Child Trafficking: The Glasgow Experience

ACT Recruitment Transportation Transfer Harbouring Receipt of personsMEANS Threat or use of force Coercion Abduction Fraud Deception Abuse of power or vulnerability Giving payment or benefits PURPOS E Exploitation including Prostitution of others Sexual exploitation Forced labour Slavery or similar Removal of organs Forced marriage FGM Other types of exploitation + + =

Glasgow research (Rigby 2009; 2010) Case file analysis of unaccompanied asylum seeking children & interviews with professionals 21% of separated children in Glasgow identified as trafficked 7% have probably been trafficked 15% ‘suspicions’ about possible trafficking / at risk  Children being bypassed by the child protection system  Too much focus on immigration concerns  Challenges of identification, assessment and intervention when information is limited and children often do not understand the roles of agencies  Relationships as a key factor in effective practice, including the recognition of a child’s relationship with traffickers

GLASGOW CPC CHILD TRAFFICKING GUIDELINES – 2009 (updated 2011) Trafficking managed under child protection (VYP) Multi agency case discussion considers the C/YP circumstances – decision will be reached re refer to NRM NRM completed jointly by police and social work (central data base held by social work CP Team) UKBA invited if immigration issues Core group may be identified and child’s plan managed by multi agency group Trafficking assessment (CTA) completed to support ongoing risk assessment processes in conjunction with broader child protection assessment (Integrated Assessment Framework)

Referred to Glasgow social work CP team for advice – n=68 Type of exploitation Nos AfricaAsiaEast Asia East Europe West Europe Sexual Commercial sexual Domestic servitude Labour exploitation Forced / under age marriage Physical abuse Criminality (including cannabis cultivation) Begging False asylum claims Benefit fraud Female genital mutilation “The backgrounds, journeys and experiences of children indicate multiple types of abuse, suggesting that children are rarely trafficked for one type of exploitation, or are at least susceptible to multiple abuses as a result of trafficking or smuggling”

GLASGOW - THE JOURNEY SO FAR – (Rigby, Murie, Ball 2012) ‘Scatter gun’ approach to service delivery in absence of evidence for most effective approach Reluctance / difficult to undertake comprehensive assessment ie what about pre UK investigations Fear / panic for some professionals when faced with potential trafficking case Some children / young people have settled in Glasgow and progressed BUT others have indicators of continued exploitation “Practitioners and policy makers are struggling to grasp the complexities of the trafficking process and develop a conceptual framework and understanding that can adequately inform assessments that take into account all phases of a child’s journey and life experiences to inform appropriate interventions.”

Identifying Trafficked Children The National Referral Mechanism (NRM) is a procedure for identifying victims of trafficking in the UK A referral is made under the NRM by a “first responder” (usually social work or the police in Scotland) A “competent authority” (UKHTC / Home Office-UKBA) make a “reasonable grounds” decision – “conclusive grounds” comes later

EU DIRECTIVE 2011/36 on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims - Article 8 Non-prosecution or non- application of penalties to the victim Member States shall, in accordance with the basic principles of their legal systems, take the necessary measures to ensure that competent national authorities are entitled not to prosecute or impose penalties on victims of trafficking in human beings for their involvement in criminal activities which they have been compelled to commit as a direct consequence of being subjected to any of the acts referred to in Article 2. Scotland - COPFS Guidance 4.2 There is a strong presumption against the prosecution of a credible trafficked victim for crimes that arise as a consequence of the accused being a credible trafficked victim.

Criminal and Youth Justice Workers’ Responsibilities  “Youth and criminal justice workers may encounter people pre and post conviction that have not been identified previously as potential victims of trafficking. During the assessment and / or supervision process……if workers encounter victims of trafficking, or become suspicious, they should be clear of procedures for reporting these suspicions, as inaction may result in further victimisation for individuals, or conviction and sentence for actions over which victims had little control” (Rigby 2010) EU Directive applies at any stage of process - professionals should be aware of responsibilities re identification and support. Cannot ignore the fact a person may have been trafficked.

Prosecution Issues in Scotland Migrant Help have expressed concern that a number of Vietnamese nationals held in Scottish prisons for offences related to cannabis cultivation were victims of trafficking. TARA worked with women charged in possession of illegal travel documents, prostitution offences, cannabis cultivation and shoplifting. Social workers have consulted TARA during preparation of court reports on women they suspect may have been trafficked.

