Malawi is a source country for men, women, and childrensubjected to forced labor and sex trafficking. To a lesserextent, Malawi is also a destination country for men, women,and children from Zambia, Mozambique, Tanzania, andZimbabwe and a transit point for people from these samecountries who are subjected to sex and labor trafficking inSouth Africa. Most Malawian trafficking victims are exploitedwithin the country, though Malawian victims of sex andlabor trafficking have also been identified in South Africa,Zambia, Mozambique, Tanzania, and Europe. Within thecountry, children are subjected to forced labor in domesticservice, cattle herding, agriculture (tobacco, tea, coffee, andsugar plantations), begging, small businesses, and coercedinto the commission of crimes, including home robberies.
MALAWI233One-third of Malawian children are involved in labor activities,with sources reporting that the majority of cases of childlabor outside of the family involve fraudulent recruitmentand physical or sexual abuse, conditions indicative of forcedlabor. Adult tenant farmers are vulnerable to exploitation asthey incur debts to landowners and may not receive paymentin times of poor harvest. Brothel owners or other facilitatorslure girls – including primary school children – from ruralareas with promises of clothing and lodging, for whichthey are later charged high fees, resulting in debt-bondedprostitution. Girls are recruited for domestic service, butinstead are forced to marry and later forced into prostitutionby their husbands. In lakeshore districts, tourists – includingEuropeans – purchase commercial sex from women, girls, andboys in forced prostitution. Nigerian and Tanzanian womenforce Malawian women and girls into prostitution in Malawi,and Nigerian syndicates are also involved in the sex traffickingof Malawians to South Africa, Germany, the Netherlands, theUnited Kingdom, Thailand, and Brazil. Italian and Mexicanorganized crime entities reportedly also are involved in sextrafficking between Malawi and South Africa. Traffickerstarget Malawian girls in secondary school for recruitment forwork in neighboring countries, offering to pay their rent, butsubjecting them to forced prostitution upon arrival. SouthAfrican and Tanzanian long-distance truck drivers and mini-bus operators, transport these victims across porous bordersby avoiding immigration checkpoints. Malawians are takento Mozambique and Zambia for forced labor on tobacco andtea farms, to Zambia for brick-making, and to Tanzania forforced labor in the fishing industry. Anecdotal reports indicateSouth Asian adults and children are forced to work in hotels,shops, bakeries, and in the construction sector in Malawi.The Government of Malawi does not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however,it is making significant efforts to do so. Despite these modestefforts, the government failed to demonstrate overall increasingefforts to combat trafficking during the reporting period;therefore, Malawi is placed on Tier 2 Watch List. Malawi’s anti-trafficking law enforcement performance declined over thelast year, with fewer trafficking offenders prosecuted than in2010, and fewer convicted trafficking offenders punished withtime in prison. Furthermore, the government did not finalizeand pass anti-trafficking legislation drafted in 2009. Thegovernment continued to rely on international organizationsand NGOs to fund most anti-trafficking programs, and district-level staff active on trafficking received little supervision orguidance from national coordinating bodies.Recommendations for Malawi: Prosecute both sex andlabor trafficking offenses vigorously; ensure the adequatesentencing of convicted trafficking offenders, including theincreased imposition of prison sentences rather than fines;investigate and prosecute complicit officials; expand trainingprograms for judges, prosecutors, labor inspectors, and policeon identification, investigation, and prosecution of traffickingoffenses under existing laws; begin the collection of nationalprosecution and protection data; develop a formal system toidentify trafficking victims and to refer them to availableservices; increase the availability of accommodations andprotection services for victims through financial or materialsupport to NGOs or expansion of direct service provision;improve national-level coordination of anti-trafficking effortsacross all districts; and launch anti-trafficking public awarenesscampaigns.ProsecutionThe Government of Malawi decreased its anti-trafficking lawenforcement efforts during the year, convicting fewer offendersthan in 2010 and failing to enact anti-trafficking legislationdrafted in 2009. Malawi prohibits all forms of traffickingthrough various laws, including the Employment Act andarticles 135 through 147 and 257 through 269 of the penalcode. The penalties prescribed under these various statutesrange from small fines to 14 years’ imprisonment; thesepenalties are sufficiently stringent and commensurate withpunishments prescribed for other serious crimes, such as rape.Despite the existence of these laws, their enforcement is weak.The Child Care, Protection and Justice Act of 2010 prohibitschild trafficking, prescribing penalties of life imprisonment forconvicted traffickers. In January 2012, the act was publishedin the government’s gazette and printed; however, somecourts have rejected cases charged under the act since theyare still without a copy of the act. Reports indicated that labortrafficking offenders were not prosecuted for a first offense;only repeat offenders were prosecuted.Although governments in 12 of 28 districts reportedinvestigating a total of 241 trafficking cases in 2011, specificsregarding these cases or their status were not provided. Localsources reported the convictions of one labor trafficker andthree sex traffickers in 2011. Only one offender, however,received a prison sentence, while the remainder paid minimalfines. In Machinga District, the Liwonde magistrate courtsentenced a convicted offender to five years’ imprisonmentwith hard labor in 2011 for the sex trafficking of two girlsfrom Mangochi. In October 2011 in Blantyre, authoritiesused the Employment Act to convict a man for the forcedlabor of 11 children; he received a fine equivalent to $17 andwas required to pay return transport costs for the victims. Thegovernment’s continued failure to seek criminal prosecutionand sentencing of forced labor offenses meant there was noeffective deterrent to the commission of trafficking crimes.The government continued to train police recruits inidentifying and combating human trafficking as part of itsstandard training curriculum at three police training schools,reaching 600 recruits during the year. In 2011, the Ministry ofGender, Child and Community Development (MGCCD) andthe Ministry of Justice (MOJ) trained law enforcement andsocial welfare officials on the child protection law. Nonetheless,police and immigration officials were complicit in traffickingcrimes, with reports of court cases diverted and offendersreleased; however, the government did not investigate orprosecute such officials.ProtectionThe Government of Malawi sustained minimal efforts toprovide protection to trafficking victims during the year.The government relied largely on NGOs to identify victimsand provide long-term care. In addition, the government
234MALAYSIAfailed to establish or employ systematic procedures for theproactive identification of victims and their referral to care.The government funded one drop-in center that providedcounseling and services for victims of trafficking and gender-based violence; it is unknown whether the center assistedtrafficking victims during the year. Over 100 police stationsacross the country housed victim support units (VSUs) torespond to gender-based violence and trafficking crimes;however, the VSUs lacked capacity to respond adequately,providing only limited counseling and, in some districts,temporary shelter to victims. Government-run hospitalsprovided trafficking victims with limited access to medicaland psychological services; for shelter, district social welfareand child protection officers referred victims to NGO-runfacilities that catered to vulnerable children and youth. Thegovernment did not provide material or financial support forthese NGO services.The national government did not provide data on the numberof victims it identified, referred, or assisted during the reportingperiod; detailed case information provided by two districtsindicates that officials, often in partnership with NGOs,identified at least 114 trafficking victims. Police, district-levelsocial welfare officers, and child protection officers cooperatedwith local NGOs that coordinated and funded the rescueof trafficking victims; during the year, these partnershipsresulted in the rescue of 83 children in prostitution froma brothel in Blantyre. The district social welfare office inLilongwe – through the aforementioned social rehabilitationcenter – provided office space to an NGO that identified 86child sex trafficking victims in four districts of Lilongwe in2011. A 2011 NGO baseline survey of six districts reportedthat over 70 percent of victims did not receive any servicesafter their rescue. The government did not provide foreignvictims with temporary residency or other legal alternativesto their removal to countries where they would face hardshipor retribution. The district social welfare office in Mangochiassisted in the repatriation of one victim. The governmentencouraged victims’ participation in the investigation andprosecution of trafficking crimes. Law enforcement, however,generally treated persons in prostitution – including children– as criminals rather than their pimps or clients, making sextrafficking victims vulnerable to arrest; subsequent to theirarrest, some police coerced them into sex acts by threateningthem with charges.PreventionThe government made minimal efforts to prevent humantrafficking during the year. The majority of public awarenesscampaigns were coordinated at the district level with NGOspartners; national level coordinating bodies played a negligiblerole, failing to organize awareness activities or finalize thenational plan of action drafted in the previous year. Thenewly reorganized Child Protection Technical Working Groupincluded trafficking within its broad work to coordinate effortson child protection. The Malawi Network Against ChildTrafficking, which is comprised of government representatives,NGOs, and religious leaders, met quarterly and, with fundingfrom a foreign government, organized an October 2011workshop on best practices to combat human trafficking. In2011 in Mangochi District, social welfare and labor officersforged partnerships with police and NGOs to train 25 peereducators in Traditional Area Chowe; this event publicizedthe IOM trafficking hotline in South Africa and resultedin the repatriation of one victim. State-owned radio alsobroadcast weekly radio programs on child labor and humantrafficking led by an NGO. The government did not makeefforts to reduce the demand for commercial sex acts duringthe year, and made no efforts to address child sex tourism.The government did not provide its military personnel withanti-trafficking training prior to their deployment abroad oninternational peacekeeping missions.MALAYSIA (Tier 2 Watch List)Malaysia is a destination and, to a lesser extent, a source andtransit country for men, women, and children subjected toconditions of forced labor and women and children subjectedto sex trafficking. The overwhelming majority of traffickingvictims are among the estimated two million documentedand two million or more undocumented foreign workers inMalaysia. They migrate willingly to Malaysia from countriesincluding Indonesia, Nepal, India, Thailand, China, thePhilippines, Burma, Cambodia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, andVietnam in search of greater economic opportunities. Someof them subsequently encounter forced labor or debt bondageat the hands of their employers, employment agents, orinformal labor recruiters. While many of Malaysia’s traffickingoffenders are individual businesspeople, large organized crimesyndicates are also behind trafficking. A significant numberof young foreign women are recruited obstensibly for legalwork in Malaysian restaurants and hotels, some of whomare legally admitted to the country for this purpose but arecoerced into the commercial sex trade. During the year, reportsindicated an increasing number of Ugandan women werefraudulently recruited to Malaysia for ostensibly legitimatework but were forced into prostitution upon arrival. Ugandanand Nigerian syndicates transport victims between China andMalaysia, and use threats of physical harm, including throughvoodoo, to victims and their families to coerce them intoprostitution. Many Malaysian labor outsourcing companiesrecruit workers from India, Vietnam, and other countries,who are often subjected to conditions of forced labor byunscrupulous employers. In some cases, foreign workers’vulnerability to exploitation was heightened when employersneglected to obtain proper documentation for workers oremployed workers in sectors other than that for which theywere granted an employment visa. Many migrant workerson agricultural plantations, at construction sites, in textilefactories, and in homes as domestic workers throughoutMalaysia are subject to practices indicative of forced laborsuch as restrictions on movement, deceit and fraud in wages,passport confiscation, and imposition of significant debtsat the hands of agents or employers. Passport confiscationremains widespread, particularly among domestic workers.Some employees reported that their employers exercisedcontrol over them by threatening to take a worker’s passportto immigration authorities where the employer would allegethat the workers had breached the terms of their labor contracts,which could result in the revocation of the workers’ visas andtheir subsequent deportation. Some Malaysian employersreportedly did not pay foreign domestic workers three to sixmonths’ wages in order to recoup recruitment agency feesand other debt-bonds. In some cases, employers illegallywithheld employee wages in escrow until completion of thecontract, resulting in workers continuing to work for fear ofnot receiving financial compensation if they ceased to do so.
MALAYSIA235Forced labor, including debt bondage, occurred among domesticworkers. It was also reported to occur on plantations in theeast Malaysian states of Sabah and Sarawak and in plywoodand pulp factories. There are an estimated 250,000 foreigndomestic workers in Malaysia with legal authorization foremployment in that sector. NGOs estimate that an additional100,000 migrant domestic workers are not formally registered;many domestic workers, both documented and undocumented,may be trafficking victims. An estimated 90 percent of alldomestic workers are from Indonesia. The Indonesiangovernment had previously banned the arrival of additionalIndonesian domestic workers to Malaysia; although thisprohibition expired during the reporting period, unresolvednegotiations over a revised memorandum of understanding(MOU) between the two governments delayed the arrival ofadditional Indonesian domestic workers. A small numberof Malaysian citizens reportedly were trafficked internallyand abroad to Singapore, China, and Japan for commercialsexual exploitation.The Government of Malaysia does not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking. Thegovernment has not shown evidence of overall increasingefforts to address human trafficking compared to the previousyear; therefore, Malaysia is placed on Tier 2 Watch List fora third consecutive year. Malaysia was granted a waiverfrom an otherwise required downgrade to Tier 3 because itsgovernment has a written plan that, if implemented, wouldconstitute making significant efforts to meet the minimumstandards for the elimination of trafficking and is devotingsufficient resources to implement that plan. During the year,the government continued to confine foreign victims tosubstandard facilities and failed to provide them with sufficientlegal, translation, or psychological resources; government-certified victims cannot opt to reside outside these facilities.Malaysia’s anti-trafficking law does not include adequateprovisions for the protection of victims, and the governmentdid not take steps to amend its laws to allow certified victims toreside outside government facilities. The government took stepsto ameliorate the poor conditions faced by officially certifiedtrafficking victims – such as granting three-year work permitsto one group of 32 male victims of forced labor – but it did nottake the more meaningful steps of structurally reforming theunnecessarily complex victim identification and protectionregime that likely causes further harm to victims. Front-lineofficials continued to lack the ability to recognize indicatorsof human trafficking, limiting their efforts to assist victimsand to investigate, prosecute, and convict trafficking offenders.Recommendations for Malaysia: Increase law enforcementactions under the anti-trafficking law, particularly labortrafficking cases; apply stringent criminal penalties to thoseinvolved in fraudulent labor recruitment or forced labor;increase efforts to investigate – and prosecute and punish, asappropriate – reports of public officials who may profit fromtrafficking or who may exploit victims; develop and implementprocedures to identify labor trafficking victims, usinginternationally recognized indicators of forced labor amongvulnerable groups such as migrant workers and refer them toavailable protection services; increase training for officials onthe effective handling of sex and labor trafficking cases, witha particular emphasis on victim protection and theidentification of labor trafficking victims; improve victimidentification efforts to ensure that victims of trafficking arenot threatened or punished for crimes committed as a resultof being trafficked; with the assistance of NGOs, improvevictim protection in government facilities by providing victimsregular access to legal services and effective counseling intheir native languages; in collaboration with NGOs, developand implement mechanisms to allow adult foreign traffickingvictims to travel, work, and reside outside government facilities,including while under protection order; provide all victimslegal alternatives to removal to countries in which they wouldface retribution or hardship; make greater efforts to educatemigrant workers of their rights, legal recourses available, andremedies against traffickers or employers who fail to meettheir legal obligations; negotiate MOUs with source countriesto incorporate victim protection and prohibit employers fromconfiscating passports and travel documents and ensure thatsuch MOUs are enforced; make efforts to reduce the demandfor both sex and labor trafficking; and increase efforts to raiseawareness about the dangers of both labor and sex trafficking.ProsecutionThe Government of Malaysia made insufficient overall progressin addressing human trafficking through law enforcementmeans during the reporting period. While it continued toprosecute and convict sex trafficking offenders, it did notdemonstrate progress in its efforts to punish those who exploitothers for forced labor. Malaysian law prohibits all formsof human trafficking through its 2010 Anti-Trafficking inPersons Act (amended), which prescribes penalties that arecommensurate with those prescribed for other serious offenses,such as rape. In November 2010, the government enactedamendments to the law that broadened the definition oftrafficking to include all actions involved in acquiring ormaintaining the labor or services of a person through coercion.During 2011, the government convicted 17 sex traffickingoffenders but did not convict any perpetrators of forced labor;this compares with 14 convictions for both sex and labortrafficking offenders obtained in 2010. Sentences for convictedoffenders ranged from two to 30 years’ imprisonment. Policeand immigration officials investigated 97 suspected traffickingcases during the year, 45 of which were labor trafficking cases;they initiated 16 prosecutions, 13 of which involved sextrafficking and three of which involved forced labor. A totalof 231 prosecutions, initiated in previous years, remainedongoing at the close of the reporting period. The share ofinitiated prosecutions that resulted in acquittals continuedto remain high, in part the result of a lack of incentives forvictims to participate in investigations and prosecutions.In November 2011, the Labor Department filed charges in asuspected labor trafficking case, the first such action it hastaken since being granted authority to file charges in traffickingcases in 2010. Three suspected trafficking offenders, proprietorsof a media company, were accused of subjecting five Indiannationals to forced labor distributing and selling newspapers.Initially, the victims – whose documents had been confiscatedby their employer – were arrested on immigration violationsand the employers were not charged. Following pressure from
