Anti-Human Trafficking Working Group Prepares

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 UNVIE VIENNA 000187

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PHUM KWMN PREF SMIG KCRM KTIP UN

SUBJECT: Anti-Human Trafficking Working Group Prepares
Recommendations

--------------
SUMMARY
--------------


1. On April 15-16 Vienna-based delegates and anti-human trafficking
government experts from several countries gathered in Vienna to
participate in a working group designed to assist the Conference of
the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Convention against
Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC) in the implementation of its
mandate with regard to the Trafficking in Persons (TIP) Protocol.
The recommendations of the session will be forwarded to the COP at
its next meeting in 2009, and to New York, as part of UNODC's input
to the Secretary General in advance of Thematic Debate on TIP,
scheduled for May 13th. Broad consensus was found in a number of
areas, evincing a convergence of opinions on many important issues.
However, thorny issues remain, notably the questions of
"criminalizing" trafficked victims and whether and how to involve
NGO's in the policy-making process. Although many issues were
discussed, the conversation often returned to the contentious and
New York-based "Global Plan of Action." Belarus, Russia and Egypt
expressed support for the Plan, but there is a noticeable lack of
enthusiasm from other delegations for such an exercise. End
Summary.

--------------
Recommendations Show
Broad Areas of Consensus
--------------


2. The first day was free-flowing and constructive on how best to
improve implementation of the TIP Protocol and how to improve
coordination at the international level. The second day reverted to
the inevitable divisions and started to focus on the line-by-line
negotiations. The U.S. delegation was pleased to see that the
proposed recommendations were often a vehicle to engage in further
substantive conversation rather than giving national statements.


3. Delegations agreed that universal adherence and effective
implementation of the TIP Protocol was a crucial initial step to
combating the trafficking problem. USDEL received support for its
proposal to ask UNODC to solicit information from signatory
countries on the obstacles preventing ratification of the TIP
Protocol and include the information in its next report to the COP.
Delegations also agreed on the need to criminalize all conduct that
facilitates or supports human trafficking, such as prostitution and
pimping. (Note: Some member states criticized the UN.GIFT Global
Report on Trafficking in Persons for the lack of acknowledgment that
many states are prosecuting the problem through TIP-related offenses
(such as pimping),rather than through an explicit criminal offense
of "trafficking in persons." Norway, for example, took umbrage at
the Report's assertion that the dearth of trafficking in persons
worldwide demonstrates insufficient attention being paid to human
trafficking. End note.)


4. Initially skeptical, member states eventually endorsed a U.S.
recommendation that the UNODC prepare issue papers to improve the
understanding and interpretation of key concepts in the Protocol in
the context of penal proceedings. Concepts such as "exploitation,"
"movement" and "vulnerability," which are decisive elements in a TIP
criminal case, are often understood inadequately by prosecutors,
court clerks or judges. Such inadequate understanding can lead to
inefficient proceedings and worse, a lack of conviction.


5. Delegations found broad consensus on the need to raise
awareness, and to build capacity by training officials from the
front-line immigration and labor inspectors, to social workers,
prosecutors and even peace-keeping soldiers. Such training, the
delegations recommended, should be especially oriented to the proper
identification of trafficked victims, which is crucial to the timely
and appropriate referral to treatment.


6. Delegations also agreed on the need to step up partnerships
between governments and the private sector to combat trafficking for
labor exploitation. The working group accepted a U.S.
recommendation that governments should, in addition to properly
identifying those products and services of exploited labor, raise
public awareness of this issue, in the hope of reducing the demand
for such goods and services.


7. The Group reached agreement on four recommendations on victim
protection and assistance: 1) the need for equal access to such
services, regardless of citizenship or origin; 2) the victim's
ability to stay in the territory temporarily or, when appropriate,
permanently; 3) the need for more effective allocation of support
service funds; and 4) the inclusion of the "best interests of the
child" principle.

