3 human trafficking

HUMAN TRAFFICKING AND SLAVERYA Contemporary Human Rights Issue

HUMAN TRAFFICKING AND PEOPLE SMUGGLING Human Trafficking is different to People Smuggling: 

Human trafficking is the physical movement of people across and within borders through deceptive means, force or coercion.  The people who commit human trafficking offences are motivated by the continuing exploitation of their victims once they reach their destination country.

People Smuggling is the organised, illegal movement of people across borders, usually on a payment for service basis.

HUMAN TRAFFICKING Human trafficking, slavery and slavery-like practices such as servitude,

forced labour and forced marriage are complex crimes and a major violation of human rights. 

Around the world men, women and children are trafficked for a wide range of exploitative purposes, such as: Servitude Slavery Forced labour Debt Bondage Forced marriage, or Organ harvesting

International Organization for Migration has stated that as many as 800 000 people may be trafficked across international borders annually.

An estimated 2.5 million people are in forced labour (including sexual exploitation) at any given time as a result of human trafficking.

Australia is primarily a destination country for people trafficked from Asia, particularly Thailand, Korea, the Philippines and Malaysia. 

INTERNATIONAL LAWS

The Slavery Convention (1926) and Protocol (1953) Developed by the League of Nations, the Convention sets out the classical

definition of slavery: Slavery is the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers

attaching to the right of ownership are exercised.

The Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons especially Women and Children (2000) Supplements the Palermo Convention Trafficking is the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of

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.

The United Nations Global Initiative to Fight Human Trafficking  UN.GIFT brings together UN agencies and intergovernmental organisations

working to combat human trafficking

The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Article 4 of the UDHR specifically addresses slavery No one shall be held in slavery or servitude: slavery and the slave trade shall be

prohibited in all their forms.

International Labour Organisation A specialised UN agency working to promote basic labour and human rights at

work across the globe

AUSTRALIA'S RESPONSE TO HUMAN TRAFFICKINGAustralia is committed to combating this issue domestically, regionally and internationally.

INTERNATIONALLY Australia has ratified the United Nations Convention against

Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC) and its supplementary Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children (Trafficking Protocol).

We participate in international forums such as the United Nations Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice, United Nations Human Rights Council's Universal Periodic Review process, United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women and the UNTOC Conference of Parties, to better address and prevent trafficking.

REGIONALLY Australia works collaboratively with other countries to combat human

trafficking. For example, Australia and Indonesia co-chair the Bali Process on People Smuggling, Trafficking in Persons and Related Transnational Crime.

Australia's aid program also supports a number of aid projects in the Asia region, including the Asia Regional Trafficking in Persons project  (ARTIP).

DOMESTICALLY Australia's National Action Plan to Combat Human Trafficking and

Slavery 2015–19 strategic framework for Australia's response to human trafficking and slavery

Interdepartmental Committee on Human Trafficking and Slavery 11 agencies that provide oversight of Australia's response to human trafficking The IDC tables an annual report in the Parliament which details its activities

Supply Chains Working Group examines ways to address serious forms of labour exploitation in the supply chains

of goods and services

Australia's Strategy to Combat Human Trafficking and Slavery—Whole-of-Government Performance Management Reporting a way to make reasonable estimates of the scale of human trafficking, slavery and

slavery-like practices in Australia

AUSTRALIAN CASE LAW

CHEE MEI WONG (2013) On 27 March 2013, Ms Chee Mei Wong was convicted of conducting a business involving

sexual servitude and offences of allowing non-citizens to work in breach of their visa requirements.

Ms Wong was responsible for recruiting six women from Malaysia for the purpose of working at a brothel, “Diamonds”, in Crows Nest. The victims entered Australia on student visas arranged for them by Ms Wong and were forced to repay a debt of $5,000 for their airfares, visas and educational course enrolments. The women who knew little to no English, were not permitted to leave the brothel premises without permission until their debts were repaid and were made to work up to 20 hours a day. Using the threat of physical violence and deportation, Ms Wong forced the women to take medication to prevent them menstruating, perform unusual sex acts against their will and parade in front of customers with only numbers to identify them.

At trial, Ms Wong pleaded not guilty to the seven charges however the jury unanimously found her guilty of them all.

On 5 July 2013, Ms Wong was sentenced to six years’ imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of three years.

DIVEYE TRIVEDI (2012) n 6 October 2011, Mr Diveye Trivedi pled guilty to one count of people

trafficking.

Between 2007 and 2008, Mr Trivedi organised the travel of an Indian male to Australia in order to work as a chef in one of his Indian restaurants. Upon arrival, the man was subjected to exploitative conditions which included: being forced to live and bathe at the restaurant and work an average of 12 hours a day, seven days a week for minimal pay; being consistently abused, both physically and mentally; and receiving threats against his person and his family.

On 8 May 2012, Mr Trivedi was sentenced to 250 hours’ community service and a fine of $1,000.

