Order Code RL30545
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Trafficking in Women and Children:
The U.S. and International Response
Updated March 26, 2004
Francis T. Miko
Specialist in International Relations
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

Trafficking in Women and Children:
The U.S. and International Response
Summary
Trafficking in people for prostitution and forced labor is one of the fastest
growing areas of international criminal activity and one that is of increasing concern
to the United States and the international community. The overwhelming majority
of those trafficked are women and children. According to the Department of State,
between 800,000 and 900,000 people are believed to be trafficked across borders
each year worldwide; some 18,000 to 20,000 to the United States. Human trafficking
is now considered a leading source of profits for organized crime, like drugs and
weapons, generating billions of dollars annually.
Trafficking in persons affects virtually every country in the world. The largest
number of victims are believed to come from Asia. The former Soviet Union and
Eastern Europe are now believed to be the largest new source of trafficking for
prostitution and the sex industry in Europe and North America. Thousands more are
trafficked from Latin America, the Caribbean, and Africa. Most of the victims are
sent to Asia, the Middle East, Western Europe and North America.
In 1998, the Clinton Administration and the 106th Congress launched a
government-wide anti-trafficking strategy of (1) prevention, (2) protection and
support for victims, and (3) prosecution of traffickers. It led to enactment of the
Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-386).
The Bush administration and Congress have continued to give priority to the
trafficking problem. The State Department issued its third Congressionally mandated
report on worldwide trafficking in June 2003. It categorized countries according to
the efforts they were making to combat trafficking. Those countries that do not
cooperate in the fight against trafficking were made subject to U.S. sanctions, starting
in 2003. Thus far, sanctions under this legislation have been applied only to Burma,
Liberia, Cuba, North Korea, and Sudan.
In December 2003, Congress adopted the Trafficking Victims Protection
Reauthorization Act of 2003, authorizing appropriations for FY2004 and FY2005.
The bill was signed into law by President Bush on December 19, 2003 (P.L. 108-
193).
The United States and other countries have also initiated bilateral and
multilateral programs and initiatives to combat trafficking. The United States is
working with the European Union, the Group of Eight, the United Nations, the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and a number of
individual countries to combat trafficking in women and children. In 2000, the U.N.
General Assembly adopted the Convention on Transnational Crime, including a
Protocol on Trafficking. A Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on
Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography was signed by the United
States in July 2000.

---

Contents
Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Scope of the Problem Worldwide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Causes of Rise in Trafficking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Traffickers and Their Victims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Regional Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Asia and the Pacific . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Middle East . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Latin America and the Caribbean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Africa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Trafficking to the United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
U.S. Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
The Clinton Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
The Bush Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
The Trafficking in Persons Report, 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
The International Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Congressional Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Policy Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
List of Tables
Table 1. Authorizations to Implement Victims of Trafficking Act . . . . . . . . . . . 21

---

Trafficking in Women and Children:
The U.S. and International Response
Definition
Severe forms of trafficking in persons has 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 Others have
put forward slightly different definitions.2 In the case of minors, there is general
agreement in the United States and much of the international community that the
trafficking term applies whether a child was taken forcibly or voluntarily.
Trafficking is distinguished from alien smuggling which involves the provision of
a service, albeit illegal, to people who knowingly buy the service in order to get into
a foreign country.
Scope of the Problem Worldwide
Trafficking in people, especially women and children, for prostitution and forced
labor is one of the fastest growing areas of international criminal activity and one that
is of increasing concern to the U.S. Administration, Congress, and the international
community. Although men are also victimized, the overwhelming majority of those
trafficked are women and children. According to the latest U.S. Government
estimates, some 800,000 to 900,000 people are trafficked across borders each year
worldwide for forced labor, domestic servitude, or sexual exploitation.3 Trafficking
is considered one of the largest sources of profits for organized crime, generating
seven to ten billion dollars annually according to United Nations estimates.4
1 Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 (P.L.106-386).
2 Some religious groups, as well as feminist organizations, have campaigned to broaden the
definition of trafficking to include all forms of prostitution, whether forced or voluntary, on
grounds that prostitution is never truly voluntary and that traffickers will simply force their
victims to claim to be acting voluntarily. However, others have rejected this broadened
definition, arguing that it would impede the capacity of the international community to
achieve consensus and act decisively against major traffickers.
3 U.S. Department of State. Trafficking in Persons Report, 2003. [http://www.state.gov/
g/tip/rls/tiprpt/2003]. These figures do not include the large number of victims who are
trafficked within borders.
4 Cited in the State Department Trafficking in Persons Report, 2003.

---

CRS-2
Trafficking is a problem that affects virtually every country in the world.
Generally, the flow of trafficking is from less developed countries to industrialized
nations, including the United States, or toward neighboring countries with marginally
higher standards of living. Since trafficking is an underground criminal enterprise,
there are no precise statistics on the extent of the problem and all estimates are
unreliable. The largest number of victims trafficked internationally are still believed
to come from South and Southeast Asia. The former Soviet Union may be the largest
new source of trafficking for prostitution and the sex industry. Many people are also
trafficked to Eastern Europe. Other main source regions include Latin America and
the Caribbean, and Africa. Most of the victims are sent to Asia, the Middle East,
Western Europe and North America. They usually end up in large cities, vacation
and tourist areas, or near military bases, where the demand is highest.
Causes of Rise in Trafficking
The reasons for the increase in trafficking are many. In general, the criminal
business feeds on poverty, despair, war, crisis, and ignorance. The globalization of
the world economy has increased the movement of people across borders, legally and
illegally, especially from poorer to wealthier countries. International organized
crime has taken advantage of the freer flow of people, money, goods and services to
extend its own international reach.

