|
Abstract
|
Response to ATR Debate Proposition: 'Prosecuting trafficking deflects attention from much more important responses and is anyway a waste of time and money'
The focus on prosecutions in anti-trafficking responses sets trafficking up as a criminal act with two polar opposites, the trafficker as the perpetrator and the trafficked person as the victim. This approach is problematic, as it ignores the complex interplay of economic inequalities between countries of origin and destination countries, as well as the role of destination countries' immigration controls and labour regulations in creating the conditions which render people vulnerable to human trafficking.1 While other crimes such as domestic violence or sexual violence in conflict have strong structural dimensions, counter-trafficking policies can be particularly problematic, as they not only obscure structural issues but sometimes actively contribute to measures which render certain groups more vulnerable.2
Immigration is restricted in most destination countries for human trafficking, but there is nonetheless demand for cheap and exploitable labour. Exploitable labour is characterised as labour which is paid below national minimum wage standards, exceeds regular workers' permitted working hours, and is easily retained. Foreign nationals are more likely to be exploitable as they have fewer opportunities to change their occupation or their employer: regular migrant workers are often tied to their employer through their work permits, whereas irregular migrants are likely to stay with their employer due to fears of deportation and lack of other options.3
In certain sectors, even citizen employees lack labour protections and areparticularly vulnerable to exploitation. These sectors include sex work, which in most countries is not considered to be work at all, as well as domestic work, certain types of care work and agricultural work, all of which are exempt from labour regulations and lack possibilities for collective bargaining. Equally, female workers are more vulnerable. They are often disempowered vis-à-vis their employers due to lesser protections in part-time or short-term work,4 different remuneration levels for men and women and a greater risk of sexual violence and harassment at the workplace. Thus, female migrant workers who enter labour sectors with low labour protections are at a heightened risk of exploitation, particularly if they engage in domestic care work or sex work, as these categories of work are almost invariably exempt from laws and regulations that impose obligations on employers and protect workers..
Language: en |