COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EVALUATION of the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2011/36/EU on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims
Date: 2022-12-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs, European Commission
Subjects: criminal law, criminal proceedings, fight against crime, help for victims, human rights, organised crime, penalty, trafficking in human beings

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 19.12.2022  SWD(2022) 427 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EVALUATION  of the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2011/36/EU on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims  {COM(2022) 732 final} - {SEC(2022) 445 final} - {SWD(2022) 425 final} - {SWD(2022) 426 final} - {SWD(2022) 428 final}  
 
 
Table of Contents 

1. 

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ …….4 

2.  THE EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE ANTI-TRAFFICKING DIRECTIVE ...... 6 

          2.1 The Anti-trafficking instruments prior to the Anti-trafficking Directive……………….6 
          2.2 The Anti-trafficking Directive and its objectives………………...……………………..6 

3.      THE DEVELOPMENTS DURING THE EVALUATION PERIOD ………………8 

          3.1. The Anti-trafficking Directive…………………...………………………….………….8 
          3.2. The transposition of the Anti-trafficking Directive by Member States……………...…6                                                                                                        
3.3. Monitoring carried out by the Commission…………...…………………………….….11 
          3.4. New challenges since the adoption of the Directive……………………...……….……12 
          3.5. Statistics and trends for the evaluation period (2013-2020)……………………...…….9 

4.  EVALUATION FINDINGS (ANALYTICAL PART) ........................................... 15 

          4.1 To what extent was the intervention successful and why?.............................................15 
              4.1.1 Effectiveness……………...……………..…………………………………….…..15 
              4.1.2 Efficiency……………………….………..………………………...……….…......35 
              4.1.3 Coherence…………………………………………………………………….…...49 

         4.2 How did the Anti-trafficking Directive make a difference?............................................56 

         4.3 Is the Anti-Trafficking Directive still relevant…………….……...……………...…….59 

5.      LESSONS LEARNED AND CONCLUSIONS……………………………..….…63 

ANNEX I:   PROCEDURAL INFORMATION…………………………………..….…54 

ANNEX II. METHODOLOGY AND ANALYTICAL MODELS USED………..….…56 

ANNEX III. OVERVIEW OF BENEFITS AND COSTS AND TABLE ON SIMPLIFICATION 
AND BURDEN REDUCTION………………………..……..71 

ANNEX IV. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION (SYNOPSIS REPORT)……..…....81 

ANNEX V. STATISTICS…………………………………………………………..…...92 

ANNEX VI. TRANSPOSITION OF THE ANTI-TRAFFICKING DIRECTIVE…......130 

ANNEX VII. INTERVENTION LOGIC…………………………………….………....181 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Term or acronym 

Meaning or definition 

Glossary 

AMIF 

EU ATC 

CEPOL 

CSO 

EUAA 

EIGE 

EMCDDA 

EMPACT 

Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund 

EU Anti-trafficking Coordinator 

European  Union  Agency  for  Law  Enforcement 
Training  

Civil Society Organisations 

European Asylum Support Office 

European Institute for Gender Equality 

European  Monitoring  Centre  for  Drugs  and  Drug 
Addiction 

European Multidisciplinary Platform Against Criminal 
Threats  

EUROSTAT 

Statistical Office of the European Union 

FRA 

GRETA 

Fundamental Rights Agency 

Group  of  Experts  on  Action  against  Trafficking  in 
Human Beings (at the Council of Europe)  

ICMPD 

International centre for Migration Policy Development 

ILO 

IOM 

ISF 

International Labour Organization 

International Organisation for Migration 

International Security Fund 

2 

 
 
 
 
JAD 

JIT 

LGBTIQ 

NREM 

NRM 

OSCE 

SOCTA 

TFEU 

THB 

UN ICAT 

Joint Action Day 

Joint Investigation Team 

Lesbian,  gay,  bisexual,  transgender,  intersex,  non-
binary and queer   

National Rapporteurs or equivalent mechanisms  

National Referral Mechanism 

Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe 

Serious and Organised Crime Threat Assessment  

Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union  

Trafficking in Human Beings 

Inter-Agency  Coordination  Group  against 

The 
Trafficking in Human Beings 

3 

 
 
 
1.  INTRODUCTION 

Trafficking  in  human  beings  is  explicitly  prohibited  under  Article  5  of  the  Charter  of 
Fundamental  Rights  of  the  EU.  Trafficking  in  human  beings  is  also  among  the  “areas  of 
particularly  serious  crime  with  a  cross  border  dimension”  for  which  Article  83(1)  TFEU 
empowers the EU to establish “minimum rules concerning the definition of criminal offences 
and sanctions”. The main legislative instrument to combat trafficking in human beings in the 
EU  is  Directive  2011/36/EU  on  preventing  and  combating  trafficking  in  human  beings, 
protecting its victims1 (hereinafter “the Directive” or “Anti-trafficking Directive”). It provides 
an  overarching  EU  framework  “to  prevent  and  combat  trafficking  in  human  beings  by 
establishing minimum rules concerning the definition of criminal offences and sanctions in the 
area  of  trafficking  in  human  beings  and  by  introducing  provisions,  taking  into  account  the 
gender  perspective,  to  strengthen  the  prevention  of  this  crime  and  the  protection  of  the 
victims”2. The Directive entered into force on 5 April 2011 and the deadline for Member States 
to transpose it was 6 April 2013. 

The  Directive  does  not  contain  any  specific  provisions  concerning  its  evaluation.  On  10 
February 2021, the European Parliament adopted a Resolution3 calling upon the Commission 
to assess the implementation of the Directive and to come forward with proposals to revise it. 
Furthermore,  in  the  EU  Strategy  on  Combatting  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings  2021-20254, 
presented on 14 April 2021 (hereinafter “the Strategy”), the Commission acknowledged that 
the Directive may no longer be fit for purpose. Accordingly, the Strategy identified as a key 
action  the  evaluation  of  the  implementation  of  the  Directive  and,  if  necessary,  its  possible 
revision. The Strategy also set out that the Commission would assess the possibility of having 
minimum EU rules that criminalise the use of services exacted from victims of trafficking in 
human beings.  

This  report  constitutes  the  first  comprehensive  evaluation  of  the  Directive.  The  evaluation 
examines  whether  the  tools  to  combat  trafficking  in  human  beings  and  support  the  victims 
provided  for  by  the  Directive  correspond  to  the  current  needs,  considering  the  social  and 
economic  changes  since  its  transposition  date.  In  compliance  with  the  Better  Regulation 
Guidelines, the evaluation assesses the effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, relevance, and EU 
added value of the Directive. It aims at identifying possible gaps and shortcomings, supporting 
the  development  of  recommendations  for  possible  future  measures,  including  legislative 
options, to  address  such gaps.  This  evaluation  is  carried out “back-to-back”  with  an impact 
assessment.5 

The scope of the evaluation covers the period between the date of transposition on 6 April 2013 
and the end of the public consultation on 22 March 2022. Its geographical scope covers 27 EU 

1  Directive  2011/36/EU  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  5 April  2011  on  preventing  and 
combating trafficking in  human beings and protecting its victims, and replacing Council  Framework Decision 
2002/629/JHA, OJ L 101, 15.4.2011, p. 1–11. 
2European Commission, Combined Evaluation Roadmap/Inception Impact Assessment. Ref. Ares(2021)4984017 
– 05/08/2021. Available at: link.  
3 2020/2029(INI). 
4 EU Strategy on Combatting Trafficking in Human Beings 2021-2025, COM(2021) 171 final. 
5 Tool #50 of the Better Regulation Toolbox. 

4 

 
 
                                                           
Member States6.   

The evaluation is based upon extensive desk research (see Annex 2) as well as a study carried 
out by an external contractor (EY/RAND) to support the evaluation of the Directive and an 
impact assessment for a legislative proposal on the topic. It uses data collected by EUROSTAT 
from the date of the transposition of the Directive until 2020. The evaluation also includes a 
transposition  assessment,  which  updates  the  Commission’s  2016  Transposition  report 
assessing the extent to which Member States have taken the necessary measures in order to 
comply with Directive 2011/36/EU7.  

The  evaluation  takes  into  account  the  outcome  of  the  extensive  stakeholders  consultations 
carried out by the external contractor and the Commission’s public consultation (see Annex 4). 
The Commission also organised consultations in the context of the EU Network of National 
Rapporteurs  and  Equivalent  Mechanisms  and  of  the  EU  Civil  Society  Platform  against 
trafficking in human beings. Separate consultations took place with the EU Agencies, which 
signed a Joint Statement of commitment to work together against trafficking8. Moreover, the 
EU  Anti-trafficking  Coordinator  held  bilateral  discussions  with  national  authorities,  civil 
society  organisations  and  international  organisations,  such  as  UNODC,  IOM,  UNHCR,  the 
OSCE, the Council of Europe, and ICMPD. 

The evaluation has limitations related to the nature of the crime and the weaknesses of the data 
collection.  The  threat  picture  and  the  quantitative  assessments  are  undermined  by  the 
difficulties in detection and the low number of reports from victims, who are often emotionally 
or  economically  dependent  on  the  trafficker.  With  low  numbers  of  victim  reports  and, 
especially without victims’ testimonies, it is challenging to formally charge and convict the 
perpetrators. This is also reflected in the low number of prosecutions and convictions within 
the EU. Moreover, despite the significant progress in the data collection in the last years, data 
is still not systematically collected in certain Member States or the gathering process may lead 
to double counting. Limited data is available also on the support and compensation received 
by victims. The gaps in  the data collection make it difficult to measure the effectiveness of 
prevention measures (awareness raising campaigns, research, information) and the impact of 
the criminalisation of the use of exploited services on demand.  

The evaluation  is  relevant  to  three Sustainable Development  Goals  (SDG), i.e. SDG 5.2 on 
eliminating all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres, 
including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation; SDG 8.7 on taking immediate 
and effective measures to eradicate forced labour, end modern slavery and human trafficking 

6 When the Directive was adopted in 2011, Denmark held an opt-out from EU policies in relation to European 
Union justice and home affairs policies. Accordingly, the evaluation will not analyse the implementation of the 
Directive in Denmark. However, it might cover other information, such as statistics related to the fight against 
THB in Denmark.   
7 European Commission, Report assessing the extent to which Member States have taken the necessary measures 
in  order  to  comply  with  Directive  2011/36/EU  on  preventing  and  combating  trafficking  in  human  beings  and 
protecting its victims in accordance with Article 23 (1), COM(2016) 722 final. 
8  European  Union  Asylum  Agency  (EUAA),  European  Union  Agency  for  Law  Enforcement  Cooperation 
(Europol),  European  Union  Agency  for  the  Operational  Management  of  Large-Scale  IT  Systems  (eu-LISA), 
European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), European Union Agency for Criminal 
Justice Cooperation (Eurojust), European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE), European Border and Coast Guard 
Agency (Frontex), European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), European Union Agency for Law 
Enforcement Training (CEPOL), European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions 
(Eurofound). 

5 

 
 
                                                           
and  secure  the  prohibition  and  elimination  of  the  worst  forms  of  child  labour,  including 
recruitment and use of child soldiers, and by 2025 end child labour in all its forms; and SDG 
16 on ending abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms of violence against and torture of 
children. 

The intervention logic of the Directive is described in Annex 7 to this Staff Working Document. 

2.  THE EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE ANTI-TRAFFICKING DIRECTIVE  

2.1   The Anti-trafficking instruments prior to the Anti-trafficking Directive 

Prior to the adoption of the Directive, the response to trafficking in human beings was regulated 
by several EU and international legal instruments. The UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and 
Punish  Trafficking  in  Persons,  especially  Women  and  Children,  supplementing  the  UN 
Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, adopted in 2000 and entered into force in 
2003, was the first comprehensive international instrument dealing with trafficking in human 
beings.  The  European  Union  signed  and  approved  the  Protocol9.  The  Council  of  Europe 
Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, adopted in 2005, also provided a 
comprehensive and coherent  framework covering prevention, cooperation between different 
actors, protection of and assistance to victims, and an obligation to criminalise trafficking in 
human beings10. The EU is not a party to the Council of Europe Convention. 

At  the  EU  level,  on  19  July  2002,  the  Council  adopted  Council  Framework  Decision 
2002/629/JHA  on  combating  trafficking  in  human  beings11  (hereafter  “the  Framework 
Decision”)  and  the  EU  Plan  on  best  practices,  standards  and  procedures  for  combating  and 
preventing  trafficking  in  human  beings12.   Member  States  made  good  progress  towards 
transposing  the  Framework  Decision  into  their  national  legislation  and  complying  with  its 
essential  requirements13.  However,  the  2006  Commission’s  report  and  the  2008  Working 
document stated that  “implementation of comprehensive  anti-trafficking  policy in [Member 
States] is still unsatisfactory.” This  was partly because Member States were not  required to 
implement several of its provisions, as these allowed for exceptions and reservations. Identified 
gaps in the anti-trafficking policy at Member States level concerned the effective detection and 
prosecution  of  the  offences,  protection  of  and  assistance  to  victims,  and  the  monitoring  of 
trafficking trends and anti-trafficking efforts. 

2.2 The Anti-trafficking Directive and its objectives 

At  the  time  of  the  2010  Commission  Proposal14,  trafficking  in  human  beings  was  already 
considered as a gross violation of human rights, a serious crime and an extremely profitable 

9 The European Union signed the Protocol on 12 December 2000 and approved it on 21 May 2004.  
10 Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (CETS No. 197). 
11 2002/629/JHA: Council Framework Decision of 19 July 2002 on combating trafficking in human beings, OJ L 
203, 1.8.2002, p. 1–4. Available at: link. 
12 EU plan on best practices, standards and procedures for combating and preventing trafficking in human beings, 
OJ C 311, 9.12.2005, p. 1–12. Available at: link.  
13  Commission  Staff  Working  Document  accompanying  the  Proposal  for  a  COUNCIL  FRAMEWORK 
DECISION  on  preventing  and  combating  trafficking  in  human  beings,  and  protecting  victims,  repealing 
Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA, Impact Assessment, COM(2009) 136 final.  
14  Proposal  for  a  Directive  on  preventing  and  combating  trafficking  in  human  beings,  and  protecting  victims, 
repealing Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA, COM(2010)95 final.  

6 

 
 
                                                           
business  for  organised  crime.  The  available  figures  at  the  time  showed  that  an  estimate  of 
several thousands of people were trafficked into the EU or within the EU every year15. The 
majority of victims were women and girls, trafficked mostly for sexual exploitation, while the 
majority of men victims were trafficked for the purpose of labour exploitation. Children were 
found to be mainly trafficked to be exploited in criminal activities, including begging, and for 
sexual exploitation.  

The  identified  drivers  of  the  crime  were  the  high  profits  generated,  the  socio-economic 
vulnerabilities  of  the  victims  and  the  demand  for  sexual  services  and  cheap  labour16.  The 
institutional  and  policy  response  within  the  Member  States  was  considered  inadequate,  not 
contributing  much  to  the  identification  of,  and  support  to,  victims,  and  discouraging  their 
participation  in  criminal  proceedings.  This  led  to  very  low  numbers  of  prosecutions  and 
convictions, in the absence of accurate sources of evidence, which could have enhanced the 
investigative response.  

Cross-border  cooperation  was  also  considered  insufficient  and  limiting  the  effectiveness  of 
investigations in transnational cases. Effective tools, such as joint investigation teams17 or other 
means typical of organised crime cases (financial investigations, phone tapping or electronic 
surveillance) were rarely used.  

At the time of the intervention, the gaps in the available data did not allow a precise estimation 
of  how  trafficking  in  human  beings  would  have  evolved  in  the  absence  of  EU  action. 
Nevertheless, the Impact Assessment to the Directive18 concluded that trafficking in human 
beings was expected to remain stable or even grow if no effective deterrents were put in place 
in  the  near  future,  due  the  large  scale  of  the  crime,  the  high  profits  generated  for  criminal 
networks and the links with  other forms  of serious crime (such as document fraud,  money-
laundering, drug trafficking and migrant smuggling). 

Due to  the physical  and  psychological  health consequences of the crime,  the importance of 
victims’ testimonies to successful investigations and protection and the low number of victims’ 
being assisted, the Commission considered that the protection of the rights of the victims had 
to be at the core of any proposals aimed at strengthening the EU action against trafficking.  

The adoption of the Directive  aimed at  responding to two general objectives, namely  (1) to 
combat crime, organised or otherwise, in particular trafficking in persons and offences against 
children, by building a more coherent framework for the fight against trafficking and (2) to 
increase the effectiveness of the framework. In addition the Directive was set to respond to five 

15 In the absence of any EU level data collection prior 2013 the IOM database included data collected from 12,627 
victims who have been assisted by IOM worldwide from November 1999 to December 2007. Among the countries 
to which people are trafficked there are several EU countries: Italy (500 victims), Greece (105), Germany (136), 
Czech Republic (303), Bulgaria (204), Austria (101) and Poland (778). 188 recorded cases concern international 
trafficking,  2,389  are  cases  of  internal  trafficking.  Concerning  the  type  of  exploitation,  72.46%  were  cases  of 
sexual exploitation, 21.95% labour exploitation, 1.99 % mixed sexual and labour exploitation, 0.84 % low level 
criminal activities, 0.05 % labour and low level criminal activities and 2.72 % other types of exploitation. 
16 According to ILO estimates in 2005 in total, 31.6 billion US dollars were made yearly by exploiting trafficked 
victims. 
17  A  joint  investigation  team  is  an  international  cooperation  tool  based  on  an  agreement  of  the  competent 
authorities  of  two  or  more  states  for  a  limited  duration  and  for  a  specific  purpose  to  carry  out  criminal 
investigations in one or more of the involved States (Council Resolution (2017/C18/01)) 
18 Ibid no.12.  

7 

 
 
                                                           
specific objectives:  

1. 

Introducing  substantive  criminal  law  provisions,  by  aligning  the  definition  with 
international instruments19 and imposing an effective, proportionate and dissuasive level 
of penalties. 

2.  Prosecuting  trafficking-related  offences,  by  removing  obstacles  to  cross-border  and 
international  cooperation  and  facilitating  prosecution  of  traffickers  when  the  offence  is 
committed outside the jurisdiction of a Member State. 

3.  Protecting  victims’  rights  by  requiring  the  non-prosecution  and  non-punishment  of 
victims for crimes committed as a direct consequence of being trafficked,  by providing 
the presumed victims with unconditional individualised assistance before, during and after 
the criminal proceedings, by requiring individualised risk assessments, by increasing the 
protection of victims from secondary victimisation,  by ensuring effective compensation 
and by establishing specific measures for children, including unaccompanied minors. 

4.  Preventing  trafficking,  by  reducing  vulnerability  factors  in  countries  of  origin,  by 
improving  the  resources  and  expertise  of  law  enforcement  and  other  public  authorities 
likely  to  come  into  contact  with  potential  victims  and  by  sanctioning  employers  who 
knowingly employ trafficked persons, and clients who knowingly use sexual services from 
trafficked persons. 

5.  Establishing  effective  monitoring  systems,  by  appointing  National  Rapporteurs  or 
Equivalent Mechanisms, by establishing close cooperation between them and by requiring 
the  Commission  to  report  every  two  years  on  the  progress  made  in  the  fight  against 
trafficking in human beings. 

3.  THE DEVELOPMENTS DURING THE EVALUATION PERIOD 

3.1.  The Anti-trafficking Directive 

The  Directive  contributed  to  creating  an  EU  common  minimum  ground  for  the  three 
dimensions of the fight against human trafficking covering the above mentioned objectives20: 
(i) criminalisation, investigation and prosecution of trafficking in human beings, including the 
definition of offences, penalties and sanctions; (ii) assistance and support to, and protection of, 
victims of trafficking in human beings; (iii) prevention of trafficking in human beings. 

The Directive includes a common minimum set of offences, which expands the minimum list 
of forms of exploitation covered by previous EU legislation.  Article 1(1) of the Framework 
Decision21  was  limited  to  “forced  or  compulsory  labour  or  services,  slavery  or  practices 
similar to slavery or servitude, or for the purpose of the exploitation of the prostitution of others 
or other forms of sexual exploitation”.  

The Directive includes further advancements in comparison to the Framework Decision: 

19  2003  Protocol  on  Trafficking  in  Person  supplementing  the  UN  Convention  against  Organized  Crime,  and 
Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings. 
20 Survey: Q 38, 2 national competent authorities (FR, LU), 2 National Rapporteurs (EL, RO), 2 law enforcement 
authorities (EL, IE), 4 others (BG, 2 from ES, MT), 2 civil society organisations (BE, MT). 
21 Article 4 of COUNCIL FRAMEWORK DECISION of 19 July 2002 on combating trafficking in human being 
(2002/629/JHA). 

8 

 
 
                                                           
  Establishing minimum penalties for all trafficking offences (Article 4), while Council 
Framework  Decision  2002/629/JHA  included  minimum  penalties  only  for  aggravating 
circumstances.  The  Directive  further  raised  the  minimum  penalties  for  aggravating 
circumstances from 8 to 10 years (Article 4(2)). 

  Expanding the scope of aggravating circumstances by (i) adding the circumstance in 
which  the  offence  is  committed  by  public  officials  in  the  performance  of  their  duties 
(Article  4(3));  and  (ii)  expanding  the  definition  of  vulnerable  victims  (Article  4(2)(a)). 
While Council Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA limited the concept of vulnerability to 
victims of sexual exploitation under the age of sexual majority, the Directive includes a 
wider range of vulnerable victims, by indicating child victims as a minimum. 

  Expanding the scope of investigation and prosecution for trafficking in human beings 

(Article 9) by covering also seizure and confiscation (Article 7). 

  Expanding the assistance, support and protection measures for victims  (Articles 11 
and 12), including the principle of non-prosecution and non-punishment of victims (Article 
8),  as  well  as  specific  assistance,  support  and  protection  measures  for  child  victims 
(Articles 13-16) and addressing access to compensation (Article 17). 

  Expanding  the  scope  of  prevention  measures  (Article  18),  including  by  requiring 
Member States to consider criminalising the knowing use of exploited services (Article 
18(4)). 

  Introducing  and  defining  the  role  of  the  National  Rapporteurs  and  Equivalent 

Mechanisms on trafficking in human beings (Article 19). 

  Introducing the obligation for Member States to periodically report to the EU Anti-
trafficking  Coordinator  (hereinafter  EU  ATC),  on  the  basis  of  which  the  EU  ATC 
contributes to the reporting carried out by the Commission every two years on the progress 
made in the fight against trafficking in human beings (Article 20). The tasks of the EU 
ATC  also  include  improving  coordination  and  coherence  between  EU  institutions  and 
agencies as well as between Member States and international actors, avoiding duplication 
of  efforts  and  contributing  to  developing  existing  or  new  EU  policies  and  strategies 
relevant to the fight against trafficking in human beings. 

The main categories of stakeholders responsible for the implementation of the Directive are 26 
Member States22, the Commission, the EU Anti-trafficking Coordinator, the EU Agencies and 
civil society organisations. The Directive encourages Member States to work closely with civil 
society organisations, in particular in policy-making initiatives, information and awareness-
raising campaigns, research and education programmes, training, as well as in monitoring and 
evaluating the impact of anti-trafficking measures.  

3.2.  The transposition of the Anti-trafficking Directive by Member States 

The main responsibility for combating trafficking in human beings lies with Member States, 
which are required to adopt legislation, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to 

22  In  accordance  with  Articles  1  and  2  of  the  Protocol  on  the  position  of  Denmark  annexed  to  the  Treaty  on 
European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark is not taking part in the 
adoption of this Directive and is not bound by it or subject to its application. 

9 

 
 
                                                           
comply with the Directive by 6 April 201323. In May 2013, the Commission sent 13 letters of 
formal notice in order to initiate infringement proceedings against Member States that had not 
communicated  the  transposition  measures.  In  four  instances,  the  Commission  addressed 
reasoned  opinions  to  the  Member  States  concerned.  Following  this,  all  the  Member  States 
bound  by  the  Directive  communicated  their  transposition  measures.  Considering  the  wide-
ranging  scope  of  the  Directive,  most  Member  States  chose  to  transpose  its  provisions  in 
different types of legal instruments, mainly: criminal codes; specific acts concerning the fight 
against trafficking;  legislation safeguarding victims  of crimes;  acts setting measures for the 
protection of children; legislation regulating the entry and residence of third country nationals. 

In 2016, the Commission adopted a report on the transposition of the Directive24. The results 
of the report showed that, five years after its adoption, the Member States had made substantial 
efforts to transpose the Directive but significant room for improvement remained in particular 
as  regards  specific  child  protection  measures;  the  presumption  of  childhood  and  the  age 
assessment;  protection  before  and  during  criminal  proceedings;  access  to  unconditional 
assistance;  compensation;  non-punishment  principle;  assistance  and  support  to  family 
members of child victims; and prevention. 

The  transposition  assessment  carried  out  in  the  context  of  this  evaluation  shows  that 
Member States have fully or partially transposed most of the mandatory provisions of 
the Directive into their national legal systems25.  

The  correct  and  complete  transposition  of  the  Directive  and  its  full  implementation 
remained a priority for the Commission throughout the evaluation period. These are crucial to 
ensure that traffickers do not benefit from diverse approaches within the EU and that victims 
receive  adequate  protection  and  support  irrespective  of  where  they  are.  The  Commission 
continued  the  engagement  with  the  Member  States  after  the  adoption  of  the  transposition 
report,  and  committed  to  use  the  powers  conferred  to  it  by  the  Treaties  to  ensure  full 
transposition and implementation, including by infringement procedures, if appropriate26. In 
the  evaluation  period,  the  Commission  did  not  launch  any  infringement  procedure.  The 
Commission supported Member States with substantial funding to facilitate and accelerate the 
implementation  of  the  Directive,  in  particular  the  provisions  on  preventing  and  combatting 
trafficking  and  on  protecting,  supporting  and  assisting  the  victims.  During  the  2014-2020 
programming period, the total EU allocation for projects aimed at preventing and combatting 
trafficking in human beings amounted to EUR 13 026 286 under shared management and to 
EUR  22  707  722  under  direct  management.  In  addition,  the  anti-trafficking  action  is  fully 
integrated in the EMPACT grants that support national actions against the ten crime priorities 
identified by the Council in the context of the EU Policy Cycle, as trafficking in human beings 
is one of them27. EMPACT grants have contributed to countering the impunity of perpetrators 
by strengthening the capacity of Member States’ law enforcement to investigate and prosecute 
trafficking offences. 

Member  States  have  also  adopted  non-legislative  instruments,  which  supported  the 

23 Article 22 of the Anti-trafficking Directive. 
24 European Commission, “Transposition” report (2016), ibid no.7. 
25 Annex 6  
26 2021 Strategy p 4. 
27 EU Council (2017), Council Conclusions on the continuation of the EU Policy Cycle for organised and serious 

international crime for the period 2018-2021. Available at: link 

10 

 
 
                                                           
implementation of the Directive, such as new or renewed National Action Plans to prevent and 
combat  trafficking  in  human  beings28,  as  well  as  sets  of  guidelines29,  protocols  and 
procedures30  aimed  at  supporting  the  relevant  stakeholders  in  detecting,  identifying  and 
protecting victims, as well as coordinating the efforts in the fight against human trafficking31.  

3.3.  Monitoring carried out by the Commission  

Pursuant to Article 20 of the Directive, the Commission reports every two years on the progress 
made in the fight against trafficking in human beings. The Progress Reports include statistical 
data on trends observed in trafficking in human beings, as well as analysis on the results of 
anti-trafficking  actions.  Moreover,  the  Commission  has  published  a  number  of  reports  and 
studies32 on different aspects of trafficking in human beings, including in cooperation with the 
EU Agencies33. 

Following  the  entry  into  force  of  the  Directive,  the  Commission  adopted  three  policy 
instruments. The first policy document presented after the adoption of the Directive was the 
EU Strategy towards the Eradication of Trafficking in Human Beings 2012-201634, which 
identified  five  priorities:  1)  identifying,  protecting  and  assisting  victims;  2)  stepping  up 
prevention; 3) increasing prosecutions; 4) enhancing coordination and cooperation among key 
actors and ensuring policy coherence; 5) increasing knowledge of, and effective response to, 
emerging concerns relating to all forms of trafficking.  

In 2017, the Commission adopted a Communication reporting on the follow-up to the EU 
Strategy and identifying further concrete actions35. In April 2021, the Commission adopted 
the EU Strategy on Combatting Trafficking in Human Beings 2021-2025, which provides 
a comprehensive response to combatting trafficking in human beings, from prevention through 
to protection of victims, to prosecution and conviction of traffickers. The Strategy identifies 
four key priorities: 1) reducing the demand that fosters trafficking; 2) breaking the criminal 
model  of  traffickers  to  halt  the  exploitation  of  victims;  3)  protecting,  supporting  and 
empowering the victims, especially women and children; 4) the international dimension. 

28 AT, EE, EL, FI, FR, HR, HU, IE, IT, LT, LU, SE, SL, EL, NO.  
29 EE, ES, IT, LT, LU, SE, EL. 
30 HR, EL. 
31 EE, ES, HR, IT, LU, SE, EL. 
32 European Commission, “Transposition” report (2016), ibid no.6; European Commission, Report assessing the 
impact of existing national law, establishing as a criminal offence the use of services which are  the objects of 
exploitation of trafficking in human beings, on the prevention of trafficking in human beings, in accordance with 
Article 23 (2) of the Directive 2011/36/EU, COM(2016) 719 final; Staff Working Document, Mid-term report on 
the implementation of the EU strategy towards the eradication of trafficking in human beings, SWD(2014), 318 
final; Study on the gender dimension of trafficking (2016); Study on high risk groups for trafficking in human 
beings  (2015);  Study  on  comprehensive  policy  review  of  anti-trafficking  projects  funded  by  the  European 
Commission (2016); Study on reviewing the functioning of Member States’ National and Transnational Referral 
Mechanisms (2020); Study on the economic, social and human costs of trafficking in human beings within the 
EU (2020). 
33  European  Institute  for  Gender  Equality,  Gender-specific  measures  in  anti-trafficking  actions  report  (2018); 
Fundamental Rights Agency, Children deprived of parental care found in an EU Member State other than their 
own – A guide to enhance child protection focusing on victims of trafficking (2019).  
34 The EU Strategy towards the Eradication of Trafficking in Human Beings 2012–2016, COM(2012) 286 final 
35 European Commission, Communication Reporting on the follow-up to the EU Strategy towards the Eradication 
of trafficking in human beings and identifying further concrete actions, COM(2017) 728 final. 

11 

 
 
                                                           
3.4.  New challenges since the adoption of the Directive 

Since  the  adoption  of  the  Directive,  several  major  developments  have  affected  the  socio-
economic situation, with significant implications on the trafficking in human beings landscape. 
Technological  developments  and  the  expansion  of  online  social  media  created  new 
opportunities  for  traffickers,  allowing  them  to  recruit  victims  online  and  to  reach  a  much 
broader audience via online streaming and widespread sharing of exploitative materials. 

In addition, over 100 million people were forcibly displaced worldwide in 2022, as a result 
of conflicts, violence and human rights violations, among others36, thus increasing the risks of 
trafficking due to their vulnerability and economic situation. Climate change is also expected 
to foster trafficking in the long term, due to the socio-economic consequences of draughts and 
famines on vulnerable categories. 

The 2021 Serious and Organised Crime Assessment of Europol highlighted that trafficking in 
human beings is a central activity for organised crime groups operating in the EU and that the 
demand for sexual and labour exploitation will continue to persist37. The risks of trafficking 
have considerably increased since the beginning of the war in Ukraine in February 2022, as 
persons fleeing to the EU might be targeted by human traffickers along their journey38. Women 
and  children,  especially  unaccompanied  minors,  are  particularly  vulnerable  to  trafficking, 
including for the purposes of sexual or labour exploitation. 

In 2020, Europol warned that trafficking in human beings, particularly for the purpose of labour 
and sexual exploitation, is likely to increase, as the economic downturn in the wake of the 
COVID-19 pandemic could increase demand for cheap labour39. Also as a consequence of 
COVID-19 prostitution has moved from brothels and the streets into hotels and apartments, 
which makes potential victims of trafficking nearly inaccessible for law enforcement and social 
services.40 

3.5.  Statistics and trends for the evaluation period (2013-2020) 

The  statistics  and  trends  outlined  below  are  based  on  the  data  provided  by  EUROSTAT 
covering the 2013-2020 reporting period in the EU2741. For the detailed statistical report for 
2013-2020, see Annex 5. 

3.5.1 Number and demographic characteristics of the of victims 

The total number of victims of trafficking in human beings registered in the EU27 during 

36 UNHCR: A record 100 million people forcibly displaced worldwide | | UN News= 
37 Europol (2021), European Union serious and organised crime threat assessment,  A corrupting influence: the 
infiltration  and undermining of  Europe's  economy  and  society  by  organised  crime, Publications  Office  of  the 
European Union, Luxembourg. Available at: link.  
38 A Common  Anti-Trafficking Plan to address the risks of trafficking in human beings and support potential 
victims among those fleeing the war in Ukraine. A new Anti-Trafficking Plan to protect people fleeing the war in 
Ukraine (europa.eu). 
39 Europol, Beyond the pandemic – How Covid-19 will shape the serious and organized crime landscape in the 
EU (2020). Available at: link.  

40 Member States contribution to the Fourth Progress Report. 

41 The UK does not form part of the analysis because the United Kingdom withdrew from the European Union as 
of 1 February 2020. The transition period ended on 31 December 2020  DK, however, provides regular data to 
EUROSTAT and has a national anti-trafficking legislation.  

12 

 
 
                                                           
the  2013-2020  period  was  55  314,  with  an  average  of  16  registered  victims  per  million 
inhabitants.  The  annual  numbers  of  registered  victims  of  trafficking  showed  very  little 
variation across the reporting period. The annual numbers are comparable, if generally slightly 
lower, to the number recorded in the EU27 in 2011 (n=7,440) and notably lower than the 2012 
number (n= 8,853).42 

However, the actual number of victims of trafficking within the EU is likely much higher than 
the data suggests. The statistics above include only victims identified by registering entities 
and are unable to encompass the estimated high numbers of undetected victims43.  

The number of victims is considered underestimated due to the widespread underreporting of 
trafficking offences, which is the consequence of numerous reasons, including the economic 
or emotional dependency between the victim and the trafficker; intimidation of extortion by 
the traffickers; the fear of reprisals from the traffickers; language or cultural barriers; distrust 
in, the competent authorities; the societal attitude towards victims of trafficking, especially for 
sexual exploitation; insufficient awareness on their rights and opportunities, as well as the fear 
to  lose  their  income,  especially  for  victims  trafficked  for  labour  exploitation;  for  illegally 
staying  third  country  nationals,  the  fear  of  deportation.  There  are  attempts  for  calculating 
regional  estimates.  The  US  2022  Report  on  Trafficking  in  Persons  (TIP)44  estimates  the 
identified and registered number of victims of trafficking in Europe (including Turkey, Russia 
and Western-Balkans) as 17 383 in 2019 and 18 173 in 2020. According to the ILO’s newly 
released  Global  estimates  of  modern  slavery45,  6.4  million  people  are  subjected  to  forced 
labour, sexual exploitation and forced marriage in Europe and Central Asia. It can be noted 
that these two reports (released few weeks one from the other) include widely different figures 
for similar geographical regions. This shows how difficult it is to make precise estimations of 
the  real  number  of  victims.  Existing  estimates  rely  on  different  concepts,  which  do  not 
necessarily amount to trafficking in human beings (e.g. forced labour or forced marriage) or 
are  not  defined  under  international  and  EU  law  (e.g.  modern  slavery),  refer  to  different 
geographical scopes or do not have a clearly outlined methodology. While there have been few 
attempts at producing estimates at Member State level, their methodology was criticised for its 
strong dependence on quality of input data and the assumptions behind the data analysis, which 
may result in a large margin of error when estimating the hidden population.46 

79% of victims registered in the EU27 were adults47. Child victims constituted around 
one fifth of all registered victims whose age was known (21%) in the EU27. The percentage 
of child victims increased over time, growing from 18% in 2013 to 24% in 2020 continuing 
the trend of 2011-2012, when the share of child victims was 17%. Over the reporting period, 
children accounted for approximately one quarter of sexual exploitation victims where the age 
group was reported. This is slightly higher than the share of child victims across all types of 
exploitation.  There  was  little  change  in  the  value  of  this  indicator  over  time,  decreasing 
somewhat from 27% in 2015 to 24% in 2020. It does, however, represent a notable increase 
from 2010-2012 when only 14% of registered victims of sexual exploitation were under 18 

42 European Commission, Eurostat, Trafficking in human beings: 2015 edition, Publications Office, 2015. 
43 European Commission, Data collection of trafficking in human beings in the EU (2020). Available at: link. 
44 2022 Trafficking in Persons Report - United States Department of State 
45 Report: Global Estimates of Modern Slavery: Forced Labour and Forced Marriage (ilo.org) 
46 Mapping the risk of serious and organised crime infiltrating legitimate businesses - Publications Office of the 
EU (europa.eu) 
47 Victims whose age group was reported as “Unknown” is not included the statistical analysis. 

13 

 
 
                                                           
years old.48 

During the 2013-2020 evaluation period, 56% of the registered victims with known citizenship 
were EU citizens and 44% were non-EU citizens.  The ratio of EU and non-EU victims in 2010-
2012 was similar to that of 2013 (69% EU victims and 31% non-EU victims). The share of 
EU victims gradually decreased between 2013 and 2018 and then increased in 2020. In 
2016 and 2018 the number of registered non-EU victims overtook that of EU citizens. During 
the overall evaluation period, the main countries of citizenship of non-EU victims in the EU 
were  Nigeria  (6,513),  China  (1,417),  Morocco  (824),  Ukraine  (743),  and  Philippines  (605), 
while the main countries of citizenship of EU victims were Romania (9,392), Hungary (3,565), 
Bulgaria (3,424), France (3,136), and the Netherlands (2,558).49  

Across the EU27, approximately one third (36%) of all registered victims of  THB were 
citizens of the country in which they were registered50. Citizens of other EU Member States 
accounted for approximately one fifth (21%) of all registered victims.  

In 2013-2020, women and girls represented three quarters of trafficking victims whose 
sex  was  reported  (75%)  in  the  EU27  likewise  as  during  2010-2012.51.  The  percentage  in 
individual Member States ranged from 42% in Portugal to 92% in Bulgaria52. The percentage 
of  female  victims  decreased  from  81%  in  2013  to  67%  in  2020.  During  the  evaluation 
period, men and boys were the majority of victims recorded in two Member States (BE, PT). 

3.5.2 Purposes of trafficking in human beings 

Sexual exploitation has constantly been the most prevalent purpose of trafficking in human 
beings across the reporting period, although its share decreased from 76% in 2014 to less than 
60% in 2019-202053. Victims of sexual exploitation are overwhelmingly women and girls 
(93%).  Trafficking  for  purposes  other  than  sexual  exploitation  has  increased  during  the 
reporting  period.  Labour  exploitation  has  consistently  been  the  second  most  prevalent 
purpose of trafficking in human beings. It  accounts for  20% of all  registrations during 
2013-2020, as the percentage was initially low but later increased to reach approximately one 
third of victims in 2020. Labour exploitation affects mostly male victims (70%), though 
female victims are increasingly exploited in particular sectors (e.g., domestic work, care 
activities or  cleaning services). The proportion  of “other purposes” increased over time to 
approximately one fifth of all cases in 2018 and decreased thereafter to slightly more than 10% 
of all registrations. These trends represent a continuity of the developments in 2010-2012 when 
69 % of registered victims  were trafficked for the purpose of sexual  exploitation,  19 % for 

48 Idem footnote 42 
49 During 2010-2012 the top five countries of citizenship within the EU, in terms of absolute numbers of registered 
victims,  were  Romania,  Bulgaria,  the  Netherlands,  Hungary  and  Poland;  for  non-EU  citizens,  the  top  five 
countries were Nigeria, Brazil, China, Vietnam and Russia. 
50 No information on citizenship was available for 8% of all registered victims. Moreover, the citizenship of about 
2% of registered victims was indicated as “unknown”. This data is not included in the statistical analysis. 
51 Idem footnote 42 
52 Data on the number of victims whose sex was reported as “Unknown” are not included the statistical analysis. 
53 Data where the form of exploitation is indicated as unknown (4% of all data) is not included in the statistical 
analysis.  Data  is  missing for  the  following country and  years:  AT (2017, 2018), BG (2017, 2018), CZ (2017, 
2018), EL (2013, 2014), FI (2017, 2018), FR (2015), IT (2013, 2014), PL (2015, 2016), RO (2015, 2016), SE 
(2017, 2018). 

14 

 
 
                                                           
labour exploitation and 12 % for other forms of exploitation such as the removal of organs, 
criminal activities, or selling of children.54 

4.  EVALUATION FINDINGS (ANALYTICAL PART) 

4.1 To what extent was the intervention successful and why? 

In order to  measure the  success  of the Directive, the  evaluation  assesses  to  what  extent the 
objectives of the Directive were met (effectiveness) and whether this was commensurate with 
the efforts, time and funding invested (efficiency). Furthermore, it is  examined whether the 
objectives of the Directive have been attained and fit in the broader political framework, and 
are in coherence with other EU, national and international instruments in the field of prevention 
of the trafficking of human beings (coherence). 

4.1.1 Effectiveness 

Overall, the Directive has proven effective in achieving its general objectives as it facilitated 
the creation of an overarching legal and institutional framework at European and national level, 
with  regard,  however,  its  specific  objectives  concerning,  prevention,  prosecution, 
assistance of victims and monitoring the Directive has not reached its full potential.  

As highlighted by several survey respondents55, the establishment of common minimum rules 
contributed  to  higher  harmonisation  of  national  criminal  laws,  which  would  have  been 
difficult to achieve by Member States acting alone. In this regard significant progress has been 
done to achieve the specific objective of the Directive. Harmonised rules resulted in higher EU 
capacity  to  fight  against  this  crime.  Nevertheless,  Member  States  have  transposed  and 
implemented the Directive to different extents and its effectiveness remains limited by the gaps 
in the practical implementation of its provisions. 

4.1.1.1 Definition of trafficking in human beings and the forms of exploitation 

Key evaluation findings: 

  The  Directive  adopted  the  same  definition  of  key  international  instruments 

(Palermo Protocol and the Council of Europe Convention).  

  Member  States  interpret  certain  key  terms  of  the  definition  (e.g.  abuse  of 

power, position of vulnerability and exploitation) differently.  

  Member States often transposed into their national legislation only the forms 
of  exploitation  explicitly  mentioned  in  the  Directive,  although  the  list  in 
Article 2(3) is non-exhaustive. 

Areas for improvement identified in relation to the definition are: 

o  Further  clarification  in  the  interpretation  of  the  key  concepts  of  the 

definition. 

o  The  inclusion  of  further  forms  of  exploitation  within  the  definition, 
provided  that  the  other  constitutive  elements  of  the  trafficking  offence 

54 Idem footnote 42. 
55  Survey:  Q  38,  1  national  competent  authority  (HR),  1  law  enforcement  authority  (CY),  2  civil  society 
organisations (DE, ES), 1 national competent authority (DE). 

15 

 
 
  
 
                                                           
(conduct and means) are fulfilled. 

a. Definition of trafficking in human beings 

Article 2 of the Directive provides a common definition of trafficking in human beings and 
requires Member States to ensure that trafficking offences committed with intent be punishable. 
The definition of the Directive is in line with the UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish 
Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children, supplementing the UN Convention 
against Transnational Organized Crime (the Palermo Protocol) and with the Council of Europe 
Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings. However, minor divergences in 
the transposition and interpretation of Article 2, may slightly reduce the effectiveness of the 
Directive at Member States’ level. 

Areas hindering the full effectiveness of the Directive in relation to the definition 

The  differences  in  how  some  key  concepts  of  the  definition  of  trafficking  are  enshrined  in 
national  law  may  hinder  EU  law  enforcement  and  judicial  cooperation  in  cases  where  the 
activities are considered to be trafficking in one Member State but not in others56. 

  Article 2(1): The term ‘abuse of power’ refers to the means used to commit human 
trafficking offences. The Directive does not specify what kind of power and how it may 
be abused. It is not known how this concept is interpreted in practice, for example if a 
parental or educational relationship may qualify as an abuse of power. 

  Article 2(2):  The term  ‘position of vulnerability’, defined as ‘no real  or acceptable 
alternative  but  to  submit  to  the  abuse  involved’  refers  to  the  means  used  to  commit 
trafficking  offences.  Member  States  define  the  position  of  vulnerability  in  different 
ways57. 

  Article 2(3): There is no EU definition or indicators of  exploitation. As reported by 
Eurojust, prosecutors face a high evidentiary burden in courts to prove the exploitation 
element.  Moreover,  this  element  is  not  clearly  and  unanimously  understood 
(particularly  with  reference  to  trafficking  for  labour  exploitation,  modern  slavery  or 
servitude, international surrogacy arrangements leading to the selling of newborns and 
exploitative  (sham)  marriages).  For  example,  in  some  Member  States,  proving 
exploitation is dependent on evidence of coercion58. 

b. Forms of exploitation 

Article  2(3)  provides  a  minimum  list  of  forms  exploitation,  which  includes  prostitution  of 
others  or  other  forms  of  sexual  exploitation;  forced  labour  or  services,  including  begging, 
slavery  or  practices  similar  to  slavery,  servitude;  exploitation  for  criminal  activities;  and 
removal  of  organs.  As  the  list  is  non-exclusive,  it  allows  Member  States  to  criminalise 
additional  forms  of  exploitation.  The  Directive  does  not  define  the  forms  of  exploitation 
explicitly mentioned therein. This has led Member States to adopt different interpretations of 
some forms of exploitation, such as forced begging, which is addressed indifferent ways across 
Member  States59.  The  risk  of  diverging  interpretations  is  even  higher  for  the  forms  of 

56 Eurojust contribution to the public consultation. 
57 Interview #27 with an International Body.  
58 Interview #30.  
59 Submission to the public consultation by ICAT. 

16 

 
 
                                                           
exploitation that are not explicitly mentioned in the Directive. 

Areas hindering the full effectiveness of the Directive in relation to the forms of exploitation 

Consulted stakeholders considered that greater clarity is required around the concept of “forced 
labour”60, as it is currently interpreted in differing ways. Recital 11 of the Directive states that 
forced labour is  defined  in  line with the  ILO  Forced  Labour Convention, 1930 (No. A 29). 
However, the concept of forced labour is not explicitly defined in many Member States.61 It 
must  be  noted  that  ILO’s  Committee  of  Experts  on  the  Application  of  Conventions  and 
Recommendations  in  their  comments  and  observations  provides  ample  guidance  to  enable 
Member  States  to  ensure  that  their  definition  of  “forced  labour”  aligns  fully  with  the  ILO 
standards62.  Eurojust  stressed  that  some  Member  States  experienced  difficulties  in  defining 
“practices similar to slavery or servitude”.  

In addition consulted stakeholders frequently referred to the evolving nature of the crime of 
trafficking in human beings and considered that other forms of exploitation could be included 
in Article 2(3)63.  

  Forced marriage is already listed in the recitals of the Directive as another purpose 
that can be covered by the definition of trafficking in human beings insofar as it fulfils 
the  constitutive  elements  of  the  offence.  The  2021  EU  SOCTA  report  and  the 
Commission’s  progress  reports  have  highlighted  a  rise  in  the  number  of  cases  of 
trafficking for forced marriage, which particularly affects women and children, and is 
often  combined  with  other  forms  of  exploitation,  such  as  sexual  exploitation  and/or 
labour exploitation.  

  Illegal adoption is also listed in the recitals of the Directive as a purpose of trafficking, 
which can be covered by trafficking in human beings, insofar as it fulfils the constitutive 
elements of trafficking in human beings. The 2021 EU SOCTA report underlines that 
children  are  trafficked  and  sold  through  illegal  adoption  schemes.  Mothers  in 
vulnerable circumstances can be forced to give their children for adoption outside the 
legal adoption system for the financial profit of the trafficker.  

  Illegal  surrogacy:  the  trafficking  of  women  for  the  purpose  of  illegal  surrogacy 
programmes,  which  involve  selling  newborn  children  has  also  been  identified  as  an 
emerging trend in the 2021 EU SOCTA report and in the Commission’s Third progress 
report. As part of the evaluation, Eurojust reported that some Member States encounter 
difficulties  in  prosecution  and  judicial  cooperation  in  cases  involving  the  selling  of 
newborn  children,  in  particular  when  vulnerable  surrogate  mothers  are  exploited  by 
intermediaries and there is a risk of exploitation of the children64.  

  Social benefit fraud was referred to as a form of exploitation in the 2021 EU SOCTA 
report. Eurojust also reported on cases where traffickers abuse vulnerable individuals 

60 Interview #20; Interview # 28.  
61 European Commission, Study on case-law relating to trafficking in human beings for labour exploitation (2015). 
Available at: link. 
62 See Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations (ilo.org). 
63 The majority of public consultation respondents (65%) considered that the Directive should explicitly refer to 
new forms of exploitation.  
64 Submission to the public consultation by Eurojust. 

17 

 
 
                                                           
coming from difficult financial conditions to commit social benefit fraud for their sole 
profits65. Because of the lack of legislation on social benefit fraud as an exploitative 
purpose of trafficking in human beings, the exploited individuals are often regarded as 
suspects of fraud rather than victims of trafficking66.  

4.1.1.2 Prevention and training  

Key evaluation findings: 

  The Directive significantly contributed to increasing the number of prevention 
initiatives  in  Member  States,  for  example  awareness  raising  campaigns, 
education  and  training  programmes  for  officials,  such  as  law  enforcement 
authorities, prosecutors, judges, as well as other professionals likely to enter in 
contact  with  victims  of  trafficking  in  human  beings,  such  as  healthcare 
professionals,  social  assistance  services  and  labour  inspectors.  Prior  to  the 
implementation  of  the  Directive  in  2011,  there  were  significantly  fewer 
prevention efforts than there are today. 

  CEPOL and FRONTEX delivered numerous specific trainings on trafficking in 

human beings. 

Areas for improvement identified in relation to prevention are: 

o  Targeting specifically vulnerable categories of people in the Member States 

and non-EU countries, as well as in high risk sectors. 

o  Addressing the societal causes of trafficking in prevention strategies. 

Areas for improvement identified in relation to training are: 

o  Including  more  law  enforcement  and  judicial  professionals  in  specific 
training  programmes  on  trafficking  in  human  beings  and  to  embed  THB 
training within the basic curriculum of law enforcement and the judiciary. 
o  Including  other  key  professionals  (from  public  and  private  sector)  into 
training  programs  likely  to  enter  into  contact  with  victims  in  training 
programmes on trafficking. 

The Directive is widely considered to have improved prevention efforts. The majority of survey 
respondents  considered  that  the  Directive  contributed  to  reducing  the  number  of  victims67. 
Respondents  also  considered  that  measures  targeting  child  victims  have  been  relatively 
effective, though less than those targeting adults68. Measures targeting potential offenders were 
considered relatively less effective than those above69.   

 Prevention measures 

65 See Eurojust, Report on Trafficking in Human Beings: Best practice and issues in judicial cooperation, February 
2021, available at: link; Eurojust’s contribution to the public consultation.    
66 Eurojust’s contribution to the public consultation.  
67 Only around 9% (n=8) of respondents  considered that the Directive had made no contribution. Most online 
survey respondents considered that prevention measures targeting victims were effective to a moderate extent (27 
of 90 respondents) or to a large extent (29 of 90 respondents). 
68 27 out of 90 respondents claimed that measures targeting children were effective to a moderate extent, 21 stated 
that  they  were  effective  to  a  large  extent  and  9  to  a  very  large  extent.  Twenty  respondents  considered  that 
preventive measures targeting child victims were effective to a small extent. 
69 22 out of 90 respondents considered that measures targeting potential offenders were effective to a small extent 
and 12 that they were not effective at all. 

18 

 
 
                                                           
Article 18 of the Directive requires the Member States to take appropriate measures to prevent 
trafficking in human beings, including education and training aimed at reducing the demand 
that fosters trafficking (Article 18(1)), as well as information and awareness raising campaigns, 
research and education programmes aimed at reducing the risks of victimisation (Article 18(2)). 

All Member States but one have transposed these two provisions in their national laws70. The 
Commission has collated information on the many examples of prevention activities conducted 
in Member States71, including projects, awareness raising campaigns, education and training 
programmes  implemented  at  national  and  transnational  level.  Examples  of  transnational 
projects  include  TRACE72,  SafeShore73  and  RAVOT-EUR74.  There  are  also  examples  of 
cooperation between child protection systems and education systems aimed at strengthening 
prevention measures targeting children75.  

Areas hindering the full effectiveness of the Directive in relation to prevention 

The  evaluation  identified  several  areas  of  improvement  with  regards  to  prevention.  These 
include  defining  concrete  objectives  to  better  target  prevention  measures  towards  specific 
groups or sectors. For example, it may be beneficial to conduct awareness campaigns in the 
main (EU and non-EU) countries of origin of victims identified in the EU76 and in high-risk 
environments (such as sectors of the economy that attract low-wage labour). 

Prevention strategies should address the root causes of trafficking in human beings, such as 
gender  discrimination,  economic  inequalities  and  restrictive  migration  policies77.  Lack  of 
education and work opportunities, as well as of regular migration routes towards the EU, are 
among the societal issues that foster trafficking78. 

 Training  

Article 18(3) requires Member States to promote regular training for officials likely to come 
into contact with victims or potential victims, including front-line police officers, in order to 
enable them to identify and deal with victims and potential victims. Recital 25 provides that 
this training obligation should be promoted for  “police officers, border guards, immigration 
officials,  public  prosecutors,  lawyers,  members  of  the  judiciary  and  court  officials,  labour 
inspectors, social, child and health care personnel and consular staff, but could, depending on 
local circumstances, also involve other groups of public officials who are likely to encounter 
trafficking victims in their work”. 

70 Italy is the only Member State that  has only partially transposed these articles: relevant national legislation 
leaves considerable discretion to the authority responsible for implementing preventive measures. Further details 
are in Annex 6. 
71 The European Commission Anti-Trafficking website section provides an overview on how each EU Member 
States tackle, prevents, and identified THB. 
72 (TRACE) Trafficking as A Criminal Enterprise. More information available at: link. 
73 SafeShore. Available. More information available at: link. 
74 Referral of and Assistance for victims of Trafficking in Europe. More information available at: link.  
75 Mentioned by five respondents to the online survey. 
76 Outcome from the discussions held during the workshop organised by the European Commission with the EU 
Civil Society Platform against trafficking in human beings on 30 November 2021.  
77 Interview (#11); interview (#20). This was also raised by three survey respondents, as well as in the contribution 
to the public consultation by the Red Cross.  
78 European Commission, Study on prevention initiatives on trafficking in human beings (2015). Available at: 
link. 

19 

 
 
                                                           
All Member States have implemented training activities envisaged in Article 18(3). The 
evaluation found that Member States have offered training programmes to officials involved 
in investigations and prosecution of trafficking offences, such as prosecutors, law enforcement 
and  judicial  authorities.  Some  Member  States  have  also  offered  training  to  healthcare 
professionals,  staff  from  social  assistance  services  and  labour  inspectors.  The  Directive  is 
considered  to  have  contributed  to  increasing  the  offer  of  specialised  training  on  trafficking 
available at the national level79. 

EU Agencies, international organisations and the Member States produce guidance and 
training documents and  offer training on trafficking in human beings, reaching a  wide 
range of professionals in Member States and non-EU countries. During the 2013-2021 period, 
CEPOL developed a complex training portfolio and trained a total of 5,173 officers80. Frontex 
prepared a training manual81, a ‘train the trainer tool’ and is currently developing a handbook 
on Risk Profiles on Trafficking in Human Beings82. FRA will develop a capacity building tool 
to train labour inspectors tasked with identifying illegal work83. 

Areas hindering the full effectiveness of the Directive in relation to training 

The evaluation identified several areas for improvement in relation to training. Although the 
number  of  capacity-building  activities  has  grown,  many  law  enforcement  and  judicial 
professionals  are  not  receiving  training  that  would  better  equip  them  to  investigate  and 
prosecute  trafficking  offences.  This  results  in  limited  knowledge,  for  example  about  child 
trafficking,  the  procedures  in  place  in  the  different  (police  or  judicial)  institutions,  or  on 
discerning persons forced into criminal activities as a result of being trafficked84. 

As  victims  may  be  scared  of  reporting  to  law  enforcement  authorities,  it  is  crucial  that  all 
relevant stakeholders receive adequate training85. Training programmes should involve other 
professionals  likely  to  come  into  contact  with  victims,  such  as  staff  from  social  assistance 
services,  healthcare  professionals,  labour  inspectors  and  airline  staff  in  direct  contact  with 
passengers. 

4.1.1.3 Reduction of the demand that fosters trafficking and criminalisation of the 
use of exploited services 

Key evaluation findings: 

  The Directive provides a limited coverage to demand reduction, mainly focusing 
on  non-legislative  measures,  such  as  information  and  awareness  raising,  and 
education. 

  Demand  persists,  especially  for  cheap  labour  and  sexual  services,  fosters 

79 31 respondents to the online survey stated that the Directive had contributed to increasing training to a large 
extent; 26 respondents replied that it had done so to a moderate extent. 
80 Data provided by CEPOL: “CEPOL Trafficking in Human Beings Training Portfolio: Overview 2013-2021”. 
81 Frontex, Combating human trafficking at the border - training for EU Border Guards (2012). See link here.  
82 Frontex’s contribution to the Commission’s fourth report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking 
in human beings. 
83 FRA’s contribution to the Commission’s fourth report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in 
human beings. 
84 Interviews with an academic expert (#4); one representative from an EU agency (#5); three representatives from 
an EU civil society organisations (#6, #7, #8). 
85 Outcome from the discussions held during the workshop organised by the European Commission with the EU 
Civil Society Platform against trafficking in human beings. 

20 

 
 
                                                           
trafficking. 

  Not all Member States have transposed the optional provision criminalising the 
knowing use of exploited services (Article 18(4)). The approaches of Member 
States that transposed it, vary to a great extent. 

  Even where available, legislation criminalising the use of exploited services is 

not extensively applied in practice. 
 
It is difficult to prove in court that the user knew that the victim was trafficked. 
  Some Member States and stakeholders raised the concern that criminalisation of 
the use of services could result in increased marginalisation and vulnerability of 
victims, which would hamper detection and early identification of victims. 

Areas  for  improvement  identified  in  relation  to  addressing  the  demand  that 
fosters trafficking: 

o  Member States  could  address  demand with  enhanced  legislative and  non-

legislative measures. 

o  Member  States  could  improve  awareness  raising,  guidance  and  education 

programmes targeting potential users, including of sexual services. 

o  Member  States  could  improve  the  collection  of  evidence  (including 

electronic evidence) to prove that users are aware of the exploitation. 

The  Directive  adopts  a  comprehensive  approach  to  demand  reduction,  which  includes  both 
legislative and non-legislative measures, although legislative measures remain in the Directive 
optional. Article 18(1) requires Member States to take appropriate measures, such as education 
and training, to discourage and reduce the demand that fosters all forms of exploitation. Article 
18(4)  requires  Member  States  to  “consider”  criminalising  the  use  of  services  which  are  the 
objects of exploitation, with the knowledge that the person is a victim of trafficking. This is an 
optional provision, on which Member States and stakeholders have widely differing views. 

The analysis of national legislation carried out as part of this evaluation indicates that eight 
Member States have legislation criminalising the knowing use of services exacted from victims 
of all forms of exploitation86. Eleven Member States have legislation that criminalises directly 
or  indirectly  the  knowing  use  of  services  exacted  from  victims  of  sexual  exploitation87 
(including  some  Member  States  requiring  a  lower,  or  no,  knowledge  requirement)88.  Seven 
Member States89 have no  legislation addressing the use of services exacted from  victims of 
trafficking. However, some of these have legislation which does not transpose the Directive 
but imposes criminal liability for users of exploited services90.  

Some Member States (FR, IE, SE and, partially, FI91) address demand for sexual services with 

86 BG; HR; HU; LT MT PT RO SI. In addition, EL legislation covers sexual and labour exploitation. 
87 DE, EE, FI, FR, IE, LV, LU, NL, SE, EL, CY. 
88 In DE and FI, the requirement is knowledge or a standard similar to serious negligence. In CY, there is no 
knowledge requirement. 
89 AT, BE, CZ, ES, IT, PL, SK. 
90  AT  criminalises  the  labour  exploitation  of  third  country  nationals.  CZ  has  an  offence  for  failing  to  report 
trafficking in human beings, when a person is aware of the situation. 
91 In FI  the  purchase of sexual services is  not criminalised if  the person providing sexual services is doing so 
individually. However, it is illegal to buy sex from individuals who work under a pimp, from victims of trafficking 
and from minors. 

21 

 
 
                                                           
the so-called “Equality Model”, which criminalises the purchase of sexual services regardless 
of  whether  the  person  is  a  victim  of  trafficking92.  This  approach  concerns  the  reduction  of 
demand  in  the  field  of  sexual  services  and  addresses  the  situation  of  victims  of  trafficking 
indirectly, as part of the individuals in prostitution. 

EUROSTAT has collected data relating to the criminal offences of the use of exploited services 
since 2015. EUROSTAT reported that during the 2015-2020 period, 331 persons were reported 
as suspects, 343 were prosecuted and 202 were convicted of such offences. As shown by Figure 
1 below, it is not possible to discern any clear trend. It is, however, important to acknowledge 
that there are serious gaps in the data collection, as only 11 Member States reported on the 
three categories (suspects, prosecutions, convictions)93. 

Figure 1: Criminal justice statistics on the offence of the use of services which are the 
objects of exploitation of victims of trafficking in human beings (2015-2020) 

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

116

104

87

70

90

75

66

63

69

19

16

0

2

2

25

20

26

26

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Suspect

Prosecuted

Convicted

In February 2021, a European Parliament Resolution called on the Commission to amend the 
Directive  with  a  view  to  ensuring  that  all  Member  States  criminalise  the  knowing  use  of 
exploited services94. UNODC called on the Commission to “recall the legal obligation Member 
States have to address demand, including by legislative measures addressing the use of services 
of victims95. It also corresponds to the recommendations of the Council of Europe’s Group of 
Expert  on  Action  against  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings  (GRETA),  which  all  include  the 
knowing  use  without  differentiating  between  the  forms  of  exploitation.96  Furthermore,  this 
approach is also supported by 61% of respondents to the public consultation97. The EU Strategy 
stipulates  that  the  Commission  would  carry  out  an  assessment  of  the  possibility  of  having 

92 These countries have outlawed the purchase of sexual services, on the grounds that it would constitute per se a 
form of exploitation and/or gender-based violence and that users of sexual services are taking advantage of the 
difficult situation of people in prostitution. This model does not criminalise the sale of sexual services, but only 
the purchase. OSCE, Office of the Special Representative and Co-ordinator for Combating Trafficking in Human 
Beings, Discouraging the demand that fosters trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation, (2021). Available 
at: link. 
93 BG, CY, DE, FI, IE, LT, LV, MT, SE, SI, SK (although the value reported by IE, MT and SK was zero). 
94 2020/2029(INI). 
95 Submission to the public consultation by UNODC. 
96 Country specific recommendations issued by GRETA. See the recommendations to DE: link 
97 While the majority of citizens and public authorities agreed to the criminalisation, civil society organisations 

were split, with a slight majority for criminalisation. 

22 

 
 
 
                                                           
minimum EU rules that criminalise the use of exploited services of trafficking victims as part 
of the evaluation of the Directive98.  

Areas  hindering  the  full  effectiveness  of  the  Directive  in  relation  to  the  use  of  exploited 
services from victims of trafficking 

(i)  Even  where  available,  legislation  criminalising  the  use  of  exploited  services  is  not 
extensively applied in practice 

Legislation  criminalising  the  knowing  use  of  exploited  services  is  applied  in  practice  to 
different extents. Several Member States (BG, EE, LU, MT) reported no cases in 2020. On the 
other hand, in the 2017-2020 period, LT reported 113 convictions and HU 4199. 

 (ii) Difficulties in proving the “knowing” use in court 

 Numerous  consulted  stakeholders  (national  rapporteurs,  prosecutors  and  civil  society 
organisations)  link  the  limited  application  of  provisions  criminalising  the  knowing  use  of 
exploited  services  with  the  difficulty  of  proving  knowledge  in  court  with  adequate  and 
sufficient evidence100. To address this challenge, a minority of stakeholders advocated for the 
removal of the knowledge requirement and called for criminalising the use of exploited services 
regardless of whether the user knows that the person is a victim of trafficking101. 

Only  one  Member  State  (CY)  has  this  strict  liability  standard  for  the  use  of  services  from 
victims  of  sexual  exploitation.  Two  Member  States  (DE  and  FI)  require  knowledge  or  a 
standard similar to serious negligence. However, the data from these Member States that adopt 
stricter approaches does not show higher numbers of prosecution or convictions, in comparison 
to Member States that adopt the knowing use approach102.  

OSCE  indicated  that  limited  capacity  building  among  law  enforcement  officials  may  also 
contribute to the limited use of these provisions103. 

(iii)  Concerns  that  criminalising  the  use  of  exploited  services  could  hinder  detection  and 
early identification of victims 

There  are  differing  views  among  Member  States  and  consulted  stakeholders  on  whether 
criminalising  the  use  of  services  is  an  effective  strategy  to  reduce  the  demand  that  fosters 

98 In 2016, the Commission found that it was too early to assess the impact of national law criminalising the use 
of exploited services due to the short period for the implementation of the Directive; Commission’s “Users” report 
(2016). Available at: link. 
99  Member  States  contributions  to  the  Commission’s  fourth  report  on  the  progress  made  in  the  fight  against 
trafficking in human beings. 
100 Outcome from the discussions held during the workshop organised by the European Commission with the EU 
Civil Society Platform against trafficking in human beings on 30 November 2021; interview with an academic 
expert (#25); OSCE, “Discouraging the demand that fosters trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation” 
(2021). Available at: link.  
101 Outcome from the discussions held during the workshop organised by the European Commission with the EU 
Network of NREM on 6 December 2021. At least five participants to the workshop raised this issue. 
102 In CY, there were 2 prosecutions and no convictions since 2019, when the relevant law came into force. This 
is compared with 14 prosecutions and 4 convictions in 2017, and 26 prosecutions in 2018. DE did not report any 
prosecution or conviction since 2015 and this timeframe includes both the period in which it had knowing use and 
the period of gross negligence. FI reported 2 prosecutions and 2 convictions since 2015. 
103  OSCE,  “Discouraging  the  demand  that  fosters  trafficking  for  the  purpose  of  sexual  exploitation”  (2021). 
Available at: link. 

23 

 
 
                                                           
trafficking. This was reflected in the public consultation, with respondents split almost evenly 
on whether this would (and would not) be an effective measure to reduce demand. 

