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

99–820PDF 2005

COMBATING HUMAN TRAFFICKING:

ACHIEVING ZERO TOLERANCE

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HUMAN 

RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

MARCH 9, 2005

Serial No. 109–32

Printed for the use of the Committee on International Relations

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/international—relations 

(II)

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 

HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois, Chairman 

JAMES A. LEACH, Iowa 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey, 

Vice Chairman 

DAN BURTON, Indiana 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California 

PETER T. KING, New York 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado 

RON PAUL, Texas 

DARRELL ISSA, California 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia 

MARK GREEN, Wisconsin 

JERRY WELLER, Illinois 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana 

THADDEUS G. MCCOTTER, Michigan 

KATHERINE HARRIS, Florida 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

J. GRESHAM BARRETT, South Carolina 

CONNIE MACK, Florida 

JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska 

MICHAEL MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

TOM LANTOS, California 

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California 

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York 

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American 

Samoa 

DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

ROBERT WEXLER, Florida 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

BARBARA LEE, California 

JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York 

EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon 

SHELLEY BERKLEY, Nevada 

GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California 

ADAM B. SCHIFF, California 

DIANE E. WATSON, California 

ADAM SMITH, Washington 

BETTY MCCOLLUM, Minnesota 

BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky 

DENNIS A. CARDOZA, California 

THOMAS E. MOONEY, SR., Staff Director/General Counsel 

ROBERT R. KING, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL

OPERATIONS

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey, Chairman 

THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

MARK GREEN, Wisconsin 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, 

Vice Chairman 

DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey 

BARBARA LEE, California 

BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

DIANE E. WATSON, California 

MARY M. NOONAN, Subcommittee Staff Director 

BEVERLY HALLOCK, Staff Associate 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESSES 

The Honorable John R. Miller, Director, Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons, U.S. Department of State .................................................... 10

Ms. Beatrice Fernando, Associate, American Anti-Slavery Group ...................... 30

The Honorable Linda Smith, President, Shared Hope International (former 

Member of Congress) ........................................................................................... 34

The Honorable Shirley E. Barnes, President, Barnes Findley Foundation 

(former American Ambassador to the Republic of Madagascar) ...................... 42

Sarah E. Mendelson, Ph.D., Senior Fellow, Russia and Eurasia Program, 

Center for Strategic and International Studies ................................................. 51

Julianne Duncan, Ph.D., Assistant Director, Migration and Refugee Services, 

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops .................................................. 59

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

The Honorable Christopher H. Smith, a Representative in Congress from 

the State of New Jersey, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Africa, Global 

Human Rights and International Operations: Prepared statement ................ 4

The Honorable Donald M. Payne, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of New Jersey: Prepared statement .......................................................... 8

The Honorable John R. Miller: Prepared statement ............................................. 14

Ms. Beatrice Fernando: Prepared statement ......................................................... 32

The Honorable Linda Smith: Prepared statement ................................................ 37

The Honorable Shirley E. Barnes: Prepared statement ....................................... 47

Sarah E. Mendelson, Ph.D.: Prepared statement ................................................. 53

Julianne Duncan, Ph.D.: Prepared statement ....................................................... 61

(1)

COMBATING HUMAN TRAFFICKING: 

ACHIEVING ZERO TOLERANCE 

THURSDAY, MARCH 9, 2005

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS

AND INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS,

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 11:04 a.m. in room 

2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Christopher H. Smith 

(Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. SMITH. The Subcommittee will come to order, and good 

morning to everyone. 

The Subcommittee will today hear testimony concerning the continuing problem of human trafficking. The U.S. Government, as we 

all know, now estimates that some 600,000 to 800,000 women, children and men are bought and sold across international borders 

each year and exploited through forced labor or commercial sex exploitation. Potentially millions more are trafficked internally within 

the borders of their countries. Eighty percent of the victims are 

women and girls. An estimated 14,500 to 17,500 foreign citizens 

are trafficked into the U.S. each and every year. 

As Chairman of the Subcommittee on International Operations 

and Human Rights in the late 1990s, I led an effort to end the 

scourge of trafficking, and it is probably better called slavery, by 

sponsoring the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA), P.L. 

106–386, which was signed into law in December 2000. In 2003, I 

sponsored a reauthorization of that act which also became law. 

These two pieces of legislation created a comprehensive framework for combatting trafficking in persons abroad, as well as the 

trafficking of foreign nationals into the United States. As a result, 

our Government has been a leader in addressing this human rights 

violation and encouraging other governments to do the same. When 

I held the first hearing on trafficking, back in 1999, only a handful 

of countries had laws explicitly prohibiting the practice of human 

trafficking. Individuals who engaged in this exploitation did so 

without fear of legal repercussions. Victims of trafficking were 

treated as criminals and illegal immigrants—governments did not 

offer them assistance to escape the slavery-like conditions in which 

they were trapped, and few NGOs were equipped to offer survivors 

of trafficking the restorative care to heal physically, mentally and 

spiritually from the trauma they experienced. Little was being done 

to prevent others from being exploited in this same way. 

2

The situation today is remarkably improved. Since taking office, 

the Bush Administration has devoted more than $295 million to 

combat trafficking in more than 120 countries. Across the globe, 

governments are taking action to prevent trafficking, to prosecute 

the exploiters, and to give hope and restoration to those victimized 

by trafficking. As Ambassador Miller testified to Congress last 

summer, between 2003 and 2004, 24 countries enacted new laws to 

combat trafficking. Dozens more were in the process of drafting or 

passing similar laws. Moreover, nearly 8,000 traffickers were prosecuted worldwide and 2,800 were convicted. Shelters have been set 

up for victims. NGOs and faith communities have reached out to 

heal survivors of trafficking. 

In order to support the ongoing efforts that have made these 

gains possible, on February 17th, I introduced, along with my good 

friend and colleague, the Ranking Member of our Subcommittee, 

Don Payne, and eight other original co-signers, the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005, H.R. 972. This bill 

would reauthorize appropriations for anti-trafficking programs both 

here and abroad. The bill also offers solutions to a number of specific scenarios in which trafficking is a problem, but which our experience has shown could benefit from additional initiatives. Our 

witnesses at today’s hearing will focus on some of these issues and 

I will mention just a few at this point. 

For example, drawing lessons from the aftermath of the war in 

the Balkans a decade ago, and the devastating tsunami in South 

Asia a few months ago, foreign policy and humanitarian aid professionals increasingly recognize the heightened vulnerability of indigenous populations in crisis situations to the many forms of violence, including trafficking for sexual and labor exploitation. Traffickers also recognize this vulnerability. This bill would focus governmental efforts, particularly by the State Department, the U.S. 

Agency for International Development (USAID), and the Department of Defense, to develop trafficking prevention strategies for 

post-conflict and humanitarian emergency situations—strategies 

which do not currently exist in sufficient form. 

The bill would also take further steps to ensure that the U.S. 

Government personnel and contractors are held accountable for involvement with acts of trafficking in persons while abroad on behalf of the U.S. Government. Although few would dispute that the 

involvement of U.S. personnel, including members of the U.S. 

armed forces, with trafficking in persons in any form is inconsistent with U.S. laws and policies and undermines the credibility 

and mission of U.S. Government programs in foreign countries, 

there remains loopholes in U.S. law which allow such acts to go 

unpunished. This bill closes those loopholes by expanding U.S. 

criminal jurisdiction for serious offenses to all U.S. Government 

contractors abroad—jurisdiction which already exists with respect 

to contractors supporting Department of Defense missions abroad—

and by making Federal criminal laws against sex and labor trafficking applicable to members of the armed forces. The bill would 

also direct the Secretary of Defense to designate a director of antitrafficking policies to guide DoD’s efforts to faithfully implement 

policies against trafficking. 

3

The bill would also take on the outrageous situation of peacekeepers, humanitarian aid workers, and international organizations’ personnel, being complicit in trafficking and sexual exploitation. On March 2nd, I chaired a hearing of this Subcommittee 

that examined the evidence of gross sexual misconduct and exploitation of refugees and vulnerable people by U.N. peacekeepers and 

civilian personnel assigned to the U.N. peacekeeping mission in the 

Democratic Republic of Congo. Human rights groups and the U.N.’s 

own internal investigations have uncovered over 150 allegations 

against mission personnel involving sexual contact with Congolese 

women and girls, usually in exchange for food or small sums of 

money, as well as allegations of rape, forced prostitution, and demands of sex for jobs. However, to date, there has not been one 

successful prosecution of U.N. civilian or military personnel, either 

in the Congo or elsewhere. 

The scandal with the U.N. mission in the Congo is but the latest 

in a long and sad list of allegations against international peacekeeping personnel involving sex trafficking and other forms of sexual exploitation that extends back at least a decade. The involvement of peacekeepers in trafficking or sexual exploitation is not 

just a private matter involving only personal moral choices. Hundreds of vulnerable women and children are being re-victimized; 

the reputation of the United Nations is being badly damaged; and 

the lack of internal discipline is compromising security and effectiveness of peacekeeping operations. 

To his credit, the U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan has promulgated a ‘‘zero tolerance’’ policy on sexual exploitation by peacekeepers. In June 2004, NATO also adopted an anti-trafficking policy. But words alone do not protect women and children from 

abuse. H.R. 972 would require that the Secretary of State certify, 

prior to endorsing an international peacekeeping mission, that the 

international organization has taken measures to prevent and, as 

necessary, hold accountable peacekeepers in the mission who are 

involved with trafficking or sexual exploitation. The bill would also 

require that the annual Trafficking in Persons Report include information on steps taken by the international organizations to eliminate involvement of the organizations’ personnel in trafficking. 

The bill also continues to improve upon the provision of assistance to foreign victims in the United States by improving trafficking victims’ access to information about federally-funded victim 

services programs and facilitating access to counsel for victims. The 

bill would also establish a guardian ad litem program for child trafficking victims here in the U.S. 

H.R. 972 would also recognize that trafficking in persons occurs 

within the borders of single countries, including the United States. 

According to the State Department, if the number of internally 

trafficked persons within countries is added to the estimate, the 

total number of trafficking victims annually would be in the range 

of 2 million to 4 million. Although outside the jurisdiction of this 

Subcommittee, I would just mention that the bill addresses the 

trafficking of American citizens and nationals within the United 

States—which the bill defines as ‘‘domestic trafficking.’’ Although 

there are no precise statistics on the numbers of United States citizens or nationals who have been victimized through trafficking, reVerDate Mar 21 2002 10:38 Jul 08, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\AGI\030905\99820.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
4

searches at the University of Pennsylvania have estimated that 

100,000 to 300,000 children in the United States are at risk for 

commercial sexual exploitation, including trafficking, at any given 

time. 

Despite the willingness of most governments today to address 

international trafficking, few have recognized the existence of internal trafficking within their own borders. By addressing internal 

trafficking in a bill that also addresses international trafficking, 

the U.S. again will lead by example in showing that internal trafficking victims must not be dismissed by the law enforcement community as prostitutes or as juvenile delinquents. This bill would 

begin to shift the paradigm—much as we have done so successfully 

in the international arena—to view these exploited souls for what 

they really are—victims of crime and sexually exploited children. 

I look forward to hearing the testimony of all of our distinguished witnesses who have a vast amount of experience with 

these and other international trafficking issues. Our Administration witness today is the very distinguished Ambassador John Miller, Director of the Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in 

Persons, who has done a yeoman’s job on behalf of trafficking victims all over the world. Our second panel will include the Honorable Linda Smith, a former Member of Congress, and now President of Shared Hope International; the Honorable Shirley Barnes, 

President of the Barnes Findley Foundation and formerly the U.S. 

Ambassador to the Republic of Madagascar; Dr. Sarah Mendelson, 

a Senior Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies; Julianne Duncan, an Assistant Director of Children’s Services 

at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops; and, finally, Ms. Beatrice Fernando, who is a survivor of trafficking herself. I want to 

particularly express my deep appreciation to Ms. Fernando for her 

willingness to share her experience with this Subcommittee and for 

traveling to be here with us today. 

I would like to yield to my good friend and colleagues, Mr. Payne, 

for any opening comments he might have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Smith follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY AND CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS

The Subcommittee will come to order. 

The Subcommittee will today hear testimony concerning the continuing problem 

of human trafficking. The U.S. Government now estimates that 600,000 to 800,000 

women, children and men are bought and sold across international borders each 

year and exploited through forced labor or commercial sex exploitation, and potentially millions more are trafficked internally within the borders of countries. Eighty 

percent of the victims are women and girls. An estimated 14,500 to 17,500 foreign 

citizens are trafficked into the United States each year. 

As Chairman of the Subcommittee on International Operations and Human 

Rights in the late 1990s, I led an effort to end the scourge of trafficking by sponsoring the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA), P.L. 106–386, which was 

signed into law in December 2000. In 2003, I sponsored a reauthorization of that 

Act which also became law. 

These two pieces of legislation created a comprehensive framework for combating 

trafficking in persons abroad, as well as the trafficking of foreign nationals into the 

United States. As a result, our government has been a leader in addressing this 

human rights violation and encouraging other governments to do the same. When 

I held the first hearing on trafficking, back in 1999, only a handful of countries had 

laws explicitly prohibiting the practice of human trafficking. Individuals who enVerDate Mar 21 2002 10:38 Jul 08, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 F:\WORK\AGI\030905\99820.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
5

gaged in this exploitation did so without fear of legal repercussions. Victims of trafficking were treated as criminals and illegal immigrants—governments did not offer 

them assistance to escape the slavery-like conditions in which they were trapped, 

and few NGOs were equipped to offer survivors of trafficking the restorative care 

needed to heal physically, mentally and spiritually from the trauma they experienced. Little was being done to prevent others from being exploited in the same 

way. 

The situation today is remarkably improved. Since taking office, the Bush Administration has devoted more than $295 million to combat trafficking in more than 120 

countries. Across the globe, governments are taking action to prevent trafficking, to 

prosecute the exploiters, and to give hope and restoration to those victimized by 

trafficking. As Ambassador Miller testified to Congress last summer, between 2003 

and 2004, twenty-four countries enacted new laws to combat trafficking. Dozens 

more were in the process of drafting or passing such laws. Moreover, nearly 8,000 

traffickers were prosecuted worldwide and 2,800 were convicted. Shelters have been 

set up for victims. NGOs and faith communities have reached out to help heal survivors of trafficking. 

In order to support the ongoing efforts that have made these gains possible, on 

February 17, I introduced, along with this Subcommittee’s Ranking Member, Rep. 

Donald Payne, and eight other original co-sponsors, the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005, H.R. 972. This bill would reauthorize appropriations for anti-trafficking programs here and abroad. The bill also offers solutions to 

a number of specific scenarios in which trafficking is a problem, but which our experience has shown could benefit from additional initiatives. Our witnesses at today’s 

hearing will focus on some of these issues and I will mention just a few here. 

For example, drawing lessons from the aftermath of war in the Balkans a decade 

ago, and the devastating tsunami in South Asia a mere few months ago, foreign policy and humanitarian aid professionals increasingly recognize the heightened vulnerability of indigenous populations in crisis situations to many forms of violence, 

including trafficking for sexual and labor exploitation. Traffickers also recognize this 

vulnerability. This bill would focus governmental efforts, particularly by the State 

Department, the U.S. Agency for International Development, and the Department 

of Defense, to develop trafficking prevention strategies for post-conflict and humanitarian emergency situations—strategies which do not currently exist in sufficient 

form. 

The bill would also take further steps to ensure that U.S. Government personnel 

and contractors are held accountable for involvement with acts of trafficking in persons while abroad on behalf of the U.S. Government. Although few would dispute 

that the involvement of U.S. personnel, including members of the U.S. Armed 

Forces, with trafficking in persons in any form is inconsistent with U.S. laws and 

policies and undermines the credibility and mission of U.S. Government programs 

in foreign countries, there remain loopholes in U.S. laws which allow such acts to 

go unpunished. This bill closes those loopholes by expanding U.S. criminal jurisdiction for serious offenses to all U.S. Government contractors abroad—jurisdiction 

which already exists with respect to contractors supporting Department of Defense 

missions abroad—and by making federal criminal laws against sex and labor trafficking applicable to members of the Armed Forces. The bill would also direct the 

Secretary of Defense to designate a director of anti-trafficking policies to guide 

DOD’s efforts to faithfully implement policies against trafficking. 

The bill would take on the outrageous situation of peacekeepers, humanitarian 

aid workers, and international organizations’ personnel, being complicit in trafficking and sexual exploitation. On March 2nd, I chaired a hearing in this Subcommittee that examined the evidence of gross sexual misconduct and exploitation 

of refugees and vulnerable people by UN peacekeepers and civilian personnel assigned to the UN peacekeeping mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo. 

Human rights groups and the UN’s own internal investigations have uncovered over 

150 allegations against Mission personnel involving sexual contact with Congolese 

women and girls, usually in exchange for food or small sums of money, as well as 

allegations of rape, forced prostitution, and demands of sex for jobs. However, to 

date, there has not been one successful prosecution of UN civilian or military personnel, either in the Congo or elsewhere. 

The scandal with the UN Mission in the Congo is but the latest in a long list of 

allegations against international peacekeeping personnel involving sex trafficking 

and other forms of sexual exploitation that extends back at least a decade. The involvement of peacekeepers in trafficking or sexual exploitation is not just a private 

matter involving only personal moral choices. Hundreds of vulnerable women and 

children are being re-victimized; the reputation of the United Nations is being badly 

6

damaged; and lack of internal discipline is compromising security and effectiveness 

of the peacekeeping operations. 

To his credit, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan has promulgated a ‘‘zero tolerance’’ policy on sexual exploitation by peacekeepers. In June 2004, NATO also 

adopted an anti-trafficking policy. But words alone do not protect women and children from abuse. H.R. 972 would require that the Secretary of State certify prior 

to endorsing an international peacekeeping mission that the international organization has taken measures to prevent and, as necessary, hold accountable peacekeepers in the mission who are involved with trafficking or sexual exploitation. The 

bill would also require that the annual Trafficking in Persons Report include information on steps taken by international organizations to eliminate involvement of 

the organizations’ personnel in trafficking. 

The bill also continues to improve upon the provision of assistance to foreign victims in the United States by improving trafficking victims’ access to information 

about federally funded victim services programs and facilitating access to counsel 

for victims. The bill would also establish a guardian ad litem program for child trafficking victims of trafficking. 

H.R. 972 also recognizes that trafficking in persons occurs within the borders of 

single countries, including the United States. According to the State Department, 

if the number of people trafficked internally within countries is added to the estimate, the total number of trafficking victims annually would be in the range of 

2,000,000 to 4,000,000. Although outside the jurisdiction of this Subcommittee, I 

would just mention that the bill addresses the trafficking of American citizens and 

nationals within the United States—which the bill defines as ‘‘domestic trafficking.’’ 

Although there are no precise statistics on the numbers of United States citizens 

or nationals who have been victimized through trafficking, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania have estimated that 100,000 to 300,000 children in the 

United States are at risk for commercial sexual exploitation, including trafficking, 

at any given time. 

Despite the willingness of most governments today to address international trafficking, few have recognized the existence of internal trafficking within their own 

borders. By addressing internal trafficking in a bill that also addresses international 

trafficking, the United States will again lead by example in showing that internal 

trafficking victims must not be dismissed by the law enforcement community as 

prostitutes or juvenile delinquents. This bill would begin to shift the paradigm—

much as we have done so successfully in the international arena—to view these exploited souls for what they really are—victims of crime and sexually exploited children. 

I look forward to hearing the testimony of all of our distinguished witnesses who 

have a vast amount of experience with these and other international trafficking 

issues. Our Administration witness today is Ambassador John Miller, Director of 

the Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons. Our second panel will include the Honorable Linda Smith, a former Member of Congress and now President 

of Shared Hope International; the Honorable Shirley Barnes, President of the 

Barnes Findley Foundation and formerly the U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of 

Madagascar; Dr. Sarah Mendelson, a Senior Fellow at the Center for Strategic and 

International Studies; Julianne Duncan, an Assistant Director of Children’s Services 

at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops; and finally, Ms. Beatrice Fernando who 

is a survivor of trafficking herself. I want to particularly express my deep appreciation to Ms. Fernando for her willingness to share her experience with this Subcommittee in order to help us achieve our goal of zero tolerance for human trafficking.

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I would like 

to certainly commend you for calling this very important hearing 

on combatting human trafficking, focusing on achieving zero tolerance. As it is pretty clear, the issue of trafficking and the devastating impact it has on communities is one that you hold very 

near and dear to your heart and you have certainly been a leading 

voice not only in Congress but throughout international organizations that have taken this issue on. So I really commend you for 

the long reach that your commitment on this issue has led us. 

I look forward to the witnesses’ testimonies and their recommendations for how to root out the illicit industry of the trafficking of humans for prostitution and forced labor. In working toVerDate Mar 21 2002 10:38 Jul 08, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\AGI\030905\99820.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
7

ward dealing effectively with complex issues such as trafficking, it 

is critical to understand the root causes of such problems. Undoubtedly, the reasons for why and how people behave, particularly 

women and children, are as diverse as the individuals, communities and countries impacted. One thing is universal though, in 

most of the countries where trafficking is practiced, the individuals 

are victims of countries that have abject poverty. 

Until we start to seriously discuss a strategy of dealing with abject poverty, then these problems of trafficking women, children 

and the vulnerable will continue to plague us. I hope that we can 

eventually get into a whole discussion about the question of poverty. 

Prime Minister Blair has been very bold as Chairman of the G-8, 

who said that he wanted to focus his Chairmanship on eradicating 

the debt and to help to eradicate poverty in Africa. He came up 

with a plan, and as you know, Prime Minister Blair is very supportive of United States policy in Iraq, but his plan was shot down 

by the Secretary of State stating that we feel that it is not necessary to create another organization. So if we are going to talk 

about these problems, we are going to have to attempt to work with 

our allies and to try to eliminate poverty. I hope that we continue 

to work with the United Nations, and I am not sure that the current nominee, Mr. Bolton, feels the United Nations should not 

exist. I do not know whether this is our way of backing out, but 

until we strengthen international organizations, until we correct 

what is wrong, we can be a world without one, and I do not know 

if that would be a better world than what we have today. 

People, and particularly women and children who tend to be the 

most vulnerable in situations of conflict and in impoverished communities, often find themselves in situations where even the most 

basic needs are not met in these desperate situations which limit 

options in terms of formal employment. Families sometimes send 

children out to labor in far places from their homes. Refugees who 

fled their countries of origin because of violence or instability are 

especially vulnerable to trafficking. The State Department’s most 

recent estimates put the number of people trafficked from one 

country to another at between 600,000 and 800,000 and the majority of these are women and children, which raises serious concerns. 

Women are often the engines of development and civil society activity, especially in developing countries. Children are the future generations and the state of their health, safety, and education levels 

tell us a great deal about the world, the problems that we have, 

and what the future looks like unless we are going to be able to 

lay out a better plan for the vulnerable children. 

Over the last few years there has been a lot of research and work 

done on trafficking of women from Asia and Eastern Europe but 

there has been very little attention paid to African women and children. For this reason, I am particularly looking forward to hearing 

the testimony of Ambassador Shirley Barnes, as she will be sharing 

data that she and others have collected on trafficking in Africa. Because there has been little focus, statistics and data are very hard 

to come by, however, tens of thousands of people from Africa are 

believed to be trafficked every year, according to the State Department. 

8

The trafficking of children for labor is particularly a problem in 

a number of African countries; Togo, Benin, Botswana, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia, Ethiopia, Zambia, Nigeria and 

Algeria. It is the responsibility of the entire international community to work with African governments to support efforts to decrease the vulnerability of women and children to trafficking 

through programs aimed at eradicating poverty such as microenterprise and microcredit programs specifically targeting women, increased funding in these areas of education and health and technical assistance. 

The protection of women and children is an issue of human 

rights. It is an issue that we need to continue, as we are doing 

today, to focus on. Again I commend Chairman Smith for his dedication to this issue, and for our continued fight to try to make a 

difference. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Payne follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE DONALD M. PAYNE, A REPRESENTATIVE

IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

Mr. Chairman, I commend you for calling this important hearing on combating 

human trafficking, focusing on achieving zero tolerance. The issue of trafficking and 

the devastating impact it has on communities is one that you hold near and dear 

to your heart and you have certainly been the leading voice in the Congress on. 

I look forward to the witness testimonies and their recommendations for how to 

root out the illicit industry of the trafficking of humans for prostitution and forced 

labor. In working towards dealing effectively with complex issues such as trafficking, it is critical to understand the root causes of such problems. Undoubtedly, 

the reasons for why and how people, particularly women and children are as diverse 

as the individuals, communities, and countries that are impacted by it but there is 

one cause that seems to be universal. That is the problem of poverty. 

Until we eradicate poverty, particularly in developing nations, we will be forced 

to contend with its effects. People, and particularly women and children who tend 

to be the most vulnerable in situations of conflict and in impoverished communities, 

often find themselves in situations where even the most basic needs are not met 

and in these desperate situations with limited options in terms of formal employment. Families sometimes send children out to labor in far from home. Refugees 

who fled their country of origin because of violence or instability are especially vulnerable to being trafficked. 

The State Department’s most recent estimates put the number of people trafficked 

from one country to another at between 600 thousand and 800 thousand and the 

majority of these are women and children, which raises serious concerns. Women 

are often the engines of development and civil society activity, especially in developing nations. Children are the future generations and the state of their health, 

safety, and education levels tells us a great deal about what our world will be like 

in the near future. 

Over the last few years there has been a lot of research and work done on the 

trafficking of women from Asia and Eastern Europe but there has been little attention paid to African women and children. For this reason, I’m particularly looking 

forward to Ambassador Shirley Barnes’ testimony today as she will be sharing data 

that she and others have collected on trafficking in Africa. Because there has been 

little focus, statistics and data are hard to come by, however, tens of thousands of 

people from Africa are believed to be trafficked each year, according to the State 

Department. 

