Abstact
Human Trafficking, a gross human rights violation, is an increasing concern in many member states of the European Union. It can be argued that further EU enlargement could have a negative impact on this modern form of slavery in the EU, since enlargement would imply a stretch of the outer borders of the Union towards parts of the world which are economically and politically unstable and where organized crime is flourishing. However, there are also optimistic views; Sweden, who will hold the upcoming EU presidency, advocates that a further enlargement of the EU will, on the contrary, have an overall positive effect in combating and preventing trafficking in persons, due to the advancement of peace and security. So, which of the two views are we to believe? I interviewed Maria Grazia Giammarinaro, Italian National Expert working in the field of combating trafficking and exploitation of human beings at the European Commission in Brussels. She shared some of her thoughts regarding the possible implications and impacts of a further enlargement of the European Union on human trafficking, whilst highlighting some of the current problems facing the EU regarding this horrendous crime.
Interview with Maria Grazia Giammarinaro, Italian National Expert at the European Commission
Poverty and instability as root causes
Human trafficking is a phenomenon often identified as stemming from poverty, conflict and the lack of economic opportunities. It is a crime which not only constitutes a gross human rights violation but also undermines national legislation and poses a security threat to the countries involved. Human trafficking is identified as an increasing problem within the EU borders, of which thousands of women, children and men fall victims each year. It is identified as a low risk crime, and the demand in the EU for commercial sex and cheap labour makes it a highly profitable business.
The Swedes, who will have the upcoming EU presidency (as of 1 July 2009) have optimistically envisioned that "an enlarged Union presents a unique opportunity to create peace and security in Europe which will lead to political, economic and environmental advantages," and as announced on the website of the Swedish Government. This would imply that the accession of new member states would have an altogether positive impact on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings in the EU.
Weighing Scandinavian optimism
On the website of the Swedish government one can, further on, read how an enlarged EU "will be in a better position to solve common problems" and, precisely, better "fight international organized crime and human trafficking." But is this necessarily true? Could traffickers not, in the worst case, profit from more open borders? Could not the accession into the EU of former countries of "origin" transform them into countries of "transit" and "destination", pushing the outer borders of the EU further towards conflict areas, in turn aggravating trafficking of human beings within the EU?
From the Centre of Administration ? Interview with Maria Grazia Giammarinaro
Ms Giammarinaro is an Italian National Expert working in the field of combating trafficking and exploitation of human beings at the European Commission in Brussels. I asked her what her opinion was on this subject.
Andrea Nyberg: Do you think that a further EU enlargement, which would push the borders of the EU further towards unstable regions, could fuel the phenomenon of trafficking in human beings in the EU?
Maria Grazia Giammarinaro: There is no evidence that enlargement caused an increase in human trafficking at the most recent enlargement (in 2004). However, the fact that people crossed borders legally from that stage on does, on the other hand, not permit us to obtain information regarding whether migrants or travellers were traffickers or trafficking victims after the opening of the borders. Naturally, the opening of borders may favour the business of trafficking in humans, but there exists no evidence of this.
One major - and "new" ? problem which came as a consequence of the last enlargement was the phenomenon of human trafficking within the borders of the EU. Previous legislation had concentrated on people trafficked from third countries into the EU; however, the phenomenon of EU citizens who are trafficked between or within member state countries is new and legislation has to be reformulated and adapt to this new situation.
AN: What would be some of the positive impacts that EU enlargement would have regarding the fight against human trafficking?
MGG: International law enforcement cooperation is much easier between two EU member states compared to cooperation between an EU and a non-EU member state. Within the EU we can set up joint investigation teams, for example. Also, the exchange of information is much easier between EU countries, and there can be a direct contact between authorities. So yes, international law enforcement cooperation becomes incomparably easier; this is the added value of the enlargement.
An interesting example of law enforcement cooperation was the setting up of a joint investigation team between United Kingdom and Romania in the fight against child trafficking. This close collaboration between the UK and the Romanian police aimed at maximising the effectiveness of identifying child trafficking networks.
AN: What can you tell me about initiatives aimed at tackling the demand side of the sex- industry?
