Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The modern slavery regime: a critical evaluation
AGNES SIMIC and BRAD K. BLITZ
Abstract: This article sets the context to this special issue: it discusses the background to the UK Modern Slavery Act 2015 and related legislative and policy instruments and sets out a methodology for comparing modern slavery in a global context. Developing the findings of a joint British Academy–DFID programme, ‘Tackling Slavery, Human Trafficking and Child Labour in Modern Business’, it describes a modern slavery regime defined by the production and implementation of laws and policies at both the international and the domestic level that specifically seeks to address a series of abuses associated with the term ‘modern slavery’. The article interrogates the effectiveness of law and policy in curbing abuse and considers how societal and cultural norms impact on the ways in which modern slavery is conceptualised. It also suggests ways in which contributions to this special issue may advance our understandings of the modern slavery regime and where efforts to address modern slavery fall short.
Keywords: Effectiveness, implementation, modern slavery, Modern Slavery Act, modern slavery regime.
INTRODUCTION
When the UK government introduced the Modern Slavery Act (MSA) 2015, it was claimed that the legislation aimed to lay the basis for more coordinated policy, especially as it regarded existing antislavery and antitrafficking provisions (Haynes 2016). In practice, the act did so by promoting the use of transparency and voluntary dis closure to combat extreme forms of exploitation in supply chains (Bloomfield & LeBaron 2018), with varying results. This article examines the context behind the development of a ‘regime’ on modern slavery and introduces the articles that follow. While there are many definitions, we note that a regime may be defined as a ‘set of explicit or implicit principles, norms, rules and decisionmaking procedures around which actor expectations converge in a given issuearea’ (Krasner 1982: 185).
The articles included in this volume are the result of research funded under a joint British Academy–DFID (Department for International Development) programme, ‘Tackling Slavery, Human Trafficking and Child Labour in Modern Business’. Together they address the modern slavery regime from a number of angles, interrogating the
Journal of the British Academy, 7(s1), 1–34. DOI https://doi.org/10.5871/jba/007s1.001Posted 18 June 2019; Preprint posted 31 May 2019. © The British Academy 2019
2 Agnes Simic and Brad K. Blitz
effectiveness of law and policy in curbing abuse, and exploring how cultural and societal norms influence the ways in which modern slavery is understood. Although modern slavery is not geographically restricted, we note that the discourse on the eradication of modern slavery reflects certain normative trends among states in the Global North. The articles in this special issue, however, focus principally on the Global South, where the modern slavery regime is compromised by various levels of governance, both overtly and covertly. While corrective laws exist in both the North and Global South, we note that in the South in particular, these are often perfunctory and are used to satisfy international agendas and country commitments or to enhance the perception of the country and its position in the global outsourcing business.
We suggest that a modern slavery regime may be inferred by the production of laws and policies at both the international and the domestic level that specifically seek to address a series of abuses that have been described under the rubric of modern slavery. This article discusses the background to the MSA and related legislative and policy instruments and sets out a methodology for comparing modern slavery in a global context before outlining how the contributions to this special issue may advance our understanding of the modern slavery regime and where it falls short of meeting its objectives.
FROM INTERNATIONAL LAW TO DOMESTIC POLICY: THE EMERGENCE OF A REGIME ON MODERN SLAVERY
The enactment of the UK Modern Slavery Act (MSA) 2015 was heralded as the first such legislation in Europe and one of the first in the world to address modern slavery as a specific set of abuses, after Brazil amended Article 149 of its penal code in 2003 to enlarge the definition of the crime of submitting someone to a ‘condition analogous to slavery’ and California introduced the Transparency in Supply Chains Act in 2010. Yet the UK law was a novel addition, not least because under Section 54, the MSA requires UKbased commercial organisations that supply goods or services and have an annual global turnover of more than £36 million to prepare an annual statement on modern slavery and human trafficking. Within four years, the law has served to inspire new legislation in other jurisdictions, and a new regime on modern slavery has quickly developed. This regime was built in part on previous international commitments, including the United Nations Trafficking Protocol (UN 2000), the Council of Europe AntiTrafficking Convention (Council of Europe 2005), and the EU AntiTrafficking Directive (EU 2011) and was supported by the introduction of new legislation. In addition, it was sustained by active antitrafficking campaigns, victim support, and rescue efforts which were assisted by a national hotline.
The modern slavery regime: a critical evaluation 3
Critics noted that Section 54, which emphasises the logic of transparency, sat, at times awkwardly, next to a human rights framework that had been boosted following the creation of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (UN 2015) and in particular SDG 8.7, which after some protest, was accepted by 193 countries. Specifically, SDG 8.7 set out measurable targets to end modern slavery offences and called upon states to take:
immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced labour, end modern slavery and human trafficking and secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour, including recruitment and use of child soldiers, and by 2025 end child labour in all its forms (Freedom United 2019).
For many years, states had been bound by existing international obligations which both protected the right to be free of slavery and established it as a basic human right. For example, within human rights law, legislation against slavery had secure foundations. Slavery and slaverytype situations are prohibited in both national and international laws including the 1950 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms under Article 4. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) also covers freedom from slavery under Article 8,1 as do many International Labour Organization (ILO) conventions. In fact, the ILO Conventions both predate the UN’s human rights instruments and raise issues which are now considered to be central to the modern slavery regime, including the use of remedies. We note that the ILO Convention Concerning Forced or Compulsory Labour (Forced Labour Convention, C029 (ILO 1930)) was adopted to prohibit slavery and forced labour from as far back as 1930. Most importantly, this early convention saw eradication as a process.2 A second ILO Convention on the Abolition of Forced Labour (C105 (ILO 1957)) identified the ways in which forced labour had been used to advance not only economic gain but also political agendas. It highlighted the need to suppress forced and compulsory labour as a means of political punishment against those with opposing conscientious views, who have participated in strikes, who have faced discrimination on various grounds such as race and ethnicity, and as a means of economic advancement by the state (Article 1). Most importantly, the ILO later expanded our understanding of abuses to include slaverylike practices such as
1 Similarly, other regional instruments have provisions affirming the right to be free; see the American Convention on Human Rights (Article 6) of 1969, and more recently the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Article 5) of 1982.2 It called upon states ‘to suppress the use of forced or compulsory labour in all its forms within the shortest possible period’ (Article 1), with some exceptions such as for public purposes, and ultimately and gradually to eradicate it altogether.
4 Agnes Simic and Brad K. Blitz
debtbondage, serfdom, forced marriage, bride sale, bride inheritance, and—for the first time in international law—forced child labour (Article 1).3
While the above international human rights conventions were well established, several decades elapsed before the adoption of stronger international legal instruments on forced and child labour, specifically. These include the 1998 Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (ILO 1998); the 1999 Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention (C182 (ILO 1999)); and 2014 Protocol to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (P029 (ILO 2014)). Arguably the emergence of new instruments in the late 1990s laid the ground for the legal regime we associate with the modern slavery challenge known today: a collection of commitments building on the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UN 2011), UN human rights conventions, and ILO legislation, in addition to the growing body of national legislation. What was most significant about these legal developments is the threepart approach of prevention, protection, and remedies in relation to forced and compulsory labour—an approach set out in the UN Guiding Principles, a ‘global authoritative standard’ (Ra’ad Al Hussein 2015).
Furthermore, within public international law the prohibition of slavery has been established as an obligation falling on states with the status of jus cogens (Verdross 1966) and having erga omnes effect (Bassiouni 1998). This status requires all states to prevent, sanction, prosecute, and punish slavery as an obligation ‘that every state owes to all others’ (Bassiouni 1998). For this reason, some suggest that modern slavery should be considered a crime with universal jurisdiction that in certain instances could amount to the level of a crime against humanity (Cockayne et al. 2016). Although public international law has been gradually weakened (especially in relation to business practices) to the detriment of private international law (Ruggie 2017), the place of slavery within public international law has great influence on discourse and social practice.
Recognising the normative dimension of modern slavery within international law, a group of academics and nongovernmental organisations has further extended the regime by drawing upon examples of ‘modernday slavery’. Most prominent among these is Nottingham University sociologist Kevin Bales (1999). Since the late 1990s, and in no small measure as a result of Bales’ writings and the lobbying efforts of groups like AntiSlavery International and Free the Slaves, the theme of modern slavery has been embraced by new generations of scholars and activists who identify as ‘abolitionists’. Although abolitionism now focuses on contemporary ills, the language of abolition is also contested, not least because of its historic association with the transatlantic slave trade.
3 See the Supplementary ILO Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade and Practices, which was adopted in 1956 (ILO 1956).
The modern slavery regime: a critical evaluation 5
The abolitionists’ emphasis on human rights, in particular the importance of human dignity within economic relations, has been challenged by critical scholars who emphasise enduring structural and powerbased relations that foster extreme exploitation. The multiplicity of issues has complicated the development of an agreed discourse among academics on both what constitutes modern slavery and how it might be measured (O’Connell Davidson 2017); a challenge replicated in policy.
DIFFERENTIATION IN LAW, PRACTICE, AND IMPLEMENTATION
As modern slavery featured more prominently on both national and international agendas, important cracks appeared in the emerging regime. Research published by the UN University Centre for Policy Research (Gleason & Cockayne 2018) found that both before and after the introduction of the UK Modern Slavery Act 2015, there has been marked variance in terms of how countries understand this phenomenon. One reason may lie with labelling and the use of language. When the General Assembly passed the Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others on 2 December 1949, the language of modern slavery was wholly undeveloped (UN 1949). Forced labour was penalised in some notable states, while it was simultaneously practised around the world. In fact, when the above convention entered into force, fewer than twenty countries had even ratified the 1932 ILO Convention Concerning Forced or Compulsory Labour. It took over three decades for commemoration of the day to be introduced, with the first International Day for the Abolition of Slavery held in 1986. Until then, the language of modern slavery largely preoccupied a small group of elite international civil servants.
In terms of state investment, we also find much differentiation. The ways in which states have directed their investment in this policy area indicate divergent policy priorities. Examining data over a fifteenyear period that predates the modern slavery regime, Gleason and Cockayne (2018) consider how states understood their requirements in a host of related areas. Most notably they record a shift in funding from project aimed at curbing child labour to antitrafficking efforts. There has also been little realisation of a body of jurisprudence in the area of international criminal law. As Duffy concludes, although slavery cases have been increasingly dealt with by regional courts, their ‘jurisprudence remains remarkably limited in its volume and scope’ (Duffy 2016: 400). She also notes that among the regional courts there were wide interpretations of modern slavery.
The lack of agreement over the scope and definition of modern slavery has also undermined the creation of a coherent body of human rights case law. We record, for
6 Agnes Simic and Brad K. Blitz
example, that the European Court of Human Rights has been most interested in cases of forced labour, when they are, to a great extent, cases of a sexual nature.4 The InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights, by contrast has focussed on slavery in both commercial and military domains,5 while other regional courts have responded to less ‘traditional’ slavery cases, at least from a Global North view, hearing cases of, for example, ‘chattel slavery’.6
We have also witnessed multiple challenges to the implementation of both international and national legislation on modern slavery. As Vaughn et al. argue in this special issue, much compliance is based on limited information which primarily focuses on the first tier of suppliers, while lower tiers are more vulnerable to exploitative labour. Similarly, in their study on the effectiveness of the modern slavery reporting obligation enshrined in Article 54 of the UK Modern Slavery Act, Voss et al. (this issue) found that compliance approaches yield particularly limited results. While there is growing willingness on the part of businesses to comply with their legal requirements and publish transparency statements, capacity is often limited, especially as it regards remedying risks (see Rende Taylor & Shih in this issue). Moreover, the quality, scope, depth, and regularity of reports are frequently compromised, especially since there are no meaningful sanctions for noncompliance.
One further point of contention is the degree to which governments sincerely wish to eradicate modern slavery. Nowhere is this more glaring than in Bangladesh, where the modern slavery regime was given an injection of energy, following the Rana Plaza tragedy of 2013. The collapse of this eightstorey building led to the Bangladesh Accord, a fiveyear, independent, legally binding agreement between global brands and retailers and trade unions designed to build a safe and healthy Bangladeshi readymade garment industry. However, even though the government has been keen to project the image of being committed to eradicating modern slavery, the industrial police has obstructed worker protests. Workers are not able to protest about wages or working conditions legally; as a result, throughout 2019 there has been widespread industrial unrest with nationwide worker protests followed by massive worker dismissals in retaliation (Agence France Press 2019). While the UK has not experienced
4 See Siliadin v. France, ECtHR (2006) App. No. 73316/01, 2005VII. Kawogo v. United Kingdom, ECtHR (2010) App. No.56921/09. Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, ECtHR (2010) App. No. 25965/04. C.N & V. v. France, ECtHR (2012) App. No.67724/09. M. and Others v. Italy and Bulgaria, ECtHR (2012) App. No.40020/03.5 See: Pereira v. Brazil, Petition 11.289 (IACtHR) Report No. 95/03, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.118, doc. 5 rev. 2 (2003). Vargas Areco v. Paraguay, IACtHR (2006) Ser. C No.155. Maya Indigenous People v. Guatemala, Petition 84405 (IACtHR) Report No. 13/08, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.134, doc. 5 rev. 1 (2008). Hugo Maciel v. Paraguay, Case 11.607 (IACtHR) Report No. 85/09, OEA/Ser.L/V/II., doc. 51, corr. 1 (2009).6 See Hadijatou Mani Koroua v. Niger where the enslaved person was kept ‘like a goat’. Mme Hadijatou Mani Koroua v. The Republic of Niger (No. ECW/CCJ/JUD/06/08), ECOWAS Court, October 2008.
