Does the law protect victims of human trafficking?

Does the law protect victims of human trafficking? 1

Abstract This paper examines the legal regulation of trafficking in the United Kingdom. While it is difficult to quantify the number of victims of trafficking, measures have been adopted to attempt to combat this practice. Controversy surrounds the identification of those who are victims of human trafficking. This essay argues that the National Referral Mechanism has flaws in relation to putting too much emphasis on the immigration status of victims, fails to recognise historical victims of trafficking and fails to recognise credible victims thus leading to a violation of their human rights. While some rights protection for trafficking victims exist due to the European Convention on Human Rights and the Council of Europe s Trafficking Convention, this protection is somewhat minimal. In particular, States, including the UK, have failed to properly investigate complaints by victims of trafficking and this has led to compensation payouts. The next section examines case law that has arisen in relation to crimes committed by victims of trafficking and how the courts have formulated three mechanisms to achieve the obligations for a State not to prosecute victims under Article 26 of the Trafficking Convention. The essay examines how the courts have ruled that Article 26 does not impose a positive obligation upon the State and have further ruled that there must be a nexus between the crime committed and the trafficking. It will be asserted that Article 17 of the European Union s Prevention of Trafficking Directive potentially provides greater recognitions of the rights of trafficking victims than has previously been the case. While it has to be recognised that current UK law in this area does provide a good degree of protection the current legal structure in place to deal with trafficking fail to provide adequate deterrence. It is submitted that the new Trafficking Directive will impose minimum and maximum sentences and this will harmonise the law within the European Union Member States thus having the effect of providing longer jail sentences for those who commit this crime. It is asserted that domestic legislation within the United Kingdom is inconsistent with the Trafficking Convention and the Trafficking Directive meaning that it may be necessary for the Government to reform this law. Finally, this paper concludes that flaws within the identification system, failure to investigate on the part of the police, criminalising victims and lack of deterrence of traffickers all lead to a further violation of the human rights of the victim and it will assert that the law does not adequately protect victims of trafficking. 2

Contents Page Introduction 4 Identification of Victims 5 Duty to Investigate 8 The Criminalisation of Victims 10 Deterrence 14 Conclusion 17 Bibliography 18 3

Introduction The trafficking of human beings for the purpose of exploitation is described as one of the most ancient and lucrative criminal activities in the world. 1 This form of modern slavery destroys the lives of its victims who are often lured by predatory organised criminals with promises of a better life in a different country, only to find themselves threatened, beaten, coerced and terrorised into working under slave-like conditions in domestic servitude, prostitution or forced to beg on the streets. 2 It is estimated that at any given time worldwide there are over twelve million victims. 3 Out of this figure, the European Commission suggests that between 100,000 and 800,000 people are trafficked into the European Union every year, 4 with around 5,000 of these people ending up in the United Kingdom. 5 While these figures are shocking, they are just estimates because no-one really knows the extent of the problem given the clandestine nature of this crime. 6 This paper will explore whether the current law protects victims of human trafficking by examining the mechanism the state uses in identifying possible victims. Early identification of victims is fundamental to the protection of their rights, thus the first part of this paper will explore whether enough is being done to facilitate the early identification of these people without which there can be no assistance. This will be done through an examination of the agencies responsible for identifying victims and will highlight ways in which some victims may slip through the net leading to a 1 Lord Luke, Hansard Debate on Human Trafficking HL, Column 597, 14 October 2010, available online http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201011/ldhansrd/text/101014-0001.htm#10101424000808, Date accessed: 23 rd October 2011. 2 Home Office, Human Trafficking: The Government s Strategy Home Office Online Report http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/crime/human-trafficking-strategy?view=binary Date Accessed 10 th October 2011. p.5 3 Home Affairs Committee, The Trade in Human Beings: Human Trafficking in the UK, sixth report of 2008-2009,(HC London: The Stationary Office 14 May 2009) p.14 4 Ibid. 5 Supra. n.1 at column 595 6 Ibid. 4