236MALAYSIAcivil society, the Labor Department subsequently made thedecision to investigate the case; the prosecution of the threetraffickers remained ongoing at the close of the reportingperiod.Poor government treatment of identified trafficking victimsand the lack of victim protection or incentives for victimassistance in investigations and prosecutions remained asignificant impediment to successful prosecutions. As inprevious years, NGOs reported referring cases of alleged laborand sex trafficking to the government but believed that inmany instances authorities did not investigate these allegations.NGOs reported that the police and Labor Department officialsoften failed to investigate complaints of confiscation ofpassports and travel documents or withholding of wages –especially involving domestic workers – as possible traffickingoffenses, and that front-line officers’ failure to recognizeindicators of trafficking regularly led them to treat these casesas immigration violations. Labor Department officials oftenclassified trafficking cases as routine labor disputes; laborinspectors were not experienced in anti-trafficking procedures.The government did not report any criminal prosecutions oflabor recruiters who used deceptive practices and debt bondageto compel migrant workers into involuntary servitude.The previously reported prosecution of one immigrationofficial, who was arrested in July 2009 for alleged involvementin trafficking Burmese citizens to Thailand, ended in anacquittal during the reporting period; the government filed anappeal, but no additional developments have been reported.Reports also indicated that collusion between individual policeofficers and trafficking offenders sometimes led to offendersescaping arrest and punishment. The Malaysian governmenttook no discernible steps to investigate such reports or toprosecute or punish direct involvement in or facilitation oftrafficking crimes by Malaysian officials.ProtectionThe government made modest but insufficient progress inprotecting victims of trafficking during the reporting period,and overall victim protection efforts remained inadequate andnegatively affected victims. Victims identified by Malaysianauthorities are adjudicated under an official protection orderthat triggers their forcible detention in government facilities,where they must remain for the period stipulated by thecourt. Most victims reportedly stay in these facilities forthree to six months, and some are detained for more thana year. The government reports that victims are no longerlocked in their rooms, yet they continue to be locked insidefacilities, and are only permitted to leave for hospital visitsor court appearances under the custody of the police; malevictims are largely confined to their rooms and have limitedfreedom of movement inside facilities. Victims were providedlimited, if any, access to legal or psychological assistance by thegovernment or NGOs. The majority of funding for governmentshelter facilities supports arming the facilities with high levelsof security, which may serve to prevent victims from escapingrather than to protect them from harm; in fact, shelters thatprohibit victims from leaving are regarded by experts as posinga serious risk for re-traumatizing victims. The governmentprovided limited counseling to victims; it reported beginningto grant some victims individual counseling sessions during theyear, and enlisting the assistance of five university students tosupport the work of the two counselors it employed, althoughit did not always have adequate facilities to offer victimsprivacy during these sessions. During the reporting period, thegovernment began working with non-governmental entities toincrease the availability of counseling and discuss guidelinesfor improved shelter management. The facilities did not employmedical officers or trained psychologists, and employees,assigned on a temporary basis, did not receive adequate, ifany, training for working with trafficking victims or managingthe facilities; a lack of translation services meant that somevictims were unable to communicate with staff.During the reporting period, the government discontinuedits policy of treating certified victims as illegal aliens andtransferring them to detention facilities for deportation afterthey provided evidence to prosecutors. Victims typically wereuninformed about the legal processes to which they weresubjected, and the government did not make adequate effortsto inform the victims of why or for how long they were beingdetained. This situation increased hardship for victims, whooften exhibited severe anxiety at not knowing when they wouldbe allowed to leave. As noted during previous reporting periods,the government’s policy of detaining trafficking victims againsttheir will continued to provide a disincentive for victims andtheir advocates to bring cases to the government’s attentionor to cooperate with authorities.The Ministry of Women, Family, and Community Developmentcontinued to operate three facilities for women and childvictims of trafficking. These facilities detained suspectedand confirmed foreign trafficking victims for an average ofthree to six months (but in some cases much longer) untilthey were deported to their home countries, per Malaysianlaw. The women’s facility in Kuala Lumpur moved to a largerlocation during the reporting period, although there werereports that it occasionally housed numbers of victims beyondits capacity. The Ministry of Home Affairs ran a similar facilityfor male victims of trafficking, which also detained suspectedand confirmed trafficking victims. The government reportedplans for the Women’s Ministry to assume responsibility forthis shelter, but this did not occur during the year. Despite theavailability of specialized NGO resources to serve traffickingvictims, including through providing shelters that may providea more comfortable environment to victims, the governmentconfines victims in its own facilities where it lacks the physicaland human resource capacity to accommodate them. Thebasis for the government’s expressed security concerns withNGO shelters was unclear, as no known security incidentshave been reported at NGO shelters and their locations werekept confidential.During the reporting year, 125 foreign women, 75 foreign men,and 22 foreign children were certified as trafficking victimsand detained in government facilities. The total number ofvictims certified, 222, is a significant decrease from the 383victims identified during the previous year. The governmentidentified an unknown number of Malaysian victims who wereexploited within the country during the year. Some foreignembassies sheltered victims directly, rather than transferringthem to Malaysian facilities, to expedite their repatriationand protect them from detention during lengthy criminalproceedings. In a positive step, the home minister announcedin January 2012 that the government would grant somevictims the right to temporarily work in Malaysia followingthe expiration of their protection order. In March 2012, thegovernment granted three-year work and residency permits to32 labor trafficking victims deemed to be in danger if returnedto their home country. These victims had already endured a
MALAYSIA237stay of more than one and a half years in a government facility.The Home Ministry reported plans to extend the provisionof work permits to other victims – meeting certain criteria –following the expiration of their protection order, but it didnot provide further details about how this program wouldbe implemented or how many victims would be eligible. Itreported that only victims who had entered Malaysia legally,and whose safety was not guaranteed if they returned to theircountry of origin, would be eligible. NGOs expressed concernsthat challenges in interagency coordination may make itdifficult to extend temporary work permits to all eligiblevictims. While the government reports it encouraged victimsto assist in the prosecution of their traffickers, some victimssought immediate repatriation by their countries’ embassiesin Malaysia or by NGOs, rather than staying in Malaysia totestify, due to systemic disincentives such as long detentions infacilities during lengthy court proceedings. Certified victimswere not permitted to leave the country while they waitedfor trials to commence. The government did not provide anyincentives such as work permits to victims during the durationof their traffickers’ trials. Victims could theoretically file civilsuits against traffickers, but as foreign victims were providedneither any form of legal assistance nor basic translationservices, none accessed this option during the year. Lawenforcement officers did not receive sufficient training towork with victims, and poor investigation procedures did nottake into account the best interests of victims. Victims wereasked to recount their trafficking experience on numerousoccasions to different officials, and during trial proceedingsauthorities did not make adequate efforts to separate victimsfrom their traffickers or recruitment agents, a practice that mayhave resulted in threats or pressure exerted on victims andtheir families if they cooperated with police and prosecutors.Several NGOs reported that they generally no longer referredvictims to the police, as they believed that doing so wasdetrimental to the welfare of the victims. Some NGOs notaffiliated with the government’s anti-trafficking council werebarred from further assisting victims after they were placedinto a government facility. The government did not providefinancial assistance to NGOs providing services to victims.The anti-trafficking law provided immunity to traffickingvictims for immigration offenses such as illegal entry, unlawfulpresence, and possession of false travel documents, but someunidentified victims continued to be detained, deported, orcharged with immigration offenses.The government reported that individual law enforcementagencies followed standardized procedures for identifying,interviewing, and referring trafficking victims, but therewas no evidence of the existence of formal procedures forthe proactive identification of victims among vulnerablegroups with whom authorities came in contact. The LaborDepartment, which recently assumed its mandate to investigatelabor trafficking cases, required evidence of non-payment ofwages to investigate a suspected trafficking case; it did notdevelop or implement procedures to identify internationallyrecognized indicators of forced labor, such as the confiscationof travel documents or the imposition of significant debtsby employers or labor brokers. Some unidentified victims,particularly those whose documents had been confiscatedby employers, were processed as illegal migrants and held inprisons or immigration detention centers prior to deportation.PreventionThe Malaysian government continued efforts to preventhuman trafficking during the reporting period. The NationalCouncil for Anti-Trafficking in Persons (MAPO), and itstrafficking in persons Secretariat within the Home Ministrycontinued to coordinate the government’s anti-traffickingresponse; although certain NGOs were included in the MAPOcouncil, some non-affiliated NGOs expressed frustration atnot being included in the government’s policy discussionsin their areas of expertise. In a positive step, the attorneygeneral’s office and the Women’s Ministry began to invitecertain NGOs not affiliated with MAPO to attend meetingsto discuss issues of forced labor and victim protection; thegovernment’s denial of regular access to a number of NGOsto its victim facilities, however, continues to obstruct effectivegovernment-civil society collaboration to combat trafficking.A state-level anti-trafficking council in Selangor, conductedindependent anti-trafficking efforts in that state, although ithas not been formally recognized by MAPO. The governmentcontinued an anti-trafficking public awareness campaign inprint media, on the radio, and on television, and officialsdisplayed an increased willingness to speak about the dangersof labor trafficking in addition to sex trafficking. For example,in November 2011, an official from the Human ResourcesMinistry spoke on a prime time news program to publicize thenew provisions of an agreement with Indonesia – includingthe potential for criminally prosecuting exploitative employersunder the anti-trafficking law – and to encourage the public toreport suspected abuses. This ministry reported conducting aseries of training events reaching 514 domestic workers, 532employers, and 93 private employment agents. The HomeMinistry continued to maintain a watch list of 42 outsourcingcompanies that recruit foreign workers into Malaysia whoselicenses have been suspended for engaging in suspiciousactivities, such as use of falsified documents or listing falseemployers, but it did not pursue criminal prosecutions ofany outsourcing companies during the year. The governmentreported imposing administrative sanctions against 136employers in 2011, but it is unknown whether any of thesefines were applied for violations related to human trafficking.Although the Home Ministry announced plans to investigateallegations that recruitment agencies charged migrant workersexcessive, exploitative fees during the government’s migrantworker registration program, it took no discernible action toinitiate any investigations during the year. In May 2011, thegovernments of Indonesia and Malaysia signed amendments toa bilateral MOU on domestic workers; the updated agreementincludes provisions prohibiting employers from takingpossession of domestic workers’ passports unless given consentto do so, mandating a weekly rest day for workers, requiringpayment of salaries directly into bank accounts, limiting theamount an employer can deduct from a domestic worker’searnings for repayment of recruitment fees, and requiring thatworkers and employers attend a seminar explaining rights andresponsibilities. The MOU provided insufficient protectionsfor workers who are compelled by their employers to “consent”to the withholding of the workers’ passports. An existingagreement with the Philippines provides some protections forPhilippine workers, and the Malaysian government continuednegotiations with the Cambodian government over a proposedMOU to govern Cambodian domestic workers employed inMalaysian. Domestic workers are excluded from a number ofprotections in Malaysian labor law.
238MALDIVESIn October 2011, the government amended its EmploymentAct to provide a legal definition of a “contractor for labour”as an employer; it is unknown what effect these amendmentsmay have on government regulation of contractor-basedlabor arrangements, which create vulnerabilities to forcedlabor. Although the confiscation of passports by employers ofmigrant workers is illegal, the government continued to allowthis practice to occur with impunity; it did not prosecute anyemployers who confiscated passports or travel documents ofmigrant workers or confined them to the workplace. In January2012, the government, with an international organization,co-hosted a Bali Process workshop – a regional conferenceon combating transnational organized crime, includingtrafficking – attended by delegates from a number of othercountries in the region, and earlier in the reporting period,government officials spoke at a conference to engage journalistson human trafficking issues. While authorities continued someanti-trafficking training for officials with responsibilities tocombat trafficking, including training conducted throughcooperation with foreign donors, international organizations,and NGOs, the lack of understanding of human trafficking bymany Malaysian front-line officers, such as police, immigration,and labor officials, continues to hinder the identification andproper investigation of trafficking cases and identificationand assistance to trafficking victims. The government didnot take measures to reduce the demand for forced labor orcommercial sex acts. The government provided anti-traffickingtraining to Malaysian troops prior to their deployment abroadon international peacekeeping missions.MALDIVES (Tier 2 Watch List)Maldives is primarily a destination country for migrantworkers from Bangladesh and, to a lesser extent, India, someof whom are subjected to forced labor. It is also a source anddestination country for women and girls subjected to sextrafficking. An unknown number of the 80,000 to 110,000foreign workers that government officials estimate are currentlyworking in Maldives – primarily in the construction andservice sectors – face conditions indicative of forced labor:fraudulent recruitment, confiscation of identity and traveldocuments, withholding or nonpayment of wages, or debtbondage. According to government sources, up to 44,000of these workers do not have legal status in the country,although both legal and illegal workers were vulnerable toconditions of forced labor. According to a diplomatic source,an estimated 50 percent of Bangladeshi workers in Maldivesare not documented and a number of these workers are victimsof trafficking. Migrant workers pay the equivalent of $1,000to $4,000 in recruitment fees in order to migrate to Maldives.In addition to Bangladeshis and Indians, some migrantsfrom Sri Lanka, Pakistan, and Nepal reportedly experiencedrecruitment fraud before arriving in Maldives. Recruitmentagents in source countries generally collude with employersand agents in Maldives to facilitate fraudulent recruitmentand forced labor of migrant workers.A small number of women from Sri Lanka, Thailand, India,China, the Philippines, Eastern Europe, and former SovietUnion countries, as well as some girls from Bangladesh, aresubjected to sex trafficking in Male, the capital. Some reportsindicate that internal sex trafficking of Maldivian girls also isa problem. The Human Rights Commission of the Maldivesreported that some migrant female domestic workers weretrapped in circumstances in which employers used threats andintimidation to prevent them from leaving. Some underageMaldivian children are transported to Male from otherislands for forced domestic service, and a small numberwere reportedly sexually abused by the families with whomthey stayed. This is a corruption of the widely acknowledgedpractice where families send Maldivian children to live witha host family in Male for educational purposes.The Government of Maldives does not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking. Thegovernment has not demonstrated evidence of increasingefforts to address human trafficking over the previous year;therefore, Maldives is placed on Tier 2 Watch List for a thirdconsecutive year. Maldives was granted a waiver from anotherwise required downgrade to Tier 3 because its governmenthas a written plan that, if implemented, would constitutemaking significant efforts to meet the minimum standardsfor the elimination of trafficking and is devoting sufficientresources to implement that plan. The government continuedto lack systematic procedures for identifying victims oftrafficking among vulnerable populations and, during thereporting period, did not take sufficient law enforcementsteps or concrete actions to protect trafficking victims andprevent trafficking in Maldives. Counter-trafficking efforts areimpeded by a lack of understanding of the issue, a lack of legalstructure, and the absence of a legal definition of trafficking.Recommendations for the Maldives: Enact legislationprohibiting and punishing all forms of trafficking in persons;clearly distinguish between human trafficking and humansmuggling in legislation, policies, and programs; develop andimplement systematic procedures for government officials toproactively identify victims of trafficking among vulnerablegroups, such as undocumented migrants and women inprostitution; work to ensure that identified victims of traffickingare provided access to victim services; increase efforts toinvestigate and prosecute suspected trafficking offenses; raisepublic awareness of human trafficking through mediacampaigns; empower the Labor Tribunal by giving it legalauthority to enforce its decisions and by providing translatorsso it is more accessible to foreign workers; ensure that changesto labor migration policies for the purpose of reducing humantrafficking do not restrict legal migration; and take steps toensure that employers and labor brokers are not abusing laborrecruitment or sponsorship processes in order to subject migrantworkers to forced labor.ProsecutionThe Government of Maldives undertook minimal anti-trafficking law enforcement efforts during the year. AlthoughMaldives does not have laws prohibiting all human traffickingoffenses, its constitution prohibits forced labor and slavery,and the Employment Act of 2009 prohibits most forms offorced labor. The Child Sex Abuse Act (2009) criminalizesthe prostitution of children with a penalty of up to 25 years’
MALI239imprisonment for violations. However, Article 14 of the actprovides that, if a person is legally married to a child underIslamic Sharia, none of the offenses specified in the legislation,including child prostitution, would be considered a crime. Thegovernment continued to develop its draft anti-trafficking lawduring the reporting period. The government did not prosecuteany new human trafficking cases. Of the two child prostitutioninvestigations noted in the 2011 TIP Report, one investigationis ongoing and the other did not lead to a prosecution due tolack of evidence. Police coordinated with Sri Lankan police inan investigation of Sri Lankan women forced into prostitutionin Maldives by suspected Maldivian traffickers.ProtectionThe Maldivian government did not ensure that victims oftrafficking received access to necessary assistance during thereporting period. The government did not develop or implementformal procedures for proactively identifying victims. In 2011,13 suspected victims of human trafficking and two suspectedhuman traffickers were intercepted and deported in threecases of human trafficking identified at the Ibrahim NasirInternational Airport. The government did not provide access toservices, such as shelter, counseling, medical care, or legal aid,to foreign or Maldivian victims of trafficking. The government’sgeneral policy for dealing with trafficking victims was todeport them, and it did not provide foreign victims with legalalternatives to their removal to countries where they mightface hardship or retribution. Authorities did not encouragevictims to participate in the investigation or prosecution oftrafficking offenders. Due to a lack of comprehensive victimidentification procedures, the government may not have ensuredthat migrants subjected to forced labor and prostitution were notinappropriately incarcerated, fined, or otherwise penalized forunlawful acts committed as a direct result of being trafficked.In April and May 2011, the Department of Immigration andEmigration (DIE) conducted two one-day training programs ontrafficking victim identification, training 17 labor inspectorsand 35 police officers.PreventionMaldives made some progress in preventing human traffickingduring the year. In March 2012, the government approved ananti-trafficking action plan for 2011-12. In January 2012, thegovernment established an Anti Human-Trafficking and PeopleSmuggling Unit, which is charged with implementing theaction plan. In April 2011, the DIE established an integratedinvestigation unit with the Maldives Police Services, andthrough this unit the government has investigated an unknownnumber of ongoing cases involving fraudulent recruitment. Twoforeigners were deported as a result of these investigations. Policereportedly raided and closed recruitment agencies by court orderfor further investigation when there was evidence that theagencies’ operations involved fraud and forgery. However, nolabor recruiter or broker was punished or fined for fraudulentrecruitment practices. During the reporting period, the DIEconducted lectures for a college on migration and humantrafficking, held anti-trafficking events during a human rightsday fair, and conducted a training program for immigrationofficials. The Labor Relations Authority prepared leaflets onworkers’ rights in Dhivehi and English for distribution byemployers to employees and are translating the leaflets intoBangla, spoken by Bangladeshi migrant workers. In January2012, the government declared a moratorium on the issuanceof new work permits to Bangladeshis seeking to migrate to thecountry for employment, a move which was intended to addressthe vulnerability of unemployed Bangladeshis to trafficking. Thegovernment continued a program, started in 2009, to registerunregistered migrant workers. The government made effortsto reduce the demand for commercial sex by investigating andprosecuting clients of prostitution. Maldives is not a party tothe 2000 UN TIP Protocol.MALI (Tier 2)Mali is a source, transit, and destination country for men,women, and children subjected to forced labor and sextrafficking. Within Mali, women and girls are forced intodomestic servitude, agricultural labor, and support roles inartisanal gold mines, as well as subjected to sex trafficking.Malian boys are found in conditions of forced labor inagriculture, artisanal gold mines, and the informal commercialsector. Adult men and boys, primarily of Songhai ethnicity, aresubjected to the longstanding practice of debt bondage in thesalt mines of Taoudenni in northern Mali. Some members ofMali’s black Tamachek community are subjected to traditionalslavery-related practices rooted in hereditary master-slaverelationships, and this involuntary servitude reportedly hasextended to their children. Boys from Mali, Guinea, BurkinaFaso, Niger, and other countries are forced into begging andexploited for labor by corrupt marabouts (religious instructors)within Mali and in neighboring countries. Reports indicatethat Malian children are transported to Senegal and Guineafor forced labor in gold mines and on cotton and cocoa farmsin Cote d’Ivoire. Women and girls from other West Africancountries are subjected to prostitution in Mali. Malians andother Africans – who travel through Mali to Mauritania,Algeria, or Libya in hopes of reaching Europe – are particularlyat risk of becoming victims of human trafficking. Malian girlsand women are trafficked to Gabon, Libya, Lebanon, andTunisia for commercial sexual exploitation.The Government of Mali does not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however,it is making significant efforts to do so. During the reportingperiod, the government increased its efforts to prosecuteand convict trafficking offenders, although these did notinclude cases of hereditary slavery – a problem that remainslargely unaddressed. Law enforcement officials prosecuted11 trafficking cases, convicted seven trafficking offenders,and identified at least 170 victims and referred them to localNGOs. The government provided in-kind donations to NGO-run multipurpose shelters, including paying for the servicesof doctors to care for trafficking victims’ medical needs. Italso sponsored awareness-raising events in all eight regionsof the country and engaged in a series of bilateral events withregional partners on combating trafficking. Despite ministerialapproval in June 2010, a bill outlawing all forms of trafficking,including slavery, has still not been brought to a vote in theNational Assembly.
