Accompanying document to the proposal for a Council Framework Decision on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings, and protecting victims, repealing Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA - Summary of the impact assessment {COM(2009) 136 final} {SEC(2009) 358}
Date: 2009-03-25
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: environmental risk prevention, help for victims, human rights, public safety, trafficking in human beings

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 25.3.2009 
SEC(2009) 359 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

Accompanying document to the 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL FRAMEWORK DECISION 

on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings, and protecting victims, 
repealing Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA 

SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

{COM(2009) 136 final} 
{SEC(2009) 358}

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT  

1. 

WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? 

Trafficking  is  considered  one  of  the  most  serious  crimes  worldwide,  a  gross  violation  of 
human rights, a modern form of slavery1, and an extremely profitable business for organised 
crime.  It  consists  of  the  recruitment,  transfer  or  receipt  of  persons,  carried  out  by  coercive, 
deceptive  or  abusive  means,  for  the  purpose  of  exploitation  including  sexual  or  labour 
exploitation, forced labour, domestic servitude or other forms of exploitation.  

Although trafficking in the EU is often linked with illegal immigration and smuggling, there 
is a clear difference. Trafficking is a crime which infringes the fundamental rights of persons, 
while  smuggling  is  a  violation  of  legislation  protecting  the  borders.  In  the  case  of  illegal 
migration  facilitated  by  a  smuggler  there  is  an  agreement  between  the  migrant  and  the 
smuggler, and the relationship between the two ends when the former enters the territory of 
the receiving State. In the case of trafficking illicit means such as coercion, deception or abuse 
of a position of vulnerability are used at a certain stage of the trafficking process; in addition, 
the transfer of the person is carried out for the purpose of further exploitation, which normally 
starts in the country of destination.  

Social vulnerability is arguably a major root cause of trafficking. Vulnerability derives from 
economic and social factors such as poverty, gender discrimination, armed conflicts, domestic 
violence, dysfunctional families, personal circumstances such as age or health conditions or 
disabilities. Such vulnerability is used by international organised crime networks to facilitate 
migration  and  subsequently  severely  exploit  people  by  use  of  force,  threat,  coercion,  or 
various forms of abuse such as debt bondage. In fact the high level of profits generated is a 
major  underlying  driver.  The  demand  for  sexual  services  and  cheap  labour  in  countries  of 
destination is a concurrent driver.  

A person can be trafficked for the purpose of sexual exploitation or for other illicit purposes 
such  as  labour  exploitation  or  domestic  servitude.  Although  trafficking  of  young  men  does 
take place, mostly for the purpose of labour exploitation, women and girls still make up the 
majority  of  trafficked  persons.  Indeed,  the  root  causes  of  trafficking  include  also  gender 
discrimination and domestic violence and therefore trafficking is considered a form of gender-
based violence. Children are trafficked with a view to being exploited in activities associated 
with  begging  or  illicit  conduct.  Both  girls  and  boys  are  trafficked  for  the  purpose  of  sexual 
exploitation. Trafficking can also be carried out for the purpose of the removal of organs.  

It is not easy to estimate the extent of this crime, since criminal activities related to trafficking 
are  hidden  behind  widespread  phenomena  such  as  prostitution  or  immigration.  The  only 
estimates on trafficking and forced labour based on transparent and accepted methodology are 
on a global scale and have been carried out by the International Labour Organisation (ILO). 
According to ILO2, bearing in mind that the majority of forced labour and services is linked 
with  traditional  slavery-like  practices,  that  is  to  say  that  the  person  is  not  transferred  but 
exploited  in  loco,  forced  labour  in  the  context  of  trafficking  represents  around  20%  of  total 

1 
2 

Georgina Vaz Cabral, La traite des êtres humains. Réalités de l'esclavage contemporain, Paris, 2006. 
Patrick Belser, Michaelle De Cock, Fahrad Mehran, ILO Minimum Estimate of Forced Labour in the 
World, ILO, Geneva, April 2005. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
forced labour.  Therefore  it  is  believed that globally there are at least 2.45 million people in 
forced labour as a result of trafficking. Of those, 1.225 million people are trafficked for the 
purpose  of  forced  labour  every  year.  These  estimates  include  both  transnational  trafficking 
and trafficking within countries. Most people are trafficked into forced labour for commercial 
sexual  exploitation  (43%)  or  mixed  reasons  (25%).  The  remainder  (32%)  are  victims  of 
trafficking  for  economic  exploitation.  Women  and  girls  represent  56%  of  victims  of  forced 
economic  exploitation,  while  men  and  boys  represent  44%.  Regarding  forced  commercial 
sexual exploitation, an overwhelming majority (98%) are women and girls. Children under 18 
represent between 40% and 50% of all victims of forced labour3.  

