<%-- Page Title--%> Human Rights Advocacy <%-- End Page Title--%>

January 11, 2004

Human trafficking in South Asia: Need to revise priorities

Human Rights Features

Human trafficking is big business. And not just for the traffickers. The United States' Comprehensive Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 1999 gave a fillip to international funding initiatives to tackle human trafficking, a 150-year old problem in South Asia. The next three years saw a proliferation of proposals, projects, and seminars. And funds, disbursed enthusiastically but indiscriminately by international funding agencies. A number of anti-trafficking "networks" emerged as part of an attempt to link organisations across the South Asian region.

A study of international funding programmes and anti-trafficking initiatives of NGOs would make for a fascinating and lengthy report. A general review of the domain however reveals that most anti-trafficking initiatives by international funding agencies focus on activities such as awareness-building among potential victims and communities and information exchanges. Others support rescue and rehabilitation efforts, training and capacity-building programmes. Few, however, have taken on the difficult but crucial task of supporting efforts aimed at the apprehension and prosecution of traffickers. The root causes of trafficking must undoubtedly be addressed. But, until attempts are made to target the perpetrators and bring them to book, the trade in human beings will continue.

Trafficking persists because judicial and law enforcement institutions have failed to systematically implement and enforce anti-trafficking laws effectively; indeed, they have exacerbated the problem. Few traffickers are apprehended, let alone prosecuted. Police collusion and bribery are often cited by anti-trafficking activists as a major part of the problem. And, despite the existence of a legal framework for combating trafficking networks, the authorities in countries of origin as well as destination countries lack both the capacity and the will to undertake the intensive investigatory and prosecutorial work necessary to have a significant impact on trafficking rings. The lack of sufficient cross-border cooperation compounds the enforcement problem.

The onus is clearly on States to ensure that their law enforcement agencies are geared to tackle the problem. The thrust of civil society's efforts needs to be on pressuring governments to take action. However, there is a general reluctance on part of NGOs to engage with governments and to make effective use of the national and international tools available. Few activists are aware, for example, of the existence of the office of the National Rapporteur on Trafficking, part of the anti-trafficking initiatives of the National Human Rights Commission of Nepal. The first rapporteur resigned, citing lack of support from the NHRC. This is where NGOs could intervene, by monitoring the functioning of the existing mechanisms and ensuring that the mandated tasks are carried out.

Existent international instruments such as UN treaty bodies and special mechanisms have been unequal to the task of monitoring anti-trafficking effects by governments. A concerted effort to submit information to the special mechanisms and to counter government claims made to human rights treaty bodies would go a long way in pressuring governments to take cognisable action.

International donor agencies have been unimaginative and short-sighted in this regard. This has unwisely shaped the activities of NGOs, which have focused on post-trafficking mop-up operations such as rescue and rehabilitation of victims, and a host of "information exchanges" and "policy dialogues".

It is not as if the policy seminars have resulted in concrete action on the ground. There was little informed NGO input prior to the drafting of the SAARC Convention Against Trafficking in 1999. The result was a weak, inadequate and moralistic Convention. First, its understanding of trafficking is confined to trafficking of women and children for the purpose of prostitution. It ignores the fact that women and children are often trafficked for use as domestic servants and other kinds of labour. Victims of trafficking include men (and boys) who are used as domestic servants, camel jockeys etc. Its language includes words such as "evil" and "honour of human beings", terms that reflect a moralistic approach, and which are marginal to the effective addressing of the issue.

The Convention fails to draw the attention of SAARC members to the various useful international initiatives and instruments with regard to trafficking. Apart from the few instruments it does cite, no mention is made of the ILO Conventions, the International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the International Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and a host of other instruments. The listing must necessarily be exhaustive if the SAARC Convention is to be a comprehensive and effective guide for governments in the region.

NGOs have also failed where follow-up is concerned. There has been little domestic pressure on the countries that are yet to ratify the Convention. Efforts to prod States towards evolving tangible policies against trafficking have likewise been myopic and delusional. A host of "outcomes' have emerged from policy dialogues, most of them imprecise and badly formulated. The ones that do provide a realistic set of proposals have not managed to reach the desks of policymakers for want of effective lobbying and advocacy.

Attempts to influence the SAARC process have been futile, and will remain so, thanks to the 'carnival' approach to lobbying and advocacy. Visits by 'citizens' groups' armed with 'People's Pledges' are a good exercise in solidarity-building, but are largely symbolic, the equivalent of a candlelight vigil, in itself not a bad thing.

However, if the aim is to influence the SAARC agenda and get governments to take a fresh look at the documents they draft, any alternative text would have to land neatly on the delegates' tables. This would require intensive lobbying, first at the national level in each country long before meetings and summits are held, and later in the run-up to the meetings. Government officials have to be contacted, and alternative texts not fuzzy wish lists submitted to them in advance for their perusal. Press conferences must be called, not during the government meetings when the agenda has already been decided, but prior to the meetings when governments are in the process of giving shape to their positions on various issues.

It is not just governments that lack the will to make a difference. For many in the non-governmental community, it is international funding that decides their priorities for them. Funding agencies, for their part, are yet to draw any conclusions from their "learning process". In any case, it will soon be time to move on to the next big item on the funding agenda.

Human Rights Features, an initiative of SAHRDC, Delhi, is an independent, objective and analytical attempt to look comprehensively at issues behind the headlines from a human rights perspective.