The trafficking of children for labor is particularly a problem in Togo, Benin, Botswana, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia, Ethiopia, Zambia, Nigeria, and 

Algeria. It is the responsibility of the entire international community to work with 

African governments to support efforts to decrease the vulnerability of women and 

children to trafficking through programs aimed at eradicating poverty such as 

microenterprise and microcredit programs specifically targeting women, increased 

funding in the areas of education and health, and technical assistance. 

The protection of women and children is an issue of human rights. Again, I would 

like to commend you, Chairman Smith, on your dedication to the issue. 

9

Thank you.

Mr. SMITH. Thank you so much, Mr. Payne. 

Mr. Fortenberry. 

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I simply wanted 

to commend you for your leadership on this important issue. 

In our modern time it is almost inconceivable that this egregious 

abuse of the dignity and rights of human persons could possibly 

exist, and I am very grateful to you, Mr. Chairman, for referring 

to the word ‘‘trafficking’’ also as ‘‘slavery.’’ I think it is a very powerful term that we can use to really continue to draw attention to 

highlight this important issue in our modern times, to show the seriousness of it. And I thank you, Mr. Chairman, again for your 

leadership in this area. Without that I am afraid this might have 

just quietly gone about its business without the type of serious 

oversight from this body and others, such as you who are here 

today, are bringing attention to this important issue. So thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you. 

Ms. Watson. 

Ms. WATSON. I have to join with my colleagues, and particularly 

with the Chair for having this hearing, and I welcome Ambassador 

Miller. 

It is an issue that I have been interested in for decades before 

I even came here. I intend to listen very closely to the report that 

Ambassador Miller will deliver and bring attention to what is going 

on in Africa. As AIDS spreads throughout the continent of Africa, 

there is a belief among some villages in South Africa that to have 

sex with an infant would cure you of AIDS. We find, particularly 

down in the Cape Town area, that this is being practiced pretty 

constantly. We need to get on that and focus on it. 

So thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this hearing, and I await the 

message that is being brought to us by the Ambassador, among the 

other witnesses. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Tancredo? Ms. McCollum. 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I also want to say that 

I look forward to listening to the testimony. I think it is important, 

as you point out, that we look inwardly to see what we, as a country, can do better. I know that we can do better by many of our 

military women, addressing the military sexual assaults that take 

place soldier-to-soldier right here in the United States. We need to 

have more action from the Department of Defense on that, as well 

as taking strong action and condemning and bringing out and 

keeping sexual abuse from happening to prisoners who are under 

our care. 

So, Mr. Chair, I appreciate the fact that not only do we have to 

work to stop the spread of this around the world, but in order to 

be a beacon of light we also have to reflect on our inability at times 

to address our own shortfalls when it comes to sexual abuse. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you. 

Mr. Flake? Mr. Meeks? 

Ambassador Miller, thank you, as I said at the onset, for your 

extraordinary leadership, and I would like to more formally introduce you. 

10

Ambassador John Miller is Director of the State Department’s 

Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons, and Senior 

Advisor to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on human trafficking. The Trafficking in Persons Office coordinates U.S. Government activities in the global fight against modern-day slavery, including forced labor, and sexual exploitation, which, as we have 

said, impacts some 800,000 women, children and men every year. 

From 1985 to 1993, Ambassador Miller served in the U.S. House 

of Representatives from the State of Washington. While in Congress, Mr. Miller had a seat on the House International Relations 

Committee, sat right up here, and was a member of the Congressional Human Rights Caucus. For his leadership on human 

rights—and he had a distinguished number of initiatives that he 

boldly sat down upon—the Seattle Anti-Defamation League gave 

Mr. Miller its coveted award, the Torch of Freedom Award. 

Ambassador Miller, thank you, and please proceed however you 

would like. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JOHN R. MILLER, DIRECTOR, OFFICE TO MONITOR AND COMBAT TRAFFICKING IN 

PERSONS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Mr. MILLER. Okay. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank all of the 

Members for being here, because you are showing that this issue 

is tremendous, and of course, nobody has shown greater interest 

than you have, Mr. Chairman. You were leading on this issue when 

very few were speaking out, and many of us knew very little about 

it. To the extent that the U.S. Government has a structure for dealing with this issue, it reflects on the work that you have done over 

the years. 

If you do not mind, I will submit a written statement for the 

record. I want to leave time for questions and I want to leave time 

for the very distinguished panel that you have, which is going to 

give you some great expertise on individual issues. 

I want to apologize in advance. As you know, every hearing I 

have come to I have stayed until the very end, listening to all the 

witnesses. Because of a previously-scheduled meeting at the White 

House, I am going to have to leave around 12:30 p.m. So with that 

let me start. 

You have asked in the invitation letter to give an overview of the 

situation, and then to address certain specific components. I think 

you have covered the figures, the up to 800,000 men, women and 

children trafficked across international borders every year; up to 

17,500 across U.S. borders. The categories of slavery extend into 

every country in the world, there are no exceptions, including the 

United States. The categories of slavery that extend to every country of the world are: Sex slavery, domestic servitude slavery, factory slavery, farm slavery, child soldier slavery, and child camel 

jockey slavery. We believe, and I think most observers believe, that 

the biggest category of slavery is sex slavery and the second biggest 

is probably domestic servitude. That is why the figures that we 

have tell us that 70 to 80 percent of those involved in slavery are 

of the female gender, and a large portion are not women, they are 

girls. 

11

That is the situation, those are the figures. As many of you 

know, figures can be pretty dry. At an earlier hearing, when I was 

reporting on some of my trips, I tried to give stories of individual 

victims that I meet with all over the world. I will not do that today. 

All I can say is that 1 hour spent with a victim who has been 

locked in a brothel for years, locked in a home or locked in a factory will make a bigger impression than hours of reports. Including 

what I like to think are very good reports from the State Department. So that is the story. 

As bad as the situation is, I do think there are some reasons for 

hope. The bipartisan leadership that Congress and the President 

has given on this issue, the broad support out in the NGO community, stretching from Evangelical Christian groups to feminist 

groups. Of course, as I was corrected the other day, some are both. 

But it just shows the breadth of support. I think that is why you 

have President Bush in his inaugural address specifically, as he 

has done so many times, focusing on this issue, saying:

‘‘We have proclaimed that every man and woman on this earth 

has rights and dignity and matchless value . . . because no 

one is fit to be a master and no one deserves to be a slave.’’

That was true in Abraham Lincoln’s time, and it is true today. 

Now, what is going on, briefly? Many of you are familiar with our 

annual report on the world. The Justice Department puts out an 

annual report on the United States. This is the vehicle that we use 

to put a spotlight on this issue, to publicize, if necessary, to embarrass or to cajole countries into doing more. In your wisdom, you 

have provided some teeth in this human rights statute. So if a 

country gets very poorly rated and then in the 3 months after the 

report they do not do things, there is some consequence, potential 

consequences in terms of aid. 

To just give you a general picture, I think there are some signs 

of progress even though the victims’ stories continue to pour in 

from all over the world. This past year, in part because of the law 

you passed pushing us to get detailed law enforcement statistics 

from every country in the world, and because of our engagement, 

and because people around the world are waking up, there were, 

as you mentioned, almost 3,000 convictions of traffickers the last 

year. Now, I can tell you 2 years ago there might have been several 

hundred if you could count them. So some things are happening 

out there. 

You mentioned the countries that have passed anti-trafficking in 

persons laws. Our latest count shows in the last 2 years over 40 

countries have passed comprehensive anti-trafficking in persons 

laws, to some degree influenced by the law that you all passed in 

2000 and reauthorized in 2003. So these are some examples of 

progress. Also, hundreds of shelters have been created and more 

education programs have been set up to warn potential victims. 

What we still do not have around the world, and I will get to 

this, is enough in the way of demand education programs. Programs with regard to sex slavery, for example, are needed that 

focus on males that are contributing to this by buying sexual services. There is a start of some good things on that though. 

12

Now let us get to some of the specific issues you asked me about. 

The tsunami brought a lot of attention to this issue. As you know 

in this East Asia-Pacific area, hundreds and hundreds of thousands 

of men, women and children have been in slavery and are in slavery, both before the tsunami and after. Fortunately, with regards 

to the tsunami itself, so far we have documented very few confirmed cases of trafficking resulting directly from the tsunami, but 

are watching carefully for this. The huge overall problem remains. 

You asked in your letter about what is going on with the Department of Defense. I want to say some good words about the Department of Defense. When I came into this position 2 years ago, there 

was no Defense Department policy on trafficking in persons. There 

was no Defense Department training. And as you recall, Mr. Chairman, you and several other Members of Congress sent a letter. I 

believe it was specifically focused on some abuses in Korea that involved our armed forces. 

Since that time there has been some significant progress. A year 

ago the Department of Defense issued a zero tolerance on trafficking directive. We engaged with them and we said this is good, 

but how does a soldier that goes to a house of prostitution know 

whether the person is a trafficking victim? 

Yes, statistically we know the majority of the women in those 

conditions want to escape, but it is pretty difficult to ask the private or seaman to say, ‘‘Well, are you a trafficking victim?’’ Of 

course, they are not going to tell them. 

And so the Department of Defense, after a lot of discussion and 

thought, has taken a new tack. They have now proposed a change 

in the military code that would make it clear that there is not only 

a zero tolerance policy on trafficking, but a zero tolerance policy on 

patronizing houses of prostitution. They have instituted training 

which is now in effect for every military person that goes overseas, 

educating him on this issue. I personally went over some of the 

training manuals with our forces in Korea. This does not mean 

there is not more to be done, but there has been some tremendous 

progress made. 

Now, when you talk about defense, and you actually asked about 

defense, U.S. defense is one component. There is NATO and in Norway the United States has taken the lead in NATO. We have 

NATO starting to adopt policies to combat trafficking and to see 

that there is proper training. 

I would say the weak link, when it comes to defense and peacekeepers, has to be the United National peacekeeping forces. Congressman Payne, you talked about how we must strengthen the 

United Nations, this is an area where we really need to help 

strengthen the United Nations. You have 103 nations contributing 

troops to these peacekeeping forces. The reality is that these troops 

come in small contingents from all over, and these countries do not 

provide training in this issue. As a result, there has been a history 

of trafficking in the Balkans. There was a history of investigations 

and reports on U.N. peacekeepers involved in trafficking operations. 

Now we have the Congo where allegations of numerous rapes of 

children by U.N. peacekeeper forces trading sexual favors for a dollar, for a little piece of food. The U.N., to its credit, did its own inVerDate Mar 21 2002 10:38 Jul 08, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\AGI\030905\99820.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
13

vestigative report. The investigators reported that it was very difficult to investigate because the peacekeeping forces tried to bribe 

and threaten them. So they had some problems. 

Nonetheless, they came out with a report. I think the report is 

summed up best with the statement that in the report they commend the Secretary-General for the anti-trafficking zero tolerance 

policy in the United Nations peacekeeping forces. Then they say, 

I am quoting: ‘‘Unfortunately, there is zero compliance with zero 

tolerance policy.’’

So this is the challenge. In his last, I believe last or next to the 

last, day in office Secretary Powell co-signed a letter with the Japanese Foreign Minister, the second largest donor to U.N. peacekeeping forces, to Secretary-General Kofi Annan. The letter was 

asking that there be immediate actions taken in training and discipline. We are pursuing that, and I see you are pursuing this in 

your reauthorization bill as well. 

The next issue you asked about was what is happening on current demand reduction around the world. Korea and Sweden have 

taken the lead in focusing law enforcement on the demand side, realizing you do not just lock up the women. As you know, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act that you authored, Mr. Chairman, 

has an approach that calls for humane treatment to victims. As I 

understand, there is legislation being introduced in this Congress 

that will provide incentives in the United States for focusing on the 

demand side of this equation when it comes to law enforcement. 

There are some educational efforts underway, but not many 

around the world. I would say the United States has probably done 

more than anyone, and primarily because of nonprofit organizations. You have a group like SAGE in San Francisco that now has 

a program—it is in your State and you may have heard of them, 

Congresswoman Watson—when a male is arrested for purchasing 

an act of prostitution, first offense they pay a fine. The fine goes 

to SAGE that conducts a school that the offender has to go to 

where he is educated on how his actions are not only demeaning 

to women, but are probably contributing to the phenomenon of trafficking. The first results of these programs are now in effect. Not 

only in SAGE, the Brooklyn District Attorney’s Office has a program. There are 15 or 20 cities now that have these programs. 

These programs are showing a very low recidivism rate, 2 to 3 percent. So we are looking very carefully at that and we are trying to 

suggest these programs in other countries around the world. 

The last question you asked was specifically on child sex tourism, 

which is a big component of slavery. Under all the protocols and 

not just our law, somebody under the age of 18 that engages in 

prostitution is a trafficking victim. Consent is irrelevant. They cannot consent at that age. 

This is going on in many countries that you know of. Fortunately, in 2003, the Child Protection Act which you all passed and 

the President signed, makes it easier to extradite American 

pedophiles going abroad, back to the United States and sending 

them to jail. I am delighted to tell you that there have been over 

20 indictments under that law. There have been over a dozen convictions. When I go around to other countries, I am very pleased 

to see their police reaction to a representative of a country that is 

14

supplying the demand for the child sex tourism in their country 

saying, ‘‘Look, we want to prosecute the people from our country 

that are abusing your children.’’ Toward that end, we have programs with nonprofits like World Vision in airports in Cambodia 

and in Costa Rica, where we are trying to educate the travelers 

that come in from the West as to the consequences of this child sex 

tourism. 

I have talked too long, Mr. Chairman. Let me yield to some questions, and let you get on with your other witnesses. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Miller follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JOHN R. MILLER, DIRECTOR, OFFICE TO

MONITOR AND COMBAT TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Mr. Chairman and other Members of the Committee: 

Thank you for the opportunity to personally discuss the efforts of the Department 

of State in combating trafficking in persons, though this term is a euphemism for 

what can more accurately be described as the 21st century slave trade. 

The U.S. Government estimates 600,000 to 800,000 women, children and men are 

bought, sold, and trafficked across international borders every year. These numbers 

do not include victims who are trafficked within their own countries. We now estimate that this modern-day slavery also includes 14,500 to 17,500 victims who enter 

our own country annually, but the numbers alone only tell part of the story. These 

victims don’t stand up to be counted; how can they? As a result of leadership from 

the President and Congress, with coordination among U.S. government agencies, 

and a bipartisan group of faith-based and feminist NGOs, efforts have accelerated 

to prevent this grave human rights abuse, to protect victims, and to punish the traffickers. As President Bush memorably said in his inaugural address: ‘‘We have proclaimed that every man and woman on this earth has rights and dignity and matchless value . . . because no one is fit to be a master and no one deserves to be a 

slave.’’

The office I lead continues to monitor worldwide human trafficking patterns and 

will issue the 5th annual Trafficking in Persons Report in June in order to stimulate 

increased action by foreign governments and regional coordination. The report has 

become an invaluable diplomatic tool for prompting and lauding progress abroad. 

We have seen a surge in government activity around the world: the passage of new 

anti-trafficking laws, almost 3,000 convictions of traffickers last year, national public service announcements and much more. We don’t think it is a coincidence that 

increased anti-trafficking efforts coincided with the imposition of sanctions in 2003: 

Thanks to the efforts of Congress, countries that do not make significant efforts to 

confront slavery face the threat of losing non-trade-related, non-humanitarian forms 

of U.S. assistance. 

In addition to the report, a second core function of our office is coordinating U.S. 

financial assistance to support anti-trafficking programs around the world. With fiscal year 2004 funding, U.S. taxpayers provided more than $144 million [Comment: 

The number seems high to me when compared to FY 2002 and 2003, even including 

the President’s $50 million initiative, but since State keeps track of these grants, 

I will defer to them.], including the President’s $50 million initiative announced before the UN in September 2003, to anti-trafficking in persons efforts, boosting our 

programming dollars to almost $300 million over three years. USAID and the Departments of State, Labor, Justice, and Homeland Security are involved in these efforts in foreign countries. In fact, 11 U.S. government agencies involved in anti-trafficking in persons efforts have developed a strategic plan to guide our government’s 

anti-TIP efforts. 

Finally, we take our mandate to increase public outreach very seriously. We are 

reaching hundreds of millions of people around the world through media, public 

speaking engagements, Digital Video Conferences, and e-mail alerts. This effort 

leverages the effectiveness of the report and assistance programs. 

Today you have requested my comments concerning what can be done to strengthen child protection in U.S. Government post-conflict and post natural disaster relief 

programs, measures to deter sexual exploitation by military and peacekeeping personnel, current demand reduction measures for sex trafficking and sex tourism, and 

what can be done to increase protection and services to victims of trafficking. 

After the first reports of potential child trafficking as a result of the Asian tsunami, we issued a statement to our NGO partners to encourage those working in 

the region to warn potential victims of human trafficking schemes. I encouraged 

15

those providing shelter and care to register and protect the people in their facilities, 

particularly children. I recommended, that women and children should not be placed 

in isolated areas of shelters or camps. I also encouraged those hiring new or temporary employees for the relief effort to educate new hires about human trafficking 

and outline a zero-tolerance policy for employees involved in human trafficking. 

Thankfully, we have seen no major evidence of a rise in trafficking in the region, 

but we encourage those working with U.S. funded programs to remain vigilant in 

their efforts as the region recovers from this terrible disaster. 

Through the combined efforts of my office and our colleagues at the Department 

of Defense, The U.S. military continues an aggressive, multi-pronged anti-TIP strategy that began in January 2004 with a ‘‘zero-tolerance’’ approach, including clear 

opposition to prostitution as a contributing factor of human trafficking. Anti-trafficking in persons training is now mandatory for all U.S. Service members and DoD 

civilians deploying overseas. Training is also available at the command level. 

In November 2004, I was able to visit U.S. Forces Korea to view its comprehensive anti-trafficking in persons program serving 38,000 Service members and DoD 

civilians. I was impressed at the scope and dedication of this program. The strategy 

focuses on awareness, identification of victims, reduction of demand, and interaction 

with local law enforcement working to eliminate prostitution and its links to human 

trafficking in Korea. USFK also maintains and updates an ‘‘off-limits’’ list of establishments deemed unsafe or associated with illegal activity. The list currently includes 600+ bars, restaurants and clubs. 

NATO has also adopted a zero tolerance policy on trafficking in persons. At the 

Istanbul Summit in June 2004, NATO Heads of State and the Euro-Atlantic Partnership (EAP) council endorsed the NATO Policy on Combating Trafficking in 

Human Beings, which reinforces efforts to prevent and combat trafficking. This policy was initially led and sponsored by the U.S. and Norway. NATO is implementing 

reporting mechanisms to ensure compliance with the human trafficking policy. 

NATO has implemented a mandatory anti-human trafficking education and 

awareness program for all its troops prior to their deployment on a NATO mission. 

Training for all 26 NATO countries and 20 EAP countries will be implemented this 

summer. 

In June 2004, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan approved a Position Paper on 

Human Trafficking and United Nations Peacekeeping. The policy, coupled with the 

U.N.’s Code of Conduct for Blue Helmets approved in 2001, promotes a ‘‘zero tolerance’’ approach for sex abuse and human trafficking by UN peacekeepers. The UN’s 

own investigative report claims there is ‘‘zero compliance’’ with the ‘‘zero tolerance’’ 

policy. Individual peacekeepers from the Balkans to the Democratic Republic of the 

Congo have violated this policy. In 2004, a UN internal investigation revealed that 

dozens of peacekeepers from the UN Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo 

(DRC) had committed sex abuse crimes against refugees there, many committed 

against minors. 

In January, the Secretary of State and the Japanese Foreign Minister sent a 

strongly worded letter to UN Secretary General Annan asking him to investigate 

the sex abuse charges against UN peacekeepers in the Democratic Republic of 

Congo and to ensure troop compliance with the UN Human Trafficking policy and 

Code of Conduct. They also encouraged the UN to adopt universal, preventative 

measures for UN troops and to urge that troop contributors swiftly and appropriately discipline and punish offenders. 

Secretary General Annan and Under Secretary General for Peacekeeping Operations, Jean Marie Guehenno, recently called for an overhaul of the UN’s training 

program and disciplinary and investigative regimes. The UN’s Code of Conduct includes a prohibition on visits to brothels by peacekeeping personnel and a curfew 

has been established for peacekeepers in the UN Mission in the DRC, among other 

steps to help prevent sexual abuse and human trafficking. I met with Under Secretary General Guehenno on February 24, 2005 and asked that training and discipline measures consistent with the UN’s official policy be put in place by all UN 

troop-contributing countries. 

Among the many despicable variants of human trafficking, a particularly noxious 

form is child sex tourism involving people who travel from their own country to another and sexually exploit children. With passage of the 2003, PROTECT Act, penalties for U.S. citizens participating in child sex tourism increased to a maximum 

of 30 years in prison. There have been over 20 indictments and over a dozen convictions of child sex tourists since passage of the law. The United States is funding 

a major public awareness campaign-which is being implemented by World Vision—

in Costa Rica, Cambodia, Thailand, and the United States against child sex tourism 

overseas. 

16

The challenge is immense, but due to the leadership of the President and Congress, an effective methodology for assessing global progress via the annual TIP Report, improved inter-agency coordination, strong NGOs working worldwide, and 

gains in public awareness, we are beginning to abolish contemporary slavery. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to address the committee. I yield for questions.

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Ambassador, I appreciate 

your testimony and, as I said earlier, your outstanding work. 

I have a couple of questions on the legislation we have introduced. Do you support it? We know you have provided some insights and counsel as we are going through the drafting stages, and 

I certainly do appreciate that. It is a bipartisan bill as you know. 

Mr. Payne, Tom Lantos and several other Democrats and friends 

on my side of the aisle, including our Whip, Roy Blunt, are all cosponsors. We have a good coalition of Members behind it, and we 

have tried to vet virtually every issue, but you always miss one. We 

found that when we did the reauthorization of 2003, that there 

were a number of things we did not get right in the original 2000 

legislation. 

Do you support it? Does the Administration support it? 

Secondly, on the interim assessments, and I do thank you for the 

interim assessments required by the 2003 act, which I think gave 

a very good—at least thumbnail, but a good look at what was being 

done or not being done on the Watch List countries. You might 

want to speak as to how well or poorly the Watch List is working, 

those between tier two and tier three. Forty-two countries are on 

it. 

Our hope is that our diplomatic personnel abroad, especially our 

Ambassadors and others, will all use the fact that that country on 

the Watch List is teetering on tier three and could very quickly fall 

into that, and then be subjected to significant penalties and sanctions with regard to foreign aid. 

So how well or poorly do you think the Watch List is working? 

And will your office make recommendations for tier three, if you 

are at liberty to say so today, based on some of the assessments 

that have been done here? 

Next, if you could, on the issue of sex tourism, maybe speak very 

specifically. We had a hearing on Cuba just a few days ago, and 

the ongoing incarceration of the best, the bravest, and the brightest 

in Cuba; people, men and women, who are the next generation of 

leaders and who have risked all for human rights. As we all know, 

Cuba is a tier three country. One of the reasons why they are tier 

three is the sex tourism and the magnet that they offer to Europe 

and to Canada for child prostitutes. There was at least one study 

done by Johns Hopkins in 2003 which brought some light and scrutiny to that horrific and heinous practice, and others that we have 

spoken to on this Committee have also spoken to that. 

But as an opening, if you could address those issues. 

Mr. MILLER. Sure. Taking them in order; the State Department 

has made some suggestions with regards to the portions of the bill 

that concern the State Department, and those portions, the State 

Department is generally supportive of and supportive of the intent, 

and has some specific detailed suggestions. Of course, your bill covers not only foreign policy, it covers domestic policy, domestic 

grants, the penal codes, et cetera. To my knowledge the AdminisVerDate Mar 21 2002 10:38 Jul 08, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\AGI\030905\99820.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
17

tration at this point has not developed an overall position on the 

bill, and if and when it does, I am sure that they will get it to you 

as soon as possible. 

On the question of the Watch List, just in case everybody is not 

familiar with the tiers, before last year there were three tiers. 

Well, first of all, if a country had a significant problem, it got into 

the report. Every country has got a significant problem, but sometimes we could not always prove it. So there are a few countries 

that did not get in, but eventually every country will be in the report. Then if a country was tier one, it met the minimum standards. That does not mean it did not have a severe problem. Let me 

tell you there are tier one countries that have severe problems, but 

it met the standards of law and punishment and serious sustained 

efforts, et cetera. And then tier two, they did not meet the minimum standards, but they were making significant efforts. Tier 

three saw no significant efforts, and that was where, if they did not 

shape up, things could happen. 

In your wisdom you looked at that provision, you looked at our 

report, and you found that most of the countries in the world were 

in tier two. It was accurate. They were not meeting the minimum 

standards but they were making some significant efforts. And so 

the Congress changed that to differentiate, and last year created a 

fourth tier. Tier two of the Watch List is sort of a warning tier. You 

are about to fall into tier three, you had better watch out. 

As you commented, there are a lot of countries in the tier two 

Watch List. I forget the exact number, but I think it is around 42. 

I think it is having a salutatory effect. I am getting more visits 

from Ambassadors of tier two Watch List countries than I got previously, and I think there is more communication. 

Our intention was, I think it was Congress’s intent also, that tier 

two Watch List countries would move up to tier one. That they 

would make some progress. If they did not, they moved down to 

tier three, and maybe in certain circumstances they would stay in 

tier two Watch List, but we would like to see some movement. That 

is what we are hoping for. 

Now, at this point I do not know what countries are going to be 

tier three or tier two Watch List, and the reason is because we 

have a schedule. Just last week the Embassies had a deadline for 

submitting reports on countries. Next week NGOs have a deadline. 