The modern slavery regime: a critical evaluation 7
such unrest, the government’s commitment to ending modern slavery was also called into question by the inability to replace the Independent AntiSlavery Commissioner, a post which lay vacant for more than nine months.
Both law enforcement agencies and lawmakers have also challenged the UK government’s commitment to eradicating modern slavery. In January 2019, a distinguished panel of parliamentarians published a damning report on the application of the Modern Slavery Act. This report evaluated the transparency in supplychain provisions and laid out some frequently heard criticisms. One recurring issue has been the design and operation of the UK’s modern slavery legislation. The authors found that there was uncertainty over which companies were covered by the legislation and condemned the level of reporting by firms as inadequate. They also identified poor compliance and identified a major weakness in the legislation, since large sectors of the economy, including public bodies, were exempt from the requirement to report on their own supply chains. The guiding conclusion from this report was that this legislation is far from sufficient to address the offences that fall under the UK Modern Slavery Act 2015.
The UK is, of course, far from alone. While states may be formally committed to the eradication of forced, compulsory, and child labour, as evidenced by the numbers of ratifications to the ILO instruments, there is a marked divide in practice. This includes uneven implementation of national laws and watereddown commitments. As noted elsewhere, slaverytype practices are frequently not treated as acts to be punished under criminal law; moreover, states often refrain from prosecuting such acts (Cockayne et al. 2016). Equally, we note that many workers themselves do not consider their conditions sufficiently appalling to warrant action; with some attributing their situation to bad luck or the function of structural hierarchies which they must endure. Such socioculturally embedded traditional understandings may also undermine the effectiveness of the modern slavery regime.
One design challenge built into the Modern Slavery Act, and similar national legislation, is a tendency to pass on the obligation to eradicate modern slavery to the business sector without offering companies an incentive to comply with such obligations. While all business enterprises, regardless of their size, sector, location, ownership, or structure, are required to comply with all applicable laws and to respect human rights, both states and businesses have paid lip service to their legal obligations. There are many reasons for this, including the fact that the demand for businesses to comply with human rights requirements did not exist before the 1990s (Economist Intelligence Unit 2015). Yet, for scholars concerned to understand how the modern slavery legislation may be used to prevent abuse, such elusion in handling the issue is deeply problematic. Furthermore, even if most modern slavery abuses occur in the workplace, states should not sidestep their responsibilities to protect against human rights
8 Agnes Simic and Brad K. Blitz
abuses by third parties, as affirmed in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (2011).
In addition, there are normative challenges which have undermined the establishment of a robust regime on modern slavery. One underreported issue regards the purpose and methodologies used to evaluate the existing legislation and policy instruments. We note that, while many government departments rely increasingly on quantitative indicators to evaluate policy, the methodological tools made available to the modern slavery regime have yet to embrace scientific techniques. Few organisations have used systematic approaches to assess modern slavery in business, with a handful of notable exceptions that are still at an early stage of development.7 Again, the lack of incentives and the increasing demands on business to audit their activities may account for this situation.
A FRAMEWORK FOR EVALUATING MODERN SLAVERY
In the absence of robust evaluation, the failings associated with the dominant compliance approach to tackle modern slavery and associated human rights abuses are often excused on the basis of circumstance. Modern slavery occurs in an extraordinarily complex economic context in which global businesses operate, so we are told. While this is undoubtedly true, the emphasis on greater transparency and reporting remains insufficient. As others note, increased transparency alone is unlikely to improve working conditions or to address modern slavery unless it is accompanied by a focus on gaps in governance (McCallSmith & Rühmkorf 2017). Arguably, we cannot ignore the institutions and processes that frustrate the implementation of laws.
There are additional challenges and further consequences that may result from the preferred compliance model, not least shifting the burden of responsibility and in effect undermining the UN Guiding Principles. As Rende Taylor and Shih, as well as Deshingkar et al., argue in this issue, the auditfocussed approach downplays the critical intersection between the state and nonstate actors and the ways in which the negligent or wrongful party may seek to avoid compliance with the law. Indeed, the design of the joint British Academy–DFID programme, ‘Tackling Slavery, Human Trafficking and Child Labour’, is squarely focussed on business practice—not government practice. Yet states are also responsible. In addition to the challenge of enforcement, which requires states to invest in people and infrastructure, scholars have condemned the role played by permissive and corrupt officials in the course activities which cross over into the business of modern slavery (see Deshingkar et al. in this issue).
7 See Corporate Human Rights Benchmark (https://www.corporatebenchmark.org/§).
The modern slavery regime: a critical evaluation 9
For example, in the case of border guards and immigration officers who facilitate the flow of irregular migrants at risk of being trafficked, or the failure by government inspectors to report on factories and production centres where labour exploitation and associated offences takes place. Indeed, such challenges were foreseen in the 2014 ILO protocol, which demands that states introduce preventive measures such as ‘labour inspection services’ (or labour due diligences) in order to combat forced and compulsory labour both in private and public sectors of the economy (Article 2 (c) (ii)). Arguably, the prevalence of rigid social hierarchies which press individuals to accept intolerable conditions is also a factor, albeit an indirect one.
The question then arises: how can we realise the ambitions of the above international and national commitments to promote joint responsibility by states and the business sector? As established in the UN Guiding Principles, both are required to protect against human rights abuses and provide remedies where they have been violated. Taking responsibility seriously therefore means addressing the ‘wide and shocking’ situation of nonenforcement (Cockayne et al. 2016: 254) and also understanding where that may both advance and undermine human rights claims. For example, as Deshingkar et al. argue in this issue, complicit officials, who violate the law and facilitate trafficking, are often not ‘against’ trafficked persons, but may be perceived as ‘friends’ who are helping desperately poor people into other livelihood situations.
While there are no easy answers, the articles in this issue propose some possible directions for future consideration by providing a deeper understanding of structural factors, not least the relationship between exploitation, economic development, and governance. This is critical to the creation and promotion of a culture of enforcement, as Cockayne et al. (2016) found:
The economic drivers of slavery intersect with political and social vulnerabilities: susceptibility to slavery is, unsurprisingly, correlated with sociopolitical marginalization and disenfranchisement. The demand for cheap labour intersects with individual vulnerability, often caused by poverty, domestic discrimination and conflict and displacement. Even those forms of slavery that seem particular to conflict, such as forced recruitment and use of children, seem to follow a similar costsaving and industrial logic (256).
Arguably, understanding the points of intersection presents an invitation for further social scientific investigation.
We suggest that one starting point is to develop a critical understanding of the taxonomy of modern slavery offences in any given state. It is only by developing a deeper understanding of the types of state, modes of governance, and economic systems in which such offences occur, that we will arrive at suitable routes of intervention. Of course, states differ in their economic and industrial performance and we
10 Agnes Simic and Brad K. Blitz
therefore need to take account of such particularities to identify where abuse is most likely to occur. Furthermore, not all sectors are the same—some are subject to greater oversight and regulation while others invite greater abuse than others. A critical investigation of modern slavery must therefore be contextspecific. This includes an understanding of the scope and degree to which laws are in place and are enforceable. For example, as Pinheiro et al. argue in this volume, in spite of a law which criminalises modern slavery in Brazil, ineffective and fragmented law enforcement undermines its operation, deterring businesses from complying. We therefore recommend mapping existing legislation in order to identify potential avenues for redress, whether that is from antiforced labour legislation, antitrafficking laws, or newly introduced modern slavery legislation, and improved governance.
It is also essential to delineate areas of responsibility. To this end, we suggest mapping the ways in which people are affected against a typology of abuses8 and defined categories of perpetrators. We need to know which types of abuses are directed against which categories of people—and by whom. In the case of states, Webb and Garciandia (2019) suggest five principal ways in which states may be responsible. These include:
1. Direct enslavement by a state, that is, forcibly conscripting individuals: for example, in Uzbekistan to harvest cotton.
2. Indirect enslavement where state agents and recruiters place individuals in a situation of impossible debt.
3. Coercion—driven by societal, personal, and cultural expectations, as well as from situations of debt.
4. Structural factors which are poverty based; and include discrimination on the basis of gender and nationality.
5. Situations where individuals may elect to put themselves in abusive and exploitative situations.
The above factors may of course overlap.Equally, when seeking practical remedies, it is important to consider where efforts
should be concentrated. We note, for example, that states differ not only in the type of governmental regime but also in terms of the relationship with the nonstate sector, which includes both business and civil society. Such practical realities should be considered in order to press for meaningful reform. Appendix 1 illustrates some of the political challenges which complicate the eradication of modern slavery and identifies areas where remedies may be sought.
8 These include forced labour, bonded labour, forcibly trafficked persons, victims of extortion, and underpaid and indebted workers.
The modern slavery regime: a critical evaluation 11
The Appendix sheds light on the types of modern slavery offence studied in this issue, where they occur, and who is most affected by them. It also illustrates where development assistance might be used to enhance state capacity to tackle the issues associated with modern slavery: for example, by providing judicial training, or clarifying where both criminal and labour laws may be used to punish abuse (Beate 2016). Such abstract illustrations are complemented by further empirical research into the context in which modern slavery exists and in some cases flourishes.
For example, the article by Vaughn et al., which is based on qualitative data collected from workers in the ‘fast fashion’ garment industry of Bangladesh and Myanmar, presents various forms and extents of verbal, physical, psychological, sexual, and economic workplace violence and their numerous constellations. By showcasing the variegated exploitative experiences of workers and their families, it promotes the need to reconceptualise definitions of modern slavery along a spectrum with severe and less severe types and forms of exploitation at various ends (Skrivankova 2010).
Voss et al. (this issue) also explore the effectiveness of the MSA’s reporting obligation. Following an analysis of publicly available transparency statements of supply chains in the fashion and textile sectors in terms of formal and contentrelated compliance, they have come to a similar conclusion to Vaughn et al., when stressing that tackling the issue of modern slavery primarily using the preferred compliance tool yields limited results. The growing willingness of businesses to comply with such legal requirements and publish transparency statements has been viewed by them as a positive sign, even though the quality, scope, depth, and regularity of the statements are frequently compromised, especially since they lack real sanctions for noncompliance. They argue, moreover, that the companies’ overreliance on media exposure of transparency statements has been instrumentalised by the state which has paid lip service to proper law enforcement mechanisms. Yet, the possibility of unsolicited media publicity may often act as a deterrent for businesses and could push them in the opposite direction: it can enhance noncompliance or highly restrained compliance. These findings reinforce the need for a diversity of multilevel, multiform, and multiactor approaches to address modern slavery and highlight the relevance of joint responsibility which demands equal commitment of the various actors.
Trafficking and physical coercion are often viewed as phenomena inextricably linked to modern slavery, particularly in the case of sex work. Cruz et al. (this issue) critically examine the boundaries between work, slavery, and freedom in an established Global North rhetoric. In particular, they argue that the way major legal instruments, such as the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 in the United States and the Modern Slavery Act of 2015 in the United Kingdom, define trafficking and modern slavery ‘fail to capture the realities, abuses, and needs’ of their participants. They draw on data gained from narratives of sex workers in Jamaica, a country
12 Agnes Simic and Brad K. Blitz
which is frequently presented as one deeply entangled in the web of ‘trafficking’ and ‘modern slavery’. In the cases of their participants, physical coercion, as an inherent feature of discourses on sexual work, was often superseded by economic coercion driven by extreme poverty, especially at the entry stage to sex work. The authors thus call on us to pay attention to the underlying structural and socio economic factors when inquiring into the junction of work, freedom, and trafficking.
In a similar vein to Cruz et al.’s article, Deshingkar et al.’s work (this issue) on precarious labour conditions of Ghanaians and Burmese migrants in the construction and domestic work sectors of Libya, the Middle East, Singapore, and Thailand also raises conceptual issues. Their study is another important contribution that interrogates some aspects of the migration industry in a culturally embedded way. By unsettling the widely held assumptions on the irreconcilable dialectics of migrants and brokers, together with the rhetoric of the benevolent state which is viewed as a positive actor, the article urges us to assume a less rigid, less compartmentalised approach to understanding modern slavery. Conditions of modern slavery arise with the concurrence, cooperation, and implications of the various actors of the regime, although at different levels and in different forms and depths. States, through their complicity, can be equally involved in the process, such as migrant workers who exercise agency. This article enables us to consider the fluid and contingent nature of the responsibility–action nexus, and in the meantime it urges us to think about responsibility in a holistic way.