240MALIRecommendations for Mali: Improve efforts to investigateand prosecute trafficking offenses, particularly cases oftraditional slavery and forced prostitution, and convict andpunish trafficking offenders; investigate and, as appropriate,prosecute trafficking offenses involving women and girlsbrought into and through the country for forced or childprostitution; enact draft legislation that prohibits and punishesall forms of trafficking in persons, including all forms ofslavery; train law enforcement officials to identify traffickingvictims among vulnerable populations, such as women inprostitution and those in traditional slavery, and refer them toprotective services; develop an improved system for collectingdata on trafficking crimes and the number of victims identifiedand referred by government authorities to service providersfor care; and increase efforts to raise public awareness abouthuman trafficking, particularly traditional hereditary slavery.ProsecutionThe Government of Mali demonstrated increased anti-trafficking law enforcement efforts during the year. Malidoes not prohibit all forms of trafficking, although Article 244of the criminal code prohibits all forms of child trafficking.Child trafficking offenders convicted under Article 244 facepenalties of five to 20 years’ imprisonment; these penaltiesare sufficiently stringent and commensurate with those forother serious crimes, such as rape. Article 229 of the criminalcode criminalizes the sexual exploitation of children andforced prostitution of adult women, prescribing penalties ofsix months’ to three years’ imprisonment; these penalties areneither sufficiently stringent nor commensurate with otherserious crimes, such as rape. Malian law may not adequatelyprohibit other forms of trafficking. Articles 242 and 243 ofthe criminal code prohibit forced labor, servitude, and otherillegal labor practices. Slavery is prohibited by Malian law,but no penalty is prescribed for its commission. Article 242of the criminal code, passed in 1973, prohibits individualsfrom entering into agreements or contracts that deprive thirdparties of their liberty. NGOs assert that the law, whichhas sometimes been characterized as an anti-slavery law, isinadequate to prosecute cases of hereditary slavery, whichare not predicated on agreements or contracts entered intoafter 1973. In June 2010, the Council of Ministers approvedan anti-trafficking bill, which, if enacted, would prohibit allforms of trafficking, although it does not adequately prohibitslavery. Despite concerted efforts by the Ministry of Justiceto bring the bill before the National Assembly, it did notcome to the floor for a vote during the reporting period. In2011, the government, with assistance from internationalorganizations and NGOs, began drafting a law criminalizingslavery. Despite NGO-led efforts to work with the courts inNorthern Mali to hear pending and newly registered hereditaryslavery cases, deterioration in security throughout northernMali led to the August 2011 shutdown of all judicial courts inthis region. Thus the government, which has not prosecuteda case of traditional slavery since 1969, has not taken actionon at least three pending cases of traditional slavery that havebeen stalled in courts for more than three years.The government reported investigating 24 new trafficking-related cases in 2011, prosecuting 11 cases and convictingseven trafficking offenders, a significant increase over the twocases investigated and prosecuted and two trafficking offendersconvicted in 2010. Five of the seven offenders convicted in2011 received sentences of five to 20 years’ imprisonment;two offenders received three-year suspended sentences. InJune 2011, Malian officials extradited two suspected Nigeriantraffickers to Nigeria for prosecution by the National Agencyfor Prohibition of Traffic in Persons (NAPTIP). In November2011, the Morals Brigade and Interpol joined forces withNAPTIP and raided four brothels in the capitol, Bamako,operated by Nigerian nationals. Four alleged traffickerswere apprehended and transported to Nigeria on a Nigeriangovernment-funded plane, along with approximately 104potential female trafficking victims. In March 2012, gendarmesapprehended four individuals suspected of trafficking fourBurkinabe boys for forced labor in Malian artisanal gold mines.As of March 2012, 12 trafficking-related prosecutions remainedbefore the court. Due to the shutdown of the courts in thenorth, two cases of traditional slavery remained pending fora third year and four new civil lawsuits requesting the returnof children allegedly held in traditional slavery were alsoput on hold. The government provided no anti-traffickingtraining to its officials. There was no evidence of governmentofficials’ involvement in human trafficking, although generalcorruption is seen as pervasive through the security forcesand the judiciary. The government did not report efforts toinvestigate, prosecute, or punish acts of government employees’complicity in human trafficking.ProtectionThe Government of Mali demonstrated increasing efforts toprotect trafficking victims during the year. The governmentreferred approximately 170 victims to NGOs and internationalorganizations for assistance. The vast majority of the victimswere initially identified by police, gendarmes, border controlofficers, or regional officials of the Ministry for the Promotionof Women, Children, and the Family. Border patrol officialsstopped two suspected cross-border trafficking attempts,rescuing three Burkinabe children at the Mali-Guineaborder, and five Malian girls at the Mali-Niger border. In2011, the Ministry for Women, Children, and the Familyappropriated the equivalent of $100,000 to support regionalmultipurpose welcome centers and family placement servicesfor abused or trafficked children. Due to limited resources, thegovernment did not directly offer shelter services, althoughits regional welcome centers received trafficking victimsfrom law enforcement and other government officials andreferred them to an NGO-operated shelter or other formsof care. The government paid for the services of doctorswho cared for child trafficking victims in NGO-operatedmultipurpose facilities. Government officials periodicallyvisited multipurpose shelters in the capital and brought largedonations of milk, sugar, diapers, and other in-kind supportto these organizations. The prime minister presented theequivalent of $600 to a shelter that cared for infants andchildren, some of whom may be trafficking victims. Thegovernment also provided the equivalent of $435 in directaid to rescue and repatriate 19 Senegalese boys held in forcedbegging by a corrupt Malian marabout. The government did notreport identifying or assisting any victims of traditional slavery.Despite increasing reports of large numbers of children forcedto labor in artisanal gold mines within Mali, the governmentcited a lack of personnel and resources to adequately identifyand rescue victims in this sector. There were no reports thattrafficking victims were penalized for unlawful acts theycommitted as a result of being trafficked.
MALTA241PreventionThe Government of Mali made modest efforts to preventtrafficking during the last year. In October 2011, the Ministryof Malians Abroad held a workshop in Bamako to educateapproximately 5,000 Malians about the dangers of illegalmigration to Europe, including the possibility of becominga victim of human trafficking. In January and February 2012,the Ministry of Malians Abroad sponsored awareness raisingdebates on human trafficking in all eight of Mali’s regions.The chair of the National Coordinating Committee for theFight against Trafficking in Persons and the head of the MalianNational Unit for the Fight against Child Labor participatedin international meetings in Cote d’Ivoire, Togo, Senegal,and Guinea-Bissau to further coordinate regional traffickingprevention. As part of the Mali-Cote d’Ivoire bilateral accord,the Malian and Ivoirian first ladies met in October 2011 tointensify their efforts against human trafficking. In November2011, the National Coordinating Committee, the National Unitfor the Fight Against Child Labor, the Committee to Track ChildLabor, and local NGOs gathered and agreed to regular meetings,a standardized intake process, and common forms and toolsfor use by police, ministry officials, regional directorates,and NGOs in addressing child victims of trafficking. Thegovernment took no visible measures to decrease the demandfor commercial sex acts or forced labor. The government didnot provide anti-trafficking training to Malian troops priorto their deployment abroad on international peacekeepingmissions.MALTA (Tier 2)Malta is a source, transit, and destination country for womenand children subjected to sex trafficking. Sex traffickingvictims have originated in Romania and Russia; children fromMalta are also found subjected to sex trafficking within thecountry. Malta is likely a destination country for men andwomen subjected to forced labor, including in restaurants,private households, and in unskilled or semi-skilled labor.The approximately 4,500 irregular African migrants currentlyresiding in Malta from African countries may be vulnerableto human trafficking in the country’s informal labor market.There were reports that Malta may be a transit country forAfrican women subjected to sex trafficking in continentalEurope.The Government of Malta does not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however,it is making significant efforts to do so. The governmentprogressed this year in its commitment to fight humantrafficking, including through victim identification andthe prosecution of trafficking offenders. The governmentcreated its first national anti-trafficking action plan andallocated funds to implement the plan. The governmentformally identified three victims of sex trafficking in June andbegan prosecuting the offenders. The government convicteda trafficking offender in a long-pending case, sentencingthe offender to a significant prison term. The governmentalso began collaborating with members of civil society toimprove its anti-trafficking activities. Nevertheless, the Maltesegovernment did not identify children in prostitution as sextrafficking victims or provide them with support availableunder Maltese anti-trafficking laws, but instead charged somethem for loitering for prostitution and sometimes subjectedthem to punishment. Despite issuing the action plan in late2011, the government has not yet finalized formal victimidentification guidelines or conducted awareness-raisingactivities. The government sponsored an IOM-conductedtraining session in late March 2012 which was designed toreview existing guidelines and provide a template for a newnational referral mechanism.MALTA TIER RANKING BY YEAR2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Recommendations for Malta: Strengthen efforts toproactively identify trafficking victims among vulnerablepopulations, particularly migrants, children, and women inprostitution, and foreign workers; develop and ensureimplementation of formal victim identification guidelines;ensure that victims of trafficking are not punished for actscommitted as a direct result of trafficking; ensure that potentialtrafficking victims are not deported prior to the investigationof their trafficking cases; increase efforts to investigate andprosecute trafficking offenses and convict and punishtrafficking offenders; continue to ensure that convictedtrafficking offenders, including any officials convicted ofcomplicity in trafficking, receive adequate punishment,including time in prison; fully enact national anti-traffickingaction plan; strengthen partnerships with NGOs or religiousorganizations in Malta on anti-trafficking activities andencourage NGOs or religious organizations to cooperate withthe government in identifying and providing services topotential victims; publicize the support hotline more broadlyas an anti-trafficking hotline; and establish partnerships withinternational organizations and NGOs in relevant sourcecountries, as appropriate, to ensure safe and voluntaryrepatriation for foreign victims.ProsecutionThe Government of Malta demonstrated clear progress inits law enforcement efforts to address human traffickingduring the reporting period. Article 248A-E of Malta’scriminal code prohibits all forms of trafficking in persons andprescribes punishments of two to nine years’ imprisonment.These prescribed penalties are sufficiently stringent andcommensurate with punishments prescribed for other seriouscrimes, such as rape. The government investigated three newtrafficking cases during the year, a significant increase fromthe complete lack of cases investigated in the previous threeyears. The first case involved Romanian dancers allegedlycoerced into prostitution. The two remaining cases involvedlabor trafficking. The government initiated the prosecutionof four alleged offenders in the sex trafficking case; the otherinvestigations remained ongoing. A court convicted onetrafficking offender in a case pending from 2004, sentencinghim to a term of ten years in prison and one additional yearfor a prior suspended sentence. Prosecution of a police officercharged in a directly related criminal case remained pending.Authorities also convicted a trafficking offender on non-trafficking charges related to producing child pornographyand child prostitution, sentencing the offender to six yearsin prison. The government provided partial financial supportfor an anti-trafficking training session conducted in June
242MARSHALLISLANDS2011 for members of the police, the attorney general’s office,the social services agency, and other stakeholders. In March2012, the government funded training for 30 government andNGO representatives on victim identification and referral. Thegovernment did not conduct any training programs in theprevious reporting period. In January 2012, the governmentreorganized the police vice squad to create a specialized uniton trafficking and appointed an experienced police inspectoras its head. Maltese authorities collaborated with Russian andPolish authorities on sex-trafficking investigations.ProtectionThe Government of Malta improved its victim protectionefforts during the reporting period, identifying victims oftrafficking, and providing care to two of them. The governmentdid not have a formal referral mechanism with which toidentify victims of trafficking and ensure their care. The lackof formal procedures to guide law enforcement respondersin identifying victims of trafficking in vulnerable groups –such as children in prostitution, foreign workers, women inprostitution, and irregular migrants – continued to impair thegovernment’s ability to ensure that trafficking victims wererecognized and treated in accordance with international law.Authorities sometimes filed criminal charges against childrenin prostitution without showing that they had attempted toidentify any trafficking victims among them. The governmentpublicly recognized the need to create victim identificationguidelines and created a task force to do so. In 2011, thegovernment identified three foreign female sex traffickingvictims. The social services agency provided the victimswith hotel accommodation and short-term psychologicalassistance during the brief period of time they were in Malta.The government funded the victims’ return to their homecountry at their request but did not coordinate with NGOs toensure that their return was safe. The government continuedto assign responsibility for the care of trafficking victims andprovide funding to Appogg, a government social servicesagency with some private participation. Under the terms ofa memorandum of understanding, Appogg was empoweredto provide shelter, psychological care, and other services toany identified victims of trafficking. Appogg cared for onepotential trafficking victim in its 16-bed mixed-use shelter.The government also provided long-term medical care andrehabilitation to another trafficking victim evacuated fromLibya. During the previous year, Appogg cared for no victimsof trafficking. The government entered into a contract withan international organization for anti-trafficking protectionwork. The government did not establish any partnershipswith international NGOs or organizations in relevant sourcecountries to ensure the safe and voluntary return of foreignvictims. There were no reports of any trafficking victimsavailing themselves of the government’s 60-day “reflectionperiod,” during which authorities would provide them shelterand services while they reflected on their options as providedunder Maltese law. Victims who assisted police in prosecutingtrafficking cases are entitled in theory to residence permits,but the government did not issue any such permits to victimsduring the year. The government took action to inspect bothrisky workplaces and strip clubs to detect illegal work andpotential trafficking cases.PreventionThe government made progress in advancing anti-traffickingprevention efforts. In October 2011, it publicized its first anti-trafficking national action plan. The action plan contemplatesthat the government train the judiciary, law enforcement, andsocial services on trafficking, create guidelines for victimidentification, complete a study on victims’ needs, andconduct awareness raising activities among vulnerable groups,including irregular migrants. The government allocatedsignificant funds toward the action plan – the equivalentof approximately $132,000 in 2011 and the equivalent ofapproximately $198,000 in 2012. In no prior year has thegovernment assigned a line-item budget for trafficking. Thegovernment enhanced transparency by issuing quarterlyreports about its anti-trafficking activities. The government’santi-trafficking monitoring board brought together key actorsfrom relevant agencies, such as the Office of the Prime Minister,the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Justice and HomeAffairs, and the police commissioner. The government alsobegan convening the stakeholder task force of working-level contacts responsible for anti-trafficking activities. Thegovernment also established relationships with certain civilsociety organizations to strengthen anti-trafficking efforts.NGOs were specifically included in the anti-trafficking actionplan to identify trafficking victims and assist in their care. Thegovernment conducted no formal anti-trafficking awarenesscampaigns during the year, although government officials diddiscuss trafficking in persons openly and high-level officialstook part in a top-rated television interview program on thesubject of human trafficking in October 2011. The Appoggsocial services agency continued to run a social services hotlinethat could receive calls about human trafficking but did notreceive any trafficking-related calls on the hotline during thereporting period. NGOs raised concerns that the hotline wasnot well-publicized as a mechanism through which individualscould report cases of trafficking. The government did not reporttaking any specific measures to reduce the participation ofMaltese nationals in child sex tourism abroad.MARSHALL ISLANDS (Tier 2)The Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI) is a destinationcountry for women subjected to sex trafficking. Foreign womenare reportedly forced into prostitution in bars frequented bycrew members of Chinese and other foreign fishing vessels;some Chinese women were recruited with the promise oflegitimate work, and after having paid large sums of moneyin recruitment fees, forced into prostitution in the MarshallIslands. Little data on human trafficking in the MarshallIslands are available, as the government has not made effortsto identify victims proactively, especially among vulnerablepopulations such as foreign and local women in prostitutionand foreign men on fishing vessels in Marshallese waters.The government has not conducted any inquiries, studies, orsurveys on human trafficking.The Government of the Marshall Islands does not fully complywith the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking;however, it is making significant efforts to do so. During theyear, the government obtained two convictions in the country’sfirst human trafficking cases, and it enacted legislationspecifically prohibiting human trafficking. However, thegovernment did not take steps to identify and protect victimsof sex trafficking proactively or educate the public abouthuman trafficking. The government devotes few resourcesto addressing human trafficking.
