U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

61–804 PDF 2010

HUMAN TRAFFICKING 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND 

COOPERATION IN EUROPE 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

OCTOBER 11, 2007 

Printed for the use of the 

Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe 

[CSCE 110–1–6] 

( 

Available via http://www.csce.gov 

COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE 

LEGISLATIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS 

HOUSE SENATE 

ALCEE L. HASTINGS, Florida, 

Chairman 

LOUISE McINTOSH SLAUGHTER, 

New York 

MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina 

HILDA L. SOLIS, California 

G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama 

JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland, 

Co-Chairman 

RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin 

CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut 

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York 

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts 

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas 

GORDON SMITH, Oregon 

SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

EXECUTIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS 

VACANT, Department of State 

VACANT, Department of Defense 

VACANT, Department of Commerce 

(II) 

HUMAN TRAFFICKING 

OCTOBER 11, 2007 

COMMISSIONERS 

Page 

Hon. Alcee L. Hastings, Chairman, Commission on Security 

and Cooperation in Europe ..................................................... 1 

Hon. Mike McIntyre, Commissioner, Commission on Security 

and Cooperation in Europe ..................................................... 4 

WITNESSES 

Charlotte M. Ponticelli, Deputy Undersecretary for International Labor Affairs, Bureau of International Labor Affairs, U.S. Department of Labor ............................................. 4 

Mark Lagon, Director, State Department Office to Monitor 

and Combat Trafficking in Persons ....................................... 6 

Michael E. Feinberg, Acting Director, Office of International 

Affairs, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. 

Department of Homeland Security ........................................ 10 

Eva Biaudet, Special Representative and Coordinator for 

Combating Trafficking in Human Beings, Organization for 

Security and Cooperation in Europe ...................................... 15 

Roger Plant, Head, Special Action Programme to Combat 

Forced Labour, International Labor Organisation ............... 19 

Kevin Bales, President, Free the Slaves ................................... 23 

APPENDICES 

Prepared statement of Hon. Alcee L. Hastings ........................ 27 

Prepared statement of Charlotte M. Ponticelli ......................... 29 

Prepared statement of Mark Lagon ........................................... 43 

Prepared statement of Michael E. Feinberg ............................. 46 

Prepared statement of Eva Biaudet .......................................... 51 

Prepared statement of Roger Plant ........................................... 63 

Prepared statement of Kevin Bales ........................................... 70 

(III) 

(1) 

HUMAN TRAFFICKING 

October 11, 2007 

COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE

WASHINGTON, DC 

The hearing was held at 10 a.m. in room 2226 of the Rayburn 

House Office Building, Washington, DC, Hon. Alcee L. Hastings, 

Chairman, Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, 

presiding. 

Commissioners present: Hon. Alcee L. Hastings, Chairman, Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe; and Hon. Mike 

McIntyre, Commissioner, Commission on Security and Cooperation 

in Europe. 

Witnesses present: Charlotte M. Ponticelli, Deputy Undersecretary for International Labor Affairs, Bureau of International Labor 

Affairs, U.S. Department of Labor; Mark Lagon, Director, State Department Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons; Michael E. Feinberg, Acting Director, Office of International Affairs, 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Department of 

Homeland Security; Eva Biaudet, Special Representative and Coordinator for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings, Organization 

for Security and Cooperation in Europe; Roger Plant, Head, Special 

Action Programme to Combat Forced Labour, International Labor 

Organisation; and Kevin Bales, President, Free the Slaves. 

HON. ALCEE L. HASTINGS, CHAIRMAN, COMMISSION ON 

SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE 

Mr. HASTINGS. Good morning, all. I’d like to start the hearing 

and welcome everyone, ladies and gentlemen, to this Helsinki Commission hearing on combating trafficking for forced labor purposes 

in the OSCE region, including the United States. 

When we designated the time for this hearing, we did not know 

the interventions [inaudible] and one of our more distinguished colleagues passed last week, and today she’s being laid to rest in Virginia. 

Toward that end, many of my colleagues are attending that funeral, and some of the Commissioners. The House of Representatives is not in session. But hey, I am. [Laughter.] 

As matters go, we do have an established record, and I think 

that this subject is of such critical importance for the Helsinki 

Commission, the OSCE and, indeed, the world [inaudible] I will see 

to it that the information is passed on to the other Commissioners 

and the House and the Senate. 

2 

Please bear with me. I have a rather lengthy statement, but I 

consider all of it to be of critical import in setting the stage. 

Trafficking in human beings is an egregious human rights violation and a serious transnational crime facing governments all over 

the world. 

According to an International Labor Organization report—and 

we have our friends here from there—of the 12.3 million victims of 

forced labor—approximately 2.4 million were trafficked for forced 

labor purposes. 

Trafficking for forced labor is a major problem in many OSCE 

countries. In Armenia, for example, both men and women are trafficked for forced labor while an International Organization for Migration report asserts that 38 percent of trafficked persons assisted 

by the International Organization for Migration in Belarus were 

male victims of forced labor. 

Although the United States, like many other OSCE states, continues to be challenged by limitations in the systems utilized for 

data gathering in human trafficking cases, we’ve seen some 

progress in our antitrafficking efforts. 

There have been significant cases. In one of them—U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, working with the FBI, successfully investigated and prosecuted organized criminals who were 

trafficking Eastern European women into the United States to 

work as exotic dancers in Michigan. 

In his book ‘‘Nobodies: Modern American Slave Labor and the 

Dark Side of the New Global Economy,’’ John Bowe describes three 

cases of forced labor in the United States in Immokalee, FL, which 

is very close to the district that I’m privileged to serve, and Tulsa, 

OK, and Saipan, a U.S. commonwealth in the Western Pacific. 

Trafficking for forced labor frequently involves physical and psychological abuse of the victims, generates millions of dollars in illicit financial profits to the perpetrators, which are often organized 

criminal groups, and leads to the thousands of migrants crossing 

international borders with fraudulent documents. 

Trafficking persons for forced labor purposes is less understood 

than trafficking for sexual exploitation, because it has largely remained a hidden form of exploitation. 

However, it is no less serious. In the OSCE region, it has accelerated in recent years as a result of the economic disruption caused 

by the collapse of Communism in the former Soviet Union and 

Eastern Europe as well as the wars in the former Yugoslavia. 

Commissioner McIntyre, welcome, sir. 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Thank you. 

Mr. HASTINGS. A high worldwide demand for women and children as sex workers, sweatshop labor and domestic servants has 

fueled the market for forced labor. 

At the same time, increasing restrictions on immigration to many 

destination countries, including the United States and Western Europe, has led many migrants to turn to human traffickers despite 

the risks involved. 

The OSCE demonstrated its commitment to combating trafficking in human beings in 2003 with the adoption of the OSCE action plan to combat trafficking in human beings. 

3 

Among other requirements, the action plan calls upon participating States to make forced labor a crime by incorporating the 

definition of human trafficking contained in the United Nations 

Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, 

especially women and children. 

The establishment of the position of special representative and 

coordinator of combating trafficking in human beings has given 

greater focus to addressing this critical challenge in the OSCE region. 

Since the adoption of these antitrafficking protocols, the OSCE 

participating States have made some significant strides in combating the sexual dimension of human trafficking, but there is a 

growing consensus that more needs to be done to understand the 

scope and challenge of humans trafficked for forced servitude. 

Presently, many participating States have not adopted legislation 

to specifically address trafficking for forced labor purposes. 

In addition, much of the resources and early antitrafficking efforts have been directed at identifying and prosecuting sexual trafficking cases. 

The U.S. Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, which was 

authored by the Helsinki Commission Ranking Member Christopher Smith, includes in its definition of human trafficking, ‘‘the 

recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision or obtaining of a 

person for labor services through the use of force, fraud or coercion 

for the purpose of subjection to involuntary servitude, peonage, 

debt, bondage or slavery.’’ 

Yet we’ve seen relatively few prosecutions of forced labor perpetrators. A September 23rd Washington Post article on the subject 

of human trafficking raises several questions which are worthy of 

examination, and perhaps our witnesses this morning will address 

some of them. 

Are there, in fact, significant numbers of trafficking cases that go 

undetected? Ms. Biaudet and I were talking about that earlier, and 

I’m sure she will address it. 

Do we simply not have a full grasp of the scope of human trafficking? Or conversely, how reliable are trafficking statistics? 

This morning we examine these issues as we hear from two expert panels on efforts to combat trafficking for forced labor purposes in the OSCE region. 

We look forward to the testimony of three key U.S. Government 

agencies represented by Ambassador Mark Lagon from the Department of State, Ms. Charlotte Ponticelli, from the Department of 

Labor, and Mr. Michael Feinberg, from the Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement. 

We are also grateful to have my friend and a person that has 

worked actively in this field and continues her participation, Ms. 

Eva Biaudet, the OSCE’s special representative and coordinator for 

combating trafficking in human beings. 

We have with us Mr. Roger Plant of the International Labor Organization, and Mr. Kevin Bales of Free the Slaves. 

The witnesses’ bios are available at the entrance for those of you 

that did not receive them. 

4 

We’ve been joined, as I indicated, by my colleague Congressman 

Mike McIntyre, who is a Commissioner of the Helsinki Commission. 

And, Mike, if there’s anything you would like to add at this 

point, you have the floor. 

HON. MIKE McINTYRE, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSION ON 

SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’ll be brief. 

We greatly appreciate those who are here with the panel today 

and those who’ve come to observe this hearing. 

This is an extremely important issue. Even though I can only be 

here for a short while this morning—as many of you know, we are 

not in session this day—but I wanted to make sure I could come 

by this morning for a while, because this hearing is so important. 

This past July, the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly—I sponsored 

a resolution to encourage OSCE member nations to establish a hotline for reporting the commercial exploitation of persons involved 

in human trafficking. 

And as a sponsor of that resolution, which did pass unanimously 

this past July the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, I wanted again 

to show my support for efforts like that to get our member states 

involved in reporting incidences like this and setting up hotlines 

and cooperating, because it is such an important issue and, unfortunately, such a serious one that still must be dealt with. 

So thank you, Mr. Chairman, for having this hearing. 

Thank you all for being with us today. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you very much, Mr. Commissioner. I appreciate very much your being with us. 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Ambassador, you lost your place when you 

weren’t here at 10 o’clock, so we’re going to begin with Ms. 

Ponticelli, and then we’ll come back to you. [Laughter.] 

So without objection, your prepared statements will be entered 

into the record. 

Ms. Ponticelli, you have the floor. 

CHARLOTTE M. PONTICELLI, DEPUTY UNDERSECRETARY FOR 

INTERNATIONAL LABOR AFFAIRS, BUREAU OF INTERNATIONAL LABOR AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Ms. PONTICELLI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, Chairman Hastings and Congressman McIntyre. I’m 

very pleased to be here today on behalf of the U.S. Department of 

Labor. We commend you for holding this hearing on the trafficking 

of humans for the purpose of forced labor, one of today’s worst 

human rights tragedies. 

It’s an honor to be here today with my fellow panelists, even the 

ones I bumped. Of course, all of them are dedicated to the global 

fight against human trafficking. 

As you pointed out, the United States is committed to ending the 

brutal practice of human trafficking. As President Bush stated at 

the signing of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization 

Act in January 2006, quote, ‘‘Our Nation is determined to fight and 

end this modern form of slavery,’’ end quote. 

5 

In signing that legislation, the President also called upon other 

nations to take action. The U.S. Government is working at home 

and with other governments, such as the 56 countries participating 

in the OSCE, to eliminate human trafficking around the world. 

Individually, we can all make a difference, but together, we can 

have an even greater and more lasting impact. 

Across the world, the transnational phenomenon of human trafficking involves trafficking both for sex and labor exploitation. 

Trafficking for commercial sexual exploitation in OSCE countries, particularly in Eastern Europe, opened the world’s eyes to 

the global problem of trafficking, yet, as we know from the ILO’s 

2005 report, most victims of trafficking in the world are actually 

victims of forced labor. 

Private agents typically traffic these individuals through coercion, forcing them to toil in sweatshops and other hidden workplaces under brutal conditions with no access to legal protection. 

In the OSCE region, the trafficking of adults for forced labor in 

the construction and agriculture industries is pervasive. And the 

trafficking of children for commercial sexual exploitation and labor 

remains a grave problem. 

While the Department of Labor, of course, is adamantly opposed 

to the trafficking of any individual, our Bureau of International 

Labor Affairs has made a special effort to eradicate the trafficking 

of children. 

Children specifically trafficked for labor find themselves forced 

into begging, petty crime, street vending and domestic work, or 

work in agriculture, construction or manufacturing. They are often 

physically abused, underfed, addicted to drugs or alcohol, and have 

no access to education and health services. 

The illicit and hidden nature in which human trafficking occurs 

sometimes makes the search for solutions seem insurmountable. 

Yet as you pointed out, Mr. Chairman, significant progress is 

being made, especially in research and data collection, which are 

key tools in this fight. 

Together with OSCE member states and other partners around 

the world, the United States has underscored the need for reliable 

research and data on the nature and magnitude of the trafficking 

problem to help us design and implement effective policies and programs for prevention, protection, and assistance to victims. 

At the same time, we recognize that the development of policy 

and collection of data should not preclude the immediate and urgent need to rescue those who have been trafficked for forced labor 

and provide them with education, job skills and economic alternatives. 

Our Bureau of International Labor Affairs has been active in 

combating trafficking around the world, including in many OSCE 

countries and has enlisted the support of several international, 

non-governmental and faith-based organizations. 

So far, more than 1 million children have been rescued from the 

worst forms of child labor and provided with education and training opportunities through our DOL-funded projects. 

Since 1995, DOL has obligated almost $600 million to organizations globally to prevent and withdraw children from exploitive 

work. 

6 

Of this amount, the department has set aside more than 40 percent, or $219 million, to combat trafficking in persons for the purpose of labor and commercial sexual exploitation. This year alone, 

the department provided $28.4 million to address this problem. 

I’d like to offer, Mr. Chairman, just a few examples of our efforts 

in the OSCE region to eliminate the trafficking of women and children for labor. 

In 2003, DOL funded a $1.5 million regional project through the 

ILO to work in Albania, Moldova, Romania, and Ukraine. This 

project assisted in the rescue of almost 3,000 children in those 

countries. 

Children were provided with educational opportunities, skills 

training, and needed psycho-social intervention. 

The project was also successful in advancing legal reforms to protect and assist child victims of trafficking and in establishing child 

labor monitoring systems to document and refer trafficking victims 

to social service providers. 

We funded a second phase of the project at $3.5 million in fiscal 

year ’06 to include Bulgaria and Kosovo. 

Through the President’s $50 million antitrafficking initiative, we 

also funded a $1.25 million project through Catholic Relief Services 

in Moldova in 2004. 

The project targets young at-risk women and seeks to reduce the 

incidence of trafficking and assist victims through a combination of 

job development, employment assistance and skills training. 

We have found that a root factor contributing to the vulnerability 

of trafficking victims, poverty, can be tackled by creating economic 

incentives and employment opportunities that offer legitimate and 

sustainable forms of income. 

We’re also pleased to participate in the last two sessions of the 

OSCE Alliance Against Trafficking in Persons Conference. 

Experts from our Wage and Hour Division shared their unique 

experience carrying out workplace investigations and identifying 

individuals who have been trafficked into forced labor in the 

United States. 

It’s this type of collaboration and information-sharing that will 

allow us to advance our efforts and make a real difference. 

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, at the Department of Labor we’re 

continuing to focus on several critical areas in the fight against 

human trafficking: Institutional and legal reforms, capacity-building to implement those reforms and direct assistance to victims 

and potential victims. 

We are proud to be part of the U.S. Government’s interagency efforts to combat trafficking, and we would like to commend you and 

the Commission for holding this hearing today. Many thanks. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you very much. 

Ambassador Lagon? 

MARK LAGON, DIRECTOR, STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICE TO 

MONITOR AND COMBAT TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS 

Amb. LAGON. Thank you very much. 

Chairman Hastings, thank you for your leadership among parliamentarians of the OSCE states, and I’m delighted to be here. 

7 

So, Chairman Hastings and members of the Helsinki Commission, thanks for the opportunity to discuss the State Department’s 

efforts to combat human trafficking for forced labor purposes. 

And I’m lucky enough by law to chair an interagency group, so 

I work with our colleagues here on this, and I’m happy to speak 

to our collective efforts, not just the State Department’s. 

I’m happy to appear with Deputy Undersecretary of Labor, Charlie Ponticelli and, indeed, to follow her, and Acting Director for 

ICE, Michael Feinberg. And it’s good to be here also with Ms. 

Biaudet, Roger Plant, and Kevin Bales. 

Crucial among the 10 principles guiding relations between OSCE 

nations is the commitment to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms. 

The strength of this commitment is expressed in the combined efforts of the United States and the OSCE states to protect victims 

from trafficking, which is a violation of basic human dignity and, 

we all agree, the modern day equivalent to slavery. 

As the State Department continues to increase attention on slave 

labor in addition to the dehumanization of sex trafficking, I appreciate the Commission’s hearing this morning on this important aspect of trafficking in persons. 

Our 2007 Trafficking in Persons Report sheds new light on the 

alarming trafficking in people for forced labor purposes. Every day, 

all over the world, people are coerced into bonded labor, exploited 

in domestic servitude and enslaved in agricultural work and in factories. 

They are victimized by unscrupulous employers who take advantage of vulnerabilities, especially among immigrants and especially 

among young women and children. 

This year in the report, we noted several disturbing global trends 

which speak directly to the plight of labor trafficking victims. First, 

is the use of debt as a tool of coercion. 

In labor as well as sexual exploitation, illegal or illegitimate debt 

is increasingly used to keep people in servitude. This debt is employed by traffickers as an instrument of coercion, especially among 

migrant laborers. 

Migrant laborers from developing countries are often legally contracted by labor agencies or respond to ads to perform low-skilled 

work in developed countries. 

For this privilege, they are required to make a steep payment up 

front for the services of the labor agency arranging the job or a 

finder’s fee that goes straight to the future employer. 

What follows is a terrifying set of circumstances in which unfair 

debt captures the indebted worker. For example, a contract labor 

agency in Bangladesh advertised work in a garment factory in Jordan. 

The ad promised a 3-year contract, $425 per month, 8-hour workdays, only 6 days a week, paid overtime, free accommodations, free 

medical care, free food and no advance fees. 

Instead, upon arrival, workers who were obliged to pay exorbitant advance fees, had their passports confiscated, were confined to 

miserable conditions and were prevented from leaving the factory. 

Months passed without pay. Food was inadequate. And sick 

workers were tortured. Because most workers had borrowed money 

8 

at inflated rates to get the contracts, they were obliged through 

debt to stay. 

Last year, press reports indicated that in Poland announcements 

in local newspapers lured workers to Italy for seasonal jobs picking 

fruit and vegetables. They were promised an hourly wage of up to 

$7.50 an hour, only after paying a finder’s fee and travel costs. 

Once in Italy, the reality proved to be quite different. Nearly 100 

Polish workers were forced to live in barracks with no sanitation 

or running water, fed only bread and water and paid just $1.25 an 

hour. 

With these meager wages, they were unable to pay the room and 

board and were pushed into debt. Attempts to resist were met with 

severe beatings and torture. 

Now, debt bondage is criminalized under U.S. law, and it’s included as a form of exploitation in the U.N. Protocol to Prevent, 

Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, as you spoke of, Mr. 

Chairman. 

As noted in our annual report, major source countries must do 

a better job protecting their citizens against this exploitation. 

They can do so by limiting pre-departure fees to reasonable levels, negotiating formal labor agreements with destination countries 

to secure their citizens’ rights while working abroad. 

The destination countries for human trafficking should be active 

in making foreign workers aware of their rights, assisting workers 

to exercise those rights and criminally prosecuting traffickers. 

A special case I’d like to make note of is private homes, where 

often times exploitation is not visible. In many countries around 

the world, homes become prisons of involuntary servitude for domestic workers. 

They’re cutoff from social contact. They work long hours, 7 days 

a week for little or no pay, no guarantee of even food or an adequate place to sleep. These workers are particularly difficult to 

identify because of the lack of witnesses to the human rights 

abuses involved. 

They become trapped when they believe that an attempted escape would result in physical harm to them or their families, and 

when their employers deceive them into believing escape would result in deportation or incarceration. 

Let me give you a case. A young West African woman I’ll call 

Maggie to protect her identity went to the United Kingdom with 

her employers. She looked after their children every day until late 

in the evening. 

She was paid no wages. Her earnings as a cleaner were confiscated by her employer. And her employers claimed that she owed 

them for her airfare—again, for the privilege of this job. 

But she couldn’t just run away. She felt trapped because her employers would not return her passport unless she paid them 4,000 

pounds, or $8,000. 

Confiscation of passports, identification and airline tickets is 

used to gain and exercise control over victims. Without these travel 

documents, foreign workers are literally trapped, vulnerable to arrest, punishment and deportation. 

U.S. Federal law makes it illegal to seize documents in order to 

force others to work. And foreign governments are encouraged to 

9 

criminalize this form of coercion as well. I work on that in the diplomacy that I am engaged in. 

As we’ve seen, trafficking can take many forms and in all cases, 

whether for sexual exploitation or forced labor, should receive equal 

attention and stringent punishment by governments. 

Since the year 2000, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, 

which I worked on as a Senate Foreign Relations Committee staffer 

with Mr. Smith and Mr. Gedjenson when he was in the Congress— 

it’s been amended—it’s amended Federal law to assign equally 

tough penalties for sexual exploitation and for trafficking for forced 

labor. 

Though many other governments have enacted criminal 

antitrafficking laws, all too often they’re limited to sexual exploitation, and they fail to punish trafficking for forced labor, including 

recruitment, transferring victims, use of fraudulent employment 

terms, physical and psychological coercion. 