further violation of their rights. The second part of this paper will focus on whether the obligations imposed by Article 26 of the 2005 Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings 7 not to impose penalties on the victims of trafficking for their involvement in unlawful activities carried out whilst they were under the influence of traffickers, impose a positive obligation on the State not to criminalise victims. This will involve an examination of case law subsequent to the ratification of the Convention and a critical evaluation of how the courts have dealt with this issue. Finally, the third part of this paper will evaluate if current legislation goes far enough to deter those who would commit this crime and will examine what more needs to be done in order for the law to truly protect victims of human trafficking. Identification of Victims On 17 December 2008, the United Kingdom ratified the 2005 Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings. The provisions contained in this Convention impose positive obligations on signatory states to take steps to combat and prevent human trafficking, 8 to assist victims of human trafficking and to protect their rights, 9 as well as to promote international co-operation with regard to the trafficking of human beings. 10 Article 10 of the Convention obliges its signatory States to equip themselves with competent authorities trained to identify and assist victims of trafficking. 11 Although the United Kingdom seems to be fulfilling this Convention obligation on paper with the creation of the National Referral Mechanism, on closer inspection it is somewhat different. 7 Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings. Treaty series No 197 Referred to hereinafter as the Trafficking Convention. 8 Ibid. Article 1(a) 9 Ibid. Article 1(b) 10 Ibid. Article 1(c) 11 Ibid. Article 10 (1) 5

The National Referral Mechanism (NRM) is a framework for the identification of victims of human trafficking to ensure they receive the appropriate care. Agencies such as the Police, United Kingdom Border Authority (UKBA), Social Services and certain Non-Governmental Organisations who encounter a suspected victim of human trafficking can refer them to the Competent Authority. 12 There is concern that the NRM s identification system is flawed. Investigations have indicated that although every stage of the system should have the interests of the victim at heart by providing appropriate support when necessary, too much emphasis is placed on the immigration status of the victims rather than on the alleged crimes committed against them. 13 In PO (Nigeria) 14, a woman who had been trafficked into the United Kingdom for the purposes of prostitution escaped and was arrested by police. After telling police about the horrific experiences she had suffered at the hands of her trafficker, they handed her straight over to immigration officers who detained her due to her illegal immigration status. 15 Although she was released into the care of a charity days later where she received free medical care, psychological support and accommodation, she spent the next six years defending herself against deportation to a country that could not protect her from being re-trafficked or accommodate her medical needs that had arisen as a result of her being trafficked. 16 Although the victim had access to free health care, psychological support and secure appropriate accommodation, 17 the 12 See http://www.soca.gov.uk/about-soca/about-the-ukhtc/national-referral-mechanism. Competent Authorities include the police, Social Services, the UKBA and Non-governmental organisations. 13 Report by The Anti Trafficking Monitoring Group, The Wrong Kind of Victim? One Year on: An analysis of UK measures to protect trafficked people. June 2010. p.9 Available online: http://www.antislavery.org/includes/documents/cm_docs/2010/a/1_atmg_report_for_web.pdf Date accessed 15th October 2011. 14 PO (Nigeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 132 15 Ibid. at para.1 16 Ibid. at para. 1 The victim was suffering from severe depression and post traumatic stress disorder. 17 Access to these services are provided for under Article 12 of the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings. Treaty Series 197 6

provision of these services do not amount to state protection 18 however, freedom from deportation to a country where there is inappropriate protection and services for the victim does. This is only one case which demonstrates that there is too much emphasis placed on the immigration status of the victim and the readiness to deport indicates reluctance on the part of the state to allow trafficking to become a means of illicit migration thereby putting a hole in their migration system. 19 Between 2009 and 2010 more than 130 possible victims of trafficking were identified by support organisations but whose cases were not referred, primarily because victims were afraid of bringing attention to their immigration status. 20 This has led to the assertion that the NRM is an extension of the UKBA s activities. 21 Furthermore, according to the Anti Trafficking Monitoring Group, officials seem to rely heavily on flawed legal guidance in relation to who should be identified as a victim of trafficking. 22 An example of this can be seen in the UKBA s guidance document for Competent Authorities which states, Based on an assessment of the individual circumstances of the case it may be reasonable to conclude that where a person has been free from their traffickers for a long period of time and has recovered and moved on with their life, then they no longer require the protection afforded by the Convention. 23 18 M Symes and P Jorro, Asylum Law and Practice (2 nd Edition, Bloomsbury Professional 2010) 368 19 V Stoyanova, Complementary Protection for Victims of Human Trafficking under the Convention on Human Rights Goettingen Journal of International Law 3 [2011] p.786 20 Supra. n.13 at p.9 21 Helen McIntyre, UK s implementation of the Convention on Trafficking Criticised ( 2010) Journal of Immigration and Asylum and Nationality Law p.228 22 Supra. n.13. 23 See the UK Border Agency s guidance: http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/policyandlaw/asylumprocessguidance/spec ialcases/guidance/competent-guidance?view=binary p.24 Date accessed: 15 October 2011 7

