Order Code RL33200
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Trafficking in Persons in
Latin America and the Caribbean
December 15, 2005
Clare Updated January 24, 2006
Clare M. Ribando
Analyst in Latin American Affairs
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress
Trafficking in Persons in
Latin America and the Caribbean
Summary
Trafficking in persons for sexual exploitation or forced labor, both within a
country and across international borders, is a lucrative criminal activity that is of
major concern to the United States and the international community. Trafficking in
persons affects nearly every country and region in the world. While most trafficking
While most
trafficking victims still appear to originate from South and Southeast Asia or the
former Soviet
Union, human trafficking is a growing problem in Latin America and
the Caribbean.
Countries in Latin America serve as source, transit, and destination
countries for
trafficking victims. Latin America is also a primary source for the
estimated 14,500
to 17,500 people that are trafficked to the United States each year.
In Latin America, trafficking in persons occurs both within countries and across
borders as children and adults are trafficked for prostitution, forced labor, and
domestic servitude. Traffickers take advantage of poor young people with minimal
education in countries with political instability, high unemployment, and corruption.
Trafficking is increasingly tied to organized criminal groups who exploit
undocumented migrants, especially in the U.S.- Mexico border region.
Congress has taken a leading role in fighting human trafficking by passing the
Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-386) and, the
Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2003 (P.L. 108-193), and the
Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-164). On
October 7, 2005, the Senate approved the ratification of the United Nations Protocol
to Prevent, Suppress, and Punish Trafficking in Persons. The United States became
a party to the Protocol on December 3, 2005.
In FY2004, the State Department and other U.S. agencies provided more than
$82 million in anti-trafficking assistance to foreign governments. On June 3, 2005,
the State Department released its fifth annual report on human trafficking, Trafficking
in Persons Report (TIP) dividing countries into four groups according to the efforts
they were making to combat trafficking. Tier 3 countries are those that have not
made an adequate effort to combat trafficking and are subject to sanctions.
Latin America had a higher percentage of Tier 3 countries in both the 2004 and
2005 TIP reports than any other region. In 2005, Bolivia, Ecuador, Jamaica,
Venezuela, and Cuba were placed on Tier 3, but only Venezuela and Cuba were
subject to sanctions by the presidential determination announced in September 2005.
This report describes the nature and scope of the problem of trafficking in
persons in Latin America and the Caribbean. The paper then describes U.S. efforts
to deal with trafficking in persons in the region, as well as discusses the successes
and failures of some recent country and regional anti-trafficking efforts. The paper
concludes by raising several issues for policy consideration that may be helpful as the
109th Congress continues to address human trafficking as part of its authorization,
appropriations, and oversight activities. This report will be updated periodically. For
more information, see CRS Report RL30545, Trafficking in Persons: The U.S. and
the International Response, by Francis Miko.
Contents
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Trafficking and Migration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Trafficking and Alien Smuggling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Global Figures on Trafficking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Scope of the Problem in Latin America and the Caribbean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Child Trafficking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Trafficking for Sexual Exploitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Trafficking for Forced Labor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Factors that Contribute to the Rise in Trafficking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Relationship to Organized Crime and Terrorism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Trafficking and HIV/AIDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
U.S. Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Anti-Trafficking Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Legislative Action in the 109th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Trafficking in Persons Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Latin America and the TIP Rankings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
U.S. Government Anti-Trafficking Programs in Latin America . . . . . . . . . 12
Presidential Anti-Trafficking in Persons Initiative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Regional and Country Efforts to Combat Trafficking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Organization of American States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Inter-American Development Bank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Country Efforts: Progress and Remaining Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Issues for Policy Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Measurements of Success . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Enforcement Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Balancing Multiple U.S. Interests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Beyond Cuba and Venezuela? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Equal Focus on All Types of Trafficking? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Prostitution and Trafficking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
List of Tables
Table 1. Latin America and the Caribbean Trafficking in Persons Status . . . . . 21
Trafficking in Persons in
Latin America and the Caribbean
Background
Trafficking in persons for sexual exploitation or forced labor, both within a
country and across international borders, is a lucrative criminal activity that is of
major concern to the United States and the international community. While most
trafficking victims still appear to originate from South and Southeast Asia or the
former Soviet Union, human trafficking is a growing problem in Latin America and
the Caribbean. This paper describes the nature and scope of the problem of
trafficking in persons in Latin America and the Caribbean. The paper then describes
U.S. efforts to deal with trafficking in persons in Latin America and the Caribbean,
as well as discusses the successes and failures of some recent country and regional
anti-trafficking efforts. The paper concludes by raising several issues for policy
consideration that may be helpful as the 109th Congress continues to address human
trafficking as part of its authorization, appropriations, and oversight activities.
Definition
Severe forms of trafficking in persons have been defined in U.S. law as “sex
trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or
in which the person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of age; or
... the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for
labor or services through the use of force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of
subjection to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery.”1 Most
members of the international community generally agree that the trafficking term
applies to all cases of this nature involving minors whether a child was taken forcibly
or voluntarily.
Some groups in the United States have sought to broaden the definition of
trafficking in persons to include all forms of prostitution, but the international
community has thus far rejected these attempts.2 Others, including key U.S. officials,
1
Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA) (P.L. 106-386). For
a detailed report on global human trafficking, see CRS Report RL30545, Trafficking in
Persons: The U.S. and the International Response, by Francis T. Miko.
2
Proponents of this broader definition of trafficking in persons, which include both religious
groups and feminist organizations, argue that prostitution is never truly voluntary and that
traffickers simply force their victims to appear to be acting voluntarily. Others, including
many European and Latin American countries, have legal and regulated prostitution and
argue that this broadened definition would impede the capacity of the international
(continued...)
CRS-2
have referred to trafficking as “modern day slavery.” Critics of presenting trafficking
as the equivalent of slavery note that although it creates a powerful analogy, the term
“slavery”only applies to a small percentage of trafficking cases. They assert that
most cases of trafficking occur when migrants are exploited by traffickers during the
process of migration.3
Trafficking and Migration. Over the last thirty years, several factors have
combined to increase migration flows from Latin America and the Caribbean. From
1995-2000, economic stagnation, poverty, unemployment, and the ongoing conflict
in Colombia made Latin America the region with the highest out-migration rate in
the world.4 Primary destination countries for Latin American immigrants have
included Spain, Italy, Canada, the Netherlands, Britain, and the United States. These
countries — many with low birth rates and aging populations — have come to rely
on both male and female migrant laborers from Latin America to fill low-paying
agricultural, construction, service industry, and domestic service jobs. At the same
time, concerns about security and other issues related to absorbing large numbers of
foreign-born populations have led many developed countries to tighten their
immigration policies. These factors have led to a global rise in irregular or
undocumented immigration.
In the Western Hemisphere, increasing irregular migration has been most
evident along the U.S.- Mexico border. In 2004, Mexican authorities reported
detaining 215,695 undocumented migrants, a 15% increase over 2003. These
migrants, though primarily from Central America, have begun to include large
numbers of individuals from South American countries such as Brazil and Ecuador.
Over the past three years, the number of non-Mexican undocumented migrants
apprehended along the U.S.- Mexico border has more than tripled.5 Increasing
irregular migration has put Latin American migrants at a high risk of both human
rights and health dangers, including abuse by traffickers and alien smugglers.
