Harsher penalties for human traffickers

Migration connected with trafficking in women and prostitution

THE PRESIDENT. – The first item of business this afternoon is the debate on the report on migration connected with trafficking in women and prostitution presented by Ms Zwerver on behalf of the Committee on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men, Document 9795, with opinions presented by Mr Piscitello on behalf of the Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee, Document 9848, and by Ms de Zulueta on behalf of the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Demography, Document 9809.

The list of speakers closed at 12 noon, twenty-six names are on the list, and ten amendments have been tabled.

I remind you that we have already agreed that, in order to finish by 4.40 p.m., we shall interrupt the list of speakers at about 4.10 p.m. to allow time for the reply and the vote.

I call Ms Zwerver, the rapporteur. You have eight minutes.

Ms ZWERVER (Netherlands). – Many women migrate from eastern European countries to the west in search of a better life. Some know that they will work as prostitutes, others think that they will work as dancers in nightclubs, as domestic servants or in other occupations. Many end up against their will in prostitution.

Two years ago, the Assembly unanimously supported the recommendations of Mrs Err’s report on a campaign against trafficking in women. We asked for urgent actions against trafficking at national and international level. Not much has changed since that time. The number of women falling victim to the traffic has risen steeply.

In 2002, Europol presented a combined strategy paper on illegal immigration and trafficking in human beings. It was thought to be more effective to combine the strategies to combat illegal immigration and trafficking in human beings. I think that this is a big mistake. The Europol strategy paper fails to recognise the fact that only a small proportion of victims of trafficking has been smuggled into the EU, and also fails to meet the objectives of preventing and suppressing the trafficking of women for sexual exploitation.

The report before us deals with a more specific item within the general problem of trafficking – migration. Migration connected with trafficking in women and prostitution can be explained by lack of prospects in the country of origin, including women’s experience of poverty and social exclusion. Unemployment, and lack of education, which in practice affect women more than men, are further contributory factors. Women in central and eastern European countries have been particularly affected by the rise in unemployment that has followed those countries’ painful transition to the market economy.

The desire to migrate can seldom be met through legal channels, since western countries have clamped down on immigration. The restrictions encourage the setting up of networks that exploit the desire to migrate. In addition, the economic situation means that, without realising the full implications, many women deliberately resort to prostitution as a means of earning a living.

Most of this migration is controlled by powerful international criminal networks. It is an extremely lucrative market and it creates ideal conditions for corruption. That applies also in western European countries. Immigrant women tend to be forced to work in sectors where access to information and welfare networks is limited. That makes them even more vulnerable to exploitation and violence. They have no residence or work permits and are totally dependent on their employers, administratively and financially. Threats of reprisals against the family are a formidable weapon in maintaining a climate of fear.

Unfortunately, in many countries the interests of the victims of trafficking still seem to be completely subordinated to the interests of prosecuting traffickers. In practice, that means that victims are first exploited by the traffickers and then, as “disposable witnesses”, by the criminal justice system. Sometimes national prosecution systems refrain from the criminal prosecution of those accused of trafficking.

A recent example is the case of a 28-year-old Moldovan woman who was a victim of sex trafficking in Montenegro. In November 2002, the woman succeeded in escaping following three years in captivity in Montenegro and was given shelter in the women’s safe house in Podgorica. She made a statement to the investigating magistrate alleging the involvement of several Montenegrin politicians in the trafficking of women for the purposes of prostitution. A few weeks ago, the Podgorica prosecutor decided not to pursue investigations or to bring charges in the case and dismissed it. That decision is a grave violation of Serbia and Montenegro’s charter on human and minority rights. I ask the new delegation of Serbia and Montenegro to urge their government to take urgent measures to strengthen the Montenegrin legal system so that traffickers can be prosecuted.

In the report I propose the adoption of urgent measures to afford victims of trafficking the opportunity to co-operate effectively and safely with law enforcement officials. Those measures should include stays of deportation; the exemption of trafficked persons from detention and prosecution for offences directly related to their trafficking; the opportunity for victims to seek justice and compensation for the abuses that they have suffered; a guarantee of victims’ personal safety and that of their family members; the facilitation of victims’ safe and humane repatriation, and the offer of alternatives, including third-country resettlement, if repatriation is not possible.

The recommendations will help member states of the Council of Europe to develop and implement national programmes to combat trafficking, giving attention to the status and rights of victims. It is important to ensure that the victims of trafficking are protected from further victimisation, whether or not they testify against the traffickers.

I ask the Assembly to support the recommendation urging European member states to take effective decisions on migration policy to develop legitimate migration opportunities, particularly for women. The Assembly should also encourage the signing of bilateral agreements between countries of origin and destination countries on short-term labour migration contracts. No one country has the resources to solve the problem of migration connected with trafficking in women and prostitution on its own. All European countries need to co-operate in the management of migratory flows, and the Council of Europe is best placed to co-ordinate those efforts.

I welcome the decision of the Committee of Ministers to start work on drafting the Council of Europe convention on trafficking in human beings, which, with its clear human rights focus and the inclusion of a gender perspective, will add value to other international instruments. That is a great success for the Assembly, as we were the first to insist on the necessity of that important convention.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you, Ms Zwerver.

I call Mr Piscitello to present the opinion of the Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee.

Mr PISCITELLO (Italy) said that trafficking in young women was a serious problem which demanded more intervention by the authorities. It was necessary to consider why trafficking had grown and whether the measures to counter it were sufficient. Globalisation, modernisation in agriculture and wide income disparities had given rise to new forms of slavery. Victims of trafficking faced threats and were subjected to rape and torture. Steps were needed to counter that horrific treatment. Greater commitments from government and greater awareness about the dangers of trafficking were needed in countries of origin, transit countries and destination countries. The draft resolution proposed, among other things, that there should be a national rapporteur on trafficking in human beings in each member country. That was a sound proposal. It was important that the Council of Europe acted on the report, and did not just leave it on the shelf, as happened to some other reports.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you, Mr. Piscitello.