They fail to assign to those elements of forced labor equally 

tough criminal penalties. Punishments resulting in fines and administrative sanctions by a country’s Ministry of Labor which may 

be sufficient for lesser labor violations aren’t sufficiently stringent 

to deter human trafficking as a serious crime. 

As head of the State Department’s Office to Monitor and Combat 

Trafficking in Persons, I’ve seen firsthand in my travels the impact 

of forced labor. I’ve met with victims in shelters. I’ve met with officials. 

I’ve seen the powerful impact when governments, NGOs and individuals stand up to combat forced labor. No laborer, no migrant, 

no woman, no man, no child deserves to be shackled by debt, chicanery and intimidation by fellow members of humankind. 

At the heart of the U.S. Government’s victim-centered approach 

to ending human trafficking is a commitment to human dignity, a 

desire to not only rescue people but to restore their dignity. 

The OSCE and its coordinator for combating trafficking in 

human beings, Eva Biaudet, play a key role, and they’re to be recognized for their committed effort in the fight against human trafficking. 

The OSCE is among a group of international organizations—the 

OSCE, the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime, the International 

Labor Organisation, the International Organization for Migration— 

who collectively work from Vancouver to Vladivostok to address 

slave labor. 

Thanks again for the opportunity to come here to talk about the 

global struggle to abolish modern day slavery. Steps to mitigate, 

regulate and unionize aren’t enough. Abolition is the goal, and I 

appreciate your commitment as part of that effort to work with us 

in partnership. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you very much, Ambassador. 

And now we’ll hear from Mr. Michael Feinberg from the Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement. 

Mr. Feinberg, you have the floor. 

10 

MICHAEL E. FEINBERG, ACTING DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

Mr. FEINBERG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Good morning, Chairman Hastings, Congressman McIntyre. As 

you said, my name is Michael Feinberg. I am the Acting Director 

of Immigration Customs Enforcement, Office of International Affairs. 

It’s my privilege to appear before you today to discuss ICE’s efforts against human traffickers who exploit men, women, and children in a form of, as my colleagues have said here, modern day 

slavery. 

I would like to thank the Commission for its continued commitment to combating human trafficking, particularly in the OSCE 

participating States. 

Among the Department of Homeland Security’s law enforcement 

agencies, ICE has the most expansive investigative authority and 

largest number of investigators. We also have more than 300 victim-witness field coordinators, which is more than any other U.S. 

agency. 

Our mission is to target the people, money and materials that 

support terrorists and other criminal activities. ICE accomplishes 

this by investigating and enforcing our immigration and customs 

laws, including laws related to human trafficking and forced labor. 

While the focus of today’s testimony is on forced labor trafficking, 

much of what I will say applies to ICE’s efforts to fight all forms 

of trafficking, whether for sex or labor exploitation. 

ICE special agents place a priority on rescuing trafficking victims 

and investigating allegations of trafficking, regardless of whether 

the victims were made to work against their will or whether they 

were unlawfully induced into a sexually exploitive situation. 

As part of ICE’s victim-centered approach to trafficking, we also 

provide the same access to victim assistance to all trafficking victims. 

ICE’s aim in all trafficking cases is to systematically disrupt and 

dismantle the international and domestic operations of human traffickers, identify and seize assets and illicit proceeds, and identify 

systemic vulnerabilities that may be exploited by criminal elements 

to undermine immigration and border controls. 

ICE has investigative jurisdiction within the United States for all 

human smuggling and forced child labor cases that have a nexus 

to the movement of people or goods across the U.S. borders. 

U.S. Federal regulations grant both ICE and the Federal Bureau 

of Investigation the authority to conduct trafficking investigations. 

Internationally, ICE does not have the authority to conduct any 

investigative activities without the consent of the host country. 

These restrictions vary by country. 

Thus, ICE relies heavily on the relationships it is able to form 

with its foreign law enforcement partners and non-governmental 

organizations to investigate cases with a nexus to the United 

States. 

The majority of ICE’s overseas investigative activities occur in 

connection with cases that originate within the United States. 

11 

ICE builds and maintains strong international relationships 

through our 50 offices located in 39 countries throughout the world, 

including 11 OSCE member countries. 

We work with host country law enforcement, NGOs and international organizations to better coordinate investigations and to 

fully identify and pursue criminal enterprises. 

Here in the United States we continue to target traffickers. In 

one ICE-led investigation conducted in collaboration with the FBI 

and the Internal Revenue Service, we targeted a criminal organization engaged in the smuggling and trafficking of Russian, Czech, 

Ukranian women into the United States. 

The victims were forced to work as exotic dancers at Detroit area 

strip clubs in order to pay smuggling and other debts. 

The techniques used by the traffickers to control the victims included confiscating their passports and identity documents, imposing social and linguistic isolation, bugging the victims’ apartment, 

rough physical treatment and threats of violence. 

Investigative efforts resulted in the rescue of four victims, the 

imprisonment of two traffickers, the seizure of two weapons, two 

vehicles, and the restitution to victims totaling over $2.5 million. 

ICE provides victim services through two full-time victim-witness 

coordinators who are stationed at Headquarters as well as through 

its 300-plus collateral duty victim-witness coordinators in the field. 

ICE also provides victim assistance in the form of immigration 

relief through Continued Presence, which is a temporary status 

that permits a trafficking victim to remain legally in the United 

States during an ongoing investigation or prosecution. 

Trafficking victims who receive continued presence are then eligible for employment authorization and other federally funded or administered benefits or services. 

In addition to our international investigations, ICE focuses much 

of its antitrafficking efforts internationally on training and outreach to foreign law enforcement, governments, and non-government organizations. 

We also provide a toll-free number or tip line for human trafficking leads. We have developed brochures and a DVD for law enforcement officers and human trafficking indicator cards, which 

have been translated into five different languages. 

And I do have copies here for the Commission if you so like. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you so much. 

Mr. FEINBERG. ICE also has scheduled a 3-day conference this 

year that will provide the attache ́ offices with additional training 

on forced labor, child sex tourism, and human trafficking. 

This training will provide the agents with additional ability to 

collaborate with other U.S. Government agencies, NGOs and international organizations that address trafficking issues. 

Domestically, ICE works closely with Federal, State, and local 

law enforcement agencies, as well as many non-governmental, community-based and faith-based organizations to assist victims of 

trafficking. 

In addition, ICE, the Department of Health and Human Services 

and the Department of Justice have launched antitrafficking initiatives and task forces in more than 40 cities across the United 

12 

States which bring together State, local, and Federal law enforcement to attack these criminal organizations. 

In conclusion, ICE has the unique ability to use its global reach 

to investigate trafficking in persons and to provide short-term immigration relief to trafficking victims. 

We will also continue to expand our outreach and training efforts 

by sharing our expertise and employing a victim-sided approach to 

combating human trafficking. 

I hope my remarks today have been helpful and informative. I 

would like to take this opportunity to thank the Commission for its 

support of ICE and our law enforcement mission. 

I’ll be glad to answer any questions. 

Mr. Chairman, ICE is getting ready to roll out a new public service announcement to the community to help us identify victims who 

have been trafficked. 

This has not been officially rolled out, but we’d like to present 

it also to the Commission. 

Mr. HASTINGS. All right. I certainly thank you in that regard, 

and hopefully we will have a few for distribution among our audience participants. It’s deeply appreciated. 

Let me ask Congressman McIntyre if he would like to ask a 

question or two. And then I’m going to try something a little different, if you all don’t mind. 

Proceed, sir. 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, since I’m going to be 

departing shortly. 

Mr. Feinberg, if you would just clarify for us exactly how you decide who is the lead agency between the FBI and ICE on trafficking 

investigations. I know there’s some overlap. 

Do you have to deal with turf war issues, or who makes the decision as to which is going to be the lead agency? 

Mr. FEINBERG. Mr. McIntyre, in the trafficking cases we really 

have a collaborative effort with the FBI. 

There’s a Human Smuggling Trafficking Center located in the 

State Department that the FBI, ICE, the State Department, intelligence communities are all a part of. And that is set up to be a 

deconfliction center to help deconflict on cases. 

And then as I mentioned in my opening statement, we have over 

40 of these human smuggling task forces throughout the country. 

The task force collaborates on the case, and then the case is moved 

forward. 

This is too severe of an issue to have turf battles. And we have 

worked out with the FBI in this particular case we’re not going to 

have turf battles. So it’s working very well in the Human Smuggling Trafficking Center as well as these task forces. 

Mr. MCINTYRE. All right. Thank you, sir. 

And would you say whether or not—there have been some reports as to whether victims in the United States are undercounted. 

I know there have been some reports that as many as perhaps 

62,000 victims have not been included in some of the official government reports. Can you address that? 

Mr. FEINBERG. Well, I can address from our perspective, sir. 

Through our victim-witness coordinators and through our invesVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:20 Dec 14, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\WORK\101107.TXT HAROLD PsN: HAROLD
13 

tigations, we have a certain amount of cases that we work, and so 

those are what we know. 

And through our outreach, we’re trying to get the message out 

more to see exactly what we have out there. So our victim-witness 

coordinators I think last year did 200-plus interventions or interviews with victims and witnesses of trafficking cases. 

So that’s what we know. Through our aggressive outreach, 

through trying to promote the program more, we’re trying to learn 

how much is out there. 

We really don’t have an answer to the article. I’ll maybe leave 

that to my other colleagues. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Lagon? 

Mr. MCINTYRE. If I could followup. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Go ahead. 

Amb. LAGON. Yes, sir. This is a very good question. Of course, 

it’s an inherently difficult thing to find victims of human trafficking. 

Why? Victims don’t tend to identify themselves because they’re 

afraid. They’re afraid of being treated as criminals. They’re afraid 

of being treated as illegal aliens. 

It’s actually one of the great innovations of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, is to have a visa status for the migrants, so 

that you determine someone’s a victim. 

And it doesn’t matter precisely the circumstances that they came 

into the country. The most important thing is they should be protected and can stay in the United States. 

I think there are many more, as—I was reported in that Washington Post story as saying that there are many more victims out 

there than we have found. 

But I’ve taken part myself in the roll-out that the Department 

of Health and Human Services has done in communities to try and 

raise the awareness of non-government organizations, medical care 

providers and so on, to look beneath the surface and try and find 

those people who, you know, might look like a migrant worker but, 

in fact, you know, are confined in the workplace, those people who 

don’t move around unless a company—or those people who don’t 

seem to know where they are, or are completely debilitated by lack 

of language. 

And that effort to reach out should buildup numbers over time. 

I am modest when I go to other nations, including those of the 

OSCE, and say, ‘‘Your government should work better on victim 

identification protocols,’’ because I share our experience over the 

last 7 years in the passage of our own comprehensive legislation on 

trafficking. 

Mr. MCINTYRE. If I may followup, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Sure. 

Mr. MCINTYRE. I know my time may be short here. 

Mr. HASTINGS. That’s OK. 

Mr. MCINTYRE. How do you distinguish between trafficking and 

alien smuggling? 

Amb. LAGON. It’s quite different. I mean, under U.S. law and 

under the U.N. protocol, trafficking in persons includes several 

qualities, one of which may be crossing an international border. 

14 

But despite the word trafficking connoting movement, in fact, 

under U.S. law and the U.N. protocol it’s the extreme exploitation 

and the control over the person that’s the defining quality. 

Alien smuggling is moving people across the border. And those 

people who do cross the border as victims of human trafficking— 

sometimes it’s voluntarily, but they think the job is going to be different from what they get. 

Sometimes it’s not, but indeed, sometimes the circumstances are 

such that someone is so defrauded and so coerced that they become 

a victim of trafficking, and it’s an enlightened policy of the United 

States that they should be given a visa status to protect them, and 

then maybe they can become a valuable witness in the prosecution. 

Mr. MCINTYRE. All right. Well, then one quick followup question 

on that. Do the migration restrictions and increased border security 

put would-be migrants at risk for trafficking? 

Amb. LAGON. I don’t think so. I mean, I think a policy that combines more serious border security with, as the President imagines, 

a guest worker program is exactly the humane kind of program 

that we should pursue. 

I don’t think there’s a likely increase of victimization. It’s all part 

of a bigger picture in which we need to realize that migrants are 

people, too. 

The human trafficking story is one in which we find women, people in prostitution, migrant workers who, in country after country, 

are not being treated like real human beings. 

We need to look out for the rights of those. 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you very much, Congressman McIntyre. 

It’s deeply appreciated. 

Mr. Lagon, Ms. Ponticelli, and Mr. Feinberg, I have several questions, and some of them I would like to submit to you in writing 

and, in keeping with the practice that I have, ask you in followup 

if you would, your time permitting, answer those questions, and 

then we can place them on our Web site and allow that the public 

be informed in an increased and enhanced manner. 

I’ve been trying to get away—thanks, Mike. I appreciate you 

being here with us. 

I’ve been trying to come up with different formats to make these 

hearings have more life, and I consider me sitting up here and you 

out there and the audience—and where I’ve been reaching out is 

in the participants. 

In the audience, regrettably, what winds up happening for 2 

hours is they sit there, and many persons in this room are experts 

in this field, and never have an opportunity to express an idea or 

to say anything. 

Now, typical of Congress and its glacial manner in which it 

changes anything, folks don’t want to do anything different, so I attempt to do some different things. 

And with your permission, what I would like is rather than me 

asking questions—and I’d ask staff if they would pass out to those 

who may have an interest—we have a questionnaire, and if you 

could write legibly. 

15 

Even if we don’t have your question asked and answered here 

today, I can send it along to our witnesses, and we can then, in 

turn, try to get a followup answer. 

Additionally, many times—and I don’t know what your time constraints are, and I certainly respect them. If either or all of you 

have to leave, I readily understand. 

But if you can stay, it would be appreciated. And let me invite 

you, this panel, to come to this table. And I’m sure that these other 

experts, some of whom you all don’t interface with on a regular 

basis—you would be interested in what they have to say. 

So if you all could come up here, and if my next panel could take 

their place. 

So, Ambassador Lagon, over here. 

Ms. Ponticelli—I appreciate it. 

I think we’ll probably—and then maybe we can just have some 

dialogue without me playing big-time Congressman. 

Yes, right there, please, sir. Thank you. I appreciate it. 

Ms. Ponticelli, if you have—if anybody has to go, and at any time 

if you have to leave, I understand. 

Thanks a lot. OK. I think you’ll find it a little interesting, because a lot of times the first panel has to leave and don’t know 

what the second panel has to say. So now I feel better. I have more 

people up here with me. 

Now we are privileged to have with us—and grateful for their 

participation—Ms. Eva Biaudet, the OSCE’s Special Representative 

and Coordinator for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings; Mr. 

Roger Plant of the International Labor Organisation; and Mr. 

Kevin Bales of Free the Slaves. 

And, gentlemen, if you don’t mind, we’ll begin with Ms. Biaudet. 

EVA BIAUDET, SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE AND COORDINATOR FOR COMBATING TRAFFICKING IN HUMAN BEINGS, 

ORGANIZATION FOR SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE 

Ms. BIAUDET. Thank you, Chairman Hastings. I’m also very 

happy to be here with you today, and I’m very happy to be in this 

distinguished company and with honorable experts from the United 

States. 

I think it is clear, given the existence of all multilateral instruments, there can be no confusion among states that trafficking for 

forced labor has to be addressed as an issue of priority. 

The U.N. Palermo Protocol has provided the catalyst and guiding 

framework for the development of antitrafficking legislation and 

supporting mechanism that we also advocate for, for many OSCE 

participating States. 

The OSCE has worked with a number of states to conform their 

legislation, to comply with the Palermo Protocol. The Palermo Protocol is supplemented further by the OSCE action plan, as you already mentioned earlier, but also of the Council of Europe Convention and the E.U. Action Plan. 

Our main challenge is actually to get countries to enact at least 

these minimum standards and instruments. Unfortunately, as has 

been said already a few times today, not all countries have 

16 

criminalized labor trafficking and still define trafficking as for the 

purpose of sexual exploitation. 

And even when legislation is adopted it does not always apply to 

cases of internal labor trafficking. The result of this, of course, is 

that potential front-line responders will not identify these cases 

and traffickers go unpunished and, of course, victims unprotected. 

Another challenge is to examine how provisions operate in practice when viewed through a victim-centered lens. One example is 

the length of reflection/recovery period. The appropriate length is 

not an arbitrary number of months, as has been shown in recent 

research. 

Another example is the common practice of conditioning a victim’s receiving assistance on testifying at trial against the traffickers, or at least assisting in the investigation. 

Such procedures are problematic. For government and law enforcement officials to require this of recently trafficked victims removed from a highly abusive environment should be questioned as 

inherently objectionable. 

From an international perspective, when looking at how political 

will to fight trafficking has been generated in the OSCE region, 

U.S. efforts, of course, have been strong. 

U.S. antitrafficking efforts reflect a broad interagency approach, 

which is a very good thing. Also, the TIP report, I believe, has been 

and still is of importance. 

However, we should not underestimate that the driving force for 

antitrafficking activity among OSCE participating States, such as 

passing legislation, has probably been a result of obligations voluntarily embraced by countries, for example, in connection with the 

U.N. Palermo Protocol and, more recently, the Council of Europe 

Convention, not, of course, to forget the prospect of future E.U. 

membership. 

So far, few antitrafficking projects in the OSCE have addressed 

labor trafficking directly. Research confirms that available assistance is geared toward a very stereotyped trafficking victim a 

young, poor, uneducated woman trafficked for sexual exploitation 

for long periods of time, having been exploited and exposed to extensive and perhaps myriad forms of abuse. 

At the same time, other forms of trafficking are being noted and 

other profiles of victims are being identified. But assistance frameworks, the real work on the ground, has not been set up to respond 

to other kinds of victims, trafficked for any other kind of abuse. 

Given the lack also of systematic anti-labor trafficking activity 

and data collection, it is so far impossible to comment on the issue 

of overall effectiveness of efforts to reduce labor trafficking. 

Further, on the project level, a meaningful analysis of effectiveness is hindered because programs—regardless, actually, of the nature of the trafficking project—almost never include independent 

components by independent expert evaluators. 

Honorable Chair, so far neither the United States nor other 

states have elevated the risk of being prosecuted for labor trafficking to a level that is even close to serve as a deterrent. 

A concerted effort to identify labor trafficking cases is needed but 

will, of course, not alone ensure success. As we know, a primary 

17 

criticism that has been raised regarding U.S. efforts is the discrepancy between the level of identified cases and the official estimate. 

The reasons for this have not been clearly ascertained. However, 

it is probably a combination of underestimating the difficulty of 

identifying the victims and at least some identification methods 

utilized that are not properly targeted. 

With victims, of course, for labor exploitation we also face the 

issue of lack of self-identification. It seems a desperate situation 

and a sense of hopelessness gives few alternatives but to accept socalled contracts more or less with knowledge of their exploitative 

character. 

OSCE-supported research show that states need to focus much 

better on a victim-centered approach. Still victims are requested to 

become involved in criminal proceedings too early, without proper 

time to reflect on the consequences. 

Still victims tend to be treated as violators of immigration law 

rather than as victims of trafficking. Still temporary residence permits are not available or are only conditional on cooperation in 

legal proceedings. And still protective measures are not available 

or they are insufficient. 

We have to start creating environments which do not foster or 

make it easy to abuse powers against people in vulnerable situations. It means not giving up on the idea that our region is a region 

for respecting human rights and human dignity. 

It means not giving up on our social conscience. And it means an 

openness to search for solutions on migration, border control and 

employment that are not abusive to these principles. 

We need also to recognize that labor exploitation is linked to employment issues in general. Special attention has to be given to improve the general working conditions in sectors where we know exploitation occurs. 

The increased use of subcontractors, for instance, is a problem 

because it brings more anonymous employers and employees and 

less transparency to de facto working conditions. 

We need provisions addressing corporate and contractor accountability for the complicity of subcontractors. 

Also policies such as linking visas or work permits to a single 

employer, including the employer having the sole responsibility for 

extensions and renewals and a worker not having a possibility to 

change employers easily leads to situations where the worker either stays with an abusive employer or is likely to face deportation. 

Most U.S. antitrafficking projects are categorized by the State 

Department as dealing both with sex and labor trafficking. 

The numbers from the 2006 TIP report also show substantial increase in TIP-related convictions in countries enacting legislation 

as well as thousands of victims receiving services. 

Nevertheless, this information is of limited value in aiding our 

understanding of the adequacy and effectiveness of resources utilized against labor trafficking since it is not disaggregated by form 

of trafficking. 

Also the ultimate yardstick should, I would say, be the impact 

in reducing labor trafficking. Since there is no evidence or sign yet 

of diminished labor trafficking, it is not possible to make a finding 

about the adequacy or effectiveness of current funding. 

18 

A second key point is that no reasonable assessment is possible 

of whether or not adequate funding has been dedicated to any particular antitrafficking effort because there is so little independent 

evaluation about what has been done and the connection between 

activities funded and the results. 

Also, the U.S. General Accountability Office has pointed out 

some of these challenges and has requested U.S. Government agencies to strengthen evaluation of projects and their impact. 

In addition, a recent USAID-sponsored study found that very little useful data is collected and few concrete facts are known to inform policymakers about the relationship of root causes and contributing factors to human trafficking. 

Hence, we will not be able to fight effectively against labor trafficking unless we start fully to use action-based research and analysis that helps transform policy into practice regarding the specific 

issues presented by labor trafficking. 

And finally, there is much work that still needs to be done regarding child trafficking both for labor and sex trafficking. Approximately half of all human beings exploited for labor purposes are 

children. 

The awful truth is that there is a high demand for exploitation 

of children both for sex, labor, and illegal activities, also in the 

OSCE region, primarily, of course, because children are cheap and 

obedient. 

We need to take a look at how to invest in responses to child 

trafficking in more effective ways. Children need special protection. 

And to enable earlier intervention, much earlier than the destination exploitation takes place, it is necessary to have more accurate information on the patterns of child trafficking. 