Other contributing factors include:
! the continuing subordination of women in many societies, as
reflected in economic, educational, and work opportunity disparities
between men and women. Many societies still favor sons and view
girls as an economic burden. Desperate families in some of the most
impoverished countries sell their daughters to brothels or traffickers
for the immediate payoff and to avoid having to pay the dowery to
marry off daughters;
! the hardship and economic dislocations caused by the transition
following the collapse of Communism in the former Soviet Union
and Eastern Europe, as well as the wars in the former Yugoslavia.
The lack of opportunity and the eagerness for a better life abroad
have made many women and girls especially vulnerable to
entrapment by traffickers. With the weakening of law enforcement
in post-Communist societies, criminal organizations have grown and
established themselves in the lucrative business of international
trafficking;
! the high demand, worldwide, for trafficked women and children as
sex workers, cheap sweatshop labor, and domestic workers.
Traffickers are encouraged by large tax-free profits and continuing
income from the same victims, until recently at very low risk;
! The inadequacy of laws and law enforcement in most origin, transit,
and destination countries hampers efforts to fight trafficking. Even
in the United States, more effective legal remedies are only now

---

CRS-3
being implemented. Prostitution is legal or tolerated in many
countries, and widespread in most. When authorities do crack down,
it is usually against prostitutes, themselves. Penalties for trafficking
humans for sexual exploitation are often relatively minor compared
with those for other criminal activities like drug and gun trafficking.
! The priority placed on stemming illegal immigration in many
countries, including the United States, has resulted in treatment of
trafficking cases as a problem of illegal immigration, thus treating
victims as criminals. When police raid brothels, women are often
detained and punished, subjected to human rights abuses in jail, and
swiftly deported. Few steps have been taken to provide support,
health care, and access to justice. Few victims dare testify against the
traffickers or those who hold them, fearing retribution for
themselves and their families since most governments do not offer
stays of deportation or adequate protection for witnesses.
! The disinterest and in some cases even complicity of governments
is another big problem. Many law-enforcement agencies and
governments ignore the plight of trafficking victims and downplay
the scope of the trafficking problem. In some cases, police and other
governmental authorities accept bribes and collude with traffickers
by selling fake documentation, etc.5 In addition, local police often
fear reprisals from criminal gangs so they find it easier to deny
knowledge of trafficking. Many countries have no specific laws
aimed at trafficking in humans.
Traffickers and Their Victims
Chinese, Asian, Mexican, Central American, Russian and other former Soviet
Union gangs are among the major traffickers of people. Chinese and Vietnamese
Triads, the Japanese Yakuza, South American drug cartels, the Italian mafia, and
Russian gangs increasingly interact with local networks to provide transportation,
safe houses, local contacts, and documentation.
Traffickers acquire their victims in a number of ways. Sometimes women are
kidnaped outright in one country and taken forcibly to another. In other cases,
victims are lured with phony job offers. Traffickers entice victims to migrate
voluntarily with false promises of well-paying jobs in foreign countries as au pairs,
models, dancers, domestic workers, etc. Traffickers advertise these “jobs” as well
as marriage opportunities abroad in local newspapers. Russian crime gangs
reportedly use marriage agency databases and match-making parties to find victims.
In some cases, traffickers approach women or their families directly with offers of
lucrative jobs elsewhere. After providing transportation and false documents to get
5 For instance, according to Global Survival Network, an NGO group, Russian traffickers
can obtain false documentation in order to enable a minor to travel to destination countries
to work as a prostitute from corrupt officials in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for
approximately $800.

---

CRS-4
victims to their destination, they subsequently charge exorbitant fees for those
services, often creating life-time debt bondage.
While there is no single victim stereotype, a majority of trafficked women are
under the age of 25, with many in their mid to late teens. The fear of infection with
HIV and AIDS among customers has driven traffickers to recruit younger women and
girls, some as young as seven, erroneously perceived by customers to be too young
to have been infected.
Trafficking victims are often subjected to cruel mental and physical abuse in
order to keep them in servitude, including beating, rape, starvation, forced drug use,
confinement, and seclusion. Once victims are brought into destination countries, their
passports are often confiscated. Victims are forced to have sex, often unprotected,
with large numbers of partners, and to work unsustainably long hours. Many victims
suffer mental break-downs and are exposed to sexually-transmitted diseases,
including HIV and AIDS. They are often denied medical care and those who become
ill are sometimes even killed.
Regional Trends6
Asia and the Pacific. The largest number of victims are trafficked from
Southeast Asia annually according to the U.S. Department of State. The growth of
sex tourism in this region is one of the main contributing factors. Large-scale child
prostitution occurs in many countries. Thailand, Cambodia, and the Philippines are
popular travel destinations for “sex tourists,” including pedophiles, from Europe,
North America, Japan, and Australia.
Japan is the considered the largest market for Asian women trafficked for sex.
Victims are believed to come mainly from the Philippines and Thailand.7 Victims
are also trafficked in increasing numbers to Taiwan, Malaysia, Hong-Kong, and
Thailand. Cross-border trafficking is prevalent in the Mekong region of Thailand,
Burma, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, and the Southern Yunan province of China.
Vietnamese women are trafficked to China and Cambodia. According to various
NGO sources, hundreds of thousands of foreign women and children have been sold
into the Thai sex industry since 1990, with most coming from Burma, Southern
China, Laos, and Vietnam. East Asia, especially Japan, is also a destination for
trafficked women from Russia and Eastern Europe.
6 Information in this section is summarized from a wide range of official and NGO sources.
Specific estimates of numbers trafficked to and from individual countries and regions are
not included in this update because their accuracy is so uncertain and the numbers presented
by different sources are dated and cannot be reconciled with new global estimates by the
State Department.
7 The Coalition against Trafficking in Women (CATW), Trafficking in Women and
Prostitution in Asia. The CATW is an international NGO.
[http://www.catwinternational.org/].

---

CRS-5
Victims from Southeast Asia, especially China, Burma, the Philippines, Thailand,
Cambodia, and Vietnam, are also sent to Western Europe, the United States,
Australia, and the Middle East.
South Asia may be the second highest source region for trafficking victims
according to the State Department. The low status of women in some societies as
well as the growth of sex tourism contribute significantly to trafficking in this region.
Sri Lanka and India are among the favored destinations of sex tourists from other
parts of the world. Bangladesh and Nepal, the poorest countries in the region, are the
main source countries. India and Pakistan are key destination countries. Thousands
of Nepalese girls and young women are lured or abducted to India for sexual
exploitation each year. The total number of Nepalese working as prostitutes in India
are believed to be in the tens of thousands. Thousands of women and children from
Bangladesh are trafficked to Pakistan each year. Also, according to Amnesty
International, Afghan women have been sold into prostitution in Pakistan.
Thousands of Nepalese women and children are believed to be trafficked for
prostitution to the Asia Pacific region, especially Hong Kong. Bangladeshi women
and children have also been trafficked to the Middle East in large numbers, over the
last 20 years. India is a source, transit, and destination country, receiving women and
children from Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, and Pakistan and sending
victims to Europe and the Middle East.
Australia has been a prime source of sex tourists in Asia. The Philippines,
Thailand, South Korea, Sri Lanka, and Hong Kong are some of the primary Asian
destinations for organized sex tours. Indonesia and Taiwan are secondary
destinations. Australians also travel to Europe and Latin America. To counteract this
problem, the Australian government has developed extraterritorial legislation and
public awareness campaigns aimed at travelers.8
International criminal organizations traffic hundreds of Thai women yearly to
Australia for prostitution. Australia is developing tougher laws including long jail
terms to stop the trafficking of Asian women to Australia.9
Europe. The former Soviet Union and Central and Eastern Europe have
replaced Asia as the main source of women trafficked to Western Europe. Victims
come from Russia, Ukraine, and other East European countries. With the economic
and political turmoil after the collapse of the Soviet Union, trafficking from the
region has escalated from a minor problem before 1991 into a major crisis. As
criminal organizations have grown, especially in Russia, they have gravitated to this
lucrative business. Russian organizations now play a dominant role not just in the
trafficking of Russian women but also women from throughout Eastern Europe.
Russian organized crime groups and others including Albanian, Estonian, Chechen,
Serb, and Italian gangs are involved in human trafficking in Europe. Furthermore,
Russian organized crime is starting to take over the sex industry in a number of West
8 World Congress Against Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children, Regional Profiles.
9 Maria Moscaritolo, “Australia takes aim at Asian sex slave trade,” Reuters, May 26, 1998.