Several Member States and stakeholders are concerned that the criminalisation of the use of 
exploited  services  could  hinder  detection  of  the  crime  by  pushing  sexual  and  labour 
exploitation further underground, thereby hampering detection and prosecution, as well as early 
identification, support and access to justice especially for vulnerable victims104.  

In  consideration of the potential risks  of criminalisation,  stakeholders advocate focusing on 
improving  access  to  information,  on  setting  up  effective  complaints  mechanisms  and  on 
ensuring safe reporting through structural reforms105. OSCE considers criminalisation as only 
part of the broader approach to reduce demand106. 

4.1.1.4 Investigations, prosecutions, penalties and confiscation  

Key evaluation findings: 

 

 

The numbers of prosecutions and convictism has remained low, especially in 
comparison  to  the  number  of  registered  victims;  this  is  also  linked  to  the 
inherent  nature  of  the  crime,  namely  in  many  cases  victims  do  not  come 
forward.  
Criminal  proceedings  often  mainly  rely  on  victim  testimony  despite  the 
requirement of the Directive to use also other evidence in case the testimony 
is not available. 

  When the evidence is insufficient to convict for trafficking-related offences, 

traffickers are often convicted for offences that are easier to prove in court. 

  Member States adopted different standards of penalties for trafficking offences 

 

 

since the Directive only sets minimum standards. 
The optional  sanctions against legal  persons in  the Directive are not  widely 
transposed  and  there  is  a  lack  of  data  regarding  the  application  of  these 
sanctions in practice. Prosecutions of legal persons are in general rare and the 
Directive has not resulted in greater action against legal persons. 
Although  Member  States  have  legislation  allowing  them  to  seize  and 
confiscate proceeds of trafficking offences, seizures and confiscations are rare. 

Areas for improvement identified in relation to investigations, prosecutions and 
convictions: 

o  Data collection could be improved to better assess the effectiveness of 
the Directive in relation to investigations, prosecutions and convictions. 
o  A wider variety of tools (including financial investigations and digital 
investigation tools) could be employed by law enforcement to ensure 
the collection of evidence other than victim testimony. 

104 Outcome from the discussions held during the workshop organised by the European Commission with the EU 
Network of NREM on 6 December 2021; submission by BE National Rapporteur in the context of the evaluation; 
interviews #11 and #22; submission to the public consultation by La Strada International, LEFÖ-IBF and the Red 
Cross. 
105 Interview #22. 
106  OSCE,  “Discouraging  the  demand  that  fosters  trafficking  for  the  purpose  of  sexual  exploitation”  (2021). 
Available at: link. 

24 

 
 
                                                           
o  Financial 

investigations  should  be  strengthened 
intelligence, evidence and tracing of the proceeds of the crime. 

to  ensure  better 

o  Cooperation between Member States could be strengthened with a view 
to improving the collection of evidence other than victim testimony in 
cross-border  cases,  as  well  as  for  sharing  good  practices  in  case-
building. 

o  Member States could rely more of the support of Europol and Eurojust. 

Areas for improvement in relation to penalties: 

o  Data collection could improve to have a better understanding of what  

penalties are handed out in practice. 

o  All criminal sanctions provided in the Directive against legal persons 

could be transposed by Member States. 

o  Law  enforcement  and  judicial  authorities  could  receive  targeted 
capacity  building  specialising  on  investigations  and  prosecutions  of 
legal persons in relation to trafficking in human beings. 

Areas for improvement in relation to seizure and confiscation: 

o  Seizing and confiscation could be resorted to more systematically, thus 

contributing to enhanced deterrence. 
 Investigations, prosecutions and convictions 

Article  9  of  the  Directive  requires  Member  States  to  ensure  that  investigations  into,  or 
prosecutions of, trafficking offences are not dependent on reporting or accusations by a victim 
and  that  criminal  proceedings  may  continue  even  if  the  victim  has  withdrawn  his  or  her 
statement. 

As shown in Figure 2, the number of suspect increased from approximately 3 000 in 2013 to 
just under 8 000 in 2019. However, this is also a result of progressive improvements in the data 
collection.  For  instance,  Italy  did  not  report  data  on  these  indicators  before  2017,  and  Italy 
alone recorded approximately 2 000 suspects in 2017 and 2018.107 

Figure 2: Trends in headline criminal justice indicators related to THB cases (2013-
2020) 

107  Since  during  2010-2012  not  all  Member  States  reported  the  number  of  investigations,  prosecutions  and 
convictions  to  the  Commission  there  is  no  comparable  data.  Member  States  reported  that  8  805  people  were 
prosecuted for trafficking in human beings over the three years 2010-2012. There were 3 855 convictions reported 
over the same period. Although many Member States provided data both on the number of prosecutions and the 
number  of  convictions  for  all  three  years,  this  was  not  the  case  for  all  Member  States.  The  EU  totals  for 
prosecutions and convictions are thus not directly comparable. See also idem footnote 42. 

25 

 
 
                                                           
9000

8000

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0

7924

7290

5919

5868

2942

2983

3159

3016

1892

1455

1830

1497

1580

3943

2384

1341

3187

2976

3484

3055

1734

693

1724

1295

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Suspected

Prosecuted

Convicted

In  the  2013-2020  period,  the  numbers  of  prosecutions  and  convictions  have  remained 
constantly  low,  especially  in  comparison  with  the  number  of  victims108,  and  consulted 
stakeholders expressed concerns of the culture of impunity for traffickers109. The gaps in the 
available data seriously limit the evaluation of the effectiveness of the Directive. In addition, 
data reliability and comparability is hindered by the different approaches taken by the Member 
States in data reporting on criminal justice indicators. For example, one reported prosecution 
or conviction could either mean that one single individual has been prosecuted or convicted, or 
that there was one case (but it may have involved more than one individual).  

Areas  hindering  the  full  effectiveness  of  the  Directive  in  relation  to  investigations, 
prosecutions and convictions 

(i)  Law  enforcement  authorities  and  prosecutors  require  specific  skills  to  build  effective 
cases against traffickers  

Law enforcement authorities and prosecutors face difficulties in building successful cases on 
trafficking  offences  within  the  time  limits  and  available  resources110.  Investigations  of 
trafficking  offences  are  often  lengthy  and  require  specialised  capacity  and  resources.  The 
testimony  provided  by  victims  often  constitutes  the  central  piece  of  evidence  and,  if  not 
supported  with  additional  evidence,  it  may  lead  to  an  acquittal  or  a  conviction  for  other 
offences111. Further challenges concern the movement of victims, who may be no longer present 
in the territory of the state where the proceedings have been initiated. 

Trafficking  cases  often  involve  criminal  organisations  that  rapidly  move  across  borders 
together with the victims. Cross-border cases may face delays related to law enforcement and 
judicial  cooperation  between  different  Member  States  or  with  non-EU  countries.  The 
insufficient  understanding  or  specialisation  on  trafficking  may  also  lead  to  unsuccessful 

108 Submission to the public consultation by Eurojust; Interview #30. 
109 Outcome from the discussions held during the workshop organised by the European Commission with the EU 
Network of NREM  on 6 December 2021; European Commission, Staff Working Document accompanying the 
Third (2020) report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in human beings third report, SWD(2020) 
226 final; submission to the public consultation by ICAT. 
110 Interview with an EU agency (#30). 
111 Submission to the public consultation by La Strada International. 

26 

 
 
 
                                                           
investigations  or  prosecutions112.  Therefore,  the  EU  Strategy  called  on  Member  States  to 
establish  law  enforcement  and  prosecution  units  specialised  in  trafficking.  Moreover,  the 
Commission is facilitating, together with Eurojust, the creation of a Focus Group of specialised 
prosecutors against trafficking in human beings. 

(ii) Further resources and knowledge are required to conduct financial investigations 

The  EU  legal  and  policy  framework  sets  out  a  follow  the  money  approach,  including  by 
conducting  proactive  financial  investigations,  including  asset-tracing.  Article  9(4)  of  the 
Directive  requires  Member  States  to  take  the  necessary  measures  to  ensure  that  effective 
investigative  tools,  such  as  those  used  in  organised  crime  or  other  serious  crime  cases,  are 
available for investigations and prosecutions of cases involving trafficking offences. Financial 
investigations are one of the most important tools in this regard. Tracing the financial flows 
allows to investigate the entire trafficking chain and gather evidence that could be produced in 
court and may help disrupting the actions of criminal networks. Most Member States conduct 
financial  investigations  in  parallel  or  as  part  of  trafficking  cases.  However,  despite  the 
importance of financial  investigations  in  trafficking cases, the relevant  authorities may lack 
capacity or expertise to conduct them. 

(iii) The collection of evidence (other than victim testimony) is currently insufficient 

Law enforcement authorities and prosecutors  could better rely on sources of evidence other 
than  victim  testimony,  such  as  financial  investigations,  surveillance  and  digital  evidence. 
Labour inspectors could have a greater role in gathering evidence113, as they are often mandated 
and trained to contribute to criminal investigations114. 

(iv) Member States could rely more on the support of Europol and Eurojust 

Recital  5  of  the  Directive  refers  to  the  enhanced  cooperation  between  Member  States  and 
Europol  and  Eurojust,  which  should  facilitate  coordinated  cross-border  investigations  and 
prosecutions. It is advisable to involve Europol at the very beginning of THB investigations, 
especially in cases with suspects and victims are originating from outside the EU (e.g. Latin 
America and Western Balkans). Another significant aspect of cross border cooperation is also 
proven by the high dynamics of Europol supported operations resulting in an increasing number 
of  action  days  with  deployed  Europol  staff  for  support  and  the  growing  interest  for 
collaboration under the Operational Task Force umbrella as the highest form of collaboration 
in the international investigations115.  Furthermore, the number of trafficking cases registered 
at  Eurojust has increased,  with  107 cases in  2013 and 163 in 2020, for an increase of over 
30%116.  However,  the  number  of  investigations  coordinated  by  Eurojust  and  of  Joint 

112 Submission to by BE National Rapporteur in the context of the evaluation; outcome from the discussions held 
during the workshop organised by the European Commission with the EU Network of NREM on 6 December 
2021. 
113 Study on comprehensive policy review of anti-trafficking projects funded by the European Commission (2016). 
114  Submission  to  the  public  consultation  by  OSCE  Special  Representative  and  Co-ordinator  for  Combating 
Trafficking in Human Beings; Population Europe, 10 Years After the Directive 2011/36/EU (2022), Population 
and Policy Brief No 33. Available at: link.  
115 Europol supported operational meetings with 32 operational meetings in 2020 comparing to 60 operational 
meetings in 2021 and tendency to top that number in 2022 since in the first half of 2022 there were already 37 
operational meeting. Number of the reported and supported action days in THB crime area has also increased 
from 6 in 2020 to 10 in 2021. 
116 Submission to the public consultation by Eurojust. 

27 

 
 
                                                           
Investigation Teams remains low in comparison with the statistics on registered victims and 
cases at the EU level. The number decreased from 183 in 2019, to 163 in 2020 to 140 in 2021117. 
It is important to note that many trafficking cases involve only two Member States, while the 
threshold  to  involve  Eurojust  is  three  countries118.  Nevertheless,  there  is  scope  for  Member 
States to rely more on the support of Eurojust, including on Joint Actions, Joint Investigation 
Teams and other cooperation tools119. 

 Seizure  and  confiscation  of  instrumentalities  and  proceeds  from  trafficking 

offences 

Article 7 of the Directive requires Member States to take necessary measures to ensure that 
their  competent  authorities  are  entitled  to  seize  and  confiscate  instrumentalities  of,  and 
proceeds from, trafficking offences. Five Member States120 have specific provisions on seizure 
and  confiscation  of  proceeds  related  to  trafficking  offences.  In  the  other  Member  States, 
national  criminal  laws on seizure and confiscation apply to  all crimes, including trafficking 
offences.  

Areas hindering the full effectiveness of the Directive in relation to seizure and confiscation 

There  is  no  available  data  on  the  number  of  seizures  and  confiscations  for  the  2013-2020 
period.  In  2021,  the  European  Parliament  called  on  Member  States  to  strengthen  their 
mechanisms for seizing and confiscating assets and proceeds of trafficking offences121. While 
in 2020, the Commission reported122 that Member States increased efforts to seize proceeds and 
instrumentalities,  it  also  underlined  that  there  is  scope  to  increase  the  use  of  confiscation 
measures in light of the estimated continuous rise of profits from trafficking offences123. The 
survey to the study also confirmed this, as 51% of respondents underlined that the Directive 
contributed only to a small extent, or not at all, to an increased number of confiscations124. 

 Penalties 

According to Article 4(1), the Member States are required to set a maximum penalty of at least 
five years of imprisonment, which can be raised to at least 10 years under certain aggravating 
circumstances, such as when the offence was committed against a victim who was particularly 

117 Submission to the public consultation by Eurojust. 
118  Regulation  (EU)  2018/1727  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  14  November  2018  on  the 
European  Union  Agency  for  Criminal  Justice  Cooperation  (Eurojust),  and  replacing  and  repealing  Council 
Decision 2002/187/JHA, OJ L 295, 21.11.2018, p. 138–183. 
119 Submission to the public consultation by Eurojust. 
120 BE, CY, EL, ES and FR.  
121  European  Parliament  (2021),  Report  on  the  implementation  of  Directive  2011/36/EU  on  preventing  and 
combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims. Available at: link. 
122 European Commission, Third (2020) report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in human 
beings, COM(2020) 661 final.  
123 European Commission, Staff Working Document accompanying the Third (2020) report on the progress made 
in  the  fight  against  trafficking  in  human  beings  third  report,  SWD(2020)  226  final;  European  Parliamentary 
Research  Service  (EPRS),  Implementation  of  Directive  2011/36/EU:  Migration  and  Gender  Issues  (2020), 
available at: link; OSCE, Leveraging Innovation to Fight Trafficking in Human Beings (2020), available at: link. 
124 The majority of the other respondents considered that the Directive had contributed to increasing the number 
of  confiscations  of  THB-related  proceeds  at  least  to  a  certain  extent.  None  of  the  respondents  to  the  public 
consultation answered that the Directive had contributed to the confiscation of criminal assets to a “high” or “very 
high” extent. Ten (36%) respondents reported that the Directive had contributed to the confiscation of criminal 
assets to a “moderate extent”.   

28 

 
 
                                                           
vulnerable,  which  includes  at  least  child  victims  or  when  it  was  committed  within  the 
framework  of  a  criminal  organisation  within  the  meaning  of  Council  Framework  Decision 
2008/841/JHA  of  24  October  2008  on  the  fight  against  organised  crime125.  Harmonising 
penalties across Member States ensures that the consequences for trafficking offences are equal 
or similar all over the EU126. 

Article  4  has  been  largely  transposed,  although  some  Member  States  have  not  included  all 
aggravating  circumstances  in  their  national  law127.  Survey  respondents  considered  that  the 
penalties  included  therein  are  dissuasive,  effective  and  proportionate.  The  Directive  has 
resulted in changes in the national laws on penalties for trafficking offences. For example, 
the implementation of the Directive led Austria, Hungary and Spain to increase their penalties, 
and Belgium, Croatia, France, Latvia, Portugal and Slovenia have included more conducts into 
the trafficking offences.128 

Areas hindering the full effectiveness of the Directive in relation to penalties 

(i) There is little available data on what penalties are handed out in practice 

Data on the numbers of penalties for trafficking offences is not systematically reported in the 
Member States. 

Figure 3: Examples of sentences imposed for trafficking in Member States129 

  In  Cyprus,  five  defendants  were  prosecuted  for  trafficking  for  labour  exploitation 

between 2015 and 2018, received penalties ranging from 12 months to 5 years. 

  In Italy, three individuals were sentenced in 2019 to terms of 20 years, 17 years and 8 

months, and 10 years.  

  In  Portugal,  three  sets  of  convictions  are  reported:  in  the  first,  14  individuals  were 
sentenced to prison terms ranging from 5 to 16 years; in the second, 22 persons were 
sentenced to prison terms ranging from 5 to 10 years; and in the third, 2 individuals were 
sentenced to 14 years in prison and another to 13 years. 

(ii) The low number of convictions prevents to assess the effectiveness of penalties 

The  low  number  of  convictions  is  due  to  several  factors,  including  that  traffickers  may  be 
convicted  for  crimes  that  are  easier  to  prove  in  court,  e.g.  labour  law  offences,  aggravated 
pimping, smuggling of migrants, infringements of social security requirements. This does not 
allow to properly assess the effectiveness of penalties. In practice, it also means that the high 
penalties for trafficking offences fail to express their full deterring potential, as traffickers are 

125 OJ L 300, 11.11.2008, p. 42. 
126 Submission to the public consultation by Eurojust. 
127 Some Member States have not transposed some of the aggravating circumstances listed in Article 4(2) in their 
national law (BG, DE, EE). Several Member States legislations do not provide for penalties of at least 10 years of 
imprisonment  when  the  offence  is  committed  with  an  aggravating  circumstance  (BG,  DE,  HU).  A  number  of 
Member  States  have  not  transposed  Article  4(3),  which  provides  that  the  fact  that  the  trafficking  offence  is 
committed by public officials should be regarded as an aggravating circumstance (DE, FI, LV, PL, SE, SI). 

128 GRETA, 2019, ‘Compendium’, p.8, p.10, p.13, p.16, p.19-21, p.28, p.32-33, p.35.  

129 GRETA (2020), Compendium of good practices in addressing trafficking in human beings for the purpose of 
labour exploitation, p.41-43, Available at: link. 

29 

 
 
                                                           
more  likely  to  be  convicted  for  offences  carrying  lower  penalties.  In  view  of  this  analysis, 
rather than increasing the severity of penalties, more emphasis could be placed on increasing 
the detection, prosecution and conviction rates130. 

Further, from Eurojust’s experience, penalties applied in some Member States are sometimes 
lowered substantially by the  mitigating circumstance of the lack of criminal  record of the 
convicted person. Consideration could be given to address this situation, especially when the 
convicted person is part of an organised criminal group that committed the trafficking offence, 
making the criminal conduct particularly serious131. 

 Sanctions against legal persons 

Member States are required by Article 5 of the Directive to ensure that legal persons be liable 
for trafficking offences. Article 6 requires Member States to implement effective, proportionate 
and dissuasive sanctions against legal persons, which shall include criminal or non-criminal 
fines.  Article  6  also  includes  five  optional  sanctions  which  Member  States  can  consider 
implementing, but are not required to: (a) exclusion from entitlement to public benefits or aid; 
(b)  temporary  or  permanent  disqualification  from  the  practice  of  commercial  activities;  (c) 
placing under judicial supervision; (d) judicial winding-up; (e) temporary or permanent closure 
of establishments which have been used for committing the offence. 

Article  5  has  been  fully  transposed  to  the  extent  the  transposition  is  mandatory  and  the 
legislation of all Member States provides for at least administrative fines or criminal sanctions 
for  legal  persons  involved  in  trafficking  offences,  in  accordance  with  the  minimum 
requirements of the Directive. Most Member States have transposed at least one of the optional 
sanctions included in Article 6132. Respondents to the public consultation were divided whether 
the Directive contributed for holding legal persons liable for THB. While the majority from 
public authorities found that the Directive contributed to it at least to moderate extent, civil 
society organisations assessed the contribution little and the trade union respondent as non-
existent.   

Areas  hindering  the  full  effectiveness  of  the  Directive  in  relation  to  sanctions  on  legal 
persons 

(i) No data is available on prosecutions and convictions of legal persons  

There  is  no  available  data  on  prosecutions  and  convictions  of  legal  persons  for  trafficking 
offences.  Although  the  Commission  guidelines  on  the  biannual  data  collection  include  the 
provision of data on investigations133, prosecutions and convictions of legal persons, no such 
data has been reported by Member States.  

 (ii)  The Directive has not resulted in greater action against legal persons 

Labour exploitation is the second most prevalent purpose of trafficking, and affects 20% of 
victims  registered  in  the  EU.  It  mainly  concerns  male  victims,  but  female  victims  are 
increasingly affected. Labour exploitation often takes place in businesses requiring low-wage, 

130  Survey  #59  Submission  to  the  public  consultation  by  La  Strada  International;  Interview  with  an  academic 
expert #24.  
131 Submission to the public consultation by Eurojust. 
132 BG, DE, EE, FI, IE, SK do not have any of the optional sanctions listed in Article 6(a)-6(e). 
133 See, for instance, Study on Data collection on trafficking in human beings in the EU (2020). Available at: link.  

30 

 
 
                                                           
intensive  and  seasonal  work,  such  as  forestry,  food  processing,  hospitality,  retail,  carwash, 
beauty  and  cleaning  services,  transportation,  housekeeping,  domestic  work134.  Consulted 
stakeholders consider that trafficking in high-risk sectors is problematic to a large or very large 
extent in the EU. This requires adequate action against legal persons that are used to commit 
trafficking offences. Although no official data is available on the number of prosecutions and 
convictions of legal persons, consulted stakeholders reported that these are extremely rare135 
and 60% of survey respondents  thought  that the Directive has  contributed to  a moderate or 
small extent to holding legal persons liable136. The non- or partial transposition of the optional 
sanctions of the Directive against legal persons hinder the effective criminal accountability of 
legal persons. 

4.1.1.5 Protection, assistance and support to victims 

Key evaluation findings: 

  The Directive has made a significant contribution to increasing the availability 
of  protection,  assistance  and  support  measures  for  victims  and  to  taking  into 
account the gender specific dimension of the crime.  

  Most Member States have identification procedures in place, which are applied 

by law enforcement authorities or with a multi-stakeholder approach. 
  The EU Agencies have stepped up the activities to support identification. 
  Not all Member States have a National Referral Mechanism and their structure 

varies across Member States. 

  The Directive is considered to have contributed to improvements in protection 

and support to child victims.  

  Some Member States do not explicitly include in their legislation the provision 

of assistance for victims with special needs. 

Areas  for  improvement  in  relation  to  the  provision  of  assistance  and support  to 
victims are: 

o  The early identification of victims by Member States could be improved, as 

many victims remain undetected.  

o  The functioning of national referral mechanisms (formal and informal) could 

be enhanced.  

o  Increased  consistency  between  National  Referral  Mechanisms  and 
harmonisation at the EU of referral mechanisms  as well as the facilitation 
of intra-EU referrals could be considered.  

o  Data on the number of victims benefitting from assistance and support could 

be more consistently recorded and reported by Member States. 

Areas for improvement in relation to the assistance, support and protection of child 
victims and victims with special needs: 

o  Member States could improve the detection and early identification of child 

134 Europol’s contribution to the Commission’s fourth report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking 
in human beings; Europol Migrant Smuggling Centre, European Migrant Smuggling Centre 4th Annual Report, 
available at: link. 
135 Interview with an academic expert #24; interview with an academic expert #25.   
136  One  respondent  (1%)  answered  to  a  ‘very  high  extent’;  five  (4%)  answered  to  a  ‘high  extent’;  19  (15%) 
answered to a ‘moderate extent’; 54 (44%) answered to a ‘small extent’; 20 (16%) answered ‘not at all’; and 25 
(20%) answered ‘I don’t know’.   

31 

 
 
                                                           
victims. 

o  Member  States  could  improve  the  number  and  quality  of  shelters  for 

children. 

o  Member  States  could  enhance  the  integration  of  children  into  the  whole 

national protection systems. 

o  Member States could pay more attention to victims with special needs and 

Roma as well as LGBTIQ victims. 

 Early identification  

Article 11 of the Directive includes a range of measures to ensure assistance and support to 
victims. Recitals  17 to 22 provide further detail  on the assistance and support that Member 
States should provide to victims of trafficking.  Most Member States have transposed the 
provisions included in Article 11 and have national measures to provide assistance and 
support.  

The Directive has contributed to increase the range of services available in Member States 
for  victims  of  trafficking.  The  Commission’s  Transposition  report  (2016)  highlighted  that 
Member  States  have  taken  measures  for  the  early  identification,  assistance,  support  and 
protection of victims of trafficking. Consulted stakeholders also considered that the Directive 
contributed towards enhancing access to support and protection, especially for women and girls 
victims of trafficking137. However, the survey highlighted that the contribution of the Directive 
to the protection of victims of trafficking for the purpose of labour exploitation had been more 
limited, as compared to other groups of victims. Member States have put in place services for 
victims, including access to shelter, provision of medical care and psychological assistance, as 
well as setting-up of helplines providing relevant information to victims.  

Procedures for the identification of victims are in place in most Member States, and are 
applied  by  law  enforcement  authorities  or  in  a  multi-stakeholder  approach.  Having 
multiple authorities responsible for the early identification of presumed  victims  may hinder 
coordination, but it also reduces the chances that victim remains unnoticed.  

EU  Agencies  have  taken  steps  to  support  the  early  identification  of  victims.  CEPOL, 
EUAA and Frontex have developed training and handbooks to guide professionals from the 
Member  State  to  better  identify  victims.  Frontex  officers  are  themselves  trained  to  identify 
victims. 

Areas hindering the full effectiveness of the Directive in relation to early identification of, 
and support to, victims of trafficking 

(i) Early identification of victims is insufficient 

Early identification of victims is considered as a priority issue, as it triggers the provision of 
assistance  and  support  services.  In  this  sense,  insufficient  or  late  identification  hinders  the 
effective  implementation  of  the  Directive138.  Member  States  face  challenges  in  the 

137  Interviews  with  one  representative  from  a  European  civil  society  organisation  (#17);  one  EU  institution 
representative (#18); one academic expert (#24). 
138 This was notably raised during the workshop organised by the European Commission with the EU Civil Society 
Platform against trafficking in human beings on 30 November 2021. 

32 

 
 
                                                           
identification of potential victims139, mainly because: 

 

 

 

Victims  may  be  unwilling  to  report  trafficking  offences  to  law  enforcement 
authorities, as they may fear that it may lead to disclose irregularities and put them at 
risk of prosecution or return140.  

Only  certain  authorities  are  competent  for  the  formal  identification  of  victims. 
GRETA  notes  that  there  is  a  series  of  stakeholders  who  can  identify  victims  of 
trafficking, not only the specialised investigation units dealing with THB offences but 
also  migration  and  asylum  officials,  labour  inspectors,  social  workers,  health-care 
staff and NGOs.”141 

The lack of harmonised indicators for the identification of (presumed) victims may 
lead to fragmented detection procedures and case management. 

(ii)  Not  all  Member  States  have  a  National  Referral  Mechanism,  and  the  structure  of 
National Referral Mechanisms varies across Member States 

National Referral Mechanism are cooperative frameworks, involving relevant authorities and 
civil  society  organisations,  aimed  at  identifying,  assisting  and  supporting  victims  of 
trafficking142.  The  Directive  does  not  require  Member  States  to  create  referral 
mechanisms.  Article  11(4)  requires  Member  States  to  “take  the  necessary  measures  to 
establish  appropriate  mechanisms  aimed  at  the  early  identification  of,  assistance  to  and 
support for victims, in cooperation with relevant support organisations.” All Member States 
except  Germany  have  developed  such  cooperation  mechanisms143.  However,  structures, 
procedures and other arrangement vary widely across the Member States.  

In some Member States, mechanisms for the identification of, and support to, victims are not 
regulated  and  remain  informal144.  In  most  Member  States,  a  central  authority  holds  the 
responsibility for identification and may take the form of a specialised body (Bulgaria, Italy) 
or  a  of  specialised  law  enforcement  unit  (Cyprus,  Luxembourg).  Numerous  consulted 
stakeholders consider that Member States should establish easily accessible National Referral 
Mechanisms145.  

Moreover, the recent increase in the percentage of registered victim citizens of non-EU 
countries shows how relevant cross-border and international cooperation are, as slow or 
insufficient coordination may cause difficulties for the receiving organisation146. The lack of 
coordination  can  cause  difficulties  for  the  receiving  organisations  to  prepare  properly  to 

139 E.g. IE, IT, AT, LT, NL. 
140 Submission to the public consultation by Missing Children Europe. 
141 Submission to the OPC by GRETA 
142  Population  Europe,  10  Years  After  the  Directive  2011/36/EU  (2022),  Population  and  Policy  Brief  No  33. 
Available at: link.  
143  European  Commission,  Study  on  reviewing  the  functioning  of  member  states’  national  and  transnational 
referral mechanisms (2020). Available at: link. 
144  Submissions  to  the  public  consultation  by  IOM;  Association  for  Juridical  Studies  on  Immigration;  EIGE; 
Contre La Traite; and GRETA. 
145 Submission to the public consultation by Victims Support Finland. 77% of the stakeholders who participated 
in the public consultation considered that the Directive should require Member States to establish formal national 
referral mechanisms. 
146 Submission to the public consultation by ICMPD. 

33 

 
 
                                                           
support a victim. 

(iii) Lack of a European Referral Mechanism 

The absence of harmonised procedures at European level hampers the effectiveness of cross-
border identification and referral of victims. Although Member States engage in bilateral and 
multilateral  forms  of  cooperation,  clearer  cooperation  between  the  national  authorities  of 
Member States would facilitate assistance to victims and their reintegration in society. The EU 
Strategy  2021-2025  sets  out  as  a  key  action  that  the  Commission  will  enhance  cooperation 
towards a European referral mechanism.  

(iv)  The  services  provided  in  Member  States  may  have  limited  scope,  capacity  or  be 
insufficiently targeted to the needs of victims 

Although  Member  States  have  transposed  Article  11  almost  fully,  gaps  remain  in  the 
availability of services. Member States implement assistance and protection measures rather 
differently, for example in decisions (i) on whether to provide assistance to victims; (ii) on the 
period during which assistance has to be provided; and (iii) on the groups to whom assistance 
has to be provided147. Furthermore, not all Member States provide sufficient access to specialist 
accommodation or psychological counselling148.  

Factors  affecting  victims’  willingness  to  seek  help  include  the  provision  of  services  in  a 
language they understand, their fear of reprisals from traffickers and the availability of services 
for their family members149. Respondents to the online survey highlighted that it is necessary 
to  enhance  Member  States’  capacity  to  provide  protection  measures  tailored  to  the  specific 
needs  of  vulnerable  groups  (women,  especially  when  pregnant;  children;  people  with 
disabilities or addictions, etc.)150. In addition, there is a need to improve services for long-term 
recovery and rehabilitation. 

On 28 June 2022, the Commission adopted its evaluation of the Victims’ Rights Directive151 
that  identified  shortcomings,  related  to  victims’  access  to  information,  justice,  support  and 
protection. The evaluation is one of the Commission’s key actions set out in the EU Strategy 
on  Victims’  Rights  (2020  –  2025)152.  The  Commission  continues  to  work  on  strengthening 
victims’ rights. It is currently preparing an impact assessment of the Victims’ Rights Directive 
and plans to propose a revision of the Directive in 2023. 

(v)  Data  concerning  the  number  of  persons  provided  with  assistance  support  is  not 
consistently reported 

Member States are not required to report on the number of victims receiving assistance. Some 
Member States report to the Commission these figures for the purposes of the progress reports 

147 Interview with a representative from an international organisation (#14). 
148  European  Migration  Network,  Third-country  national  victims  of  trafficking  in  human  beings:  detection, 
identification and protection (2022). Available at: link.  
149 Submission to the public consultation by Victims Support Finland. 
150  53%  (n=48)  of  respondents  reported  that  EU  intervention  would  be  necessary  to  enhance  Member  States’ 
capacity to provide protection measures tailored to the specific needs of vulnerable groups. 
151  Directive  2012/29/EU  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  25 October  2012  establishing 
minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime (OJ L 315, 14.11.2012, p. 57). 
152 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and 
Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions.  EU  Strategy  on  Victims’  Rights  (2020-2025), 
COM/2020/258 Final. 

34 

 
 
                                                           
but  data  is  not  collected  systematically  therefore  data  provided  by  Member  States  is  not 
comparable.  

 Gender-sensitive approach to assistance and support 

Considering that 75% of the victims of trafficking identified in the EU are women and girls, 
EU strategic documents have taken the gender dimension into particular account. The Directive 
recognises the gender-specific phenomenon of trafficking and that female and male victims are 
often  trafficked  for  different  purposes.  It  also  requires  Member  States  to  provide  gender-
specific assistance and support measures, where appropriate.  

Member  States  have  introduced  specific  measures  that  provide  tailored  gender-sensitive 
support,  including  increased  awareness-raising  of  healthcare  staff  to  identify  and  support 
women and girl victims of trafficking for sexual exploitation; training and guidance on gender-
based  violence  for  immigration  authorities;  and  assistance  procedures  especially  addressing 
women  and  children  in  the  hotspots.153  Member  States  have  introduced  gender-sensitive 
legislation and policy154, notably as a result of the implementation of the Directive.  

 Child victims’ access to protection, assistance and support  

The  scale  of  child  trafficking  remains  “an  overwhelming  concern”155.  In  2013-2020,  child 
victims constituted over a fifth of all registered victims of trafficking in the EU27 (21%).  

The  Directive  includes  specific  measures  focusing  specifically  on  ensuring  child  victims’ 
access  to  assistance,  support,  and  protection.  These  include  general  protection  measures 
(Articles  13  and  14),  protection  measures  during  criminal  investigations  and  proceedings 
(Article 15), and measures for unaccompanied minors (Article 16). Although Member States 
have transposed and implemented the provisions related to child protection to different extents, 
the stakeholders consider that the Directive has contributed to enhancing child victims’ access 
to assistance and support. 

Areas hindering the full effectiveness of the Directive in relation to child victims’ rights to 
assistance, support and protection 

(i) Insufficient identification of child victims hinders the provision of assistance  

While Member States have made progress, there is scope to improve practical support to child 
victims on the ground. All European Commission Progress Reports raise concerns about child-
specific  measures  for  prevention,  identification,  and  assistance,  although  they  reported  new 
actions on identification, guardianship and accommodation taken in some Member States156. 

153  European Commission, Third (2020) report on the progress made in the fight against  trafficking in human 
beings, COM(2020) 661 final.  
154 GRETA, Assistance to Victims of Human Trafficking (2019), available at: link; EIGE, Protecting victims: an 
analysis  of  the  Anti-Trafficking  Directive  from  the  perspective  of  a  victim  of  gender-based  violence  (2017), 
available at: link; EPRS, Trafficking in Human Beings from a Gender Perspective Directive 2011/36/EU  (2016), 
available at: link. 
155 Submission to the public consultation by ICAT. 
156 European Commission, Third (2020) report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in human 
beings,  COM(2020)  661  final;  Second  report  on  the  progress  made  in  the  fight  against  trafficking  in  human 
beings, COM(2018) 777 final;  Report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in human beings (“first 
progress report”), COM(2016) 267 final. 

35 

 
 
                                                           
Concerns include:  

o 

o 

o 

o 

The disappearance of child victims, from shelters and care/foster homes157.  

The  lack  of  access  to  psychologists  for  children  are  sometimes  placed  in  child 
protection institutions. 

The non-application of the presumption of childhood set out in Article 13(2). 

Guardianship, which according to Article 14(2) should start “from the moment the 
child is identified by the authorities”, is sometimes only  appointed  after the child 
victim has requested asylum. 

(ii) Limited number and capacity of shelters for children  

Another  identified  area  for  improvement  concerns  specialised  shelters  for  child  victims  of 
trafficking158. Shelters should have specialised trained staff, a confidential address and security 
measures, both physical  and in terms of access to internet159. Separation between trafficked 
women and their children into different assistance facilities should be avoided, in order to avoid 
further  traumatisation160.  The  Commission  Communication  on  the  protection  of  children  in 
migration  calls  for  improved  specialised  services  for  refugee  girls,  some  of  whom  may  be 
victims of trafficking161. Placing children in institutions instead of foster families may increase 
the risk of being re-trafficked162. 

 Assistance, support and protection of victims with special needs 

Article 11(7) of the Directive requires that Member States “attend to victims with special needs, 
where  those  needs  derive,  in  particular  from  […]  their  health,  a  disability,  a  mental  or 
psychological  disorder  they  have,  or  a  serious  form  of  psychological,  physical  or  sexual 
violence they have suffered’. The other provisions in Article 11 encompass necessary assistance 
and  support  for  victims  of  trafficking.  The  Directive,  however,  does  not  require  explicitly 
Member States to ensure the accessibility (i.e. including braille, sign languages and easy-to-
read) of prevention material or the physical accessibility of shelters.163The available data shows 
that the number of trafficked victims with disabilities is rising. Trends include trafficking of 
persons  with  physical  or  visual  impairments  for  the  purpose  of  forced  begging,  as  visible 
disabilities have a stronger impact on public sympathy164.  

Since  the  adoption  of  the  Directive,  there  have  been  important  improvements  in  creating 
national  measures  providing  assistance  to  victims  with  special  needs  related  to  sexual  or 

157 GRETA, Trafficking in Children (2019), available at: link; EPRS, Trafficking in Human Beings from a Gender 
Perspective Directive 2011/36/EU (2016), available at: link.  
158 Submission to the public consultation by ECPAT France. 
159 Submission to the public consultation by ECPAT France. 
160 GRETA, Trafficking in Children (2019), available at: link; EPRS, Trafficking in Human Beings from a Gender 
Perspective Directive 2011/36/EU (2016), available at: link.  
161 Communication from the European Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the protection 
of children in migration (COM(2017) 211 final), available at: link. 
162 LUMOS, Recommendations stemming from Lumos’ Panel Discussion on 27 October 2021 (2021).  
163 Submission to the OPC by the EDF. 
164  UN  Office  of  the  High  Commissioner  for  Human  Rights,  Thematic  study  on  the  issue  of  violence  against 
women and girls and disability (2012). Available at: link 

36 

 
 
                                                           
domestic violence165. It remains, however, a challenge to provide suitable care for victims, who 
are also suffering in some sort of addiction (alcohol or drugs), which is often the case. 

Areas hindering the full effectiveness of the Directive in relation to assistance, support and 
protection of victims with special needs 

(i) Limited attention to, or understanding of, the needs of victims with disabilities 

While the Directive increased attention on assistance, support and protection of victims with 
special needs, there are still gaps in the tailored attention to their specific needs. In 2021, the 
European Parliament reported that the needs of victims with disabilities are often overlooked, 
calling  on  Member  States  to  provide  them  with  appropriate  support166.  There  are  currently 
important gaps in the data collection on the number of victims with disabilities. This does not 
allow  to  gather  information  disaggregated  by  gender,  age  and  disability,  which  would  be 
important  to  allow  Member  States  and  other  stakeholders  to  adopt  age-  and  disability-
appropriate protection and support measures167. 

 Other vulnerable groups, including LGBTIQ and Roma victims of trafficking 

LGBTIQ people are a particularly vulnerable to trafficking. Research suggests that they 
are  particularly  at  risk  when  they  work  in  the  sector  of  prostitution,  where  they  may  find 
themselves in precarious and dangerous contexts168. However, there is no official data on the 
number of LGBTIQ victims of trafficking in the EU.  

The Commission Progress Reports highlighted that Roma people are at particular risk of 
becoming victims of trafficking169. Their vulnerability is due to structural ethnic and gender 
discrimination,  poverty,  social  exclusion,  lack  of  access  to  education  and  employment  and 
domestic violence170. Despite the lack of official data about trafficking of Roma people, one 
study from 2011171 conducted in Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia 
indicates that trafficking in persons affects Roma disproportionately. A 2016 Europol report 
identified the particular vulnerability of Roma communities, especially in related to trafficking 
for forced criminality or sham marriages.172The Directive strengthened the awareness of the 
specific needs of these groups leading to targeted prevention activities, in particular education 
and awareness raising programs in certain Member States173.  

Areas  hindering  the  effectiveness  of  the  Directive  in  relation  assistance,  support  and 

165 Commission’s First, Second and Third Progress Report. 
166  European  Parliament  (2021),  Report  on  the  implementation  of  Directive  2011/36/EU  on  preventing  and 
combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims. Available at: link. 
167 Submission to the public consultation by the European Disability Forum (EDF). 
168 Submissions to the public consultation by Diritti Civili delle Prostitute ONLUS; Sex Work Polska; European 
Sex Workers Alliance; LEFÖ. 
169 European Commission, Second report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in human beings, 
COM(2018)  777  final;    Report  on  the  progress  made  in  the  fight  against  trafficking  in  human  beings  (“first 
progress report”), COM(2016) 267 final. 
170 European Commission, Staff Working Document accompanying the Third (2020) report on the progress made 
in the fight against trafficking in human beings third report, SWD(2020) 226 final; EPRS, Trafficking in Human 
Beings from a Gender Perspective Directive 2011/36/EU (2016), available at: link. 
171 European Roma Rights Centre (2011) Breaking the silence. Trafficking in Romani Communities. Available 
here: link.  
172 Europol (2016), Situation report: trafficking in human beings in the EU, p.4, p.14, Available at: link. 
173 HU 

37 

 
 
                                                           
protection to vulnerable groups, including LGBTIQ and Roma people 

There have been calls, including by the European Parliament174, for increased EU-level action 
to  address  the  particular  needs  and  situations  of  vulnerable  categories  of  people,  including 
LGBTIQ and Roma people. The third European Commission progress report suggests there 
have  been  limited  efforts  to  address  the  particular  vulnerabilities  of  Roma  victims175.  The 
European  Parliament  also  called  for  increasing  the  provision  of  specific  tailored  services176 
(which was included in the EU Strategy on Combatting Trafficking in Human Beings 2021-
2025).  Similarly,  interviewees  stated  that  more  could  be  done  to  support  victims  whose 
experiences do not correspond to the common perceptions of trafficking victims177.   

4.1.1.6   Protection, assistance and support to victims involved in the criminal justice 
system  

Key evaluation findings: 

  While all Member States provide access to witness protection programmes, they 
appear to be used infrequently for victims of trafficking and may be unsuitable 
for vulnerable victims.  

Areas  for  improvement  in  relation  to  victims  involved  in  the  criminal  justice 
procedures:  

o  Member  States  could  improve  criminal  procedures  in  order  to  avoid 
secondary victimisation of the victim. The assessment of the individual 
needs of the victim could be more consistently applied. 

o  Member  States  could  increase  awareness  of  the  available  victim 

protection measures. 

Protection  of  victims  of  trafficking  in  human  beings  in  criminal  investigation  and 

proceedings 
Article 12 of the Directive obliges Member States to protect victims in criminal proceedings. 
Under Article 12(3), victims receive the appropriate protection on the basis of an individual 
risk  assessment,  which  includes  access  to  witness  protection  programmes  or  other  similar 
measures.  

Article 12(4) of the Directive also requires Member States to protect victims of trafficking from 
secondary victimisation and further trauma during the criminal investigations and proceedings. 
Member States are active in training of professionals and building specialist facilities (such as 
interrogation rooms), and that it is common for the statements of victims of trafficking to be 
recorded in advance (and later played in court) to avoid personal attendance at court. Some 

174  European  Parliament  (2021),  Report  on  the  implementation  of  Directive  2011/36/EU  on  preventing  and 
combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims, p.18, Available at: link. Submission to the OPC 
by ICMPD. 
175  European  Commission  (2020),  Commission  staff  working  document  accompanying  […]  third  report,  p.39, 
Available at: link.  
176 European Parliament, Report on the implementation of Directive 2011/36/EU on preventing and combating 
trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims (2021). Available at: link. 
177 Interviews with one representative from an international body (#3) and two representatives from an EU civil 
society organisations (#6 and #8), among others.  

38 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
Member States have adopted the holistic “Barnahus” model for supporting child victims178. 

Areas hindering the effectiveness of the Directive with regard to the protection of victims of 
trafficking in human beings in criminal investigation and proceedings 

(i)Witness protection programmes appear to be used infrequently for victims of trafficking 

While all Member States have transposed Article 12(3), witness protection does not appear to 
be widely used  for trafficking victims, although  there is  very limited information  available. 
Witness protection programmes may not always be recommended for trafficking victims, as 
they often disconnect victims from dependents and support systems179.  

(ii)  Inconsistent  application  of  measures  to  prevent  contact  with  the  defendant  and 
unnecessary questioning 

Secondary  victimisation  was  raised  as  a  major  concern  by  several  stakeholders180.  Desk 
research showed that protocols and guidelines to prevent victims repeating their experiences 
were ‘not consistently found’ across the Member States181. This is also true of protection for 
child  victims182.  Examples  of  violations  of  Article  12(4)  of  the  Directive  were  reported  to 
GRETA, including cases of victims experiencing “visual contact with the accused, testimonies 
in open court and unnecessary questioning into [...] private life”183.  

4.1.1.7 Victim compensation and non-prosecution 

Key evaluation findings: 

  The Directive has contributed to legislative and policy developments enabling 
victims to access and exercise their rights to assistance, including compensation, 
in Member States.  

  However,  the  award  of  compensation  is  rare  and  often  hindered  by 
administrative obstacles, lack of legal aid and the duration of criminal trials 
  While all Member States  have  adopted measures for the non-prosecution  and 
non-punishment  of  victims  of  trafficking  for  their  involvement  in  criminal 
activities which they were compelled to commit as a direct consequence of being 
trafficked, restrictive interpretations tend to prevail among national authorities.   
Areas  for  improvement  identified  in  relation  to  compensation  and  the  non-

178  For  instance,  HU  adopted  the  Barnahus  model,  ensures  that  crisis  intervention,  medical  and  forensic 
examinations and police hearings of sexually abused children take place in one location, at almost the same time, 
protecting him or her from the traumatic effects of multiple testimonies and other risks of participating in criminal 
proceedings (e.g confrontation with the abuser, frustration caused by inappropriate interrogation). An amendment 
to Act XC of 2017 on Criminal Proceedings entered into force on 1 January 2021 created the possibility of hearing 
the sexually abused, exploited minors as a criminal procedural act through the specialist of the Barnahus and the 
child-friendly infrastructure thereof. 
179 EPRS, Trafficking in Human Beings from a Gender Perspective Directive 2011/36/EU (2016). Available at: 
link. 
180 Workshop organised by the European Commission with the EU Civil Society Platform against trafficking in 
human beings on 30 November 2021. 
181 E.g. IE, RO and ES. See EPRS, Trafficking in Human Beings from a Gender Perspective Directive 2011/36/EU 
(2016). Available at: link. 
182 GRETA, Trafficking in Children (2019). Available at: link. 
183 EPRS, Trafficking in Human Beings from a Gender Perspective Directive 2011/36/EU (2016). Available at: 
link. 

39 

 
 
                                                           
prosecution of victims: 

o  Member  States  could  take  further  efforts  in  order  to  improve  access  to 

compensation and the application of non-prosecution. 

Access to compensation 

Article 17 of the Directive requires Member States to ensure that victims of THB have access 
to existing schemes of compensation to victims of violent crimes of intent. 

All  but  two  Member  States  have  fully  transposed  Article  17  of  the  Directive184.  Such 
measures include compensation for non-material damages, such as physical and psychological 
suffering185    dual  system  of  compensation,186  fund  for  victims  of  violent  crimes187  or  other 
special compensation measures188. 

The Directive has made an important contribution to increasing access to compensation 
with  almost  80%  of  survey  respondents  reporting  that  the  Directive  had  contributed  to 
increased access to compensation. This is supported by the Commission second progress report 
which  found  that,  as  a  result  of  the  Directive  (in  combination  with  the  Residence  Permits, 
Victims’ Rights and Compensation Directive), significant legislative and policy developments 
enabling victims to access and exercise their rights to assistance, including compensation, had 
been enacted189.  

Areas hindering the effectiveness of the Directive with regard to the access to compensation 
by the victim 

(i) The award of compensation is rare and often hindered by administrative obstacles, lack 
of legal aid and the duration of criminal trials 

While no data is available on the number of claims that were made or that were successful, or 
the  amount  of  compensation  awarded  to  victims,  stakeholders  underlined  that  in  practice, 
compensation  is  rare190.  Most  stakeholders  reported  that  compensation  schemes  in  their 
Member States had been effective to a ‘small’ or ‘moderate’ extent. While some Member States 
reported  an  increase  in  funding  for  state  compensation  (e.g.  IT),  GRETA  stated  that  the 
majority of Member States needed to improve existing legislation on both state compensation 
and compensation from perpetrators191. 

Compensation is often awarded at the end of the criminal proceedings, which can last for years. 
The  COVID-19  pandemic  has  worsened  the  situation,  with  delayed  court  hearings,  longer 

184 SI has not fully transposed Article 17. In national law, compensation appears to be provided only to victims 
who  are  Slovenian  or  EU  citizens.  In  IE,  the  existing  scheme  for  compensation  to  victims  of  violent  crimes 
(namely  the  Criminal  Injury  Compensation  Schemes)  only  recovers  verifiable  expenses,  and  not  pain  and 
suffering. 
185 AT, FI, SK. 
186 BG, CZ, ES, IE, LT, MT, NL, PT, SE. 
187 BE, FR and HR. 
188 EE, EL, HU, LV, PL, RO, SK. 
189 AT, BE, BG, CZ, DK, FI, FR, HU, LV, LU, MT, NL, PT, SK, SE were mentioned. European Commission, 
Second report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in human beings, COM(2018) 777 final. 
190 Interview #18. 
191 GRETA, 4th General Report on GRETA's activities (2015). Available at: link.  

40 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
police  investigations,  etc.192.  The  awarding  of  compensation  can  also  be  linked  to  victims’ 
capacity to prove their status as victim of trafficking, which can prove particularly difficult 
when  there  is  no  court  case  against  the  trafficker193.  Moreover,  victims  often  face 
administrative obstacles194  and are not always provided with free legal aid in order to make 
their claim, which makes the process more challenging195. 

(ii) Victims may have returned to their country of origin, or may have irregular migration 
status 

It  is  particularly  difficult  for  victims  who  have  returned  to  their  country  of  origin  before  a 
decision is taken on their compensation claim,196 or for undocumented migrants197 to receive 
compensation. 

 Non-prosecution of victims for their involvement in criminal activities 

Article 8 of the Directive requires Member States to ensure that competent national authorities 
are entitled not to prosecute or impose penalties on victims of trafficking for their involvement 
in criminal activities which they have been compelled to commit as a result of being trafficked.  

All Member States but one have transposed Article 8 into national law198. Around half of 
Member  States  explicitly  refer  to  non-prosecution  of  THB  victims  in  their  national  law199, 
while others refer to the non-prosecution of a person who was compelled, threatened or coerced 
to  commit  a  criminal  act200.  Victims  can  be  forced  by  their  traffickers  to  engage  in  illegal 
conducts such as forced prostitution, in drug production or trafficking, petty crime, possession 
or  the  use  of  fraudulent  documents  or  entering  another  country  in  a  manner  that  does  not 
comply with its immigration laws201. 

The  language  of  the  Directive  allows  for  a  certain  degree  of  discretion,  as  it  only  requires 
national authorities to be entitled not to prosecute or impose penalties on a person who was 
compelled to engage in criminal activities. 

192  Submission  to  the  public  consultation  by  La  Strada  International;  workshop  organised  by  the  European 
Commission with the EU Network of NREM on 6 December 2021; submission by Belgium in the context of the 
workshop. 
193 Interview with two representatives from an EU civil society organisation (#8). 
194  Interview  with  two  representatives  from  an  EU  civil  society  organisation  (#8);  submission  to  the  public 
consultation by IOM.  
195 Workshop organised by the European Commission with the EU Civil Society Platform against trafficking in 
human beings on 30 November 2021; submission to the public consultation by La Strada International and the 
Red Cross. 
196 Submissions to the public consultation by IOM; and la Strada International. 
197 Interview with two representatives from an EU civil society organisation (#8); Interview with a representative 
from an International Organisation (#28). 
198 HR has not transposed this article.  
199 BG, EL, ES, CY, LV, LT, LU, MT, NL, RO and SK. 
200 HU, IT, PL, PT, SE and SI. 
201 Submission to the public consultation by ICAT.  

41 

 
 
                                                           
Areas  hindering  the  effectiveness  of  the  Directive  with  regard  to  the  non-prosecution  of 
victims 

Even  though  national  authorities  are  entitled  not  to  prosecute  and  punish  victims  for  their 
engagement  in  forced  criminal  activities,  this  is  not  consistently  applied  in  practice,  and 
approaches differ across Member States. 

The Commission’s progress reports highlighted that Member States did not provide sufficient 
information on the application of the non-prosecution and non-punishment principles and that 
victims of trafficking for sexual exploitation and forced criminal activities were at high risk of 
being  punished.  This  was  also  underlined  as  a  particular  issue  in  many  Member  States  by 
several consulted stakeholders202. GRETA notably reported on victims who have been arrested 
for their involvement in drug-related crimes203.  

Civil society organisations stressed that there is a lack of clarity about the interpretation of the 
provisions  on  the  non-prosecution  and  non-punishment  of  victims  by  legal  professionals. 
Judges and prosecutors are also not necessarily aware of the relevant legislation in force in the 
Member State. Moreover, such provisions often tend to be interpreted in a restrictive way (e.g. 
the principle of non-prosecution does not apply to serious offences or coercion is defined in a 
strict  way,  which  focuses  on  the  use  and  threat  of  force)204.  GRETA  expressed  concerns 
regarding the punishment of child victims of trafficking in some Member States205.  

Some stakeholders have raised the fact that Article 8 of the Directive could be reinforced in 
order to provide for an obligation on Member States not to prosecute and punish victims of 
trafficking for their involvement in criminal activities as a result of being trafficked206.  

4.1.1.8 Conclusions on effectiveness of the Directive 

Several reasons lead to conclude that the Directive fulfilled its general objectives207 and it can 
be  considered  as  overall  effective.  Firstly,  it  has  significantly  contributed  to  setting  up  an 
institutional and organisational framework at the EU and Member States level, which addresses 
trafficking  in  human  beings  not  just  as  a  serious  crime,  but  as  a  complex  socio-economic 
phenomenon. The comprehensive, multi-disciplinary and multi-agency approach enshrined in 
the Directive has led to the development of National Action Plans and Strategies with actions 
aimed at achieving the objectives of the Directive (preventing and combatting trafficking in 
human  beings,  as  well  as  protecting,  supporting  and  assisting  the  victims  of  this  crime).  In 
concrete terms, this enabled Member States to detect offences committed in the EU, to have a 

202 Interviews with two representatives from an EU civil society organisation (#8); an expert/academic (#25); an 
international  organisation  (#14);  an  EU  Agency  (#21);  an  International  Organisation  (#28);  a  Business  and 
Employer Association (#29). Submissions to the public consultation by, among others, ICAT, ICMPD and IOM; 
Interview with expert/academic (#25). 
203  GRETA,  Trafficking  in  Children  (2019),  available  at:  link;  RACE  (2014),  Trafficking  for  force  criminal 
activities and begging in Europe, available at: link.  
204 Submission to the public consultation by La Strada International and The Red Cross; evidence submitted to 
the external contractor by Bulgaria, Workshop 2. 
205 Idem no. 152 
206  Population  Europe,  10  Years  After  the  Directive  2011/36/EU  (2022),  Population  and  Policy  Brief  No  33. 
Available at: link 
207 Two general objectives, namely (1) to combat crime, organised or otherwise, in particular trafficking in persons 
and offences against children, by building a more coherent framework for the fight against trafficking and (2) to 
increase the effectiveness of the framework. 

42 

 
 
                                                           
common approach on prevention (which is not solely based on criminal law) and to have an 
adequate  framework  ensuring  that  victims  enjoy  a  wide  set  of  rights  and  have  access  to 
appropriate services. Secondly, the Directive also effectively contributed to the harmonisation 
of  minimum  rules  of  criminal  law,  and  of  protection,  assistance  and  support  to  victims.  In 
concrete terms, this increased cooperation among Member States in cross-border cases, both 
in terms of law enforcement and judicial cooperation, and in terms of assistance of victims that 
were exploited in different Member States or that left the country in which they were exploited. 
The Directive provided an appropriate legal framework for the EU Agencies to coordinate such 
cooperation and for the competent authorities of the Member States to have a harmonised rules 
and practices. In addition, the Directive incorporates the definition and the key provisions of 
the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and 
Children. This allows to have a common understanding and contributes to cooperation in cross-
border cases with non-EU countries.  

The evaluation has identified, however, a number of gaps either inherent in the provisions of 
the Directive or stemming from the transposition and implementation where improvements are 
necessary, which impede the attainment of the specific objectives, in particular gapes and 
inconsistencies were identified in applying the definition of trafficking and exploitation; the 
investigation and prosecution of the crime is hampered by lacking capacities of investigations 
and training; prevention cannot fully work due to the low criminal accountability of the private 
sector and the persisting demand for cheap labour and sexual services; and the assistance and 
support of the victims remain limited mainly due to the lack of sufficient infrastructure and 
expertise as well as the reduced access for the victims to compensation. 

4.1.2 Efficiency 

Key evaluation findings: 

  Human trafficking implies high costs to the economy and society,  including 
law 

the  coordination  and  prevention,  specialised  services, 

costs  for 
enforcement, health services and social protection. 

  Overall, the implementation of the Directive did not entail significant costs, as 
confirmed  by  the  majority  of  stakeholders,  which  agreed  on  the  cost-
effectiveness of the measure in the light of the high societal costs of human 
trafficking.  

  Stakeholders  claimed  that  funding  made  available  by  Member  States  is  not 

sufficient.  
Areas for improvement: 

o  Member  States  could  allocate  more  resources  to  fight  trafficking  in 
human beings, in particular they could consider the use of confiscated assets to 
reduce the costs of human trafficking. 

Overall, stakeholders confirmed the cost-effectiveness of the Directive, despite some variations 
between the categories of stakeholders. 17% of the civil society organisations consulted as 
part of the survey pointed to a substantial increase in costs, not always proportionate with 
the  achieved  benefits,  whereas  only  7%  of  National  Rapporteurs  and  Equivalent 
Mechanisms  were  of  the  same  opinion.  Several  National  Rapporteurs  and  Equivalent 

43 

 
 
 
Mechanisms208  considered  that  implementation  costs  had  not  increased  due  to  the  fact  that 
some of the measures provided for in the Directive were already in place before its adoption 
(e.g. establishment of a National Rapporteur or Equivalent Mechanism209, as well as assistance 
and protection services for THB victims210).  

69% of the respondents to the public consultation, regardless of their affiliation, stated that the 
implementation of the Directive had not caused any unnecessary administrative burden, thus 
confirming  its  cost-effectiveness.  In  addition,  according  to  27%  of  the  online  survey 
respondents  the  benefits  brought  by  the  Directive  do  not  outweigh  its  costs,  while  25% 
confirmed that benefits of the Directive are beyond its costs (44% did not express any opinion). 

It should also be noted that the initial proposal for the  Directive did not  contain a financial 
statement as the Directive was deemed not to impact the Union’s budget. 

4.1.2.1 Cost of trafficking in human beings 

Trafficking in human beings generates very high proceeds. The estimated global annual profit 
of organised criminal groups for trafficking in human beings amounted to EUR 29.4 billion211. 
In  the  EU,  in  one  single  year  criminal  revenues  of  trafficking  for  sexual  exploitation  are 
estimated  at  about  EUR  14  billion212.  In  addition,  organised  crime  groups  specialised  in 
trafficking increasingly exploit legal businesses in their operations, such as hotels, nightclubs 
and massage parlours213.  

The  Commission’s  2020  Study  on  the  economic,  social  and  human  costs  of  trafficking  in 
human beings214 showed that, in 2016, the total cost of trafficking in human beings amounted 
to EUR 2,7 billion for the EU27 and EUR 337 462 per victim. The costs associated with THB 
are mainly linked to: (i) the use of assistance and support services by victims (42% of the total 
costs)  (i.e.  coordination  and  prevention  activities;  provision  of  specialised  services,  law 
enforcement  activities,  health  services  and  social  protection);  (ii)  the  lost  economic  output 
(18%)  due  to  the  fact  that  the  victims  is  not  participating  in  the  legal  economy  while  in 
trafficking; and (iii) the lost quality of life for the victim (40%), who may have been subject to 
physical, sexual and metal injuries as part of the trafficking. For the whole EU, most of the 
costs related to the use of services relate to law enforcement (EUR 105 827), followed by health 
services  and  social  protection  (EUR  21  785),  specialised  services  (EUR  11  355)  and 
coordination and prevention (EUR 2 949). 

The costs of trafficking in human beings can only be calculated on the basis of the number of 
victims officially registered in the EU. As part of the Commission’s study, the costs of THB 
have been computed per victim, and then multiplied by the total number of victims officially 
registered in  the EU in  a given  year. However, the actual number of victims is likely to  be 

208 4 National Rapporteurs and Equivalent Mechanisms (AT, BE, CZ, SE). 
209 1 National Rapporteur (CZ). 
210 1 National Rapporteur (BE) and 1 national authority responsible for social services (EE). 
211 Europol, The trafficking in human beings financial business model (2015). Available at: link.  
212  This  is  a  high-range  estimate,  taking  into  account  hidden  victims.  The  middle  range  estimate  is  at 
approximatively  EUR  7  billion.  European  Commission,  Directorate-General  for  Migration  and  Home  Affairs, 
Mapping the risk of serious and organised crime infiltrating legitimate businesses: final report, Disley, E.(editor), 
Blondes, E.(editor), Hulme, S.(editor), Publications Office, 2021, p. 10.  
213 Ibid.  
214 European Commission, Study on the economic, social and human costs of trafficking in human beings within 
the EU (2020). Available at: link. 

44 

 
 
                                                           
significantly higher than the number officially reported. Accordingly, the overall costs of THB 
are likely to be underestimated. Moreover, the estimates include the victims registered in one 
year, but the costs associated to victims extends beyond that one year of registration.  

The detection of the crime leads to the identification of the victims and then to their referral to 
protection, assistance and support services. The law enforcement and specialised services costs 
are related only to detected offences and identified victims. In this sense, underreporting does 
not cause additional costs, taken especially into account that traffickers are prosecuted for other 
offences,  such  as  forced  prostitution, migrant  smuggling,  social  security  or  tax  offences.  In 
such cases, the related law enforcement and specialised services  costs are considered under 
these crime areas, rather than under trafficking in human beings.  

On the other hand, trafficking in human beings has a higher, though more indirect, societal 
cost, including the lost economic output and the lost quality of life of the victims. In this sense, 
the costs are underestimated. An adequate estimation of such costs would have to be based on 
the number of undetected crimes and unidentified victims, a factor that is difficult to calculate.  

Sexual  exploitation  is  associated  with  higher  costs  with  respect  to  the  other  forms  of 
exploitation. In 2016, the costs per victim were EUR 364 474 for sexual exploitation, EUR 232 
932 for labour exploitation and EUR 325 405 for other forms of exploitation. This is driven by 
larger costs associated with sexual exploitation, which are linked to greater utilisation of health 
services  and  social  protection,  greater  lost  economic  output  and  greater  lost  quality  of  life, 
notably due to the perpetration of sexual violence. Larger costs are associated to female victims 
of trafficking (EUR 353 027 per victim) than to male victims (EUR 286 769 per victim), as 
women and girls are disproportionately affected by sexual exploitation.  

There are higher costs for child victims (EUR 460 391 per victim) as compared to adult victims 
(EUR 306 373 per victim), due to a larger use of specialised health and educational services. 

Organised criminal groups involved in trafficking in human beings often infiltrate into the legal 
economy  by  using  legal  persons  for  labour  exploitation  purposes.  In  this  context,  labour 
exploitation is intertwined with various forms of tax and social benefit fraud or evasion, and 
traffickers use grey-area economic practices or violate labour and other administrative rules. 
In case of labour exploitation revenues are often covered by the use of intermediary companies 
or job agencies and long supply chains, in particular cascade subcontracting. Therefore, it is 
even more difficult to differentiate legal and illegal economies and provide a cost estimates of 
labour exploitation.215 

Labour  exploitation  has  multiple  severe  impacts  on  the  economy:  (i)  it  generates  limited 
investment  in  the  human  capital  of  a  country  as  it  is  often  associated  with  labour-intense 
production  requiring  low-skilled  workers.  An  economy  running  on  labour  exploitation  is 
expected to stagnate; (ii) companies that use labour exploitation save a lot of money on wages 
thus lowering their production costs; (iii) similarly, companies reduce their costs by failing to 
provide  social  contribution,  severance  pay,  and  other  benefits  often  afforded  to  salaried 
workers; and (iv) governments are not able to collect tax revenues from the income that paid 
labour would receive. In addition, considering that labour exploitation is illegal, the corruption 
that goes hand in hand with it frequently incurs considerable costs to the state, for example 

215 Mapping the risk of serious and organised crime infiltrating legitimate businesses - Publications Office of the 
EU (europa.eu) 

45 

 
 
                                                           
through tax avoidance and corrupt public contracting. Hence, labour exploitation constitutes a 
barrier to competition, investment, and technological changes causing the economy to run at 
sub-optimal productivity levels.216 In the EU there is no estimates of the economic loss as a 
consequence  of  labour  exploitation.  ILO,  however,  estimated  in  2012  the  annual  profit  of 
labour exploitation in the EU and developed economies to 20,5 billion USD217, which was not 
channelized back to the legal economy or to the state. The profit achieved on each victim may 
amount to 34 800 USD.  

4.1.2.2 Costs related to the specific objectives of the Directive 

a. Investigation and prosecution  

No  significant  change  was  noted  during  the  evaluation  period  with  respect  to  the  costs 
associated to law enforcement and judicial activities, following the adoption of the Directive. 
The highest increase in financial and human resources relates to the training of officials 
as a result of Article 9 of the Directive, which requires Member States to ensure that persons, 
units or services responsible for investigating or prosecuting trafficking offences are trained 
accordingly. 

b. Assistance, support and protection of THB victims  

Almost  all  Member  States  have  adopted  or  reinforced  existing  assistance  and  protection 
programmes for victims of trafficking covering a wide range of measures (e.g. psychological, 
health, social assistance, etc.), in compliance with Article 11 of the Directive.  

Figure 2 Examples of national expenditure for assistance and protection of VoT218 

216 Juliette Faure: ForcedLabour.pdf (unu.edu) 
217 Report: Profits and Poverty: The Economics of Forced Labour (ilo.org) 
218  Information  on  the  national  expenditure  for  assistance  and  protection  of  THB  victims  was  retrieved  from 
GRETA’s Reports (available  at: link). Information  was only available  for the Member States  presented in the 
table. 

46 

 
 
                                                           
Pursuant to Article 17, some Member States set up specific funds for the compensation of 
victims of trafficking219. The total amount of compensation granted to victims of THB varies 
across countries220. In addition, Member States’ approaches vary as regards the mechanisms 
that are in place at the national level to ensure the compensation of victims. For instance, in 
some Member States confiscated criminal assets are used to compensate victims221 and fines 
imposed on traffickers contribute to the national compensation fund222.  

