Together Against Trafficking in Human Beings

International Legislation

International Legislation

This section provides a list of the most important international conventions, protocols and declarations to fight human trafficking and an overview of other instruments of relevance.


Project

Integration of victims of trafficking in human beings

 

Reference

AMIF-2017-AG-INTE-05 

 

Timeframe

09 November 2017 - 01 March 2018 

 

Objectives and results

Scope:

According to the 2016 Report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in human beings, there is strong evidence that the migration crisis has been exploited by criminal networks involved in trafficking in human beings to target the most vulnerable, in particular women and children. As an example, recent IOM estimates show a sharp increase by 600% since 2014 in the number of potential victims of trafficking for sexual exploitation arriving to Italy through the Central Mediterranean route. Victims are predominantly Nigerian women and girls. In this context, there is a clear need to support the integration of victims of trafficking who are third-country nationals and who are residing legally in a Member State or, where appropriate, who are in the process of acquiring legal residence in a Member State, including beneficiaries of international protection.

The provision of assistance and support for the victims of trafficking in human beings under this call assists the Member States to meet their obligations under Articles 11-14 of Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims[1]. Priority 5 of this call addresses the findings of the Commission Report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in human beings (2016) as required under Article 20 of Directive 2011/36/EU on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims and 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].

Projects applications submitted under the present call for proposals under priority 5 should be designed to include in particular one or more of the following activities (non-exhaustive list):

1. In the context of delivering individual risk assessments in view of finding durable solutions, actions on assistance and support measures should address the needs of third-country nationals, especially women and children, including unaccompanied children, who are victims of trafficking and have specific needs (pregnancy, psychological trauma, physical injuries, and age). It is crucial that the measures incorporate a gender-specific approach. Actions should address support during procedures before national authorities; legal and medical assistance (including psychological support); psychosocial support; accommodation and other relevant assistance and support measures.

2. Actions related to the integration of third-country nationals who are victims of trafficking should, in particular, address the perspective of the victims, with a view to assisting their integration in the host society. This should include, but not be limited to, possibilities for education, vocational training and apprenticeship programmes; job placement services; income-generating activities; and specialized family or dependent support. A gender-specific approach to such actions is considered important.

Proposals must take a victim-centered approach, and be gender-specific as relevant. Projects should target, but not be limited to, trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation as per the results of the Comprehensive Policy Review (see above), the statistical data available (see above), and in line with the decision of the Commission of designating 2017 as the year of focused action to address violence against women and girls [The aforementioned Study found that whilst 14 % and 12 % of funded projects are on sexual exploitation and labour exploitation respectively, 14 % of EC funding is on labour exploitation projects and only 7 % is on sexual exploitation projects. Only between 2-3 % of funded projects are on trafficking of women and children, and trafficking of women.].

The projects under priority 5 must be aiming at achieving one or more of the following outcomes:

Improve the situation of third-country national victims of trafficking in human beings and/or demonstrate and evaluate how the national/transnational actions contributed in this regard

Set up and improve transnational cooperation networks for assistance and support of victims and their integration

Share, exchange experiences and information and best practices related to the groundwork for integrating victims of trafficking in human beings in cooperation with relevant authorities and civil society and disseminate the results

Develop practical approaches, tools, and guidelines.

 

Topic conditions and documents

1. List of eligible countries:
All EU Member States, with the exception of Denmark.

2. Admissibility requirements and eligibility criteria: See sections 5 and 6 of the Call document.

3. Indicative timetable for evaluation and contract signature: See section 3 of the Call document.

4. Provisions, proposal templates and evaluation forms for the type(s) of action(s) under this topic:

Call for Proposals AMIF-2017-AG-INTE

Guide for applicants

Standard proposal template – AMIF, ISFB, and ISFP

Model Grant agreement for multi-beneficiary grants

5. Additional documents:

AMIF Annual Work Programme 2017 

AMIF legal basis: Regulation (EU) No. 514/2014 and Regulation (EU) No. 516/2014

EU Financial regulation

Members of the consortium are required to conclude a consortium agreement prior to the signature of the grant agreement.

Members of the consortium are not required to conclude a consortium agreement under AMIF rules.