I call Ms de Zulueta to speak on behalf of the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Demography.

Ms de ZULUETA (Italy). – In expressing our committee’s support for the principles laid down in the draft resolution and recommendation, I underline the importance and urgency of the report. The increase in trafficking in human beings in Europe continues unabated, in spite of the attention that the problem has received and the important international instruments to combat it, which include two recommendations by this Assembly.

Unfortunately, in Europe and beyond, the rhetoric of condemnation of trafficking has not been matched by effective Europe-wide action against what effectively constitutes a new form of slavery. For example, the European Union has proposed a directive, but it remains a proposal.

For that reason, I wish to draw the Assembly’s attention to one of the key recommendations put forward by Ms Zwerver – the rapid completion and adoption of a specific Council of Europe convention to combat trafficking in human beings. I want to stress that we offer our support not to an instrument that competes with the UN Convention Against Transnational Organised Crime and, in particular, its additional protocol on the prevention and suppression of trafficking in persons, but in order to reinforce that and other instruments. We need a legally binding instrument in Europe because if, as the report stresses, trafficking is first and foremost a violation of human rights, we must avoid an exclusively repressive approach so as to avoid treating victims as merely a tool for investigation.

Existing plans for a Council of Europe convention appear to strike a balance between the protection of human rights and prosecution. Our committee particularly emphasises the attention that such a convention could draw to the root causes of migration – the poverty and other factors that drive women into this clandestine market.

Perhaps the most important contribution a European convention could make to the fight against trafficking is the possibility of an independent and effective monitoring procedure. Our experience in the areas of torture and minorities shows how important such a mechanism could be. Therefore, if we want to move from good intentions to concrete actions, we must begin by voting for the report and, above all, by supporting ongoing work in the Council of Europe on the drafting and approval of a convention of our own.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you, Ms de Zulueta.

In the debate, I call first Mr Rakhansky, who will speak on behalf of the Group of the Unified European Left.

Mr RAKHANSKY (Ukraine) said that there had been an increase in clandestine migration recently, the most worrying aspect of which was the trafficking of women from central and eastern Europe to western European countries. They often ended up without passports or money and their fate was determined by organised criminal networks and pimps. Women were often driven to that situation because they were out of work in their own countries, and it was therefore impossible to tackle the problem effectively without improving the condition of citizens in the countries of origin.

Human trafficking was a very lucrative business carried out by well-organised networks with a clear division of labour: there were organisers, recruiters, pimps, those in charge of travel arrangements and so on. The view of the Group of the Unified European Left was that it was necessary to solve the socio-economic problems in the countries of origin. It was also necessary to pool efforts at policing in order to ensure that those involved in trafficking were more likely to be punished. The treaty of 15 September 2000 and its protocols needed to be incorporated into the signatories’ own domestic law. The Group of the Unified European Left supported the report and the draft resolution.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you, Mr Rakhansky.

The next speaker is Mr Skarphédinsson, who will speak on behalf of the Socialist Group.

Mr SKARPHÉDINSSON (Iceland). – Human trafficking and enforced prostitution have emerged in the past few years as two of the fastest-growing problems in Europe and, indeed, the world at large. I do not hesitate to say that the crimes attached to that terrible development encompass the most brutal affront to individual human rights that we encounter today.

This is a problem that concerns everyone, male and female. Trafficking in women and, indeed, even in individuals who can be described only as children is the darkest side of our present-day societies. It constitutes total disrespect for the most basic human rights and dignity.

I have the privilege of speaking to the Assembly for the first time, and I am also speaking on behalf of the Socialist Group. As a socialist, I refuse to believe that nothing can be done, and I refuse to believe that trafficking and enforced prostitution are inevitable by-products of the twenty-first century.

I believe that the family of Council of Europe states must urgently address this issue. The glaring lack of a concentrated European effort to address the terrible fate of the countless victims of trafficking and enforced prostitution casts a shadow over how we, as civilised Europeans, practise basic human rights today. I say to the Assembly that we must take action immediately.

The cost of those crimes is enormous not only in social terms, but in the form of devastated families and terribly abused young women who have been robbed of their future, their basic dignity and sometimes their very life. The reasons for this development are only too obvious and they have already been stated today. Criminal business, not least trafficking in women, feeds on poverty, despair, war, social breakdown and ignorance. Those are the factors that we must remove.

There are two points that I particularly want to make. First, it is very important that we try to reduce the demand side of the trafficking problem. In that respect, I urge the Assembly to look to Sweden, where the purchase of sex from prostitution has been made illegal. That, to my mind, is likely to reduce the demand side.

Simultaneously, one feels shamed by the fact, as shown by the report produced by our very able rapporteur, that the presence of the international peacekeepers in our continent’s most troubled regions has produced a thriving market in enforced prostitution. That is deplorable, and we and the international community must fight against it with all means.

Secondly, to apprehend the criminals responsible, it is very important that we create an environment in which the victims of enforced prostitution can come forward to testify against their abusers without having to worry about further victimisation or deportation. I agree totally with and support the points made by our very able rapporteur, who said that it is necessary to press for changes in our migration laws to make that possible.

I urge the Assembly to make the report a step forward rather than just another piece of work.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you Mr Skarphédinsson.

I call Mr Muratović, who is speaking on behalf of the Group of the European People’s Party.

Mr MURATOVIĆ (Bosnia and Herzegovina). – The EPP Group analysed and discussed this report with great interest. I join all those who commended the report and the rapporteur and I express our support for this document as well as the measures that it sets out. We support all the measures outlined in the report.

The report confirms without any doubt that the trafficking and exploitation of women is a dirty and criminal business. It is not restricted to a few countries as it was several years ago, but is a problem throughout Europe and it concerns all of us – every member of the Council of Europe. The report indicates that the problem can be reduced and uprooted only through co-ordinated action in all Council of Europe member states.