To date this is the only conviction for labour trafficking in Australia. 

ZOLTAN KOVACS AND MELITA KOVACS (2010) In November 2007, Mr Zoltan Kovacs and his wife, Ms Melita Kovacs were each tried and

convicted for offences of intentionally possessing a slave, intentionally exercising over a slave a power attaching to the right of ownership, namely the power to use and for arranging a marriage for the purpose of assisting the victim to get a stay visa.

In around the year 2000, Mr and Mrs Kovacs devised a plan whereby a friend of Mr Kovacs, Mr Balint Olasz, would marry a Filipina woman and bring her to Australia where she would work for the Kovacs, both in their take away shop and their home as a child minder and housekeeper. The victim’s aunt was approached by Mrs Kovacs to identify a suitable woman to marry Mr Olasz and work in Australia. The aunt suggested the victim, who was at the time 25 years old, living with nine other members of her family in a one room, galvanised shack with no electricity, running water or telephone. The victim also had a son who was ill and a mother who was also in poor health. The victim’s mother encouraged her to go to Australia to earn money to support the family.

Prior to her arrival in Australia, the victim was told she would earn $800 for doing domestic work, which she assumed would be paid monthly. She was informed that expenses incurred in bringing her to Australia would be deducted from this total but she was not told the amount of these expenses. The victim was also told that she would need to marry a white Australian man to assist her in obtaining a visa, but that the marriage would be a sham.

The victim married the Australian man in January 2001 and arrived in Australia in August 2002, where she was met at the airport by Mr Kovacs. Mr Kovacs took her to a motel where he raped her three times. She was then taken to the shop owned by Mr and Mrs Kovacs where she was forced to work from 6am-6pm. After finishing work, she was required to do domestic work until around 10-11pm. The victim worked 7 days per week and was not given time off.

Mr Kovacs continued to rape the victim two to three times a week at the shop and sometimes at the house when his wife was not around. He warned the victim not to say anything to police or else they would both go to gaol.

The victim attempted to escape on one occasion but was located and forcibly returned by Mr and Mrs Kovacs. A few months later, she successfully escaped with the help of Mr and Mrs Kovacs’ daughter and an employee at the shop.

In December 2007, Mr Kovacs was sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of three years and nine months. Mrs Kovacs was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of 18 months.

Immediately after sentencing, both Mr and Mrs Kovacs appealed their convictions in respect of the slavery charges. The Queensland Court of Appeal upheld the appeals on the basis that a miscarriage of justice had occurred due to two errors of law by the trial judge under the Queensland Evidence Act. The Court of Appeal set aside the verdicts of guilty and ordered retrials.

Immediately after sentencing, both Mr and Mrs Kovacs appealed their convictions in respect of the slavery charges. The Queensland Court of Appeal upheld the appeals on the basis that a miscarriage of justice had occurred due to two errors of law by the trial judge under the Queensland Evidence Act. The Court of Appeal set aside the verdicts of guilty and ordered retrials.

Mr Kovacs pleaded guilty to the charges and was given a total effective sentence of twelve years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of one year and three months (taking into account time already spent incarcerated).

In February 2010, following a six-day retrial, Ms Kovacs was again convicted on all counts and was given a total effective sentence of four years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of nine months (taking into consideration time already spent incarcerated).

Ms Kovacs again attempted to appeal against her conviction and sentence however this appeal was later withdrawn.

WEI TANG (2009) In 2005, Ms Wei Tang was charged with five counts of possessing a slave and five counts of

intentionally exercising over a slave, the power attaching to the right of ownership namely the power to use.

Between August 2002 and May 2003, five Thai women, recruited by brokers in Thailand, voluntarily entered into contracts to work as sex workers in a brothel owned by Ms Tang in Australia. Pursuant to the contract, each woman incurred a debt of between $40,000 and $45,000, which was said to include their travel expenses, accommodation, food and any other incidental expenses incurred whilst working in Australia.

Upon arrival, each of the women’s passports and return airline tickets were confiscated and placed in a locker at the brothel. The women were accommodated in an apartment located close by or else lived in the house of the brothel manager known as “Mummy”, where three or four women shared each room. The women’s movements were restricted and Ms Tang controlled when and where the women worked, often requiring them to work long hours, up to seven days a week.

The brothel charged each client a fee of $110 for sex. The debt of each woman was reduced by $50 per client, however one day a week they were entitled to a free day or could work and retain any earnings they made (still being $50 per client).

On 31 May 2003, the brothel was raided and Ms Tang, Mr Paul Pick and one other co-accused (DS) were arrested. DS pleaded guilty to three counts of possessing a slave and two counts of engaging in slave trading. She was sentenced to nine years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years. Following an appeal, the sentence was reduced to six years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of two years and six months.