Trafficking and Alien Smuggling. In 2000, the United Nations drafted
two protocols, collectively known as the Palermo Protocols, to deal with trafficking
in persons and human smuggling.6 Trafficking in persons is often confused with
alien or human smuggling. Alien smuggling involves the provision of a service,
generally procurement or transport, to people who knowingly buy that service in
order to gain illegal entry into a foreign country. The Trafficking Protocol considers
people who have been trafficked, who are assumed to be primarily women and
children, as “victims” or “survivors” who are entitled to protection and a broad range
of social services from governments. In contrast, some analysts assert that the
2
(...continued)2
(...continued)
argue that this broadened definition would impede the capacity of the international
community to achieve consensus and work together to combat trafficking.
3
“Human Trafficking and Slavery,” Vital Voices Trafficking Report, September 2005.
4
“World Migration,” International Organization for Migration, 2005.
5
For more information, see CRS Report RL33097, Border Security: Apprehensions of
“Other Than Mexican” Aliens, coordinated by Blas Nuñez-Nieto.
6
The United Nations Convention Against Organized Crime and Its Protocols, Available at
[http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/crime_cicp_convention.html].
CRS-3
of social services from governments. In contrast, some analysts assert that the
Smuggling Protocol considers people who have been smuggled as willing
participants in a criminal activity. Smuggled migrants are to be treated “humanely,”
but states are not required to provide them with any specific level of protection.7
Some observers assert that smuggling is a “crime against the state” and that
smuggled migrants should be immediately deported, while trafficking is a “crime
against a person” whose victims deserve to be given government assistance and
protection.8 Others maintain that there are few clear-cut distinctions between
trafficking and smuggling cases and that many people who are considered
“smuggled” should actually be viewed as trafficking victims. They argue that as
immigration and border restrictions have tightened, especially along the U.S. Mexico border, smuggling costs have increased and migration routes have become
more dangerous. As a result, they assert that smugglers have increasingly sold
undocumented migrants into situations of forced labor or prostitution in order to
recover their costs.9
Global Figures on Trafficking. Trafficking in persons for sexual
exploitation or forced labor, both within a country and across international borders,
is one of the most lucrative and fastest growing types of organized crime. Due to the
clandestine nature of this type of crime, it is difficult to gather reliable data on its
prevalence in particular countries and regions of the world. Researchers have
generally had to rely on estimates compiled by non-governmental organizations
(NGOs) in order to assess the scope of the global trafficking industry. NGO reports
on trafficking tend to contain more anecdotal evidence than concrete statistics. In
addition to the difficulty of gathering good statistics on a clandestine activity,
countries may be reluctant to publish data for fear of being cited by the U.S.
government as having a major trafficking problem. According to U.S. State
Department estimates, some 600,000 to 800,000 people are trafficked across borders
annually worldwide for forced labor, domestic servitude, or sexual exploitation.
These figures do not include victims who are trafficked domestically who, if
included, would raise the total to between 2 million and 4 million.10
The International Labor Organization (ILO) estimates that globally some 2.4
million people have been trafficked by private agents into situations of forced labor.
Although most observers concur that the overwhelming majority of trafficking
victims are women and children, the ILO has found that the sex of trafficking victims
depends on the type of activity they are forced to undertake. Women and girls
7
Jacqueline Bhabha, “Trafficking, Smuggling, and Human Rights,” Migration Policy
Institute, March 1, 2005.
8
Statement by Claire Antonelli of Global Rights, Center for Strategic and International
Studies Event on Human Trafficking in Latin America, July 9, 2004.
9
Ann Jordan, “Human Trafficking and Globalization,” Center for American Progress,
October 2004.
10
U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, 2005, June 3, 2005.
[http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/itprpt/2005].
CRS-4
account for the vast majority of those trafficked for commercial sexual exploitation,
but men and boys account for 44% of those trafficked for forced or bonded labor.11
Trafficking in persons affects nearly every country and region in the world.
Internal trafficking generally flows from rural to urban or tourist centers within a
given country, while trafficking across international borders generally flows from
developing to developed nations. Countries are generally described as source, transit,
or destination countries for trafficking victims. Most trafficking victims still appear
to originate from South and Southeast Asia. The countries of the former Soviet
Union have also been major source countries for many years, especially for women
and children trafficked into prostitution and the sex industry. There has also been an
increasing problem of human trafficking in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Scope of the Problem in Latin America and the Caribbean
Countries in Latin America and the Caribbean serve as both source, transit, and
destination countries for trafficking victims. Latin America, along with Southeast
Asia and the former Soviet Union, is a primary source region for people trafficked
to the United States. The U.S. State Department estimates that some 14,500 to
17,500 people are trafficked to the United States annually.12 Countries in Latin
America and the Caribbean also serve as transit countries for victims brought from
China and other countries to Canada or the United States. For example, in 2004,
Argentine officials discovered some 700 Chinese trafficking victims en route to the
United States.13
Child Trafficking. There is considerably less research on the extent and
nature of trafficking in persons in Latin America and the Caribbean than there is on
Asia and Europe. Most of the research that does exist focuses on trafficking in
children for sexual exploitation. This research is often tied to ongoing projects in
particular countries — targeted at children vulnerable to commercial sexual
exploitation — that are administered by the ILO and other international organizations
in partnership with local NGOs. Trafficking of children for sexual exploitation is
most common in countries that are both popular tourist destinations and centers of
sex tourism. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that most countries in the region
have legislation establishing (on average) 14 years of age as the legal age of consent
11
The ILO subdivides trafficking by private agents into two categories. The first category
is commercial sexual exploitation and the second is economic exploitation, which includes,
among other things, bonded labor, domestic servitude, and forced agricultural labor. See
“A Global Alliance Against Forced Labor,” ILO, 2005.
12
The number of people trafficked to the United States each year has been revised
downward from 1999 Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) estimates of 45,000 to 50,000
victims, to 18,000 to 20,000 victims reported in the 2003 Trafficking in Persons report, to
the current range of 14,500 to 17, 500 trafficking victims. While the U.S. government cites
better methodologies as the reason for these altered figures, some academics have criticized
them as being merely ‘guesstimates.’ See Gozdziak and Collett, “Research on Human
Trafficking in North America: A Review of the Literature,” in Data and Research on
Human Trafficking: A Global Survey, International Organization for Migration (IOM), 2005.
13
“Chinese Use Back Door Into America,” Washington Times, January 24, 2005.
CRS-5
to work (see Table 1 at the end of this report). The available data show that the
number of children sexually exploited in the region is increasing while the average
age of exploited children is decreasing.14
Although street and orphaned children are particularly vulnerable to trafficking
into the sex industry, a large percentage of children who have been trafficked remain
living with their families and engage in commercial sex activity in order to contribute
to household income. A 2002 study of child prostitutes in El Salvador found that
57% of those interviewed lived with their parents or other close relatives.15 Other
factors associated with children at risk of trafficking include poverty, infrequent
school attendance, physical or sexual abuse, drug or alcohol addiction, and
involvement in a criminal youth gang.
In addition to sexual exploitation, Latin American children have been trafficked
for illegal adoptions and for use as soldiers in armed conflict, domestic servants, and
agricultural and mining laborers. Guatemala is one of the largest source countries of
children kidnaped and trafficked internationally for adoption by childless couples
unwilling to wait for a child through legitimate adoption agencies.16 Colombia has
the largest number of children trafficked for use as child soldiers; as many as14,000
youth as young as seven years old have been trafficked to fight in the country’s armed
conflict.17 However, other countries, including Brazil, are facing increasing instances
of youth trafficked by drug gangs into urban warfare.