When discussing this problem we must take into account all the key factors involved. Those are: the women victims of trafficking; traffickers, acting as sellers of women; buyers, who are owners of nightclubs and other establishments registered for so-called entertainment and who are dealing in prostitution; and, customers, those who use the services provided by the victims of trafficking who are forced into prostitution. All four elements of the problem must be treated through a holistic, comprehensive approach. Each of them should be given indispensable legal, economic, social and human treatment in every state and in co-operation with the states concerned.

Let us avoid hypocrisy here. The poor women victims from the countries referred to could not be trafficked if the owners of entertainment businesses in cities and towns did not buy and hire them. We even know in which streets the services of such women are purchased. Owners of these dirty businesses are paying taxes, which go to the budget of their country. We must each of us prevent that in our own countries.

We cannot talk about educating women in the countries where they are being recruited and lured into this business without at the same time educating their clients. Without the clients, there would be no trafficking in the first place. Whereas victims come from undeveloped and poor countries, their clients are in the richer, more developed and advanced countries. Each government and each of us, all together, can do much more to stop this business. We should no longer allow this sort of enterprise.

The main problems that we identified in the group were inadequate and insufficient international co-operation, a lack of funding for the actions required, poor co-ordination between the international organisations, which are treating this only as a business activity, and an inadequate international approach to solving the problem.

Finally, I must draw your attention to the fact that this is not merely a problem of migration. No one will be able to guard against the problem or help the women victims of trafficking by combating immigration alone and by imposing rigid visa regime requirements and other anti-immigration measures. We all have the responsibility in our own parliaments and elsewhere to do what we can to alleviate, reduce or eradicate this misery – this tragedy – in Europe, our own countries and worldwide. Thank you.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you, Mr Muratović, but your speech took one minute longer than you were allowed.

I call Mr Schmied, on behalf of the Liberal, Democratic and Reformers’ Group.

Mr SCHMIED (Switzerland) congratulated the rapporteur and supported the proposed recommendation. The Liberal, Democratic and Reformers’ Group was disappointed, however, that the report reiterated many resolutions that had already been passed but had had no impact. The traffickers seemed to be beyond reach, certainly beyond the reach of mere words. It was time to move beyond diplomatic language, to be bold and more imaginative – the approach in the report was possibly too generalised. Stronger language was needed, but most of all it was action that was needed, not words. One more report would not really make an impact; what was required were effects on the ground. It needed to be remembered that women were suffering physical and moral abuse. There was concern that if victims talked to the authorities, there might be reprisals against the victims’ families. Most of all, it had to be hoped that the report would have some effect on the ground.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you Mr Skarphédinsson.

I call Mr Muratović, who is speaking on behalf of the Group of the European People’s Party.

Mr MURATOVIĆ (Bosnia and Herzegovina). – The EPP Group analysed and discussed this report with great interest. I join all those who commended the report and the rapporteur and I express our support for this document as well as the measures that it sets out. We support all the measures outlined in the report.

The report confirms without any doubt that the trafficking and exploitation of women is a dirty and criminal business. It is not restricted to a few countries as it was several years ago, but is a problem throughout Europe and it concerns all of us – every member of the Council of Europe. The report indicates that the problem can be reduced and uprooted only through co-ordinated action in all Council of Europe member states.

When discussing this problem we must take into account all the key factors involved. Those are: the women victims of trafficking; traffickers, acting as sellers of women; buyers, who are owners of nightclubs and other establishments registered for so-called entertainment and who are dealing in prostitution; and, customers, those who use the services provided by the victims of trafficking who are forced into prostitution. All four elements of the problem must be treated through a holistic, comprehensive approach. Each of them should be given indispensable legal, economic, social and human treatment in every state and in co-operation with the states concerned.

Let us avoid hypocrisy here. The poor women victims from the countries referred to could not be trafficked if the owners of entertainment businesses in cities and towns did not buy and hire them. We even know in which streets the services of such women are purchased. Owners of these dirty businesses are paying taxes, which go to the budget of their country. We must each of us prevent that in our own countries.

We cannot talk about educating women in the countries where they are being recruited and lured into this business without at the same time educating their clients. Without the clients, there would be no trafficking in the first place. Whereas victims come from undeveloped and poor countries, their clients are in the richer, more developed and advanced countries. Each government and each of us, all together, can do much more to stop this business. We should no longer allow this sort of enterprise.

The main problems that we identified in the group were inadequate and insufficient international co-operation, a lack of funding for the actions required, poor co-ordination between the international organisations, which are treating this only as a business activity, and an inadequate international approach to solving the problem.

Finally, I must draw your attention to the fact that this is not merely a problem of migration. No one will be able to guard against the problem or help the women victims of trafficking by combating immigration alone and by imposing rigid visa regime requirements and other anti-immigration measures. We all have the responsibility in our own parliaments and elsewhere to do what we can to alleviate, reduce or eradicate this misery – this tragedy – in Europe, our own countries and worldwide. Thank you.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you, Mr Muratović, but your speech took one minute longer than you were allowed.

I call Mr Schmied, on behalf of the Liberal, Democratic and Reformers’ Group.

Mr SCHMIED (Switzerland) congratulated the rapporteur and supported the proposed recommendation. The Liberal, Democratic and Reformers’ Group was disappointed, however, that the report reiterated many resolutions that had already been passed but had had no impact. The traffickers seemed to be beyond reach, certainly beyond the reach of mere words. It was time to move beyond diplomatic language, to be bold and more imaginative – the approach in the report was possibly too generalised. Stronger language was needed, but most of all it was action that was needed, not words. One more report would not really make an impact; what was required were effects on the ground. It needed to be remembered that women were suffering physical and moral abuse. There was concern that if victims talked to the authorities, there might be reprisals against the victims’ families. Most of all, it had to be hoped that the report would have some effect on the ground.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you, Mr Schmied.

The next speaker is Mr Lomakin-Rumiantsev, on behalf of the European Democratic Group.

