Análisis Descriptivo Multivariado

The Norwegian Government’s plan of action Stop Human Trafficking (2006–2009) had two principal and equal goals: to protect victims and prosecute traffickers. The goals were mutually dependent: in order to give victims the best protection possible, traffickers must be prosecuted, and in order to prosecute traffickers, victims must be protected and safeguarded as witnesses. The new plan of action for 2011– 2014 retains these principal goals.

A number of factors inhibit or promote a victim’s willingness and capacity to report and stand witness in criminal

proceedings. The following factors are based on experience and feedback reported to the KOM project by the police and support groups:

Factors which inhibit a victim’s cooperation with the police:

„Fear of reprisals from traffickers in the form of threats of violence and/or economic sanctions against actual victims and/or their families

„Lack of knowledge of the rights of victims of human trafficking

„Fear of punishment or expulsion as a result of it emerging that the victim has broken the law in the course of the human trafficking situation

„Feelings of shame and guilt at finding themselves in such a situation

„Attachment to the traffickers – the Stockholm syndrome

„Mistrust of the authorities and the fear of being tricked once again

„Belief that life in the human trafficking situation is better than the former life

„Financial commitments to family in the home country – and few opportunities for income-earning work

„Lack of confidence in the future

„Unclear and complex information on the support offered by Norwegian authorities if victims cooperate with the police

„No guarantees of protection, residence permit, work and housing in the long term – only provisional promises

„Knowledge or rumours of others who have acted as witnesses and not received sufficient assistance and protection

„Knowledge or rumours of police often dismissing reports

„Knowledge or rumours that the traffickers will be acquitted or be given minor sentences

Factors which promote a victim’s cooperation with the police:

„Frequent conversations with lawyer and support groups regarding victim’s rights and opportunities if they cooperate with the police

„Written information from the Norwegian authorities regarding victim’s rights and opportunities if they cooperate with the police

Unambiguous information from all agencies and

Table. 5 Potential victims of human trafficking repatriated with IOM Oslo in 2010

organisations involved with the victim

„Bilateral cooperation between the police and support groups in Norway and the home country to prevent any sanctions against the family, to facilitate repatriation and reintegration and to prosecute traffickers in the home country

„Being met by policemen or policewomen who have expertise in human trafficking and who understand the victim’s situation

„Knowledge that the traffickers will be judged and sentenced

„Knowledge that other victims have received assistance

„Arranged housing and follow-up and work-related activity that adds content meaning to daily life

„Necessary health assistance, including therapy

„Desire to prevent other persons falling into the same situation

„Desire for reparation

As mentioned earlier, there is a need for more knowledge about the reasons why potential victims of human trafficking decline offers of assistance and protection. It is also relevant to gain further knowledge about the factors that will encourage victims themselves to take the initiative to ask for assistance and protection. The same applies to the factors which inhibit and encourage the decision to cooperate with the police regarding prosecution of the traffickers.

As in previous years, the reporting bodies were requested to

specify the status of any trials for persons under follow-up as potential victims of human trafficking in 2010. For 204 of the 319 potential victims, the reporting body did not have any information about any trials in progress. For the remaining 115 persons, the following was reported:

„44 persons decided not to file a report

„16 filed a report in 2010 and at the end of the year were awaiting a decision on whether investigations would be implemented.

„17 had the status of witness/aggrieved party in a trial under investigation (section 224 of the General Civil Penal Code) in Norway.

„Two had the status of witness/aggrieved party in a trial under investigation (section 224 of the General Civil Penal Code) abroad.

„26 had the status of witness/aggrieved party in a trial involving human trafficking which was dismissed.

„Five had the status of aggrieved party in a trial being processed in court.

„Three had the status of aggrieved party/witness in a trial with judgement in court.

It should be noted that the overview relates to what has been reported to KOM, and that this does not therefore reflect the real numbers.

Table 6 provides an overview of the number of reports filed pursuant to section 224 of the General Civil Penal Code in

YEAR

REPORTS FILED PURSUANT TO SECTION 224

TOTAL Prostitution/other

sexual exploitation Forced labour/services Removal of organs War service

2007 19 4 0 0 23

2008 41 4 1 0 46

2009 31 7 0 0 38

2010 30 10 0 0 40

TOTAL 121 25 1 0 147

the period 2007–2010. The information was obtained from the police register of criminal cases.

The number of reports has varied somewhat over the last four years. In 2007, there were “only” 23 reports, compared with 46 in 2008. In 2009, there were 38 reports, compared with 40 in 2010.