We have asked them to submit information. Our staffers are still 

out on visits, so we do not know yet how it is going to come about. 

Probably by the end of this month we will make some recommendations. There will be a process in the State Department. The regional bureaus will explain where they object to our recommendations. There will be an appeal process that goes up the line to the 

Secretary, et cetera, and then some time in May it will go to the 

printers. This report should be out by June 1. That is the idea. 

Your last question related to Cuba, and what is happening on 

Cuba. One of my disappointments has been that with some of the 

countries that were named tier three, in the 3 or 4 months after 

the naming of tier three, some of these countries made tremendous 

progress—Greece and Turkey a year ago, Bangladesh last year. 

There are a few countries where this has not happened. Cuba is 

one of them. Fidel Castro made his speech that he always makes 

18

the day after the report denouncing it. We tried. I had my office 

prepare a—as for any tier three country—a list of suggestions to 

be discussed with the Cuban Government, sort of a mini-plan, and 

our interest section in Havana tried to do that, but there was no 

reciprocal interest. So as far as I know, very little, if anything, has 

happened on this issue. 

This is not to say that Cuba has not done some things. They appear to be taking, perhaps, a tougher stance on the prostitution 

leading to trafficking, but they still have this huge Government-related child sex tourism industry, which is, as far as we are concerned, very bad. 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Payne. 

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much. 

With the various definitions of various countries as it relates to 

what constitutes prostitution and trafficking, have we found it difficult to get many of the countries on the same page as it relates 

to their own laws? 

Mr. MILLER. A good question. A lot of countries we get on the 

same page, and sometimes there is confusion. I will give you some 

examples. 

The law, our law, and the U.N. protocol, makes it very clear that 

an adult that is subject to sexual exploitation against her will is 

a trafficking victim and it makes it very clear that a child that is 

involved in sexual exploitation is a trafficking victim. Sometimes 

with countries there are differences, which I think we are in the 

process of clarifying. Countries that have legalized prostitution as 

part of a sex industry that they are promoting may not take as 

tough an interpretation of the laws as we do. Sometimes countries 

are under the impression—there was an example last year, I think 

it was New Zealand—that if slavery was internal, than it was not 

trafficking. So we have to educate there. 

Trafficking does not have to be across borders. It is perceived as 

such, and there is a lot of it, but you can have internal trafficking. 

Somebody can be in slavery right in their country. There are plenty 

of people, particularly in the forced labor area, that have not 

crossed borders, so that is a problem. 

We have another definitional problem, Congressman Payne. I 

think some countries—it is a minority but for example some Latin 

American countries—have conflated smuggling and trafficking. 

They believe that if they are doing something about smuggling of 

illegal aliens, this is the same as doing something about trafficking. 

Now, there is some overlap, some illegal aliens are trafficking victims, but they are not one and the same. Somebody who comes in 

legally to this country can be a trafficking victim and somebody 

that comes in illegally does not have to be a trafficking victim. 

So there are definitional challenges. 

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much. 

As a matter of fact, in New Jersey, we have a problem of Eastern 

Europeans in the State on trafficking. We started a safe house in 

Newark with the archdioceses there where we are trying to have 

a place where people could go if they are in fear of the traffickers. 

I just have another quick question. 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. 

19

Mr. PAYNE. Since we know that the people, particularly women 

and children, that are most vulnerable are in areas where there 

are conflict situations and instability, I wonder if we have any special focus on those areas as a Government and whether there is 

any increased funding that may be available as we look into these 

unstable places. 

Mr. MILLER. We are trying to put more focus there, and I notice 

in the Reauthorization Bill you are basically calling for more focus, 

and there is no question there is an increase, for example, in child 

soldier slavery in these conflict situations. 

One of the challenges has been that if you look at the law it basically focuses on governments and what governments can do. In a 

lot of these conflict areas, the government cannot do much because 

they do not control what is going on. This does not mean that we 

should not address the problem. It means, I think, we have to 

rethink how we are approaching this. Maybe it is not all done 

through the government that just controls a piece of the country. 

This is going to take some more thought. 

But clearly, if we are serious about abolishing slavery, we cannot 

ignore the slavery in conflict situations. 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Tancredo. 

Mr. TANCREDO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ambassador Miller. 

We have given the State Department significantly more discretion in trying to determine who qualifies for the status of someone 

who is being trafficked, and it is a very difficult thing to do. I actually was able to sit in once on, I would say, an interrogation, 

though another case, but an interview with someone who was first 

claiming that she was trying to escape an abusive spouse and had 

come across the line, in this case illegally. Then during the questioning period the person who was actually discussing this with her 

sort of led her, in a way, into this other issue of trafficking. 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. 

Mr. TANCREDO. Kind of saying, ‘‘Well, there is another way you 

can get in essentially, you know, claim this status.’’ I was surprised 

by that, but I just wondered, what criteria do you use? Is there 

something that is said? I know that you have greater discretion, as 

I say, so I wonder how carefully we are, I guess, reviewing whatever kind of information that is provided, and in fact, what is the 

criteria for determining this? 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. Okay. I will answer the question starting with 

a caveat. I suspect some people from the Justice Department and 

the Homeland Security Department that are involved in that kind 

of questioning are far more knowledgeable. But the definitions 

start with the law. In the reauthorization, you are dealing with 

some definitions. So we get the definitions from the Congress and 

you define sex trafficking, you defined involuntary servitude, debt 

bondage, coercion, et cetera. 

Mr. TANCREDO. But it is the discretion that I am going to. 

Mr. MILLER. Well, now, okay. I have not sat in on this kind of 

questioning that you are talking about. It sounds like you are concerned that they were taking too much discretion. 

20

Mr. TANCREDO. Well, in particular, the State Department has 

been given this discretion by us, but I think it is listed here as 

Public Law 106–382. 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. 

Mr. TANCREDO. Given greater discretion in determining the criteria. 

Mr. MILLER. Well, we do not decide in the United States who is 

a trafficking victim. If you are talking about U.S. prosecutions and 

working and giving temporary visas, the State Department does 

not deal with that. That is done with Health and Human Services 

and the Justice Department and DHS. 

We have our role, and it is a serious one, it is to question these 

applicants abroad, to make sure that we are not letting trafficking 

victims into the country, and the answer there is that if there is 

a suspicion that they are trafficking victims, they should not be admitted. 

Mr. TANCREDO. Now, if they are a victim? 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. If they are, for example, if you are a counsellor 

office and a gentleman of around 50 or 60 comes along with 2 girls 

that are 14 and 16, lights go on. 

Mr. TANCREDO. Yes. 

Mr. MILLER. Or even if the gentleman is 30 years old. There are 

questions that they have been trained to ask. Are you really family? Can you prove they’re family? Why are you going there? 

To me, and you may be on to something I do not know about, 

but to me, and I am just giving you my perspective, Congressman, 

from what I hear from law enforcement people, it is not so much 

the definitions that are the problem, it is developing skilled sensitive questioning based on the definitions. 

Mr. TANCREDO. Yes. 

Mr. MILLER. Because police, immigration officials, and counsellor 

officials all over the world, whatever country, you really need some 

sophisticated training to ask the right questions. But I would like 

to pursue this further. If there is a key provision where you think 

the State Department is taking too much discretion, I would be 

happy to follow up on it. 

Mr. TANCREDO. I do not know that that is the case. I just simply 

wanted to get your impression of, if you have discretion, on what 

basis do you make any decisions. 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. Yes. Well, when I look at these definitions, 

they do not seem to allow much discretion as far as I am concerned. 

Mr. TANCREDO. Agreed. 

Mr. MILLER. When we are applying the law, we are trying to 

apply it as literally as we can in looking at the situations in different countries. 

Mr. TANCREDO. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Ambassador. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. Ms. Watson. 

Ms. WATSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and again welcome, 

Ambassador Miller. 

I just returned from a codel going to Chad and the Sudan, and 

we were among 250,000 refugees. We were told that most of the 

21

women there had been raped. Now we had the AU and we had 

some from the U.N. and all, but we certainly do not have enough 

of our people there. 

I am wondering, Is there any attempt to work with the administration in the Sudan on this issue? 

Now, we have a bigger issue, and that has been the ethnic 

cleansing, and the genocide, but it is a feature that we need to 

focus on as they have come over to Chad as refugees, and their survival. So that is one issue. The other issue is labor trafficking, too. 

Can you comment on those two issues, and what is being done? 

Mr. MILLER. First, on the Sudan, Congresswoman Watson, you 

have correctly identified, basically, at least three. There are probably a lot more problems in the Sudan, but there is the genocide, 

there is the rape, and there is the slavery, and the three can overlap at times too. 

Sudan, long before the outbreak at Darfur, there was a very significant slavery problem. Sudan, a couple of years ago, was rated 

tier three. There were NGO reports that thousands had been abducted and were being held in slavery. 

So along with the challenge of stopping ethnic cleansing, along 

with the challenge of stopping rape, if there is to be peace in the 

Sudan, not only must the practices of slavery end, but those that 

were taken into slavery—in many cases transported hundreds, 

hundreds of miles—they have to be freed and allowed to go back 

to their villages. This is going to take a Herculean effort on the 

part of so many people, I suspect, including you and Congress as 

well as us in the State Department. 

The second question you asked about forced labor. 

Ms. WATSON. Yes. 

Mr. MILLER. This remains a serious problem, and in your wisdom 

in this law, you have provisions that deal not just with sex trafficking, but forced labor trafficking. 

I think the seriousness of it varies from country to country. In 

the United States, just to give you an example, the Berkeley 

Human Rights Law Center and Kevin Bales, who is a scholar in 

this area, just did a study of victims in the United States. These 

are estimates. I do not think they are claiming it is a scientific 

count because the victims do not stand up in a line to be counted. 

They found that of the victims in the United States, I think it was 

8 percent were factory slaves, 9 percent were farm slave victims—

it might have been the reverse—and then they had domestic servitude victims in the high 20s, and sex slavery victims up around 

44 or 46 percent. 

I think in some countries in the world it varies. I think there are 

probably some countries, for example, in Latin America, perhaps 

Brazil, where the proportion of farm slave victims would be higher 

than that, significantly higher if you were looking at a victim profile. I think there are some countries in East Asia-Pacific, for example, Malaysian Singapore, where the percentage of domestic servitude victims would be higher than that Berkeley Human Rights’ 

United States study. I think there are some countries in Western 

Europe where the percentage of sex slavery victims would be way 

higher than that 44 or 46 percent. 

22

Last summer I was visiting Czech Republic and Germany and I 

remember asking German officials, ‘‘What do you think, how would 

you break down the categories of slavery?’’ They said, ‘‘Oh, sex 

slavery, 80 to 90 percent.’’

So those percentages vary country to country. 

Ms. WATSON. Let me just respond, if I have a minute left, Mr. 

Chairman. 

I have approached the Secretary of State about going back with 

a codel, a high-powered one to the Sudan on all those issues that 

you had mentioned. But you know, we might be able to use the 

companies that have built the pipeline in Chad to be like the unofficial official, shall I say a diplomat there, like we do Coca-Cola in 

many of the countries where they are. 

We did tour the pipeline, and I think if they could have on their, 

shall I say ‘‘social responsibility’’ side, assist us until we can really 

sit down with the Sudanese and work something out. That might 

be a way to go, and I just throw that out. We can talk about it 

later. 

Mr. MILLER. I would be delighted to talk. 

Ms. WATSON. But we have to use every means that we have to 

attack these problems. 

Mr. MILLER. Yes, and you are on to something when you talk 

about involving the private sector given the role they play in a particular country. 

Ms. WATSON. Exactly. 

Mr. MILLER. In West Africa, there are nongovernment organizations that involve the chocolate industry, the producers of the finished products, in an effort to try to address the farm slavery on 

the cocoa farms. 

Ms. WATSON. Sure. 

Mr. MILLER. We have been trying this past year to involve our 

tourism industry in cooperation. I am talking about airlines and 

cruise lines and hotels, and we have had one tremendous success 

with Carson Wagonlit, and we are hoping to build on that. 

But I would be delighted to talk with you further on this. 

Ms. WATSON. Yes, and you know, in South Africa, DaimlerChrysler, for instance, has a program to prevent AIDS and to monitor AIDS, and they put their own together because of their workers. 

The pipeline employees, maybe 500, are natives around in that 

area, and they seem to be very interested. So we need to talk about 

that, and to see if we cannot use the private sector industries that 

you just mentioned more effectively in these countries where we 

cannot always get there ourselves. As a democratic diplomatic 

group, we might be able to do this through the businesses, so I 

would like to have further conversation on this. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you. 

Mr. Flake. 

Mr. FLAKE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for the testimony. 

You mentioned with regard to Cuba—and I am sorry, I missed 

the hearing that we had last week on this subject—that the interest section had sought a response from the Cuban Government, 

23

and had not received any, or something to that effect. It is my understanding that our interest section in Cuba is prescribed from actually contacting government officials there. I can be corrected on 

that if that is the case. I know we have some cooperation with regard to drug trafficking, we are allowed, but it is not at the level 

of the interest section. 

What is our policy, as you see it there, and would it be aided by 

an ability to more easily contact those officials? 

Mr. MILLER. Well, first of all, I obviously have some checking to 

do because I was under the impression that we submitted suggestions and a mini-plan. I do not know how exactly it was, whether 

an interest section official did it or it went through the SWISA, I 

do not know how. 

Mr. FLAKE. Okay. 

Mr. MILLER. With that I do not know how it was done, and I will 

check on that. 

Well, you are above my pay grade when we are talking about relations with Cuba. I am interested in ending slavery and throwing 

traffickers in jail throughout the world. So I would be delighted to 

see Cuba make progress on this issue regardless of all their other 

problems, yes. 

Mr. FLAKE. Yes. Well, I am not at all confident that they will. 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. 

Mr. FLAKE. There are so many other human rights abuses and 

problems there, and I am not sure they will make progress here. 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. 

Mr. FLAKE. But it seems to me our policy of just saying that if 

we contact you or try, it would be, in this instance, counterproductive because we have actually had a fair amount of cooperation on the drug side. 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. 

Mr. FLAKE. And that has been productive, and perhaps it would 

be here as well. And perhaps there are contacts that I am not 

aware of that are allowed, but I believe that our policy is with our 

interest section there that they are prescribed from any contact 

with government officials. 

Mr. MILLER. Okay. Well, let me get back to you to discuss this 

further. 

Mr. FLAKE. That would be appreciated. Thank you so much. 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. 

[The information referred to follows:]

WRITTEN RESPONSE RECEIVED AFTER THE HEARING FROM THE HONORABLE JOHN R. 

MILLER TO QUESTION ASKED BY THE HONORABLE JEFF FLAKE, A REPRESENTATIVE

IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA

The U.S. Interests Section (USINT) regularly shares information through diplomatic channels with the Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Castro regime restricts USINT’s interactions with other Cuban government ministries. In June 2004, 

the interest section delivered a copy of the Trafficking in Persons Report on Cuba 

to the Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which the Cubans promptly rejected.

Mr. SMITH. Ms. McCollum. 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

You went into great length talking about what the U.S. Department of Defense is working on, and we have defense contractors in 

many countries, and in the bill on page 34, we start with the DeVerDate Mar 21 2002 10:38 Jul 08, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\AGI\030905\99820.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
24

partment of Defense, Director of Anti-Trafficking policies, and it is 

pretty prescriptive in here. It says the Secretary may not be assigned any responsibilities that are not directly related to the trafficking in persons. 

So I am wondering why we need—or in your estimation do we 

need to have a new position created at the level of Director of Antitrafficking Policies at the rank of Assistant Secretary? Could there 

not be some liaison work or someone assigned from the Department of State to work on that? 

Because the Department of State is going to compile the report, 

it is our Government’s report, it is our Government’s policy. I am 

just wondering why we are creating what could potentially be a 

silo, another bureaucracy that the State Department has to go 

through there to receive information. It is, in my opinion, Mr. 

Chair, that quite often, especially in this Committee, we can get information from the State Department, but we just had a hearing 

recently in which GAO could not even get information from the Department of Defense. So I am wondering why we are segregating 

this out. 

Mr. MILLER. Well, just reading this section quickly, I do not 

think this has to do with our report. I think it has to do with implementing Defense Department anti-trafficking policies within the 

Department of Defense, and—you know, whether that position is 

good or bad—I think I would have to defer to the Department of 

Defense or the Administration to come to a decision on that. I can 

attest that there has been increasing progress and cooperation on 

this issue in the Department of Defense, but I am not knowledgeable enough to know the pros and cons of this position. 

Mr. SMITH. Would my friend yield? 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Yes. 

Mr. SMITH. The genesis of the original law when we wrote it was 

to create an Interagency Task Force. The Secretary of State, the 

Attorney General, and other high level people in the bureaucracy 

were all part of this group. Then, their designees obviously do 

much of the heavy lifting, although they were at, as was I, the first 

meeting where Secretary of State Colin Powell called to order this 

group of very high level bureaucrats within the Administration. We 

really believe we left out the Department of Defense inadvertently. 

When we did our request a couple of years ago and found out that 

trafficking victims by the hundreds from Russia, the Philippines, 

and other countries were in very close proximity to our military 

bases in South Korea, it became very clear that there was a lack 

of knowledge and a lack of commitment to mitigating and hopefully 

ending the abuse of women outside of these military bases in South 

Korea. 

We also asked the Inspector General to look at what was going 

on vis-a-vis Bosnia and other places where United States deployments were. The reports that came back were that there is no set 

policy. There needs to be. As a matter of fact, to his credit, President Bush put into place a zero tolerance policy with regards to our 

military. The uniform military code of conduct is being written 

right now as we meet to not only preclude trafficking and complicity in it, but prostitution as well. The other twin, if you will, 

the evil twin which is very often so closely associated with human 

25

trafficking, that is being written right now so that there is a zero 

tolerance policy. 

We had a hearing on this last year. We did it jointly with the 

Helsinki Commission, which I chair, and the Armed Services Committee, which Duncan Hunter chairs. We heard from General Leon 

LaPorte, who is the Supreme Allied Commander in South Korea; 

Inspector General Joseph Schmitz; and Ambassador John Miller 

and others. General LaPorte has a very strong proactive, best-practices for the whole chain of command as to what they can do to ensure that our soldiers are not compliant in any way, shape or form 

in this. Not to have the DoD people properly tasked, funded, 

resourced with the right kind of personnel, out of a $400 billion 

budget, it seems to me a drop in the bucket to make sure that we 

have a very proactive unit within the Department of Defense. 

I saw it even further, if the gentlelady would continue yielding, 

when we traveled over to Brussels and asked that the NATO have 

a zero tolerance policy. We met with a number of Ambassadors and 

a number of military people. The military people had significant 

push back, to my chagrin and dismay, not ours but some of the 

other countries that were in these meetings. You know, they do not 

get it and we tried to be as forceful as we could. Ambassador R. 

Nicholas Burns did an outstanding job in promoting the idea of 

zero tolerance and full compliance with that zero tolerance policy. 

They now have it. 

So it seems to me wherever there are soldiers gathered, the traffickers will see that as a payday for them and will bring women 

in. Bases will become a magnet for these trafficked women. We 

found further, that the way the Russian women were getting there 

and the others into South Korea, for example, was under the ruse 

of this bogus entertainment visa where the South Korean Government allowed the mafia and the mob to bring these people in. We 

heard from Russian women who said they took their passports as 

soon as they came in, and now they are working in this brothel and 

cannot leave. 

To its credit, the South Korean Government has passed landmark legislation across the board on trafficking and prostitution. 

They got rid of this egregious faction known as the ‘‘entertainment 

visa,’’ which was nothing but a means of facilitating trafficked 

women into South Korea. We want to do even more. We see with 

the peacekeeping, they are not United States peacekeeping, but in 

the Congo everyone talks a good game, but where is the enforcement? Where is the penalty phase? 

Again, I want to congratulate Ambassador Miller for being so aggressive on the military side as well. Went in the building, so to 

speak, to ensure that these things happen. 

I do thank my friend for yielding. 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Well, Mr. Chair, the point that I am concerned 

about is that we have had a great deal of problems getting information from the Department of Defense even with, quite often, abuses 

that are committed at our military academies. So, by having the 

Department of Defense have, in my opinion, what appears to be 

sole control of this issue and then either saying it is classified or 

they do not have to share it with State or if we call them in, they 

say, ‘‘No, that is going to be discussed in the Military Affairs ComVerDate Mar 21 2002 10:38 Jul 08, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\AGI\030905\99820.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
26

mittee because it is DoD.’’ I am just concerned that be fully vetted 

out before we create a Director of Anti-trafficking Policies at the 

rank of Assistant Secretary. That, in fact, you are getting what you 

think you are going to get rather than have a barrier put up or 

being told, ‘‘No, we are handling that.’’ The State Department and 

Ambassador Miller’s people do not need to be coming in, looking at 

or working with, because we have seen a lot of division lately between the State Department and the Defense Department. In my 

opinion at times, and I know that is not the intent of the authors’ 

language, the Defense Department is literally taking things away 

from the Department of State, and saying, ‘‘No, this is ours now.’’

Mr. MILLER. Yes. 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. So I have a concern about the way things will 

be reported back by creating another bureaucracy, a bureaucracy 

in the Department of Defense, which has not been very forthcoming 

at all with either the House Armed Services Committee or with 

this Committee with many questions that we have had put forth 

dealing with abuse, sexual abuse in particular. That was my point, 

Mr. Chair. 

Mr. SMITH. I appreciate that. If the gentlelady would yield, I assume that there will be a goodwill effort until shown otherwise. 

The same could have been said about everything we are doing with 

the State Department, that they will just take this report, and perhaps because good relations with nations is important, paper over 

the problems on human rights in general and sexual trafficking 

and all forms of trafficking in particular. Nothing could have been 

further from the truth in its implementation. 

One of the keys is having someone at the helm like Ambassador 

Miller, people who get it, and who understand that this is a heinous form of human rights abuse. There is already an effort underway within the Department of Defense, the problem is they do not 

have the clout. They do not have the resources to do the job where 

it is commensurate with the need. 

Of course, we will do very strong oversight on this. I have spoken 

to the Chairman of the Armed Services Committee who, again, cochaired that hearing we had last year, who will do vigorous oversight on it as well. Until shown otherwise, I think we need to say 

that we need more eyes and ears, more proactive individuals who 

will fight the inside battle so it does not get put on a back burner 

where nothing happens on trafficking, or boys will be boys, and 

that whole modus operandi will take hold. 

That is the kind of push back we got from some of the NATO 

people. That is what we got at the OSCE when we had a provision 

dealing with trafficking in the militaries. We got a consensus from 

54 of the countries, only to have one country, Russia, break that 

consensus. We are going right back at the ministerial to try to fight 

to get them on board and shame them into it, if necessary. Why 

is their military exempt from a code of conduct that should apply 

to every military man or women anywhere in the world? 

Mr. MILLER. I think this is really a—excuse me. 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. It is a managerial problem. 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. I think that the Chair and I have different experiences with the Department of Defense. Until the Department of 

27

Defense can prove to me that it can put its house in order, and it 

has not proven to me that it can and the State Department has 

been aggressive, has a protocol, and has respect in this area, I just 

in my opinion right now feel more confident with the State Department taking the lead on the issue. So we will work on this as we 

move forward, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. MILLER. Yes. Madam Congresswoman, just to avoid any confusion, the State Department does not direct the Department of Defense in its anti-trafficking policy. I think they have given us good 

cooperation and we work with them. 

I would say from your point of view, whether you set up a position within the Defense Department or you do not, you, and I assume the President and the Secretary of Defense, want to see that 

anti-trafficking, training, and policies are carried out, and the question is: What is the best way to get them carried out? But it is not 

like we are going to take over Defense Department training. That 

is not something we can do. 

Mr. SMITH. Could I ask the Ambassador, do you support the provision in the bill dealing with the military? 

Mr. MILLER. Which provision? 

Mr. SMITH. The provision dealing with the establishment of an 

office and a designated person? 

Mr. MILLER. As I said, this is not something that we have taken 

a position on, and I think this is something for the Administration 

and the Defense Department to look at. We have gotten very good 

cooperation from the Department of Defense in the last year or 2. 

That I can say. 

Mr. SMITH. Yes, Mr. Tancredo. 

Mr. TANCREDO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, just one other question. 

We have all been made aware of the incredible problems in Mexico and just across the board, the many women who have been 

found dead in Juarez, the fact that even the U.N. has now established a commission, provided some sort of report or provided some 

sort of leadership in this area, but are you, number one, able to tell 

us if there has been any progress made in trying to identify the 

perpetrators, what is happening down there, and whether or not 

this is being dealt with appropriately? 

Mr. MILLER. I cannot give you an answer on that specific case. 

I can tell you that I have great concern about the trafficking situation in Mexico. Mexico is on the tier two Watch List. I was just 

down in Mexico last November, I think. I am hoping that Mexico 

will actually get some convictions of Mexican traffickers. There 

were a lot of investigations and prosecutions at that time, but no 

convictions. 

I hope that better relations will be set up between NGOs and the 

Mexican Government to provide protection to victims. We are in 

dialogue with the Government of Mexico. We recognize that as 

their neighbor we share responsibility for the challenge, but there 

are a lot of things that needs to be done in Mexico to fight trafficking of persons. 

Mr. TANCREDO. I understand that the State Department report 

recently identified some serious concerns about corruption in the 

customs. 

28

Mr. MILLER. Yes. 

Mr. TANCREDO. All the officials that deal with this issue down 

there are quite corrupt. I do not know, but it could be an enormous 

problem all over the world, but here it is on our door step and making matters even worse. I just wondered if you had any observations. 

Mr. MILLER. No, I do not have any specifics on that case. 

Mr. TANCREDO. Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. Let me ask, Mr. Ambassador, I know you have got 

to run but one very brief final question. 