This guidance is flawed because Convention imposes no time limit as to when someone ceases to be a victim of trafficking. 24 In one case, a woman who was forced to work eighteen hour days as a domestic worker was told by officials that because this had occurred in 2008 she should now have overcome any trauma she had suffered. 25 In another case a young West African woman was informed that although being forced to have sex with strange men was extremely unpleasant, that because she did not avail herself of the opportunity to escape when it arose, then this did not amount to trafficking. 26 Failure to recognise credible victims or refusal to recognise victims who are no longer under the control of their exploiters amounts to a violation of their Human Rights 27 because it deprives them of all the other rights a positive identification would provide such as protection under the law, investigation, prosecution of their exploiters and compensation. 28 Duty to Investigate In Rantev v Cyprus, 29 a young Russian woman who was working as a cabaret artiste in Cyprus attempted to leave her employment. 30 Her employer found her and brought her to a police station asking them to deport her. The police checked and declared that her status was not illegal and held her in detention until she was collected by her 24 A Weiss and S Chaudry, Assessing Victim Status under the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings: the situation of historical victims ( 2011) Journal of Immigration Asylum and Nationality Law 178 25 Press release from Anti-Slavery, UK Anti-Trafficking Measures Not Fit For Purpose And Breach International Law. 16 th June 2010. Available online: http://www.antislavery.org/english/press_and_news/news_and_press_releases_2008/2010_press_and_ news/uk_antitrafficking_measures_not_fit_for_purpose_and_breach_international_law.aspx date accessed: 15 October 2011 26 Ibid. 27 Article 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 provides the right to an effective remedy, also Article 4 provides a prohibition against slavery or forced labour, incorporated into domestic law by the Human Rights Act 1998 28 Supra n.24 at p.177 29 Rantev v Cyprus (2010) 51 E.H.R.R. 1 30 Ibid at [H1] 8

employer. 31 She was later found dead having supposedly fallen over the balcony of her apartment. 32 The European Court of Human Rights held that Cyprus had violated articles 3 and 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights 33 by its failure to investigate if the woman was a victim of trafficking and by detaining her in the police station in order to deliver her back into the hands of her traffickers. 34 The court held that there was a positive obligation on the police to investigate all credible allegations that breached these rights. 35 It must be noted that at no point did the woman identify herself as a victim of trafficking. The trafficking of a human being for purposes of exploitation is a criminal offence by virtue of s.4 of the Immigration and Asylum (Treatment of Claimants etc) Act 2004. 36 This type of criminal offence also breaches the human rights of the person involved, 37 therefore, if a person presents herself at a police station complaining of this crime, it would be logical for the police to immediately launch an investigation. Astonishingly this has not always been the case. In 2011 the court heard a case which involved five claimants who alleged that the failure by the police to investigate their claims breached their human rights. 38 Although each of these cases were unrelated they all involved female claimants who were brought illegally into the United Kingdom from Nigeria to work in households with no pay in the London area under conditions where they were subjected to emotional and physical abuse. All of the claimants were children when they were brought into the United Kingdom and this 31 Ibid. at [H2] 32 Ibid. at [H3] 33 European Convention on Human Rights 1950: Article 3 protects from degrading and inhuman treatment and Article 4 upholds the right to freedom from slavery and servitude. 34 Supra n.29 at [H22] 35 Supra n. 29 at [H8] 36 As amended by Section 54 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 37 Supra n.27 38 O.O.O, O.O.A, M.T.K., R.T.F. v The Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2011] EWCA 1246 (QB) para.1 9