Children are also trafficked both internally and across international borders for
use as domestic servants. One State Department official estimates that as many as
1 million children may be working as domestic servants in Latin America, many of
whom are vulnerable to verbal, physical, and sexual abuse.18 A 2004 USAIDsponsored study explores this phenomenon in the case of child domestic servants
from Haiti who are trafficked to the Dominican Republic. In early November 2005,
the United Nations Children Emergency Fund (UNICEF) and the Inter-American
Commission on Human Rights (IAHCR) condemned this practice, which has
involved the illegal trading of some 30,000 Haitian children to the Dominican
Republic.19
14
Pamela Coffey et al., “Literature Review of Trafficking in Persons in Latin America and
the Caribbean,” Development Alternatives, Inc (DAI) for the U.S. Agency for International
Development, August 2004.
15
Zoila Gonzalez de Innocenti, “Explotación Sexual Comercial de Niñas y Adolescentes:
Una Evaluación Rápida, ILO/IPEC, 2002.
16
“The Baby Trade,” Foreign Affairs, November 1, 2003.
17
“Child Soldiers Global Report 2004,” Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers,
November 17, 2004.
18
Interview with representative from the Global Office to Monitor Trafficking in Persons,
U.S. Department of State, September 29, 2005.
19
Smucker and Murray, “The Uses of Children: A Study of Trafficking in Haitian
Children,” USAID/Haiti Mission, December 28, 2004; “Rights Organizations Slam Illegal
Trade in Children on Haitian-Dominican Border,” BBC News, November 7, 2005.
CRS-6
Finally, the ILO has documented instances from across the region of children
forced to work under dangerous circumstances in agricultural or mining industries.
In Bolivia, children work in the country’s mines and sugarcane harvesting, while
Brazilian youth harvest agro-export crops.20
Trafficking for Sexual Exploitation. While trafficking for forced labor is
a serious problem in Latin America and the Caribbean, trafficking for sexual
exploitation has been perceived as a more widespread and pressing regional
problem.21 Most victims are trafficked for prostitution, but others are used for
pornography and stripping. Children tend to be trafficked within their own countries,
while women between the ages of 18 and 30 are often trafficked internationally,
sometimes with the consent of their husbands or other family members. Major
source and recruitment countries include Brazil, Colombia, the Dominican Republic,
Uruguay, Venezuela, and Suriname. Spain, Germany, the Netherlands, Portugal, and
the United States are commonly identified as countries of destination for Latin
American trafficking victims. Although flows are significant, some observers
question 2004 and 2005 TIP report estimates that some 70,000 Brazilians, 45,00050,000 Colombians, and 50,000 Dominicans are engaged in prostitution in Europe
and may be trafficking victims, noting that the figures have not been corroborated by
European police officials. In addition to Europe and the United States, the
Organization of American States (OAS) estimates that 1,700 women from Latin
America, primarily Colombians, Peruvians, and Brazilians, are trafficked each year
to Japan.22
There are also intra-regional trafficking problems. A 2005 report by the
International Organization for Migration (IOM) report asserts that the Caribbean’s
relatively open borders, lax enforcement of entertainment visa and work permit rules,
legalized prostitution, and burgeoning tourism industry have contributed to the
problem of trafficking there.23 Argentina and Brazil have also served as destination
countries for women trafficked from the Andes or Caribbean countries like the
Dominican Republic. Panama attracts as many as 1,000 Colombian migrants per
year, many of whom are trafficked, who arrive with entertainment visas to work in
prostitution, which is legal in that country for residents and non-residents. The
newest trafficking problem has occurred at border crossings throughout Central
America and Mexico, especially the Mexico-Guatemala border, as undocumented
women who have not been able to get to the United States end up being forced into
20
TIP Report, 2005, [http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/itprpt/2005].
21
Laura Langberg, “A Review of Recent OAS Research on Human Trafficking in the Latin
American and Caribbean Region,” in Data and Research on Human Trafficking: A Global
Survey, IOM, 2005.
22
“Annual Report on Fighting the Crime of Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women,
Adolescents, and Children in the Americas,” Inter-American Commission of Women,
Organization of the American States, May 5, 2005.
23
“Exploratory Assessment of Trafficking in Persons in the Caribbean Region,” IOM, June
2005.
CRS-7
prostitution. Tecun Uman, a Guatemalan town near the Mexican border, reportedly
has one brothel with as many as 1,000 women working as prostitutes.24
Trafficking for Forced Labor. The ILO reports that trafficking victims
comprise 20% (or 250,000) of the 1.3 million people in Latin America engaged in
forced labor.25 These numbers do not include the increasing numbers of Latin
Americans who have ended up in situations of forced labor after migrating to Europe
or the United States. Despite the relatively large number of victims trafficked for
forced labor both within the region and internationally, there are relatively few
studies on this topic aside from reports describing the problem of bonded labor in
Brazil and the trafficking of Haitians to the Dominican Republic. In Brazil, more
than 25,000 people have been recruited from small towns in the northeast to labor in
the country’s agribusiness industry.26 In 2003, following a concerted law enforcement
effort by the Brazilian government, some 4,900 workers were freed from conditions
of slave labor. Every year thousands of undocumented Haitians flock to the
Dominican Republic lured by false promises from recruiters of profits to be made in
the sugarcane fields (bateyes). The IOM estimates that some 650,000 Haitians,
unable to gain citizenship for themselves or for their children born in the Dominican
Republic, live and work under slave-like conditions in the sugarcane, construction,
or domestic service industries in the Dominican Republic.27
In the past few years, the Department of Justice has prosecuted an increasingly
large volume of cases of foreigners trafficked into forced labor in the United States.
Although the majority of these cases have involved trafficking for prostitution, a
significant number have involved the agricultural sector. Annually some 1.5 million
seasonal farm workers, mostly from Latin America and the Caribbean, plant and
harvest produce in the United States. Low wages, harsh working conditions, and a
lack of legal protection, combined with an ever increasing demand for cheap labor,
have resulted in growing numbers of forced labor abuses. In 2003, two New
Hampshire employers were convicted of forcing four Jamaicans to labor in their
landscaping business by confiscating their passports and threatening them with
physical abuse.28
Factors that Contribute to the Rise in Trafficking. Both individual
factors and outside circumstances may account for the rise of human trafficking
within and from Latin America and the Caribbean. Individual risk factors include
poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, history of physical or sexual abuse, homelessness,
drug use, and gang membership. The IOM in Colombia has identified some personal
characteristics common among trafficking victims. These include a tendency to take
risks in order to fulfill one’s goals, a focus on short-term rewards that may result
24
Mary Jordan, “A Harsh Price to Pay in Pursuit of a Dream,”Washington Post, December
6, 2004.
25
26
“A Global Alliance Against Forced Labor,” ILO, 2005.
TIP Report, 2005, [http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/itprpt/2005].
27
U.S. Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices 2004: Dominican
Republic, February 2005.
28
Free the Slaves, “Hidden Slaves: Forced Labor in the United States,”September 2004.