 

Get support

Contact the HOME-AMIF-UNION-ACTIONS@ec.europa.eu for further assistance related to the content of the call and topics.

Participant Portal FAQ – Submission of proposals.

IT Helpdesk– contact the IT helpdesk for questions such as forgotten passwords, access rights and roles, technical aspects of submission of proposals, etc.

H2020 Online Manual - Please use the manual with caution and only for the Participant Portal tools guidance, i.e. Submission service and Beneficiary register. It is H2020 specific and does not cover the AMIF rules. Some aspects of these funds are different from the provisions of the H2020 programme.

 

Submission Service

The submission system is planned to be opened on the date stated in the topic header.

To mark the 11th EU Anti-Trafficking Day, the European Commission is today calling for a renewed commitment to eradicating trafficking in human beings.
 
Commissioner for Migration, Home Affairs, and Citizenship Dimitris Avramopoulos said: "Every day, women and girls, men and boys, EU and non-EU citizens, are exploited by unscrupulous traffickers for profit. On EU Anti-Trafficking Day, we are reminded of the gravity of this heinous crime, which often has strong links with cross-border organised crime and takes advantage of irregular migration routes. It is imperative that all authorities and stakeholders strengthen their work on prevention by untangling the complex chain of trafficking, reducing demand, following the money and ensuring better access to justice for the victims. We stand ready to further support our Member States and cooperate more closely with our international partners in working towards eradicating trafficking in human beings."
 
The Commission will shortly publish its priority actions to address trafficking in human beings. These will build on the ongoing work, taking stock of the achievements of the EU strategy 2012-2016 and ensuring the continuation of efforts, including coordination with stakeholders and increasing the knowledge base.
 
For more information:
 
 
Natasha Bertaud – Tel.: +32 229 67456;
Tove Ernst – Tel.: +32 229 86764;
Markus Lammert – Tel.: +32 299 80423.
 
 
 
4-5 September 2017, Vienna
 
Statement by H.E. Mr Didier Lenoir, Ambassador, Head of the European Union Delegation to the International Organisations in Vienna, in the context of the Fifth informal thematic session on Smuggling of migrants, trafficking in persons and contemporary forms of slavery, including appropriate identification, protection and assistance to migrants and trafficking victims for the UN Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration.
 
In June 2017, Frontex released a video presenting its Vega project and the role of border guards at airports in detecting children at risk of trafficking in human beings. 
 
The video highlights some of the challenges for officials to identify trafficked children, as well as some of the best practices recommended in the VEGA handbook: Children at airports (Frontex, 2015).
 
 
 

"This is not a European Commission publication. The European Commission is not responsible for, nor does it necessarily endorse its content. Any views expressed are solely those of the author or publisher and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Commission, the European Union or its Member States".

On 26th June 2017, the Commission adopted the Guidelines on non-financial reporting, to enhance business transparency on social and environmental matters. The new guidelines will support companies in fulfilling their reporting obligations under current non-financial disclosure requirements and will promote smart company reporting. Companies falling within the scope of Directive 2014/95/EU have to disclose relevant information on policies, risks, and results as regards environmental matters, social and employee-related aspects, as well as respect for human rights, anti-corruption, and bribery issues, and diversity on the boards of directors.


In the Guidelines, trafficking in human beings is highlighted amongst the possible objectives of the due diligence processes to be reported. In particular, companies may consider disclosing material information and key performance indicators on processes and measures for preventing trafficking in human beings in the context of corporate respect for human rights, as well as on trafficking in human beings in relation to the monitoring of supply chains.In the Guidelines, trafficking in human beings is highlighted amongst the possible objectives of the due diligence processes to be reported. In particular, companies may consider disclosing material information and key performance indicators on processes and measures for preventing trafficking in human beings in the context of corporate respect for human rights, as well as on trafficking in human beings in relation to the monitoring of supply chains.​

Eurojust's 15th Annual Report provides insights into the EU Agency's support to the Member States in the fight against serious cross-border crime. Amongst other things, the report includes a section on trafficking in human beings (THB), with information in relation to: Eurojust’s support to national investigations and prosecutions of trafficking cases; an increase in the use of Joint Investigation Teams; Eurojust's operational support coupled with strategic activities, to enhance the effectiveness of international judicial cooperation, and to bolster its partnership with other EU institutions and agencies, for the purpose of streamlining actions and optimising resources in the fight against THB.

