Crime in International Context - Essay Example

Crime in International Context I. Introduction As globalization has reached its peak, there are a number of transnational crimes that has seriously hampered global accord. By definition, transnational crime refers to crimes that have a strong impact that stretches across national borders and affects the entire population across the globe. However, the trial of transnational crimes gives rise to a major argument pertaining to the application of state-territorial principle to administer and prosecute transnational crimes. Application of state-territorial principle is argued to give rise to dualistic approach towards a particular crime because of the significant amount of differences between countries’ stance and legislation to tackle to various offences. (Aas, 2007) The exact nature and limitation of this principle will discussed through the example of Raymond Davis and Aafia Siddiqui in later parts of the prose to help further understanding of the state-territorial principle and why criminologists need to look beyond it. The substance of this prose will systematically assess all aspects of transnational crimes and demonstrate both national and international contexts in which the crime is prosecuted and demonstrate it primarily through the scourge of human trafficking in the United States. The prose will also assess the strategies adopted by countries to help curb the problem. II. State-Territorial Principle The state-territorial principle dictates that sovereign states are able to prosecute crimes that are committed within their borders and hence, triggers a number of complications when it comes to dealing with crimes that requires legislation beyond the country’s borders. The principle bars the country from exercising control and prosecuting the perpetrator outside its border. However, the principle stands null and void for those countries that possess universal jurisdiction or those who have been granted to exercise their control by other principles such as the “Principle of nationality”, “the passive personality principle” or the ‘protective principle”. (Randall, 2004) The territorial principle is based on the premise that criminal jurisdiction is based on the place where the crime was perpetrated. Having defined the state territorial principle and the dynamics involved in its application on the prosecution and tackling of crimes, criminologists have often argued that criminology needs to move beyond the state-territorial principle. (Randall, 2004) It is a logical approach to decide the course of jurisdiction; however there are several arguments for and against it. As the state-territorial principle bars research analysts from establishing theories to study international and transnational crimes. It is an undeniable fact that every country establishes legislation to tackle crimes according to the perception and gravity of the crime that depends upon the cultural stance of the country. (Murphy, 2006) Therefore, in order to pave way for researcher and establish a more uniform approach to these crimes, it is important to move beyond the state –territorial principle. Furthermore, sometimes people may feel that the culprit of a transnational crime has not received a punishment that is proportional or equal to his or her offence; however, it is the country’s law and regulation that allow that punishment for the crime as a result in order to draw a verdict that is acceptable to the legal system of both countries. State territorial principle has been met with a highly dual approach by researchers and critics. (Randall, 2004) Some critics have argued, “As a matter of convenience crimes should be dealt with by those states whose social order is most closely affected, and in general this will be the state on whose territories the crime are committed… The territorial state has the strongest interest, the greatest facilities and the greatest instruments for repressing crimes committed within its territory.” However, many people are opposed to this ideology using the argument that all civilized states are capable and interested in suppressing. (Murphy, 2006) The need to go beyond the territorial principle is further backed by the fact that it involves the concept of independence of countries, convenience, power and state interests. Involvement of the home country of the foreigner involved in the criminal activity or vice versa actually considered asserting control over the country’s matters as a result hampering their independence and impairing their sovereignty. The main premise of this argument was that bigger nations can always coerce smaller nations to turn in their citizens who have committed a crime on their territory. For example the case of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui and Raymond Allen Davis epitomize this aspect of the argument. Dr. Aafia Siddiqui who was convicted by the American government for involvement in terrorist activities against America and even though eminent political leaders and Pakistani population requested the American government to hand over Aafia to the Pakistani authorities, the territorial principle was applied and Aafia was given a life sentence. (Duff, 2010) On the other hand, Raymond Allen Davis, who killed two young men in Lahore, was convicted and hard evidence was found against him but due immense amount of intervention from American government agencies such as the CIA and FBI, Raymond Davis was allowed to go free and soon departed Pakistan. The United States being a highly influential country on an international front was able to intervene in the criminal trail proceedings of Raymond Davis. (Yusuf, 2011) However, when it came to Aafia, her case became a highly controversial one and has been the reason for the rising resentment amongst the Pakistani population against the American Government. Even though, British Parliamentarians had questioned the credibility of the evidences gathered against and even criticized the government. The aforementioned examples clearly demonstrate as to why criminologists need to look beyond the state-territorial principle to assess the nature of crimes due to the same fact that stronger nations can overpower smaller ones that can result in increased amount of resentment and grudges against each other and resulting in global unrest. (Duff, 2010 & Aas, 2007) III. Criminological Dualisms in Transnational Criminology It is an undeniable fact that perception of crimes and criminal activities varies from country and country due to the fact that culture is the most influential factor in this regard. The