Trafficking  in  the  EU  is  mostly  a  criminal  phenomenon  coming  from  third  countries,  but 
especially after the last enlargement there are flows of trafficking within the EU area. Cases 
of internal trafficking are also reported by national monitoring mechanisms4. Estimates which 
have  been  attempted  for  Europe  are  scarce  and  not  reliable.  However,  as  one  of  the  most 
significant destinations in the world, it is reasonable to estimate from the available figures that 
several hundred thousand people are trafficked into the EU or within the EU every year. 

The  response  to  trafficking  must  be  robust,  and  aimed  at  both  prosecuting  the  crime  and 
protecting victims.  

At international level, the 2000 UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in 
Persons,  especially  Women  and  Children,  supplementing  the  UN  Convention  against 
Transnational Organized Crime5, was the first comprehensive international instrument dealing 
with  trafficking  in  human  beings.  The  Council  of  Europe  Convention  on  Action  against 
Trafficking in Human Beings6 is regarded as constituting the highest international standard to 
date.  At  EU  level,  the  Framework  Decision  on  combating  trafficking  in  human  beings 
2002/629/JHA7  addressed  in  particular  the  need  for  approximation  of  criminal  law  and 
penalties8.  

Although  Member  States  have  generally  complied  with  the  essential  requirements  of  the 
Framework  Decision,  the  implementation  of  comprehensive  and  effective  anti-trafficking 
policy will require more effort.  

2. 

WHAT IS THE RATIONALE FOR EU ACTION? 

A  substantive  international  legal  framework  for  tackling  human  trafficking  already  exists. 
This current framework, however, is considered by stakeholders to suffer from insufficient or 
erratic implementation in Member States (MS). 

3 

4 

5 

6 
7 
8 

These  percentages  correspond  to  between  4.9  and  6.15  million  children.  The  latter  estimate  is 
considered consistent with the estimate contained in the ILO Global Report of 2002 "A future without 
child labour" which had estimated with a different methodology that there were 5.7 million children in 
forced and bounded labour. 
For example, cases of internal trafficking have been reported by the Sixth Report of the Dutch National 
Rapporteur, 2008. 
United Nations Protocol to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons, especially women and 
children, supplementing the United Nations Convention against transnational organised crime, 2000. 
Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (CETS No. 197). 
2002/629/JHA, cit.  
Report  based  on  Article  10  of  the  Council  Framework  Decision  of  19  July  2002  on  combating 
trafficking in human beings - COM(2006) 287. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The  Commission's  2006  Report  on  the  implementation  of  the  Framework  Decision  (FD)  on 
combating trafficking in human beings9, and the 2008 Working Document on the EU Action 
Plan10 found that the FD's requirements had been largely met by MS in terms of transposition 
of legislation. In fact, MS' compliance with the essential requirements of the current FD is a 
consequence  of  pre-existing  legislation,  or  new  legislation  transposing  the  FD.  However, 
since a number of provisions in the FD allow for exceptions or reservations, and since the FD 
only  contains  criminal  law  provisions,  implementation  of  a  comprehensive  anti-trafficking 
policy  in  MS  is  still  unsatisfactory.  The  above-mentioned  Commission  Working  Document 
found that implementation of anti-trafficking policy would require more effort.  

The  2005  Council  of  Europe  Convention  on  Action  against  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings 
establishes a higher international standard and is an important step towards harmonisation of 
legislation, including criminal law, victim support, prevention, and monitoring. However, the 
Convention  contains  binding  and  non-binding  provisions,  and  allows  for  reservations  in 
crucial  areas  such  as  extraterritorial  jurisdiction.  Therefore  the  Convention  itself  shows  a 
number of weak points.  