The article by Pinheiro et al. (this issue) examines the nexus of laws tackling modern slavery, including human rights legislation, and the market characteristics of the Brazilian–UK beef and timber supply chains. The paper aims to explore to what extent multilayered and overlapping norms and practices can contribute to business methods where human rights are respected. Unsurprisingly, ineffective and fragmented law enforcement creates a business environment where noncompliance with laws seem to be encouraged. Nevertheless, as the paper stresses, sectorspecific characteristics leave significant footprints on business practices, including on exploitative ones. Although the article is written from a legal perspective, the recurring practice of ineffective law enforcement by the state has been raised in most of the contributions to this special issue. It foregrounds the role of responsibility by the state to enforce its national laws, as well as regional and international laws to which it adheres. At the same time, there is a clear responsibility on businesses, including transnational ones with part of their supply chains in Brazil, to abide by laws that address them, even in the event of a weaker institutional compliance control. As the article highlights, a more concerted approach would be needed to eradicate labour law exploitation with stronger enforcement and monitoring. This latter might be done increasingly with the use of technology, as businesses’ compliance with human rights is more difficult to supervise when exploitative labour takes place in remote areas.
The modern slavery regime: a critical evaluation 13
The potential of technologies—in particular mobilephonebased tools and applications—to combat modern slavery in global supply chains is reviewed by Rende Taylor and Shih (this issue). It is assumed that, since businesses are better placed to identify and remediate modern slavery conditions with the use of technologies that enable worker feedback, they would take greater responsibility in combating modernday slavery. Their article, however, paints a darker picture by shedding light on significantly lesser ambitions and practices of corporations, where corporations are primarily interested in promoting due diligence, rather than remediation.
The authors demonstrate that due diligence tools, developed and sold to businesses by forprofit tech companies, are used primarily by businesses to identify human trafficking and forced labour within their supply chains but not to address it. They argue that these tools are purposefully designed to have limited scope and not reveal, in earnest, serious modern slavery issues, mainly for lack of willingness and capacity on the side of businesses to deal with and to remedy such risks. Hence, these technologies seem to be the perfect tools to ‘produce deliverables’, which are so much needed for compliance. On the other hand, remediation tools are usually developed and/or primarily used by nonprofit entities, such as civil society and human rights enhancing organisations, with the aim of identifying and addressing issues of modern slavery. The article calls for reconsidering the sole use of due diligence tech tools by transnational companies. Instead, they advocate for the need for businesses to employ more remediation tech tools with real remediation potential. The intended use of these technological methods allows us to ponder on the recurring theme of conflicting responsibilities in the fight against modern slavery. Are businesses solely responsible for the wide use of the more formulaic and, from a business risk perspective, safer due diligence process? The authors infer that companies would probably be more prepared to do more than basic legal compliance if real options for them were available to remedy modern slavery conditions within their supply chain.
In the last article of this collection, Jones et al. (this issue) raise the issue of moral and ethical responsibility of transnational businesses in combating and remedying forced labour within their supply chains. They do so by investigating poor working conditions of Indonesian fishermen within the domestic labour market, situated at the axis of the state and global fish market. Their study identifies a high degree of informality within the sector and the extensive reliance on existing social networks, especially in the case of smaller fishing vessels. These attributes manifest themselves mainly in recruitment practices, in the pervasive lack of written employment agreements, but also in terms of onboard workshare and discipline procedures. Importantly, these also have an impact on payment conditions, which are closely linked to (temporary) bonded labour.
14 Agnes Simic and Brad K. Blitz
The authors invite transnational businesses in the global fish for food sector to reconsider their responsible sourcing approaches in relation to their sourcing from Indonesian supply chains. In particular, as they state, hitherto not enough attention has been given to potential forced labour conditions experienced by domestic workers within the Indonesian fishing industry, whilst exploitation of migrant workers, especially on Thai and Taiwanese shipping vessels, has received widespread media scrutiny. According to them, these may be related to illseated assumptions linked to the structure and smallscale fishing methods of the Indonesian fishing sector, which make transnational companies unaware of and reluctant to investigate potential labour risks. Scarcity in the availability of worker’s voices and lack of organisations that could effectively represent workers’ interests may also add to such business practice. The authors warn us that, in the absence of responsible sourcing practices of transnational businesses, the business risks continue to rest jointly on local companies and workers, while human rights risks would always be allocated to the fishing crew.
CONCLUSION
The contributions to this special issue highlight the complex nature of the modern slavery regime and also the value of joint, as well as individual, responsibility in combatting modernday slavery. Whilst profound power imbalances exist between the state, businesses, and workers, all play their part in tackling the issue. A central problem remains the governance of modern slavery. It is still early days and, as noted above, the challenges of implementation and commitment on the part of states and businesses undermine effective enforcement of human rights norms. However, reform follows analysis and criticism. By illustrating where action has proven successful, and why poor governance allows abuse to flourish, the articles in this issue provide a rare insight into the operations of the modern slavery regime in an international and comparative context. Most importantly, they demonstrate how empirically grounded research may advance our understanding of emerging global discourses on modern slavery and shine a light on promising practices that incentivise action to tackle abuse and exploitation.
The modern slavery regime: a critical evaluation 15
REFERENCES
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (1987). http://www.achpr.org/instruments/achpr/ Agence France Presse (2019), ‘Bangladesh Strikes: Thousands of Garment Workers Clash With Police
Over Poor Pay’, The Guardian, 14 January. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/14/bangladeshstrikesthousandsofgarmentworkersclashwith policeoverpoorpayAmerican Convention on Human Rights (1969). https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b36510.html Bales, Kevin (1999), Disposable People: New Slavery in the Global Economy (Berkeley, CA, University of
California Press).Bassiouni, C. M. (1998), ‘International Crimes: Jus cogens and obligatio erga omnes’, Law and
Contemporary Problems, 59: 63–74. https://doi.org/10.2307/1192190Beate, Andrees (2016), ‘Defending Rights, Securing Justice, The International Labour Organization’s
Work on Forced Labour’, Journal of International Criminal Justice, 14: 343–62. https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqw018
Bloomfield, M. & LeBaron, G. (2018), ‘The UK Modern Slavery Act: Transparency through Disclosure in Global Governance’, E-International Relations.
https://www.eir.info/2018/09/21/theukmodernslaveryacttransparencythroughdisclosurein globalgovernance/.California Transparency in Supply Chains Act (2010) SB657.
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/164934.pdfCockayne, J., Grono, N. & Panaccione, K. (2016), ‘Introduction’, Special Issue: Slavery and the Limits of
International Criminal Justice, Journal of International Criminal Justice, 14: 253–67. https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqw014
Corrie, K. L. (2016), ‘Could the International Criminal Court Strategically Prosecute Modern Day Slavery?’ Journal of International Criminal Justice, 14: 285–303. https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqv064
Council of Europe (2005), Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, https://ec.europa.eu/antitrafficking/sites/antitrafficking/files/cets_197.docx.pdf
Cruz, Katie, O’Connell Davidson, Julia & Sanchez Taylor, Jacqueline (2019), ‘Tourism and Sexual Violence and Exploitation in Jamaica: Contesting the “Trafficking And Modern Slavery” Frame’, Journal of the British Academy, 7(s1): 191–216. https://doi.org/10.85871/jba/007s1.191
Deshingkar, Priya, Awumbila, Mariama & Teye, Joseph Kofi (2019), ‘Victims of Trafficking and Modern Slavery or Agents of Change? Migrants, Brokers, and the State in Ghana and Myanmar’, Journal of the British Academy, 7(s1): 77–106. https://doi.org/10.85871/jba/007s1.077
Duffy, H. (2016), ‘Litigating Modern Day Slavery in Regional Courts: A Nascent Contribution’, Special Issue: Slavery and the Limits of International Criminal Justice, Journal of International Criminal Justice, 14: 375–403. https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqv079
Economist Intelligence Unit (2015) The Road from Principles to Practices: Today’s Challenges for Business in Respecting Human Rights’, 13 October. https://www.eiuperspectives.economist.com/strategyleadership/roadprinciplespractice
EU (2011), Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on Preventing and Combating Trafficking in Human Beings and Protecting its Victims, and Replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA. https://eurlex.europa.eu/legalcontent/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32011L0036
European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1950). https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf
16 Agnes Simic and Brad K. Blitz
Freedom United (2019), ‘Field Report: Modern Slavery in UN Sustainable Development Goals. Freedom United’. https://www.freedomunited.org/ourimpact/slaverysustainabledevelopmentgoals2/ [accessed 13 March 2019].
Gleason, Kelly A. & Cockayne, James (2018), ‘Official Development Assistance and SDG Target 8.7’, Centre for Policy Research, United Nations University. http://collections.unu.edu/view/UNU:6612#viewAttachments
Haynes, J. (2016), ‘The Modern Slavery Act (2015): A Legislative Commentary’, Statute Law Review, 37(1): 33–56. https://doi.org/10.1093/slr/hmv024
ILO (1930), Convention Concerning Forced or Compulsory Labour (C029), International Labour Organization.
https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C029ILO (1956), Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and
Practices Similar to Slavery, International Labour Organization. http://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocitycrimes/Doc.15_supplementary% 20slaverytrade.pdf
ILO (1957), Abolition of Forced Labour Convention (C105), International Labour Organization. https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f ?p=1000:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C105
ILO (1998), Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, International Labour Organization. https://www.ilo.org/declaration/thedeclaration/textdeclaration/langen/index.htm
ILO (1999), Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention (C182), International Labour Organization. https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C182 ILO (2014), Protocol of 2014 to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (P029), International Labour
Organization. https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:P029International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966).
https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx Jones, Katharine, Visser, David & Simic, Agnes (2019), ‘Fishing for Export: Calo, Recruiters, Informality,
and Debt in International Supply Chains’, Journal of the British Academy, 7(s1): 107–130. https://doi.org/10.85871/jba/007s1.107
Krasner, S. D. (1982), ‘Structural Causes and Regime Consequences: Regimes as Intervening Variables’, International Organization, 36(2): 185–205. .https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300018920
McCallSmith, K. & Rühmkorf, A. (2018), ‘Reconciling Human Rights and Supply Chain Management through Corporate Social Responsibility’, in V. Ruiz AbouNigm, K. McCallSmith & D. French (eds.), Linkages and Boundaries in Private and Public International Law. (Oxford, Hart), 147–73.
Modern Slavery Act 2015. (c.30) (London, The Stationery Office). http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/30/contents/enacted
O’Connell Davidson, J. (2017), ‘Editorial: The Presence of the Past: Lessons of History for Antitrafficking Work’, in Special Issue: The Lessons of History, Anti-Trafficking Review, (9):1–13. https://doi.org/10.14197/atr.20121791
Pinheiro, Silvia Marina, Emberson, Caroline & Trautrims, Alexander (2019), ‘ “For the English to See” or Effective Change? How Supply Chains Are Shaped by Laws and Regulations, and What That Means for the Exposure of Modern Slavery’, Journal of the British Academy, 7(s1): 167–190. https://doi.org/10.85871/jba/007s1.167
bin Ra’ad Al Hussein, Z. (2015), ‘Ethical Pursuit of Prosperity’, The Law Society Gazette, 23 March 2015. http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/analysis/commentandopinion/ethicalpursuitofprosperity/5047796. fullarticle
The modern slavery regime: a critical evaluation 17
Rende Taylor, Lisa & Shih, Elena (2019), ‘Worker Feedback Technologies and Combatting Modern Slavery in Global Supply Chains: Examining the Effectiveness of Remediationoriented and Duediligenceoriented Technologies in Identifying and Addressing Forced Labour and Human Trafficking’, Journal of the British Academy, 7(s1): 131–165. https://doi.org/10.85871/jba/007s1.131
Ruggie, J. G. (2017), ‘The Social Construction of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights’, Corporate Responsibility Initiative Working Paper No. 67, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2984901
Skrivankova, K. (2010), ‘Between Decent Work and Forced Labour: Examining the Continuum of Exploitation’, Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/betweendecentworkandforcedlabour examiningcontinuum exploitation
UN (1949), Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/TrafficInPersons.aspx
UN (1989), Convention on the Rights of the Child. https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx
UN (2000), Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons Especially Women and Children, Supplementing the United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime. https://www.ohchr.org/en/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/ProtocolTraffickingInPersons.aspx
UN (2011), UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Implementing the United Nations ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ Framework. (New York and Geneva, United Nations Publications).
https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/GuidingPrinciplesBusinessHR_EN.pdfUN (2015), ‘Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda For Sustainable Development’, A/RES/70/1.
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/21252030%20Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf
Van der Wilt, H. (2016), ‘Slavery Prosecutions in International Criminal Jurisdictions’, Journal of International Criminal Justice, 14: 269–83. https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqv071
Vaughn, Leona, Balch, Alex, Johns, Jennifer & Currie, Samantha (2019), ‘Transparency in Supply Chains and the Lived Experiences of Workers and Their Families in the Garment Sectors of Bangladesh And Myanmar’, Journal of the British Academy, 7(s1): 35–60. https://doi.org/10.85871/jba/007s1.035
Verdross, A. (1966), ‘Jus dispositivum and jus cogens in International Law’, American Journal of International Law, 60: 58–9. https://doi.org/10.2307/2196718
Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000. https://www.state.gov/j/tip/laws/61124.htmVoss, Hinrich, Davis, Matthew, Sumner, Mark, Waite, Louise, Ras, Ilse A., Singal, Divya & Jog, Deepti
(2019), ‘International Supply Chains: Compliance and Engagement with the Modern Slavery Act’, Journal of the British Academy, 7(s1): 61–76. https://doi.org/10.85871/jba/007s1.061
Webb, P. & Garciandia, R. (2019), ‘State Responsibility for Modern Slavery: Uncovering and Bridging the Gap’.
https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/sites/default/files/StateresponsibilityformodernslaveryWebbGarciandia.pdf.
