9/11/22, 9:23 PM India's "Anti-Trafficking" Bill Ignores Socio-Economic Realities of Trafficked Persons | Rethinking the 2018 Trafficking Bill

(/engage)

Welcome Banaras Hindu University. You have been automatically logged into Economic and Political Weekly.
You may also log in as another user (/user/logout) if required.

India's "Anti-Trafficking" Bill Ignores Socio-Economic

Realities of Trafficked Persons
by

Bandana Pattanaik and Leah Sullivan (/author/bandana-pattanaik-and-leah-sullivan)

A comprehensive law that seeks to bring Indian anti-trafficking measures in line

with international law is much welcome; but is the proposed Trafficking of
Persons (Prevention, Protection and Rehabilitation) Bill, 2018 up to the task?
The bill’s approach ignores the factors that drive people to risky situations and
fails to integrate the lessons learned by anti-trafficking stakeholders since the
adoption of the United Nations Trafficking Protocol, including in relation to
reintegration. It adopts a belief that trafficking can be stopped through harsh
punishments, rather than addressing root causes, and this indeed may
undermine, rather than protect, the human rights of trafficked persons.
Implementing a rights-based approach that facilitates, and does not criminalise,
migration and one that promotes decent work is the most constructive approach
to preventing human trafficking.
This article is a part of the Special Feature  Rethinking Trafficking Bill 2018. To
read other articles in this feature,  click here.  (https://www.epw.in/rethinking-
2018-trafficking-bill)
 
The Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women (GAATW) [1] welcomes the move by
the Government of India to address the problem of human trafficking with a
comprehensive legislation that aspires to be in line with current international
law. The Trafficking of Persons (Prevention, Protection and Rehabilitation) Bill,
2018 (henceforth referred to as the bill) that has been approved by the cabinet
will become law, if passed in Parliament. With this law, the government aims to
“make India a leader among South Asian countries to combat trafficking”
(Ministry of Women and Child Development 2018).  
The United Nations Transnational Organised Crime Convention, 2000 and its
protocols have led many countries to revise their anti-trafficking legislations.
The last 18 years have also seen a wide range of initiatives in the area of
prevention, protection (of rights of trafficked persons) and prosecution of human
trafficking. Compared to 2000, there now exists a wealth of knowledge about
what works and what does not work in anti-trafficking efforts and there is a
better understanding of the relationship between migration policies and human
trafficking. Policymakers and anti-trafficking service providers can now utilise
well-researched evidence on the negative impact of anti-trafficking legislation 
and initiatives on the human rights of working-class migrants and sex workers
https://www.epw.in/engage/article/trafficking-persons-prevention-protection-rehabilitation-bill-2018-ignores-socio-economic-realities-gaatw 1/7
9/11/22, 9:23 PM India's "Anti-Trafficking" Bill Ignores Socio-Economic Realities of Trafficked Persons | Rethinking the 2018 Trafficking Bill

(GAATW 2007). These analyses of the impact on human rights should give India
a key advantage to create progressive, rights-affirming and victim-centred
legislation. 
(/engage)

While we are broadly supportive of the Indian government’s move for a new
legislation, our years of evidence-building through grass roots, community work
with women migrants and trafficked persons across the globe lead us to be quite
concerned that this bill will work in ways that undermine, rather than protect
human rights, and could heighten migrants’ risk of abuse and exploitation, and
create confusion between the distinct legal concepts of trafficking in persons,
and the smuggling of migrants. We think that the bill buys into a simplistic
understanding of trafficking as a crime that can be contained through stringent
punishment. As such, the bill ignores the underlying socio-economic factors that
drive people to make desperate choices. The GAATW therefore calls on the
Government of India to fundamentally rethink the bill.
Anti-migration in the Guise of Anti-trafficking?