---

CRS-6
European countries. Russian criminal groups reportedly are also gaining control of
prostitution in Israel, and parts of the United States.10
The largest number of victims trafficked annually from the former Soviet Union
and Eastern Europe come from Russia and Ukraine. In addition, several Central and
East European countries are reported to be source, receiving, and transit countries.
The conflicts in Bosnia and Kosovo provided new opportunities for traffickers in the
former Yugoslavia and the Balkans. Traffickers targeted refugee women who fled
Kosovo. According to the Women’s Commission for Refugee Women and Children,
Albanian traffickers have smuggled thousands of Kosovo women into Italy by boat
for the sex trade.
Most Russian and East European victims are believed to be sent to West
European countries (especially Germany, Italy, France, Switzerland, the Netherlands,
Greece, Austria, and England). A substantial number are also sent to the Middle East
(especially Israel and Saudi Arabia) and the Far East (especially Japan and Thailand).
Many wind up in the United States or Canada. The remainder are sent to Central
European countries, especially Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic.11
Western European countries are also destination points for victims from other
parts of the world, including Africa (Ghana, Nigeria, Morocco), Latin America
(Brazil, Colombia, the Dominican Republic), and Southeast Asia (the Philippines,
Thailand).
Middle East. The sexual exploitation of women and children in the Middle
East usually involves the importation of women from other regions. The exploitation
of Middle Eastern women tends to have less of a commercial dimension.12
Women and children, mostly from Asia (Thailand, the Philippines, Indonesia),
are trafficked as prostitutes or brides to the Middle East (Saudi Arabia, The United
Arab Emirates). Women from the former Soviet Republics are sent to Israel.
According to the Israel Women’s Network, every year several hundred women from
Russia and the former Soviet Union are brought to Israel by well-organized criminal
groups.13
Latin America and the Caribbean. Tens of thousands of Latin American
and Caribbean women and children are believed to be trafficked for sexual
exploitation each year. Impoverished children are particularly vulnerable to
trafficking for prostitution. Victims from Latin America and the Caribbean are
trafficked to Western Europe and the United States. The Central American countries
and Mexico are also transit countries for trafficking to the United States.
10 Global Survival Network. An Expose of the Traffic in Women for Prostitution from the
Newly Independent States. Washington, D.C., 1998, p. 5-10.
11 Ibid.
12 World Congress Against Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children, Regional Profiles.
13 Michael Specter, “Traffickers’ New Cargo: Naive Slavic Women,” New York Times,
January 11, 1998.

---

CRS-7
The presence of sex tourists from Europe, North America, and Australia has
significantly contributed to the trafficking of women and children. A growing
number of sex tourists are going to Latin America, partly as a result of recent
restrictions placed on sex tourism in Thailand, Sri Lanka, and other Asian countries.14
Favored sex tourism destinations are Brazil, Argentina, the Dominican Republic,
Mexico, Honduras, Costa Rica, Trinidad and Tobago. Brazil has one of the worst
child prostitution problems in the world.15
Africa. In Africa, tens of thousands of victims are believed to be trafficked
annually according to the U.S. Department of State, although the extent of trafficking
is not well documented. Like elsewhere, poverty and the low status of women are
major contributing factors. In addition, wars and civil strife engulfing countries like
Sudan and Rwanda, as well as the indifference of some governments make women
and children vulnerable to trafficking.16
Trafficking in children for labor is a serious problem in Togo and Benin as well
as Botswana, Zaire, Somalia, Ethiopia, Zambia, Nigeria, Algeria. Victims are
trafficked to Nigeria, Gabon, Ghana, and South Africa. Africans, especially women
from Nigeria, are trafficked to Western Europe and the Middle East.
Trafficking to the United States
Some 18,000 to 20,00 people are trafficked to the United States each year,
according to the most recent Department of State estimates.17 Most come from
Southeast Asia and the former Soviet Union. About half of those are forced into
sweatshop labor and domestic servitude. The rest are forced into prostitution and the
sex industry, or in the case of young children, kidnaped and sold for adoption. While
many victims come willingly, they are not aware of the terms and conditions they
will face. Women trafficked to the United States most often wind up in the larger
cities in New York, Florida, North Carolina, California, and Hawaii.18 But the
problem is also migrating to smaller cities and suburbs. Russian crime groups are
said to be actively involved in trafficking and the sex industry in the United States.
The United States is also the major destination country for young children
kidnaped and trafficked for adoption by childless couples unwilling to wait for a
child through legitimate adoption procedures and agencies. The largest source
14 Casa Alianza/Covenant House Latin America, “Casa Alianza Warns That Central America
Is New Sex Tourism Destination,” November 17, 1997.
15 Social Security Network, “Brazil spends $1.7mil on helping child prostitutes.” Reuters,
June 12, 1998.
16 John Eibner of Christian Solidarity International, Karin Davies, “Slave Trade Thrives in
Sudan,” Associated Press, February 7, 1998.
17 Testimony of Frank E. Loy, Undersecretary of State for Global Affairs, before the
Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs, Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, February 22, 2000.
18 U.S. Department of State. Bureau of Consular Affairs, Fraud Digest,
November/December, 1997.

