The consequences for the UK and the world post Brexit have still to become clear, and may not do for at least another decade. One issue that needs to be considered is the impact of the UK leaving the EU on the ever growing, international industry of human trafficking.
When we talk about human trafficking a simple definition would be the moving of a person from one place to another, with or without their consent, in order to exploit them in a different destination. This can be internal however most of the time human trafficking involves an element of cross border migration. As such human trafficking can be labelled as a global issue which requires international co-operation to resolve and combat. The UK has altered its relations with the rest of the world by leaving the EU and this will undoubtedly impact upon its competency with helping to combat human trafficking.
There are three key areas that the UK will need to monitor closely and aim to resolve as it goes forward with separating from Europe and European institutions.
- The “Tough Borders” approach
A key component of the vote to leave campaign was that the UK needs better control of immigration. This could potentially manifest itself in different ways, but the overall paradigm appears to be that the UK needs better control over who they let in and they therefore need “tougher borders.”
When talking about the issue of human trafficking one argument made by supporters of the “tough borders” approach is that free movement of people in the EU has led to transnational criminal organisations. Iain Duncan Smith has said, specifying the Schengen no borders area, this has facilitated people smuggling and human trafficking throughout Europe. To what extent does this account of human trafficking hold up against the views of experts in the area as well as empirical evidence as to how increasing control at a border impacts upon human trafficking?
There are a few issues with the “tough borders” as a means to reduce human trafficking as well as how it impacts upon human trafficking generally.
The first issue is that as a means of preventing people taking risks to cross a border, it presumes that migrants are informed and that also, particularly with refugees, the cost of being found to be an illegal migrant is enough of a disincentive relative to the trauma they have just escaped. A recent report written by Ana Gomes, a Portugue
se MEP, found that the numbers of people arriving at Calais had dramatically increased post-Brexit because criminal gangs had misinformed migrants that Brexit would make it easier for people to enter the UK.
Continuing on the theme of Calais, another criticism of this theory is that the UK has in fact always had policed borders that could monitor illegal migration. At the moment Calais effectively acts as the UK’s southern most border through the 2003 Touquet Treaty with France. With the UK leaving Europe and so rescinding any responsibility to other EU citizens there may be little incentive for France to uphold this treaty, so in effect making it harder to police the southern border.
Further issues highlighted by Aidan McQuade, Director of Human Rights Watch, are that often victims come through legal channels, voluntarily, and are then exploited once they get to the destination country. He also mentions that often victims of trafficking are made to work in destination countries in order to pay off the debt of the cost of getting them into the country, this debt will be increased if it involves creation of passports etc.
Overall it is recognised that tough borders actually put people into a position of greater vulnerability. In what is already a hidden crime, people fleeing desperate situations take greater risks in order to overcome borders and to get into a place of safety, this makes them easy targets for criminal gangs to exploit. This has been seen clearly with regards to the refugee crisis (https://stopscottishslavery.wordpress.com/2015/12/23/syrian-refugees-easy-prey-for-human-traffickers-a-sad-consequence-of-european-immigration-policy/) with people going to extreme lengths in order to cross a border.
- The importance of European Co-operation in Combating Trafficking
Human trafficking is predominantly an international issue and as such preventing it and prosecuting traffickers as a deterrent requires international co-operation. Specifically this takes the form of the sharing of intelligence and resources for the protection of victims as well as the prosecution of traffickers.
Two important institutions for facilitating this are Europol and Eurojust. Europol describe their motives as “creating a safer Europe for the benefit of EU citizens.” Essentially they are an international police force that specifically target international crime and they list tackling human trafficking as one of their key objectives. Eurojust is a judicial arm to the EU with respect to international crime, their aim is described in Article 85 of the Lisbon Treaty and states that Eurojust facilitates the co-ordination and co-operation of member states judicial systems in order to prosecute serious international crime.
These two organisations are extremely important for the prosecution of human traffickers but also in protecting victims. Sir Hugh Orde, former president of UK Association for Police Officers, said prior to the vote that it would be worrying to lose Eurojust and Europol. He also mentioned that the UK would lose the European Arrest Warrant and that the EU provides translator
s and experts that streamline the sharing of information. Without this resource the sharing of evidence will take longer and be more expensive. Sir Hugh’s faith in the EU for dealing with international crime is backed up by previous UK actions. The UK has used Eurojust for joint investigations more than any other EU country, 67 between 2011-2015 of which 16 involved human trafficking.
Compounding the problems the UK could face by leaving these organisations is that the need for international co-operation on migration is increasing. This can be attributed to, in part, the refugee crisis. A report made in late 2015 by Europol stated that they believed up to 90% of people entering the EU from non-EU countries are doing so through “facilitation services” most of which are criminal gangs. Europol believes that because of this there is a greatly increased risk of exploitation of people in destination countries. This is an extremely worrying claim from Europol for the efforts of combating human trafficking and suggests a very large amount of people are currently, and will be, extremely vulnerable to being trafficked.
There is the possibility that the UK will be able to form bilateral treaties with organisations such as Eurojust and Europol, however these could take up to years to form at a time where the UK will be attempting to make a large amount of international treaties, such as trade agreements. Until something solid is in place a very high amount of people are more vulnerable to trafficking and traffickers are less likely to be prosecuted.