MAURITANIA243Recommendations for the Marshall Islands: Train lawenforcement and judicial officials to implement new anti-trafficking laws; increase efforts to investigate, prosecute, andpunish trafficking offenders and apply stringent sentences toconvicted offenders; take steps to prosecute public officialswhen there is evidence they are complicit in traffickingactivities or hindering ongoing trafficking prosecutions; workwith NGOs and international organizations to provideprotective services to victims; make efforts to study humantrafficking in the country and identify victims amongvulnerable populations, such as women in prostitution, andforeign workers, including foreign fishermen; adopt proactiveprocedures to identify victims of trafficking among vulnerablegroups, such as foreign workers and women in prostitution;develop and conduct anti-trafficking information andeducation campaigns; and accede to the 2000 UN TIP Protocol.ProsecutionThe Government of the Marshall Islands increased its effortsto investigate and prosecute trafficking offenses during thereporting period. In September 2011, the government enactedits first legislation specifically prohibiting trafficking in persons,within a package of revisions to the country’s criminal code.Article 251 of the revised code, which came into effect inOctober 2011, defines trafficking and prescribes penaltiesof up to 35 months’ imprisonment and a $5,000 fine for thetrafficking of adults and up to 10 years’ imprisonment anda $10,000 fine for the trafficking of children. The penaltiesfor the trafficking of children are sufficiently stringent, butthe penalties for trafficking adults are not, and neitherpenalty is commensurate with those prescribed for otherserious crimes, such as rape. A specific section of Article 251criminalizes the exploitation of people not legally entitled towork, including through confiscating such workers’ passportsor travel documents, disclosing the circumstances of theiremployment to any person, or interfering with workers’ accessto privacy and freedom of movement. Article 251 also includesupdated provisions against promoting prostitution, replacingthe Prostitution Act, which was used to prosecute two casesduring the year. During the year, authorities initiated onenew sex trafficking prosecution and concluded one whichremained pending at the close of the previous year; both cases,prosecuted under the country’s now-repealed anti-prostitutionlaw, involved Chinese traffickers who lured women to the RMIfrom China on the promise of legitimate employment andsubsequently forced them into prostitution. The governmentobtained convictions in both cases – the first convictions forhuman trafficking offenses in the RMI – despite initial concernsthat senior officials might attempt to interfere in the trials.The first convicted trafficker received an insufficient sentenceof a one-year house arrest and a fine; she was permitted toleave the country to visit family after submitting a bond to thegovernment and is currently serving her sentence in the RMI.The second offender was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment,the maximum allowed under the law, and a fine, but fouryears of the sentence were suspended; due to a lack of prisonfacilities for women, she is currently serving her sentence ashouse arrest. The government did not provide any trainingfor law enforcement or other officials on the provisions of thenew legislation or how to recognize, investigate, and prosecuteinstances of trafficking. The government did not investigate,prosecute, or convict any public officials for trafficking ortrafficking-related offenses during the reporting period. Thegovernment also did not provide training to law enforcementor court personnel on identifying trafficking victims andprosecuting trafficking offenders.ProtectionThe Government of the Marshall Islands made few efforts toensure trafficking victims’ access to protective services duringthe year. Law enforcement and social services personneldo not have systematic procedures to identify victims oftrafficking proactively among high-risk populations withwhom they come in contact; this could have resulted insome victims being punished for acts committed as a resultof being trafficked. No specialized services were available totrafficking victims. Two foreign victims identified themselvesto authorities with complaints of mistreatment. Both victims,in addition to two victims identified during the previous year,assisted authorities in the investigation and prosecution oftheir cases. The government does not have any mechanismsin place to ensure that trafficking victims receive access tolegal, medical, or psychological services, and it did not makeefforts to identify or reach out to international organizations orcommunity groups to provide such assistance. The governmentdid not provide financial assistance to repatriate victims totheir home countries. The government does not provide legalalternatives to the removal of victims to countries where theymay face hardship or retribution.PreventionThe government made negligible efforts to prevent traffickingduring the year. It did not conduct any public campaigns ortake other steps to raise public awareness about the dangersof trafficking. The government did not provide general humantrafficking awareness training or guidelines to governmentemployees, nor did it take steps to reduce the demand forcommercial sex acts. The lack of explicit labor rights affordedto all workers in the Marshall Islands’ labor code increasesthe vulnerability to forced labor. The RMI is not a party tothe 2000 UN TIP Protocol.MAURITANIA(Tier 2 Watch List)Mauritania is a source, transit, and destination country forwomen, men, and children subjected to conditions of forcedlabor and sex trafficking. Adults and children from traditionalslave castes are subjected to slavery-related practices rootedin ancestral master-slave relationships. Reliable data onthe total number of slaves do not exist, but according tothe estimate of a respected Mauritanian NGO, slavery mayaffect up to 20 percent of the population in both rural andurban settings. Held for generations by slave-holding families,persons subjected to slavery are forced to work without pay ascattle herders and domestic servants. Some boys from withinMauritania and other West African countries who study at
244MAURITANIAKoranic schools – referred to as talibes – are subsequentlysubjected to forced begging by corrupt religious teachersknown as marabouts. Mauritanian girls as well as girls fromMali, Senegal, The Gambia, and other West African countriesare forced into domestic servitude. Mauritanian women andgirls are forced into prostitution in the country or transportedto countries in the Middle East for the same purpose. Men fromMiddle Eastern countries use legally contracted “temporarymarriages” as a means to sexually exploit young girls andwomen in Mauritania.The Government of Mauritania does not fully comply withthe minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking, butit is making efforts to do so. The government acknowledgesthat some forms of trafficking are a problem in the countryand, during the year, its multi-stakeholder body met seventimes to coordinate government and NGO activities relatedto child trafficking, child smuggling, and child labor. For thefirst time in its history, in November 2011, the governmentsuccessfully prosecuted and punished a slave-master underits 2007 anti-slavery law. In partnership with local NGOs, thegovernment rescued four child trafficking victims during theyear. In early 2011, the parliament approved a constitutionalprovision criminalizing slavery and all forms of exploitation,equating them to crimes against humanity. In August, thegovernment also enacted a new statute to strengthen thelabor code governing the employment of domestic workersin private households. Despite these efforts, investigationsand prosecutions remained minimal and protective servicesfor victims were inadequate.Recommendations for Mauritania: Increase efforts toinvestigate and prosecute trafficking offenses, addressing alltypes of trafficking of adults as well as children, and to convictand punish offenders using the 2003 Law Against Traffickingin Persons and the 2007 Anti-Slavery Law; ensure that effortsto hold parents criminally liable for their involvement insending their children away from home are accompanied byefforts to prosecute and convict the traffickers who forcechildren into servitude; train law enforcement personnel toidentify trafficking victims among vulnerable populations,such as women in prostitution and those in traditional slavery,and refer them to protective services; consider amending Law2007-048, which outlaws slavery, to allow civil societyorganizations to file complaints on behalf of slaves; providesupport for and access to legal assistance for adult and childtrafficking victims; increase efforts to coordinate with NGOsto arrange protective services for trafficking victims; withinput from civil society representatives, develop a plan toprovide economic resources – financial or property – toempower members of traditional slave castes to liveindependently; ensure that the Program to Eradicate theEffects of Slavery functions and provides financialcompensation to previous slaves; and increase efforts to raisepublic awareness about trafficking, including traditionalservitude.ProsecutionThe Government of Mauritania increased its anti-traffickinglaw enforcement efforts during the reporting period. All formsof trafficking, except hereditary slavery, are prohibited by the2003 Law Against Trafficking in Persons, which prescribespenalties of five to 10 years’ imprisonment for violations. Thesepenalties are sufficiently stringent and exceed those prescribedfor rape. Slavery, including hereditary slavery, is prohibitedby Law 2007-048, which was enacted in September 2007.The law defines slavery and prescribes a sufficiently stringentpenalty of five to 10 years’ imprisonment for violations. Thelaw’s effectiveness remains impaired by its requirement thatslaves file a legal complaint before prosecution can be pursuedas well as by its barring of NGOs from filing complaintson behalf of slaves. Many slaves are illiterate and unableto complete the paperwork involved in filing a criminal orcivil complaint. The government provided no support forprograms to assist victims in filing complaints on slavery.In April 2011, the government prosecuted two alleged slave-masters for enslaving a child. Although the court acquitted thedefendants, the case set a precedent, as it was the first time the2007 anti-slavery law was specifically invoked. In November2011, the government successfully prosecuted six individualsfor enslaving two children and convicted a slave-master, hissiblings, and the mother of enslaved 11- and 14-year-old boysfor slavery offenses under the 2007 anti-slavery law. Theslave-master received a sentence of two years’ imprisonment,while his four siblings and the children’s mother were giventwo two-year suspended sentences and fines ranging from theequivalent of $1,724 to $345, respectively, for their complicity.The judge ordered the slave-master to pay the victims theequivalent of $3,725. In partnership with UNICEF, 213 lawenforcement officials and NGOs participated in trainingthat covered anti-trafficking. As a result of complaints filedby NGOs and parents, trafficking victims who had sufferedviolence and physical abuse were referred to the SpecialPolice Brigade for Minors. NGOs reported that few of thesecases resulted in prosecutions. Victims and their employersgenerally resolved grievances via informal agreements outof court. The government did not report any investigationsor prosecutions of government officials for complicity intrafficking, although civil society representatives argue thatjudicial failure to pay due attention to slavery cases broughtto their attention amounts to tacit complicity.ProtectionThe Government of Mauritania demonstrated modest efforts toprotect victims of human trafficking, including those exploitedin traditional slavery. NGOs reported that the governmentremoved four children from slavery in 2011 as well as 1,678child domestic workers and childcare providers – some ofwhom may have been victims of trafficking – from exploitativehouseholds. Six former slave children were returned to theirfamilies and 182 of the 1,678 rescued child domestic workerswere enrolled in school or training centers, with the remainderreturned to their families. The Ministry of Social Affairs,Childhood, and the Family continued to operate two NationalCenters for the Protection and Social Integration of Childrenand, in September 2011, opened a third center in a major townin the interior. However, NGOs note that these centers arenot fully functional due to insufficient funding, and it is notclear how many of the children they assisted were traffickingvictims. During the reporting period, NGOs provided themajority of protection services to trafficking victims. The
MAURITIUS245government continued to take no steps to identify traffickingvictims among vulnerable populations. Illegal migrantswere detained and placed in the Migrant Detention Centerat Nouadhibou pending their expulsion from the country,and women suspected of prostitution were often jailed. Thegovernment also did not encourage victims to assist in theinvestigation and prosecution of human trafficking cases,and no victims filed civil suits against trafficking offenders.PreventionThe Government of Mauritania made limited efforts to raiseawareness of trafficking during the year. In January 2012, theCommissariat for Human Rights, Humanitarian Action, andRelations with Civil Society, a government agency responsiblefor coordinating Mauritania’s international commitments withits domestic human rights policy, held a two-day workshop incooperation with the UN to create a road map for Mauritania’santi-trafficking efforts. The government broadcast a televiseddebate on slavery in April 2011 with representatives fromlocal NGOs, government officials, and the country’s humanrights ombudsman. In August 2011, Mauritania adopted anew labor statute to update and strengthen regulation ofthe employment of domestic workers by private households,including replacing provisions governing the treatment ofhousehold employees and reinforcing their rights vis-a-visemployers for proper treatment, pay, and work conditions. TheTTTE (Traite, Traffic, et Travail des Enfants), the government’smulti-stakeholder body addressing trafficking in persons,organized a workshop in January 2012 to present a draft lawto representative government agencies on the worst forms ofchild labor and strengthening child protection. Through itschild protection centers, the government provided care tochildren vulnerable to forced labor and helped reintegrateapproximately 2,000 children back into public school. Thegovernment’s the equivalent of $3.4 million Program toEradicate the Effects of Slavery (PESE) did not functionduring the reporting period after the former human rightscommissioner was arrested in 2010 and the commissariat’sfinancial director and the PESE coordinator were arrested oncorruption charges in May 2011. The government made noeffort to reduce the demand for forced labor or commercialsex acts.MAURITIUS (Tier 1)Mauritius is a source country for children and, to a muchlesser extent, men and women subjected to sex traffickingprimarily, but also to forced labor. Secondary school-agegirls and, in fewer numbers, younger girls from all areas ofthe country, including from Rodrigues Island, are inducedinto prostitution, often by their peers, family members, or bybusinessmen offering other forms of employment. Girls arealso sometimes sold into prostitution by a family member orforced into the sex trade in exchange for food and shelter. Taxidrivers provide transportation and introductions for both thegirls and the clients. Girls and boys whose mothers engagein prostitution are reportedly vulnerable to being forced intoprostitution at a young age. Some women addicted to drugsare forced into prostitution by their boyfriends, who act astheir pimps. In recent years, small numbers of Mauritianadults have been identified as trafficking victims in the UnitedKingdom, Belgium, and Canada. Mauritius’s manufacturingand construction sectors employ approximately 30,000 foreignmigrant workers from India, China, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, andMadagascar. Although there have been no confirmed cases todate of workers subjected to conditions of forced labor withinMauritius, some migrant workers have reported passportconfiscation, underpayment of wages, substandard livingconditions, and threats of deportation. In 2011, Cambodianmen were identified as victims of forced labor on a Thai-flagged fishing boat in Mauritius’s territorial waters. Malagasywomen reportedly transit Mauritius en route to employment asdomestic workers in Lebanon, where some were subsequentlysubjected to conditions of forced labor.The Government of Mauritius fully complies with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking.Mauritius sustained its efforts to identify, investigate, andprosecute human trafficking offenses during the reportingperiod. In 2011, the government investigated 14 cases ofchild trafficking and convicted six trafficking offenders, anincrease over the previous year. The government augmentedits funding for victim services, identified and cared for sevenvictims of child prostitution, and rescued and repatriated 24Cambodian forced labor victims. The Mauritius police forcemaintained its anti-trafficking training programs for policeofficers and continued its awareness campaigns in schools andvillages. The government’s efforts to communicate with andcoordinate among all relevant ministries, however, remainedlacking, leading to inconsistent provision of protective andinvestigative services to trafficking victims. Although thegovernment sought to address proactively the exploitation ofchildren in prostitution, it made no similar effort to investigateor address the forced prostitution of women.Recommendations for Mauritius: Utilize anti-traffickinglegislation to investigate and prosecute trafficking offensesand convict and punish trafficking offenders, including incases involving adult women exploited in forced prostitution;designate an official coordinating body or mechanism tofacilitate improved anti-trafficking communication andcoordination among the relevant ministries, law enforcemententities, working groups, and NGOs; establish procedures toguide officials in the proactive identification of victims oftrafficking among at-risk populations; provide increasedfunding and support to all branches of the Minors Brigade inthe investigation of human trafficking cases; provide anti-trafficking training to personnel of the police prosecutionoffice to improve the timeliness in deciding whether toprosecute trafficking cases; and ensure that all cases of childrenin prostitution identified by the Ministry of Gender Equality,Child Development, and Family Welfare’s (MOGE) ChildDevelopment Unit (CDU) are referred to the police forinvestigation.ProsecutionThe Mauritian government augmented its anti-trafficking lawenforcement efforts during the reporting period, investigatingan increased number of child trafficking cases and achieving
246MAURITIUSsix convictions, compared with none in 2010. The Combatingof Trafficking in Persons Act of 2009 prohibits all forms oftrafficking of adults and children and prescribes penaltiesof up to 15 years’ imprisonment for convicted offenders. Inaddition, the Child Protection Act of 2005 prohibits all formsof child trafficking and prescribes punishment of up to 15 years’imprisonment; the Judicial Provisions Act of 2008 increasedthe maximum prescribed punishment for child traffickingoffenses to 30 years’ imprisonment. All of the aforementionedpenalties are sufficiently stringent and commensurate withthose prescribed for other serious crimes, such as rape.From arrest to sentencing of offenders, cases of child traffickingtypically took 18 to 24 months to resolve; a lack of anti-trafficking training among officials in the police prosecutionoffice often created backlogs when determining whetherto prosecute a trafficking case. The MOGE reported thegovernment’s investigation of 14 cases of child trafficking in2011. The Mauritian police reported its investigation of 12child sex trafficking cases involving 15 suspects during thereporting period, including one case involving three suspectsin early 2012, and its referral of 11 cases to the director ofpublic prosecution for trial in 2011. The government securedsix convictions in 2011 under Article 14-1 (Causing a child tobe sexually abused) of the Child Protection Act and Articles253 (Procuring prostitutes) and 90 (Brothel keeping) of theCriminal Code Amendment Act of 1998, with punishmentsranging from small fines to 10 years’ imprisonment with hardlabor; one convicted trafficking offender received a suspendedsentence pending the completion of 250 hours of communityservice. In July 2011, the government convicted one man andone woman under Article 14-1(c) of the Child ProtectionAct for causing a child to engage in prostitution, sentencingthem to 10 years’ imprisonment with hard labor. The MinorsBrigade of the Mauritian police force maintained a databaseof all trafficking incidents involving minors. A local NGOprovided training for 70 government officials on commercialsexual exploitation of children and the police training schoolprovided training to 300 new police recruits on traffickingin persons. There was no evidence of government officials’involvement in human trafficking during the reporting period.ProtectionThe government sustained protection of child traffickingvictims during the reporting period and dedicated significantfinancial resources to expanding existing assistance options.The Minors Brigade systematically referred all cases ofidentified children in prostitution to the CDU for assistance.CDU officials regularly referred abused and exploited childrento organizations running multi-purpose shelters for care. Thegovernment also encouraged the placement of traffickingvictims in foster homes for long-term shelter. Victims receivedmedical and psychological assistance regardless of whetherthey resided in a shelter, in foster care, or with relatives. In2011, the MOGE provided the equivalent of $89,965 to fundthe operation of an NGO-run drop-in center for sexuallyabused children – a 246 percent increase over 2010 funding– that provided counseling to girls engaged in prostitutionand advertised its services through a toll-free number andcommunity outreach. The center counseled seven victims ofchild prostitution during the reporting period. In 2011, theMOGE broke ground on the construction of a residentialcenter at Grande Riviere North West – at a cost equivalent to$804,195 – to provide care for victims of child prostitution;it is expected to be operational by June 2012.In July 2011, Mauritian maritime authorities intercepted aThai-flagged fishing vessel and rescued 24 Cambodian males,including one child, who claimed to be working in conditionsof forced labor. Although the government did not designatethe 24 Cambodians as victims of human trafficking or offerthem shelter, it facilitated IOM’s interviewing of the victimsand the Mauritius Immigration Office transported the victimsto and provided them assistance at the airport when they wererepatriated to Cambodia in the November 2011. Althoughthe government continued to operate a 24-hour hotline forreporting cases of sexual abuse, it received no calls regardingcases of child prostitution or other forms of trafficking in2011. The government continued to employ a formal protocolon the provision of assistance to all victims of sexual abuse;minors victimized in prostitution were accompanied to thehospital by a child welfare officer, and police worked inconjunction with this officer to obtain statements from thechildren. Medical treatment and psychological support werereadily available at public clinics and NGO-run centers inMauritius. The government encouraged victims’ assistancein the investigation and prosecution of trafficking crimes,and ensured that identified victims were not incarceratedinappropriately, fined, or otherwise penalized solely forunlawful acts committed as a direct result of being trafficked.PreventionThe government made notable efforts to prevent the sextrafficking of children and reduce the demand for commercialsex acts during the year. Communication and coordinationamong the relevant government ministries, however, wasinsufficient and hindered effective national partnerships.The police Family Protection Unit and the Minors Brigadecontinued their widespread public awareness campaigns onchild abuse and child rights at schools and community centersthat included information on the dangers and consequencesof engaging in prostitution. The campaign targeted at-riskregions in the east and south coasts of the island and reached38,979 persons in 2011, including parents, primary schoolchildren, high school students, and civil society members.Members of police units also discussed these topics on threeradio programs. Law enforcement and child welfare officialsconducted surveillance at bus stops, nightclubs, gaming houses,and other places frequented by children to identify and interactwith students who were at a high risk of sex trafficking. Inorder to prevent potential child trafficking between mainlandMauritius and Rodrigues Island, the Passport and ImmigrationOffice required children under the age of 18 to carry a traveldocument issued by their local police station when travelingbetween the two islands.The Ministry of Tourism, Leisure, and ExternalCommunications sustained its distribution of pamphlets tohotels and tour operators regarding the responsibility of thetourism sector to combat child sex trafficking. Inspectionsconducted by the Ministry of Labor’s 30 labor officers in 2011yielded no cases of forced labor or exploitative child labor.The Ministry of Labor’s Special Migrant Unit was responsiblefor vetting contracts, inspecting workplaces, investigatingclaims of poor working conditions, and following up onworker complaints; it did not provide specific informationregarding corrective actions, such as the issuing of noticesor fines, taken as a result of such inspections during thereporting period. The unit employed interpreters to facilitatecommunication between the ministry and foreign workers ofevery nationality employed in Mauritius. The Occupational