---

CRS-8
country is Mexico. Mexican children are also kidnaped and trafficked to the United
States for child prostitution.
American men, along with Europeans and Australians, are reportedly the most
numerous sex tourists in Central America (Costa Rica, Honduras), South East Asia
(The Philippines, Thailand), and South Asia (India, Sri Lanka). Many companies
operating in a number of large cities reportedly specialize in sex tours.
Until recently, U.S. laws were widely believed to be inadequate to deal with
trafficking in women and children. Nor were there thought to be adequate laws and
services to protect and assist victims. With the implementation of anti-trafficking
legislation and programs, the hope is that the situation will improve significantly.
U.S. Policy
The Clinton Administration. The trafficking issue has been gaining attention
in the United States and worldwide since the late 1990s. The problem was addressed
as a priority by the Clinton Administration and the 106th Congress. As part of former
President Clinton’s announced International Crime Control Strategy, an interagency
working group was set up to address international crime implications of trafficking.
On March 11, 1998, President Clinton issued a directive establishing a U.S.
government-wide anti-trafficking strategy of (1) prevention, (2) protection and
support for victims, and (3) prosecution of traffickers. The strategy, as announced,
had strong domestic and international policy components:
! In the area of prevention, the Administration outlined the need for
programs to increase economic opportunities for potential victims
and dissemination of information in other countries to increase
public awareness of trafficking dangers and funding for more
research on trafficking.
! In terms of victim protection and assistance, the Administration
argued for legislation to provide shelter and the support services to
victims who are in the country unlawfully and therefore presently
ineligible for assistance. It pressed for creation of a humanitarian,
non-immigrant visa classification to allow victims to receive
temporary resident status so that they could receive assistance and
help to prosecute traffickers. Also, support was sought for
developing countries to protect and reintegrate trafficking victims
once they were returned.
! As far as prosecution and enforcement, the Administration pressed
for laws to more effectively go after traffickers and increase the
penalties they can face. In addition, restitution for trafficked victims
was sought in part by creating the possibility of bringing private civil
lawsuits against traffickers. The Department of Justice called for
laws that would expand the definition of involuntary servitude,
criminalize a broader range of actions constituting involuntary
servitude, and increase the penalties for placing people in

---

CRS-9
involuntary servitude. Justice Department spokesmen also urged
that prosecutors be give the capability to go after those who profit
from trafficking, not just those directly involved in trafficking.19
They also called for amending immigration statutes to punish
traffickers who entrap victims by taking their passports and
identification from them.
On the domestic side, a Workers’ Exploitation Task Force, chaired by the
Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division and the Solicitor’s Office in the
Department of Labor, was charged with investigating and prosecuting cases of
exploitation and trafficking. In addition, the Department of Justice reviewed existing
U.S. criminal laws and their enforcement to see if they adequately dealt with the
crime of trafficking.
The Department of State funded the creation of a database on U.S. and
international legislation on trafficking.
An Interagency Council on Women formed
by the Clinton Administration established a senior governmental working group on
trafficking. The Council sponsored a meeting of governmental and non-government
representatives from source countries, transit countries, and international
organizations to call attention to the trafficking issue and to develop strategies for
combating this problem. The Clinton Administration worked with Congress on what
it considered urgently needed legislation to strengthen the tools available to fight
trafficking at home and abroad, building on its framework of “prevention, protection,
and prosecution” to strengthen tools available for the fight and to help advance the
U.S. policy on trafficking in other countries. The Administration also urged the
enactment of legislation to encourage and support strong action by foreign
governments and help the work of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in this
area.
The Bush Administration. The Bush Administration, as well as the 107th
and 108th Congress, have continued the anti-trafficking effort with strong bipartisan
support. Attorney General John Ashcroft announced in March 2001 that the fight
against trafficking would be a top priority for the Administration and that U.S. law
enforcement agencies, including the FBI, the Immigration and Naturalization Service,
and the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division would cooperate closely to
upgrade their efforts to combat trafficking. The Justice Department also announced
new guidelines for federal prosecutors to pursue trafficking cases.20 The State
Department issued its first Congressionally mandated report on worldwide trafficking
in July 2001.21
On January 24, 2002, U.S. Attorney General announced the implementation of
a special “T” visa, as called for in P.L.106-386, for victims of trafficking in the
19 Testimony of William R. Yeomans, Chief of Staff of the Civil Rights Division,
Department of Justice, before the Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs,
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, April 4, 2000.
20 Attorney General John Ashcroft’s news conference on March 27, 2001. See
[http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/speeches/2001/032701workerexploitation.htm].
21

---

CRS-10
United States who cooperate with law enforcement officials. Under the statute,
victims who cooperate with law enforcement against their traffickers and would be
likely to suffer severe harm if returned to their home countries may be granted
permission to stay in the United States. After three years in T status, the victims are
eligible to apply for permanent residency and for non-immigrant status for their
spouses and children.22
On February 13, 2002, President Bush signed an Executive Order establishing an
Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons. The Task
Force, mandated by the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-386),
includes the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Labor, the
Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Director of the Central Intelligence
Agency, the Administrator of the Agency for International Development, the Director
of the Office of Management and Budget, and Office of the National Security
Advisor. The Task Force is charged with strengthening coordination among key
agencies. It is to identify what more needs to be done to protect potential victims, to
punish traffickers, and to prevent future trafficking. According to Secretary of State
Powell, the United States would work closely with other governments, non-
governmental organizations and concerned people throughout the world to put an end
to trafficking. The State Department Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in
Person was tasked with assisting the Interagency Task Force in implementing P.L.
106-386 and Task Force initiatives.
In addition to announcing the establishment of the Interagency Task Force, the
State Department issued a fact sheet on February 14, 2002, detailing planned U.S.
activities to stop trafficking in persons.23 The Departments of State and Justice were
to establish a Migrant Smuggling and Trafficking in Persons Center to gather and
disseminate information from intelligence and law enforcement. USAID was
charged with developing partnerships between source and destination countries to
combat trafficking. The Department of Justice was to institute training programs for
federal prosecutors, Immigration and Naturalization Service personnel, and FBI
agents in 2002. The Department of Justice announced that it would seek sponsors in
Congress for legislation to punish Americans engaging in “sex tourism” abroad with
minors. The Department of Labor was to establish six training and support centers
for women victims or at risk of trafficking in major cities of Central and Eastern
Europe and the Newly Independent States. The Department of Health and Human
Services was to launch a public awareness campaign to encourage trafficking victims
to come forward.
In February 2003, The State Department co-sponsored an in international
conference on Sex Trafficking in Washington, D.C. with a coalition of NGOs.
Speaking at the conference, Attorney General John Ashcroft indicated that since
passage of U.S. anti-trafficking legislation in 2002, the U.S. Justice Department had
22 U.S. Department of State. International Information Programs. Washington File, January
24, 2002. (Website http://usinfo.state.gov)
23 U.S. Department of State. International Information Programs. Washington File, February
14, 2002. (Website http://usinfo.state.gov)

