As government officials, the system currently in place to stop trafficking is unacceptable. Devising a new system immediately should be a primary goal for the State of New York. As a leader and example to our state and others, it is imperative to show that this crime and those who commit it will not be tolerated. I have proposed new criteria that will change the tier system in the annual Trafficking in Persons (TIPS) report. I feel as though it is our duty as representatives to properly assess the world’s current laws on this epidemic and the implementation of them.
Trafficking is a crime that happens in every state in America. A case of trafficking in your jurisdiction was United States v. Yingji Jin (2009). An investigation into massage parlors in the Buffalo, New York area, led law enforcement to believe that a woman they picked up outside of Hong Kong Acupressure was a victim of trafficking. After questioning her, it was clear that the defendant might help run the massage parlor. Eventually, the defendant, an undocumented Chinese woman, accepted a plea bargain in exchange for the government dropping the trafficking charges. It is concerning when a defendant avoids punishment for such a serious crime in your state. Lenient prosecution on serious crime does not deter future criminals and presents a danger to the citizens.
My concern of the application of the current system stems from several recent country ratings. The Republic of Korea, or South Korea, has been a tier one country on the TIPS report since 2010. South Korea is a source, transit, and destination country for trafficking. It is politically and economically stable and is allies with the United States. The relationship between South Korea and the United States comes from the threat of North Korea. Korean culture, like many others, designates males as the head of the household. As a result, women are limited in the workforce and unequally given roles in society. As Weiss refers to, “this social structure establishes South Korea as a society that accepts prostitution as a necessary evil, creating a culture that views women as inferior to men” (316). As the South Korean economy has experienced rapid growth, Korean women started to seek legitimate working opportunities. The demand for women did not stop as Filipina, Southeast Asian, and Eastern Europeans replaced Korean women as prostitutes.
Most foreign women come to South Korea legally with entertainment (E-6) visas. South Korea introduced the entertainment visa to admit foreign nationals pursuing careers in art, music, literature, sports, and performance related activities. However, the visa has often been abused and used to bring in women, particularly from the Philippines, to work in the sex industry. Foreign women also enter through B-2 tourist/transit visas or C-3 visitor visas and then overstay their visit. With this negligent issuance of visas and accepted culture towards trafficking, there are numerous reasons as to why South Korea should not be a tier one country and these reasons stated discredit the tier system and show possible political bias.
Another country that I believe is tiered incorrectly is Honduras. Honduras has been a tier 2 country since 2014 and is classified as a source, transit, and destination country. Honduras is utterly corrupt. As one of the poorest countries in Central America, there is a strong unequal distribution of income and high unemployment rates leading to vulnerable people everywhere. Notorious gangs present throughout the Americas rely heavily on drug trafficking and brothels for profits and often tip off law enforcement. The idea of machismo as masculine pride results in limited jobs and opportunities for woman. With these characteristics combined, it is easy to see the opportunity for trafficking and exploitation to occur.
A troubling problem in Honduras is the danger that activists face when campaigning some kind of social change. As Clarke recalls, more than 30 demonstrators have been killed since the contested elections were held in November of last year (16). The U.S. Department of State website praises the country saying, “Honduras is an ally of the United States, and its population registers some of the highest favorability ratings in the hemisphere toward the United States.” Looking at the current state of the country with all of its violence and corruption leads me to further believe that the tier placement is constructed with political bias.
Kevin Bales explains the difficulties that the researchers who compile the TIPS report face. He commends the overall report saying they face two unfair criticisms that is not the researcher’s fault but is a result of the requirements that Congress set in the TVPA law. The first criticism is that all countries are ranked in one of three categories or tiers. It is flawed scaling to fit 170 countries into three categories with so many components to all forms of trafficking. Furthermore, countries like North Korea and Cuba are regularly sanctioned while friendlier countries like Nigeria and India, where trafficking and slavery are widespread, are not sanctioned. The second criticism is that the United States has judged all other countries without assessing its own work. It would be reasonable to the rest of the world if the U.S. judged itself on the same standards as everyone else. 237
Researchers constantly set out to bring awareness to global trafficking and voice their frustrations on the subject. Often using victims as examples, writers seek to evoke sympathy in his or her audience who may be oblivious to this topic. Lagon critiques the U.S. government’s handling of victims saying, “victims hidden in the shadows of complex, insidious manipulation — what sociologist Kevin Bales calls ‘disposable people’ — are afraid to come forward and seek help, afraid to be treated as criminals and illegal aliens” (60). Lagon describes the role of governments as an obligation (61). “Labor-destination countries should have procedures in place to ensure that foreign workers are screened for evidence of trafficking prior to being removed for lack of legal immigration status”(58). Lagon says countries should also consider training law enforcement and immigration officers as another measure.
The outline of my proposed system involves expanding the amount of tiers in order to distinguish countries currently in the same tier and to avoid complacency with so many different countries in the highest tier. The critique of the system begins with the ‘4 Ps’ of prevention, prosecution, protection, and partnership. Prevention is the most obvious step but also the most difficult. Since trafficking seems hidden, this is a task that can be done through the spreading of awareness and carried out with prosecution. Prosecution is the last step in each small case that is necessary to set a precedent for all cases to come. It must be the foundation for each country as it is the only true measure that proves a government’s dedication to ending this crime, since completely preventing and eradicating it immediately is implausible.
Just like implementing a law without enforcing it, the work is done in vain if justice is not served. Protection of victims is a concept not every state and country has adopted. The men, women, and children trafficked around the world are all victims. Force, fraud, or coercion is not needed to rob someone of his or her freedom. As Lagon states, victims are worried of being demonized and considered criminals so they are scared to come forward and insecure of their futures if they do. Partnership brings all of these ideas together. Clearly, countless countries do not abide by any laws and are appropriately ranked as tier 3 nations. For the countries dedicated to stopping global trafficking, resources and expertise are needed to approach this complex matter.
As far as criteria, I propose a new tier system based on Shared Hope International’s criteria. With this tier system, there is no incentive to improve efforts and standards when the highest tier involves meeting minimum standards. Shared Hope International’s reports have had profound impacts on state ratings in just a few years from 2011-2017. In that time, the national average grade has risen by 23 points. Nine states raised their grades in 2017 alone. This is evidence of progress whether states consider this a priority or are embarrassed with the grades.