Distinguished Commission, in conclusion, current efforts against 

trafficking for labor exploitation still seem to be in their infancy. 

It is apparent that all of the challenges that exist in responding 

effectively to sex trafficking—they also exist with developing responses to labor trafficking. 

Prevention, training awareness, assistance, and criminal justice 

responses tailored to the different requirements of labor trafficking 

are all needed. 

Unfortunately, it can, however, be anticipated that the challenges that have been faced in creating these responses for sex 

trafficking may be increased in the context of labor trafficking, as 

it may not garner committed political will without more effort, and 

it may become embroiled in confusion with issues involving economic migration. 

For overcoming this, political leadership and political will to find 

new solutions, to address vulnerabilities and decrease demand is 

very much needed. 

Concerning the important question about adequacy of resources 

dedicated to identify victims of labor trafficking compared to those 

of sex trafficking, I want to stress here that even if it’s clear that 

too few resources are allocated fighting trafficking for labor purposes, I cannot advocate to solve this by any shift of resources between different forms of trafficking in persons. 

19 

Better identification of victims still is the main challenge. This 

is true for labor trafficking but also for sex trafficking and trafficking in children. 

Finally, I want to thank the Commission for holding this important hearing and I kindly request to submit my full written statement into the hearing record. 

I also have some added material. We have had two labor conferences on labor trafficking the last 2 years which have gathered 

hundreds of experts, from international organizations, with a report on conclusions and recommendations on efforts that could be 

done. 

And also a few agendas on more recent conferences just for you 

to see the practical way we’ve tried to work together. Thank you. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you very much, Ms. Biaudet. 

Mr. Plant, you have the floor. 

ROGER PLANT, HEAD, SPECIAL ACTION PROGRAMME TO COMBAT FORCED LABOUR, INTERNATIONAL LABOR 

ORGANISATION 

Mr. PLANT. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for the possibility to testify at this hearing. It’s a great honor and a pleasure 

for us. 

I’d also like to thank the members of the administration for their 

support to the ILO and its activities. 

When you are the fifth of six speakers at a hearing like this, a 

lot has already been said. I think we know a lot about the basic 

facts and the challenges before us. 

You, Mr. Chair, have talked about a number of 12.3 million victims of forced labor, of which 2.4 are victims of trafficking. We 

know also there are 360,000 cases of forced labor in the industrialized countries, including many of the OSCE countries, of which 

270,000 are victims of trafficking. 

And this tells us that trafficking for forced labor as well as sexual exploitation is a global problem. It’s a challenge for every kind 

of economy. We all of us have things to do as either sender or destination countries. 

Trafficking in forced labor are violations of not only fundamental 

human rights but fundamental labor rights. 

And to address these effectively, prosecution, victim identification or prevention and the rehabilitation of victims must be addressed with full attention to the core labor standards: Fighting 

discrimination, fighting child labor, fighting forced labor, and promoting freedom of association. 

Of course, it is essential that the vulnerable migrants who are 

the main victims of forced labor and trafficking do have the right 

to organize and that trade unions in both sender and receiving 

countries organize them in defense of their rights. 

The ILO has a particular mandate, role, and responsibility on the 

forced labor dimensions of human trafficking. In the 6-years since 

I’ve been heading the ILO’s special action programme, we’ve accepted this responsibility when very little was known 6 years ago. 

When there was only anecdotal information about exploitation in 

construction, garments, textiles, and it was only anecdotes, only a 

20 

few journalistic statements, we began to promote very detailed and 

systematic research on this issue. 

And I’m glad to say that we’ve now produced very well received 

reports in a range of countries—in Russia, in Germany, in France. 

And just last week, the Government of Portugal, during its E.U. 

presidency, had a major conference on trafficking and released the 

report we conducted with them on forced labor and trafficking in 

Portugal. 

So I would say that the information base is there. We’re beginning to know what we’re talking about. I don’t think anybody’s in 

denial mode now that trafficking is as serious a problem for labor 

as well as sexual exploitation. 

I would commend very heartily Ambassador Lagon. I commend 

his office for the June 2007 antitrafficking report. I think it’s an 

absolutely outstanding report. We’re very glad to have contributed 

to this. 

And I think it really sets out all the forms of coercion and exactly 

why these challenges are before us. 

I’d also like to commend the OSCE. I had the honor to be invited 

to address the 2005 and 2006 meetings where we really did place 

trafficking for forced labor high on the agenda of the OSCE countries. 

So this is where we stand. But where do we go? And that’s what 

I would like to set out for you in the few minutes I’ve got available 

today. 

I’ve got a written statement. It’s set things out in much more detail. But I’m just going to mention five things or six things that the 

ILO is doing and why I think these are very important and why 

I think they need to be built on more. 

First, we have heard about the vital importance of surveys and 

data collection. This is not easy. It’s incredibly difficult to capture 

these issues which are so hidden. 

So what we’re doing now in a number of countries, after our global estimate, we are helping OSCE and other countries develop national estimates of forced labor, which has never happened before. 

And we’re doing it in Georgia, in Ukraine, in Moldova, just to 

give three examples—we’re also doing it outside the OSCE region— 

by helping departments of statistics, bureaus of statistics to have 

the relevant questions on forced labor and trafficking and labor 

market surveys and migration surveys and others. 

It may not be completely accurate, but, my goodness, it’s going 

to help, because unless we take this much more seriously, unless 

we really help governments to try and capture what is a totally 

hidden thing, we’re never going to have a good idea of the problems, and we’re never going to place this on the radar screens of 

the governments in countries where these problems occur. 

Second, we’re beginning to hear a lot about national action plans. 

You need very good legislation, and after that you need the policy 

mechanisms, the coordination mechanisms and the action plans. 

So we’re working particularly in the framework of the European 

Union-supported projects in countries like Ukraine, Moldova, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, and others. 

We’re actually helping to make sure that labor partners are involved in the design and formulation of action plans and that 

21 

they’re very heavily involved in the implementation of these action 

plans. 

Just one example. Ukraine, the national action plan is excellent. 

But how do you implement it? We have a project which is addressing five regions of Western Ukraine from where irregular migration 

occurs mainly to the European countries. 

And we’re helping a whole range of labor partners, including employment, job placement agencies, labor inspection, and others, to 

actually implement the labor aspects of this plan, and we feel this 

is certainly going to help with prosecution as well as prevention. 

But the resources are limited. Here’s one example. We can’t 

touch the Eastern Ukraine where there are massive problems affecting trafficked Ukrainian workers going through to the Russian 

Federation. We’ve documented this very carefully. So this is a pilot 

on which one needs to build. 

Third, you must bring together—you must combine the efforts of 

labor inspection and criminal law enforcement. This is absolutely 

essential, both because labor inspectors are often the first people 

to be able to catch the problems which have to be prosecuted later 

by the police, the prosecutors and the criminal law enforcement, 

but they have to understand what they’re talking about. 

So we have come up with a number of manuals, like we have one 

manual here. It’s called ‘‘Trafficking for Forced Labor: How to Monitor the Recruitment of Migrant Workers.’’ I’m delighted to say that 

this has been very well picked up. 

Just last year, the Czech Ministry of Interior asked for permission to publish a Czech version. There are now versions in Polish, 

Ukrainian, Romanian, and other languages. 

So this has really helped—helping these people to—how do you 

capture these forced labor situations in practice? It’s one thing to 

have a general law, but you need very, very detailed guidance for 

your labor inspectors and your law enforcement. 

We had a very innovative E.U.-supported project between 2004 

and 2006 which brought sender and destination countries of Europe together. This has created the groundwork for future cooperation. 

And next month, we will have a meeting of chief labor inspectors 

to validate a training manual. So I’m glad we’re moving forward. 

A fourth thing is judges. Judges are absolutely essential. We’ve 

heard there are practically no prosecutions. We’ve heard there are 

practically no convictions. 

But it’s very difficult for judges in either common or civil law system to understand the precedent. When you’ve got a new law, how 

do you apply it? How do you relate it to other laws, peonage, involuntary servitude, et cetera? 

So we are preparing a rather detailed book of case law which will 

be validated later this year, and this, I believe, is really going to 

help move forward on getting the judges more extensively involved. 

And the final point—I could go on much longer, but you’re going 

to have to read it in the written statement—I think we’ve begun 

to hear of the importance of involving trade unions and business 

organizations. 

They both have an absolutely essential role to play—trade unions 

in monitoring conditions, in organizing workers, in making sure 

22 

that you cut out the debt bondage that Ambassador Lagon talked 

about and ensure that the remittances are channeled back to countries of origin; and of course, employers, business actors, in preventing the emergence of forced labor in their company supply 

chains and a host of other things. 

So I’m glad to say that we have been working extensively with 

employers’ organizations. An example is the Russian construction 

industry where, together with the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development, we have now held a survey, had a number 

of meetings, and will hopefully soon be completing a self-regulation 

handbook. 

More generally, we are promoting a business alliance against 

forced labor and trafficking. We’ve put forward 10 principles for 

business leaders. 

We have been working very closely with the International Trade 

Union Confederation at the global level on promoting a workers alliance against forced labor and trafficking. 

But we’ve had some very successful experiences at the country 

level, first, working with trade unions between the Central Asian 

countries and Russia, helping to organize the migrant workers, 

helping them channel remittances back to communities of origin. 

We’ve just started a similar exercise in Kazakhstan with the first 

pilot projects under way. And I think this is going to be a very important way forward. 

One must have multistakeholder initiatives involving government and all government agencies together with the business partners and the worker partners. 

And I think this is where the ILO has a tremendous value added, 

a tremendous contribution to make, as a tripartite organization 

with these networks across the globe, not only in the OSCE countries. 

So in conclusion, Mr. Chair, I’d like to thank you once again. I’d 

like to say that I have had the opportunity myself to address meetings organized by the Department of Justice, Department of State, 

and Department of Labor, as well as this Congress. 

And I’ve been able to appreciate over the last 2 years how much 

more commitment there is, every day more commitment, from this 

government as well as from the OSCE. 

So we hope we can continue to cooperate with you. We just had 

a large mission last month discussing how we can cooperate more 

with regard to the protection and promotion of international core 

labor standards. 

And this is part of our Decent Work Agenda. And I would say 

that forced labor is the absolute antithesis of the Decent Work 

Agenda for which the ILO stands. 

And while we’re not easily going to get consensus, as Eva 

Biaudet said, over some difficult aspects of migration policy here 

and everywhere in the OSCE region, nobody—nobody—is going to 

tolerate forced labor, slavery and human trafficking. 

So this is where we really can move forward through very concrete and practical action along the lines I’ve been mentioning. 

Thank you very much, indeed. 

23 

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you very much for your stimulating comments and intervention, and your full statement, of course, will be 

made a part of the record. 

As we prepare to hear from Dr. Bales, if anyone has any question 

and you would pass it to the lady in pink over there, then we, after 

Dr. Bales, will go to some questions. 

And also, I don’t know whether members of the press are here, 

but I have instituted a policy of at least allowing a couple of members of the press to state a question. 

As to whether or not those who are our witnesses are interested 

in answering, that’s a different subject. But at least it can stimulate added discussion. 

Dr. Bales, you have the floor. 

KEVIN BALES, PRESIDENT, FREE THE SLAVES 

Mr. BALES. Thank you so much, Mr. Hastings. It’s a great honor 

to be here before the Commission. I appreciate so much that we’re 

the only NGO that’s been asked to speak. 

I want to explain briefly—I saw some puzzled looks—that our organization, Free the Slaves, is, in fact, the American extension and 

sister organization of Anti-Slavery International in Britain, and 

that we are, in fact, the organization that formed in 1787 to initiate the very first antislavery campaign and human rights organization on earth. 

We continue that work today. We haven’t ceased in those more 

than 200 years. 

I appreciate what Roger was saying about being the fifth of six 

speakers. But when you’re the sixth of six speakers you are, in fact, 

more like the person who sweeps up after the parade of great luminaries wrought down the thoroughfare. 

But I’m going to use that fact that I get to be the sweeper to not 

spend so much time on recommendations that we would bring forward that would very much repeat those of the previous speakers. 

And I want to also follow your lead, Mr. Hastings, and be a little 

bit more provocative in terms of some of my comments, because I 

think there’s a great coherence and agreement about the kinds of 

recommendations. I have a few I want to highlight. 

I want to also, from my sweeper position, note that Ambassador 

Lagon highlighted the tricking of debt, the trickery in debt, in overseas worker exploitation and finder’s fee and danger. 

And I just want to highlight that for the past 2 years our organization has been pressing for compensation for families of exactly 

such victims who had, in fact, been killed in one such example of 

that trickery and exploitation. 

The shocking fact that underlies this is that, in fact, their exploitation and death occurred when they were recruited from Nepal to 

work within the U.S. Green Zone for American contractors in Iraq. 

This has been brought forward several times and it’s been mentioned in the TIP report and so forth. 

But there remain families in Nepal who contracted large debts 

to pay those finder fees. The men of the families were killed by a 

roadside bomb in an attack in Iraq, when they were told that they 

were, in fact, going to be working in a different country, and so 

forth. 

24 

It’s particularly shocking, I think, for all of us who are American 

citizens to find that it’s been flowing into our own efforts to bring 

democracy and freedom to a country and then, in fact, we somehow 

facilitated the enslavement of workers in that country. 

I want to touch a tiny bit on the definitions—earlier there was 

a question about smuggling and trafficking—and say that I think 

we should be very clear that human trafficking really is simply the 

movement of a person into a situation of enslavement. 

The definition of human trafficking rests upon what happens to 

someone when their journey, whether it’s internal or across a border—when that journey ends and forced labor begins. 

If the forced labor of whatever sort is not the end result, then 

it’s not called trafficking. It could be called migration. It could be 

called smuggling, or so forth. 

And again, as Ambassador Lagon highlighted, the emphasis on 

one type of trafficking, that for sexual exploitation, in the laws of 

several countries I believe requires a very invidious comparison 

that says one kind of enslavement may be more serious than another type of enslavement. 

And I just want to be a little provocative and say to my mind 

that’s as illogical as saying that one type of murder leaves the victim more dead than another type of murder. Slavery is slavery. 

And I want to go on to reinforce that idea by saying that it’s been 

in my work for 15 years now that when we try to meet our desire 

to divide the crime of enslavement into categories and trafficking 

into categories, I just want to say that I’ve met and spoken to at 

length, and even become close friends and colleagues, with men 

and women and children who have been enslaved. 

And I want to tell you that not one of those people—not one who 

has lived the experience of enslavement—has ever claimed that 

their slavery was worse than that of another person or deserved 

some sort of special emphasis. 

Across their different cultures and continents and ages and religions and experiences, ex-slaves recognize in each other the pain 

and the violation of their shared experience. 

They don’t attempt to draw tidy lines of demarcation, and not 

least because virtually all slaves and ex-slaves know this fact, that 

whatever type of forced work they face, if they are women and 

girls, it will include sexual exploitation as well. 

Now, to think a moment about the estimations, because of the 

very hidden nature of trafficking crimes, I think it’s important to 

remember that no country, not one, knows the actual distribution 

between the different types of criminal exploitation for forced labor. 

In a study that we conducted with the Human Rights Center at 

the University of California, Berkeley—and it was, in part, supported by the ILO—we made estimates for the distribution in the 

United States. 

We found that exploitation for sexual purposes made up about 

just over 46 percent of the cases in the United States, domestic 

service enslavement accounted for 27 percent, and agriculture just 

over 10 percent. 

Now, I mention this just because I think these figures might be 

indicative of the distributions or proportions for other developed 

economies, not for the economies of the developing world. 

25 

It’s important, I believe, to remember that trafficking for forced 

labor is very difficult to see for many reasons, but I want to highlight two. 

First, it can be spread very thinly through the economy. For example, in developed economies, in addition to the prostitution, domestic service and agriculture I mentioned, I want to point out that 

in our own work we have found enslavement, forced labor, in restaurants, old folks homes, hair braiding and hair salons, nail salons, in a factory making cannolis, in a mental institution, in plant 

nurseries, and in forestry. 

A troop of Chinese acrobats has been enslaved. A boy’s choir 

from Zambia has been enslaved. Slaves beg on the street—have 

begged on the street in the United States. They’ve sold ice cream 

from trucks in the Midwest. And like me, they sweep up after everyone else has gone. 

I think we have to remember that criminals can be very clever. 

They’re often pushed much harder toward innovation than the rest 

of us, since failure in a criminal business can mean prison or death 

and success can mean huge profits. 

The fact is that slavery can be used—forced labor can be used 

in almost any job. And if the door is left open through inadequate 

enforcement or inspection or ignorance of its warning signs, criminals will find that niche and exploit trafficked people in it. 

Now, one of the things that I think could help us to see that 

forced labor around us in different forms of—to see that forced 

labor are some of the factors that we have learned support trafficking into forced labor. 

And our sister organization, Anti-Slavery International, carried 

out research for trafficking into forced labor in the European countries of United Kingdom, Ireland, the Czech Republic, and Portugal. 

And that full report has been sent along to be picked up by anyone who wants it. 

In that research, we identified four main factors. And I believe 

these factors are important because they give you the points of 

intervention at which you might intercede to prevent forced labor 

or to find those points of identifying forced laborers. 

The most important common factor across those countries—rather, a set of factors—are those of isolation, lack of knowledge, of 

rights, and multiple dependency of migrant workers. 

In general, migrant workers lack knowledge of their rights. They 

feel responsible because they feel that they’ve made a wrong choice. 

They’re not aware of the options that they have under national or 

international law. 

And those that have been selected by dishonest employment 

agencies, because of their lack of knowledge of local languages, 

they are very much discouraged from learning it, so they’re kept 

in a situation of isolation. 

And a special concern there is the exploitation of domestic work, 

a very serious problem in the United States, because it occurs in 

a private sphere behind closed doors, making intervention and discovery from the outside very difficult. 

The second factor that we found has a very important impact on 

those who are caught up in forced labor is the restrictive nature 

26 

and complexity of labor and immigration regulations in destination 

countries. 

Now, I have a recommendation that I’ll come to in a moment 

that addresses this in particular. But these restrictive migration 

regulations force more people to look for alternative ways to carry 

out their migration, using the services of these agents and intermediaries that we talked about before. 

And I think it’s very important to remember that most of these 

economic migrants are, in fact, doing exactly what we would do in 

their same situation, that if they have hungry children, if they 

have situations where they lack a chance to have education, if, like 

many of our ancestors, they sought opportunity and went to a new 

place, and at times that process leads to their exploitation. 

The third most important factor we discovered were the threats 

of violence, and I won’t say more about that, because we understand that violence is used to control people, to enforce their—and 

to force their exploitation. 

And of course, it includes the debt, the withholding of documentation and pay, to create a kind of multiple level of dependency. 

And then the fourth is, in fact—the fourth factor is, in fact, more 

structural, and it is that increasing demand for cheap labor. This 

is in many of the industries and service sectors across the European Union and North America. 

Even in cases where employers pay a legal minimum wage, the 

increasingly widespread practice of subcontracting creates opportunities for agents to withhold the earnings and take control over the 

lives of migrant workers. 

And if you combine that with the urgent need of many countries 

outside the OECD area to search for a better life, it simply means 

often to provide additional income for the basic needs of their families. It provides the circumstances in which people take risks in 

their migration strategies. 

Now, I want to move on to a few recommendations, and Ms. 

Biaudet has highlighted the question of adequacy of enforcement. 

And I want to offer—I guess it might be termed a factoid, a small 

fact, that I believe very strongly illustrates this, from the experience of the United States. 

And it’s about the fundamental nature of the level of resources 

that are brought to bear on this crime. Let’s recall for a moment 

that, in fact, the State Department has estimated that 14,500 to 

17,500 people are trafficked into the United States each year. 

In other words, something like—and let me use the number 

17,000 for a reason that will become clear in a moment—something 

like 17,000 people are, in fact, newly enslaved in the United States 

each year. 

Now, it’s an interesting criminological, statistical coincidence 

that, in fact, the murder rate in the United States is almost exactly 

17,000 per year. 

Now, the reason I put those two next to each other is because 

in the 18,600 police departments in the United States, there is not 

one police department without a homicide unit, a homicide detective, a specially trained homicide officer. 

27 

In the 18,600 police departments in the United States, to the 

best of our estimation and reckoning, and we’ve been looking, we 

have found three officers trained and ready and who, when they 

get up in the morning, their only job is to work against slavery and 

trafficking. 

Now, I’m going to reiterate that slightly to say 17,000 murders, 

17,000 people newly enslaved in the country each year, and— 

through trafficking, and reminding you that trafficking is, in fact, 

a bundle of very serious crimes, not a single crime. 

It includes assault, kidnapping, indentured servitude, forced 

labor, very often sexual assault, very often rape, as well as a number of crimes like document fraud and economic fraud and so 

forth—a very serious bundle of very serious crimes, and yet we are 

enforcing it at a level which is less than 1⁄10 of 1 percent of the allocations of resources that we would bring to the question of homicide. 

It was very difficult to determine how much is actually spent on 

homicide in this country. I wanted to find that number for comparison purposes. The closest that I could find was something over $2 

billion, but it was unclear to me what it was. 

If we look at all the U.S. Government expenditure on 

antitrafficking and antislavery work, it comes to something over 

$200 million. So there’s a very significant discrepancy in this resource allocation. 

And while a number of our recommendations—and the recommendations that have gone before I think are very sound. Without the adequate resourcing, they’re not going to reach out to the 

size of this problem. 

The second and, let me say, the end of the recommendations that 

I want to offer will actually come from a slightly odd direction. 

In 2002 and 2003, I was asked by the United Nations Office of 

Drugs and Crime to prepare for the Global Program on Trafficking 

in Persons an action plan for the countries of the economic communities of West African states. 