It is difficult to identify concrete reasons for the variation in numbers of reports filed. The reasons are complex and may be based on factors relating to the police and prosecution authorities and the victims and their legal counsels. Human trafficking as a crime was incorporated into the General Civil Penal Code in 2003. Between then and March 2011, 21 criminal cases under section 224 of the General Civil Penal Code were brought before the courts, 16 of them resulting in convictions. Only one of the 21 cases heard in court resulted in a conviction for exploitation for forced labour. The other cases related to exploitation for prostitution/other sexual purposes and resulted in human trafficking convictions for 29 persons. Approx. 80% of those convicted were men and almost 40% came from Eastern European countries.

In total, there were 50 aggrieved parties in the cases settled in court. Over 80% of the cases related to women and in five of the cases, the aggrieved party was a minor.

A Save the Children Norway report in 2009 discussed why so few cases of trafficking of children have been brought to court in Norway.81 One of several factors discussed in the report is the fact that human trafficking of minors breaks the stereotypical perception of human trafficking, and as a consequence, cases are not brought to light and prosecuted. As indicated by the review in 3.1.3.3, the highest ratio of exploitation of presumed victims who are minors is in forced

81 Smeby, Sheela (2009) Human trafficking with children – exposure, reporting and prosecution. Oslo: Save the Children.

labour and forced services. The competence, experience and measures associated with human trafficking in Norway are focused mainly on human trafficking for prostitution. We therefore have to ask the question is human trafficking of minors detected and prosecuted to a lesser extent because of the concentration of efforts on human trafficking for prostitution?

In August 2009, Hordaland police district established a special group, the EXIT project, to combat human trafficking, violation of the prohibition on the purchase of sexual services and pimping. In 2010, the EXIT project discovered two cases where children were believed to have been exploited for crime.

In one of the cases, the police brought charges against two persons in June 2011 for serious trafficking. The police believe that the defendants exploited four adolescents (15–17 years of age) from Lithuania for shoplifting in Norway. In their investigations, the police discovered that the young persons come from very poor living conditions in Lithuania and were recruited for “theft journeys” there. The police believe that, while in Norway, the young persons were transported to and from the shops by the defendants, lived in the defendants’ vehicles or tents and stole food or were given food by the defendants.

The second case concerns children from the Roma

population and is a particularly far-reaching case. The police in Bergen brought charges against six Romanian citizens for serious trafficking or involvement in trafficking. Police believe the children have been transported to cities in Norway and Sweden for the purpose of exploitation for different types of crime for profit and begging. It is likely that the children have suffered violence, rape and other sexual abuse. The children have had little schooling and have very poor reading and writing skills. As at June 2011, three minors and a baby were in the care of the local child welfare services. Police suspect that the baby was exploited/used in connection with begging. The accused have criminal conduct registered in many police districts in Norway. The police have also discovered that the

accused are related to other Romanian citizens who have convictions for drug offences and crime for profit in Norway. It will be interesting to follow these two cases further, both in terms of the experience gained in connection with assistance and protection for the children and the experience of the police in the criminal proceedings. This is the first time that charges have been brought in Norway for trafficking for exploitation for theft.

The STOP project was established in the Oslo police district in January 2007 as one of the measures in the plan of action to combat human trafficking (2006–2009). In relation to the mandate, the project shall have a preventive focus on making use of problem-oriented police work as a method. The STOP project has advocated the prevention and combating of human trafficking by the use of alternative methods, rather than solely by prosecution under section 224 of the General Civil Penal Code. The STOP project has shown that, in some cases, it may be better for the victim if the traffickers are prosecuted for crimes other than human trafficking, such as drug dealing and money laundering, as these do not require the victim’s testimony in court.

In its new plan of action against human trafficking for 2011– 2014, the Ministry of Justice has stated that a new research project will be conducted to evaluate police efforts against human trafficking. The research project will examine cases that have been dropped and identify factors that are particularly important for an investigation to result in a conviction. In other words, this review will increase knowledge about how many cases are dismissed and on what grounds. It will also provide useful knowledge about the challenges associated with investigating and producing evidence of human trafficking. Norway is not alone in having challenges relating to the prosecution of human trafficking. Consequently, it will be productive to make comparisons with other countries in order to gain an impression of whether the challenges in Norway are the same internationally or whether there are countries with a higher clear-up ratio due to special methods, organisation or resources.

Safeguarding the victims’ safety and life quality should always take first priority for the police when investigating cases involving human trafficking. It is important to take this and the above-mentioned factors into account when evaluating police efforts to combat human trafficking.