Impacts of Human Trafficking in Europe - Essay Example

Impacts of Human Trafficking in Europe Number Department Impacts of Human Trafficking in Europe Human trafficking refers to the trade in human beings, especially for purposes of using the victims as sex slaves, forced labourers and organ or tissue donors as well as surrogacy among others crimes. In Europe, human trafficking takes place within individual countries and across the borders. Other victims come from northern Africa, Asia and the Middle East. Human trafficking is regarded as a serious offense under EU Law because it breaches human rights. As such, the Union has passed various international conventions and Directives to rein in the problem. This paper critically examines the impacts of human trafficking on the European Union and some of the steps that the Union has taken to handle the problem. Statistics Human trafficking is an industry with annual value of about $32 billion and witnesses current-day smuggling of persons or human organs into another country without due consent of the victims. The United Nations estimates that 2.5 million people are trapped in the complicated, clandestine web of human trafficking at any point in time. About one-fifth of the global estimates are in Europe (Holmes, 2010). Human trafficking affects people from all walks of life, since traffickers have a variety of reasons for engaging in the business. Men are usually enlisted for hard labour placements, while children find themselves in manufacturing industries such as textiles, and farming. Women and young girls are essentially enrolled for the commercial sex industry (Aronowitz, 2009; Petrunov, 2011). Territo and Kirham (2010) note that official statistics are far from providing a clear definition of the issue in almost all of the 28 European nations, but credible estimations are available. It has been established that human trafficking went up by 18 percent between 2008 and 2010; but with a reduced government effort in tackling the menace. Regrettably, the 1534 cases in 2008, 1445 in 2009, 1144 in 2010 suggests the number of successful trials for the crime went down by 13 percent during the three-year period. Of the victims, 68% were women, 17% men, 12% girls and 3% boys (Vinkovic, 2010). Impacts of human trafficking on Europe Regional imbalance Human trafficking has touched off a wide range of serious social, political and economic problems in EU member countries (Scott and Chase, 2011). The perceived impressive economic growth and the potential for massive opportunities in certain European countries have led to many people from around the world giving in to lies of traffickers that they would find adequate job placements away from their original homes (Lee, 2013). This victims’ spiriting away from their homes original homes has led to an imbalance of populations and added to the pressure on social amenities in the destination countries. The clandestine criminal gangs, therefore, undermines the fundamental human rights issues that the continental Europe has laboured to safeguard since 20th century, thus calls for adequate intervention mechanisms to correct the imbalance. Impairment of constitutionalism Human trafficking influences the perpetuation of poor legal regimes within which such operations can operate. Other impacts include the reluctance of political elite to act on such crimes; confusion among compromised law enforcers in handling the problem; corruption; and the inability of the victims to cooperate with law enforcers (Holmes, 2010; Scott and Chase, 2011). These factors have conspired to complicate meaningful investigations that would lead to successful convictions of the culprits in parts of Europe (Obokata, 2003; Muus, 2001). As Gallagher (2010) has noted human trafficking spawn confusion and scepticism among EU countries and hinders the smooth movement of people and goods in a globalized world. As a result, EU countries have abandoned some of the liberal market rules to enact strict border controls to avoid human trafficking; developments that have only served to undermine different freedoms as envisaged in the EU Law. The ensuing scenario against the backdrop of an increasing reality of regional imbalance has culminated in a rise in the number of illegal migrants and a corresponding rise in human trafficking cases. According to Territo and Kirham (2010), the tighter the rules governing the movement of people across the borders, the higher the likelihood of growth of trans-national criminal gangs. Under-development Cases of underdevelopment, lack of resources are some of the results of human trafficking in Europe. These serve to motivate traffickers to heighten their game in an environment where there are an existence high numbers of desperate and readily available political refugees (Scott and Chase, 2011). Apart from cases of social instability, worsening economic inequalities among different EU countries, along with the inclination of poverty to women and their side-lining in many societies have over the history made the women and children more susceptible to trafficking to Europe to fill non-existent job placements. These triggers have served to create a lot of economic pressure on EU member countries. Other impacts on the EU include heightened rate insecurity, and poor social and physical health among the locals. Economic Impacts Trafficking sparks off lost opportunities in the EU countries including unemployment for the locals and the dwindling productivity in the future. According to Gallagher (2010), trafficking also strains national budgets for welfare programs and as such limit remittances that developed