treatment of them occurred over a period of years. It was claimed that they were held in slavery or servitude contrary to articles 3 and 4 of the Convention on Human Rights. 39 In all of these cases the claimants had sought the help of the police at different points in time and the police failed to undertake investigations. 40 In one of the cases, the claimant came forward to the police and complained of being taken from Nigeria to work as a slave in a household where she was abused emotionally and physically. 41 The claimant s friend was with her throughout the police interview. After the interview the friend stated, The officer then took me aside and said there were a lot of people [the Fifth Claimant] who try to use the police to get out of situations that they have got themselves into. The officer appeared to think that [the Fifth Claimant] was partly to blame for coming into the UK illegally even though she was a child and said that the police see a lot of people in [the Fifth Claimant's] position. The officer said: If I were you I wouldn't get involved. 42 The fifth claimant ended up having to go back to her exploiter having being told by police nothing could be done. The court held that the police had failed in its duty to investigate and awarded 25,000 in compensation. 43 The other claimants in this case were each awarded 5000. 44 For a legal system to award compensation to victims not because of the awful crimes they have suffered but because the system fails to uphold the rights of the victims demonstrates that there are flaws within the system. Failure by the police to investigate would indicate that not only does the law does not protect those particular victims of human trafficking but it further violates the human rights of the victim, 39 Ibid. 40 Ibid. at para.2 41 Ibid. at para.36 42 Ibid at para.38 43 Ibid. at para.49 44 Ibid. at para. 190 10

depriving them of the right to an effective remedy, prosecution of their exploiters and protection under the law. 45 The Criminalisation of Victims Article 26 of the Trafficking Convention states Each Party shall, in accordance with the basic principles of its legal system, provide for the possibility of not imposing penalties on victims for their involvement in unlawful activities, to the extent that they have been compelled to do so. 46 There is no legislative framework for this provision. 47 Instead, the courts have formulated three mechanisms that achieve the implementation of Article 26. The first mechanism is found in the common law defences of duress and necessity. 48 This means that if a victim of trafficking is coerced into committing a crime or if the crime was committed to avoid serious injury or death, he can rely on the appropriate defence, except in cases that involve murder or attempted murder. 49 The second mechanism comes in the form of special guidance issued by the Crown Prosecution Service to prosecutors where, if a person is suspected of being a credible victim of trafficking, the prosecutor should judge whether it is in the public interest to continue the prosecution. The third mechanism is the courts power to stay the prosecution as an abuse of process. 50 Prosecutors have a wide discretion to prosecute and historically the courts have been reluctant to interfere with this; but in the case of 45 Supra n. 27 46 Supra n.7 47 L Cowen, Victims of human trafficking: Protection from punishment (2011) Archbold Review, p.5 48 R v LM, R v YT, R V BT, R v DG, R v MB [2010] EWCA Crim 2327 para.8 49 Ibid. at para.8 50 This test is akin to that of Wednesbury reasonableness in Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223 11

prosecuting victims of trafficking the third mechanism acts as a safety net if the courts suspect prosecuting policies have not been correctly adhered to. 51 LM and Others 52 involved five cases of women who had all been convicted of crimes and all of their appeals centred on Article 26. The first three cases were women who were convicted of controlling prostitution for the gain of themselves or another under s.53 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. 53 In the Crown case against them it was heard that they were previously victims of trafficking who were coerced into encouraging the prostitution of others and the collection of money under the influence of the men who trafficked them. 54 They were duly convicted following guilty pleas, and appealed. 55 The Court quashed their convictions on the basis that Article 26 had been ignored in the Crown case against them and if it had been applied these women would not have been prosecuted. 56 The Court of Appeal held that Article 26 does not provide blanket immunity from prosecution. 57 This would appear to mean that it does not impose a positive obligation upon the state not to prosecute victims. 58 In YT, the defendant, who had been trafficked into the country but had managed to escape, was convicted of using a forged identity card contrary to s.25 Identity Cards Act 2006 to obtain employment. 59 Although she was assessed as a credible victim of trafficking, the courts held that 51 C Wells, Sensible Prosecuting and Article 26, (2011) 175 JPN 34 52 Supra. n.38 at para.1. 53 Ibid. at para.24 54 Ibid. at para.25 55 Ibid. at para.29 56 Ibid. at para.34 57 Ibid. at para.13 58 Ibid. 59 Ibid. at para.41 12