After an initial trial heard together with Mr Pick, the jury were discharged after failing to reach a unanimous verdict in respect of any of the charges against Ms Tang. Ms Tang was later tried separately from Mr Pick and convicted on all counts in June 2006. She was sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of six years. She appealed against both conviction and sentence.

In June 2007, the Victorian Court of Appeal found that despite the conviction being adequately supported by evidence, the trial judge provided an inadequate direction to the jury in respect of the fault element of the offence and as such the appeal was to be upheld and the convictions quashed. A retrial was ordered.

The prosecution sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia which was subsequently granted. On 28 August 2008, the High Court handed down its judgment, with a 6-1 majority upholding the appeal, setting aside the orders of the Court of Appeal and dismissing Ms Tang’s appeal on conviction.

Following the High Court’s decision, Tang resubmitted her appeal against sentence. The Victorian Court of Appeal found that while the sentence was not manifestly excessive, as had been claimed by Ms Tang, it did have the effect of ultimately punishing Ms Tang twice for her crimes and as such should be reduced. Further evidence which was not available to the sentencing judge was also accepted in respect of Ms Tang’s circumstances which resulted in the Court of Appeal reducing the sentence to a total of nine years’ imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of five years.

MR & MRS MADLEY (2011) Ms Madley was 16 years old when her parents arranged for her to marry a

man from Lebanon that she had met only once before. The wedding was scheduled to take place in Lebanon within two weeks of her urgent application to the Court. She gave evidence that she was fearful for her safety and her mother’s reactions and that she did not want to marry the young man she was engaged to.

The Court ordered that her parents be restrained from removing, attempting or causing removal of, Ms Madley from Australia. Ms Madley’s passport was also to be surrendered to court and she was placed on the airport Watch List.

MS KREET & MR SAMPIR (2011)  A 17 year old girl was tricked into travelling to India under the belief that she could

marry her Australian boyfriend but was instead forced to go through a marriage ceremony to another suitor by her parents. The girl’s parents, who confiscated her passport upon arrival in India, threatened to kidnap and rape the mother and sister of her Australian boyfriend if she did not comply with their directions. It was alleged that threats of a similar nature were also made to her boyfriend. The girl also stated that her father had hit her across the face on two separate occasions and hit her once on the back.

After the marriage in India had taken place, the girl agreed to assist in her husband’s visa application and they both returned to Australia. In Australia, she withdrew her support for the visa application and went to live with her former boyfriend.

The Family Court held that the marriage was void as “her consent was not real because it was obtained by duress”. The Court found that she had been “physically and mentally overborne” and refused to recognise the marriage under Australian law.

THE ROLE OF NGOS

• Aims to bring Government and NGOs in the East Asia and Pacific together to cooperate and learn from each other’s experiences in their efforts to combat human trafficking

humantrafficking.org

• The only specialist legal research and policy centre in Australia focused on the abolition of slavery, trafficking and extreme labour exploitation

Anti-Slavery Australia

• Caritas Australia partners with organizations in countries such as Nepal and Uganda to raise awareness and prevent trafficking.

Caritas Australia

• CATW promotes recognition that all forms of trafficking and sexual exploitation, including trafficking in women, prostitution, pornography, mail order bride selling, incest and rape, are an abuse of universal human rights. They do this through participation in international conferences, publications, and their involvement with the United Nations

Coalition Against Trafficking in Women (CATW) Australia

• Aims to educate community service providers on the issue of people trafficking in Australia, helping them to develop skills to work safely and ethically with trafficked people.

Red Cross Australia

THE ROLE OF THE MEDIA

The media can investigate and expose instances of human trafficking and slavery

Media reports may direct public opinion, or pressure governments to take action

FOUR CORNERS: SEX SLAVERYhttp://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2011/10/06/3333668.htm

SMHhttp://www.smh.com.au/nsw/afp-investigating-record-number-of-human-trafficking-cases-in-australia-20141030-11eh3n.html

FOUR CORNERS: SLAVING AWAYhttp://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2015/05/04/4227055.htm

In response to the issue, the Federal Government has announced reforms to the 417 working holiday visa.

The Assistant Minister for Immigration, Michaelia Cash, said the government would make it mandatory for young visitors to produce a payslip, if they were applying to renew their working visas for a second year.

"The reform will require those seeking to apply for a second Working Holiday visa holder to produce an official payslip from their employer, demonstrating they have completed their regional work component," she said.

Senator Cash said the change would be introduced over the coming months to prevent visa holders accepting terrible conditions.

“WHAT CAN CONSUMERS DO?”“The disturbing accounts in the report have provoked a backlash against some of the companies who use produce from the suppliers mentioned including Covino, tomato grower D’VineRipe as well as Baiada Chicken, which produces Steggles and Lilydale chickens.

“Many took to Twitter to demand action from supermarkets, fast food chains and producers.”

http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/calls-for-national-response-to-slave-conditions-of-farm-workers/story-fnkgbb6w-1227337635170