Challenges Not our children – ie foreigners / immigrants – therefore viewed as an immigration issue not child protection Challenges faced locally in the face of globalisation and need to understand children’s cultural, economic and social backgrounds and realities Young people making choices to move / be exploited (not possible to make this choice legally under EU Directive !) It’s not happening here ! INDICATORS - “There is little empirical understanding of how the indicators should be incorporated into an assessment process, nor how they combine with background and social circumstances to aid assessments, predict risk and help in determining which services may best meet children's needs. While the indicators may aid the process of initial identification, reliance on them as part of an ongoing process of assessment [of risk] may prove problematic” (Rigby 2011)

EU DIRECTIVE EU DIRECTIVE 2011/36/EU on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims Article 13(1) Child victims of trafficking in human beings shall be provided with assistance, support and protection. In the application of this Directive the child’s best interests shall be a primary consideration. Article 14(1) Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the specific actions to assist and support child victims of trafficking in human beings, in the short and long term, in their physical and psycho-social recovery, are undertaken following an individual assessment of the special circumstances of each particular child victim, taking due account of the child’s views, needs and concerns with a view to finding a durable solution for the child. Within a reasonable time, Member States shall provide access to education for child victims and the children of victims who are given assistance and support in accordance with Article 11, in accordance with their national law. Article 16(1) Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the specific actions to assist and support child victims of trafficking in human beings, as referred to in Article 14(1), take due account of the personal and special circumstances of the unaccompanied child victim.

Good practice models National Pilot of London LSB Toolkit (Fairfax & Rigby 2011)  Multi-agency engagement at the point of assessment and NRM referral improves the quality of referrals – ‘The Glasgow Model’  A single agency (Children’s Services) leading and coordinating the multi- agency team during assessment, safeguarding and referral to the NRM  Full assessment only after implementing good practice measures to reduce the risk of a child going missing ie good child protection practice  JIT style interviews to avoid multiple interviews for children ? “Trafficked children are safeguarded best where a multi-agency approach is working well”

Residential CHILD PROTECTION COMMITTEE / CP case conference CHILD PROTECTION COMMITTEE / CP case conference Health Asylum & Immigration Police UKBA Specialist Legal Services Social Work Leaving Care Child Protection Support projects Vol Sect / NGO GLASGOW MULTI-AGENCY STRATEGIC / PRACTICE APPROACH Guardianship Primary care Mental health SCRA Education Counselling

1. Brief background details (pen picture of the young person within their family / country of origin context) 2. Movement / recruitment / harbouring (how travelled; timescales; time at locations etc; entry into trafficking process;– eg sold; passage bought; abducted; escape; present accommodation) 3. Exploitation / abuse (detail evidence and / or suspicions; types of exploitation; locations; length of exploitation; freedom of movement) 4. Trafficker(s) (relatives; organised gang; gender; title; job; names; relationship to child; still in contact etc) 5.Means of control (threats (to child & family); grooming; violence, voodoo, oaths, captivity, debt) 6. Additional risk factors (from indicator matrix; may include health; other contacts) 7. Agency contact / actions taken (police; social work; UKBA; voluntary; overseas) 8. Views of young person (if appropriate) 9. Analysis / Assessment of Needs and Risks in relation to trafficking (present safety; future risk of trafficking) 10. Conclusion & recommendation (CP reg, action plan) Child Trafficking Assessment – CTA (in conjunction with full GIRFEC assessment)

Needs and support IDENTIFICATIONIDENTIFICATION (Rigby, Malloch, Hamilton-Smith 2012)

Scottish research & guidance EHRC (2011) Inquiry into Human Trafficking in Scotland & (2013) Inquiry into Human Trafficking in Scotland: Follow on Report Edinburgh, Equality and Human Rights Commission Fairfax, K. and Rigby, P. (2011) Final Monitoring Report Local Authority Pilots of the London Safeguarding Trafficked Children Guidance and Toolkit London Safeguarding Children Board Rigby, P. (2009) Child Trafficking in Glasgow: Report of a Case File Analysis of Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children Rigby, P (2010) Child Trafficking in Glasgow: The Views of Professionals Rigby, P. Murie, S. Ball, M. (2012) Child Trafficking in Glasgow: The Journey So Far Glasgow Child Protection Committee Rigby, P. (2010) Human Trafficking: A Role for Youth and Criminal Justice Workers? Towards Effective Practice, Paper 11, Criminal Justice Social Work Development Centre for Scotland, University of Edinburgh Rigby, P. Malloch, M. Hamilton-Smith, N. (2012) A Report on Child Trafficking and Care Provision: Towards Better Survivor Care Criminal Justice Social Work Development Centre for Scotland, Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research, Love 146, Stirling Rigby, P. & Whyte, B. (2013) Children's Narrative within a Multi-Centred, Dynamic Ecological Framework of Assessment and Planning for Child Trafficking British Journal of Social Work doi: /bjsw/bct105 Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People (2011) Scotland: A Safe Place for Child Traffickers Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People / University of Highlands and Islands Scottish Government (2009) Safeguarding Children in Scotland Who May Have Been Trafficked Edinburgh, Scottish Government Scottish Government (2013) Inter-agency Guidance for Child trafficking Edinburgh, Scottish Government Scottish Parliament (2010) Equal Opportunities Committee Inquiry into Migration and Trafficking htm#Col1649www.scottish.parliament.uk/s3/committees/equal/or-10/eo htm#Col1649