MEXICO247Safety and Health (Employees’ Lodging Accommodation)Regulations of 2011 establish a minimum standard for lodgingand other living conditions provided to migrant workers. In2011, the government established a lodging accommodationcommittee to examine companies’ applications for lodgingpermits, as well as a lodging accommodation unit – comprisedof officials from the Ministries of Labor and Health and the FireServices Department – to enforce the regulations. Correctiveactions taken by these entities during the reporting period,if any, are unknown. Several Mauritian statutes, includingthe anti-trafficking act, the Child Protection Act, and theEmployment Rights Act of 2008 make provision for criminalpunishment for local recruitment agencies who engage inrecruitment of workers using fraudulent or deceptive offers;the government did not investigate or shut down any localor foreign recruitment agencies suspected of fraudulentoperations in 2011.MEXICO (Tier 2)Mexico is a large source, transit, and destination country formen, women, and children subjected to sex trafficking andforced labor. Groups considered most vulnerable to humantrafficking in Mexico include women, children, indigenouspersons, persons with mental and physical disablilitys, andundocumented migrants. Mexican women and children areexploited in sex trafficking within Mexico and the United States,lured by fraudulent employment opportunities or deceptiveoffers of romantic relationships. Mexican men, women, andchildren also are subjected to conditions of forced labor inagriculture, domestic service, construction, and street begging,in both the United States and Mexico. The vast majority offoreign victims in forced labor and sexual servitude in Mexicoare from Central and South America, particularly Guatemala,Honduras, and El Salvador. However, trafficking victims fromthe Caribbean, Eastern Europe, Asia, and Africa have also beenidentified in Mexico, some en route to the United States. Therewere continued reports from civil society organizations thatorganized criminal groups coerced children and migrants intoprostitution and to work as hit men, lookouts, and drug mules.Central American men, women, and children, especiallyGuatemalans, are subjected to forced labor in southern Mexico,particularly in agriculture, domestic servitude, street vending,and forced begging. Child sex tourism persisted in Mexico,especially in tourist areas such as Acapulco, Puerto Vallarta,and Cancun, and in northern border cities like Tijuana andCiudad Juarez. Many child sex tourists are from the UnitedStates, Canada, and Western Europe, though some are Mexicancitizens. In some parts of the country, threats of violence fromcriminal organizations impede the ability of the governmentand civil society to combat trafficking effectively.The Government of Mexico does not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however,it is making significant efforts to do so. During the reportingperiod, Mexican authorities passed constitutional reformson trafficking, strengthened training and awareness efforts,and significantly increased trafficking convictions at boththe federal and state level, convicting at least 14 traffickingoffenders. Given the magnitude of Mexico’s trafficking problem,however, the number of human trafficking investigations,prosecutions, convictions, and sentences remained low,and government funding for victim services remainedinadequate. Victim identification and interagency coordinationremained uneven. While Mexican officials recognize humantrafficking as a serious problem, NGOs and governmentrepresentatives report that some government officials tolerateand are sometimes complicit in trafficking, undermininganti-trafficking efforts.Recommendations for Mexico: Continue to investigate andprosecute trafficking offenses and convict and punishtrafficking offenders at both the federal and state level,including for forced labor crimes; increase efforts to holdpublic officials who are complicit in trafficking accountablethrough prosecution and conviction; increase funding forspecialized victim services and shelters and ensure that victimsof all forms of trafficking receive adequate protection; continueto implement the National Program to Prevent and CombatTrafficking in Persons and consider increasing dedicatedfunding for the program; consider amending the current lawto strengthen the legal framework; increase collaborationwith NGOs to provide victim care; enhance formal proceduresto identify trafficking victims among vulnerable populations,such as people in prostitution and undocumented migrants;improve coordination mechanisms between federal, state,and local authorities; increase the ability of regional and statecoalitions and specialized units to more effectively respondto human trafficking cases through increased funding andstaff dedicated to state-level efforts; improve data collectionefforts; ensure effective protection for witnesses and victimstestifying against traffickers; and increase training on humantrafficking and victim identification and treatment for lawenforcement officers, immigration officials, labor inspectors,prosecutors, judges, social workers, and other governmentemployees.ProsecutionThe Government of Mexico sustained its anti-trafficking lawenforcement efforts during the reporting period; convictionsof sex trafficking offenders increased, though the number ofconvictions remained low in comparison with the numberof cases investigated. There were no reported convictionsfor forced labor. Mexico’s 2007 federal anti-trafficking lawprohibits all forms of human trafficking, prescribing penaltiesof six to 18 years’ imprisonment. The law includes a clausethat can render consent of victims over the age of 18 relevant,even if threats, abduction or fraud were used, making theprosecution of traffickers more difficult when the victimmay have originally consented to an activity. In April 2011,the government enacted reforms raising trafficking to thelevel of a serious crime, allowing for preventive detention ofsuspected traffickers, as well as establishing enhanced victimidentity protections.In Mexico’s federal system, state governments investigateand prosecute trafficking cases that occur wholly withinthe country, except in cases that involve organized crime,transnational trafficking, government officials, and casesoccurring on federally-administered territory. All 32 Mexican
248MEXICOstates have passed some anti-trafficking penal code reforms,though these reforms varied in content and effectiveness,and not all of the reforms outlawed all forms of trafficking.Eighteen states have specific state trafficking laws, and threehave achieved convictions under these laws. Inconsistenciesamong state penal codes and laws on human traffickingcaused confusion among law enforcement and problemsamong inter-state prosecutions.The federal police maintained a small unit to investigatehuman trafficking and smuggling crimes, and some statesalso had law enforcement units that investigated traffickingcrimes, specifically sex trafficking. The Attorney General’sSpecial Prosecutor’s Office for Violence Against Women andTrafficking in Persons (FEVIMTRA) handles federal traffickingcases involving three or fewer suspects, while the AttorneyGeneral’s Office of the Special Prosecutor for Organized Crime(SIEDO) investigates cases with more than three suspects.Law enforcement coordination between different governmententities and data collection on human trafficking efforts wereweak. Officials and NGOs reported that some investigationsand prosecutions were delayed while authorities determinedwhich prosecutors had jurisdiction, to the detriment of boththe criminal case and the victim. Resources and staff for thesededicated units remained limited. Mexican authorities at thefederal and state levels convicted a total of 14 sex traffickersduring the year. There were no reported convictions for forcedlabor. In 2011 FEVIMTRA investigated 67 trafficking cases:it did not report how many prosecutions were initiated, anddid not convict or sentence any traffickers. In 2011, SIEDOachieved its first convictions for trafficking; four sex traffickingoffenders received sentences ranging from 14.5 to 16.5 years’imprisonment, while other traffickers involved in the crimewere convicted in the United States. The Mexico City AttorneyGeneral’s Office convicted four trafficking offenders, whosesentences ranged from six to 12 years’ imprisonment. Severalstates also prosecuted human trafficking cases; authorities inPuebla reported three convictions, while Chiapas reported twoand Yucatan reported one, with sentences ranging between10and 14 years’ imprisonment. This represents an increase fromthe previous year, when FEVIMTRA convicted one traffickerand Mexico City prosecutors achieved four convictions.NGOs, members of the government, and other observerscontinued to report that trafficking-related corruption amongpublic officials, especially local law enforcement, judicial,and immigration officials, was a significant concern. Someofficials reportedly accepted or extorted bribes, includingin the form of sexual services, falsified victims’ identitydocuments, discouraged trafficking victims from reportingtheir crimes, solicited sex from trafficking victims, or failed toreport child prostitution and other human trafficking activityin commercial sex locations. Puebla prosecutors reportedinvestigating four officials for suspected trafficking crimes,but there were no reported prosecutions or convictions ofpublic officials for trafficking complicity in 2011.NGOs noted that some public officials in Mexico did notadequately distinguish between alien smuggling, prostitution,and human trafficking offenses and that many officials arenot familiar with trafficking laws. They also reported thatsome officials threatened to prosecute trafficking victimsas accomplices in order to force them to denounce theirtraffickers. Some federal government agencies provided theirown employees with anti-trafficking training and cross-trained officials in other agencies, often in partnership withNGOs, international organizations, and foreign governments,and FEVIMTRA reported training hundreds of officials ontrafficking in 2011. The Mexican federal government continuedto partner with the U.S. government on cross-border traffickinginvestigations.ProtectionThe Mexican government carried out limited efforts to identifyand assist trafficking victims in 2011, with the majority ofservices available only to female sex trafficking victims. Thegovernment continued to work in cooperation with NGOs,international organizations, and foreign governments toprovide victim care, relying on these partners to operate or fundthe bulk of specialized assistance and services for traffickingvictims. Mexican immigration agents continued to implementa system for identifying potential trafficking victims andreferring these victims to care providers, such as NGOs. SomeNGOs, however, were critical of the government’s ability toidentify accurately trafficking victims, and most states lackedformal procedures for identifying trafficking victims amongother vulnerable populations, such as migrant workers andpeople in prostitution. There were no comprehensive statisticsavailable on the number of trafficking victims identified duringthe year; FEVIMTRA reported identifying 89 victims in 2011,while the National Institute for Migration (INM) reportedidentifying 29, and authorities in Baja, California and MexicoCity identified 13 and 29 victims respectively. This representsa decrease from 2010, when authorities reported identifyingat least 259 victims. INM and the National Human RightsCommission (CNDH) both had referral mechanisms fortrafficking victims, though officials’ ability to refer Mexicanvictims to care services varied in different parts of the country.In September 2011, the president established a new agency,Provictima, to assist victims of all crimes, and shifted fundingand facilities from other government agencies, includingFEVIMTRA, to support it. Provictima provides medical andpsychological support, as well as information and assistanceduring legal processes, through 14 help centers across thecountry, but does not provide shelter. Some interlocutorsnoted that the lack of clarity regarding the division ofresponsibilities between FEVIMTRA and Provictima, as wellas the lack of organizational structure within the new agency,could negatively impact the quality of services provided totrafficking victims. The lack of Provictima centers in high-crime areas such as cities along the northern border hinderedprovision of services.FEVIMTRA continued to operate a high-security shelter inMexico City dedicated to female victims of sex traffickingand other violence including kidnapping, as well as womenwhose family members had disappeared or been murdered.Victims were not allowed to leave the shelter unaccompanied;according to the government, this was due to safety concerns.Some NGOs reported that the shelter housed victims for up tothree months. This shelter coordinated medical, psychological,and legal services for 97 individuals during the year: it isunclear how many of these were trafficking victims. Mexico’ssocial welfare agency maintained general shelters for childrenunder the age of 13 who are victims of violence, thoughstatistics were not maintained on how many trafficking victimswere housed in these shelters during the reporting period.The government continued to support a national network ofshelters and emergency attention centers for female victimsof violence, but few of these shelters offered specialized care
MICRONESIA,FEDERATEDSTATESOF249for trafficking victims. Some victims received services atshelters that were operated and funded by NGOs, internationalorganizations, and religious groups, and officials referredsome victims to these shelters during the reporting period.According to NGOs, however, victim services in some regionsof the country remained inadequate in light of the significantnumber of trafficking victims. Furthermore, some shelters formigrants and domestic abuse victims were reportedly reluctantto house trafficking victims due to fear of retribution fromorganized crime. Authorities arrested and opened an ongoinginvestigation of the director of a domestic violence shelterin Ciudad Juarez in October 2011 that had received somestate funding. Authorities charged the director with humantrafficking, illegal detention, and sexual abuse of womenand girls reportedly held against their will in the shelter. Thegovernment did not provide adequate shelter services for malevictims. Mexican consulates in the United States identifiedand assisted an unknown number of victims during the year,and authorities provided limited services to some repatriatedMexican trafficking victims.Although authorities encouraged victims to assist in traffickinginvestigations and prosecutions, many victims in Mexicowere afraid to identify themselves or seek legal remediesdue to their fears of retribution from trafficking offendersor lack of trust in authorities. Some civil society groupsreported that local authorities threatened to arrest victimsas accomplices if they refused to testify against their traffickers.Traditionally, prosecutions of human trafficking offendersin Mexico have relied almost entirely on victim or witnesstestimony. Trafficking victims and witnesses continuedto have little incentive to participate in the legal process,based on the limited numbers of trafficking convictionsand sentences and on the fact that no trafficking victim wasawarded compensation for damages. Furthermore, manyvictims feared for their safety, since the witness protectionprogram in Mexico remained nascent and did not providesufficient protection. Foreign trafficking victims could receiverefugee status, and an INM directive required immigrationofficials to offer foreign victims the option to stay in thecountry, independent of any decision to testify against theirtraffickers. However, NGOs and international organizationsreported these legal alternatives to deportation were often notprovided in practice; they noted that some officials handedidentified victims over to INM for deportation due to theirlack of legal status or that victims were not identified assuch and housed in INM detention centers and subsequentlydeported. Many foreign trafficking victims opted to return totheir countries of origin after giving testimony, in some casesdue to a lack of adequate shelter or information about theirrights. INM reported that 11 victims that they identified in 2011received legal residency in Mexico, while 13 were repatriatedand five cases were ongoing. However, it was unclear how manyof the 98 foreign victims identified by INM and FEVIMTRA in2010 – whose application for residency remained pending inearly 2011 – were allowed to remain in the country.PreventionFederal and state governments sustained trafficking preventionefforts last year. An inter-agency commission on traffickingcoordinated federal government efforts. The commission wasresponsible for implementing the National Program to Preventand Combat Trafficking; the government reduced the budgetfor the National Program to Prevent and Combat Trafficking tothe equivalent of $313,000 from the equivalent of $4.2 millionfor budgetary reasons. NGOs and international organizationscriticized authorities for the reduction and lamented thelack of information on the program’s implementation. Thegovernment engaged in a variety of awareness-raising activitiesusing radio and television commercials, as well as othermultimedia efforts. Some states established or maintainedstate-level anti-trafficking committees. CNDH also maintainedregional partnerships with NGO and government actors in13 states, and reported training over 20,000 individuals ontrafficking in 2011, including officials, tourism operators,and transportation companies. Authorities raised awarenessof child sex tourism and reported investigating some cases;however, the government reported no prosecutions orconvictions of child sex tourists, and some NGOs allegedthat some corrupt local officials allowed commercial sexualexploitation of children to occur. There were no reportedefforts to reduce the demand for forced labor or to punishlabor recruiters or brokers complicit in human trafficking.MICRONESIA, FEDERATEDSTATES OF (Tier 2 Watch List)The Federated States of Micronesia (FSM) is a source and, to alimited extent, a destination country for women subjected tosex trafficking. Some reports suggest FSM women are recruitedwith promises of well-paying jobs in the United States andits territories and are subsequently forced into prostitution orlabor upon arrival. The most vulnerable groups of persons atrisk for sex trafficking in FSM include foreign migrant workersand FSM women and girls. Pohnpei State Police have reportedthe prostitution of FSM and foreign women and children tocrew members on fishing vessels in FSM, or in its territorialwaters. Some Micronesians allegedly transport women andgirls to the fishing vessels and are involved in their prostitutionin restaurants and clubs frequented by fishermen. Othervulnerable groups include FSM nationals who travel to theUnited States. In addition, the Transnational Crime Unit (TCU)has received and investigated labor trafficking complaintsfrom foreign nationals on fishing boats for lack of paymentand inhuman treatment. Data on the prevalence of humantrafficking in the FSM is not available, as the government doesnot collect and maintain crime data, nor has it conducted anystudies or surveys on human trafficking.The Government of the Federated States of Micronesia does notfully comply with the minimum standards for the eliminationof trafficking; however, it is making significant efforts to do so.Because the assessment of these significant efforts is based inpart on the government’s commitment of future actions, FSMis placed on Tier 2 Watch List. During the current reportingyear, the FSM acceded to the 2000 UN TIP Protocol, and theFSM congress passed new legislation that revised the country’scriminal code to include anti-trafficking provisions. However,the Government of the FSM did not prosecute any traffickingcases, made no efforts to identify or assist victims of trafficking,and failed to make substantive efforts to prevent trafficking orincrease the general public’s awareness of trafficking in 2011.