Nearly a year and a half after the enactment of the 2003 legislation, have Federal agencies implemented the mandate in the law 

that incorporate termination clauses in Federal grants, contracts 

and cooperative agreements if a contractor engages in trafficking? 

Mr. MILLER. As far as I know all agencies are aware of this law. 

We are in the process of drafting a regulation that will more thoroughly and in more detail implement the law. This is being discussed at the senior policy operating group. Your question is getting at whether any contracts have been terminated, and I am not 

aware of a contract that has been terminated on this basis, but I 

am not aware of a contractor who was in violation of this provision. 

If you hear of such, please let me know immediately. 

Mr. SMITH. Ambassador, thank you. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. I know you have to go now. 

Mr. MILLER. That is all right. You have got a great panel, people 

that have been on the frontlines on this issue, including a former 

colleague of yours, Linda Smith. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Ambassador. 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Mr. Chair. 

Mr. SMITH. Yes. 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. As the panel is coming forward, if I am out of 

the room, there is a markup with roll votes that Mr. Payne and I 

are both involved in, and I just wanted the Chair to know I will 

have to excuse myself for votes at some point. 

Mr. SMITH. I appreciate that. 

You too? 

Mr. PAYNE. I even have another report at a meeting that is going 

on from 12 to about 2 o’clock. I want to hear this panel, at least 

most of them, and then will rush back and go over there to do the 

roll vote. It is a tough day but that is the day in the life. 

Mr. SMITH. That is why we have a record, too, so we can all read 

it later. 

Thank you so much to my friends for alerting us to that. 

Well, our first panelist will be Beatrice Fernando, and I think we 

have kind of changed the order, and you will see why when she 

speaks. 

She is an Associate of the American Anti-Slavery Group. Ms. 

Fernando, a native of Sri Lanka, was a victim of trafficking simply 

by answering an advertisement for an agency placing Sri Lankan 

housemaids with families in Lebanon. She has broken her silence 

by publishing her autobiography, In Contempt of Fate. Ms. Fernando has appeared on television and radio shows across the country, and has been profiled in several newspapers. She has spoken 

29

to various communities about her story, and the state of slavery 

worldwide. 

We will then hear from Congresswoman Linda Smith who served 

in Congress from 1994 to 1998. In November 1998, she founded 

Shared Hope International, a nonprofit based in Vancouver, to assist local leaders around the world in providing direct service, to 

rescue and restore women and children in crisis. Shared Hope 

International provides assistance to Homes of Hope in India, 

Napal, Jamaica, Fiji, South Africa, the Dominican Republican, and 

the Netherlands. To build on the momentum of the international 

movement of anti-trafficking, Ms. Smith founded the War Against 

Trafficking Alliance in January 2001, to coordinate both regional 

and international efforts necessary to combat sexual trafficking. 

Ambassador Shirley E. Barnes will be next. Ambassador Barnes 

of New York City is a retired career member of the Senior Foreign 

Service Class of Counselor. She was nominated by President William Jefferson Clinton and confirmed in 1998 as Ambassador of the 

United States of America in the Republic of Madagascar. She is 

currently Founder and President of the Barnes Findley Foundation, 

a nonprofit group focused on the promotion of education, training 

of career development for African women and girls. Ambassador 

Barnes received her Bachelor of Business Administration from Baruch College of the City University of New York, and her M.B.A. 

from Columbia University. 

We will then hear from Dr. Sarah Mendelson who is a Senior 

Fellow with the Russia and Eurasia Program at the Center for 

Strategic and International Studies. Dr. Mendelson received her 

B.A. in History from Yale University in 1984, and her Ph.D. in Political Science from Columbia in 1993. At CSIS, she manages several projects that explore the links between security and human 

rights. Her current research includes collaborative work on public 

opinion surveys of Russian attitudes on democracy, human rights, 

Chechnya, and the military. Dr. Mendelson served on the Steering 

Committee for the European and Central Asia Program of Human 

Rights Watch, and Editorial Board of International Security, and 

is a member of the Council on Foreign Relation, Research Associate 

at Harvard University’s Davis Center, and a member of the Program on New Approaches to Russian Security. 

We will then hear from Dr. Julianne Duncan. Dr. Duncan is responsible for special programs for children and other significantly 

vulnerable populations in the Migration and Refugee Services, 

United States Catholic Conference of Bishops here in Washington, 

DC. The Migration and Refugee Services is coordinating the Catholic Coalition Against Human Trafficking, a coalition of 25 Catholic 

agencies united to provide the Catholic response to programmatic 

and advocacy issues on human trafficking. Dr. Duncan has both 

national and international child welfare experience. Her earlier 

work involved assistance to Southeast Asian refugees in Thailand 

and in the United States. She had developed a curriculum for parenting classes for Cambodian and other refugee ethnic groups, and 

taught parenting classes for refugees herself for many years. Dr. 

Duncan’s degree is in Anthropology with a specialization in the 

mental health needs of refugees. 

30

So if we could hear from Ms. Fernando and then follow with each 

of our distinguished witnesses. 

STATEMENT OF MS. BEATRICE FERNANDO, ASSOCIATE, 

AMERICAN ANTI–SLAVERY GROUP 

Ms. FERNANDO. Congressman Smith and Members of the Subcommittee. 

Thank you for the opportunity to speak before you on the problem of slavery. I cannot believe that I am here speaking to political 

leaders of the most powerful country in the world. If I close my 

eyes, the memories of pain take me back to a time when I felt all 

alone. It happened two decades ago, but it feels as if it is happening right now. 

I was at the airport in Columbo, Sri Lanka, saying goodbye to 

my 3-year-old son. With his eyes filled with tears, he asked, ‘‘Can’t 

I come with you, Mom? When you make a lot of money will you 

buy me a car to play with?’’ My heart breaking, I took him into my 

arms and told him, ‘‘If I had the money, I would buy you the 

world.’’ My desperation to give him a better life drove me to leave 

him with my parents, to go to Lebanon and be a maid. 

At the job agency in Beirut, my passport was taken away. The 

agent made me stand in line with a group of women in the same 

predicament as myself. Lebanese men and women pace in front of 

us, examining our bodies as if we were vacuum cleaners. I was sold 

to a wealthy woman, who took me home to her mansion, up to the 

fourth floor balcony of her condo building. 

My chores seemed unending. I washed the windows, walls, and 

bathrooms, shampooed the carpets, polished floors, and cleaned furniture. After 20 hours, I was still not done. There was no food on 

my plate for dinner, so I scavenged through the trash. I tried to 

call the job agency, but the woman had locked the telephone. I 

tried to leave, but the door was locked. 

I can still feel the burning on my cheeks as she slapped me. It 

was night and the kids had gone to bed. Grabbing me by the hair, 

she banged my head into the wall and threw me to the floor. She 

kicked me and hit me with the broom. If I were to scream or fight 

back, she would kill me. So I would bite my lips to bear the pain, 

then I would pass out. That was my daily routine, the life of a 

slave. 

One day I was standing on the balcony of her condo, four floors 

up. I was holding onto the railing staring down at the ground far 

below. I felt my heart racing. I missed my son. I knew he was waiting for me. There was no other way to get home. I grasped the railing, closed my eyes, and asked God for his forgiveness if I die now. 

It was no suicide attempt. I was desperate for freedom, not death. 

With the tiny hope that I might survive, I let go of the railing, and 

dove backward into the air. 

Dear leaders of Congress, how did a nice Sri Lankan girl like me 

end up jumping off a balcony in Lebanon? How did I end up in 

slavery? Could this have been prevented? And how did I survive 

the leap? In my brief testimony today, I want to address just those 

issues. 

I understand that I have only 7 minutes, but I am a member of 

Toastmasters, and I appreciate the time. But let me make a few 

31

observations about the problem of human trafficking from the point 

of view of someone who has experienced it. 

Number one: Public awareness. I needed to make a living so like 

many people from South and Southeast Asia, I pursued work in the 

Middle East. I got swept up in human trafficking because I did not 

understand the risks and did not know how to look out for myself. 

I had no idea that my passport would be taken away, and I did not 

know that I would not get paid. An important way we can reduce 

the power of traffickers is to educate at-risk populations. My suggestion is to make sure that there are public service announcements and public education campaigns not just in the U.S. but also 

around the world. For example, I am ready today to record a message for Sri Lanka, in Singhalese, about what happened to me and 

warning them to be aware. 

Number two: Monitoring the job agencies that send people to 

work in the Middle East. In my case, there was one office in Sri 

Lanka and one in Lebanon. The directors of both offices are responsible for what happened to me. These agencies are sending thousands of people to work overseas. In fact, the population of Kuwait 

is two-thirds foreign workers. The percent of foreign workers in the 

UAE is even higher. People like me are actually the majority, even 

though we have no guaranteed rights. My parents were worried 

sick when they did not hear from me, but they had no way to reach 

me. My idea is to insist on having registration programs so relatives and workers can always track them down. We also need accountability and to pressure governments around the world to monitor the job agencies more closely, and make these agencies liable 

if employees’ rights are violated by their employers. 

Number three: Giving survivors of slavery a platform to speak. 

After I jumped off the balcony, I woke up in the hospital paralyzed. 

Eventually, I made it home to Sri Lanka, but I was ashamed to 

speak about it. I prayed to God for strength, and after many years 

of silence, freedom in this land has helped me to find my courage 

to write my story, which I have published recently, In Contempt of 

Fate. Thankfully I met someone from the American Anti-Slavery 

Group, an organization that has adopted me as a member of its 

Bearing Witness Program for survivors of slavery. To remove the 

shame from slavery, we need to encourage survivors to talk openly 

about their experience to help victims recover. Our message is that 

there is no reason to be ashamed. Believe in yourself and hold onto 

your faith even if one treats you like an animal. There is a spiritual and psychological side to the recovery process that should not 

be neglected. 

Four: Monitoring anti-trafficking performance in foreign countries. Every year the State Department’s annual report of trafficking should list the amount of money each country spends on 

anti-trafficking efforts. We need to evaluate if funding matches performance. The report should also document the repression of antislavery groups. For instance, in Mauritania, the Government still 

bans the abolitionist group SOS Slaves. The United States should 

be more supportive to anti-slavery activists in repressive countries 

like Mauritania or Burma where the Government does not allow 

free discussion on the issue of slavery. The United States should 

32

fund a commission of Government officials and NGO activities to 

ensure the liberation of all slaves in Sudan. 

Dear congressional leaders, I speak before you on behalf of the 

millions of slaves who could not be here even if you invited them. 

Just a few weeks ago I read about an Indonesian maid enslaved 

in Bahrain who, like me, jumped off the fourth floor balcony. It 

hurts me to think that women are still facing the same agonizing 

choice. We can help these women, children, and men by educating 

them about the dangers of slavery groups before they get trapped, 

by monitoring the job agencies and helping victims overcome their 

shame after they escape. We need to hold accountable the repressive governments that are part of the problem rather than part of 

the solution. 

Thank you again for inviting me to testify. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Fernando follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. BEATRICE FERNANDO, ASSOCIATE, AMERICAN ANTI- SLAVERY GROUP

Congressman Smith and Members of the Sub-Committee: 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you on the problem of slavery. I 

cannot believe that I am here, speaking to political leaders of the most powerful 

country in the world. If I close my eyes, the memories of pain take me back to a 

time when I felt all alone. It happened two decades ago, but it feels as if it were 

happening right now. 

I am at the airport in Columbo, Sri Lanka, saying good-bye to my three-year-old 

son. With his eyes filed with tears, he asks, ‘‘Can’t I come with you, Mom? When 

you make a lot of money will you by me a car to play with?’’ I take him in my arms, 

my heart breaking, and tell him, ‘‘If I have the money, I will buy you the world.’’ 

My desperation to give him a better life has driven me to leave him with my parents, to go to Lebanon and be a maid. 

At the job agent’s office in Beirut, my passport is taken away. The agency staff 

makes me stand in line with a group of women in the same predicament as me. 

Lebanese men and women pace in front of us, examining our bodies as if we were 

vacuum cleaners. I am sold to a wealthy woman, who takes me home to her mansion up on the forth floor of a condo building. 

My chores seem unending. I wash the windows, walls, and bathrooms. I shampoo 

carpets, polish floors, and clean furniture. After twenty hours I am still not done. 

There’s no food on my plate for dinner, so I scavenge through the trash. I try to 

call the job agency, but the woman who now owns me has locked the telephone. I 

try to flee the apartment, but she has locked the door. 

I can feel the burning on my cheeks as she slaps me. It is night and her kids 

have gone to sleep. Grasping me by the hair, she bangs my head into the wall and 

throws me to the floor. She kicks me and hits me with a broom. If I scream or fight 

back, she will kill me. So I bite my lips to bare the pain and then I pass out. This 

is my daily routine, the life of a slave. 

But now I am standing on the balcony of her condo, four floors up. I am holding 

onto the railing, staring down at the ground far below. I feel my heart rising. I miss 

my family, and I know my son is waiting for me. There is no other way to get home. 

I grasp the railing, close my eyes, and ask God for his forgiveness if I die now. This 

is no suicide attempt. I am desperate for freedom, not death. With the tiny hope 

that I might survive, I let go of the railing. I dive backwards into the night air. And 

I scream. 

Dear leaders of Congress, how did a nice Sri Lankan girl like me end up jumping 

off a balcony in Lebanon? How did I end up in slavery? Could this have been prevented? And how did I survive the leap? In my brief testimony today, I want to address those questions. 

I understand that I only have a few minutes for my testimony—and I am a member of Toastmasters, so I appreciate time limits! 

Let me make a few observations about the problem of human trafficking from the 

point of view of someone who experienced it.

1) We need more public awareness campaigns about the dangers of trafficking.

I got swept up in human trafficking because I did not understand the risks. 

I needed to make money, and like many people from South and Southeast 

33

Asia, I pursued work in the Middle East. I didn’t know my passport would 

get taken away, and I didn’t know that I wouldn’t get paid. 

We can reduce the power of traffickers by educating at-risk populations. 

People don’t know what can happen to them and can easily be tricked. So 

here is my suggestion: We need to make sure there are public service announcements and public education campaigns, not just in the US but around 

the world. For example, I am ready today to record a message for Sri 

Lankans, in Singhalese, telling them about what happened to me and warning them to be aware.

2) We need to monitor—and make sure other governments are monitoring—the 

job agencies that send so many people to work in the Middle East. In my 

case, there was an office in Sri Lanka and an office in Lebanon. The directors of these offices are both responsible for what happened to me. They did 

nothing to help me, and they never paid me. These agencies are sending 

thousands of people to work overseas. In fact, the population of Kuwait is 

two-thirds foreign workers. The percent of foreign workers in the United 

Arab Emirates is even higher. People like me are actually the majority, even 

though we have no guaranteed rights. 

The waves of workers arriving in these countries come through job agencies, but the agencies are not being watched closely enough. One idea is to 

insist that agencies have registration programs, so relatives of workers can 

always track them down. My parents back in Sri Lanka were worried sick 

about me and couldn’t understand why I wasn’t answering their letters. But 

they had no way to reach me. We need accountability, and we should pressure governments around the world to monitor job agencies more closely. And 

job agencies should be made liable if employees’ rights are violated by the 

contracted employers.

3) We need to give survivors of slavery a platform to speak out and help other 

survivors recover. After I jumped off the balcony, I blacked out. I woke up 

later in the hospital, paralyzed. Eventually, I got a flight home to Sri Lanka. 

I didn’t speak much about what had happened to me. I was ashamed, and 

I quietly prayed to God for strength. Only a few years ago, I began to feel 

I was ready to discuss what had happened to me. So I sat down and wrote 

my autobiography, which has now been published under the title In Contempt of Fate. And thankfully I met someone from the American Anti-Slavery Group, an organization that has adopted me as a member of its ‘‘Bearing 

Witness Program’’ for survivors of slavery. 

We need to remove the shame from slavery. To do that, survivors need to 

talk openly about their experience in order to help victims of trafficking recover. Our message is that there is no reason to be ashamed, even though 

you will at first feel ashamed. Our message is that you have to believe in 

yourself and hold on to your faith, even if people will treat you like an animal. There is a spiritual and psychological side to the recovery process that 

should not be neglected.

4) We need to have even tougher monitoring of foreign countries. Every year, the 

State Department’s annual report on trafficking should list the amount of 

money each country spends on anti-trafficking efforts. We need to evaluate 

if funding matches performance. The report should also document the repression of anti-slavery groups. For instance, in Mauritania the government still 

bans the abolitionist group SOS Slaves. The US should do more to support 

anti-slavery activists in repressive countries where the government doesn’t 

allow free discussion on the issue of slavery. And the US should fund a commission of government officials and NGO activists to ensure the liberation 

of all slaves in Sudan.

Dear congressional leaders, I speak before you on behalf of the millions of slaves 

who could not be here even if you invited them. Just a few weeks ago I read about 

an Indonesian maid enslaved in Bahrain who, like me, was so desperate that she 

jumped off a fourth-floor balcony. It pains me to think that two decades after I had 

to dive off a balcony to save my life, women are still facing the same agonizing situation. 

We can be doing much more to help these women—and children and men. We 

need to educate them about the dangers of slavery before they get caught up. We 

need to monitor the job agencies that ensnare them. We need to help them overcome 

their shame after they escape. And we need to hold accountable the repressive governments that are part of the problem rather than part of the solution. 

Thank you again for inviting me to testify.

34

Mr. SMITH. Ms. Fernando, thank you so much for your willingness to be here, and to bear witness to a terrible truth, and you 

do speak for the millions of women and men who are entrapped by 

slavery. For that we are also very grateful. Thank you for your testimony. 

Congresswoman Smith? 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE LINDA SMITH, PRESIDENT, 

SHARED HOPE INTERNATIONAL (FORMER MEMBER OF CONGRESS) 

Ms. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I sit here remembering 

the first time I testified, and all I could think about was the Chairman and his passion, and today I think again about the Chairman 

and his passion. Many issues start and they are popular for a moment, and then policymakers go to another issue. Thank you for 

staying and fighting for this issue, and giving us a chance to sit 

here today and tell you what is happening around the world. 

I shared earlier that I was sure you would rather be where I was 

last week. I was interviewing girls trafficked out of Africa and 

throughout Africa, into the Netherlands and into the legal prostitution in the Netherlands. Because you are hands-on, you absolutely 

want to know what is going on. But what I want to do today is say 

I think John Miller is doing a good job as the Ambassador. I think 

he is doing a great job. He is aggressive. He is ruffling feathers 

around the world, and some of the feathers need to be ruffled. He 

is making some of our Ambassadors mad and some of theirs, and 

that means they know he was there. So he is making a difference, 

and our department, the Trafficking in Persons Department, is 

making a difference, and I want to commend them. 

The President’s strong stand is commended by me and criticized 

by others that say, ‘‘Stop speaking.’’ But the moment the American 

Government and people stop speaking about freedom, there is a 

moment we are not America. So I commend the President and this 

Administration for speaking. The Justice Department is all over 

the world. Homeland Security is watching, making sure that sex 

trafficked victims are not victimized by an American, and arresting, and of that I want to tell you I am very proud. 

America is aggressive, and again we do get criticized for that, but 

the Trafficking Victims Act is working and the evaluation is working. But most significantly, today I want to talk a little bit about 

what I believe is missing. We have to tackle the issue of demand. 

I am so tried of hearing documentaries that talk about the victim, 

and I have been involved in saving thousands of women and children now that are in our shelters all over the world. I am excited 

when I see them, but I am disgusted when I see the man’s face covered—if he is there at all. We have to fight that, and I will make 

my commitment that that is going to be Shared Hope International’s greatest effort over the next couple of years. 

House Resolution 972 is good. I was glad to see the comprehension in it. I realize there will be criticism of it. There always is. But 

on our part, Shared Hope International says, ‘‘Good job, we support 

this bill, we want to stand with you. We are happy to look at any 

adjustments that you might have, or anything you find.’’ It is going 

35

to have to grow. Trafficking grows and it evolves, and we are going 

to have to do that, and again thank you. 

I have been asked today to just comment on restoration services 

in the portions of the bill that talk about that. I like the idea of 

the pilot projects. Shared Hope has developed pilot projects all over 

the world. We have a 72-acre development in India, a 40-some-acre 

development in Fiji. These are long-term restoration services for 

women and children. We have had women in our system as long 

as 7 years, and as little as 7 days, and actually maybe a little less 

now because I identified a 15-year-old in Switzerland while I was 

in Amsterdam this week. 

I want to mention, though, that the restoration services have a 

lot of the same things in common, and those things that are in 

common you would not be surprised at. They are intervention. We 

have to go where the girls are. We have to find them. I spent last 

week in 3 inches of ice in bad weather, and I sound like it, do I 

not? I found a lot of girls. 

There is an underground in Europe where the girls are hiding so 

they do not get deported back to countries where they will get 

killed. We have a lot of issues there. There is a marketplace of victimization that is built in several countries, and some of them are 

friends, and they are allies. 

To this I want to say to you, our Government is telling our allies 

you cannot have slaves either. I really do appreciate that because 

friends do not let friends have slaves. Truly we have some allies, 

like the Netherlands and like Australia, who have significant number of trafficking victims. An identification project, just this last 

year, identified over 300 trafficking victims in Australia in 5 weeks. 

Last week I identified, I am not sure how many total, but it is in 

the dozens just last week in the legal brothels of Amsterdam. 

First, effective rehabilitation programs must be holistic, but they 

also have to be long-term, they cannot be short. Second, they have 

to be safe. One of our biggest costs is security. We have built secure 

roads and fences on the 72 acres out in a secluded area, and we 

have hired additional guards because our girls are a valuable commodity. 

You realize in a marketplace you have to have product. That 

product is to be taken to be sold, it is best if you do not have to 

pay much for it. So stealing it or getting a child is an easy way 

to get a product to sell in a brothel in Amsterdam, Australia, Cape 

Town, South Africa, Goya, India, and I can take you all the way 

around the world to the places you would go on vacation, and that 

is where we find our children and our young women. Often, in 

areas like Cape Town, Sri Lanka and other places, our little boys. 

Third, we have to stop thinking about 30 days. So when you look 

at the models, that there are beautiful, wonderful people around 

the world. I am sure you are going to hear about them from others 

today, who are in the country. They have already invented the 

wheel. They are developing great programs. They are quiet. They 

are not talking about it because the bad guys are dangerous to 

them. We need to find them, and that is what Shared Hope does. 

Our underground—you might call it—is developed of people who 

have already sacrificed their lives, have sacrificed all of their income, and they are out there on the frontline and they did it withVerDate Mar 21 2002 10:38 Jul 08, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\AGI\030905\99820.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
36

out any Federal grants. So we need to find them because if we are 

going to find the best, we need to find the ones that already have 

done it. We do not need to go in and create new things. 

I would like to share with you just a little bit about one of the 

girls in Australia. I do the interviews now. Over the last 7 years 

I found that the girls trust me. I have never lost a girl, and so I 

actually used the U.N. protocol. For you that want to know how we 

identify trafficking victims, we have a format that identifies the recruitment, the transportation if there is one, the age, the ethnic 

issues, the terms of the enslavement, and the use of the person. 

Those will then align back to the U.N. protocol or the TVPA. That 

is how we determine what a trafficking victim is. 

We did this with nearly 300 trafficking victims in Australia. 

What I would like to show you is part of an interview so you get 

an idea of one of the girls. These are not just big numbers. These 

are people. These are precious girls and many are taken right out 

of universities. Last week several of the girls came out of universities in Africa, all over, who were too poor to go to school. They 

were promised they could go to school in Europe, and they were 

put in a brothel and raped the same day they got into Europe. 

These girls in Australia, it was similar. The girl you are going 

to see is bright, smart, and not now in any university. 

[Video tape played.] 

Ms. SMITH. I am not going to show you the rest of this. This happens to be a pedophile out of Cape Town, South Africa, and his 

eyes should have been covered, usually without seeing his face. 

We are actually interviewing sex tourist pedophiles and situational offenders all over the world inside brothels and resort areas. 

Sometimes when they are a little drunk, sometimes they do not actually know that we are not the Federal Government, so entrapment is not an issue. 

Last week in Amsterdam most of the people we focused on were 

Nigerian women. We do have homes in Amsterdam. Our biggest 

problem there is deportation. Many countries of the world are right 

behind us, and the question comes with some of us advocates regarding what do we do when the law says they cannot go home and 

they cannot stay? If you are in Amsterdam right now, you cannot 

get amnesty, and they do not ask if you are a trafficking victim. 

If they decide to prosecute you, you can stay a year before they deport you. If they deport you, the Nigerian gangs are famous for killing the people that were trafficked. So we are having some real 

issues as advocates around the world. They cannot stay. They cannot go. And so there is a system, a network of homes around the 

world, and we do have some of them. 

I am going to tell you just one last story, and then I want to ask 

you a question. Ganga was about 10. She is not sure because they 

do not have birthdays for girls in some countries. We think she is 

about 10 by her medical records. But she was trafficked from Napal 

to India, and she was kept in a dark place without going outside 

for about a year. Then she was put into forced prostitution. Ganga 

was rescued by us about 5 to 6 years ago, and she now works for 

us. What we are finding is that there are wonderful people, like 

this lady beside me, who are the strongest workers around the 

world, and Ganga now works for us. This time last year my husVerDate Mar 21 2002 10:38 Jul 08, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\AGI\030905\99820.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
37

band and I flew to India, invited 500 of our closest friends from 

throughout India—many of them trafficked girls who are in our 

systems there—and Ganga got married. 

I leave you with that because I say the human spirit is strong. 

What you are doing is right. No person should be in slavery, and 

there is hope for every person, and there are Gangas like that out 

there. So thank you for everything that you are doing, and I am 

honored to sit here today with you and share what your bill has 

done. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Smith follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE LINDA SMITH, PRESIDENT, SHARED HOPE

INTERNATIONAL (FORMER MEMBER OF CONGRESS) 

Thank you Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to testify on H.R. 972, the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005. It is always an honor to 

come before your subcommittee because of the great respect I have for your passionate and tireless commitment to defending the world’s most vulnerable victims. 