Mr LOMAKIN-RUMIANTSEV (Russian Federation). – Today we are discussing an extremely topical and painful issue: migration connected with trafficking in women and prostitution. I congratulate Ms Zwerver on the excellent report.

Everyone agrees that the problem originates from social and economic factors: poverty, unemployment and the absence of basic living conditions are the main reasons for it. In terms of its economic importance, this criminal business is next to drugs and arms trafficking. The criminal income that it generates is almost $7 billion, and the number of victims throughout the world, according to UN estimates, is between 700 000 and 2 million.

How can we combat this evil without dreaming of a utopia where every country would instantly become rich, all young ladies would get an excellent education and all men would be models of virtue? Of course, we can declare the poorest countries a source of evil and start building barriers to prevent women from entering the territory of more prosperous neighbouring countries. Unfortunately, that is not just supposition: one can already see such an approach when young women – single, or even married – from central and eastern Europe are considered potential participants in sexual commerce and their visa applications are rejected. My friends’ daughter was directly asked in one embassy whether she intended to sell herself in that country. This young girl, a sociology student, felt humiliated and cancelled her trip to a student conference. God forbid we should go that way. Let us combat criminals without affecting women’s right of free movement, hurting their pride, humiliating them and affecting their human dignity.

I want to recall a law that is well known to economists: demand determines supply. That is true for any goods, and for live ones too. Hence, the receiving countries should create the conditions necessary to reduce the demand; then trafficking will decrease.

The main thing – this is clearly stated in the report – is to fight those who make profits in this business. Organised crime plays a central role in migration connected with trafficking in women and prostitution. We need a co-ordinated approach towards the prosecution of transnational criminal groups, grounded in a unified legislative basis, an integrated database and information exchange.

I am persuaded that firm moral principles translated into strict laws are a sine qua non of success. Of course, we cannot succeed without strengthening the family, without high moral criteria in children’s education, and without spreading examples of moral conduct. We should state that clearly in our resolution.

To protect women is an obligation for all those who care about future generations, all those who are ready to work hard today in the name of the future. The report is an important step towards that goal.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you, Mr Lomakin-Rumiantsev.

Before I call Ms Ferić-Vac, let me inform you that Mr Salles is not here, so instead, after Ms Ferić Vac, I will call Mr Reymann, and the other speakers will move accordingly.

Ms FERIĆ-VAC (Croatia). – First, I congratulate Ans Zwerver and the rapporteur of opinion, Tana de Zulueta. I also thank the Committee on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men for having undertaken to deal with this topic. I am sorry that I am not a member of that committee, because of the allocation arrangements, but it is a topic for which I have taken some responsibility in my country, and I am a member of our National Board for the Suppression of Trafficking in Human Beings.

It is important to deal with those who, without knowing, are drawn into a position of dependence on criminal circles. We need to find new ways to combat those circles, which use ever more sophisticated means to undermine or override any legal institutions.

As a Croatian, I would have said a few years ago that we were only a transit country, through which people pass on the way to western European countries, but in the meantime we have become a destination country as well. That is why we established a national body to combat trafficking through and in the country.

We recognise that the proximity of armed forces is an additional burden, but it is not an excuse. We cannot excuse countries where forces are present, and neighbouring countries, from dealing with the situation.

We should certainly not restrict visa regulations further simply because such migration can happen. We should instead strengthen our means of combating the criminals involved. Since the report was compiled much has changed in Croatia, and now prosecution is part of the law, the national body has been established and we are in the middle of a broad campaign to raise awareness in schools and the media.

With this, as with many other subjects, we tend to be a look-away society. We must remember that it is indeed a question of supply and demand, and we must ask our colleagues from the main destination countries to take similar measures.

Trafficking in women is not new. We know that people were taken to faraway places on planes in the 1970s, but it was not in our part of the world – not in my back yard. Now it has come home to us. We asked people then to move against the companies that organised such journeys to south Asia, but now it is happening closer to home. It could happen to your daughters’ friends or mine, so we need all possible support to combat this trade.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you, Ms Ferić-Vac.

I call Mr Reymann.

Mr REYMANN (France) said that the fall of the Berlin Wall had led to an increase in migration and in trafficking in women. It was important to try to dispel the false expectations that led to women leaving their home countries. The International Organisation for Migration had been organising campaigns to raise awareness for many years, but there were obstacles in the way, such as the fact that many victims came from rural areas where communications were problematic. The co-operation of the police was vital and Interpol had been active in that area, with good results. It was important to work with countries of origin, but this subject was a delicate one.

Anglo-Saxon countries had had a different legal system from most other European countries, which allowed traffickers to exploit various differences in national laws. Several countries, such as Belgium and France, aimed to protect victims while at the same time countering the criminal networks. The report had accurately described the unacceptable position faced by many women who had moved from country to country under the watchful eye of criminal networks. The victims could be helped by non-governmental organisations or officials working out of consulates.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you.

I call Mr Cox.

Mr COX (United Kingdom). – Along with other speakers, I pay a warm tribute to the rapporteurs.

As others have said, trafficking in women and young people, both boys and girls, is growing in Europe year by year. We in the United Kingdom have clear evidence that women from Council of Europe member states are being trafficked to work in brothels and massage parlours in the UK – member states such as Russia, Ukraine, Albania, the Balkan states and other central European countries, and the Baltic states. Just what is the role taken by such countries when women and young people apply for passports in order to leave? What checks are made of the applications?

debate. He has just left. I want to ask him what action he will take, in view of the clear evidence of the abuse that fellow member states have allowed to be perpetrated on their citizens? What action will he take to bring to their attention the enormous annoyance and anger felt by many Assembly members about what is happening in other member states?

I have with me a copy of a British newspaper, The Independent, dated 19 June this year. It tells the story of a six-year-old youngster who was trafficked in Albania, and suffered enormous abuse. I believe that we have a right to seek action against member states which must know what is happening to their citizens.

protection is offered to people who are trying to lead another life. We must also be concerned about the action that we take against those who traffic in people. I believe that far too many get away with no punishment whatever. They are making enormous sums. It is estimated that in the United Kingdom women in this position earn up to £500 a day, and keep very little of it.