Although the Member States allocated national  budget  when it comes to  the assistance  and 

219 See Annex 6 on the transposition of the Directive.  
220 For instance, according to information from GRETA reports (available at: link), in AT, the total amount of 
compensation granted to trafficking victims amounted to EUR 50 375 (for 6 victims) in 2015, EUR 89 680 (for 
10 victims) in 2013 and to EUR 13 630 (for 4 victims) in 2012. In BG, the compensation granted to victims ranges 
from EUR 125 to EUR 2 500 per victim. In FR, compensation is paid by the Guarantee fund for victims of acts 
of terrorism and other offences. In 2012, a total of EUR 460 450 was awarded to victims of trafficking. EUR 287 
900 were awarded in 2014, and EUR 92 568 in 2015. In DE, the compensation awarded to trafficking victims 
ranges  between  EUR  1  000  and  30  000  per  victim.  In  IT,  the  compensation  granted  to  victims  amounts  to  a 
maximum of EUR 1 500 euros per victim. In NL, victims of trafficking can apply to obtain compensation from 
the Violent Offences Compensation Fund. The maximum amount of compensation that they could receive is EUR 
35 000 in the form of lump sums awarded based on the severity of the damages (e.g. physical or mental) caused 
to the victim. In PL, State compensation for victims of trafficking amounted to a maximum of about EUR 5 800 
in 2017. In ES, victims received compensation ranging between  EUR 300 and EUR 60 000 euros in 2013. In 
2014, 12 victims were granted compensation ranging from EUR 6 000 to EUR 125 000. In 2015, 82 victims were 
awarded between EUR 2 000 and EUR 71 000 of compensation. 
221 CY, CZ, DE, RO. 
222 CY, CZ. 

47 

 
 
 
                                                           
support  to  victims,  most  stakeholders  highlighted  that  available  resources  have  not 
substantially increased as a result of the adoption and subsequent implementation of the 
Directive.  

With respect to protection measures, law enforcement authorities reported the highest increase 
in resources allocated to the protection of victims and underlined that most of these resources 
are needed to perform individual risk assessments, pursuant to Article 12(3) of the Directive. 
NREM reported slightly lower costs in relation to victim’s protection.  Other categories (i.e. 
national competent authorities, judicial authorities and civil society organisations) reported the 
smallest increase in costs.  

c. Prevention  

The  largest  reported  increase  over  time  in  resources  dedicated  to  the  prevention  of 
trafficking  in  human  beings  at  the  national  level  concerned  training  and  awareness-
raising campaigns. This increase may result from the obligations entailed by Article 18 of the 
Directive, which  requires Member States  to  promote regular trainings for officials likely to 
come into contact with victims or potential victims of trafficking (Art. 18(3)), as well as to take 
other appropriate preventive actions,  such  as information and  awareness-raising  campaigns, 
research and education programmes (Art. 18(2)). 

Member  States  allocated  national  budget  for  the  implementation  of  awareness-raising 
activities aimed at reducing the risk of people becoming victims of trafficking.  

Some  Member  States  allocated  national  resources  to  actions  against  trafficking  in  human 
beings as part of national anti-trafficking strategies, beyond what required by the Directive, 
including for instance the establishment of hotlines223.  

a.  Communication  and  information  sharing  with  the  European  Commission  for 

monitoring 

Costs related to information sharing and communication with the Commission did not increase 
noticeably  because  of  the  information  exchange  required  by  Art.  19-20  of  the  Directive 
between the national authorities and the Commission. National Rapporteurs indicated a slightly 
higher  increase  in  the  costs  associated  to  both  data  analysis  and  collection  and  information 
sharing, and regular communication with the Commission, with respect to the other stakeholder 
categories. 

 Areas for improvement in relation to the efficiency 

Overall, all Member States have allocated public budget to  external stakeholders concerned 
with the implementation of Directive at the national level.  In most Member States, external 
stakeholders include local authorities, civil society organisations and private agencies. Besides 
assistance and support to THB victims, external actors are responsible for the implementation 
of prevention programmes, including education and awareness raising. Nevertheless, a general 
decrease in government funding dedicated to the fight against THB has been noted in many 
Member States by civil society organisations224. 

223 IT, LT, LU NL, PT. 
224 Workshop organised by the European Commission with the EU Civil Society Platform against trafficking in 
human beings on 30 November 2021. 

48 

 
 
                                                           
As  pointed  out  by  several  stakeholders  consulted  throughout  the  evaluation,  the  limited 
availability  of  financial  resources  contributed  to  hindering  Member  States’  capacity  to 
effectively prevent and fight against THB225. The limited budget can reflect in a decrease in 
the number of investigations and prosecutions of THB  crimes that  in  turn, can increase the 
offender rate of impunity226. As regards prevention of THB, insufficient funds undermine the 
development  of  capacity  building  initiatives  and  the  provision  of  adequate  trainings  of 
professionals  likely  to  come  into  contact  with  THB  victims227.  Vast  majority  of  survey 
respondents  agreed  that  funding  made  available  by  Member  States  is  not  sufficient  for  the 
criminalisation,  assistance  and  support,  and  prevention  of  THB.  Insufficient  funding  by 
Member States emerged as a constraint to the implementation of the Directive228 hence 
to achieve its specific goal, in particular in the areas of prevention and assistance to the 
victims.  

In this context the re-use of confiscated proceeds of crime could be better considered. The so 
called  “social  re-use”  of  the  confiscated  proceeds  of  crime  is  covered  by  Article  10(3)  of 
Directive  2014/42/EU229.  This  is  a  non-binding  provision,  which  requires  Member  States  to 
consider reusing confiscated property  for the public interest  or social purposes. 19 Member 
States adopted specific legislation on the use of confiscated property for public interest or social 
purposes.  Trafficking  in  human  beings  is  covered  in  the  crime  areas  within  the  scope  of 
Directive 2014/42/EU, so Member States are entitled to reuse confiscated proceeds for victim 
compensation and general victim support. 

4.1.3 Coherence 

The  evaluation  found  that  the  Directive  is  overall  coherent  with  other  relevant  EU  and 
international instruments. Due to the comprehensive approach of the Anti-trafficking Directive 
regulating  not  only  the  criminalisation  of  the  offence  but  also  the  protection  of  victims 
numerous EU legislation and international instruments had to be considered for the coherence 
review. 

4.1.3.1 Coherence with EU legislation  

Key evaluation findings: 

  The  Directive  proved  overall  coherent  with  other  relevant  EU  initiatives 
(2004/80/EC)230;  Residence  Permit  Directive 

(Compensation  Directive 

225  Targeted  interviews  with  EU-level  representatives  (#1,  #2,  #3);  workshop  organised  by  the  European 
Commission with the EU Civil Society Platform against trafficking in human beings on 30 November 2021. 
226 Workshop organised by the European Commission with the EU Civil Society Platform against trafficking in 
human beings on 30 November 2021. 
227 Targeted interviews with EU-level representatives (#1, #2, #3). 
228  Targeted  interviews  with  EU-level  representatives  (#1,  #2,  #3);  workshop  organised  by  the  European 
Commission  with  the  EU  Civil  Society  Platform  against  trafficking  in  human  beings  on  30  November  2021; 
survey responses from 1 National Rapporteur (CZ) and 1 civil society organisation (FR). 
229 Directive 2014/42/EU of the European Parliament and of  the Council of 3  April 2014 on the  freezing and 
confiscation  of  instrumentalities  and  proceeds  of  crime  in  the  European  Union  (OJ  L  127,  29.4.2014,  p.  39). 
Available at: 
230 Council Directive 2004/80/EC of 29 April 2004 relating to compensation to crime victims, OJ L 261, 6.8.2004, 
p. 15. 

49 

 
 
                                                           
(2004/81/EC)231; Employers Sanctions Directive (2009/52/EC)232; Child Sexual 
Abuse  Directive  (2011/93/EU)233;  Victims’  Rights  Directive  (2012/29/EU)234; 
Directive on freezing and confiscation orders (2014/42/EU)235; Regulation (EU) 
2018/1805  on  the  mutual  recognition  of  freezing  orders  and  confiscation 
orders236), Commission proposal for  sustainability corporate due diligence237 and 
Commission proposal on prohibiting products made with forced labour238.   

Areas for improvement: 

o  Coherence with the Employers Sanctions Directive (2009/52/EC) could be 

improved in relation to the sanctions against legal persons.  

Overall, the evaluation has demonstrated that each legislation is complementary with the 
Anti-trafficking  Directive  with  special  consideration  of  its  own  subject  matter  Some 
margin  for  better  alignment  between  the  Anti-trafficking  Directive  and  other  relevant  EU 
initiatives  could  be  considered,  in  particular  with  the  Employers  Sanction  Directive 
(2009/52/EC) in relation to the sanctions against legal persons.  

a. Council Directive 2004/80/EC of 29 April 2004 relating to compensation to crime 
victims 

Article  17  of  the  Anti-Trafficking  Directive,  which  provides  for  the  right  of  victims  of 
trafficking  in  human  beings  to  access  compensation  schemes,  proved  to  be  coherent  with 
Directive 2004/80/EC on facilitating access to compensation for victims of violent intentional 
crime committed in other Member States or in their Member State of residence.  

b. Council Directive 2004/81/EC of 29 April 2004 on the residence permit issued to 
third-country nationals who are victims of trafficking in human beings or who have 
been the subject of an action to facilitate illegal immigration, who cooperate with the 
competent authorities 

231 Council Directive 2004/81/EC of 29 April 2004 on the residence permit issued to third-country nationals who 
are  victims  of  trafficking  in  human  beings  or  who  have  been  the  subject  of  an  action  to  facilitate  illegal 
immigration, who cooperate with the competent authorities, OJ L 261, 6.8.2004, p. 19. 
232 Directive 2009/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2009 providing for minimum 
standards on sanctions and  measures against employers of  illegally staying third-country nationals,  OJ L 168, 
30.6.2009, p. 24. 
233 Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on combating the 
sexual  abuse  and  sexual  exploitation  of  children  and  child  pornography,  and  replacing  Council  Framework 
Decision 2004/68/JHA, OJ L 335, 17.12.2011, p. 1. 
234  Directive  2012/29/EU  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  25 October  2012  establishing 
minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime, and replacing Council Framework 
Decision 2001/220/JHA, OJ L 315, 14.11.2012, p. 57. 
235 Directive 2014/42/EU of the European Parliament and of  the Council of 3  April 2014 on the  freezing and 
confiscation of instrumentalities and proceeds of crime in the European Union, OJ L 127, 29.4.2014, p. 350. 
236 Regulation (EU) 2018/1805 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 November 2018 on the mutual 
recognition of freezing orders and confiscation orders, OJ L 303, 28.11.2018. 
237 Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on sustainability corporate due diligence 
(COM(2022) 71 final) 
238 Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on prohibiting products made with 
forced labour on the Union market (COM(2022) 453 final) 

50 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Some stakeholders239 are of the view that Directive 2004/81/EC on the residence permit issued 
to third-country nationals who are victims of trafficking in human beings or who have been the 
subject of an action to facilitate illegal immigration, is not fully coherent with the integrated, 
holistic  human  rights-based  approach  to  the  fight  against  trafficking  adopted  by  the  Anti-
trafficking  Directive.  Directive  2004/81/EC  defines  “the  conditions  for  granting  residence 
permits of limited duration, linked to the length of the relevant national proceedings, to third-
country nationals who cooperate in the fight against trafficking in human beings or against 
action to facilitate illegal immigration” (Article 1).  

In  accordance  with  Article  11(3)  of  the  Anti-trafficking  Directive,  Member  States  have  an 
obligation to ensure that assistance and support for a victim are not made conditional on the 
victim’s willingness to cooperate in the criminal proceedings, without prejudice to Directive 
2004/81/EC. Third-country national victims who are irregularly staying in the EU should be 
granted unconditional assistance at least during the reflection period240. After the expiry of the 
reflection period, Recital 18 of Directive 2011/36/EU leaves it up to the Member State to decide 
whether to grant assistance and support to a victim of THB who is not legally residing on its 
territory.  However,  Article  4  of  Directive  2004/81/EC  allows  Member  States  to  adopt  or 
maintain more favourable provisions for the persons covered by the Directive.  

It should be noted that, in practice, most Member States grant residence rights to third-country 
nationals  that  are  not  conditional  to  their  cooperation  with  national  authorities241.  The 
Commission will assess the implementation of the Residence Permit Directive, as set out in the 
Renewed EU action plan against migrant smuggling (2021-2025)242. The European Migration 
Network will support this assessment through an ad-hoc query. 

c. Directive  2009/52/EC  providing  for  minimum  standards  on  sanctions  and 
measures against employers of illegally staying third-country nationals 

No particular issue was identified in terms of coherence between Directive 2009/52/EC and 
the Anti-trafficking Directive, which criminalise different offences.  

However, the coherence could be improved with respect to two aspects. Directive 2009/52/EC 
establishes as a criminal offence the “use of work or services exacted from an illegally staying 
third-country national with the knowledge that he or she is a victim of trafficking in human 
beings.”  The  Anti-trafficking  Directive  leaves  Member  States  with  discretion  as  to  the 
criminalisation  of  the  use  of  services  exacted  from  victims  of  trafficking  in  human  beings, 
regardless of their nationality or status (Article 18(4)).The two Directives could be made more 
coherent with respect to the sanctions against legal persons. Directive 2009/EC/52 provides for 
a  range  of  penalties  and  measures  against  employers,  including  legal  entities,  who  employ 
illegally  staying  third  country  nationals.  More  particularly,  Article  7  of  the  Employers 
Sanctions  Directive  requires  Member  States  to  take  the  necessary  measures  to  ensure  that 

239 5 civil society organisations (AT, BE and 3 from NL) and 1 civil society organisation (BE) expressed concerned 
regarding the conditionality of assistance, support and protection for victims falling within the scope of Directive 
2004/81/EC and the coherence between the two directives. 
240 Recital 18. 
241  European  Migration  Network,  Third-country  national  victims  of  trafficking  in  human  beings:  detection, 
identification and protection (2022). Available at: link. Member States that grant residence rights to third-country 
nationals that are not conditional to their cooperation with national authorities are BE, BG, CZ, DE, EL, ES, FI, 
FR, HR, IT, LU, LV, MT, NL, PL, SI. 
242 European Commission, A renewed EU action plan against migrant smuggling (2021-2025), COM(2021) 591 
final.  

51 

 
 
                                                           
employers shall also, if appropriate, be subject to the exclusion from entitlement to some or all 
public benefits, aid or subsidies; and temporary or permanent closure of the establishments that 
have been used to commit the infringement. These two measures are among the other sanctions 
under Article 6 of the Anti-trafficking Directive that Member States may include as part of the 
effective,  proportionate  and  dissuasive  sanctions  against  legal  persons,  which  committed 
trafficking offences. This means that Member States do not have an obligation to transpose 
these sanctions in their national law under the Anti-trafficking Directive.  

d. Directive  2011/93/EU  on  combating  the  sexual  abuse  and  sexual  exploitation  of 
children and child pornography  

Directive  2011/93/EU  establishes  minimum  rules  concerning  the  definition  of  criminal 
offences and sanctions in the area of sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children, child 
pornography and solicitation of children for sexual purposes. It also introduces provisions to 
strengthen the prevention of those crimes and the protection of the victims thereof. The Anti-
trafficking  Directive  states  in  its  Recital  (7)  that  it  should  be  fully  complementary  with 
Directive 2011/36/EU, as some victims of human trafficking have also been child victims of 
sexual abuse or sexual exploitation.  

The  link  between  the  fight  against  sexual  abuse  and  trafficking  in  human  beings  has  been 
further  confirmed  by  the  2019  Council  Conclusions  on  combating  the  sexual  abuse  of 
children243 and the EU Strategy for a more effective fight against child sexual abuse244, adopted 
in 2020. 

Article 2(3) of the Anti-trafficking Directive criminalises the act of trafficking in human beings 
when it is committed for the purpose of “the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other 
forms  of  sexual  exploitation”.  Directive  2011/93/EU  provides  for  a  list  of  punishable 
intentional  conducts  that  constitute  an  offence  of  sexual  exploitation.  For  each  of  such 
punishable conducts, Directive 2011/93/EU establishes specific levels of penalties. Moreover, 
Directive 2011/93/EU provides for different levels of penalties based on the age of the child 
victim, i.e. depending on whether the age of the victim is below or above the age of sexual 
consent. On the contrary, the Anti-trafficking Directive does not make a distinction based on 
the age of the child.245 Based on the EU Strategy on a more effective fight against child sexual 
abuse,  Directive  2011/93/EU  is  being  evaluated  and  a  legislative  proposal  will  recast  the 
Directive  by  2024.  New  priority  actions  will  be  proposed  to  ensure  that  this  legislation 
continues to reach the goals that it sets out to achieve, and that it will be harmonised to existing 
and proposed legislation, including the Anti-trafficking Directive.  

Some consulted stakeholders further highlighted that the definition of sexual exploitation under 
the Anti-trafficking Directive could be aligned to the one included in Directive 2011/93/EU. In 
addition, some stakeholders pointed to the fact that trafficking for sexual exploitation does not 

243 Council conclusions on combating the sexual abuse of children ‒ Council conclusions (8 October 2019)  
244 COM(2020) 607 final. 
245 Under Article 4(2) (a) of the Anti-trafficking Directive committing an offence of trafficking in human beings 
against a child is considered as an aggravating circumstance, which should be punished by a maximum penalty of 
at least 10 years of imprisonment. Amongst the penalties established for sexual exploitation offences in Directive 
2011/93/EU,  only  the  penalty  for  coercing  or  forcing  a  child  into  prostitution  amounts  to  the  penalty  under 
Directive 2011/36/EU, if the child is below the age of sexual consent. The other offences range from penalties of 
at least 5 to 8 years if the child is below the age of consent to 2 to 5 years if the child is above the age of consent, 
depending on whether coercion or force has been used.  

52 

 
 
                                                           
only cover prostitution but also other forms, such as child pornography.  

e. Directive 2012/29/EU establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and 
protection of victims of crime   

The  Anti-trafficking  Directive  is  coherent  with  Directive  2012/29/EU  that  is  the  horizontal 
instrument,  applicable  to  all  victims  of  crime.  The  Anti-trafficking  Directive  addresses  the 
specific needs of the particular categories of victims of trafficking in human beings. Victims 
of trafficking are nevertheless entitled to the measures provided under Directive 2012/29/EU. 

On 28 June 2022, the Commission adopted its evaluation of the Victims’ Rights Directive. The 
evaluation is one of the Commission’s key actions set out in the EU Strategy on Victims’ Rights 
(2020 – 2025)246. 

f. Directive  2014/42/EU  on  the  freezing  and  confiscation  of  instrumentalities  and 
proceeds  of  crime  in  the  European  Union  and  Regulation  (EU)  2018/1805  on  the 
mutual recognition of freezing orders and confiscation orders 

The Anti-trafficking Directive is coherent with both Directive 2014/42/EU and Regulation EU 
2018/1805. The former is aimed at enabling Member States to ensure seizure and confiscation 
of  instrumentalities  and  proceeds  deriving  from  a  series  of  crime,  including  trafficking  in 
human beings. Consistently, Directive 2011/36/EU provides that “Member States shall take 
the  necessary  measures  to  ensure  that  their  competent  authorities  are  entitled  to  seize  and 
confiscate instrumentalities and proceeds” from trafficking in human beings offences (Article 
7).  At  the  same  time,  Directive  2014/42/EU,  which  was  adopted  after  the  Anti-trafficking 
Directive,  goes  further  in  detailing  the  rules  for  competent  authorities  to  freeze  and 
subsequently  confiscate  and  manage  the  proceeds  and  instrumentalities  of  crime.  This 
framework is to be reinforced in the future, upon the adoption of the Commission proposal for 
a  Directive  on  asset  recovery  and  confiscation247,  which  provides  for  a  single  instrument 
regulating the tracing, freezing, management and confiscation of proceeds of crime.. 

g. EU Asylum Acquis248 

No major inconsistencies have been identified between the assistance measures included in the 
Anti-trafficking  Directive  and  under  the  EU  Asylum  acquis.  However,  it  is  not  explicitly 
mentioned which legislation shall prevail in the case of the application of protection measures 
which are contained both in the EU Asylum acquis and the Anti-trafficking Directive to victims 
of trafficking in human beings who benefit from international protection. For example, it is not 

246 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and 
Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions.  EU  Strategy  on  Victims’  Rights  (2020-2025), 
COM/2020/258 Final. 
247 Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on asset recovery and confiscation, 
Brussels, 25.5.2022, COM/2022/245 final 
248  Directive  2011/95/EU  on  standards  for  the  qualification  of  third-country  nationals  or  stateless  persons  as 
beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary 
protection, and for the content of the protection granted, OJ L 337, 20.12.2011, p. 9; Directive 2013/32/EU on 
common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection, OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 60; Directive 
2013/33/EU  laying  down  standards  for  the  reception  of  applicants  for  international  protection,  OJ  L  180, 
29.6.2013,  p. 96;  Regulation  (EU)  No  604/2013  establishing  the  criteria  and  mechanisms  for  determining  the 
Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member 
States by a third-country national or a stateless person, OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 31. 

53 

 
 
                                                           
clear under which circumstances a victim of trafficking can be transferred to the Member States 
of his/her first application for international or subsidiary protection. The same applies for the 
return of irregularly staying third-country nationals, who are also victims of trafficking. 

Some stakeholders pointed out that the links between the Anti-trafficking Directive and the EU 
Asylum acquis could be expressed more explicitly249. 

The definitions of unaccompanied minor and vulnerable persons under the Anti-Trafficking 
Directive are consistent with the EU Asylum acquis.  

Overall,  the  Anti-trafficking  Directive  provides  access  to  more  assistance  and  protection 
measures  as  a  minimum  than  the  legal  instruments  under  the  EU  Asylum  acquis,  notably 
Directive  2013/33/EU  (e.g.  material  assistance,  translation  and  interpretation  and  legal 
counselling).  

a.  Proposal of the European Commission for a Directive on corporate sustainability due 

diligence 

The  Proposal  for  a  Directive  on  corporate  sustainable  due  diligence  is  coherent  and 
complementary with the Anti-trafficking Directive and once adopted, it will create essential 
preventive  measures  for  large  companies  against  labour  and  sexual  exploitation  and  forced 
labour.  The  objective  of  the  Proposal  is  fostering  companies’  sustainability  transition  with 
regard to human rights, including combatting trafficking in human beings, and environmental 
risks and impacts, by improving relevant corporate governance practices. The Proposal also 
clarifies that in case of human rights or environmental harm in a company’s value chain, the 
company can be held liable under specific conditions. 

b.  Proposal  of  the  European  Commission  for  a  Regulation  on  prohibiting  products 

made with forced labour on the Union market 

The  Proposal  for  a  Regulation  on  prohibiting  products  made  with  forced  labour  will 
complement the Anti-trafficking Directive by banning products from the Union market that are 
produced  by  forced  labour.  It  is  a  product-focused  legislation  and  it  will  not  impede  the 
competent authorities, including law enforcement, from taking actions within their competence 
against  natural  or  legal  persons,  with  regard  to  the  alleged  or  confirmed  human  trafficking 
offence related to forced labour and labour exploitation. 

4.1.3.2  Coherence with relevant international instruments 

Key evaluation findings: 

  The EU Anti-trafficking Directive proved coherent with relevant international 

instruments and goes even further. 

Overall, the vast majority of stakeholders consulted considered that the Directive was to a large 
extent consistent with the relevant international legislation.  

a. The 2000 United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in 
Persons,  Especially  Women  and  Children,  supplementing  the  United  Nations 

249  5  civil  society  organisations  (from  AT,  BE,  NL)  and  1  other  (ES);  targeted  interview  with  an  EU-level 
representative (#1). 

54 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
Convention  against  Transnational  Organised  Crime  (UN  Trafficking  in  Persons 
Protocol) and the 2005 Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking 
in Human Beings 

These two Conventions are the primary international legal standards addressing trafficking in 
human beings. According to Recital (9) of the Anti-trafficking Directive, these instruments are 
crucial steps in the process of enhancing international cooperation against trafficking in human 
beings.  

The definition of trafficking in human beings under the UN Trafficking in Persons Protocol 
and  the  Council  of  Europe  Convention  is  consistent  with  Article  2  of  the  Directive.  The 
Directive expands the definition by including the “exchange of transfer of control over those 
persons”  within  the  act  of  “harbouring  or  reception  of  persons”.  Moreover,  the  Directive 
extends the minimum list of the punishable forms of exploitation with “forced begging” as an 
example of forced labour or services, and with the exploitation of criminal activities.  

The Directive goes further than the UN Trafficking in  Persons Protocol  and the Council of 
Europe Convention by setting the maximum minimum sanctions for the offence of trafficking 
in human beings. However, the Directive and Council of Europe Convention contain the same 
provisions on the liability of legal persons and mandatory sanctions. 

The assistance, support and protection measures provided by the Directive are consistent with 
the UN Trafficking in Persons Protocol, although the Directive generally goes further than the 
Protocol,  for  instance  when  it  comes  to  the  obligation  to  appoint  a  guardian  or  legal 
representative for a child victims of trafficking in human beings (Article 14(2)) or measures 
aimed  at  protecting  victims  of  trafficking  in  human  beings  during  criminal  proceedings 
(Articles 12 and 15).  

With  respect  to  the  Council  of  Europe  Convention,  provisions  on  assistance,  support  and 
protection are also overall coherent.  

Article 14 of the Council of Europe Convention provides for an obligation on State Parties 
to issue a residence permit under three options: (a) the competent authority considers the stay 
of  the  victims  necessary  due  to  the  victim’s  personal  situation;  (b)  the  competent  authority 
considers  that  the  stay  is  necessary  for  the  purpose  of  the  victims’  cooperation  with  the 
competent  authorities  in  investigation  or  criminal  proceedings;  (c)  both  options.  The  Anti-
trafficking Directive clearly states that it does not deal with the conditions of the residence of 
the victims of trafficking in human beings in the territory of the Member States (Recital (17)). 
For  the  evaluation  of  the  coherence  of  the  Anti-trafficking  Directive  with  Directive 
2004/81/EC, see Section 4.3.1.2 of the evaluation. 

b. International  Labour  Organization’s  Forced  Labour  Convention,  1930  (No.  29) 
and its 2014 Protocol 

The International Labour Organization Convention’s Forced Labour Convention 1930 (No. 29) 
defines forced or compulsory labour as “all work or service which is exacted from any person 
under  the  menace  of  any  penalty  and  for  which  the  said  person  has  not  offered  himself 
voluntarily” (Article 2). Article 3 of the 2014 Protocol to the ILO Forced Labour Convention 
requires  State  parties  to  “take  effective  measures  for  the  identification,  release,  protection, 
recovery  and  rehabilitation  of  all  victims  of  forced  or  compulsory  labour,  as  well  as  the 
provision  of  other  forms  of  assistance  and  support”.  The  Directive  also  provides  for  early 

55 

 
 
identification,  assistance,  support  and  protection  measures  for  all  victims  of  trafficking, 
including those trafficked for the purpose of forced labour and services.  

c. Other relevant international instruments 

No issues of incoherence were found in relation to the 1989 United Nations Convention on the 
Rights  of  the  Child  (UNCRC);  the  2006  UN  Convention  on  the  rights  of  persons  with 
disabilities; and the 1979 UN Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women 
(CEDAW), which are all relevant in the fight against trafficking in human beings.  

4.2  How did the Anti-trafficking Directive make a difference? 

The added value brought by the Directive was confirmed by most of the responses received to 
the public consultation, as well as by survey respondents250 and by stakeholders’ feedback on 
the Inception Impact Assessment and the roadmap of the Directive.  

Key evaluation findings: 
The Directive has brought an added value in the fight against THB at the EU level, notably 
by: 

  Establishing common minimum rules on THB offences and related penalties; 
  Fostering EU-wide cooperation initiatives to prevent and combat THB (e.g. JADs 

and JITs focused on THB); 

  Enhancing assistance, support and protection to THB victims; 
  Promoting the establishment of both coordinating bodies (EU ATC and NREMs) 
and data collection and monitoring processes at the EU and the national level. 

Areas for improvement: 

o  Monitoring process, in particular the data collection is insufficient due to the 
lack of agreed mechanisms in certain Member States, which limit the proper 
estimation and impact of human trafficking in the EU. Therefore, the data 
collection process and the indicators could be harmonised and formalised. 

4.2.1 EU common minimum rules and standards against THB 

The main added value of the Directive was its contribution to the creation of an EU common 
minimum  ground251  for  all  the  three  relevant  dimensions  of  the  fight  against  THB:  (i) 
criminalisation,  investigation  and  prosecution  of  offences,  including  related  definition  and 
sanctions; (ii) assistance, support and protection of victims; (iii) prevention of related offences.  

In  addition,  the  establishment  of  common  minimum  rules  contributed  towards  a  higher 
harmonisation of national criminal laws252, which would have been difficult to be achieved 
by Member States acting alone. In turn, harmonised rules boosted Member States to take action 
against THB, which reflected in higher EU capacity to fight against this crime.  

250 2 national competent authorities (FR, LU); 2 National Rapporteurs (EL, RO); 2 law enforcement authorities 
(EL, IE); 4 others (from BG, MT, ES); 2 civil society organisations (BE, MT). 
251 2 national competent authorities (FR, LU); 2 National Rapporteurs (EL, RO); 2 law enforcement authorities 
(EL, IE); 4 others (from BG, ES, MT), 2 civil society organisations (BE, MT). 
252 1 national competent authority (HR); 1 law enforcement authority (CY); 2 civil society organisations (DE, ES); 
1 national competent authority (DE). 

56 

 
 
 
                                                           
4.2.2 Cross-border cooperation 

Harmonisation  of  relevant  national  legislation  contributed  to  enhancing  cross-border 
cooperation to combat trafficking in human beings, since cross-border cases are managed based 
on  common  rules.  This  is  crucial  considering  the  increasing  cross-border  dimension  of 
trafficking253  that  requires  EU-wide  cooperation  to  identify  and  protect  victims,  as  well  as 
investigate, prosecute and convict traffickers who move across borders254.   

Better intra-EU cooperation reflected in the setting up of Joint Investigation Teams (JITs) Joint 
Action Days (JADs)255 focused on investigation of trafficking in human beings cases. 

4.2.3 Assistance, support and protection of THB victims 

As part of the implementation of the Directive, Member States strengthened their assistance, 
support and protection services for victims, albeit issues remain in terms capacity to ensuring 
equal access to assistance services across Member States.256  

4.2.4 EU Anti-trafficking Coordinator  

The  establishment  of  the  EU  Anti-Trafficking  Coordinator  (ATC)  made  a  difference  in 
relation to internal and external coordination. The EU ATC was for the first time included in 
the Stockholm programme257 and then introduced in the Directive258. The establishment of the 
EU  ATC  recognises  the  need  to  ensure  coordination  across  different  policy  areas  and 
stakeholders.  The  EU  ATC  is  based  in  the  Commission  and  is  in  charge  of  “improving 
coordination  and  coherence  among  EU  institutions,  EU  agencies,  Member  States  and 
international actors, and for developing existing, and new EU policies to address Trafficking 
in Human Beings”259. In 2022, under the lead of the EU ATC, a Common Plan260 was developed 
by the Commission, with Member States and EU agencies to protect people fleeing the war in 
Ukraine. 

4.2.5   EU Network the National Rapporteurs and Equivalent Mechanisms (NREM) 

and the EU Civil Society Platform against trafficking in human beings 

According to Article 19, National Rapporteurs (Article 19) are in charge of, inter alia, assessing 
trends  in  trafficking  in  human  beings,  and  measuring  results  of  anti-trafficking  actions, 
including the gathering of statistics. Such information must be then transmitted to the EU ATC 

253 Eurojust, Eurojust Report on Trafficking in Human Beings – Best practice and issues in judicial cooperation 
(2021). Available at: link. 
254 1 national competent authority (DE); 1 National Rapporteur (HU); 1 judicial authority (NL); 1 other (NL); 2 
national competent authorities (FR, HU). 
255 Joint Action Days are “cross-border law enforcement action days focusing on horizontal key crime hot spots 
and criminal infrastructures across the EU. They are a Member States-led initiative, supported by Europol and 
take place within the EMPACT framework”. Note from the Council to the Delegations (2016). Definition of Joint 
Action Days (JADs). Available at: link. 
256 The Commission’s First, Second and Third Progress Report. 
257 European Commission, The Stockholm Programme - An open and secure Europe serving and protecting the 
citizens (2009). Available at: link. 
258 Recital 29 and Article 20 of the Directive. 
259 EU Strategy on Combatting Trafficking in Human Beings 2021-2025. See also the website of the European 
Commission. Available at: link. 
260 A Common Anti-Trafficking Plan to address the risks of trafficking in human beings and support potential 
victims among those fleeing the war in Ukraine. Available at: link. 

57 

 
 
                                                           
(Article  20).  They  contribute  to  the  biannual  progress  reports  on  the  basis  of  the 
abovementioned  data  and  statistics,  as  foreseen  by  Article  20  of  the  EU  Anti-trafficking 
Directive261.  

The EU Civil Society Platform against trafficking in human beings was launched in 2013 
as a key action of the EU Strategy towards the Eradication of Trafficking in Human Beings 
2012–2016262. It is composed of around 100 civil society organisations from the EU Member 
States and some non-EU countries, and aims at being a forum for civil society to engage at the 
EU  level  and  exchange  experiences  to  enhance  coordination  and  cooperation  amongst  key 
actors263.  

The  EU  Strategy  on  Combatting  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings  acknowledged  that  the 
Commission’s with the NREM and CSP has supported the implementation of the Directive. 
The two networks have also actively contributed to the Common Anti-Trafficking Plan related 
to Ukraine in 2022.  

4.2.6 Monitoring and data collection 

In line with Articles 19 and 20 of the Directive, which require Member States to gather and 
report statistics, since 2013, EUROSTAT, in collaboration with the NREMs, the Commission 
and the relevant national statistical authorities, carry out EU-wide data collection on THB. The 
Commission’s  most  recent  publications  on  data  related  to  THB  are  2018  “Study  on  Data 
collection on trafficking in human beings in the EU”264 and 2020 ‘Study on Data collection on 
trafficking in human beings in the EU265.   

Persistent gaps in the data collection prevent capturing the full scale of trafficking in human 
beings in  the EU and adequately monitoring the  phenomenon. Despite significant  progress, 
statistics are still not systematically collected by all Member States266. While all Member States 
reported  data  on  victims  for  the  latest  reporting  period  (2019-2020),  criminal  justice  data 
(investigations,  prosecutions,  convictions  and  or  penalties  imposed  by  national  courts  for 
trafficking offences) was still missing in eight Member States267. There are several reasons for 
this. Certain statistics are simply not available in some Member States. Other Member States 
only record statistics on persons who have been prosecuted or convicted, but not on suspects, 
or collect data on the number of proceedings rather than the number of prosecuted persons. 
More  generally,  gaps  in  the  availability  and  quality  of  data  can  result  from  issues  in  the 
functioning of national registration systems and coordination between registering authorities 
and National Statistical Authorities, which report the data to EUROSTAT. Furthermore, the 
data collection is affected by widespread underreporting, which also hinders the detection of 

261 According to Article 20 of the Anti-trafficking Directive “[…] the ATC shall contribute to reporting carried 
out by the Commission every two years on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in human beings.” 
262 European commission (2012), The EU Strategy towards the Eradication of Trafficking in Human Beings 2012–
2016. Available at: link. 
263 See the website of the European Commission at: link. 
264 European Commission, Data collection on trafficking in human beings in the EU (2018) Available at: link. 
265 European Commission, Data collection of trafficking in human beings in the EU (2020). Available at: link. 
266 See Annex 5 for a detailed analysis of the data collection on trafficking in human beings in the EU for the 
period  2013-2020.  Information  on  Member  States’  data  provision  and  related  gaps  is  also  available  in  the 
Commission’s EU-wide data collection studies, published in 2018 (p.28) and 2020 (p.128).  
267 BE, CY, EE, DE, IE, IT, NL and RO. The availability of criminal justice data for 2019-2020 depended on the 
Member States, the year and the indicators (e.g. suspects, prosecuted persons and convicted persons).  

58 

 
 
                                                           
the crime as described above. The establishment of monitoring mechanisms to oversee the 
implementation of the Directive and the creation of an EU-wide data collection on THB were 
also confirmed as an important added value of the Directive by some stakeholders268 and at 
national  level,  the Directive has boosted a series  of initiatives that strengthened monitoring 
mechanisms already in place. Due to the identified gaps, however, the specific objective of 
the Directive on establishing a monitoring system is only partially attained due to the reasons 
described above. 

4.3  Is the Anti-Trafficking Directive still relevant? 

While the relevance of the Directive is beyond doubt for the public authorities and the civil 
society organisations, it has, however, proven less relevant for the private sector, in particular 
for the employers in high risk sectors and the online platforms and technology companies.  

Key evaluation findings: 
 

The  Directive  is  a  comprehensive  instrument,  which  brings  clarity  and  greater 
coherence among Member States and contributed to the adoption of measure and 
advances in the protection and recognition of the rights of victims of trafficking.  
There is a need, however, for more consistent and comprehensive implementation 
of the transposed provisions of the Directive. 
In addition, the Directive has been less relevant for the private sector, in particular 
for employers and the technology companies. 

 

 

Areas for improvement with regard to the relevance of the Directive:  

o  The  online  dimension  and  the  accountability  of  businesses  could  be 

o 

better covered in EU legislation. 
Intensified  dialogue  with  the  internet  companies  and  high  risk  sector 
employers could be envisaged. 

o  Stronger  accountability  and  engagement  of  private  businesses  and 
education, awareness raising and information of the the consumers about 
the risks of labour exploitation, with a view to changing their behaviour 
with regards to cheap goods and services. 

4.3.1 The online dimension  

Evidence  from  stakeholders  and  documentary  sources  strongly  support  that  the  online 
dimension of trafficking is  a significant and growing threat.  All  stakeholders noted that 
online recruitment facilitates THB and social media has increasingly been used as a means for 
recruiting,  advertising  sexual  services  of,  and  exerting  control  over  victims269.  Technology 
allows traffickers increased anonymity via common encrypted communication solutions. This 
digitalisation  of  the  trafficking  process  has  notably  accelerated  during  the  COVID-19 

268  1  National  Rapporteur  (FI),  1  civil  society  organisation  (HR).  Targeted  interviews  with  three  EU-level 
representatives (#2, #7, #10). 
269  Submission  to  the  public  consultation  by  UNODC  and  Eurojust;  Frontex’s  contribution  to  the  fourth 
commission report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in human beings.  

59 

 
 
 
                                                           
pandemic270.  

The  increasingly  online  nature  of  trafficking  poses  challenges  for  investigators,  as 
illustrated below in Box 1271.  

Box 1: Examples of issues posed by the online dimension of THB272 

 

Internet allows perpetrators to reach a higher number of victims of THB compared to 
other ways of recruiting potential victims.  

  Online  social  networks  and  online  classified  sites  are  used  to  deceive  and  recruit 
victims, usually through promising jobs offers or travel advertisements either placed 
on  general  advertisement  websites  or  distributed  through  au  pair  agencies, 
international marriage agencies or dating sites.  

  The  internet  is  increasingly  used  to  manage  the  transportation  of  victims: 
compromised credit cards are used by traffickers to purchase tickets online in order to 
hide their identities. This way, neither the tickets nor the victims can be traced and 
linked to their exploiters. 

  The  internet  is  used  by  traffickers  to  control,  threaten  or  coerce  victims  (e.g. 
blackmailing  victims,  threatening  to  send  compromising  pictures  to  their  family  or 
friends or to expose them online), and to exploit them, since certain types of sexual 
exploitation take place online entirely (e.g. live videos or sex chats). 

  The internet enables perpetrators to anonymously share abusive material and exchange 
information on specialised fora such as experience and recommendations on ways to 
commit the crime. 

At  the  same  time,  the  increasing  move  of  traffickers  to  the  online  space  fosters  the 
development of new and innovative methods for fighting THB. These include technological 
methods for identifying victims of THB online273. For instance, the online advertising of the 
services of victims of trafficking across a number of countries can be used by investigators as 
an evidence of the magnitude of a case of trafficking. Moreover, law enforcement authorities 
can identify victims through the monitoring of websites where services are advertised274. The 
judiciary  and  police  use  social  media  and  the  internet  themselves,  as  a  method  of 
investigation275. Criminals may leave a digital footprint which law enforcement can use, for 
instance  financial  transactions.  Investigators  are  able  to  discover  information  on  identities, 
roles, structures, locations and criminal assets from the online activity of suspects276. 

Areas for improvement in the Directive in relation to the online dimension  

270 Europol’s contribution to the fourth commission report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in 
human beings.  
271 Europol, The challenges of countering human trafficking in the digital era (2020). Available at: link. 
272 Europol, Trafficking in human beings and the internet (2014). Available: link. 
273 UNODC, The effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic (2021). Available at: link. 
274 Interview #30. 
275 Submission by Bulgaria in the context of the workshop organised by the European Commission with the EU 
Network of NREM on 6 December 2021. 
276 Europol, The challenges of countering human trafficking in the digital era (2020). Available at: link. 

60 

 
 
                                                           
The Directive does not explicitly address the digital dimension of trafficking in human beings. 
The internet is only referred to in a provision on prevention (Article 18(2)), as a means to raise 
awareness and reduce the risk of people, especially children, becoming victims of trafficking 
in human beings.  

The  vast  majority  of  respondents  to  the  survey  said  that  the  Directive  did  not  sufficiently 
address  the  online  dimension  of  trafficking.  The  digitalisation  of  the  crime  was  the  most 
commonly identified challenge for the next 5 to 10 years among respondents277. 74% of the 
stakeholders who participated in the public consultation were in favour of the introduction of 
explicit provisions on the online dimension of trafficking in human beings278. Moreover, 65% 
of respondents to the online survey said that EU intervention would be necessary to enhance 
cooperation with online private companies to fight against trafficking in human beings279.  

It should be noted that the newly adopted Digital Services Act280 will also have an impact in 
relation  to the fight  against  human trafficking online  by providing for a clear due diligence 
obligation  for  the  online  platforms  aiming  to  tackle  the  availability  of  online  content. 
Furthermore,  the  Proposal  for  a  Regulation  laying  down  rules  to  prevent  and  combat  child 
sexual  abuse281online  will  oblige  online  platforms  to  prevent  and  detect  child  sexual  abuse 
material. 

Moreover, reacting to Russia’s unjustified military aggression against Ukraine, the EU Internet 
Forum  has  launched  the  discussion  on  the  role  of  technology  and  internet  companies  in 
preventive and awareness raising measures, as well as in the detection of the crime to protect 
vulnerable people from exploitation. 

4.3.2 Role of the private economy in fighting trafficking in human beings 

The  EU  Strategy  requires  “…fostering  the  development  of  public-private  initiatives  with 
businesses in high risk sectors and high risk environments, also by involving the regional and 
local  level”.  Some  Member  State  have  started  to  develop  public-private  partnerships282  and 
other  forms  of  cooperation  with  private  businesses  and  the  financial  sector.  The  European 
Labour  Authority  set  up  a  specific  subgroup  on  tackling  undeclared  work  among  displaced 
persons and  refugees  from  Ukraine  was  a very  good example of how to  mobilise and raise 

277 25 respondents mentioned this as one of the main challenges in relation to the fight against trafficking in human 
beings within the next 5-10 years. In addition, five National Rapporteurs and Equivalent Mechanisms (NREM) 
participating in the workshop on 6 December 2021 suggested the Directive should include specific provisions 
addressing the online dimension of trafficking in human beings. One NREM called for more resources to be made 
available to national authorities  in order to combat this issue.  Many civil society organisations also  raised the 
importance of tackling trafficking in human beings in the online environment at the workshop organised on 30 
November 2021. 
278 Public authorities, citizens and academic research were very much in favour of explicit provisions on the online 
dimension, while civil society organisations were more split but generally in favour. 
279 38% of respondents said that EU intervention to enhance cooperation with online private companies to fight 
against trafficking  would be necessary “to a very large  extent” and 27% said “to a large extent”. None of the 
respondents considered that the EU should not intervene in this area.  
280 Regulation 2022/2065/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of  19 October 2022 on a Single 
Market for Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act) (OJ L 277, 27.10.2022, 
p.1) See also EUR-Lex - 32022R2065 - EN - EUR-Lex (europa.eu) 
281 COM/2022/209 final. 
282 CZ, FI. 

61 

 
 
 
                                                           
awareness  of  national  labour  authorities  and  the  private  sector,  as  labour  inspections  for 
undeclared work can sometimes lead to detecting cases of trafficking in human beings.  

In addition, at global level there were numerous initiatives from the financial sector to screen 
financial  transactions  to  detect  trafficking  in  human  beings  by  reinforcing  anti-money 
laundering rules and the sanction regime, fostering innovation, reinforcing the cooperation with 
law enforcement, etc.283  

Areas for improvement with regard the private businesses 

(i) EU legislation does not require businesses to  take measures to  reduce the demand for 

cheap products and services in value chains 

Labour exploitation is increasingly concentrated in the private economy and the need to keep 
costs low fosters the demand for cheap labour. Hence, demand-reduction measures can be taken 
within the value chain of businesses284. 

The Commission proposed a Directive on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence285, which is 
intended to “set out a horizontal framework to foster the contribution of businesses operating 
in the single market to the respect of the human rights and environment in their own operations 
and through their value chains, by identifying, preventing, mitigating and accounting for their 
adverse  human  rights,  and  environmental  impacts,  and  having  adequate  governance, 
management  systems  and  measures  in  place  to  this  end”.  Once  adopted,  the  Directive  will 
complement the Anti-trafficking Directive.  

The liability of legal persons for trafficking in human beings, set out in Article 5 of the Anti-
trafficking Directive, aims to ensure that businesses are investigated, prosecuted and convicted 
for trafficking offences. However, in practice, (despite the high risks of forced labour in value 
chains) there is no data available on the number of legal persons held prosecuted and convicted 
for trafficking offences.  

See  also  in  Section  4.1.1.3  on  the  reduction  of  the  demand  that  fosters  trafficking  and 
criminalisation of the use of exploited services. 

(ii)  The  efforts  to  change  the  behaviour  of  consumers  and  to  sensitise  them  to  labour 
exploitation are insufficient 

The interest in acquiring low-cost products and services incentivises the public to neglect the 
issue of labour exploitation, even when visible286. The efforts to inform consumers about their 
choices and the risks of labour exploitation should increase, with a view to reducing demand 
for cheap goods or services which fosters trafficking for forced labour. Member States, civil 
society organisations as well as businesses may engage in awareness raising and information 

283  Finance  Against  Slavery  and  Trafficking  (FAST)  is  a  multi-stakeholder  initiative  based  at  United  Nations 
University  Centre  for  Policy  Research  that  works  to  mobilize  the  financial  sector  against  modern  slavery  and 
human trafficking (Finance Against Slavery and Trafficking (fastinitiative.org)) 
284 Submission to the public consultation by the ILO. 
285  Proposal  for  Directive  of  The  European  Parliament  and  Of  the  Council  on  Corporate  Sustainability  Due 
Diligence and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937, COM(2022) 71 final. 
286  European  Commission,  Study  on  comprehensive  policy  review  of  anti-trafficking  projects  funded  by  the 
European Commission (2016). 

62 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
campaigns for the consumers and also should recognise the consumer responsibility alongside 
with  other  stakeholders.  Experience  has  shown  that  certification  or  labelling  systems 
confirming that certain products did not use forced or child labour or they were produced under 
decent working conditions can give strong incentive to consumers to make an informed and 
deliberate choice in favour of such products. 

5. CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED 

5.1 Conclusions 

The Directive constitutes a major milestone in the fight against trafficking in human beings. 
The evaluations showed that the general objectives of the Directive, namely to combat crime, 
organised or otherwise, in particular trafficking in persons and offences against children, by 
building a more coherent framework for the fight against trafficking and (2) to increase the 
effectiveness  of  the  framework  are  met.    However,  the  evaluation  identified  a  number  of 
shortcomings which impede the full attainment of its five specific objectives287. Therefore, the 
deficiencies can either be addressed through improving the implementation of the Directive or 
reinforcing and/or updating certain legal aspects.   

More specifically, a number of shortcomings were identified with respect to investigations and 
prosecutions for trafficking offences. The level of investigations, prosecutions and convictions 
remain  low,  thus  contributing  to  a  culture  of  impunity  in  the  EU.  There  is  also  a  need  to 
strengthen  the  capacity  of  law  enforcement  and  judicial  authorities  to  carry  out  financial 
investigations, address the challenges posed by the increasing digitalisation of trafficking and 
to seize and confiscate instrumentalities and proceeds from trafficking offences. There is a lack 
of  data  on  the  prosecutions  and  convictions  against  legal  persons.  More  dissuasive  actions 
against legal persons to prevent, detect and combat trafficking was also identified as a key area 
for improvement.  

The evaluation found that issues related to assistance, support and protection of victims mainly 
stem from gaps in the implementation of the Directive in the Member States, for instance when 
it comes to the application of the principles of non-prosecution and non-punishment of victims; 
protection  of  victims  in  criminal  proceedings;  provision  of  assistance  and  support  services 
targeted  to  the  specific  needs  of  particularly  vulnerable  victims,  including  children  and 
vulnerable groups; or access to compensation. The Directive proved to be effective with respect 
to the establishment of mechanisms aimed at the early identification and referral of victims to 
assistance,  support  and  protection.  However,  some  gaps  persist  when  it  comes  to  the 
functioning of these mechanisms and their coordination at the national and cross-border level, 
which  may  hinder  victims’  identification  and  referral  to  adequate  services,  which  take  into 
account their specific needs.  

The  effectiveness  of  the  Directive  is  limited  in  relation  to  reducing  the  demand  through 
legislation.  The  optional  provision  on  the  criminalisation  of  the  knowing  use  of  services 
exacted  from  victims  of  trafficking  has  not  been  transposed  by  all  Member  States  and 
approaches  among  the  Member  States  that  have  transposed  it  vary  greatly.  The  evaluation 
found that it is often difficult to prove knowledge, although data does not allow to conclude 
that approaches, which remove the knowledge requirement do not show  higher numbers of 

287  Specific  objectives  of  the  Directive:  (1)  introduction  of  substantive  legal  provisions,  (2)  strengthened 
prosecution; (3) prevention; (4) support and assistance to the victims and (5) monitoring and data collection. 

63 

 
 
                                                           
prosecution and conviction. Stakeholders were divided on the question of whether this measure 
would be an effective measure to reduce demand.  

The Directive was found to be overall efficient, which means that the benefits it brought offset 
the costs its adoption, transposition and implementation entailed. The evaluation found that the 
costs related to the non-implementation of the Directive were considerable, as trafficking in 
human  beings  incurs  high  costs  to  the  economy  and  the  society,  linked  to  anti-trafficking 
activities;  the  provision  of  assistance,  support  and  protection  services,  as  well  as  the  lost 
economic output and lost quality of life for the victim. Despite the cost-effectiveness of the 
Directive, there is a lack of adequate funding to fight trafficking in human beings at the national 
level, which affects the prevention, effective investigation and prosecution of the crime, as well 
as the assistance and support to the victims.  

The Directive was found to be coherent with all relevant EU and international initiatives that 
were  considered.  However,  there  is  room  to  further  improve  consistency  with  Directive 
2009/52/EC (Employers Sanctions Directive).  

The evaluation highlighted the added value of the Directive to the fight against trafficking in 
human  beings  within  the  EU,  which  contributed  to  enhancing  cross-border  cooperation, 
including  with  the  support  of  EU  Agencies.  The  Directive  also  contributed    to  fostering 
institutional  developments  in  the  anti-trafficking  field  at  the national and  EU level, notably 
with  the  establishment  of  National  Rapporteurs  or  Equivalent  Mechanisms;  introducing  the 
function of the EU Anti-trafficking Coordinator; as well as the monitoring of the situation of 
trafficking in human beings through reporting and EU-wide data collection, despite the gaps 
mentioned above. Existing gaps in the data collection on trafficking in human beings, however, 
limit the added value of the Directive, as data may not be fully reliable and comparable. This 
also limit the understanding of the crime in terms its volume and impact not just on the victims 
but on the society as a whole. 

Finally,  the  evaluation  found  that  the  both  the  general  and  the  specific  objectives  of  the 
Directive remain relevant, although a number of developments in the recent years need to be 
addressed. The use of technology for every phase of the trafficking offence is a major concern 
and  growing  threat.  Stakeholders  largely  highlighted  the  need  to  address  this  aspect  in  the 
Directive and step up the capacity of relevant stakeholders to combat the crime online. The 
evaluation also underlined that the Directive had been less relevant for the private sector, in 
particular for employers and the technology companies. In this respect, there is a need to further 
intensify the dialogue with internet companies and employers in high-risk sectors in order to 
encourage them to raise awareness, detect and fight against trafficking in human beings. 

5.2 Lessons learned 

One  of  the  main  lessons  learned  from  the  evaluation  is  that  the  Directive  provided  an 
overarching framework, which contributed to creating a common ground at the EU level to 
combat trafficking in human beings. The evaluation found that some identified shortcomings 
are linked to the implementation of the Directive in the Member States rather than gaps in the 
EU legislation itself, for instance issues related to  the gender dimension;  investigations and 
prosecutions;  assistance,  support  and  protection  of  victims;  training  and  awareness  raising 
activities. These aspects could be addressed through increased support to the Member States, 
including through monitoring, funding, as well as policy and operational actions.  

64 

 
 
Major trends  since the adoption of the Directive  necessitate  further  reflections, whether the 
Directive is capable to address those phenomena and fulfil its general and specific objectives 
in its current forms. Most importantly the surge of online trafficking, namely that one or more 
elements  of  nearly  each  trafficking  offence  take  place  in  the  internet  require  an  urgent  and 
adequate  response.  Moreover,  the  prevention  of  gradual  expansion  of  labour  exploitation 
should be closer looked at and examine whether the existing optional provisions are sufficiently 
addressing the criminal accountability of legal persons. In addition, some Member States did 
not criminalise additional forms of exploitation than the ones that are included in the list of 
Article  2(3)  of  the  Directive,  despite  the  fact  that  this list  is  non-exhaustive.  Moreover,  the 
evaluation has shown that the demand for sexual exploitation and cheap products is increasing. 
Trafficking in human beings is a cross-border crime, therefore victim support must be equally 
available and adequate in cross-border cases. The most practical, feasible and meaningful way 
to increase the cross-border communication and information exchange amongst Member States 
should be further analysed, in particular the possible improvement of national and transnational 
referral mechanisms. Finally, the data gap should be reduced or closed and the monitoring of 
human trafficking in the EU should be strengthened. 

The aforementioned deficiencies are not sufficiently covered by the existing wording of the 
Directive therefore it could be assessed if they necessitate legislative changes. 

To conclude, it should be noted that the evaluation largely confirms the challenges and areas 
of action that were identified in the EU Strategy on Combatting Trafficking in Human Beings 
(2021-2025). Therefore, the key actions of the EU Strategy remain highly relevant in order to 
improve the implementation of the Directive in the Member States.  

65 

 
 
ANNEX I:   PROCEDURAL INFORMATION 

1. LEAD DG, DECIDE PLANNING/CWP REFERENCES 

DG Migration and Home Affairs (DG HOME) is the lead DG. The agenda planning (Decide) 
reference assigned to the evaluation and impact assessment is PLAN/2021/11112. There is no 
reference to the evaluation and impact assessment in the Commission Work Programme 2022.  

2. ORGANISATION AND TIMING 

The Terms of Reference for  carrying out  an  external  study to support the evaluation  of the 
Directive on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims 
and an impact assessment for a legislative proposal on the topic were launched on 9 July 2021 
with  a  deadline  on  6  August  2021.  An  evaluation  committee  consisting  of  staff  from  DG 
HOME selected an external contracor to conduct the study on 30 September 2021288. The kick-
off meeting of the contract for the study took place on 27 October 2021. The contract ended on 
21 July 2022 (following an extension of approximately one month, as the contract was initially 
planned to terminate on 16 June 2022).  

The  combined  evaluation  roadmap  and  inception  impact  assessment  for  the  initiative  was 
published by DG HOME on the Commission’s “Have your say” webpage289 on 5 August 2021 
until 16 September 2021. The Commission carried out a public consultation from 14 December 
2021 to 22 March 2022, which was also published on “Have your say” webpage.  

The Inter-Service Group (ISG) on Trafficking in Human Beings, which already existed, was 
composed of  several Directorate-Generals within the Commission290. The meetings of the ISG 
were chaired by DG HOME. The steering group was regularly consulted over the course of the 
evaluation  and  impact  assessment,  in  particular  on  the  draft  reports  of  the  contractor 
responsible for carrying out the external study. The following list provides an overview of the 
work of the ISG:  

  The ISG was consulted in June 2021 in order to provide feedback on the draft Terms 

of Reference for the external study.  

288 The call for service was issued via framework contract HOME/2020/ISFP/FW/EVA2/0074. Three contractors 
submitted an offer to carry out an evaluation and impact assessment study. The evaluation committee considered 
a number of criteria, namely: compliance with the technical specifications described in the Terms of Reference; 
demonstrated understanding of the objectives and tasks; the quality of the preliminary assessment of difficulties 
and expected results; the quality of the proposed methodology; and the quality of the project management and 
team organisation. The Commission awarded the contract to EY/RAND. 
289 Fighting human trafficking – review of EU rules (europa.eu). 
290 Secretariat-General (SG); Legal Service (LS); Justice and Consumers (JUST); Education, Youth, Sport and 
Culture (EAC); European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO); European External Action 
Service (EEAS); Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion (EMPL); Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship 
and SMEs (GROW); Mobility and Transport (MOVE); Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations (NEAR); 
Regional  and  Urban  Policy  (REGIO);  Health  and  Food  Safety  (SANTE);  TRADE;  International  Partnerships 
(INPTA); Eurostat (ESTAT). 

66 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
  On 27 October 2021, the ISG was invited to the kick-off meeting of the external 

study with the contractor. 

 

In November 2021, the ISG was consulted on the public consultation questionnaire. 

  On 19 January 2022, the ISG was invited to participate in the meeting to discuss the 
interim report of the study, drafted by the contractor. The report was subsequently 
accepted after revisions were made to reflect the comments of the ISG. 

  On 4 April 2022, DG HOME invited the ISG to discuss the contractor’s first final 

report of the study. 

  The ISG, as well as DG HOME relevant units, were consulted in writing throughout 
the evaluation and impact assessment process and their comments to the external 
study were duly taken into account.  

  A written informal consultation with the ISG on the Staff Working Documents on 
the  Evaluation  and  Impact  Assessment  took  place  between  22  July  2022  and  2 
August 2022 and ISG met on 29 August to discuss the changes.  

On 24 July 2022, the final second report of the study was re-submitted by the contractor to DG 
HOME for revisions and subsequently accepted.   

3. CONSULTATION OF THE RSB 

The Regulatory Scrutiny Board examined the Staff Working Document on the Evaluation and 
Staff  Working  Document  on  the  Impact  Assessment  in  written  procedures  and  delivered  a 
positive opinion on 14 October 2022. 

The  Staff  Working  Document  addresses  the  recommendations  of  the  Regulatory  Scrutiny 
Board as follows: 

Recommendations 

Reply 

The  objectives  considered  in  the  evaluation  report 
should mirror the original objectives of the Directive. 
The list of objectives presented in section 2.2 of the 
report  does  not  seem  to  correspond  neither  to  the 
objectives  presented  in  the  text  of  the  adopted 
Directive nor to the impact assessment conduced for 
the Framework Decision preceding the adoption of the 
Directive. 

The general objectives presented by the Commission 
in  the  Impact  Assessment  to  the  Directive  were 
inserted  in  Section  2.2.  Both  the  general  and  the 
specific  objectives  were  consistently  referred  to 
throughout SWD and duly integrated into the analysis. 
In Section 5, Conclusions, the report further details the 
attainment of each objective. 

The  intervention  logic  and  the  findings  in  section  4 
should be revisited to reflect the appropriate general 
and specific objectives. 

The intervention logic was updated and aligned with 
the  initial  objectives  of  the  Directive  likewise  the 
findings. 

The absence of the evaluation matrix is in particular 
detrimental  to  the  quality  of  the  report  as  the 
framework  for  assessing  the  Directive  presented  in 
section 4 of the report is missing. 

The  evaluation  framework  /matrix  was  inserted  into 
Annex III. 

67 

 
 
The  section  providing  statistics  and  trends  for  the 
evaluation period (2013-2020) (section 3.5) should be 
expanded with more systematic data on the points of 
comparison. 

Statistics for 2010-2012 prior to the transposition of 
the Directive, as point of comparison, were added to 
the  relevant  sections,  which  contain  statistical 
analysis. 

What  are  the  reasons  to  conclude  that  the  Directive 
was  effective,  given  the  gaps  in  transposition  and 
implementation,  and 
in  data 
availability and the lack of monitoring system despite 
this being a specific objective of the Directive? 

the  shortcomings 

is 

A  “Conclusions  on  effectiveness”  sub-section  was 
inserted  in  the  section  on  effectiveness,  which 
explains  how  the  Directive  fulfils  the  two  general 
objectives,  which 
to  assess 
effectiveness. It is further mirrored and elaborated in 
the final conclusions. In addition, the explanation on 
the  level  of  transposition  and  implementation  also 
includes  the  monitoring  of  the  progress  by  the 
Commission  and  the  help  it  provided  to  Member 
States to implement the Directive. 

the  baseline 

The report explain why the quality and availability of 
data is still an issue. The report should analyse to what 
extent Member States are able to collect reliable data. 

The  report  refers  to  the  monitoring  as  one  of  the 
specific objectives of the Directive and it provides  a 
more detailed explanation of the issue in the sections 
on efficiency and EU added value. The problems with 
data collections were also added to the key-findings. 

report  does  not 

systematically  provide 
The 
justifications for the included statements. This is the 
case,  for  instance,  for  the  absence  of  harmonised 
procedures  at  European  level  for  identification  and 
referral of victims. 

The  conclusions  were  revised  throughout  the  SWD 
and they were complemented with more explanation 
and  justification.  In  addition  the  reasons  for  the 
deficiencies were clarified, notably whether they are 
inherent in the requirements of Directive itself or they 
are due to partial implementation by Member States.  

is 

Why 
the  number  of  victims  considered  as 
underestimated? What is the order of magnitude of it? 
How does this affect the cost estimates? 

What  are  the  lessons  learned  from  the  evaluation? 
Why  does  this  section  focus  more  on  effectiveness 
rather than on the main issues? How can the lessons 
learned  inform  the  analysis  presented  in  the  impact 
assessment? 

On the issue of labour exploitation, the report should 
explain if the costs from lower tax collection and the 
impact of business relocation is considered. It should 
also explain how the benefit of asset confiscations and 
fines imposed to traffickers are considered. 

The  report  should  be  more  specific  whether  the 
increase in resources for training related to prevention 
or  investigation  and  prosecution  refers  to  financial 
resources,  human  resources  or  any  other  type  and 

Section 3 of the report includes various estimates for 
the  real  numbers  of  victims  of  trafficking  and  the 
problems  with  the  methodology.  On  this  basis  the 
report  cannot  provide  an  estimate  for  this  “hidden 
population”. The section on efficiency provides more 
explanation on the cost of trafficking occurred due to 
the underestimation of the number of victims. 

Section 5 now differentiate between conclusions and 
lessons  learned.  The  conclusions  focus  on  the 
attainment  of  the  objectives  (general  and  specific) 
taking  into  account  the  five  evaluation  criteria.  In 
addition  sub-section  “Lesson  learned”  deal  with  the 
major areas, which are further analysed and assessed 
in the Impact Assessment creating a link to the Impact 
Assessment. 

The report elaborates on the economic costs of labour 
exploitation in the section on efficiency and provides 
an estimate of ILO for the costs of labour exploitation. 
It  also  explains  how  Member  States  implement  the 
2004  Confiscation  Directive  for  the  social-reuse  of 
confiscated proceeds of crime. 

The nature of the costs is clarified but costs estimates 
due to the lack of stakeholder contribution cannot be 

68 

 
 
provide some cost estimates or justification for their 
absence. 

provided. More examples are provided, however, on 
the costs of the victim support. 

The analysis of the change of consumer behaviour on 
labour exploitation should adjusted given the impact 
on  consumer  brands  having  to  state  they  do  not 
employ  children  or  where  they  have  been  forced  to 
relocate  their  production.  The  role  of  NGOs  and 
consumer associations should be considered. 

Some  outcomes  from  the  public  consultation  should 
those 
more  nuanced 
stakeholder  groups  having  business 
interests 
indirectly  linked  with  sexual  exploitation  e.g  online 
platforms. 

the  views  of 

regarding 

The section on relevance for private businesses raises 
the  responsibility  of  private  companies  in  the  fight 
against  trafficking  in  human  beings  including  their 
information  to  consumers  about  the  origin  of  their 
products. In this regard the report also recognises the 
role  of  the  civil  society  and  consumer  organisations 
enabling consumers to take informed and responsible 
decisions for their product choices. 

Concerning  certain  consultation  questions  the  report 
is  nuancing  the  replies  to  the  public  consultation 
according  to  stakeholder  groups.  It  has  to  be  noted, 
however,  that  only  one  industrial  actor  replied  the 
questionnaire, namely a trade union from Ireland. 

The  section  analysing  coherence  of  the  Directive 
should  also  mention  the  recent  proposal  on  due 
diligence, currently listed in section 4.3.1.2 

A  coherence  review  with  the  Commission  proposal 
for  a  Directive  on  sustainability  due  diligence  were 
included. 

The  references  to  the  EU  Strategy  on  combatting 
trafficking  in  human  beings  2021-25  were  deleted 
from the section on relevance. 

The templates are corrected and updated. 

The report should not use the Strategy as an argument 
confirming its relevance, because that analysis should 
be  based  solely  on  the  Directive  itself.  Where  the 
strategy  is  referred  to  it  should  be  in  terms  of  the 
evaluation  analysis  confirming  the  validity  of  its 
content (section 4.3) 

The  report  does  not  use  the  standard  template  for 
evaluations. In particular, the content of the annexes 
of the report does not correspond to the requirements 
(Annex  II  –  methodology  and  analytical  method, 
Annex III – the evaluation matrix, Annex IV – costs 
and benefits, Annex V – stakeholder consultation). 

The  cost/benefit  tables  in  Annex  III  of  the  report 
should be cleared of how-to-fill instructions 

4. EVIDENCE, SOURCES AND QUALITY 

The main sources for the evaluation and Impact Assessment are the Commission’s biannual 
reports on the fight against trafficking in human beings and Studies on data collection on THB 
in the EU, as well as other reports and studies published by the Commission, the European 
Parliament and EU Agencies. The Evaluation and Impact Assessment are also based on the 
stakeholder consultations (Annex 4). They rely on the feedback received from the consultation 
on  the  Evaluation  Roadmap/Inception  Impact  Assessment,  the  public  consultation,  the 
organisation  of  two  workshops,  one  with  the  EU  Network  of  National  Rapporteurs  and 
Equivalent Mechanisms (NREM) on 6 December 2021 and the other with the EU Civil Society 
Platform against Trafficking in Human beings 30 November 2021, as well as the meetings and 
joint meeting of the NREM and EU Civil Society Platform on 16-18 May 2022.  