--------------

UNVIE VIEN 00000187 002 OF 003


Bones of Contention:
Criminalizing TIP Victims
--------------


9. A number of other issues proved contentious. One was the manner
in which trafficked victims should be treated by the criminal
justice system. While it is undeniable that many victims engage or
engaged in unlawful acts (use of fraudulent identification, illegal
border crossing, as well as prostitution, etc.),many member states
(including the US) asserted that such persons should not be
prosecuted or otherwise punished for those acts, so long as these
acts were the "direct result" of their status as a trafficked
person. Iran, Egypt and Pakistan (which is not party to the
protocol) strenuously objected to what they saw as "blanket amnesty"
to criminals, albeit trafficked victims. They insisted that before
they would even consider non-punishment, the victim must show that
she/he was compelled to engage in the unlawful activity. (Note:
Such a position arguably is at odds with the irrelevance of
"consent," as discussed in Article 3 of the Protocol. It also
creates an undue burden on the victim to establish "compulsion" as
an affirmative defense. End Note.) In the end, delegations agreed
to insert the element of compulsion, and, softened the
recommendation to request that member states "consider the
possibility of non-prosecution or punishment."

--------------
NGO Involvement in Policy
--------------


10. A second contentious issue was the involvement of NGO's in the
formation of national policy. China, Pakistan (neither are a
signatory nor a party to the Protocol),Russia, and Egypt objected
vociferously to NGO inclusion in related governmental task forces.
In contrast, USDEL and many EU countries, especially Austria,
stressed that it was absolutely indispensible for civil society to
have an "equal" seat at the table. The compromise is a
recommendation for NGO's and their work to be taken into account by
policymakers when formulating national strategies.


11. USDEL underscored its support for the UNODC's crucial role in
helping states implement the protocol, but found some proposals
impractical or ill-developed. Russia, the UK and others expressed
support for UNODC's Global TIP report, and called on a biennial
summary report, and comprehensive review of TIP issues worldwide
once every ten years. Russia specifically expressed the need for
such a report "independent from government bias." Others called for
a UNODC-administered database that would collect TIP information.
However, no one was able to articulate clearly the purpose of this
database, whether it would serve as: a clearinghouse of government
information on health statistics, or a compilation of law
enforcement cases, or a status report of TIP-related legislation.
Delegates could not find consensus on any of these recommendations,
although delegations acknowledged that they should at least be
considered by the COP.

--------------
Global Plan of Action
Proposal Finds Limited
Support in Vienna
--------------


13. Throughout the two-day meeting, conversation often returned to
the contentious "Global Plan of Action". Led by Belarus, the Plan
was characterized as a supplement to the Protocol and would assist
the implementation of the Protocol. Russia, joined by the Africa
Union and Egypt, expressed support for the Plan. [Note: Many
delegations, including Egypt, acknowledged privately that the AU and
Egyptian positions were in large part dictated by their national
"first wives," such as Mrs. Mubarak in Egypt. End note.]


14. The U.K., Canada, Norway, Colombia, Peru, Iran, Indonesia,
Pakistan, France, China and Argentina all spoke either publicly or
privately against the Plan. Their objections were wide-ranging,
from the need to focus on existing mechanisms, or on regional
mechanisms, to the potential of creating an undesired parallel
process to the COP. Pakistan in particular stated it was "too much
too soon" to develop a global plan, and since it was not a party to
the TIP Protocol it could not support such a plan of action. USDEL
outlined concerns about the utility of launching a new initiative
when there is already an adequate global legal framework in place,
i.e., the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in
Persons, Especially Women and Children, supplementing the United
Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. In the
end, the Plan failed to gain consensus as a recommendation to the
COP; the Chair's report of the meeting will characterize the
discussions.

--------------

UNVIE VIEN 00000187 003 OF 003


Comment
--------------


15. We were pleased at this opportunity to focus UNODC's
anti-trafficking activities through the lens of the COP. Despite
broad consensus in a number of areas, the UNTOC COP will undoubtedly
face controversy over involvement, the criminalization of TIP
victims, the Global Plan of Action, and the direction of UNODC's
anti-TIP efforts (regular global reports vs. technical assistance).
While there was little enthusiasm in the room for the Global Plan of
Action, U.S. delegation also sensed disconnect between national
delegations in Vienna and New York. Our Mexican interlocutor, for
example, stated that it is very hard for him to get an answer from
his New York colleagues on whether they support the GPOA. Other
delegations voiced similar sentiments. It will be important in this
regard for the Department to work through capitals to ensure that
governments speak with a single voice in both New York and Vienna on
UN anti-trafficking work.
END COMMENT.


Schulte