The Assembly, and our national governments, must have a clear policy of working together to tackle the problem of trafficking, and of action against those who subject people to abuse and suffering in the process. Sadly, that happens all too often.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you.

I call Mr Mooney, who will speak on behalf of the Liberal, Democratic and Reformers’ Group.

Mr MOONEY (Ireland). – I, too, compliment my colleague Ms Zwerver on her excellent report, and wish her well in her post-political employment. She will no longer be with us following the results of recent elections in her home country. That is a great loss to the Assembly and the committee.

I think that we need to change the words we use in this debate. What we are talking about is not trafficking but human slavery, and I think that we parliamentarians, and everyone else who discusses the subject, should use that term in future.

Trading in women is a profitable business. Annual profits are estimated to be €1.3 billion in Europe alone – more than is generated by illegal drug trafficking. Regrettably, a recent study by the International Organisation for Migration revealed that at any one time there are an estimated 15 million to 30 million irregular migrants worldwide. The United States Justice Department estimates that, of that total, 700 00 women and children are trafficked yearly across borders. The chances of their being caught are small.

Owing to the illegal status of those unfortunate women, they rarely inform the police, and when they come into contact with police they stay silent because of the threat of deportation. If women who are victims of trafficking do decide to give evidence, they are often returned to their home countries once the judicial process is complete. That poses grave risks not just for the victims but for their families.

In Ireland, my own country, illegal trafficking in women has resulted in a proliferation of lap-dancing clubs where – as others have said – many of those participating originated in non-EU countries, especially Moldova, Ukraine, Russia and Albania. I question the attitude of some governments and state agencies which allow such exploitation. It is alleged that in some cases money changes hands between those who are trafficking and representatives of state agencies.

The Irish police have launched a series of raids on such clubs in recent weeks, arresting dozens of dancers for failing to have proper entry and work permits. They have also opposed the issuing of licences in the courts, which has resulted in the closure of one prominent establishment in Dublin. Well-known businessmen are associated with those clubs, promoting what I strongly believe is the first rung on the ladder to prostitution, and some elements of the media have surprisingly given such people celebrity status.

I urge the media to be accurate and describe those institutions for what they are: centres of slavery and exploitation motivated by greed. I commend the UK-based Observer newspaper for a series of articles in recent weeks, which make horrifying reading in describing the process by which young women and girls are transported across borders. A recent company report filed in Dublin by a nightclub stated that it had converted a significant loss into a €1 million profit within twelve months of introducing lap-dancing.

It is not enough to arrest and convict these despicable people who deal in human misery. They need to be hit where it hurts, in the pocket. I commend the Irish law in the Proceeds of Crime Act 1996 which allows the confiscation of criminal assets, including those of traffickers.

I urge countries that have yet to do so, including my own, to ratify the UN Convention against Transnational Organised Crime. I also support my government’s view that the initiative to draw up a European convention on action against trafficking with a special focus on human rights – which is one of the report’s recommendations – could detract from the need to ensure that the UN protocols are implemented. I believe that the existing UN instrument should be signed and ratified, as it is a strong document that would significantly reduce this epidemic, if enforced. The launch of yet another initiative or convention might cause some governments that do not wish to commit themselves to the protocols to say, “We can defer implementation, as we have something else to consider.”

Anglo-Saxon countries had had a different legal system from most other European countries, which allowed traffickers to exploit various differences in national laws. Several countries, such as Belgium and France, aimed to protect victims while at the same time countering the criminal networks. The report had accurately described the unacceptable position faced by many women who had moved from country to country under the watchful eye of criminal networks. The victims could be helped by non-governmental organisations or officials working out of consulates.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you.

I call Mr Cox.

Mr COX (United Kingdom). – Along with other speakers, I pay a warm tribute to the rapporteurs.

As others have said, trafficking in women and young people, both boys and girls, is growing in Europe year by year. We in the United Kingdom have clear evidence that women from Council of Europe member states are being trafficked to work in brothels and massage parlours in the UK – member states such as Russia, Ukraine, Albania, the Balkan states and other central European countries, and the Baltic states. Just what is the role taken by such countries when women and young people apply for passports in order to leave? What checks are made of the applications?

Until a few moments ago the Secretary General of the Parliamentary Assembly was listening to the debate. He has just left. I want to ask him what action he will take, in view of the clear evidence of the abuse that fellow member states have allowed to be perpetrated on their citizens? What action will he take to bring to their attention the enormous annoyance and anger felt by many Assembly members about what is happening in other member states?

I have with me a copy of a British newspaper, The Independent, dated 19 June this year. It tells the story of a six-year-old youngster who was trafficked in Albania, and suffered enormous abuse. I believe that we have a right to seek action against member states which must know what is happening to their citizens.

As others have pointed out, we must ensure that in countries such as mine where abuse is taking place protection is offered to people who are trying to lead another life. We must also be concerned about the action that we take against those who traffic in people. I believe that far too many get away with no punishment whatever. They are making enormous sums. It is estimated that in the United Kingdom women in this position earn up to £500 a day, and keep very little of it.

The Assembly, and our national governments, must have a clear policy of working together to tackle the problem of trafficking, and of action against those who subject people to abuse and suffering in the process. Sadly, that happens all too often.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you.

I call Mr Mooney, who will speak on behalf of the Liberal, Democratic and Reformers’ Group.

Mr MOONEY (Ireland). – I, too, compliment my colleague Ms Zwerver on her excellent report, and wish her well in her post-political employment. She will no longer be with us following the results of recent elections in her home country. That is a great loss to the Assembly and the committee.

I think that we need to change the words we use in this debate. What we are talking about is not trafficking but human slavery, and I think that we parliamentarians, and everyone else who discusses the subject, should use that term in future.