250MOLDOVARecommendations for the Federated States of Micronesia:Publicly recognize and condemn all acts of trafficking; makerobust efforts to criminally investigate, prosecute, and punishall trafficking offenders; develop and implement proceduresfor the proactive identification of trafficking victims amongvulnerable populations, such as foreign workers in the FSM,fishermen on fishing vessels, women and girls in prostitution,and FSM nationals migrating to the United States for work;establish measures to ensure that victims of trafficking arenot threatened or otherwise punished for crimes committedas a direct result of being trafficked; train officials on humantrafficking and how to identify and assist trafficking victims;support and facilitate comprehensive and visible anti-trafficking awareness campaigns directed at employers offoreign workers and clients of the sex trade; make efforts tonotify foreign workers of their rights, protections, and waysthey can report abuse; establish a registration system foroverseas employment recruiters as agreed to in the Compactof Free Association as Amended (2004); initiate monitoringmechanisms for recruitment agencies both domestically andabroad; investigate and prosecute recruiters who may beengaged in fraudulent recruitment acts that lead to traffickingin persons; and develop a national plan of action for anti-trafficking matters.ProsecutionThe Government of the Federated States of Micronesiademonstrated modest progress in its anti-trafficking lawenforcement efforts during the reporting period. During thereporting period, the FSM congress drafted and passed anti-trafficking legislation that prohibits all forms of traffickingin persons, and acceded to the 2000 UN TIP Protocol. Thenewly enacted legislation prescribes penalties of 15 to 30years’ imprisonment and fines not exceeding $50,000, whichare sufficiently stringent and commensurate with penaltiesprescribed for other serious offenses, such as rape. While therewere limited investigations of entertainment sites suspectedof involvement in sex trafficking, authorities did not reportany prosecutions, or convictions for trafficking crimes.The government did not cooperate with any internationalorganizations or NGOs to offer anti-trafficking training andsupport to government officials during the reporting period.During the year, there were no investigations, prosecutions,convictions, or sentences of government employees complicitin human trafficking.ProtectionThe FSM government’s efforts to identify and protect traffickingvictims during the reporting period remained inadequate. FSMhas never identified a trafficking victim within the country anddoes not have a proactive system in place to identify victimsof trafficking systematically among vulnerable groups, suchas foreign workers and women and children in prostitution.In addition, the FSM government made no efforts to identify,protect, or refer trafficking victims to services during thereporting period; no NGOs provided services to any traffickingvictims. The government reported that any identified victimswould have access to the very limited social services and legalassistance provided to victims of any crime. Although victimshave the legal right to bring personal injury civil suits againsttraffickers, because no victims have ever been identified, nosuits have ever been filed. FSM officials did not provide legalalternatives to the removal of foreign trafficking victims tocountries where they may face hardship or retribution.PreventionThe FSM government did not substantially expand efforts toprevent trafficking or increase the general public’s awareness oftrafficking during the reporting year. Two members of the FSMcongress made several outreach presentations over the courseof 10 days within Yap, Chuuk, and various outer islands inorder to promulgate awareness of trafficking and immigrationissues. However, the government did not conduct or supportany other informational or educational campaigns solelyabout human trafficking and the prevention thereof. Also,FSM officials did not develop or implement any monitoringor enforcement measures to govern the activities of laborrecruiters and brokers. Government entities did not developor disseminate campaigns aimed at reducing the demandfor commercial sex acts and child prostitution, nor werespecific populations targeted. The FSM government did notdraft a national action plan against trafficking in personsand sufficient resources were not designated to this regard.MOLDOVA (Tier 2)Moldova is a source and, to a lesser extent, a transit anddestination country for women and girls subjected to sextrafficking, and for men, women, and children subjected toconditions of forced labor. Moldovan women are subjected toforced prostitution in Turkey, Russia, Cyprus, the United ArabEmirates (UAE), Bulgaria, Kosovo, Israel, Indonesia, Malaysia,Lebanon, Italy, Greece, Ukraine, the Czech Republic, Romania,Poland, Slovenia, Spain, Tajikistan, and Ukraine. Men, women,and children are subjected to conditions of forced labor inRussia, Ukraine, Turkey, UAE, Israel, Greece, and the UnitedStates in the construction, agriculture, and service sectors.Men, women, and children are also subjected to conditionsof forced labor and sexual exploitation in Slovenia, Spain,the Netherlands, and Ukraine. Children from Moldova aresubjected to conditions of forced begging in some neighboringcountries. Victims of forced prostitution found in Chisinauinclude Ukrainian women and Moldovan girls and womenfrom rural areas. Moldovan men and women are subjected toforced labor in Moldova. Moldovan victims of trafficking havebeen subjected to re-trafficking after their return to Moldovafrom foreign countries. Victims from Moldova are oftenrecruited by individuals they trust. In the past several years,there have been reported incidents of men from the UnitedStates, the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Greece, Norway,and possibly Turkey traveling to Moldova for the purpose ofchild sex tourism. The small breakaway region of Transnistriain eastern Moldova is outside the central government’s controland remained a source for victims of both forced labor andforced prostitution.
MOLDOVA251The Government of Moldova does not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however,it is making significant efforts to do so. The government hasmade progress over the past year in addressing the protectionof victims and the prevention of trafficking. Specifically, itincreased the participation of NGOs in law enforcementinvestigations and made special provisions to protect childtrafficking victims. The government also increased fundingto its primary shelter and offered services to victims withphysical and mental disabilities. The government expandedits national referral system (NRS), a program lauded by NGOsand viewed as a model for other countries in the region. Inaddition, the government raised awareness through high-levelattention to the issue and numerous public campaigns. Lawenforcement started to investigate and prosecute forced laborcrimes. However, the government did not show sufficientprogress in addressing widespread complicity in traffickingby law enforcement and other public officials. Reports ofwidespread corruption in the police and judicial systempersisted and no officials were convicted for trafficking-relatedoffenses. Furthermore, despite increased prosecutions incomparison to the previous year, the number of convictionsdeclined and the proportion of convicted offenders receivingprison sentences declined as well. The government providedinadequate witness protections for some victims waiting totestify in court.Recommendations for Moldova: Demonstrate vigorousefforts to investigate, prosecute, and convict governmentofficials complicit in trafficking, and seek criminal prosecutionand conviction of any guilty officials; ensure that convictedtrafficking offenders serve time in prison; increase investigation,prosecution, and conviction of labor trafficking offenses; traininvestigators, prosecutors, and judges in applying humantrafficking laws to forced labor cases; increase the number ofprosecutors assigned to the anti-trafficking section of theProsecutor General’s Office; further improve child traffickingvictim protection by continuing to encourage law enforcementofficials, in both urban and rural areas, to consult with NGOexperts during the victim interview process; increase the safetyof victims prior to testifying by increasing security at shelters,decreasing delays in court hearings, increasing prosecutionsof witness tampering, and relocating witnesses whenwarranted; improve victims’ awareness of and ability to obtainrestitution from trafficking offenders; clarify the rules andprocedure for the provision of residence permits to traffickingvictims; reinstitute inspections of regional national referralcommissions and revitalize inactive ones; continue to improvecooperation between local anti-trafficking civil society groupsand local law enforcement; continue efforts to provide anti-trafficking training to law enforcement and other governmentofficials, including members of the judiciary; and use measuresto reduce the demand for commercial sex, such as conductingawareness activities that target potential consumers ofprostitution.ProsecutionThe Government of Moldova demonstrated inadequate anti-trafficking law enforcement efforts during the reportingperiod. Of particular concern, it demonstrated inadequateefforts to prosecute, convict, or criminally punish governmentemployees complicit in human trafficking. The governmentprohibits all forms of trafficking through articles 165 and206 of its criminal code, which prescribe penalties of fiveto 20 years’ imprisonment. These penalties are sufficientlystringent and commensurate with those prescribed forother serious crimes, such as rape. An NGO reported thatMoldovan prosecutors frequently reclassified cases oflabor trafficking from articles 165 and 206 to article 168,which also criminalizes forced labor. Article 168, however,prescribes lighter penalties of a maximum of only three years’imprisonment and the possibility of probation or dismissalof the case if the parties achieve reconciliation. Regionalinvestigators, also lacking familiarity with trafficking laws,frequently applied the more lenient forced labor law to labortrafficking cases. The government reported 135 traffickinginvestigations in 2011, down from 161 reported in 2010.Authorities reported prosecuting 79 suspected traffickingoffenders in 2011, an increase from 66 suspected offenders in2010. However, the government convicted only 22 traffickingoffenders in 2011, reflecting a significant decrease from the47 trafficking offenders convicted in 2010. The governmentreported that approximately one-quarter of its prosecutionsin late 2011 and early 2012 were labor trafficking cases, anotable increase from 2010 when the government had nolabor trafficking prosecutions or convictions. Moreover, thegovernment convicted one individual for forced labor in July2011, although the court suspended the convicted offender’ssentence. In 2011, the Moldovan government indicted fivesuspects involved in a child sex tourism ring uncovered in 2010.Despite promises to establish a national trafficking statisticsdatabase, the government has made little progress in doing so.While Moldovan law provides explicit sentencing guidelines fortraffickers, which are consistent with international standards,the judiciary often applies sentences that do not correspondwith the severity of the crime, and traffickers have regularlyescaped with fines or suspended prison terms. In 2011, 10 outof 22 convicted offenders were prescribed prison sentences,which ranged from four years and eight months to 11 years’imprisonment. The remaining 12 convicted offenders receivedsuspended sentences or paid a fine and did not serve timein prison. Multiple individuals convicted of trafficking inprevious years were acquitted on appeal in 2011, at timeswithout the court issuing a written opinion explaining itsdecision. The government continued to assign five prosecutorsto focus solely on investigating and prosecuting traffickingcases. The government provided anti-trafficking training inthe police academy curriculum that is mandatory for policeofficers and investigators; it also held two anti-traffickingtrainings for more than 50 judges and prosecutors. During2011, law enforcement officials worked with counterpartsin Greece, Spain, Russia, Poland, Romania, and Ukraine toinvestigate transnational cases of human trafficking.Government complicity in human trafficking remained asignificant concern and no government officials were convictedfor trafficking-related complicity in 2011. The government iscurrently prosecuting two high-level government officialsfor trafficking-related complicity, an increase from last yearwhen there were no prosecutions against public officials.
252MONGOLIAHowever, the Government of Moldova has provided verylimited information on other cases against public officialsmoving from investigation to trial. Some anti-traffickingexperts noted concerns of complicity in human traffickingcases within the judicial branch. For example, NGOs havereported judges giving reduced sentences in exchange formonetary bribes, as well as judges supporting certain politicalparties in exchange for political protection. Due to lowresources for victim protection and endemic delays in courthearings, victims often receive threats or bribes to change theirstories. The OSCE also reported that trafficking offenders hadthreatened some victims’ lawyers.ProtectionMoldova made modest progress in improving its efforts toensure that victims of trafficking received access to protectionsduring the reporting period. The government and IOM, whichworked together in implementing the NRS, identified 98victims in 2011, compared to 139 in 2010. This represents athree-fold reduction in the number of victims identified byIOM and the government since 2006. The NRS expandedto four more regions in 2011 and now covers all 32 regionsin the country. Each region has a multidisciplinary teamcomposed of representatives from the police, NGOs, andcare providers that is tasked with identifying and assistingtrafficking victims and persons vulnerable to trafficking. In2011, the government allocated the equivalent of $67,000 toa primary shelter operated jointly by the government andIOM for repatriated and internal adult and child victims oftrafficking, compared with the equivalent of $48,000 in 2010.The shelter provided temporary shelter, legal and medicalassistance, psychological counseling, and vocational trainingto 67 trafficking victims in 2011. Victims are not detained inthe shelter; they are permitted to freely enter and leave. Thenational government provided the equivalent of an additional$154,947 to four regional rehabilitation centers that providedtrafficking victims with long-term assistance. The governmentprovided cash benefits to 65 victims in 2011, up from 63 in2010. Increasingly, local governments also provided assistanceto trafficking victims and people vulnerable to traffickingthrough limited funding, specialized personnel, and rent-freefacilities and utilities given to NGOs and shelters. For instance,the city of Balti allocated the equivalent of over $45,155 to acrisis center that provides care to a variety of people in need,including victims of trafficking. The Department for Victimand Witness Protection reported that it accommodated threetrafficking victims in its program.Thegovernmentencouragedallvictimstoassistlawenforcementwith trafficking investigations and prosecutions, and did notmake assistance contingent upon their cooperation; however,a draft amendment to the Law on Foreigners would requireforeign victims in Moldova to participate in the criminal caseas a precondition to receiving a residence permit. Althoughgeneral mistrust of the police remained high, 131 victimscooperated with law enforcement in 2011, compared with 169victims in 2010. Moldovan law enforcement demonstratedefforts to protect and assist child victims of trafficking bymore consistently involving NGO service providers early in theinvestigative process and adopting victim-centered interviewtechniques. For example, a NGO said that its “children’sroom” was used by Moldovan police to interview 24 childtrafficking victims in the presence of an NGO psychologist.According to IOM, 11 trafficking victims with physical andmental disabilities were assisted in 2011, and the governmentprovided to care facilities with all of the necessary equipmentfor victims with special needs. The government also providedtraining for border guards to identify potential victims, thoughborder guards reportedly identified 29 potential victims oftrafficking in 2011, down from 83 victims in 2010.PreventionThe government increased its efforts to prevent humantrafficking during the reporting period. The majority ofoutreach and trafficking awareness efforts by the governmentwere conducted in close coordination with NGOs at thenational and regional levels. The government also raised publicawareness of trafficking through visible high-level attentionand media interaction on the issue. NRS commissions setup at the regional level usually met on a regular basis to dealwith trafficking issues, including organizing public awarenessevents. The OSCE praised this system’s structure for its rolein preventing trafficking and assisting identified victims. TheMinistry of Labor, Social Protection, and Family trained 185members of these regional commissions in 2011; however,after inspecting 16 regions in 2010, the ministry conductedno inspections in 2011. Moldovan government officials sharedbest practices with a number of regional neighbors throughbilateral meetings, conferences, and trainings. In 2011, theCenter for Combating Trafficking in Persons organized 30workshops in high schools, vocational schools, and universitiesto raise awareness about trafficking. The Ministry of Educationfacilitated an anti-trafficking conference attended by 300students, a roundtable on prevention for 70 vocationalschools, and three different classes on trafficking, collectivelyattended by 750 students. Local governments advertisedthe existence of victim hotlines. The government’s nationalaction plan concluded in 2011, but the National Committeefor Combating Trafficking in Persons is currently analyzingits results and developing a new plan that will launch inspring 2012. The government did not undertake steps toreduce the demand for commercial sex acts. In March 2012,the government announced it would implement a code ofconduct for businesses in its tourist industry, compellingthem to notify travelers of Moldova’s laws against the sexualexploitation of children.MONGOLIA (Tier 2)Mongolia is a source, transit, and destination country for men,women, and children who are subjected to sex trafficking andforced labor. Mongolian men, women, and children are foundin forced labor and forced prostitution in China, Malaysia, andSingapore. Mongolian women and girls are found in forcedprostitution in Macau, Hong Kong, and South Korea. Chinawas the primary source of repatriated Mongolian victims.Mongolian men and women are found in conditions of forcedlabor in Turkey, Kazakhstan, the Czech Republic, and Poland.Mongolia is used as a transit point en route to other destinationsin Northeast Asia for forced prostitution and forced labororiginating in China and Russia. There were reports of asignificant increase in the number of forced labor and forcedprostitution cases involving Mongolian labor migrants inTurkey. Singapore has become a destination for Mongolian sextrafficking victims as well as a base of operations for recruitersof illegal Filipino domestic labor to Mongolia. Mongolianwomen continue to be subjected to involuntary servitudeupon engaging in brokered marriages, often to South Korean
