The case of Belarus and Ukraine
Rebecca Surtees
NEXUS Institute, Vienna
Report prepared for the International Organization for Migration (IOM)
2008
Executive Summary
To date, trafficking in males has been underconsidered in research despite noteworthy signals that it is a violation faced by many males, adult and minors. Often severely exploited male migrants are overlooked, with women and children recognized most commonly as victims of trafficking (VoT). This trend is in need of remedy and, increasingly, it is acknowledged that “trafficking in persons” must be understood and addressed as affecting women and men, adults and minors. In Belarus and Ukraine, male victims accounted for 28.3 per cent and 17.6 per cent of the IOM assisted caseload respectively between 2004 and 2006. Through the lens of trafficking in males (primarily adult men) from Belarus and Ukraine, this study considers male victim’s pre-trafficking life (namely their personal, family and socio-economic background), trafficking experience (from recruitment, through transportation and during exploitation) and post trafficking experience and needs. We examine, on the one hand, what is known about this less considered profile of trafficked persons and, on the other hand, what can be done to meet their needs, both as a means of assistance and protection. The study draws on primary data collected about 685 trafficked males assisted by IOM and its partners, through IOM’s Counter-Trafficking Module Database (CTM) in Geneva as well as qualitative information from interviews with and case files of assisted men. The research findings should not be read as representative of the full scope of trafficking in either country; they are instead representative of trafficked males who have been identified and received assistance and not male trafficking victims generally.
Personal, family and social environment
The majority of Belarusian and Ukrainian trafficked men assisted between 2004 and 2006 were adults, between 18 and 44 years. Approximately two thirds of Ukrainian males were married or living with a partner prior to trafficking, while about one third of Belarusian males were married and about half were single. Many (at least half) had dependent children and a number cited the need to support children as a key factor in
their decision to migrate. Education levels of males from both Belarus and Ukraine were seemingly consistent with the general population – most had received technical or vocational training, following completion of either middle or high school, although some had also attained university or college education. Considered together, more than 60% of Belarusian and nearly 70% of Ukrainian males had some job training or university education. The vast majority from both countries had previous work experience prior to migrating. In spite of their education, technical training and past work experience, unemployment was a serious issue for many men trafficked fromBelarus, the majority being unemployed at recruitment. By contrast, only a minority
of Ukrainian males were unemployed at recruitment. This signals, on the one hand, the that being employed was not a sufficient deterrent for migration offers. Decisions to migrate may equally have been linked to dissatisfaction with employment conditions as well as more personal and social factors.
Trafficking experience (recruitment, transportation and exploitation)
The vast majority of male victims were recruited with promises of work, generally through personal contacts but also advertisements – newspapers, television, billboards and the Internet. Recruitment generally mimicked legal migration – men often made what they thought were legally binding agreements with reliable companies, employment agencies and recruiters.
Transportation was generally overland – by train, bus or car – likely due to the proximity of and ease of land travel to many destination countries. Border crossings by Belarusian men were increasingly done through unofficial entry points, while Ukrainian men reported crossing borders at official entry points. Legal documents
were most common amongst men trafficked from Belarus and Ukraine, consistent with information about female victims.
Belarusian and Ukrainian men were, by and large, trafficked for forced labour – in 99.1 per cent and 98.2 per cent of assisted cases respectively between 2004 and 2006. The most common form of forced labour was within the construction industry; other sectors included agriculture, factory work and fishing. In addition to trafficking for forced labour, however, there were a handful of males who suffered other forms of
exploitation – adoption (in the form of selling a trafficking victims’ child), low level criminal activities (including forced begging and delinquency) and sexual exploitation.
Most Belarusian men were trafficked to Russia; Russia was also the primary (and increasingly the most common) destination country for Ukrainian men. Other destinations included South-eastern Europe (SEE), the European Union (EU), the United States (US), Turkey, Central Asia, North Asia and the Middle East.
Both Ukrainian and Belarusian men faced exploitative, often traumatic working and living conditions, which, in many circumstances, compromised their physical and mental well-being. Men worked six to seven days each week, regardless of destination country or form of work, and work days were commonly twelve hours or more.