In other words, the ECOWAS countries, the Economic Community of West African States, knew that they had a situation in 

which trafficking was going on between those countries, and they 

were hoping to bring together all of the, first, Secretaries of Justice 

and so forth and then, finally, the Prime Ministers and Presidents 

to agree a plan of action that would cover all those states. 

Now, the reason I point this out is that the OECD countries have 

been working very carefully and cooperating, but they haven’t necessarily come together and said, ‘‘We are going to set forward an 

entire raft of legislation which would bring our laws into a kind of 

harmony that recognizes that, in fact, this international crime is an 

international crime and that we must have laws which continue 

across borders with a certain coherence and harmony. Otherwise, 

criminals will take advantage of that difference, that arbitrage, between one side of a border and the other.’’ 

I point to that, and I explain a number of those provisions adopted by the ECOWAS countries in 2003 in the written section. And 

I won’t go into any detail here. 

But it was primarily about bringing those ministries of justice 

and so forth together to say how can we make our immigration 

28 

laws, simply in terms of, for example, the issuing of passports, the 

issuing of documents that we can all recognize, not unlike what has 

been happening in the European Union, how—to make sure that 

those are—or make our antitrafficking work at the border more effective. 

How can they make sure that the crime that’s punished with a 

severe penalty on one side of a border is not, in fact, treated as a 

misdemeanor or, in fact, completely defined in a different way on 

the other side of a border? 

It’s a fundamental approach to a global problem with a global solution. And I think it’s one that, in this case, the Economic Community of West African States has stolen a march on the countries 

of Western Europe and North America and can point to a way in 

which those laws and enforcement practices can be brought into coherence. 

I very much appreciate your time. I guess I wasn’t too provocative. I didn’t hear anyone gasp or anything. But we very much appreciate the chance to speak. Thank you so much. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you all so very much. 

I’m beholden to the persons who helped us to put this together, 

and I want to mention by name the staffer from the Helsinki Commission that all of you worked with, Ms. Winsome Packer. 

And she had able assistance, and I thank her personally, of Clair 

Rioboando Sieelkey from the Congressional Research Service, 

which most countries don’t have the luxury of having such a tremendous resource as the United States does with the CRS. 

I wanted to share with all of you, as I listened to you, that—I 

think, Mr. Plant, you highlighted what I feel is something that 

needs to be addressed, and that is that—and all of you in some way 

approached it—that this is really a global situation, and it’s interfaced, as all of you put it, with bundled crimes, so to speak, that 

register. 

But before we do our finger pointing—and we’re very good at 

that in the United States, finger pointing all over the world. 

But before we get into that finger pointing, if we were to spend 

substantial time analyzing how we got to where we are, we would 

recognize, among other things, that different forms or perhaps as 

we—not as much sexual exploitation, but in migrant labor, different forms of exploitation have taken place in this country. 

And while we have had good laws that have assisted in overcoming it, the simple fact of the matter is that we’ve had our share 

of participation in the kinds of things that you discuss, particularly 

in the labor area. 

Lest I go forward to say that during the Second World War, I 

worked in a DDT factory in Jersey City putting labels on bottles 

at 9 years old. 

And I hear now about the dangers of DDT and what have you, 

but I was sort of like the roaches. I absorbed it and got over it and 

kept going. It didn’t work on them and it didn’t work on me either. 

[Laughter.] 

But not only did I but all of my colleagues who wanted to have 

the little bitty jobs got it. And then I graduated and became a person that worked in the migrant fields. 

29 

And now I’m fortunate enough—I’m fond of saying that I go 

back—and I know, Ambassador, that you have a little bit of a Florida background—and the best football team in Florida today at 

South Florida, as it were. 

But I have a total background in the State of Florida, and I 

thought of a time when I weighed about 119 pounds, and we were 

working at an agricultural product, chicory. We were cutting chicory. 

And the man that was the straw boss determined that I was to 

load at that time, and I didn’t have the physical capacity to lift and 

throw those bundles onto a truck. 

And so I quarreled with him. And this is in the halcyon days of 

segregation. And he informed me that I had to go back to the migrant bus and wait. And I told him I’m not going to wait, I want 

my money right now. 

And I’ll never forget. He slapped me, and I hit him with a shovel, 

and—— 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. HASTINGS [continuing]. I ran all the way home, which was 

about 12 miles from Umatilla at that time, and my grandmother 

sat on the porch with a shotgun awaiting him to come. 

They beat just about everybody in the migrant coterie, and none 

of them would tell them who I was or where I lived. And I guess 

that’s attendant to how I’m here today. 

Later I went on to work in Belle Glade, FL, and in Kahulke picking beans, especially, and then being on the back of a migrant 

truck, coming up to Connecticut. 

And I cite to it only for the reason that now I represent Kahulke 

and Belle Glade. Thanks to the laws that developed over time and, 

of course, went on to assist in developing the legal services to migrants program, which I think has strengthened in some particulars the rights of migrants who still find themselves substantially 

taken advantage of in the labor market. 

Again, I’m not referencing the sexual exploitation. 

And then, Mr. Plant, you’d be pleased to know that my mother, 

who was an impressive person, went on, along with my dad, to become domestic servants. 

Fortunately for them, they worked at the high end of domestic 

service for extremely wealthy families in Queens and in Beverly 

Hills and in Bel Air, California. 

But I remember my mother talking about wanting to write a 

book called ‘‘Thursday and Every Other Sunday.’’ During the hours 

that they were on call during that entire period,—if the boss came 

home at 1 o’clock in the morning, they had to get up and prepare 

a party. 

They were on the job, lived there, primarily for the reason that 

they wanted to assist in me going to college. So these things do 

have a real tinge to them. 

My mom wanted to organize me in the United States of America 

something that probably still needs to be done, because very occasionally we find not only in the field that you all have so aptly described, that people are taken advantage of. 

That’s my little story that I wanted to share. 

30 

Ambassador, I did have for you a question. Ms. Biaudet and I 

were talking about—and I have heard rather repeatedly, including 

recently when the Chief of Staff of the Helsinki Commission, the 

young fellow over here on the right—Fred Turner and I were in 

Slovenia for the fall and Mediterranean conference of the Parliamentary Assembly of OSCE. 

And while there, I had an opportunity to talk with Marc de 

Brichambaut, who is the OSCE Secretary General. And of course, 

he has been here. 

I don’t know whether he has met with your good offices, but he 

has been here on numerous occasions meeting with officials at the 

State Department. 

And a concern that’s being expressed by him and others—and I 

add my voice to that—is that there is considerable talk about cutting the budget of the OSCE, which, if that were to occur, would 

cut the mission in the OSCE, which if that is to occur would cut 

the projects that allow Ms. Biaudet and others to feed into trying 

to address this enormous problem in the OSCE sphere. 

What, if anything, should we be doing or can we do? And not because you’re at crosshairs with your superiors at State, but you get 

my drift. 

Amb. LAGON. You bet. I’ve been in this job for 4 months, and I 

come to it from having been the deputy assistant secretary for 

international organizations. 

So funding issues and international organizations is something 

I’ve thought about a good deal. 

We need to make sure that when we look at fiscal responsibility 

and the overall budget line that those functions that are most vital, 

like helping those who are victims of human trafficking not get undercut. 

I think the United States needs to use its substantial voice to 

make sure that’s the case within the OSCE budget. I can’t speak 

to the overall funding level, although I think it’s important that if 

we are careful and cautious and conservative about funds, that we 

not [inaudible] the most important [inaudible] function. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Yes. I appreciate that very much. 

One of the participants in the audience submitted this question, 

and it’s directed to you, Mr. Feinberg—You said although ICE provides entry into the United States via visas, et cetera, and Federal 

jobs or other work opportunities. Does ICE provide any kind of 

medical treatment for physical and/or mental diseases resulting 

from their abuse? 

And if they do, is this treatment free or discounted? And how will 

the victims be treated upon rescue? And how will they continue 

treatment if their work does not afford it for them? 

Mr. FEINBERG. Thank you, Mr. Hastings. First of all, I just want 

to—for the record, ICE is a law enforcement organization. We do 

not issue visas. That’s the State Department. 

We do have a little bit of oversight on the issuances of visa, but 

the U.S. State Department is the one that issues visas. 

Our job is strictly trying to identify victims and then work with 

NGOs and other government agencies to help them. 

31 

We ask the victims provide information and to serve as witnesses 

to prosecute international and domestic organizations that are exploiting men, women and children for these crimes. 

And then we will help—we will work with Health and Human 

Services and faith-based organizations and other NGOs to get them 

the help that they need. 

We also, because of our immigration authority, can give the victim Continued Presence into the United States so they don’t have 

to worry about their immigration status if they were illegally 

present in the United States before assisting with a trafficking investigation. 

So we have a few weapons in our arsenal. We can help them as 

well as work with the organizations to help them recover from 

their violation. 

Mr. HASTINGS. We also had a question from the audience, I 

guess, that was directed to all of you—is how do you respond to Mr. 

Markon’s—and I stand to be corrected as to the pronunciation. 

I read some of the series—the Washington Post article of September 23rd, quote, ‘‘Human Trafficking Evokes Outrage and Little 

Evidence,’’ unquote. Do either of you have any response? 

Amb. LAGON. I would be happy to start. And I tried to address 

that through Mr. McIntyre’s good questions, in part. 

I think it’s right that we don’t have an exact idea of the scale 

of the problem. We’re quite clear that to be able to pursue prosecutions and to help victims, you have to find them first. 

And when I share with other countries our experience about how 

we try and build cooperation between governments; national, local 

law enforcement; social services; with NGOs, that’s essential. 

In particular, I’ve got to emphasize that civil society organizations, non-government organizations, are the ones who have to help 

find victims. They often times are the least threatening. 

When victims believe that they’re just going to be treated as disposable people, they’re going to be treated like criminals, they’re 

going to be seen as just a mere prostitute—this is only a migrant 

worker, sadly—they are hard to find. 

So the numbers aren’t what the estimates had said, but those estimates are just that, estimates. I strongly agree with Ms. 

Biaudet’s suggestion that we need kind of actionable research. 

If we get hung up on what is the global number, and we don’t 

take finite funds and look at particular migration patterns, particular sectors of the economy, to reverse engineer the profitability 

to traffickers, we’re not taking the right first steps. 

Mr. HASTINGS. In your interagency approaches, are you all producing reports or—— 

Amb. LAGON. Yes. I chair something called the Senior Policy Operating Group on Trafficking. We have a subcommittee on research, 

and we made this very decision that to devote a lot of resources to 

getting the overall global number would be a mistake. 

But devoting resources, just as our colleagues in the Department 

of Justice and some other places are, to specific problems—for instance, the National Institute of Justice is looking at particular 

flows from Mexico and Central America or from East Asia, and 

what the exact textured circumstances are. 

I think that’s the way to go. 

32 

Mr. HASTINGS. Yes, Kevin? 

Mr. BALES. Mr. Hastings, if I may, because I’ve stated my previous incarceration was as a professor of social statistics and research methods—and I was very dismayed to read that article in 

the Post, not least because he used only Federal prosecutions as 

listing the number. 

And yet we know from the research that only about one-third of 

all trafficking cases that are found reach law enforcement, much 

less Federal law enforcement. The others come through social service providers, hospitals, medical—so forth. 

And yet all of that information was out, easily available, and he 

seemed to be unable to find the fundamental research that’s out 

there. 

Mr. HASTINGS. [Inaudible.] 

Mr. BALES. Now, if I could say that that doesn’t answer the question—solve the problem. 

And I think one of the things that’s very important to highlight— 

and Ambassador Lagon has, in a sense, raised it—which is that we 

actually have within the Federal Government and some of the related agencies and international organizations a series of very 

large-scale data sets which are held in completely watertight compartments from each other. 

And I’ve met with a number of the agencies that hold these data 

sets, and I’ve asked and pointed out that normally at this point in 

the development of research agenda, particularly, say, in the area 

of epidemiology, you conduct what’s called a meta-analysis by combining a whole series of existing data sets to discover the epidemiological, if you will, of this particular illness of trafficking. 

At the moment—and this is why I wanted to say this in front of 

the Ambassador—is that the decision to open the doors of those 

data sets to each other across the bureaucratic lines has to come 

from the top, from the Senior Policy Operating Group. 

I’ve attempted to speak to the people who work with those data 

sets, the computer nerds and analysts who work those data sets, 

but they say it’s above my pay grade, we can’t begin to share information. 

If we could reach that point of sharing that information, we don’t 

know if it would be great results or not, like much blue sky research is. But I suspect that we’d find many new things to help us 

make the best of—— 

Mr. HASTINGS. Right. 

Ambassador, you were going to followup with something? 

Amb. LAGON. That is a good idea and, in fact, our interagency 

group meets at the cabinet level on October 25th. Secretary Rice 

is the chair, so we should look to discuss it. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Yes, sure. 

Amb. LAGON. Just one other thing. I was just going to say another way another way that the Markon piece doesn’t capture all 

of reality is the difficulties found in—we have a formalized way 

that the identified victims who are foreign nationals—we certify 

them for benefits and we give them [inaudible]. 

We have the sense that there are victims who are American citizens—are getting access to social benefits that they have rights to, 

but there isn’t a formal certification process. 

33 

Mr. HASTINGS. I follow you. 

Amb. LAGON. Very important that we not only split—we avoid 

splitting sex trafficking from forced labor, but we also serve all victims, foreign nationals, and U.S. citizens, without any zero sum 

games. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Yes. Mr. Markon was here earlier. I don’t know 

whether he’s still here or not. 

Mr. MARKON. I’m right here. 

Mr. HASTINGS. You are? Reaction? 

Mr. MARKON. I’m sorry, I can’t. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Question? 

Mr. MARKON. I’m just here to take notes. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Oh, OK. That’s the first time we shut a journalist 

up. [Laughter.] 

I’m sure that he’ll have a reaction. 

But I wanted you all to interact with each other. 

Ms. Biaudet, if you don’t mind, in the interest of time, I know 

you want to ask each other some questions, and I want to give each 

of you about 30 seconds to wrap up, since we are running out of 

time with this room. 

But Ms. Ponticelli was taking copious notes, and so my formula 

or at least this new paradigm is working a little better than some 

of this other stuff I’ve seen, and she might have a few questions 

that she wanted to put to you that might be useful for all of us. 

Yes. 

Ms. PONTICELLI. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I think it’s very—first of all, on the collection of data—and I 

think the really global challenge for all of us—identifying the victims. I think it’s a global—it’s not just a U.S. challenge. It’s a challenge, I think, for every country around the world trying—working 

hard to deal with this problem. 

And I think that one aspect of the complexities and sometimes 

the apparent insurmountability of this problem—and I think it’s a 

dimension we haven’t had a chance to really discuss that much 

today, Mr. Chairman—and that has to do with what I mentioned 

in my statement, one of the key root causes, poverty and lack of 

economic opportunity. 

So I would say that if someone were to ask me where do we need 

to devote, perhaps even increase, attention, additional attention, I 

would say two areas, particularly for the main focus of our bureau, 

which is to prevent children from entering and to rescue them from 

what we call the worst forms of child labor. 

One is education, the key. And second, of course, education writ 

broadly—job skills, access to alternative livelihoods. 

You mentioned from your personal story, which I really commend—and I felt that was very, very moving—there are other 

forms of bad labor, exploited labor, that children—we all know 

about the situation, of course, of child soldiers. 

We know about children in other kinds of bondage. We know 

about children that are taken into prostitution, into hazardous occupations, as you mentioned. 

And I think that this is where the United States, if we look at 

total numbers—I think the problem is so complex and so multidimensional—how many children may be in a hazardous working 

34 

situation, how many children may be in another kind of forced 

labor situation that might not be classified as per se trafficking. 

And I think this is where our partnership—certainly within the 

Department of Labor—our partnership with the Wage and Hour 

Division which inspects workplaces, which secures compliance, 

which stands up for labor standards and workers’ rights, whether 

that person is someone born here or someone who comes from 

abroad. 

It’s a tremendous partnership that we have, and to work with 

that bureau and with the Employment and Training Administration, which has some excellent models of success that we’ve been 

sharing with other countries—the One-Stop Career Centers, which 

can be a rescue and education tool as well. 

So I just want to kind of [inaudible] a long way of saying I think 

that—— 

Mr. HASTINGS. Are you going to put a question to her? 

Ms. PONTICELLI. I would like to know perhaps in the context of 

OSCE, or perhaps ILO as well—we are the largest, of course, contributor to the ILO’s efforts to eliminate forced labor and child 

labor. 

What should we be doing more in terms of addressing those root 

causes of economic opportunity—lack of economic opportunity, lack 

of access to quality education? 

Mr. HASTINGS. Ms. Biaudet? 

Ms. BIAUDET. Well, I think one very important thing is, of course, 

also to look at—you all know that when children are not in school 

they are very much at risk of getting into anything—I mean, not 

only becoming victims of trafficking, but they can—many, many 

horrible things can happen. 

So I think this, of course, is crucial. But we know also that many, 

many countries don’t allow undocumented children to go to school 

in practice. 

So I think there are lot of easy practical issues that could be addressed if there would be political will to address these issues that 

would put these children less at risk. 

We also know that I think—or I don’t know really for sure, but 

I think there are more than 8,000 children coming unaccompanied 

at the borders of the U.S. every year. What happens to those? Do 

we really know? 

We know that there are a lot of missing children in Europe. Nobody knows where they are. They come from China. They come 

from different places. 

They are not recognized as trafficking victims, which is interesting when we have this numbers question, because when they 

come unaccompanied, usually they are just sort of smuggled or [inaudible] but they have been—you know, they are trafficked. 

And research show that it’s very likely that they might be trafficked, but they are, of course, not in the destination so the intervention, the protection, has to come much earlier—it’s not so important if there is a definition of trafficking or not, because the 

child needs the protection. 

So there are a lot of practical issues we can do, but it sometimes 

mean that we have to change our system a little bit. It doesn’t always mean that we have to compromise our other interests. But we 

35 

just have to think a little bit out of the box once in a while, perhaps, and create these and take them into account. 

Of course, also, as a multilateralist, I think the U.S. efforts in 

the OSCE are very important. Sometimes, though, I think if the 

multilateral approach would be stronger politically, it might be 

beneficial also for having results in other countries, because I think 

this is how it has to be. 

And there is a lot to show of experience and a lot of lessons 

learned from each other but also from the United States. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Plant? 

Mr. PLANT. Thank you, Chairman. I’d like to use my time to compliment what Ms. Ponticelli has just said. I think it’s tremendously 

important to see the linkage between the fight against forced labor 

and slavery and overall poverty reduction approaches. 

It’s really essential to mainstream this on development, antipoverty agendas, with the World Bank, et cetera. Kevin Bales and 

myself—I know we’re going to be participating together with the 

World Bank in a couple of months in this, and I believe Ambassador Lagon as well. 

And I’m glad I’ve got meetings with both of you later today, because I was working very hard trying to map out—think of a strategy on that. 

The only thing I would add to what you’re saying is yes, education for children, but please remember that in the current state 

of affairs the most vulnerable people are going to continue to move. 

It’s going to be a long time before they can earn their livelihoods 

at home. We’re going to have to accept contract labor and migration, which is why what Ambassador Lagon said about contract 

labor is so important. 

Think of how much remittances contribute to poorer countries. 

Let’s think how much more the poorer people would get if the profits were not siphoned off by abusive labor contractors, et cetera. 

So let’s remember that when we’re thinking of adequate antipoverty strategies, we’ve got to think of labor market, government, 

operating all of these systems. 

You’re not going to—we’ve always got to think that this is a 

question of movement, and we’ve got to empower people to get better earnings when they’re traveling abroad, better protection, as 

well as getting education, livelihood, vocational training at home. 

They’re all important. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Ms. Biaudet, former Senator Robert Graham and 

I introduced legislation dealing with unaccompanied minors and it 

did not see the light of day in the U.S. Congress. 

I would end at this time, as I’m required to for use of the room, 

but I would like to say, in closing, that these kinds of hearings are 

particularly helpful to those of us that are policymakers. 

And, Ambassador Lagon, you had the good fortune of working in 

some of the developmental legislation and now you see it from an 

executive capacity. 

You would know that former Congressman Sam Gejdenson and 

Chris Smith, who is the Ranking Member of the Helsinki Commission, did extraordinary foundational work in this arena. 

And Chris has really no peers in dealing with the subject of 

human trafficking. Much of his work is still ongoing. But what we 

36 

need from you is empirical data and the collection of that data put 

in some form so that we can address it. 

One of the things that I think that we did—and, Dr. Bales, I 

don’t accuse you of naivete ́, but I do suggest, to be provocative, that 

you think outside the Western confines. Many of these countries 

don’t give a happy hoot about what we’re talking about, and their 

leaders have rubber stamp parliaments. 

Mr. Plant spoke about developing the judiciary. I can’t tell you 

the amount of time that I spent discussing with my colleagues that 

when we are talking about going someplace and trying to cause democracy to take root, it has as a component not just free and fair 

elections, which are critical, but the rule of law. 

And if you don’t have an established rule of law, then you’re not 

going to be able to do the things that are vitally necessary. Just 

to flag for all of you all, Ms. Biaudet and I were talking earlier before this hearing—I have legislation that I’ve developed. 

And it’s astounding to me that so few of my colleagues, Commissioners included, on both sides of the aisle are not ignoring but 

choosing not to address the significant number of Iraqi refugees 

that have been created by virtue of the intervention. 

I’m not talking ideologically whether we ought to be there, who 

got there, what we went there for. The simple fact of the matter 

is a significant number of people have been displaced externally 

and internally, burdening other countries, not necessarily in the 

OSCE sphere, but certainly this matter should be important to the 

United States. 

And yet we don’t have a true mechanism for accepting and dealing with those refugees. State is beginning to address it. Ms. 

Sauerbrey and others—Dan Fried and I have had discussions about 

this. 

But that’s going to be an enormous problem that’s going to feed 

into, in another form, the same kind of thing we are talking about, 

although it’s in another part of the world. 

