Today, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced the release of the U.S. Government’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report, which included the first ever ratings for Curacao and Aruba.
The Netherlands Antilles was rated in 2009 and 2010. As Secretary Clinton said, "Modern slavery – be it bonded labor, involuntary servitude, or sexual slavery – is a crime and cannot be tolerated in any culture, community, or country … [It] is an affront to our values and our commitment to human rights."
In this new report, Curacao was ranked Tier Two Watchlist, because it does not fully comply with the minimum standards to combat human trafficking. However, Curacao is making significant efforts to come into compliance with those standards, including legislation which would criminalize human trafficking.
For 2011, Aruba was ranked Tier Two. Although Aruba has criminalized human trafficking, no cases have yet been prosecuted. Aruba also needs to improve screening and formalize victim protection policies.
The U.S. Consulate and the U.S. Government stand ready to assist both the Governments of Curacao and Aruba in their efforts to combat human trafficking.
Each TIP Report narrative contains specific recommendations for governments to consider implementing over the coming year. Full copies of the 2011 reports on Aruba and Curacao are attached and can also be found at http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/tiprpt/2011/index.htm
Aruba, country narrative in the 2011 TIP Report
Aruba (Tier 2)
——————
Aruba is primarily a destination for women and men subjected to sex trafficking and forced labor. Those at greatest risk of trafficking are foreign women in Aruba’s commercial sex trade and foreign men and women in the service and construction industries. Also at risk are Chinese men and women working in supermarkets as well as Indian men in the jewelry sector, and Caribbean and South American women in domestic service. There are indications of past instances of Aruban children under 18 in prostitution in Aruba.
The Government of Aruba does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however, it is making significant efforts to do so. The government has not yet successfully prosecuted any trafficking offenders to date, though the Aruban anti-trafficking coordinator has demonstrated outstanding leadership in advancing the government’s response to human trafficking during her short time in office, and the government initiated several complex prosecutions during the reporting season. The government also showed improved efforts in the area of victim protection, primarily officials’ increased
victim identification measures.
Recommendations for Aruba: Implement procedures to guide health officials charged with screening people in prostitution on the identification and referral of suspected victims of human trafficking to the anti-trafficking committee; formalize victim protection policies for adults and children that include provisions ensuring identified trafficking victims are not punished for crimes committed as a direct result of their human trafficking situation and ensuring safe and, to the extent possible, voluntary repatriation for foreign victims; consider providing the anti-trafficking committee with an independent budget as a means to ensure its effectiveness; include the child protection agency as part of the anti-trafficking committee and in training opportunities; empower the anti-trafficking committee to direct formal training opportunities toward committee-identified areas of high need; expand multi-lingual public outreach activities; and consider ways to educate clients of the sex trade about the causes and consequences of trafficking.
Prosecution
The Government of Aruba demonstrated strong law enforcement efforts during the reporting period. Aruba prohibits all forms of trafficking in persons through Articles 203a and 286a of its criminal code, which prescribes penalties ranging from four to 15 years’ imprisonment. These penalties are sufficiently stringent and are commensurate with those for other serious crimes, such as rape.
In 2010, the government initiated seven trafficking investigations and arrested four people, including one police officer, in a case involving forced prostitution and forced labor. Authorities initiated prosecutions of three of the arrestees and a disciplinary process for the police officer. The prosecutions have involved many
witnesses from multiple countries, and the government expected to bring the case to trial in late 2011. Two of the defendants remained in pre-trial detention. During the reporting period, the anti-trafficking coordinator took steps toward elevating the discourse on trafficking complicity in the region by speaking in
public forums about her concerns regarding the linkage between official complicity and human trafficking in Aruba. The police established a team that specializes in human trafficking cases. The Royal Military Police and Dutch NGO Comensha have offered periodic training opportunities as has Aruba’s anti-trafficking coordinator.
Protection
The Government of Aruba demonstrated progress in its victim protection efforts during the reporting period. Largely due to the positive work of the anti-trafficking committee, the government identified up to 46 adult victims of human trafficking in 2010, a significant achievement, particularly when contrasted with the lack of any victims identified in 2009. The government did not provide routine, formal training in victim identification to law enforcement officers and officials charged with providing regular health checks on people in Aruba’s sex trade. The government implemented a victim referral mechanism; the government directed
all reported trafficking cases to a small group from the anti-trafficking committee, which devised assistance plans tailored for each victim identified in coordination with the Bureau for Victim Assistance and other government agencies. The committee did not, however, have dedicated funds to provide specialized services for trafficking victims. In one situation, an NGO that reportedly did not receive government funding assisted the committee by sheltering a male victim. In another situation, the government employed a Kingdom of the Netherlands memorandum of understanding to obtain Kingdom funds for victims’ access to protective services. During the reporting period, the government issued a ministerial decree to ensure victims have access to legal aid. Aruba’s child
protection agency would handle victim assistance for any cases of child trafficking, though the government did not identify any child trafficking victims during the reporting period.
The government encouraged trafficking victims to participate in investigations and prosecutions of trafficking offenders and did not punish identified victims for unlawful acts committed as a direct result of being trafficked. According to Aruban officials, the government offered identified trafficking victims relief from
immediate deportation. The government worked with IOM on the safe repatriation of several foreign victims.