CRS-8
from short-term risks, and a lack of familial support and/or strong social networks.29
These risk factors that may “push” an individual towards accepting a risky job
proposition in another country have been compounded by “pull” factors, including
the hope of finding economic opportunity abroad, which is fueled by television and
internet images of wealth in the United States and Europe.
Outside factors contributing to human trafficking include the following:
!
the high global demand for domestic servants, agricultural laborers,
sex workers, and factory labor;
!
political, social, or economic crises, as well as natural disasters,
occurring in particular countries;
!
lingering machismo (chauvinistic attitudes and practices) that tends
to lead to discrimination against women and girls;
!
existence of established trafficking networks with sophisticated
recruitment methods;
!
public corruption, especially complicity between law enforcement
and border agents with traffickers and alien smugglers;
!
restrictive immigration policies in the destination countries that have
limited the opportunities for legal migration flows to occur;
!
government disinterest in the issue of human trafficking; and,
!
limited economic opportunities for women in Latin America. Even
where women have achieved the same educational levels as men,
women’s employment continues to be concentrated in low-wage,
informal sector jobs. As of 2002, women’s income averaged just
69% of men’s income in Latin America.30
Relationship to Organized Crime and Terrorism. In many parts of the
world, trafficking in money, weapons, and people is largely conducted by criminal
gangs or mafia groups. Human trafficking can be a lucrative way for organized
criminal groups to fund other illicit activities. In Latin America, regional gangs —
including the Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) — are increasingly involved in the
trafficking of drugs, arms, and people.31 According to the Bilateral Safety Corridor
29
Sanin et al., “Condiciones de Vulnerabilidad a la Trata de Personas en Colombia,” IOM,
2005.
30
David E. Guinn and Elissa Steiglich, eds. In Modern Bondage: Sex Trafficking in the
Americas, New York: Transnational Publishers, Inc., 2003.
31
The MS-13 is one of the largest gangs operating in Latin America with ties to the United
States. MS-13 was created during the 1980s by Salvadorans in Los Angeles who fled the
country’s civil conflict. For more information, see CRS Report RS22141, Gangs in Central
(continued...)
CRS-9
Coalition (BSCC), criminal gangs from Mexico, Central America, Russia, Japan,
Ukraine and several other countries have been caught attempting to traffic victims
across the U.S.- Mexico border. Some analysts maintain that these gangs could
eventually form ties with terrorist groups, such as Al Qaeda, thereby threatening
regional security, although there has been no evidence of this to date. They argue
that, just as terrorists have engaged in drug trafficking in Colombia and the TriBorder region (Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay), they may increasingly turn to human
trafficking as a way of funding their networks and operations. Others contend that
trafficking is a type of “disorganized crime” in which traffickers are generally
individuals or small groups that collaborate on an ad-hoc basis, rather than a big
business controlled by organized crime.32
Trafficking and HIV/AIDS. One of the serious public health effects of human
trafficking is the risk of victims contracting and transmitting HIV/AIDS and other
diseases. On the global level, women engaged in prostitution, whether voluntarily
or not, have a high prevalence of HIV/AIDS. Some experts have noted that human
trafficking may be linked to the spread and mutation of the AIDS virus. Recent
research in the region has shown that trafficking victims, along with other irregular
migrants, are at high risk of contracting HIV/AIDS. Factors that put these groups at
risk include poverty, discrimination, exploitation, lack of legal protection and
education, cultural biases, and limited access to health services. One study found that
HIV is rapidly spreading among the migrant communities in north-eastern Brazil.33
U.S. Policy
Anti-Trafficking Legislation
Congress approved the first major legislation on human trafficking, the Victims
of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act (TVPA) of 2000, and President Clinton
signed the bill into law on October 28, 2000 (P.L. 106-386).34 The law seeks to
enable the U.S. government to confront the issue of human trafficking at the national
and international level within the framework of “prevention, protection, and
prosecution.” The law directs the Secretary of State to issue an annual report to detail
the trafficking problem in each country, assess each government’s efforts to combat
trafficking, and list countries that do and do not comply with minimum standards for
the elimination of trafficking. Countries failing to meet the minimum standards are
subject to sanctions on non-humanitarian U.S. assistance unless continued assistance
is deemed to be in the U.S. national interest. The law also calls for the creation of
31
(...continued)
America, by Clare Ribando.
32
David A. Feingold, “Human Trafficking,” Foreign Policy, September/October 2005.
33
TIP Report, 2005, [http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/itprpt/2005]; UNAIDS, Latin America
Fact Sheet, July 2005; IOM, World Migration, 2005; “Mobility and HIV in the Caribbean,”
October 2005.
34
For more detailed information on anti-trafficking legislation, see CRS Report RL30545,
Trafficking in Persons: The U.S. and the International Response, by Francis T. Miko.
CRS-10
an Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking, chaired by the
Secretary of State, and an Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking to fund antitrafficking programs and initiatives in foreign countries and coordinate U.S.
government efforts to combat trafficking.
In 2002, Congress amended the TVPA in Sec. 682 of the Foreign Relations
Authorization Act, FY2003 (P.L. 107-228) in order to provide increasing support,
especially for NGOs, to provide services and assistance to trafficking victims. The
amendment also authorized an increase in FY2003 appropriations to fund such
programs.
In 2003, Congress approved the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization
Act of 2003 (TVPRA), which President Bush signed into law on December 19, 2003
(P.L. 108-193). The law authorized large increases in funding for anti-trafficking
programs in FY2004 and FY2005 (totaling more than $100 million for each fiscal
year). P.L. 108-193 refined the standards for the elimination of trafficking that
governments must meet and charged those governments with providing the
information to prove their compliance. The bill also created a “special watch list”
of countries that, although not subject to sanctions, requires ongoing scrutiny over
the next year.
Legislative Action in the 109th Congress. On October 7, 2005, the U.S.
Senate gave its advice and consent to ratify the United Nations Protocol to Prevent,
Suppress, and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children.
President Bush then signed the Protocol and the United States became a party to the
agreement on December 3, 2005. Currently 113 countries have signed the Protocol
and 94 countries are party to the agreement. The United Nations Protocol on
Trafficking is an important multilateral policy instrument that commits its parties to
prevent and combat trafficking, protect and assist victims of trafficking, and promote
anti-trafficking cooperation among states. The Protocol defines trafficking, offers
tools for law enforcement and border security, emphasizes the importance of the
judiciary in enforcing anti-trafficking laws, expands the scope of victim assistance,
and establishes prevention policies.
The House-passed version of the FY2006 and FY2007 Foreign Relations
Authorization Act, H.R. 2601, would require the State Department to submit a costbenefit analysis to Congress on the most effective ways to help deal with the
problems of trafficking and alien smuggling in Ecuador.
On February 17, 2005, Representative Christopher Smith and nine co-sponsors
introducedIn 2005, Congress approved the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005, H.R.
972. The bill authorizes appropriations for FY2006 and FY2007 and seeks to close
loopholes in previous anti-trafficking legislation. On December 8, the House
Judiciary Committee approved, by voice vote, a bill (H.R. 972) to re-authorize the
Trafficking Victims Protection Act (P.L. 106-386) through FY2007. It contains
provisions that would increase support to
Act of 2005 (TVPRA), which President Bush signed into law on January 10, 2006
(P.L. 109-164). The TVPRA of 2005 contains provisions to increase support to
foreign trafficking victims in the United
States, address the needs of child victims,
and develop anti-trafficking programs for
post-conflict situations and humanitarian emergencies abroad
emergencies abroad. It will provide an estimated $361 million over the next two
years to combat human trafficking.