69 

 
 
  
The Evaluation and Impact Assessment also take into account the findings of the “Study to 
support  the  evaluation  of  the  Directive  on  preventing  and  combating  trafficking  in  human 
beings and protecting its victims and an impact assessment for a legislative proposal on the 
topic”, which was commissioned by DG HOME and developed by the contractor based on desk 
research  and  the  following  stakeholder  consultation  methods:  scoping  interviews,  desk 
research, online survey, interviews and case studies.  

ANNEX II. METHODOLOGY AND ANALYTICAL MODELS USED 

1. EVALUATION QUESTIONS AND METHODOLOGY 

1.1. Evaluation questions 

In accordance with the Terms of Reference drawn up by the European Commission, RAND 
Europe in collaboration with Ernst & Young (EY) conducted a study to support the evaluation 
of the Directive on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its 
victims and an impact assessment for a legislative proposal on the topic (request for service No 
29 - HOME/2020/ISFP/FW/EVA2/0074). 

The methodological approach derived from a careful analysis of the 37 evaluation questions 
presented  in  Table  1  and  the  production  of  evaluation  grids  separated  by  each  of  the  five 
evaluation criteria as they are stipulated by the Better Regulation Guidelines (effectiveness, 
efficiency, relevance, coherence and EU Added Value). Building on the evaluation questions, 
the evaluation grids included: 

a.  Judgment  criteria:  statements  that  need  to  be  confirmed  or  disconfirmed  by  the 

analysis. 

b.  Analytical approach: the type of analysis used to answer the evaluation question. The 

proposed analysis informed the type of information collected. 

c.  Indicators:  quantitative  and  qualitative  measures  supporting  the  analysis  and 

informing the judgement criteria. 

d.  Data sources:  quantitative and qualitative sources of indicator variables  used in  the 

analysis. 

The evaluation grids have been treated as a ‘live’ document throughout the research process. 
This means they have undergone revisions throughout the early research process to ensure that 
the questions were phrased in a manner that supports the aims of the evaluation in best way 
possible.  

1.2 Evaluation framework 

In  this  report,  the  evaluation  criteria  are  addressed  according  to  the  order  of  the  Better 
Regulation Guidelines.  The evaluation questions are arranged into an evaluation framework 
providing for the analytical framework, indicators and sources.

70 

 
 
Judgment criteria 

Analytical approach 

Indicators 

Sources 

JC.  1.1.  The  THB 
directive  is  not  fit  for 
purpose. 
JC 
directive 
purpose. 

1.2.  The  THB 
for 

fit 

is 

of 

key 

analysis 

Content 
documents  
Triangulation 
evidence 
collected from desk-based and 
fieldwork activities. 

of 

Degree  to  which  the 
objectives 
the 
Directive are met  

of 

Evaluation question 
Effectivness 

Subquestions 

EQ1:  To what extent have the 
relevant  provisions  of 
the 
Anti-trafficking  Directive  fit 
for purpose?  

N/A 

General 

the 

quality 
by 

EQ2:  Which  main  factors 
of 
(e.g. 
implementation 
the 
Member  States,  action  by 
stakeholders) 
have 
contributed to or stood in the 
the 
way 
of 
objectives 
the  Anti-
trafficking Directive? 

achieving 
of 

N/A 

JC2.1 Factors faciliating 
hindering 
or 
achievement 
the 
of 
objectives  of  the  Anti-
trafficking Directive.  
JC  2.2:  There  are  no 
identifiable  factors  that 
facilitated or hindered or 
the 
facilitated 
effective 
Directive’s 
implementation, 
in  an 
operational setting. 

Content  analysis  of  reports 
focusing  on  the  Directive’s 
implementation  
Analysis  of 
interview  and 
survey responses  regarding the 
Directive’s  implementation  at 
the  national 
level,  notably 
focusing  on  the  barriers  to 
implementation 
an 
operational setting. 
Triangulation 
evidence 
of 
collected from desk-based and 
fieldwork activities. 

in 

in 
Reference 
sources 
documentary 
to  either 
that  seem 
facilitate 
hinder 
or 
achieving 
the 
objectives  of  the  Anti-
trafficking Directive. 

Factors  mentioned  by 
interview,  survey,  and 
ad-hoc 
meetings/workshop 
participants  that  seem 

71 

Document review:  
Relevant 
documents 
included  in  Annex  I  of 
the ToR 
Other relevant EU policy 
and 
legislative 
documents 
Other 
relevant 
international policies and 
from 
documents 
institutions  such  as  the 
ILO, Council of Europe , 
IOM 
Targeted Interviews 
Online Survey 
Ad-hoc 
meetings/workshops 
Document review 
Online survey 
Case studies 
Ad-hoc 
meetings/workshops  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Content  analysis  of  how  the 
THB  directive  fits  within  the 
provisions  of  the  global  pact 
(e.g.,  what  objectives  are 
shared) 
Analysis  of  any  available 
quantitative  and  qualitative 
data related to these objectives, 
including changes on the scope 
the  human 
and  nature  of 
trafficking landscape.  
Analysis  of 
interview  and 
survey  responses  on  how  the 
the 
directive  contributed 
objectives of the global action 
against THB, if at all  
Triangulation 
evidence 
collected from desk-based and 
fieldwork activities. 
Triangulation  of  responses  to 
EQ6.2 and EQ7.2. 

of 

to 

N/A 

EQ3.  To  what  extent  has  the 
effectively 
Directive 
contributed 
the  global 
to 
action  against  trafficking  in 
human beings?  

JC.  3.1.  The  directive 
has  contributed  to  the 
global  action  against 
trafficking 
in  human 
beings.  
JC.3.2. The directive has 
not  contributed  to  the 
global  action  against 
trafficking 
in  human 
beings. 

EQ4. What is the contribution 
of the directive to preventing 
trafficking in human beings?  

N/A 

JC4.1 
Activities 
undertaken as a result of 
the Directive act work to 
in 
prevent 
combination  with  other 
measures.  

THB 

Prevention  of 
trafficking 
in 
human beings 

72 

Document review  
Online survey 
Interviews 

to  either  hinder  or 
facilitate  achieving  the 
objectives  of  the  Anti-
trafficking Directive.  
Changes  in  the  scope 
and scale of trafficking 
in human beings across 
Europe 
team’s 
Study 
the 
assessment 
extent 
of 
implementation  of  the 
shared objectives 
which 
to 
Extent 
interview  and  survey 
respondents  report  that 
directive 
the 
the 
to 
contributed 
objectives of the global 
action against THB 

of 

Effectiveness 
of 
preventive  measures 
(e.g. measures taken to 
risk  of 
the 
reduce 
people 
becoming 
victims of trafficking in 
beings), 
human 
research, 
including 
information, 
awareness-raising,  and 
education  
Effectiveness 
of 
measures 
national 
criminalising the use of 

Document review:  
Relevant 
documents 
included  in  Annex  I  of 
the ToR 
Other relevant EU policy 
and 
legislative 
documents 
relevant 
Other 
international policies and 
documents 
from 
institutions  such  as  the 
ILO, Council of Europe , 
IOM 
Targeted Interviews 

 
 
 
 
contributed 

EQ5.  To  what  extent  has  the 
directive 
to 
discourage  and  reduce  the 
demand that fosters all forms 
of  exploitation?  To  what 
extent  the  concrete  measures 
taken  to  reduce  the  risk  of 
people  becoming  victims  of 
trafficking  in  human  beings, 
research, 
including 
awareness-
information, 
raising,  and  education  have 
been effective?  

EQ5.1  To  what 
extent  has 
the 
directive 
contributed 
to 
discourage  and 
reduce 
the 
that 
demand 
fosters all forms 
of exploitation? 
EQ5.2.  To what 
the 
extent 
concrete 
measures  taken 
to 
the 
reduce 
risk  of  people 
becoming 
of 
victims 
trafficking 
in 
human  beings, 
including 
research, 
information, 
awareness-
and 
raising, 
education  have 
been effective? 

fosters 

JC5.1.1  The  directive 
to 
contributed 
and 
discouraging 
the  demand 
reducing 
that 
sexual 
fosters 
exploitation.  
JC5.1.2  The  directive 
to 
contributed 
discouraging 
and 
the  demand 
reducing 
labour 
that 
exploitation. 
JC5.1.3  The  directive 
to 
contributed 
discouraging 
and 
the  demand 
reducing 
that  fosters  other  forms 
as 
of 
exploitation, 
the 
outlined 
section 
background 
(e.g., 
forced  begging, 
domestic servitude). 
JC5.2.1  Research  has 
effective 
in 
been 
reducing 
risk  of 
the 
peple  becoming  victims 
of THB. 
JC5.2.2  Information  has 
effective in reducing the 

in 

implemented 

Mapping  of  existing  measures 
and  programmes  aimed  at 
discouraging  and  reducing  the 
demand that fosters all forms of 
exploitation  and  reducing  the 
risk  of  people  becoming 
victims of THB. 
Content analysis of documents 
providing  information  on  the 
measures 
to 
discouraging  and  reducing  the 
demand that fosters all forms of 
exploitation  and  reducing  the 
risk  of  people  becoming 
victims of THB. 
Content analysis of documents 
providing  information  on  the 
effectiveness 
of  measures 
aimed at reducing demand and 
reducing  the  risk  of  people  of 
becoming  victims  of  THB, 
research, 
including 
information, 
awareness-
raising, and education.  
Analysis  of 
interviews  and 
survey responses regarding the 
extent to which the Directive’s 
implementation 
had 
to  discouraging 
contributed 
and  reducing  the  demand  that 

73 

Online Survey 
Ad-hoc 
meetings/workshops 
Public consultation  

Country  mapping  of 
available 
reports 
information 
containing 
of  
Document review  
Public consultation  

services  of  victims, 
with 
the  knowledge 
that  the  person  is  a 
victim of trafficking to 
for 
reduce  demand 
exploited  services  of 
victims 
Number  and  type  of 
measures  implemented 
across  Member  States 
aimed  at  discouraging 
and 
the 
reducing 
demand  that  fosters  all 
forms  of  exploitation 
and reducing the risk of 
people 
becoming 
victims of THB. 

to 

Extent 
which 
to 
interview  and  survey 
respondents 
report 
perceiving 
research, 
information, 
awareness-raising,  and 
education 
be 
effective  in  aimed  at 
and 
discouraging 
reducing  the  demand 
that fosters all forms of 
exploitation, 
and 
reducing  the  risk  of 
people 
becoming 
victims of THB. 
Results 
any 
available  monitoring 
and  evaluation  data  on 
the  
impacts  of 
the 

of 

 
 
fosters all forms of exploitation 
and reducing the risk of people 
becoming victims of THB. 
Triangulation 
evidence 
collected from desk-based and 
fieldwork activities. 

of 

risk of people becoming 
victims of THB. 
Awareness-
JC5.2.3. 
raising 
been 
has 
effective in reducing the 
risk of people becoming 
victims of THB. 
JC5.2.4  Education  has 
in 
been 
risk  of 
reducing 
people 
becoming 
victims of THB. 

effective 
the 

EQ6.  What  measures  have 
been  put  in  place  in  national 
laws to establish as a criminal 
offence the use of services of 
victims,  with  the  knowledge 
that the person is a victim of 
trafficking?  To  what  extent 
such  measures  have  been 
effective  to  reduce  demand 
for  exploited  services  of 
victims?  

  What 
EQ6.1. 
measures  have 
been put in place 
in  national  laws 
to  establish  as  a 
criminal offence 
of 
the 
use 
services 
of 
victims, with the 
knowledge  that 
the  person  is  a 
victim 
of 
trafficking? 
EQ6.2.   To what 
have 
extent 

JC.  6.1.1  Number  and 
list  of  Member  States 
implemented 
having 
national 
legislation 
criminalising  the  use  of 
services of victims, with 
the  knowledge  that  the 
person  is  a  victim  of 
trafficking.  
JC6.2.1. 
National 
measures  criminalising 
the  use  of  services  of 
victims, 
the 
the 
knowledge 
person  is  a  victim  of 

with 
that 

74 

Mapping  of  existing  national 
laws  criminalising  the  use  of 
services  of  victims,  with  the 
knowledge that the person is a 
victim of trafficking 
Content analysis of documents 
providing 
information  about 
effectiveness  of  national  laws 
reports), 
(e.g. 
including  specifically  in  terms 
of 
for 
exploited services of victims.  
Analysis  of  interviews,  and 
survey responses, and feedback 
provided  at  ad-hoc  meetings 

evaluation 

reducing 

demand 

the 

taken 

to 
measures 
risk  of 
reduce 
people 
becoming 
victims of trafficking in 
beings, 
human 
including 
research, 
information, 
awareness-raising,  and 
education. 

of 

the 
Assessment 
the 
extent 
of 
contributions 
the 
directive  has    made  in 
discouraging 
and 
reducing  the  demand 
that fosters all forms of 
and 
exploitation, 
reducing  the  risk  of 
people 
becoming 
victims of THB. 

Number  of  Member 
States  that  have  laws 
that criminalise the use 
of  services  of  victims, 
the  knowledge 
with 
that  the  person  is  a 
victim of trafficking 
Extent 
to 
stakeholders 
survey 
(interviewees, 
respondents, 
ad-hoc 
meeting  participants) 
perceive  that  national 
laws that establish as a 
the 
criminal  offence 

which 

In-depth  national  desk 
research  
Interviews 
Surveys 
Ad-hoc meetings  
Public consultation  

 
 
 
 
 
trafficking,  have  been 
in 
effective 
reducing 
demand 
for  exploited 
services of victims.  

use 

national 
measures 
criminalising 
of 
the 
of 
services 
victims, with the 
knowledge  that 
the  person  is  a 
victim 
of 
trafficking, been 
effective 
to 
reduce  demand 
exploited 
for 
of 
services 
victims? 

 EQ7.1.  What 
training is being 
provided to: 
Law 
enforcement 
officials 
Judges, 
prosecutors  and 
legal councillors 
other 
And 
likely 
officials 
into 
to  come 
with 
contact 
victims 
or 
potential victims 
of trafficking 

JC7.1.  The  directive 
contributed  to  ensuring 
adequate training of law 
enforcement 
officials, 
judges  and  prosecutors, 
legal  councillors  and 
officials  likely  to  come 
into contact with victims 
or  potential  victims  of 
trafficking 
in  human 
beings.  
JC7.2.  The  directive 
contributed  to  ensuring 
adequate training of law 
enforcement 
officials, 
judges  and  prosecutors, 
legal  councillors  and 

75 

contributed 

EQ7.  To  what  extent  has  the 
directive 
to 
ensuring adequate training of 
law  enforcement  officials, 
judges  and  prosecutors,  legal 
councillors 
officials 
likely  to  come  into  contact 
with  victims  or  potential 
victims  of 
in 
human beings, including child 
victims of trafficking? 

trafficking 

and 

exist,  with 

regarding  the  extent  to  which 
national  laws  to  establish  as  a 
criminal  offence  the  use  of 
services 
the 
knowledge that the person is a 
victim  of  trafficking,  and  the 
extent  such  measures  have 
been 
reduce 
demand  for  exploited  services 
of victims. 
Triangulation 
evidence 
collected from desk-based and 
fieldwork activities. 

effective 

of 

to 

and 

training 

Mapping  of  existing  measures 
and 
programmes 
implemented  at  in  Member 
States-levels  aimed  at  raising 
increasing 
awareness, 
knowledge, 
building 
capacity  of  law  enforcement 
and justice professionals about 
assisting  victims  of  human 
trafficking.  
Content analysis of documents 
providing 
information  about 
measures  implemented  aimed 
at 
awareness, 
increasing  knowledge,  and 
law 
building 
justice 
enforcement 

capacity  of 
and 

raising 

of 

services  of 
use  of 
the 
victims,  with 
knowledge 
the 
that 
person  is  a  victim  of 
trafficking are effective 
to  reduce  demand  for 
exploited  services  of 
victims.  
the 
Assessment 
which 
to 
extent 
national 
that 
laws 
establish  as  a  criminal 
offence 
the  use  of 
services  of  victims, 
with 
the  knowledge 
that  the  person  is  a 
victim  of 
trafficking 
are  effective  to  reduce 
demand  for  exploited 
services of victims. 
Number  and  type  of 
measures 
and 
programmes 
implemented 
across 
Member  States  aimed 
at  raising  awareness, 
increasing  knowledge 
and  building  capacity 
of law enforcement and 
justice 
professionals 
about  assisting  victims 
of THB. 

Extent  to  which  the 
training 
identified 
and 
measures 

In-depth  national  desk 
research  
Interviews 
Surveys 
Ad-hoc meetings 

 
 
 
officials  likely  to  come 
into contact with victims 
or  potential  victims  of 
trafficking 
in  human 
beings, specifically child 
victims of trafficking? 

EQ7.2.  What 
training is being 
provided 
to  
Law 
enforcement 
officials 
Judges, 
prosecutors,  and 
legal councillors 
Other  officials 
likely 
to 
encounter 
victims 
or 
potential victims 
of trafficking?  

on 

information 

professionals  about  assisting 
victims  of  human  trafficking 
and 
the 
effectiveness  of 
measures’ 
evaluation 
(e.g., 
measures 
reports). 
Analysis  of 
interviews  and 
survey responses regarding the 
extent to which the Directive’s 
has 
implementation 
contributed 
increasing 
to 
awareness,  knowledge  and 
capacity  of  law  enforcement 
to 
judicial  authorities 
and 
better  assist  victims  of  human 
trafficking.  
Triangulation 
evidence 
collected from desk-based and 
fieldwork activities. 

of 

programmes have been 
effective  in  achieving 
their objectives.   

of 

the 
Assessment 
extent 
which 
to 
Member  States  share 
information  and  best 
practices 
about 
measures  and  training 
programmes  aimed  at 
raising 
awareness, 
increasing  knowledge 
and  building  capacity 
of law enforcement and 
justice 
professionals 
about  assisting  victims 
of  human  trafficking, 
including child victims.  

Extent 
which 
to 
interview  and  survey 
respondents  report  that 
the 
Directive’s 
implementation 
contributed 
to 
increasing  awareness, 
and 
knowledge 
law 
capacity 
enforcement 
and 
judicial  authorities  to 
better  assist  victims  of 
human 
trafficking, 
including child victims. 

of 

EQ8.  To  what  extent  has  the 
directive  contributed  to  the 
trafficked 
of 
protection 

EQ8.1.  To  what 
the 
extent  has 
directive 

JC8.1. The directive has 
the 
contributed 
protection  of  trafficked 

to 

Mapping  of  programmes  and 
support  services  aimed  at 
supporting 
and 
protecting 

Document review 
Interviews 
Survey responses  

76 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Protecting  and 
supporting 
the 
victims 

victims  in  cross-border  cases 
and within Member States?  

victims  in  cross-border 
cases 
within 
and 
Member States. 
JC8.1. The directive has 
not  contributed  to  the 
protection  of  trafficked 
victims  in  cross-border 
cases 
within 
and 
Member States. 

to 
contributed 
the protection of 
trafficked 
victims in cross-
border cases? 
EQ8.2.  To  what 
extent  has 
the 
directive 
contributed 
to 
the protection of 
trafficked 
victims in cross-
border  within 
Member States? 

of 

or 

cases 
aimed 

cross-border 
of 
at 
supporting 

victims of trafficking available 
in Member States. 
Mapping 
initiatives, 
collaboration, 
protecting 
and 
victims of THB.  
Content  analysis  of  secondary 
sources  referencing  examples 
of  support  offered  to  victims, 
both at Member State level and 
in cross-border cases 
Analysis  of 
interview  and 
survey responses on the extent 
the Directive contributed to the 
protection of trafficked victims 
in  cross-border  cases  and 
within Member States. 

access 

support, 

ensuring 

EQ9.  To  what  extent  the 
mechanism established under 
the  directive  has  contributed 
to 
to 
and 
assistance, 
in 
protection  measures, 
particular  persons  trafficked 
for  the  purpose  of  sexual 
exploitation?  To  what  extent 
have mechanisms for referral 
of  trafficked  victims  worked 

EQ9a.    To  what 
the 
extent 
mechanism 
established 
the 
under 
has 
directive 
contributed 
to 
ensuring  access 
assistance, 
to 
support, 
and 
protection 
measures, 

in 

access 

JC9a.1.  The  mechanism 
the 
established  under 
directive 
have 
contributed  to  ensuring 
victims’ 
to 
assistance,  support,  and 
protection  measures,  in 
particular  women  and 
girls  trafficked  for  the 
purpose 
sexual 
of 
exploitation. 

Content  analysis  of  reports 
discussing access to assistance, 
support, 
protection 
and 
measures, in particular women 
and  girls  trafficked  for  the 
purpose of sexual exploitation. 
Content  analysis  of  reports 
discussing to what extent have 
mechanisms  for  referral  of 
victims  worked 
trafficked 
cross-border 
in 
efficiently 
cases.  

77 

Support  offer  provided 
to  victims  in  Member 
States 

Support  offer  provided 
to  victims 
in  cross-
border cases.  

Extent 
which 
to 
interview  and  survey 
respondents  report  that 
has 
the  Directive 
contributed 
the 
to 
protection of trafficked 
victims in cross-border 
cases. 

which 
to 
Extent 
interview  and  survey 
respondents  report  that 
has 
the  Directive 
contributed 
the 
to 
protection of trafficked 
victims in cases within 
Member States  
which 
Extent 
to 
and 
interviewees 
respondents 
survey 
report 
the 
that 
mechanism  established 
under  the  directive  has 
contributed  to  women 
and  girls  trafficked  for 
the  purpose  of  sexual 
exploitation 
having 
to  assistance, 
access 

Interviews 
Online Survey  
Document review  
Public consultation  

 
 
 
 
 
efficiently 
cases?  

in  cross-border 

JC9b.1.  The  mechanism 
for  referral  of  trafficked 
victims 
support] 
[for 
work efficiently in cross-
border cases. 

particular 
persons 
trafficked for the 
purpose 
of 
sexual 
exploitation? 
EQ9b.  To what 
extent 
have 
mechanisms  for 
of 
referral 
trafficked 
victims  worked 
efficiently 
in 
cross-border 
cases? 

the 

interview  and 
Analysis  of 
survey  responses  as  to  what 
extent 
mechanism 
established under the directive 
has contributed to  women and 
girls trafficked for the purpose 
of  sexual  exploitation  having 
access  to  assistance,  support, 
and protection measures.  

responses 

interview  and 
Analysis  of 
survey 
to  what 
extent  have  mechanisms  for 
referral  of  trafficked  victims 
worked  efficiently  in  cross-
border cases. 

of 

evidence 
Triangulation 
collected from desk-based and 
fieldwork activities 

78 

efficiency 

support  and  protection 
measures.  
which 
Extent 
to 
and 
interviewees 
respondents 
survey 
report 
the 
that 
mechanism  under  the 
has 
directive 
mechanisms 
for 
trafficked 
referral  of 
worked 
victims 
efficiently 
in  cross-
border cases. 
in 
References 
regarding 
documents 
of 
the 
for 
mechanisms 
trafficked 
referral  of 
victims in cross-border 
cases. 
Reference 
documents 
the 
to   
contribution 
discussing  access 
to 
assistance, support, and 
protection measures, in 
particular  women  and 
girls  trafficked  for  the 
purpose 
sexual 
of 
exploitation. 
Assessment 
the 
extent  the  mechanism 
established  under  the 
directive 
has 
contributed to ensuring 
to  assistance, 
access 

in 
regarding 
directive’s 

of 

 
 
 
of 

of 

on 

for 

and 

support, and protection 
measures,  in  particular 
girls 
women 
the 
trafficked 
sexual 
of 
purpose 
exploitation. 
teams’ 
Study 
judgement 
the 
extent  mechanisms  for 
trafficked 
referral  of 
victims  have  worked 
efficiently 
in  cross-
border cases.  
integrated 
Type 
services 
child 
victims  of  available  in 
Member States  
References  in  reports 
and 
relevant 
secondary  sources  on 
the  effectiveness  on 
child-sensitive 
assistance  and  support 
measures. 
Extent of interview and 
participants 
survey 
the 
that 
reporting 
has 
directive 
contributed 
the 
assistance,  support and 
child 
protection 
victims of trafficking.  
Extent of interview and 
participants 
survey 
reporting 
that  child-
sensitive assistance and 
support  measures  are 

other 

of 

to 

Document analysis: 
Reports 
Government/support 
service 
websites 
Interviews 
Survey 
Public consultation  

organisations’ 

support 

EQ10. To what extent has the 
directive  contributed  to  the 
assistance, 
and 
protection of child victims of 
trafficking?  To  what  extent 
have  mechanisms  and  child-
and 
sensitive 
been 
support  measures 
effective? 
they 
Have 
integrated 
to 
contributed 
services  having  been  made 
available  to  child  victims  of 
trafficking? 

assistance 

EQ10a.  To what 
extent  has 
the 
directive 
to 
contributed 
assistance, 
the 
and 
support 
protection 
of 
child  victims  of 
trafficking?  
EQ10b. To what 
extent 
have 
mechanisms and 
child-sensitive 
assistance 
support 
measures  been 
in 
effective 
and 
protecting 
supporting 
victims of THB?  
EQ10c.  Have 
child-sensitive 
assistance 
support 

and 

and 

to 

of 

JC10a.    The  directive 
contributed 
the 
assistance,  support  and 
protection 
child 
victims of trafficking.  
JC10b.  Child-sensitive 
assistance  and  support 
measures  been  effective 
in 
and 
protecting 
supporting child victims 
of THB.  
JC10c.  Child-sensitive 
assistance  and  support 
have 
measures 
contributed to integrated 
services  having  been 
made  available  to  child 
victims of trafficking. 

of 

of 

gain 

reports 

Content analysis of reports and 
secondary 
relevant 
other 
sources 
an 
to 
existing 
understanding 
for  child 
support  services 
trafficking, 
victims 
especially  measures 
and 
services  explicitly  referring  to 
providing 
‘child-sensitive’ 
assistance, and content analysis 
providing 
of 
of 
information 
such 
programmes’ 
effectiveness 
(e.g evaluation reports, reports 
by  child-rights  organisation, 
reports 
anti-trafficking 
by 
organisation). 
Content  analysis  of  Member 
States  resource  websites,  as 
well  as  reports,  availability  of 
integrated  services  for  child 
victims  of 
in 
Member States.  

trafficking 

79 

 
 
 
 
to 

measures 
contributed 
integrated 
services  having 
made 
been 
available 
to 
child  victims  of 
trafficking? 

EQ11. To what extent has the 
contributed 
directive 
to 
to  victims  with 
attending 
including 
needs, 
special 
related 
disability, 
to 
psychological,  physical  or 
sexual violence?  

EQ11a. To what 
extent 
do 
Member  States’ 
legal 
national 
provisions 
and/or  policies 
the 
recognise 
of 
importance 
paying  attention 
trafficking 
to 
victims 
with 
disabilities (both 
or 
intellectual 
physical)?  

directive 
JC11a.1.The 
has 
the 
contributed 
attention  being  paid  to, 
being 
services 
and 
provided 
for,  victims 
with  disabilities  (both 
intellectual or physical).  
JC11b.1.  The  directive 
has 
to 
contributed 
attention  being  paid  to, 
and 
being 
services 
provided  for,  to  victims 
who have been subjected 
to sexual violence. 

80 

to 

and 
assistance 

interview  and 
Analysis  of 
survey responses on the extent 
of 
the 
the  contribution  of 
directive 
the  assistance, 
support and protection of child 
victims of trafficking.  
Analysis  of 
interview  and 
survey responses on the extent 
mechanisms 
child-
and 
sensitive 
support mechanisms have been 
effective 
in  protecting  and 
supporting  child  victims  of 
THB.  
Analysis  of 
interview  and 
survey responses on the extent 
the directive has contributed to 
integrated services having been 
made available to child victims 
of trafficking.  
Triangulation 
evidence 
collected from desk-based and 
fieldwork activities. 
Mapping  of  laws  and  policies 
in  Member 
that 
explicitly  mention  to  victims 
with disabilities (intellectual or 
physical)  and/or  victims  who 
have  been  subjected  to  sexual 
violence. 
Mapping of services provisions 
that explicitly targeted victims 
of  human 
trafficking  with 
disabilities.  
Mapping  of 
that 
to  human 
explicitly  cater 
trafficking  victims  who  have 

services 

States 

of 

victims 

effective  in  supporting 
child 
of 
trafficking. 
Extent of interview and 
participants 
survey 
the 
reporting 
that 
has 
directive 
contributed 
to 
integrated 
services 
being made available to 
child 
of 
trafficking. 
Assessment 
the 
directive  contribution 
to  the  provision,  and 
the  effectiveness  of  
child-sensitive 
assistance  and  support 
integrated 
measures 
services 
child 
victims of trafficking. 

victims 

for 

of 

Document analysis: 
Reports 
Government/support 
service 
websites 
Interviews 

organisations’ 

laws 

Number  of  existing 
national 
or 
policies 
explicitly 
mentioning  victims  of 
THB  with  disabilities 
and/or  victims  of  THB 
been 
have 
who 
sexual 
to 
subjected 
violence.  
Number  and  type  of 
services 
support 
explicitly 
targeting 
victims  of  THB  with 
and/or 
disabilities 

 
 
 
EQ11b. To what 
extent 
do 
Member  States  
national 
legal 
provisions 
and/or  policies 
recognise 
to 
national 
who 
victims 
been 
have 
subjected 
to 
sexual violence? 
EQ11c.  What 
programmes and 
services 
do 
Member  States 
offer 
that 
specifically 
target 
trafficking 
victims 
with 
disabilities (both 
intellectual  and 
physical)  and/or 
who 
victims 
been 
have 
to 
subjected 
sexual violence?  

human 

81 

to 

to 

sexual 

(physical 

subjected 

subjected 

been 
violence.  
Content  analysis  of  reports 
providing  information  on  the 
effectiveness  of  measures  and 
programmes  aimed  to  support 
human trafficking victims with 
disabilities 
and 
intellectual),  and/or  who  have 
sexual 
been 
violence.   
Analysis  of 
interview  and 
survey responses on the extent 
the  Anti-trafficking  directive 
to  human 
has  contributed 
with 
trafficking 
victims 
(physical 
disabilities 
and 
and/or  human 
intellectual) 
trafficking  victims  who  have 
been 
sexual 
violence,  having  their  needs 
being attended to.  
interview  and 
Analysis  of 
survey 
the 
existence  and  effectiveness  of 
laws/measures/programmes 
aimed  at  human  trafficking 
victims 
disabilities 
(intellectual or physical) and/or 
human trafficking victims who 
have  been  subjected  to  sexual 
violence.  
Triangulation 
evidence 
collected from desk-based and 
fieldwork activities 

responses  on 

subjected 

with 

of 

to 

other 

violence 

victims  of  THB  who 
have  been  subjected  to 
sexual 
in 
Member States.  
References  in  reports 
relevant 
and 
the 
documents 
to 
and 
existence 
effectiveness 
of 
services  for  victims  of 
THB  with  disabilities 
and/or  victims  of  THB 
been 
have 
who 
sexual 
to 
subjected 
violence 
in  Member 
States. 
Extent 
which 
to 
interview  and  survey 
respondents  report  that 
the 
Anti-trafficking 
Directive  contributed 
trafficking 
to  human 
with 
victims 
disabilities 
(physical 
and intellectual) and/or 
human 
trafficking 
victims who have been 
subjected 
sexual 
violence,  having  their 
needs  being  attended 
to. 
Extent 
which 
to 
interview  and  survey 
respondents  report  that 
their  Member  State 
to  victims  of 
caters 
THB  with  disabilities 

to 

 
 
 
in 

the 
the 

and/or  victims  of  THB 
been 
have 
who 
subjected 
sexual 
to 
in  Member 
violence 
by 
either 
States 
explicitly  mentioning 
them 
national 
policies  or  legislation, 
and/or  by  providing 
support 
targeted 
services. 
Assessment 
of 
contribution  of 
Anti-trafficking 
directive’s contribution 
trafficking 
to  human 
victims 
with 
(physical 
disabilities 
and intellectual) and/or 
human 
trafficking 
victims who have been 
subjected 
sexual 
violence,  having  their 
needs  being  attended 
to. 
Number  of  existing 
or 
national 
policies 
explicitly 
mentioning  victims  of 
THB who are Roma or 
LGBTIQ. 
Number  and  type  of 
services 
support 
targeting 
explicitly 

laws 

to 

EU/international 
research Interviews  

desk 

support, 

EQ12. To what extent has the 
directive  contributed  to  the 
assistance, 
and 
protection  of  other  relevant 
groups 
of 
trafficking,  including  people 
with disabilities, marginalised 
Roma  people  and  LGBTIQ 
people?291  

victims 

of 

EQ12a. To what 
the 
extent  has 
directive 
contributed 
the 
support, 
protection 
marginalised 
Roma people? 

to 
assistance, 
and 
of 

JC.  12a.1.  The  directive 
has  contributed  to  the 
and 
provision 
availability 
of 
assistance,  support  and 
of  Roma 
protection 
people  
JC12b.1.The 
directive 
has  contributed  to  the 

Mapping  of  national  laws  and 
policies in Member States that 
explicitly  mention  Roma 
and/or LGBTIQ people.  
Mapping  of  support  services 
explicitly  catering  to  Roma 
and/or LGBTIQ people.  
Content analysis of reports and 
other  secondary  sources,  such 

291 People with disabilities are covered under EQ12.  

82 

 
                                                           
 
and 
provision 
availability 
of 
assistance,  support,  and 
protection  of  LGBTIQ 
people.  

  To 
EQ13b. 
what  extent  has 
directive 
the 
contributed 
to 
assistance, 
the 
and 
support, 
protection 
of 
LGBTIQ 
people?  

of 

service 
as  government  or 
provider  websites,  regarding 
the 
and 
availability 
effectiveness 
support 
services  targeting  specifically 
THB  victims  who  are  either 
Roma or LGBTIQ.  
Analysis  of 
interview  and 
survey responses on the extent 
the  Anti-trafficking  directive 
has  contributed  to  assistance 
and  support  being  provided  to 
THB  victims  who  are  Roma 
and/or LGBTIQ.  
interview  and 
Analysis  of 
the 
survey 
existence  of  national 
laws, 
policies, or measures explicitly 
mentioning  THB  victims  who 
are Roma or LGBTIQ, and on 
the existence and effectiveness 
of support services specifically 
catering  to  THB  victims  who 
are Roma or LGBTIQ.  
Triangulation 
evidence 
collected from desk-based and 
fieldwork activities 

responses  on 

of 

EQ13. To what extent has the 
contributed 
to 
directive 
of 
victim 
a 
allowing 
to  access  and 
trafficking 

EQ13a. To what 
extent  has 
the 
directive 
contributed 

to 

JC13a.1    The  directive 
has 
to 
contributed 
allowing  a  victim  of 
trafficking to access and 

Mapping 
of  mechanisms 
allowing a victim of trafficking 
to  access  and  claim  adequate 

83 

other 

victims  of  THB  who 
are  Roma  or  LGBTQI 
in Member States.  
References  in  reports 
relevant 
and 
the 
documents 
to 
and 
existence 
effectiveness 
of 
services  for  victims  of 
THB who are Roma or 
LGBTIQ  in  Member 
States. 
Extent 
which 
to 
interview  and  survey 
respondents  report  that 
their  Member  State 
caters 
to  victims  of 
THB  who  are  either 
or  LGBTIQ 
Roma 
explicitly 
either  by 
mentioning 
in 
them 
national  policies  or 
legislation,  and/or  by 
providing 
targeted 
support services. 
Assessment 
of 
contribution  of 
Anti-trafficking 
directive’s contribution 
to  THB  victims  who 
are  Roma  or  LGBTIQ 
receiving  support  and 
assistance.  
Number  and  type  of 
mechanisms allowing a 
victim of trafficking to 
claim 
and 
access 

the 
the 

National desk research  
Document review 
Interviews  

 
 
 
of 

seized 

adequate 

claim 
compensation. 
JC13b.1    The  directive 
has  contributed  to  the 
and 
use 
confiscated 
instrumentalities 
criminal  proceeds 
support 
assistance 
protection, 
compensation 
victims.  

and 
to 
victims’ 
and 
including 
of 

claim 
compensation?  

adequate 

a 
allowing 
of 
victim 
trafficking 
to 
access and claim 
adequate 
compensation?  
EQ13b.  What 
mechanisms 
a 
allowing 
of 
victim 
trafficking 
to 
access and claim 
adequate 
compensation 
are  in  place  in 
Member States?   
EC13c.  Has  the 
directive 
contributed 
to 
the use of seized 
and  confiscated 
instrumentalities 
criminal 
and 
proceeds 
to 
support  victims’ 
assistance 
and 
protection, 
including 
compensation of 
victims? 

EQ14. To what extent has the 
to 
directive 
that  victims  of 
ensuring 

contributed 

N/A 

JC14.  The  directive  has 
contributed  to  ensuring 
of 
victims 
that 

84 

compensation  are  in  place  in 
Member States.  
Content  analysis  of  sources 
mentioned  in  appendix  IV  of 
the  RfS  for  mentioning  of 
mechanisms allowing a victim 
of  trafficking  to  access  and 
claim  adequate  compensation 
and  to  the  use  of  seized  and 
instrumentalities 
confiscated 
and  criminal  proceeds 
to 
support victims’ assistance and 
protection, 
including 
compensation of victims. 
Analysis  of 
interview  and 
survey responses on the extent 
to  which  the  Anti-trafficking 
directive  has  contributed  to 
allowing a victim of trafficking 
to  access  and  claim  adequate 
compensation. 
Analysis  of 
interview  and 
survey responses on the extent 
to  which  the  Anti-trafficking 
directive has contributed to the 
use  of  seized  and  confiscated 
instrumentalities  and  criminal 
proceeds  to  support  victims’ 
assistance 
protection, 
and 
including 
compensation  of 
victims.  
Triangulation 
evidence 
collected from desk-based and 
fieldwork activities 
Analysis  of 
interview  and 
survey  responses,  as  well  as 
data from ad-hoc meetings, on 

of 

Public consultation 

adequate compensation 
are in place in Member 
States. 
Extent 
which 
to 
interview  and  survey 
respondents  report  that 
Anti-trafficking 
the 
directive 
has 
contributed to allowing 
a  victim  of  trafficking 
to  access  and  claim 
adequate 
compensation. 
which 
to 
Extent 
interview  and  survey 
respondents  report  that 
the  Anti-
to  which 
directive 
trafficking 
has  contributed  to  the 
use  of 
seized  and 
confiscated 
instrumentalities 
criminal  proceeds 
support 
assistance 
protection, 
compensation 
victims.  

and 
to 
victims’ 
and 
including 
of 

Extent 
which 
to 
interview  and  survey 
respondents, as well as 

Interviews  

Ad-hoc meeting  

 
 
 
 
 
 
Access 
justice 
rights 
victims 

to 
and 
of 

for 
in 

prosecuted 

trafficking  in  human  beings 
or 
are 
not 
their 
penalised 
involvement 
criminal 
activities  which  they  have 
been compelled to commit as 
a  consequence  of  being 
trafficked?  

N/A 

EQ15.  To  what  extent  do 
victims  need  to  cooperate  in 
the  criminal  proceedings  to 
access 
and 
support?  

assistance 

in  human 
trafficking 
beings 
not 
are 
prosecuted  or  penalised 
for  their  involvement  in 
criminal activities which 
they 
been 
have 
compelled  to  commit  as 
a  consequence  of  being 
trafficked.  

JC15.1  Victims 
are 
required  to  cooperate  in 
the criminal proceedings 
to  access  assistance  and 
support. 
JC15.2  Victims  are  not 
required  to  cooperate  in 
the criminal proceedings 
to  access  assistance  and 
support. 

85 

the extent victims of trafficking 
are prosecuted or penalised for 
their  involvement  in  criminal 
activities which they have been 
compelled  to  commit  as  a 
consequence 
being 
trafficked. 

of 

in 

prepared 

Analysis  of 
interview  and 
survey responses on the extent 
victims  of  trafficking  need  to 
the  criminal 
cooperate 
proceedings 
access 
to 
assistance and support. 
Content  analysis  of  advice, 
manuals  and  guidelines  for 
victims  of  trafficking  and/or 
practitioners 
by 
support  organisations  (either 
non-
governmental 
governmental).  
Content  analysis  of  reports  by 
victims 
rights  organidation, 
either national or EU-level; and 
reprots by EU organisations or 
international 
(E.g. 
UN/ILO).  
evidence 
Triangulation 
collected from desk-based and 
fieldwork activities 

bodies 

or 

of 

Public consultation 

Desk research Interviews 

for 

meeting 
ad-hoc 
participants, report that 
victims  of  trafficking 
or 
are 
prosecuted 
their 
penalised 
involvement 
in 
criminal 
activities  
which  they  have  been 
compelled  to  commit 
as  a  consequence  of 
being trafficked 
Extent 
which 
to 
interview  and  survey 
respondents  report  that 
victims  of  trafficking 
need to cooperate in the 
criminal proceedings to 
access  assistance  and 
support. 
References  made 
in  
manuals and guidelines 
for 
of 
victims 
and/or 
trafficking 
practitioners  prepared 
support 
by 
organisations 
(either 
governmental  or  non-
governmental)  to  need 
of  victims  of  THB 
having  to  cooperate  in 
criminal proceedings to 
access  assistance  and 
support.  
References  made 
in 
reports by victim rights 
organisations regarding 
the need  of victims of 

 
 
 
 
that 

contributed 

prosecution 

EQ16. To what extent has the 
directive 
to 
investigation 
ensuring 
of 
into 
or 
trafficking  offences 
is  not 
dependent  on  reporting  or 
accusation  by  a  victim  and 
that criminal proceedings may 
continue  even  if  the  victim 
has  withdrawn  his  or  her 
statement?  

N/A 

JC16.  The  directive  has 
contributed  to  ensuring 
that investigation into, or 
of, 
prosecution 
is 
trafficking  offences 
not 
on 
dependent 
reporting  or  accusation 
by  a  victim,  but  that 
criminal 
proceedings 
may continue even if the 
victim has withdrawn his 
or her statement.  

86 

and 

that 

into 

bodies 

Content  analysis  of  reports  by 
victims 
rights  organisation, 
either national or EU-level; and 
reports by EU organisations or 
international 
(E.g. 
UN/ILO)  for  mentioning  of 
or 
investigation 
prosecution 
trafficking 
of 
offences  being  dependent  on 
reporting  or  accusation  by  a 
criminal 
victim 
proceedings may continue even 
if the victim has withdrawn his 
or her statement. 
Analysis  of 
interview  and 
survey responses on the extent 
into  or 
that 
prosecution 
trafficking 
of 
offences  is  not  dependent  on 
reporting  or  accusation  by  a 
victim 
criminal 
proceedings may continue even 
if the victim has withdrawn his 
or her statement. 
Analysis  of 
interview  and 
survey responses on the extent 
the  Anti-trafficking  directive 
has contributed to  
 investigation 
prosecution 

or 
into 
trafficking 

investigation 

that 

and 

of 

Document review  
Interviews 

having 

to 
THB 
cooperate  in  criminal 
proceedings to access 
References  made 
in 
reports  by  the  EU  or 
international 
bodies 
(e.g. UN/ILO) 
Extent to which reports 
express 
that 
into  or 
investigation 
prosecution 
of 
trafficking  offences  is 
not 
on 
dependent 
reporting or accusation 
by  a  victim  and  that 
criminal  proceedings 
may  continue  even  if 
has 
victim 
the 
withdrawn  his  or  her 
statement. 
Extent 
which 
to 
interview  and  survey 
respondents report  that 
into  or 
investigation 
prosecution 
of 
trafficking  offences  is 
on 
dependent 
not 
reporting or accusation 
by  a  victim  and  that 
criminal  proceedings 
may  continue  even  if 
the 
has 
victim 
withdrawn  his  or  her 
statement. 
Extent 
which 
to 
interview  and  survey 
respondents  report  that  

 
 
and 

that 

offences  not  being  dependent 
on reporting or accusation by a 
victim 
criminal 
proceedings may continue even 
if the victim has withdrawn his 
or her statement. 
Triangulation 
evidence 
collected from desk-based and 
fieldwork activities 

of 

N/A 

EQ17. To what extent has the 
directive contributed to access 
of 
to  witness 
protection  programmes  or 
other similar measures?  

victims 

JC.17.1.  The  directive 
contributed  to  access  of 
victims 
to  witness 
protection  programmes 
or 
similar 
measures. 

other 

responses  on 

interview  and 
Analysis  of 
the 
survey 
possibility  of  victims  gaining 
access  to  witness  protection 
programmes  or  other  similar 
measures.  

87 

of 

the 

Anti-trafficking 
the 
has 
directive 
to  
contributed 
into  or 
investigation 
of 
prosecution 
trafficking offences not 
being  dependent  on 
reporting or accusation 
by  a  victim  and  that 
criminal  proceedings 
may  continue  even  if 
the 
has 
victim 
withdrawn  his  or  her 
statement. 
the 
Assessment 
Anti-
extent 
trafficking 
directive 
contributed to ensuring 
that  investigation  into 
or 
of 
prosecution 
trafficking  offences  is 
not 
on 
dependent 
reporting or accusation 
by  a  victim  and  that 
criminal  proceedings 
may  continue  even  if 
has 
victim 
the 
withdrawn  his  or  her 
statement.  
which 
Extent 
to 
and 
interviewees 
survey 
respondents 
report that victims have 
the possibility to access 
witness 
protection 
programmes  or  other 
similar measures. 

Interviews 

 
 
 
 
 
interview  and 
Analysis  of 
survey responses on the extent 
the  Anti-trafficking  directive 
to  victims 
has  contributed 
to  witness 
access 
having 
protection 
or 
other similar measures. 

programmes 

which 
to 
Extent 
and 
interviewees 
survey 
respondents 
report  that  this  can  be 
attributed  to  the  Anti-
trafficking directive.  

N/A 

contributed 

EQ18. To what extent has the 
to 
directive 
preventing 
secondary 
victimisation  of  victims  of 
criminal 
trafficking 
and 
investigation 
proceedings?  

EQ19a.  What 
sanction  do  MS 
have in place for 
offences 
of 
THB?  
EQ19b. To what 
the 
extent  are 
and 
sanctions 
penalties 
for 
offences in THB 
(e.g., 
effective 
in 
dissuasive 
character) 
and 
proportionate? 
N/A 

contributed 

EQ19. To what extent has the 
to 
directive 
efficiently 
sanctioning 
trafficking 
of 
offences 
inhuman 
the 
beings 
Member  States?  To  what 
extent  the  penalties  in  place 
have 
effective, 
proportionate  and  dissuasive 
character?  

an 

in 

contributed 

EQ20. To what extent has the 
directive 
to 
holding legal persons liable?  
EQ21.  To  what  extent  the 
penalties in this regard had an 

Criminal 
justice response 
to the crime 

JC18.1.  The  directive 
to 
contributed 
has 
preventing 
secondary 
victimisation  of  victims 
of  trafficking  criminal 
and 
investigation 
proceedings.  

JC19a. Descriptive so no 
JC required 
JC.19.1  The  directive 
has 
to 
contributed 
sanctions  and  penalties 
for  offences  in  THB  to 
be 
and, 
effective 
proportionate..  

Analysis  of 
interview  and 
survey responses on the extent 
to  which    interviewees  and 
survey  respondents  report  that   
secondary  victimisation  of 
is 
victims 
prevented 
criminal 
investigation and proceedings 

trafficking 
in 

of 

of 

Mapping of sanctions in place 
in MS for offences of THB. 
interview 
Analysis 
responses  on  whether 
the 
sanctions  are  effective  (e.g. 
dissuasive  in  character)  and 
proportionate. 
Analysis  of  survey  responses 
on the existence of sanctions.  
evidence 
Triangulation 
collected from desk-based and 
fieldwork activities 

of 

JC21:  The  directive  has 
contributed  to  holding 
legal  persons  liable  for 
offences 
concerning 
in  human 
trafficking 
beings  and  incitement, 

Analysis  of  crime  conviction 
rates data 
Analysis 
interview 
of 
responses  on  any  changes  in 
teh 
rates 
conviction 
implementation of the directive 

since 

88 

Interviews 

national 

In-depth 
research  
Interviews 
Online survey 
Public consultation 

which  
Extent 
to 
and 
interviewees 
survey 
respondents 
report  that      secondary 
victimisation of victims 
is 
trafficking 
of 
prevented  in  criminal 
investigation 
and 
proceedings 
Existence  and  type  of 
sanctions  in  place  in 
MS  for  offences  of 
THB. 
Interviewees’ 
to 
perceptions 
whether  the  sanctions 
are 
(e.g. 
effective 
dissuasive in character) 
and proportionate.  
Assessment of whether 
sanctions  are  effective 
and proportionate  

as 

on 

crime 

Data 
conviction rates 
Extent 
interviewee 
respondents  report  that 
Anti-trafficking 
the 

which 

to 

In-depth 
international/EU 
research Interviews 
Public consultation  

 
 
 
 
effective,  proportionate,  and 
dissuasive character?  

aiding and abetting, and 
attempt.  

EQ22. To what extent has the 
directive  contributed  to  the 
seizure  and  confiscation  of 
instrumentalities 
and 
proceeds  from  offences  of 
trafficking  inhuman  beings?  
Has  the  directive  contributed 
to  the  use  of  seized  and 
confiscated  instrumentalities 
and  criminal  proceeds 
to 
support  victims’  assistance 
and  protection, 
including 
compensation of victims? 
EQ23.  To  what  extent  have 
the  directives  contributed  to 
of 
allowing 
trafficking 
effectively 
to 
report a case and bring a case 
to  court?  What  have 
the 
obstacles  been  for  victims  to 
seek redress?  

victim 

a 

N/A 

to 

JC22.  The  directive  has 
contributed 
the 
seizure  and  confiscation 
of  instrumentalities  and 
proceeds  from  offences 
of  trafficking  inhuman 
beings. 

JC23a.    The  directive 
contributes  to  enabling 
victims  of  trafficking  to 
effectively  report  a  case 
and bring a case to court. 
JC23b.1.  Barriers  and 
facilitators for victims to 
report a case. 
JC23b.2.  Barriers  and 
facilitators  for  a  case 
going to court.  

to 
a 
of 
to 

EQ23a. To what 
extent  have  the 
directives 
contributed 
allowing 
victim 
trafficking 
effectively 
report a case and 
bring  a  case  to 
court?  
EQ23b.  What 
have 
the 
obstacles  been 
for  victims 
to 
report a case and 

89 

has 
directive 
contributed  to  holding 
legal persons liable.  

Extent 
which 
to 
interview  and  survey 
respondents  report  that  
has 
directive 
the 
the 
contributed 
to 
and 
seizure 
of 
confiscation 
instrumentalities 
and 
proceeds from offences 
of  trafficking  inhuman 
beings. 

Factors  enabling  or 
hindering  victims 
in 
and 
reporing 
bringin them to court.  

cases 

Online survey 
Public consultation  

Public consultation  

of 

the  extent  of  Anti-
has 
directive 
such 
(any) 
to 

and 
trafficking 
contributed 
changes.  
evidence 
Triangulation 
collected from desk-based and 
fieldwork activities 
Analysis  of 
interview  and 
survey  responses  on  whether 
the directive has contributed to 
the seizure and confiscation of 
instrumentalities  and  proceeds 
from  offences  of  trafficking 
inhuman beings. 

relevant 

Content analysis of reports and 
other 
secondary 
sources  on  victims’  ability  to 
report and bring cases to court 
(e.g.  reports  from  victims’ 
rights  organisations;  national 
government evaluation reports; 
reports  by  EU  institutions  or 
international  bodies,  such  as 
the ILO and UN).  
Analysis  of 
survey responses on  

interview  and 

 
 
by 

analysis 

Content 
of 
implementation and evaluation 
reports  
interview  data 
Analysis  of 
European 
provided 
stakeholders 
their 
experience  of  implementation 
across Member States  
evidence 
Triangulation 
collected from desk-based and 
fieldwork activities 

on 

of 

Desk research  
Interviews  

and 
in 
as 
the 
and 

Level of harmonisation 
of  the  Directive  across 
Member States.  
Simiarlities 
differences 
implementation, 
referenced 
in 
implementation 
evaluation reports 
of 
Aspects 
harmonisation 
and 
aspects  that  are  still 
inconsistent as reported 
by interviewees.  

extent 

does 
achieving 
as 

EQ24.  With  reference  to  the 
above  questions, 
to  what 
extent  has  the  directive  been 
interpreted  and  enforced  in  a 
consistent  and  harmonised 
way in the Member States? To 
this 
what 
influence 
their 
regards 
objectives 
preventing  and  combatting 
trafficking  in  human  beings? 
do 
To 
in 
insufficiencies 
interpretation 
and 
enforcement cause distortions 
as regards the achievement of 
there 
the  above  aim? 
sufficient  uniformity  in  the 
key  concepts  relevant  to  the 
effective  implementation  of 
the EU’s legal framework?  

extent 

what 

Is 

Implementation 
and 
enforcement  

bring  a  case  to 
court?  

EQ24a. To what 
the 
extent  has 
directive 
been 
interpreted  and 
in  a 
enforced 
consistent 
and 
harmonised way 
in  the  Member 
States?  
EQ24b. To what 
extent 
does 
interpretation 
and enforcement 
of  the  Directive 
enable  Member 
States to achieve 
the  Directive’s 
ojbectives 
preventing  and 
combatting 
trafficking 
in 
beings 
human 
and  protecting 
and  supporting 
victims?  
EQ24c.  Is there 
sufficient 
uniformity 
[across  Member 
States’ 
implementation 
of the Directive] 

JC24. The directive been 
interpreted and enforced 
in  a  consistent  and 
harmonised  way  across 
the Member States 

90 

 
 
 
key 

the 
in 
concepts 
relevant  to  the 
effective 
implementation 
of the EU’s legal 
framework? 
N/A 

EQ25. Has the directive led to 
any other significant changes, 
regards 
as 
either 
implementation 
and 
enforcement  or  otherwise, 
from 
the  perspective  of 
victims of trafficking?  

JC25a: The directive led 
to 
unexpected 
consequences 
JC25b: The directive did 
not 
any 
lead 
unexpected 
consequences.  

to 

Reviewing  data  sources  for 
information  

Themes emerging from 
the  data  that  is  not 
covered  in  any  other 
EQ 
analytical 
framework  

or 

Any  sources  previously 
mentioned  

91 

 
 
Evaluation question 
Efficiency 

Added subquestions  

Judgment criteria 

Analytical approach 

Indicators 

Sources 

and 

with 

JC26.b 
JC26.a 
Compliance 
the 
Directive implies both costs 
to  Member 
and  benefits 
States and businesses. 
JC26.c  There  are  particular 
with 
associated 
costs 
the 
with 
complying 
directive  that  seem  out  of 
proportion  with  benefits 
achieved  as 
the 
prevention  and  combatting 
THB.  
JC26.d  There  is  evidence 
that  the  implementation  of 
the  directive  has  caused 
unnecessary  administrative 
burdens. 

regards 

EQ26. If identifiable, what 
have the costs and benefits 
(monetary  but  also  non-
monetary)  associated  with 
compliance  with 
the 
directive  in  the  Member 
States been - as regards the 
aim  of  preventing  and 
combatting  trafficking  in 
human beings?  

with 

with 

26a:  What  are  the  costs  of 
complying 
the 
Directive? 
26b: What are the benefits of 
complying 
the 
Directive? 
26c:  Can  any  costs  be 
identified  that  are  out  of 
proportion  with  the  benefits 
achieved?  In  particular,  are 
the  costs  of  compliance 
proportionate  to  the  benefits 
brought  by  the  directive  as 
and 
regards 
combating 
in 
human beings? 
26d:  Taking  into  account  of 
the benefits possibly created 
by the implementation of the 
regards 
as 
Directive 
trafficking  in  human  beings, 
is  there  evidence  that  they 
have  caused  unnecessary 
administrative burden? 

preventing 

trafficking 

Secondary sources: 
Desk  research  (e.g. 
publicly 
available 
reports and studies) 
Primary sources: 
Online survey 
Targeted interviews 
ad-hoc 
First 
meetings 

costs 

in 
States 

Mapping  of  different 
operational activities that 
directly  stem  from  the 
Directive  for  different 
stakeholder 
constituencies, including 
public  authorities  and 
the 
businesses 
Member 
in 
relation to: 
Prevention 
Investigation 
Victim support 
Mapping  of  different 
types  of 
and 
benefits 
relating  each 
operational activity. 
analysis 
Content 
of 
scientific 
reports  and 
policy studies 
Analysis  of  survey  and 
interview 
responses 
regarding: 
The extent to which costs 
and  benefits  (monetary 
and  non-monetary)  are 
incurred  by  different 
types  of  stakeholders  in 
different Member States 
The  extent  to  which  the 
implementation  of 
the 
Directive 
caused 
administrative burden 
Whether  any  cost  and 
burden 
seem 
unnecessary,  taking  into 
account  the  benefits  of 
the directive, 

each 

type  of 

type  of 
Number  and 
operational 
activities 
entailed  by  compliance 
with the Directive 
Number  and 
stakeholder 
constituencies concerned 
with  the  implementation 
of 
operational 
activity 
type  of 
Number  and 
costs 
from 
stemming 
each operational activity 
associated  with 
and 
different 
stakeholder 
constituencies  
Number  and 
type  of 
benefits  stemming  from 
each operational activity 
associated  with 
and 
different 
stakeholder 
constituencies 
type  of 
Number  and 
burden 
administrative 
stemming 
each 
operational  activity  and 
associated with different 
stakeholder 
constituencies 
which 
Extent 
to 
interview  and 
survey 
respondents  as  well  as 
meeting 
ad-hoc 
participants  report  that 
costs  and  administrative 
burden are necessary and 
the 
proportionate 
advantages achieved. 

from 

to 

92 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
N/A 

EQ27.  Is  availability  of 
funding a constraint for the 
the 
implementation 
Directive  as  regards  the 
achievement  of  the  above 
aim? 

of 

JC27.  The  implementation 
of 
is 
the  Directive 
limited 
constrained 
funds.  

by 

N/A 

EQ28.  Have  the  Member 
States  provided  sufficient 
funding if relevant actions, 
such  as  support  services, 
are  externalised  to  other 
stakeholders, 
as 
regional or local authorities 
non-governmental 
or 
organisations? 

such 

JC28.  Member 
States 
provide sufficient funding to 
external support services for 
them  to  effectively  support 
victims.  

93 

and 

feedback 
ad-hoc 

of 
available 
policy 

Analysis  of 
provided 
at 
meetings. 
Triangulation 
of 
evidence  collected  from 
desk-based 
and 
fieldwork activities 
Content 
analysis 
publicly 
reports 
studies 
Analysis  of  survey  and 
interview 
responses 
regarding  the  extent  to 
which  available  funding 
is  not  sufficient  towards 
effective 
an 
the 
implementation  of 
Directive  
the 
Analysis 
respective 
feedback 
provided by stakeholders 
ad-hoc 
the 
during 
meetings 
Triangulation 
of 
evidence  collected  from 
and 
desk-based 
fieldwork activities 
Based on the operational 
activities 
identified 
under EQ26, mapping of 
key 
activities 
externalised  in  different 
Member States  
Comparative  analysis  of 
the budget lines available 
for externalised activities 

of 

Extent 
which 
to 
stakeholders  report  that 
available  funding  is  not 
adequate 
Number  and 
type  of 
constraints due to limited 
availability of budget   

Secondary sources: 
Desk  research  (e.g., 
available 
publicly 
statistical  data  and 
available reports) 
Primary sources: 
Interviews  
First ad-hoc meeting  

Number  and 
type  of 
activities  externalised  in 
the  different  Member 
States 
Level of budget allocated 
to  external  stakeholders 
in  the  different  Member 
States 

Secondary sources:  
Desk  research  (e.g., 
available 
publicly 
statistical  data  and 
available reports) 
Primary sources: 
Interviews  
Survey 
questionnaire 

 
 
 
 
 
 
of 

in  the  different  Member 
States 
Analysis  of  survey  and 
interview 
responses 
regarding  the  extent  to 
which  funding  available 
to  external  stakeholders 
is sufficient  
Analysis 
the 
feedback 
respective 
provided by stakeholders 
during 
ad-hoc 
the 
meetings 
of 
Triangulation 
evidence  collected  from 
desk-based 
and 
fieldwork activities 
of 
analysis 
Content 
and 
implementation 
for 
evaluation 
good 
examples 
practices 
cost-
effective implementation 
of 
in 
the  Directive 
Member States. 
Analysis  of 
interview 
and  survey  responses, 
and feedback provided at 
  for  
ad-hoc  meeting, 
good 
examples 
cost-
practices 
effective implementation 
of 
in 
the  Directive 
Member States 
Analysis  of 
responses  

reports 
of 
of 

interview 

of 
of 

which 
to 
Extent 
stakeholders  report  that 
available 
is 
adequate 

funding 

Ad-hoc meetings  

Secondary sources: 
Documents 
Interviews 
Primary sources: 
Online survey 

References  to  examples 
of good practices of cost-
effective implementation 
in  implementation  and 
evaluation reports 
good 
Examples 
practices 
cost-
effective implementation 
of the Directive provided 
consulted 
by 
stakeholders  

of 
of 

Views of interviewees of 
what  the  monetary  and 
non-monetary  costs  of 

Primary sources: 
Interviews  

N/A 

EQ29. What good practices 
cost-effective 
of 
implementation 
the 
of 
Directive  can  be  identified 
in the Member States?  

JC29. There are examples of 
good  practices  of  cost-
effective  implementation  of 
the  directive 
in  Member 
States.  

EQ30. If identifiable, what 
are  likely  to  be  the  costs 
(monetary  but  also  non-

N/A 

94 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
in 

of 

non-
monetary) 
of 
the 
implementation 
Directive 
regards 
as 
preventing  and  combatting 
human 
trafficking 
beings? 
EQ31.  To  what  extent  is 
there 
for 
potential 
(legislative, 
non-
legislative)  simplification 
and reduction of regulatory 
costs 
as 
regards the achievement of 
the  above  aim?  What 
would be the risks of such 
reductions? 

and  burdens 

of 

using 

EQ31a.  To  what  extent  is 
there 
for 
potential 
(legislative,  non-legislative) 
simplification  and  reduction 
regulatory  costs  and 
of 
burdens 
the 
Directive?  What  would  be 
some of the  ways this could 
be achieved?  
EQ31b.  What  would  be  the 
risks  of 
simplifying  or 
reducing regulatory costs and 
burdens  associated  with  the 
Directive?  

JC31a. There is potential for 
(legislative,  non-legislative) 
simplification and reduction 
regulatory  costs  and 
of 
burdens  and  burdens  of 
using the Directive. 
JC31b.  There  are  risks  of 
reducing 
simplifying  or 
regulatory costs and burdens 
of using the Directive.  

95 

and 

costs 

analysis 

analysis 
risks 

for 
Content 
recommendations 
on 
reducing  or  simplifying 
burdens 
costs 
associated  with 
the 
Directive. 
Content 
for 
of 
potential 
reducing  or  simplifying 
regulatory 
and 
burdens  associated  with 
the Directive. 
Analysis  of 
interview 
and survey responses on 
potential for (legislative, 
non-legislative) 
and 
simplification 
reduction  of  regulatory 
burdens 
costs 
associated  with 
the 
Directive. 
Analysis  of 
interview 
and  survey  responses  of 
potential 
risks 
and 
simplification 
reduction  of  regulatory 
burdens 
costs 
associated  with 
the 
Directive. 
of 
Triangulation 
evidence  collected  from 

and 

and 

of 

Secondary sources: 
Documents 

Primary sources: 
Interviews 
Survey  

non-implementation  of 
the  Directive  as  regards 
preventing 
and 
combatting trafficking in 
human beings would be.  

risks 

costs 

References in reports on 
recommendations 
(legislative, 
non-
legislative)  on  potential 
simplification 
and 
reduction  of  regulatory 
costs 
burdens 
and 
associated with the Anti-
trafficking directive.  
References in reports on 
potential 
of 
reducing  or  simplifying 
regulatory 
and 
burdens  associated  with 
the directive. 
Study team’s assessment 
based on the evidence of 
what  could  be  some  of 
(legislative, 
the  areas 
with 
non-legislative) 
for 
potential 
simplification 
and 
reduction  of  regulatory 
costs 
burdens 
and 
associated with the Anti-
trafficking directive.  
Assessment 
of  what 
would  be  some  of  the 
risks 
potential 
and 
simplification 
reduction  of  regulatory 

of 

 
 
 
 
 
Added subquestions  
N/A 

Relevance 
EQ32a.  If  identifiable,  what 
are the remaining concerns to 
be  addressed  with  a  view  to 
effectively  preventing  and 
combatting 
in 
human beings in the Member 
State?  To  which  degree  are 
these  addressed  by  the  EU 
legislation described above? 

trafficking 

for 

relevant 

EQ32b.  Has  the  directive 
been 
the 
stakeholders 
different 
affected 
the 
regards 
achievement  of  the  above 
aim and how? 

as 

directive 

Slightly reworded: 
EQ32b.  How  relevant  has 
the 
to 
been 
different 
stakeholders  as 
regards  the  achievement  of 
the THB, including: relevant 
EU  institutions  and  bodies, 
national  authorities,  LEA, 
judicial authorities, CSOs   

desk-based 
fieldwork activities. 

and 

and 

costs 
associated  with 
Directive. 

burdens 
the 

in 

the 

and 

Analysis of interview and 
survey responses, as well 
as feedback from ad-hoc 
meetings,  on  remaining 
concerns to be addressed 
with a view to effectively 
preventing 
and 
combatting trafficking in 
the 
human  beings 
Member State.  
Comparing 
the  results 
from  the  analysis  of  the 
survey 
interview 
responses,  with  the  legal 
texts 
three 
of 
specified directives.  
of 
analysis 
Content 
available implementation 
reports  for  information 
coherence 
on 
between 
of 
needs 
stakeholders 
different 
and  the  objectives  and 
provisions  of  the  Anti-
trafficking directive.  
Analysis of interview and 
survey 
to 
gather information on the 
adequacy of the Directive 
vis-à-vis  the  needs  of 
affected  stakeholders  in 

responses 

the 

of 

texts 

Legal 
directives 
Interviews 
Online survey 
Ad-hoc meetings 

Documents 
Interviews 
Online Survey  

by 
References  made 
study 
on  
participants 
remaining concerns to be 
addressed  with  a  view  to 
effectively 
preventing 
combatting 
and 
trafficking 
human 
in 
beings  in  the  Member 
State. 
Assessment of the degree 
that existing concerns are 
already  covered  by  the 
three specified directives.  

that 

Extent to which interview 
and  survey  respondents 
the  Anti-
report 
Directive 
trafficking 
provides 
adequate 
an 
framework  to  respond  to 
the  needs  of  affected 
stakeholders.  

of 
Level 
adequacy/correspondence 
the 
of 
the  content  of 
the 
provisions 
vis-à-vis 
Directive 

of 

view 

JC32a.1.  Some  concerns 
remain to be addressed with 
a 
effectively 
to 
preventing  and  combatting 
trafficking  in  human  beings 
in  the  Member  State,  and 
they  are  not  addressed  by 
existing Directives.   
JC32a.2. Some concerns [...] 
remain  in  MS,  but  they  are 
stipulated 
existing 
by 
directives, specifically either 
Directive  2009/52/EC,  the 
Directive  2011/36/EU    or 
Directive 2009/52/EC.  