MONGOLIA253men. Women and girls are subjected to forced prostitutionin massage parlors, and girls remained vulnerable to forcedprostitution in hotels, bars, karaoke clubs, and at mining sitesin Mongolia. Young girls are sent to foreign countries to serveas contortionists in circuses, where they may become victimsof forced labor. Some Mongolian children are forced to begor labor in the informal construction, mining, and industrialsectors. There is continued evidence of Chinese laborers inthe mining and construction industries being expelled fromMongolia for visa violations without being compensated fortheir work. Approximately 2,000 North Koreans are employedin Mongolia as contract laborers, more than quadruple thenumber reported the previous year. This increase occurreddespite well-documented concerns that North Korean workersoverseas are not free to leave their employment and receive onlya fraction of the money paid to the North Korean governmentfor their work.Mongolian authorities reported that human traffickingcases were more prevalent during the reporting periodand recruitment for forced prostitution has become moresophisticated to avoid detection by police. Whereas in thepast trafficking perpetrators would place fraudulent ads innewspapers or on television, traffickers are increasingly usingsocial networking sites and online advertisements. Anecdotalreports continue to indicate that South Korean and Japanesetourists engage in child sex tourism in Mongolia.The Government of Mongolia does not fully comply withthe minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking;however, it is making significant efforts to do so. In January2012, the government passed the Law on Combating HumanTrafficking, which provides provisions for coordination amongagencies on human trafficking and clearly prohibits all formsof trafficking in persons under a single, comprehensive law.To date, the government has not recognized forced labor as aproblem and no forced labor cases have ever been prosecuted,despite the fact that Mongolia repatriated forced labor victimsin 2010 and 2011. The Criminal Police Department and theState Investigation Department stated that, even when forcedlabor cases were reported, they were not referred for furthercriminal investigation. In October 2011, the governmentpassed the National Program for the Elimination of the WorstForms of Child Labor. However, the government did notdedicate funding towards enacting the initiatives listed in theprogram, as it hopes to contract with NGOs for specific servicesand pool funding across agencies to achieve program goals.Funding remained a serious constraint to implementing boththe trafficking prevention council and the National Programfor the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labor. Theentire government budget for crime victim protection serviceswas the equivalent of $16,000 in 2011. Government corruptionremained endemic, and turnover among prosecutors, judges,and law enforcement officers resulted in a new cadre of officialsthat have little to no experience or training in combatinghuman trafficking. The government conducted a number oftraining programs for police officers on human traffickingissues and investigations.Recommendations for Mongolia: Establish formalprocedures to guide government officials in victimidentification and referral of victims to protective services;cease increases in the employment of North Korean laborers;train law enforcement officials, judges, and members of thegovernment on trafficking and how to effectively implementthe new 2012 law; allocate government funds or seekinternational funding to support activities of the TraffickingPrevention Council and the National Program for theElimination of Child Labor; cease prosecuting traffickingvictims for crimes committed as a result of being trafficked;undertake victim identification efforts among vulnerablepopulations, such as foreign migrants and children; andcommence serious efforts to investigate and prosecute labortrafficking cases, including those involving foreign workers.ProsecutionThe Government of Mongolia made significant anti-traffickinglaw enforcement efforts during the reporting period. InJanuary 2012, the Mongolian government passed the Lawon Combating Human Trafficking, a comprehensive anti-trafficking law that more rigorously defines trafficking toinclude forced prostitution and prostitution of minors andmandates coordination among agencies involved in anti-trafficking efforts. Mongolia prohibits all forms of humantrafficking through Article 113 of its criminal code, which, withthe passage of the 2012 Law on Combating Human Trafficking,now clearly covers forced prostitution and prostitution ofminors in addition to all other forms of trafficking. Article 115of the criminal code previously covered prostitution of minors;these provisions were incorporated into Article 113 to aidlaw enforcement authorities in investigating and prosecutingtrafficking-related crimes through a single, comprehensiveanti-trafficking law. The law prescribes penalties that aresufficiently stringent – with up to 15 years’ imprisonment– and commensurate with penalties prescribed for otherserious offenses, such as rape. During the reporting period,the government investigated 15 forced prostitution casesand obtained nine convictions. The government tried andconvicted one case of forced prostitution of a minor. Thegovernment conducted no forced labor investigations andobtained no forced labor convictions. However, 2011 saw thefirst conviction of a trafficker of young female contortionistsfor circus performances. Article 113 was not used to convictthe perpetrator, who was sentenced to 5.5 years’ imprisonmentunder a torture and grievous bodily harm statute. Althoughthe case was not prosecuted under forced labor statutes,anti-trafficking organizations in the country viewed thecase as a positive development. Previously, traffickers ofyoung contortionists had not been prosecuted in Mongolia.Corruption among law enforcement personnel remains asignificant problem in the country and a barrier to anti-trafficking progress. The government did not investigate or takedisciplinary actions against law enforcement officers involvedin trafficking-related corruption. Despite having an extremely
254MONTENEGROlimited budget, the Criminal Police Department’s OrganizedCrime Division held several training programs on traffickinginvestigations for local police forces. The Ulaanbaatar Citymayor’s office also provided the equivalent of approximately$1,600 to train 30 prosecutors on China-Mongolia traffickingissues in September 2011.ProtectionThe Government of Mongolia made progress in its efforts toprotect victims of trafficking during the year. The governmentdid not employ systematic procedures for the proactiveidentification of trafficking victims, although authoritiesidentified 52 victims of forced prostitution during the reportingperiod, and an additional 21 victims were repatriated fromother countries. Authorities did not formally identify anyvictims of forced labor. In one case, the Mongolian Embassyin China repatriated a mentally disabled minor to Mongolia,as authorities believed he had been sent to China for organharvesting. Because the Mongolian government had nofunding for the repatriation of victims, its embassy in Beijingpaid repatriation expenses out of its own budget. Donor-funded NGOs provided many protective services for traffickingvictims, both male and female, and the Ministry for SocialWelfare and Labor funded a shelter dedicated to assistingfemale trafficking victims. During the reporting period, theshelter assisted 37 trafficking victims. The government fundedseveral other shelters aimed primarily at assisting domesticviolence victims; an unknown number of trafficking victimsutilized those shelters during the reporting period. In January2011, a government resolution decreed that the state budgetwould be used to assist and compensate Mongolian victims oftrafficking abroad. However, the government has not assistedany victims using this provision to date, and there were nodiscernible mechanisms to provide restitution to repatriatedMongolian trafficking victims during the reporting period.The government did not provide foreign victims with legalalternatives to repatriation in cases where repatriation wouldconstitute a significant risk of hardship, torture, or death.Victims continued to be punished for unlawful acts committedas a direct result of their being trafficked, including childrenin prostitution being arrested, detained, and prosecuted.Foreign trafficking victims in Mongolia were also fined forviolating visa terms, as their traffickers were not identified bythe government in a timely manner. Intimidation of traffickingvictims and witnesses remained a major problem.PreventionThe Government of Mongolia made almost no effort to preventtrafficking during the reporting period. The governmentdid not conduct any public education campaigns to combattrafficking, although it did host a number of training programsfor law enforcement officials. The government introduced aNational Plan of Action on Commercial Sexual Exploitationand Trafficking of Women and Children in 2006, which hasbeen implemented to a limited extent. The new law mandatesthe creation of the trafficking prevention council to streamlinegovernment efforts to prevent human trafficking. At of the endof the reporting period, the trafficking prevention council hadnot convened. The law also established fines and administrativepenalties for trafficking-related advertisements on televisionand the Internet. The government convened an interagencycouncil to coordinate the government’s anti-trafficking efforts,which met four times during 2011, and it convened an NGOworking group on trafficking. The government did not take anymeasures during the reporting period to reduce the demandfor commercial sex acts or to address the problem of childsex tourism in the country.MONTENEGRO (Tier 2)Montenegro is a source, transit, and destination country for men,women, and children subjected to sex trafficking and forcedlabor. Trafficking victims are mostly women and girls fromEastern Europe and other Balkan countries, including Serbiaand Kosovo, who migrate or are smuggled through the countryen route to Western Europe and are subjected to sex traffickingin Montenegro. Children, many of whom are Roma, are coercedby their family members into street begging in Montenegro;many of these children come from Kosovo, Serbia, or fromwithin Montenegro. There have been reports that Roma girlsfrom Montenegro, who are often forced into domestic servitude,have been sold into servile marriages in Roma communities inSwitzerland and Germany. De facto stateless individuals werevulnerable to trafficking in persons. While there were no reportsof labor trafficking during the year, in prior years, there werereports that mainly foreign men and boys were subjected toforced labor in Montenegro’s growing construction industry.Montenegrin women and girls are vulnerable to sex traffickingin other Balkan countries, including Serbia. NGOs reported thatRoma teenagers in Montenegro were engaged in prostitution,some of which was allegedly sex trafficking.The Government of Montenegro does not fully comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however,it is making significant efforts to do so. The government’s effortsto address trafficking in persons have been undermined by itsofficials’ position that trafficking did not exist as a prevalentphenomenon in Montenegro, but rather in isolated cases. Atthe same time, the government identified human traffickingas an important policy issue and its anti-trafficking preventionactivities were robust and diverse. The government proactivelyidentified only one trafficking victim during the year. Thisnumber is low, despite the government having conducted large-scale operations to suppress child begging and received NGOreferrals. The government did not initiate the prosecution ofany trafficking offenders during the year. NGOs reported thatthe government did not take protective action on occasionswhen potential victims were brought to the centers for socialwork. Nevertheless, the governments did provide care to moretrafficking victims than during the previous year. The courtachieved convictions in a high-profile sex trafficking case,including convicting, among others, three police officers forcomplicity in alleged human trafficking. The governmenttook some efforts to address forced begging, includingconducting a study of children involved in begging to assesstheir demographics and vulnerability.Recommendations for Montenegro: Improve efforts toproactively identify more potential victims among vulnerable
MONTENEGRO255groups, such as Roma children involved in prostitution, womenarrested for prostitution violations, undocumented migrants,refugees and displaced persons – particularly Roma – andchild beggars, and refer them to the government shelter orNGOserviceproviders;improveoutreachtoRomacommunitiesto ensure prevention of trafficking and effective victimidentification; ensure that all state institutions responsibleforthecareoftraffickingvictimsimplementtheirmemorandumof understanding defined roles; enhance training andengagement of the centers for social work on trafficking victimassessment and care; vigorously investigate and aggressivelyprosecute sex trafficking and labor trafficking crimes, enhancejudicial understanding of trafficking offenses, and convictand sentence trafficking offenders, including public officialscomplicit in trafficking; continue to ensure that the rights oftrafficking victims are respected while victims are given carein shelters, including the right to free movement; adopt apublic stance toward trafficking in persons that acknowledgestrafficking in persons in the country; improve protections forpotential victim witnesses to empower more victims to testifyagainst their traffickers; and improve specific protections forchild victims of trafficking, ensuring that the best interestsof potential trafficking victims guide their care.ProsecutionThe Government of Montenegro made no reported progressduring the reporting period in prosecuting new cases oftrafficking offenses, although it achieved convictions in casesfrom previous years. Montenegro prohibits sex and labortrafficking through Article 444 of its criminal code, whichprescribes penalties of up to 10 years’ imprisonment forviolations and 12 years’ imprisonment for offenses involvingaggravated circumstances; these penalties are sufficientlystringent and commensurate with those prescribed for otherserious crimes, such as rape. During the reporting period, thegovernment investigated only three trafficking cases. It failedto initiate new prosecutions of any trafficking offenders, incontrast to the 22 alleged trafficking offenders prosecutedin 2010. However, the government convicted 14 traffickingoffenders during the year from earlier cases. In one of thesecases, eight defendants were convicted of sexual exploitationand organized crime. In 2010, 12 trafficking offenders wereconvicted and received sentences of between 12 months’and six years’ imprisonment. While the trial court initiallyacquitted the defendants of trafficking charges and convictedthem on charges related to forced organized prostitutionand criminal association, the appellate court reinstated thetrafficking charges and returned the case to the trial court.Among those convicted were three police officers who hadtransported young women, including trafficking victims, forthe purpose of prostitution and served as security guards forthe strip clubs. They were convicted for failing to report theprostitution although they were aware of it. Despite conductinginvestigations of the organized begging of children, authoritiesdid not prosecute any trafficking cases for forced begging.Authorities did, however, charge 11 adults with organizingthe begging by children. The government did not provide anyspecialized anti-trafficking training for prosecutors, policeofficers, judges, or other investigators this year, althoughanti-trafficking training remained a mandatory subject forall new police trainees. Montenegrin authorities collaboratedwith their Serbian law enforcement counterparts to investigatetrafficking offenses.ProtectionThe government displayed mixed trafficking victim protectionefforts during the reporting period and needs to improve theimplementation of victim identification procedures. Duringthe year, the government proactively identified one victim oftrafficking in Montenegro and a foreign government identifiedand repatriated two victims to Montenegro. The Montenegringovernment provided care to a greater number of traffickingvictims than in the prior reporting period. The nationalcoordinator fully funded an NGO shelter, providing theequivalent of $52,224 for a range of services, including housing,medical, and psychological care to trafficking victims. Duringthe previous year, the government provided the equivalent of$152,000. The drop in funding was attributed to a change inthe funding structure, which resulted in the operational costsof the shelter being covered directly under the budget of theMinistry of Internal Affairs. The government also providedthe equivalent of eight dollars per day for each victim whoreceived care at the shelter. The government-funded shelterwas a closed shelter. The government takes the position that,for their protection, victims may leave only if accompaniedby chaperones. The government cared for three traffickingvictims during the reporting period, an increase from theone victim who received care at the shelter the previousyear. Two victims who were initially identified by a foreigngovernment received care from Montenegrin authorities, whocollaborated with NGOs in their repatriation and provideda medical evaluation, shelter, and psychological assistance.NGOs observed that government officials still lacked skill inproactive victim identification. Despite conducting large-scalepolice operations to suppress child begging, the governmentagain failed to identify any trafficking victims among childbeggars discovered during these operations. In addition,NGOs claimed that, when they brought potential Roma childtrafficking victims to the attention of the centers for socialwork, the government-run centers did not take any action.NGOs alleged that some of the government actors obligatedto care for victims, such as the health services, did not provideexpedient care. Montenegro’s Law on Foreigners allows victimsof trafficking to receive a temporary residence permit in thecountry lasting between three months and one year, althoughno victims received such a permit during the reporting period.NGOs reported that trafficking victims were not prosecuted forunlawful acts compelled as a direct result of their trafficking.Under a government program, authorities encouraged victimsto participate in the investigation and prosecution of humantrafficking cases by providing free legal aid and enablingNGOs to attend all interviews with the police. All victimsgave statements to the police. Nevertheless, in practice fewvictims of trafficking participated in the prosecution of theirtraffickers, and victims often changed their statements aboutalleged trafficking offenders out of fear of reprisal. A high-profile civil case was resolved during the year with the dismissalof a lawsuit filed by a former government official against atrafficking victim.PreventionThe Government of Montenegro improved its anti-traffickingprevention activities during the year. In May 2011, authoritiesconducted a survey of children begging in the street todetermine their demographics and vulnerability to trafficking.The government also began a campaign to dissuade peoplefrom giving money to children engaged in begging entitled“Let’s Teach Them Something New.” The government launched
256MOROCCOan anti-trafficking campaign in all tourist centers, distributingflyers, posters, and other advertising materials. The governmentprovided an NGO the equivalent of more than $7,000 fora human trafficking prevention project, “Stop HumanTrafficking.” In coordination with UNICEF, the governmentorganized anti-trafficking training programs for 60 primaryand secondary school teachers in November and December2011. The government also produced an anti-trafficking textbook and leaflets and continued to maintain a hotline and ananti-trafficking website. The government marked EuropeanAnti-Trafficking day in October by organizing several events forstudents in all primary and secondary schools in the country.The government broadcast an anti-trafficking preventionspot to promote the anti-trafficking hotline on television.Authorities investigated nightclubs suspected of providingillicit sexual services but, aside from attempts to addresssex trafficking, did not make efforts to reduce the demandfor commercial sex acts. The government collaborated withhotels on a code of conduct for protection of children fromsexual exploitation in travel and tourism to prevent childsex tourism. The government collaborated with NGOs todevelop a new anti-trafficking action plan for 2012-18. TheMontenegrin government provided anti-trafficking trainingto its military personnel prior to their deployment abroad forinternational peacekeeping missions.MOROCCO (Tier 2)Morocco is a source, destination, and transit country for men,women, and children who are subjected to forced labor andsex trafficking. Some Moroccan girls as young as six or sevenyears old from rural areas are recruited to work as child maidsin cities and often experience conditions of forced labor, suchas nonpayment of wages, threats, and physical or sexualabuse, and restrictions on movement; however, due to greatersensitization of the issue, the incidence of child maids hasdecreased dramatically from 1999 to 2010. Some Moroccanboys experience forced labor as apprentices in the artisan andconstruction industries and in mechanic shops. Men, women,and an increasing number of children primarily from sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia enter Morocco voluntarily butillegally with the assistance of smugglers; once in Morocco,some of the women and older girls are coerced into prostitutionor, less frequently, forced into domestic service. Some femalemigrants in Oujda, particularly Nigerians, were forced intoprostitution once they reached Europe. Sometimes, femalemigrants are transported to other cities, including Casablanca,and then sold into prostitution networks. There is some sextourism by foreigners in major cities in Morocco.Moroccan men, women, and children are exploited for forcedlabor and sex trafficking in European and Middle Easterncountries. Moroccan women are forced into prostitution inGulf States (including the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain),Jordan, Libya, Syria, and European countries; some of themexperience restrictions on movement, threats, and emotionaland physical abuse. Some Moroccan men reportedly arepromised jobs in the Gulf but experience confiscation of theirpassports and are coerced into debt bondage after arrival. Afew Moroccan men and boys are lured to Europe by fraudulentjob offers and are subsequently forced to sell drugs.The Government of Morocco does not comply with theminimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however,it is making efforts to do so. The government continuedoffering protective services to Moroccan children and adultswho may have been trafficked, though it failed to makeoverall progress in convicting and adequately punishingtrafficking offenders, proactively identifying trafficking victimsamong vulnerable groups, or ensuring that adult male foreigntrafficking victims are not subject to arrest and deportation.Moreover, the government did not address the forcedprostitution and forced labor of undocumented migrants inMorocco, and continues to conflate migrant smuggling withhuman trafficking. Despite repeated recommendations inthis Report, the Moroccan government has not developedan effective system to collect and report anti-trafficking lawenforcement data, which continues to prevent the governmentfrom providing trafficking-related investigation, prosecution,conviction, and sentence information in a timely manner.Recommendations for Morocco: Draft and enactcomprehensive anti-trafficking legislation that prohibits allforms of trafficking and increases prescribed penalties forforced labor; enact draft legislation addressing domesticworkers, and fully implement Decree no. 1-11-164 concerningthe protection of crime victims and witnesses; significantlyincrease investigations, prosecutions, and convictions oftrafficking offenders, including convictions with morestringent penalties, for all forms of trafficking; institute avictim identification mechanism; ensure that identified victimsare not punished for acts committed as a direct result of beingtrafficked; encourage victims to participate in investigationsagainst their traffickers, including by offering relief fromdeportation; initiate law enforcement activities withdestination countries to prosecute those who force Moroccansinto labor and prostitution overseas; improve child protectionunits by providing more human resources, improvingmanagement, and collaborating with various ministries;continue to train judges, prosecutors, and law enforcementon the characteristics of all forms of human trafficking;improve data collection and reporting, including thedisaggregation of data between human trafficking and peoplesmuggling; ensure that potential trafficking victims do notsuffer physical abuse at the hands of Moroccan police; andconduct public awareness campaigns, addressing all forms oftrafficking and encompassing child sex tourism.ProsecutionThe Government of Morocco made little progress in itslaw enforcement response to human trafficking during thereporting period. Morocco lacks a single comprehensiveanti-trafficking law. Morocco’s penal code prohibits forcedchild labor through Article 467, and forced prostitutionand child prostitution through articles 497-499; Article 10of Morocco’s labor code prohibits forced labor of a worker.Penalties prescribed by these various statutes for sex traffickingoffenses are sufficiently stringent and commensurate withthose prescribed for other serious crimes, such as rape. Incontrast, penalties prescribed for labor trafficking offenses