CRS-11
Trafficking in Persons Reports
On June 3, 2005, the State Department issued its fifth annual report on human
trafficking, Trafficking in Persons Report (TIP), June 2005, as mandated by P.L.
106-386 and P.L. 108-193. The 2005 TIP report is more comprehensive than prior
reports, covering 150 countries as compared to 140 countries in the 2004 report.
Countries not included in the report either do not appear to have a trafficking
problem (at least 100 cases per year) or there is insufficient data to ascertain whether
or not they have a trafficking problem.
In the 2005 TIP report, countries are ranked in four groups or tiers. Tier 1 is
comprised of the countries that have a serious trafficking problem but fully comply
with the act’s minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking. Tier 2 consists
of the countries the State Department identifies as not fully complying with those
standards but making “significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance.” Tier
2 Watch-list, first added in the 2004 report, are the countries that are between Tier
2 and Tier 3, that the State Department must submit an interim report for by February
2006 in advance of the next TIP report. Tier 3 are the countries whose governments
are deemed as not fully complying with the minimum standards and not making
significant efforts to do so. Beginning in 2003, countries on Tier 3 could be subject
to sanctions on non-humanitarian, non-trade-related assistance and loss of U.S.
support from international financial institutions. Sanctions may be imposed if such
countries have not made adequate progress in combating trafficking by the date that
the President issues a determination (generally within 90 days of the release of the
report) or have not been granted a sanctions waiver.
Latin America and the TIP Rankings. The extent of the trafficking
problem in Latin America and the Caribbean is evidenced by the fact that Latin
America had a higher percentage of Tier 3 countries in the 2005 TIP report than any
other region (See Table 1 at the end of this report). In its FY2006 budget
justification, the State Department asserts that these low rankings show a lack of
awareness in the region about the seriousness of the trafficking problem and a lack
of political will on the part of some governments to deal with the problem. In 2005,
Latin American countries on Tier 3 were Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, Jamaica, and
Venezuela. Tier 2 Watch-list countries were Belize, Dominican Republic, Haiti,
Mexico, Nicaragua, and Suriname. After a 90-day grace period, Bolivia and Jamaica
avoided sanctions and moved to the Tier 2 Watch-list on the basis of positive actions
taken by their governments to bring themselves into compliance with the TVPA.
Ecuador was judged not to have made significant progress within the allotted period,
but U.S. assistance was allowed to continue on the basis that it either promoted the
purposes of the TVPA (funded anti-trafficking programs) or is otherwise in the U.S.
national interest. Of the five Tier 3 countries, Venezuela was made subject to partial
sanctions, and the Cuban government, which does not have diplomatic relations with
the United States, was subjected to full sanctions.
On September 22, 2005, Representative Chris Smith, the original author of the
TVPA, issued a statement expressing disappointment that countries like “Ecuador
were waived [from sanctions], despite their failure to make any significant reform.”
Representative Smith commented that “actions like this send the wrong signal to
CRS-12
nations — friends and foes alike — that turn a blind eye to this international
horror.”35
In 2004, Latin America also had a higher percentage of its countries on both the
Tier 3 and the Tier 2 Watch-list than any other region. Latin American countries on
Tier 3 were Cuba, Ecuador, Guyana, and Venezuela. Tier 2 Watch-list countries
were Belize, Bolivia, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico,
Paraguay, Peru, and Suriname. After a 90-day grace period, Ecuador and Guyana
avoided sanctions and moved to the Tier 2 Watch-list on the basis of positive actions
taken by their governments to bring themselves into compliance with the TVPA.
Venezuela was subject to partial sanctions, and the Cuban government, which does
not receive U.S. assistance, was subject to full sanctions.
These trends reflect a similar pattern as the 2003 TIP report, in which Belize,
Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, and Suriname were placed on Tier 3, but only
Cuba remained following the September Presidential determination.
U.S. Government Anti-Trafficking Programs in Latin America
In FY2004, the U.S. government provided $82 million in anti-trafficking
assistance to foreign governments worldwide, with some $17 million for Latin
America and the Caribbean. The funding supported 251 global and regional antitrafficking programs, with 60 in Latin America, second only to Europe and Eurasia
with 115 programs. These programs are administered by a variety of U.S. agencies,
including Department of State, the Agency for International Development,
Department of Labor, Department of Justice, Department of Health and Human
Services,
Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, the White House, and U.S. contributions to the United Nations.36 The
majority of the programs are either regional, or directed at countries that were placed
on either Tier 3 or the Tier 2 Watch-list in recent TIP reports.
In FY2004, Latin America regional programs focused on coordinating regional
efforts to combat trafficking in persons through the Organization of American States
(OAS) and providing funds for workshops, conferences, and public awareness
campaigns throughout the region. Funds also supported large initiatives administered
by the ILO and others aimed at reducing child labor and the commercial sexual
exploitation of children. In Central America, several programs focused on
harmonizing trafficking, repatriation, and victim protection policies among the
governments and civil society; disseminating public awareness materials; and
reintegrating street children at-risk of trafficking with their families and social
networks.
Whereas regional programs in Latin America supported initiatives necessary to
address the cross-cutting nature of human trafficking, country programs focused on
35
“Rep. Smith Disappointed with White House Failure to Sanction Allies for Trafficking
Violations,” U.S. Fed News, September 22, 2005.
36
TIP Report, 2005, [http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/rpt/51689.htm]; USAID, Trafficking in
Persons: USAID’s Response, March 2005.
CRS-13
the specific challenges and/or government weaknesses in combating trafficking that
have been identified in TIP reports. For example, anti-trafficking programs in Brazil
were targeted at combating sex tourism and forced labor. Programs in Haiti aimed
to provide assistance to children employed under harsh circumstances in domestic
service and to prevent further trafficking of these children within Haiti and to the
Dominican Republic. Throughout Latin America, there is an emphasis on programs
that seek to improve public awareness and prevention efforts, to provide more
thorough assistance to trafficking victims, including repatriation and reintegration for
victims trafficked abroad, and to strengthen legal reforms and enforcement
mechanisms.
Although a break-down of the FY2005 anti-trafficking initiatives funded by
agency are not yet available, the FY2006 State Department budget justification
indicates that $2.6 million of $12 million in global Economic Support Funds (ESF)
would be targeted to Latin America. The funds would be used to support regional
coordination activities through the Organization of American States (OAS), public
awareness campaigns, victims services and reintegration (especially in border areas),
creation or expansion of shelters for trafficking victims in countries where few exist,
and anti-trafficking legal reform.
In addition to foreign aid programs, various agencies within the Department of
Homeland Security are stepping up joint efforts with Mexican officials to identify,
arrest, and prosecute human trafficking and smuggling rings that operate along the
U.S - Mexico border and beyond. On July 21, 2005, the Bureau of U.S. Immigration
and Customs Enforcement (ICE) reported that it had apprehended 10 members of a
criminal group trafficking young women from Honduras to work as forced laborers
in New Jersey. In August 2005, the Bureau of U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) announced a new program, the “Operation Against Smugglers (and
Traffickers) Initiative on Safety and Security” (OASISS), aimed at strengthening
cooperation with Mexican officials to crack down on these types of criminal groups.37
Presidential Anti-Trafficking in Persons Initiative. In July 2004,
President Bush announced that eight countries had been selected to receive $50
million in strategic anti-trafficking in persons assistance.38 The countries were
chosen on the basis of the seriousness of the trafficking problem each faces, as well
as their willingness to cooperate with a variety of U.S. agencies to combat the
problem. Brazil and Mexico, along with Cambodia, India, Indonesia, Moldova,
Sierra Leone, and Tanzania, were slated to receive the funds. The $50 million would
be in addition to regular anti-trafficking funds being provided by the United States.