there was no nexus between the crimes committed and the trafficking; therefore, the case fell outside the protection offered by Article 26 of the Convention. 60 A connection can be made in YT with the way the Court has dealt with a victim of trafficking who appears to have been trying to get on with her life after her ordeal and the way the NRM treat the same type of victims. Both appear not to recognise historical victims of trafficking. The law provides them with no protection whatsoever and only serves to criminalise them. 61 On 14 October 2011 the United Kingdom s request to opt in to the EU Directive on protecting and combating human trafficking and protecting its victims was accepted by the Commission. 62 Article 14 of the Directive 63 contains a provision that supports the non-punishment of victims of trafficking for their crimes committed as a direct result of trafficking. Primary legislation will be required in order to transpose this Directive into domestic law and this may have the effect of strengthening the position of victims in this context because it is then open to scrutiny from the European Commission and the European Court of Justice. 64 On the other hand, it may have no effect at all because the Directive also requires a nexus between the trafficking and 60 Ibid. at para.45 61 Elliot, J., (Mis)identification of Victims of Human Trafficking: the case of R v O, (2009) 21 International Journal of Refugee Law, 738 62 2011/692/: Commission Decision of 14 October 2011 on the request by the United Kingdom to accept Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA (notified under document C(2011) 7228) 63 Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on Preventing and Combating trafficking in Human Beings and Protecting its Victims,, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA (notified under document C(2011) 7228) Referred to hereinafter as the Trafficking Directive. 64 V., Mitsilegas, Trafficking: guidance trafficking people committing criminal offences correct approach to prosecutions, 2011, Criminal Law Review, 425 at p.429 13

the crime committed; 65 therefore, it may still fall to the discretion of the prosecutor and courts to decide when a prosecution is appropriate. Deterrence The United Kingdom has formidable laws pertaining to the trafficking of human beings. The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 gives sizeable powers to seize assets and property of the traffickers. Section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum (Treatment of Claimants, etc) Act 2004 criminalises the trafficking of a person for the purposes of labour exploitation and carries a maximum sentence of fourteen years imprisonment. 66 Criminal offences relating to the sexual exploitation of a person who has been trafficked are to be found in sections 57-59 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, again carrying a maximum penalty of fourteen years imprisonment. 67 In order for these laws to have sufficient deterrent effect, traffickers must be caught and punished first. Although over two million pounds was recovered under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 between 2004 and 2009 from people charged with trafficking they were not all necessarily convicted of this offence. 68 There are only six convictions recorded between 2008 and 2009 under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum (Treatment of Claimants, etc) Act 2004. 69 In this same period, there were eighteen convictions recorded under section 57 70 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, and sixteen convictions under section 58. 71 There were no convictions under section 59 72 of the Sexual 65 Ibid. 66 Immigration and Asylum (Treatment of Claimants, etc) Act 2004 Section 4 (5) (a) 67 Sexual Offences Act 2003, section 57 (2)(b) 68 A Gilbert C Moore Human trafficking in the United Kingdom: the journey so far and the road ahead, Criminal Lawyer, (2010) p.2 69 Ibid. 70 Section 57 deals with the trafficking of a person into the country for the purposes of sexual exploitation. 71 Section 58 deals with the trafficking of a person within the country for the purposes of sexual exploitation. 14