Notes on the authorsAgnes Simic is a former Hungarian solicitor turned into social policy researcher in the area of migration. She is currently a research officer at the Institute of Global Affairs of the London School of Economics and Political Science. She had worked as a research assistant on numerous migrationrelated research projects at the LSE, the
18 Agnes Simic and Brad K. Blitz
University of Exeter, and Middlesex University. One of her recent research projects focussed on legal and procedural information provision to asylum seekers in the UK and in Hungary. Agnes has held lectures and seminars at the Department of Criminology and Sociology of Middlesex University, where she is currently an hourly paid lecturer in Migration and [email protected] or [email protected]
Recent publications:‘Subversive Citizens: Using EU Free Movement Law to Bypass The UK’s Rules on Marriage Migration’
(with Helena Wray & Eleonore Kofman), Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, Special Issue (forthcoming 2019, accepted).
‘INFORM: Legal and procedural information for asylum seekers in the European Union. Hungary Country Report (with Zoltán BarczaSzabó, Gruśa Matevžič, Zoltán Somogyvári & Zsolt Szekeres), (2018). https://www.informasylum.eu/uploads/1/2/1/7/12176018/midj6040_middlesexunihungary 180712.pdf
‘INFORM: Legal and Procedural Information for Asylum Seekers in the European Union’, UK Country Report (with Jocelyn Hutton & Brad Blitz), (2018). https://www.informasylum.eu/uploads/1/2/1/7/12176018/midj6040reportuk1804168web.pdf
Brad K. Blitz is Director of the British Academy/DFID Programme, ‘Tackling Slavery, Human Trafficking and Child Labour in Modern Business’, and has recently been appointed Professor of International Politics and Policy at University College London Institute of Education. He is also Visiting Professor at the London School of Economics, and Senior Fellow of the Global Migration Centre in the Graduate Institute, Geneva.
He recently acted as Principal Investigator for the ESRC–DFID funded EVIMED project on refugee and migrant reception systems in the Mediterranean and the EU Commission project INFORM, which seeks to understand how asylum seekers access legal and procedural information. In March 2019 he began a fiveyear project as co investigator of a £17.4 million ‘hub’ on Gender, Justice and Security, funded by the Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF) with the London School of Economics.
Publications include Statelessness in the European Union: Displaced, Undocumented and Unwanted (Cambridge University Press, 2011) and Statelessness and Citizenship: A Comparative Study on the Benefits of Nationality (Edward Elgar, 2011). In 2011, he completed a US State Department funded project ‘Measuring the Costs of Statelessness’, which subsequently informed US humanitarian policy. He also contributed to UNDP’s Asia-Pacific Human Development Report. In November 2013, he completed a major crossnational study of the benefits of birth registration on development outcomes for Plan International. He is also the author of Migration and
The modern slavery regime: a critical evaluation 19
Freedom: Mobility, Citizenship, and Exclusion (Edward Elgar, 2014; reissued in 2016), which was nominated for three awards. [email protected]
To cite the article: Agnes Simic and Brad K. Blitz (2019), ‘The modern slavery regime: a critical evaluation’, Journal of the British Academy, 7(s1): 1–34.DOI https://doi.org/10.5871/jba/007s1.001
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons AttributionNonCommercialNoDerivs 4.0 Unported License.
Journal of the British Academy (ISSN 2052–7217) is published by
10–11 Carlton House Terrace, London, SW1Y 5AHwww.thebritishacademy.ac.uk
20 Agnes Simic and Brad K. Blitz
Eco
nom
ic a
nd p
olit
ical
sy
stem
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Indu
stry
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Nat
ure
of a
buse
Rel
evan
t le
gisl
atio
n
Pote
ntia
l are
a of
act
ion
Ban
glad
esh
(1)
• U
nsta
ble
dem
ocra
cy w
ith
polit
ical
vio
lenc
e (s
tate
and
ex
trem
ist
grou
ps)
• E
mer
ging
‘pre
dato
r’ m
arke
t ec
onom
y: c
ost
cutt
ing,
hi
ghly
com
peti
tive
, inc
reas
e of
aut
omat
ed t
echn
olog
y•
Est
ablis
hed
hub
in g
loba
l (t
exti
le)
prod
ucti
on w
ebs
• St
ate
ackn
owle
dged
labo
ur
abus
e, o
ffici
al c
ompl
icit
y in
fo
rced
labo
ur a
nd
traf
ficki
ng•
Hig
h ra
te o
f po
vert
y •
Ris
k of
nat
ural
dis
aste
rs
(floo
d, c
yclo
nes)
• T
exti
le, a
gric
ultu
re (
tea)
, fis
hing
(at
sea
and
dry
fish
pr
oduc
tion
), a
lum
iniu
m
fact
orie
s, b
rick
kiln
s, s
ex
wor
k, d
omes
tic
serv
itud
e,
forc
ed c
rim
inal
ity
(e
.g. b
eggi
ng)
• R
ohin
gya
child
ren:
esp
. as
shop
han
ds, fi
sher
men
, ri
cksh
aw p
ulle
rs, d
omes
tic
wor
kers
• W
eak
and
deve
lopi
ng
labo
ur r
egul
atio
n sy
stem
: la
bour
exp
loit
atio
n, w
orke
r pr
otes
ts n
ot p
erm
itte
d, lo
w
pay,
job
inse
curi
ty,
unau
thor
ised
sub
cont
ract
in
g to
sm
all f
acto
ries
•
Gen
der
base
d in
equa
litie
s in
he
alth
, edu
catio
n, la
w, a
nd
wid
er s
ocie
ty. G
ende
red
wor
kpla
ce v
iole
nce
and
aggr
essi
on (p
hysi
cal,
sexu
al
and
verb
al)
vas
t maj
ority
of
wor
kers
in te
xtile
fact
orie
s ha
d be
en w
omen
from
rur
al
area
s•
Hig
hly
vuln
erab
le g
roup
: st
atel
ess
ethn
ic R
ohin
gya:
se
x tr
affic
king
thr
ough
fal
se
arra
nged
mar
riag
e an
d jo
b pr
ospe
cts,
chi
ldre
n w
orki
ng
in o
ther
sec
tors
: lon
g w
orki
ng h
ours
, low
pay
, pr
ohib
itio
n of
kee
ping
in
touc
h w
ith
fam
ily•
Chi
ld la
bour
ser
ious
issu
e
• IL
O C
029,
087
, 098
, 100
, 10
5, 1
11, 1
82, C
RC
(U
N
Con
vent
ion
on t
he R
ight
s of
th
e C
hild
(U
N 1
989)
) an
d C
RC
Opt
iona
l Pro
toco
ls.
• T
he ‘A
ccor
d on
Fir
e an
d B
uild
ing
Safe
ty in
B
angl
ades
h’ (
was
in p
lace
fo
r 5
year
s un
til m
id
2018
)—bu
t ac
tion
s ba
sed
on t
hat
lack
ed g
over
nmen
t su
ppor
t, c
urre
ntly
bei
ng
repl
aced
by
the
new
‘T
rans
itio
n A
ccor
d 20
18’
• ‘T
he A
llian
ce fo
r B
angl
ades
h W
orke
r Sa
fety
’—le
gally
bin
ding
ag
reem
ents
bet
wee
n gl
obal
br
ands
, ret
aile
rs a
nd t
rade
un
ions
• M
emor
andu
m o
f U
nder
stan
ding
(M
OU
) ta
cklin
g ch
ild la
bour
(19
95)
betw
een
the
Ban
glad
eshi
G
arm
ent
Man
ufac
ture
rs
and
Exp
orte
rs A
ssoc
iati
on
(BG
ME
A),
UN
ICE
F
Ban
glad
esh
and
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Lab
our
Org
aniz
atio
n (I
LO
) B
angl
ades
h.
• St
rong
er la
bour
reg
ulat
ion
syst
em a
nd p
rote
ctio
n m
ea
sure
s ne
eded
tha
t ex
tend
to
form
al a
nd in
form
al
econ
omie
s.
• In
crea
se p
rose
cuti
on a
nd
conv
icti
on o
f fo
rced
labo
ur
offe
nder
s.
• A
ddre
ss o
ffici
al c
ompl
i cit
y in
tra
ffick
ing
and
forc
ed
labo
ur c
rim
es.
• E
nhan
ce t
rain
ing
to o
ffi
cial
s on
forc
ed la
bour
iden
ti
ficat
ion
and
prot
ecti
on.
• A
ddre
ss s
emi
form
al
recr
uitm
ent
prac
tice
s.
App
endi
x 1.
A t
axon
omy
of m
oder
n sl
aver
y in
sel
ecte
d st
ates
dis
cuss
ed in
the
spe
cial
issu
e.
The modern slavery regime: a critical evaluation 21
Ban
glad
esh
(1)
• U
nsta
ble
dem
ocra
cy w
ith
polit
ical
vio
lenc
e (s
tate
and
ex
trem
ist
grou
ps)
• E
mer
ging
‘pre
dato
r’ m
arke
t ec
onom
y: c
ost
cutt
ing,
hi
ghly
com
peti
tive
, inc
reas
e of
aut
omat
ed t
echn
olog
y•
Est
ablis
hed
hub
in g
loba
l (t
exti
le)
prod
ucti
on w
ebs
• St
ate
ackn
owle
dged
labo
ur
abus
e, o
ffici
al c
ompl
icit
y in
fo
rced
labo
ur a
nd
traf
ficki
ng•
Hig
h ra
te o
f po
vert
y •
Ris
k of
nat
ural
dis
aste
rs
(floo
d, c
yclo
nes)
• T
exti
le, a
gric
ultu
re (
tea)
, fis
hing
(at
sea
and
dry
fish
pr
oduc
tion
), a
lum
iniu
m
fact
orie
s, b
rick
kiln
s, s
ex
wor
k, d
omes
tic
serv
itud
e,
forc
ed c
rim
inal
ity
(e
.g. b
eggi
ng)
• R
ohin
gya
child
ren:
esp
. as
shop
han
ds, fi
sher
men
, ri
cksh
aw p
ulle
rs, d
omes
tic
wor
kers
• W
eak
and
deve
lopi
ng
labo
ur r
egul
atio
n sy
stem
: la
bour
exp
loit
atio
n, w
orke
r pr
otes
ts n
ot p
erm
itte
d, lo
w
pay,
job
inse
curi
ty,
unau
thor
ised
sub
cont
ract
in
g to
sm
all f
acto
ries
•
Gen
der
base
d in
equa
litie
s in
he
alth
, edu
catio
n, la
w, a
nd
wid
er s
ocie
ty. G
ende
red
wor
kpla
ce v
iole
nce
and
aggr
essi
on (p
hysi
cal,
sexu
al
and
verb
al)
vas
t maj
ority
of
wor
kers
in te
xtile
fact
orie
s ha
d be
en w
omen
from
rur
al
area
s•
Hig
hly
vuln
erab
le g
roup
: st
atel
ess
ethn
ic R
ohin
gya:
se
x tr
affic
king
thr
ough
fal
se
arra
nged
mar
riag
e an
d jo
b pr
ospe
cts,
chi
ldre
n w
orki
ng
in o
ther
sec
tors
: lon
g w
orki
ng h
ours
, low
pay
, pr
ohib
itio
n of
kee
ping
in
touc
h w
ith
fam
ily•
Chi
ld la
bour
ser
ious
issu
e
• IL
O C
029,
087
, 098
, 100
, 10
5, 1
11, 1
82, C
RC
(U
N
Con
vent
ion
on t
he R
ight
s of
th
e C
hild
(U
N 1
989)
) an
d C
RC
Opt
iona
l Pro
toco
ls.
• T
he ‘A
ccor
d on
Fir
e an
d B
uild
ing
Safe
ty in
B
angl
ades
h’ (
was
in p
lace
fo
r 5
year
s un
til m
id
2018
)—bu
t ac
tion
s ba
sed
on t
hat
lack
ed g
over
nmen
t su
ppor
t, c
urre
ntly
bei
ng
repl
aced
by
the
new
‘T
rans
itio
n A
ccor
d 20
18’
• ‘T
he A
llian
ce fo
r B
angl
ades
h W
orke
r Sa
fety
’—le
gally
bin
ding
ag
reem
ents
bet
wee
n gl
obal
br
ands
, ret
aile
rs a
nd t
rade
un
ions
• M
emor
andu
m o
f U
nder
stan
ding
(M
OU
) ta
cklin
g ch
ild la
bour
(19
95)
betw
een
the
Ban
glad
eshi
G
arm
ent
Man
ufac
ture
rs
and
Exp
orte
rs A
ssoc
iati
on
(BG
ME
A),
UN
ICE
F
Ban
glad
esh
and
the
Inte
rnat
iona
l Lab
our
Org
aniz
atio
n (I
LO
) B
angl
ades
h.
