by Anne Winsnes Rødland
 |
| From the movie "Lilja 4-ever". Photo: Memfis film |
“Human trafficking and prostitution are often confused in the social debate, particularly among those who want to criminalise the buying of sex. Some describe all foreign prostitutes as victims of human trafficking, which is not the case. Others describe all prostitutes as exploited. That is not the case, either,” says Senior Consultant Nell Rasmussen at the Danish Centre for Research on Social Vulnerability (DCR/SV) at the National Board of Social Services.
The Board is a subdivision of the Ministry of Social Affairs, and prostitution, among other issues, is included in its areas of responsibility. Last year Rasmussen published a book on prostitution and she is member of the EU Expert Group on Trafficking in Human Beings. She has also participated in the preparation of a new strategy for combating human trafficking within the Nordic co-operation.
“Everybody agrees that human trafficking is serious crime that must be prevented, but there is not the same agreement when it comes to prostitution in general,” explains Finnish researcher Anne-Maria Marttila at the Helsinki University, Department of Social Science History. She participated in NIKK’s research project on prostitution in the Nordic countries.
“Particularly when discussing the criminalisation of buying sex, the concepts of human trafficking and of prostitution are confused. The supporters of criminalisation regard such a law as an important measure in the struggle against trafficking in humans,” she continues.
 |
| From the movie "Lilja 4-ever". Photo: Memfis film |
In Sweden, the purchase of sexual services was prohibited on 1 January 1999. In Norway, a similar proposition was discussed by the Parliament in November, and the law will come into force on 1 January 2009. In Denmark, no such prohibiting law exists.
“I do, however, think that the arguments for a ban on buying sex are reasonable in relation to those who traffick in human beings. When the buying of sex is forbidden, it is financially less profitable to send prostitutes into the country. Therefore such legislation might contribute to reducing human trafficking in relation to prostitution,” says Rasmussen.
“But there might be other, essential grounds for not criminalising prostitution,” she adds.
Finland has its own version of the sex-purchase law, which has been in force since 1 October 2006. It is only forbidden to
buy sexual services from victims of human trafficking or procuring.
“Nobody has so far been convicted for breaking this law. According to the police, this is not only due to lack of resources. There are also problems with the evidence: For somebody to be suspected for having committed such a crime, there must be documentation that the person knew that the prostitute was victim of procuring or human trafficking,” Marttila explains.
Even if it is, so far, difficult to say very much on the effects of the law, it might seem that it has had an impact for traditional Finnish prostitutes. They have probably become more attractive for clients who do not want to break the law.
“Based on a study I conducted of Finnish prostitution clients before the law was introduced, I think that the sex-purchase law has greater effect on people who seldom buy sex. The permanent clients are more knowledgeable about the practices in the market, and surer about their ability to avoid being caught,” Marttila assumes.
Nell Rasmussen warns against reducing human trafficking to prostitution.
“A sex-purchase law does not obstruct the abuse of women, men and children in other contexts. There are many types of immigrants
and many ways of exploiting people. For example, both builders from Eastern Europe and girls working as au pairs might live
in circumstances akin to slavery,” she points out.
Conflict with migration laws
In Denmark, victims of human trafficking basically come under the migration legislation. This means that the persons are sent back to their home country. Nell Rasmussen underlines that they are only sent out from the country, not deported.
“In addition, they have had a reflection period of 30 days before being sent home. Now it is possible to extend this period to 100 days, if there are particular grounds for this. They then have the opportunity to co-operate with the police to prepare for their return home. In the meantime, they are protected in crisis centres or in special safe houses for victims of human trafficking,” Rasmussen explains.
There is no obligation to co-operate with the police for solving the case in order to get an extended reflection period, but the persons must co-operate about their return home. Nevertheless, the victims are often called to witness in court, so that their evidence can be used in a case.
In Norway, the Ministry for Labour and Social Inclusion recently sent an instruction to the Directorate of Immigration which says that victims who have testified in serious criminal cases on human trafficking should, as a rule, get a permanent residence and work permit in the country.
 |
| Support Lawyer Eva Frivold. Photo: VG |
Support Lawyer Eva Frivold is pleased that the legislation will now give the victims better protection. She has previously made radical statements that she will not recommend victims of human trafficking to testify unless they are promised a residence permit in Norway.
“There have been a few cases where victims who have given evidence have not received a residence permit. It is obvious that they would not have testified, had they known that they would be denied the permit. They fear reprisals when they are sent back to their home country,” she says.
“Of course they fear retaliation in Norway, too. But here we have an efficient witness protection programme. It is a totally different system of caring for them than in their home countries. In addition, they have to start from scratch if they are sent back. Psychological support, safe accommodation and general follow-up are not very common,” Frivold continues.
In Finland, victims of human trafficking can be given a special residence permit if they co-operate in solving the case. They are first given a reflection period of between 30 days and 6 months in order to find out whether they want to co-operate with the authorities.
“Practitioners have, however, argued that the threshold for being given a reflection period should be lowered, and that the practices must be better defined so that victims dare contact the authorities,” Marttila says.
Victims of human trafficking typically suffer a psychological blow afterwards, and need to be followed up for several years.
“In Norway, we try to give them psychological help as soon as possible. Many stay at a crisis centre for a long time. Even when they move to a flat of their own, many continue their counselling at the centre. They also get help with practical matters that they cannot cope with themselves”, Frivold explains.
She would like to see specific centres for victims of human trafficking established, where they could stay after they move
out from the crisis centres, and receive professional follow-up help for several years.
Anne Winsnes Rødland is a journalist and former Information Officer at NIKK.