37
“Indictments Made in Case Involving U.S.-Honduran Smuggling Ring,” July 22, 2005,
and “U.S. Mexico Increasing Efforts to Prosecute Human Traffickers,” August 23, 2005,
U.S. Department of State, Washington File, [http://usinfo.state.gov].
38
The $50 million consists of projects that must be approved by the Senior Policy Operating
Group (SPOG) and the Deputy Secretary of State for each region. At this time, $7.1million
have yet to be approved by the SPOG and the Deputry Secretary of State. Programs were
either funded by FY2003 Child Survival and Health (CSH) funds, FY2004 ESF funds, or,
once approved, will be funded by the end of FY2006 with FY2005 ESF funds (which are
two-year funds).
CRS-14
As of October 2005, $8.2 million in funds had been approved by the Senior
Policy Operating Group (SPOG) on trafficking for Brazil. These funds will support
labor trafficking programs in the Southern Amazon; shelters for sex tourism victims
in Rio, Recife and Sao Paulo; reintegration and border shelters in the Tri-border
region (Brazil, Paraguay, and Argentina); and strengthening mobile law enforcement
teams to fight forced labor in the interior, as well as training judges and prosecutors.
Mexico is also slated to receive $8.2 million in funds. An additional $550,000
for Mexico and regional programs are currently pending SPOG approval. These
funds will support training for law enforcement and immigration officials, as well as
shelter and emergency services in Mexico City, Cancun, Ciudad Juarez, Tijuana and
Monterey. They will also finance projects aimed to prevent sex tourism and to
rehabilitate sex trafficking victims. Funds are slated for prosecutorial training, which
may be especially important if and when the Mexican Congress adopts pending antitrafficking legislation. The funds will establish shelters and provide reintegration
assistance along the Mexico-Guatemala border.
Regional and Country Efforts
to Combat Trafficking
Organization of American States
OAS efforts to combat trafficking in persons began in 1999 when the InterAmerican Commission of Women (CIM) co-sponsored a research study on
trafficking in persons in nine countries in Latin America that offered broad
recommendations for its elimination. In 2003 and 2004, the OAS General Assembly
passed two resolutions on the subject, the latter of which created an OAS Coordinator
on the Issue of Trafficking in Persons based in the CIM. Since that time, OAS/CIM,
in partnership with IOM, has provided training and held several workshops for
government officials and representatives from civil society in Mexico, Bolivia,
Belize, and the English-speaking Caribbean and the Netherlands Antilles. CIM
representatives have participated in numerous seminars at the country, regional, and
international level to identify and disseminate information on best practices in the
region. The OAS/CIM has also begun to conduct research in destination countries,
including a project recently completed in Japan and a proposed project with the
European Union.
Inter-American Development Bank
In 2004, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) formed an internal
working group to begin developing ways to support governments’ anti-trafficking
efforts in the region. The IDB is coordinating its efforts with the OAS and the IOM,
and has developed technical cooperation projects for Bolivia, Colombia, El Salvador,
Guyana, and Paraguay. The IDB is also working with the Ricky Martin Foundation
to raise awareness of the extent of child trafficking in the region through public
service announcements, promotional materials, and a video on best practices to
combat trafficking in the region. In 2006, the Bank and the Foundation will publicize
CRS-15
trafficking prevention hotlines (funded by IOM) in Central America, Colombia,
Mexico, and Peru.
CRS-15
Country Efforts: Progress and Remaining Challenges
Over the last few years, most Latin American countries, perhaps motivated by
international pressure or the threat of U.S. sanctions, have taken steps to address the
growing problem of human trafficking. As evidenced in Table 1, a majority of
countries in the region have signed and ratified several international protocols in
which they have pledged to combat various aspects of the trafficking problem. Those
agreements include The UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in
Persons, the ILO Convention on the Worst Forms of Child Labor; the Optional
Protocol to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) on the Sale of
Children, Child Prostitution, and Pornography; and The Optional Protocol to the
CRC on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict.
A number of countries, including 7 countries in 2004, also passed new or
amended anti-trafficking legislation and created National TIP Coordinators or Task
Forces to coordinate anti-TIP programs and initiatives. For example, in January
2003, President Lula da Silva of Brazil announced a seventy-five point “National
Plan for the Eradication of Slavery,” thereby elevating trafficking — especially for
forced labor — to the level of a top presidential priority.
Most governments in the region that have received a Tier 3 designation, though
initially dismayed, have worked with U.S. officials to address the problem of
trafficking in persons during the 90-day grace period before the Presidential
determination. According to the State Department, Bolivia, a country that was placed
on Tier 3 in June 2005, had begun taking steps to improve its anti-trafficking
programs and legislation before the report was released. A State Department
spokesman asserted that the Bolivian example “is a model for the kind of cooperative
dialogue on these kinds of issues that is envisioned not only by the law, but by ... our
application of the law.”39 In contrast to the case of Bolivia, the Venezuelan
government issued a statement on June 3, 2005 challenging the TIP reports’
conclusions that “it funded no NGO programs geared toward victims of trafficking”
and that its prevention efforts were “inadequate.” The statement concludes that
Venezuela’s Tier 3 status is “an example of either a profound lack of knowledge of
what the government of Venezuela is doing,” or an “intentional mis-characterization
of the good faith actions” that it has taken.40
The general problem with the new international commitments, legal reforms,
and human trafficking initiatives that have emerged in Latin America is that many
countries appear to lack the resources and perhaps the political will to fund and
implement their anti-trafficking programs adequately. Sometimes country efforts are,
for example, thwarted by larger problems, such as political instability. Ecuador had
five different Ministers of Government responsible for trafficking measures over the
course of the two-year Gutierrez administration, making it difficult, if not impossible,
for the government to coordinate effective anti-TIP activities. Many countries have
39
Sean McCormack, Spokesman, U.S. Department of State, Daily Press Briefing, June 3,
2005.
40
“Politics: U.S. Trafficking Report Includes Cuba and Venezuela,” Inter Press Service,
June 10, 2005.
CRS-16
five different Ministers of Government responsible for trafficking measures over the
course of the two-year Gutierrez administration, making it difficult, if not impossible,
for the government to coordinate effective anti-TIP activities. Many countries have
few, if any, shelters for trafficking victims and, as in the case of Paraguay, no followup plans to help victims after they return from overseas or to their residences in
smaller towns across the country. Some countries — including Guyana and Belize
— have appeared to model their national TIP laws so closely to TVPA that they do
not have the resources or the manpower to implement the complicated legislation.
Public corruption is also a major obstacle to effective anti-trafficking programming
as there is often complicity between traffickers and corrupt border officials, customs
agents, law enforcement personnel, and politicians.