JC32b.1.  The  directive  is 
relevant  to  EU  institutions 
working in the field of THB.  
JC32b.2.  The  directive  is 
relevant 
national 
to 
authorities in MS working in 
the field of THB.  
32b.3.  The  directive 
is 
relevant to LEA and judicial 
authorities working on THB 
cases. 
32b.4.  The  directive 
relevant 
international CSOs.  

is 
to  national  and 

96 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
identified 
affected stakeholders.  

needs 

of 

a 

for 

(i) 
from 
general 
relevant  EU  institutions 
and  bodies 
,  National 
Competent Authorities in 
the 
charge 
implementation  of 
the 
Directive,  and  National 
Judicial 
Authorities; 
from  (ii)  first-line  actors 
such  as  European  CSOs, 
National  CSOs,  as  well 
as  from  (iii)  victims  to 
better  understand 
the 
needs  from  a  key  target 
group benefiting from the 
Anti-trafficking 
directive.  

EQ32c.  In  particular,  how 
relevant  is  the  directive  to 
relevant  stakeholders  and 
what is their level of support 
for  it  in  terms  of  the  aim  of 
preventing  and  combatting 
trafficking in human beings?  

Slightly reworded: 
EQ32c. What is the extent of 
stakeholders’ 
relevant 
institutions 
(relevant  EU 
national 
bodies, 
and 
judicial 
authorities,  LEA, 
CSOs) 
the 
directive?  

support  of 

relevant 
All 
JC32c. 
stakeholder are in support of 
the directive.  

97 

Study  teams’  assessment 
of  the  level  of  support 
given 
different 
stakeholder groups, based 
on the evidence provided.   

by 

Interivews 
Online surveys 
Ad-hoc meetings  

Triangulation 
of 
evidence  collected  from 
desk-based and fieldwork 
activities. 
interview, 
Analysis  of 
surview 
survey 
and 
responses,  as  well  as 
feedback provided at ad-
the  
hoc  meetings,  on 
level  of  support  for  the 
Anti-trafficking 
Directive in terms of the 
aim  of  preventing  and 
combatting trafficking in 
human beings.  
Development  of  a  scale 
that allows for the rating 
of the level of support of 
stakeholder 
different 

 
 
 
 
are 

regards 

regards 

EQ32d.  What 
the 
Member  State  authorities’ 
expectations  for  the  role  of 
the  EU  as 
the 
achievement  of  the  above 
aim? 
EQ32e.  What  are  other 
stakeholders’,  such  as  non-
governmental  organisations’ 
expectations  for  the  role  of 
the  EU  as 
the 
achievement  of  the  above 
aim? 
EQ32f. To what extent do the 
original  objectives  of 
the 
directive  correspond  to  the 
current  needs  of  the  society 
within the EU, reflect current 
into 
policy 
trends, 
account  developments 
at 
Union 
international 
and 
levels,  and  fit  the  Union's 
institutional, legal, economic 
and  political  landscape  as 
regards  the  achievement  of 
the above aim? 

taking 

responses 

groups  for  the  Directive, 
once the results from the 
survey, 
interviews  and 
ad-hoc meeting has been 
collated.  
Analysis of interview and 
survey 
to 
gather  information  from 
key stakeholders on their 
views  on  the  role  of  the 
EU.  
Analysis of interview and 
survey 
to 
gather  information  from 
key stakeholders on their 
views  on  the  role  of  the 
EU. 

responses 

Content 
analysis 
regarding legal bases and 
reference  at 
texts  of 
level  and 
international 
EU level (e.g., Charter of 
Fundamental  Rights  of 
the EU, relevant Council 
Framework  Decisions  to 
list possible evolutions of 
the 
latter  and/or  new 
international  agreements 
on the theme. 

of 
by 

analysis 
published 

Content 
studies 
international 
organisations, 
EU 
institutions  and  bodies 

Interviews 
Online survey 

Interviews 
Online survey 

Documents  
Interviews  

Extent in which interview 
and  survey  respondents 
stress  the  importance  of 
the  role  to  be  played  by 
the EU in the fight against 
THB.  
Extent in which interview 
and  survey  respondents 
stress  the  importance  of 
the  role  to  be  played  by 
the EU in the fight against 
THB. 

Extent  of  change  in  the 
international 
and  EU 
policy  context  since  the 
entry  into  force  of  the 
Anti-trafficking Directive  

Observed  changes  to  the 
nature of THB.  

Extent to which interview 
and  survey  respondents 
report relevant changes to 
the  nature  of  THB  in  the 
EU. 

Extent to which interview 
and  survey  respondents 
report the Directive to be 
outdated  or  no  longer  in 

= 
N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

role 

JC32d.  Member 
States 
authorities expect the EU to 
take  a 
in 
leading 
preventing and responding to 
THB.  
JC32e. 
society 
Civil 
organisations, and other non-
governmental  stakeholders,  
expect  the  EU  to  take  a 
leading  role  in  preventing 
and responding to THB. 

JC32f.1. 
original 
The 
objectives  of  the  Directive 
correspond  to  the  current 
needs  of  the  society  within 
the EU. 
JC32f.2. 
  The  original 
objectives  of  the  directive 
reflect  current  policy  trends 
(EU and international).  
JC32f.3. 
  The  original 
objectives of the directive fit 
the  Union's 
institutional, 
legal, economic and political 
landscape. 

98 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
regarding  the  nature  of 
THB.  

the 
vis-à-vis 
line 
evolution  on  the  policy 
context. 

(i) 

Analysis of interview and 
online  survey  responses 
regarding 
the 
evolution  of  the  policy 
context 
relevant 
and 
changes  at  EU  level  and 
level  with 
National 
International bodies with 
relevant 
in 
THB  and  regarding  (ii) 
the evolution of nature of 
crimes  with  EMPACT, 
CSOs and representatives 
from 
Academia 
especially. 

expertise 

Triangulation 
of 
evidence  collected  from 
desk-based and fieldwork 
activities 
Content 
analysis 
regarding legal bases and 
texts  of 
reference  at 
level  and 
international 
EU level (e.g., Charter of 
Fundamental  Rights  of 
the EU, relevant Council 
Framework  Decisions  to 
list possible evolutions of 
the 
latter  and/or  new 
international  agreements 
on the theme. 

Extent  of  change  in  the 
legal  context  since  the 
entry  into  force  of  the 
Anti-trafficking Directive  

Documents  
Interviews 
Online survey  

Observed  changes  to  the 
nature of THB, especially 
in  terms  of  technological 
advancements  

Extent to which interview 
and  survey  respondents 
report relevant changes to 

adapted 

to 
and 

EQ32g.  Has  the  directive 
legal, 
been 
other 
technological 
progress 
field  of 
in 
preventing  and  combatting 
trafficking in human beings?  

the 

with 

JC32g.  The  Anti-trafficking 
directive  is  no  longer  up  to 
date 
or 
technological  developments 
in the field of preventing and 
combatting 
in 
human beings.  

trafficking 

legal 

99 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
the  nature  of  THB  in  the 
EU. 

Level  of  “flexibility”  of 
to  cover 
the  Directive 
technological  changes  in 
the digital world 

Extent to which interview 
and  survey  respondents 
report the Directive to be 
outdated  or  no  longer  in 
line  vis-à-vis  existing 
legal  and  technological 
developments.  

of 
by 

analysis 
published 

Content 
studies 
international 
organisations, 
EU 
institutions  and  bodies 
regarding  the  nature  of 
THB.  

in 

Analysis of interview and 
survey  responses  to  (i) 
understand 
the  main 
technological 
advancements 
the 
digital world, but also to 
(ii)  understand  to  what 
extent  the  Directive  has 
taken into account, and is 
to 
able 
technological  advances 
through, in particular, the 
analysis  of  contributions 
from National Competent 
Authorities  in  charge  of 
the implementation of the 
Directive.  

adapt, 

to 

Is 

trafficking 

in 
EQ32h. 
human  beings,  including  in 
the online domain, addressed 
under  the  national  laws  and 
court 
administrative 
the  Member 
practice  of 
State? If it is not addressed or 

or 

EQ32h.  To  what  extent  is 
THB  in  the  online  domain 
addressed  under    national 
laws 
or 
administrative  practice  of 
the Member State? 

court 

and 

of 
Triangulation 
evidence  collected  from 
desk-based and fieldwork 
activities 
Mapping of national laws 
referring 
explicitly 
to 
THB 
the  online 
in 
domain. 
Content 
analysis 
of 
the 
reports  discussing 
nature  of  THB  in  the 

Reference  made  to  THB 
in  the  online  domain  in 
reports 
court 
and 
and  other 
proceeding 
relevant 
documents 
detailing  administrative 
procedures.  

Mapping exercise 
Document  analysis 
reports, 
(including 
but 
court 
also 
guideline 
documents, etc.) 
Interviews 

JC32h.  Member  States’ 
national  laws  and  related 
administrative 
court 
and 
procedures 
sufficiently 
address  THB  in  the  online 
domain.  

100 

 
 
 
 
 
 
it is addressed only partially, 
what 
left 
forms 
unaddressed? 

are 

EQ32h.2. What gaps remain 
to  be  addressed  in  Member 
States  national 
laws  and 
court 
administrative 
practice  

or 

in 

online domain, and  what 
gaps remain. 
Content analysis of court 
documents 
proceeding 
administrative 
and/or 
guidelines  on  the  extent 
to  which  they  refer  to 
THB 
the  online 
domain. 
Analysis of interview and 
survey responses, as well 
as  feedback  received  at 
ad-hoc  meetings,  on  the 
extent  to  which  Member 
States  national  laws  and 
court  or  administrative 
practice  address  THB  in 
the online domain, and if 
there  are  any,  what  gaps 
remain. 
Triangulation 
of 
evidence  collected  from 
desk-based and fieldwork 
activities 

Extent  to  which  study 
participants  report 
that 
they  think  that  Member 
States’  national laws and 
court  or  administrative 
practice  address  THB  in 
the online domain. 

Gaps  identified  by  study 
participants  in  Member 
States’  national  laws  and 
court  or  administrative 
practice  address  THB  in 
the online domain.  

Study  teams’  assessment 
the  extent  Member 
of 
States’  national  laws  and 
court  or  administrative 
practice  address  THB  in 
the  online  domain  and 
of 
identification 
remaining 
if 
applicable.  

gaps, 

Is 

trafficking  of 
EQ32i. 
vulnerable  groups,  such  as 
women  and  children  or  in 
high-risk  sectors  such  as 
domestic  work,  agriculture, 
hospitability,  fishing  or  the 
garment  industry,  addressed 
under  the  national  laws  and 
court 
administrative 
the  Member 
practice  of 
State?  Which  provisions  are 

or 

EQ32i.1. What are the ways 
Member  States’  national 
legislation  and  court  or 
practice 
administrative 
the 
address 
specifically 
trafficking of women?  
EQ32i.2. What are the ways 
Member  States’  national 
legislation  and  court  or 
practice 
administrative 

States’ 
JC32i.  Member 
national  laws  and  court  or 
administrative procedures do 
not address the trafficking of 
vulnerable  groups  (women, 
children, people in high risk 
sectors,  and  people  with 
intellectual 
physical 
disabilities).   

or 

101 

Mapping of national laws 
and  national  court  or 
administrative 
explicitly 
procedures 
  women, 
to: 
referring 
children,  people  in  high 
risk  sectors,  and  people 
with 
or 
intellectual 
physical disabilities.  
Content 
reports 

analysis 
and 

of 
sources 

to 
References  made 
women,  children,  people 
in  high  risk  sectors,  and 
people with intellectual or 
in 
physical  disabilities 
and/or 
national 
national 
and 
administrative  procedure 
documents.  
in 
References  made 
reports  by  international, 

laws, 

court 

Online survey 
Ad-hoc meetings  

Mapping exercise  
Documents 
Interviews 
Survey 

 
 
 
 
 
 
applicable  to  it?  If  it  is  not 
addressed  or  it  is  addressed 
only partially, what forms are 
left unaddressed? 

address  the  trafficking  of 
children?  
EQ32i.3. What are the ways 
Member  States’  national 
legislation  and  court,  or 
administrative 
practice 
address  the  trafficking  of 
children? 
EQ32i.4.    EQ35i.3.  What 
the  ways  Member 
are 
States’  national  legislation 
and court,  or administrative 
practice 
the 
trafficking  of  people  with 
disabilities 
(physical  and 
intellectual)?  

address 

102 

on 

governmental  and  non-
governmental 
stakeholders 
how  
THB  victims  who  are  
women,  children,  people 
in  high  risk  sectors,  and 
people with intellectual or 
physical  disabilities,  are 
covered  under  national 
laws and national court of 
administrative practice 
Assessment of  the extent 
national laws and national 
court  or  administrative 
procedures    address  the 
needs  of  THB  victims 
who  are  victims  who  are  
women,  children,  people 
in  high  risk  sectors,  and 
people with intellectual or 
physical  disabilities,  and 
what gaps remain, if any. 
This will be based on the 
framework  developed  as 
part of the approach.  

of 

by 
prepared 
governmental  and  non-
governmental 
actors 
specifically  focusing  on 
THB  victims  who  are  
women,  children,  people 
in  high  risk  sectors,  and 
people  with  intellectual 
or  physical  disabilities, 
specifically  in  terms  of 
how 
these  groups  are 
covered  under  national 
laws and national court of 
administrative practice.  
Development 
an 
analytical  framework  or 
list  of  classification  that 
operationalises 
further 
are 
what 
aspects 
currently 
in 
Member Sates in relation 
to these groups, and what 
gaps  remain,  and  for 
which groups.  
Analysis of interview and 
survey  responses  on  the 
extent  national  laws  and 
national  and  court  or 
administrative 
practice 
sufficiently  address  the 
needs  of  THB  victims 
who are victims who are  
women,  children,  people 
in  high  risk  sectors,  and 
people  with  intellectual 
or  physical  disabilities, 

covered 

 
Is 

trafficking 

EQ32j. 
in 
human beings addressed with 
a  gender  perspective  and  a 
child-rights  approach  in  the 
Member 
State?  Which 
provisions  are  applicable  to 
it? If it is not addressed or it 
is  addressed  only  partially, 
what 
left 
forms 
unaddressed?  

are 

the 

reference 
a 

and what gaps remain, if 
any.  
Triangulation 
of 
evidence  collected  from 
desk-based and fieldwork 
activities 
Mapping of national laws 
that:  i)  identify  women 
as 
and 
children 
to 
vulnerable  groups 
THB 
investigates 
ii) 
which MS’ national laws 
to 
make 
gender 
applying 
meaning 
perspective, 
they 
they 
  meaning 
convey an understanding 
different 
of 
vulnerabilities 
of 
different genders to THB 
and  different  forms  of 
trafficking most common 
iii) 
gender; 
by 
investigates  which  MS’ 
national 
laws  make 
reference  to  child-rights 
approaches,  such  as  the 
UN  Convention  on  the 
the  Child, 
Rights  of 
especially 
‘best 
the 
interest principle (Article 
3) 
children’s 
rights  to  participate  in 
decisions that affect them 
(Article  12),  or  requires 
adequate  provision  of 
iv)  make 
services, 

and/or 

a 

JC32j.1  Member  States  do 
not 
gender 
apply 
perspective to THB.  
JC32j.2.  Member  States  do 
not  apply  a  child-rights 
approach to THB.  

EQ32j.1.  To  what  exent  do 
Member  States  apply  a 
perspective, 
gender 
(meaning  they  convey  an 
understanding 
the 
different  vulnerabilities  of 
different  genders  to  THB 
and  different 
forms  of 
trafficking most common by 
gender)  in  preventing  and 
combatting THB?  

of 

EQ32j2.  To  what  extent  do 
Member States apply a child 
rights-  approach  (e.g.  by 
the  UNCRC, 
referencing 
considering 
‘best 
interest’ principle) to TBH?   

the 

103 

Mapping exercise  
Documents  
Interviews 

Extent  to  which  national 
make 
legislation 
reference 
gender 
to 
sensitive  or  child-rights 
approaches. 
References  made 
in 
reports and other relevant 
documents  on the extent 
MS  address  THB  with  a 
gender perspective and/or 
a  child-rights  approach 
and  what  aspects  are  left 
unaddressed. 
Extent 
which 
to 
stakeholders  report  that 
MS  are  applying    gender 
sensitive  or  child-rights 
approaches  to  THB,  and 
what 
remain 
areas 
unaddressed. 
Assessment  of  the  extent 
MS  address  THB  with  a 
gender perspective and/or 
a  child-rights  approach 
and  what  aspects  are  left 
unaddressed.  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
reference  to  other  forms 
of  gender-sensitive  or 
child-rights 
based 
approaches. 

analysis 

of 
Content 
measures 
preventive 
(information, 
research 
awareness-raising, 
and 
education  and  identified 
under EQ6) to examining 
them  specifically  for  the 
extent 
these 
to  which 
measures apply a gender-
sensitive  or  child-rights 
approach.  

analysis 
produced 

of 
Content 
by 
reports 
international 
bodies 
(EU,UN,ILO),  national 
governments  and  non-
actors 
governmental 
(both 
and 
national 
international)  assessing 
Member 
States 
application  of  gender 
sensitive  and/or  child-
rights  based  approaches 
to  THB,  and  what  gaps 
remain, if any. 

Analysis of interview and 
survey  responses  on  the 
extent  Member  States 
application  of  gender 
sensitive  and/or  child-

104 

 
 
 
 
rights  based  approaches 
to  THB,  and  what  gaps 
remain, if any. 

of 
Triangulation 
evidence  collected  from 
desk-based and fieldwork 
activities 

the 

Coherence 
EQ33.  Where  relevant,  to 
what  extent  is  the  directive 
coherent  with  the  following 
ones  as  regards  preventing 
and combatting trafficking in 
human beings:  
2012/29/EU 
-  Directive 
minimum 
establishing 
standards  on 
rights, 
support  and  protection  of 
victims of crime;  
2009/52/EC 
-  Directive 
providing 
for  minimum 
standards  on  sanctions  and 
measures  against  employers 
of 
third-
country nationals  
- 
Directive 
2004/81/EC of 29 April 2004 
residence  permit 
on 
third-country 
to 
issued 
nationals who are victims of 
trafficking  in  human  beings 
or who have been the subject 
to  facilitate 
of  an  action 
immigration,  who 
illegal 

illegally  staying 

Council 

the 

Added subquestions  
N/A 

JC33.1  The  Directive's 
objectives and provisions are 
those  of 
coherent  with 
2012/29/EU; 
Directive 
2009/52/EC; 
Directive 
2004/81/EC; 
Directive 
2011/93/EU; 
Directive; 
2004/80/EC; 
Directive 
Directive 2014/42/EU. 
JC33.2  The  Directive's 
definitions are coherent with 
Directive 
of 
those 
Directive 
2012/29/EU; 
Directive 
2009/52/EC; 
Directive; 
2004/81/EC; 
Directive 
2011/93/EU; 
Directive 
2004/80/EC; 
2014/42/EU. 
JC33.3 There  is  consistency 
the  stakeholders 
between 
the 
concerned 
implementation  of  Directive 
Directive 
2012/29/EU; 
Directive 
2009/52/EC; 
Directive; 
2004/81/EC; 
Directive 
2011/93/EU; 

with 

105 

a 

at 

and 

aimed 

analysis 

instrument, 

Desk 
understanding 
complementarities 
and 
the 
misalignments  between 
Directive  and  other  relevant 
interventions; 
content 
analysis  of  each  EU  measure 
will  allow  to  map  the  key 
objectives  and  provisions  of 
each 
to 
examine  different  dimensions 
of  analysis,  namely:  (i)  a 
general  dimension,  including 
the  nature  of  the  measure,  the 
actor  taking  it,  its  legal  basis 
and scope (ii) investigation and 
(iii)  assistance 
prosecution, 
and protection of  victims, (iv) 
prevention  
Analysis  of  evidence  of  the 
targeted interviews and online 
highlight 
survey 
to 
and 
complementarities 
misalignments  between 
the 
Directive  and  other  relevant 
interventions 

Primary sources: 
Interviews 
Online survey 
Secondary sources: 
Legislation 
(Directives) 

Extent to which the 
content 
analysis 
reveals  coherence 
to  objectives, 
as 
definitions 
and 
stakeholders 
involved  
to  which 
Extent 
interviewees 
and 
survey  respondents 
agree 
the 
upon 
consistency  of  the 
objectives, 
provisions, 
definitions 
and 
stakeholders  of  the 
with 
Directive 
respect to Directive 
2012/29/EU; 
Directive 
2009/52/EC; 
Directive 
2004/81/EC; 
Directive; 
2011/93/EU; 
Directive 
2004/80/EC;  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
and 

cooperate with the competent 
authorities  
-  Directive  2011/93/EU  on 
combating  the  sexual  abuse 
and  sexual  exploitation  of 
children 
child 
pornography;  
- 
Directive 
Council 
2004/80/EC of 29 April 2004 
relating  to  compensation  to 
crime victims  
-  Directive  2014/42/EU  of 
the European Parliament and 
of  the  Council  of  3  April 
2014  on  the  freezing  and 
of 
confiscation 
instrumentalities 
and 
proceeds  of  crime  in  the 
European Union 
-  the  CoE  Convention  on 
Action againts Trafficking in 
Human Beings 
EQ34. To what extent is the 
directive 
satisfactorily 
integrated and coherent  with 
other  relevant  EU  laws  and 
the 
policies,  such  as 
context  of  the  EU  Asylum 
Acquis?  Is  there  scope  for 
further integration with other 
policy  objectives?  How  do 
these 
affect 
policies 
(positively or negatively) the 
implementation  of  the  EU 
legislation 
to 
preventing  and  combatting 
trafficking in human beings? 

relevant 

in 

in 

EQ34a.To what extent is the 
directive 
satisfactorily 
integrated and coherent with 
other  relevant  EU  laws  and 
the 
policies,  such  as 
context  of  the  EU  Asylum 
Acquis?    Is  there  scope  for 
further 
integration  with 
other policy objectives? 
EQ34b.  How  do  policies 
under 
the  EU  Asylum 
Acquis  affect  (positively  or 
the 
negatively) 
the 
implementation 
Directive?  

of 

2004/80/EC; 
2014/42/EU. 

Directive 

of 

evidence 
Triangulation 
collected  from  the  desk-based 
and fieldwork activities. 

Directive 
2014/42/EU 

See approach to EQ33.  

in 

JC34.1  The  Directive's 
objectives and provisions are 
coherent  with  those  of  the 
other  relevant  EU  laws  and 
the 
policies,  such  as 
context  of  the  EU  Asylum 
Acquis.  
JC34.2  The  Directive's 
definitions are coherent with 
those  of  the  other  relevant 
EU  laws  and  policies,  such 
as  in  the  context  of  the  EU 
Asylum Acquis. 
JC34.3  Other  relevant  EU 
laws and policies, such as in 

106 

Secondary sources:  
Legislation  
Primary sources: 
Interviews  
Online survey   

Extent to which the 
content 
analysis 
reveals  coherence 
to  objectives, 
as 
and 
definitions 
stakeholders 
involved  
to  which 
Extent 
and 
interviewees 
survey  respondents 
agree 
the 
upon 
consistency  of  the 
and 
objectives 
the 
provisions  of 
with 
Directive 

 
 
the  EU 
the  context  of 
Asylum  Acquis  (positively 
or  negatively)  affect 
the 
implementation  of  the  EU 
to 
legislation 
preventing  and  combatting 
THB.  

relevant 

See approach to EQ33 

JC35.  The  objectives  of  the 
directive  are  coherent  with 
the  Treatis  of  the  European 
Union, including the Charter 
of the Fundamental rights.  

respect  to  the  other 
EU  
to  which 
Extent 
interviewees 
and 
survey  respondents 
agree 
the 
upon 
consistency  of  the 
definitions 
provided  by 
the 
with 
Directive 
respect  to  the  other 
EU measures  
Extent 
to  which 
and 
interviewees 
survey  respondents 
agree 
the 
upon 
consistency 
between 
stakeholders 
concerned  with  the 
implementation  of 
the Directive and of 
EU 
other 
the 
measures  
See  indicators  for 
EQ34 

the 

sources 

for 

See 
EQ34 

JC36.  The  objective  of 
preventing  and  combatting 
trafficking  in  human  beings 
been  successfully  integrated 
into EU funds.  

Desk  analysis  of  information 
on available EU funds and the 
extent  to  which  they  make 
reference to the anti-trafficking 
Directive,  and  they  share  the 

References made to  
the Directive, and to 
the  objective  of 
and 
preventing 
combatting THB by 

Secondary sources: 
Information 
covering  EU  funds 
and 
reports 
(e.g. 
websites) 

107 

N/A 

N/A 

EQ35. To what extent is the 
Directive  coherent  with  the 
objectives  of  the  Treaties, 
including 
the  Charter  of 
Fundamental  Rights  of  the 
European  Union,  as  regards 
the achievement of the above 
aim? 
EQ36. To what extent has the 
objective  of  preventing  and 
combatting 
in 
been 
human 

trafficking 

beings 

 
 
 
 
successfully  integrated  into 
EU funds? 

N/A 

EQ37. To what extent is the 
Directive coherent with other 
relevant 
international 
obligations  and  standards 
(such  as  the  United  Nations 
against 
Convention 
Transnational 
Organized 
Crime and its supplementing 
Protocol to Prevent, Suppress 
and  Punish  Trafficking  in 
Persons,  Especially  Women 
and Children, the ILO Forced 
the 
Labour  Convention, 
the 
Convention 
Elimination 
of 
Discrimination 
against 
Women  (CEDAW)  and  UN 
Conventions on the Rights of 
the  Child  (UNCRC)  and  the 
Rights  of  Persons  with 
Disabilities (UNCRPD)?  

on 

JC37.1.  The  directive 
is 
coherent  with  the  United 
Nations  Convention  against 
Organised 
Transnational 
Crime and its supplementing 
Prevent, 
to 
Protocol 
Punish 
and 
Suppress 
Persons, 
in 
Trafficking 
Especially  Wome 
and 
Children. 
JC37.2.  The  directive 
is 
coherent with the ILO Forces 
Labour Convetion. 
JC37.3.  The  directive 
coherent 
Convention 
Elimination 
Discrimination 
Women (CEDAW).  
is 
JC37.4.  The  directive 
the  UN 
coherent  with 
Convention on the Rights of 
the Child (UNCRC). 
JC37.5.  The  directive 
is 
coherent  with  the  Rights  of 
Persons  with  Disabilities 
(UNCRPD).  

is 
the 
the 
of 
against 

with 
on 

108 

objective  of  preventing  and 
combatting THB.  
Analysis  of 
interview  and 
survey responses on the extent 
the objectives of the Directive 
are reflected in EU funds.  
Triangulation 
evidence 
collected from desk-based and 
fieldwork activities 

of 

at 

aimed 

analysis 

Desk 
understanding 
complementarities 
and 
the 
misalignments  between 
Directive  and  other  relevant 
obligation 
standards.  More 
specifically, a content analysis 
of  each  regional  and  global 
initiative will allow to map the 
key  objectives  and  provisions 
of  each  measure,  and 
to 
examine  different  dimensions 
of  analysis,  namely:  (i)  a 
general  dimension,  including 
the  nature  of  the  measure,  the 
actor  taking  it,  its  legal  basis 
and  scope,  (ii)  investigation 
and 
(iii) 
prosecution, 
assistance  and  protection  of 
victims, (iv) prevention  
Analysis  of  evidence  of  the 
targeted interviews, and online 
highlight 
survey 
to 
and 
complementarities 
misalignments  between 
the 
Directive  and  other  relevant 

Primary sources: 
Interviews 
Online Survey 

Secondary sources:  
Document analysis 
Primary sources: 
Online survey 
Interviews  

funding 

EU 
documentation. 
interview 
Extent 
and 
survey 
respondents  report 
that  objectives  of 
the  Anti-trafficking 
directive  have  been 
integrated  into  EU 
Funds.  
Extent to which the 
content 
analysis 
reveals  coherence 
to  objectives, 
as 
definitions 
and 
stakeholders 
involved  
to  which 
Extent 
interviewees 
and 
survey  respondents 
agree 
the 
upon 
consistency  of  the 
and 
objectives 
the 
provisions  of 
with 
Directive 
respect 
to  other 
relevant obligations 
and standards 
to  which 
Extent 
interviewees 
and 
survey  respondents 
agree 
the 
upon 
consistency  of  the 
definitions 
provided  by 
Directive 
respect 

the 
with 
to  other 

 
 
international  obligations  and 
standards 
Triangulation 
evidence 
collected  from  the  desk-based 
and fieldwork activities 

of 

initiatives 
broader 
at  regional  and  the 
global  level  aimed 
at  preventing  and 
combatting  human 
trafficking 
to  which 
Extent 
interviewees 
and 
survey  respondents 
the 
upon 
agree 
consistency 
between 
stakeholders 
concerned  with  the 
implementation  of 
the Directive and of 
broader 
other 
at 
initiatives 
regional  and 
the 
global  level  aimed 
at  preventing  and 
combatting  human 
trafficking  

the 

Added subquestions  
N/A 

regards 

EU Added Value 
EQ38. What has been the EU 
added value of the Directive 
as 
the  aim  of 
preventing  and  combatting 
trafficking  in  human  beings 
in  particular?  What  would 
the situation have been in the 
Member  States  if  there  had 
been  no  EU 
legislation 
applicable (compared to what 
could have been achieved by 
the  Member  States  alone  at 

JC38.1: The implementation 
of  the  Directive  provided 
additional  value  to  the  one 
that would have been created 
by  Member  States  alone  in 
preventing  and  combatting 
human trafficking.  

Secondary sources: 
Document analysis 
Primary sources: 
Online survey 
Interviews 

responses 

Analysis of interview and 
to 
survey 
gather information on the 
added value generated by 
the  Directive  (e.g., 
in 
terms  of  coordination 
gains,  complementarities 
or  greater  effectiveness) 
vis-à-vis what could have 
by 
achieved 
been 
Member  states  acting  in 
uncoordinated 
an 

that 

Extent to which interview 
and  survey  respondents 
the 
report 
implementation  of 
the 
Anti-trafficking 
generated 
Directive 
added value in preventing 
and  combatting  human 
trafficking  compared  to 
what  could  be  achieved 
by  the  Member  States 

109 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
regional 
and/or 
national 
levels,  as  well  as  through 
international agreements and 
cooperation)? 

taking  actions  without 
EU action. 

Level  of  harmonisation 
of the national regulatory 
frameworks 
the 
Member  States  since  the 
entry  into  force  of  the 
Regulation 

in 

manner.  Data  providers 
include  (i)  EU  bodies 
with relevant expertise on 
the 
area 
policy 
National 
(EMPACT, 
Competent  Authorities 
for the implementation of 
the  Directive,  National 
Competent  Authorities 
working  with  human 
trafficking 
in 
Europe,  National  Law 
enforcement  authorities, 
Judicial 
National 
Authorities), 
(ii) 
stakeholders  involved  in 
the 
as 
European  and  National 
organisations 

cases 

such 

field 

and 

Analysis  of  the  added 
value, stemming from the 
answers to other relevant 
evaluation 
questions 
(e.g., effectiveness vis-à-
vis the objectives).  

Content  analysis  of  EU 
policy  documents  and/or 
reports 
providing 
information  on  the  state 
of play in preventing and 
combatting 
human 
trafficking  at  national 
level,  as  well  as  studies, 
assessments  produced  at 
National level,  

110 

 
 
 
 
Triangulation 
of 
evidence  collected  from 
desk-based and fieldwork 
activities. 

111 

 
 
 
2. IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

Assessing the potential impact of policy options included the following stages:  

1.  Problem definition and assessment; 

2.  Analysis of the EU’s right to act; 

3. 

Identification of policy objectives and detailed formulation of retained policy options; 

4.  Assessment of the impact of policy options; 

5.  Ranking and comparison of policy options. 

3. DESCRIPTION OF DATA COLLECTION METHODS METHODOLOGY  

3.1. Evaluation 

The evaluation of the Directive was informed by the collection and analysis of qualitative 
and quantitative data obtained through the following methods:  

  Mapping and analysis of transposition of the Directive into national law. By using 
a network of national correspondents, the external contractor conducted desk research 
regarding the transposition of the Directive into Member States land compared it to 
data shared by the European Commission on the state of transposition in 2016. The full 
analysis is presented in Annex 6. 

  Analysis of quantitative data shared by EUROSTAT on trends in THB from 2013-

2020 across the EU27. 

  Documentary  review  of  more  than  100  sources.  Key  desk  resources  include  (i) 
reports, studies and other publications addressing trafficking in human beings; and (ii) 
information  shared  by  DG  HOME  on  EU  funding  streams  (i.e.,  AMIF,  ISF).  The 
complete list of sources reviews for the Staff Working Document on the evaluation is 
presented at the end of this Annex. 

  Public consultation of EU citizens that ran from 14 December 2021 until 22 March 

2022. A total of 124 contributions were received. 

  Online  survey  that  ran  from  29  November  2021  to  15  January  2022.  A  total  of  90 
responses  were  received.  Participants  included  Member  State  national  competent 
authorities  (16);  National  rapporteurs  and  equivalent  mechanisms  (NREM)  (14), 
national  LEAs (9), national judicial authorities (JAs) (12), other national  authorities 
(5),  CSOs  (24)  and  other  (10).  At  least  one  response  from  each  Member  State  was 
received. 

  Interviews with 29 stakeholders were performed. Five interviews (4 EU agencies, 1 
CSO) were performed during the inception phase to inform the scope, framework and 
data collection tools of the study. A further 24 interviews were performed during the 
evaluation  phase.  One  additional  stakeholder  chose  to  submit  responses  in  writing. 
Stakeholders included representatives from EU agencies (6), EMPACT (1), European 

1 

 
 
CSOs  (5),  international  bodies  (5),  academics/experts  (6),  and  business/employer 
associations (1).  

  Two  stakeholder  workshops  with  the  EU  Civil  Society  Platform  against  THB 

(Workshop 1) and NREM (Workshop 2).  

  Analysis of data on EU funding of THB projects from 2014-2020 under the Asylum, 

Migration, and Integration Fund (AMIF) and the Internal Security Fund (ISF).  

  Feedback on the Roadmap/Inception Impact Assessment. From 5 August 2021 to 
16  September  2021,  the  EC  sought  feedback  on  the  inception  impact  assessment 
underpinning  this  evaluation.292  The  36  responses  received  from  CSOs  (24),  EU 
citizens  (4),  public  authorities  (3),  non-EU  citizens  (2)  and  other  (3)  were  also 
analysed293.   

Further details on the data collection activities can be found in the synopsis report in Annex 
4.  

3.2. Impact assessment  

  Interviews  with  (4)  EU  agencies  and  (3)  EU  level  civil  society  organisations 
were  performed.  One  additional  interview  with  a  senior  advisor  at  a  National 
Rapporteur’s office was conducted. Interviews were aimed at collecting views on 
the nature and extent of the likely impacts and feasibility of the identified policy 
options for the stakeholder groups who might be affected. 

  Case studies of five Member States (FR, IT, HU, NL, RO). A description of the 
case study selection methodology can be found in the synopsis report (Annex 2). 
The  case  studies  included  group  interviews  with  national  authorities  from  the 
selected Member States on possible impacts of the identified policy measures. 

4. Limitations  

The data collected for the evaluation and impact assessment has several limitations that 
should be borne in mind when interpreting the findings. We summarise these limitations 
below, along with the mitigation measures taken to address them where possible.   

  Measuring  effectiveness  with  limited  available  data:  Given  some  of  the  data 
gaps (see evaluation and Annex 5), it was sometimes challenging to validate some 
of  the  expert  judgements  and  stakeholder  opinions,  which  made  measuring  the 
effectiveness challenging. For example, there was a lack of monitoring data on the 
effectiveness  of  prevention  measures,  such  as  awareness  raising  campaigns, 
research and information.  

  Subjectivity of stakeholders’ views: Data collected from stakeholders, including 
through  interviews,  surveys,  and  workshops  represents  subjective  views,  rather 
than  objective  conclusions.  To  help  mitigate  this,  the  report  relies  on  the 
triangulation  of  various  data  sources  (as  outlined  in  this  Annex).  In  addition, 
stakeholders  consulted  as  part  of  the  evaluation  and  impact  assessment  for 

292 European Commission, Fighting human trafficking – review of EU rules. Available here. 
293  European Commission, Fighting human trafficking – review of EU rules. Available here. 

2 

 
                                                           
 
interviews,  workshops,  and  the  online  survey  included  people  with  relevant 
expertise  in  the  field  of  trafficking  in  human  beings,  who  are  used  to  giving 
evidence as part of their professional roles.  

  Selection bias of stakeholders: There may be a certain degree of selection bias, 
especially regarding interviewees. Participants’ views might not be representative 
of all stakeholders affected by the Directive. To help mitigate this, stakeholders at 
all  levels  were  selected  for  participation  (in  consultation  with  DG  HOME), 
including  at  the  EU,  national,  international  and  civil  society  level.  Through  the 
consultations, in particular the online survey, it was possible to gather perspectives 
from all Member States.  

  Attributing  outcomes  to  the  Directive:  attributing  outcomes  in  the  area  of 
combatting trafficking  in human beings to  the  existence of the  Directive  can be 
challenging.  The  evaluation  and  impact  assessment  assess  the  Directive’s 
contribution to preventing and combatting trafficking in human beings based on 
how the available evidence compares to the intervention logic (see Annex 7 to the 
evaluation).   

  Assessing trends and statistics related to the phenomenon of THB: As outlined 
in more detail in the evaluation and Annex 5, there are a number of gaps  in the 
available data on THB. In an effort to fill gaps as much as possible, this report relies 
on a variety of available data sets, including data gathered by ESTAT from 2013-
2020 and inputs provided by Member States in response to request for data from 
the  European  Commission.  The  consultation  of  several  available  data  sources 
helped map important gaps.   

5. LIST OF SOURCES 

1.  Legislative and non-legislative acts  

I. 

EU law 

-  Council  Directive  2004/81/EC  on  the  residence  permit  issued  to  third-country 
nationals  who  are  victims  of  trafficking  in  human  beings  or  who  have  been  the 
subject  of  an  action  to  facilitate  illegal  immigration,  who  cooperate  with  the 
competent authorities, 29 April 2004; 

-  Council  Directive  2004/83/EC  on  minimum  standards  for  the  qualification  and 
status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who 
otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted, 
29 April 2004; 

-  Directive (EU) 2019/1153 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying 
down rules facilitating the use of financial and other information for the prevention, 
detection, investigation or prosecution of certain criminal offences, and repealing 
Council Decision 2000/642/JHA, 20 June 2019; 

-  Directive 2004/80/EC relating to compensation to crime victims, 29 April 2004; 
-  Directive  2004/81/EC  on  the  residence  permit  issued  to  third-country  nationals 
who are victims of trafficking in human beings or who have been the subject of an 

3 

 
 
 
 
action  to  facilitate  illegal  immigration,  who  cooperate  with  the  competent 
authorities, 29 April 2004; 

-  Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the right 
of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within 
the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and 
repealing  Directives  64/221/EEC,  68/360/EEC,  72/194/EEC,  73/148/EEC, 
75/34/EEC,  75/35/EEC,  90/364/EEC,  90/365/EEC  and  93/96/EEC,  L158/77,  29 
April 2004; 

-  Directive 2009/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on providing 
for minimum standards on sanctions and measures against employers of illegally 
staying third-country nationals, 18 June 2009; 

-  Directive 2011/93/EU on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of 

children and child pornography, 13 December 2011; 

-  Directive 2012/29/EU on establishing minimum standards on the rights,  support 

and protection of victims of crime, 3 April 2014; 

-  Directive  2013/32/EU  on  common  procedures  for  granting  and  withdrawing 

international protection, 29 June 2013; 

-  Directive  2013/33/EU  laying  down  standards  for  the  reception  of  applicants  for 

international protection, 29 June 2013 

-  Directive  2014/42/EU  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  the 
freezing  and  confiscation  of  instrumentalities  and  proceeds  of  crime  in  the 
European Union, 3 April 2014; 

-  European  Parliament  (2021),  Resolution  on  the  implementation  of  Directive 
2011/36/EU  on  preventing  and  combatting  trafficking  in  human  beings  and 
protecting its victims, 10 February 2021. 

-  Regulation (EU) 2018/1805 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 
November  2018  on  the  mutual  recognition  of  freezing  orders  and  confiscation 
orders, L303; 

-  Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 
26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member 
State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged 
in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person. 

-  Council  of  the  European  Union,  Council  Framework  Decision  2002/629/  on 

combating trafficking in human beings, 19 July 2002; 

-  Council of the European Union, Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA on 

the fight against organised crime, 24 October 2008. 

II. 

Conclusions of Council of the EU  

-  Council of the European Union (2009),  Council Conclusions  on establishing  an 
informal  EU  Network  of  National  Rapporteurs  or  Equivalent  Mechanisms  on 
Trafficking in Human Beings, Luxemburg, 4 June 2009; 

-  Council of the European Union (2017), Council Conclusions on the continuation 
of the EU Policy Cycle for organised and serious international crime for the period 
2018-2021, 10 March 2017; 

4 

 
 
 
 
-  Council  of  the  European  Union  (2019),  Council  conclusions  on  combating  the 

sexual abuse of children, 8 October 2019; 

-  Council  of  the  European  Union  (2021),  Council  conclusions  setting  the  EU's 
priorities for the fight against serious and organised crime for EMPACT 2022 – 
2025, 12 May 2021. 

2.  Other instruments 

I. 

EU Action Plans 

-  European  Commission  (2020),  Action  plan  on  Integration  and  Inclusion  2021-

2027, Publications Office; 

-  European Commission (2009), The Stockholm Programme - An open and secure 
Europe serving and protecting citizens, 17024/09, Brussels, 2 December 2009; 
-  Committee  Of  The  Regions  on  a  renewed  EU  action  plan  against  migrant 
smuggling 2021-2025, COM(2021) 591 final, Brussels, 29 September 2021; 
-  European  Commission  (2020),  Action  plan  on  Integration  and  Inclusion  2021-

2027, Publications Office; 

-  European  Commission  (2021),  Communication  from  The  Commission  to  The 
European Parliament, The Council, The European Economic and Social Committee 
And The Committee Of The Regions on a renewed EU action plan against migrant 
smuggling 2021-2025, COM(2021) 591 final, Brussels, 29 September 2021.  

II. 

EU Strategies 

-  Council of the European Union (2018), Internal Security Strategy for the European 

Union, Publications Office of the European Union;  

-  European Commission, (2012), EU Strategy towards the eradication of trafficking 
in human beings 2012-2016, COM(2012) 286 final, Brussels, 19 June 2012; 
-  European  Commission  (2020),  A  Union  of  Equality:  Gender  Equality  Strategy 

2020-2025, COM/2020/152 final, Brussels, 5 March 2020; 

-  European  Commission  (2020),  EU  Strategy  on  victims'  rights  (2020-2025), 

COM(2020) 258 final, Brussels, 24 June 2020; 

-  European  Commission  (2020),  Communication  from  The  Commission  to  The 
European Parliament, The Council, The European Economic and Social Committee 
And The Committee Of The Regions on the EU strategy for a more effective fight 
against child sexual abuse, COM(2020) 607, Brussels, 24 July 2020; 

-  European  Commission  (2021),  Communication  from  The  Commission  to  The 
European Parliament, The Council, The European Economic and Social Committee 
And  The  Committee  Of  The  Regions  on  the  EU  Strategy  on  Combatting 
Trafficking in Human Beings 2021-2025, COM(2021) 171 final, Brussels, 14 April 
2021; 

-  European Commission (2021), EU Strategy to tackle Organised Crime 2021-2025, 

COM(2021) 170 final, Brussels 14 April 2021. 

III. 

European Commission Proposals 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
-  European Commission (2022), Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament 
and  of  the  Council  on  asset  recovery  and  confiscation,  COM(2022)  245  final, 
Brussels, 25 May 2022. 

-  European  Commission  (2022),  Proposal  for  a  regulation  of  the  European 
Parliament and of the Council on laying down rules to prevent and combat child 
sexual abuse, COM(2022) 209 final, Brussels, 11 May 2022.  

-  European Commission (2022), Proposal for Directive of The European Parliament 
and  Of  the  Council  on  Corporate  Sustainability  Due  Diligence  and  amending 
Directive (EU) 2019/1937, COM(2022) 71 final, Brussels, 23 February 2022; 
-  European  Commission  (2010),  Proposal  for  a  Directive  on  preventing  and 
combating  trafficking  in  human  beings,  and  protecting  victims,  repealing 
Framework  Decision  2002/629/JHA,  COM(2010)  95  final,  Brussels  29  March 
2010; 

-  European Commission (2009), Impact Assessment  - 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. 

IV. 

European Commission Impact Assassments 

-  European  Commission  (2016),  Assessing  the  impact  of  existing  national  law, 
establishing  as  a  criminal  offence  the  use  of  services  which  are  the  objects  of 
exploitation  of  trafficking  in  human  beings,  on  the  prevention  of  trafficking  in 
human  beings,  in  accordance  with  Article  23  (2)  of  the  Directive  2011/36/EU, 
COM(2016) 719 final, Brussels 2 December 2016 

-  European Commission (2016), Assessing the extent to which Member States have 
taken the necessary measures  in  order to  comply with  Directive 2011/36/EU on 
preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims in 
accordance with Article 23 (1), COM(2016) 722 final, Brussels, 2 December 2016.  
-  European Commission (2021), Inception impact assessment - Ares(2021)4984017; 

V. 

Conventions 

-  Council  of  Europe  (2005),  Convention  on  Action  against  Trafficking  in  Human 

Beings, Warsaw, 16 May 2005; 

-  Council  of  Europe  (2011)  Convention  on  preventing  and  combating  violence 

- 

against women and domestic violence, Istanbul, 11 May 2011; 
International Labour Office (ILO) (2014) Convention 29 on Forced Labour and its 
Protocol, ILO; 

-  United Nations  (1979) Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against 

Women, United Nations publication; 

-  United  Nations  (1989)  Conventions  on  the  Rights  of  the  Child,  United  Nations 

publication; 

-  United Nations (2000) Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and the 

Protocols Thereto, United Nations publication; 

-  United  Nations  (2022)  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  Persons  with  Disabilities, 

United Nations publication. 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
VI.  Miscellaneous  

-  European Commission (2018), Joint Statement of commitment to work together to 
address  THB,  ensuring  a  coordinated,  coherent  and  comprehensive  response, 
available  at:  https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/sites/default/files/Publications/JHA-
Joint-Statement-THB-2018_EN.pdf. 

-  European  Commission  (2021),  EU  Policy  Cycle  to  tackle  organised  and  serious 
international  crime  -  European  Multidisciplinary  Platform  Against  Criminal 
Threats (EMPACT) 2022–2025; 
International  Labour  Office  (ILO)  (2014),  Recommendation  203  on  Forced 
Labour, ILO. 

- 

3.  REPORTS 

I. 

European Commission Reports 

-  European  Commission  (2016),  First  Report  on  the  progress  made  in  the  fight 
against  trafficking  in  human  beings  as  required  under  Article  20  of  Directive 
2011/36/EU  on  preventing  and  combating  trafficking  in  human  beings  and 
protecting its victims, COM(2016) 267 final, Brussels, 19 May 2016. 

-  European Commission, Reporting on the follow-up to the EU Strategy towards the 
Eradication of trafficking in human beings and identifying further concrete actions, 
COM(2017) 728 final, Brussels, 4 December 2017.  

-  European  Commission  (2018),  Second  report  on  the  progress  made  in  the  fight 
against trafficking in human beings (2018) as required under Article 20 of Directive 
2011/36/EU  on  preventing  and  combating  trafficking  in  human  beings  and 
protecting its victims, COM(2018) 777 final, Brussels, 3 December 2018. 

-  European  Commission  (2020),  Third  report  on  the  progress  made  in  the  fight 
against trafficking in human beings (2020) as required under Article 20 of Directive 
2011/36/EU  on  preventing  and  combating  trafficking  in  human  beings  and 
protecting its victims, COM(2020) 661 final, Brussels, 20 October 2020; 

-  European Commission, Staff Working Document accompanying the Third (2020) 
report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in human beings third 
report, SWD(2020) 226 final, Brussels, 20 October 2020. 

II. 

Other Reports 

-  European  Parliament  (2021)  Report  on  the  implementation  of  Directive 
2011/36/EU  on  preventing  and  combating  trafficking  in  human  beings  and 
protecting its victims, European Parliament; 

-  UNODC  (2020),  Global  Report  on  Trafficking  in  Persons,  United  Nations 

- 

publication; 
JHA (2021) Joint report of the JHA agencies’ network on the identification and 
protection of victims of human trafficking; 

-  Eurojust (2021), Report on Trafficking in Human Beings: Best practice and issues 

in judicial cooperation, available at: 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/sites/default/files/assets/2021_02_16_thb_casewo
rk_report.pdf. 

4.  STUDIES 

I. 

 Studies commissioned or published by the European Commission  

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 
- 

European Commission (2015), Study on prevention initiatives on trafficking in 
human beings; 
European  Commission  (2015),  Study  on  high  risk  groups  for  trafficking  in 
human beings; 
European  Commission  (2015),  Study  on  case-law  relating  to  trafficking  in 
human beings for labour exploitation; 
European Commission (2016), Study on the gender dimension of trafficking in 
human beings; 
European Commission (2016), Study on comprehensive policy review of anti-
trafficking projects funded by the European Commission; 
European Commission (2020), Data collection of trafficking in human beings 
in the EU; 
European Commission (2020), Study on reviewing the functioning of Member 
States’ National and Transnational Referral Mechanisms, Publications Office; 
European Commission (2020), Study on the economic, social and human costs 
of  trafficking  in  human  beings  within  the  EU,  Publications  Office  of  the 
European Union; 
European Commission, Eurostat (2015), Trafficking in human beings; 
European Commission (2021) Mapping the risk of serious and organised crime 
infiltrating legitimate businesses. 

II. 

European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) publications 

-  European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) (2018), Gender-specific measures 

in anti-trafficking actions, Publications Office; 

-  European  Institute  for  Gender  Equality  (EIGE)  (2018),  Protecting  victims:  An 
analysis of the anti-trafficking directive from the perspective of a victim of gender-
based violence, Publications Office. 

III.  European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) publications 

-  European  Parliamentary  Research  Service  (EPRS)  (2020),  Implementation  of 

Directive 2011/36/EU: Migration and gender issues, EPRS; 

-  European  Parliamentary  Research  Service  (EPRS)  (2021),  Understanding  EU 

action against human trafficking, EPRS; 

-  European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) (2016), Trafficking in Human 

Beings from a Gender Perspective Directive 2011/36/EU, EPRS. 

IV. 

European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) publications 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
-  European  Union  Agency  for  Fundamental  (FRA)  (2019),  Children  deprived  of 
parental  care  found  in  an  EU  Member  State  other  than  their  own  –  A  guide  to 
enhance child protection focusing on victims of trafficking, Publications Office; 
-  European  Union  Agency  for  Fundamental  Rights  (FRA)  (2017),  Out  of  sight: 

migrant women exploited in domestic work, FRA; 

-  European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) (2018), Protecting migrant 
workers from exploitation in the EU: boosting workplace inspections, FRA. 

V. 

Europol publications 

-  Europol (2014), Trafficking in human beings and the internet, Europol, available 

at: intelligence_notification_thb_internet_15_2014_public.pdf (europa.eu)  

-  Europol (2015), The THB financial business model, Assessing the current state of 
knowledge  July  2015,  Europol,  available  at:  Draft  Staff  Working  Document 
Evaluation of the Anti-trafficking Directive 14102022.docx; 

-  Europol  (2016),  Situation  Report:  Trafficking  of  Human  Beings  in  Europe, 
at: 

Europol, 
https://www.europol.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/thb_situational_repo
rt_-_europol.pdf; 

available 

-  Europol  (2020),  How  COVID-19-related  crime  infected  Europe  during  2020, 
at: 

Europol, 
https://www.europol.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/how_covid-19-
related_crime_infected_europe_during_2020.pdf; 

available 

-  Europol (2020), The challenges of countering human trafficking in a digital era, 
available 
at: 
https://www.europol.europa.eu/cms/sites/default/files/documents/the_challenges_
of_countering_human_trafficking_in_the_digital_era.pdf; 

-  Europol  (2021),  Serious  and  Organised  Crime  Threat  Assessment  (SOCTA), 
at: 

available 
https://www.europol.europa.eu/cms/sites/default/files/documents/socta2021_1.pd
f; 

-  Europol Migrant Smuggling Centre (2020), European Migrant Smuggling Centre 
4th  Annual  Report,  available  at:  emsc_4th_annual_activity_report_-_2020.pdf 
(europa.eu); 

VI.  GRETA publications  

-  Group  of  Experts  on  Action  Against  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings  (GRETA) 
(2020), Compendium of Good practices in addressing trafficking in human beings 
for the purpose of labour exploitation, Council of Europe. 

-  Group  of  Experts  on  Action  Against  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings  (GRETA) 
(2020), Guidance Note on the entitlement of victims of trafficking, and persons at 
risk of being trafficked, to international protection, Council of Europe. 

-  Group  of  Experts  on  Action  Against  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings  (GRETA) 

(2019), Practical impact of GRETA’s monitoring work, Council of Europe. 

-  Group  of  Experts  on  Action  Against  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings  (GRETA) 

(2018), Assistance to victims of human trafficking, Council of Europe. 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
-  Group  of  Experts  on  Action  Against  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings  (GRETA) 
(2017),  Human  Trafficking  for  the  purpose  of  labour  exploitation,  Council  of 
Europe. 

-  Group  of  Experts  on  Action  Against  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings  (GRETA) 

(2018), Trafficking in Children, Council of Europe. 

-  Group  of  Experts  on  Action  Against  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings  (GRETA) 

(2015), 4th General Report on GRETA’s activities, Council of Europe. 

VII.  OSCE publications 

-  Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) (2017), Ministerial 
Council Decision No. 6/17 Strengthening Efforts to Prevent Trafficking in Human 
Beings, MC.DEC/6/17; 

-  Organization  for  Security  and  Co-operation  in  Europe  (OSCE)  (2018),  Child 
Trafficking  and  Child  Protection:  Ensuring  that  Child  Protection  Mechanisms 
Protect  the Rights  and  Meet  the Needs of Child Victims  of Human Trafficking, 
OSCE; 

-  Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) (2020), Leveraging 
innovation  to  fight  trafficking  in  human  beings:  A  comprehensive  analysis  of 
technology tools, OSCE; 

-  Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) (2020), Establishing 
National Focal Points to Protect Child Victims of Trafficking in Human Beings, 
OSCE; 

-  Organization  for  Security  and  Co-operation 

in  Europe  (OSCE)  (2021), 
Discouraging  the  demand  that  fosters  trafficking  for  the  purpose  of  sexual 
exploitation, OSCE; 

-  Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) (2021), Applying 
Gender-Sensitive Approaches in Combating Trafficking in Human Beings, OSCE. 

VIII. 

 UN publications  

-  UNHCR (2012), Thematic study on the issue of violence against women and girls 

and disability, United Nations publication; 

-  UNODC (2020), Interlinkages between Trafficking in persons and forced marriage, 

United Nations publication; 

-  UNODC  (2021),  Compendium  of  Promising  Practices  on  Public-Private 
Partnerships  to  prevent  and  counter  trafficking  in  persons,  United  Nations 
publications; 

-  UNODC (2021), The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on trafficking in persons 

and responses to the challenges, United Nations publications. 

IX. 

 Other publications 

-  RACE in Europe project partners (2014),Trafficking for Forced Criminal Activities 
at:  http://www.antislavery.org/wp-
available 

and  Begging 

in  Europe, 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
content/uploads/2017/01/trafficking_for_forced_criminal_activities_and_begging
_in_europe.pdf; 

-  Population Europe (2022), 10 Years After the Directive 2011/36/EU, Population 

- 

- 

- 
- 

and Policy Brief No 33; 
International  Labour  Office  (ILO)  (2017),  Global  estimates  of  modern  slavery: 
forced labour and forced marriage, ILO; 
International  Labour  Office  (ILO)  (2022),  Global  estimates  of  modern  slavery: 
forced labour and forced marriage, ILO; 

ICAT  (2019),  Human  trafficking  and  technology:  trends,  challenges  and 
opportunities, Issue 07/09; 

-  Eurostat (2015), Trafficking in human beings, Publications Office; 
-  Frontex  (2012),  Combating  human  trafficking  at  the  border  -  training  for  EU 
Border Guards, available at: Combating human trafficking at the border - training 
for EU Border Guards (europa.eu); 

-  European Migration Network (2022), Third-country national victims of trafficking 
identification  and  protection,  available  at: 

in  human  beings:  detection, 
https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/whats-new/publications/third-country-national-
victims-trafficking-human-beings-detection-identification-and-protection_en. 

11 

 
 
   
 
ANNEX III. OVERVIEW OF BENEFITS AND COSTS ANDTABLE ON SIMPLIFICATION AND BURDEN 
REDUCTION 

12 

 
National  competent 
authorities 

National 
Rapporteurs 

Law 
enforcement 
authorities 

Judicial 
authorities 

Civil 
Society 
Organisati
ons 

Quantitati
ve  

Comme
nt 

Quan
titati
ve  

Comme
nt  

Qu
ant
itat
ive 

Comment  Q
ua
nti
tat
iv
e 

Com
ment 

Comment  Q
u
a
n
ti
t
a
ti
v
e 

Investiga
tion  and 
prosecuti
on 
of 
THB 

Costs   

Indirect 
costs, 
recurrent
: 

Purchase 
and 
maintenan
ce  of  IT 
equipmen
t  needed 
to perform 
judicial 
investigati
ons  

Indirect 
costs, 
recurre
nt: 

Purchas
e  of  law 
enforce
ment 
equipme
nt 
and 
related 
material
s  

Personn
el  

Equipm
ent  and 
related 
material
s  

Direct 
costs, 
recurre
nt: 

Training 
of 
officials 

Indirec
t  costs, 
recurre
nt: 

Purchas
e of law 
enforce
ment 
equipm
ent  and 
related 
materia
ls  

Purchas
e 
and 
mainten
ance  of 
IT 
equipm
ent 
needed 
to 
perform 
judicial 
investig
ations 

Direct 
costs, 
recurre
nt:  

Trainin
g 

of 

13 

 
                        
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Indir
ect 
costs, 
one-
off: 

Set 
Set  up 
of 
protec
tion 
progra
mmes 

Indirect 
costs, 
recurrent
: 

for 

Purchase 
of 
adequate 
equipmen
t 
audio-
visual 
recording 
of 
interviews 
with 
children 
during 
criminal 
proceedin
gs 

official
s  

Bene
fits 

Assistanc
e, 
support 
and 
protectio
n to THB 
victims 

Costs 

Direct 
costs, 
recurrent 

Assistance 
and 
protection 
programm
es: 
from 
around 
EUR 
106.000 in 
2018 
in 
CZ  2018 
EUR 
to 
22.5 
million  in 
2017 in IT 

Compensa
tion 
(per 
victim): 
from  EUR 
to 
125 
EUR 
2.500 
(CZ), 
from  EUR 
to 
1.000 
EUR 
30.000 
(DE) 

Indirect 
costs, 
recurrent
: 

Repatriati
on 
programm
es/initiativ
es:LT 
allocates 
EUR 
3.000 
annually 
for 
diplomatic 
missions 
to 
repatriate, 

Indirec
t  costs, 
one-
off: 

Set  up 
of 
protecti
on 
progra
mmes 

Indirec
t  costs, 
recurre
nt: 

Purchas
e 
of 
adequat
e 
equipm
ent  for 
audio-
visual 
recordi
of 
ng 
intervie
ws  with 
childre
n 
during 
crimina
l 
proceed
ings 

Direct 
costs, 
recurre
nt: 

Provisi
on of: 

Accom
modati
on  

Indirect 
costs, 
recurre
nt: 

of 

Purchas
e 
adequat
e 
equipme
for 
nt 
audio-
visual 
recordin
of 
g 
intervie
ws  with 
children 
during 
criminal 
proceedi
ngs 

14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PT’s 
repatriatio
n 
programm
e 
costs 
EUR 
800.000 
each  year 
(it 
is 
jointly 
financed 
by  AMIF 
(75%)  and 
the 
Portugues
e 
governme
nt (25%)) 

Materia
l 
assistan
ce  

Psychol
ogical 
assistan
ce  

Medica
l aid  

Transla
tion and 
interpre
tation 

Set up a 
compen
sation 
fund/sc
heme 
and 
provisi
of 
on 
compen
sation 
to 
victims  

of 

rovisio
n 
legal 
counsel
ling and 
represe
ntation 

Perfor
ming of 
individ
ual  risk 
assessm
ent 

Bene
fits 

Preventio
n of THB 

Costs 

Direct 
costs, 
recurrent
: 

Awarenes
s 
raising 
campaigns
LU 
: 
spends 

Indirec
t  costs, 
one-
off: 

Set  up 
of 
prevent
ion 

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
progra
mmes 

Indirec
t  costs, 
recurre
nt: 

Hiring 
lawyers 
and 
interpre
ters 

Direct 
costs, 
recurre
nt: 

Deliver
ing  of 
educati
on 
activitie
s 

Deliver
ing  of 
training
s 
for 
national 
authorit
ies/bodi
es  

Deliver
ing  of 
awaren
ess- 
raising 
campai
gns  

EUR 
95.000  in 
an 
informatio
n 
and 
awareness
-raising 
campaign 
on  THB 
for 
the 
general 
public,  SI 
allocates 
EUR 
44.000  for 
awareness 
raising 
projects 
on THB 

Indirect 
costs, 
recurrent
:  

of 

Establish
ment 
anti-
trafficking 
hotlines: 
IT 
allocates 
EUR 
300.000 
annually, 
LU 
two 
national 
hotlines 
for 
children in 
difficulty, 
which cost 
EUR 
400.000 
each year 

has 

Bene
fits 

Data 
collection 
and 
communi
cation 

Costs 

Direct 
costs, 
recurrent
: 

Collection 
and 
analysis 
of 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Bene
fits 

data/infor
mation 
sharing 

Regular 
communi
cation 
with 
the 
Commissi
on 

17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TABLE 2:  Simplification and burden reduction (savings already achieved)  

Report  any  simplification,  burden  reduction  and  cost  savings  achieved  already  by  the  intervention 
evaluated, including the points of comparison/ where available (e.g. REFIT savings predicted in the IA or 
other sources).  

Citizens/Consu
mers/Workers 

Businesses 

Administrations 

[Other…] 
specify 

_ 

Quantitati
ve  

Com
ment 

Quantit
ative  

Com
ment 

Quantitative  Com

ment  

Quanti
tative 

Com
ment 

Type:  One-off 
/ 
recurrent 
(select) 

PART II: II Potential simplification and burden reduction (savings) 

Identify  further  potential  simplification  and  savings  that  could  be  achieved  with  a  view  to  make  the 
initiative more effective and efficient without prejudice to its policy objectives294. 

National  competent 
authorities 

National 
Rapporteurs 

Law 
enforcement 
authorities 

Judicial 
authorities 

Comment  Quanti
tative 

Quanti
tative 

Com
ment 

Co
mm
ent  

Quantita
tive  

Comme
nt 

Q
u
a
n
ti
t
a
ti
v
e  

Civil 
Society 
Organisati
ons 

Co
mm
ent 

Qu
ant
itat
ive 

Description:… 

Type:  One-off 
/ 
recurrent 
(select) 

294    This assessment is without prejudice to a possible future Impact Assessment. 

18 

 
                                                           
               
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Recurrent 

Recurrent 

Increasin
g  seizure 
and 
confiscati
on 
of 
assets 
from 
THB 
proceedin
gs  to  be 
to 
used 
feed 
compensa
tion 
schemes 
(e.g. 
when 
implemen
ting 
Article 
17) 

Spend 
more  on 
preventio
n  would 
a 
imply 
reduction 
of  THB 
cases, 
hence  the 
number 
of 
offenders 
(and 
related 
costs  of 
investigat
ion 
and 
prosecuti
on) and of 
victims 
(and 
related 
costs  of 
support 
and 
protection
)  would 
also 
be 
reduced 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX IV. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION (SYNOPSIS REPORT) 

This Annex presents the synopsis report of the consultation activities undertaken for the 
evaluation and impact assessment of the Anti-Trafficking Directive.  

1.  CONSULTATION ON THE ROADMAP/INCEPTION IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

The combined evaluation roadmap and inception impact assessment for the initiative was 
published by DG Migration and Home Affairs (DG HOME) on the Commission’s ‘Have 
your  say’  webpage295  on  5  August  2021  until  16  September  2021.  The  Commission 
received feedbacks from 36 stakeholders. 

2.  MEETINGS OF THE EU NETWORK OF NATIONAL RAPPORTEURS AND EQUIVALENT 

MECHANISMS AND THE EU CIVIL SOCIETY PLATFORM 

On  30  November  2021,  the  Commission  organised  a  virtual  meeting  of  the  EU  Civil 
Society Platform against trafficking in human beings in order to inform the evaluation and 
impact  assessment  of  the  Anti-trafficking  Directive.  On  6  December  2021,  a  virtual 
meeting  was  organised  with  the  EU  Network  of  National  Rapporteurs  and  Equivalent 
Mechanisms  (NREM).  The  meetings  focused  on  the  challenges  that  affect  the 
implementation of the Anti-trafficking Directive and its possible amendments, in order to 
inform its evaluation and impact assessment.  

The topics of the criminalisation of the use of exploited services and levels of penalties in 
the Directive were discussed during the meeting of the EU Network of NREM on 16 May. 
On 18 May, the EU Civil Society Platform discussed the topics of the criminalisation of 
the use of exploited services, as well as national and transnational referral mechanisms. 
The NREM and Civil Society Platform gathered on 17 May in a joint meeting, where the 
digital dimension of trafficking in human beings as well as trafficking for the purpose of 
labour  exploitation  were  addressed.  All  these  discussions  informed  the  evaluation  and 
impact assessment.  