The right to migrate or “the right to leave any country including one’s own  as
well as to return,” is well established in international law, including in the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), and a number of conventions
ratified by India,  including  the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR), Article 12, and the International Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), Article 5 (UN General Assembly
1948; 1965; 1966).[2] Although this right does not have a corresponding right to
enter any country, and states have the sovereign right to control their borders,
irregular entry or stay are not crimes per se, and international law is clear that
these concerns are subordinate to states’ obligations to respect, protect and
fulfill the rights of all persons, regardless of their migration status.[3]  The fact
remains that many people, regardless of the availability of regular pathways for
migration, need to, and have a right to migrate, whether out of a well-founded
fear of persecution, poverty, or the inability to survive or prosper in the place of
origin.
The bill has a new category of offence called aggravated trafficking—“by
encouraging or abetting any person to migrate illegally into India or Indians to
some other country”—with a minimum punishment of ten years. This approach
undermines the right to migrate to and from any country, including one’s own,
conflates trafficking and smuggling, and ignores the reality of migration and the
dramatic mismatch between migratory pathways and regular migration
opportunities. Moreover, the reference to the legality or illegality of migration is
also out of step with international law. As far back as 1975, the United Nations
(UN) member states endeavoured to avoid the word “illegal” in reference to
migrants.[4]  The use of such language acts as a barrier to cohesion, is
discriminatory, and misrepresents the reality of migration, most of which,
globally, is regular.
The text confuses human trafficking with smuggling of migrants. Referring to
aiding and abetting the migration of a person in and out of a country as
“trafficking” overlooks two of the three necessary components of the most up to
date and internationally recognised definitions of trafficking in persons. In the
UN protocol on trafficking in persons, which requires an “act,” a “means,” and a
“purpose” (exploitation). The conflation of smuggling and human trafficking can

lead to the mischaracterisation of the relationship between the smuggler and the

https://www.epw.in/engage/article/trafficking-persons-prevention-protection-rehabilitation-bill-2018-ignores-socio-economic-realities-gaatw 2/7
9/11/22, 9:23 PM India's "Anti-Trafficking" Bill Ignores Socio-Economic Realities of Trafficked Persons | Rethinking the 2018 Trafficking Bill

migrant (Sanchez 2017), the criminalisation or stigmatisation of migrants and all

people who assist with the migration process, and the denial of migrants’ human
rights. The conflation makes plain the anti-migration agenda that underlies such
(/engage)

efforts. States should provide rights-based responses and protection that are
applicable under the specific protocols as well as under human rights law.
This provision is also a disconcerting development in the context of the ongoing
discussions in the global compacts for migration and for refugees. The process of
the global compacts was initiated to address protection gaps for migrants in
vulnerable situations, who do not fit the definition of a refugee under the 1951
Refugee Convention. In this process, some states, including India are looking to
limit the human rights protections enshrined in international law for
undocumented migrants, roll back on agreed language on human rights
regardless of status,[5]  sometimes using a fight against human trafficking and
smuggling as justifications for harsher border regimes and criminalisation. The
draft text of the Global Compact for Migration (2018) calls upon states to
“design, review, and amend relevant policies and procedures to distinguish
between the crimes of smuggling of migrants and trafficking in persons by using
the correct definitions and applying distinct responses to these separate crimes
...” as well as “[ensure] that definitions of trafficking in persons used in
legislation, migration policy and planning, as well as in judicial prosecutions are
in accordance with international law, in order to distinguish between the crimes
of trafficking in persons and smuggling of migrants.”
The bill, then, falls foul of the global compact for migration before it has even
been agreed. The proposed criminalisation of irregular migration overlooks the
realities of migration today and the fact that large portions of many states’
economies rely on undocumented migrant labour, with the pathways for regular
migration, particularly for women, and low-paid sectors remaining inadequate.
India is the world’s largest remittance receiving country and the benefits of
migration should be clear to the policymakers. Yet, India has always demonised
migrants from neighbouring countries rather than recognising their rights and
contributions. 
The issue of human trafficking does not exist in a vacuum, but is closely
interlinked to migration and labour. Consequently, legal and policy responses to
trafficking are only effective and rights protective, when they are matched by
effective and rights-protective labour and migration policies, among others. The
Government of India needs to adopt a whole-of-government approach to
migration that does not exacerbate the risks and consequences of trafficking,
that distinguishes clearly between trafficking and smuggling, and is consistent
with existing obligations under international law to protect the rights of all
migrants regardless of status. This is a trend noted by the UN Special Rapporteur
on trafficking in persons in the most recent report to the United Nations Human
Rights Council (UNHRC). The report says that states’ migration policies are often
disconnected from their legal obligations towards trafficked persons, and that
“[c]urrent approaches to migration and the identification of victims and
potential victims of trafficking are taking place in a context in which poisonous
political discourse is leading many countries to adopt anti-migration and even
racist positions” (Giammarinaro 2018). Let not India be amongst those countries.
Rehabilitation and Reintegration of Trafficked Persons


https://www.epw.in/engage/article/trafficking-persons-prevention-protection-rehabilitation-bill-2018-ignores-socio-economic-realities-gaatw 3/7
9/11/22, 9:23 PM India's "Anti-Trafficking" Bill Ignores Socio-Economic Realities of Trafficked Persons | Rethinking the 2018 Trafficking Bill