Colombia, the only Latin American country placed on Tier 1 in 2005, is also the
largest recipient of U.S. assistance in Latin America, which may account for some
of its ability to mobilize law enforcement, judicial and social service systems to fight
trafficking in a holistic manner. The Colombian government did not prosecute any
traffickers in 2004, but initiated 20 new cases and continued working on more than
300 pending cases. It worked with authorities in other countries to repatriate
Colombians who had been trafficked abroad and to provide them with reintegration
assistance. Similar services were provided for child victims of internal trafficking.
National public awareness campaigns have been complemented by efforts to raise
awareness in other countries in the region, including the Dominican Republic, about
successful ways that Colombia has dealt with human trafficking.
Issues for Policy Consideration
There are a number of issues and foreign policy considerations affecting the
implementation of anti-trafficking in persons legislation that make U.S. efforts on
this front appear inconsistent at times. Indeed, the State Department has
acknowledged that the United States has a “deep, involved relationship” with a
number of the countries in the TIP report, but that trafficking is “an important moral
issue” that “we’re not going to hesitate to bring up [with those countries].”41 As is
the case with many human rights issues, ethical concerns about human trafficking
must be balanced against broader U.S. geopolitical goals and interests in each
country. Striking a balance between these competing concerns is exacerbated by the
difficulty of gauging the effectiveness of existing implementation efforts. Issues that
may be considered when evaluating the implementation of U.S. anti-trafficking
policies are discussed below.
Data Collection
In June 2003, Human Rights Watch criticized the State Department’s
Trafficking Report for lacking a consistent analytical framework for gathering data
on trafficking. Most observers attribute the lack of reliable data on trafficking to the
clandestine nature of the crime. Others assert that good data are only produced when
police are mandated to keep reports on prostitution or forced labor in their
41
McCormack, June 3, 2005.
CRS-17
jurisdictions, which is often not the case. Information that has been gathered by
NGOs is often not properly categorized as trafficking or, if it is properly identified,
is frequently program-specific and difficult to aggregate. While some NGOs
41
McCormack, June 3, 2005.
CRS-17
exaggerate figures in order to draw attention to the trafficking problem in a particular
country, others hold back figures out of fear that it could result in a country being
criticized in the TIP report.42
In November 2005, the State Department hosted a conference with leading
academics and practitioners on the topic of developing better trafficking indicators.
Once those indicators are agreed upon, regional officials might discuss how best to
aggregate those indicators into user-friendly databases. Latin American countries are
likely to require financial and technical assistance to enable them to collect better
migration and trafficking data.
Measurements of Success
It is often difficult to measure success in the fight against human trafficking.
The State Department has identified the passage of new TIP legislation or the
amendment of existing TIP legislation to increase prosecutions of traffickers as
evidence of some success. Since many countries in Latin America have passed or
amended their existing TIP laws in recent years, it follows that an increasing number
of prosecutions and convictions under that legislation should be a further indicator
of success in combating TIP. In 2004, there were 145 prosecutions of suspected
traffickers, but only 56 convictions in Latin America. These figures pale in
comparison to South Asia, with 1,705 prosecutions and 1,260 convictions, and
Europe and Eurasia, with 3,329 prosecutions and 1, 274 convictions in 2004.43 Some
have asserted that the low conviction rates in Latin America may be due to the fact
that it is easier to prosecute traffickers for other offenses, such as money laundering,
than for trafficking in persons. Others have noted that even in the United States,
there were only 59 defendants charged with trafficking and 43 individuals convicted
of TIP-related crimes in 2004.
Enforcement Improvement
In order to improve enforcement of TIP legislation in Latin America, observers
have identified several issues that they maintain should be addressed. Some have
noted that countries, instead of being encouraged to pass laws modeled after other
countries (such as the TVPA), need to be given time to develop trafficking laws that
respond to their particular TIP problems and law enforcement capacities. Once
legislation is in place, more attention and resources may be needed to help countries
implement that legislation, and that assistance may need to go beyond training for
law enforcement and legal professionals. Third, attention may be needed to address
the issue of police corruption that has long-plagued many countries in the
hemisphere. This could be addressed by stiffening penalties for police, border
guards, lawyers, judges, or politicians caught assisting traffickers.
42
“U.S. State Department Trafficking Report Undercut by Lack of Analysis,” Human Rights
Watch,, June 2003; Laczko and Gramegna, “Developing Better Indicators of Human
Trafficking,”Brown Journal of World Affairs, Summer/Fall 2003.
43
TIP Report, 2005, [http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/rpt/51689.htm].
CRS-18
hemisphere. This could be addressed by stiffening penalties for police, border
guards, lawyers, judges, or politicians caught assisting traffickers.
Balancing Multiple U.S. Interests
U.S. interests in Latin America are multiple and, at times, conflicting. These
interests include strengthening democracy, promoting economic growth through free
trade, stemming the flow of illegal narcotics and undocumented migrants, and
cooperating on border security and anti-terrorism measures. These broad interests
either directly or indirectly affect all U.S. policy in the region and may at times
conflict with specific human rights goals, such as fighting human trafficking.
There are several ways in which broader U.S. foreign policy goals may influence
the TIP report and sanctions process. Some observers maintain that there are certain
U.S. allies in the region that could never be sanctioned for political reasons. Others
contend that the repeated inclusion of Cuba and Venezuela on the Tier 3 list
constitutes “selective indignation” on the part of the U.S. government.44 While those
cases may be extreme, there are other countries in the region facing sanctions for not
complying with other U.S. requests — such as signing an Article 98 agreement45 —
whom some feel the United States does not mind seeing on Tier 3, such as Bolivia
and Ecuador.
U.S. Embassy officials in the region have noted that it is sometimes difficult to
produce an unbiased account of government efforts against trafficking without being
swayed by underlying foreign policy concerns. Others have noted that it is difficult
to deal with human rights issues like trafficking in persons when a country is
undergoing extreme political instability.46 Others contend that sanctions against
countries such as Bolivia and Ecuador, which would include democracy and
governance assistance, could undermine larger goals of preventing further democratic
breakdown in the hemisphere.
Beyond Cuba and Venezuela?
Since 2003, no governments in Latin America except Cuba and Venezuela have
been subject to partial or full sanctions for failing to meet the minimum standards of
TVPA. Ecuador has appeared on the Tier 3 list in both 2004 and 2005, but has yet
to face sanctions. Some argue that sanctions will probably only be applied to
countries already subject to sanctions — such as Burma, Cuba, or North Korea —
and that threatening other countries with sanctions may actually encourage them to
become less open to working with the United States.47
Others argue that this may be the case with China or Saudi Arabia, but most
Latin American countries depend on good political and economic relations with the
United States and fear the public humiliation that comes with a Tier 3 designation as
44
“Politics: U.S. Trafficking Report Includes Cuba and Venezuela,” Global Information
Network, June 10, 2005.
45
Article 98 agreements exempt U.S. service members from the jurisdiction of the
International Criminal Court.
46
Interviews with State Department Officials, September 2005.
47
Feingold, 2005.
CRS-19
Others argue that this may be the case with China or Saudi Arabia, but most
Latin American countries depend on good political and economic relations with the
United States and fear the public humiliation that comes with a Tier 3 designation as
much as actual sanctions. For example, some believe a Tier 3 designation motivated
the Jamaican government to take several positive steps against trafficking between
June and September 2005. In this view, the Government of Jamaica may have been
motivated by the sanctions threat, but it was also concerned with maintaining its
international image as a good destination for foreign tourists. As more countries in
the region become eligible for Millennium Challenge (MCA) assistance, the stakes
will be raised even higher, as a Tier 3 designation could jeopardize both regular U.S.
foreign assistance and MCA assistance.