countries within the Union can send to their developing counterparts. This creates insecurity in Northern Africa and Eastern Europe, which impacts directly on Europe and their interests in the developing countries. Owing to the annual rate of remittances to poor countries being over €300 billion, with about half coming from the EU, the shrinking level of remittances from the victims normally translates into about € 30 billion in lost economic development between Europe and the developing countries on an annual basis (Kaye, Winterdyk and Quarterman, 2014). In addition, the costs of forced labour and other forms of exploitation visited on victims of trafficking cannot be accurately measured, but it is apparent that the gravest ways in which child labour manifests as a result of their trafficking represents lost productivity in Europe. This is more serious considering that the younger generation of individuals will be expected to drive the economy in less than two decades (Aronowitz, 2009). Under human trafficking, whatever government policies are put in place to improve education and health are not properly utilised because a significant number of those who should benefit from such programs are not in the right institutions that provide such services. Lastly, human trafficking has resulted in the channelling of huge chunks of national budgets towards fighting the problem. As Lee (2013) has indicated, such campaigns deny other development programs that would contribute to better growth of the national economies the necessary budgets and resources. Social impacts Apart from lost benefits in form of human capital and remittances, Oguz (2012) and Chaudary (2011) have noted that human trafficking triggers additional costs on the social development of the European society. For instance, the direct impact of human trafficking on the family and immediate community of the victims is normally dire. Trafficking impairs extended family relationships, and in a number of situations where women are victims, the families they live behind dissolve. Children and the elderly are also left to their own devices. Victims of trafficking who are lucky to return to their original homes often encounter hostile reception, stigma, and isolation, and are more susceptible to drug abuse and deviance Scott and (Chase, 2011). In addition, trafficked children usually grapple with irreversible impairment of their growth and development. Survivors undergo unbearable traumas and emotional disorders, which only serve to further strain shrinking health care budgets. Health impacts There are substantial health impacts of human trafficking on not only the victims, but on their respective destinations as well. The health risks are often compounded during the victims’ transit (Caplin, 2007; Balch and Geddes, 2011). Perilous means of transport expose trafficked persons to harm and even death. This is especially true, for the victims are sometimes transported under overcrowded and unhygienic conditions such as trailer containers that lack enough food, water and air. Such dire conditions serve to spread infectious diseases among the victims who survive the ordeal to an extent that when they are eventually allowed in their destinations, they are already sick and can easily infect others. In addition, trafficked people undergo physical, sexual, and psychological turmoil at the hands of criminal traffickers, employers, and members during their transit. At their destinations, some of them face persecution from members of their immediate community. These conditions cause the victims more vulnerability to different occupational, health, and ecological risks (Caplin, 2007). Individuals who are trafficked to work in sex dens are not only susceptible to contracting sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), but they spread the diseases to the healthy local citizens of EU member states. The health challenges facing the victims are complicated by their denial of protective contraceptives. Sex slaves, especially those who are deployed by their pimps and employers along trucking routes have been blamed for the high rate of new HIV/AIDS infections across the continent through the ‘porous’ borders created by increased movement of people cross EU member states (Farrugia, 2012; Bressan, 2011). It is notable that health impacts of human trafficking are not restricted to those who are sent to sex dens for exploitation. Trafficked labourers stay and work in congested, unhygienic conditions, with very minimal if any concern for safety. As Territo and Kirham (2010) have indicated, these are serious health challenges that normally affect not just the individual victims, who may experience long-term health complications, but the wider populations of European member states. Insecurity An increase in the cases of human trafficking triggers poorer national security and pose challenges to law and order (Caplin, 2007; Balch and Geddes, 2011). For instance, some of the gains that traffickers generate from the illegal activities may be used to manipulate the whole immigration system. Such criminal gangs are aware that with strong government institutions, their illegal activities would be rooted out completely so they seek to influence relevant government agencies in a manner that challenges law and order. The end result is that Europe faces a large network of crime syndicates which might pose serious threats to the very core of transparency and accountability in governance. And, owing to the fact that human traffickers liaise with organised criminal gangs to effectively perpetrate criminal acts including terrorism, reining in human traffickers