Trading in women is a profitable business. Annual profits are estimated to be €1.3 billion in Europe alone – more than is generated by illegal drug trafficking. Regrettably, a recent study by the International Organisation for Migration revealed that at any one time there are an estimated 15 million to 30 million irregular migrants worldwide. The United States Justice Department estimates that, of that total, 700 00 women and children are trafficked yearly across borders. The chances of their being caught are small.

Owing to the illegal status of those unfortunate women, they rarely inform the police, and when they come into contact with police they stay silent because of the threat of deportation. If women who are victims of trafficking do decide to give evidence, they are often returned to their home countries once the judicial process is complete. That poses grave risks not just for the victims but for their families.

In Ireland, my own country, illegal trafficking in women has resulted in a proliferation of lap-dancing clubs where – as others have said – many of those participating originated in non-EU countries, especially Moldova, Ukraine, Russia and Albania. I question the attitude of some governments and state agencies which allow such exploitation. It is alleged that in some cases money changes hands between those who are trafficking and representatives of state agencies.

The Irish police have launched a series of raids on such clubs in recent weeks, arresting dozens of dancers for failing to have proper entry and work permits. They have also opposed the issuing of licences in the courts, which has resulted in the closure of one prominent establishment in Dublin. Well-known businessmen are associated with those clubs, promoting what I strongly believe is the first rung on the ladder to prostitution, and some elements of the media have surprisingly given such people celebrity status.

I urge the media to be accurate and describe those institutions for what they are: centres of slavery and exploitation motivated by greed. I commend the UK-based Observer newspaper for a series of articles in recent weeks, which make horrifying reading in describing the process by which young women and girls are transported across borders. A recent company report filed in Dublin by a nightclub stated that it had converted a significant loss into a €1 million profit within twelve months of introducing lap-dancing.

It is not enough to arrest and convict these despicable people who deal in human misery. They need to be hit where it hurts, in the pocket. I commend the Irish law in the Proceeds of Crime Act 1996 which allows the confiscation of criminal assets, including those of traffickers.

I urge countries that have yet to do so, including my own, to ratify the UN Convention against Transnational Organised Crime. I also support my government’s view that the initiative to draw up a European convention on action against trafficking with a special focus on human rights – which is one of the report’s recommendations – could detract from the need to ensure that the UN protocols are implemented. I believe that the existing UN instrument should be signed and ratified, as it is a strong document that would significantly reduce this epidemic, if enforced. The launch of yet another initiative or convention might cause some governments that do not wish to commit themselves to the protocols to say, “We can defer implementation, as we have something else to consider.”

I would also applaud the decision of the EU Council of Ministers, which adopted conclusions preventing and combating the trafficking of human beings. The EU has also requested member states to harmonise laws in this area. Once again, I commend the report.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you, Mr Mooney.

I call Mr Mignon.

Mr MIGNON (France) said that human trafficking was a very topical issue in his country. It was necessary to take action not only to suppress the traffickers but to deal with their clients, and to banish any toleration of them. It was necessary to co-ordinate efforts at policing, and European arrest warrants would be an important contribution to those efforts.

The Council of Europe must redouble its efforts on this front in the future, but it would have its work cut out. The issue would not be resolved simply by this debate; it had to be followed up with action. Of course, the victims themselves should be treated humanely and there should be tough action to deal with the traffickers.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you, Mr Mignon.

Mrs Topalli is not here, so I call Mrs Zapfl-Helbling, to speak on behalf of the Group of the European People’s Party.

Mrs ZAPFL-HELBLING (Switzerland) said that the Assembly had already debated the issue on several occasions, and she thanked the rapporteur for the report.

Unemployment played a role in the creation of the problem, as did poverty and the lack of prospects for young people, even those who were well educated.

The report called for measures relating to migration and asked for greater co-operation of police work against trafficking. In Switzerland, the government had taken various steps to deal with the issue, such as setting up an inter-departmental group. It was also necessary to look at the question of legislation.

Prostitutes needed assistance – they were held as slaves and exploited. They needed to be able to take forward their grievances and to have access to health care and social assistance. Deporting them to their own countries, where they might be treated with a lack of respect and where, often, young children had been sold to the traffickers, was not the solution. Switzerland had recently signed up to the UN treaty, but had not yet incorporated it into its national law.

It was important to provide support in the countries from which the victims came, not only by warning about the dangers of trafficking, but also by combating poverty. Corrupt practices and mafia activity had to be stamped out before investment could take place.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you, Mrs Zapfl-Helbling.

I must now interrupt the list of speakers. The speeches of members on the speakers’ list who have been present during the debate but have not been able to speak may be given to the Table Office for publication in the official report.

I call Ms Zwerver, the rapporteur, to reply. You have four minutes, which may be shared by the co-rapporteur for an opinion.

Ms ZWERVER (Netherlands). – I thank everybody who has contributed to the debate for their nice words in commenting on my report. Like Mr Skarphédinsson, I refused to believe that nothing can be done. It is extremely important to continue working on the issue. I understand Mr Schmied’s disappointment. He said that many of the proposals that are set out in the report have been recommendations for a long time, and nowadays we need more dramatic recommendations to kill off the trade. We made a lot of recommendations on this subject but they were never implemented.

If we look back, we see that in 1987 trafficking in women was not a political issue. The women involved were simply prostitutes and illegal migrants, and therefore considered undeserving of protection or respect. Fifteen years later, trafficking is a hot issue. An amazing amount of paper on the subject has been produced. There are governmental and intergovernmental initiatives, and NGOs are involved. Everybody talks about the matter and policies are being developed. In practice, however, nothing is done. There are simply no strategies for implementing those policies.

I recognise Mr Schmied’s disappointment, but we must promote this issue. That is why I am so happy that the Council of Europe is at the forefront with its work on the convention on the trafficking in human beings. The convention is important because victims have rights, and it is necessary because we have to address the consequences of trafficking when preventive measures fail. Trafficking in women is a human rights issue, and the Council of Europe promotes human rights, so we should be in the forefront of the fight against that crime. I sincerely hope that all the measures in my report are implemented by governments and politicians.