 

 

"This is not a European Commission publication. The European Commission is not responsible for, nor does it necessarily endorse its content. Any views expressed are solely those of the author or publisher and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Commission, the European Union or its Member States".

Please find below the link to the Special Edition newsletter by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) to introduce the Global Action to Prevent and Address Trafficking in Persons and the Smuggling of Migrants (GLO.ACT.)

GLO.ACT  is a four-year (2015-2019) €11 million joint initiative by the European Union (EU) and (UNODC) implemented in partnership with the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF).

 

 

The Global Action to Prevent and Address Trafficking in Persons and the Smuggling of Migrants is a four-year (2015-2019) joint initiative by the European Union (EU) and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) being implemented in partnership with the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF).

The programme forms part of a joint response to trafficking in persons and the smuggling of migrants and it is expected to be delivered in up to 15 strategically selected countries across Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe and Latin America. A focus will be placed on assistance to governmental authorities, civil society organizations, victims of trafficking and smuggled migrants. 

Aims and Objectives: The programme aims to assist the selected countries in developing and implementing comprehensive national counter-trafficking and counter-smuggling responses. A dual prevention and protection approach has been adopted and includes six key responses linked to the following objectives:

  • Strategy and policy development
  • Legislative assistance
  • Capacity building
  • Regional and trans-regional cooperation
  • Protection and assistance to victims of trafficking and smuggled migrants
  • Assistance and support to children among victims of trafficking and smuggled migrants.

 

  •  Check the in-country activities that have recently taken place: Glo.Act

 

 
28 June 2011 (strike-out decision)
 
The applicant, a Somali national born in 1992, arrived by boat in Italy in November 2007. He was running away from Mogadishu where he claimed he had been forced to join the army after the collapse of the country’s administrative structures and where he risked his life at the hand of the Ethiopian troops who aimed at capturing and killing young Somali soldiers. The Italian authorities left him in the streets of Rome in the winter of 2007, without any help or resources. He was constantly hungry and cold, physically and verbally abused in the streets, and by the police in Milan where he looked for help. Eventually, he was trafficked to Finland, where he applied for asylum which was refused in February 2010. The applicant complained that if returned back to Italy, he would risk inhuman or degrading treatment contrary to Article 3 of the Convention, particularly as he was an unaccompanied minor.
 
The Court struck the application out of its list of cases, in accordance with Article 37 (striking out applications) of the Convention, as it noted that the applicant had been granted a continuous residence permit in Finland and that he was no longer subject to an expulsion order. The Court thus considered that the matter giving rise to the complaints in the case had been resolved.
 
Read the Full Case Law: D.H. v. Finland (no. 30815/09)
17 January 2017
 
This case concerned the Austrian authorities’ investigation into an allegation of human trafficking. The applicants, two Filipino nationals, who had gone to work as maids or au pairs the United Arab Emirates, alleged that their employers had taken their passports away from them and exploited them. They claimed that this treatment had continued during a short stay in Vienna where their employers had taken them and where they had eventually managed to escape. Following a criminal complaint filed by the applicants against their employers in Austria, the authorities found that they did not have jurisdiction over the alleged offences committed abroad and decided to discontinue the investigation into the applicants’ case concerning the events in Austria. The applicants maintained that they had been subjected to forced labour and human trafficking, and at the Austrian authorities had failed to carry out an effective and exhaustive investigation into their allegations. They argued in particular that what had happened to them in Austria could not be viewed in isolation, and at the Austrian authorities had a duty under international law to investigate also those events which had occurred abroad.
 