- European Legislation
The majority of human rights advances in legislation in the UK originally come from European directives. For example the Human Rights Act 1998 pretty much embodies the same terms as are in the European Convention on Human Rights. The rights guaranteed in the 1998 act do afford some protection for victims of trafficking, such
as the right to non-degrading treatment; the right to life and the freedom from slavery and forced labour. The EU has also created numerous employment rights that protect a person against being exploited at work, such as forced labour.
Importantly the EU has created legislation that is specific to the issue of human trafficking. Directive 2011/36/EU on Preventing and Combating Trafficking in Human Beings and Protecting its Victims and Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, 2005 are two specific examples. These two pieces of legislation enshrine obligations on the UK towards prevention of trafficking, prosecution of traffickers and protection of victims of trafficking. They are two of the most extensive and specific pieces of international legislation on the issue of human trafficking. The legislation was created through an amalgamation of expertise and experience from every signatory member state, the UK in particular being very influential. As Professor Michael Dougan, Liverpool University, puts it: “The EU is not something that happens to us (the UK), we are major players.”
Some specific examples of what is contained in the European legislation includes the right for victims of trafficking to access legal and medical aid and not be prosecuted for a crime they committed as a consequences of being trafficked. Kevin Hyland is the UK’s independent anti-slavery commissioner and directs the UK government’s efforts at tackling human trafficking. It was decided in Article 19 of the above Directive that every EU member state should have someone of this nature who would then interact with each member state’s representative. This is crucial for the gathering and sharing of information about trends and concerns with the ever changing, hidden crime of human trafficking.
EU legislation on human trafficking has been partially embodied by the Human Trafficking (Scotland) Act 2015 as well as the Modern Slavery Act of the same year. While these pieces of UK legislation go some way to fulfill European obligations there are still a lot of criticisms of them, particularly when talking about victim protection. It is unclear what will happen with legislation that has been influenced by EU directives now Professor Dougan suggests that any Act with a European influence will need to be reviewed and this process could take up to ten years. During this time victims of trafficking are vulnerable.
As well as this Aidan McQuade, Director of Anti-Slavery, states that because the UK will lose its position on the council of ministers it will lose all ability to influence new legislation and methods of tackling trafficking in the future. With human trafficking being an ever changing and hidden crime that we are still learning about, this is a big blow for trafficking victims generally to lose UK expertise but also for the UK in gaining insight as to the best way to deal with the issue within its own borders.
There are therefore some serious areas of concern with the UKs future ability to combat trafficking and contribute anything internationally to counteract an international crime once it has left the EU. These issues should be looked at seriously. The sentiment made by Boris Johnson recently, that despite leaving the EU “the UK is not leaving Europe” is a positive one because in order to protect victims of this vicious crime international co-ordination and co-operation is paramount. The UK separating itself from the rest of Europe would be to completely abandon the thousands of people at risk of human trafficking or victims that are currently being exploited.
References
- Banks, M., Calais migrant numbers swollen by Brexit says Ana Gomes, (The Parliament, 2016), <https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/articles/news/calais-migrant-numbers-swollen-brexit-result-says-ana-gomes>
- Dougan, M., Transcript: Professor Michael Dougan on the EU referendum, (University of Liverpool, 2016), <https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2016/06/22/transcript-professor-michael-dougan-eu-referendum/>
- Eurojust, History of Eurojust, <http://www.eurojust.europa.eu/about/background/Pages/history.aspx>
- Europol, About Europol, https://www.europol.europa.eu/content/page/about-europol-17>
- Europol, Interpol, Migrant Smuggling Networks: Joint Europol-Interpol Report (Europol-Interpol 2016) – can find at – <https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0ahUKEwiH9Kq9gvbNAhWHB8AKHcatCusQFgg1MAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.europol.europa.eu%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fpublications%2Fep-ip_report_executive_summary.pdf&usg=AFQjCNFHvrB-6XI8gYDO5r6IZ81WgXNFlw>
- McQuade, A., Brexit could destroy EU progress on tackling modern slavery?, (Left Foot Forward, 2016), < http://leftfootforward.org/2016/06/brexit-could-destroy-eu-progress-on-tackling-modern-slavery/>
- Rentoul, J., EU referendum will we gain or lose rights by leaving the European Union?, (The Independent, 2016), <http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-uk-rights-will-we-gain-or-lose-a7054091.html>
- Smith, I.D., Iain Duncan Smith on Brexit: The EU creates political extremism, (Newsweek, 2016), <http://europe.newsweek.com/brexit-tory-iain-duncan-smith-remaining-part-dysfunctional-declining-eu-not-470729>
- Stapleton, P., What would Brexit mean for labour rights and exploitation? (Focus on Labour Exploitaion, 2016), <http://www.labourexploitation.org/news/what-would-brexit-mean-labour-rights-and-exploitation>
- Swidlicki, P., Would Brexit leave the UK be better placed to handle the Calais crisis? (Open Europe, 2016), < http://openeurope.org.uk/today/blog/would-brexit-leave-the-uk-better-placed-to-tackle-the-calais-crisis/>
- Wintour, P., Boris Johnson Launches Charm Offensive at French Embassy, (The Guardian, 2016), <http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/14/boris-johnson-uk-outside-the-eu-will-play-greater-role-in-europe>
Stop Scottish Slavery 