It is encouraging to see the continued commitment by many in Congress to finetune and further develop our anti-trafficking efforts at home and abroad. I am honored to have the opportunity to present what Shared Hope International has 

learned in its years of rescuing and restoring women and children who are victims 

of trafficking around the world. 

The Bush Administration has taken significant leadership on this issue and 

should be commended for all that it has done so far. President Bush himself has 

demonstrated his commitment to eradicating the trade of persons both internationally and domestically by addressing the United Nations on September 23, 2003 and 

at the Department of Justice’s National Training Conference on Human Trafficking 

held in Tampa, Florida in July of 2004. 

Ambassador John Miller is a catalyst among international leaders evaluating government’s progress and directing US dollars. I appreciate this opportunity to commend him for his bold leadership on this issue. 

The Department of Justice is also moving aggressively to prosecute human traffickers. Since January 2001, Civil Rights Division’s Criminal Section—working with 

U.S. Attorney’s Offices nationwide—has charged, convicted, or secured sentences for 

92 human traffickers in 21 cases. They have also developed city wide taskforces to 

increase the capacity of local law enforcement to identify victims and bring their 

traffickers to justice. 

The effects of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act are being felt around the 

world. Regardless of whether you agree on the specific tier placements, it is clear 

that in the past several years the annual report issued by the Department of State’s 

Office to Combat and Monitor Trafficking in Persons is pushing countries to make 

strides of progress to fight human traffickers and aid their victims. The United 

States government demonstrates it’s most noble leadership by holding our allies feet 

to the fire, encouraging them to take all necessary efforts to address trafficking in 

persons in their country. As a country of destination for trafficking, the United 

States can continue aggressively leading this international movement by strengthening the protection in our own country. Most notably we need to aggressively tackle the demand that creates market places of victimization. 

H.R. 972 is a good bill and I strongly support it. It addresses many of the gaps 

that exist in the global fight against trafficking in persons. It deals with some issues 

we’d rather not acknowledge as a country—exploitation of child prostitutes by U.S. 

government personnel, U.S. government contractors and international peacekeepers—but it provides tools for ensuring that this exploitation is no longer tolerated. It also acknowledges, as did the original TVPA, that trafficking in persons is 

not something that happens only in other countries but is still a problem in our own 

country. 

I would like to comment on two sections of the bill which I believe are very important:

1) The provisions to create pilot programs for long-term residential care facilities for trafficking victims in the United States and abroad, and

2) The provisions related to the protection of children in post-conflict situations 

and humanitarian crises. 

38

Pilot Programs for long-term care 

I am particularly pleased to see language in the bill that enhances services for 

trafficking victims, both domestic and international. Since the TVPA was passed, 

the United States government has dramatically improved its service for victims of 

trafficking in the U.S. There are still improvements that can be made—particularly 

in the area of housing for victims—and this pilot program will address that. 

Creating a pilot project for programs will establish a basis for best-practices and 

development of services around the world. Starting with two pilot projects is useful, 

but I would hope this would not limit us to providing long-term residential care facilities in countries with high incidences of trafficking. 

Helping women and children who are victimized is the core of Shared Hope International’s mission since its inception in 1998. In the past six years, we have established Homes of Hope in seven countries—India, Nepal, Fiji, the Dominican Republic, Jamaica, South Africa and most recently, The Netherlands. All of Shared Hope 

International’s Homes of Hope include the following services: outreach & identification, residential facilities, education, vocational training, and assistance with medical care and job placement. Each of these elements must be in place to provide effective care to trafficking victims. 

A victim of human trafficking is a victim of a serious crime, a person whose physical, mental and emotional well-being has been severely damaged. While the seriousness of this crime is not in question, service providers, including ourselves, are 

still learning how best to bring about healing and long term restoration. I want to 

give credit to some of my colleagues working in the field who are pioneers on this 

issue. There was strong testimony presented on after-care to the Subcommittee on 

International terrorism, Non-proliferation and Human Rights on June 25, 2003 by 

Rev. Lauran Bethel with the European Baptist Federation, and Nancy Murphy, Executive Director of the Northwest Life and Family Center. I would refer Members 

to that testimony because it confirms my own experience in working with trafficking 

victims. 

Of course every rehabilitation program must be tailored to the specific cultural 

context in which it is located, but there are some core principles that I have seen 

to be highly effective in the restoration and rehabilitation process. 

First, effective rehabilitation programs must reflect a holistic view of the person.

Programs must consider the displacement of a person who is a victim of trafficking, 

recognizing the many ways in which the person must be addressed for their longterm restoration. They must meet the needs of the woman and child, including their 

physical, mental, spiritual and social needs. 

Second, effective rehabilitation programs must be safe. Security is one of the most 

crucial factors and often one of the most expensive to put in place. All facilities require significant security measures to protect the survivors from the threats of 

gangs, pimps and traffickers. 

Third, rehabilitation care facilities must be available to the person for the long 

term. We must move from thinking of rehabilitation centers as ‘‘short-term shelters’’ 

to thinking in terms of ‘‘home’’ and ‘‘community.’’ A home is a place where a person 

can grow, learn and develop (or recover) a sense of independence with loving care 

and nurture. A home is a place where people care about you as a person. A home 

is a place where it is safe to share your feelings and experiences, both positive and 

negative, with people who will listen and will love you regardless. A home is a place 

where you belong. We have seen in our experience working with trafficking victims 

that these individuals need to feel loved and protected before they can move toward 

recovery. Every individual comes with their own unique story. This requires programs to have the flexibility to meet the individual’s needs. 

‘‘Leila’’ is a Thai girl who was trafficked to Australia. I discovered her while conducting a human rights investigation in February of 2004. She was studying at a 

University in Thailand and withdrew. She felt responsible for providing the tuition 

costs for her brother and sister to also attend the University. Different ‘‘friends’’ 

from Bangkok told her they could get her a job in Australia. She trusted them and 

they flew with her to Sydney around the time of the 2000 Olympic Games. They 

told her she could work in a restaurant and make a lot of money. When she arrived 

they took her to a small hotel where she was kept and forced to prostitute. The girl 

who traveled with her knew they were going to be sold for prostitution; she had already been taken to other countries. ‘‘Leila’’ paid 50,000 Baht (USD$1,300) to go to 

Australia. When she arrived she had to pay back A$60,000 (USD$47,500). Eventually, a customer became sympathetic and put her into hiding. She was taken to a 

safe place but still lives in fear of her traffickers, and believes her mother will not 

receive her knowing she was a prostitute. 

I just returned from Amsterdam where I met with several strong and educated 

young women whose lives radically changed by the deception and exploitation of 

39

human traffickers. ‘‘Sarah’’, a Nigerian from Edo State, was recruited by a Nigerian 

trafficker who said that she could be a beautician in Europe and send money home 

for her family. She was recruited while she was in school learning economics. She 

is also the oldest child of a family with 9 children and believes she is financially 

responsible for her family. To intimidate and maintain control of ‘‘Sarah’’ the trafficker took her to a voodoo doctor where they had taken her nails, hair, and body 

fluids before leaving Nigeria. The first destination was Vienna, Austria where she 

worked in a strip club and was forced to prostitute. When she arrived in Europe 

she was told that she owed the trafficker Euro 35,000 (USD$46,350.00). After 8 

months she was taken to Amsterdam where she told a ‘‘client’’ what happened to 

her. He assisted her out of the brothels and introduced her to a place of safety. 

‘‘Vanessa’’ was a University student in Nigeria from Edo State. Vanessa was having trouble getting the money she needed for tuition and books. Another student 

said he had an auntie who helped people come to Europe. The lady was very nice 

and helped her get her papers. She arrived in Amsterdam where the woman told 

her that there weren’t jobs except prostitution. Vanessa did not want to do this and 

tried to get out. The woman held her captive and sent a man who raped her. They 

beat her and locked her up. Vanessa eventually ran away and went to Germany 

where she was picked up and put into an immigration camp. She was raped in the 

camp and got pregnant. She is now a mother of a five-month-old boy and are both 

safe in a Home of Hope. 

The Netherlands does not provide residency status for victims of trafficking. They 

also can not return home to Nigeria due to the threat of being re-trafficked. Shared 

Hope International is establishing an economic program to enable these women to 

provide for themselves. 

I have shared before the story of Ganga who came to our Home of Hope in India 

in 1998. Ganga had been trafficked from Nepal to India and brought to a brothel 

on Falkland Road in Bombay. She was malnourished, repeatedly raped and locked 

in a dark room for a year. She tried to flee numerous times but was always discovered and beaten harshly by her trafficker. She finally managed to escape with the 

help from one of our outreach workers. The good news is that a year ago January, 

my husband Vern and I went to Ganga’s wedding with 500 other guests at the Village of Hope. After five years of recovery she is now married and a leader at the 

Shared Hope International Village of Hope. 

Anthea is a 19-year-old girl who is a victim of trafficking in South Africa. She was 

managed as a prostitute by gangs, addicted to drugs and was coerced by satanic rituals that included having most of her body covered in tattoos. She was identified 

by a local non-governmental organization (NGO) and offered a safe place to flee the 

gangs. When I first met Anthea she was pensive, withholding and adjusting to the 

requirements and comforts of the Home of Hope. After one year in the program, she 

was becoming a leader. We invited her to join a meeting with the Shared Hope 

International Board of Directors last fall. She came to tell us that she was accepting 

a job with the Home of Hope to help direct the girls’ center in Cape Town. As she 

sat around the board room table she looked around at each one of us and burst into 

an assertive tone and confidently proclaimed, ‘‘I am a person.’’ We were captivated 

by this young woman who, after a year in the Home of Hope, was radiating not as 

a victim of a crime but as a young woman who had come to a new understanding 

of who she really is. 

Imagine taking any one of these girls and women and giving them 30 days to 3 

months to recover in a safe home. Ganga was illiterate, did not have formal education, a family support network, and very little sense of worth. Women like 

‘‘Vanessa’’, ‘‘Sarah’’ and ‘‘Leila’’ are educated and in need of employment and protection in their home countries. All of these young women and girls have hopes and 

dreams. Each of them has a desire to be empowered to obtain their dreams and provide for their families. 

These women and youth are viewed by the traffickers as products to be sold. Market places of victimization are no respecter of persons; it robs the individual of their 

value. Part of restoring a life, is recognizing the individual person by rediscovering 

and building her dreams, one life at a time. 

The pivotal element to restoration is the long-term commitment and expectation 

that is given to the woman and children. It is about creating a place that the victimized person would identify as home and like good homes do, provide enough security 

and opportunity to help them further establish themselves after their period of recovery. We can not underestimate the kind of time it takes for a person to regain 

their own sense of dignity and the acquired skills to be productive members of society. They must have a place to call home for as long as it takes. 

Fourth, more efficient and effective rehabilitation is provided when there is ongoing outreach to local service providers already working with women and children 

40

and a commitment to build local capacity, including the capacity to provide effective 

security, so victims of trafficking can be incorporated into existing programs. We 

don’t need to reinvent the wheel, just educate and build capacity into groups, including faith-based groups, currently committed to helping women and children. 

Organizations such as Teen Challenge International have created models for addiction recovery programs that are often effective for victims of trafficking when applied to the specific cultural context and to the special needs of women and children. 

Shared Hope International’s partners in three locations are modeled after the Teen 

Challenge recovery model. 

Shared Hope International partners with local service providers to run Homes of 

Hope because we believe that local leaders committed to helping women and youth 

do develop the most culturally relevant and effective programs. We look for leaders 

who demonstrate a sacrificial and sustained commitment to helping vulnerable and 

victimized women and youth. We then educate them on the nature of trafficking and 

build their capacity to address the needs of trafficking victims. 

One way the U.S. government could help the efforts of the anti-trafficking community worldwide would be to encourage US Embassies and the USAID Missions to 

routinely inventory NGOs providing a variety of services to women and children. 

There needs to be a deliberate strategy to identify a broader base of these NGOs, 

including the faith-based organizations that serve victimized women or youth in cities of destination for human trafficking and commercial sex tourism. We should 

then ensure that those providing direct services have an increased capacity to apply 

their programs to women and children trafficking victims. 

I should also say for the record that the faith-based community has really stepped 

up to the plate on the issue of victim rehabilitation. There are new networks being 

developed around the world of faith-based groups willing and ready to engage in the 

work of rehabilitation. That is something that is encouraging to me personally. 

Strategies for Preventing Trafficking in post-conflict situation and humanitarian 

emergency situations. 

The other aspect of H.R. 972 which is very needed are the provisions that encourage the U.S. government and the international community to develop trafficking 

prevention strategies for post-conflict and humanitarian emergency situations. 

After the Tsunami in Asia, the media highlighted the trafficking threat in countries such as Thailand and made it seem like it was a new problem. Those of us 

who have been doing anti-trafficking work know, however, that trafficking was already a big problem in many of those countries before the Tsunami. The only difference is that the Tsunami created a more expansive group of vulnerable victims—

children without parents and women who, through the loss of a husband or family, 

lost their means of livelihood and support. 

What is needed are short-term strategies for protecting vulnerable children and 

long-term strategies for assuring that women benefit from the reconstruction efforts 

and are able to gain meaningful employment. If women can find jobs and the ability 

to support their families, they will be less likely to fall prey to traffickers. 

Part of this long-term strategy should include programs to train U.S. military personnel who will engage in regions affected by conflict or humanitarian crises about 

the crime of trafficking, those who are most vulnerable, and how traffickers operate. 

This April Shared Hope International will be co-hosting the sixth event as follow 

up to the world summit that we co-sponsored with the U.S. Department of State 

in February of 2003. The event will convene 14 nations in Southeast and East Asia 

to address measures that tackle the demand for child sex tourism and sex trafficking. This event will be among one of the many activities in the region to continue raising the awareness about the conditions of sex trafficking in the region and 

move practical measures forward. We must continue focusing on programs that educate vulnerable populations as to the nature of trafficking and build economic and 

educational alternatives that will keep women and children from the false promises 

that lead to such severe exploitation. 

The women and children that I’ve met through our Homes of Hope demonstrate 

to me the vitality of the human spirit. They are among the strongest people I have 

encountered. I know that their strength comes in part from the sustained support 

and development that is offered to them through a community of hope. Together, 

we can help build these communities offering victims of a serious crime a place to 

rebuild their lives. This is not an inevitable crime. And, the women and children 

can be survivors, even becoming the agents of change for others like them. 

Thank you for the opportunity to provide remarks on this important piece of legislation. 

41

Mr. SMITH. Congresswoman, thank you so much for your leadership and for your compassion. I appreciate it. 


99820a.eps
42

Ambassador Barnes? 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE SHIRLEY E. BARNES, PRESIDENT, BARNES FINDLEY FOUNDATION (FORMER AMERICAN 

AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF MADAGASCAR) 

Ms. BARNES. Thank you so much. Are you hearing me? How is 

that? Good. 

Mr. Chairman, Members of the Subcommittee, it is both an 

honor and a privilege to have an opportunity to be here today, and 

to present the following testimony for this extremely important 

hearing on combating human trafficking, and to work toward zero 

tolerance. It is especially timely and fitting today that you are having this hearing because it is also International Women’s Day, and 

thank you so much for this invitation. 

I am especially pleased to be here to testify because through commendable work that you have done, other people are beginning to 

hear the story. However, much of the attention and awarenessbuilding that has gone on has generally focused on trafficking of 

Eastern European women and Asian women. The issue of trafficking in African women and children has in general received less 

attention, and as a result less corresponding development of programs to combat the activity and to assist the victims. 

Let me underline that I do not attach any orders of magnitude 

in terms of focusing attention on victims of trafficking. It is a heinous violation of human rights for any victim. Nonetheless this 

hearing provides a welcome chance to bring the issue of trafficking 

in African women and children to the attention of a wide audience. 

Through previous hearings such as yours, many of us have begun 

to grasp the import and devastating impact of human trafficking 

on our global society. It is a billion dollar illicit industry, third only 

to drug trafficking and small arms trafficking, and it is rapidly 

growing. 

Unfortunately, hard data are difficult to obtain due to the clandestine nature of human trafficking, and total aggregate numbers 

of African women and children trafficked are not definitive. However, through observation and an array of studies in the last few 

years, a sharper image of trafficking in African women and children has developed. Reasons for trafficking in African women and 

children are manifold and vary from country to country. As Congressman Payne noted, one of the most basic and general reasons 

is poverty, and of course, economic hardship. In some instances, 

corrupt governments and government officials play a part in it in 

Africa. Other factors include social disruption, political instability, 

natural disasters, armed conflict, social customs and mores, familial pressures, and the global demand for cheap, vulnerable labor. 

It should be noted that in many African countries decisive steps 

are being taken to address this terrible problem. The African Government, working with cooperating international organizations, 

NGOs, grassroots groups, are among those who have actively participated in anti-trafficking programs. Further on in this presentation I will refer to specific groups that may be of interest to you 

and with whom we are also working. 

In an in-depth study done by UNICEF’s Innocenti Research Centre in Rome, there is a study that is called ‘‘Trafficking in Human 

43

Beings, Especially Women and Children, in Africa.’’ It was done in 

September 2003. And some of the outputs and conclusions were 

that trafficking in African women and children is a cheap, easy access to child labor, and exploitation of children and women for prostitution. Western Europe, the United States, Canada, and the Middle East, for example, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, the UAE, Western 

Europe, and Bahrain are major destination points for most victims 

trafficked out of Africa. I want you to know that reliable figures, 

however, do not exist in terms of girls and women trafficked into 

the United States, but anecdotal information, including recent 

newspaper articles, point out a large clandestine operation of African girls imported to work as unpaid servants, and then on into 

prostitution. 

Out of 53 African countries UNICEF surveyed, at least 49 percent responded that human trafficking existed in their respective 

countries, and the problem requires effective action, targeted programs and strategies, and intra-African cooperation. Trafficking in 

African children appears more widespread than trafficking in 

women. The number of African countries reporting trafficking in 

children is two times the number reporting trafficking in women. 

And just to give you an example of the globalization of trafficking 

of African women and children: The case of a young South African 

woman lured into prostitution and shipped as far away as Macau, 

according to a report of the International Organization on Migration. 

Here is a brief regional overview of human trafficking in Africa: 

On the West Coast, for example, in the western region of Africa, 

the U.N. reports that at least 200,000 children are trafficked annually out of Western Central Africa. The U.S. Department of State 

estimates that as many as 400,000 children are involved in child 

labor across West Africa based on baseline estimates. They come 

from places like Benin, Burkino Faso, Cameroon, Cote d’Ivoire, 

Gabin, Mali, Nigeria, and Togo. These are some of the Western African countries that have high levels of trafficking of child laborers. 

Congresswoman Diane Watson referred to the chocolate industry, 

and there is a very interesting study out of American University 

and it is called ‘‘Chocolate and Slavery,’’ and it is very interesting 

because when you are eating a Hershey bar, you do not think about 

the fact that very often this is something to do with child labor and 

trafficking in West Africa. And excuse me, I do not mean to say 

Hershey but a chocolate bar in general. Many of these children 

have never had identification papers such as birth certificates, 

thereby facilitating the traffickers’ operations. 

In the case of Nigeria, a great number of young Nigerian women 

are sent to Italy via well-organized illegal operations, and this had 

prompted me, as much as 7 years ago, to start working on this. 

When I was at the Department of State, the Italian Deputy Chief 

of Mission came in and asked whether I, as Director of Western 

European Affairs, could help out. Italy was in my portfolio. He said 

that there was a proliferation of African women, mainly Nigerians, 

on the streets of Rome, and in the next several years the State Department looked into it. I have been looking into the trafficking in 

humans issue long afterwards. We see the well-conducted, orchesVerDate Mar 21 2002 10:38 Jul 08, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\AGI\030905\99820.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
44

trated import of Nigerian women into Italy. In fact, many of the 

trafficked women are from Edo and Delta States. 

Several Nigerian organizations actively fight trafficking in 

women and children, including the Women Trafficking and Children Labor Education Foundation, WOTCLEF, which is headed by 

the wife of the Vice President of Nigeria. The wife of the Governor 

of Edo State has a similar organization called Ida Renaissance. The 

Women’s Consortium of Nigeria, WOCON, whose Executive Director, Ms. Bisi Olatero-Olagbegi, has done outstanding work in rehabilitation of trafficking victims. So there is work going on but we 

need to be more involved in it too. 

In Central and Southern Africa, for example, Botswana, the 

Democratic Republic of Congo, Lesotho, Mozambique, Malawi, 

South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zimbabwe and Zambia, they 

are considered source countries for trafficking activities. These are 

the people that they can get out of their countries as source people. 

And several of the same countries are transit countries, so that you 

have an arc. You have people that are coming in all over Africa, 

and then going out to other states, and there is a good, wonderful 

map that is done by Johns Hopkins Protection Project showing just 

the proliferation and trafficking right in Africa itself, and then 

going out all across the world. 

Human trafficking into and out of South Africa provides a prime 

example of the extent of human trafficking operations. South Africa 

is a rich, dynamic, vanguard country in Africa. It naturally attracts 

a high influx of people from all over Africa, and indeed, the world. 

Unfortunately, many of criminal elements. 

Women and children worldwide are trafficked into and out of Africa. Example: Girls from South Africa are trafficked to brothels in 

the Netherlands; girls from Thailand are trafficked into South Africa brothels; women from rural China are brought to South Africa 

for prostitution; women are flown to Johannesburg and then taken 

to Swaziland, Lesotho, or Mozambique, then cross the border by 

road back into South Africa to circumvent airport immigration controls, and there is the weak place, too, in the immigration process—trucks and private industry trucks transport these women 

back and forth, and then on into other countries. Eastern European 

women are controlled by the mafia—the Russian mafia—and they 

take similar routes. Much to the dismay of South African police authorities who must try to cope with the problem, a large coterie of 

organized crime groups operate in South Africa, some estimate up 

to 500 of these are Nigerian gangs. Also there are the Japanese 

Yakuza and Russian mafia. In Cape Town, the children’s rights 

group, Molo Songololo works with homeless children who have been 

trafficked. It is estimated that at least 25 percent of the prostitutes 

in Cape Town are children. 

The IOM reports that as many as 30,000 teenage Ethiopian girls 

arrive in Lebanon and are then trafficked worldwide. A lot of them 

are trafficked mainly into Middle Eastern countries. The main reason for trafficking are sexual exploitation and forced domestic 

labor. An encouraging step toward ameliorating this problem has 

been taken by the Ethiopian Government along with USAID. A 

center funded by USAID was recently opened in Addis Ababa to 

help rehabilitate trafficked victims. I like what Congresswoman 

45

Smith has said in terms of the rehabilitation programs that are 

really necessary for these young women. 

Though there is no direct link that has yet been established between HIV/AIDS and the trafficking in African women and children—and we know already the high proportion of people that have 

HIV/AIDS in Africa—we have no distinct figures, but know that 

there has to be a causal connection between HIV/AIDS and trafficking of African women and children. The fear of infection with 

HIV/AIDS among customers in the sex industry has driven traffickers to recruit younger and younger women and girls. This was 

pointed out, I think again by Congresswoman Watson. These customers erroneously perceive that the younger the girl it is more 

likely that the customer will not be infected when having sex. 

As I stated earlier, African States have not been passive in addressing the issue of human trafficking. Several have initiated 

measures to curb trafficking: Mali and Cote d’Ivoire have set up a 

commission to study the trafficking issue; Nigeria’s President 

signed a law in July 2003, prescribing stiff sentences to trafficking 

perpetrators, including life in prison. Benin enacted a law in 1995 

to regulate the travel of children under 14 years old, and Benin 

and Togo have agreed to programs to rehabilitate trafficking victims. However, there is much more that must be done. 

Here are some recommendations: 

African countries, with cooperation and assistance from international organizations in the United States and other countries, 

should continue to develop and enforce more effective anti-trafficking and child labor laws. This includes reinforced programs 

with the African Union, NEPAD, and other African organizations. 

Targeted, focused and increased support should be placed on 

working with African women’s groups, and I really underline that, 

because the women are really serious; not that the men are not, 

but the women’s groups that have worked on this and worked on 

other development projects, even with the smallest and barest 

amount of resource funds, seem to make much more progress. 

Strong emphasis should be placed on supporting programs to return and rehabilitate trafficking victims, including educational 

training and job-development programs. Again, Congresswoman, 

you have talked about that. 

Public and private organizations should develop programs to 

build awareness in the United States of the trafficking-in-womenand-children issues, especially African women and children. I say 

this in terms of many African-American church groups, et cetera, 

many women’s groups, African-American women’s groups, need to 

have stronger emphasis placed in their programs about the trafficking issue of African women and children. 

Broader support of programs of registering birth certificates for 

African children should be set up, in connection with all of the African Embassies and groups that we have, to see how we can help 

in terms of registering births because, very often, when these children have no I.D., it facilitates the operations of the traffickers. 

In the United States, there should be an establishment or some 

more institutions or a research center that focuses primarily on 

studying and developing reliable data on trafficking in African 

women and children. I say this because possibly my idea of what 

46

we are doing with the Barnes Findley Foundation is to see whether 

we can get more, and Congress can help out too. Encourage and 

support Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) to 

have an institute or to start some kind of established research center, especially with the HBCUs units involved and some corresponding schools of higher education in Africa. Then, we will 

have more reliable data, we can build more reliable data, and then, 

hence, do more effective programming, especially concerning African women and children. 

Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and I again want to tell you 

how much I appreciate being able to contribute. I want to thank 

Congressman Payne also because I had a chance to bring up these 

issues at the Black Caucus panel that he chairs every year during 

the Black Caucus Week. Thank you so much. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Barnes follows:]

47


99820b.eps
48


99820c.eps
49


99820d.eps
50


99820e.eps
51

Mr. SMITH. Ambassador Barnes, thank you so much for your testimony and your very significant recommendations. I think you 

made a number of proposals that we need to follow up on, so I appreciate that very much. 