---

CRS-11
doubled the number of prosecutions and convictions for trafficking.24 The
Department of Justice also announced a $9.5 million nationwide grant program to
assist victims of human trafficking in the United States.
The Trafficking in Persons Report, 2003. On June 11, 2003, the State
Department issued its third annual report on human trafficking, Trafficking in
Persons Report (TIP), June 2003.25 This report is mandated by Congress under
P.L.106-386 (the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000). The report expands
on and seeks to address what were widely seen as weaknesses in the previous two
annual reports.
The report rates countries according to whether they meet “minimum standards”
with regard to their anti-trafficking commitment and policies. Governments meeting
“minimum standards” are defined in the Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of
2000 (P.L.106-386) as those that: (1) prohibit and punish acts of trafficking; (2)
prescribe punishment commensurate with that for grave crimes, such as forcible
sexual assault, for the knowing commission of trafficking in some of its most
reprehensible forms (trafficking for sexual purposes, trafficking involving rape or
kidnaping, or trafficking that causes a death); (3) prescribe punishment that is
sufficiently stringent to deter, and that adequately reflects the offense’s heinous
nature; and (4) make serious and sustained efforts to eliminate trafficking.26
For the first time, the report’s findings carried possible negative consequences for
countries that are deemed not to be meeting minimum standards for fighting
trafficking and not to be making adequate efforts to meet them. P.L. 106-386 made
countries listed in Tier Three (beginning with the 2003 State Department report)
24 U.S. Department of State. International Information Programs. Washington File, February
26, 2003.
25 www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/tiprpt/2003/
26 The Act also established criteria that should be considered as evidence of serious and
sustained efforts to eliminate trafficking: These are whether a government (1) vigorously
investigates and prosecutes acts of trafficking within its territory; (2) protects victims of
trafficking, encourages victims’ assistance in investigation and prosecution, provides victims
with legal alternatives to their removal to countries where they would face retribution or
hardship, and ensures that victims are not inappropriately penalized solely for unlawful acts
as a direct result of being trafficked; (3) has adopted measures, such as public education, to
prevent trafficking; (4) cooperates with other governments in investigating and prosecuting
trafficking; (5) extradites persons charged with trafficking; (6) monitors immigration and
emigration patterns for evidence of trafficking, and responds appropriately; and (7)
vigorously investigates and prosecutes public officials who participate in trafficking, and
takes all appropriate measures against such officials who condone trafficking.
The Act also spells out three factors that the Department is to consider in determining
whether a country is making significant efforts to bring itself into compliance with these
minimum standards. These considerations are: (1) the extent of trafficking in the country;
( 2) the extent of governmental noncompliance with the minimum standards, particularly the
extent to which government officials have been complicit in trafficking; and (3) what
measures are reasonable to bring the government into compliance with the minimum
standards in light of the government’s resources and capabilities.

---

CRS-12
subject to sanctions, including termination of non-humanitarian, non-trade-related
assistance and loss of U.S. support for loans from international financial institutions,
specifically the International Monetary Fund and multilateral development banks
such as the World Bank. On September 9, 2003, the White House announced that the
President was imposing trafficking related sanctions against Burma, Cuba, Liberia,
North Korea, and Sudan.27
The TIP is more comprehensive than in previous years, rating 116 countries
(compared to 89 countries in the 2002 report). It provides much more detail than past
reports on the criteria by which countries are selected for inclusion in the report and
for ranking in the three categories or tiers. For the first time, the report includes a
separate category of special case countries that are not ranked due to particular
circumstances, such as Afghanistan and Iraq because governments were recently
replaced there and Iran because of the absence of information deemed to be reliable.28
The report lowers the range of estimates of the number of persons trafficked
across borders each year around the world (between 800,000 and 900,000) and to the
United States (18,000-20,000) but does not make clear whether these new estimates
reflect the success of efforts to fight trafficking, better tracking, or simply changes
in methodology. The report provides an enumeration of “best practices”or successful
actions that have been taken by countries, often at low or no cost, to combat human
trafficking. To convey the human cost of trafficking, the report places the spotlight
on a number of individual cases.
In the report, countries are ranked in three groups or tiers. Countries not included
are either not seen as having a significant trafficking problem as source, transit, or
destination countries (meaning more than 100 cases per year) or there is insufficient
information about their situation.
Tier 1 is made up of countries deemed by the State Department to have a serious
trafficking problem but fully complying with the Act’s minimum standards for the
elimination of trafficking. Twenty-six countries are included.29
Tier 2 countries are those whose governments the State Department views as not
fully complying with those standards but making “significant efforts to bring
themselves into compliance.” This is the largest group with seventy-five countries
27 Presidential Determination with Respect to Foreign Governments’ Efforts Regarding
Trafficking in Persons (Presidential Determination No. 2003-35), September 9, 2003.
28 Other countries listed as special cases include Egypt, Algeria, Tunisia, Somalia, and
Mauritania.
29 Included in Tier One are Austria, Belgium, Benin, Colombia, Czech Republic, Denmark,
France, Germany, Ghana, Hong Kong, Italy, Lithuania, Macedonia, Mauritius, The
Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, Taiwan, the
United Arab Emirates, and the United Kingdom.