MOZAMBIQUE257do not appear to be sufficiently stringent; penalties forchild labor under Article 467 range from one to three years’imprisonment. The government’s most recent statistics from2011 are not specific to trafficking, but rather cover a widearray of offenses that may include human trafficking. Thegovernment reported there were 38 cases of exploitation ofchildren to beg, 10 cases of exploitation of children related todrugs, and 55 cases of facilitating the prostitution of a minor.It is unclear, however, how many of these cases constitutedhuman trafficking offenses. The government did not reportsentencing information. Despite repeated recommendations,the government has not developed an effective system tocollect and report anti-trafficking law enforcement data, whichcontinues to prevent the government from providing traffickinginvestigation, prosecution, conviction, and sentencinginformation in a timely manner.The government continued to provide and fund a variety oftrafficking training to law enforcement and judicial officials in2011. The Ministry of Justice (MOJ) provided anti-traffickingtraining for 1,000 judges, 170 court clerks, and 88 socialassistants. In October 2011, MOJ and UNHCR organizeda training session in Tangier for judges, police officers,gendarmerie and civil society members on national andinternational law related to human trafficking. The Ministryof Interior also reported that territorial police, border securityofficials, Royal Gendarmerie, and the Auxiliary Forces receivedtraining programs that include modules on human trafficking.ProtectionThe Moroccan government demonstrated minimal effortsto protect victims of trafficking over the past year. It didnot develop or employ systematic procedures to proactivelyidentify victims of trafficking, and it continues to show weakefforts in identifying victims of all forms of trafficking, thoughit continued to refer victims to NGO-provided services. Thegovernment is also limited in its ability to provide sufficientstaffing and funding resources to address human trafficking.The Ministry of Employment and Professional Development(MOEPT) employed 463 labor inspectors for the entire country,and 45 of the total 51 labor inspectorates in the country aretrained and designated to child labor cases. The inspectorswere hindered by minimal staffing and did not have the legalauthority to enter homes, preventing them from investigatingand identifying instances of child labor or child traffickingin domestic service situations. The government continued tomake some progress in protecting child victims of violencefound within the country, some of whom may be victims oftrafficking, through its 75 “children reception centers” andthree child safety centers for girls; however, it is unknownhow many of the child victims receiving services at thesecenters were trafficking victims. The government mademinimal efforts to protect Moroccan victims overseas, thoughthe government reportedly provided assistance with traveldocuments and transportation home in 2011. Undocumentedforeign trafficking victims were often treated as undocumentedmigrants, and reports from NGOs state that some victimshave been arrested, detained, and deported. Undocumentedmigrants who arrived from Algeria were usually deportedback to the Algerian border, reportedly often without food orwater, and were susceptible to being robbed, assaulted, andsexually abused by criminal gangs that operate in the area.The government did not provide or fund protective servicesfor foreign trafficking victims.The government did not offer legal alternatives to the removalof foreign victims of trafficking to countries where they mightface retribution or hardship. The government did not report ifit encouraged victims to participate in investigations againsttraffickers. Sub-Saharan African women who were forcedinto prostitution in Morocco were unlikely to report crimesfor fear of being treated as undocumented migrants anddeported, though in reality, undocumented migrant womenwere rarely deported. Undocumented migrants have accessto basic medical care at public health institutions.PreventionThe Moroccan government made few efforts to prevent humantrafficking over the last year. The government did not undertakecampaigns to raise public awareness about human trafficking.Most child labor prevention programs focus on providingfinancial support and education to targeted families to ensurethat children stay in school. In 2011, the MOEPT allocated theequivalent of $187,500 to child labor prevention programsconducted by Moroccan NGOs focusing on awareness-raisingand rescuing children. Two government-operated childprotection units, an emergency telephone hotline, a mobileassistance program, and “women and children” focal pointscontinued to assist vulnerable women and children in majorcities in Morocco. The government reported in 2011 thatlabor inspectors visited 383 enterprises on potential incidentsof child labor, filed 1,234 reports, issued 63 formal noticesof warning, and imposed nine fines. Through these visits,inspectors identified and addressed cases of 119 child workersunder the age of 15 years old and 397 child workers betweenthe ages of 15 to 18; the government provided no informationon possible assistance to the children. An inter-ministerialcommittee on coordination for trafficking issues comprised ofrepresentatives from multiple ministries did not meet formallyduring the reporting period. Authorities made no discernibleefforts to raise public awareness of child prostitution and sextrafficking of women and did not take any reported measuresto reduce the demand for commercial sex acts. The Moroccangovernment provided training on the issue of sex traffickingto Moroccan soldiers prior to their deployment abroad onUN peacekeeping missions. The Moroccan government hasnot implemented the legislative and policy recommendationsenshrined in the IOM and UNHCR report on transnationalhuman trafficking. Morocco ratified the 2000 UN TIP Protocolin April 2011.MOZAMBIQUE (Tier 2)Mozambique is a source, transit, and, to a lesser extent,destination country for men, women, and children subjectedto forced labor and sex trafficking. The use of forced childlabor is common in agriculture, including on tobacco farms,and in commercial activities in rural areas of the country,often with the complicity of family members. Women andgirls from rural areas, lured to cities in Mozambique orSouth Africa with promises of employment or education,are exploited in domestic servitude and the sex trade. YoungMozambican men and boys are subjected to forced laboron farms and in mines in South Africa, where they oftenlabor for months without pay and under coercive conditionsbefore being turned over to police for deportation as illegalmigrants. Some Mozambican adults are subjected to forcedlabor and forced prostitution in Portugal. Some women and
258MOZAMBIQUEgirls from Zimbabwe and Malawi who voluntarily migrateto Mozambique are subsequently subjected to sex traffickingor domestic servitude. Mozambican or South Africantrafficking networks are typically informal; larger Chineseand Nigerian trafficking syndicates are reportedly also activein Mozambique. In addition, South Asian alien smugglerswho move undocumented South Asian migrants throughoutAfrica reportedly also transport trafficking victims throughMozambique. Recent reports indicate that South Asian citizensand companies in Mozambique pay the initial travel costs ofillegal Bangladeshi and Pakistani migrants, whom they latermaintain in bonded labor.The Government of Mozambique does not fully comply withthe minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking;however, it is making significant efforts to do so. In 2011,the government continued to increase its anti-traffickinglaw enforcement efforts, including more than doubling itsnumber of trafficking prosecutions – totaling 11 new cases –and achieving seven convictions, some with significant prisonsentences, under the 2008 anti-trafficking act; this data wasreported as part of a new effort to track trafficking case databy province. The government instituted a new two-weekcourse at its law enforcement training center for new officers.Despite these advances, the government made minimal effortsto protect trafficking victims, raise public awareness, andprevent the use of forced child labor.Recommendations for Mozambique: Take concrete stepsto finalize and issue necessary regulations to implement theprotection and prevention provisions of the 2008 anti-trafficking law; develop a formal system to proactively identifytrafficking victims among vulnerable populations and refervictims to care; continue to build the capacity of the policeanti-trafficking unit, the labor inspectorate, and the Womenand Children’s Victim Assistance Units to investigate traffickingcases and provide short-term protection to victims; continuetraining for law enforcement officers in victim identification,particularly at border points; finalize the national action planto coordinate the government’s efforts, with resources allocatedto its implementation; and investigate reports of officialcomplicity in human trafficking and vigorously prosecute,where appropriate, those implicated in trafficking offenses.ProsecutionThe government demonstrated significant progress in itsanti-trafficking law enforcement efforts during the reportingperiod. The Law on Preventing and Combating the Traffickingof People, enacted in 2008, prohibits recruiting or facilitatingthe exploitation of a person for purposes of prostitution,forced labor, slavery, or involuntary debt servitude. Article10 prescribes penalties of 16 to 20 years’ imprisonment forviolations, penalties which are sufficiently stringent andexceed those for other serious crimes, such as rape. In 2011,the government compiled data on its anti-trafficking lawenforcement efforts for the first time. It reported seveninvestigations carried over from 2010, 15 new investigations,11 prosecutions, six convictions, one acquittal, and 16 ongoinginvestigations carried into 2012, although it did not providedetails on the facts in these cases. The court in Manicaprovince convicted and sentenced two trafficking offendersto two years’ imprisonment for the attempted trafficking ofa child; further details regarding this case are unknown. Inaddition, at least one convicted trafficking offender in Sofalaprovince received a sentence of eight years’ imprisonment,while a conviction in Gaza province resulted in a sentenceof 10 years’ imprisonment. The remaining three cases thatresulted in convictions carried sentences of less than twoyears’ imprisonment. Police investigative techniques, training,capacity, and forensic abilities are known to be very weak,particularly outside of the capital. Local experts report thatthese shortcomings led to the acquittal of three allegedoffenders in Manica province.The Interior Ministry’s investigative police maintained aseven-member unit that specialized in addressing violenceagainst women and children nationwide, including handlingtrafficking cases, although the government did not report onthe unit’s specific anti-trafficking efforts in the last year. In lateNovember and early December 2011, the government instituteda two-week anti-trafficking course at the police training centerfor all newly recruited police officers, border guards, customsand immigration agents, and rapid intervention police (riotpolice). The course, taken by 1,500 recruits in 2011, providedinstruction on recognizing trafficking cases, protecting victims,the rights of children, domestic abuse, and child custody law.Separately, 120 customs, immigration, and border police agentsreceived NGO-funded training on identifying trafficking cases.During the reporting period, there were reported cases ofgovernment officials facilitating trafficking and trafficking-related crimes. Trafficking offenders commonly bribed lawenforcement officials to allow them to move trafficking victimswithin the country and across national borders into SouthAfrica and Swaziland, sometimes without passports. In January2012, police in Beira announced the arrest of two SofalaProvincial Civil Identification Services officials for illegallyproviding Mozambican identity cards to four foreign citizens.Sources also reported an ongoing investigation at the RessanoGarcia border post, attempting to root out official corruptionand possible complicity in illegal acts, which may or may notinclude trafficking.ProtectionThe Government of Mozambique demonstrated little progressin its efforts to protect victims. The Ministry of Justice (MOJ)began drafting regulations for the non-criminal portions of theanti-trafficking law that would address assistance to victims. Inparallel to this effort, in March 2012, the parliament approveda draft law on the protection of victims and witnesses of allcrimes, including trafficking victims and those who cooperatewith law enforcement in the investigation and prosecution ofhuman trafficking cases. The government provided very limitedfunding to NGOs or international organizations undertakinganti-trafficking work in Mozambique. Government officialscontinued to rely on NGOs to provide shelter, counseling,food, and rehabilitation to victims. An NGO managed thecountry’s only permanent shelter for child trafficking victims,while the Ministry for Women and Social Action funded thestaff’s salaries and the district of Moamba provided the landfor the shelter. The government lacked formalized procedures
NAMIBIA259for identifying potential victims of trafficking and referringthem to organizations providing protective services. TheInterior Ministry’s Women and Children’s Victim AssistanceUnit continued to operate facilities in over 200 police stationsthroughout the country that provided temporary shelterfor an unknown number of trafficking victims and referredvictims to NGOs offering services. In 2011, the Institute forJudicial Support, a government body that provides legaladvice to the impoverished, began to offer legal assistance toabused women and children, including an unknown numberof trafficking victims. The government offered very limitedreintegration assistance to repatriated trafficking victims. Thegovernment encouraged victims to assist in the investigationand prosecution of trafficking offenders. The government didnot provide temporary residency status or legal alternativesto the removal of foreign victims to countries where theymight face hardship or retribution and it continued to deportforeign trafficking victims without screening them for possiblevictimization. Although NGO contacts reported no instancesof trafficking victims having been detained, fined, or jailed forunlawful acts committed as a result of having been trafficked,the lack of formal identification procedures impaired thegovernment’s ability to ensure that no trafficking victimsreceived such penalties.PreventionThe Government of Mozambique demonstrated decreasedtrafficking prevention efforts during the reporting periodand lacks a single national body to coordinate anti-traffickingefforts across ministries. A national action plan to combathuman trafficking exists as a subsection of the government’scurrent five-year anti-crime plan, and the MOJ began draftingan independent plan specific to trafficking. The Ministry ofLabor employed labor inspectors, but they were too few innumber, lacked resources such as transportation, and hadgenerally not received adequate training regarding humantrafficking. Consequently, the government did not adequatelymonitor for child trafficking and labor violations, especiallyon farms in rural areas, and judges frequently dismissedcases because inspectors did not properly prepare evidence.The number of public awareness campaigns decreased fromthe previous year, when the government was more active indistributing information on human trafficking to students,outgoing travelers, community leaders, and businesses. Thegovernment did not make an effort to reduce the demandfor commercial sex acts during the year. In July and August2011, the Caucus of Women Parliamentarians led delegationsof public officials and civil society leaders to the cities ofQuelimane and Nampula to conduct two days of trainingfor local officials and to raise awareness among the publicof the legal remedies provided by anti-trafficking, spousalprotection, and family laws.NAMIBIA (Tier 2 Watch List)Namibia is a country of origin, transit, and destination forwomen, children, and possibly men subjected to forced laborand sex trafficking. Victims lured by promises of legitimatework for adequate wages may instead be forced to work longhours and carry out hazardous tasks in urban centers and oncommercial farms. Traffickers in Namibia exploit Namibianchildren, as well as children from Angola, Zambia, andZimbabwe, through forced labor in agriculture, cattle herding,fishing, and domestic service as well as in prostitution. Touristsfrom southern Africa and Europe are among the clienteleof children in prostitution in Namibia. Children are forcedto care for the children of farm or factory workers and arealso coerced to engage in criminal activity, including drugsmuggling and robberies. Some adults subject the childrenof their distant relatives to sex trafficking or forced labor.Among Namibia’s ethnic groups, San girls are particularlyvulnerable to be trafficked for prostitution and forced laboron farms or in domestic service. Allegations arose during theyear regarding the labor conditions at Chinese companies’construction sites in Namibia, including long hours and lowwages for both Chinese and Namibian staff.The Government of Namibia does not fully comply withthe minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking;however, it is making significant efforts to do so. Despitethese efforts, including its continued investigation of ninesuspected traffickers and the initiation of one potentialtrafficking investigation in 2011, the government did notdemonstrate evidence of overall increasing efforts to addresshuman trafficking over the previous year; therefore, Namibia isplaced on Tier 2 Watch List. The government failed to prosecuteor convict trafficking offenders during the year and has notyet prosecuted or convicted a trafficking offender under any ofits laws. During the year, the cabinet approved the Child Careand Protection Bill, which now awaits parliamentary debateand passage. The government also completed its renovation ofthree additional shelters for victims of gender-based violence,including trafficking. Although the government continuedpublic awareness campaigns, it took no action to prosecutesex trafficking offenders and protect such victims.Recommendations for Namibia: Greatly increase effortsto investigate and prosecute trafficking offenses and convictand punish trafficking offenders under existing legislation,including the Prevention of Organized Crime Act (POCA);train law enforcement officials on the anti-traffickingprovisions of the POCA and other relevant legislation; establisha formal process for the identification of victims and theirsubsequent referral to care among law enforcement,immigration, labor, and social welfare officials; continue todedicate adequate time and resources to complete ongoingshelter and safe house renovations; strengthen coordinationof anti-trafficking efforts across the government; conductnational anti-trafficking public awareness campaigns; andcollect data and maintain databases on trafficking cases.ProsecutionThe Government of Namibia made modest anti-trafficking lawenforcement efforts during the year, as it failed to prosecuteor convict trafficking offenders. In May 2009, the governmentenacted the POCA of 2004, which explicitly criminalizes allforms of trafficking. Under the POCA, persons who participatein trafficking offenses or aid and abet trafficking offenders maybe imprisoned for up to 50 years and fined up to the equivalent