Dr. Mendelson? 

STATEMENT OF SARAH E. MENDELSON, PH.D., SENIOR FELLOW, RUSSIA AND EURASIA PROGRAM, CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES 

Ms. MENDELSON. Chairman Smith, Members of the Committee, 

thank you for inviting me to participate in this hearing. It is a real 

honor to be here. 

My comments address the trafficking of women and girls for 

forced prostitution and links to peacekeeping operations. As noted, 

in 2004, the DoD, NATO, and the U.N. each took potentially dramatic steps to address this issue by adopting zero tolerance policies. Today, I am going to talk about what I see as potential obstacles to the full implementation of these policies. 

At this time, I would like to submit my prepared statement for 

the record and, for the remainder of the time, summarize the main 

points. 

Mr. SMITH. Without objection, your full statement will be made 

a part of the record. 

Ms. MENDELSON. Thank you. 

First, let me say how pleased I am that the bill specifically addresses the role of peacekeeping. More than that, the bill proposes 

remedies to a multitude of problems that have long been documented by activists, journalists, and researchers. In my work, I 

often have heard concerned individuals remark that they have 

tried to raise awareness—they have written articles, and they have 

written reports—about the link between trafficking in women and 

girls and peacekeepers. But they felt frustrated and saddened by 

how little impact reports, even those that are laden with evidence, 

have had on policy and behavior. 

With the provisions in this bill concerning peacekeeping, you can 

help us all have much more effect. I want to thank you for your 

good work and for that of your staff in preparing it. The majority 

of uniformed service people, both U.S. and international, as well as 

civilian contractors, who support peacekeeping operations, do so 

honorably. It is their voices and the voices of the victims that this 

bill amplifies. 

As I noted, numerous organizations have reported that following 

the deployment of international peacekeeping contingents, one 

finds a dramatic rise in the number of trafficked women and girls. 

This phenomenon has been documented in many post-conflict regions around the world. My research explores how peacekeepers 

and policymakers understand this phenomenon so that policies 

might be fully implemented. In a report recently published by CSIS 

entitled ‘‘Barracks and Brothels: Peacekeepers and Human Trafficking in the Balkans,’’ I document the prevalence of attitudes, including indifference, denial, misperception, and even acceptance of 

trafficking, that I believe seriously challenge comprehensive implementation of antitrafficking policies. 

52

To change the hearts and minds of uniformed personnel and civilian contractors on this issue will require a different style and 

depth of implementation than is underway. To create a taboo 

against human trafficking, whether for forced prostitution or other 

forms, such as forced labor, will require significantly more resources than a few training modules. These organizations are capable of change and of implementing these new policies in a robust 

manner if they are given adequate resources and if they have committed leadership. My confidence is especially high concerning the 

DoD and NATO. Currently, however, attitudes and organizational 

cultures are themselves obstacles. The misperceptions of and reluctance to deal with human trafficking are intense enough that some 

argue the link between peacekeeping and trafficking is simply a 

fact of life about which nothing can be done. Others argue that 

peacekeepers purchasing sex is in the interest of the mission and 

a soldier’s right. 

Let me explain briefly what is at stake in getting full implementation of these policies. Peacekeeping missions have been gravely 

undermined by the human rights abuses committed by peacekeepers. These abuses prolonged deployments because they have 

helped institutionalize organized crime, and they undermined the 

rule of law. Yet senior personnel show little recognition that 

human rights abuses and organized crime are among the fundamental security threats to peacekeeping missions. In other words, 

combating human trafficking in peacekeeping missions and making 

sure peacekeepers are not involved in criminal activity is not mission creep but part of the core mission of establishing the rule of 

law. 

Let me be specific. In terms of DoD, few, if any, resources have been specifically allocated from, as you note, a budget of over $400 

billion to the implementation of this policy. Without resources and 

the involvement by senior military leadership, efforts to create a 

taboo around trafficking are likely to fail. Training alone, the main 

effort we have seen today, will not suffice. 

At NATO, a handful of Nordic countries, along with the United 

States, have led the charge. Other than the United States, no 

major troop-contributing country has actively supported the policy. 

I have just returned from a meeting hosted by a non-NATO member country, Finland, concerning implementation of NATO’s antitrafficking policy. I find some at NATO who believe the policy binds 

countries, but there are many others who perceive the obligation as 

weak and unenforceable. I find an ad hoc quality to how the policy 

is being implemented, and that worries me a great deal. It is not 

surprising since the NATO policy, like that of the U.N., shifts responsibility for implementation to individual nations. Both policies 

do so with little guarantee of transparency. So those nations that 

care might do something, those that do not, will not. 

One example I found interesting: The subject-area experts of 

trafficking that help the NATO defense colleges create training 

modules, our colleagues from various NGOs, were either paid for 

by private foundations, by the Norwegian or the United States missions to NATO, or they were not compensated at all. 

Last week, in Finland, military officers talked to me about the 

unfinished business of implementation. Specifically, I heard about 

53

the need to mobilize commanders, institutionalize transparent evaluation and reporting mechanisms, as well as investigative and disciplinary measures. The United States should lead on this issue 

and by example. Additionally, we need a transparent and thorough 

assessment of efforts by the U.N., by NATO, and by the DoD conducted not by these organizations but by outside experts. 

Recalcitrant nations, including, alas, on occasion, the United 

States, have failed to prosecute and discipline their own nationals 

for involvement in trafficking. Recalcitrant organizations, such as 

the U.N. and, on occasion, NATO, have failed to provide transparent reporting on trafficking in persons and peacekeeper involvement. In the coming years, experts will assess implementation by 

whether these organizations assign senior leadership to combat 

trafficking, deploy resources, hire or develop in-house expertise, 

consult with outside experts, develop substantive training materials, address trafficking with transparency, conduct thorough investigations, and prosecute those implicated. 

So rather than spreading assets throughout the building among 

already overburdened staff at DoD, and rather than tasking personnel who are, frankly, not especially interested in combating trafficking, efforts should be centralized in an office directed by an Assistant Secretary of Defense. This office would lead on combating 

human trafficking as related to military and peacekeeping deployments. And the reality is that there is just so much more to do beyond training and education, and I would be happy to talk about 

that in question-and-answer. 

The policies adopted in 2004 were important first steps. I am inspired by the leadership and the courage of those who fought hard 

to get these policies adopted and to begin implementation, and I 

believe DoD can lead globally on addressing these important 

human rights and security issues, and the impact will be felt within NATO and the U.N., as well as inside ministries of defense 

around the world. This bill is critical to making this happen. Thank 

you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Mendelson follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SARAH E. MENDELSON, PH.D., SENIOR FELLOW, RUSSIA

AND EURASIA PROGRAM, CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

Chairman Smith and Members of the Committee: 

Thank you for inviting me to participate in this hearing on efforts to combat 

human trafficking. My name is Sarah Mendelson, and I am senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. It is an honor to be here. 

My comments address the trafficking of women and girls for forced prostitution 

and links to peacekeeping operations. In 2004, the U.S. Department of Defense 

(DOD), the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and the United Nations 

(UN) each took potentially dramatic steps to address the role of peacekeeping operations in human trafficking by adopting zero-tolerance policies. I focus today on 

what I see as potential obstacles to the full implementation of these policies. I do 

this by drawing on a number of findings and recommendations, some of which I am 

pleased to see included in the current draft of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization bill, and that follow from my research and that of others. 

I. Human Trafficking and Peacekeeping Operations 

The majority of uniformed service people—both US and international—as well as 

civilian contractors who support peacekeeping operations do so honorably. They risk 

their lives to help repair the damage and destruction of war. Peacekeepers who 

serve with honor are being tainted by the minority who commit human rights violations and support criminal networks. Specifically, human rights and international 

organizations have documented a disturbing correlation: where one finds interVerDate Mar 21 2002 10:38 Jul 08, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 F:\WORK\AGI\030905\99820.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
54

national peacekeeping deployments, one also sees a dramatic rise in the number of 

trafficked women and girls that follow these deployments. In the Balkans, peacekeeping operations have had the unintended consequence of providing the demand 

for trafficked females from Eastern Europe and Eurasia for forced prostitution. This 

phenomenon has been documented in other post-conflict regions. The studies that 

have been among the most important on this issue include numerous reports by 

Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, the International Organization for 

Migration as well as the United Nations and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. In short, this link is well documented. 

The contribution of my research has been to explore how peacekeepers and policymakers understand the link so that these zero-tolerance policies might be fully implemented. In a recently published report entitled Barracks and Brothels: Peacekeepers and Human Trafficking in the Balkans, I document the prevalence of attitudes—including indifference, denial, misperception and even acceptance—that pose 

serious challenges to the comprehensive implementation of the anti-trafficking policies. To change the hearts and minds of uniformed personnel and civilian contractors on this issue will require a different style and depth of implementation than 

is underway. To create a taboo against human trafficking—whether for forced prostitution or other forms such as forced labor—will require significantly more resources than a few training modules and more senior leadership than these organizations have allocated. 

Organizational attributes and attitudes shared to varying degrees by DOD, NATO 

and the UN have determined a weak response to human trafficking in the past. 

Each of these organizations has been reluctant to address:

• The security implications of misconduct by uniformed service members and 

civilian contractors, especially involving human rights abuses; and

• The role of organized crime in shaping the security environment of post-conflict regions.

I have confidence these organizations are capable of change and of implementing 

these new policies in a robust manner if they are given adequate resources and if 

they have committed leadership. My confidence is especially high concerning the 

DOD and NATO. Currently, however, attitudes and organizational cultures appear 

themselves to be obstacles and to drive the current low level of resources. 

Central to adequate responses will likely be the recognition by senior personnel 

inside these organizations that human rights abuse and organized crime are among 

the fundamental security threats to peacekeeping missions. In other words, addressing human trafficking in peacekeeping missions and making sure that peacekeepers 

are not involved in criminal activity is not ‘‘mission creep’’ but part of the core mission of establishing the rule of law. 

If those overseeing peace support operations grasped the security implications of 

peacekeeper involvement in human rights abuse and how this affects perceptions of 

the local community toward a mission, the resources for implementing anti-trafficking policies would be more forthcoming. If leadership inside these organizations 

addressed organized crime in post-conflict regions in a comprehensive, robust manner, it would be impossible to ignore human trafficking. Part of what we encounter 

when we assess slow or minimal implementation of these policies is not only attitudes toward women and girls that enable exploitation but also resistance to tackling the security challenges of human rights abuse and organized crime. 

Let me speak for a moment about differences and similarities across these diverse 

organizations. I recognize these organizations have different cultures, and their history with trafficking has taken different forms. The policies are varied in terms of 

implementation, but all share a rhetorical commitment to ending the abuse by and 

corruption of those sent by the international community to help restore a safe and 

secure environment in post-conflict regions. Most strikingly, the policies all share 

a stark lack of resources. 

Let me note also an important difference between those who work inside these 

organizations and those on the outside. Some inside these organizations perceive 

current efforts as adequate. To outside experts who are fully familiar with the links 

between trafficking and peacekeeping operations, and with whom I have had the 

pleasure of working, the efforts seem inadequate. 

II. Looking for Leadership and Resources 

Drawing on numerous interviews with officers, observations of the DOD Inspector 

General assessment of complicity in human trafficking, and access to internal 

memos from NATO and the UN, my report Barracks and Brothels documents the 

numerous attitudes that appear to impede the implementation of anti-trafficking 

policies adopted in 2004. The prevalence of such attitudes—including denial, invisiVerDate Mar 21 2002 10:38 Jul 08, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 F:\WORK\AGI\030905\99820.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
55

bility, mistaking human trafficking for legalized prostitution, and, as a result, inaction by authorities—shapes organizational cultures and current responses. 

Although Pentagon officials claim to have responded to a congressional request to 

address human trafficking in a thorough manner, few, if any, resources have been 

specifically allocated from its budget of over $400 billion. Current efforts by DOD 

to implement the anti-trafficking policy are in danger of being ineffective in addressing the plethora of impediments identified in my report. Without the allocation of 

resources and commitment by senior military leadership, efforts to create a taboo 

around trafficking are likely to fail. Training alone—the main effort we have seen 

to date—will not suffice. 

At NATO, a handful of Nordic countries along with the US mission have led the 

charge. To date, other than the United States, no major troop contributing country 

at NATO has actively supported the policy. The NATO staff has been particularly 

open to working with outside experts, but they have been given few resources to 

support this work and are extremely overburdened. This perception is derived from 

research but also from a meeting I attended last week hosted by a non-NATO member country—Finland—on the issue of NATO’s anti-trafficking policy. 

At the meeting, there were some diplomats who argued that the NATO policy 

binds countries, including our own, and obliges them to make the policy real. My 

sense is that some at NATO share the conviction that this is a strong obligation 

while others perceive it as quite weak and unenforceable. Perhaps symptomatic of 

this unclear obligation and lack of resources, I noted that the subject-area experts 

on trafficking that worked alongside military representatives in creating the trafficking training modules for NATO defense colleges were either paid for by foundations, by the Norwegian and US missions to NATO or they were not compensated 

at all. In other words, efforts to date have been ad hoc. 

The NATO policy, like that of the UN, is such that it shifts responsibility for implementation to individual nations. Both policies do so with little guarantee of 

transparency. Again, we are not seeing a lot of leadership on this issue beyond Nordic countries and the United States. Even within the United States government, the 

response has been uneven; my interviews and conversations suggest that we have 

some who are leading, but we have many—including inside the military—who are 

unconvinced of the importance of this issue. 

To make implementation meaningful at NATO, we need political and military 

leadership inside member states. Individual nations need to commit resources and 

senior military officials need to become knowledgeable about and more actively engaged in combating trafficking. This applies most definitely to the United States, 

especially given the size of its defense budget compared to all other NATO countries 

combined. Military officers and those working with NATO from the military side at 

the meeting in Finland acknowledged the unfinished business specifically in terms 

of mobilizing commanders, institutionalizing transparent evaluation and reporting 

mechanisms as well as investigative and disciplinary measures. Given the political 

capital that the United States has devoted to this issue, the United States should 

lead by example. To date, we see little transparency. 

The United Nations has an especially troubling track record of peacekeeper involvement in trafficking as well as other forms of sexual exploitation in conflict and 

post-conflict regions. To date, decision makers at the UN seem to fear that creating 

a taboo against trafficking for peacekeepers would negatively affect the UN’s ability 

to attract peacekeepers. The stature of those policymakers advocating attention to 

both gender and human rights agendas within the UN system has made it impossible to ignore trafficking. Their influence has been insufficient, however, to produce 

a comprehensive anti-trafficking effort among the multiple UN agencies responsible 

for peacekeeping around the world. A constant refrain has been that the UN—like 

NATO—lacks jurisdiction to discipline and prosecute those violating the zero-tolerance policy. 

Given this institutional reluctance, the secretary-general and the under-secretary 

of peacekeeping will need to lead on this issue, and individual nations must also 

address the issue. While I welcome the comments as reported in the press by the 

under-secretary of peacekeeping that there will be an assessment of the missions 

in the coming weeks, I believe we need a transparent assessment of efforts by the 

UN (as well as by NATO and the DOD) to be conducted by outside groups adequately funded and by recognized experts. Recalcitrant nations, including the 

United States, have failed to prosecute and discipline their own nationals for involvement in trafficking. Recalcitrant organizations, such as the UN, have failed to 

provide transparent reporting on trafficking in persons and peacekeeper involvement. 

Let me explain briefly what is at stake. First, peacekeeping missions have been 

gravely undermined by the human rights abuses committed by peacekeepers. These 

56

abuses prolonged deployments because they have helped institutionalize organized 

crime and undermined the rule of law. 

Second, and more generally, organizations—including various ministries of defense—have helped create a culture of acceptance. The challenge now is to change 

that culture. The absence of awareness concerning the links between human trafficking and peacekeeping operations is pervasive. These organizations need not only 

to address the behavior of those peacekeepers actively engaged in or facilitating 

trafficking but the larger community of people who know nothing about this issue, 

who turn a blind eye, or misperceive what is going on. 

While experts have extensively documented that trafficking follows deployments, 

most officials I meet deny or downplay the issue and not surprisingly, its relevance. 

That commands in Bosnia and Kosovo have tasked intelligence analysts to track 

trafficking in guns and drugs but not humans suggests the command climate has 

not been conducive to combating trafficking. There have been real consequences to 

inaction: not only have crimes against thousands of women and girls gone 

unpunished, criminal networks have acquired revenue and possibly weapons, and 

the missions of establishing safe and secure regional environments have been undermined. 

Certainly I have spoken with many officers and policy advisors who fully recognize the threats of trafficking and who look forward to comprehensive implementation of the policy. However, the misperceptions of and reluctance to deal with 

human trafficking are intense enough that some argue the link between peacekeeping operations and human trafficking is simply a fact of life, about which nothing can be done. Others argue that peacekeepers purchasing sex is in the interest 

of the mission and a soldier’s right. One US Army colonel billeted to NATO in 

Kosovo in 2000 described to me how soldiers and commanding officers would likely 

perceive such a situation:

It is irrelevant that these women are prisoners because [the soldiers] are 

thinking ‘holy mackerel, here is a great opportunity.’ . . . The commanding officer may be thinking: . . . ‘this guy [his soldier] is happy and he is happier 

if he had a half hour with a beautiful 17 year old—whether he knows she is 

forced or not—he is happier—he will do his mission better’. . . the commander 

can be a great guy but maybe he will turn a blind eye—and think that boys 

will be boys.

These organizations faces an enormous challenge in tackling such attitudes and 

changing how officers and those they command understand and respond to trafficking victims. 

III. Beyond Training Modules 

The creation of a taboo against human trafficking will require nothing less than 

a shift in the current organizational cultures of the DOD, NATO and the UN. The 

goal for these organizations should be to develop a robust norm about what it means 

to be a professional, well-trained and effective peacekeeper. Such a norm would dictate that all contingents and civilian contractors know:

• How human trafficking relates to security, organized crime, and human 

rights;

• How to recognize human trafficking;

• How to report involvement in trafficking by service members or by contractors 

up the chain of command; and

• Which local organizations to contact if they see it.

They would also need to understand that:

• Purchasing sex is illegal in most post-conflict regions;

• Purchasing illegal sex creates conditions permissive to trafficking;

• Patronizing establishments with trafficked people breeds corruption as well 

as undermines the mission;

• Purchasing a human being as chattel is illegal;

• Trafficking is a grave human rights abuse and a serious crime; and

• National authorities will criminally prosecute and discipline troops and contractors engaging in trafficking.

Ultimately, prosecution of traffickers, as well as those who facilitate trafficking, 

may be the greatest deterrent. Organizations must be willing to penalize, whether 

at home or in the theatre of operation, any peacekeepers who are implicated. The 

culture of impunity must end or peacekeepers will continue to be engaged in crimiVerDate Mar 21 2002 10:38 Jul 08, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 F:\WORK\AGI\030905\99820.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
57

nal activity while on mission, and these organizations—the U.S. military, NATO 

and the UN—will be undermined and damaged. 

Senior policymakers within the DOD, NATO, and the UN need to recognize that 

rhetoric must be accompanied by a concerted, widespread effort to change the 

knowledge, attitudes and behavior of all who serve, from U.S. uniformed service 

members to civilian contractors, from military officers in NATO member states to 

UN police officers. To have decisive impact, policymakers have to commit resources 

including staff to this effort. They must focus on accountability and, where merited, 

prosecute personnel. In the coming years, experts will judge organizations by whether they:

• Assign senior leadership to combat trafficking;

• Deploy the needed resources;

• Hire or develop in-house expertise;

• Consult routinely and effectively with outside experts;

• Develop substantive training materials;

• Address trafficking with transparency;

• Conduct thorough investigations of criminal behavior and prosecute those implicated.

In my remaining time, I want to focus on the recommendations in the report concerning the DOD because of its potential to lead globally on this issue. Given the 

extensive misperception and lack of awareness, the initial DOD effort, as it has been 

explained to me in numerous meetings and conversations, appears to be a minimal 

response, somewhat akin to trying to combat the spread of HIV through training 

on the internet. 

Change in the uniformed service members’ and contractors’ behavior will require 

new social and cultural norms. To this end, DOD leadership should resist thinking 

that one or two fixes alone (e.g. long-distance training modules) will have the decisive impact in addressing the trafficking-peacekeeping link. Instead, the comprehensive implementation of the DOD policy will require ownership, leadership and organization. 

Inside the DOD, rather than spreading assets throughout the building among already overburdened staff, and rather than tasking personnel who are not especially 

interested in combating trafficking, efforts should be centralized in an office, directed by an Assistant Secretary of Defense. This office would lead on combating 

human trafficking as related to military and peacekeeping deployments. 

At a minimum, the tasks of such an office would be to oversee education and 

training, including the research and design of awareness campaigns specifically for 

U.S. personnel deployed oversees (drawing on focus groups and random sample surveys); develop training for all military and contract personnel; oversee training of 

CID and IG inspectors in how to investigate systematically and thoroughly all cases 

involving U.S. personnel (uniformed service members and civilian contractors). In 

post-conflict reconstruction and in peace support operations, this office would liaise 

with military planners. The office would work also with the General Counsel’s office 

to make sure all legal instruments accessible to the DOD reflect anti-trafficking 

policies, including the Uniform Code of Military Justice and defense contracts. While 

DOD has proposed some revisions to the UCMJ, the language needs to clearly address the crime of trafficking in humans. 

This office would also work with defense contractors and senior management to 

ensure that they are well educated on the dangers of human trafficking. Finally it 

would liaise with UN, NATO, and the relevant regional organizations such as the 

Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and serve as a central point 

for military-to-military contact programs on this issue. 

The education and awareness of commanders, Special Operations Forces, intelligence officers, CID, and inspectors should be given high priority. Training should 

draw on case studies—not hypothetical situations but the types of cases detailed in 

my report and others from relevant theatres of operation. Missions will need to develop a regional portrait of trafficking routes, revenue streams, and the modality of 

trafficking to understand the specific dangers in their neighborhoods. The political 

economy of trafficking needs to be spelled out so the participants understand the 

revenue streams. Training should be done soldier-to-soldier, with participation and 

consultation from nongovernmental anti-trafficking experts. 

To counter the invisibility of trafficking, commanders should make human trafficking a ‘‘priority intelligence requirement’’ in regions where they already follow 

narcotics and arms trafficking. 

58

The misperceptions documented in the CSIS report suggest that the DOD needs 

a concerted awareness campaign to combat trafficking. Toward this end, the DOD 

should fund large, random sample surveys across the services on attitudes toward 

trafficking and use these data to develop messages that are most likely to resonate 

with the target audience. The DOD should support tracking surveys after the campaign has been underway to test its effectiveness. These surveys would address 

knowledge, attitudes, and behavior. 

U.S. government agencies need to work with contractors to end the crisis hiring 

that increases the chances of having poorly trained staff, with incomplete background checks, deployed overseas. Instead, government agencies should maintain 

standing rosters of qualified specialists for overseas work. When contractors deploy 

to areas known to be replete with victims of human trafficking, such as the Balkans, 

trafficking in persons should be a regular part of pre-theatre and in-theatre training. Managers and supervisors must be made aware that ad hoc arrangements with 

local law enforcement officials to pick up and release U.S. personnel found during 

brothel raids undermine both the rule of law and the mission itself; they are a form 

of corruption. Additionally, it is important that U.S. criminal jurisdiction be extended to all federal contractors serving abroad, and not just those under contact 

to the DOD. 

Uniformed service members and contractors implicated in facilitating or engaging 

in trafficking should be investigated and criminally prosecuted. Those picked up in 

police raids should be made available to testify as witnesses in cases against traffickers. 

The management and supervision of civilian contractors pose special problems 

and require particular attention. Institutions as varied as HRW and the DOD/IG 

have found U.S. contractors implicated in human trafficking. In Bosnia and Kosovo, 

contractors and uniformed service members had separate lines of command that did 

not overlap. Moreover, companies need to end rapid repatriation of contractors accused of involvement in trafficking and other criminal activity. The DOD should develop monitoring mechanisms that require companies to report to the DOD those 

employees alleged to have committed crimes in the field. Certainly commanders on 

the ground must be made aware rather than having these people whisked away in 

the middle of the night as is so often the case. Currently, contractors who have been 

rapidly repatriated can find employment again in post-conflict regions without penalty or prosecution. The DOD rather should penalize individuals who impede the 

implementation of DOD’s anti-trafficking policy. As is, companies unwittingly facilitate the lack of prosecutions. 

Defense contractors should also take an active role in making sure their staff is 

educated on human trafficking, including input from NGO experts. Organizations 

such as the ‘‘Defense Industry Initiative on Business Ethics and Conduct’’ could arrange meetings with experts and DOD contractors to explain the problem and encourage compliance. Special attention should be devoted to helping defense contractors understand the implications of the DOD policy, the NATO policy, and the language of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act, which requires that 

certain U.S. government contracts can be terminated if contractors are found either 

to engage in human trafficking or to procure a commercial sex act while the contract 

is in force. The U.S. government should encourage and reward companies for transparency and independent monitoring. 

With the issuance of its policies in 2004, the DOD, NATO and the UN have each 

taken an important first step in addressing the problem of combating human trafficking. My comments in no way detract from the leadership and courage of those 

who have fought hard inside these organizations to get these policies adopted and 

to begin implementation. My observations are meant to bolster their efforts but also 

to highlight how difficult it has been to get even the minimal response we have seen 

to date. A comprehensive response will require more than has been done so far in 

implementation. My hope is that the DOD can lead globally on addressing this important human rights and security issue and that the impact will be felt within 

NATO and the UN as well as inside ministries of defense around the world. 

Thank you.