study into transnational crimes brings the dualisms in transnational criminology to surface that shed light on the social and political sciences of the legal and criminological framework across the border. The dualism occurs as a result of the existing distinctions between the internal and external meaning attached to the idea of security. However, the aforementioned is the way conceptual dualism is incorporated into transnational criminology and there are certain examples that further elaborate upon this aspect of transnational criminology. For instance the notions regarding war, crime and security are becoming highly dualistic in nature and are often challenged by transnational criminology. (Aas, 2007) Critics argue that war is also a transnational crime; however, transnational criminology challenges this by saying that war involves crossing the border but it is an entirely different case, whereby countries use force and arms in order to resolve conflicts, however during time of war, there is widespread unrest in a country and its framework is affected and is rendered suspended till the war finally comes to an end. Hence, it may not be technically to call war a transnational crime, as war by its nature causes a suspension of an individual’s right to life and leads extremely inhuman activities and mistreatment of prisoners in order to over power the other nation. (Aas, 2007 & Castells, 1998) Even human trafficking has been challenged by transnational criminology as a person migrating to greener pastures is a highly old concept and has been around for ages. However, most criminologists define human trafficking widely on the basis of people lured into developed countries with the hopes of enjoying a high standard of living but end up being exploited by others. It can be argued that if human trafficking involves the individual being exploited sexually or forced into labour then can be deemed a serious crime as it takes away fundamental human rights from the individual. (Sasses, 2005) However, immigration demonstrates that an individual has come to the developed country in search of better opportunities and even the American government gives announces amnesty for illegal immigrants to give them the right to live in the United States as a legal resident. There are a number of aspects to human trafficking and hence that is where the dualism stems from. Transnational criminology seeks to define and elaborate upon this dualism in order to make sure that the individual is prosecuted effectively and fair trail is given to anyone who is accused of being involved in the criminal activity. (Woodiwiss & Hobbs, 2009, 106-128) IV. Human Trafficking in the United States of America As mentioned earlier, the substance of this prose will delve deeper in to the subject of transnational crimes and will effectively elaborate upon its nature in the United States and how the crime perceived and responded to on an international front. Human trafficking refers to the unlawful transport of people from one country to another for illicit activities such as sex slavery, prostitution and immigration. Human trafficking has become a rising problem in the world and as a result countries including the United States have tightened their laws and regulation in order to curb this problem. According to the reports made by Human Rights Centre in Berkeley, California in 2004 stated that around 10,000 people were in the United States under forced labour; one-third of this estimate comprised of domestic labourers whereas some portion of this estimate also included extreme minors. As mentioned earlier, human trafficking is on a rise in the United States of America; it is main hub for traffickers and around 14500 to 17500 women and children are trafficked to the United States in an annual basis according to the Department of Justice in the United States of America. (Department of Justice report) There is an influx of people coming into the United States of America and are usually lured into forced labour and sex slavery with the promise of a better job and high standard of living by the traffickers. The people usually belong to impoverished nations such as Africa, India, Pakistan, China, Philippines and Bangladesh. Traffickers often go to developing countries to adopt children and then force them into prostitution. Even in South America, poverty and social unrest spurs human trafficking; similarly countries like Russia, Columbia, Thailand and western European countries that often give their consent to the trafficker in order to escape the harsh circumstances in their home country. (Dinan, 2000) The act of human trafficking is characterized by three major aspects the act that involves transporting the individuals from one place to another. The means used by the trafficker to convince the individual such as the use of force, threats, abduction, fraud or deception to lure them to another country. Finally, the act of trafficking is then defined by the purpose that for which the people were transported to the country. The purpose of trafficking people may be for prostitution, organ removal, forced labour, slavery or any other kind of exploitation. People may also fall prey to something that is now known as reproductive trafficking, which involves ova trade and surrogacy trade that seriously endangers the victim’s life in the long-run and due to rampant illiteracy women are not aware of it as a result they willingly do it for money at the cost of their health. (Eyal, 2011) The United Nation Office of drugs and crimes(UNODC) have identified the rising scourge of human trafficking in the America and has actively worked with the American government to draft out laws and regulation that criminalizes such activities and is drafted to curb the problem, if not eradicate it completely. There first obstacle to criminalizing human trafficking largely involved defining it in a highly broad term so that every individual is prosecuted and punished according to his or her role in the activity. Criminalization of human trafficker then also involved the criminalization of people who acted as accomplice to the trafficker and guiding or organizing others to carry out such activities. The UNODC stressed upon the need of developing and adopting a broad definition for human trafficking for the legislative activities so that the legal procedure can become more dynamic, flexible and is able to accommodate the legislative outline of across the border. By adopting a broad definition of human trafficking, there are a number of benefits such as it is applicable both inside and outside the