Equal Focus on All Types of Trafficking?
The TVPA defines trafficking broadly to include problems such as forced labor,
sex slavery, and domestic servitude. Although the U.S. government funds programs
to combat all types of trafficking in persons, some observers believe that the
government focuses too much on sex slavery as opposed to non-sexual labor
exploitation. A 2005 ILO study finds that less than half of all trafficking victims
worldwide are part of the sex trade. Despite these statistics, critics say that both the
media and the U.S. government focus on sex-trafficking cases more than other
trafficking cases. They argue that an increasing percentage of the U.S. antitrafficking budget is being directed to inexperienced NGOs focused on rescuing
women and children from the commercial sex industry. The inventory of U.S. antitrafficking programs in 2004 appears to counter these claims as it shows U.S. support
for a wide variety of NGOs that strive to protect victims and prosecute traffickers
engaged in all types of human trafficking.48
Prostitution and Trafficking
Some groups in the United States have sought to broaden the definition of
trafficking in persons to include all forms of prostitution, but many countries have
thus far rejected those attempts. Proponents of this broader definition of trafficking
in persons argue that prostitution is “not ‘sex work;’ it is violence against women
[that] exists because ... men are given social, moral and legal permission to buy
women on demand.”49 Opponents, including many European and Latin American
countries, have legal and regulated prostitution and argue that this broadened
definition would impede the capacity of the international community to achieve
consensus and work together to combat trafficking.
The U.S. State Department has repeatedly asserted that prostitution and
trafficking in persons are inextricably linked. U.S. officials argue that “where
prostitution is legalized or tolerated, there is greater demand for human trafficking
victims and nearly always an increase in the number of women and children
trafficked into commercial sex slavery.” Others disagree, noting that giving
48
Jennifer Block, “Sex Trafficking: Why the Faith Trade is Interested in the Sex Trade,”
Conscience, Summer/Autumn 2004; “A Global Alliance Against Forced Labor,”ILO, 2005;
Debbie Nathan, “Oversexed,” The Nation, August 29 - September 5, 2005, vol. 281; U.S.
State Department, TIP Report 2005, [http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/rpt/51689.htm]
49
Janice G. Raymond, “Sex Trafficking is Not ‘Sex Work,’” Conscience, Spring 2005.
CRS-20
victims and nearly always an increase in the number of women and children
trafficked into commercial sex slavery.” Others disagree, noting that giving
prostitutes some measure of legitimacy short of legalization reduces the risk that they
will be exposed to the dangers of trafficking.50
In 2003, Congress approved two pieces of legislation that made U.S. funding
for HIV/AIDS and anti-trafficking programs available only to groups that explicitly
condemn “prostitution and sex trafficking.” An amendment to H.R. 1298 (P.L. 10825), which authorizes the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR),
prohibits funds from being distributed to any group or organization that does not have
a policy “explicitly opposing prostitution and sex trafficking.”51 Similarly, the
Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2003 (P.L. 108-193) restricts
anti-trafficking funds to groups that oppose prostitution.
Critics have argued that these policies exclude the people who are most able to
report and combat abuses within the sex industry, prostitutes themselves. They are
concerned that well-established programs may be penalized by these new regulations,
thereby nullifying progress that has been made in HIV/AIDS prevention and antitrafficking. Some groups that work directly with sex workers in India and Cambodia
have already rejected U.S. funding. Brazil has rejected U.S. support for its
HIV/AIDS programs because it is opposed to the new restrictions. On the other
hand, Ambassador John Miller, Director of the State Department’s Office to Monitor
and Combat Trafficking in Persons, has replied to these assertions by noting that this
change in U.S. funding policy has yet to have any adverse effects on groups already
working to combat trafficking worldwide.52
50
U.S. State Department web-site, [http://www.state.gov/g/tip/]; Feingold, Sept./Oct. 2005.
51
For more information on PEPFAR, see CRS Report RL33135, The Global Fund and
PEPFAR in U.S. International Aids Policy, by Raymond W. Copson.
52
Melissa Ditmore, “New U.S. Funding Policies on Trafficking Affect Sex Work and HIVPrevention Efforts World Wide,” SIECUS Report, Spring 2005; Esther Kaplan, “Just Say
Nâo,” The Nation, May 30, 2005; “Opinion: Des Moines Register Editorial Showed
‘Surprising Ignorance’ on Sex Work, Trafficking, HIV/AIDS,” Kaiser Daily HIV/AIDS
Report, July 28, 2005.
CRS-21
Table 1. Latin America and the Caribbean Trafficking in Persons Status
Country
Argentina
Belize
Bolivia
Brazil
Chile
Colombia
Costa Rica
Cuba
DR
Ecuador
El Salvador
Guatemala
Guyana
Haiti
Honduras
Jamaica
Mexico
Nicaragua
Panama
Paraguay
Peru
Suriname
Venezuela
2004 Tier
Placement
2005 Tier
Placement
Tier 2
Tier 2 (W)
Tier 2 (W)
Tier 2
Tier 2
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Tier 2 (W)
Tier 3
Tier 2
Tier 2 (W)
Tier 3
Tier 2
Tier 2 (W)
Tier 3
Tier 2
Tier 2
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Tier 2 (W)
Tier 3
Tier 2
Tier 2
Tier 2
Tier 2 (W)
Tier 2
Tier 3
Tier 2 (W)
Tier 2 (W)
Tier 2
Tier 2
Tier 2
Tier 2 (W)
Tier 3
Tier 2 (W)
Tier 2 (W)
Tier 2 (W)
Tier 2
Tier 2
Tier 2 (W)
Tier 2 (W)
Tier 2 (W)
Tier 3
UN TIP
Protocol
Signed Ratified (a)
X
X
X (a)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X (a)
X (a)
ILO
Convention
182
Ratified
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Optional Protocol of
Optional Protocol
CRC
CRC Armed Conflict
Signed Ratified (a) Signed Ratified (a)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X (a)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Age of
Consent to
Work
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
14
14
14
14
14
14
15
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
pending
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X (a)
X
X
National
Plan on
CSEC
TIP Coord.
TIP Law or Task Force
X
X (a)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X (a)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
15
14
14
14
14
15
16
12
14
14
14
15
14
14
14cr
s
p
h
p
g
w
* For an explanation of Tier Placement, see USG Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2004 and June 2005.
** (W) indicates placement on Tier 2 Watch List as opposed to Tier 2.
*** (a) indicates accession.
X
X
X
15
14
14
14
14
15
16
12
14
14
14
15
14
14
14
Status of Ratification of Treaties and Protocols:
— U.N. Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons: [http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/crime_cicp_signatures_trafficking.html]
— ILO Convention 182 (Convention on the Worst Forms of Child Labor): [http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/newratframeE.htm]
— Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution, and Pornography: [http://www.ohchr.org/english/countries/ratification/11_c.htm]
— Optional Protocol to the CRC on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict: [http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu2/6/crc/treaties/status-opac.htm]
— National Plan of Action Against Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children: [http://www.ecpat.net/eng/Ecpat_inter/projects/monitoring/national_plan.asp#5]