International peace keeping was mentioned. It is true that the white slave trade is flourishing in Bosnia and Herzegovina because of the presence of the international community. It is always difficult to believe such things. Why are the peacekeeping forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina in the first place? They are there to make things better, but in fact they are making life horrible for many women.

In our societies, whether we live in eastern, central or western Europe, there are as many prostitutes as there are clients, and we all know that it is mostly men who go to prostitutes. I agree with my colleague from Iceland that we have to address that issue in all European countries, but I do not believe that Sweden is a very good example because it has never reduced the demand for prostitution. Perhaps the approach in the Netherlands is not very good either.

Again, I ask the Council of Europe to promote the report and to work on the convention on trafficking in human beings.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you, Ms Zwerver. There is no time left for the other rapporteurs.

Does the Chairperson of the Committee on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men, Mrs Err, wish to speak? You have two minutes.

Mrs ERR (Luxembourg) said that, unfortunately, it was easier to deport the victims of trafficking than to prosecute and punish the criminals who were procuring them in the first place. Efforts should concentrate on prosecuting the traffickers. Trafficking was a human rights issue. It was also an equality issue, which was why it was an issue for the Committee on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men. Furthermore, it was an economic issue, since the sums of money involved were staggering. The international community must address the problem not only in words, but also by actions.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you, Mrs Err.

The debate is closed.

The Committee on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men has presented a draft resolution, to which nine amendments have been tabled.

They will be taken in the order in which they appear in the notice paper, as follows: 1 (English only), 9, 10, 2 (English only) and 3 to 7.

I have received an oral amendment from Mrs Err on behalf of the Committee on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men, which reads as follows:

In the draft resolution, paragraphs 5 and 9.B.i, in the French version only, change “légale” to “légitime”.

Members may note that this proposal is the exact opposite of Amendments Nos. 1 and 2. At present the texts use the words “legitimate” in the English text and “légale” in the French text. Amendments Nos. 1 and 2 seek to use “legal”/“légale” in both texts, whereas the committee seeks in this oral amendment to use the word “legitimate”/“légitime”. If this oral amendment is agreed to, Amendments Nos. 1 and 2 will fall.

In my opinion, the oral amendment meets the criteria of Rule 34.6.

Is there any opposition to the amendment being debated?

That is not the case.

I call Mrs Err to support the oral amendment. You have one minute.

Mrs ERR (Luxembourg) said that there was a difference between the English and French versions of the same paragraph and the oral amendment was intended to correct that.

THE PRESIDENT. – Thank you, Mrs Err.

Does anyone wish to speak against the oral amendment?

I call Ms de Zulueta to speak against the oral amendment.

Ms de ZULUETA (Italy). – If I understand correctly, if this amendment is passed my Amendment No. 1 would fall. I would therefore like to explain that, at least in English, an aspiration could be legitimate. The aspiration to emigrate is always legitimate, particularly if, as in many cases, there is a flight from peril or a situation of need. However, such aspirations do not always accord with the law, so people with legitimate aspirations fail to achieve them. We wish to grant people the guarantee of lawful entry, which is why I proposed my amendment. If people do not have guarantees in law, they may legitimately aspire to achieve something that is unachievable.

THE PRESIDENT. – Since the oral amendment has been tabled on behalf of the committee, the committee is obviously in favour.

I shall now put the oral amendment to the vote.

The voting is open.

The oral amendment is adopted.

In that case, Amendment No. 1 falls.

We come to Amendment No. 9, tabled by parliamentarian Bargholz, on behalf of the Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee, which is, in the draft resolution, at the end of paragraph 9.A.i, to add the following words:

“to act also as an interlocutor and advocate for victims of trafficking and their families;”.

I call Mr Piscitello to support Amendment No. 9.

Mr PISCITELLO (Italy) said that the amendment sought to create an advocate for victims of trafficking.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment?

That is not the case.

What is the opinion of the committee?

Mrs ERR (Luxembourg). – In favour.

THE PRESIDENT. – The voting is open.

Amendment No. 9 is adopted.

We come to Amendment No. 10, tabled by parliamentarian Bargholz, on behalf of the Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee, which is, in the draft resolution, after paragraph 9.A.iv, to insert the following sub-paragraph:

“develop sociological research projects and surveys in order to improve knowledge of the profiles of clients of trafficking in women and prostitution and identify and promote alternative measures to the present options of criminalizing clients or granting them total impunity;”.

I call Mr Piscitello to support Amendment No. 10.

Mr PISCITELLO (Italy) said that the amendment focused on the issue of prostitutes’ clients. It was important to try to understand the apparently high demand which was fuelling trafficking in order to seek to reduce that demand. The amendment would enable research to be conducted into the reasons for the demand.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment?

That is not the case.

What is the opinion of the committee?

Mrs ERR (Luxembourg). – In favour.

THE PRESIDENT. – The voting is open.

Amendment No. 10 is adopted.

In that case, Amendment No. 2 falls.

We come to Amendment No. 3, tabled by parliamentarian de Zulueta, on behalf of the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Demography, which is, in the draft resolution, at the end of paragraph 9.B.v, to add the following sentence:

“The person concerned should be entitled to lodge an appeal with suspensive effect on deportation against the refusal to issue or renew such residence permit;”.

I call Ms de Zulueta to support Amendment No. 3.

Ms DE ZULUETA (Italy). – The amendment is self-explanatory. It would guarantee that people could not be extradited or deported without having been able to lodge an appeal. That is part of international conventions. We debated it in committee and Ms Zwerver appeared to be in agreement.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment?

That is not the case.

What is the opinion of the committee?

Mrs ERR (Luxembourg). – In favour.

THE PRESIDENT. – The voting is open.

Amendment No. 3 is adopted.