is increasingly being seen as a major priority of European member states (Great Britain Parliament Joint Committee on Human Rights 2007). Kaye, Winterdyk and Quarterman (2014) concur that human trafficking activities undermine government programs, which are aimed at achieving effective control within their jurisdictions. It also threatens the safety of the economically poor in not only the EU but in countries neighbouring Europe as well. Owing to the economic impacts of the current crisis, many EU member states are struggling to guarantee security and tend to every need of their vulnerable populations. Regardless, Orlowska (2011) says the EU and state governments are doing what they can within their budgets to stop human trafficking by protecting hundreds of vulnerable women and children who are being taken from their residences, refugee camps and other social facilities with promises of better employment opportunities. The governments have engaged in a number of programs that are aimed at bringing sanity in the region, and within the worst affected member countries. EU Interventions The dire need to rein in the problem to human trafficking has led the EU into classifying the problem as a form of slavery that has persisted to the neo-modern era (Breuil et al, 2011; Abas et al, 2013). This stance is largely evident in the political interventions by the EU. The EU Directives, binding Court decisions, and insistence on the protection of human rights are responses that are normally viewed in the continental Europe as well thought-out as far as curbing the crime of the ‘modern slavery’ is concerned. The political will at the international EU quarters to tackle the problem was seriously considered for the first time in 1990s when numerous programs, strategies, and funding were proposed by the member countries for implementation by individual member countries within the spheres of influence and the continental level (Orlowska, 2011). The current economic crisis facing several EU member states has dented government efforts towards this cause and boosted business opportunities for traffickers, however. Diagnosing the problem First among the most important EU interventions has been to establish the actual number of the people affected by the human trafficking on an annual basis. Obokata (2008) argues that with accurate facts in addition knowledge of the actual origins of victims of human trafficking (including Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, within the EU, and Russia, Nigeria, Ukraine, Vietnam and China) has formed the basis of various EU interventions to curb the problem. With this adequate information regarding the origin of the victims, their passage and their destination, the EU has enacted a number of Charters, issued vital Directives, and worked with state judicial organs to implement appropriate policies which are aimed at ending the problem (Caplin, 2007; Balch and Geddes, 2011). Charter of Fundamental Rights Human Trafficking is outlawed by the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights 2000, the Human Trafficking Directive 2011, and the Palermo Protocol which all define the crime as the enlisting, transportation, relocation, hoarding or receipt of individuals by forcible means or threats of force for purposes of exploitation. The bodies of law also indict the receipt of any benefits on such human persons (Shelley, 2010). Still, the documents define exploitation as inclusive of receipt and subjecting human beings to forced labour, prostitution, servitude, slavery or similar practices, or cutting out of their body organs. With these clear definitions of the crime, states have been given the green light to enact relevant laws which are consistent with the overall EU Law in an effort to root out drug trafficking in the continent. Court rulings have also served to provide the much-needed direction on the issue for courts with lower jurisdictions to follow when dealing with human trafficking in European nation-states (Great Britain Parliament Joint Committee on Human Rights, 2007). Authorities In the case of Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia - 25965/04 [2010] ECHR 22, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) issued a landmark verdict spelling out the obligations of states regarding the fight against human trafficking. The Court held that it is the duty of states to act reasonably when addressing the problem by curbing recruitment of innocent persons within their respective jurisdictions; investigating, prosecuting, and safeguarding the human rights of vulnerable people from abuse by providing the necessary help they need to remain safe. In light of the ruling, state authorities are required to protect witnesses and actual victims of human trafficking by enacting relevant laws that criminalise such practices (Breuil et al, 2011; Abas et al, 2013). The EU strives to also ensure that the interests the victims are given priority by EU states in the war against human trafficking (Farrugia, 2012; Aronowitz, 2001; Bressan, 2011). To achieve this, the EU obligates the countries where the victims of the crime come from, those which they pass and governments in charge of their destinations to liaise in curbing the problem. This approach was spelt out in the verdict on the case of Siliadin v. France ECHR [2005] 73316/01. Serving as the first human trafficking case to be taken up by the ECtHR, the plaintiff, a female resident of Paris with Togolese citizenship, had been subjected to forced child labour and denied pay for many years. Her employer had also taken her travel documents to prevent her escape. The Court decided that