Offences Act 2003 in this period. 73 The longest custodial sentence for those convicted was eight years imprisonment, the shortest was nine months. 74 In Shahnawaz Ali Khan and Others 75, the Court of Appeal raised the custodial sentence of three people who had exploited trafficked people by making them work in their family restaurant for little pay under harsh conditions, from three years imprisonment to four years. 76 The Court held that the sentence had been unduly lenient. 77 Although in Elisabeth Delgado-Fernandez and Godwin Zammit, 78 concerning the trafficking of women for the purposes of sexual exploitation, the Court held that the sentence of five years imposed upon was excessively harsh and reduced it to four years. 79 It could hardly be said that there is sufficient deterrence effect. While it is recognised that the elusive nature of trafficking makes it difficult for the police to secure convictions, there have been reports that brothels containing victims of trafficking are operating in plain sight, 80 therefore greater public awareness is needed in order to assist police in catching these criminals. It is further asserted that the courts need to toughen up on sentencing in order to deter others. The Trafficking Directive will impose maximum sentences for offences relating to trafficking and while these appear 72 Section 59 deals with the trafficking of a person out of the United Kingdom for the purposes of sexual exploitation. 73 Supra n. 68 at p.3 74 Supra n.68 at p.4 75 Attorney General's Reference (Nos.37, 38 and 65 of 2010) (Shahnawaz Ali Khan and others) [2011] 2 Cr. App. R. (S.) 31 76 Ibid. at para.34 77 Ibid. 78 Attorney General's Reference Nos 129 and 132 of 2006 (Elisabeth Delgado-Fernandez and Godwin Zammit [2007] EWCA Crim 762 79 Ibid. at para.42 80 BBC News Channel Seedy Underworld of Human Trafficking (Tuesday 18 May 2010) available online: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8675275.stm Date accessed: 20 October 2011 15

to be lower 81 than the United Kingdom s maximum sentence of fourteen years imprisonment, it will have the effect of harmonising the law throughout the member states, be open to scrutiny from the European Court of Justice and may have the effect of deterring traffickers from entering the member state countries thus making Europe an undesirable place for these criminals. 82 Another concern is the creation of a new strict liability offence by virtue of s.53 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 83 which makes it a criminal offence to avail of the services of a prostitute who has been forced, coerced or deceived into performing those services whether or not the person availing of those services knows or not. 84 While this provision heralds a policy shift by the state to reduce the demand of commercial sexual services 85 it must be noted that not only is it manifestly unfair to the person charged with this offence, 86 it expressly contradicts Article 19 of the Trafficking Convention 87 and Article 26 of the Trafficking Directive 88, both of which state that sanctions should only imposed on the user of such services if he has the knowledge that the person has been trafficked. In order for domestic law to be compliant with the Trafficking Directive this provision will require amendment or repeal 89 as it is a long standing principle that the law of the European Union takes precedence over domestic law. 90 81 The maximum sentences contained in Article 4 of Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on Preventing and Combating trafficking in Human Beings and Protecting its Victims. Are five years imprisonment and ten years imprisonment depending on the seriousness of the crime. 82 Supra n. 63, Article 5 83 As amended by section 14 of the Policing and Crime Act 2009 84 Sexual Offences Act 2003 Section 53A (2)(a) 85 Supra n.68 at p.2 86 Editorial, Policing and Crime Act 2009 Criminal Law Review (2010) p.91 87 Supra n.7 88 Supra n.63 89 See R v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Factortame [1990] 2 AC 85 90 C Elliot and F Quinn, English Legal System (7th Edn, Pearson Education Limited, Essex, 2006) p.90 16

Conclusion This paper has investigated whether the law protects victims of human trafficking and has discovered that flaws within the identification system, failure to investigate complaints of trafficking by victims on the part of the police, criminalisation of victims and lack of deterrence of traffickers all lead to a further violation of the human rights of the victim. It has examined the recently adopted Trafficking Directive and has asserted that certain provisions of domestic law are inconsistent with the Directive and will need amendment or repealed when the Directive is transposed into domestic law. The common thread that runs throughout the paper is that the law does not adequately protect victims of trafficking and it is hoped that the transposition of the Directive into domestic law will strengthen the position of victims in this regard. 17

Bibliography International Legislation Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings 2005 Treaty Series 197 The European Convention on Human Rights 1950 European Union Legislation Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on Preventing and Combating trafficking in Human Beings and Protecting its Victims, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA (notified under document C (2011) 7228) European Union Decisions 2011/692/: Commission Decision of 14 October 2011 on the request by the United Kingdom to accept Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA (notified under document C(2011) 7228) United Kingdom Legislation Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 Immigration and Asylum (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act 2004. Policing and Crime Act 2009 Sexual Offences Act 2003 European Cases Rantev v Cyprus (2010) 51 E.H.R.R. 1 Table of Cases United Kingdom Cases Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223 18