We come to Amendment No. 4, tabled by parliamentarian de Zulueta, on behalf of the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Demography, which is, in the draft resolution, at the end of paragraph 9.C.ii, to add the following words:

“, including through the support and/or organisation of information campaigns addressed to potential victims of trafficking, especially in risk areas, schools and other places of education and socialisation;”.

I call Ms de Zulueta to support Amendment No. 4.

Ms DE ZULUETA (Italy). – One of the precious elements of this report is that it pays due attention to the urgent question of prevention. Our committee thinks that this inclusion would enable the resolution to give full efficacy to analysis and recommendations that are included in the report.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment?

That is not the case.

What is the opinion of the committee?

Mrs ERR (Luxembourg). – In favour.

THE PRESIDENT. – The voting is open.

Amendment No. 4 is adopted.

We come to Amendment No. 5, tabled by parliamentarian de Zulueta, on behalf of the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Demography, which is, in the draft resolution, after paragraph 9.D.ii.a, to insert the following sub-paragraph:

“introduce the offence of trafficking in their criminal law;”.

I call Ms de Zulueta to support Amendment No. 5.

Ms DE ZULUETA (Italy). – Once again, members have underlined the importance of examining national legislation in their own countries to see whether the various recommendations can indeed become part of that legislation. Very few countries have so far introduced trafficking as a criminal offence. That is an urgent part of the panoply of necessary legislative measures.

THE PRESIDENT. – I understand that Ms Zwerver wishes to propose an oral sub-amendment on behalf of the Committee on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men, which reads as follows:

At the end of the line add: “if they have not done so already”.

In my opinion, the oral sub-amendment meets the criteria of Rule 34.6 and it can be considered unless ten or more members of the Assembly object. Is there any opposition to the oral sub-amendment being debated?

That is not the case.

I call Ms Zwerver to support the oral sub-amendment. You have one minute.

Ms ZWERVER (Netherlands). – I do not need much time because this sub-amendment speaks for itself. It needs no further explanation.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the oral sub-amendment?

That is not the case.

What is the opinion of the mover of the amendment on the oral sub-amendment?

Ms DE ZULUETA (Italy). – In favour.

THE PRESIDENT. – The committee is obviously in favour.

The voting is open.

The oral sub-amendment is adopted.

Does anyone wish to speak against Amendment No. 5, as amended?

That is not the case.

The voting is open.

Amendment No. 5, as amended, is adopted.

We now come to Amendment No. 6, tabled by parliamentarian de Zulueta, on behalf of the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Demography, which is, in the draft resolution, paragraph 9.E.iv, to replace the words “and counselling” with the words:

“, counselling and vocational training, in the host country and/or in the country of origin, if they return to such a country”.

I call Ms de Zulueta to support Amendment No. 6.

Ms DE ZULUETA (Italy). – The amendment is self-explanatory. I hope that the rapporteur considers it useful.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment?

That is not the case.

What is the opinion of the committee?

Mrs ERR (Luxembourg). – In favour.

THE PRESIDENT. – The voting is open.

Amendment No. 6 is adopted.

We now come to Amendment No. 7, tabled by parliamentarian de Zulueta, on behalf of the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Demography, which is, in the draft resolution, after paragraph 9.E.v, to add the following sub-paragraph:

“enable the relevant courts to order offenders to pay compensation to victims of trafficking.”

I call Ms de Zulueta to support Amendment No. 7.

Ms DE ZULUETA (Italy). – Here, we are talking about compensation, which is a key point. It is part of the provisions in the UN Palermo convention against transnational organised crime. It would be a useful way to finance rehabilitation programmes.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment?

That is not the case.

What is the opinion of the committee?

Mrs ERR (Luxembourg). – In favour.

THE PRESIDENT. – The voting is open.

Amendment No. 7 is adopted.

We will now proceed to vote on the whole of the draft resolution contained in Document 9795, as

amended.

The voting is open.

The draft resolution in Document 9795, as amended, is adopted.

The Committee on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men has presented a draft recommendation to which one amendment has been tabled.

I have received an oral amendment from Mrs Err on behalf of the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Demography, which is, in paragraph 3.i of the draft recommendation, to replace “take as soon as possible the decision to begin” with

“to begin as soon as possible”.

In my opinion the oral amendment meets the criteria of Rule 34.6.

Is there any opposition to the amendment being debated?

That is not the case.

I call Mrs Err to support the oral amendment.

Mrs ERR (Luxembourg) said that her amendment called for the drafting itself to be started rather than a decision to start drafting.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the oral amendment?

That is not the case.

The committee is obviously in favour.

The voting is open.

The oral amendment is adopted.

We come now to Amendment No. 8, tabled by parliamentarian de Zulueta, on behalf of the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Demography, which is, in the draft recommendation, after paragraph 3.i, to insert the following sub-paragraph:

“ensure that the Council of Europe Convention on trafficking in human beings includes provisions aiming at:

a. introducing the offence of trafficking in the criminal law of Council of Europe member states;

b. harmonising the penalties applicable to trafficking;

c. ensuring the effective establishment of jurisdiction over traffickers or alleged traffickers, including by facilitating extradition and the application of the principle aut dedere aut iudicare in all cases concerning trafficking;”.

I call Ms de Zulueta to support Amendment No. 8.

Ms DE ZULUETA (Italy). – I do not want to try the patience of the Assembly. The amendment was put forward by the committee because it felt strongly that it wanted to support Ms Zwerver. If she thinks that it will be useful in reinforcing the indications that we give to the drafters of the Council of Europe Convention, we would strongly recommend it.

THE PRESIDENT. – Does anyone wish to speak against the amendment?

That is not the case.

What is the opinion of the committee?

Mrs ERR (Luxembourg). – In favour.

THE PRESIDENT. – The voting is open.

Amendment No. 8 is adopted.

We will now proceed to vote on the whole of the draft recommendation contained in Document 9795, as amended. A two-thirds majority is required, counting only affirmative and negative votes.

The voting is open.

The draft recommendation in Document 9795, as amended, is adopted.