even though the evidence did not suggest that the victim was subjected to slavery, it was convinced that the applicant was a victim of forced labour. The EU is also facilitating better international relations among the member states so as to achieve a successful war on human trafficking by making binding rulings. In the case of case Kodos v. Prosecutor General’s Office of the Republic of Lithuania [2010] EWHC 897, the Prosecution sought the contribution of a defendant from the UK to ensure the successful settlement of a case involving eight Lithuanian women who had allegedly undergone sexual exploitation in the country at the hands of the defendant. Despite the fact that some of the human trafficking cases within the continental EU are handled by member states, they are literally following the precedents set by the ECtHR in the case of Siliadin v. France and various EU Directives on Human Trafficking (Shelley, 2010). Conclusion Human Trafficking is a serious problem that negatively affects EU member states’ economy, social relations, security and better participation in international spheres. It brings about serious health complications, and soaring health care costs in the society which stem from the management of HIV/AIDS. Owing to the fact that human traffickers are themselves criminals with wide networks having a multi-billion dollar economic empire, the EU is surely upset by the problem. In light of this, the EU has taken remarkable steps to rein in the problem by ratifying binding Directives and Charters to this effect since 1990s. Through the ECtHR, the EU has set the precedent in the war against human trafficking by prioritizing the interest of the victims and vulnerable populations. As a result, EU member states have been mandated to prosecute cases of human trafficking at the national level and embrace international cooperation in the war against human trafficking. By virtue of the EU’s interventions, cases of human trafficking are expected to reduce due to better inter-state cooperation and guidance provided by the EU. References Abas et al. 2013. Risk factors for mental disorders in women survivors of human trafficking: a historical cohort study. BMC Psychiatry, 13(1), pp.1-11. Aronowitz, A.A. 2001. Smuggling and Trafficking in Human Beings: The Phenomenon, The Markets that Drive It and the Organisations that Promote It. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 9(2), p.163. Aronowitz, A.A. 2009. Human Trafficking, Human Misery: The Global Trade in Human Beings. London: Greenwood Publishing Group. Balch, A., and Geddes, A. 2011. Opportunity from Crisis? Organisational Responses to Human Trafficking in the UK. British Journal of Politics & International Relations, 13(1), pp.26- 41. Bressan, S. 2011. Louise Shelley: Human Trafficking: A Global Perspective. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 17(4), pp.349-352. Breuil et al. 2011. Human trafficking revisited: legal, enforcement and ethnographic narratives on sex trafficking to Western Europe. Trends in Organized Crime, 14(1), pp.30-46. Caplin, J. 2007. Europe: Invisible Children. Harvard International Review, 29(2), pp.11-12. Chaudary, S. 2011. Trafficking in Europe: an analysis of the effectiveness of European Law. Michigan Journal of International Law, 33, p.77. Farrugia, R. 2012. State responsibility for human trafficking - perspectives from Malta. Journal of Money Laundering Control, 15(2), pp.142-152. Gallagher, T.A. 2010. The International Law of Human Trafficking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Great Britain Parliament Joint Committee on Human Rights. 2007. Human trafficking: update, twenty-first report of session 2006-07, report, together with formal minutes and appendix. London: The Stationery Office. Holmes, L. 2010. Trafficking and Human Rights: European and Asia-Pacific Perspectives. London: Edward Elgar Publishing. Kaye, J., Winterdyk, J., and Quarterman, L.2014. Beyond Criminal Justice: A Case Study of Responding to Human Trafficking in Canada1. Canadian Journal of Criminology & Criminal Justice, 56(1), pp.23-48. Lee, M. 2013. Human Trafficking. New York: Routledge. Muus, P. 2001. International Migration and the European Union, Trends and Consequences. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 9(1), p.31. Obokata, T. 2003. EU Council Framework Decision on Combating Trafficking in Human Beings: A critical appraisal. Common Market Law Review, 40(4), pp.917-936. Obokata, T. 2008. Legal Responses to Trafficking in Women for Sexual Exploitation in the European Union. Common Market Law Review, 45(4), 1298-1299 Oguz, G. 2012. International cooperation in combating human trafficking in the EU: evidence from Turkey. Irish Journal of Sociology, 20(1), pp.39-64. Orlowska, R. 2011. Immigration in the European Union in the Second Decade of the 21st Century: Problem or Solution? Folia Oeconomica Stetinensia, 10(1), p.164. Petrunov, G. 2011. Managing money acquired from human trafficking: case study of sex trafficking from Bulgaria to Western Europe. Trends in Organized Crime, 14(2/3), pp.165-183. Scott, C.R., and Chase, A.D. 2011. Human Trafficking in Europe and Eurasia: Prevention, Protection, and Victim Assistance. London: Nova Science Publishers, Incorporated. Shelley, L. 2010. Human Trafficking: A Global Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Territo, L., and Kirham, G. 2010. International Sex Trafficking of Women & Children: Understanding the Global Epidemic. London: Looseleaf Law Publications. Vinkovic, M. 2010. The "unbroken marriage" - trafficking and child labour in Europe. Journal of Money Laundering Control, 13(2), pp.87-102. Read More