---

CRS-13
listed.30 Critics charge that this group is too all encompassing, lumping together
countries with very different track records.
Tier 3 are those countries whose governments the State Department deems as not
fully complying with those standards and not making significant efforts to do so.
This group includes fifteen countries.31 These countries are subject to U.S. sanctions
after October 1, 2003, if they have not improved their performance.
At a press conference following release of the report, the Director of the State
Department Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons, John Miller,
stressed that there were still problems even in Tier One countries and that placement
on Tier Three did not mean that there had been no effort by a government to fight
trafficking. He noted that many countries had improved their performance in advance
of the issuance of this report, proving the utility of the U.S. “carrot and stick”
approach to other governments. He expressed the hope that Tier Three countries
would improve their record against trafficking before the specified October 1, 2003
date after which sanctions might be imposed. He responded to criticism that the
United States was rating other countries but not assessing itself by noting that the
Department of Justice was in the process of completing an assessment of U.S.
performance that would be released later in the summer.32
The rankings are not without controversy. Several countries, especially U.S.
NATO allies Greece and Turkey, have condemned their placement on the Tier Three
list. In addition to being a NATO member, until recently Greece held the rotating
presidency of the European Union. Canadian commentators were reportedly
surprised by Canada being dropped from Tier One to Tier Two. Others criticized the
State Department for giving certain countries too high marks, in particular countries
like Russia and Pakistan. Human Rights Watch, an NGO that takes a strong interest
in the trafficking issue, was very critical of the report, stating that for the third year
in a row, it failed to give hard figures on the number of people being trafficked and
stating that it gave undue credit for minimal effort while ignoring practices such as
summary deportation and incarceration.33 It also said that the report’s framework for
country analysis needed improvement. At the same time, Human Rights Watch did
acknowledge that the report was an improvement over previous ones.
30 Tier Two includes Albania, Angola, Armenia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bolivia,
Brazil, Brunei, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, China,
Congo, Costa Rica, Cote d’Ivoire, Croatia, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Estonia,
Ethiopia, Finland, Gabon, The Gambia, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia,
Israel, Jamaica, Japan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyz Republic, Laos, Latvia, Lebanon, Malawi,
Malaysia, Mali, Mexico, Moldova, Mozambique, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria,
Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia and
Montenegro, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan,
Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Uganda, Ukraine, Venezuela, Vietnam, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.
31 Tier Three countries include Belize, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burma, Cuba, Dominican
Republic, Georgia, Greece, Haiti, Kazakstan, Liberia, North Korea, Sudan, Suriname,
Turkey, and Uzbekistan.
32 [http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/rm/21459.htm].
33 [http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/06/traffickingreport.htm].

---

CRS-14
The Trafficking in Persons Report acknowledges some continuing weaknesses
that had been criticized earlier. The TIP lacks specific information about law
enforcement efforts in other countries. Too many countries are still omitted from the
report due to inadequate information. Some countries do not adequately distinguish
between trafficking and other human smuggling, resulting in faulty data. It pointed
out that inadequate attention has been given to the demand side of trafficking,
according John Miller.34
The International Response
The United States and other countries are also pursuing a number of bilateral and
multilateral programs and initiatives to combat trafficking. The steps taken by the
United States internationally include the following:
! The Departments of State and Justice are training foreign law
enforcement and immigration officers to better identify and crack-
down on traffickers and their victims at the border.
! U.S. embassies and consulates worldwide are working with other
countries to stop international trafficking in women and children.
The United States has expanded its program to heighten public
awareness about trafficking in source countries, targeting the
messages to potential victims.
! The United States is also working with the European Union, the
Group of Eight, the United Nations, and the Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). The United States
supported some 240 programs in 75 countries to combat trafficking
in FY2002.35
The United States and the European Union agreed on a joint initiative to combat
trafficking in November 1997.36 U.S. and EU officials met in Luxembourg to launch
a jointly funded initiative against trafficking in women from Russia and Eastern
Europe. It is primarily an information campaign, warning potential victims and an
education program for law enforcement, customs and consular officials to heighten
their awareness of the problem. Pilot projects were launched in Poland by the EU
and in Ukraine by the United States. The United States initiated bilateral cooperation
programs in a number of countries, including Russia, other former Soviet Republics,
Bosnia, Albania, Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary, Thailand, and the Philippines to fight
trafficking.
In 2002, the Council of the European Union took a major further step in the fight
against human trafficking, reaching agreement on a broad new framework decision.
34 Trafficking in Persons Report, 2003, p. 17.
35 Trafficking in Persons Report, 2003, p. 170.
36 Fact Sheet: US-EU Initiative to Prevent Trafficking in Women. USIS Washington File,
December 5, 1997.

---

CRS-15
The decision sought to strengthen police and judicial cooperation and to harmonize
the laws and policies of member states in areas such as criminalization, penalties,
sanctions, aggravating circumstances, jurisdiction, and extradition. The deadline for
implementation of the decision by Member States was set for August 1, 2002.37
At the OSCE Summit Meeting in Istanbul in November 1999, leaders of the 55
OSCE member states from Europe, Central Asia, and North America, agreed to make
combating trafficking in the OSCE area (where some 200,000 people are trafficked
annually) a priority issue. A follow up meeting on trafficking was held in Vienna on
June 19, 2000. The participating states agreed on steps to increase their efforts and
better coordinate actions to fight the problem. The OSCE sponsored conference in
Bangkok in June 2002 to deal with the trafficking issues. Speaking at the conference,
Helga Konrad who heads the OSCE task force on human trafficking said that the
approach taken to date to fighting trafficking has failed. She argued that closer
collaboration between source and destination countries was vital.38
The international community began meeting in 1999 to draft a Protocol to
Prevent, Suppress, and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and
Children in conjunction with the U.N. Convention Against Transnational Organized
Crime. The United States, along with Argentina, introduced the draft protocol in
January 1999. Negotiations were concluded in 2000 on a revised draft. On
November 15, 2000, the U.N. General Assembly adopted the Convention on
Transnational Crime, including the Protocol on Trafficking. The Convention and
Protocols formally signed in Palermo, Italy, in December 2000, were designed to
enable countries to work together more closely against criminals engaged in cross-
border crimes. The United States signed the U.N. protocol on Trafficking in
December 2000, but has not yet ratified it.
The United States is party to two other international agreements that have been
adopted to address aspects of trafficking in children. The International Labor
Organization (ILO) Convention 182 concerning the Prohibition and Immediate
Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labor was ratified by United
States in December 1999.39 The Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the
Child on Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography was signed by
the United States July 2000 and ratified in December 2002. In January, 2002, the
Protocol went into force, having been signed by 88 countries and ratified by 16.40
The Organization of American States (OAS) has also placed the issue of
trafficking on its agenda. In November 2002, its Inter-American Commission on
Women is scheduled to meet in Washington to discuss trafficking in the Americas.

37 [http://europa.eu.int/]
38 Agence France-Presse, June 20, 2002.
39 See [http://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/ipec/about/factsheet/facts23.htm].
40 See [http://www.unicef.org/crc/crc.htm].