• St
rong
er la
bour
reg
ulat
ion
syst
em a
nd p
rote
ctio
n m
ea
sure
s ne
eded
tha
t ex
tend
to
form
al a
nd in
form
al
econ
omie
s.
• In
crea
se p
rose
cuti
on a
nd
conv
icti
on o
f fo
rced
labo
ur
offe
nder
s.
• A
ddre
ss o
ffici
al c
ompl
i cit
y in
tra
ffick
ing
and
forc
ed
labo
ur c
rim
es.
• E
nhan
ce t
rain
ing
to o
ffi
cial
s on
forc
ed la
bour
iden
ti
ficat
ion
and
prot
ecti
on.
• A
ddre
ss s
emi
form
al
recr
uitm
ent
prac
tice
s.
Eco
nom
ic a
nd p
olit
ical
sy
stem
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Indu
stry
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Nat
ure
of a
buse
Rel
evan
t le
gisl
atio
n
Pote
ntia
l are
a of
act
ion
App
endi
x 1.
Con
tinu
ed.
Bra
zil (
2)•
Fas
tgr
owin
g m
arke
t ec
onom
ic w
ith
high
di
spar
itie
s be
twee
n ge
ogra
phic
al a
reas
(N
orth
an
d So
uth)
and
rur
al/u
rban
ar
eas
• E
cono
mic
cri
sis
of 2
015
slow
ed d
own
econ
omic
gr
owth
• R
elia
nce
on m
igra
nts
from
ne
ighb
ouri
ng c
ount
ries
, So
uth
Asi
a, a
nd A
fric
a
• R
ural
are
as: a
gric
ultu
ral
sect
or (
coff
ee, c
harc
oal
prod
ucti
on, f
ores
try,
cat
tle
ranc
hing
)•
Urb
an a
reas
: tex
tile
, co
nstr
ucti
on, d
omes
tic
labo
ur a
nd t
ouri
sm (
sex)
in
dust
ries
• R
ural
wor
kers
(es
peci
ally
in
the
Am
azon
reg
ion)
: in
form
al w
orki
ng c
ondi
ti
ons
(no
cont
ract
s),
unet
hica
l rec
ruit
men
t,
rest
rict
ed la
bour
mar
ket
mob
iliti
es, p
hysi
cal t
hrea
ts
and
hara
ssm
ent,
low
pay
, lo
ng w
orkd
ays,
poo
r w
orki
ng c
ondi
tion
s•
Mig
rant
wor
kers
: hig
hly
vuln
erab
le, u
ndoc
umen
ted
stat
us, d
ebt
bond
age,
lack
of
lang
uage
kno
wle
dge,
to
tal r
elia
nce
on e
mpl
oyer
•
Dom
esti
c la
bour
: bas
ic
righ
ts d
enie
d•
Lon
gst
andi
ng d
iscr
imin
at
ion
agai
nst
indi
geno
us
Bra
zilia
ns a
nd p
eopl
e of
A
fric
an o
rigi
ns, m
ore
pron
e to
exp
loit
atio
n•
Chi
ld la
bour
(es
p. d
omes
tic
and
sex
wor
k)
• IL
O C
029,
098
, 100
, 105
, 11
1, 1
38, 1
82, C
RC
, CR
C
Opt
iona
l Pro
toco
ls a
nd
Pale
rmo
Pro
toco
l (U
N 2
000)
• F
orce
d la
bour
is a
cri
min
al
offe
nce
unde
r A
rtic
le 1
49
and
197
of t
he P
enal
Cod
e.
In O
ctob
er 2
016,
Law
13
.344
/16
was
pas
sed,
cr
imin
alis
ing
all f
orm
s of
hu
man
tra
ffick
ing
wit
h ha
rshe
r pe
nalt
ies
for
perp
etra
tors
, pro
posi
ng
prev
enta
tive
mea
sure
s in
clud
ing
the
crea
tion
of
a da
taba
se fo
r of
fend
ers,
and
ex
tend
ing
the
righ
t to
lega
l, so
cial
, and
hea
lth
bene
fits
to t
raffi
ckin
g vi
ctim
s.
Bra
zil’s
pro
gres
sive
and
br
oad
defin
itio
n of
sla
very
ha
s be
en r
ecen
tly
chal
le
nged
by
a go
vern
men
t de
cree
see
king
to
chan
ge
and
limit
the
defi
niti
on.
• N
atio
nal P
act f
or th
e E
radi
catio
n of
Sla
ve L
abou
r w
as la
unch
ed in
200
5,
sign
ator
y co
mpa
nies
hav
e vo
lunt
arily
agr
eed
to
prom
ote
dece
nt w
ork
prac
tices
and
cut
com
mer
cial
tie
s w
ith th
ose
busi
ness
es o
n th
e ‘S
lave
Lab
our
Dir
ty L
ist’
(cri
ticis
m th
at th
e lis
t has
not
be
en u
pdat
ed).
• St
reng
then
legi
slat
ion
(e.g
. to
ena
ct e
thic
al r
ecru
itm
ent
law
, law
tha
t re
quir
es
com
pani
es t
o m
ake
publ
ic
thei
r ac
tion
s ag
ains
t m
oder
n sl
aver
y in
sup
ply
chai
ns)
• M
onit
or t
he im
plem
enta
ti
on o
f la
bour
law
s•
Tac
kle
wid
er s
ocie
tal r
oot
caus
es a
nd r
isk
fact
ors
such
as
lack
of
educ
atio
n, jo
b cr
eati
on, e
tc.
22 Agnes Simic and Brad K. Blitz
Chi
na (3
) •
Rap
idly
dev
elop
ing
mar
ket
econ
omy
spec
ialis
es in
pr
oduc
tion
for
expo
rt o
f ch
eap
good
s th
at r
equi
re
inte
nsiv
e la
bour
•
Eno
rmou
s di
verg
ence
s be
twee
n in
com
e le
vels
ac
ross
geo
grap
hica
l are
as•
Stat
eim
pose
d fo
rced
labo
ur
• M
anuf
actu
ring
(ga
rmen
t,
elec
tron
ics)
, con
stru
ctio
n se
ctor
s•
Les
s fo
rmal
indu
stri
es, e
.g.
bric
k ki
lns,
sug
arca
ne
• St
ate
sect
or: f
orce
d la
bour
in
det
enti
on, d
rug
reha
bilit
atio
n, r
eed
ucat
ion
cent
res;
org
an h
arve
stin
g fr
om p
riso
ners
(m
ainl
y of
co
nsci
ence
); ‘i
nter
nshi
ps’ o
f st
uden
ts in
fac
tori
es a
s pa
rt
of v
ocat
iona
l tra
inin
gs
• Se
x in
dust
ry: l
ocal
s an
d m
igra
nts,
adu
lts
and
child
ren
• L
ow, d
elay
ed (
e.g.
in t
he
cons
truc
tion
sec
tor)
or
som
etim
es n
o pa
y, lo
ng
wor
king
hou
rs, p
hysi
cal
thre
ats
and
abus
e, la
ck o
f em
ploy
men
t co
ntra
ct•
Chi
ld la
bour
: lon
g w
ork,
ph
ysic
al h
aras
smen
t fo
r re
fusa
l to
com
ply,
oft
en
limit
ed p
hysi
cal m
obili
ty
(con
fisca
ted
pass
port
s,
mob
ile p
hone
s)
• In
tern
al m
igra
nts:
hig
hly
vuln
erab
le g
roup
, red
uced
ac
cess
to
soci
al s
ervi
ces
follo
win
g th
eir
mov
e (h
ealt
h, e
duca
tion
, etc
.),
undo
cum
ente
d, o
ften
wor
k in
info
rmal
sec
tors
• In
tern
atio
nal m
igra
nts:
of
ten
undo
cum
ente
d, h
ighl
y vu
lner
able
to
labo
ur a
buse
•
Sex
indu
stry
: adu
lts
and
child
ren
traf
ficke
d in
to
forc
ed s
exua
l exp
loit
atio
n (m
ainl
y fr
om n
eigh
bour
ing
coun
trie
s); f
orce
d m
arri
ages
of
fore
ign
wiv
es•
Vic
tim
s m
ay b
e pu
nish
ed
for
thei
r fo
rced
act
s
(e.g
. sex
ual w
ork)
, hen
ce
ofte
n do
not
see
k he
lp
• IL
O C
100,
111
, 138
, 182
•
For
ced
labo
ur is
a c
rim
inal
of
fens
e as
laid
out
by
sect
ion
244
in t
he C
hine
se
crim
inal
cod
e •
No
lega
l req
uire
men
t fo
r co
mpa
nies
to
publ
ish
case
s of
mod
ern
slav
ery
that
the
y ha
ve d
isco
vere
d in
the
ir
supp
ly c
hain
s
• L
ooph
oles
in le
gisl
atio
n to
be
clo
sed
to e
nabl
e be
tter
pr
otec
tion
of
wor
kers
•
Law
s to
be
effe
ctiv
ely
enfo
rced
• V
icti
m p
rote
ctio
n to
be
prof
ound
ly r
econ
side
red
and
deve
lope
d •
Tra
inin
gs fo
r bo
th s
tate
of
ficia
ls a
nd e
mpl
oyer
s ab
out
reco
gnit
ion
and
tack
ling
of m
oder
n sl
aver
y ca
ses
Eco
nom
ic a
nd p
olit
ical
sy
stem
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Indu
stry
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Nat
ure
of a
buse
Rel
evan
t le
gisl
atio
n
Pote
ntia
l are
a of
act
ion
App
endi
x 1.
Con
tinu
ed.
The modern slavery regime: a critical evaluation 23
Dom
inic
an R
epub
lic (4
) •
Mar
ket
econ
omy
wit
h re
lati
vely
str
ong
econ
omic
gr
owth
in t
he la
st y
ears
•
Stri
king
soc
ial i
nequ
alit
y,
extr
eme
pove
rty,
illit
erac
y,
unem
ploy
men
t, d
rug
use
• C
ount
ry is
hea
vily
inde
bted
• N
atur
al d
isas
ters
can
aff
ect
stab
ility
• R
ampa
nt c
orru
ptio
n
• R
ural
are
as: a
gric
ultu
re
(esp
. sug
ar, r
ice
and
coff
ee
prod
ucti
on)
• U
rban
are
as: c
onst
ruct
ion,
to
uris
m, d
omes
tic
serv
itud
e,
forc
ed b
eggi
ng, s
tree
t se
lling
, sex
wor
k
• D
elay
ed o
r no
npa
ymen
t of
w
ages
, man
dato
ry o
vert
ime,
bo
nded
labo
ur, d
ecep
tion
re
. wor
k co
ndit
ions
, ha
zard
ous
wor
king
co
ndit
ions
, exp
osur
e to
sun
an
d pe
stic
ides
• M
igra
nts,
mai
nly
from
H
aiti
and
Dom
inic
an–
Hai
tian
eth
nic
min
orit
y:
ofte
n un
docu
men
ted,
no
r
ight
s to
bas
ic s
ocia
l wel
fare
(e
duca
tion
for
thei
r ch
ildre
n, h
ealt
hcar
e)
prec
ario
us w
ork
and
life
cond
itio
ns, i
nsti
tuti
onal
ised
di
scri
min
atio
n ag
ains
t th
em•
Adu
lt a
nd c
hild
sex
tou
rism
th
rivi
ng
• F
orce
d m
arri
age
of c
hild
ren
• G
ende
red
viol
ence
hig
h•
Polic
e vi
olen
ce, e
sp. a
gain
st
LG
BT
Q
ILO
C02
9, 0
87, 0
98, 1
00, 1
05,
111,
138
, 182
, CR
C, C
RC
O
ptio
nal P
roto
cols
and
P
aler
mo
Pro
toco
l
• T
ackl
e w
ider
soc
ieta
l roo
t ca
uses
• St
reng
then
law
enf
orce
men
t•
End
sti
gmat
isat
ion
and
crim
inal
isat
ion
of s
ex w
ork
Eco
nom
ic a
nd p
olit
ical
sy
stem
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Indu
stry
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Nat
ure
of a
buse
Rel
evan
t le
gisl
atio
n
Pote
ntia
l are
a of
act
ion
App
endi
x 1.
Con
tinu
ed.