3.  CONSULATION IN THE CONTEXT OF THE EVALUATION 

3.1. Consultation strategy 

3.1.1. Public consultation 

The Commission carried out a public consultation targeting the general public with the 
aim of collecting information, evidence, and views on the issues at stake and to feed into 
the evaluation questions. The questionnaire was available in all official languages of the 
EU  institutions296  and  remained  open  on  the  Commission’s  public  consultation  website 
from  14  December  2021  to  22  March  2022.  In  total,  124  responses  were  received.  In 
addition, 75 contributors submitted a standalone written response.  

Of  the  124  contributions  received,  58  (47%)  were  submitted  by  non-governmental 
organisations (NGOs). Thirty-two (26%) were submitted by EU citizens. Public authorities 
were the third largest group, accounting for 19 (15%) of responses. This was followed by 

295 Fighting human trafficking – review of EU rules (europa.eu). 
296 Except Gaelic.  

20 

 
                                                           
two  academic/research  institutions  (n=2,  2%),  one  non-EU  citizen,  one  environmental 
organisation and one trade union (Figure 1).  

Figure 1: Public consultation responses by type of respondent 

By category of respondent

10; 8%

19; 15%

32; 26%

58; 47%

NGO

Other

EU citizen

Public authority

Academic/research institution Non-EU citizen

Environmental organisation

Trade union

Source: European Commission, About this Consultation297 

Almost  a  quarter  of  responses  came  from  Germany  (23%,  n=28).  The  second  largest 
number of contributions came from Spain (15%, n=18), followed by Belgium (10%, n=13) 
and Austria (10%, n=12). This was followed by Italy (6%, n=8), France (5%, n=6), Finland 
(5%, n=6), the Netherlands (3%, n=4),  and Malta (3%, n=4). 18  countries had three or 
fewer contributions (Figure 2).298   

297 European Commission, Have your Say – Fighting Human Trafficking: Review of EU rules. Available 
here.  
298 European Commission, Have your Say – Fighting Human Trafficking: Review of EU rules. Available 
here. 

21 

 
 
                                                           
Figure 2: Responses to public consultation by country 

18

13

12

30

28

25

20

15

10

5

0

8

6

6

4

4

3

2

2

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

i

n
a
p
S

y
n
a
m
r
e
G

i

m
u
g
e
B

l

y
l
a
t
I

a
i
r
t
s
u
A

e
c
n
a
r
F

d
n
a
n
i
F

l

s
d
n
a
l
r
e
h
t
e
N
e
h
T

a
t
l
a
M

d
n
a
e
r
I

l

i

a
n
e
v
o
l
S

i

a
n
a
m
o
R

d
n
a
o
P

l

e
c
e
e
r
G

i

a
n
o
t
s
E

n
e
d
e
w
S

e
m
a
n
i
r
u
S

a
i
k
a
v
o
l
S

l

a
g
u
t
r
o
P

d
n
a
l
r
e
z
t
i

w
S

g
r
u
o
b
m
e
x
u
L

i

a
n
a
u
h
t
i
L

a
i
v
t
a
L

y
r
a
g
n
u
H

a
i
t
a
o
r
C

i

a
n
o
d
e
c
a
M
h
t
r
o
N

i

a
n
a
b
A

l

Source: European Commission, About this Consultation299 

3.1.2. Online survey 

Within the framework of the study to support the evaluation of the Directive on preventing 
and  combating  trafficking  in  human  beings  and  protecting  its  victims  and  an  impact 
assessment  for  a  legislative  proposal  on  the  topic,  the  external  contractor  launched  an 
online survey, which aimed at collecting both comprehensive and specific information on 
stakeholders’ views regarding the impact of the Anti-trafficking Directive and some of the 
remaining challenges in preventing and combatting trafficking in human beings. It allowed 
to  collect  information  from  a  large  number  of  stakeholders,  and  to  gather  specific 
contributions that would not be possible to obtain from interviews alone. Specifically, the 
online survey was targeted at the following categories of stakeholders: 

  National competent authorities (16 responded); 
  National Rapporteurs and Equivalent Mechanisms (14 responded); 
  National law enforcement authorities concerned with THB-related crimes 

(9 responded);  

  National  judicial  authorities  concerned  with  THB-related  crimes  (12 

responded); 

  National authorities responsible for social services (1 responded); 
  Relevant civil society organisations (24 responded); 
  Other national authorities (4 responded). 

In total,  90 replies to  the online survey were  received. The survey was launched on 29 
November 2021 using the EY on-line survey tool Qualtrics, and remained open until 21 
January 2022. 

299 European Commission, Have your Say – Fighting Human Trafficking: Review of EU rules. Available 
here.  

22 

 
 
                                                           
 
 
2.1.3. Stakeholder interviews 

The contractor carried out interviews with 29 stakeholders from 41 organisations across 
six main stakeholder groups, as summarised in Table 1. Topic guides and the content of 
interviews were tailored to the expertise of the interviewee. Stakeholders were identified 
the  Commission,  a  stakeholder  mapping  process, 
through  suggestions 
recommendations  from  the  interviewees,  and  recommendations  from  members  of  the 
study’s expert panel. Key information was coded into an evidence grid, in relation to each 
evaluation question.  

from 

Table 1: Number of organisations consulted by stakeholder group 

Stakeholder group 

EU Agency300 

EMPACT 

International organisation 

European civil soceity organisation301 

association 

or 

Business/employer 
representative 

Experts/academics 

Total:  

Number 
consulted 

of 

organisations 

9 

1 

6 

5 

2 

6 

29 

3.2. Results of the consultation activities 

3.2.1. Public consultation 

A  summary  of  the  key  findings  from  the  public  consultation,  grouped  by  evaluation 
criterion, is provided below. It should be noted that this summary is not exhaustive and 
rather presents some of the key results of the public consultation.  

3.2.1.1. Effectiveness 

Most respondents to the public consultation considered that the Directive contributed to a 
small or moderate extent to reducing demand.302 

300 One of the stakeholders preferred to send a written response to the interview questionnaire, rather than 
participate in an interview.  
301 One of the stakeholders preferred to send a written response to the interview questionnaire,  rather than 
participate in an interview. 
302  Question  #3  of  the  public  consultation  asked  respondents  to  what  extent,  in  their  view,  the  Directive 
contributed  to  reducing  demand  in  trafficking  in  human  beings  related  to  sexual  exploitation,  labour 
exploitation,  exploitation  for  criminal  activities,  removal  of  organs  and  forced  begging.  More  than  40% 

23 

 
 
                                                           
61% of the respondents considered that the Directive should criminalise the knowing use 
of  services  exploited  from  victims  of  trafficking.  However,  respondents  had  more 
diverging views with respect to the extent to which existing national laws criminalising the 
knowing  use  of  exploited  services  had  contributed  to  reducing  the  demand  for  such 
services303.  

Almost 60% of the respondents to the public consultation considered that the Directive had 
only  contributed  to  holding  legal  persons  liable  for  THB  offences  to  a  ‘moderate’  or  a 
‘small extent’.304   

The  majority  of  the  respondents  (67%)  replied  that  the  Directive  had  contributed  to 
allowing victims of trafficking to effectively report a case to a “small extent”.305 

3.2.1.2. Efficiency 

Almost  half  of  the  replies  highlighted  the  cost-effectiveness  of  the  Anti-trafficking 
the 
Directive  (43%,  n=53).  The  majority  of 
implementation of the Directive had not caused unnecessary administrative burden (56%, 
n=69).  

the  respondents  considered 

that 

3.2.1.3. Relevance 

70% (n=83) of the respondents to the public consultation agreed that the gender dimension, 
in particular the protection of women and girls, should be more prominently articulated in 
the Directive. Twenty-three per cent (n=29) of respondents disagreed.306  

Almost two thirds of respondents (74%, n=92) agreed that he Directive should introduce 
specific  provisions  to  address  the  online  dimension  of  trafficking  in  human  beings, 
including online recruitment, advertisement and exploitation of the victims. Almost 20% 
(19%, n=24) disagreed.307 

3.2.1.4. Coherence  

Most of the respondents (69%, n=86) considered that the Anti-trafficking Directive was 
coherent with the Victims’ Rights Directive (2012/29/EU). Nearly half of the respondents 

(44%, n=54) of respondents reported that the Directive  made  either a ‘moderate’ (21%, n=26) or ‘small’ 
(23%, n=28) contribution to reducing the demand for sexual exploitation, almost 20% (n=24) of respondent 
said  the  Directive  did  not  at  all  contribute.  Almost  one  third  of  respondents  (32%,  n=40)  stated  that  the 
Directive  made  a  small  contribution  to  reducing  the  demand  for  labour  exploitation.  A  large  portion  of 
respondents did not know whether the Directive contributed to reducing the demand for THB in relation to 
the exploitation for criminal activities (44%, n=55), the removal of organs (56%, n=69) or forced begging 
(47%, n=58).   
303 Only one respondent (1%), who was from an NGO, responded to a ‘very high extent’. Five (n=6) per cent 
of respondents said to a ‘high extent’, 15% (n=19) to a ‘moderate extent’ and 21% (n=26) to ‘a small extent’. 
Forty per cent of respondents (n= 49) reported that existing national laws criminalising the knowing use of 
exploited services of victims did “not at all” contribute to reducing the demand for such services. Nineteen 
per cent (n=23) responded ‘I don’t know’ 
304  One respondent (1%) answered to  a ‘very high extent’, 4% (n=5) of respondents answered to a ‘high 
extent’, 15% (n=19) answered to a ‘moderate extent’, 44% (n=54) answered to a ‘small extent’, 16% (n=20) 
answered ‘not at all’ and 20% (n=25) answered ‘I don’t know’.   
305 ‘High extent’: 10% (n=13), ‘Moderate extent’: 17% (n=21), ‘Small extent’: 54% (n=67), ‘Not at all’: 8% 
(n=10), ‘I do not know’: 10% (n=13). 
306 About 10% (n=12) states ‘I don’t know’.  
307 Six per cent (n=8) replied ‘I don’t know’.  

24 

 
                                                           
said  that  the  Anti-trafficking  Directive  was  coherent  also  with  the  Employer  Sanctions 
Directive (2009/52/EC) (43%, n=53) and the Child Sexual Abuse Directive (2011/93/EU) 
(39%, n=48). Almost half of the respondents (42%, n=52) were of the view that the Anti-
trafficking Directive was not coherent with the Residence Permit Directive (2004/81/EC).  

Respondents  to  the  public  consultation  mostly  found  that  the  Anti-trafficking  Directive 
was  coherent  with  the  UNTOC  and  its  supplementing  Protocol  (69%,  n=85),  the  ILO 
Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No.29) (58%, n=72), the CEDAW (51%, n=63) and the 
UNCRC (43%, n=53). 

3.2.1.5. Added value 

The vast majority of the replies underlined the added value brought by the Anti-trafficking 
Directive.  Ninety-eight  percent  (n=122)  considered  that  EU-wide  cooperation  was 
necessary to effectively combat trafficking in human beings. Eighty-two percent (n=102) 
considered  that  the  Anti-trafficking  Directive  continued  to  bring  an  added  value  in  the 
Member States in combatting THB. 85% (n=105) replied that, without the Anti-trafficking 
Directive,  it  would  be  more  difficult  for  Member  States  to  tackle  trafficking  in  human 
beings  individually.  Finally,  95%  (n=118)  agreed  that  the  aim  of  preventing  and 
combatting THB continued to require action at the EU level. 

3.2.2. Online survey 

3.2.2.1. Effectiveness 

Respondents to the online survey considered that prevention measures targeting victims 
were effective either to  a ‘moderate’ extent (30%, n=27) or to a ‘large’ extent (32% of 
respondents,  n=29).  Prevention  measures  targeting  child  victims  were  also  considered 
relatively  effective,  but  less  so  than  for  adults.  Thirty  per  cent  (n=27)  of  respondents 
claimed they were effective to a ‘moderate’ extent, 23% (n=21) stated they were to a ‘large’ 
extent, and 10% (n=9) to a ‘very large’ extent. However, 22% (n=20) of respondents said 
that preventive measures targeting child victims were effective to a small extent. 

Some  survey  respondents  considered  that  preventive  measures  targeting  potential 
offenders were relatively less effective than measures targeting victims. 24% (n=22) of the 
respondents claimed that they were effective to a ‘small’ extent and 13% (n=12) claimed 
they were not effective at all. 

22%  (n=20)  of  the  respondents  answered  that  measures  targeted  at  marginalised  Roma 
people  and  LGBTIQ  people  were  effective  to  a  ‘large  extent’  and  28%  (n=25)  to  a 
‘moderate extent’.308  

Most online survey respondents reported that compensation schemes in their Member State 
had been effective to a ‘small’ or ‘moderate’ extent for victims of trafficking.309 

308 Six per cent of respondents (n=5) answered that measures to assist, support and protect vulnerable 
groups, such as  marginalised  Roma people and LGBTIQ people had been effective in their Member 
State to a ‘very large extent’. Nine-teen per cent of respondents (n=17) answered to a ‘small extent’. 
Seven per cent of respondents (n=6) answered ‘not at all’.  
309  The  majority  of  respondents  suggested  compensation  schemes  had  been  effective,  although  the 
largest percentage (29%, n=26) of respondents answered that this was to a ‘small extent’. Ten per cent 

25 

 
                                                           
Stakeholders  had  different  views  when  it  comes the  effectiveness  of  witness  protection 
programmes  in  supporting  victims  of  THB.310  34%  of  the  respondents  said  such 
programmes were effective either to ‘very large’ or a ‘large extent’, while 20% said to a 
‘moderate extent’ or to a ‘small extent’.  

More  than  half  of  respondents  considered  that  the  Directive  contributed  towards  an 
increased number of convictions against THB for labour exploitation to a ‘moderate’ (30%, 
n=27)  or  to  a  ‘small  extent’  (30%,  n=27).311  More  than  one  third  (37%,  n=33)  of 
respondents said that the Directive contributed towards increased numbers of convictions 
against  THB  for  sexual  exploitation  to  a  ‘moderate  extent’.312  19%  (n=17)  said  the 
Directive contributed to a ‘large extent’ and 17% (n=15) said to a ‘small extent’.  

Nearly a quarter of respondents (23%, n=21) said that the Directive contributed towards 
an increased number of confiscations of THB-related proceeds to a ‘moderate extent’.313  

3.2.2.2. Efficiency 

The majority of survey respondents agreed on the cost-effectiveness of the Anti-trafficking 
Directive. 27% (n=24) of the respondents considered that the costs of implementing it did 
not outweigh its benefits at all, 17% (n=15) said that the costs outweigh benefits only from 
a  ‘small’  to  a  ‘moderate’  extent  and  only  12%  (n=11)  replied  that  the  costs  outweigh 
benefits  from  a  ‘large’  to  a  ‘very  large’  extent.314  The  highest  increases  in  resources, 
dedicated to the prevention and fight against THB at the national level, are associated with 
training and awareness-raising campaigns. 

However,  the  survey  found  that  available  funding  remained  insufficient  in  relation  to 
prevention measures, the fight against the crime, as well as the assistance and support to 
victims  of  trafficking.315  The  need  to  increase  the  allocation  of  national  funding  to 
externalised services was also highlighted. 

(n=9) of respondents answered, ‘to a very large extent’, the same percentage who answered, ‘not at all’ 
(n=9). 
310 Eighteen per cent (n=17) respondents said that witness protection programmes in their country had 
been effective in terms of protecting, assisting and supporting victims of THB to a ‘very large extent’, 
16% (n=14) said to a ‘large extent’, 19% (n=17) said ‘to a moderate extent’, 13% (n=12) said to a ‘small 
extent’, 8% (n=7) said ‘not at all’ and  25% (n=23) of respondents answered ‘I don’t know’. 
311  Four  out  of  90  respondents  stated  that  the  Directive  contributed  towards  an  increased  number  of 
convictions against THB for labour exploitation to a ‘very large extent’, 12 respondents stated to a ‘large 
extent’, seven respondents said the Directive ‘did not all’ contribute. Thirteen respondents said ‘I don’t 
know’.   
312 Five out of 90 respondents (6%) stated that the Directive contributed towards an increased number 
of convictions against THB for labour exploitation to a ‘very large extent’, six (7%) respondents said 
the Directive did not contribute ‘at all’. Fourteen (16%) said ‘I don’t know’.  
313 Only two respondents though the Directive contributed towards an increased number of confiscations 
of THB related proceeds to a ‘very large extent’. Fourteen per cent (n=13) responded to a ‘large extent’. 
Thirteen per cent (n=12) said the Directive did not contribute ‘at all’.  
314 Twenty-seven per cent of respondents (n=24) said ‘not at all’, 6% (n=5) said ‘to a small extent’, 11% 
(n=10) said ‘to a moderate extent’, 9% (n=8) said ‘to a large extent’, 3% (n=3) said ‘to a very large 
extent’, 44% (n=40) said ‘I don’t know’. 
315 Nine percent (n=8) of respondents said that funding  was ‘not at all’ sufficient  with respect to the 
criminalisation of the crime; 18% (n=16) said it was sufficient ‘to a small extent’, while 29% (n=26) 
replied ‘to a moderate extent’, 13% (n=12) ‘to a large extent’, 7% (n=6) ‘to a very large extent’, 24% 
(n=22) ‘I don’t know’. With respect to the assistance and support to victims of trafficking, the replies 

26 

 
                                                           
Although survey respondents considered that the implementation of the Anti-trafficking 
Directive did not entail a significant burden, some of them suggested some ways to further 
simplify  it,  notably  by  increasing  asset  seizures  and  confiscation  of  assets  from  the 
proceeds  of  trafficking  offences,  which  could  be  used  to  feed  compensation  schemes; 
improving inter-agency cooperation as well as focusing resources on prevention in order 
to address the root causes of trafficking.  

3.2.2.3. Relevance 

Overall,  survey  respondents  considered  that  the  Directive  was  still  fit  for  purpose  and 
addressed the main concerns related to trafficking in human beings, notably in relation to 
the prevention and criminalisation of the offence, as well as the protection of victims. in 
the EU.316 39% of the respondents stated that the Directive is fit for purpose to a ‘large 
extent’. 33% per cent stated that it is fit for purpose to a ‘moderate extent’.  

The vast majority of respondents said that the Directive did not sufficiently address the 
online dimension of trafficking. The digitalisation of the crime was the most commonly 
identified challenge for the next 5 to 10 years among respondents.317 

65%  of  the  respondents  said  that  EU  intervention  would  be  necessary  ‘to  a  very  large 
extent’ (38%, n=35) or to a ‘large extent’ (27%, n=25) in order to enhance cooperation 
with online private companies to fight against trafficking.318 No respondent said that the 
EU intervention would not be necessary for this purpose.   

Trafficking in human beings in high-risk sectors was perceived as a significant issue that 
needs to be addressed. Most respondents considered that trafficking of people in high-risk 
sectors is a problem in the EU to a ‘large’ or ‘very large’ extent. None of them said that it 
was ‘not at all’ relevant. 

3.2.2.4. Coherence 

Respondents had diverging views regarding the coherence of the Anti-trafficking Directive 
with Directive 2004/81/EC (Residence Permits Directive). While 37% of them agreed that 
the two instruments were coherent from a ‘large’ to a ‘very large’ extent, 38% said that the 
two directives were ‘not at all’ coherent or coherent to a ‘moderate extent’. 319  

were: ‘not at all’ 3% (n=3), ‘to a small extent’ 14% (n=13), ‘to a moderate extent’ 36% (n=32), ‘to a 
large extent’ 22% (n=20), ‘to a very large extent’ 7% (n=6), ‘don’t know’ 18% (n=16). With respect to 
prevention, 4% (n=4) of respondents said that funding was ‘not at all’ sufficient, while 22% (n=20) said 
it was ‘to a small extent’, 38% (n=34) ‘to a moderate extent’,10% (n=9) ‘to a large extent’, 4% (n=4) 
‘to a very large extent’ and 21% (n=19) ‘I don’t know’.  
316 Nineteen per cent of respondents said the Directive is fit for purpose to a ‘very large extent’, 39% 
said to a ‘large extent’, 35% said to a ‘moderate extent’ and 5% said to a ‘small extent’. No respondent 
answered that the Directive is ‘not at all’ fit for purpose. Four per cent answered ‘I don’t know’.  
317 25 respondents mentioned this as one of the main challenges in relation to the fight against HB in the 
next 5-10 years. 
318 Fifteen per cent (n=14) of respondents answered to a  ‘moderate  extent’, 7% (n=6) answered to a 
‘small extent’, and 9% (n=10) answered ‘I don’t know’.  
319 ‘Not at all’ 10% (n=9), ‘to a small extent’ 10% (n=9), ‘to a moderate extent’ 18% (n=16), ‘to a large 
extent’ 27% (n=24), ‘to a very large extent’ 10% (n=9), ‘I don’t know’ 26% (n=23). 

27 

 
                                                           
49%e  percent  (n=44)  of  the  survey  respondents  considered  that  the  Anti-trafficking 
Directive and Directive 2011/93/EU (Child Sexual Abuse Directive) were coherent to a 
‘large’ or a ‘very large’ extent.320 

The Anti-trafficking Directive and the EU Asylum acquis were deemed to be coherent to 
a limited extent.321 

3.2.2.5. Added value 

The survey underlined the added-value of the Anti-trafficking Directive, mainly in creating 
a common intra-EU playground, which encouraged Member States to take action against 
THB;  discouraged  traffickers  to  choose  some  Member  States  to  others  as  countries  of 
destination for the victims; and enhanced cross-border cooperation and the exchange of 
good practices between Member States. 

3.2.3. Stakeholders interviews 

3.2.3.1. Effectiveness 

One interviewee from an international body322 and one academic/expert were in favour of 
criminalising the knowing use of services exacted from victims of trafficking.323 

Three interviewees stressed that the Directive had contributed towards enhancing victims’ 
access  to  support  and  protection,  especially  for  female  victims.324  Several  interviewees 
underlined the need for increased attention and resources addressing the vulnerabilities of 
LGBTIQ people, and that more could be done to ensure that victims whose experiences do 
not  correspond  to  common  perceptions  of  victims  (e.g.  female  victims  and  victims  of 
trafficking for sexual exploitation) receive adequate support.325   

Several  interviewees  considered  that,  although  victims  are  in  principle  not  obliged  to 
cooperate  with  law  enforcement  authorities,  cooperation  is  sometimes  necessary  in 
practice  for  victims  to  be  recognised  as  victims  and  receive  assistance,  support  and 
protection.326 

Interviewees highlighted that the risks of punishment of victims who are exploited for the 
purpose of criminal activities is an issue in several Member States.327 Two interviewees 
mentioned that irregular migrants or persons who are under asylum procedures often fear 
to be forcibly returned.328   

320 ‘Not at all’ 1% (n=1), ‘to a small extent’ 4% (n=4), ‘to a moderate extent’ 19% (n=17), ‘to a large 
extent’ 36% (n=32), ‘to a very large extent’ 13% (n=12), ‘I don’t know’ 27% (n=24). 
321 ‘Not at all’ 7% (n=6), ‘to a small extent’ 17% (n=15), ‘to a moderate extent’ 18% (n=16), ‘to a large 
extent’ 14% (n=13), ‘to a very large extent’ 3% (n=3), ‘I don’t know’ 41% (n=37). 
322 Interviewee #14. 
323 Interviewee #27. 
324 Interviewees#17, #18, and #24.  
325 Interviewees #3, #6, #8, #17, and #12. 
326 Interviewees #8, #20, #27; submission to the OPC by LEFÖ.  
327 Interviewees #8), #14, #21, #25, #28, #29. 
328 Interviewees #8 and #11. 

28 

 
                                                           
Some  interviewees  mentioned  that  the  concept  of  “forced  labour”  could  be  further 
clarified329, as its interpretation is often left to national law or courts, which can lead to 
different interpretations across the Member States330. 

3.2.3.2. Efficiency 

Interviewees  pointed  to  the  fact  that  the  lack  of  funding  can  be  a  constraint  to  the 
implementation of the Anti-trafficking Directive. They highlighted that limited funding – 
both at the EU and national levels - hinders Member States’ capacity to deliver effective 
prevention  measures,  including  awareness  raising  initiatives  and  training  targeted  at 
professionals likely to come into contact with THB victims. 

3.2.3.3. Relevance 

According to one interviewee from an international body, the gender-specific approach to 
the fight against trafficking is not always put into practice. Moreover, it often only concerns 
the assistance, support and protection of the victims, while failing to be taken into account 
in the context of prosecutions and investigations.331 

3.2.3.4. Coherence 

Some  interviewees  underlined  that  it  is  not  always  clear,  which  of  the  assistance  and 
support measures included in the Anti-trafficking Directive and those provided for by EU 
Asylum acquis should prevail when it comes to victims of trafficking who are international 
protection applicants or beneficiaries.  

3.2.3.5. Added value 

Interviewees  highlighted  the  added  value  of  the  Anti-trafficking  Directive  in  ensuring 
coordination  at  the  EU  level,  as  well  as  regarding  its  contribution  to  the  creation  of 
transnational referral mechanisms. 

3. Consultation in the context of the impact assessment 

The external contractor carried out individual interviews and case study group interviews 
in order to assess the potential impacts of the proposed policy options. The organisations 
and type of stakeholders consulted as part of this process is included in Table 2.  

Table 2: Interviewees consulted on potential impacts of policy options 

Individuals/Organisations consulted 

Types of stakeholders 

Council of Europe (CoE) 

International body 

European Labour Authority (ELA) 

EU Agency 

European Union Agency for Asylum (EUAA) 

EU Agency 

329 Interviewees #20 and #28.  
330 However, it should be noted that there is a vast, existing guidance provided by the ILO’s Committee 
of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations. 
331 Interviewee #3. 

29 

 
                                                           
European Union Agency for Law Enforcement 
Training (CEPOL) 

EU Agency 

Frontex 

EU Agency 

La Strada International 

EU civil society organisation 

Red Cross EU 

EU civil society organisation 

Swedish  expert  on  criminalisation  of  use  of 
exploited services 

Expert/academic 

Victims Support Europe 

EU 
organisations 

civil 

society 

In addition to individual interviews, the external contractor carried out group interviews 
with national stakeholders in five selected Member States  – France, Italy, Hungary, the 
Netherlands, and Romania. The criteria for selection were described in detail in the study’s 
inception report delivered to the European Commission and included:  

  Number of registered victims of THB in the Member State; 
  Geographical position (Central, Southern, Northern and Eastern Europe); 
  Common types of exploitation found in the Member State; 
  Whether  the  Member  State  is  a  typical  country  of  origin  or  destination  for 

victims of THB. 

National  stakeholders invited to  participate in  the case study  group interviews included 
national  competent  authorities  working  on  THB,  national  law  enforcement  authorities, 
national judicial authorities and social services working with victims of THB.  

Prior to the interviews, stakeholders had been asked to fill in a written questionnaire, in 
which they were asked to provide: 

-  Quantitative  scores  on  the  social,  security,  economic  and  fundamental  rights 

impacts of each policy measure; 

-  Quantitative  scores  on  the  necessity,  effectiveness,  coherence,  subsidiarity, 

proportionality and EU added value of each policy measure; 

-  Quantitative estimation of the expected cost of implementing each measure. 

ANNEX V. STATISTICS 

1.  State of play: trends and extent of THB 

This section of the draft first final report sets out the state of play regarding the levels of 
and trends in THB. The analysis is based on data on THB provided by the EUROSTAT, 
covering the reporting period 2013-2020. The analysis was complemented by a review of 
a EC/Eurostat  2015 report on THB, which provided insights  into the situation in  2010-

30 

 
 
 
2012.332 The presentation of findings that follows excludes the United Kingdom (UK) but 
includes Denmark, thus covering the situation in the EU27.333 

1.1.  Total number of victims: current situation and trends 

The  annual  number  of  registered  victims  of  trafficking  in  human  beings  showed 
relatively  little  sign  of  variation  across  the  2013-2020  reporting  period.  The  total 
number of victims registered during the period 2013-2020 was 55,314 in the EU27, with 
an  average  of  16  registered  victims  per  million  inhabitants.  The  annual  number  of 
registered victims showed relatively little sign of variation across the 2013-2020 reporting 
period  (see  Figure  3),  with  the  lowest  number  recorded  in  2015  (6,071  registered 
victims)334 and reaching the highest value in 2019 (7,777 registered victims). The annual 
numbers are comparable, if generally slightly lower, to the number recorded in the EU27 
in 2011 (n=7,440) and notably lower than the 2012 number (n= 8,853).335 

Figure 3: Trends in the number of registered victims in the EU (2013-2020)336 

9000

8000

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

The  actual  number  of  victims  is  likely  significantly  higher  than  reported  data 
suggests,  as  these  statistics  only  capture  victims  that  become  known  to  one  of  the 
registering entities and many victims remain undetected.337  

Numbers  of  registered  victims  differs  by  Member  State  (see  Figure  4).  During  the 
period 2013-2020, the five Member States with the largest number of registered victims, 

332 European Commission, Eurostat, Trafficking in human beings: 2015 edition, Publications Office, 2015. 
Available here.  
333 Note: At the time of writing, the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war was predicted to impact on the extent of 
trafficking in human beings in Europe. However, no statistics were available to include in this report. For 
more information, please see Siegfried, K; Ukraine crisis creates new trafficking risks, UNHCR, 13 April 
2022. Available here.  
334 Values for 2015 are significantly affected by the fact that data are not available for France, which 
recorded among the highest number of victims in the EU27. 
335 European Commission, Eurostat, Trafficking in human beings: 2015 edition, Publications Office, 2015. 
336 Values for 2015 are significantly affected by the fact that data are not available for France, which 
recorded among the highest number of victims in the EU27. 
337 European Commission (2020), Data collection of trafficking in human beings in the EU. Available at: link. 

31 

 
 
                                                           
in  absolute  numbers,  were  the  Netherlands  (8,967),  France  (8,652),338  Italy  (6,927), 
Romania (5,742) and Germany (4,842). However, considering the proportion of victims as 
compared to the total population339 of the registering country, rather than on the absolute 
number  of  victims,  the  top  five  EU-27  Member  States  in  the  period  2013-2018  were 
Cyprus (100), the Netherlands (66), Romania and Austria (both 36), and Malta (35).340  

Figure 4: Number of registered victims by Member State (2013-2020) 

0

2.000

4.000

6.000

8.000

10.000

AT
BE
BG
CY
CZ
DE
DK
EE
EL
ES
FI
FR
HR
HU
IE
IT
LT
LU
LV
MT
NL
PL
PT
RO
SE
SI
SK

Three quarters of all victims in the EU were female (women and girls) (75%), ranging 
from  42%  in  Portugal  to  92%  in  Bulgaria.341  There  were  two  Member  States  (BE,  PT) 
where the majority of victims recorded during this period were male (men and boys).  

The majority of all victims (79%) in the EU were adults.342 However, children were the 
majority of recorded victims in Hungary (54%) and in further five Member States (CZ, 
EE, EL, HR, RO) the proportion of children as a share of all victims where age group was 
reported exceeded one third.343 A significant number of victims are EU citizens. Of the 
total  registered  victims,  56%  were  EU  citizens,  although  the  share  of  non-EU  citizens 

338 Data for 2015 not available and thus not included in the total. 
339 Number of victims per million inhabitants. 
340 Missing data: CZ (2017, 2018), FR (2015), SE (2017, 2018). 
341 Victims whose sex was reported as “Unknown” excluded from this analysis. 
342 Victims whose age group was reported as “Unknown” excluded from this analysis. 
343 Children defined as persons younger than 18 years. 

32 

 
 
                                                           
among  recorded  victims  increased  over  time.344  Amongst  the  EU  victims,  63%  were 
registered in their country of citizenship, although this varied substantially across Member 
States. To give an example of countries with higher numbers of their own citizens among 
registered victims: almost three fourths (70%) of victims with Hungarian citizenship were 
registered  in  Hungary,  much  smaller  shares  of  victims  with  Bulgarian  (33%)  and 
Romanian (44%) citizenship were registered in their respective countries. 

1.2.  Trends in types of trafficking 

1.2.1.   Overview of trends 

The common forms of exploitation of human beings trafficked in Europe are sexual 
exploitation and labour exploitation, which is linked to a sustained demand for sexual 
services and cheap labour. Figure 5 provides an overview of the main forms of exploitation 
in the EU27 over time.345 The most prevalent form was consistently sexual exploitation, 
although its share decreased somewhat from 76% in 2014 to less than 60% in later years.346 

Trafficking for purposes other than sexual exploitation appear to be increasing. The 
proportion  of  labour  exploitation,  accounting  for  20%  of  all  registrations  during  2013-
2020,  as  a  share  of  all  registrations  initially  decreased  somewhat  over  time  but  later 
increased to represent approximately one third of all victims in 2020. The proportion of 
“other” forms increased over time to represent approximately one fifth of all cases in 2018 
and decreased thereafter to slightly more than 10% of all registrations.347 

344 For the purposes of this analysis, citizenships recorded as “autre europe est,” “autre europe ouest” and 
“other” were assumed to be non-EU victims. 
345 See section 7.5 for a discussion of possible national differences in recording forms of exploitation, which 
may give rise to discrepancies and imprecisions in aggregate analyses. 
346 Cases where the form of exploitation is indicated as unknown (4% of all cases) excluded from analysis. 
Data  missing  for  the  following  country-years:  AT  (2017, 2018),  BG  (2017,  2018),  CZ  (2017,  2018),  EL 
(2013, 2014), FI (2017, 2018), FR (2015), IT (2013, 2014), PL (2015, 2016), RO (2015, 2016), SE (2017, 
2018) 
347  The  categorization  of  exploitation  forms  follows  the  2013/2014  data  collection  questionnaire.  For 
subsequent waves, this analysis includes the following forms of exploitation in the “other” category: benefit 
fraud, criminal activities, forced begging/use for begging, other forms of exploitation, removal of organs, 
unknown form of exploitation. See section 6.2.3 for a more detailed discussion of other types of exploitation. 
Note that both labour and other (i.e., non-sexual and non-labour) forms of exploitation saw a notable change 
between 2018 and 2019. It is possible that this development is at least partially attributable to changes in data 
collection.  Starting  in  2019,  the  heretofore  separate  categories  "labour,  including  forced  labour”  and 
“domestic servitude” were seemingly merged in a new reporting category “forced labour, including domestic 
servitude.” At the same time, the share of registrations recorded as “other” fell precipitously from 14% in 
2018 to 5% in 2019. 

33 

 
                                                           
Figure 5: Trends in main forms of exploitation in the EU (2013-2020), as a % of the 
total number of victims registered 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Sexual

Labour

Other

The forms of exploitation differ by Member State. Figure 6 shows the distribution of 
cases by type of exploitation across the entire reporting period (2013-2020) by individual 
Member States. In the majority of Member States (n=18), sexual exploitation was the most 
common form. In five Member States (BE, LV, MT, PL, PT) labour exploitation was most 
prevalent and in another three Member States (LT, SE, SK) the most frequently reported 
forms  of  exploitation  fell  under  the  “other”  category.  In  Finland  sexual  and  labour 
exploitation were equally common. 

34 

 
 
 
Figure 6: Main forms of exploitation per Member State in 2013-2020, as a % of the 
total number of victims registered 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

AT BE BG CY CZ DE DK EE EL ES FI FR HR HU IE IT LT LU LV MT NL PL PT RO SE SI SK

Sexual

Labour

Other

1.2.2.   Sexual exploitation 

Sexual  exploitation  is  the  most  prevalent  purpose  behind  THB  in  the  EU  (65%  of  all 
reported cases between 2013-2020),348 although as Figure 7 shows, the absolute number 
of registered victims of sexual exploitation decreased between 2013 and 2020. The victims 
of sexual exploitation are overwhelmingly female (93%), both adults and minors, to the 
point that trafficking in human beings for sexual exploitation has been defined as a form 
of  violence  against  women,  rooted  in  gender  inequalities.349  This  is  the  case  across  all 
Member States.  

In all but three Member States (CZ, HU, NL) female victims accounted for at least 90% of 
all registered victims. The share of female victims stayed very high over time, exceeding 
90% in almost every year during the 2013-2020 reporting period (the exception was 2019 
with  85%  share  of  females)  as  well  as  during  2010-2012.350  The  Member  States 
registering the highest numbers of female victims of sexual exploitation in 2013-2020 were 
France  (5,911),  the  Netherlands  (5,535),  Germany  (3,753),  Italy  (2,795),  and  Romania 
(2,681). 

348 Cases with unknown form of exploitation were omitted from the analysis. 
349 European Commission (2020), Data collection of trafficking in human beings in the EU. Available at: link. 
350 European Commission, Eurostat, Trafficking in human beings: 2015 edition, Publications Office, 2015. 

35 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
Figure 7: Trends in the number of sexual exploitation victims in the EU27 (2013-
2020) 351 

4231

4093

4208

3979

3857

3883

3157

3037

4500

4000

3500

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Over  the  reporting  period,  children  accounted  for  approximately  one  quarter  of  sexual 
exploitation  victims  where  the  age  group  was  reported.  This  is  slightly  higher  than  the 
share of child victims across all types of exploitation. There was little change in the value 
of this indicator over time, decreasing somewhat from 27% in 2015 to 24% in 2020.352 It 
does, however, represent a notable increase from 2010-2012 when only 14% of registered 
victims of sexual exploitation were under 18 years old.353 

1.2.3.   Labour exploitation 

Trafficking  for  labour  exploitation  is  the  second  main  cause  of  THB  in  the  EU  (21%). 
Several  Member  States  and  CSOs  report  an  increase  in  trafficking  for  labour 
exploitation,354 an assessment trend which is also borne out by ESTAT data indicating a 
notable  increase  in  2019  and  2020  (see  Figure  8)  (although  it  is  possible  that  this 
development is at least partially attributable to changes in data collection). THB for labour 
exploitation entails any work or service exacted from any person under the threat of a 
penalty and for which the person has not offered himself or herself voluntarily.355  

Overall,  labour  exploitation  affects  mostly  men  (70%),  although  in  particular  sectors 
women  are  increasingly  exploited  (e.g.,  domestic  work,  care  activities  or  cleaning 
services).  After  an  initial  slight  increase,  the  share  of  men  among  victims  of  labour 
exploitation where the victim’s sex is reported decreased over the reporting period, from 
73% in 2013 to 65% in 2020. The Member States registering the highest number of labour 

351 Note: 2015 values very likely affected by missing data from France, which typically registers among the 
highest numbers of THB victims in the EU27. 
352 Data on age breakdowns by form of exploitation not available for 2013 and 2014. A disaggregated analysis 
of trends at the level of individual Member States is rendered difficult by gaps in existing data. For instance, 
most of victims reported by Austria are recorded with their age group unknown, with the majority of the 
much smaller remainder recorded as children.  
353 European Commission, Eurostat, Trafficking in human beings: 2015 edition, Publications Office, 2015, 
https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2785/512112 
354 European Commission (2020), Data collection of trafficking in human beings in the EU. Available at: link. 
355 ILO Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29). 

36 

 
 
  
                                                           
exploitation victims during the 2013-2020 reporting period were the Netherlands (1,957), 
Italy (998), France (974), Romania (953), and Spain (602). 

Figure 8: Trends in the number of labour exploitation victims in the EU27 (2013-
2020)  

1914

1833

1063

875

860

934

988

947

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Labour exploitation predominantly affects adult victims, with children accounting for only 
7%  of  victims  of  this  type  of  exploitation  where  the  victim’s  age  group  was  reported 
between 2013-2020. Over time, the share of children among victims of labour exploitation 
rose  from  4%  in  2015  to  12%  in  2016,  stayed  broadly  constant  until  2018  and  then 
decreased dramatically to only 4% in 2019 and 2% in 2020.356 

1.2.4.   Other forms of exploitation 

As set out above, forms of exploitation other than sexual and labour-related accounted for 
14% of THB cases where the form of exploitation was indicated. The share of these other 
forms of exploitations grew from 8% in 2013 to 20% in 2018 and then decreased to 12% 
in 2020.  

Data for the reporting period 2015-2020 enable  a further disaggregation of this “other” 
category  into  additional  specific  forms  of  exploitation,  as  shown  in  Figure  9.  Forms  of 
exploitation falling under the “other” umbrella term included criminal activities (3% of all 
cases  during  2015-2020),  forced  begging  (also  3%),  and  benefit  fraud  and  removal  of 
organs (both less than 1%). Cases with a form of exploitation marked as “other” (i.e., not 
indicating any of the specific designations offered) accounted for 11% of all cases during 
the reporting period. 

356 Data on age breakdowns by form of exploitation are not available for 2013 and 2014. The same limitations 
pertaining to individual MS data regarding age group breakdowns as those reported in the section on sexual 
exploitation apply to labour exploitation as well. The decrease observed in 2019 and 2020 may also be at 
least partially attributable to data issues as both years saw a notable increase in the number of cases were age 
group was reported as unknown. 

37 

 
 
 
                                                           
Figure 9: Trends in all forms of exploitation in the EU (2015-2020), as a % of the 
total number of victims registered 

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Other forms of exploitation

Removal of organs

Forced begging/use for begging

Criminal activities

Benefit fraud

Labour included forced labour and domestic servitude

Sexual exploitation

1.3. Trends in the types of people who are trafficked 

1.3.1.   Victims by age 

In 2013-2020, child victims  constituted around one-fifth  of all registered victims  in the 
EU27 (21%) where the victim’s age group was known. The age group of the victim was 
indicated as “unknown” in 12% of all cases. The share of children among victims increased 
somewhat  over time, growing from  18% in  2013 to  24% in 2020 (see  Figure 10). This 
represents a continuation of a trend from previous years, as the share of children among 
registered victims was and 17% in 2011 and 2012.357 

357 European Commission, Eurostat, Trafficking in human beings: 2015 edition, Publications Office, 2015. 
Available here.  

38 

 
 
 
                                                           
Figure 10: Trends in victims by age group in the EU27, as a % of the total cases of 
THB with age group reported (2013-2020) 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

82%

81%

76%

79%

77%

79%

80%

76%

18%

19%

24%

21%

23%

21%

20%

24%

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Child

Adult

The Member States with the highest proportion of registered child victims where age group 
was known were Hungary (54%), the Czech Republic (44%), Romania (42%), and Estonia 
and Spain (38%). Figure 11 provides an overview of the age group distribution of victims 
across all Member States. 

Figure 11: Victims by age group per Member State, as a % of the total cases of THB 
with age group reported (2013-2018) 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

AT BE BG CY CZ DE DK EE EL ES FI FR HR HU IE IT LT LU LV MT NL PL PT RO SE SI SK

Child

Adult

1.3.2.   Victims by sex 

In 2013-2020, women and girls represented a large majority of victims (75%) whose sex 
was reported (Figure 12). The sex of the victim was indicated as “unknown” in 9% of all 
cases, though the reporting of sex appears to have improved over time, with “unknown” 
indicated only in less than 5% of cases in 2020. The proportion of women as a share of all 
victims decreased over the 2013-2020 reporting period, declining from 81% in  2013 to 

39 

 
 
  
 
  
67% in 2020, although similar fluctuation could be seen in 2010-2012 as well.358 Female 
victims  are  especially  endangered  by  trafficking  for  the  purpose  of  sexual  exploitation, 
while men are usually victims of labour exploitation.  

Figure 12: Trends in victims by sex in the EU27, as a % of the total cases of THB 
with sex reported (2013-2020) 

19%

17%

22%

22%

23%

25%

35%

32%

81%

83%

78%

78%

77%

75%

65%

67%

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Female Male

Source: Authors’ elaboration based on ESTAT data 

During  the  reporting  period,  the  Member  States  registering  the  highest  proportion  of 
female victims were Bulgaria (92%), Slovenia (89%), Hungary (87%), Austria (85%) and 
Germany  (84%).  By  contrast,  the  Member  States  with  the  highest  proportion  of  male 
victims  were  Portugal  (58%),  Belgium  (54%),  the  Czech  Republic  (48%),  Lithuania 
(47%), and Slovakia (44%). Figure 13 displays the categorisation of reported victims by 
sex in each Member State. 

358 European Commission, Eurostat, Trafficking in human beings: 2015 edition, Publications Office, 2015. 
Available here.  

40 

 
 
 
                                                           
Figure 13: Victims by sex per Member State, as a % of the total cases of THB 
reported (2013-2020) 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

AT BE BG CY CZ DE DK EE EL ES FI FR HR HU IE IT LT LU LV MT NL PL PT RO SE SI SK

Female Male

Other

1.3.3.   Victims by citizenship 

In 2013-2020, 56% of the registered victims with known citizenship information were EU 
citizens  and  44%  were  non-EU  citizens.  In  2%  of  cases,  the  victim’s  citizenship  was 
recorded as unknown. As Figure 14 shows, the share of EU victims gradually decreased 
between 2013 and 2018 and then increased somewhat in 2020.359 In 2016 and 2018 the 
number of registered non-EU victims eclipsed that of those with EU citizenship.  

Figure 14: Trends in victims by citizenship group in the EU27, as a % of the total 
cases of THB with citizenship reported (2013-2020) 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

31%

29%

69%

71%

43%

57%

51%

48%

52%

50%

49%

52%

48%

50%

42%

58%

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

EU

non-EU

359 The ratio of EU and non-EU victims in 2010-2012 was similar to that of 2013. European Commission, 
Eurostat, 
2015, 
https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2785/512112 

Publications  Office, 

Trafficking 

edition, 

beings: 

human 

2015 

in 

41 

 
 
  
 
  
                                                           
As Table 1 shows, the main countries of citizenship of EU victims were Romania (9,392), 
Hungary (3,565), Bulgaria (3,424), France (3,136), and the Netherlands (2,558).  

Table 1: Citizenship of victims of THB (EU citizens, 2013-2020) 

Country 

Number 

9392 

3565 

3424 

3136 

2558 

1551 

1262 

961 

605 

421 

387 

261 

218 

203 

176 

141 

76 

62 

56 

23 

21 

20 

18 

Romania 

Hungary 

Bulgaria 

France 

Netherlands 

Poland 

Germany 

Italy 

Slovakia 

Lithuania 

Portugal 

Latvia 

Croatia 

Spain 

Czech Republic 

Greece 

Estonia 

Finland 

Austria 

Belgium 

Ireland 

Slovenia 

Cyprus 

42 

 
Denmark 

Malta 

Sweden 

Luxembourg 

8 

6 

3 

1 

The main countries of citizenship of non-EU victims in the EU were Nigeria (6,513), China 
(1,417), Morocco (824), Ukraine (743), and Philippines (605) (see  

43 

 
Country 
Nigeria 
China 
Morocco 
Ukraine 
Philippines 
Brazil 
Moldova 
Pakistan 
India 
Albania 
Cameroon 
Uganda 
Afghanistan 
Colombia 
Guinea 
Vietnam 
Bangladesh 
Thailand 
Venezuela 
Tunisia 
Sierra Leone 
Serbia 
Algeria 
Bosnia and Herzegovina 
Gambia 
Iraq 
Ghana 
Russia 
Egypt 
Syria 
Côte d'Ivoire 
Dominican Republic 
Paraguay 
Somalia 
Senegal 
Eritrea 
Nepal 
Peru 
Democratic Republic of the Congo 
North Korea 
Indonesia 
Turkey 
Angola 
North Macedonia 

44 

Number 
6513 
1417 
824 
743 
605 
588 
473 
418 
406 
378 
375 
317 
303 
295 
291 
283 
279 
257 
228 
221 
217 
214 
205 
194 
193 
192 
190 
187 
172 
172 
161 
156 
150 
146 
140 
138 
130 
126 
124 
119 
109 
107 
93 
86 

 
Iran 
Belarus 
Vietnam 
Ethiopia 
Taiwan 
Mali 
Sri Lanka 
Honduras 
Comoros 
Nicaragua 
Kenya 
Zimbabwe 
Mongolia 
Equatorial Guinea 
Niger 
Tajikistan 
Benin 
Liberia 
Argentina 
Georgia 
Ecuador 
Kosovo 
Republic of the Congo 
Suriname 
Armenia 
Burkina Faso 
Cuba 
Guinea-Bissau 
Bolivia 
El Salvador 
Mauritius 
Sudan 
Uzbekistan 
Kyrgyzstan 
United Kingdom 
Madagascar 
South Africa 
Togo 
Burundi 
Tanzania 
Zambia 
Other 

). 

45 

84 
81 
77 
66 
60 
59 
57 
52 
49 
49 
46 
43 
39 
36 
35 
35 
33 
32 
27 
27 
26 
25 
24 
24 
23 
23 
23 
22 
21 
21 
20 
20 
20 
17 
16 
14 
14 
14 
13 
10 
10 
1,706 

 
Table 2: Citizenship of victims of THB (non-EU citizens, 2013-2020)360 

360 Note: “Other” includes all nationalities with fewer than 10 individuals, those marked as “other,” “autre 
Afrique,”  “autre  Europe  est,”  “autre  Europe  ouest,”  and  those  marked  as  “stateless.”  Entries  marked  as 
“Congo” subsumed under “Democratic Republic of the Congo.” 

46 

 
 
                                                           
Country 
Nigeria 
China 
Morocco 
Ukraine 
Philippines 
Brazil 
Moldova 
Pakistan 
India 
Albania 
Cameroon 
Uganda 
Afghanistan 
Colombia 
Guinea 
Vietnam 
Bangladesh 
Thailand 
Venezuela 
Tunisia 
Sierra Leone 
Serbia 
Algeria 
Bosnia and Herzegovina 
Gambia 
Iraq 
Ghana 
Russia 
Egypt 
Syria 
Côte d'Ivoire 
Dominican Republic 
Paraguay 
Somalia 
Senegal 
Eritrea 
Nepal 
Peru 
Democratic Republic of the Congo 
North Korea 
Indonesia 
Turkey 
Angola 
North Macedonia 

47 

Number 
6513 
1417 
824 
743 
605 
588 
473 
418 
406 
378 
375 
317 
303 
295 
291 
283 
279 
257 
228 
221 
217 
214 
205 
194 
193 
192 
190 
187 
172 
172 
161 
156 
150 
146 
140 
138 
130 
126 
124 
119 
109 
107 
93 
86 

 
Iran 
Belarus 
Vietnam 
Ethiopia 
Taiwan 
Mali 
Sri Lanka 
Honduras 
Comoros 
Nicaragua 
Kenya 
Zimbabwe 
Mongolia 
Equatorial Guinea 
Niger 
Tajikistan 
Benin 
Liberia 
Argentina 
Georgia 
Ecuador 
Kosovo 
Republic of the Congo 
Suriname 
Armenia 
Burkina Faso 
Cuba 
Guinea-Bissau 
Bolivia 
El Salvador 
Mauritius 
Sudan 
Uzbekistan 
Kyrgyzstan 
United Kingdom 
Madagascar 
South Africa 
Togo 
Burundi 
Tanzania 
Zambia 
Other 

84 
81 
77 
66 
60 
59 
57 
52 
49 
49 
46 
43 
39 
36 
35 
35 
33 
32 
27 
27 
26 
25 
24 
24 
23 
23 
23 
22 
21 
21 
20 
20 
20 
17 
16 
14 
14 
14 
13 
10 
10 
1,706 

Across the EU27, approximately one-third (36%) of all registered victims were citizens of 
the country in which they are registered.361 Citizens of other EU countries accounted for 
approximately  one  fifth  (21%)  of  all  registered  victims  and  non-EU  citizens  for 

48 

 
approximately two fifths (44%) of registered victims. However, this EU-level overview 
obscures important differences across individual Member States (see Figure 15). In some, 
the vast majority of registered victims were citizens of that country – this was particularly 
the  case  for  Bulgaria  (100%),  Romania  (100%),  Hungary  (99%),  Slovakia  (96%),  and 
Lithuania  (91%).  The  Member  States  with  the  highest  share  of  citizens  of  other  EU 
countries  among  registered  victims  were  the  Czech  Republic  (65%),  Germany  (48%), 
Ireland  (41%),  Slovenia  (39%),  and  Austria  (37%).  Lastly,  in  a  few  countries,  the  vast 
majority of registered victims were non-EU citizens. This was notably the case for Sweden 
(96%), Malta (90%), Finland (86%), Denmark (87%), and Belgium and Italy (both 75%).  

Figure 15: Victims by citizenship type per Member State, as a % of the total cases 
of THB reported (2013-2020) 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

AT BE BG CY CZ DE DK EE EL ES FI FR HR HU IE IT LT LU LV MT NL PL PT RO SE SI SK

Own

Other EU

non-EU

During 2015-2020,362 there was very little difference in the sex breakdown between EU 
and  non-EU  victims  until  2018.  Afterwards,  victims  with  EU  citizenship  were  notably 
more likely to be female than victims with non-EU citizenship, although sex information 
was not available for 7% of citizenship records during the reporting period.363 The majority 
of both groups were female, with the gap between the share of women in the EU and the 
non-EU group reaching 14 percentage points in 2020 (see Figure 16). 

361 No information on citizenship was available for 8% of all victims. Further, the citizenship of about 2% of 
victims  as  indicated  as  “unknown.”  These  records  were  excluded  from  the  analysis  presented  in  this 
paragraph. 
362  Sex breakdown of victims by citizenship group is not available for 2013 and 2014. 
363  One  implication  of  this  data  gap  is  that  the  share  of  females  arrived  at  by  looking  at  victims  with 
citizenship information only is somewhat lower than the share of females when analyzing all victims with 
sex data (72% vs. 75%, respectively). In other words, female victims appear to be slightly less likely to have 
their citizenship information identified and recorded than male victims. 

49 

 
 
                                                           
Figure 16: Share of female victims by citizenship group among victims registered in 
the EU27 (2015-2020) 

78%

75%

71%

76%

65%

54%

73%

67%

59%

79%

77%

76%

77%

76%

76%

76%

76%

76%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

EU

Non-EU

All victims

During the same reference period, there was a marked difference between the EU and non-
EU  groups  and  their  age  distribution  where  data  on  victims’  age  group  were  provided. 
There were notably more children among victims with EU citizenship than among victims 
with non-EU citizenship and the difference increased over time, largely due to the decrease 
in the share of children in the non-EU group (see Figure 17). Age group data were not 
available for 11% of records with citizenship information.364  

Figure 17: Share of children by citizenship group among victims registered in the 
EU27 (2015-2020) 

40%

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

32%

30%

24%

14%

23%

17%

34%

36%

35%

37%

24%

23%

25%

21%

13%

10%

6%

7%

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

EU

Non-EU

All victims

364  Similarly  to  the  discussion  of  sex  breakdowns  presented  above,  an  analysis  of  records  with  both 
citizenship and age group data yields a share of 23% of children among all victims, whereas an analysis of 
records with only age group data yields a share of 21% of children among all victims. In other words, child 
victims appear to be slightly more likely to have their citizenship information identified and recorded than 
adult victims. 

50 

 
 
  
 
  
                                                           
1.4.  Trends in criminal justice system indicators related to THB 

ESTAT collects data on a variety of aspects pertaining to the criminal justice involvement 
of individuals in  connection  with  THB cases.  Figure 18 shows trends in  three headline 
indicators related to the processing of individuals in the criminal justice system – suspects 
individuals, prosecuted individuals, and convicted individuals. Of the three, the number of 
recorded  suspects  shows  the  most  pronounced  increase,  nearly  doubling  from 
approximately 3,000 in 2013 to just under 8,000 in 2019. However, much of this increase 
is attributable to a gradual closing of data gaps. For instance, there are no data from Italy 
before 2017 and Italy alone recorded approximately 2,000 suspects in 2017 and 2018.365 
The number of recorded prosecuted individuals also rose over the reporting period, with a 
marked increase between 2014 and 2015 and a relatively stable trend thereafter. Again, the 
observed rise appears to be primarily a function of the fact that 2015 is the first year in 
which data from France are available. Lastly, the number of recorded convicted individuals 
increased somewhat over the reporting period, with a precipitous drop recorded in 2018. 
As with the previous two indicators, even this is largely explicable by data issues – no data 
are available for that year for Belgium, France, and the Netherlands, all Member States 
with comparatively high numbers of recorded convictions in prior years. 

Figure 18: Trends in headline criminal justice indicators related to THB cases 
(2015-2020) 

7924

7290

5919

5868

2942

2983

3159

3016

1892

1455

1830

1497

1580

3943

2384

1341

3187

2976

3484

3055

1734

693

1724

1295

9000

8000

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Suspected

Prosecuted

Convicted

1.4.1.  Individuals suspected of THB crimes 
Over the period 2015-2020,366 the majority of individuals suspected of THB crimes where 
sex information was recorded were male (73%). As Figure 19, shows, the sex breakdown 
of  THB  suspects  stayed  relatively  constant  over  time,  with  the  share  of  males  staying 
between 69% and 76% in individual years. 

365 The increase recorded in 2019 is also largely attributable to data from Italy, which reported an increase 
of more than 2,000 suspects from 2018 to 2019. 
366 Data on the sex of  suspects  only began being available in 2015. The sex of suspects  was recorded as 
“unknown”  in  5%  of  instances  over  the  2015-2020  period,  although  completeness  of  data  improved 
substantially over time  – in 2019 and 2020 fewer than 1% of records indicated the sex  of the  suspect as 
“unknown”. 

51 

 
 
 
                                                           
Figure 19: Sex of individuals suspected of THB crimes in EU27 (by year, 2015-2020) 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

74%

69%

74%

73%

72%

76%

26%

31%

26%

27%

28%

24%

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Female Male

Correspondingly, men accounted for the majority of individuals suspected of THB crimes 
in all but one Member State (see Figure 20). The exception to the rule was Latvia where 
women accounted for 62% of recorded suspects, in further three Member States (EE, FI, 
MT), the proportion of women among suspects exceeded 40%. 

Figure 20: Sex of individuals suspected of THB crimes in EU27 (by Member State, 
2015-2020) 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

T
A

E
B

G
B

Y
C

Z
C

E
D

K
D

E
E

L
E

S
E

I
F

R
F

R
H

U I
E
H

T
I

T
L

U
L

V
L

T
M

L
N

L
P

T
P

O
R

I

E S
S

K
S

Female Male

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the vast majority (96%) of those suspected of THB crimes in 2015-
2020 were adults.367 As with gender, the age breakdown of suspects stayed constant over 
the reporting period, with the share of children among suspects staying between 2% and 
5% in individual years. In four Member States, the share of children was notably higher 
than the EU average. In Estonia, children accounted for the majority of recorded suspects 
(53%);  however,  this  needs  to  be  viewed  in  light  of  a  very  small  number  of  suspects 

367 Age group was recorded as “unknown” in 9% of cases. No data on age group of suspects provided by PT. 

52 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
recorded in Estonia in 2015-2020 (n=42). In further three Member States (CZ, HU, SE), 
the share of children exceeded 10%.368  

With respect to various types of exploitation, individuals were most frequently suspected 
in relation to sexual exploitation (72%), followed by labour (18%) and other (10%) types 
of  exploitation.369  However,  as  Figure  21  shows,  the  share  of  sexual  exploitation  as  an 
underlying reason decreased over time from a high of 81% in 2017 to 65% in 2020. This 
was contrasted with a rise in the frequency of labour exploitation, reaching 24% of cases 
of suspects in 2020, and with a somewhat less notable rise in suspicions related to other 
forms of exploitation. 

Figure 21: Individuals suspected of THB crimes and underlying form of 
exploitation in EU27 (by year, 2015-2020) 

4%

18%

14%

9%

7%

12%

8%

16%

12%

23%

12%

24%

78%

77%

81%

76%

65%

65%

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Sexual

Labour

Other

Correspondingly,  in  most  Member  States  sexual  exploitation  was  the  most  commonly 
recorded form in connection with suspects (see Figure 22). The Member States with the 
highest shares of sexual exploitation cases were Finland (100%), Hungary (97%), Greece 
(92%), Ireland (88%), and the Czech Republic (87%). However, in three Member States, 
labour  exploitation  was  the  most  frequently  indicated  form  –  these  were  Malta  (82%), 
Luxembourg (52%) and Belgium (48%). 

368 In the case of Sweden, this is possibly attributable to data issues. Information on suspects’ age group is 
only available for 2015 and is recorded as “unknown” in the remaining years. 
369 Form of exploitation marked as “unknown” in 12% of cases. No data on forms of exploitation and suspects 
available from BG, DK, PT, RO. 

53 

 
 
 
                                                           
Figure 22: Individuals suspected of THB crimes and underlying form of 
exploitation in EU27 (by Member State, 2015-2020) 370 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

AT BE CY CZ DE EE

EL

ES

FI

FR HR HU IE

IT

LT

LU LV MT NL PL

SE

SI

SK

Sexual

Labour

Other

Lastly, with respect to the citizenship of individuals suspected of THB crimes, EU citizens 
accounted for more than two thirds (70%) of all suspects with known country of citizenship 
during  the  2015-2020  period.  However,  as  Figure  23  shows,  the  proportion  of  non-EU 
citizens among suspects increased steadily during the reporting period, reaching 41% in 
2020. 

370 Note: Data missing for BG, DK, PT, RO. 

54 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
Figure 23: Citizenship of individuals suspected of THB crimes (by year, 2015-2020) 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

10%

18%

27%

33%

34%

90%

82%

73%

67%

66%

41%

59%

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

EU

Non-EU

EU Member States with the highest number of nationals among those suspected of THB 
crimes  were  Romania  (5,685),  Italy  (5,545),  France  (3,914),  Hungary  (1,882),  and 
Germany (1,219) (see Table 3).  

Table 3: Citizenship of individuals suspected of THB crimes (EU citizens, 2015-
2020) 
Number of suspects 

Country 

5685 

5545 

3914 

1882 

1219 

1102 

436 

381 

248 

247 

224 

214 

Romania 

Italy 

France 

Hungary 

Germany 

Bulgaria 

Belgium 

Spain 

Greece 

Slovakia 

Netherlands 

Latvia 

55 

 
 
 
Poland 

Croatia 

Lithuania 

Czech Republic 

Slovenia 

Austria 

Finland 

Portugal 

Estonia 

Cyprus 

Malta 

Luxembourg 

Denmark 

Sweden 

Ireland 

192 

185 

147 

129 

80 

67 

66 

65 

29 

24 

8 

7 

6 

6 

5 

The  most  frequent  non-EU  nationalities  among  suspects  were  Nigeria  (2,441),  China 
(1,165), and Albania (695) (Table 4).  

Table 4: Citizenship of individuals suspected of THB crimes (non-EU citizens, 2015-
2020) 371 

Country 

Nigeria 

China 

Albania 

Pakistan 

Morocco 

Brazil 

Number 

2441 

1165 

695 

490 

456 

237 

371 Note: “Other” includes all nationalities with fewer than 10 individuals, those marked as “other” and those 
marked as “stateless.” 

56 

 
 
                                                           
234 

222 

194 

179 

145 

143 

140 

138 

123 

111 

97 

89 

86 

86 

82 

72 

65 

64 

58 

57 

54 

53 

51 

48 

44 

40 

Tunisia 

Turkey 

India 

Colombia 

Algeria 

Bangladesh 

Serbia 

Ukraine 

Egypt 

Syria 

Bosnia and Herzegovina 

Venezuela 

Ghana 

Iraq 

Cameroon 

Dominican Republic 

Peru 

Afghanistan 

Russia 

Côte d'Ivoire 

Senegal 

Moldova 

Philippines 

Thailand 

North Macedonia 

Paraguay 

57 

 
46 

39 

30 

27 

26 

26 

25 

25 

21 

20 

20 

17 

16 

16 

15 

14 

13 

13 

12 

11 

11 

11 

10 

839 

Vietnam 

Ecuador 

Kosovo 

Eritrea 

Belarus 

Sudan 

Gambia 

Mali 

United Kingdom 

DR Congo 

Iran 

Liberia 

Armenia 

Guinea 

Sri Lanka 

Sierra Leone 

Nicaragua 

Somalia 

Ethiopia 

Argentina 

Burkina Faso 

Cuba 

Honduras 

Other 

58 

 
1.4.2.  Individuals prosecuted for THB crimes 

Most individuals prosecuted for THB crimes in 2015-2020 in the EU27 where information 
on sex was provided were male (74%).372 There were no notable changes in this indicator 
over  the  reporting  period,  with  the  share  of  males  staying  between  72%  and  76%  in 
individual years (Figure 24). 

Figure 24: Sex of individuals prosecuted for THB crimes in EU27 (by year, 2015-
2020) 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

75%

75%

73%

76%

72%

75%

25%

25%

27%

24%

28%

25%

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Female Male

Men accounted for the majority of prosecuted individuals in all Member States during the 
reporting  period.  The  Member  States  with  the  highest  shares  of  women  among  those 
prosecuted were Spain (44%), Malta (40%), Latvia (39%), the Czech Republic (38%), and 
Croatia (37%) (Figure 25). 

372 Information on sex of prosecuted individuals was recorded as “unknown” in 9% of cases in 2015-2020. 
No sex data were available for BG, DE, and PL. 

59 

 
 
 
                                                           
Figure 25: Sex of individuals prosecuted for THB crimes in EU27 (by Member 
State, 2015-2020) 373 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

AT BE CY CZ DK EE EL ES FI FR HR HU IE IT LT LU LV MT NL PT RO SE SI SK

Female Male

Other

As Figure 26 shows, the vast majority of prosecuted individuals in 2015-2020 in EU27 
were  adults  (95%).  This  indicator  remained  stable  over  the  reporting  period  with  the 
exception of 2016 when children accounted for 15% of recorded prosecuted individuals.374 
However, this deviation from the long-term average may be a function of available data – 
only 11 Member States provided information on sex in 2016 of which two (HU and RO) 
reported comparatively high numbers of defendants who were children. 

Figure 26: Age of individuals prosecuted for THB crimes in EU27 (by year, 2015-
2020) 

100%

6%

2%

3%

5%

5%

15%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

94%

85%

98%

97%

95%

95%

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Adult

Child

373 Note: Data missing for BG, DE, PL. 
374 Over the reporting period, in 25% of cases the age group of the prosecuted individual was recorded as 
“unknown”. No age group data were available for BG, DE, IE, and PL.  

60 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Correspondingly, adults were the vast majority of prosecuted individuals in all Member 
States. Hungary  stands out  as having a relatively higher share of children among those 
prosecuted  for  THB  crimes  (20%).  The  Czech  Republic  (8%)  and  Romania  (6%)  also 
reported above-average shares of children; by contrast, twelve Member States (CY, DK, 
EE, EL, ES, LT, LU, MT, PT, SE, SI, SK) did not report any prosecuted children, although 
in at least some cases this may have been a function of data reporting (see Figure 27). 

Figure 27: Age of individuals prosecuted for THB crimes in EU27 (by Member 
State, 2015-2020) 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

AT BE CY CZ DK EE EL ES FI FR HR HU IT LT LU LV MT NL PT RO SE SI SK

Adult

Child

Sexual exploitation was the most common reason for prosecution, accounting for 71% of 
all recorded prosecuted persons. 375 Its share briefly decreased in 2017-2018 but recovered 
to  reach 81% in  2020. Simultaneously, the share of labour exploitation  cases increased 
from 1% in 2015 to 24% in 2019 and then falling to 16% in 2020%. The share of other 
forms of exploitation decreased steadily to represent only 3% of cases in 2020 (see Figure 
28). 