---

CRS-16
Congressional Action
The 106th Congress took several legislative initiatives on the issue of trafficking
in persons for sexual and other exploitation. The focus of bills paralleled the Clinton
Administration’s framework of “prevention, protection, and prosecution. However,
some of the congressional initiatives went beyond Clinton Administration
recommendations in several areas, especially in calling for actions against
governments that tolerate trafficking. Several bills on trafficking were introduced in
the House and Senate in 1999 and 2000.41 H.R. 3244, was introduced by Rep.
Christopher Smith (R-NJ) on November 8, 1999. A similar bill was sponsored in the
Senate by Sam Brownback (R-KS). In conference, the bill was combined with the
Violence against Women Act of 2000 and repackaged as the Victims of Trafficking
and Violence Protection Act of 2000, along with miscellaneous anti-crime and anti-
terrorism provisions. President Clinton signed the bill into law on October 28, 2000
(P.L. 106-386).
Among its key provisions, P.L. 106-386:
! Directed the Secretary of State to provide an annual report by June
1, listing countries that do and do not comply with minimum
standards for the elimination of trafficking and to provide in his
annual report on human rights information on a country-by-country
basis describing the nature and extent of severe forms of trafficking
in persons in each country and an assessment of the efforts by
governments to combat trafficking;
! Called for establishing an Interagency Task Force to Monitor and
Combat Trafficking, chaired by the Secretary of State, and
authorized the Secretary to establish within the Department of State
an Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking to assist the Task
Force;
! Called for measures to enhance economic opportunity for potential
victims of trafficking as a method to deter trafficking, to increase
public awareness, particularly among potential victims, of the
dangers of trafficking and the protections that are available for
41 On March 11, 1999, S. 600 was introduced by Senator Paul Wellstone (D-Minn.) and
referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. An identical bill, H.R. 1238, was
introduced in the House by Representative Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) The bills were
entitled the International Trafficking of Women and Children Victim Protection Act of
1999. Subsequently, H.R. 1356 was introduced in the House by Representative Christopher
Smith (R-N.J.) on March 25, 1999 and referred to several Committees. It was titled the
Freedom From Sexual Trafficking Act of 1999.
On October 27, 1999, Rep. Sam Gejdenson (D-CT ) introduced H.R. 3154, the
“Comprehensive Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 1999.” Senator Paul D. Wellstone
introduced an identical bill in the Senate, S. 1842. These bills had the support of the
Clinton Administration as being in line with its own approach.

---

CRS-17
victims, and for the government to work with NGOs to combat
trafficking;
! Established programs and initiatives in foreign countries to assist in
the safe integration, reintegration, or resettlement of victims of
trafficking and their children, as well as programs to provide
assistance to victims of severe forms of trafficking in persons within
the United States, without regard to such victims’ immigration status
and to make such victims eligible, without regard to their
immigration status, for any benefits that are otherwise available
under the Crime Victims Fund;
! Provided protection and assistance for victims of severe forms of
trafficking while in the United States;
! Amended the code to make funds derived from the sale of assets
seized from and forfeited by trafficking available for victims
assistance programs under this Act;
! Amended the Immigration and Nationality Act to allow the Attorney
General to grant up to 5000 non-immigrant visas per year to certain
victims of severe forms of trafficking who are in the United States
and who would face a significant possibility of retribution or other
harm if they were removed from the United States. In addition,
amended the Act to adjust to lawful permanent resident the status
of up to 5000 victims per year who have been in the United States
continuously for three years since admission, who have remained of
good moral character, who have not unreasonably refused to assist
in trafficking investigations or prosecutions, and who would face a
significant possibility of retribution or other harm if removed from
the United States;
! Established minimum standards applicable to countries that have a
significant trafficking problem. Urged such countries to prohibit
severe forms of trafficking in persons, to punish such acts, and to
make serious and sustained efforts to eliminate such trafficking;
! Provided for assistance to foreign countries for programs and
activities designed to meet the minimum international standards for
the elimination of trafficking;
! Withheld U.S. non-humanitarian assistance and instructed the U.S.
executive director of each multilateral development bank and the
International Monetary Fund to vote against non-humanitarian
assistance to such countries that do not meet minimum standards
against trafficking and are not making efforts to meet minimum
standards, unless continued assistance is deemed to be in the U.S.
national interest;

---

CRS-18
! Encouraged the President to compile and publish a list of foreign
persons who play a significant role in a severe form of trafficking in
persons. Also encouraged the President to impose sanctions under
the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, including the
freezing of assets located in the United States, and to exclude
significant traffickers, and those who knowingly assist them, from
entry into the United States; and
! Amended the U.S. Code to double the current maximum penalties
for peonage, enticement into slavery, and sale into involuntary
servitude from 10 years to 20 years imprisonment and to add the
possibility of life imprisonment for such violations resulting in death
or involving kidnaping, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to
kill.
The Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 was amended
in 2002 by Sec. 682 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, FY2003 (P.L.
107-228) to provide “....(a) support for local in-country nongovernmental
organization-operated hotlines, culturally and linguistically appropriate protective
shelters, and regional and international nongovernmental organization networks and
databases on trafficking, including support to assist nongovernmental organizations
in establishing service centers and systems that are mobile and extend beyond large
cities; (b) support for nongovernmental organizations and advocates to provide legal,
social, and other services and assistance to trafficked individuals, particularly those
individuals in detention; (c) education and training for trafficked women and girls;
(d) the safe integration or reintegration of trafficked individuals into an appropriate
community or family, with full respect for the wishes, dignity, and safety of the
trafficked individual; and (e) support for developing or increasing programs to assist
families of victims in locating, repatriating, and treating their trafficked family
members, in assisting the voluntary repatriation of these family members or their
integration or resettlement into appropriate communities, and in providing them with
treatment.” The amendment also authorized an increase in appropriations for
FY2003 to fund such programs.
On April 17, 2002, H.R. 4477, The Sex Tourism Prohibition Improvement
Act was introduced in the House by Rep. James F Sensenbrenner (R-WI). The bill
aimed to curb “sex tourism” by Americans to foreign countries for purpose of
engaging in sex acts, especially with minors, that would be illegal in the United
States. The bill was passed by the House on June 26, 2002 and sent to the Senate but
was not enacted. However, provisions to combat sex tourism were included in
subsequent anti-trafficking legislation in the 108th Congress (P.L. 108-193).
In 2003, Congress enacted the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization
Act of 2003. The president signed the Act into law on December 19, 2003 (P.L. 108-
193). The Act authorized substantial increases in funding for anti-trafficking
programs in FY2004 and FY2005 (over $100 million for each fiscal year).