I guess we could go on and on and on, but I had the last word. 

[Laughter.] 

[Whereupon, at 12:03 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

37 

A P P E N D I C E S 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. ALCEE L. HASTINGS, CHAIRMAN, COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE 

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to this Helsinki Commission hearing on combating trafficking for forced labor 

purposes in the OSCE Region, including the United States. 

Trafficking in human beings is an egregious human rights violation and a serious transnational crime facing governments all over 

the world. According to a 2005 International Labor Organization 

report, of the 12.3 million victims of forced labor, approximately 2.4 

million were trafficked for forced labor purposes. 

Trafficking for forced labor is a major problem in many OSCE 

countries. In Armenia, for example, both men and women are trafficked for forced labor, while an International Organization for Migration (IOM) report asserts that 38 percent of trafficked persons 

assisted by IOM in Belarus were male victims of forced labor. Although the U.S., like many other OSCE states, continues to be 

challenged by limitations in the systems utilized for data gathering 

in human trafficking cases, we have seen progress in our anti-trafficking efforts. In one significant case, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, working with the FBI successfully investigated 

and prosecuted organized criminals who were trafficking Eastern 

European women into the United States to work as exotic dancers 

in Michigan. In his book Nobodies: Modern American Slave Labor 

and the Dark Side of the New Global Economy, John Bowe describes three cases of forced labor in the U.S.: in Immokalee, Florida, Tulsa, Oklahoma, and Saipan (a U.S. commonwealth in the 

Western Pacific). 

Trafficking for forced labor frequently involves physical and psychological abuse of the victims; generates millions of dollars in illicit financial profits to the perpetrators, which are often organized 

criminal groups; and leads to thousands of migrants crossing international borders with fraudulent documents. 

Trafficking in persons for forced labor purposes is less understood than trafficking for sexual exploitation because it has largely 

remained a hidden form of exploitation. However, it is no less serious. In the OSCE region, it has accelerated in recent years as a result of the economic disruption caused by the collapse of Communism in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, as well 

as the wars in the former Yugoslavia. A high worldwide demand 

for women and children as sex workers, sweatshop labor and domestic servants has fueled the market for forced labor. At the same 

time, increasing restrictions on immigration to many destination 

countries, including the United States and Western Europe has led 

many migrants to turn to human traffickers, despite the risks involved. 

The OSCE demonstrated its commitment to combating trafficking in human beings in 2003, with the adoption of the OSCE 

Action Plan to Combat Trafficking in Human Beings. Among other 

requirements, the Action Plan calls upon member states to make 

38 

forced labor a crime by incorporating the definition of human trafficking contained in the United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and 

Children. The establishment of the position of Special Representative and Coordinator for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings 

has given greater focus to addressing this critical challenge in the 

OSCE region. 

Since the adoption of these anti-trafficking protocols, the OSCE 

participating states have made significant strides in combating the 

sexual dimension of human trafficking. But there is a growing consensus that more needs to be done to understand the scope and 

challenge of humans trafficked for forced servitude. 

Presently, many member states have not adopted legislation to 

specifically address trafficking for forced labor purposes. In addition, much of the resources and early anti-trafficking efforts have 

been directed at identifying and prosecuting sexual trafficking 

cases. The U.S. Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) of 2000, 

which was authored by Helsinki Commission Ranking Member 

Christopher Smith, includes in its definition of human trafficking, 

‘‘the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining 

of a person for labor services, through the use of force, fraud or coercion for the purpose of subjection to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery.’’ 

Yet, we have seen relatively few prosecutions of forced labor perpetrators. A September 23rd Washington Post article on the subject 

of human trafficking raises several questions which are worthy of 

examination: Are there in fact, significant numbers of trafficking 

cases that go undetected? Or do we simply not have a full grasp 

of the scope of human trafficking? Or conversely, how reliable are 

trafficking statistics? 

This morning, we examine these issues as we hear from two expert panels on efforts to combat trafficking for forced labor purposes in the OSCE region. We look forward to the testimony of 

three key U.S. government agencies, represented by Ambassador 

Mark Lagon, from the. Department of State, Ms. Charlotte 

Ponticelli, from the Department of Labor; and Mr. Michael 

Feinberg, from the Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement. We are also grateful to have the 

participation of Ms. Eva Biaudet, the OSCE’s Special Representative and Coordinator for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings, 

Mr. Roger Plant, of the International Labor Organization, and Mr. 

Kevin Bales, of Free the Slaves. The witnesses bios are available 

at the entrance. 

Without objection, your prepared statements will be entered into 

the Record. Please summarize your oral testimony. Ambassador 

Lagon, you may begin. 

39 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHARLOTTE M. PONTICELLI, DEPUTY UNDERSECRETARY FOR INTERNATIONAL LABOR AFFAIRS, BUREAU OF INTERNATIONAL LABOR AFFAIRS, U.S. 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Good morning, Chairman Hastings, Co-Chairman Cardin, and 

distinguished members of the United States Helsinki Commission. 

I am pleased to be here today on behalf of the U.S. Department of 

Labor. Thank you for holding this hearing on the trafficking of humans for the purpose of forced labor—one of today’s worst human 

rights tragedies. It is an honor to be here today with my fellow 

panelists, who are all dedicated to the global fight against human 

trafficking—Ambassador Mark Lagon (U.S. State Department/GTIP), Mr. Michael Feinberg (U.S. Department of Homeland Security), Ms. Eva Biaudet (OSCE), Mr. Roger Plant (ILO), and Mr. 

Kevin Bales (Free the Slaves). 

The United States is committed to ending the brutal practice of 

human trafficking. As President George Bush stated at the signing 

of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act in January 2006, ‘‘Our nation is determined to fight and end this modern 

form of slavery.’’ In signing this legislation, the President also 

called upon other nations to take action. The U.S. Government is 

working at home and with other governments, such as the 56 countries participating in the Organization for Security and Cooperation 

in Europe (OSCE) to eliminate human trafficking around the 

world. Alone, we can have an impact, but together we can have an 

even greater and more lasting impact. 

Across the world, the transnational phenomenon of human trafficking involves both trafficking for sex and labor exploitation. 

Trafficking for commercial sexual exploitation in OSCE countries, 

particularly in Eastern Europe, opened the world’s eyes to the global problem of trafficking. Yet as we know from the ILO’s 2005 report A Global Alliance Against Forced Labour, most victims of trafficking in the world are actually victims of forced labor. Private 

agents typically traffic these individuals through coercion, forcing 

them to toil in sweatshops and other hidden workplaces under brutal conditions with no access to legal protections. 

In the OSCE region, the trafficking of adults for forced labor in 

the construction and agricultural industries is pervasive and the 

trafficking of children for commercial sexual exploitation and labor 

remains a grave problem. Children specifically trafficked for labor 

find themselves forced into begging, petty crime, street vending, 

and domestic work; or work in agriculture, construction, or manufacturing. 

Albanian children, for instance, are often trafficked to beg in 

Greece or Italy. Other children from Eastern Europe, especially 

from orphanages and vulnerable Roma (Gypsy) populations, are 

trafficked to beg on the streets of large cities throughout Europe. 

They are often physically abused, underfed, addicted to drugs or alcohol, and have no access to education and health services. Children from Central Asia are trafficked, often by their parents or acquaintances, for the purposes of commercial sexual exploitation or 

for strenuous labor in markets, construction sites, and agriculture. 

The illicit and hidden nature in which human trafficking occurs 

sometimes makes the search for solutions seem insurmountable. 

40 

Yet significant progress is being made, especially in research and 

data collection—key tools in the fight. OSCE member states have 

underscored the need for reliable research and data on the nature 

and magnitude of the trafficking problem to design policies and implement programs for prevention, and protection and assistance to 

victims. 

From the Department of Labor’s work on eliminating the worst 

forms of child labor internationally, data collection and research 

have been central to increasing our knowledge of the extent and 

nature of the exploitive child labor, including the trafficking of children. In compliance with Trade Promotion Authority, for example, 

the Department issues reports on respect for core labor standards, 

including forced labor, for all nations which the U.S. seeks negotiations for a trade agreement. The Department also produces the 

Congressionally mandated Trade and Development Act Findings on 

the Worst Forms of Child Labor report that includes information 

on forced child labor and child trafficking in 141 countries. Data 

collection and research efforts at the Department have laid the 

ground work for identifying priorities, designing strategies, and 

measuring and monitoring progress towards the elimination of 

these problems. The July 2007 Government Accountability Office’s 

Report on Human Trafficking acknowledged that the Department 

of Labor had the necessary elements in place to monitor and measure the performance of its anti-trafficking projects. 

Nonetheless, the development of policy and collection of data 

should not preclude the immediate and urgent need to rescue those 

men, women, and children who have been trafficked for forced 

labor. 

At the Department of Labor, we are engaged both domestically 

and internationally in efforts to combat trafficking in persons for 

commercial sexual exploitation and forced labor. This engagement 

builds upon the Department of Labor’s long history of working to 

protect and assist vulnerable workers. 

The Department’s Bureau of International Labor Affairs has 

been active in combating trafficking around the world, including in 

many OSCE countries, and has enlisted the support of several 

international, nongovernmental, and faith-based organizations. So 

far, more than 1 million children have been rescued from the worst 

forms of child labor and provided with education and training opportunities through DOL-funded projects. 

Since 1995, the Department of Labor has obligated over $595 

million to organizations globally to prevent and withdraw children 

from exploitative work. Of this amount, the Department has set 

aside more than 40 percent, or $219 million, to combat trafficking 

in persons for the purpose of labor and commercial sexual exploitation. In this year alone, the Department provided $28.4 million 

to address the trafficking of children for commercial sexual exploitation and labor purposes. 

Excellent examples of emerging good practices to eliminate the 

trafficking of women and children for labor are from U.S. Department of Labor-funded projects in the OSCE region. In 2003, the 

Department of Labor funded a $1.5 million regional project through 

the ILO to work in the Central and Eastern European countries of 

Albania, Moldova, Romania, and Ukraine. This project, entitled 

41 

PROTECT CEE (Project of Technical Assistance Against the Labor 

and Sexual Exploitation of Children, including Trafficking, in 

Countries of Central and Eastern Europe), assisted in the rescue 

of 2,600 children. Children were provided with educational opportunities, skills training, and the necessary psychosocial interventions. 

The project was also successful in working with governments to advance legal reforms, including bilateral agreements, to protect and 

assist child victims of trafficking. At the community level, local 

government units in pilot areas have established child labor monitoring systems comprised of teachers, labor inspectors, and health 

professionals to document and refer trafficking victims to social 

service providers for rehabilitation services. To expand on these efforts, we funded a second phase of the project at $ 3.5 million in 

FY 2006 to include Bulgaria and the UN Administered Province of 

Kosovo. 

Through President Bush’s $50 million anti-trafficking initiative, ILAB also funded a $1.25 million project through Catholic Relief 

Services in the Republic of Moldova in 2004. The project targets 

young, at-risk women and seeks to reduce the incidence of trafficking and assist victims through a combination of job development, employment assistance, and skills training. We have found 

that a root factor contributing to the vulnerability of trafficking victims—poverty—can be tackled by creating economic incentives and 

employment opportunities that offer legitimate and sustainable 

forms of income. 

The U.S. Department of Labor has also been pleased to participate in the last two sessions of the OSCE Alliance Against Trafficking in Persons Conference. Experts from the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division shared the unique way investigators 

carry out civil law enforcement in the nation’s workplaces, and are 

able to identify individuals who have been trafficked into forced 

labor in the United States. Working to ensure compliance with domestic labor laws such as the Fair Labor Standards Act and the 

Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act, Wage 

and Hour investigators monitor workplaces, especially low-wage industries, on a daily basis and are often the first government authorities to witness exploitive conditions and talk to victims. 

By participating in more than 38 local human trafficking 

taskforces around the country, which include federal, state, and 

local law enforcement agencies as well as nongovernmental organizations, faith-based organizations, and assistance based organizations, the Wage and Hour Division takes part in law-enforcement 

networks designed to end the practice of human trafficking in the 

United States. In fiscal year 2007, the Wage and Hour Division collected over $85,900 in back wages and liquidated damages for 61 

workers in response to 7 task force-referred or other trafficking-related investigations. 

It is this type of collaboration and information sharing that will 

allow us to advance our efforts and make a real difference. 

At the Department of Labor, we are continuing to focus on several critical areas in the fight against human trafficking: institutional and legal reforms, capacity building to implement these reforms, and direct assistance to victims and potential victims. We 

are proud to be a part of the U.S. Government’s interagency efforts 

42 

involving the Department of State, Department of Health and 

Human Services, Department of Homeland Security, Department of 

Justice, and U.S. Agency for International Development to assist 

current victims of trafficking, and those at-risk of entering harm’s 

way. 

I want to commend the Helsinki Commission for helping to bring 

the plight of trafficking victims in the OSCE region to the attention 

of the American public. Thank you again for allowing me to join 

you today for this important event. 

43 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MARK LAGON, DIRECTOR, STATE 

DEPARTMENT OFFICE TO MONITOR AND COMBAT TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS 

Chairman Hastings and members of the Helsinki Commission: 

Thank you for the opportunity to personally discuss with you the 

State Department’s efforts to combat human trafficking for forced 

labor purposes. I am pleased to appear this morning with my esteemed colleague Deputy Undersecretary of Labor for International 

Affairs, Charlotte Ponticelli, and Acting Director for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Michael Feinberg, as well as, partners in our anti-trafficking efforts, Ms. Eva Biaudet, Mr. Roger 

Plant and Mr. Kevin Bales. 

Crucial among the ten principles guiding relations between participating OSCE nations is a commitment to ‘‘respect human rights 

and fundamental freedoms.’’ The strength of this commitment is 

expressed in the combined efforts of the United States and other 

OSCE states to protect victims from trafficking, a violation against 

basic human dignity that is the modern-day equivalent of slavery. 

As the Department of State continues to increase attention on 

slave labor in addition to the dehumanization of sex trafficking, I 

appreciate the commission’s hearing this morning on this important issue. The 2007 Trafficking in Persons Report sheds new light 

on the alarming trafficking of people for forced labor purposes. 

Forced labor is a form of human trafficking that can be harder 

to identify and estimate than sex trafficking. For this reason, too 

often the victims go unnoticed. Every day, all over the world, people are coerced into bonded labor, exploited in domestic servitude, 

and enslaved in agricultural work and in factories. They are victimized by unscrupulous employers who take advantage of 

vulnerabilities, especially among immigrants, young women and 

children. 

Each year as we add to our knowledge of the trafficking phenomenon we are better able to locate, rescue and assist these victims. This year we noted several disturbing global trends which 

speak directly to the plight of labor trafficking victims. 

The first is the use of debt as a tool of coercion. In labor as well 

as sexual exploitation, illegal or illegitimate debt is increasingly 

used to keep people in servitude. This debt is employed by traffickers as an instrument of coercion, especially among migrant laborers. Migrant laborers from developing countries are often legally 

contracted by labor agencies or respond to ads to perform lowskilled work in developed countries. For this ‘‘privilege’’ they are required to make a steep payment up front for the services of the 

labor agency arranging the job or as a finder’s fee that goes 

straight to the future employer. What follows is a terrifying set of 

circumstances in which unfair debt captures an indebted worker. 

For example, a contract labor agency in Bangladesh advertised 

work at a garment factory in Jordan. The ad promised a three-year 

contract, $425 per month, eight hour workdays, six days a week, 

paid overtime, free accommodations, free medical care, free food, 

and no advance fees. Instead, upon arrival, workers (who were 

obliged to pay exorbitant advance fees) had passports confiscated, 

were confined to miserable conditions, and were prevented from 

leaving the factory. Months passed without pay, food was inadVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:20 Dec 14, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\WORK\101107.TXT HAROLD PsN: HAROLD
44 

equate, and sick workers were tortured. Because most workers had 

borrowed money at inflated rates to get the contracts, they were 

obliged through debt to stay. 

The sad truth is that we find workers across the globe holding 

on to the thin hope that they will eventually get paid, or that conditions will improve, because if they leave, there is no hope that 

they will be able to repay the debt. Last year, press reports indicated that in Poland, announcements in local newspapers lured 

workers to Italy for seasonal jobs picking fruit and vegetables. 

They were promised an hourly wage of up to $7.50, only after paying a finder’s fee and travel costs. Once in Italy the reality was 

much different. Nearly 100 Polish workers were forced to live in 

barracks with no sanitation or running water, fed only bread and 

water and were paid just $1.25 an hour. With these meager wages, 

they were unable to pay the room and board and were pushed into 

debt. Attempts to resist were met with severe beatings and torture. 

Debt bondage is criminalized under U.S. law and included as a 

form of exploitation related to trafficking in the United Nations 

Protocol To Prevent, Suppress, and Punish Trafficking in Persons, 

Especially Women and Children (UN TIP Protocol). As noted in our 

annual report, major source countries must do a better job of protecting their citizens against this exploitation. They can do so by 

limiting pre-departure fees to reasonable levels and negotiating formal labor agreements with destination countries to secure their 

citizen’s rights while working abroad. Destination countries should 

be active in making foreign workers aware of their rights, in assisting workers to exercise those rights, and in criminally prosecuting 

traffickers. 

Private homes are another sphere which often escapes the law. 

In many countries around the world homes become prisons of involuntary servitude for domestic workers. Most are cut off from outside social contact. They work long hours, seven days a week for 

little or no pay with no guarantee of even food or an adequate place 

to sleep. These workers are particularly difficult to identify because 

their suffering is not witnessed by anyone outside the employer’s 

family. They become trapped when they believe an attempted escape would result in physical harm to them or their families, or 

when their employers deceive them into believing escape would result in deportation or incarceration by local law enforcement. 

A young west African woman I’ll call Maggie for her anonymity 

went to the United Kingdom with her employers. She looked after 

their children every day until late in the evening. However, she 

was paid no wages. Her earnings as a cleaner were also confiscated 

by her employer. Her employers claimed she owed them for her airfare. But she couldn’t just run away. She was trapped because her 

employers refused to return her passport unless she paid them 

4,000 pounds ($8,000). 

Confiscation of travel documents including passports, identification and airline tickets is a form of coercion used to gain and exercise control over a victim. Without these documents, foreign workers are trapped, vulnerable to arrest, punishment, and deportation. 

U.S. federal law makes it illegal to seize documents in order to 

force others to work and foreign governments are encouraged to 

criminalize this form of coercion as well. 

45 

Prosecution is an important prong in our assessment of a country’s anti-trafficking efforts. The vehicle for successful prosecution 

is through strong national anti-trafficking laws that cover both sex 

and labor trafficking. As we’ve seen, trafficking can take many 

forms, and all cases, whether for sexual exploitation or forced 

labor, should receive equal attention and stringent punishment by 

governments. Since 2000, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act 

(TVPA) has amended federal law to assign equally tough penalties 

for trafficking for sexual exploitation and trafficking for forced 

labor. Though many other governments have enacted criminal antitrafficking laws, they often are limited to sexual exploitation and 

fail to punish trafficking for forced labor—including recruitment or 

transferring victims, use of fraudulent employment terms, and 

physical and psychological coercion—with equally tough criminal 

penalties. 

Punishments resulting in fines and administrative sanctions by 

a country’s Ministry of Labor, which may be sufficient for less serious labor violations, are not sufficiently stringent to deter the serious crime of human trafficking for forced labor. Governments can 

adequately address the serious crime of trafficking for labor exploitation only by assigning tough criminal penalties to its perpetrators. 

As the head of the State Department’s Office to Monitor and 

Combat Trafficking in Person, I have seen firsthand in my travels 

the need to actively abolish this form of trade in people and I have 

seen the powerful impact when governments, NGO’s, and individuals stand up to meet this need. No laborer, migrant, woman, man, 

child deserves to be shackled by debt, chicanery, and intimidation 

by fellow members of humankind. At the heart of the U.S. government’s victim-centered approach to ending human trafficking is a 

commitment to human dignity—a desire not only to rescue people, 

but restore their dignity. The OSCE and its Coordinator for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings, Eva Biaudet, play a key role, 

and are to be recognized for their committed effort, in the fight 

against human trafficking. The OSCE, the UN Office on Drugs and 

Crime, the International Labor Organization, and the International 

Organization of Migration are among those collective efforts from 

Vancouver to Vladivostok addressing slave labor. 

Thank you again for this opportunity to testify before this Commission and for its support in the global struggle to abolish modern 

day slavery. Steps to mitigate, regulate, unionize aren’t enough. 

Abolition is the goal. I look forward to answering any questions you 

may have. 

46 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MICHAEL E. FEINBERG, ACTING 

DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT 

OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

Good morning, Chairman Hastings, Co-Chairman Cardin, and 

distinguished members of the U.S. Helsinki Commission. It is my 

privilege to appear before you today to discuss Immigration and 

Customs Enforcement’s (ICE’s) efforts against human traffickers 

who exploit men, women, and children—a form of modern-day slavery. I would like to thank the Commission for its continued commitment to combating human trafficking, particularly in the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) participating states. 

Among the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) law enforcement agencies, ICE has the most expansive investigative authority 

and the largest number of investigators. We also have more than 

300 victim-witness field coordinators, which is more than any other 

U.S. agency. Our mission is to target the people, money, and materials that support terrorist and other criminal activities. ICE accomplishes this by investigating and enforcing our immigration and 

customs laws, including laws related to human trafficking and 

forced child labor. 

ICE’S ROLE IN COMBATING TRAFFICKING 

While the focus of today’s testimony is on forced labor trafficking, 

much of what I will say applies to ICE’s efforts to fight all forms 

of trafficking, whether for sex or labor exploitation. ICE special 

agents place a priority on rescuing trafficking victims and investigating allegations of trafficking, regardless of whether the victims 

were made to work against their will or whether they were unlawfully induced into a sexual exploitative situation. As part of ICE’s 

victim-centered approach to trafficking, we also provide the same 

access to victim assistance to all trafficking victims. 