24 Agnes Simic and Brad K. Blitz
Gha
na (5
) •
Mar
ket
econ
omy
wit
h ec
onom
ic c
halle
nges
(e
.g. h
igh
infla
tion
, hea
vy
inde
bted
ness
) bu
t w
ith
high
ra
te o
f co
mpe
titi
on; s
tate
st
ill m
ost
prom
inen
t em
ploy
er in
form
al
econ
omy
• W
ide
econ
omic
and
soc
ial
ineq
ualit
ies
• C
onsp
icuo
us g
eogr
aphi
c an
d re
ligio
us d
ivid
e (p
oor
Nor
th w
ith
a si
gnifi
cant
M
uslim
pop
ulat
ion,
mor
e af
fluen
t So
uth)
• R
ampa
nt c
orru
ptio
n
• G
old
min
ing
and
othe
r ill
egal
art
isan
al s
mal
lsc
ale
min
ing,
agr
icul
ture
(co
ca),
fis
hing
, oil
• C
hild
labo
ur a
lso
in
dom
esti
c la
bour
, por
tera
ge,
haw
king
, fish
ing
(esp
. Lak
e V
olta
)
• L
ong
stan
ding
str
uctu
ral
disc
rim
inat
ion
agai
nst
wom
en: w
idow
inhe
rita
nce,
fo
rced
mou
rnin
g pr
acti
ces
• C
hild
ren:
forc
ed c
hild
m
arri
age,
com
mer
cial
se
xual
exp
loit
atio
n,
espe
cial
ly o
f th
ose
who
m
igra
ted
to u
rban
are
as,
phys
ical
ly d
rain
ing
and
haza
rdou
s fo
rced
wor
k,
long
wor
king
hou
rs, o
ften
un
derg
roun
d an
d un
der
wat
er (
cons
tant
thr
eat
of
drow
ning
), e
xpos
ure
to
heal
th h
azar
dous
mat
eria
ls
(e.g
. mer
cury
), p
hysi
cal
abus
e, m
aybe
sex
ual a
buse
• E
xces
sive
use
of
forc
e by
po
lice
ILO
C02
9, 0
87, 0
98, 1
00, 1
05,
111,
138
, 182
, CR
C, C
RC
O
ptio
nal P
roto
cols
and
P
aler
mo
Pro
toco
l
• St
reng
then
law
enf
orce
m
ent,
als
o by
allo
cati
ng
suffi
cien
t re
sour
ces
for
trai
ning
and
labo
ur
insp
ecti
ons
• T
ackl
e co
rrup
tion
and
ad
min
istr
ativ
e in
erti
a
Eco
nom
ic a
nd p
olit
ical
sy
stem
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Indu
stry
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Nat
ure
of a
buse
Rel
evan
t le
gisl
atio
n
Pote
ntia
l are
a of
act
ion
App
endi
x 1.
Con
tinu
ed.
The modern slavery regime: a critical evaluation 25
Indi
a (6
) •
Mar
ket
econ
omy
wit
h st
rong
eco
nom
ic g
row
th•
Sign
ifica
nt in
com
e an
d liv
elih
ood
disp
arit
ies
betw
een
Indi
an s
tate
s •
Lon
gst
andi
ng s
ocia
l and
ec
onom
ic d
iscr
imin
atio
n ag
ains
t im
port
ant
grou
ps o
f th
e po
pula
tion
(Sc
hedu
led
Cas
tes,
Sch
edul
es T
ribe
s an
d D
alit
s, w
omen
)
Man
ly in
info
rmal
ec
onom
ies
in
agri
cult
ure,
fore
stry
, fis
hing
, min
ing
(e
.g. g
rani
te, s
ands
tone
),
man
ufac
turi
ng
(e.g
. bri
ck k
ilns)
, co
nstr
ucti
on a
nd
serv
ices
(e.
g. s
ex
wor
k). I
n T
amil
N
adu:
spi
nnin
g m
ills
•
ILO
C02
9, 1
00, 1
05,
111,
138
, 182
, CR
C,
CR
C O
ptio
nal P
roto
cols
an
d P
aler
mo
Pro
toco
l•
Indi
a’s
Pen
al C
ode
crim
inal
ised
mos
t fo
rms
of m
oder
n sl
aver
y, i.
e.
traf
ficki
ng, s
lave
ry,
forc
ed la
bour
, and
chi
ld
sexu
al e
xplo
itat
ion
(for
ced
mar
riag
e is
ra
rely
cri
min
alis
ed)
• N
o le
gal r
equi
rem
ent
for
com
pani
es t
o pu
blis
h ca
ses
of m
oder
n sl
aver
y th
at t
hey
have
dis
cov
ered
in t
heir
sup
ply
chai
ns
• Im
plem
ent
gove
rnm
ent
polic
ies
to e
nd m
oder
n sl
aver
y •
Stre
ngth
en v
icti
m r
escu
e an
d re
inte
grat
ion
• St
reng
then
acc
ount
abili
ty
of b
usin
esse
s•
Gov
ernm
ent
to c
ondu
ct
com
puls
ory
labo
ur d
ue
dilig
ence
s in
hig
hri
sk
sect
ors,
incl
udin
g in
the
in
form
al e
cono
my
Eco
nom
ic a
nd p
olit
ical
sy
stem
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Indu
stry
whe
re
abus
e m
ay o
ccur
R
elev
ant
legi
slat
ion
Pote
ntia
l are
a of
act
ion
App
endi
x 1.
Con
tinu
ed.
• In
tern
al m
igra
nts:
mig
rati
on d
ue to
lack
of
live
lihoo
d an
d em
ploy
men
t, la
ck o
f ID
doc
umen
tati
on, r
estr
icte
d ac
cess
to
soci
al s
ervi
ces,
cul
tura
l and
ling
uist
ic
diff
eren
ces,
lack
of
soci
al n
etw
orks
m
ake
them
vul
nera
ble
• H
igh
num
ber
of in
tern
atio
nal m
igra
nts:
si
mila
r vu
lner
abili
ties
that
inte
rnal
m
igra
nts
expe
rien
ce•
Bon
ded
labo
ur: h
igh
inte
rest
loan
s,
(som
etim
es fo
rced
) wag
e ad
vanc
es,
som
etim
es li
fel
ong
bond
ed la
bour
, tr
ansf
er o
f de
bt o
nto
child
ren,
oft
en
linke
d to
forc
ed s
exua
l exp
loit
atio
n; th
is
appl
ies
to T
amil
Nad
u’s
spin
ning
mill
s:
expl
oita
tive
labo
ur c
ondi
tion
s, lo
ng
wor
king
hou
rs, r
estr
icte
d ph
ysic
al m
obili
ty
(con
fisca
tion
of m
obile
pho
nes)
, del
ayed
pa
ymen
t with
yea
rs o
f a
lum
p su
m•
Dom
esti
c w
ork:
oft
en b
y in
tern
al
mig
rant
s, h
igh
vuln
erab
ility
• Tr
affic
king
and
forc
ed s
ex la
bour
: ad
ults
and
chi
ldre
n •
Forc
ed m
arri
age
wit
hin
Indi
a: o
ften
at a
yo
ung
age,
pro
ne to
dom
esti
c se
rvit
ude
and
phys
ical
, sex
ual a
nd e
mot
iona
l ex
ploi
tati
on•
Org
an h
arve
stin
g•
Exp
loit
atio
n of
chi
ldre
n in
arm
ed
confl
ict
• W
omen
, esp
. fro
m m
argi
nalis
ed o
r ec
onom
ical
ly b
ackw
ard
grou
ps
Nat
ure
of a
buse
26 Agnes Simic and Brad K. Blitz
Indo
nesi
a (7
) •
Maj
or e
mer
ging
eco
nom
y w
ith
conf
usin
gly
mix
ed
prot
ecti
onis
t an
d pr
om
ar
ket
mea
sure
s•
Vol
atile
dem
ocra
cy a
nd
econ
omy
• In
form
al s
ecto
r ve
ry
sign
ifica
nt•
De
cent
ralis
ed w
ay o
f go
vern
ing
• R
ampa
nt c
orru
ptio
n•
Eth
nica
lly, l
ingu
isti
cally
and
so
cio
econ
omic
ally
hig
hly
dive
rse
popu
lati
on
Pri
mar
ily a
gric
ultu
re
(e.g
. pal
m o
il) a
nd fi
shin
g •
For
ced
labo
ur a
nd h
uman
tr
affic
king
in t
he fi
sher
ies
sect
or: a
t se
a an
d in
sho
re;
thos
e w
orki
ng a
t se
a: s
ever
e re
stri
ctio
n on
phy
sica
l m
obili
ty (
ofte
n fo
r ye
ars)
, of
ten
undo
cum
ente
d,
extr
eme
labo
ur e
xplo
itat
ion
wit
h lo
ng w
orki
ng h
ours
, w
ithh
oldi
ng o
f w
ages
, se
vere
phy
sica
l and
ps
ycho
logi
cal a
buse
, uns
afe
and
unhy
gien
ic w
orki
ng a
nd
dwel
ling
cond
itio
ns,
seri
ousl
y re
stri
cted
food
and
w
ater
pro
visi
on, p
arti
cula
rly
hars
h en
viro
nmen
tal
cond
itio
ns, l
ack
of m
eans
of
com
mun
icat
ion
wit
h fa
mily
(co
nfisc
atio
n of
m
obile
pho
ne)
and
wit
h cr
ew d
ue t
o lin
guis
tic
barr
iers
• L
abou
r m
igra
nts
from
ne
ighb
ouri
ng c
ount
ries
in
high
num
bers
und
er fo
rced
la
bour
con
diti
ons,
hig
h vu
lner
abili
ty•
Chi
ld la
bour
als
o ra
mpa
nt
ILO
C02
9, 0
87, 0
98, 1
00, 1
05,
111,
138
, 182
, CR
C, C
RC
O
ptio
nal P
roto
cols
and
P
aler
mo
Pro
toco
l
• T
ackl
e w
ider
soc
ieta
l roo
t ca
uses
• D
evel
op a
nd s
tren
gthe
n la
bour
reg
ulat
ions
• St
reng
then
law
enf
orce
men
t in
a d
ecen
tral
ised
gov
erni
ng
envi
ronm
ent
• A
ddre
ss c
orru
ptio
n•
Incr
ease
tra
ceab
ility
m
onit
orin
g an
d po
licin
g at
se
a
Eco
nom
ic a
nd p
olit
ical
sy
stem
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Indu
stry
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Nat
ure
of a
buse
Rel
evan
t le
gisl
atio
n Po
tent
ial a
rea
of a
ctio
n
App
endi
x 1.
Con
tinu
ed.
The modern slavery regime: a critical evaluation 27
Jam
aica
(8)
• P
atro
nage
bas
ed t
wo
part
y de
moc
racy
(cl
ient
elis
tic
rela
tion
ship
s be
twee
n pa
rtie
s an
d ci
tize
ns)
• Sm
all a
nd u
nsta
ble
mar
ket
econ
omy,
wit
h im
port
ant
tour
ism
indu
stry
• R
ampa
nt c
orru
ptio
n an
d vi
olen
t cr
ime
• St
rong
pre
senc
e of
or
gani
sed
crim
inal
gan
gs
• L
arge
info
rmal
sec
tor
• H
igh
rate
s of
pov
erty
Tour
ism
(se
x tr
affic
king
),
forc
ed b
eggi
ng, d
omes
tic
serv
itud
e, fo
rced
cri
min
al
acti
vity
, fish
ing
• C
hild
and
adu
lt s
ex t
ouri
sm
in fo
rmal
(e.
g. h
otel
s) a
nd
info
rmal
(e.
g. n
ight
club
s,
stre
et)
sett
ings
: sex
ual a
nd
phys
ical
vio
lenc
e, e
xtor
tion
, ro
bber
y, la
ck o
f ch
ance
s of
ph
ysic
al m
obili
ty; h
owev
er,
entr
y in
to s
ex w
ork
is o
ften
‘v
olun
tary
’, do
ne m
ainl
y to
ec
onom
ic p
ress
ures
•
Hig
hri
sk g
roup
s: p
oor
youn
g w
omen
, chi
ld v
icti
ms
of s
exua
l abu
se, t
hose
livi
ng
in a
reas
con
trol
led
by
‘don
s’, (
undo
cum
ente
d)
mig
rant
s, in
form
al s
ecto
r w
orke
rs•
Reg
ardi
ng o
ther
typ
es o
f w
ork
linke
d to
the
tou
rism
in
dust
ry: l
ow, d
elay
ed o
r no
pa
y at
all,
labo
ur r
egul
ati
ons
circ
umve
nted
by
empl
oyer
s, p
reve
ntin
g ba
sic
stab
ility
in li
fe•
Tour
ism
indu
stry
rem
inis
ce
nt o
f cl
assi
cal s
lave
ry
heri
tage
: whi
te ‘r
ich’
cu
stom
ers
serv
ed b
y bl
ack
loca
ls
ILO
C02
9, 0
87, 0
98, 1
00, 1
05,
111,
138
, 182
, CR
C, C
RC
O
ptio
nal P
roto
cols
and
P
aler
mo
Pro
toco
l
• T
ackl
e w
ider
soc
ieta
l roo
t ca
uses
• St
reng
then
law
enf
orce
men
t•
Stre
ngth
en v
icti
m
iden
tific
atio
n an
d pr
otec
tion
• P
rovi
de t
rain
ing
to o
ffici
als
on h
uman
tra
ffick
ing
and
forc
ed la
bour
and
aw
aren
ess
rais
ing
to p
ublic
• E
nd s
tigm
atis
atio
n an
d cr
imin
alis
atio
n of
sex
wor
k•
Dec
rim
inal
ise
hom
osex
ualit
y
Eco
nom
ic a
nd p
olit
ical
sy
stem
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Indu
stry
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Nat
ure
of a
buse
Rel
evan
t le
gisl
atio
n
Pote
ntia
l are
a of
act
ion
App
endi
x 1.