---

CRS-19
Policy Issues
A broad consensus seems to be shared in Congress and the policy community on
the need for decisive action to curb trafficking. And the general framework of
“prevention, protection, and prosecution” also has widespread support. Questions
have been raised about implementation.
How will the war on terrorism and the emphasis on homeland security affect
the efforts to combat human trafficking? Since the terrorist attacks on the United
States on September 11, 2001, there has been concern among those advocating strong
policies to counter human trafficking that momentum might be lost in that battle.
The concern diminished in early 2002 when both the Administration and Congress
were seen as renewing their attention to the trafficking problem. However, there is
still some question about whether the emphasis on homeland security and the war on
terrorism might sap financial, law enforcement, and judicial resources from other
efforts, including the campaign against human trafficking. Some observers also
wonder if the U.S. need for support in the war on terrorism from certain governments
will make it more difficult to pressure those governments if their anti-trafficking
efforts are inadequate.
Should sanctions against foreign governments be used as a policy instrument
to combat trafficking? Most agree that extensive international cooperation will be
needed to stop international trafficking and that both “carrots” and “sticks” may be
needed to encourage other governments, including assisting governments in their
efforts to curb trafficking. The Clinton Administration argued against sanctions
language in P.L. 106-386 as unnecessary and counterproductive since very few, if
any, governments favor or support trafficking. Instead, it was argued, the focus
should be on cooperation. In the Bush Administration, Secretary of State Powell has
expressed concern in general that sanctions are an overused policy tool. On the other
side, some see the sanctions language contained in the anti-trafficking legislation as
being too weak since sanctions can be easily waived and a broad range of programs
are exempted. The Administration must make a determination by October 1, 2003,
about whether to impose sanctions against certain governments. The Tier 3 list of
non-cooperating countries includes a number of key U.S. allies and front-line states
in the war on terrorism, as well as some of the largest recipients of U.S. assistance.
How will the Administration decide against which Tier Three countries to impose
sanctions?
Who is eligible for protection as a victim of trafficking? Are the standards of
eligibility for benefits as a victim of trafficking the right ones? At present, protection
is limited to victims of “severe forms of trafficking”42 and victims must prove that
they are in the United States as a direct result of trafficking and that they have a well-
42 Severe forms of trafficking is defined in Section 3 of the bill as “sex trafficking in which
either a commercial sex act or any act or event contributing to such act is effected or
induced by force, coercion, fraud or deception or in which the person induced to perform
such acts has not attained the age of 18,” as well as “the purchase, sale, recruitment or
harboring, transportation, transfer or receipt for the purpose of subjection to involuntary
servitude....effected by force, coercion, fraud, or deception.”

---

CRS-20
founded fear of retribution if they are returned to their country of origin. They must
be willing and needed to help identify and prosecute their traffickers. Some critics
argue that the standards are too high to help many deserving victims. Critics also
argue that the line between pure victims and those who have a degree of complicity
in being brought to the United States may be difficult to draw. Such distinctions,
they argue, will leave some victims unprotected. P.L. 106-386 gives the executive
branch some discretion in determining who qualifies.
More broadly, differing perspectives on what constitutes trafficking could make
international cooperation more difficult. In the United States, some politicians,
religious groups, as well as feminist and other organizations, have campaigned to
broaden the definition of trafficking to include all prostitution, whether forced or
voluntary, with the prostitutes are always victims, and that traffickers will simply
force their victims to claim to be acting voluntarily. However, a number of countries
including some western democracies with otherwise strong human rights records
have legal and regulated prostitution, believing that the “world’s oldest profession”
cannot be stamped out and that a carefully regulated sex industry is the best
protection for those involved.
Are the links between human trafficking and HIV/AIDS receiving adequate
attention? Trafficking victims in the sex industry are exposed to sexually-
transmitted diseases, including HIV/AIDS, at much higher rates than the general
population. Very often they have no access to medical care. In addition, the fear of
infection with HIV/AIDS among customers has driven traffickers to recruit younger
women and girls, erroneously perceived by customers to be too young to have been
infected. Some question whether existing legislation, policies, and programs address
these issues.

---

CRS-21
Table 1. Authorizations to Implement Victims of Trafficking Act
P.L. 106-386, Part A
P.L. 108-193
Designations
FY2001
FY2002
FY2003*
FY2004
FY2005
Interagency Task
$1,500,000
$3,000,000
$3,000,000
$5,000,000
$5,000,000
Forcea
HHSb
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
—
$15,000,000
$15,000,000
State/USAID
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$30,000,000
$30,000,000
Bilateral
Assistancec
State Dept
$300,000
$300,000
$300,000
$300,000
$300,000
Internat. Organ.d
President
—
—
—
$250,000
$250,000
Law Enforcement
Academiese
President for
—
—
—
$300,000
$300,000
Researchf
Dept. of Justiceg
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
—
$15,000,000
$15,000,000
President
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$15,000,000
$15,000,000
Foreign Victims
Assistanceh
President To Help
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$15,000,000
$15,000,000
Meet Standardsi
Dept. of Laborj
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
—
$10,000,000
$10,000,000
a. (a) To Support Interagency Task Force in carrying out:
Sec. 104. Addition of Trafficking to State Dept. Human Rights Report.
Sec. 105. Establishment of an Interagency Task force and State Dept. Office to Monitor and
Combat Trafficking.
Sec. 110. Preparation of annual report and country list regarding severe forms of trafficking.
b. (b) To HHS for purposes of
Sec.107 (b). Assistance to victims of trafficking in the U.S.
c. (c) To Secretary of State for State Dept. and USAID to carry out:
Sec.107(a) Assistance for Trafficking victims in other countries.
d. For voluntary contribution to international organizations for projects related to trafficking
e. For training at the International Law Enforcement Academies
f. Research on domestic and international trafficking
g. (d) To Department of Justice to carry out Sec.107 (b) Grants to states, localities for protection of
victims.
h. (e) (1) To President to carry out Sec.106, foreign victim aid, including
— Enhancing economic opportunities for potential victims
— Increasing public awareness and information
— Consultation and working with NGOs
i. To President to carry out Sec. 109(2) Assistance to governments, NGOs, multilateral organizations
to help countries to meet minimum standards:
— law drafting assistance
— investigation and prosecution
— for facilities, programs, projects, exchanges
j. (f) To Department of Labor to carry out Sec.107 (b), assistance to trafficking victims in U.S.
— Employment assistance and benefits
— Contribution to HHS Annual Report
*Note: As amended by Sec. 682 of the Foreign Relations Author. Act for FY2003 (P.L.107-228).

---