ICE’s aim in all trafficking cases is to systematically disrupt and 

dismantle the international and domestic operations of human traffickers, identify and seize assets and illicit proceeds, and identify 

systemic vulnerabilities that may be exploited by criminal elements 

to undermine immigration and border controls. 

There is an important distinction between the terms ‘‘human 

smuggling’’ and ‘‘human trafficking.’’ These are not interchangeable 

terms. ICE views human smuggling as the importation of people 

into the United States involving deliberate evasion of immigration 

laws. Human trafficking on the other hand comes in two forms: 

trafficking for sexual exploitation in which commercial sex is induced through the use of force, fraud, or coercion or in which the 

person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of 

age; or labor exploitation, which is 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 

subjecting the person to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery. It is unnecessary to prove force, fraud or coercion 

in cases of commercial sex acts where the victim is under 18. SimVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:20 Dec 14, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\WORK\101107.TXT HAROLD PsN: HAROLD
47 

ply stated human smuggling is transportation-based and human 

trafficking is exploitation-based. 

ICE has jurisdiction within the U.S. for all human smuggling 

and forced child labor cases that have a nexus to the movement of 

people or goods across the U.S. borders. U.S. Federal law grants 

both ICE and the Federal Bureau of Investigation the authority to 

conduct trafficking investigations. Internationally, ICE does not 

have the authority to conduct any investigative activities without 

the consent of the host country. These restrictions vary by country. 

Thus, ICE relies heavily on the relationships it is able to form with 

its foreign law enforcement partners to investigate cases with a 

nexus to the United States. The majority of ICE’s overseas investigative activities occur in connection with cases that originate 

within the United States. 

ICE builds and maintains strong international relationships 

through our 50 offices located in 39 countries throughout the world, 

including 11 OSCE member countries. We work with host country 

law enforcement to better coordinate investigations and to fully 

identify and pursue criminal enterprises. This is accomplished by 

targeting recruiters, brokers, document providers, travel agencies, 

corrupt officials, smugglers, and associated businesses engaged in 

criminal activities at source, transit, and destination countries. We 

also work with foreign law enforcement partners to target bank accounts, wire transfers, and funding mechanisms that fuel criminal 

enterprises. In addition, we coordinate with NGOs, international 

organizations (IOs), and foreign law enforcement agencies to enhance awareness and to increase efforts to combat human trafficking in source and transit countries. 

ICE also holds the permanent directorship of the Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center (HSTC), a joint venture of participating investigative and intelligence agencies, including DHS, the 

Department of State, and the Department of Justice. Its main focus 

is to combat support for clandestine terrorist travel, human smuggling, and trafficking in persons. The HSTC is also the official 

point of contact for Interpol regarding trafficking matters, and has 

established direct ties to other international organizations such as 

Europol and the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime 

(UNODC) Anti-Human Trafficking Unit. ICE is an active participant in the Senior Policy Operating Group and regularly coordinates with our partners at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, 

Diplomatic Security and the Department of Labor. 

ICE recognizes that merely focusing on stopping the supply of 

trafficking victims is not enough to end human trafficking. Instead, 

attention must also be paid to ending the demand of those who 

seek to exploit trafficking victims. ICE addresses this problem 

through aggressive investigation and prosecution of traffickers and 

violators of the PROTECT Act of 2003, those individuals who travel 

for purposes of sexual exploitation of children. ICE agents have 

made more than 60 arrests under the child sex tourism provisions 

of the PROTECT Act of 2003. ICE recently produced a public service announcement, which will further educate the public in identifying trafficking victims and hopefully reduce the demand for prostitution if the customer realizes that the sex provider might be a 

victim of trafficking. 

48 

Using its customs authorities, ICE also conducts investigations 

based on laws that ban the importation of products that are made 

with forced child labor and prison labor. Through the Tariff Act of 

1930, DHS has the authority to prohibit the importation of any 

goods made with convict, forced, or indentured labor. If it can be 

shown reasonably, but not conclusively, that a product being imported is made with forced child labor or prison labor, then the 

Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has the authority to detain that item at the border. If probable cause has 

been established that the product has been made with forced child 

or prison labor, and the consumptive demand and de minimis requirements are met, then the item may be excluded from entry. 

These investigations allow the U.S. to keep products from entering 

our country that are made by forced labor trafficking victims in 

other countries. 

SUCCESSFUL INVESTIGATIONS 

Here in the United States, we continue to target traffickers. In 

one 2005 ICE-led investigation, conducted in collaboration with the 

Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Internal Revenue Service, 

we targeted a criminal organization engaged in the smuggling and 

trafficking of Russian, Czech, and Ukrainian women into the 

United States. The victims were forced to work as exotic dancers 

at Detroit-area strip clubs in order to repay smuggling and other 

debts. The techniques used by the traffickers to control the victims 

included confiscating their passports and identity documents, imposing social and linguistic isolation, bugging the victims’ apartment, rough physical treatment, and threats of violence. Investigative efforts resulted in the rescue of four victims, the imprisonment 

of two traffickers, the seizure of two weapons, two vehicles, and 

restitution to victims totaling over $2,500,000. Specifically, in June 

of 2007, one of the defendants was sentenced to 14 years in prison 

and ordered to pay over $1.5 million in restitution to the victims. 

In another case that was completed in late 2005, a husband and 

wife smuggled more than 60 Peruvian nationals, including 13 children, into the United States. The couple charged the victims a 

smuggling fee of $6,000 to $13,000, confiscated their passports, and 

then, required the victims to perform work for them and other employers. The husband and wife kept most of the earning of the victims, leaving them with less than $50 per week. The defendants 

used the money to purchase vehicles and real property on Long Island and in Peru. In addition to the smuggling fees, the victims 

were required to pay the defendants for over-crowded and unsanitary living space—frequently eight to ten persons per room with 

only one or two mattresses, and no more than two bathrooms for 

use by 30 or more individuals. The defendants also threatened to 

turn the victims over to law enforcement authorities if they refused 

to pay the defendants. The husband and wife pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit forced labor, recruiting, harboring, transporting, 

and housing undocumented workers, and other charges. The wife 

was sentenced to 15 years in prison, while the husband received 11 

years in prison. This case also demonstrates the importance of 

partnerships. ICE first received information about the case from a 

49 

non-governmental organization (NGO), which provides services to 

victims of human trafficking. 

VICTIM SERVICES 

ICE provides victim services through two full-time victim witness 

coordinators who are stationed at Headquarters as well as through 

more than 300 collateral duty victim witness coordinators in the 

field. ICE also provides victim assistance in the form of immigration relief through Continued Presence, which is a temporary status that permits a trafficking victim to remain legally in the 

United States during an ongoing investigation or prosecution. ICE 

coordinates with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 

(USCIS) on which aliens should be granted T visas, a nonimmigrant visa category for victims of trafficking. Trafficking victims who receive Continued Presence or T visas are then eligible 

for employment authorization and other federally funded or administered benefits or services. 

ICE’S OUTREACH EFFORTS 

In addition to our international investigations, ICE focuses much 

of its anti-trafficking efforts internationally on training and outreach to foreign law enforcement, governments, and NGOs. We are 

engaged in an aggressive outreach campaign to educate local, state, 

federal, and foreign law enforcement, as well as NGOs, on how to 

identify human trafficking, the services and immigration relief 

available to trafficking victims, the roles of NGOs, and the distinction between human smuggling and human trafficking. We also 

provide a toll free number or tip line for human trafficking leads. 

We have developed brochures and a DVD for law enforcement officers, and laminated wallet-size cards with human trafficking indicators, which have been translated into five different languages. 

ICE is currently creating additional outreach material specifically 

for our attache ́ offices, including online information, booklets, and 

cards that will identify indicators of forced labor and provide suggestions for industries on voluntary compliance with U.S. forced 

child labor laws. 

ICE has hosted and participated in numerous training sessions 

on human trafficking and victim issues for combined audiences of 

law enforcement, prosecutors and NGOs. We have developed 

human trafficking training modules, which are part of the permanent curricula at the International Law Enforcement Academies 

(ILEA) in Bangkok, Budapest, and San Salvador. Through ILEA, 

in fiscal year 2006, ICE trained 429 law enforcement personnel 

from 43 countries on trafficking investigations and working with 

victims. 

Recently, the UNODC hosted a working group in Vienna, Austria, consisting of experts from the international law enforcement 

and NGO communities to develop human trafficking law enforcement training modules, along with modules covering a variety of 

other crimes. ICE served as the sole representatives from the 

United States aiding in the development and editing of these antitrafficking training materials. 

50 

One of the reasons this aggressive training is so critical is because there is no perfect method to identify trafficking victims. 

Each situation is different. ICE has developed a series of indicators 

based on its past investigations, which provide assistance to law 

enforcement personnel in identifying whether a person has been 

trafficked. These indicators include: whether the victim is in possession of identification and travel documents; whether the victim 

was coached about what to say to law enforcement and immigration officials; whether the victim was recruited for one purpose and 

has been forced to engage in another job; whether the victim’s salary was garnished to pay off a smuggling fee; whether the victim 

or the victim’s family has been threatened with harm if the victim 

attempts to escape; whether the victim has been threatened with 

deportation or law enforcement action; and whether the victim was 

harmed or deprived of food, water, sleep, medical care or other life 

necessities. 

ICE recently implemented a national strategy to foster closer relationships with federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. 

As part of this strategy, ICE field offices have engaged in an outreach campaign to educate federal, state, and local law enforcement 

agencies and NGOs regarding ICE’s expertise and role in human 

trafficking investigations, and the provision of Continued Presence. 

ICE is working closely with the Department of Health and 

Human Services, the Department of Justice, as well as many nongovernmental, community-based, and faith-based organizations to 

assist victims of trafficking. Our departments have launched antitrafficking initiatives and task forces in more than 40 cities across 

the United States. These task forces combine state, local, and federal law enforcement to attack these criminal organizations. Collaboration between law enforcement agencies is done primarily 

through local human trafficking task forces. 

CONCLUSION 

In conclusion, ICE has the unique ability to use its global reach 

to investigate trafficking in persons and to provide short-term immigration relief to trafficking victims. We will also continue to expand our outreach and training efforts by sharing our expertise in 

employing a victim-centered approach to combating human trafficking. 

I hope my remarks today have been helpful and informative. I 

would like to take this opportunity to thank the Commission for its 

support of ICE and our law enforcement mission. I will be glad to 

answer any questions you may have at this time. 

51 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF EVA BIAUDET, SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE AND COORDINATOR FOR COMBATING TRAFFICKING IN HUMAN BEINGS, ORGANIZATION FOR SECURITY 

AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE 

Honourable Chairman, 

Distinguished members of the Commission, 

I am pleased and privileged to be able to testify before you here 

today on U.S. and OSCE efforts in combating trafficking for labour 

purposes and further measures I believe the United States and the 

OSCE should take in order to better protect our children, women 

and men from trafficking and exploitation. 

INTERNATIONAL LEGAL INSTRUMENTS

Perhaps even more than trafficking into the sex industry, trafficking for forced labor is addressed within a broad framework of 

protections in international instruments addressing trafficking, 

forced labor, slavery, rights of the child and human rights. 

The United Nations Palermo Protocol supplementing the UN 

Transnational Organized Crime Convention has provided the catalyst and guiding framework for the development of anti-trafficking 

legislation and supporting mechanisms by many OSCE participating States. It remains recognized by the OSCE and around the 

world as the central international instrument in the fight against 

human trafficking. The OSCE Office of Democratic Institutions and 

Human Rights (ODIHR) and OSCE Field Missions in Eastern Europe, South Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia have 

worked with a number of OSCE participating States to conform 

their legislation to comply with the Palermo Protocol. 

The Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking 

in Human Beings, which will enter into force very soon, goes even 

further than the Palermo Protocol by formalizing ground-breaking 

victim protection measures, e.g. by emphasizing a human rights 

and victim-centered approach and imposing a minimum period for 

reflection and recovery periods as well as specific services for victims of trafficking. 

These instruments are supplemented further by the 2003 OSCE 

Action Plan to Combat Human Trafficking and the 2005 EU Action 

Plan. 

I am convinced that, the combination of these instruments provides countries with a sufficient framework to address labor trafficking. Together, these instruments reflect a set of minimum international standards that countries should enact covering criminalization, prevention and assistance that apply to trafficking for 

forced labor as well as sex trafficking. 

Given the existence of this collection of multi-lateral instruments, 

there should be no confusion among OSCE participating States 

that trafficking for forced labor has to be addressed as an issue of 

priority. It is evident, for example, that countries that fail to criminalize labor trafficking in their laws, something which not all 

countries have achieved, have failed to meet the standard set in 

these instruments. 

While it is possible to debate whether international laws could be 

stronger, for example whether the reflection and recovery periods 

52 

in the Council of Europe Convention are sufficient given evidence 

about long term mental and physical health issues suffered by the 

majority of trafficking victims, it should be remembered that these 

instruments set forth frameworks and minimum standards for 

countries. Each country should incorporate and adapt these minimum standards into their responses to labor trafficking and supplement these minimum standards with whatever more is needed 

to be effective given the country’s experience and advances in our 

common understanding of what is required based upon rigorous research and analysis. 

Our challenge is to get countries to enact at least these minimum 

standards reflected in these international instruments. The fact 

that they have not reflects the continuing challenge of the need to 

increase political will, not the absence of sufficient international 

legal instruments. 

However, unfortunately, it is possible to anticipate a sizable challenge in attempting to gain political will in many countries in support of addressing trafficking for labor exploitation because of the 

strong link to economical issues such as regular migration, irregular migration and addressing the protection of undocumented 

women and children, as well as men, to diminish the factors that 

make people vulnerable of becoming trafficking victims. But this 

also is true of course regarding combating sex trafficking and 

issues of prevention, root causes and demand. Effective measures 

would require change of practices, some regulations and clearly of 

behavior, on behalf of new citizens in our societies and elsewhere, 

that is children and women and men who do not make political 

constituencies or political waves. Political change is always difficult 

to achieve, and even more so when there is no big political constituencies putting the pressure for change. Key is political will on high 

level, as have been the case also in the US history of anti-trafficking legislation. 

IMPLEMENTATION BY OSCE PARTICIPATING STATES

Most, but not all, OSCE participating States have ratified the 

UN Palermo Protocol, and even less have implemented all its provisions. At the same time, the work continues and good progress is 

being made on ratification of the Council of Europe Convention. 

Many OSCE Participating States have responded by enacting national legislation, national action plans, coordinating mechanisms, 

and national governmental coordinators. And I want to stress, that 

significant progress has taken place. Nevertheless, serious gaps 

still exist. Not all OSCE participating States have criminalized 

trafficking for labor exploitation. In contrast to the U.S. law’s approach, a significant number of countries define trafficking only for 

purpose of sexual exploitation and do not yet recognize trafficking 

for labor exploitation or do not prioritize actions to tackle it. 

Also, some countries’ legislation would not seem to readily apply 

to cases of internal labor trafficking. 

The result is that in countries that do not criminalize labor trafficking, potential front-line responders will not identify these cases 

properly and traffickers are unpunished. There also will not be a 

legal right to the possibility of assistance and protection for victims 

of labor trafficking. Moreover, if not defined in a country’s law, 

53 

there is no possibility that data will be collected regarding the phenomenon by the government and law enforcement. Without such 

data there is no possibility of policies being informed by analysis. 

All of these considerations mean that we collectively are operating from a position that is relatively very weak in responding to 

trafficking for labor exploitation. 

Among OSCE participating States, even where such legislation 

against labor trafficking has been adopted, generally these laws 

have not been implemented against traffickers and in support of 

trafficking victims. One of the challenges seems to be clarifying 

conceptual understanding for developing workable legal definitions 

in national legislations. It is necessary to ensure that national 

criminal legislation has definitional clarity, including the concepts 

of forced labour, coercion, abuse of power and abuse of position of 

vulnerability. 

There is still a lingering confusion about distinguishing between 

trafficking and illegal immigration and smuggling generally among 

many officials. This confusion seems to increase when discussing 

labor trafficking as many officials appear to have trouble identifying differences between labor trafficking and migration for economic purposes that results in sub-standard working conditions. 

This confusion undermines the possibility of building political 

will to address labor trafficking. Unless conceptual murkiness is 

dispelled, labor trafficking will continue to be unnecessarily caught 

up in countries’ concerns about illegal immigration, concerns that 

works against achieving sound anti-trafficking policy. 

To respond to this need to increase awareness about labor trafficking among the OSCE participating States, the OSCE has taken 

steps to begin to bring additional attention to the issues involved 

in responding to trafficking for forced labor. In 2005 the OSCE 

hosted a conference titled ‘‘Human Trafficking for Labour Exploitation/Forced and Bonded Labour: Identification—Prevention— 

Prosecution’’; and in 2006 a second conference titled ‘‘Human Trafficking for Labour Exploitation/Forced and Bonded Labour: Prosecution of Offenders, Justice for Victims’’. The second conference included participation from the U.S. Departments of Justice and 

Labour. These conferences connected hundreds of experts form capitals with NGOs and international organizations and produced a 

substantive number of recommendations for further commitments 

for governments to consider. I will add the draft report from these 

conferences to my statement. 

I will argue that it is now important for countries to understand 

that they have the means to begin to tackle labor trafficking. Even 

in the absence of a specific law directly addressing labor trafficking, nearly all countries can begin to address trafficking to 

some degree through the use of other laws. These other laws typically do not provide all of the necessary tools that a good anti-trafficking law would provide, but no country can convincingly claim 

that it must wait to prosecute criminals engaged in trafficking in 

their country until specific anti-trafficking criminal provisions are 

enacted. 

Another challenge is the need to examine how certain provisions 

operate in practice when viewed through a victim-centered lens in 

the U.S. and OSCE participating States. One example is the issue 

54 

of the length of reflection and recovery periods that has been mentioned above. The appropriate length is not an arbitrary number of 

months as shown in research by Cathy Zimmerman from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Another example is 

the common legal requirement and practice of conditioning a victim’s receiving assistance on testifying at trial against the traffickers or at least assisting in the investigation. The issue is that 

such procedures are a form of coercion no matter how well intended. This might be problematic under any circumstance, but for 

government and law enforcement officials to require this of recently 

trafficked victims removed from a highly coercive and abusive environment should be questioned as inherently objectionable. 

The challenge is to develop more sophisticated approaches that 

reconcile law enforcement needs with not prolonging a victim’s experience with any form of coercion even if it seems necessary to 

support prosecutions and may seem relatively benign. In essence, 

this is what a victim-centered approach means and some commonly-accepted practices should be revisited for their compliance 

with this principle. 

EFFORTS IN THE U.S AND OSCE PARTICIPATING STATES TO COMBAT

TRAFFICKING FOR LABOUR PURPOSES

When looking at how political will to fight trafficking has been 

generated in the OSCE region over the past decade, U.S. efforts of 

course have been exemplary. 

From an international perspective, U.S. efforts to combat trafficking reflect a broad interagency approach, involving several departments. International policy and funding are coordinated by an 

inter-departmental chaired by the Director of the State Departments Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons. For 

the oversight of domestic anti-trafficking efforts such a system, 

with one governmental representative serving as responsible coordinator, has not been established, even if such a model is promoted 

by the U.S. at the international level, for example within the OSCE 

framework by recommending countries to appoint national governmental coordinators and develop national action plans. It is of 

course possible that these increasingly common components of 

countries’ anti-trafficking responses, are not well suited for the 

U.S. Nevertheless, it would over time be important to evaluate 

what lessons can be learned from the U.S. approach and to what 

extent having multiple coordinating task forces involving a range 

of anti-trafficking actors at federal, State and local levels of government can promote anti-trafficking objectives effectively. 

The centerpiece of U.S. anti-trafficking legislation, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, provides broad tools to address the range of different forms of trafficking both internationally 

and domestically. Its criminal provisions, prevention measures and 

assistance eligibility apply equally to labour trafficking and sex 

trafficking. The law provides for significant prison sentences for 

traffickers and the law’s assistance provisions have been used to 

provide hundreds of victims of labour trafficking with a generous 

range of benefits equivalent to those available to victims of sex 

trafficking. Temporary residency is, however, tied to a willingness 

to co-operate with investigators or prosecutors. In short, the U.S. 

55 

law provides officials with all basic necessary tools to address 

labour trafficking. 

Regarding the yearly U.S. Trafficking in Persons report, including its rating of countries and threat of financial sanctions, and its 

effectiveness in advocating for anti-trafficking measures needed to 

be taken in OSCE countries, I believe it has been of importance. 

However, we must not underestimate that the driving force for 

anti-trafficking activity among OSCE participating States, such as 

passing legislation, has probably been a result of obligations voluntarily embraced by countries, e.g. in connection with the UN Palermo Protocol and more recently the Council of Europe Convention. For some countries, the goal of joining the EU has provided 

additional impetus. Nevertheless, the Report’s public identification 

of shortcomings and challenges has certainly pushed governments 

toward action and nourished political awareness and debate on the 

national level. 

While U.S. anti-trafficking actors have focused on both sex trafficking and trafficking for labour exploitation, the governments actions, when looking at the implementation of awareness programs, 

assistance opportunities (e.g. shelters), trainings, public statements 

and conferences, seems to have emphasized primarily sex trafficking. 

Training projects supported by USAID and the State Department 

generally have focused on trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation. As one law enforcement training manual, supported by 

USAID funding, states, ‘‘Whilst human trafficking is a crime committed for a range of exploitative purposes, this core training material mainly focuses upon the trafficking of women and girls for the 

purposes of sexual exploitation . . .’’ 

However, in recent years, U.S. efforts have started to pay more 

international attention to trafficking for labor exploitation. Illustrating this is the most recent TIP Report which highlights and addresses this issue in its assessments in more detail than it has in 

the past. 