Taking  into  account  the  current  legal  framework,  relating  to  UN  and  CoE  instruments,  and 
EU legislation, the loopholes can be identified as follows:  

–  Criminals not being brought to justice  

•  Not enough  criminal proceedings  are  currently undertaken11.  In  2006,  the  highest  figures 
concerning  investigation  and  prosecution  of  trafficking  for  the  purpose  of  sexual 
exploitation were recorded in AT (128), BE (291), BG (291), DE (353), IT (214), PT (65), 
and UK (54)12. The total number of cases investigated in the EU was 195 in 2001, 453 in 
2003,  1  060  in  2005,  and  1  569  in  2006.13  Despite  the  upward  trend,  the  number  of 
criminal  proceedings  is  still  not  comparable  with  the  presumed  scale  of  the  crime  as 
described above.  

–  Victims not receiving adequate assistance, protection or compensation 

•  Concerning the numbers of victims who have received support in recent years, figures have 
only been provided by AT (162), BE (121), BG (81), CZ (14), FI (9) IT (2.143), LT (96), 
PL (10), SL (40), and NO (37).14 Given the presumable scale of trafficking in Europe, it is 
necessary to conclude that only a few countries have taken measures that can be considered 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

Report  based  on  Article  10  of  the  Council  Framework  Decision  of  19  July  2002  on  combating 
trafficking in human beings - COM(2006) 287. 
Commission Working Document "Evaluation and monitoring of the implementation of the EU Action 
Plan  on  best  practices,  standards  and  procedures  for  combating  and  preventing  trafficking  in  human 
beings"  -  COM(2008)  657.  The  Document  was  drafted  on  the  basis  of  24  replies  to  a  Questionnaire 
circulated by the Commission in December 2007, and information transmitted by various bodies such as 
Europol and Eurojust. 
Commission  Working  Document  COM(2008)  657,  cit.  is  the  source  of  all  the  figures  this  paragraph 
refers to.  
In  some  countries  figures  include  trafficking  for  labour  exploitation.  It  is  possible  that  a  number  of 
cases of trafficking for sexual exploitation are still prosecuted as cases of exploitation of prostitution, 
due to the difficulty in gathering evidence.  
The number of sentenced cases is much lower. The total amount in 2006 was 284 sentenced cases of 
trafficking for sexual exploitation. 
These figures are not comparable with those included in the IOM database.  

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
to  be  a  real  response.  On  the  other  hand,  in  countries  such  as  AT,  BE,  IT,  BG  and  UK, 
which  have  a  significant  number  of  assisted  victims,  figures  on  criminal  proceedings  are 
also higher.  

–  Poor monitoring of the situation 

•  There is a general lack of figures and estimates on trafficking. In the field of victims' rights 
and  victims'  support,  the  vast  majority  of  countries  do  not  even  possess  figures.  The 
national  machinery  still  seems  to  be  inadequate  as  far  as  monitoring  mechanisms  are 
concerned.  Two  countries  (NL  and  SE)  have  appointed  National  Rapporteurs  and  eight 
indicate  that  comparable  mechanisms  have  been  set  up  (BE,  BG,  CY,  CZ,  DK,  FI,  PT, 
UK). This situation might have a negative impact on the quality of the data collected. 

For  these  reasons,  stakeholders  argue  for  more  effective,  specific  and  binding  measures 
especially in the above-mentioned critical areas. 

3. 

WHAT ARE THE OBJECTIVES? 

The  overall  goal  of  the  exercise  is  to  combat  crime,  organised  or  otherwise,  in  particular 
trafficking in persons and offences against children, in conformity with Article 29 of the EU 
Treaty,  by  building  a  more  coherent  framework  for  the  fight  against  trafficking  within  the 
third pillar and to increase its effectiveness.  

A 

Specific objective: To prosecute the crime 

–  Operational objectives: 

–  A1 

To impose effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties; 

–  A2 

To facilitate victims' cooperation with judicial authorities; 

–  A3 

To remove obstacles to international cooperation and generalise the use 
of  investigative  tools  which  are  effective  in  organised  crime  and  transnational 
cases; 

–  A4 

To  facilitate  prosecution  of  traffickers  when  the  offence  has  been 

committed outside the territory of the State. 