Mr. SMITH. Dr. Mendelson, thank you very much for your testimony, and I will just state for the record, your book or study, ‘‘Barracks and Brothels’’—I just returned from the winter meeting of 

the OSCE in Vienna and used this and read from it during the 

course of our debates over there, so it is a very, very fine piece of 

work, and thank you for your leadership. 

Dr. Duncan? 

59

STATEMENT OF JULIANNE DUNCAN, PH.D., ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, MIGRATION AND REFUGEE SERVICES, UNITED STATES 

CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS 

Ms. DUNCAN. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Members of the 

Committee. I am Dr. Julianne Duncan from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. I am working in refugee programs 

where we have services for migrating children and trafficking victims. I am very pleased to be here today before the Subcommittee. 

Our purpose here is to support your bill, which will be a subject 

of markup tomorrow. The bishops do appreciate your leadership 

over many years in bringing this terrible situation to the attention 

of the United States Government and to lead the Government into 

a humane response on this issue. I have prepared written testimony which will be submitted, but as for my oral remarks, I would 

like to discuss specifically services and interests of child-trafficking 

victims and particularly addressing issues related to the services 

that the United States provides internally for trafficking victims. 

The Catholic bishops all over the world are active in efforts to 

carry out the teachings of the church. His Holiness Pope John 

Paul, II, has called on all Catholics and all people of goodwill to 

eliminate the scourge of human trafficking and to do whatever is 

possible to alleviate the suffering of the victims. In the United 

States, migration and refugee services within the Bishops Conference has taken the lead to convene the Catholic Coalition 

Against Human Trafficking, which is made up of religious orders, 

Catholic colleges and universities, Catholic legal services, social 

service agencies, and many others, who are cooperating in many 

ways to try to address the issue of human trafficking. Specifically, 

we have worked to provide multiple services to trafficking victims 

in the United States. 

One of the issues that we are aware of and that causes us concern in the United States is that while the estimate of probable 

numbers of trafficking victims who are entering the United States 

are in the neighborhood of about 17,000 victims entering per year, 

the United States has actually certified for formal care, fewer than 

700 victims, I think, really fewer than 600, although the number 

is a changing number. Our agency has been involved with a considerable number of those who have received formal, certified care. 

We have two particular programs that might be of interest to the 

Committee. We have programs which will serve adult or family 

trafficking victims in the United States. In that program, we have 

been able to formally serve 135 victims. Some of those victims are 

children who are with their parents and were trafficked together. 

In addition, we have provided all of the services to unaccompanied 

child-trafficking victims in the United States; that is, for 36 children. There are 36 unaccompanied trafficking victims in care, but 

some of those have small children or babies, so we actually have 

40 children in care as unaccompanied children. 

We have learned much about the system of trafficking and what 

happens to families, adults, and children in the United States. One 

thing I would like to discuss with you today, though, is the people 

we have not been able to serve, because I believe that it will shed 

some light on what is the difference. We believe that 17,000 people 

60

are trafficked. We have been able to formally serve, as a country, 

fewer than 600. 

In terms of numbers just in the past year, in our adult and family program, we have consulted on, been aware of, and are active 

in services for up to 200 individuals who were never able to enter 

formal care and, therefore, have not been able to enter the statistics that the Government is producing. In addition, related to unaccompanied children, we have consulted or assisted on 45 cases, 

with up to 140 children, none of whom have been able to enter formal care or formal services within the United States. 

There are a variety of reasons that these individuals or families 

have not been able to enter care, but we believe that some of the 

barriers that prevent people from being served could, and should, 

be remedied, and we believe that some of the provisions of your 

current bill will assist in this way. 

Our written testimony will discuss more recommendations, but I 

would like to focus on four today: 

First, there must be many more avenues of referral to Health 

and Human Services, especially in the case of child- trafficking victims. Referrals must not only come from law enforcement. 

Immediate, safe care must be available for all victims and, again, 

especially for children. Children and other victims require stability 

while the details of their situation are being sorted out. 

Third, we need immediate, or very rapid, determination of eligibility by Health and Human Services based on referrals from social 

service providers, child welfare agencies, attorneys, medical providers, or others. Especially since children are not required to testify, there should not need to be a law enforcement referral or 

verification that many, many times prevents children and adults 

from receiving care. 

Fourth, we believe that there must be a continuum of care, from 

identification through self-sufficiency. Immediately upon identification, care must be provided, but we must not drop care and stop 

assisting victims 30 days or 60 days after their identification. 

We believe that some of the provisions in your proposed bill will 

assist with some of the problems that we have just identified. In 

cases where Health and Human Services cannot immediately or 

rapidly determine a child to be eligible for services, we believe that 

the guardian ad litem provision will assist HHS by creating a 

mechanism that they can use to investigate the situation, to identify whether a child is a trafficking victim, and to provide safe care 

for the child while those questions are being resolved. The guardian ad litem service would terminate immediately upon placement 

of a child into appropriate care. 

We also believe that the requirement that the victims be informed of their rights to services would assist with victim identification as well as in the efforts of both Department of Justice and 

Department of Health and Human Services to provide immediate 

care for victims. We support the provisions which would ensure 

that trafficking victims are not denied access to legal representation. We believe that these three provisions, among others, would 

be a great help to the identification and formal provision of services 

to trafficking victims in the United States. 

61

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I want to repeat my thanks to this 

Committee for considering this bill and making efforts to prevent 

human trafficking. We reiterate our support for the bill, H.R. 972. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Duncan follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JULIANNE DUNCAN, PH.D., ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, MIGRATION AND REFUGEE SERVICES, UNITED STATES CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS

I am Julianne Duncan, director of children’s services of Migration and Refugee 

Services of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (MRS/USCCB). I am pleased to 

be here today before the subcommittee to testify on trafficking in human persons 

and the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005. 

I would like to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for inviting us to testify today and for 

your leadership on this important and vital humanitarian issue. You have been tireless in your advocacy on behalf of victims of human trafficking. In part because of 

your leadership, Mr. Chairman, general awareness of this issue has grown, as has 

the response of our government to end it. 

Our purpose in testifying today is to provide the perspective of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops on the U.S. government response to human trafficking 

and to relay our support for the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act 

of 2005, which will be the subject of a markup tomorrow in this Subcommittee. 

In my testimony, I will focus mainly on child trafficking victims, who are particularly vulnerable to traffickers. I also will address advances in the treatment of trafficking victims that have been made as a result of the Trafficking Victims Protection 

Act of 2000 and its 2003 reauthorization; set forth a number of changes in law and 

practice that the Bishops recommend be made in order to more fully protect such 

victims; and assess H.R. 972, the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act 

of 2005, which you recently introduced in the House of Representatives. 

At this point in my testimony, I will briefly summarize a number of recommendations on actions that need to be taken in order to more fully protect the victims of 

trafficking. I explore each of them more fully later in my testimony. 

Policy Recommendations 

We recommend that the U.S. government undertake the following actions, which 

we believe would more fully protect trafficking victims encountered in the United 

States:

1. More avenues should be created for the referral of trafficking victims for certification and services, including referrals from appropriate nonprofit, child 

welfare, and social service providers.

2. Services to trafficking victims should be made available from the point they 

are rescued to the point they are self-sufficient and in good health.

3. There should be established within the Department of Health and Human 

Services (HHS) a contingency fund for use when sudden, large-scale emergency cases threaten to overwhelm the capacity of nonprofit agencies that 

partner with HHS.

4. Federal agencies should better coordinate efforts, especially in the certification, protection, and care of victims.

5. The federal government should provide more education and guidance to state 

and local law enforcement agencies on their authority to recommend that trafficking victims be referred for services.

6. Special procedures should be developed for assisting child trafficking victims, 

including provisions for their referral, addressing their need for immediate 

safe haven, expediting determinations relating to their eligibility, providing 

long-term care in the least restrictive setting, and ensuring that they have access to child welfare specialists.

7. Congress should enact into law H.R. 972, the ‘‘Trafficking Victims Protection 

Reauthorization Act of 2005,’’ including its important reforms relating to access to information about services that are available to trafficking victims, 

guardians ad litem for child trafficking victims, access to counsel, and residential rehabilitative facilities.

8. Congress should enact into law S. 119, the Unaccompanied Alien Child Protection Act of 2005, which would establish a comprehensive framework for the 

protection of unaccompanied alien children, including those caught up in 

human trafficking. 

62

1Pope John Paul II, Letter to Archbishop Jean-Louis Tauran on the Occasion of the International Conference on 21st Century Slavery—the Human Rights Dimension in Trafficking in 

Human Beings, May 15, 2002. 2 U.S. and Mexican Catholic Bishops, Strangers No Longer: Together on the Journey of Hope, 

January, 2003, n. 191. 3Statement of Bishop Thomas Wenski, Press Conference on Launching of Anti-Trafficking Initiative in Central Florida, June 9, 2004. 

The Bishops’ Interest in Human Trafficking 

The movement of people across boundaries around the world is part of the collective human experience, but towards the end of the 20th century a new and disturbing issue related to the international migration of humans began to emerge: the 

trafficking of humans through the use of fraud, force, or coercion. 

Now, in the twenty-first century, this practice reaches every corner of the globe, 

from Asia and Africa to Europe and the Americas. The purveyors of this new international scourge—international traffickers and their accomplices—gain power and 

reap profits from their abuse and exploitation of those they traffic. 

This is not a problem which exists merely on far away shores and in less developed lands. It exists right here in the United States, where thousands of persons 

are trafficked each year for purposes of forced prostitution or forced labor. Trafficking in persons is a modern-day form of slavery, and it is the largest manifestation of slavery today. 

The Catholic bishops of the United States and the church community throughout 

the nation have placed combating human trafficking as a top priority in their public 

advocacy, educational outreach, and in providing service to trafficking victims. From 

the Catholic perspective, human trafficking represents a scourge on the earth which 

must be eradicated. It is indeed troubling that in the twenty-first century human 

beings are being sold into bondage as prostitutes, domestic workers, child laborers, 

and child soldiers. 

His Holiness Pope John Paul II, in a letter on the occasion of the International 

Conference on ‘‘21st Century Slavery—the Human Rights Dimension to Trafficking 

in Human Beings,’’ stated that human trafficking ‘‘constitutes a shocking offense 

against human dignity and a grave violation of fundamental human rights. In particular, the sexual exploitation of women and children is a particularly repugnant 

aspect of this trade, and must be recognized as an intrinsic violation of human dignity and human rights.’’ 1

The Catholic bishops of the United States and Mexico have also spoken out on 

the issue, calling upon the governments of the United States and Mexico to work 

together to apprehend traffickers and destroy trafficking networks: ‘‘Both governments must vigilantly seek to end trafficking in human persons. Together, both governments should more effectively share information on trafficking operations and 

should engage in joint action to apprehend and prosecute traffickers.’’ 2

In a recent statement, the U.S. Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Migration reaffirmed the commitment of the U.S. Catholic Bishops to end this humanitarian crisis: ‘‘The Catholic Church . . . in the United States stands ready to work with our 

government to end this scourge. We cannot rest until trafficking in human persons 

is eliminated from the globe.’’ 3

The Scourge of Human Trafficking 

At least 700,000 persons annually are trafficked within or across international 

boundaries. They are forced mainly from less-developed countries and regions, such 

as India, the former Soviet Union, Central and South America, and throughout Africa. They traverse the globe, ending in Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Israel, Australia, Japan, Canada, and the United States. 

It is estimated that as many as 17,500 human beings each year are trafficked into 

the United States to work in the sex trade or as slave labor. Women and children 

have been forced to work in prostitution and child pornography rings, while men, 

women, and children have been forced into different types of manual labor, without 

pay or protection. 

Victims of human trafficking are commonly linked by poverty and lack of opportunity. They are also connected by their desperation and urge to escape the double 

trap of privation and their perception of migration as an accessible escape route. 

Often they seek to escape life in a dreary village or oppressive slum, with the hope 

of finding opportunity and a brighter future in a more developed land. 

It is in these environments that human traffickers flourish, promising 

unsuspecting victims an opportunity to travel to a foreign land, at no immediate expense, for employment and housing. At the end of the journey, they find coercion, 

abuse, entrapment, and exploitation in a brothel, a massage parlor, an illicit factory, 

63

or an agricultural outpost. By the time they are rescued, if ever, they are shattered 

by physical, mental, and psychological abuse in the roles of prostitutes, domestic 

servants, or manual laborers. Many become ill with disease or become infected with 

HIV. Some lose their lives. 

The Church Response to Human Trafficking 

As I mentioned, Mr. Chairman, the Catholic Church has placed the elimination 

of trafficking as an important priority in the areas of public advocacy, public education, and services to trafficking victims. We are working to raise awareness within 

the Catholic community about the problem, including trainings to help diocesan 

staff identify and assist victims of trafficking. We have sponsored roundtables and 

conferences on the subject and held public meetings on several occasions to educate 

the Catholic faithful and others on human trafficking. It is important to note, Mr. 

Chairman, that all of our training and education is directed toward one end: the 

best interest of the victims. Our education and training are intended to help people 

to identify victims when they see them, and to empower them to act on what they 

see. Part of this effort is driven by the Catholic Coalition Against Human Trafficking, 

which consists of about twenty Catholic organizations which convene quarterly and 

work together on advocacy and public outreach. The coalition was instrumental in 

influencing provisions of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 and its successor, the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2003. 

The Church and its service organizations, particularly Catholic Charities, also 

provide support services to both adult and child victims of trafficking, including 

health and mental health services, employment assistance, English-language training, counseling, housing and other material assistance needs. Through our networks, we also provide case management services, social service assistance, and 

legal assistance, where appropriate. We have served 135 adult trafficking victims 

in the past two years and 36 child trafficking victims. We also have consulted on 

over 45 potential child trafficking cases, possibly representing as many as 140 victims. In our experience, Mr. Chairman, victims of trafficking need access to a continuum of services in order to attain self-sufficiency and restored mental and physical health. 

Trafficking victims also need, first and foremost, safety and security. Many are 

terrified of the traffickers who brought them to the United States and show signs 

of post traumatic stress disorder syndrome, among other mental health problems. 

Providing them with a secure, safe, and nurturing environment is crucial to ensuring their return to society as contributing members. In this vein, MRS/USCCB has 

developed a system for short-term emergency housing where victims can be safe 

until they are assigned to a non-governmental organization to provide them with 

the services they are entitled to as victims of trafficking. Our system of safe houses 

involves the commitment of individuals and communities, including religious communities, who open their doors when there is an emergency in their area or who 

network to ensure that victims receive housing and are protected. 

Mr. Chairman, let me add that faith-based organizations are uniquely positioned 

to identify and provide assistance to victims of human trafficking. First, faith-based 

organizations act from a theological and philosophical perspective. For example, the 

themes of Catholic social teaching—the protection of human dignity and human 

rights; the option for the poor; the call to family and community; the rights of workers; solidarity and care for creation—all address evils inherent in human trafficking. 

These principles of justice are not unique to Catholicism but are manifest in most 

religions. Commitment to these principles gives the issue of human trafficking a 

sense of urgency to many faiths and religious communities. 

Second, most faith-based organizations have national and international networks 

that enhance their capacity to give voice and volume to the cry for justice. They 

have access to a cross-section of agencies, both domestic and international, which 

offer expertise and geography that expand the possibilities for outreach and service, 

an asset not to be underestimated. For example, the Catholic Church is present 

overseas, in the form of Catholic Relief Services and the universal Church, as well 

as domestically, in the form of Catholic Charities, local dioceses, and parishes. We 

also have access to other networks, such as religious congregations around the 

world. 

Finally, faith-based organizations have resources, in the form of human resources, 

in-kind donations, and other assets, which provide an important infrastructure 

which can assist in the fight against human trafficking. While we see the effort as 

a partnership with the U.S. government and other governments around the world, 

we would be performing this work regardless, particularly because of the moral 

gravity of the issue and the ongoing suffering of its victims. 

64

U.S. Government Response to the Plague of Human Trafficking 

Mr. Chairman, in 2000 the U.S. Congress passed landmark legislation which you 

sponsored, entitled the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, which provided 

the U.S. government the framework to respond to the plague of human trafficking 

in the United States. In 2003, Congress reauthorized funding for original legislation 

and made major improvements to it, giving law enforcement authorities more tools 

to apprehend traffickers and giving trafficking victims, especially children, easier access to immigration benefits and services. 

Specifically, TVPA revamped U.S. law by making trafficking a crime against an 

individual, allowing the U.S. government to focus on victims of trafficking. The government now provides funding to assist victims and issues a T-visa, created under 

the law, to provide protection and permanence to victims. Reauthorization of TVPA 

allowed for minors to access the T-visa without being forced to testify in open court 

against their persecutors and allowed for siblings of victims to come with their parents to the United States. We believe the T-visa and its protection is a major feature 

of U.S. law which permits victims to remain in the United States and not be sent 

back to traffickers in their home country. 

Since the enactment of TVPA in 2000, the State Department, the Department of 

Justice, and the Department of Health and Human Services have made great 

strides in implementing the law. Because of their joint and individual efforts, general awareness about the reality of human trafficking has increased, more victims 

have been identified and referred for services, and more traffickers have been 

brought to justice. Your leadership, Mr. Chairman, and that of Congress will help 

improve these efforts even further in the years ahead. 

Despite the advancements made in the past several years, Mr. Chairman, improvements can continue to be made in providing a continuum of services to victims 

and in identifying and referring victims for care. 

The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005

Mr. Chairman, I would like to take this opportunity to comment on the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005, which you have introduced 

in this Congress. We applaud you for the introduction of the legislation and support 

its enactment. While we generally support the legislation, we would like to highlight 

several provisions in the legislation which will help fill the gaps in the continuum 

of care for victims. 

Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem for Potential Child Trafficking Victims. Mr. 

Chairman, we are in strong support of Section 102 of HR 972. Section 102 (a) requires, to the extent practicable, that victims of severe forms of trafficking have access to information regarding federally-funded programs which provide services to 

victims. It is vital that these victims, who are traumatized and require special attention, at a minimum receive information regarding the services available to them. 

Without such information, some are unable to access care, leaving them vulnerable 

and without support. 

Section 102 (b) of the legislation creates a guardian ad litem program in the Office 

of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) which gives the director of ORR the authority, if the 

director has a reason to believe that a child is a victim of trafficking, to appoint 

a guardian ad litem to investigate whether a child is a child trafficking victim in 

need of services. It also allows the guardian to guide the child during legal proceedings. 

Mr. Chairman, we believe strongly that Section 102 (b) is necessary to ensure that 

unaccompanied alien children who may be victims of trafficking but have not been 

referred to ORR by federal or state law enforcement authorities can receive appropriate care and services. In our experience, we have seen cases where children (and 

adults) who may be victims of trafficking languish in detention or some other setting for months because federal or local prosecutors and law enforcement have not 

decided whether to pursue their case as trafficking and have not made referrals for 

services. 

In some cases, the child is not able to articulate their circumstances adequately 

so that federal prosecutors can proceed to make a case. Nevertheless, they are trafficking victims, as their social workers or others can testify. HHS has not been able 

to determine that these children should receive formal services, thus leaving children in unsuitable care. Even worse, they are left to return to the hands of their 

traffickers when ORR/HHS is not able to intervene to provide services. 

Section 102 (b) allows for a guardian to investigate the circumstances of a potential child trafficking victim and report his or her findings to ORR. ORR can then 

use the report as a basis for a declaration of eligibility. Implementation of this provision would plug a gap in the continuum of care for child trafficking victims, makVerDate Mar 21 2002 10:38 Jul 08, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 F:\WORK\AGI\030905\99820.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
65

ing such a continuum less dependent on the discretion of prosecutors, who may or 

may not decide to refer a child for services. 

Mr. Chairman, Section 102 (b) is designed to assist a child who may be a trafficking victim but who has not been declared eligible for services because of limitations in the system. The guardian shall carry out the duties under the section until 

one of five events occur: 1). Such duties are completed; 2).The child departs the 

United States; 3). The child is granted permanent resident status; 4). The child attains age 18; or 5). The child is placed in the legal custody of a parent, legal guardian, or licensed child welfare agency. It is our experience and the current practice 

of ORR to place the child in legal custody with a child welfare agency upon declaration of eligibility for services. At that point, the child welfare agency, or the parent 

or legal guardian, acts as guardian for the child. 

Access to Counsel for Victims of Trafficking. MRS/USCCB also strongly supports 

Section 102 (c) of the legislation, which ensures that victims of severe forms of trafficking ‘‘shall not be denied access to counsel in any proceeding or matter relating 

to the investigation and prosecution of the act of trafficking involved.’’ The provision 

also requires that victims be informed of their right to have counsel and that information about available counsel in the community be made available. Mr. Chairman, 

given the lack of counsel available to trafficking victims, Section 102 (c) is the minimum we can do to ensure that trafficking victims are adequately represented in 

the legal process. The provision does not require that the victim be represented by 

counsel or that government-funded counsel is provided, but merely ensures that victims are not denied the right to be represented by counsel. Victims of trafficking 

benefit from counsel because they are involved in legal proceedings to prosecute 

traffickers, need assistance to obtain a legal visa, and may or may not be involved 

in deportation proceedings. 

Protection of Victims of Domestic Trafficking in Persons. We support Section 203 

of the bill regarding the establishment of a pilot program to establish residential 

treatment facilities for minor victims of domestic trafficking in the United States. 

Often overlooked in the debate around human trafficking is that trafficking does not 

have to cross international boundaries. Human trafficking can, and does, occur 

wholly within the jurisdiction of the United States. We would suggest that the program not be focused solely on the development of residential treatment facilities, 

which can be costly and restrictive in setting, but begin with a needs assessment 

which would identify and provide specialized treatment available in the community. 

We also support Section 205 of the legislation, which would establish a grant program for states and local law enforcement to work with victim service providers to 

investigate and prosecute acts of domestic trafficking in persons. It is vital that relationships between local law enforcement and local nongovernmental organizations 

be strengthened in the effort to combat human trafficking. Local community organizations who work with victims of trafficking can be indispensable in identifying trafficking victims and assisting local law enforcement in identifying and prosecuting 

perpetrators. We encourage that such a program be extended to all forms of trafficking, not just domestic trafficking. 

Prevention of Trafficking in Persons. The USCCB also supports the provision in 

Section 101, Prevention of Trafficking in Persons, to instruct the Agency for International Development (AID), the Department of State, and the Department of Defense to incorporate anti-trafficking protections for vulnerable populations in post 

conflict and humanitarian emergency situations. War exacts a terrible human and 

material cost on its victims. Too often, in the chaos of war and ensuing refugee situations, women and children in particular are subject to trafficking. As we recently 

saw in Thailand and Indonesia after tsunami devastation, children can be vulnerable to traffickers after a natural disaster or humanitarian crisis. Improved research 

and implementation of standards and programs in these agencies are necessary first 

steps in the prevention and elimination of the abuse arising from trafficking in postconflict or humanitarian situations. 

Enhancing United States Efforts to Combat Trafficking in Persons. In supporting 

Section 104, we are all too familiar from our own experience that children are often 

abducted and enslaved as child soldiers. We must put an end to this horrific practice, which can destroy future generations. We strongly support Section 104(f), to 

strengthen the capacity of multilateral organizations to address trafficking by peacekeepers. Peacekeepers are essential to helping communities end conflict and restore 

stability and peace. Abuse and trafficking by peacekeepers is a terrible betrayal of 

trust and damaging to long-term peace-keeping efforts. Strengthening certification 

of these organizations to prevent and address trafficking is most welcomed. 

In addition to endorsing the enactment of H.R. 972, we also make the following 

recommendations for your consideration: 

66

1. Services to trafficking victims should be made available to victims from the 

point they are rescued to the point they are self-sufficient and in good 

health. 

While the Congress has appropriated funds for services to trafficking victims 

through the Office of Refugee Resettlement of the Department of Health and 

Human Services (ORR/HHS) and the Department of Justice, there exist gaps 

in funding and services for victims which should be addressed. 

First, funding for services should be made more available once a victim is 

identified but before certification by HHS. This is a critical time in the care of 

a trafficking victim, who is usually traumatized, physically and mentally 

abused, and insecure. The funding which is available for pre-certification is inadequate to address the needs of an individual when the period between his or 

her identification and certification lasts many months. Care and placement 

should begin immediately upon the rescue of a victim. While both the Department of Justice’s Office of Victims of Crime and HHS recognize this principle, 

the funding does not match the long-term care that the investigation mandates. 

Consideration should also be given for the care of victims post-certification, 

at least until they have achieved self-sufficiency and good health. Currently, 

funding provides for initial screening, health-care, employment referral, and 

other services, but does not follow the victim beyond the initial stages of resettlement. This leaves these victims susceptible to traffickers and to desperation 

on the streets. 

We recommend that the subcommittee examine the continuum of care given 

to trafficking victims and work to fill the gaps which undermine the potential 

success of victims to lead happier and more fulfilling lives. 

2. More avenues should be created for the referral of victims, especially child 

victims, for certification and services, including referrals from appropriate 

nonprofit, child welfare, and social service providers. 

Although as many as 17,000 persons are trafficked into the United States 

each year, approximately 500 have been identified and certified since 2000. This 

is primarily because of the lack of awareness among the general public, community organizations and groups, and local law enforcement authorities, which 

should improve in the months and years ahead. It is also because there exist 

only certain avenues for referral, mainly by federal authorities who apprehend 

and prosecute traffickers and who rescue victims. 

We strongly believe that more avenues for referral should be available. Nonprofit organizations in the community, such as child welfare agencies or social 

service providers, possess experience in identifying potential trafficking victims 

and should be allowed to refer victims to ORR for appropriate services, where 

possible. 

3. There should be established within the Department of Health and Human 

Services a contingency fund for use when sudden, large-scale emergency 

cases threaten to overwhelm the capacity of nonprofit agencies that partner 

with HHS. 