The emphasis on sex trafficking seems to have been mirrored in 

anti-trafficking activities of many OSCE participating States. Few 

projects in OSCE participating States have addressed trafficking 

for labor trafficking directly, especially by adult men and women. 

Research confirms that most assistance efforts are linked to aiding 

victims of sex trafficking. This research, conducted by the Nexus 

Institute in South Eastern Europe, indicate that available assistance is geared toward a prototypical trafficking victim—a young, 

poor, uneducated woman trafficked for sexual exploitation for long 

periods of time and exposed to extensive and myriad forms of 

abuse. At the same time, other forms of trafficking are being noted 

and other profiles of victims are being identified. But the assistance frameworks have not been set up to respond to these other 

victims. A very specific example is shelters. Most victims of a form 

of trafficking other than sex trafficking are not eligible and not 

suitable for accommodation at most shelters for trafficking victims 

and typically there are not housing alternatives available for these 

victims. 

Thus, it is possible to observe large gaps in the availability of effective assistance for victims of labor trafficking. Looking specifiVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:20 Dec 14, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\WORK\101107.TXT HAROLD PsN: HAROLD
56 

cally at responses directed at labor trafficking, given the lack of 

systematic anti-labor trafficking activities and data collection to 

document the phenomenon, it is therefore impossible to comment 

on the issue of overall effectiveness of efforts to reduce labor trafficking. 

Further, on the project level, a meaningful analysis of effectiveness is hindered because programs, regardless of the nature of the 

trafficking project, almost never include independent components 

by independent expert evaluators. Consequently, it is impossible to 

evaluate and comment upon the issue of effectiveness in an informed and meaningful way. This points to the need for donor governments and others to integrate into their programs independent 

evaluations to review the impact of major anti-trafficking projects. 

It is very difficult to determine best practices or next steps without 

knowing whether what is already being done has been effective. 

Internal evaluations by the project contractor itself or review by 

the agency sponsoring the projects are not enough. They are by definition biased and cannot provide a long term or global evaluation 

of best practices or lessons learned for reshaping strategies or policies. An objective independent evaluation is needed for every larger 

project and such evaluations need to be a fully resourced element 

of these projects. 

Another challenge is sustainability. How can the good works of 

projects be continued beyond the funding cycle of a project? This 

is a concern regardless of whether a project is addressing sex trafficking or labor trafficking or both. Failure to adequately address 

the challenge of sustainability hinders the prospects for long-term 

success of our efforts against human trafficking. The challenge of 

sustainability is demonstrated, for example, where a training program was funded to develop a curriculum for police drafted by police and NGOs together that was intended to be integrated into existing curricula of the countries’ police academies throughout the 

region. But upon completion of the curriculum, no funds were provided to permit conducting and institutionalizing the training within the police academies. 

IDENTIFICATION OF LABOUR TRAFFICKING CASES

Compared to the U.S., many individual OSCE participating 

States have had relatively few prosecutions for trafficking for 

forced labor. On the other hand, neither U.S. nor other OSCE participating States have so far elevated the risk of being prosecuted 

for trafficking for labor exploitation to a level that is sufficiently 

high to serve prevention objectives as deterrence. 

A concerted effort to identify labor trafficking cases will be needed but will not alone ensure success. As we know, a primary criticism that has been raised regarding U.S. efforts is that it has not 

led to the level of identification of cases and victims of trafficking 

within the United States as might have been anticipated, especially 

given the official figures that the government promulgates of 

14,500–17,500 new victims annually in the United States. The reasons for this discrepancy have not been clearly ascertained, however, it is probably a combination of underestimating the difficulties of identifying victims and at least some identification methods 

utilized that are not properly targeted and implemented. 

57 

Pro-active investigations involving countries of origin, transit and 

destination are needed for effective prosecutions. Trafficking for 

labor exploitation has not received as much attention in the context 

of organizing multi-country cooperative law enforcement operations 

among OSCE participating States. Most of the examples of successful multi-country law enforcement operations have addressed sex 

trafficking. 

We also need to understand why so few victims are identified by 

our authorities and why so few come forward. But the problem is 

not only that law enforcement, labour inspectors and other officials 

have to be trained and get more resources for identification work. 

With victims for labour exploitation we also face the issue of lack 

of self-identification. It seems that desperate situations and the 

sense of hopelessness give few alternatives but to accept so called 

contracts more or less with knowledge of their exploitative character. 

Related to successful law enforcement is the issue of victim safety. Research has shown that safety concerns are one of the paramount issues with victims. Multi-jurisdictional cooperation for victim protection needs to be strengthened. Victims need to be safe 

and feel safe to cooperate with prosecutions. It is unsatisfactory to 

respond as though the threat to victims and their families exists 

only in the country of destination. We must find ways to encourage 

countries to cooperate on this. 

OSCE-supported research shows that OSCE participating States 

face challenges not only in terms of increasing effectiveness in law 

enforcement against labor trafficking but also in terms of conducting law enforcement utilizing a victim-centered approach. This 

OSCE background research found that: • Victims are requested to become involved in criminal proceedings very early and not allowed time to reflect on the consequences of their involvement (e.g. threat to safety, possibility of 

re-trauma etc.). • Victims tend to be treated as violators of immigration law 

rather than as victims of trafficking. They are not identified as victims by the State agency with whom they first come into contact 

so they are not referred for assistance or are referred to immigration services who take steps only in relation to immigration status 

e.g. deportation without consideration given to their exploitative 

situation. • Temporary residence permits are not available or are only conditional on co-operation in legal proceedings and not on the victim’s 

needs for protection or assistance. 

• Protective measures are not available or are insufficient for 

victims of trafficking for labor exploitation or they are perceived 

not to have suffered a sufficient level of abuse and endangerment 

to qualify for assistance. 

FURTHER MEASURES THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN IN THE OSCE 

REGION

By today, most countries in our region have identified cases of 

labour exploitation in different sectors of their economies, not only 

in classical low wage work such as agriculture, domestic work and 

construction, but exploitation exist even in the public sector. The 

58 

increased use of subcontractors is bringing more anonymous employers and employees, and less transparency to de facto working 

conditions. Elements that may be missing in national legislation include provisions addressing corporate accountability and contractor 

accountability for the complicity of subcontractors. In my opinion, 

it can be only rational to include the new organizing of work into 

normal labour regulation and legislate responsibility for labour conditions in the whole supply chain, including subcontractors. 

We have to create environments which do not foster or make it 

easy to abuse powers against people in vulnerable situations. It 

means not giving up on the idea that our region is a region for respecting human rights and human dignity. It means not giving up 

on our social conscience and it means an openness to search for solutions on migration and border control that are not abusive to 

these principals. It is clear to me that irregular migration cannot 

be stemmed by not protecting people from traffickers or by not providing victims assistance and rehabilitation. It is also clear that by 

not addressing the issues that pose migrants, legal or illegal, refugees or even foreign students at risk for trafficking labour exploitation, we open the field for criminal activities of cruelty against 

humans beyond our imagination. 

However, I want to point out that it always also is a moral issue 

to cut the demand for exploitation. But this ethical code of non exploitation is created only in an environment where political decision makers pave the way, and show that everything possible is 

being done to prevent this crime. 

What specific measures could then be taken in the OSCE region 

to prevent labour exploitation? Where can we identify a need for 

new commitments? 

First, we need to recognize that labour exploitation is linked to 

employment issues in general. The new dynamics of international 

production, subcontractors and more mobile labour requires adjusting of labour protection regulations to these circumstances. Special 

attention has to be given to improve the general working conditions 

in sectors where we know exploitation occurs. 

Many studies show that certain policy practices, such as linking 

visas or work permits to a single employer, including the employer 

having the sole responsibility for extension and renewal and the 

worker not having a possibility to change employer, easily leads to 

a situation where the worker either stays with an abusive employer or is likely to face deportation. From the point of addressing 

trafficking, it cannot be unreasonable to look for new practises concerning visa, labour permits and residency regulations so as not to 

create situations where a migrant is so at risk and so alone with 

abuse. 

Other labour practices which could reduce vulnerability include 

an obligation to provide written contracts when requested by the 

worker, legislation on working time protection and a right to basic 

health and education services regardless of immigration status. 

When it comes to victim protection we have to provide him or her 

tools for empowerment, to get back in charge of his or her life, his 

or her freedom. Victims should be eligible for work permits during 

their rehabilitation. When exploitation has been grave, considerVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:20 Dec 14, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\WORK\101107.TXT HAROLD PsN: HAROLD
59 

ation should be given to issuing permanent residence and work 

permits to victims enabling long term integration. 

For prosecutions to be successful it is necessary that law enforcement officials are trained to identify victims, and that prosecutors 

and also judges are trained to understand the practices of exploitation of different forms and changing patterns of trafficking in 

human beings and that trafficking investigations are prioritized. 

For the criminal the kind of exploitation is secondary, the victim 

is a commodity sold for whatever purpose there is a market. Multiple exploitations are common. It is the economics of this crime 

that keeps traffickers going. Therefore, participating States have to 

put emphasis into getting the profits of trafficking and related 

crime support services confiscated. 

From the international perspective it is evident that the level of 

international police and legal co-operation, and the capabilities to 

use mutual legal assistance tools, affect the effectiveness of law enforcement and prosecutorial responses. 

And finally, addressing official corruption must go hand-in-hand 

with addressing trafficking. 

ADEQUACY OF RESOURCES DEDICATED TO IDENTIFY AND SUPPORT

VICTIMS OF TRAFFICKING FOR FORCED LABOR

In 2006, the U.S. Government obligated approximately $74 million to 154 international anti-trafficking projects in 70 countries 

and $28.5 million to 70 domestic anti-trafficking projects worldwide. Five percent of projects are identified by the State Department as directly labour trafficking projects. According to the State 

Department, the majority of projects worldwide (86%) are categorized as having components that deal both with trafficking for 

the purpose of forced labor and sexual exploitation. 

In OSCE participating States, U.S. federal agencies have supported many projects, especially in South East Europe countries 

and increasingly in Eurasia. Twenty-two percent of total projects 

are identified by the U.S. as spent in countries of ‘‘Europe and Eurasia’’ in 2006. Russia and Bulgaria are among the top five countries 

with the most projects supported by U.S. funds. 

The question of adequacy of resources spent generally has at one 

point been answered by the U.S. State Department in the following 

way: ‘‘The 2006 Trafficking in Persons Report issued by the Department of State’s Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons noted that there were over 1700 more TIP-related convictions 

around the world in 2005 than in 2004, and in 2005 41 countries 

enacted new or amended legislation outlawing TIP. Thousands of 

survivors have received services from NGOs, both in the United 

States and abroad.’’ 

However, this answer is of limited value in aiding our understanding of the adequacy and effectiveness of resources utilized 

against labor trafficking, since it is not disaggregated by form of 

trafficking. Also, the ultimate yardstick should be the impact in reducing labor trafficking. Since there is no evidence or signs yet of 

diminished labor trafficking, it is not possible to make a finding 

about the adequacy or effectiveness of current funding. 

A second key point is that no reasonable assessment is possible 

of whether or not adequate funding has been dedicated to any parVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:20 Dec 14, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\WORK\101107.TXT HAROLD PsN: HAROLD
60 

ticular anti-trafficking effort because there is so little independent 

evaluation about what has been done and the connection between 

activities funded and results. For example, the statement that 

‘‘thousands of survivors have received services . . .’’ does not measure the quality or adequacy or appropriateness of those services received. In addition, the point made about projects that end funding 

streams that should be long-term commitments (e.g. not funding 

implementation in police academies of finalized and agreed-upon 

curricula) would seem to suggest that funding is either not adequate or could be better applied. 

The U.S. General Accountability Office (GAO), in a recently released report, has pointed out some of these challenges and it inter 

alia found deficiencies in U.S. development of information needed 

to inform its anti-trafficking decisions, as well as identifying monitoring and evaluation of U.S. projects as critical. It has requested 

U.S. government agencies to strengthen its evaluation of projects 

and impact. 

Since observation appears to lead to the conclusion that most 

funding is dedicated to sex trafficking, primarily for general awareness and identification (through training and awareness programs), 

and assistance (mostly connected with centralized shelters dedicated to sex trafficking victims and return of those individuals), 

then the resources dedicated to identify and support victims of trafficking for labor exploitation is inadequate. 

As noted above, research has determined that trafficking identification and assistance eligibility and treatment has been designed 

for a prototypical trafficking victim—a young, poor, uneducated 

woman trafficked for sexual exploitation for long periods of time 

and exposed to extensive and myriad forms of abuse. Because many 

victims of trafficking in OSCE participating States do not fit this 

description, it follows that the resources being spent are not addressing a large segment of victims—men, women and children 

trafficked for forced labor. 

A challenge will be to train and enable those who are in the best 

position to assist in identifying trafficking for labor exploitation to 

be able to do that. This includes a range of inspectors, licensing officials, immigration personnel, social service workers, child welfare 

workers, trade union members, and employees in fields such as 

construction. 

The importance of these actors to understand and recognize labor 

trafficking is clear. For example, the inability of an adult to provide 

immigration or identity documents can be caused by a number of 

things. Have all relevant officials in a country who may ask for the 

individual to produce immigration or identity documents been 

trained to know that trafficking in persons may be one of those explanations that must also be examined? Without engaging these 

professionals, victims of labor trafficking will continue to be 

misidentified and will not receive the help they need and, depending upon a country’s laws, are entitled to receive. 

Most funding has gone to projects in countries that are considered origin or transit countries. So far there has not been a comprehensive strategy of investment to ‘‘link’’ the work of destination 

countries for example in the EU with origin and transit countries 

efforts in a more systematic way. 

61 

The U.S. has funded a number of projects to reduce vulnerability 

and risks of ‘‘potential victims.’’ A recent USAID-sponsored study 

on the intersection between domestic violence and human trafficking found that very little useful data is collected and few concrete facts are known to inform policy-makers about the relationship of root causes and contributing factors to human trafficking. 

This will directly impact the effectiveness of prevention projects. 

We will not be able to effective against labor trafficking unless 

we fully back action-based research and analysis that helps transform policy into practice regarding the specific issues presented by 

labor trafficking. 

Finally, there is one segment of labor trafficking that deserves 

mention as requiring special attention in OSCE participating 

States. There is much work that still needs to be done regarding 

child trafficking, both for labor and sex trafficking. Approximately 

half of all human beings exploited for labour purposes are children. 

The awful truth is that there is a high demand for exploitation of 

children both for sex, labour and illegal activities also in the OSCE 

region, primarily of course because children are cheap and obedient. 

Reports tell about a substantial amount of missing children in 

our region. These children having many times arrived as unaccompanied asylum seekers, are often perceived as smuggled and therefore not provided adequate protection against what we believe are 

their traffickers. Research shows that these children are likely to 

be on the way to be exploited in destination countries in domestic 

servitude or in the sex-trade. Experience shows that unaccompanied children usually disappear within two days after having 

been brought into so called protection. Recent experiences in countries, where compulsory child protection measures have been taken 

in order to protect unaccompanied children, have shown positive results. 

We need to take a look at how to invest in responses to child 

trafficking in more effective ways. Children need specialized care. 

Children are not properly co-mingled in shelters with adult victims 

of sex trafficking but there are often no assistance alternatives. 

The risk of re-trafficking remains a dire problem. There is a need 

to acquire data with greater detail and disaggregated that is childspecific (i.e. not just their age) so that there is the factual basis to 

better understand and respond to child trafficking. 

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, current efforts against trafficking for labor exploitation still seem to be in their infancy. It is apparent that all of 

the challenges that exist in responding effectively to sex trafficking 

also exist with developing responses to labor trafficking. Prevention, training, awareness, assistance, and criminal justice responses tailored to the differing requirements of labor trafficking 

are all needed. Unfortunately, it can be anticipated that the challenges that have been faced in creating these responses for sex 

trafficking may be increased in the context of labor trafficking as 

it may not garner committed political will without more effort and 

may become embroiled in confusion with issues involving economic 

migration in the minds of public officials. For overcoming this, poVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:20 Dec 14, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\WORK\101107.TXT HAROLD PsN: HAROLD
62 

litical leadership and political will, to find new solutions to address 

vulnerabilities and decrease demand is very much needed. 

Concerning the important question about the adequacy of resources dedicated to identify victims of labor trafficking compared 

to those of sex trafficking, I want to stress, that even if it is clear 

that too few resources are allocated fighting trafficking for labour 

purposes, I cannot advocate to solve this by any shift of resources 

between different forms of trafficking in persons. Better identification of victims still is the main challenge. This is true for labor 

trafficking but also for sex trafficking and trafficking in children. 

Experience shows that the more resources there are to investigate, 

the more you find. The correlation tells about the possibilities to do 

so much more. 

Finally, I would like to thank you for your attention and thank 

the Commission for holding this important hearing. 

63 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ROGER PLANT, HEAD, SPECIAL 

ACTION PROGRAMME TO COMBAT FORCED LABOUR, INTERNATIONAL LABOR ORGANISATION 

Distinguished members of Congress and the Administration, 

I am glad and honoured to testify at today’s hearing, on a subject 

close to the ILO’s heart. I understand that the purpose of the hearing is to examine the scope and efficacy of OSCE and U.S. efforts 

on this subject; to assess the effectiveness of legal anti-trafficking 

instruments in combating forced labour in selected member states, 

and the adequacy of resources dedicated to identifying the victims 

of trafficking for forced labour, as compared with those directed at 

sex trafficking. Witnesses have also been invited to suggest additional measures that OSCE states or the U.S. Government to better address trafficking and the underlying factors that make people 

vulnerable to it. 

These are several key questions on a fundamental human and 

labour rights concern which—though the knowledge base is still 

weak—is increasingly arousing the world’s attention. As the questions merit a detailed response, I am adding this written statement 

to my verbal testimony. I shall begin with a review of the ILO approaches to combating forced labour. I shall end with some comments on our cooperation with both the OSCE and the US Government, and what we see as the main priorities in order to use their 

resources as effectively as possible. 

ILO APPROACHES TO TRAFFICKING FOR FORCED LABOUR

The ILO promotes the eradication and prevention of forced 

labour, as part of its broader efforts to promote the fundamental 

principles and rights of work recognized in its 1998 Declaration on 

the subject (freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining, the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour, 

the effective abolition of child labour, and the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation). A Special 

Action Programme to Combat Forced Labour (SAP–FL) has been 

active for almost six years within this programme to promote core 

labour standards. 

Many of SAP–FL’s activities have been carried out within the 

OSCE region, responding to demand from both developing and industrialized countries. It has given particular attention to trafficking for forced labour purposes. It has carried out qualitative research and surveys, and is now assisting a number of countries to 

develop more quantitative assessments of forced labour and trafficking. This is considered essential, in addition to adequate laws 

and policy coordination, in order to develop an adequate policy response. Training materials have been prepared for different actors, 

including legislators and law enforcement. More targeted materials 

are currently being prepared for, among others, labour inspectors, 

judges and prosecutors, trade unions, and employers’ organizations. 

Operational projects are also being undertaken—in Moldova and 

Ukraine, in the Caucasus, and most recently in Tajikistan—in particular bringing labour institutions together with criminal law enforcement to develop an integrated response to trafficking for 

forced labour, and also focusing on preventive strategies through 

64 

local employment creation and improved migration management. 

Employers’s organizations and trade unions have also been harnessed to these activities. 

Some lessons of experience to date can be summarised as follows. 

Research and surveys 

Good research, founded wherever possible on specific case studies, is essential. SAP–FL has issued a series of country case studies 

on forced labour and trafficking in OSCE countries, so far covering 

Germany, Russia, France (with a specific focus on Chinese irregular migrants), and Portugal. The most recent of these, prepared 

together with the Portuguese Ministry of Labour, was distributed 

this week at an EU conference on trafficking, held in Oporto this 

week under the Portuguese presidency. Other completed research 

covers Chinese migrants in Italy and the United Kingdom. An ongoing research project covers Kazakhstan, Kyrghistan and Uzbekistan. This assesses secondary data on forced labour incidence in 

these countries, and the current national and international responses. Its preliminary results suggest that forced labour linked 

to trafficking is quite widespread in these countries the response 

however tends to focus very narrowly on sex trafficking, even 

though the available evidence suggests that the majority of trafficking cases are for labour exploitation. 

Following the global and regional estimates on forced labour and 

trafficking, several OSCE countries are now being included in a 

new pilot programme to develop national estimates. This is a complex exercise, with so little official data available; the approach has 

varied in accordance with the main forms of forced labour believed 

to exist in the country concerned, and available statistical expertise. In Moldova, the ILO is cooperating with National Bureau of 

Statistics to incorporate forced labour and trafficking in its household survey on labour migration, attached to the broader Labour 

Force Survey. In Georgia, where a recent National Action Plan 

against trafficking calls specifically for better quantitative surveys, 

we are working with the Ministry of Economic Development’s Department of Statistics (DS) to address forced labour and trafficking 

in a labour migration module attached to the next Labour Force 

Survey. A similar approach is now being discussed in Ukraine in 

the context of an EU supported project. 

Training and capacity building 

Many of the OSCE countries, as either source or destination 

countries or a mixture of both, now have legislation or national action plans against trafficking which include trafficking for forced 

labour. The ILO has sought to ensure that Ministries of Labour 

and other key labour actors are involved in the drafting of legislation, the preparation of national action plans (NAPs) and their subsequent implementation. As a first stage, some key training materials have been prepared. A guidance document on Human trafficking and forced labour exploitation: guidance for legislation and 

law enforcement has been published in Russian, and widely disseminated through the Russian-speaking countries of the region. A 

further training manual on Trafficking for forced labour: How to 

65 

monitor the recruitment of migrant workers has been yet more 

widely disseminated in English, Czech, German, Polish, Romanian, 

Russian and Rumanian). As a sign of strong demand for this publication, the Czech Ministry of Interior requested ILO permission to 

issue a version in the Czech language. 