The Court, finding that the Austrian authorities had complied with their duty to protect the applicants as (potential) victims of human trafficking, held that there had been no violation of Article 4 (prohibition of forced labour) and no violation of Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) of the Convention. It notably noted that there had been no obligation under the Convention to investigate the applicants’ recruitment in the Philippines or their alleged exploitation in the United Arab Emirates, as States are not required under Article 4 of the Convention to provide for universal jurisdiction over trafficking offences committed abroad. Turning to the events in Austria, the Court concluded that the authorities had taken all steps which could have reasonably been expected in the situation. The applicants, supported by a government-funded NGO, had been interviewed by specially trained police officers, had been granted residence and work permits in order to regularise their stay in Austria, and a personal data disclosure ban had been imposed for their protection. Moreover, the investigation into the applicants’ allegations about their stay in Vienna had been sufficient and the authorities’ resulting assessment, given the facts of the case and the evidence available, had been reasonable. Any further steps in the case – such as confronting the applicants’ employers – would not have had any reasonable prospect of success, as no mutual legal assistance agreement existed between Austria and the United Arab Emirates, and as the applicants had only turned to the police approximately one year after the events in question, when their employers had long left the country.
 
Read the full test case: J. and Others v. Austria (no. 58216/12)
18 February 2014 (strike-out decision)
 
The applicant, a Nigerian national, who claimed to be a victim of human trafficking, complained that her expulsion to Nigeria would expose her to a real risk of re-trafficking.
 
The Court decided to strike the application out of its list of cases, in accordance with Article 37 (striking out applications) of the Convention, noting that the applicant was no longer at risk of being removed as she had been granted refugee status and an indefinite leave to remain in the United Kingdom. Moreover, the United Kingdom authorities had accepted that she had been a victim of trafficking.
 
30 March 2017
 
The applicants – 42 Bangladeshi nationals – were recruited in Athens and other parts of Greece between the end of 2012 and early 2013, without a Greek work permit, to work at the main strawberry farm in Manolada. Their employers failed to pay the applicants’ wages and obliged them to work in difficult physical conditions under the supervision of armed guards. The applicants alleged that they had been subjected to forced or compulsory labour. They further submitted that the State was under an obligation to prevent their being subjected to human trafficking, to adopt preventive measures for that purpose and to punish the employers.
 
The Court held that there had been a violation of Article 4 § 2 (prohibition of forced labour) of the Convention, finding that the applicants had not received effective protection from the Greek State. The Court noted, in particular, that the applicants’ situation was one of human trafficking and forced labour, and specified that exploitation through labour was one aspect of trafficking in human beings. The Court also found that the State had failed in its obligations to prevent the situation of human trafficking, to protect the victims, to conduct an effective investigation into the offences committed and to punish those responsible for the trafficking.
 
Read Full Case Law: Chowdury and Others v. Greece
28 June 2007 (decision on the admissibility)
 
The applicant, a Turkish national who had lived in Germany for some 30 years, was convicted in 1999 for, among other things, attempted aggravated trafficking in human beings and aggravated battery. He was expelled in 2001 from Germany to Turkey after he had served two two-thirds prison sentence, as the courts found that there was a high risk that he could continue to pose a serious threat to the public. The applicant complained that his deportation from Germany had breached his private and family life.
 
The Court held that there had been no violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the Convention. It found that the applicant’s expulsion had been in accordance with the Convention, particularly given that he had been sentenced for rather serious offences in Germany, and had been eventually able to return to Germany.
 
REad the full Case Law: Kaya v. Germany
Application communicated to the Greek Government on 6 September 2016
 
Recognised as victims of human trafficking, the applicants, three Russian nationals, complain in particular of the Greek State’s failure to discharge its obligations to penalise and prosecute acts relating to human trafficking in their cases.
The Court gave notice of the application to the Greek Government and put questions to the parties under Articles 4 (prohibition of slavery and forced labour), 6 (right to a fair trial) and 13 (right to an effective remedy) of the Convention.
 
12 May 2009 (decision on the admissibility)
 
This case concerned the confiscation of premises used in connection with offence linked to human trafficking and exploiting vulnerable aliens. The applicant relied in particular on Article 1 (protection of property) of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention.
 
The Court declared the application inadmissible as being manifestly ill-founded. Taking into account the margin of appreciation afforded to States in controlling “the use of property in accordance with the general interest”, in particular in the context of a policy aimed at combating criminal activities, it found that the interference with the applicant’s right to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions had not been disproportionate to the legitimate aim pursued, i.e., in accordance with the general interest, to combat human trafficking and the exploitation of foreigners in a precarious situation.
 
Read the full Case Law: Tas v. Belgium