Prevention
The government made some efforts to raise awareness of human trafficking during the reporting period. In a positive step, Aruba’s justice minister spoke out in January 2011 against human trafficking and, in conjunction, raised awareness about Aruba’s crime victim hotline, which has been staffed by operators trained
to identify and refer trafficking victims. The government sustained the functions of an anti-trafficking committee started in 2007. The committee achieved tangible results, for example the rescue of victims, and has been developing a large-scale public awareness campaign, but its operations depended on the personal commitment of the anti-trafficking coordinator and participants as the committee
has no funding attached to its operations or projects. Aruba does not have a trafficking rapporteur to monitor and evaluate its anti-trafficking efforts, but Aruba’s anti-trafficking coordinator and director of public prosecutions were required to provide written reports on anti-trafficking results every three months to Aruba’s Justice Minister in preparation for Kingdom justice meetings. The government has formally presented and shared its best practices on regional cooperation, victim identification, and investigation of trafficking cases in several international forums. There were no awareness campaigns specifically targeting potential clients of the sex trade in Aruba in an effort reduce demand for commercial sex acts. There were no known reports of child sex tourism occurring in Aruba or of Arubans participating in international sex tourism, though the government has expressed willingness for training in this area.
*Footnote: Aruba is a semi-autonomous entity within the Kingdom of the Netherlands. The Kingdom Charter divides responsibility among the co-equal parts of the Kingdom based on jurisdiction. For the purpose of this report, Aruba is not a "country" to which the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking in the Trafficking Victims Protection Act apply. This narrative reflects how Aruba would be assessed if it were a separate, independent country
Curacao, country narrative in the 2011 TIP Report
—————————-
Curacao (TIER 2 Watch List)
—————————-
Curacao is a source, transit, and destination area for women, children, and men who are subjected to sex trafficking and forced labor. There are indications that child prostitution may be a problem in Curacao and that some of the hundreds of migrant women in Curacao’s regulated and illegal prostitution are victims of forced prostitution. Local authorities believe that migrant workers have also been subjected to forced domestic service and forced labor in construction, landscaping, and shops. Some migrants in restaurants and local businesses may be vulnerable to debt bondage. Foreign trafficking victims originate in Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, and Asia.
The Government of Curacao does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however, it is making significant efforts to do so. Despite these efforts, the government has not shown evidence of increasing efforts over the previous year; therefore Curacao is placed on Tier 2 Watch List. Curacaoan authorities identified at least four potential victims of forced labor during the year. This accomplishment, however, was overshadowed by the lack of progress in enacting comprehensive legislation – which remained stalled in parliament – that would prohibit all forms of human trafficking and weak victim protections, as well as the lack of identification of victims of forced or child prostitution, despite a large population of people that are vulnerable to sex trafficking.
Recommendations for Curacao:
Enact legislation prohibiting all forms of human trafficking and prescribing punishments commensurate with other serious crimes such as rape; implement formal victim protection measures to guide officials, including health workers, on how to identify victims and how to assist victims of both forced labor and sex trafficking; make a robust and transparent effort to identify and assist potential victims of sex trafficking and forced labor in Curacao.
Prosecution
The government of Curacao demonstrated minimal efforts in the prosecution of trafficking offenders. Curacao’s laws do not appear to cover all forms of human trafficking and prescribed penalties under Curacao’s trafficking-related laws do not appear to be commensurate with those penalties prescribed under separate laws for other serious crimes, such as rape. For another year, comprehensive legislation prohibiting all forms of trafficking remained pending; this greatly hindered officials’ efforts to combat sex trafficking and forced labor in Curacao. The government reported at least two investigations of alleged trafficking offenses, but no prosecutions or convictions of sex or labor trafficking offenders. The government did not fund any anti-trafficking training for government officials during the reporting period, but a government official reportedly distributed a trafficking awareness handbook to law enforcement officials and public prosecutors.
Protection
The government’s victim protection measures were weak. The lack of identification of sex trafficking victims in Curacao, despite the very large vulnerable population of foreign women and girls in prostitution in Curacao’s sex trade, highlights the ineffectiveness of the government’s victim identification measures. In a positive development, law enforcement proactively identified at least four potential victims of forced labor during the reporting period, but it did not identify any victims of sex trafficking. The government reported its use of a formal mechanism to refer identified victims to available services. The government operated multi-purpose shelter facilities and provided health care for victims of trafficking during the reporting period. The identified victims in Curacao declined assistance; however, the government reportedly provided quality assistance to several sex trafficking victims identified in Aruba under the partnership forged through the Kingdom of the Netherlands’ anti-trafficking memorandum of understanding. The government reported encouraging trafficking victims to participate in investigations and prosecutions of trafficking offenders, though no victims chose to participate in prosecutions during the reporting period. The government did not grant temporary or longer-term residency status to any foreign victims of trafficking during the year. The government did not have a policy to protect identified victims from being punished for crimes committed as a direct result of being trafficked.
Prevention
The government did not implement any campaigns to raise public awareness about forced labor and forced prostitution, or aimed at reducing the demand for commercial sex acts. The government did not employ a formal mechanism to monitor its anti-trafficking efforts. The Curacaoan government maintained a multidisciplinary trafficking in persons working group. The government has not identified a child sex tourism problem involving Curacao.
*Footnote: Curacao is a semi-autonomous entity within the Kingdom of the Netherlands. The Kingdom Charter divides responsibility among the co-equal parts of the Kingdom based on jurisdiction. For the purpose of this report, Curacao is not a "country" to which the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking in the Trafficking Victims Protection Act apply. This narrative reflects how Curacao would be assessed if it were a separate, independent country