While HHS funding for victims has been adequate, given the low numbers of 

victims identified it will not accommodate numbers that will surface if the HHS 

Rescue and Restore program is effective. When large numbers of victims are uncovered, no funded agency can respond without depleting their funding on one 

single case. We recommend a contingency fund that is both large enough and 

flexible enough to provide for large-scale emergency cases. 

Recent events on Long Island demonstrate the need for such a fund. Last 

year 69 Peruvians were rescued from captivity in Suffolk County, Long Island, 

by law enforcement authorities. They had been held in captivity for four years, 

forced to work 18 hour days and pay traffickers. Catholic Charities of Rockville 

Centre diocese is now attempting to provide counseling, medical care, job placement, housing, and immigration assistance to the victims 

4. Federal agencies should better coordinate efforts, especially in the certification, protection, and care of victims. 

The creation of a State Department office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking 

in Persons in the TVPA has helped focus the efforts of the U.S. government in 

the last several years. Among the initiatives undertaken by the office include 

an interagency task force to coordinate efforts and initiatives to combat trafficking and the sponsorship of conferences to educate the public and others 

about the issue. The office also issues an annual Trafficking in Persons report, 

which identifies sending countries and holds them accountable for not addressVerDate Mar 21 2002 10:38 Jul 08, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 F:\WORK\AGI\030905\99820.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
67

ing the issue in their countries. The office also speaks for the U.S. government 

on trafficking issues, raising awareness domestically and abroad. 

Despite significant progress in this area since 2000, coordination between federal agencies, such as the Department of Justice and the Department of Health 

and Human Services, could be improved. For example, information on victims 

and prosecutions should be more readily shared between the agencies, and 

questions about implementation of the law should be jointly considered and addressed. 

5. The federal government should provide more education and guidance to 

state and local law enforcement agencies on their authority to recommend 

that trafficking victims be referred for services. 

The reauthorization of the TVPA in 2003 includes a provision which allows 

ORR/HHS to consider referrals by state and local law enforcement authorities 

of trafficking victims for certification. However, federal guidance on this provision has not been forthcoming, resulting in confusion as to how local and state 

law enforcement are involved in referral/certification decisions. We recommend 

that the exact authority of local and state law enforcement to refer victims for 

services be clarified, either by statute or regulation. 

In addition, many state and local officials are unaware of this provision and 

of the certification process and services available to victims. Since state and 

local authorities often encounter trafficking rings and victims without recognizing them as such, more education should be provided by the federal government to state and local governments for this purpose. We applaud the initiatives of the Department of Justice to provide this education and encourage them 

to move expeditiously. 

6. Special procedures should be developed for assisting child trafficking victims, including provisions for their referral, addressing their need for immediate safe haven, expediting determinations relating to their eligibility, 

providing long-term care in the least restrictive setting, and ensuring that 

they have access to child welfare specialists. 

Mr. Chairman, MRS/USCCB have a special interest in the situation of children 

who are trafficking victims. As you know, children are particularly vulnerable to 

traffickers and are susceptible to their abuses. We must pay particular attention to 

child trafficking victims and ensure that they are protected and provided special 

care. 

Mr. Chairman, children are perhaps the most vulnerable group of victims of trafficking. While efforts to find and assist victims of trafficking have been pursued 

with commendable commitment over the last several years, I fear that children, as 

a group, have fallen through the cracks of these enforcement efforts. Since the enactment of TVPA, only 63 child victims have been identified within the United 

States and referred for services. However, knowledge of the nature of trafficking, 

the sexual exploitation of children, and statistics gathered by the State Department 

on worldwide numbers of trafficked kids leads one to conclude that many more children are being held involuntarily in trafficking situations in the United States than 

we have so far identified. Special attention needs to be given to identifying child 

victims of trafficking crimes. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to share with you and the subcommittee members a 

success story of trafficked children who were referred to our agency for services. 

In early April, 2002, a local law enforcement agency conducted a raid on an organized crime syndicate involving illegal aliens engaged in prostitution in the United 

States. Among those apprehended were four young girls from Mexico who had been 

lured to the United States with promises of marriage, but who instead were forced 

into prostitution and kept in virtual slavery. At the time of their apprehension by law 

enforcement personnel, the girls, ranging in ages from 14 to 16, had been in the U.S. 

and kept in slave-like conditions for two years. They were not allowed to leave the 

houses in which they were forced into prostitution, were often beaten, and were forbidden to even speak with each other. 

Shortly after the raid, a call was made to ORR/HHS and to Migration and Refugee Services of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops in Washington, requesting 

assistance in locating an appropriate child welfare environment in which to place the 

girls. Within a week, the girls were transferred to a state-licensed, residential program for unaccompanied minors which specializes in assisting children suffering 

from sexual abuse and is experienced in caring for children around the world. 

Since placement of the girls, reports are that their fears and trauma-induced nightmares are abating. The girls have since received T-visas and helped prosecute the 

men who trafficked them. The court convicted the traffickers and ordered them to 

68

give restitution of $135, 000 to the girls. They are receiving an education and two 

are living with family. 

Mr. Chairman, this is an example of how the system should work. Unfortunately, 

it does not always work in this manner because not enough child victims are able 

to access the system. 

Of the close to 17,500 persons trafficked into the United States each year, an estimated one-third are children. Unfortunately, there have been few referrals of children for services since 2000. Through January of this year, only 63 children nationwide have been certified and referred for care. Since 2000, we and our partner agency, the Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, have received only 36 referrals 

of children for services. 

The children identified and ‘‘determined eligible’’ for services in the United States 

to date are largely being served in specialized foster care programs which have long 

experience caring for refugee, asylee, and other unaccompanied foreign-born children. Immediate safety and long-term stability are the overwhelming needs of child 

trafficking victims, regardless of age, background, type of enslavement or any other 

characteristic. For some of the children to date, the referral and service system has 

worked well. However, a continuum of care in which the child experiences the most 

stability should become the norm for child referral victims. 

The care of children, particularly extremely vulnerable children such as child trafficking victims, should be governed by a set of principles to ensure positive outcomes. These principles include use of the ‘‘best interest of the child’ standard in 

all cases; the provision of immediate safe haven with a systematic plan for assessing 

a child’s needs; the exploration of family reunification as a priority; the placement 

of children in the least restrictive setting; the provision of legal assistance to children; and the development of a long-term plan for self-sufficiency for children. 

Despite best efforts, there exist gaps in the continuum of care for child trafficking 

victims, including initial identification by law enforcement of trafficked persons as 

children and victims, referral to ORR/HHS to be determined eligible for services, 

and assessments of ‘‘family reunification’’ placements to ensure children are not 

given back to traffickers. 

These gaps can have major consequences for child trafficking victims. For example, when children are not identified as trafficking victims, they may be mistakenly 

identified as adults, detained and deported through the Department of Homeland 

Security detention system, placed in overburdened local child welfare systems with 

little security and planning, or released back to traffickers or their associates. When 

children are identified as trafficking victims but not referred to ORR/HHS for care, 

they can be placed in short-term shelters where they experience frequent moves, receive no orderly system of assessment and treatment, and have no long-term safety 

and security. 

In order to avoid these devastating consequences for children, we offer the following recommendations:

• Procedures should be developed for all federal, state, and local law enforcement personnel to refer immediately children in trafficking-like situations for 

assessment and age determination with benefit of the doubt going to the 

child;

• A system of immediate safe haven should be developed where a child is safe 

while being determined eligible, which includes immediate care and assessment of needs and a strategy to assess family for possible safe reunification;

• Determination of eligibility for child victims should be expedited, with the assistance of a guardian ad litem, if necessary; and

• Long-term care in a least restrictive setting should be arranged, with capacity 

for therapeutic intervention; assistance with legal obligations; plan for family 

reunification; or eventual self-sufficiency.

• A child welfare specialist should be appointed to oversee the child from rescue 

to self-sufficiency. Such an expert can act as a decision-maker for a traumatized child in a complex legal and child welfare system.

The Catholic Church recognizes the special vulnerability of trafficked victims who 

are children and are ready to work with the federal government to develop and implement programs which address their needs. 

Finally, Mr. Chairman, we would ask the subcommittee’s support for legislation 

which addresses the plight of unaccompanied alien children. Senator Dianne Feinstein has introduced S. 119, the Unaccompanied Alien Child Protection Act of 2005, 

which would sensibly resolve these ambiguities and provide other needed reforms 

in the care and placement of these children, including ensuring that proactive steps 

are taken to protect such children from smugglers, traffickers, and unscrupulous atVerDate Mar 21 2002 10:38 Jul 08, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 F:\WORK\AGI\030905\99820.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
69

torneys who may be cooperating with such criminals. I commend the Senate for 

passing this legislation in the 108th Congress and urge both the Senate and House 

of Representatives to pass it in this Congress so the legislation may be presented 

to the President for his signature. 

Conclusion 

Mr. Chairman, the issue of trafficking in human persons is perhaps one of the 

most important human rights issue facing the world community today. The United 

States, and Congress, have taken significant steps in the past several years to address this problem. The historic passage of trafficking legislation in 2000 established 

the framework for the U.S. response and places the United States as a moral leader 

in the effort to eradicate the scourge of trafficking from the face of the earth. Reauthorization of the legislation in 2005 would represent another positive step. 

I am confident that, with better coordination and cooperation between all 

branches of government, we can, as a nation, punish traffickers and provide appropriate care to victims. We also will, as a nation, influence other nations to step up 

their efforts to end this practice, so that vulnerable men, women, and children everywhere will not become victims of the worse side of humanity. 

Thank you for considering our views today.

Mr. SMITH. Dr. Duncan, thank you very much for your testimony, 

and without objection, your full statement and those of all of our 

witnesses will be made a part of the record. 

You have made a number of very important recommendations, 

some of which are in the bill, some that are allusive, and I think 

you give us additional information to begin working on for additional text, so I do thank you for that. 

In looking at your testimony—oral as well as in your written—

you talk about the barriers and the avenues of referral. I, too, am 

concerned that only 63—I think, is the number you have here—

child victims have been identified within the U.S. and referred for 

services. The law enforcement provision, even though it does not 

bind a youth in terms of testifying, was a sticky provision back 

when we originally wrote the law. There were those who wanted 

an even tougher provision, believing that this would be liable to 

fraud if we did not have some connection to law enforcement. 

What I argued for was, at least, a minimum policy of aiding law 

enforcement in the prosecution. Certainly we want to put traffickers behind bars, but for a traumatized young woman who is 18 

or older sometimes that becomes generally impossible; to do just 

the barest minimum would be prescribed. So we need to work on 

that further, and I think you have some very good recommendations here. 

I did want to ask you, if I could: What do you think the unmet 

need is? How many children are going without the services that 

they otherwise should be provided? 

Ms. DUNCAN. Well, I think Mr. Miller gave the estimates of the 

number of probable children who are trafficked into the United 

States: 17,000 people. If half, at least, of those victims are women 

and children, at the very minimum, we must assume that about 

5,000 children are trafficked into the United States per year. The 

number, 63, is the total number of children who have formally received benefits since 2000, since the passage of the bill. Thirty-six 

of those 63 are unaccompanied; the others are with parents or legal 

guardians. 

It seems to me that the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) effort, the Rescue and Restore Campaign, is beginning 

to bear fruit. We have received considerably more requests for consultation during the past year than we did the year before, so we 

70

do think that the word is beginning to get out and that there will 

be more referrals. If we consulted on 45 cases in which there were 

probably 140 children during the past year, I think we have to assume that the system should be prepared to receive and care for 

several hundred children per year once this system gets up and 

running. 

Mr. SMITH. I would just say as well that I participated in one of 

the breakout meetings that DHHS conducted at Newark with the 

diocese of Newark, the archdiocese, and Bishop Myers was there of 

Catholic Charities and a whole host of NGOs. That kind of breakout, I think, was a learning experience for everybody, including 

several law enforcement people who were aware but not to the degree that they walked away with after the conclusion of the meeting as to how, within their own municipality, their own county, 

trafficked women were being exploited. I remember the Union 

County prosecutor came forward, who is Ukrainian by ethnicity, 

and was shocked to hear how many Eastern European women were 

in his area, Russian and others, who have been trafficked. He had 

no idea. So I just want to thank you. 

Let me just ask a couple of other questions. Ms. Fernando, you 

talked about and you gave this Committee the reason why we are 

trying to do this. You are the reason, the victim, and thank you for 

your courage in coming forward. 

We did make mention of job agencies being a front for trafficking. That is something we have not focused on enough in the 

past, that legitimate or illegitimate job agencies become the conduit 

by which the traffickers open up shop. I think that is something 

we need to look at further in our work. I thank you for bringing 

that forward because, frankly, in all of my years working on this, 

we had not focused on that, so I do appreciate that. Anything you 

might want to say regarding that, we certainly welcome. 

Ms. FERNANDO. Yes. In Sri Lanka, there are so many job agencies, and even the Government is encouraging the people to go to 

the Middle East to get these housemaids/housekeeping/cleaners 

jobs. So how they get it is through these agencies. They are conducting Arabic classes so they can learn the language and get the 

jobs. Sometimes the agencies in Sri Lanka are not necessarily the 

traffickers, but when they transfer these people to the Middle East, 

then there they get into the traffickers’ hands. 

Mr. SMITH. Could I just ask you: To what do you attribute your 

ability to recover, or you are in the process of recovering from your 

trafficking experience? What are the most critical types of assistance that you think our Government, or any government, needs to 

be providing for trafficked victims? 

Ms. FERNANDO. I think, mainly, they should really register every 

month all of the children and women and men who are going to be 

domestic workers leaving the country. They should be registered. 

There should be a record so anyone can check them, because once 

they leave, they just disappear. Even when they come back, no one 

knows; they will not speak about it in public. 

Mr. SMITH. Let me ask you, Dr. Mendelson, if you would, as you 

know, our legislation would establish a Director of Anti-trafficking 

Policies in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. You probably 

heard earlier a little interplay between one of the other Members 

71

of the Committee and myself. I understand and fully appreciate a 

lack of faith that the military will get it right, especially after Abu 

Ghraib and other problems. It should be noted for the record that 

it was the military that uncovered Abu Ghraib—it was a whistleblower within the military—and there have been significant investigations, prosecutions, and convictions. I do not like the fact that 

this happened. Nobody does. I abhor it. That said, the Convention 

Against Torture is absolute in its proscribing any type of torture, 

but here we are talking about a unit that would be a strike force, 

if you will, within the building to ensure that all that can be done 

and should be done is being done; at least, that is what we envision 

it as, but I would appreciate your thoughts on it. 

Ms. MENDELSON. Well, I think one thing to consider is that there 

is, obviously, a larger issue of how the Department of Defense has 

dealt with human rights issues inside its own building and among 

its own troops, on its own troops, and, at one point, I thought that 

that was an alternative to an office that dealt specifically with trafficking. This is an organization that is, in a lot of ways, struggling 

with itself. It is struggling to get post-Cold War, if you will, and 

part of what we see when we look at peacekeeping operations and 

trafficking in persons is that they have not really developed all of 

the capacity and training that they should have for people going 

into the field to work in peacekeeping operations because, frankly, 

they have not made it as much a priority as perhaps they should 

have. 

I came to the realization, or my belief, that there should be an 

office in a couple of ways. Initially, I thought there should be an 

office, and then people sort of talked me out of it and said, ‘‘No, 

no, no. Much better to have the assets distributed around the 

building.’’ And I watched over a period of a year and a half, where 

the youngest person in the office was assigned to deal with it, and 

sometimes that was an intern, where people talked about it as ‘‘I 

am the stuckee’’ or ‘‘expert by appointment,’’ where there was just 

no leadership, over and over and over again. And it was as if people did not understand that not only they should have been responding to NSPD 22, but that this was actually part of their mission and that it was not something that they should be running 

from. 

So it became clear to me that there needed to be serious leadership, there needed to be assets, and there needed to be resources 

devoted to this. The State Department is not in the business of 

overseeing what the Department of Defense does on this issue, and 

this is beyond education and training. This is about making sure 

that inspectors are trained in how to do this kind of investigation, 

which is quite sensitive and which Inspector General Schmidtz admitted, they are in the very early stages of learning. Military police, CID, need particular focus. Special Forces need focus. Our 

academies need to be trained on this issue. We have issues with 

reserves as well who are more and more on peacekeeping deployment. 

But it is also that the Department of Defense can lead in working with other NATO countries’ ministries of defense and with the 

U.N. on this issue. What I see is that Finland, Sweden, Norway are 

with us, but I am looking for Great Britain, I am looking for 

72

France, I am looking for Italy, and I am looking for Germany, in 

the NATO context. Obviously, in the U.N. context, we have an 

enormous burden. If you think of it as a campaign, that this is a 

campaign to cut the links between peacekeeping operations and 

trafficked women and girls, if we can get it right at DoD, and we 

are getting it right at NATO, then we have the possibility of also 

looking at the U.N. And I should say that these are, all three, very 

different organizations, and I recognize that they have different 

burdens and different responsibilities and different organizational 

cultures. 

I understand the Congresswoman’s concerns that DoD might not 

be transparent, and, for that, we certainly look to Congress, and 

that there should be a strong oversight. We also would hope that 

whoever is leading this effort understands this issue, embraces this 

issue, and is going to work—both on the military side and the civilian side—to advance this. But I think that we cannot just sit back 

and believe that organizations feel some obligation to implement 

these policies, particularly if they have no resources devoted to 

them, and if they are not devoting any resources to them. 

Mr. SMITH. I would just note for the record that when we did the 

International Religious Freedom Act, as well as the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, there were large numbers of people who 

thought this kind of specializing within the Department of State 

was a misguided but well-intended effort. I think both of those efforts have yielded fruit and have actually mobilized the rest of the 

building, across the under secretaries, across the assistant secretaries, and our Ambassadors have now taken a lead. 

When we first did the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, we 

made what is now Ambassador rank a Director because we could 

not do the lift sufficient enough to get that passed. There was not 

enough support for it. We came back, and it was—an Ambassador. 

But there was that sense of, well, that is why we have a Human 

Rights Bureau, that they should be doing that. That is why whenever you travel, you find out there is some Foreign Service officer, 

and like the intern you mentioned, it is usually the lowest-grade 

person on the totem pole, the newest person in the mission, who 

is the human rights action officer. And it always has bothered me 

that everyone else is doing trade and other important issues, and 

human rights gets a little asterisk at the bottom of the page. It 

seems to me, that same kind of trivialization could happen within 

DoD. Dr. Mendelson? 

Ms. MENDELSON. Let me just add that there is the additional aspect of this that is addressed by the bill legally, and that is civilian 

contractors. It is extremely important that the extension of jurisdiction be to contractors beyond DoD but that within DoD the responsibility for reaching out to the private sector and getting defense 

contractors smart on this issue, proactive on countering trafficking 

and not trafficking, is enormous, and we have not made the kind 

of progress that I would have hoped that we would have made to 

date, and this is very, very big business, billions of dollars, and I 

think that we really need to focus our efforts on that. 

UCMJ, the changes that you want to make, that you are recommending, are extremely important. We want this to be a kind of 

precedent setting for other countries, and you mentioned the case 

73

of the Russians. We know that there is a lot of trafficking that goes 

on within the Russian military, not only when there are peacekeepers, but there is an enormous amount of labor trafficking inside, and it would be very helpful if we had this in our military 

code of conduct when talking to Russian colleagues. 

Mr. SMITH. Congresswoman Smith, in Ambassador Barnes’ testimony, she mentioned that South African girls are trafficked to 

brothels in the Netherlands. I, and I am sure you have done this 

as well, have spoken to the foreign minister of the Netherlands, 

where prostitution is legal. They seem to think there is a bright 

line of demarcation that can be erected between prostitution and 

trafficking, and then when all is said and done, there is a commingling and, very often, what they call ‘‘a prostitute that has gotten 

there free and on her own accord’’ is really a trafficked woman. 

Why don’t you give me your response, especially in terms of the 

Netherlands? 

Ms. SMITH. I am a businessperson by background. If I were to 

build a mall, I would automatically attract those that would want 

to sell products. So what happened is the Netherlands has built a 

mall. They drew some courts around the mall blocking us last 

week. I did not find an alley or even a main street within an hour 

of the Union Station where there were not brothel windows with 

women standing. 

They are in a struggle with themselves. I know they travel and 

say, ‘‘We have clean prostitution,’’ but I am recalling my history of 

the country and they also had the cleanest slave ships, and they 

were proud of their clean slave ships. While I was there, I stood 

before a very large, brick building down on the waterfront, and in 

brass was New York and major cities all over the world where they 

repackaged slaves that they sent on in their clean slave ships. And 

as I look at it, slavery is slavery. 

I am about proving this right now, but I believe most of the girls 

in these brothels are trafficked victims. I cannot prove that yet, but 

I would say that it is high enough that I would place this question 

before the Government at a proper time: If you had a slave factory 

in Amsterdam that made product, and it had 50 percent, which is 

what they are saying came from poor countries and were trafficked 

probably at some point, would you say that slavery was okay? No, 

they would not. For some reason, some societies have decided that 

sexual slavery is okay. 

So I do not buy that it is clean; I do not buy that it is safe. I 

am the person that interviews thousands of these girls. When I finally get to where they trust me, or they are in a place in one of 

our homes, and they talk about their real age and how they were 

told to say they were, whatever country, 16, 18, or whatever, that 

made them legal, you find out that most of them are 13, 14, 15. 

I just left a little girl named Hope who was trafficked at 15. I 

think she might be a little bit mentally slow. I left her with some 

color books and some school supplies. I have her in hiding. She was 

trafficked last year, and she is in one of those clean brothels, or she 

was, in the Netherlands. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you. One final question because I understand 

there is another Committee coming in very shortly, but I will submit some questions for the record, if you would not mind getting 

74

back to us. We have a provision for a certification requirement for 

peacekeeping, and, I guess, Dr. Mendelson, you would be the best 

one to ask this of, the idea that 15 days before approving or reapproving a current mission, our Secretary of State would have to 

certify that sufficient safeguards are in place to prevent trafficking 

and to prosecute if it, indeed, happens. What is your take on that 

provision? 

Ms. MENDELSON. I was not at the hearing last week because I 

was traveling to Finland, but I heard that there were Representatives of many States that showed up because they are concerned 

about this issue of withholding either funds or peacekeepers, and 

I think that on some level the bottomline gets attention. I am worried that, or I have concerns, that certification be done in more 

than a pro forma way and that maybe there is some way that we 

can work to make sure that there is a formal process of review. I 

have been to trainings for DynCorp, which was a certification process, and I was unimpressed with the training. It was pro forma. It 

was not mission specific. I talked to some of the folks who were in 

the training afterwards, and they did not understand what the 

issue was. They sort of had some idea that there had been a problem in the past. 

This is not rocket science, but it is also not automatic. I am sure 

there is a way to come up with a smart way to do certification, and 

I look forward to working with you and others on that. I think it 

will get the attention of the international community very, very 

quickly when the U.S. starts holding back and shows they are very 

serious. 

Mr. SMITH. I appreciate that. 

Secretary Kim Holmes had a couple of, I think, interesting ideas 

that we are taking into consideration. I am sure they will do it 

themselves. The idea is that countries that are deploying troops 

certify in writing before the fact that they have in place education. 

Secondly, that if there are members from their military that are 

found complicit in trafficking or prostitution, that they will be prosecuted, and to do so in writing. I thought that was a very valid recommendation from him. Yes? 

Ms. MENDELSON. Part of what we have to do are awareness campaigns and change behavior and knowledge of peacekeepers. We 

need to do that in as thorough a way as possible. It is very hard 

with just posters that are based on the policy. We really need to 

work on that. So I look forward to that. 

Mr. SMITH. The one question I have not gotten an answer to, and 

perhaps one of you might have it, is: How well or poorly do you 

think we have been, or the International Committee, has been vetting those who are deployed? I mentioned to Jane Hall Luttes, 

when she testified, from the United Nations, and I thought she did 

a very good job and is very deeply committed to eradicating trafficking and this kind of exploitation, and I made a point at the 

time which she took some umbrage with, and that is that we do 

not want peacekeeping to become sex tourism for soldiers. 

There has to be, at least, some people out here who might see 

this as an opportunity to exploit young children or vulnerable 

women, a registry of anyone who has committed any kind of crime 

like this to ensure they do not jump into a peacekeeping deployVerDate Mar 21 2002 10:38 Jul 08, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\AGI\030905\99820.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
75

ment. I say that with additional emphasis because Megan Kanka, 

a young girl who lived in my district, in Hamilton Township, was 

killed brutally by a pedophile who lived across the street. It has led 

to Megan’s Law, the disclosure laws that we now have in most of 

the States, and we have a Federal overlay to try to promote that 

idea in terms of withholding certain funds. A right to know who it 

is that you are sending, and they are not somebody with significant 

perversion who then acts it out on a vulnerable population. So a 

register of past people who have committed crimes so they are not 

just back into the system again, but also a vetting to make sure 

that these people are weeded out. 

Ms. MENDELSON. At the moment, we have no assurance that people who have been either actively trafficking, facilitating trafficking, in some cases involving trafficking are not serving somewhere else. It is a particularly acute problem in contractors, which 

I discuss in the report. I think that there is a role for external oversight. It is not just the DoD who is not used to working with NGOs. 

NATO is really stretched in its effort. The U.N. is more used to it, 

but they have also been somewhat resistant. This is, you know, a 

transnational crime. You have to have transnational efforts at combating it. 

So I think that, to the degree that we can institutionalize the 

role of both inside and outside eyes watching this, I think that is 

important. 

Mr. SMITH. Would anybody like to add anything before we conclude? 

I want to thank you so much for your testimony, for your leadership, for the clarity of your presentations, both written and oral, 

and for the wisdom you have conveyed to this Committee so that 

we can, hopefully, craft a good piece of legislation, and, hopefully, 

we all benefit from that. Thank you so much. The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 1:31 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

Æ