375 Form of exploitation was recorded as “unknown” in 10% of cases. No data on forms of exploitation and 
prosecuted persons available for BE, CZ, DE, PT, SI, SK. 

61 

 
 
 
                                                           
Figure 28: Prosecuted individuals and underlying form of exploitation in EU27 (by 
year, 2015-2020) 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

22%

1%

24%

2%

21%

18%

17%

22%

5%

24%

3%

16%

76%

74%

61%

61%

71%

81%

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Sexual

Labour

Other

As with suspects, sexual exploitation was the most frequent form recorded for prosecuted 
individuals in most Member States, where the form was recorded as known, reaching 100% 
in Austria and Romania, and 97% in Hungary. Labour exploitation was the most common 
form of exploitation in Ireland (100% of cases), Denmark (67%), and Malta (60%) (see 
Figure 29). 

Figure 29: Prosecuted individuals and underlying form of exploitation in EU27 (by 
Member State, 2015-2020) 376 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

AT BG CY DK

EE

EL

ES

FI

FR HR HU IE

IT

LT

LU LV MT NL

PL RO SE

Sexual

Labour

Other

376 Note: Data missing for BE, CZ, DE, PT, SI, SK. 

62 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
Similar  to  suspects,  EU  citizens  accounted  for  a  clear  majority  (72%)  of  individuals 
prosecuted  for  THB  crimes  with  known  country  of  citizenship.  The  share  of  non-EU 
citizens among prosecuted individuals rose sharply from 9% in 2016 to 36% in 2017 and 
has gradually decreased since then, reaching 27% in 2020 (Figure 30).377  

Figure 30: Citizenship of prosecuted individuals (by year, 2015-2020) 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

15%

9%

36%

34%

33%

85%

91%

64%

66%

67%

27%

73%

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

EU

Non-EU

EU Member States  with  the highest  number of citizens among prosecuted were  France 
(2,934),  Romania  (2,560),  Hungary  (963),  Belgium  (759),  and  the  Netherlands  (238) 
(Table 5).  

Table 5: Citizenship of individuals prosecuted for THB crimes (EU citizens, 2015-
2020) 

Country 

France 

Romania 

Hungary 

Belgium 

Netherlands 

Bulgaria 

Poland 

Lithuania 

Number 

2934 

2560 

963 

759 

238 

215 

202 

198 

377  The  vast  majority  of  prosecutions  were  recorded  while  the  UK  was  a  member  of  the  EU.  Only  16 
prosecuted individuals were reported in the UK in 2020. 

63 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
Italy 

Austria 

Czech Republic 

Greece 

Portugal 

Spain 

Croatia 

Latvia 

Cyprus 

Slovakia 

Estonia 

Germany 

Malta 

Finland 

Slovenia 

Denmark 

Luxembourg 

Sweden 

148 

128 

103 

89 

69 

60 

49 

43 

38 

24 

23 

20 

12 

11 

9 

8 

7 

2 

The most common non-EU countries of citizenship among registered defendants for THB 
crimes were Nigeria (655), China (368), and the United Kingdom (153) (Table 6).  

Table 6: Citizenship of individuals prosecuted for THB crimes (non-EU citizens, 
2015-2020) 378 

Country 

Number 

Nigeria 
China 
United Kingdom 
Albania 
Morocco 

655 
368 
153 
78 
58 

378 Note: “Other” includes all nationalities with fewer than 10 individuals, those marked as “other” and those 
marked as “stateless.” 

64 

 
 
                                                           
Serbia 
Eritrea 
Ukraine 
Pakistan 
Brazil 
Turkey 
India 
Suriname 
Egypt 
Bosnia & Herzegovina 
Russia 
Iraq 
Moldova 
Venezuela 
Iran 
Ethiopia 
Syria 
Afghanistan 
Algeria 
Cameroon 
Bangladesh 
Colombia 
Paraguay 
Dominican Republic 
North Macedonia 
Sudan 
Vietnam 
Other 

52 
39 
36 
35 
34 
32 
26 
25 
24 
22 
22 
21 
19 
19 
18 
16 
16 
14 
13 
13 
12 
11 
11 
10 
10 
10 
10 
1,610 

1.4.3.  Individuals convicted of THB crimes 

In line with the preceding sections, men accounted for a clear majority (74%) of individuals 
convicted of THB crimes in the EU27 in 2015-2020.379 As Figure 31 shows, there was 
very little variation in this indicator over time. 

379 Sex was reported as “unknown” in 9% of cases. No sex information data available for IE. 

65 

 
                                                           
Figure 31: Sex of individuals convicted of THB crimes in EU27 (by year, 2015-2020) 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

70%

73%

78%

74%

75%

74%

30%

27%

22%

26%

25%

26%

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Female Male

Correspondingly, men accounted for the majority of convicted individuals in all but one 
Member State.380 Member States with comparatively higher shares of women among those 
convicted were (in descending order) Denmark, Cyprus, Greece, Latvia, and Austria (see 
Figure 32). However, it is plausible that the observed sex breakdowns are distorted by the 
relatively high prevalence of the “unknown” sex designation in available data. 

Figure 32: Sex of individuals convicted for THB crimes in EU27 (by Member State, 
2015-2020) 381 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

AT BE BG CY CZ DE DK EE EL ES FI FR HR HU IT LT LU LV MT NL PL PT RO SE SI SK

Female Male

Other

Adults accounted for nearly all (98%) individuals convicted for THB crimes in 2015-2020 
and never in the reporting period did the share of children among those convicted exceed 
3%. This is reflected in the situation in individual Member States, of which 13 reported no 

380 The only exception was Denmark, with women representing 67% of convicted individuals. However, this 
is likely a function of data availability as only 3 cases with known sex were reported in Denmark over the 
2015-2020 period. 
381 Note: Data missing for IE. 

66 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
convicted children (AT, BE, CY, DK, EL, LT, LU, LV, MT, PT, SE, SI, SK). Croatia was 
the Member States with by far the highest share of children among convicted individuals 
(22%) – though with a very low denominator – followed by the Czech Republic (10%) and 
Finland (9%). 

Sexual exploitation was consistently the most common form of exploitation in connection 
with convicted individuals, accounting for 68% of cases.382 Its share decreased notably in 
2018 but then reversed the trend to reach 72% in 2020. The share of labour exploitation 
grew over time to reach approximately 20% in recent years. By contrast, the share of other 
forms of exploitation decreased over the reporting period (Figure 33). 

Figure 33: Convicted individuals and underlying form of exploitation in EU27 (by 
year, 2015-2020) 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

25%

1%

30%

1%

74%

69%

16%

21%

64%

38%

10%

51%

11%

22%

10%

19%

66%

72%

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Sexual

Labour

Other

Correspondingly, among Member States reporting on forms of exploitation in relation to 
conviction, most indicate sexual exploitation as the most common one and in three Member 
States  (FI,  RO,  SE)  even  the  only  one  reported.  No  Member  State  reported  labour 
exploitation  as  the  most  common  form,  while  other  forms  of  exploitations  were  most 
frequently reported in Cyprus, Estonia, Croatia, Lithuania, and Slovakia (Figure 34). 

382 “Unknown” form of exploitation was recorded in 14% of cases. No data on forms of exploitation and 
convicted individuals available for BG, CZ, DK, HU, IE, IT, PT. 

67 

 
 
 
                                                           
Figure 34: Convicted individuals and underlying form of exploitation in EU27 (by 
Member State, 2015-2020) 383 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

AT

BE

CY DE

EE

EL

ES

FI

FR HR

LT

LU LV MT NL

PL

RO SE

SI

SK

Sexual

Labour

Other

383 Note: Data missing for BG, CZ, DK, HU, EI, IT, PT. 

68 

 
 
 
                                                           
 
Since 2017, data are also available on the citizenship of convicted individuals. In contrast 
with suspected and prosecuted persons, convicted individuals were broadly evenly split 
between EU citizens (51%) and non-EU citizens (49%). As  

Figure 35 shows, the share of non-EU citizens decreased somewhat overtime from 56% 
in 2017 to 41% in 2020.  

Figure 35: Citizenship of convicted individuals (by year, 2017-2020) 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

56%

55%

44%

41%

44%

45%

56%

59%

2017

2018

2019

2020

EU

Non-EU

Source: Authors’ elaboration based on ESTAT data 

EU Member States with the highest numbers of citizens among convicted individuals were 
Romania  (1,178),  France  (1,047),  Germany  (371),  Bulgaria  (240),  and  Lithuania  (92) 
(Table 7).  

Table 7: Citizenship of individuals convicted of THB crimes (EU citizens, 2017-
2020) 

Number 

1178 

1047 

371 

240 

92 

86 

69 

67 

Country 

Romania 

France 

Germany 

Bulgaria 

Lithuania 

Poland 

Belgium 

Hungary 

69 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Netherlands 

Spain 

Slovakia 

Portugal 

Czech Republic 

Italy 

Latvia 

Estonia 

Austria 

Croatia 

Finland 

Malta 

Slovenia 

Greece 

Denmark 

Cyprus 

62 

61 

48 

45 

43 

34 

25 

18 

10 

8 

6 

6 

4 

3 

1 

1 

The  most  frequently  recorded  non-EU  countries  of  citizenship  among  convicted 
individuals were Nigeria (273), China (178), and Morocco (107) (Table 8). 

Table 8: Citizenship of individuals convicted of THB crimes (non-EU citizens, 2017-
2020) 

Row Labels 

Number 

Nigeria 

China 

Morocco 

United Kingdom 

Turkey 

Albania 

70 

273 

178 

107 

75 

39 

25 

 
 
Brazil 

Bosnia and Herzegovina 

Algeria 

Afghanistan 

Syria 

Thailand 

Other384 

23 

18 

15 

14 

12 

11 

724 

1.4.4.  Use of exploited services 

Since  2015,  Eurostat  has  also  collected  data  related  to  the  criminal  offence  of  use  of 
services, which are the objects of exploitation of victims. Altogether, during the reporting 
period of 2015-2020, 331 individuals were reported as suspects in cases related to the use 
of  services,  343  persons  were  reported  as  prosecuted  for  these  offenses  and  202  were 
reported as convicted of such offenses. As Figure 36 shows, there is no clear trend in these 
indicators  across  the  reporting  period.  Early  on,  the  number  of  reported  prosecuted 
individuals vastly outnumbered the other two categories, while in more recent years the 
number of reported suspects has been notably higher than that for the other two categories. 
However,  it  is  necessary  to  acknowledge  that  data  on  the  use  of  services  suffers  from 
serious data gaps, which affect the statistics presented above. Data on this indicator are 
available only for 18 Member States, of which only 11 reported on all three categories.385 
Notably, countries for which no data are available include some with comparatively high 
numbers of recorded victims such as France, Spain and the Netherlands.386 

384 Note: “Other” includes all nationalities with fewer than 10 individuals, those marked as “other” and those 
marked as “stateless.” 
385 Of these 11 Member States, three (IE, SI, SK) positively reported zero individuals (as opposed to not 
providing any data at all). 
386 Some countries do not have any legislation criminalising knowing use of services extracted from victims. 
This might explain some of the data gaps; however, existing data gaps extend beyond this group of countries. 

71 

 
 
                                                           
Figure 36: Individuals involved with the criminal justice system in connection with 
the use of services, which are the objects of exploitation of victims (by criminal 
justice status, 2015-2020) 

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

116

104

87

70

90

75

66

63

69

19

16

0

2

2

25

20

26

26

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Suspect

Prosecuted

Convicted

ANNEX VI. TRANSPOSITION OF THE ANTI-TRAFFICKING DIRECTIVE 

This section provides an analysis of if and how the provisions of the Directive have been 
transposed by Member States. The methodology employed for this activity was as follows: 

1)  The  external  contractor  used  the  analysis  in  the  2016  conformity  assessment 
conducted  for  the  European  Commission387  as  a  starting  point.  This  assessment 
resulted in the European Commission’s 2016 Report assessing the extent to which 
Member States had taken the necessary measures in order to comply with Directive 
2011/36/EU  in  accordance  with  Article  23(1).  In  relation  to  Article  18(4)  the 
external  contractor  used  the  analysis  in  the  2016  report  by  the  Commission 
assessing the impact of existing national law, establishing as a criminal offence the 
use of services which are the objects of exploitation of trafficking in human beings, 
on the prevention of trafficking in human beings388 as the starting point.  

2)  A network of National Correspondents – one in each Member State except DK – 
were  asked  to  indicate  if  there  had  been  relevant  changes  to  the  national  laws 
transposing the Directive since 2016.  

3)  In addition, the external contractor analysed responses sent by Member States to 
the Commission in 2019, as a result of a request for information from the EC.  

4)  The  external  contractor 

the  National 
Correspondents, the information 2016 Conformity Assessment and the information 

information  from 

triangulated 

the 

387 These assessments were conducted for the European Commission by TIPIK. 
388  European  Commission  (2016)  REPORT  FROM  THE  COMMISSION  TO  THE  EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT  AND  THE  COUNCIL  assessing  the  impact  of  existing  national  law,  establishing  as  a 
criminal offence the use of services which are the objects of exploitation of trafficking in human beings, on 
the  prevention of trafficking in human beings, in accordance with Article 23 (2) of the Directive 2011/36/EU. 
Available at: link 

72 

 
 
 
                                                           
provided  by  MS  to  the  EC  in  2019  in  order  to  update  the  2016  Conformity 
assessments.  

5)  A  draft  version  of  the  assessment  was  share  with  National  Rapporteurs  for 

clarification and validation.  

This information is displayed visually below, as follows:  

Transpo
sed  

Partially 
transpos
ed 

Not 
transpos
ed 

Not 
transposed 
optional 
provision 

No 
changes 
observe
d 

Minor 
changes 

Major 
changes 

Change 
since  2016 
assessmen
t 

  The  dark  blue  cells  indicate  major  changes  to  national  legislation  since  2016, 

while the light blue cells indicate minor changes.  

  Green cells indicate full transposition. 

  Orange cells indicate partial transposition. 

  Red  cells  indicate  that  the  national  law  has  not  transposed  that  article  of  the 

Directive.  

  Purple cells indicate that Member States decided not to transpose optional articles 

of the Directive. 

  Dark green cells indicate that the external contractor’ analysis identified that, after 
the changes to national legislation or clarifications, Member States have transposed 
the Article of the Directive, when the conclusion of the 2016 assessment was that 
they had not.  

Article 1: Subject matter 

Article 1: Subject matter 

This Directive establishes minimum rules concerning the definition of criminal offences 
and  sanctions  in  the  area  of  trafficking  in  human  beings.  It  also  introduces  common 
provisions, taking into account the gender perspective, to strengthen the prevention of 
this crime and the protection of the victims thereof. 

As Article 1 presents the subject matter of the Directive, a transposition assessment is not 
applicable.  

Article 2: Offences concerning trafficking in human beings 

Article  2  of  the  Directive  provides  a  common  definition  of  THB  and  related  offences 
against  which  Member  States  have  to  ensure  criminalisation  measures.  The  text  of  this 
provision is set out below.  

Article 2: Offences concerning trafficking in human beings 

1.  Member  States  shall  take  the  necessary  measures  to  ensure  that  the  following 

intentional acts are punishable: 

73 

 
The recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or reception of persons, including 
the exchange or transfer of control over those persons, by means of the threat or use of 
force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of 
power  or  of  a  position  of  vulnerability  or  of  the  giving  or  receiving  of  payments  or 
benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the 
purpose of exploitation. 

2.  A position of vulnerability means a situation in which the person concerned has no 

real or acceptable alternative but to submit to the abuse involved. 

3.  Exploitation  shall  include,  as  a  minimum,  the  exploitation  of  the  prostitution  of 
others  or  other  forms  of  sexual  exploitation,  forced  labour  or  services,  including 
begging,  slavery  or  practices  similar  to  slavery,  servitude,  or  the  exploitation  of 
criminal activities, or the removal of organs. 

4.  The consent of a victim of trafficking in human beings to the exploitation, whether 
intended or actual, shall be irrelevant where any of the means set forth in paragraph 
1 has been used. 

5.  When the conduct referred to in paragraph 1 involves a child, it shall be a punishable 
offence  of  trafficking  in  human  beings  even  if  none  of  the  means  set  forth  in 
paragraph 1 has been used. 

6.  For the purpose of this Directive, ‘child’ shall mean any person below 18 years of 

age. 

The results of the analysis of transposition are set out in the figure below.   

Art. 

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

2(1)  1st 
subpar
a. 

2(1) 
2nd 
subpar
a. 

2(2) 

2(3) 

2(4) 

2(5) 

2(6) 

74 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Chang
es 

The main identified changes since 2016 were: 

  All these changes have improved the transposition of the Directive, and in some 
cases mean that MS have fully transposed a provision of the Directive for the first 
time.    

  Regarding Article 2(2): 

o  ES: the 2016 Assessment concluded partial transposition because the term 
‘abduction’ is not mentioned as one of the means by which the offence is 
committed (in Article 177a(1) of the Spanish Criminal Code). However, ES 
clarified  that  the  omission  of  the  term  ‘abduction’  was  deliberate,  since 
abduction  is  an  offence  in  its  own  right  in  Spanish  law,  punishable  by 
penalties  up  to  20  years’  imprisonment.  When  the  means  of  committing 
another offence constitutes an offence in its own right - a ‘means to an end’ 
- it is governed in Spanish law by the concept of concurrent offences, as 
specified in the general part of the Code, under Article 77. For this reason 
it would not have been appropriate to insert the precise term into Article 
177a without actually implying, on the contrary, less criminal protection or 
that such acts would not be prosecuted when committed in this way. The 
assessment  made  in  the  context  of  the  evaluation  finds  that  ES  has 
transposed Article 2(1) of the Directive.  

  Regarding Article 2(3): 

o  EE: This change is being clarified with the national correspondent. 

o  EL:  In  2019  Article  323  A  of  the  Greek  Penal  Code  came  into  force,  this 
includes  all  forms  of  exploration  as  foreseen  in  the  Directive.  Based  on  the 
assessment made in the context of the evaluation, this change means that 
EL has now transposed Article 2(3) of the Directive.  

o  HU amended its legislation to include “Forced Labour” as a possible purpose 
of  trafficking  in  human  beings.  The  previous  system  provided  a  standalone 
crime for forced labour, thus hampering conformity with the transposition of 
Article 2(3). Moreover, the definition of “Forced Labour” was further specified. 
Based on the assessment made in the context of the evaluation, this change 
means that HU has now transposed Article 2(3) of the Directive.  

o  LT: This change is being clarified with the national correspondent.  

o  SE  amended  its  legislation  in  a  way  that  it  now  specifies  some  forms  of 
exploitation,  which  were  previously  covered  by  a  catch-all  provision 
transposing  Article  2(3).  Specifically,  Swedish  law  now  explicitly  refers  to 
“forced  labour”,  “labour  under  clearly  unreasonable  conditions”  and 
“begging”. 

  Regarding Article 2(4): 

o  EL:  In  2019  an  amended  Article  323  A  of  the  Greek  Penal  Code  came  into 
force,  this  includes  reference  to  the  fact  that  the  consent  of  the  victim  is 

75 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
irrelevant, in case this has been extracted through means of deception or abuse 
of power or other. The assessment made in the context of the evaluation finds 
that  this  change  means  that  EL  has  now  transposed  Article  2(4)  of  the 
Directive.   

  Regarding Article 2(5):  

o  EL:  In  2019  Article  323  A  of  the  Greek  Penal  Code  came  into  force,  this 
includes that where the victim is a minor, the consent is irrelevant regardless if 
means have been deployed to extract his or her consent or not. The assessment 
made in the context of the evaluation means that EL has now transposed 
Article 2(5) of the Directive.  

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition: 

  Article 2(1): While the use of threat, force, other forms of coercion and the abuse 
of  position  of  vulnerability  are  covered  by  all  Member  States,  some  Member 
States389 still do not explicitly include other means covered by article 2(1).  

  Article  2(2):  Some  Member  States390  define  the  position  of  vulnerability  in 

different ways, and they do not always cover all the forms of vulnerability. 

  Article 2(3): Several Member States391 do not include explicit references to some 
of the forms of exploitation referred to in Article 2(3), such as slavery, servitude, 
begging or the exploitation of criminal activities.  

  Article 2(4): Most Member States are compliant with Article 2(4) on the irrelevance 
of the victim’s consent. Although a few Member States392 do not make an explicit 
refence to this element in their national legislation.   

  Article 2(5) and Article 2(6): For DE, a “child” for the purposes of THB is a person 
under the age of 14, thus possibly hampering conformity with both Articles 2(5) 
and 2(6).  

Article 3: Incitement, aiding and abetting, and attempt 

Article 3 of the Directive requires Member States to “take the necessary measures to ensure 
that inciting, aiding and abetting or attempting to commit an offence referred to in Article 
2 is punishable”. The provision is set out below. 

Article 3: Incitement, aiding and abetting, and attempt 

Member  States  shall  take  the  necessary  measures  to  ensure  that  inciting,  aiding  and 
abetting or attempting to commit an offence referred to in Article 2 is punishable. 

389 In EE, FR, LV, HU and FI, there is no explicit mention of “abduction” and “fraud”. IT does not explicitly 
include “abduction”, SI does not refer to “fraud”, AT does not refer to “abduction”, EE, HU and SI do not 
refer to “giving or receiving of payments or benefits”.  
390 For instance, some national laws only mention the “abuse of a position od dependency” (BG, CZ).  Similar 
problems have been identified in DE, FR, HR and SI.  
391 Forms of exploitation that are not explicitly referred to in national legislations: Begging (HR, LV, SI), 
slavery and practices similar to slavery (BE, IT), exploitation of criminal activities (PL, RO, FI). Although 
Some Member States provide criminal sanctions for these crimes, conformity is affected because these forms 
of exploitation should be listed among the purposes for trafficking in human beings.  
392 For example, there is no reference to the irrelevance of victims’ consent in DE, LV, NL.  

76 

 
                                                           
The results of the analysis of transposition are set out in the figure below.  

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

Art. 

3 

Chang
es 

The main identified changes since 2016 were: 

  HU:  Incitement,  aiding  and  abetting,  and  attempt  were  already  punishable  acts 
under Hungarian law in 2016 and remain to be so. The change relates to the penalty 
thresholds  set  for  these  acts.  An  amendment  of  Article  192  of  the  Hungarian 
Criminal  Code  set  the  penalty  threshold  up  to  one  year  imprisonment  for 
preparation of the acts set out in Article 192(1), up to three years of imprisonment 
for preparation of the acts in Article 192(2)-(3) and between one to five years of 
imprisonment for the acts in Article 192(4).  

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition: 

  All Member States have transposed Article 3 in their national laws. 

Article 4: Penalties 

Article 4 lays down the minimum level of the maximum penalty that should be applicable 
for the offence of THB (Article 4(1)). It also lists aggravating circumstances (Article 4(2)), 
which should lead to the imposition of higher maximum penalties. The provisions are set 
out below.  

Article 4: Penalties 

1.  Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that an offence referred 
to  in  Article  2  is  punishable  by  a  maximum  penalty  of  at  least  five  years  of 
imprisonment. 

2.  Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that an offence referred 
to  in  Article  2  is  punishable  by  a  maximum  penalty  of  at  least  10  years  of 
imprisonment where that offence: 

(a)  was committed against a victim who was particularly vulnerable, which, in the 

context of this Directive, shall include at least child victims; 

(b) was  committed  within  the  framework  of  a  criminal  organisation  within  the 
meaning of Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA of 24 October 2008 on 
the fight against organised crime (15); 

(c)  deliberately or by gross negligence endangered the life of the victim; or 

(d) was committed by use of serious violence or has caused particularly serious harm 

to the victim. 

77 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
  
  
  
  
3.  Member  States  shall  take  the  necessary  measures  to  ensure  that  the  fact  that  an 
offence referred to in Article 2 was committed by public officials in the performance 
of their duties is regarded as an aggravating circumstance. 

4.  Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that an offence referred 
to  in  Article  3  is  punishable  by  effective,  proportionate  and  dissuasive  penalties, 
which may entail surrender. 

The results of the analysis of transposition are set out in the figure below. 

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

Art. 

4(1) 

4(2) 
Intro 

4(2)a 

4(2)b 

4(2)c 

4(2)d 

4(3) 

4(4) 

Chang
es 

The main identified changes since 2016 were: 

  All the Member States who made changes were already at least partially compliant 

in 2016.  

  Regarding Article 4(2): 

o  ES:  the  2016  assessment  conclude  partial  transposition  of  Article  4(2)(d). 
However,  ES  has  clarified  that  under  Article  177a(4)  of  the  criminal  code, 
imprisonment of between eight years and one day and twelve years is imposed 
where “(a) the life or physical or mental integrity of the persons subjected to the 
offence has been endangered; b) 
the victim is particularly vulnerable because 
of  illness,  pregnancy,  disability  or  personal  circumstances,  or  is  a  minor.” 
“Serious violence” (as stated in the Directive) exists where the victim’s life or 
physical  or  mental  integrity  is  endangered.  The  assessment  made  in  the 
context of the evaluation means that ES has now transposed Article 4(2) of 
the Directive. 

78 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
o  No changes were identified regarding the non-transposition of Article 4(3) by 

DE, LV and SI.   

o  CY amended its legislation so that the maximum penalty for the offence of THB 
has  been  raised.  Specifically,  for  trafficking  in  adult  persons  and  sexual 
exploitation of adults (from 10 to 25 years), for labour exploitation (from 6 to 
15 years), in case the victim is a child (from 10 years to lifelong), and for sexual 
exploitation of children (from 20 years to lifelong imprisonment).  

o  EL amended its legislation to enhance the maximum penalty for the offence of 
THB to “at least 10 years of imprisonment”, while before it was punishable by 
a “maximum penalty of 10 years of imprisonment”.  

o  HU raised the penalty thresholds for the offence of THB. Among others, THB 
for  the  purpose  of  forced  labour  is  now  punished  between  2  and  8  years 
(compared to the previous 1 to 5 years), and sexual exploitation between 5 to 
10 years of imprisonment (compared to the previous 2-8 years).  

o  IT added two aggravating circumstances; where the defendant is the master of 
a  ship  used  for  the  purposes  of  human  trafficking;  where  the  defendant  is  a 
member of the crew of a ship used for the purposes of human trafficking.   

o  MT amended its criminal code so that the minimum penalty for the offence of 

THB was increased from 4 to 6 years imprisonment.  

o  RO also increased the minimum length of the penalty for the offence of THB 
from 3 to 5 years, and from 5 to 7 years for its aggravated form. The maximum 
penalty stayed the same, namely 10 years of imprisonment, and 12 years for its 
aggravated  form.  Moreover,  three  new  aggravated  forms  of  trafficking  of 
minors were introduced, such as if the crime endangered the minor's life, and if 
the crime was committed by a family member.  

o  SE: This change is being clarified with the national correspondent 

o  SK amended its criminal code so that it introduced the use of a stricter criminal 
sanction (7 to 12 years of imprisonment) where the offence was committed by 
two or more persons acting in conjunction.  

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition: 

  Article 4(1): The 2016 Conformity Assessment found that all MS had transposed 

this Article.   

  Article 4(2): Some MS do not include some of the aggravating circumstances listed 
in  this Article in  national  law (BG, DE, EE). Some Member States do not  have 
provisions applying the requirement of at least 10 years of imprisonment for the 
aggravating circumstances (BG, DE,  HU).  

  Article 4(3): Several MS still do not explicitly provide for aggravated penalties for 
THB offences committed by public officials in the performance of their duties (DE, 
FI, LV, PL, SE, SI). 

Article 5: Liability of legal persons 

Article 5 requires Member States to ensure that legal persons may be held liable for the 
offences  referred  to  in  Articles  2  and  3  and  specifies  the  position  or  capacity  of  the 

79 

 
perpetrator in relation to the legal person, which will lead to the legal person’s liability. 
The provisions are shown below.  

Article 5: Liability of legal persons 

1.  Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that legal persons can be 
held liable for the offences referred to in Articles 2 and 3 committed for their benefit 
by any person, acting either individually or as part of an organ of the legal person, 
who has a leading position within the legal person, based on: 

(a)  a power of representation of the legal person; 

(b) an authority to take decisions on behalf of the legal person; or 

(c)  an authority to exercise control within the legal person. 

2.  Member States shall also ensure that a legal person can be held liable where the lack 
of supervision or control, by a person referred to in paragraph 1, has made possible 
the commission of the offences referred to in Articles 2 and 3 for the benefit of that 
legal person by a person under its authority. 

3.  Liability  of  a  legal  person  under  paragraphs  1  and  2  shall  not  exclude  criminal 
proceedings against natural persons who are perpetrators, inciters or accessories in 
the offences referred to in Articles 2 and 3. 

4.  For the purpose of this Directive, ‘legal person’ shall mean any entity having legal 
personality  under  the  applicable  law,  except  for  States  or  public  bodies  in  the 
exercise of State authority and for public international organisations. 

The results of the analysis of transposition are set out in the figure below.  

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

Art. 

5(1) 
Intro 

5(1)a 

5(1)b 

5(1)c 

5(2) 

5(3) 

5(4) 

Chang
es 

80 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
The main identified changes since 2016 were: 

  IT: The liability of legal persons for labour exploitation was specified. The criminal 
code  now  stipulates  that  also  intermediaries  and  third  parties  can  be  held 
responsible,  and  lists  several  “exploitation  indices”  (e.g.  unsustainable  working 
hours, violation of safety, healthy and surveillance regulations).  

  LU: Following the 2019 Commission’s request for further information, LU replied 
that, by reading together Article 34 and Article 66 of the Criminal Code, the main 
participation by support or assistance to a crime or an offence committed on behalf 
or in the interest of a legal person includes the lack of supervision or control by one 
of the legal  person’s  legal  bodies or by one or several  of its  de jure or de facto 
managers. Based on the assessment made in the context of the evaluation, this 
clarification means that LU can be considered to have transposed Article 5(2) 
of the Directive. 

  SE: New legislation on criminal liability of legal persons entered into force on 1 
January  2020,  with  the  aim  to  ensure  the  efficiency  and  effectiveness  of  the 
Swedish criminal regulatory framework for legal persons. The maximum amount 
for  corporate  fines  has  increased  from  10 million  SEK  to  500  million  SEK.  In 
addition, the scope of application of corporate fines does not only cover business 
activities, but also public sector activities that can be equated to business activities 
and other activities conducted by a legal person, if the illegal act was intended to 
bring the legal person financial benefit.  

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition: 

  All  Member  states  have  introduced  criminal  or  administrative  liability  of  legal 

persons that shall lead to responsibility for the offence.  

  Some  MS  introduced  ad  hoc  provisions  concerning  corporate  liability  for  the 
crimes of THB,393 while others transposed Article 5 (1)(a) to (c) literally.394  

Article 6: Sanctions on legal persons 

Article 6 specifies the sanctions for legal persons which should be available within MS. 
The provisions are set out below.  

Article 6: Sanctions on legal persons 

Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a legal person held liable 
pursuant  to  Article  5(1)  or  (2)  is  subject  to  effective,  proportionate  and  dissuasive 
sanctions,  which  shall  include  criminal  or  non-criminal  fines  and  may  include  other 
sanctions, such as: 

(a)  exclusion from entitlement to public benefits or aid; 

(b) temporary  or  permanent  disqualification  from  the  practice  of  commercial 

activities; 

(c)  placing under judicial supervision; 

393 LT, MT. 
394 EL, CY, LT, MT, PL, SK.  

81 

 
                                                           
(d) judicial winding-up; 

(e)  temporary  or  permanent  closure  of  establishments  which  have  been  used  for 

committing the offence. 

The results of the analysis of transposition are set out in the figure below. 

Art. 

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

6 Intro 

6a 

6b 

6c 

6d 

6e 

Chang
es 

The main identified changes since 2016 were: 

  BE: The criminal code has been amended and it now specifies that only a guilty 
verdict may be pronounced against certain bodies of the State (i.e. Federal State, 
Regions and communities, municipalities), to the exclusion of any other penalty. 
Concerning Article 6(a), Belgian law previously provided that for public contracts, 
any candidate or tenderer shall be denied access to any public contracts if he/she 
has been convicted by a judgment which related to the participation to a criminal 
organisation,  corruption,  fraud  or  money  laundering.  However,  this  did  not 
correspond  to  the  crime  of  trafficking  in  human  beings.  Therefore,  the  2016 
conformity assessment concluded that the law was not entirely in conformity with 
the Directive’s optional requirement set out in Article 6(a). BE has now modified 
its  national  legislation,  and  the  provisions  concerning  the  exclusion  from  public 
tenders  for  persons  and  companies  convicted  for  human  trafficking  have  been 
included  in  the  new  text.  Concerning  Article  6(e),  the  criminal  code  already 
specified that, as a specific sanction for the crimes of trafficking in human beings, 
the court may order the temporary or permanent, partial or complete closure of the 
enterprise  in  which  the  crime  is  committed.  The  amendment  specified  that  the 
partial or complete closure of the enterprise can be pronounced by a judge for a 
term of between one and twenty years. However, no changes have been identified 
concerning the transposition of the optional sanction provided in Article 6(c). 

  EL: Article 6(e) of the Directive has been included in national law (law 4198/2013, 

article 3, para 1). 

82 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  LT:  Article  43  of  the  criminal  code  –  defining  the  types  of  penalties  for  legal 
entities  -   was  amended by including an additional  paragraph (n. 5), which now 
provides that, besides the penalty, legal persons may also receive one or more of 
the following punitive measures: contribution to the victims’ fund, confiscation of 
property  and  extended  confiscation  of  property.  The  sanction  related  to  the 
contribution to the Victims’ fund may only be imposed in addition to the penalty 
of restriction of operation of the legal entity (provided in Art. 43 para 2).  

  LV: Article 708 of the KL (Krimināllikums, Criminal Law) was amended. It now 
provides  that  “in  determining  the  type  of  a  coercive  measure,  the  nature  of  the 
criminal  offence,  the  harm  caused  shall  be  taken  into  account  and  whether  a 
coercive measure has been previously applied to a legal person”.395 Article 704 of 
the KL, which provided that “a public prosecutor may, in an injunction regarding 
a coercive measure, apply not more than half of the maximum time for restriction 
of rights provided for in paragraph one396 of this article” was abolished from the 
KL.  

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition: 

  All Member States have at least a fine for legal persons involved in THB crimes, 

in accordance with the minimum requirements of the Directive.  

  All Member States except BG, EE, FI, IE and SK have at least one of the optional 

additional sanction among those foreseen by the Directive: 

  Article 6 (a): Exclusion from entitlement to public benefits or aid (BE, CZ, CY, 

EL, ES, HU, HR, IT, MT, PL, PT).397  

  Article  6  (b):  Temporary  or  permanent  disqualification  from  the  practice  of 
commercial activities (AT, BE, CZ, CY, CY, EL, ES, FR, HU, HR, IT, LT, LV, 
MT, PL, PT, RO, SE, SI). 

  Article 6 (c): Placing under judicial supervision (CY, ES, FR, IT, MT, PT, RO). 

  Article 6 (d): Judicial winding-up (BE, CY, CZ, EL, ES, FR, HU, HR, LT, LU, 

MT, NL, PT, RO, SI) 

  Article 6(e): Temporary or permanent closure of establishments which have been 
used for committing the offence (BE, EL, CY, ES, FR, LT, LU, MT, PT, RO).  

  Some Member States’ legislation also provide for the publication or display of the 
decision or judgement in which the legal person has been found guilty of the crime 
(BE, CZ, FR, PT, RO).  

Article 7: Seizure and confiscation 

Article 7 of the Directive requires Member States to ensure measures aiming at seizing and 
confiscating proceeds from the offences related to THB. The provisions are set out below: 

395 The reference to “whether a coercive measure has been previously applied to a legal person” was added.  
396 Paragraph one provides that “Restriction of rights is the deprivation of specific rights or permits or the 
determination of such prohibition, which prevents a legal person from exercising certain rights, receive State 
support or assistance, participate in a State or local government procurement procedure, to perform a specific 
type of activity for a term of not less than one year and not exceeding ten years.”. 
397 In RO, any economic operator is excluded from any procedure for the award of a public procurement if 
guilty of committing acts related to trafficking in human beings.  

83 

 
                                                           
Article 7: Seizure and confiscation 

Member  States  shall  take  the  necessary  measures  to  ensure  that  their  competent 
authorities are entitled to seize and confiscate instrumentalities and proceeds from the 
offences referred to in Articles 2 and 3. 

The results of the analysis of transposition are set out in the figure below: 

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

Art. 

7 

Chang
es 

The main identified changes since 2016 were:  

  A few changes were observed vis-à-vis the transposition of Art. 7 of the Directive. 

However, none of these changes affect the transposition of this article.  

  BE:  Art.  43bis  of  the  Belgian  Criminal  Code  –  which  deals  with  the  special 
confiscation applicable to the material benefits directly obtained from the crime, 
the goods and values brought in its place and the income from the invested benefits 
–  states  that  if  the  goods  cannot  be  found  within  the  property  of  the  convicted 
person, the judge shall estimate  the monetary value thereof and the confiscation 
shall relate to a corresponding amount. This was amended to state that the measure 
of  special  confiscation  shall  be  imposed  except  where  this  would  result  in  the 
sentenced person being subject to an unreasonably harsh penalty. In addition, since 
2018,  Art.  43quater  of  the  Belgian  Criminal  Code  is  explicitly  linked  to  article 
433quinquies  of  the  Criminal  Code,  which  means  that  special  confiscation  is 
possible for crimes relating to human trafficking. 

  BG: Amendments to the text of Art. 53 of the Bulgarian Criminal Code brought 
clarifications as to the list of instrumentalities and proceeds subject to confiscation. 
It is now clear that both direct indirect benefits gained through the crime (if they 
are not subject to return or restoration) are subject to confiscation; where the benefit 
is missing or is expropriated, its equivalent shall be awarded. Furthermore, several 
relevant provisions implementing parts of Art. 7 of the Directive were moved to 
the  Counter-Corruption  and  Unlawfully  Acquired  Assets  Forfeiture  Act  that 
replaced the Act on Forfeiture to the Exchequer of Unlawfully Acquired Assets. 

  LV:  In  Latvia,  Art.  7  of  the  Directive  is  transposed  in  Art.  361  of  its  Criminal 
Procedure Law (‘KPL). This article was amended several times since 2016. These 
amendments redacted the wording and structure of the Article. For example, a new 
Article 361(9) was introduced in 2017 that stated that a copy of the decision shall 
be sent or issued to a person whose property is being seized. 

  RO: Article 112^1 (Law 286/2009) regulating extended confiscation was amended.   
Extended confiscation can be applied in cases where the defendant was convicted 
for a crime for which the law stipulates imprisonment of 4 years or more. There is 

84 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
no longer a specific enumeration of crimes and only the 4 years of imprisonment 
limit subsists. The court's appreciation in deciding whether to apply the extensive 
confiscation may also  be based on the disproportion between the lawful income 
and the person's wealth. 

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition:  

  All  Member  States  have  measures  in  place  that  ensure  that  national  competent 
authorities are entitled to seize and confiscate proceeds related to THB crimes.  

  Most  Member  States  rely  on  national  criminal  laws  on  seizure  confiscation  that 
apply to all crimes, including THB. Only few Member States (BE, CY, EL, ES, 
FR,  UK)  have  specific  provisions  aimed  at  seizing  and  confiscating  proceeds 
related to THB crimes.  

Article 8: Non prosecution of non-application of penalties to the victim 

The  Directive,  under  Article  8,  protects  THB  victims  from  being  prosecuted  for  the 
criminal activities they committed as a direct consequence of their exploitation. Article 8 
leaves  discretion  to  Member  States  on  how  to  regulate  the  non-prosecution  or  non-
application of penalties to the victims involved in criminal activities which they have been 
compelled  to  commit  as  a  direct  consequence  of  being  subject  to  such  a  crime.  The 
provisions are set out below. 

Article 8: Non-prosecution or non-application of penalties to the victim 

Member States shall, in accordance with the basic principles of their legal systems, take 
the necessary measures to ensure that competent national authorities are entitled not to 
prosecute  or  impose  penalties  on  victims  of  trafficking  in  human  beings  for  their 
involvement in criminal activities which they have been compelled to commit as a direct 
consequence of being subjected to any of the acts referred to in Article 2. 

The results of the analysis of transposition are set out in the figure below: 

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

Art. 

8 

Chang
es 

The main identified changes since 2016 were:  

  BE:  Article  443  of  the  criminal  code  has  been  amended,  introducing  a  new 
paragraph (quinquies). It now specifies that a victim of trafficking in human beings 
who  was  involved  in  a  criminal  offence  as  a  direct  consequence  of  his  or  her 
exploitation  shall  not  be  punished  for  those  offences.  Article  71  of  the  criminal 
code provides that “there is no offense if the defendant or the accused, at the time 
of the facts, […] was forced by a power which he was unable to resist”.  As the 
national  law does  not  define what  should be  considered as  “forced by a  power” 
which the person is unable to resist, the 2016 conformity assessment concluded that 

85 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BE’s  transposition  of  the  Article  was  only  in  partial  conformance  with  the 
Directive, since it does  not clearly ensure that victims of trafficking involved in 
criminal  activities  which  they  have  been  compelled  to  commit  shall  not  be 
prosecuted. Although Article 71 of the criminal code has not been amended, the 
amendment  to  Article  443quinquies,  described  above,  specifies  the  non-
punishment  principle  in  more  detail.  Based  on  the  assessment  made  in  the 
context  of  the  evaluation,  this  change  means  that  BE  has  now  transposed 
Article 8 of the Directive. 

  EL: As of 2019 paragraph 8 of article 323 A of Greek Penal Code provides for the 
application  of  the  principle  of  non-punishment  of  the  victim  of  trafficking  for 
offenses committed in connection with the fact that he or she was exploited (even 
if the perpetrator has been exonerated, but the allegation seems valid). 

  IE: The Second National Action Plan to Prevent and Combat Human Trafficking 
in  Ireland  provides  an  ad  hoc  action  (action  n.  32),  which  aims  to  develop 
guidelines to assist all State authorities in addressing complex cases where persons 
who have been found engaged in criminal activities may be victims of trafficking. 
Action n. 42 aims to ensure the effective investigation of human trafficking where 
criminal  activities  may  have  been  carried  out  by  the  potential  victim  and  the 
appropriate consideration of non-punishment of victims of trafficking. Activities to 
implement  this  action  include  regular  training  for  the  police  authorities, 
information initiatives with relevant bodies to address the issue of non-punishment, 
and the decision to expunge the criminal records of potential victims of trafficking 
for sexual exploitation.  

  LT: Paragraph 3 of Article 147-1 of CC(VIII-1968) was amended by including the 
same clause as in Articles 147 and 157, stating that also the victim of forced labour 
may be relieved from criminal liability for the offence which he/ she was directly 
forced to commit because of the offence done to him/her.  

  SK: Article 215(2) d of Act no 301/2005 now specifies that the prosecutor may 
discontinue  the  criminal  proceedings  if  the  person  was  compelled  to  commit  a 
crime as a direct consequence of being subjected to trafficking in human beings. 
The  previous  wording  only  provided  that  “the  prosecutor  may  discontinue  the 
criminal  prosecution  if  a  person  was  compelled  to  commit  a  minor  offence  as  a 
direct consequence of being subjected to trafficking in human beings”.  

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition: 

  Around half Member States (BG, EL, ES, CY, LV, LT, LU, MT, NL, RO and SK) 
explicitly refer to non-prosecution of THB victims, while others refer to the non-
prosecution of a person  who was compelled, threatened or  coerced to  commit a 
criminal act (HU, IT, PL, PT, SE and SI). 

  Concerning  HR,  Article  22(1)  and  (2)  of  the  criminal  code  (KZ)  state  that  a 
criminal offence does not exist in case a perpetrator has committed such act in order 
to avert from himself or from another an imminent danger which could not have 
been averted in any other way, and a lesser harm was done than that which had 
been  threatened.  However,  the  2016  conformity  assessment  concluded  that  this 
article sets  out  a  general provision  of criminal  law on endangerment  and lawful 
defence and does not as such correspond to the scenario foreseen in Article 8 of the 

86 

 
Directive. There have been no changes to HR law on this matter since the 2016 
assessment.   

Article 9: Investigation and prosecution 

Article 9 of the Directive provides that the investigation and prosecution of THB crimes 
(i) shall not be subject to victims’ reporting or accusation; (ii) prosecution shall be enabled 
for  a  sufficient  period  of  time  after  the  victim  has  reached  the  age  of  majority;  (iii) 
investigators  and  prosecutors  are  properly  trained  and  (iv)  granted  with  effective 
investigative tools. The provisions are set out below: 

Article 9: Investigation and prosecution 

1.  Member States shall ensure that investigation into or prosecution of offences referred 
to in Articles 2 and 3 is not dependent on reporting or accusation by a victim and 
that criminal proceedings may continue even if the victim has withdrawn his or her 
statement. 

2.  Member States shall take the necessary measures to enable, where the nature of the 
act  calls  for it, the prosecution of an offence referred to  in  Articles 2 and 3 for a 
sufficient period of time after the victim has reached the age of majority. 

3.  Member  States  shall  take  the  necessary  measures  to  ensure  that  persons,  units  or 
services  responsible  for  investigating  or  prosecuting  the  offences  referred  to  in 
Articles 2 and 3 are trained accordingly. 

4.  Member  States  shall  take  the  necessary  measures  to  ensure  that  effective 
investigative tools, such as those which are used in organised crime or other serious 
crime cases are available to persons, units or services responsible for investigating 
or prosecuting the offences referred to in Articles 2 and 3.  

The results of the analysis of transposition are set out in the figure below. 

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

Art. 

9(1) 

9(2) 

9(3) 

9(4) 

Chang
es 

87 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The main identified changes since 2016 were398: 

  BE: An amendment was made to Article 21 Vt. W, transposing Article 9(2) of the 
Directive.  The  amendment  extended  the  right  to  prosecute  crimes  committed 
against  minors  to  20  years  (instead  of  15  years),  and  to  15  years  for  crimes 
committed  against  adults  (instead  of  10  years).  Moreover,  Article  21bis  (1)  has 
been amended so that it now states that there is no time limitation on prosecution 
for crimes regarding genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. Article 
21bis (2) now states that there is no limitation of prosecution for crimes such as 
voyeurism, rape, and spreading sexual images, human trafficking, begging, forced 
labour, and removal of organs. The 2016 conformity assessment concluded that BE 
national  law  (Article  21bis  (2))  was  partially  in  conform  to  Article  9(2)  of  the 
Directive as it referred solely to sexual exploitation and did not cover all types of 
exploitation  foreseen  in  the  Directive.  Based  on  the  assessment  made  in  the 
context  of  the  evaluation,  this  change  means  that  BE  has  now  transposed 
Article 9(2) of the Directive. 

  BG: the 2016 assessment concluded partial conformity. BG clarified that Art. 80 
of  the  Penal  Code,  the  statute  of  limitations  sufficiently  covers  the  period  for 
instituting  criminal  proceedings  after  reaching  the  age  of  18  by  victims  of 
trafficking. Based on the assessment made in the context of the evaluation, BG 
has transposed Article 9(2) of the Directive. 

  EL: There has been an extension of the time limit for commencing prosecution, 

after reaching majority.    

  ES:  Article  132  CC,  which  transposed  Article  9(2)  of  the  Directive,  has  been 
modified. It now establishes that for victims of trafficking in human beings who 
are minors, the term for the prosecution of the offence will not be computed from 
the time the victim reaches the age of majority, but from the time he/she has 35 
years old, or, if he/she dies before, from the date of their death. 

  FR:  Article  7  of  the  Code  of  Criminal  proceedings  transposing  Article  9(2)  has 
been updated. The amendment extended the period of time for the right to prosecute 
the offence of trafficking in human beings against minors to 30 years (instead of 
20 years), which only starts to run when the victim reaches the age of majority.   

  HU: the amendment of Article 28(1a) of the Btk transposing Article 9(2) amended 
the  limitation  period  regarding  trafficking  in  human  being  cases  against  victims 
who were minors when the offence occurred. The limitation period now starts to 
run  only  when  the  victim  comes  to  the  age  of  21  years  old  (instead  of  18). 
Moreover, the national legislation transposing Article 9(4) has also been amended. 
The relevant provisions regulate the covert information gathering procedure: the 
amendments  made  the  data  information  sharing  among  police  authorities  more 
transparent and with stronger rule of law safeguards. Some covert instruments are 
not subject to prior authorisation (e.g. the surveillance of a premise or a vehicle), 
while others require the prior authorisation of the court (e.g. interception).  

  LT:  The  national  law  transposing  Article  9(4)  of  the  Directive  was  modified. 
Specifically, Article 93 paragraph 2 and Article 94 paragraph 1 of XI-1482 extend 

398 The adoption of an updated National Plan for combatting trafficking in human beings [which frequently 
covers the need to provide trainings for relevant actors – Article 9(3)] was not included in the “minor/major 
changes” category.   

88 

 
                                                           
the  trainings  organised  by  the  National  Courts  Administration  to  court  civil 
servants and employees (and not only to judges).   

  PT: The Framework Law on Criminal policy (n.55/2020) states that trafficking in 
human beings is a crime of priority (including in terms of prevention and criminal 
investigation). This piece of legislation is updated every two years.  

  SI:  the  2016  assessment  conclude  partial  transposition  of  9(2).  SI  clarified  that 
Article 90(3) of the Criminal Code determines that notwithstanding paragraph one 
of that  Article (limitation of criminal prosecution), the time limit for the statute of 
limitations in criminal offences against sexual inviolability and criminal offences 
against marriage, family or youth, committed against a minor, shall begin when the 
injured person reaches adulthood. Based on the assessment made in the context 
of the evaluation, SI has transposed Article 9(2) of the Directive. 

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition: 

  Article 9(1): All Member States have transposed the provision and are compliant; 
all  MS  provide  that  the  submission  of  a  complaint  is  not  required  to  open  the 
investigation, and the withdrawal of a victim's statement does not have influence 
on the continuation of the investigation or prosecution.  

  Article 9(2): The 2016 assessment concluded that HR and IE had not transposed 
Article 9(2). No relevant changes were identified to legislation in HU and IE since 
2016.The 2016 identified some MS as having partially transposed on the grounds 
that: that national legislation referred solely to the sexual exploitation and do not 
cover  all  the  types  of  exploitation  foreseen  in  the  Directive  (SI,  LV,  EE);  the 
national legislation did not ensure that young victims would be given a sufficient 
period of time to initiate criminal proceedings after reaching the age of 18 (PT, SE). 
With  regard  to  child  victims  of  trafficking,  DE  legislation  does  not  stay  the 
limitation period up until the age of majority of the child victim.  

  Article  9(3):  All  Member  States  provide  measures  for  the  training  of  actors 
responsible for the investigation and prosecution of trafficking in human beings, 
either in soft-law instruments (e.g. national action plans) or in legal provisions.  

  Article 9(4): All Member States have foreseen measures to ensure the availability 
of  effective  investigative  tools  to  persons,  units  or  services  responsible  for 
investigating or prosecuting trafficking in human beings.  

Article 10: Jurisdiction 

Article 10 requires MS laws to provide for jurisdiction over THB offences committed not 
just  within  their  territory,  but  also  where  the  offender  is  a  national  of  that  country 
(regardless of whether the act was an offence in the jurisdiction where it was committed 
and regardless of whether it is reported by a victim). Article 10 also requires MS to inform 
the EC about any wider jurisdiction. The provisions are set out below: 

Article 10: Jurisdiction 

1.  Member States shall take the necessary measures to establish their jurisdiction over 

the offences referred to in Articles 2 and 3 where: 

(a)  the offence is committed in whole or in part within their territory; or 

89 

 
(b) the offender is one of their nationals. 

2.  A Member State shall inform the Commission where it decides to establish further 
jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Articles 2 and 3 committed outside its 
territory, inter alia, where: 

(a)  the  offence  is  committed  against  one  of  its  nationals  or  a  person  who  is  an 

habitual resident in its territory; 

(b) the  offence  is  committed  for  the  benefit  of  a  legal  person  established  in  its 

territory; or 

(c)  the offender is an habitual resident in its territory. 

3.  For the prosecution of the offences referred to in Articles 2 and 3 committed outside 
the territory of the Member State concerned, each Member State shall, in those cases 
referred  to  in  point  (b)  of  paragraph  1,  and  may,  in  those  cases  referred  to  in 
paragraph 2, take the necessary measures to ensure that its jurisdiction is not subject 
to either of the following conditions: 

(a)  the acts are a criminal offence at the place where they were performed; or 

(b) the prosecution can be initiated only following a report made by the victim in the 
place where the offence was committed, or a denunciation from the State of the 
place where the offence was committed. 

The results of the analysis of transposition are set out in the figure below.   

Art. 

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

10(1) 
Intro 

10(1)a 

10(1)b 

10(2) 
Intro 

10(2)a 

10(2)b 

10(2)c 

10(3) 
Intro 

10(3)a 

90 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
10(3)b 

Chang
es 

The main identified changes since 2016 were:  

  BE:  Articles  10ter,  of  Vt.  W.  Sv,  which  transposes  Article  10(1)(b)  and  Article 
10(2)(a)  and  Article  10(2)(c)  and  Article  10(3)(a)  of  the  Directive,  has  been 
updated. Any person can now be prosecuted if he commits (outside the territory of 
the  State)  any  of  the  crimes  set  in  Articles  433  quinquies  to  433  octies  of  the 
Criminal Code. The new Article 10ter  refers to all transposing provisions of the 
offences  referred  to  in  Articles  2  and  3  of  the  Directive.  The  2016  conformity 
assessment  concluded  that  the  national  law  was  partially  conform  to  Articles 
10(2)(a)  ,  10(2)(c)  and  10(3)(a),  since  it  did  not  cross-refer  to  all  transposition 
provisions of the offences referred to in Articles 2 and 4 of the Directive. Based on 
the assessment made in the context of the evaluation, this change means that 
BE has now transposed Article 10(2)(a) Article 10(2)(c) and Article 10(3)(a) of 
the Directive. 

  SE: In 2022, legislative amendments entered into force, giving to Swedish courts 
jurisdiction to adjudicate offences committee outside Sweden if those are directed 
against  a  Swedish  citizen,  an  alien  who  habitually  resides  in  Sweden,  or  to  a 
Swedish  legal  person.  Based  on  the  assessment  made  in  the  context  of  the 
evaluation, this change means that SE has now transposed Article 10(2)(a).  

  SI:  The  2016  assessment  conclude  partial  conformity  with  Article  10(2)c.  SI 
clarified that: Article 10(1) of the Criminal Code determines that the Criminal Code 
applies  to  any  person  who  commits  a  criminal  offense  in  Slovenia's  territory. 
Article 12 of Criminal Code determines that it is applicable to any citizen of the 
Republic  of  Slovenia  who  commits  any  criminal  offence  abroad.  The  Criminal 
Code  applies  to  any  foreign  citizen  who  has,  in  a  foreign  country,  committed  a 
criminal  offence  against  the  Republic  of  Slovenia  or  any  of  its  citizens  (Article 
13(1) of the Criminal Code) and is also applicable to any foreign citizen who has, 
in a foreign country, committed a criminal offence against a third country or any of 
its citizens if he has been apprehended in the territory of the Republic of Slovenia, 
but  was  not  extradited  to  the  foreign  country.  In  such  cases,  the  court  shall  not 
impose a sentence on the perpetrator heavier than the sentence prescribed by the 
law  of  the  country,  in  which  the  offence  was  committed  (Article  13(2)  of  the 
Criminal Code). Under Article 13(3) the Criminal Code of the Republic of Slovenia 
is  applicable  also  to  anyone  who  commits  any  criminal  offence  abroad  which, 
under  relevant  international  agreements  or  general  legal  rules  recognised  by  the 
international community, is subject to prosecution, regardless of the location where 
it  was  committed.  Based  on  the  assessment  made  in  the  context  of  the 
evaluation, SI has transposed Article 10(2)c of the Directive. 

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition: 

  Article 10(1): All Member States took necessary measures to ensure jurisdiction 
when the offence is committed within their national territory or the offender is one 
of  their  nationals.  In  IT,  conformity  is  affected  because,  for  crimes  committed 

91 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
outside the Italian territory against the EU, a foreign State or a foreign citizen, the 
Italian jurisdiction is established only upon request of the Ministry of Justice, and 
unless extradition has been conceded.  

  Article 10(2): All Member States - except BG, DE and FR - had at least one of the 

optional jurisdictional grounds provided in Article 10(2) (a) (b) and (c).  

  Article  10(3):  most  Member  States  transposed  Article  10(3)(a)  in  their  national 
legislation  and  have  not  introduced  such  a  requirement  when  determining 
jurisdiction under Article 10(1). Nevertheless, in EE, NL, PT and RO, jurisdiction 
for cases in which the offender is one of their nationals is only established when 
the offence is criminalised in the place where it is committed. Concerning ES, the 
2016 conformity assessment concluded that the national law was not in conformity 
with the Directive, as it provided that the jurisdiction shall not be granted to Spanish 
Courts in the event such jurisdiction is being granted to an international court or 
another  State  whereby  proceedings  are  already  initiated.  The  reply  to  the  2019 
Commission’s request for further information explained that, in accordance with 
the principle of universal jurisdiction, acts committed by Spanish nationals or non-
nationals outside the national territory that can be classified according to Spanish 
law as human trafficking offences are subject to Spanish jurisdiction where any of 
the  conditions  set  out  in  Article  23(4)(m)  of  the  OLJP  exist.  As  none  of  these 
conditions  refer  to  the  double  criminality  requirement,  the  Spanish  authorities 
consider that the national law transposing the Directive is in conformity. Based on 
the assessment made in the context of the evaluation, this clarification means 
that ES can be considered to have transposed Article 10(3) of the Directive.  

Article 11: Assistance and support for victims 

Pursuant to Article 11 of the Directive, Member States shall provide adequate assistance 
and  support  to  victims  of  THB  as  soon  as  competent  authorities  have  an  indication  or 
reasonable grounds to believe that the person might have been subject to THB offences. 
The provisions are set out below. 

Article 11: Assistance and support for victims of trafficking in human beings 

1.  Member  States  shall  take  the  necessary  measures  to  ensure  that  assistance  and 
support are provided to victims before, during and for an appropriate period of time 
after the conclusion of criminal proceedings in order to enable them to exercise the 
rights set out in Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA, and in this Directive. 

2.  Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a person is provided 
with assistance and support as soon as the competent authorities have a reasonable-
grounds indication for believing that the person might have been subjected to any of 
the offences referred to in Articles 2 and 3. 

3.  Member  States  shall  take  the  necessary  measures  to  ensure  that  assistance  and 
support  for  a  victim  are  not  made  conditional  on  the  victim’s  willingness  to 
cooperate  in  the  criminal  investigation,  prosecution  or  trial,  without  prejudice  to 
Directive 2004/81/EC or similar national rules. 

4.  Member  States  shall  take  the  necessary  measures  to  establish  appropriate 
mechanisms  aimed  at  the  early  identification  of,  assistance  to  and  support  for 
victims, in cooperation with relevant support organisations. 

92 

 
5.  The  assistance  and  support  measures  referred  to  in  paragraphs  1  and  2  shall  be 
provided on a consensual and informed basis, and shall include at least standards of 
living  capable  of  ensuring  victims’  subsistence  through  measures  such  as  the 
provision of appropriate and safe accommodation and material assistance, as well as 
necessary  medical  treatment  including  psychological  assistance,  counselling  and 
information, and translation and interpretation services where appropriate. 

6.  The information referred to in paragraph 5 shall cover, where relevant, information 
on  a  reflection  and  recovery  period  pursuant  to  Directive  2004/81/EC,  and 
information  on  the  possibility  of  granting  international  protection  pursuant  to 
Council  Directive  2004/83/EC  of  29  April  2004  on  minimum  standards  for  the 
qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or 
as  persons  who  otherwise  need  international  protection  and  the  content  of  the 
protection granted (16) and Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005 on 
minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing 
refugee  status  (17)  or  pursuant  to  other  international  instruments  or  other  similar 
national rules. 

7.  Member States shall attend to victims with special needs, where those needs derive, 
in particular, from whether they are pregnant, their health, a disability, a mental or 
psychological  disorder  they  have,  or  a  serious  form  of  psychological,  physical  or 
sexual violence they have suffered. 

The results of the analysis of transposition are set out in the figure below. 

Art. 

11(1) 

11(2) 

11(3) 

11(4) 

11(5) 

11(6) 

11(7) 

Chang
es 

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

n
c 

n
c 

93 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The main identified changes since 2016 were399:  

  AT: The following identified changes strengthened national measures to provide 
assistance and support, relevant to Article 11 of the Directive. Section 56(1) point 
3 SPG has been amended and it now specifies that police authorities may convey 
information  (personal  data)  to  intervention  facilities  and  counselling  centres  for 
violence prevention if this is necessary for the protection of people at risk. Section 
25(1)  SPG  was  expanded  to  include  the  following  sentence:  “To  this  end400, 
security  authorities  may  establish  platforms  at  the  regional  level  with  the 
participation of people involved in the performance of tasks in the public interest, 
in the framework of which necessary measures are developed and coordinated (so 
called  'safety  forums')”.  Section  66a(2)  point  1  StPO  currently  provides  that 
vulnerable victims have the right to demand that they be questioned by a person of 
the same sex in the preliminary proceedings. Particularly vulnerable victims also 
have the right to demand that interpretation services be provided by a person of the 
same  sex.  In  case  of  a  minor  victim  who  has  been  violated  in  his  or  her  sexual 
sphere, he or she will be heard by an expert. The provisions on psychosocial and 
legal assistance are now regulated in greater detail in Section 66b StPO (formerly 
regulated under Section  66(2) and (4) StPO).  In  2017, the decree of the  Labour 
Inspectorate on the topic of trafficking in human beings and labour exploitation, 
which had been in place since 2011, was updated. Among other things, the decree 
was expanded to include the list of indicators for assisting inspection authorities in 
identifying those possibly affected.  

  BG:  The  following  identified  changes  have  strengthened  national  measures  to 
provide information to victims. Article 6 of LAFCCV establishes an obligation of 
the  authorities  of  the  Ministry  of  Interior,  investigative  authorities,  and  victim 
support  organisations,  to  provide  specific  information  to  victims  (relevant  to 
Article 11(5) and 11(6) of the Directive). The provision no longer specifies that the 
information is to be provided in writing or orally, nor that the notification is stored 
in  a  record  in  the  premises  of  the  competent  authority.  The  amendment  also 
foresees  an  obligation  for  the  monitoring  prosecutor  during  the  pre-trial 
proceedings  to  monitor  performance  of  the  investigating  authorities’  duties 
concerning  the  provision  of  the  information.  Article  11  LAFCCV  currently 
provides that practical help ensured by victim support organizations also includes 
providing information about the risk of secondary and repeated victimisation, of 
intimidation or revenge, as well as providing advice on preventing the latter. Victim 
support organisations now also have the obligation to provide shelter or any other 
suitable temporary accommodation to the victims of crimes for which there is an 
imminent risk of secondary victimisation, intimidation, and revenge. 

  EL:  The  2016  assessment  conclude  that  EL  had  partially  transposed  11(2).  EL 
clarified  that  presidential  decree  233/2003  provides  for  the  assistance  measures 
outlined in Article 11(2). Based on the assessment made in the context of the 

399  The  adoption  of  an  updated  National  Plan  for  combatting  trafficking  in  human  beings  [which 
frequently lay down measures related to the assistance and support for victims of trafficking in human 
beings provided for in Article 11(1))] was not included in the “minor/major changes” category.    
400 The article provides that “In order to prevent dangerous actions against life, health and property of 
people, security authorities shall promote the willingness and ability of everyone to inform him/her about 
threats of legal goods and to prevent such actions accordingly”. This include information of persons who 
have been subject to the crime of trafficking in human beings to be provided with assistance and support.  

94 

 
                                                           
evaluation,  this  clarification  means  that  EL  can  be  considered  to  have 
transposed Article 11(2) of the Directive.  

  HR: A 2019 Protocol on the integration and reintegration of victims of trafficking 
in human beings was adopted, which specified several victims’ rights to be ensured 
before, during and after the criminal proceedings. 

  HU:  According  to  the  amended  Article  17(6)  of  Government  Decree  354/2012, 
voluntarily  cooperating  organisations  may  conclude  identification  conversations 
with presumed victims of trafficking in human beings. In case the victim status is 
confirmed, the organisation informs the regional victim aid service without delay 
(relevant to Article 11(2).  

  LT:  Paragraph  5  of  Article  8  of  CCP  (IX-785)  was  amended  by  including  the 
victim’s right to  request a translation of the criminal proceeding’s documents in 
cases where a translation of these documents or parts thereof is necessary for them 
to take an active part in the criminal proceedings. 

  LV:  Regulation  No.  344  (2019)  regarding  the  procedures  by  which  victims  of 
trafficking receive social rehabilitation service, and the criteria for the recognition 
of  a  person  as  a  victim  of  trafficking  in  human  beings  clarifies  the  regulatory 
framework on assistance and support to victims of trafficking. Regulation No 388 
(2017) on the requirements for social service providers was also adopted.  

  MT: Two new services have been added to the list of minimum services for victims 
of crimes  (Article 12 VCA), namely medical  treatment  and protection measures 
against the risks of intimidation and retaliation. The amendments also clarified that 
these services are to be provided to victims even when the offence was committed 
in another EU Member State. 

  PT:  Order  No-138-E/2021  approved  a  new  model  regarding  the  status  of 
vulnerable victims, including victims of trafficking in human beings. The aim is to 
ensure  that  relevant  documents  for  victims  are  clear  and  easy  to  understand, 
especially the information about their rights. To this end, documents were revised 
by specialised services to convert legal and procedural technical language into a 
more  accessible  language.  The  rights  provided  to  victims  of  trafficking  include, 
inter alia, the right to file a criminal complaint, the right to be accompanied, the 
right to legal assistance, right to receive compensation, the right to the reflection 
period, the right to non-punishment of victims of trafficking their involvement in 
criminal activities if they were compelled to do so.   