The proposed bill places great faith in rehabilitation and reintegration

initiatives. While on the face of it this may be seen as a strength, it is important
to be aware of lacunae in current practices in assisting trafficked persons and
(/engage)

take steps to address those. Many in our constituency, both in India and across
the globe, take issue with the idea that there is necessarily something that one
needs to be “rehabilitated” from. Our members have learned that when the
factors that lead to trafficking in the first place have not been resolved, there is a
high risk of repeated trafficking or of the person returning to the environment of
exploitation. Most “reintegration” initiatives facilitate a return to the person’s
community/country of origin, which may not always be the best solution and
might, in fact, work against their social inclusion in the long term (GAATW
2016). 
The most durable and rights-affirming approaches put the person at the centre,
and support community-led approaches, rather than the protectionist and
institutionalised care approach proposed in the bill, which limit women’s rights
and freedoms and violate their privacy. Community-based reintegration models,
such as those run by Shakti Samuha, our member in Nepal, have been critical in
being able to address one of the most damaging elements of the trafficking
experience—social stigma. 
Prosecution Model

The GAATW’s experience over the last 25 years has also contributed to our
concern over what we see as an excessive focus on prosecution. In 2016, we
invited scholars and practitioners to analyse and debate the problems with
prosecuting human trafficking. Increased penalties, arrests and prosecutions
take the focus away from victims and survivors, aggravate victim traumatisation
and move us away from meaningfully addressing the problem. Indeed, Gallagher
(2017) has referred to the global efforts to prosecute trafficking as “miserable”—
with only 9,000 prosecutions made in 2016 against a problem of a scale that,
while not accurately quantified, is estimated to be in the tens of millions. Based
on her firsthand experience in South-east Asia, Gallagher has also observed that
“the drive for prosecutions (largely initiated and perpetuated by the United
States government through the Trafficking in Persons Report process) is
contributing to miscarriages of justice on a significant scale as countries
scramble to prove their commitment to anti-trafficking efforts in a way that will
appeal to their assessors. Cases that are not trafficking (such as pimping and
marriage brokering) are being prosecuted as such and convictions are leading to
penalties that are grossly disproportionate to the seriousness of the underlying
conduct. Accused persons are too often being denied the right to challenge their
accusers, to benefit from a presumption of innocence and to secure assistance in
their defence (Anti-Trafficking Review 2016 ).
Implementing a rights-based approach that facilitates, and does not criminalise
migration and one that promotes decent work is the most constructive approach
to preventing trafficking in persons. It reduces opportunities for exploitation and
enables individuals to report crimes and seek assistance without fear of
detention and deportation. Trafficking and indeed migration cannot be looked at
in isolation from development and economic policies that are creating an
increasingly unequal world. Without addressing the structural drivers in the
global economy that fuel the demand for the cheap goods and services made


https://www.epw.in/engage/article/trafficking-persons-prevention-protection-rehabilitation-bill-2018-ignores-socio-economic-realities-gaatw 4/7
9/11/22, 9:23 PM India's "Anti-Trafficking" Bill Ignores Socio-Economic Realities of Trafficked Persons | Rethinking the 2018 Trafficking Bill

possible by poor pay and working conditions with little or no labour regulation,
the conditions for labour exploitation, including that of migrant workers and
which may constitute trafficking in persons, will continue (GAATW 2017).
(/engage)

