Human Trafficking: Redefining Progress

By Julie Dahlstrom

Human trafficking, long-recognized as a compelling and complex human rights issue, has generated considerable recent discussion. Politicians and prosecutors have re-examined existing tools and proposed new initiatives to confront it. While such initiatives are, on the whole, welcome and necessary, serious problems of definition, focus, and best practices remain.

In 2000, Congress passed the Trafficking Victim Protection Act (“TVPA”), which greatly enhanced the ability of the U.S. Department of Justice to prosecute human trafficking. The legislation also offered certain protections to trafficking victims, including public benefits and legal immigration status. The law established a new “T visa” for non-citizens, designed to encourage undocumented victims to cooperate with law enforcement in exchange for legal immigration status. This merger of humanitarian and prosecutorial agendas has largely marked the field.

This mixed model has had some positive results. Since the passage of the TVPA, prosecutions have risen, and an estimated 1,300 victims from about 80 different countries have escaped situations of trafficking. However, despite such successes, significant challenges remain. For example, despite the availability of 5,000 T visas annually, only 1,300 such visas were granted from 2000 until 2009. As there are an estimated 20,000 non-citizens trafficked into the United States annually, questions about the comprehensiveness and the efficacy of this method continue to be raised.

Furthermore, the increase of prosecutions has not stemmed the growth of this profitable trade. Human trafficking remains tied with the illegal arms industry as the largest criminal industry in the world. The problem is both global and – surprisingly to many – local. According to the Boston Globe, in March 2010, law enforcement arrested five individuals accused of using apartments in Newton, Watertown, Wellesley and Somerville as brothels in an interstate prostitution ring. Furthermore, WBUR reported in July, 2010, about a Dorchester-based man suspected of using nail salons as fronts for human trafficking in Springfield and in other states, including Connecticut.

In recognition of the need for new approaches, there have been several efforts locally and nationally to address human trafficking. On January 20, 2011, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley filed new legislation, entitled An Act Relative to the Commercial Exploitation of People, which would create new criminal offenses, such as crimes of trafficking of persons for sexual servitude or forced labor. The legislation also would create an inter-agency task force to examine the prevalence of human trafficking.

On the federal level, a similar prosecution-focused model has been unveiled. On February 1, 2011, Attorney General Eric Holder announced the launch of a nationwide Human Trafficking Enhanced Enforcement Initiative, seeking to streamline federal criminal investigations and prosecutions. The initiative calls for the creation of Anti-Trafficking Coordination Teams, known as ACTeams, comprised of prosecutors and federal law enforcement in pilot districts across the country.

The proposed Massa-chusetts legislation and new federal initiative, while laudable and needed, focus heavily on a prosecution-based model that seeks primarily to punish traffickers. Notably absent from these efforts is a substantial focus on human trafficking survivors.

As state Senator Mark Montigny opined in a recent press conference, we as a society have a “moral responsibility” to protect and to provide services to human trafficking survivors. However, Massachusetts, like many states, has failed to live up to such lofty ambitions. State budget cuts have slashed social safety nets. Services to survivors, already woefully underfunded, have been deeply hit. In addition, other services of last resort for survivors, such as domestic violence shelters, are increasingly underfunded and overcrowded. As a result, existing safety nets are broken – if not altogether absent – for survivors.

This has two major negative consequences. First, many survivors do not have a “way out” of human trafficking. Without shelter, food, and basic services, survivors are less likely to leave trafficking situations. Second, survivors are much less likely to cooperate with law enforcement if they do not have sufficient support throughout the process. As U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz recently stated, “[s]uccessful prosecutions of traffickers rely heavily on the cooperation of victims and law enforcement’s ability to gain their trust.” However, cooperation is only possible if survivors have real protection. This means access to social and legal services as well as a clear right to immigration status for the undocumented.

The roots of the trafficking problem are deep and complex, implicating gender roles and vast disparities of wealth and power across the world. Criminal prosecutions are important tools. But we must also pay attention to the causes of trafficking and to hearing the voices of its survivors.

Julie Dahlstrom is an immigration attorney and the program manager of the Immigration Legal Assistance Program of Lutheran Social Services of New England (LSS).  She manages the LSS Anti-Trafficking Program, which provides legal and social services to non-citizen survivors of human trafficking in Massachusetts.  She is also a member of the Massachusetts Human Trafficking Task Force.