Most men reported severely substandard living conditions while trafficked – living in unheated rooms, cramped together with others in unhygienic situations and being provided with limited and poor quality food. A combination of abuse (or threats of abuse), non-payments, debts and restricted freedom of movement served to keep many men in trafficking situations.
Post-trafficking life (identification and assistance)
The ability to exit trafficking differed substantially. Some men were physically prevented from leaving, confined, under constant guard and exposed to violence or threats of violence. Others were physically able to leave, but prevented by factors such as forfeiture of their salary, potential retribution against their families, debt, their illegal status, being destitute and not knowing where to go for help. That being said, many victims were identified and referred for assistance. Referrals were through law enforcement, IOM missions, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) at home and abroad, via helplines, embassies/consulates, medical institutions and when trafficked persons or their relatives sought out assistance.
The noteworthy number of men exposed to trafficking necessitates assistance tailored to their specific needs and interests. Tailoring of services is required to the specific profile of male victim, not least according to their trafficking experience, whether they are a minor or adult and the family and social conditions to which they
will return. Data from Belarusian and Ukrainian men indicates that primary needs range from the basic (i.e. accommodation, medical care, legal assistance, security) to more long term and complex support (i.e. psychological assistance, education and training, sustainable economic opportunities, reintegration support). Such assistance was not always available and accessible to men. Even where different forms of assistance
were available (and much needed), men were not always inclined to seek it out or accept it. Some men may not see themselves as trafficked; others may feel that their agreement to go abroad makes them complicit with their trafficker. Further, the terminology of “trafficking victim” and the social construction of “victimhood”
may be problematic for some men to accept and apply to their situation. As such, it is not only about what services and interventions are developed but also how these interventions are framed and offered to trafficked males.
The specific experiences of trafficked males of Belarusian and Ukrainian nationality highlight some general patterns not only in terms of how trafficking takes place from these countries but equally some of the needs and interests of this specific target group. Five main issues emerge when considering how to better address the issue of trafficking in males:
• Consider the gender dimensions of trafficking: There is a need to better understand and appreciate the gender dimensions of trafficking. Being a man (or a woman) may create conditions which incline one to migration and, by implication, potentially put one at risk of trafficking. Understanding both the environment and its intersection with risk, is vital in addressing trafficking from both a prevention and protection angle.
•Design anti-trafficking interventions through a gendered lens: Gender needs to be considered in terms of trafficking vulnerability, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, individuals’ post-trafficking needs, including protection and assistance. As such, attention to (and a re-examination of) socially constructed
assumptions about gender and gender roles must be embedded in the design and implementation of assistance programmes as well as anti-trafficking efforts more generally.
assumptions about gender and gender roles must be embedded in the design and implementation of assistance programmes as well as anti-trafficking efforts more generally.
•Conduct victim-centred research and evaluation on the subject men and boys: There is a dearth of information on trafficked men and boys, both in terms of their trafficking experiences and what can be done to address this less considered trend, in terms of prevention, protection and prosecution. Research on this particular aspect of trafficking is urgently needed, including that which is undertaken from the perspective of trafficked men and boys and considers their individual experiences, the assessment of their needs and how they value existing anti-trafficking interventions. Such research must be undertaken ethically and sensitively, according to strict research protocols.
•Funding needed for all profiles of victims, including trafficked men and boys: Where there are indications of trafficking in males, both donors and anti-trafficking organizations should be prepared to attend to the needs of victims, including allocating adequate funding for appropriate interventions. In some cases, programmes will be able to adapt their activities to include male victims; in others this may require the male-specific programmes and interventions. Donor flexibility ensuring that the needs of trafficked males as well as females are considered and addressed.
•Consider other aspects of identity which impact risk and intervention needs: Gender is not the only issue impacting trafficking vulnerability assistance needs. Vulnerability may also differ according to other
age, education or class, and a diversity of experiences. Better understanding of the social terrain upon which trafficking plays out (and anti- interventions, therefore, need to take place) is essential.
No comments:
Post a Comment