Attorney General's Reference Nos 129 and 132 of 2006 (Elisabeth Delgado- Fernandez and Godwin Zammit [2007] EWCA Crim 762 Attorney General s Reference (Nos.37, 38 and 65 of 2010) (Shahnawaz Ali Khan and others) [2011] 2 Cr. App. R. (S.) O.O.O, O.O.A, M.T.K., R.T.F. v The Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2011] EWCA 1246 (QB) PO (Nigeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 132 R v LM, R v YT, R v BT, R v DG, R v MB [2010] EWCA Crim 2327 R v O [2011] EWCA Crim 2226 R v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Factortame [1990] 2 AC 85 UK Legislation Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 Human Rights Act 1998 Immigration and Asylum (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act 2004. Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. Policing and Crime Act 2009 Sexual Offences Act 2003 Instruments UK Border Authority Guidance for Competent Authorities http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/policyandlaw/asylumproc essguidance/specialcases/guidance/competent-guidance?view=binary Date accessed: 15 October 2011 Textbooks Elliot C and Quinn F, English Legal System (7th Edn, Pearson Education Limited, Essex, 2006) Symes M and Jorro P, Asylum Law and Practice (2 nd Edition, Bloomsbury Professional 2010) 19

Journal Articles Cowen L, Victims of human trafficking: Protection from punishment [2011] Archbold Review, 4 Editorial, Policing and Crime Act 2009 (2010) Criminal Law Review 91 Elliot C and Quinn F, English Legal System (7th Edn, Pearson Education Limited, Essex, 2006) Elliot J, (Mis)identification of Victims of Human Trafficking: the case of R v O [2009] 21 International Journal of Refugee Law, 727 Gilbert S and Moore C, Human trafficking in the United Kingdom: the journey so far and the road ahead [2010] Criminal Lawyer 2 McIntyre H, UK s implementation of the Convention on Trafficking Criticised [2010] Journal of Immigration and Asylum and Nationality Law 228 Mitsilegas V, Trafficking: guidance trafficking people committing criminal offences correct approach to prosecutions [2011] Criminal Law Review 425 Stoyanova V, Complementary Protection for Victims of Human Trafficking under the Convention on Human Rights Goettingen Journal of International Law 3 [2011] 2 Squires N, Pulling and Pushing: UK measures to combat people trafficking 2003 Coventry Law Journal 50 Wells C, Sensible Prosecuting and Article 26 [2011] 175 JPN 34 Weiss A and Chaudry S, Assessing Victim Status under the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings: the situation of historical victims [2011] Journal of Immigration Asylum and Nationality Law 168 Miscellaneous The Anti Trafficking Monitoring Group, The Wrong Kind of Victim? One Year on: An analysis of UK measures to protect trafficked people. Online Report http://www.antislavery.org/includes/documents/cm_docs/2010/a/1_atmg_report_for_ web.pdf Date accessed: 15 October 2011 BBC News Channel Seedy Underworld of Human Trafficking (Tuesday 18 May 2010) available online: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8675275.stm Date accessed: 20 October 2011 Hansard Debate on Human Trafficking HL. 14 th October 2010 20

Home Office: Human Trafficking: The Government s Strategy, Home Office Online Reporthttp://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/crime/human-traffickingstrategy?view=Binary Date Accessed: 15 October 2011 Home Affairs Committee, The Trade in Human Beings: Human Trafficking in the UK Sixth report of 2008-2009 HC London: The Stationary Office 14 May 2009 Press release from Anti-Slavery, UK Anti-Trafficking Measures Not Fit For Purpose And Breach International Law. 16 th June 2010. Available online: http://www.antislavery.org/english/press_and_news/news_and_press_releases_2008/2 010_press_and_news/uk_antitrafficking_measures_not_fit_for_purpose_and_breach_ international_law.aspx Date accessed: 15 October 2011 21