Con
tinu
ed.
28 Agnes Simic and Brad K. Blitz
Mal
aysi
a (9
) •
Hyb
rid
or m
oder
ate
auth
orit
aria
nism
wit
h un
conv
inci
ng t
rans
form
at
ion
into
dem
ocra
cy•
At
the
sam
e ti
me
stab
le
mar
ket
base
d ec
onom
y•
Soci
ocu
ltur
al o
bsta
cles
, et
hnic
– re
ligio
us c
onfli
cts
root
ed in
inst
itut
iona
lised
di
scri
min
atio
n ag
ains
t no
net
hnic
Mal
ay
popu
lati
on (
mai
n et
hnic
m
inor
itie
s: C
hine
se a
nd
Indi
an)
• H
eavy
rel
ianc
e on
mig
rant
w
orke
rs m
ainl
y fr
om
neig
hbou
ring
cou
ntri
es
• R
ural
/at
sea:
agr
icul
ture
, pl
anta
tion
, for
estr
y, fi
shin
g,
man
ufac
turi
ng
(e.g
. ele
ctro
nics
, rub
ber
glov
es)
• U
rban
: con
stru
ctio
n,
tour
ism
(co
mm
erci
al s
exua
l ex
ploi
tati
on),
food
ser
vice
• M
igra
nt w
orke
rs: m
ore
prev
alen
t in
rur
al a
reas
, are
le
sser
edu
cate
d, t
hus
empl
oyed
in lo
wer
ski
lled
jobs
; the
y ex
peri
ence
forc
ed
labo
ur, f
orce
d ov
erti
me,
de
bt b
onda
ge, w
ithh
eld
wag
es, u
nsaf
e w
orki
ng a
nd
acco
mm
odat
ion
cond
itio
ns,
pass
port
con
fisca
tion
, un
docu
men
ted
wit
h de
port
atio
n th
reat
s, p
hysi
cal
and
soci
al is
olat
ion,
ph
ysic
al a
nd v
erba
l abu
se•
Sign
ifica
nt n
umbe
r of
fo
reig
n an
d a
smal
ler
num
ber
of lo
cal w
omen
and
ch
ildre
n tr
affic
ked
and
forc
ed in
to c
omm
erci
al
sexu
al a
ctiv
itie
s•
Syst
emic
dis
crim
inat
ion
agai
nst
wom
en, e
thni
c m
inor
itie
s, a
nd L
GB
TQ
ILO
C02
9, 0
98, 1
00, 1
05, 1
11,
138,
182
. Den
ounc
ed C
105
•
Stre
ngth
en e
ffor
ts a
gain
st
hum
an t
raffi
ckin
g•
Bet
ter
prot
ect
(oft
en
undo
cum
ente
d) m
igra
nts
both
in fo
rmal
and
info
rmal
se
ctor
s•
Ado
pt p
olic
ies
to t
ackl
e et
hnic
and
gen
der
disc
rim
inat
ion
• R
aise
aw
aren
ess
of m
oder
n sl
aver
y am
ong
wor
kers
; pr
ovid
e m
ore
prot
ecti
on fo
r vi
ctim
s.
Eco
nom
ic a
nd p
olit
ical
sy
stem
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Indu
stry
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Nat
ure
of a
buse
Rel
evan
t le
gisl
atio
n
Pote
ntia
l are
a of
act
ion
App
endi
x 1.
Con
tinu
ed.
The modern slavery regime: a critical evaluation 29
Mex
ico
(10)
•
For
mal
ly d
emoc
racy
wit
h cl
ient
elis
m (
‘par
ticr
acy’
)•
Lib
eral
eco
nom
y w
ith
mon
opol
ies
and
olig
opol
ies
mai
nly
in t
he e
nerg
y,
tele
com
mun
icat
ions
, ce
men
t, e
lect
roni
c m
edia
an
d re
tail
sect
ors
• V
ery
sign
ifica
nt in
form
al
sect
or•
Ram
pant
cor
rupt
ion
• Po
wer
ful o
rgan
ised
cri
min
al
gang
s th
at f
requ
entl
y co
ntro
l pol
itic
s as
wel
l•
Gen
eral
impu
nity
for
hum
an r
ight
s ab
uses
• R
ural
: agr
icul
ture
(e
.g. o
nion
, cuc
umbe
r,
chill
i pep
per,
coff
ee,
suga
r, to
bacc
o), m
inin
g,
food
pro
cess
ing
• U
rban
: man
ufac
turi
ng,
cons
truc
tion
, tou
rism
, do
mes
tic
serv
itud
e, c
hild
ca
re, f
orce
d be
ggin
g, s
tree
t ve
ndin
g•
Pre
vale
nt in
the
info
rmal
se
ctor
• P
arti
cula
rly
vuln
erab
le t
o fo
rced
labo
ur: w
omen
, ch
ildre
n, in
dige
nous
pe
rson
s, p
erso
ns w
ith
men
tal a
nd p
hysi
cal
disa
bilit
ies,
LG
BT
I, a
nd
mig
rant
s; e
xtre
mel
y lo
w
wag
es, o
ften
bon
ded
labo
ur,
rest
rict
ed p
hysi
cal m
obili
ty,
inhu
man
wor
king
co
ndit
ions
•
For
ced
crim
inal
ity
by
orga
nise
d cr
imin
al g
roup
s:
peop
le fo
rced
to
act
as
assa
ssin
s, lo
okou
ts, a
nd
wor
k in
the
dru
gs b
usin
ess
• C
hild
ren:
com
mer
cial
se
xual
exp
loit
atio
n,
espe
cial
ly in
hol
iday
res
ort
tow
ns•
Sexu
al a
buse
and
ext
rem
e vi
olen
ce a
lso
in g
over
nmen
t in
stit
utio
ns fo
r th
e di
sabl
ed,
drug
reh
abili
tati
on c
entr
es
and
wom
en’s
shel
ters
ILO
C02
9, 0
87, 0
98 (
will
ent
er
into
forc
e on
23
Nov
embe
r 20
19),
100
, 105
, 111
, 138
, 182
• St
reng
then
labo
ur la
w
(inc
ludi
ng c
hild
labo
ur)
enfo
rcem
ent,
inve
stig
atio
n an
d pr
osec
utio
n at
sm
alle
r en
terp
rise
s, in
the
agr
icul
tu
ral a
nd c
onst
ruct
ion
sect
ors
and
in g
ener
al in
the
in
form
al e
cono
my
• In
crea
se id
enti
ficat
ion
of
and
prov
ide
serv
ices
for
vict
ims
• A
lloca
te m
ore
fund
s fo
r th
e ab
ove
• C
omba
t co
rrup
tion
and
of
ficia
l com
plic
ity
• C
omba
t or
gani
sed
crim
inal
gr
oups
Eco
nom
ic a
nd p
olit
ical
sy
stem
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Indu
stry
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Nat
ure
of a
buse
Rel
evan
t le
gisl
atio
n
Pote
ntia
l are
a of
act
ion
App
endi
x 1.
Con
tinu
ed.
30 Agnes Simic and Brad K. Blitz
Mya
nmar
(11)
•
Sem
ide
moc
rati
c re
gim
e w
ith
stro
ng m
ilita
ry p
ower
•
Fas
tgr
owin
g ‘p
reda
tory
’ m
arke
t ec
onom
y (l
owc
ost,
lo
wv
alue
add
ed, a
nd
larg
evo
lum
e su
pplie
s w
ith
shor
ter
lead
tim
es)
wit
h pr
oduc
tion
of
garm
ents
as
a ke
y ec
onom
ic a
ctiv
ity
• O
ffici
al c
ompl
icit
y an
d co
erci
on in
to fo
rced
labo
ur
of c
ivili
ans
• E
xtre
me
unde
rnut
riti
on
• St
ate
and
ethn
ic a
rmed
fo
rces
, pre
ciou
s st
one
min
ing
(e.g
. jad
e),
agri
cult
ure
(pal
m o
il,
rubb
er),
rip
aria
n fis
hing
, se
x tr
affic
king
, dom
esti
c se
rvit
ude
• C
hild
ren:
sta
te a
nd e
thni
c ar
med
forc
es, s
ex t
raffi
ck
ing,
forc
ed la
bour
in
teas
hops
, sm
all b
usin
esse
s,
agri
cult
ure,
con
stru
ctio
n,
begg
ing,
dom
esti
c se
rvit
ude
• C
ivili
ans
(mos
tly
men
) co
erce
d by
offi
cial
s, s
tate
ar
med
forc
es in
to fo
rced
la
bour
of
any
type
: cl
eani
ng, c
ooki
ng, p
ublic
in
fras
truc
ture
, als
o th
roug
h so
cal
led
‘sel
fre
lianc
e’
polic
y: p
eopl
e fo
rced
to
prov
ide
for
thei
r ow
n fo
od
and
labo
ur f
rom
nea
rby
com
mun
itie
s•
Ram
pant
labo
ur e
xplo
it
atio
n: lo
w p
ay, l
ow
unio
nisa
tion
, exc
essi
ve
over
tim
e, d
ire
wor
king
co
ndit
ions
esp
. in
smal
ler
fact
orie
s•
Chi
ld s
oldi
er r
ecru
itm
ent
and
use,
inti
mid
atio
n,
phys
ical
thr
eats
and
abu
ses,
ar
bitr
ary
taxa
tion
, pr
osec
utio
n an
d de
fam
atio
n w
hen
dese
rtin
g•
For
ced
conc
ubin
ism
, es
peci
ally
fro
m e
thni
c m
inor
itie
s, o
ften
to
fore
ign
men
• A
buse
of
wor
ker’s
dru
g (m
ainl
y op
iate
) ad
dict
ion
• H
igh
risk
gro
ups:
eth
nic
grou
ps, o
ften
inte
rnal
ly
disp
lace
d an
d st
atel
ess
(Roh
ingy
a, e
tc.)
ILO
C02
9, 0
87, 1
82, C
RC
, C
RC
Opt
iona
l Pro
toco
l (C
RC
AC
) an
d P
aler
mo
Pro
toco
l
• E
nhan
ce g
over
nanc
e an
d la
w e
nfor
cem
ent
in r
elat
ion
to fo
rced
labo
ur
• C
omba
t co
rrup
tion
and
of
ficia
l com
plic
ity
• St
op o
ffici
al im
plic
atio
n in
co
erci
ng c
ivili
ans
to a
ny
type
s of
forc
ed la
bour
• St
op r
ecru
itin
g an
d us
ing
child
ren
in a
rmed
forc
es,
and
late
r pu
nish
ing
for
thei
r ac
tivi
ties
don
e in
forc
ed
labo
ur
• E
nhan
ce p
rose
cuti
on a
nd
conv
icti
on o
f pe
rpet
rato
rs
• St
reng
then
vic
tim
id
enti
ficat
ion
and
prot
ecti
on•
Allo
cate
fun
ding
for
the
abov
e
Eco
nom
ic a
nd p
olit
ical
sy
stem
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Indu
stry
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Nat
ure
of a
buse
Rel
evan
t le
gisl
atio
n
Pote
ntia
l are
a of
act
ion
App
endi
x 1.
Con
tinu
ed.