An important part of this is clarifying concepts. For many of the 

OSCE countries the concept of forced labour has been little understood, let alone the further issue of trafficking for forced labour. 

The ILO has estimated an absolute minimum of 12.3 million persons in forced labour today, over 2.4 million of these as a result of 

human trafficking. For the ILO supervisory bodies, forced commercial sexual exploitation has been considered a form of forced labour. 

Thus victims of sex trafficking have therefore been included in our 

figure of 12.3 million . Of trafficked persons, we estimate that some 

43 per cent are trafficked into forced labour for commercial sexual 

exploitation, while approximately one third are trafficked for other 

forms of forced labour exploitation. The remainder are trafficked 

for mixed or undetermined reasons. 

For the purposes of this estimate, the ILO took the position that 

the offence of trafficking has the three elements of deceptive or coercive recruitment, movement (though not necessarily across international borders), and forced labour exploitation at the place of destination. For example boded labourers in South Asia, who had not 

been moved from their places of origin through deceptive or coercive recruitment practices, were considered to be in situations of 

forced labour but not victims of trafficking. 

Others however have considered that movement is not a necessary criterion for identifying a trafficking victim. The ILO accepts 

that there will be different views on the best conceptual and legal 

entry points for tackling such coercive practices today, between 

forced labour, slavery and slavery-like practices, and trafficking for 

forced labour exploitation. The most important thing is that there 

be strong laws against coercive exploitation of human beings, 

backed by vigorous law enforcement, and also strong measures for 

the protection and rehabilitation of victims 

A more serious point is how to apply the law, when law enforcement may find it difficult to identify and capture trafficking for 

forced labour, when there are very for prosecutions and convictions 

and judges have little precedent to which to refer. Moreover it is 

common wisdom that there is a continuum from the criminal offence of forced labour, through to other forms of labour exploitation 

which do not involve criminal coercion, and through to decent work 

conditions safeguarded by national law and international standards. All of this requires clear guidance to labour inspectors, police 

and prosecutors as how to identify the forced labour practices, 

many of which occur outside recognized workplaces. The abovementioned ILO guidance manuals set out the various options, between criminal, labour and also civil law for securing penalties for 

offenders and compensation for victims. 

A further challenge is to help countries actually implement policies and action plans against forced labour and trafficking. Since 

early this year, EU funding has enabled SAP–FL to develop new 

projects in several OSCE countries. One project addresses elimination of human trafficking from Moldova and Ukraine through 

66 

labour market bases measures. Addressing gaps in the implementation of current NAPs against trafficking, it seeks to enhance 

labour market information systems in the public service, to train 

labour inspectors and other Government authorities to better monitor private employment agencies, to improve vocational raining 

curricula and promote entrepreneurship among returned victims of 

trafficking, as well as the data gathering referred to above. 

In Ukraine—from where there is extensive emigration of an estimated two million persons, both west to Europe and eastwards to 

Russia—the NAP adequately covers trafficking for forced labour. 

The project is now providing capacity building for Government officials and other partners in western Ukraine. Under the EU project 

there is insufficient funding to cover those regions of eastern 

Ukraine from which there is sizeable irregular migration and trafficking to Russia. In Moldova, the project is working to incorporate 

labour concerns in the draft NAP, soon to be adopted. It is also 

using the above-mentioned materials to train Ministry of Labour 

officials responsible for licensing and monitoring of private employment agencies. 

A further project is being implemented in Armenia, Azerbaijan 

and Georgia, together with the OSCE and International Centre for 

Migration Policy Development (ICMPD) as international partners. 

While seeking increased prosecutions for trafficking offences, including abusive recruitment practices, it also seeks to raise migrants’ awareness of legal channels of migration. 

We have also tried to stimulate more cooperation between the 

sender and destination countries of trafficked persons in Europe, 

again with a particular focus on labour institutions, but also bringing these together with police and criminal prosecutors, as well as 

business and trade union partners from the participating countries. 

A project was implemented between 2004–6 in seven countries of 

the OSCE region (Germany, Moldova, Poland, Portugal, Romania, 

Ukraine and the UK). With organizations such as EUROPOL and 

the International Association of Labour Inspection (IALI) involved 

in several of the activities, this has involved the sharing of much 

relevant expertise, and identified the main needs for follow-up 

training on the forced labour aspects. An expert meeting with the 

involvement of Chief Labour Inspectors from Europe is planned for 

next month, to validate training materials and make sure they 

meet the needs of law enforcement on the ground. 

Case law on forced labour and trafficking 

Though there have been few prosecutions to date, the first cases 

on trafficking for forced labour are now coming before the courts. 

As the impetus for this grows, judges will need to know how to 

grapple with the issues. A collection of case law is now being developed, examining how judges in different jurisdictions have interpreted such concepts as force, menace or vulnerability, and also the 

extent to which the ILO’s own forced labour Conventions have been 

used in judgments, The training materials, covering both common 

and civil law countries, are to be tested at expert meetings later 

this year. 

67 

Involving employers’ and workers’ organizations 

On an issue like labour trafficking, it is essential to galvanise 

business and trade union organizations to action. Employers need 

to sensitize their members, to regulate their own conduct, to be on 

guard against abusive recruitment practices such as involuntary 

servitude or debt bondage for contract and migrant workers, particularly when such abuses can penetrate their own business supply chains, Trade unions need to monitor and denounce such practices, to organize those at risk of labour trafficking and promote cooperation between unions in sender and destination countries, also 

to provide direct support to those released from such trafficking, 

We began some years ago with a project covering Russia and 

some Central Asian Republics, through which trade unions from 

several countries combined their efforts, organizing migrant workers and assisting them to send remittances back to communities 

and families of origin, A new country for this approach is 

Kazakhstan, where a start-up meeting was held in August this 

year to assist trade union capacity and meet the need for further 

training on means to assist migrant workers. More generally, the 

International Trade Union 

Confederation has been assisted to develop a Workers’ Alliance 

against Forced Labour and Trafficking. This is to be refined at a 

meeting of European trade union leaders and global federations 

later this month, before being presented to the ITUC general council in December. 

In some countries, employers’ organizations have now begun to 

address these concerns more systematically. In Russia, in cooperation with the European Development Bank for Reconstruction and 

Development, EBRD (which, like the IFC and other financial institutions now seeks to develop safeguards on core labour standards 

including forced labour for its private sector lending), there has 

been a particular focus on the forced labour affecting migrants from 

Central Asia in the construction industry. A survey has been carried out among employers on the demand for migrant labour, the 

treatment of migrants and the feasibility of self-regulation through 

an industry-wide code of conduct or similar measure. 

COOPERATION WITH THE US GOVERNMENT AND THE OSCE 

Our programme has been able to work closely with the present 

and past OSCE Special Representatives on trafficking, and to appreciate their strong commitment to combating trafficking for 

forced labour. I was invited to address the two high-level OSCE 

conferences on trafficking for forced and bonded labour exploitation, In november 2005 and 2006 respectively, which did so much 

to draw the attention of member states to these problems. Just last 

week, on 2 October in Warsaw, member states reaffirmed their 

commitment to combat the forced labour dimensions of trafficking. 

Moreover, the ILO’s cooperation with the OSCE against forced 

labour and trafficking also involves practical action through the 

field projects in the Caucasus mentioned above. Our programme 

has also benefited from close cooperation and sharing of experience 

with the Government of the United States. In recent years I have 

been invited to separate meetings or conferences of the DepartVerDate Nov 24 2008 08:20 Dec 14, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\WORK\101107.TXT HAROLD PsN: HAROLD
68 

ments of Justice, Labour and State, and have been able to appreciate the coordinated efforts of so many departments and agencies. 

At all of these events there was a clear concern to focus more on 

the forced labour dimensions of trafficking. Last year I also testified at a hearing of the U.S. Congressional Executive Commission 

on China. This was an important opportunity to share with Congress the impact of the ILO’s engagement with China on forced 

labour, including: cooperation with several Government agencies to 

promote the ratification of the ILO’s two forced labour Conventions; 

a project on forced labour and trafficking, supported by the US Department of State; and capacity building for Chinese employers’ organizations on the prevention of forced labour and trafficking in 

their enterprises and supply chains. 

The US Department of State also funds a project on forced labour 

and trafficking in Jordan, which seeks to enhance law enforcement 

capacity and inter-Ministerial cooperation. And the US Department 

of Labour supports a number of ILO projects to prevent child trafficking in developing countries. 

The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005 

indicated the sense of Congress that both the Department of State 

and the Department of Labour should give more attention to forced 

labour. The former’s Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking 

should intensify its focus in countries where forced labour continues to be a serious human rights concern. And the Department 

of Labour was to carry out additional activities to monitor and combat forced labour and child labour in foreign countries. 

The increased attention to forced labour is clear from the US 

Government’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report released in 

June this year. It contains thematic assessments of the forms and 

impact of human trafficking for forced labour, including labour 

trafficking in general, bonded labour, involuntary servitude, debt 

bondage and involuntary servitude among guest workers, and 

forced child labour. Among the topics of special interest are sponsorship laws and forced labour, the responsibilities of source governments with regard to the trafficking of migrant labourers, and 

trafficking for involuntary domestic servitude. Moreover several of 

the countries placed in this report’s Tier 3, particularly in the Gulf 

countries, are there specifically because the conditions of recruitment and employment for overseas contract workers are seen as 

amounting to trafficking for forced labour. 

In concluding, let me say that this is a highly appropriate time 

to be addressing such human and labour rights concerns, both 

more specifically in anti-trafficking programmes, and more generally in our combined efforts to promote core labour standards in 

all development. These are critical aspects of labour market governance. 

Just last month, an ILO mission came to Washington to meet 

with a wide group of policy makers and their advisers, explaining 

the positive impact of its past work on core labour standards in selected countries, much of this with US support. Today we are addressing the specific crime of trafficking for forced labour, the ways 

in which it can be placed higher on policy agendas, that the offenders can be prosecuted more effectively, the victims or those at-risk 

69 

protected, the vulnerable given the chance of a better livelihood, 

and the structural factors behind these problems addressed. 

I believe that a start has been made, with the very strong commitment of the OSCE, but that this is only a beginning. I have 

tried today to provide some examples of the practical measures 

that the ILO is taking, but most of these are pilot initiatives that 

need to be replicated on a far larger scale. We hope that, together 

with partners like the US Government, the ILO can continue to 

use its tripartite structure to address these urgent human and 

labour rights issues. They are the very antithesis of the decent 

work agenda for which the ILO stands, and tackling such problems 

head on as a first step is a very concrete way of moving this agenda 

forward. 

Thank you for your attention. 

70 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF KEVIN BALES, PRESIDENT, FREE 

THE SLAVES 

Free the Slaves and our sister-organization in Europe, Anti-Slavery International welcome this hearing on forced labor trafficking. 

Events organised at both national and international levels are 

often focussed on trafficking for sexual exploitation, frequently justified on the grounds that there is more experience in this area. 

This tends to reinforce the attention put on trafficking for sexual 

exploitation rather than labor exploitation. The OSCE has sought 

to challenge this by holding conferences that focus solely on trafficking for forced labor since last year. Free the Slaves welcomes 

additional attention on slavery in all its forms, including trafficking 

for both labor and sexual exploitation. 

Despite the existence of international law outlawing trafficking, 

forced labor and all forms of slavery, research by Free the Slaves’ 

sister-organization Anti-Slavery International shows that cases of 

trafficking for forced labor and labor exploitation occur at least in 

the UK, Ireland, Portugal and the Czech Republic. We have no reason to believe that these countries would be exceptions in Europe; 

these situations are likely to be just as common in other EU countries. 

There is a long list of industries and sectors in which cases of 

trafficking for forced labor have been identified. Despite the media 

focusing mostly on trafficking for prostitution we found evidence of 

exploitation in other industries, too. The main ones are agriculture, 

construction, domestic work and hospitality, yet we came across 

many others, ranging from nail parlours to forced begging. 

Migrant workers are a group at risk of trafficking for forced 

labor. Due to their often insecure and vulnerable situation, they 

are an easy target for exploiters and find themselves compelled to 

perform work in conditions amounting to slavery. 

FINDINGS

There is an inconsistent approach to trafficking for forced labor 

across the OSCE region. While some countries strive to implement 

policies that address forced labor (for example, Italy, Poland, Czech 

Republic), other governments within the OSCE do not consider it 

a significant problem. Assessments of trafficking for forced labor 

are generally poor or nonexistent, but then this absence or lack of 

information is used as an indicator that there cannot be a serious 

problem of trafficking for forced labor. 

This inconsistent approach and lack of emphasis is also a factor 

in the absence or very limited provision of protection and support 

services available to persons trafficked for labor exploitation. There 

is lack of dialogue about the specific and different needs for victims 

of forced labor, including gender specific assistance and new challenges arising. For example, while the UK Government funds the 

provision of specialised support to women trafficked into prostitution, no specialised support (either government funded or provided 

by other bodies) is available to those trafficked into forced labor. 

While many NGOs agree that while identification of trafficking 

victims remains a problem, the problem of identifying the victims 

of trafficking for forced labor is more acute. Those trafficked into 

71 

forced labor are often unlikely to consider themselves ‘‘victims’’ or 

identify themselves as having been trafficked. There is often no incentive for them to come forward to the authorities as support services are unlikely to be available and, if they do not have the correct 

papers to live and work in a country, they will be treated as illegal 

migrants and face swift deportation. In terms of enforcement, in 

the situation of trafficking for forced labor there is still primarily 

a focus on the immigration status of the migrant rather than the 

criminal nature of the forced labor in which they have been exploited. For example, in many OSCE states an irregular migrant 

who has been trafficked into forced labor will be unable to stay in 

the country to pursue a claim against the people who have trafficked and exploited them. 

In some countries, restrictive immigration controls can actually 

make migrant workers more vulnerable to trafficking and forced 

labor. For example, in the UK, the Government proposes to change 

an immigration rule affecting migrant domestic workers. The 

changes would mean migrant domestic workers could only get a six 

month non-renewable visa and would not be allowed to change employers even if they are subject to abusive practices. All the available evidence in the UK leaves little doubt that that this will increase the number of individuals who are subjected to exploitation 

and forced labor as it ties domestic workers to one employer and 

increases the coercive power of that employer to exploit them. 

In view of the above it is not surprising that the numbers of 

prosecutions and convictions for trafficking for forced labor do not 

compare in any respect to those for trafficked for sexual exploitation. For example, in the UK, trafficking for sexual exploitation 

and trafficking for labor exploitation where both made criminal 

offences in 2004 with a maximum penalty of 14 years in prison. By 

July 2007, there had been 62 successful convictions for trafficking 

for sexual exploitation with more than 50 other cases still pending. 

There had not been a single successful prosecution for trafficking 

for forced labor. 

FACTORS SUPPORTING TRAFFICKING INTO FORCED LABOR

We identified four main factors affecting the exploitation of migrant workers that are at the same time underlying causes why 

migrant workers end up in forced labor as a result of trafficking. 

The most important common factor, or rather a set of factors, to 

such cases are those of isolation, lack of knowledge of rights and 

multiple dependency of migrant workers. In general, migrant workers often lack knowledge of their rights. They feel responsible for 

making the wrong choice and are not aware of the options they 

have under national and international law. Moreover, migrant 

workers are often selected by dishonest employment agents for 

their lack of knowledge of the local language in the country of destination and are discouraged from learning it. A special concern is 

exploitation for domestic work in the private sphere that makes 

intervention and discovery from outside even more difficult. However, in other industries, for example forestry in the Czech Republic, employers take great efforts to hide migrant workers away in 

remote locations and to prevent contact with the local population. 

72 

The second factor that has an important impact is the restrictive 

nature and complexity of the labor and immigration regulations in 

destination countries. Restrictive migration regulations force more 

people to look for alternative ways to carry out their migration, 

using the services of agents or intermediaries (who sometimes are 

involved in the trafficking chain) for arrangements, assistance with 

documents and finding work. These arrangements leave migrants 

vulnerable to exploitation due to their dependency and high debts. 

The complexity of regulation in many countries explains why it is 

not uncommon for migrants, who would be permitted to reside and 

work somewhere legally, to be exploited on the basis of their belief 

that they are not meeting immigration requirements. Under those 

circumstances they can be threatened with exposure to the authorities, whereas they would in fact be safe from deportation. 

In a large number of the cases reported a third important factor 

involves threats of violence made to the migrant worker or their 

family at home. These threats are underlined partly by myths 

planted by exploitative employers and partly by the knowledge of 

what happened to fellow workers. In addition to debt bonds and violence, additional strategies used by exploitative agents/employers 

are to withhold documentation and pay or to create multiple dependency, for example by providing accommodation at extortionate 

rates. In many cases there is a combination of means of coercion 

present. 

The fourth major factor is more structural: the increasing demand for cheap labor in many of the industries and service sectors 

in the European Union. Even in cases where employers pay the 

legal minimum wage, the increasingly widespread practice of subcontracting creates opportunities for agents to withhold the earnings of migrant workers. Combined with the urgent need in many 

countries outside the EU to search for a better life, often simply to 

provide additional income for basic needs for their families, this 

provides the circumstances in which people take risks in their migration strategies. 

RECOMMENDATIONS

Policy needs to be developed at the European level to counteract 

the trafficking of people for forced labor. The regulatory framework 

of the European Union provides a mechanism for cross-border cooperation that is superior to most international situations of 

human trafficking. Further a relatively high level of public awareness and commitment create a context in which positive change 

could rapidly be achieved. Our recommendations are aimed at fostering that positive change; they are the OSCE should support and 

states should act: 

1. To ratify and fully implement the Palermo Protocol, the Council of Europe Convention On Action Against Trafficking in Human 

Beings, (countries that are not members of the Council of Europe 

can become the Parties to the Convention) and the UN Convention 

of the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and their 

Families. 

2. To undertake detailed research into trafficking for forced labor 

in their respective countries and to provide training to all appropriate people who may come into contact with people trafficked into 

73 

forced labor or migrant workers at risk of being trafficked. These 

groups should include law enforcement, immigration officials, 

NGOs, social services, unions, labor inspectors, labor providers, 

medical personnel, and the general public. 

3. To make migrants more aware of their rights in the countries 

of destination and where they can turn to for assistance. States 

should also reinforce labor inspection and other regulatory frameworks and encourage trade unions and employers to play a full role 

in ensuring that all appropriate laws are properly enforced. 

4. To establish independent bodies, like Special Rapporteurs or 

Labor Trafficking Ombudspersons, who can monitor all trafficking 

in human beings in their respective countries and report on Government’s implementation of policy. 

5. To review existing migration policy to ensure that there are 

sufficient regular migration opportunities available, for both skilled 

and unskilled work and to remove policies that are likely to make 

migrants more vulnerable to trafficking for forced labor. 

6. To develop a social responsibility law (on the model of Portugal), under which any link of the supply chain can be held responsible for forced labor within the chain. Hence the companies 

and contractors would be responsible for ensuring that there is no 

exploitation involved on the side of contractors, labor providers or 

suppliers. 

7. To examine the model regional Action Plan adopted and put 

into force in the Economic Community of West African States 

(ECOWAS) in 2003. The OSCE countries share with ECOWAS the 

challenge of addressing human trafficking for labor exploitation 

across boundaries of culture, language, legal systems, and economic 

disparity. Relevant provisions of the Action Plan being implanted 

within the ECOWAS region are: 

a. The adoption of legal provisions for the protection of victims 

of trafficking, and ensure that national legal systems contain measures that offer victims of trafficking for labor exploitation the possibility of obtaining compensation for damage suffered. 

b. Ensuring that national laws and administrative practices provide information to victims about the status of relevant criminal 

and other legal proceedings and an opportunity to voice their views 

and concerns in a manner not prejudicial to the rights of the 

defence and that the status of any such proceedings are considered 

prior to any repatriation of the victim. 

c. Adopting legislative or other appropriate measures that permit 

victims of trafficking for labor exploitation to remain in their territory, temporarily or permanently, in appropriate cases; and shall 

give appropriate consideration to humanitarian and compassionate 

factors in the consideration of permitting victims of trafficking for 

labor exploitation to remain in their territory. 

d. Taking responsibility for victims of trafficking for labor exploitation, who are their nationals, or persons with the right of permanent residence in their territory at the time of entry into the territory of the receiving State by facilitating and accepting, with due 

regard for the safety of such persons, the return of such persons 

without undue or unreasonable delay. 

74 

e. Taking measures that permit the denial of entry into the country and/or the revocation of visas of persons wanted for the commission of crimes related to the trafficking for labor exploitation. 

f. Establishing a National Task Force on Trafficking in Persons 

that will bring together relevant Ministries and Agencies in developing policy and taking action against trafficking in persons, and 

calling on Inter-Governmental Organizations, Non-Governmental 

Organizations, and other representatives of civil society, as necessary. 

g. Encouraging victims of trafficking for labor exploitation to testify in the investigation and prosecution of cases, by giving due 

consideration to the safety and security of victims and witnesses at 

all stages of legal proceedings, permitting them to remain in their 

territory. 

h. At the regional level, establishing a fund for victims of trafficking for labor exploitation. The fund shall be used in particular 

to provide support to States for the repatriation of victims of trafficking. 

Æ 

This is an official publication of the 

Commission on Security and 

Cooperation in Europe. 

★ ★ ★ 

This publication is intended to document 

developments and trends in participating 

States of the Organization for Security 

and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). 

★ ★ ★ 

All Commission publications may be freely 

reproduced, in any form, with appropriate 

credit. The Commission encourages 

the widest possible dissemination 

of its publications. 

★ ★ ★ 

http://www.csce.gov 

The Commission’s Web site provides 

access to the latest press releases 

and reports, as well as hearings and 

briefings. Using the Commission’s electronic 

subscription service, readers are able 

to receive press releases, articles, 

and other materials by topic or countries 

of particular interest. 

Please subscribe today.