  RO: New services to support and protect victims of trafficking have been added, 
such  as  the  provision  of  day  care  centres  that  mainly  provide  information, 
emotional  and  social  support  for  the  purposes  of  reintegration,  and  social, 
psychological,  legal  and  financial  counselling.  The  national  legislation  further 
specifies that the legal provisions on assistance and support apply in cases of crimes 
committed on the Romanian territory and for crimes committed outside the territory 
of Romania but against a Romanian citizen or legal resident. Moreover, Article 43 
of the CPE was amended. This article regulates the tasks and purposes of the Fund 
for Victims' Aid and Post-Penitentiary Aid. The amendments introduced by the Act 
of 12 July 2017 clarify what the Fund's resources may be used for. Among other 
things, paragraph 8, item 4, subsection (e) was added to this provision, which states 

95 

 
that  the  Fund's  resources  shall  be  used  to  promote  the  system  of  assistance  to 
persons wronged by crime 

  SE: Section 1 of Chapter 4 of the Social Services Acts has been amended. It now 
specifies that anyone who is unable to meet their own needs or can have them met 
in  another  way  is  entitled  to  assistance  from  the  social  welfare  board  for  their 
support and for their living in general. Those who are unable to support themselves 
but  who  can  work  are  entitled  to  maintenance  support  according  to  the  first 
paragraph  if  he  or  she  is  available  on  the  labour  market,  which  includes,  if 
necessary, participating in municipal adult education in Swedish for immigrants or 
equivalent education at folk high schools. The individual might also be entitled to 
maintenance support even if he or she is not available on the labour market. The 
individual must be ensured a reasonable standard of living through the assistance. 
The assistance must be designed so that it strengthens his or her opportunities to 
live  an  independent  life.  It  must  be  noted  that  the  2016  conformity  assessment 
specified  that,  previously  to  this  amendment,  it  was  unclear  whether  victims  of 
trafficking  who  do  not  have  a  right  to  reside  in  Sweden  would  get  support  that 
include at least standards of living capable of ensuring victims subsistence.  The 
assessment of the Evaluation Team is that this change means that SE has now 
transposed Article 11(5) of the Directive. 

  SI: Article 50 of the Aliens Act has been amended. It now provides for a new reason 
on the basis of which the police may allow a victim of trafficking in human beings 
to  stary  for  90  days  in  the  territory  of  Slovenia  on  the  basis  of  the  existence  of 
personal  circumstances.  The  2016  assessment  concluded  partial  and  non 
transposition  of  parts  of  Article  11.  SI  clarified  that:  in  the  process  of 
implementation of so-called Victims’ Rights Directive, the Criminal Procedure Act 
and Social Assistance Act have been amdended.  Following these changes, each 
victim is entitled to help and support, regardless of his or her status in the eventual 
(pre)criminal procedure and also, if (s)he didn’t report the criminal offence. The 
centers for social work provide general support and help to victims of all criminal 
offences (free of charge), while NGOs provide special services (also for victims of 
human  trafficking).  Based  on  the  assessment  made  in  the  context  of  the 
evaluation, SI has transposed Article 11 of the Directive. 

  SK: According to article 49 of the Criminal Procedure Act (301/2005), victims are 
informed  about  (both  orally  and  in  a  written  form),  inter  alia,  the  specialized 
programmes offered, for free, to victims of trafficking. Since 2020, the contracted 
NGO for assistance to victims of trafficking (namely Caritas Slovakia) has been 
enabled to speak to victims of trafficking and inform them about the specialised 
programmes and the available services.  

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition: 

  Article  11(1):  Almost  all  Member  State  legislation  specifies  that  victims  of 
trafficking are provided with the assistance and protection measures before, during 
and  after  the  criminal  proceedings.  The  2016  conformity  assessment  identified 
partial transposition in some national legislation, namely LV, FI, PL and HU401, as 

401 For example, in HU, the national law does not ensure ‘aid and support’ to third-country national victims 
before the commencement of the criminal proceedings. Third-country national victims are only entitled to 
receive  care  after  the  issuance  of  the  third  country  national  victims’  residence  permit  which  is  issued 
depending on their willingness to cooperate in the criminal investigation.  

96 

 
                                                           
their national legislation does not explicitly state that the protection measures shall 
be provided to victims before, during and after the criminal proceedings.  

  Article 11(2): Several Member States do not explicitly require that assistance and 
support should be provided as soon as the competent authorities have an indication 
or reasonable grounds to believe that the person is a victim of trafficking (PL, HR, 
LV,  IT,  PT,  SE).  Other  national  legislation  seem  to  make  a  distinction  between 
victims who are third-country nationals and EU citizens (BE, DE, HU).  

  Article 11(3): Almost all Member States have transposed the requirement to ensure 
that assistance  and support for victims are not  made conditional on the victim’s 
willingness to cooperate in the criminal investigation. However, in IE, the provision 
of temporary residence for victims of trafficking is governed by the Administrative 
Immigration Arrangements (AIA). The provision of temporary residence remains 
contingent upon cooperation with law enforcement authorities. In BE, the national 
legislation transposing Article 11(3) only applies to aliens, and not to nationals. In 
SK,  the  duration  of  the  so  called  “emergency  treatment”  is  conditional  to  the 
victim’s cooperation with the law enforcement authorities.402 

  Article 11(4): All Member States established different types of mechanisms aimed 
at the early identification of, assistance to and support for victims of trafficking, in 
cooperation  with  relevant  support  organisations.  However,  in  BE  although  the 
Belgian  provisions  seem  to  create  appropriate  mechanisms,  those  only  apply  to 
non-Belgian victims.  

  Article 11(5): All Member States transposed the minimum requirements of article 
11(5) in different ways that range from the transposition in national law (CY, MT), 
the inclusion of the provisions in different acts (BE, BG, EL, ES, FR, HU, IT, LV, 
LT, NL, AT, PL, PT, RO, SI and SK) or via catch-all provisions aimed at ensuring 
other form of assistance (BG, ES, HR, RO). In BE provisions create appropriate 
mechanisms,  but  these  only  apply  to  non-Belgian  victims.  In  IT  no  provision 
provides that victims must be informed on their rights and on the availability of 
assistance programmes. 

  Article 11(6): In most Member States compliance with article 11(6) can be derived 
from  a  set  of  national  provisions  on  the  necessary  procedure  to  gain  residence 
permits for third-country nationals. However, some Member State legislation does 
not  explicitly  provide  that  the  person  concerned  shall  be  informed  about  the 
reflection period (BE, LV, IT), or the possibility of granting international protection 
(BE, HU, IE, LV, SE, NL).403  

402 In addition, Article 9(2) of Decree No 180/2013 provides that if the victim’s presence is not necessary for 
the purposes of criminal proceedings in the Slovak Republic, the victim can be discarded from the program.  
403 In LV, the national law transposing Article 11(6) does not specifically ensure the provision of information 
on  the  possibility  to  be  granted  a  reflection  period  or  international  protection  to  a  victim  of  trafficking. 
Specifically, the victim can only submit to the investigative institution an application for the granting of the 
reflection period within 3 days after he or she has been granted the status of victim of trafficking, and the 
national  law  does  not  impose  an  obligation  on  the  authorities  to  grant  a  reflection  period.  The  2016 
Commission’s report also noted that information in LV might need closer examination. In NL, the national 
legislation ensures that an informational meeting in the form of an interview shall take place prior to a victim 
filing any report. This meeting aims to provide the victim an explanation concerning the criminal procedure, 
but the law does not explicitly state that the victim is given the information on the possibility of being granted 
international protection and it does not mention the principle of non-refoulement.  

97 

 
                                                           
  Article 11(7): Some Member States include the reference to victims with special 
needs in soft law instruments (BG, HR), while in other cases the national laws do 
not clearly set out a special assistance tailored for victims of trafficking with special 
needs (BE, DE, EL, FR, SI, LV, NL).  

Article 12: Protection of victims in criminal investigation and proceedings 

Article 12 of the Directive obliges Member States to provide THB victims with protection 
measures in criminal investigations and prosecutions. The provisions are as follows: 

Article  12:  Protection  of  victims  of  trafficking  in  human  beings  in  criminal 
investigation and proceedings 

1.  The protection measures referred to in this Article shall apply in addition to the rights 

set out in Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA. 

2.  Member States shall ensure that victims of trafficking in human beings have access 
without delay to legal counselling, and, in accordance with the role of victims in the 
relevant justice system, to legal representation, including for the purpose of claiming 
compensation.  Legal  counselling  and  legal  representation  shall  be  free  of  charge 
where the victim does not have sufficient financial resources. 

3.  Member  States  shall  ensure  that  victims  of  trafficking  in  human  beings  receive 
appropriate protection on the basis of an individual risk assessment, inter alia, by 
having  access  to  witness  protection  programmes  or  other  similar  measures,  if 
appropriate  and  in  accordance  with  the  grounds  defined  by  national  law  or 
procedures. 

4.  Without  prejudice  to  the  rights  of  the  defence,  and  according  to  an  individual 
assessment by the competent authorities of the personal circumstances of the victim, 
Member  States  shall  ensure  that  victims  of  trafficking  in  human  beings  receive 
specific treatment aimed at preventing secondary victimisation by avoiding, as far 
as possible and in accordance with the grounds defined by national law as well as 
with rules of judicial discretion, practice or guidance, the following: 

(a)  unnecessary repetition of interviews during investigation, prosecution or trial; 

(b) visual  contact  between  victims  and  defendants  including  during  the  giving  of 
evidence  such  as  interviews  and  cross-examination,  by  appropriate  means 
including the use of appropriate communication technologies; 

(c)  the giving of evidence in open court; and 

(d) unnecessary questioning concerning the victim’s private life. 

The results of the analysis of transposition are set out in the figure below. 

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

Art. 

12(1) 

98 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
n
c 

12(2) 

12(3) 

12(4) 
Intro 

12(4)a 

12(4)b 

12(4)c 

12(4)d 

Chang
es 

The main identified changes since 2016 were: 

  ES: The 2016 assessment concluded Article 12(4)(a) had not been transposed. ES 
clarified that, in order to ensure the correct interpretation of these measures by the 
various actors involved in the procedure for detecting and protecting the persons 
concerned, different guides and protocols have been agreed and published which, 
in implementation of the legislation in question, are intended to standardise these 
measures.  They  include  the  Guide  on  criteria  for  judicial  action  in  response  to 
trafficking in human beings. Based on the assessment made in the context of the 
evaluation, ES has transposed Article 12(4)a of the Directive. 

  EL: the 2016 assessment concluded that Article 12(4)(d) had not been transposed. 
EL clarified that there is a general principle in court hearings, that only relevant 
questions  are  posed.  Based  on  the  assessment  made  in  the  context  of  the 
evaluation,  this  clarification  means  that  EL  can  be  considered  to  have 
transposed Article 12(4)(d) of the Directive.  

  HR: The following identified changes strengthened national measures to provide 
assistance  and  support,  including  special  protection  measures  to  victims  of 
trafficking. In 2017, amendments were made to the Croatian CPA (ZKP) which, 
inter  alia,  established  a  mandatory  procedure  to  undertake  an  individual  needs 
assessment  for  every  victim  of  trafficking  (Article  43.a).  The  purpose  of  this 
procedure is to apply ad hoc mechanisms that protect vulnerable victims and ensure 
that they are not exposed to secondary victimization through their participation in 
criminal proceedings. The assessment must be made by the criminal prosecution 
bodies of the pre-court and court proceedings in co-operation with the authorities, 
services  and  institutions  of  the  victim  support  system,  before  the  victim  is 
interviewed. The aim is to determine whether there is a need for special protection 
measures  and,  if  so,  which  specific  protection  measures  should  be  applied.  A 
Minister of Justice decree, issued in 2017, defines the roles and responsibilities of 

99 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
different  actors  (including  NGOs)  in  the  procedure  of  the  individual  needs’ 
assessment of the victim. Article 44 of the ZKP outlines specific rights of trafficked 
persons and victims of crimes against sexual freedom including the provision of a 
free legal advisor, the right to choose to be interviewed by a person of the same 
sex,  and,  if  possible,  to  be  examined  by  the  same  person  in  the  case  of  re-
examination;  examination  by  means  of  an  audio-video  device;  and  the  right  to 
request the exclusion of the public from the hearing. According to Article 12 of the 
2019  Protocol  on  integration  /  reintegration,  victims  are  entitled  to  primary  and 
secondary legal aid. Primary legal aid covers all legal services for the victim related 
to  the  victim/injured  person's  status  in  criminal  court  proceedings.  The  2019 
Protocol specified several victims’ rights both before, during and after the criminal 
proceedings.  From  the  moment  of  establishing  contact  with  the  competent 
authorities,  victims  are  entitled  to  access  to  information  on  relevant  court  and 
administrative  proceedings  in  a  language  they  understand.    Victims  should  be 
familiar with their rights and should be provided with free legal aid at the earliest 
possible stage.   

  HU: Article 3 of the Government Decree 420/2017 regulates the procedural rules 
to  certify  the  victim  status.  In  accordance  with  this  decree,  in  case  legal  aid  is 
needed,  and  the  client  is  considered  as  a  victim  eligible  for  victim  aid 
compensation, the regional victim aid service sends the certification of victim status 
and related documents to the legal aid services chosen by the victim without delay. 
The detailed rules on granting legal aid are now contained in the New Be., the Act 
on  Legal  Aid, as well in  Government  Decree 421/2017.  For the purposes of the 
transposition  of  the  Directive,  there  were  no  material  changes  in  this  matter 
compared to the 2016 assessment. The 2016 conformity assessment observed that 
it was unclear when, exactly, the victim will have access to legal counselling after 
the decision of the legal assistance service. However, Act LXXX of 2003 on Legal 
Aid  aims  to  establish  institutions  for  socially  disadvantaged  people  in  order  to 
enhance  their  access  to  justice  by  providing  professional  legal  advice  and 
representation  in  courts  in  case  of  asserting  rights  and  resolving  legal  disputes. 
According  to  the  Act,  the  National  Legal  Aid  Service  may  grant  legal  aid  in 
extrajudicial  cases,  both  in  civil  and  criminal  procedures.  According  to  the  Act, 
among others, victims of trafficking in human beings may also be provided legal 
aid  in  both  extrajudicial  cases  (legal  advice,  drafting  a  document)  and  criminal 
procedures. Victims of trafficking in human beings can get immediate legal advice 
from the employees of either the victim support services or the legal aid services 
for free, in simple legal cases, without a separate application. Otherwise, after the 
application  has  been  processed,  victims  can  benefit  from  legal  aid  in  both 
extrajudicial  and  litigation  cases.  Eligibility  is  facilitated  if  the  applicant  has  a 
certificate  of  victim  status.  The  victim  status  is  declared  by  the  Victim  Support 
Service. Legal aid in extrajudicial cases provided for the applicants can be granted 
in two basic forms: as free assistance, or by advancing the fees of the assistance. 
The granting legal aid is based on the financial situation of the applicant. Therefore, 
the  assessment  concluded  that  HU  transposed  Article  12(2)  of  the  Directive.  In 
addition, Points 1 and 8 of Article 1 of the Act on the Protection Programme were 
amended. Pursuant to the current rules, the Protection Programme is now extended 
to every - past or present - participant to the criminal procedure. Furthermore, the 
New Be. restructured the rules concerning the protection - including data protection 
- of participants to the criminal procedure. While the Be. regulated the confidential 
handling of personal data only with regards to witnesses, the New Be. extends these 

100 

 
provisions  to  all  participants  of  the  criminal  procedure.  The  personal  data  of 
persons participating in Protection Programme and the related documents shall be 
handled  with  confidentiality.  The  provisions  regarding  witnesses  of  special 
protection were amended with more detailed procedural rules. Chapter XIV. of the 
New Be. included numerous provisions on the protection of persons with special 
needs during the criminal procedure. Specifically, it is important to point out that 
Article 85(1)(c) of the New Be clearly states that the court shall exercise due care 
in  the  conduct  of  the  criminal  proceeding  in  order  to  respect  the  privacy  of  the 
person concerned. The 2016 conformity assessment concluded that Hungarian law 
transposing  Article  12(4)  was  partially  in  conformity  because  the  unnecessary 
questioning concerning the victim’s private life was only prohibited in the national 
strategy  2013-2016,  which  is  a  soft  law  instrument.  Therefore,  based  on  the 
assessment made in the context of the evaluation, this change means that HU 
has now transposed Article 12(4)(d) of the Directive. 

  LT:  Paragraph  1  of  Article  185  of  CCP  (IX-785)  was  amended  by  stating  that, 
where necessary to meet the special protection needs of the victim, one or more of 
the  provisions  of  Article  186  of  the  Code  may  apply.  Article  186  regulates  the 
questioning of minors. Paragraph 2 of Article 185 was added including a right of a 
victim of trafficking of human beings to request that the questioning is conducted 
by  a  person  of  the  same  sex.  Paragraph  3  of  Article  186  of  CCP  (IX-785)  was 
amended  to  include  additional  provisions  regarding  the  questioning  of  a  minor, 
namely the mandatory participation of a psychologist. 

  LV: the national law transposing Article 12(2) has been replaced with Regulation 
338 (2017) providing for the requirements for social service providers. However, 
no specific substantial changes have been identified.   

  RO: Act of 11 March 2016 introduced article 148a of the CPP, which ensured better 

protection of victims’ personal data.  

  SI: the 2016 assessment concluded SI partially transposed Article 11. Since then, 
the process of implementing the so-called Victims Directive, in SI the needs of each 
victim  with  regard  to  the  protective  measures  in  the  criminal  procedure  are 
individually  assessed.  Various  protective  measures  can  be  used  given  the 
aforementioned assessment. Based on the assessment made in the context of the 
evaluation, SI has transposed Article 11 of the Directive. 

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition:   

  Article 12(1): All Member States provide that the protection measures enshrined in 
their national legislation apply in addition to the rights set out in the Framework 
Decision 2001/220/JHA, currently Directive 2012/29/EU. 

  Article 12(2): Most Member States (BG, CY, CZ, EE, EL, ES, FI, FR, HR, LV, 
LT, MT, PT, SI, SK, FI, SE) have legislation in place that provides THB victims 
with  access  without  delay  to  legal  counsel  and  representation,  including  for  the 
purpose of claiming compensation, and free of charge where the victim does not 
have sufficient financial resources. More precisely, most Member States included 
the possibility of legal aid, free of charge, where a person does not have sufficient 
financial  resources.  In  some  Member  States  (EL,  HR,  LV  and  SE)  such  aid  is 
granted  for  free,  regardless  of  victims’  resources.  However,  some  national 
legislation does not specify that access to legal counselling and legal representation 

101 

 
should  occur  without  delay  (BE,  DE,  HU,  IE,  IT,  PL,  RO),  and  some  Member 
States have different procedures for third country nationals (LU, IT) or do not cover 
all kinds of exploitation, thus different “types” of victims (NL).   

  Article 12(3):  All  Member States are  compliant with  paragraph 3 which  obliges 
them to provide assistance protection to victims on the basis of an individual risk 
assessment.  The  assistance  protection  measures  envisaged  by  the  Directive  and 
transposed by all Member States include the access to a witness protection process 
or to other similar measures.   

  Article 12(4): Most Member States have transposed this provision. However, some 
Member States do not explicitly provide that the practices listed in Article 12(4) (a-
d) shall be avoided.  

Article 13: General provisions on assistance, support and protection 

Article  13  requires  that  Member  States  ensure  assistance  measures  to  child  victims 
following the child’s best interests. The provisions are below: 

Article 13: General provisions on assistance, support and protection measures for 
child victims of trafficking in human beings 

1.  Child  victims  of  trafficking  in  human  beings  shall  be  provided  with  assistance, 
support and protection. In the application of this Directive the child’s best interests 
shall be a primary consideration. 

2.  Member States shall ensure that, where the age of a person subject to trafficking in 
human beings is uncertain and there are reasons to believe that the person is a child, 
that  person  is  presumed  to  be  a  child  in  order  to  receive  immediate  access  to 
assistance, support and protection in accordance with Articles 14 and 15. 

The results of the analysis of transposition are set out in the figure below. 

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

Art. 

13(1) 

13(2) 

Chang
es 

The main identified changes since 2016 were:404 

  BE: The circular of 26 December 2016 provides that in case of child victims of 
human trafficking, the police will take into account the specificity of the minor's 

404  Soft  law  instruments  (such  as  circulars  or  an  updated  National  Action  Plan)  which  frequently  cover 
general provisions on assistance and protection to victims of trafficking was not included in the “minor/major 
changes” category.   

102 

 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
vulnerability. The understanding is that this circular does not change legislation, so 
does not change the Transposition Assessment.  

  ES: Amendments ensure that if the age of a victim cannot be established, they will 
be  considered  a  minor  and  be  guaranteed  all  other  rights  provided  for  by 
transposition of Article 15.  

  HU: Article 43(2) of the Act on the Support of Crime Victims was amended in a 
way that it no longer requires the severe threat to be directed against the life or the 
physical  integrity  of  the  child  represent  a  prerequisite  for  the  starting  of  a 
procedure. Other articles of the Gyvt. Have been amended. The aim was to specify 
some children’s rights, such as the access to special care, rehabilitation, as well as 
a  procedure  through  which  the  police  can  immediately  place  a  presumed  child 
victim of trafficking (who either lives in his/her family or in temporary care) under 
the  care  of  a  special  children's  home.  In  addition,  Article  84(1)  of  Gyvt.  was 
amended in such way that a child protection guardian shall be appointed in cases 
where the child’s parents are unknown. Concerning Article 13(2) of the Directive, 
article  72(1)  of  the  Harmvhr  was  amended.  It  now  provides  that  a  medical 
examination  shall  be  carried  out  to  clarify  the  person’s  age  in  case  the  age  is 
uncertain.  

  IE: The Second National Action Plan to Prevent and Combat Human Trafficking 
in Ireland specifies that where the age of a person is uncertain and they claim to be 
a child, Tusla (the Child and Family Agency) considers them as such initially and 
provides them with assistance, support and protection as if they are a child.  

  IT:  The  so-called  Zampa  Law  (47/2017)  introduced  a  series  of  changes  to  the 
national legislation on unaccompanied minors. Among the most relevant changes, 
it established a prohibition on rejecting unaccompanied minors at the border and it 
ensured that reception facilities meet minimum standards in terms of assistance and 
support  services.  When  choosing  where  to  place  a  minor,  the  needs  and 
characteristics  of  the  minor  (resulting  from  an  interview)  shall  be  taken  into 
account, in relation to the type of services offered by the facility. Concerning the 
age assessment of the child, the amendment specified that in the event that there 
are well-founded doubts as to the age declared by the minor, the public security 
authority shall proceed to the identification with the help of cultural mediators and 
in the presence of the guardian or temporary guardian, if already appointed, and 
only after ensuring immediate humanitarian assistance. This law already provided 
that  the  minor  age  is  presumed  in  the  case  where  the  disciplinary  procedure 
performed does not allow to establish with certainty the age of the person. 

  LT: In all cases where the victim of trafficking is a minor, the State Child Rights 
Protection and Adoption Service under the Ministry of Social Security and Labour 
shall now be informed. The national law also specified that assistance to victims of 
trafficking  (including  minors)  can  also  be  offered  by  non-governmental 
institutions.  

  LU: According to Article 3-7 para 3 of the Criminal Procedure Code (amended by 
Law 8 Mars 2017), when the age of the victim is uncertain, and there are reasons 
to believe that the victim is a minor, the victims is presumed to be a minor. Based 
on the assessment  made in the context of the evaluation, this change means 
that LU has now transposed Article 13(2) of the Directive.   

103 

 
  NL: While not a change to national legislation, it was noted that the 2021 tender 
procedure for appointing and organisation to provide the Categorical Reception of 
Victims of Human Trafficking (COSM) service has started, adopted on behalf of 
the Ministry of Justice and Security and the Ministry of Health. Compared to the 
previous COSM, there is a reduction in the number of available places in reception 
centres  for  children.  This  reduction  was  probably  caused  by  the  effects  of  the 
Covid-19 pandemic.  

  RO: the Annex to the Order of the Minister of Labour and Social Protection no. 
1335/2020  approving  the  minimum  quality  for  social  services  specifies  the 
minimum quality standards for social services with accommodation and assistance 
services for child victims of human trafficking.  

  SI: The 2016 assessment conclude SI had not transposed 13(2). SI clarified that 
Article 64(2) of the CPA transposes this Article. Legislation says that each victim 
is  individually  assessed,  and  the  law  stipulates  that  a  minor  always  has  special 
needs for protection (therefore, no need to argue for special needs in the process of 
individual  assessment);  Article  143.č  of  CPA.  The  assessment  made  in  the 
context of the evaluation is that SI has transposed Article 13 of the Directive. 

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition:  

  Article  13(1):  This  provision  has  been  transposed  by  all  Member  States. 
Concerning BE, the 2016 conformity assessment found that the specific measures 
of assistance and support for all child victims of trafficking in human beings is only 
contained in a soft law instrument.405 

  Article 13(2): Several Member States have not transposed Article 13(2), as their 
national legislation does not explicitly provide for a specific measure ensuring that, 
where  the  age  of  a  person  is  uncertain,  the  person  is  presumed  to  be  a  child. 
Specifically, some Member States do not refer to the principle (BE, DE, FI, FR, 
HU406, LV, PL, SI),407 IE does not include it in non-binding instruments,408 while 
others limit the scope of the principles to unaccompanied minors or to third-country 
nationals (IT, LT, NL).  

Article 14: Assistance and support to child victims 

405 2016 Circular on the introduction of multidisciplinary cooperation regarding the victims of trafficking in 
human beings and/or certain more serious forms of smuggling of human beings need to be clarified.  
406 Although the amended provision states that a medical examination shall be carried out to clarify his/her 
age, the articles does not ensure that if the age of the minor is uncertain and there are no reasons to believe 
that the person is a child, that person is presumed to be a child. 
407 Similarly, in SE, if an asylum applicant claims that he or she is an unaccompanied minor, the Migration 
Agency shall, providing there are reasons to question that the applicant is  under the age  of 18, promptly 
assess the age and issue a temporary decision. According to chapter 13, section 17 of the Swedish Aliens 
Act, a final judgement about the age of the applicant shall be made in the final decision on the application. 
The Migration Agency´s temporary decision about the age may be appealed to a migration court. However, 
the national law does not specifically provide the presumption of minority.  
408 It should be noted that the 2016 conformity assessment stated that Ireland did not transpose Article 13(2) 
because the SCEP (Statement of Good Practice – which was identified as the national law transposing Article 
13(2)) only applied to third country nationals and not to all victims of trafficking. Moreover, as the SCEP 
was  adopted  by  a  non-governmental  entity,  it  does  not  have  binding  force.  As  the  National  Plan  has  no 
binding nature either, the assessment concludes that Ireland did not transpose Article 13(2).  

104 

 
                                                           
Article 14 requires tailored assistance measures for child victims of THB. The provisions 
are set out below: 

Article 14: Assistance and support to child victims 

1.  Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the specific actions 
to assist and support child victims of trafficking in human beings, in the short and 
long term, in their physical and psycho-social recovery, are undertaken following an 
individual assessment of the special circumstances of each particular child victim, 
taking due account of the child’s views, needs and concerns with a view to finding 
a  durable  solution  for  the  child.  Within  a  reasonable  time,  Member  States  shall 
provide access to education for child victims and the children of victims who are 
given assistance and support in accordance with Article 11, in accordance with their 
national law. 

2.  Members  States shall appoint a  guardian or  a representative  for  a child  victim of 
trafficking in human beings from the moment the child is identified by the authorities 
where, by national law,  the holders of parental  responsibility are, as a  result of a 
conflict of interest between them and the child victim, precluded from ensuring the 
child’s best interest and/or from representing the child. 

3.  Member  States  shall  take  measures,  where  appropriate  and  possible,  to  provide 
assistance and support to the family of a child victim of trafficking in human beings 
when the family is in the territory of the Member States. In particular, Member States 
shall,  where  appropriate  and  possible,  apply  Article  4  of  Framework  Decision 
2001/220/JHA to the family. 

4.  This Article shall apply without prejudice to Article 11. 

The results of the analysis of transposition are set out in the figure below. 

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

Art. 

14(1) 

14(2) 

14(3) 

14(4) 

Chang
es 

The main identified changes since 2016 were:409  

409 The adoption of an updated National Plan for combatting trafficking in human beings (IE, PL) [which 
frequently covers Article 13] was not included in the “minor/major changes” category.  

105 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
 
  AT: Legislation regarding child and youth welfare tasks which transposed Article 
14(1) expired in 2019. However, other existing requirements for child protection 
and  access  to  education  make  the  necessary  provisions  for  this  Article  and  the 
Austrian  authorities  have  provided  more  description  to  demonstrate  this.  The 
legislation  requiring  the  appointment  of  a  guardian  (Article  14(2))  has  been 
replaced and the new legislation now specifies the guardian (or ‘curator’) might be 
distinct  from  the  legal  representative  and  should  be  different  for  each  affected 
minor, if their best interests are in conflict.      

  BG: The relevant regulation now stipulates that an action plan be agreed upon with 
the  child  (depending  on  age  and  stage  of  development).  Additionally,  periodic 
meetings to monitor the child now must include ‘all interested parties’.  

  EL: The 2016 assessment concluded that EL had partially transposed Article 14(1). 
EL  clarified  that  Presidential  Degree  233/2003  and  other  legal  instruments 
concerning child protection ensure that access  to  education is  guaranteed  for all 
minors irrespective of nationality, legal status, or vulnerability. Needs assessment 
and best interests assessment take place in all cases where a child is under the care 
of  an  agency,  actor,  NGO,  etc.  (Civil  code,  law  4554/2018,  4538/2018,  law 
4636/2019, as amended).  Based on the assessment made in the context of the 
evaluation,  this  clarification  means  that  EL  can  be  considered  to  have 
transposed Article 14(1) of the Directive. 

  EE: The Child Protection Act (2016) provides a comprehensive definition of “child 
in need of assistance”, urging all persons who have knowledge of a child in need 
of assistance to notify their situation to the local authority (or to a helpline service), 
which is required to immediately assess the child’s need for assistance and provide 
the relevant assistance measures. The same act provides for other rights related to 
child’s assistance and victim support services.  

  HR: A section of a new Protocol on unaccompanied minors specifies actions to be 
taken in the case of suspected THB. The Protocol requires immediate notification 
of  a  specialised  police  officer  and  subsequent  information-sharing  with  the 
Coordinator  for  the  Suppression  of  THB  and  the  National  and  Regional 
Coordinators for Combatting THB. The Regional Officer or a centre for social care 
is authorised to make decisions on safe accommodation for the child without delay 
and the child should be accompanied there by the regional coordinator and a special 
guardian.   

  HU: Changes reported in regard to the transposition of Article 13 are reported to 
also apply for Article 14. Beyond this, amendments have stated that it is no longer 
necessary that a child be in  danger of direct  risk  to  life or physical  integrity  for 
intervention by the relevant authorities to begin. Legislation providing for access 
to education has been replaced, but this has not resulted in any material changes to 
the provisions transposing Article 14(1). Legislation has also been amended to state 
that an unaccompanied minor will be provided with a guardian if their parents are 
unknown and/or if available, where information shows them to be unaccompanied 
(Article 14(2)). 

  IT: A 2017 law changed existing legislation on unaccompanied foreign minors so 
that the national system of protection and reception is strengthened. It also states 
that  educational  institutions  of  all  levels  must  promote  the  completion  of 

106 

 
compulsory schooling for these minors, including those who are child victims of 
THB.  

  LV: Amendments have been made to increase the tasks assigned to the Orphan’s 
Court. These now include the responsibility to evaluate abuse of parental rights, 
carrying out necessary activities to ensure appropriate care of a child and that their 
best interests are represented, informing the State Inspectorate for the Protection of 
the Rights of the Child of cases of repeated termination of parental custody. These 
are all reported to apply to child victims of THB and to transpose Articles 14(1) 
and 14(2).   

  MT:  In 2019, legislation transposing Article 14 was replaced with a new act on 
child  protection.  This  includes  a  review  of  the  childcare  system,  protection  of 
children during judicial procedures and the availability of child advocates. These 
are all applicable to child victims of THB and are reported to transpose Articles 
14(1) and 14(2).  

  PL:  Legislation  providing  access  to  education  for  child  victims  of  THB  was 
revoked in 2017 (Article 14(1)). In the same year, a new regulation was issued on 
the  education  of  children  without  Polish  citizenship  or  children  with  Polish 
citizenship who have previously been education abroad. This provides for access 
to education for any child arriving from abroad but does not specify provisions for 
child victims of THB.  

  RO:  In  2019,  amendments  were  made  to  Law  211/2004  on  measures  to  ensure 
information,  support  and  protection  of  victims  of  crime.  Article  1  currently 
provides that everyone who is a victim has the right to be recognised as such from 
the moment of identification, to be treated with respect, professionalism, to benefit 
from individualised protection and support, financial compensation and restoration 
for rights, and the victim’s family members enjoy the same rights. Based on the 
assessment made in the context of the evaluation, this change means that RO 
has now transposed Article 14(3) of the Directive.   

  SK:  Legislation has been amended to state that if the legal  representative of the 
child victim cannot exercise the rights of the child or if there is danger of omission, 
the prosecutor can request a judge to appoint a guardian (Article 14(2)).  

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition: 

  Article 14(1):  

o  Most Member States (BG, EL, CZ, EE, ES, FR, CY, HU, LT, PT, RO, SK) 
refer to general assistance and support measures tailored to children such 
as counselling, social support, healthcare services and an appropriate form 
of  accommodation.  In  some  Member  States  (IE,  FI,  SE)  support  and 
assistance measures are only available to a limited group of minors.  

o  Only few Member States developed psychological and medical assistance 
measures  for  child  victims  providing  them  with  enrolment  in  the  social 
welfare  system  (HR),  a  temporary  residence  permit  (SI)  and  the 
establishment of child protection groups in hospitals (AT). 

o  The assistance and support measures offered by some Member States (BE, 
LV and PL) are applicable to all victims. Article 14(1) also provides that 

107 

 
these measures should assist and support the child "in the short and long 
term":  only  France  makes  explicit  reference  to  the  time  period  of  the 
duration of the assistance measures, while the other Member States seem to 
provide  such  measures  for  a  “reasonable  time”  without  specifying  the 
precise time frame. 

  Article 14(2): All Member States have made provisions to conform to Article 14(2): 
a few Member States (CY, NL) adopted specific provisions to that purpose, while 
the others ensure the appointment through their general rules. 

  Article 14(3). The 2016 assessment found that only half of Member States (BG, 
ES, CY, LT, LU,410 MT, PL, PT, SI, SK, FI, SE) had adopted specific measures for 
the  family  of  the  child  victim.  Other  Member  States  (CZ,  DE,  LV)  partially 
transposed Article 14(3), as their national legislations are very general in terms of 
assistance and support measures offered to the family of the child victim.  

 Article  15:  Protection  of  child  victims  of  trafficking  in  human  beings  in  criminal 
investigations and proceedings 

Article 15 sets out a number of measures to protect child victims during the process of a 
criminal investigation proceedings. The provisions are set out below: 

Article 15: Protection of child victims of trafficking in human beings in criminal 
investigations and proceedings 

1.  Member  States  shall  take  the  necessary  measures  to  ensure  that  in  criminal 
investigations and proceedings, in accordance with the role of victims in the relevant 
justice system, competent authorities appoint a representative for a child victim of 
trafficking  in  human  beings  where,  by  national  law,  the  holders  of  parental 
responsibility are precluded from representing the child as a result of a conflict of 
interest between them and the child victim. 

2.  Member States shall, in accordance with the role of victims in the relevant justice 
system, ensure that child victims have access without delay to free legal counselling 
and to free legal representation, including for the purpose of claiming compensation, 
unless they have sufficient financial resources. 

3.  Without  prejudice  to  the  rights  of  the  defence,  Member  States  shall  take  the 
necessary  measures  to  ensure  that  in  criminal  investigations  and  proceedings  in 
respect of any of the offences referred to in Articles 2 and 3: 

(a)  interviews  with  the  child  victim  take  place  without  unjustified  delay  after  the 

facts have been reported to the competent authorities; 

(b) interviews  with  the  child  victim  take  place,  where  necessary,  in  premises 

designed or adapted for that purpose; 

(c)  interviews with the child victim are carried out, where necessary, by or through 

professionals trained for that purpose; 

410 In LU, a bill of law on the rights of child victims will soon be submitted for approval to the Council of 
Government  and  to  the  Parliament.  This  bill  will  gather  the  (already  existing)  procedural  rights  of  child 
victims in one piece of legislation.  

108 

 
                                                           
(d) the same persons, if possible and where appropriate, conduct all the interviews 

with the child victim; 

(e)  the number of interviews is as limited as possible and interviews are carried out 
only  where  strictly  necessary  for  the  purposes  of  criminal  investigations  and 
proceedings; 

(f)  the child victim may be accompanied by a representative or, where appropriate, 
an adult of the child’s choice, unless a reasoned decision has been made to the 
contrary in respect of that person. 

4.  Member  States  shall  take  the  necessary  measures  to  ensure  that  in  criminal 
investigations of any of the offences referred to in Articles 2 and 3 all interviews 
with  a  child  victim  or,  where  appropriate,  with  a  child  witness,  may  be  video 
recorded  and  that  such  video  recorded  interviews  may  be  used  as  evidence  in 
criminal court proceedings, in accordance with the rules under their national law. 

5.  Member States shall take the necessary measures to  ensure  that in  criminal  court 
proceedings relating to any of the offences referred to in Articles 2 and 3, it may be 
ordered that: 

(a)  the hearing take place without the presence of the public; and 

(b) the child victim be heard in the courtroom without being present, in particular, 

through the use of appropriate communication technologies. 

6.  This Article shall apply without prejudice to Article 12. 

The results of the analysis of transposition are set out in the figure below 

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

n
c 

Art. 

15(1) 

15(2) 

15(3) 

15(3)a 

15(3)b 

15(3)c 

15(3)d 

15(3)e 

15(3)f 

109 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
15(4) 

15(5) 
Intro 

15(5)a 

15(5)b 

15(6) 

Chang
es 

The main identified changes since 2016 were:411 

  AT: Amendments have been made to expand the definition of victim (any person 
subject to violence or threat or whose personal dependency has been exploited) and 
to provide victims with the right to have a person of their confidence present during 
examination.  

  BE:  Provisions  have  been  made  so  that  minor’s  vulnerabilities  are  taken  into 

account by police, including the choice of a specialised shelter. 

  BG: New legislation and amendments define legal aid and oblige investigators to 
notify victims of their right to legal support. They also require relevant training for 
judges, prosecutors and investigators and state that minors can give testimony if 
contact with the accused can be avoided (Article 15(5b).  

  EL: the 2016 assessment concluded EL had not transposed Article 15(3)(d). EL 
clarified  that  this  is  implemented  in  practice  following  standard  operating 
procedures. Based on the assessment made in the context of the evaluation, this 
clarification  means  that  EL  can  be  considered  to  have  transposed  Article 
15(3)(d) of the Directive. 

  HU:  Changes  to  legislation  are  reported  but  these  do  not  appear  to  change  the 
conclusions of the 2016 assessment that there is only partial transposition of Article 
15(2), 15(3a), 15(3b), 15(4) and 15(5b) for the following reasons: the legislation 
does not specify that protection should be provided without delay (Article 15(2)), 
the crime of human trafficking is not sufficiently covered by the provisions quoted 
as  transposing  Article  15(3a),  provisions  transposing  Article  15(3b),    15(4)  and 
15(5b) only refer to minors under 14 or refer to minors under 18 without foreseeing 
an obligation.  

  IE: The 2017 Victims’ Crime Act currently includes victims’ rights enshrined in 
Article  15(3)(a-f).  Based  on  the  assessment  made  in  the  context  of  the 
evaluation, this change means that IE has now transposed Article 15(3).    

411  The  adoption  of  an  updated  National  Plan  for  combatting  trafficking  in  human  beings  (IE)  [which 
frequently covers Article 15] was not included in the “minor/major changes” category.  

110 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
  LT: Legislation on the timing and number of interviews of child victims has been 
amended to state that such proceedings with minors may not be performed between 
10pm  and  6am  unless  urgent.  Other  provisions  have  been  moved  between  legal 
articles but are unchanged. 

  LV:  Legislative amendments require that a minor is questioned by an interviewer 
with knowledge of communication with a minor during criminal proceedings and 
that a child victim’s representative is permitted to participate in the interview.  

  MT: New legislation allows for the appointment of a trained expert support person 
for child victims throughout court proceedings and for the appointment of a family 
law child’s advocate to represent the child victim’s interests in civil proceedings.  

  SI: The 2016 assessment concluded some articles had not been transposed. Since 
then SI has significantly changed its CPA in order to implement so-called Victims 
Directive. Based on the assessment made in the context of the evaluation, ES 
has transposed Article 15 of the Directive. 

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition: 

  Article 15(1): All Member States provide the appointment of a guardian or a legal 
representative in case parents cannot represent a child’s interest due to a conflict of 
responsibility, or for unaccompanied children (please refer to Article 16 below).  

  Article  15(2)  and  (3):  the  2016  Assessment  noted  that  these  were  implemented 
through general provisions of criminal law, thus specific measures are sometimes 
lacking and there is some variability in terms of the age of child for whom such 
measures are available (the Directive specifies under 18, but some Member States 
apply to under 15 or under 15).  

  Article 15(4): Four states have partially transposed this article (FI, HU, LV, PL), 
with the remainder fully transposing. Finland’s amendments do not cover minors 
of all ages, Hungary’s and Latvia’s only cover minors under 14 and Poland’s only 
cover minors under 15.  

  Article 15(5a): Two Member States have only partially transposed this article. In 
Belgium,  provisions  transposing  this  article  have  not  been  consistently  applied 
across the legislation reported on, while the Polish provision to exclude the public 
from court proceedings is aimed solely at the protection of minors under 15.  

  Article 15(5b): Some Member State laws only apply to children under 15 (FI) and 
14  (HU,  LV).  The  Directive  categorises  child  victims  as  under  18.  In  addition, 
Polish legislation refers to the rights of the accused to be present (with exceptions) 
rather than the rights of the child victim. Therefore, these five Member States are 
considered to have only partially transposed this article. 

  Article 15(6): All Member States have transposed this article without prejudice to 
Article 12 (Protection of victims in criminal investigation and proceedings).  

 Article  16:  Assistance,  support  and  protection  for  unaccompanied  child  victims  of 
trafficking in human beings 

Article  16  sets  out  the  measures  that  MS  must  provide  to  protect  children  who  are 
unaccompanied. The provisions are set out below: 

111 

 
Article 16: Assistance, support and protection for unaccompanied child victims of 
trafficking in human beings 

1.  Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the specific actions 
to assist and support child victims of trafficking in human beings, as referred to in 
Article  14(1),  take  due  account  of  the  personal  and  special  circumstances  of  the 
unaccompanied child victim. 

2.  Member States shall take the necessary measures with a view to finding a durable 

solution based on an individual assessment of the best interests of the child. 

3.  Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that, where appropriate, 
a  guardian  is  appointed  to  unaccompanied  child  victims  of  trafficking  in  human 
beings. 

4.  Member  States  shall  take  the  necessary  measures  to  ensure  that,  in  criminal 
investigations and proceedings, in accordance with the role of victims in the relevant 
justice  system,  competent  authorities  appoint  a  representative  where  the  child  is 
unaccompanied or separated from its family. 

5.  This Article shall apply without prejudice to Articles 14 and 15. 

The results of the analysis of transposition are set out in the figure below.   

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

Art. 

16(1) 

16(2) 

16(3) 

16(4) 

16(5) 

Chang
es 

The main identified changes since 2016 were: 

  AT: Legislation has been updated to re-name the national youth agency, which is 
entrusted with the custody and care of unaccompanied minors, to ‘child and youth’ 
agency.  

  BG: Amendments to national law oblige the relevant authorities to take measures 
for  the  protection  of  child  victims,  ensure  access  to  public  education  and  the 
appointment  of  legal  representation  with  necessary  knowledge,  make  provisions 
for an assessment of the child’s best interests and a subsequent action plan as well 
as residential care for child victims of trafficking. The mandatory notification of 

112 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
victims  about  their rights now specifies the need to  take the age of victims  into 
account.  

  EL:  The  2016  assessment  concluded  that  EL  had  partially  transposed  Articles 
16(1)  and  16(2).  However,  law  4554/2018  and  4636/2019  now  provide  that 
unaccompanied  minors  are  accorded  special  protection  measures,  including 
appropriate for their age and needs accommodation, interpretation, representation, 
access to healthcare and to education. A risk/vulnerability assessment and a best 
interest  assessment  take  place  in  view  of  identifying  durable  solutions.  These 
measures  apply  to  all  unaccompanied  minors  in  the  country.  Under  Presidential 
Decrees 18/2020, 106/2020, law 4636/2019 and Presidential Decree 70/2021, the 
Special  Secretariat  for  the  Protection  of  Unaccompanied  Minors  has  been 
established  within  the  Ministry  of  Migration  and  Asylum  as  the  competent 
authority for all matters concerning the protection of unaccompanied minors  and 
in  particular  their  accommodation,  the  quality  of  service  provision,  their 
integration,  support,  representation/guardianship  and  institutional  protection. 
Based  on  the  assessment  made  in  the  context  of  the  evaluation,  EL  has 
transposed Article 16(1) and (2) of the Directive. 

  HR: A new Protocol was adopted in 2019 which outlines actions to be taken in 
case of suspected TBH: upon identification of a potential child victim, the relevant 
authority is to notify officers specialising in trafficking or juvenile delinquency and 
the coordinator for the suppression of THB (Article 16(1) and 16(2)). A  special 
guardian will be proposed (Article 16(3)), and appropriate accommodation should 
be decided on for the child victim without delay.   

  IT:  New  (2017)  legislation  establishes  a  national  system  of  protection  and 
reception for unaccompanied foreign minors, ensuring homogeneity of provisions 
across the national territory. It also aims to strengthen existing protection tools and 
requires that educational institutions of all levels activate measures to promote the 
completion of compulsory schooling for unaccompanied minors (Article 16(1) and 
16(2).   

  LT: Legislative amendments now require the participation of a psychologist in any 
questioning of a minor and mandate that the Migration Department must issue a 
foreigner’s  registration  certificate  within  2  days  of  receiving  information  on  an 
identified unaccompanied minor, rather than within 2 working days.  

  LV: Relevant laws have been amended to empower an Orphans and Custody Court 
to  evaluate  cases  of  abuse  or  failures  in  custody  and  act  to  secure  appropriate 
alternative care in the best interests of the child. These provisions would also be 
applicable  to  (unaccompanied)  child  victims  of  trafficking  (Articles  16(1)  and 
16(2). Other amendments replaced ‘interim guardian’ with ‘a guardian for a time 
period’ to reflect the nature of appointing a guardian for unaccompanied children 
without specifying if temporary or otherwise (Article 16(3)). 

  RO: Amendments specify that the procedures of identification and assignment of 
support are considered complete only if the minor is safely reunited with family or 
handed over to authorities in the country of origin, if there is non-identification of 
family or if the State of origin will not accept the minor. In the latter two cases, 
long-term stay permits can be granted and now, international protection in Romania 
is granted rather than ‘a form of protection’. Conditions for these provisions were 
also added to state that no serious doubts over the minority of the victim may exist.  

113 

 
  SI:  Legislation  previously  transposing  Article  16(3)  is  no  longer  in  use,  having 
been replaced by the  Family Code. However, the provisions required by Article 
16(3) can be inferred from other national provisions on victims of all nationalities.  

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition:  

  All MS have at least partially implemented all parts of Article 16.  In some MS, 
measures specify provisions for unaccompanied child victims (HU, IE, CY, AT, 
SK, FI, FR, LU, NL) while, in others, general rules and regulations on assistance 
and care for children also are also suitable to cover unaccompanied child victims 
(BG, EE, HR, LV, PT, SI).  

  Latvia’s legislation only partially conforms to Article 16(2) as provisions to ensure 
a rehabilitation plan and the receipt of social services apply to both adult and child 
victims, therefore not accounting for the specialised assistance required for minors. 

  Regarding Sweden, the unclear scope of support and assistance provided to child 
victims who do not have a right to reside in Sweden (or are ‘paperless’) means that 
legislation specifying assistance, support and durable solutions  for  child victims 
only partially transposes both Article 16(1) and Article 16(2). 

 Article 17: Compensation 

Article 17 requires Member States to provide compensation measures to THB victims. The 
provision is set out below: 

Article 17: Compensation to victims 

Member States shall ensure that victims of trafficking in human beings have access to 
existing schemes of compensation to victims of violent crimes of intent. 

The results of the analysis of transposition are set out in the figure below: 

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

Art. 

17 

Chang
es 

The main identified changes since 2016 were:  

  BE: Legislation has been amended to specify that exceptional damage caused by 
the  identity  and  motives  of  the  perpetrator  remaining  unknown  is  now  basis  for 
compensation. Another amendment states that aid will be granted per intentional 
act of violence, per applicant, for damages above 500€ to a limit of 125,000€.  

  BG: Amendments to existing laws transposing Article 17 now specify that victims 
of  crimes  can  receive  assistance  for  both  pecuniary  and  non-pecuniary  damages 
whereas  financial  compensation  can  be  granted  to  victims  who  have  suffered 
pecuniary damages as a result of THB. The loss of support to dependents has been 
added to the list of damages which can result in a claim for compensation while 

114 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
expenses covered by the National Health Insurance fund have been excluded from 
the medical costs which can be compensated.   

  EE:  The  wording  of  relevant  legislation  has  changed,  now  stating  that 
‘compensation is payable for economically assessable damage’, including for costs 
arising  from  incapacity  for  work,  damage  to  health,  death  and/or  funeral  of  the 
victim,  damage  to  spectacles,  dentures  and  other  similar  appliances  for  bodily 
function.  

  HU: Legislation regarding the support of crime victims was amended in 2020 to 
make compensation available to all victims regardless of their deprivation status, 
with the amount of compensation victims can receive clarified: the rate is at most 
fifteen times the basic sum.  

  NL: One section of the Code of Criminal Procedure transposing Article 17 has been 
abolished.  However,  it  is  claimed  that  another  section  sufficiently  establishes 
victims’ rights to compensation.  

  SK: A piece of legislation which transposed Article 17 was repealed. It has been 
replaced  with  a  new  legislative  act  which  defines  the  category  of  ‘victim’  and 
‘vulnerable  victim’  and  stipulates  rights  to  compensation  for  victims  of  violent 
criminal offences of any nationality, provided the injury or damages occurred in 
the Slovak Republic. It  also  describes the circumstances in  which compensation 
cannot be granted, including scenarios in which the alleged perpetrator is acquitted.  

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition: 

  All  Member  States  provide  compensation  measures  to  THB  victims.  Such 
measures  include  compensation  for  non-material  damages,  such  as  physical  and 
psychological suffering (AT, FI, SK, UK), dual system of compensation (BG, CZ, 
ES, LT, MT, NL, PT, SE), fund for victims of violent crimes (BE, FR and HR) or 
other special compensation measures (EE, EL, HU, LV, PL, RO, SK and UK). 

 

In  the  case  of  SI,  the  2016  assessment  found  that  compensation  appeared  to  be 
provided only to victims who are Slovenian or EU citizens. No relevant changes 
have been identified in national legislation since that assessment was made. In IE, 
the  existing  scheme  for  compensation  to  victims  of  violent  crimes  (namely  the 
Criminal  Injury  Compensation  Schemes)  only  recovers  verifiable  expenses,  and 
not pain and suffering. Although the possibility to start a legal action is open, in 
practice, victims of trafficking’ eligibility to free legal aid is not guaranteed.  

Article 18: Prevention  

Article 18 requires that Member States take steps to prevent THB. This includes actions 
for  awareness-raising  campaigns  but  also  education  and  training  measures  for  their 
officials involved in the fight against THB. Article 18.4 states that Member States shall 
consider measures to  establish as a criminal offence the use of services related to the object 
of exploitation.  The provisions are set out below: 

Article 18: Prevention 

1.  Member States shall take appropriate measures, such as education and training, to 
discourage and reduce the demand that fosters all forms of exploitation related to 
trafficking in human beings. 

115 

 
2.  Member States shall take appropriate action, including through the Internet, such as 
information and awareness-raising campaigns, research and education programmes, 
where appropriate in cooperation with relevant civil society organisations and other 
stakeholders, aimed at raising awareness and reducing the risk of people, especially 
children, becoming victims of trafficking in human beings. 

3.  Member States shall promote regular training for officials likely to come into contact 
with victims or potential victims of trafficking in human beings, including front-line 
police officers, aimed at enabling them to identify and deal with victims and potential 
victims of trafficking in human beings. 

4.  In order to make the preventing and combating of trafficking in human beings more 
effective by discouraging demand, Member States shall consider taking measures to 
establish  as  a  criminal  offence  the  use  of  services  which  are  the  objects  of 
exploitation as referred to in Article 2, with the knowledge that the person is a victim 
of an offence referred to in Article 2. 

The results of the analysis are set out in the figure below.   

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

Art. 

18(1) 

18(2) 

18(3) 

18(4) 

Chang
es 

The main identified changes since 2016 were:412 

  EL:  The  legislation  transposing  Article  18(1)  was  annulled  but  a  Ministerial 
Decision provides for the establishment and operation of the National System for 
the Identification and Referral of Victims of Human Trafficking and the rest of the 
measures brought in to conform to this Article of the Directive remain in place.  

  HU: A new provision transposes Article 18(4) and criminalises the knowing use of 
the  work  or  services  of  a  trafficked  person  with  a  penalty  of  up  to  three  years’ 
imprisonment. In the case of knowing use of sexual services of a trafficked person, 
the  penalty  is  up  to  five  years’  imprisonment  with  a  minimum  sentence  of  one 
year’s  imprisonment.  Based  on  the  assessment  made  in  the  context  of  the 
evaluation, this change means that HU has now transposed the optional Article 
18(4) of the Directive. 

412 The adoption of an updated National Plan for combatting trafficking in human beings (BE) [which covers 
the type of actions required by Article 18] was not included in the “minor/major changes” category. 

116 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
  LU: The 2016 conformity assessment was unable to locate measures on education, 
training, and raising awareness. Therefore, this meant that the actions taken have 
only partially transposed Article 18(1) and 18(2). Several initiatives were set up 
after  2017,  including  Stoptrate.lu,  trainings,  and  other  initiatives  implemented 
through the Benelux framework. Based on the assessment made in the context 
of the evaluation, this change means that LU has now transposed Article 18(1) 
and Article 18(2) of the Directive.   

  LV: A new Trafficking Prevention Plan for 2021-2023 was developed, including a 
list  of  actions  to  be  taken  in  this  time  period.  These  actions  are:  raising  public 
awareness, improving the identification of victims, stepping up efforts to prosecute 
perpetrators  with  the  aim  of  providing  a  deterrent  and,  finally,  strengthening 
coordination and information-exchange within Latvia and with partners abroad and 
in international institutions.  

  RO: Relevant legislation was amended to clarify the responsibilities of the National 
Agency  Against  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings  (previously  in  Persons).  These 
responsibilities are developing campaigns to prevent THB, programs to facilitate 
assistance to victims and collaboration with public, private and non-governmental 
organisations for joint campaigns.  

  NL: The Dutch Parliament passed a law criminalising the use of services exploited 
from  victims  of  trafficking  (linked  to  sexual  exploitation).413  Based  on  the 
assessment made in the context of the evaluation, this change means that HU 
has now partially transposed the optional Article 18(4) of the Directive.   

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition 

  Article 18(1) and 18(2): Most Member States (BE, EE, EL, ES, FR, HR, HU, IE, 
CY, LT, MT, NL, AT, PL, PT, RO, SI, SK, SE) have developed general training 
and educational measures. All Member States have put in place campaigns to raise 
awareness  and  enable  the  reduction  of  the  demand  of  THB,  such  as  awareness-
raising  campaigns  and  lectures  among  students  (FR,  LT,  SK),  round  tables  and 
debates (HR, LU), TV and radio campaigns (CY, LU, MT), festivals and annual 
events (AT, HU, PL, SK)414. Some Member States also introduced activities for 
foreign victims to prevent THB in their country of origin (AT, BE, BG).  

  The 2016 conformity assessment concluded that Italy’s provisions only partially 
conform to Article 18(1) and 18(2) due to a missing article in the relevant Decree 
and the large discretion given to the Department for Equal Opportunities in carrying 
out prevention measures.  

  Article  18(3):  All  Member  States  included  training  activities  for  competent 
authorities in their strategy against THB415. All Member States reported measures 
aimed  at  ensuring  that  their  officials  who  are  likely  to  engage  with  victims  or 
potential  victims  of  THB  are  adequately  trained.    Some  Member  States focused 
more on training of their immigration officers (BE, FR and LU) and border control 

413  Kamerbrief  over  initiatiefwetsvoorstel  strafbaarstelling  misbruik  van  prostitué(e)s  die  slachtoffer  van 
mensenhandel zijn 34091" Available here.  
414 Website of the European Commission, Together Against Trafficking in Human Beings – Member States. 
Available at: link. 
415 Website of the European Commission, Together Against Trafficking in Human Beings – Member States. 
Available at: link. 

117 

 
                                                           
staff (HU, LT and PT). Others focused on the training of health-care professionals 
(BE, FR and LU), staff of social assistance services (BG, HU, IT, LT, LU, MT, PT, 
SI and SK) or labour inspectors (CZ, FR and SI). The majority of Member States 
made reference to training measures for public officials involved in investigations 
and prosecutions such as judges (AT, BE, BG, CZ, HU, LT, MT, PL, PT, SE and 
SI), prosecutors (BG, CZ, EE, ES, HU, IT, LT, MT, NL, AT, PL, SI and SE), law 
enforcement bodies (EE, NL and PL) and judicial police (ES).  

  Article 18(4): Article 18(4) sets out an option for the Member States to criminalise 

the use of services which are the object of exploitation.  

  Ten Member States416 have legislation that criminalise the knowing use of services 
extracted from victims of any form of exploitation. One Member State (CY) has 
such a standard – the law states that, in the case of the use of sexual exploitation 
services,  a person can be prosecuted for the demand, reception or use  of sexual 
exploitation service, regardless of whether they had a reasonable suspicion that the 
person was a VoT. CY therefore uses a ‘strict liability’ standard.417  

  Ten Member States418 have legislation that criminalise the knowing use of services 
by victims of sexual exploitation. To this extent, the assessment concludes that 
these  Member  States  have  partially  transposed  the  optional  Article  18(4). 
Additionally,  PL  reported  that  there  is  discussion  underway  about  whether  to 
criminalise knowing use and SK reported that the process is ongoing to criminalise 
knowing use of the services by VoT.  

  Four Member States419 in effect criminalise the knowing use of services exacted 
from VoT for sexual exploitation because they follow the ‘Nordic Model’, which 
criminalises consumers of prostitution (including those who use the services of sex 
workers who are VoT). 420  This approach is adopted by Sweden, Finland, Ireland 
and France. Spain is reported to be considering adopting the Nordic Model.421 To 
this extent the assessment concludes that these Member States have partially 
transposed the optional Article 18(4). 

  Seven Member States422 do not have any legislation criminalising knowing use of 

services exacted from victims.  

  Some Member States have legislation that may create criminal liabilities for users 
of exploited services, but which does not transpose the Directive. For example: 

416 BG; CY; EL; HR; HU; LT; MT; PT; RO; SI.  
417  OSCE  Office  of  the  Special  Representative  and  Co-ordinator  for  Combating  Trafficking  in  Human 
Beings,  Discouraging  the  demand  that  fosters  trafficking  for  the  purpose  of  sexual  exploitation  (2021). 
Available at: link.  
418 EE; DE; EL; FI; FR; IE; LU; LV; NL; SE.  
419 FI; FR; IE; SE. 
420 Some countries have outlawed sex buying on the grounds that any purchase of sex is a form of exploitation 
and related to gender-based violence, regardless of the status of any person in prostitution. This is the so-
called Nordic model, which bases the criminalisation of the purchase of sex on the grounds that most sex 
purchasers are taking advantage of the difficult situation of prostitutes. Because of this analysis, the Nordic 
model does not criminalise the selling of sex. OSCE Office of the Special Representative and Co-ordinator 
for  Combating  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings,  Discouraging  the  demand  that  fosters  trafficking  for  the 
purpose of sexual exploitation (2021). Available at: link. 
421 Comment from ES National Rapporteur, Workshop 2.  
422 AT; BE; CZ; ES; IT; PL; SK. 

118 

 
                                                           
o  AT  has  legislation  that  criminalises  labour  exploitation  by  third  country 

nationals  

o  CZ makes it an offence not to report trafficking, where a person becomes 

aware. 

o  IT has legislation making unlawful brokering and exploitation of labour an 

offence (in the Criminal Code).  

o  PL (According to Article 10(1) of the AREIF) it is a criminal offence for an 
employer  to  employ  an  illegally  residing  foreigner,  accompanied  by 
particularly  exploitative  working  conditions.  However, 
the  2016 
assessment found that this law does not refer to the condition requiring that 
the employer has the knowledge that the employee is a victim of trafficking 
in human beings. In addition, the national provisions are only addressed to 
third-country  nationals.  Overall,  based  on  the  assessment  made  in  the 
context of the evaluation, PL has not transposed the optional 18(4).  

 Article 19: National Rapporteurs or equivalent mechanisms (NREMs) 

According to Article 19, Member States shall appoint a national rapporteur or equivalent 
mechanism with the aim to report periodic national assessment of trends, measures and 
issues related to the fight against THB. The provision is set out below: 

Article 19: National rapporteurs or equivalent mechanisms 

Member  States  shall  take  the  necessary  measures  to  establish  national  rapporteurs  or 
equivalent mechanisms. The tasks of such mechanisms shall include the carrying out of 
assessments of trends in trafficking in human beings, the measuring of results of anti-
trafficking  actions,  including  the  gathering  of  statistics  in  close  cooperation  with 
relevant civil society organisations active in this field, and reporting. 

The results of the analysis of transposition are set out in the figure below. 

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

Art. 

19 

Chang
es 

The main identified changes since 2016 were: 

  BG:  2019  legislation  establishes  the  National  Commission  for  Combatting 
Trafficking in Human Beings (NCCTHB) as national rapporteur with authority to 
request and receive information from all relevant actors and to report to the Council 
of Ministers.  

  CZ:  The  National  Strategy for 2020-2023 improves the rapporteur mechanisms. 
These improvements include revisions to the NRM to improve functionality and 
increased data collection on THB, especially information on victims’ demographics 
and country of origin.  

119 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  HU: The relevant legislation (Order of the Minister of the Interior) was replaced 

with new legislation on the same subject.  

  IE:  In  October  2020,  IE  adopted  a  law  appointing  an  independent  national 
rapporteur on Trafficking in Human Beings, namely the Irish Human Rights and 
Equality Commission (IHREC)   

  LT: The relevant legislation was abolished and replaced with a new order of the 
minister of the interior in 2017 which appoints a national rapporteur. The order also 
regulates  procedures  for  the  rapporteur’s  collection  of  statistical  data  and  other 
information on THB.  

  PL: The Committee for Combating and Preventing Trafficking in Human Beings 
was replaced by the Team for Counteracting Human Trafficking in 2019. The team 
is tasked with drafting National Action Plans, initiating actions against THB and 
evaluating  the  implementation  of  programmes.  The  Inter-Ministerial  Team  for 
Combatting and Preventing Human Trafficking was abolished in 2018. However, 
the Head of the Office for Foreigners is a member of the Team for Counteracting 
Human Trafficking.  

  RO: Legislative amendments removed the coordination of the implementation of 
human trafficking policies from the responsibilities of the National Agency against 
Trafficking Human Beings.  

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition  

  All  Member  States  have  identified  a  specific  person,  a  body  or  equivalent 

mechanism to carry out the tasks envisaged by article 19 of the Directive.  

Article 20: Coordination 

Article 20 requires Member States to report the information required in Article 19 to the 
Anti-Trafficking coordinator at the EU level. 

Article 20: Coordination of the Union strategy against trafficking in human beings 

In  order  to  contribute  to  a  coordinated  and  consolidated  Union  strategy  against 
trafficking  in  human  beings,  Member  States  shall  facilitate  the  tasks  of  an  anti-
trafficking coordinator (ATC). In particular, Member States shall transmit to the ATC 
the information referred to in Article 19, on the basis of which the ATC shall contribute 
to reporting carried out by the Commission every two years on the progress made in the 
fight against trafficking in human beings. 

The results of the analysis of transposition are set out in the figure below. 

A
T 

B
E 

B
G 

C
Y 

C
Z 

D
E 

E
E 

E
L 

E
S 

F
I 

F
R 

H
R 

H
U 

I
E 

I
T 

L
T 

L
U 

L
V 

M
T 

N
L 

P
L 

P
T 

R
O 

S
E 

S
I 

S
K 

Art. 

20 

Chang
es 

120 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The main identified changes since 2016 were423: 

  All  Member  States  had  transposed  Art.  20  of  the  Directive  as  at  2016.  A  few 
organisational  changes were implemented since, but  these had no impact  on the 
transposition of the Directive: 

o  IE:  The  Irish  Human  Rights  and  Equality  Commission  (INHREC)  recently 
made  its  first  submission,  to  contribute  to  the  fourth  progress  report  on  the 
progress made in the fight against trafficking in human beings.    

o  LT: Order of 6 September 2013 of the Minister of Interior of the Republic of 
Lithuania No 1V – 750 on the implementation of Articles 19 and 20 of Directive 
2011/36/EU  was  abolished  and  replaced  by  the  order  of  the  minister  of  the 
interior of the Republic of Lithuania of 31 March 2017 on the appointment of 
the national reporter of the republic of Lithuania on the situation of the fight 
against trafficking in human beings and statistical data and other information 
about the situation of trafficking in the protection of human resources No 1V-
245. The order regulates the procedure for collecting and providing statistical 
data  and  other  information  on  the  situation  regarding  trafficking  in  human 
beings to the National Rapporteur on Combating Trafficking in Human Beings 
and publishing this information. 

o  PL: The 2016 Assessment concluded that the Polish legislation does not include 
a  provision  corresponding  explicitly  to  Art.  20  of  the  Directive,  but  that  its 
requirements can be inferred from several national instruments, including the 
Committee for Combating and Preventing Trafficking in Human Beings. This 
committee  was  replaced  in  2019  by  the  Team  for  Counteracting  Human 
Trafficking (established by Ordinance No. 6 of the Minister of Internal Affairs 
and  Administration  of  15  February  2019),  which  now  fulfils  that  role  in 
implementing Art. 20. 

o  SI:  Previously,  Slovenian  national 

law  did  not 

include  a  provision 
corresponding  explicitly  to  Article  20  of  the  Directive.  However,  the  2016 
assessment  concluded  that  Slovenia  seemed  to  contribute  to  the  work  of  the 
ATC through information provided from the national contact point. In 2020, the 
Government  of  the  Republic  of  Slovenia  adopted  Resolution  no.  01203-
9/2020/4 amending the  decision on the establishment of the  Inter-Ministerial 
Working Group on Combating Trafficking in Human Beings, which appointed 
a new national coordinator for combatting trafficking in human beings and an 
updated membership of the working group. Similar to the situation in 2016, this 
working group fulfils the role of ATC.  

Overall status of transposition/ gaps in transposition:  

  All Member States have implemented to Article 20.  

423 The adoption of an updated National Plan for combatting trafficking in human beings (FR) [which covers 
the type of actions required by Article 20] was not included in the “minor/major changes” category. 

121 

 
 
                                                           
ANNEX VII. INTERVENTION LOGIC 

122