Conclusion 

Overall, the weakest point of the bill is not in its text, but rather in its sub-text
which seems to believe that trafficking happens in a vacuum and can be stopped
by stringent punishments. In late 2017, when the Government of India spared no
efforts to criticise the Global Estimate of Modern Slavery (2017), we were hopeful
that India would resist sensationalism with strong labour laws and workers’
rights protection. The new anti-trafficking bill belies that hope. However, there is
still time to turn it around and come up with a progressive legislation that is
based on a realistic people-centred social analysis. 
This article is a part of the Special Feature  Rethinking Trafficking Bill 2018. To
read other articles in this feature,  click here.  (https://www.epw.in/rethinking-
2018-trafficking-bill)

Bandana Pattanaik
(bandana@gaatw.org) and Leah
Sullivan (leah@gaatw.org) are
with The Global Alliance Against
Traffic in Women (GAATW).
Vol. 53, Issue No. 28, 14 Jul, 2018
(/journal/2018/28)
13 July 2018
Download PDF
(/node/152197/pdf)

Notes

References


https://www.epw.in/engage/article/trafficking-persons-prevention-protection-rehabilitation-bill-2018-ignores-socio-economic-realities-gaatw 5/7
9/11/22, 9:23 PM India's "Anti-Trafficking" Bill Ignores Socio-Economic Realities of Trafficked Persons | Rethinking the 2018 Trafficking Bill

MUST READ
(/engage)

(/engage/article/sundarbans-forefront-impending-doom)
(/engage/article/social-media-heralding-new-world-order)
(/engage/article/2021-excerpts-articles-films-and-web-series)
(/engage/debate-kits/story
The Sundarbans At The Forefront
Social
Of An Media:
Impending
Heralding Doom a New(/engage/article/sundarbans-forefront-impending-
World
2021: Excerpts
Order (/engage/article/social-media-herald
from Articles on STORY Films and OFWebA STRI Se
doom) In the present times, we see that though series)
social media gives us hope to reform traditional political
*/
*/ discourse, yet at ma
media thus is becoming this peculiar...

EPW

About Us (/about-us.html) (/engage/debate-kits/reser

The Team (/the-team.html) RESERVATIONS I
(/engage/article/many-lives-womans-body) (/engage/article/womens-day-feminism-in-the-last-decade)
About Engage (/epw-engage-about-us)
The Many Lives of A Woman's Body... (/engage/article/many-lives-womans-body)
Feminism in the Last Decade: An Interactive (/en
For Contributors (/notes-contributors.html)
Opportunities (/openings)
Term & Policy (/engage/article/building-blocks-brahmanical-patriarchy)
Building Blocks of Brahmanical Patriarchy (/engage/article/building-blocks-brah
Terms and Conditions (https://www.epw.in/terms-conditions.html)
Copyright (https://www.epw.in/copyright.html)
Privacy Policy (https://www.epw.in/privacy.html)
(/engage/article/you-are-fe
Style Sheet (https://www.epw.in/style-sheet.html)

(/engage/debate-kits/price-of-development-hydel-power-projects)
You Are a Feminis
The Price of Development (/engage/debate-kits/price-of-development-hydel-power-projects) actually-doing-it)
Circulation

Refund and Cancellation (https://www.epw.in/refund.html)

User Registration (https://www.epw.in/user-registration.html)
Delivery Policy (https://www.epw.in/delivery-policy.html)


https://www.epw.in/engage/article/trafficking-persons-prevention-protection-rehabilitation-bill-2018-ignores-socio-economic-realities-gaatw 6/7
9/11/22, 9:23 PM India's "Anti-Trafficking" Bill Ignores Socio-Economic Realities of Trafficked Persons | Rethinking the 2018 Trafficking Bill

Advertisement

Why Advertise in EPW? (https://www.epw.in/why-advertise.html)

(/engage)
Advertisement Tariffs (https://www.epw.in/tariffs.html)

Connect with us

Contact Us (/contact-us.html)

320-322, A to Z Industrial Estate, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai, India 400 013

Phone: +91-22-40638282   |   Fax: +91-22-24934515   |   Email: Editorial - edit@epw.in (mailto:edit@epw.in)  |  Subscription - circulation@epw.in (mailto:circulation@epw.in)   |  
Advertisement - advertisement@epw.in (mailto:advertisement@epw.in) 

Designed, developed and maintained by Yodasoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (https://www.yodasoft.com/)

https://www.epw.in/engage/article/trafficking-persons-prevention-protection-rehabilitation-bill-2018-ignores-socio-economic-realities-gaatw 7/7