border. Broad definition also makes the activity punishable for a variety of exploitation and not just sex slavery and protects men, women and children against these crimes. (McClain, 2007) The most popular act passed by the American government is “The Trafficking Victims Protection Act” (TVPA) in 2000, which has defined trafficking along severe forms of trafficking that include sex trafficking that include causing an individual to indulge in commercial sex by force, coercion, and deception. The act is also drafted to protect those who are not eighteen years of age. The act also defines trafficking as a way of forcing people into bondage or labour. According to the TVPA, the penalties and consequence of the act has been made even harsher as a form of deterrent. (McClain, 2007) The TVPA also works to reduce human trafficking by using economic alternative and helping the victims of human trafficking to rehabilitate and helping them either return to their home country or helping them find employment in the United States. The act required the federal government to establish a programme that oversees the implementation of the act and the federal programme also helped in providing various services to trafficking victims. The act also involves raising public awareness regarding Human Trafficking. It is more like a preventative measure to help people realize the ulterior motive behind people, who try to lure them into making such a deal with them and end up trapped in a foreign country. (Lee, 2011) The act was reauthorized in 2003 and became known as Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA). The act has mandated several other acts on an international level and has played a major role in curbing human trafficking in other countries as well. The office to monitor and combat human trafficking was made that has provides millions of dollars of funds to organizations all over the world to help eradicate this problem. As United States is the main “transit and destination country for human traffickers” there fore they have made significant amount contributions to raise awareness and education amongst people to protect them from human traffickers. Good education is necessary for people to understand and not to be easily fooled by these people who often use dubious methods to trap them. The act has also initiated various methods to decrease the existing numbers of people who are brought to United States. They are trained by organization and given employment, which helps them to get away from their oppressors and start a new life. (Lee, 2011) The Unites States has also assisted many countries to criminalize human trafficking and introduce legislation in their legal framework to help prosecute traffickers and also help the victims rehabilitate as effectively as possible. In 2007, American government passed another act called Anti-Human Trafficking Act, to reinforce the reforms introduced by TVPRA. On an international level, the United States has had a highly influential role in helping countries realize what a major problem human trafficking is and has worked with other countries to counter the problem effectively. (McClain, 2007) V. Conclusion In conclusion, the substance has effectively highlighted the definition if transnational criminology and how it is perceived and responded to on an international façade. Dr. Aafia’s and Raymond Davis’ example clearly demonstrates as to why criminologists need to look beyond the State Territorial principle, due to the variance in security notions between countries and in order to avoid developed countries from overpowering smaller under-developed ones. (Aas, 2007) Human activity in general is dual in nature and crime itself is a multifarious notion that needs to be defined and transnational criminology has challenged countless to demonstrate their dualistic nature and to further aid fair prosecution of such crimes, which also includes human trafficking. As the substance of the prose has highlighted how the crime is tackled in the United States of America and how effectively it has influenced the legislation in other countries. There are a number perspective regarding criminal behaviour and greater uniformity is required in legislation and it is required to look beyond the state territorial principle to create uniformity in criminology particularly to study transnational crimes. Bibliography Aas, K. (2007). Globalization and Crime. SAGE, London (chapters 1, 6 & 8) Castells, M. (1998) End of Millennium: The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture, Cambridge: Blackwell (extract from McLaughlin, E. et al., eds., 2003, Criminological Perspectives, London: Sage, available on blackboard) Department of Justice report. Combating Human Trafficking. Web: http://www.humantrafficking.org/countries/united_states_of_america. United States of America. Dinan K. (2000). Owed justice: Thai women trafficked into debt bondage in Japan. Human Rights Watch, New York Dragan, S. (2006). Constitutive Criminology: The Maturation of Critical theory, John Wiley & Sons, Indianapolis: Duff, G. (2010). Victim of Bush rape and Kidnap squad. U.S. Veterans Group - Injustices in Dr. Aafia's Case. Web. http://www.freeaafia.org/home/34-us-news/149-us-veterans-group-injustices-in-dr-aafias-case.pdf. New York. Eyal, H. (2011). Gene Watch: reproductive trafficking. Council Responsible for genetics. Web: http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/GeneWatch/GeneWatchPage.aspx?pageId=313. Cambridge Lee, M. (2011) Trafficking and Global crime Control, London: Sage McClain, R. (2007). An ounce of prevention: improving the preventative measures of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act. Vanderbilt journal of Transnational Law. Cengage Learning, Kentucky. Murphy, S. D. (2006). Principles of International Law. Thomson West. Massachusetts. Randall, K. C. (2004). "Recent Book on International Law: Book Review - Universal Jurisdiction: International and Municipal Legal Perspectives". American Journal of International Law, Massachusetts. Sassen, S. (2005) ‘Globalization after September 11’, in Edelman, M. & Haugerud, S. (eds.) The Anthropology of Development and Globalization, Blackwell Publishing (available though e-book), Oxford Woodiwiss, M. & Hobbs, D. (2009) ‘Organized evil and the Atlantic alliance: Moral panics and the rhetoric of organized crime policing in America and Britain’, British Journal of Criminology, United Kingdom. 49: 106-128 Yusuf, H. (2011). Dealing with Davis: inconsistencies in the US-Pakistan relationship. East-West Center in Washington, Washington D.C Read More