B 

Specific objective: To protect victims' rights 

–  Operational objectives:  

–  B1 To  provide  any  presumed  victim  with  unconditional  and  individualised 

assistance before, during and after criminal proceedings; 

–  B2 To  protect  victims  from  detention  and  prosecution  for  crimes  they  have  been 

induced to commit such as violation of immigration laws; 

–  B3 To  increase  the  protection  of  victims  from  secondary  victimisation,  which 
derives from the way the proceedings are carried out by the competent authorities; 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
–  B4 To  establish  specific  means  aimed  at  ensuring  effective  protection  and 

compensation.  

C 

Specific objective: To prevent trafficking  

–  Operational objectives: 

–  C1 To reduce vulnerability factors in countries of origin;  

–  C2 To improve skills of public officials likely to come into contact with potential 

victims; 

–  C3 To discourage the demand for sexual services and cheap labour. 

–  D  Specific objective: To establish effective monitoring systems  

–  Operational objectives: 

–  D1 

To set up consistent national mechanisms such as National Rapporteurs 

or equivalent mechanisms;  

–  D2 

To  establish  close  cooperation  between  National  Rapporteurs  or 

equivalent mechanisms. 

4. 

WHAT ARE THE POLICY OPTIONS? 

Various policy options have been examined as a means to achieve the identified objectives. 

•  Policy option (1): No new EU action 

•  The EU would take no action to combat trafficking, while Member States may continue the 
process  of  signature  and  ratification  of  the  Council  of  Europe  Convention  on  Action 
against Trafficking in Human Beings.  

•  Policy Option (2): Non-legislative measures 

FD 2004/629/JHA would not be amended. Non-legislative measures could be put in place in 
the  areas  of  victim  support  schemes,  monitoring,  prevention  measures  in  countries  of 
law  enforcement 
destination,  prevention  measures 
cooperation.  

in  countries  of  origin, 

training, 

•  Policy  option  (3):  New  legislation  on  prosecution,  victim  support,  prevention  and 

monitoring 

A  new  FD  would  be  adopted,  incorporating  the  provision  of  the  existing  FD,  along  with 
certain provisions of the CoE Convention, and additional elements. In particular, the new FD 
would  contain  provisions  in  the  areas  of  substantive  criminal  law,  jurisdiction  and 
prosecution,  victims'  rights  in  criminal  proceedings,  victim  assistance,  special  protective 
measures for children, prevention, and monitoring.  

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
•  Policy option (4): New legislation (as in option 3) + non-legislative measures (as in option 

2)  

–  A new FD would be adopted, incorporating the existing FD and including new provisions. 
The new FD would be supplemented by non-legislative measures, and in particular those 
identified in option 2. 

5. 

HOW DO THE POLICY OPTIONS COMPARE? 

Option 1 (status quo) may provide significant improvement if Member States sign, ratify and 
implement  the  CoE  Convention  CETS  No.  197.  However,  the  lengthy  national  ratification 
procedures in the absence of an EU-wide legally binding framework make it uncertain when 
and to what extent the benefits of that Convention will put into practice.  

Option  2  would  boost  the  implementation  of  the  existing  legal  framework,  but  it  would  be 
insufficient  to  improve  prosecution  in  a  number  of  areas  where  a  specific  legal  basis  is 
required. In addition, the low level of implementation of non-binding documents adopted in 
the past does not give grounds for optimism concerning the effectiveness of option 2. 

Option 3 would improve matters in comparison to the current situation. It would strengthen 
legislation  in  the  areas  covered  by  the  current  EU  rules  on  prosecution  of  offenders  and 
protection of victims. It would also address prevention and monitoring. The financial cost is 
expected to be outweighed by the social and economic benefit of more efficient action against 
this crime. 

Option 4 would multiply the effectiveness of the measures in options 2 and 3 by combining 
them and encouraging Member States to cooperate on setting up tools and acting to improve 
the implementation of the more comprehensive legal framework that will be put in place. 

Following the analysis of economic impact, social impact, and impact on fundamental rights, 
options  3  and  4  present  the  best  approach  to  the  problems  with  a  view  to  achieving  the 
identified objectives. The preferred option would be option 4.  

EN 

7 

   EN