MGG: Tackling the demand side is a highly sensitive subject. This, because there is a cultural and ideological dimension to the commercialization of sex. The EU has therefore not been able to take any specific action on this level. There is, of course, the Swedish model (the criminalization of those who buy sexual services, but not of those who sell them). We are proposing the possibility of criminalization of clients who knowingly take advantage of trafficked persons ? however, there is a difficult, political debate surrounding this. The criminalization of exploiters regarding people trafficked for the labour market (and not the sex industry) would be easier. However, due to the fact that weaker economies largely rely on cheap labour, sometimes involving exploitation of migrant workers, this is also a difficult point to tackle. Sanctions issued by the European Commission for persons that knowingly employ trafficked persons do exist, however. Constant monitoring is, however, required on a local level in order to make any of the existing policies work.
AN: Do you think it would make sense to drop the issue of immigration altogether when talking about human trafficking, in order to avoid misunderstandings?
MGG: It is important, always, to distinguish very clearly between immigration, human smuggling and human trafficking. It is not an illegal immigration issue, i.e. the trafficking victim should not be looked upon as someone who "needs to be deported". Instead we need to adopt a protective attitude, of which the aim is not deportation. Also, it is not the victims which we have to catch; it is the traffickers. However, victim identification may be an important step in the efforts to catch the traffickers.
AN: What specific actions are needed to effectively combat human trafficking, and what has the European Commission done recently in this area?
MGG: Crucial is that police officers are trained. Currently, a lot of action taken is based on national policy and legislation. We are trying to introduce specific, binding measures for EU countries in the effort to combat human trafficking; however, this is not easy since all too often there is a lack of political will to thoroughly tackle the problem. What we need is to adopt a holistic approach which also concerns procedural law, investigative techniques and the specific type of assistance which should be given to victims. Also, we need to establish frameworks regarding how and when victims should return to their countries or places of origin (human trafficking can also occur within one single EU country) and how they should be rehabilitated and protected, also in order to avoid that they are re-trafficked. Here, international cooperation is needed; there has to be an exchange of communication between countries.
AN: What does the fight against human trafficking look like at the national level?
MGG: The situation regarding combating human trafficking in many EU member states is not very good; governments are cautious, because of public opinion. People might not be happy with aspects of the trafficking legislation, because they are diffident of the victims, whom they suspect might claim to be victims of trafficking in order to obtain permits of stay or working permits. Also, people cannot imagine the level of coercion involved in the human trafficking trade; some who claim to be victims can appear to be "free", although these are, instead, stuck in an evil circle of debt to their traffickers, living under constant threat and may be psychologically or physically tortured. Also, the purpose of the victim's journey into the hands of her/his trafficker in the first place - and almost exclusively ? has to do with her/his responsibility for keeping a family alive somewhere in their countries of origin; this is another vulnerability factor which might be difficult for the vaster public to grasp.
AN: How do you think the Swedish presidency will influence the European Commission's efforts in the fight against human trafficking?
MGG: For the Swedes, the fight against human trafficking is a high priority on their agenda. For example, they are currently preparing a large conference to be held around EU Anti-Trafficking Day (18 October).
AN: In conclusion, how would you sum up the positive and negative points regarding further enlargement of the EU and the fight against trafficking ? and to what extent do you agree with the Swedes, who insist on the positive impact enlargement would have on the phenomenon?
MGG: It is not so much a questions of how far the EU borders are pushed ? it is more a question of how certain trafficking routes are influenced by this. At most, one might examine drugs trafficking and its link between human trafficking, and how these routes might be affected by a future enlargement of the EU. However, it is not known whether there exists any direct link between these.
The difficulty in the fight against human trafficking is that the trafficking routes are so complicated. We are talking about networks operating internationally, which are difficult to identify. I do not think that a further EU enlargement would aggravate trafficking; however this also depends on how the routes are affected by the enlargement. I do agree with the Swedes; the positive impacts on the fight against human trafficking regarding further enlargement of the EU outnumber the negative aspects. Of course there are problems, for example corruption, which can hamper efforts. However, corruption in certain countries will continue to exist, regardless of EU membership or not.
Write the Author directly: Nyberg.andrea@hotmail.com