The modern slavery regime: a critical evaluation 31
Nep
al (1
2)
• T
rans
itio
n fr
om m
onar
chy
to f
eder
al d
emoc
rati
c re
publ
ic•
Fra
gile
law
and
gov
erna
nce,
w
eak
infr
astr
uctu
re•
Polit
ical
inst
abili
ty•
Offi
cial
com
plic
ity
in
mod
ern
slav
ery
• O
ne o
f th
e w
orld
’s po
ores
t co
untr
ies
• N
atur
al d
isas
ter
zone
(e
.g. 2
015
deva
stat
ing
eart
hqua
ke)
• R
ural
: agr
icul
ture
, bri
ck
kiln
s, m
ines
• U
rban
: con
stru
ctio
n,
fact
orie
s, d
omes
tic
wor
k,
sex
wor
k, b
eggi
ng, a
dult
en
tert
ainm
ent
indu
stry
.•
Chi
ld la
bour
: agr
icul
ture
, br
ick
kiln
s, s
tone
bre
akin
g,
dom
esti
c se
rvit
ude,
em
broi
dere
d te
xtile
and
ca
rpet
indu
stry
, for
ced
begg
ing,
rec
yclin
g,
tran
spor
tati
on, e
nter
tain
m
ent
sect
ors
• P
reva
lenc
e of
bon
ded
labo
ur (
esp.
re.
tho
se
wor
king
in G
ulf
coun
trie
s)•
Wom
en: e
arly
and
forc
ed
mar
riag
es, a
rran
ged
mar
riag
es w
ith
Chi
nese
and
So
uth
Kor
ean
men
. E
xper
ienc
e fr
eque
ntly
do
mes
tic
viol
ence
, dom
esti
c se
rvit
ude,
hig
hly
rest
rict
ed
phys
ical
mob
ility
, dow
ryr
ela
ted
viol
ence
•
Chi
ldre
n: s
ex t
raffi
ckin
g an
d se
xual
exp
loit
atio
n of
ch
ildre
n in
dan
ce b
ars,
m
assa
ge p
arlo
urs,
cab
in
rest
aura
nts;
in o
ther
sec
tors
, lo
ng w
orki
ng h
ours
, un
heal
thy
envi
ronm
ents
ca
usin
g he
alth
pro
blem
s,
carr
ying
hea
vy lo
ads
• So
cio
econ
omic
and
lega
l di
scri
min
atio
n ag
ains
t w
omen
, mem
bers
of
cert
ain
ethn
ic g
roup
s, u
ntou
chab
les
• In
tern
ally
dis
plac
ed a
fter
20
15 e
arth
quak
e pa
rtic
ula
rly
vuln
erab
le
ILO
C02
9, 0
98, 1
00, 1
05, 1
11,
138,
182
, CR
C, C
RC
Opt
iona
l P
roto
cols
• St
reng
then
gov
erna
nce
• E
nabl
e w
omen
to
mig
rate
th
roug
h of
ficia
l cha
nnel
s to
pr
even
t ill
egal
mig
rati
on
and
subs
eque
nt
vuln
erab
ility
• C
omba
t co
rrup
tion
and
of
ficia
l com
plic
ity
in fo
rced
la
bour
.•
Incr
ease
vic
tim
iden
tific
ati
on, d
est
igm
atiz
atio
n of
vi
ctim
s, a
nd m
ale
vict
im
prot
ecti
on b
oth
in N
epal
an
d ab
road
Eco
nom
ic a
nd p
olit
ical
sy
stem
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Indu
stry
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Nat
ure
of a
buse
Rel
evan
t le
gisl
atio
n
Pote
ntia
l are
a of
act
ion
App
endi
x 1.
Con
tinu
ed.
32 Agnes Simic and Brad K. Blitz
Per
u (1
3)
• E
mer
ging
dem
ocra
cy w
ith
stro
ng p
ower
s of
the
ex
ecut
ive
• M
arke
tba
sed
econ
omy
• O
ffici
al c
ompl
icit
y in
m
oder
n sl
aver
y•
Ver
y si
gnifi
cant
info
rmal
se
ctor
• Im
port
ant
guer
rilla
gro
up
acti
viti
es, n
atio
nal s
ecur
ity
conc
erns
•
Wor
ld’s
prim
e pr
oduc
er o
f co
cain
e •
Ris
k of
nat
ural
dis
aste
rs
(e.g
. floo
ding
)
• R
ural
: agr
icul
ture
(c
oca–
coca
ine)
, log
ging
, le
gal a
nd il
lega
l gol
d m
inin
g (a
nd r
elat
ed s
ervi
ces)
, bri
ck
mak
ing
(ille
gal)
, fac
tori
es,
sex
wor
k •
Urb
an: f
orce
d be
ggin
g,
stre
et v
endi
ng, d
omes
tic
serv
ice,
sex
wor
k
• H
igh
risk
gro
ups:
indi
ge
nous
peo
ple,
wom
en,
rura
l poo
r, L
GB
TI,
po
pula
tion
livi
ng c
lose
to
illeg
al m
inin
g si
tes
and
rece
nt V
enez
uela
n m
igra
nts
• In
min
ing
sect
or: e
.g. f
orce
d la
bour
, mis
lead
ing
recr
uitm
ent
prac
tice
s, d
ebt
bond
age,
res
tric
ted
phys
ical
m
obili
ty, n
o or
late
pay
men
t of
wag
es, t
hrea
ts a
nd u
se o
f ph
ysic
al v
iole
nce
• Se
x tr
affic
king
and
sex
w
ork:
adu
lts
and
child
ren
affe
cted
, rec
ruit
men
t th
roug
h fa
lse
offe
rs, b
onde
d la
bour
, res
tric
ted
phys
ical
m
obili
ty (
if c
lose
to
min
ing
site
s: in
rem
ote
area
s).
• C
hild
ren:
sex
wor
k, fo
rced
cr
imin
al a
ctiv
itie
s su
ch a
s dr
ugr
elat
ed (
prod
ucti
on
and
tran
spor
tati
on o
f co
cain
e) o
r te
rror
ism
re
late
d, fo
rced
beg
ging
and
st
reet
sel
ling
ILO
C02
9, 0
87, 0
98, 1
00, 1
05,
111,
138
, 182
, CR
C, C
RC
O
ptio
nal P
roto
cols
and
P
aler
mo
Pro
toco
• St
reng
hten
law
enf
orce
men
t an
d cr
ime
pros
ecut
ion
• In
crea
se c
omm
unic
atio
n an
d co
oper
atio
n w
ithi
n th
e ex
ecut
ive
at d
iffer
ent
leve
ls
of g
over
nanc
e —
reg
iona
l an
d na
tion
al
• C
omba
t co
rrup
tion
and
of
ficia
l com
plic
ity
• St
reng
then
vic
tim
id
enti
ficat
ion,
pro
tect
ion
and
soci
al r
eint
egra
tion
•
Allo
cate
mor
e fu
nds
to
com
bat
mod
ern
slav
ery
• P
rovi
de t
rain
ings
to
offic
ials
de
alin
g w
ith
mod
ern
slav
ery
Eco
nom
ic a
nd p
olit
ical
sy
stem
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Indu
stry
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Nat
ure
of a
buse
Rel
evan
t le
gisl
atio
n
Pote
ntia
l are
a of
act
ion
App
endi
x 1.
Con
tinu
ed.
The modern slavery regime: a critical evaluation 33
Vie
tnam
(14)
•
One
par
ty c
omm
unis
t di
ctat
orsh
ip•
Fas
tgr
owin
g an
d in
crea
sin
gly
mar
ket
orie
nted
ec
onom
y•
Mix
ed e
cono
my:
sta
te
mon
opol
ies
(sti
ll in
m
ajor
ity)
, pri
vate
ent
er
pris
es a
nd jo
int
stoc
k•
Lar
ge in
form
al s
ecto
r•
Stat
e im
plic
ated
in fo
rced
la
bour
: e.g
. in
drug
re
habi
litat
ion
cent
res;
als
o,
offic
ial c
ompl
icit
y in
m
oder
n sl
aver
y•
Ram
pant
cor
rupt
ion
• St
ate
drug
reh
abili
tati
on
cent
res:
forc
ed la
bour
• R
ural
: pri
vate
gol
d m
ines
• U
rban
: for
ced
stre
et
haw
king
and
beg
ging
, in
form
al g
arm
ent
and
bric
k fa
ctor
ies,
dom
esti
c se
rvit
ude,
tou
rism
(se
x w
ork)
• H
igh
risk
gro
ups:
und
ocu
men
ted
mig
rant
s, e
thni
c m
inor
itie
s (e
sp. i
n ru
ral a
nd
mou
ntai
nous
are
as),
di
sabl
ed, a
nd w
omen
•
Wor
king
abr
oad:
deb
t bo
ndag
e (e
xces
sive
re
crui
tmen
t fe
es fo
r fo
reig
n w
ork)
, pas
spor
t co
nfisc
ati
on, t
hrea
t of
dep
orta
tion
of
the
und
ocum
ente
d;
arra
nged
inte
rnat
iona
l m
arri
ages
or
wor
k in
fo
reig
n re
stau
rant
s, m
assa
ge
parl
ours
and
kar
aoke
bar
s:
dom
esti
c se
rvit
ude,
forc
ed
sexu
al w
ork
• Se
x tr
affic
king
: bot
h w
omen
an
d ch
ildre
n, d
ecei
tful
em
ploy
men
t ch
ance
s su
ch
as s
ellin
g th
em t
o br
othe
ls
on t
he b
orde
rs•
Org
an h
arve
stin
g•
Gir
ls: b
ride
kid
napp
ing
in
rura
l are
as
ILO
C02
9, 0
98, 1
00, 1
05, 1
11,
138,
182
• St
reng
then
inte
rage
ncy
coor
dina
tion
wit
hin
the
exec
utiv
e •
Impr
ove
forc
ed la
bour
and
vi
ctim
iden
tific
atio
n an
d pr
osec
utio
n •
Com
bat
offic
ial c
ompl
icit
y •
Pro
visi
on o
f tr
aini
ng t
o of
ficia
ls o
n ta
cklin
g fo
rced
la
bour
• A
war
enes
s ra
isin
g am
ong
the
popu
lati
on
Eco
nom
ic a
nd p
olit
ical
sy
stem
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Indu
stry
whe
re a
buse
may
oc
cur
Nat
ure
of a
buse
Rel
evan
t le
gisl
atio
n
Pote
ntia
l are
a of
act
ion
App
endi
x 1.
Con
tinu
ed.
34 Agnes Simic and Brad K. Blitz
Sour
ce o
f da
ta:
1:
Ban
glad
esh:
Vau
ghn
et a
l. (2
019)
; htt
ps://
ww
w.b
bc.c
o.uk
/new
s/w
orld
sou
tha
sia
1265
0940
; htt
ps://
ww
w.b
tip
roje
ct.o
rg/fi
lead
min
/file
s/B
TI/
Dow
nloa
ds/R
epor
ts/2
018/
pdf/
BT
I_20
18_B
angl
ades
h.pd
f; h
ttps
://w
ww
.sta
te.g
ov/d
ocum
ents
/org
aniz
atio
n/28
2800
2:
Bra
zil:
Glo
bal S
lave
ry I
ndex
. C
ount
ry S
tudi
es: B
razi
l: ht
tps:
//ww
w.g
loba
lsla
very
inde
x.or
g/20
18/fi
ndin
gs/c
ount
rys
tudi
es/b
razi
l/
3: C
hina
: Glo
bal S
lave
ry I
ndex
. Cou
ntry
Stu
dies
: Chi
na. h
ttps
://w
ww
.glo
bals
lave
ryin
dex.
org/
2018
/find
ings
/cou
ntry
stu
dies
/chi
na/
4:
Dom
inic
an R
epub
lic: h
ttps
://w
ww
.fre
ethe
slav
es.n
et/w
here
we
wor
k/do
min
ican
rep
ublic
/; ht
tps:
//ww
w.f
reed
omun
ited
.org
/new
s/se
xtr
affic
king
dom
inic
anr
epub
lic/;
http
s://
ww
w.o
pend
emoc
racy
.net
/bey
onds
lave
ry/r
al
zecc
aca
stel
/ext
orte
dan
dex
ploi
ted
hait
ian
labo
urer
son
dom
inic
ans
ugar
pla
ntat
i; ht
tps:
//ww
w.r
eute
rs.c
om/a
rtic
le/u
sdo
min
ica
nse
xcri
mes
/chi
lds
ext
ouri
sts
dod
irty
bus
ines
sw
ith
impu
nity
in
dom
inic
anr
epub
lici
dUSK
BN
1972
7B; h
ttps
://w
ww
.wor
ldba
nk.o
rg/e
n/co
untr
y/do
min
ican
repu
blic
/ove
rvie
w;
http
s://w
ww
.bti
pro
ject
.org
/file
adm
in/fi
les/
BT
I/D
ownl
oads
/Rep
orts
/201
8/pd
f/B
TI_
2018
_Dom
inic
an_R
epub
lic.p
df; h
ttps
://w
ww
.sta
te.g
ov/d
ocum
ents
/org
aniz
atio
n/27
7571
.pd
f.
5: G
hana
: htt
ps://
ww
w.b
tip
roje
ct.o
rg/fi
lead
min
/file
s/B
TI/
Dow
nloa
ds/R
epor
ts/2
018/
pdf/
BT
I_20
18_G
hana
; htt
ps://
ww
w.s
tate
.gov
/doc
umen
ts/o
rgan
izat
ion/
2772
49.p
df h
ttps
://w
ww
.dol
.gov
/sit
es/d
efau
lt/fi
les/
docu
men
ts/il
ab/C
hild
Lab
orR
epor
t.pd
f
6: I
ndia
: Gob
al S
lave
ry I
ndex
. Cou
ntry
Stu
dies
: Ind
ia. h
ttps
://w
ww
.glo
bals
lave
ryin
dex.
org/
2018
/find
ings
/cou
ntry
stu
dies
/indi
a/
7: I
ndon
esia
: htt
ps://
ww
w.b
bc.c
o.uk
/new
s/w
orld
asi
apa
cific
149
2123
8; h
ttps
://w
ww
.bti
pro
ject
.org
/file
adm
in/fi
les/
BT
I/D
ownl
oads
/Rep
orts
/201
8/pd
f/B
TI_
2018
_Ind
ones
ia.p
df;
http
s://w
ww
.ilo.
org/
wcm
sp5/
grou
ps/p
ublic
/
ed_n
orm
/
decl
arat
ion/
docu
men
ts/p
ublic
atio
n/w
cms_
2144
72.p
df; M
ason
et
al. 2
015;
htt
ps://
indo
nesi
a.io
m.in
t/si
tes/
defa
ult/
files
/Hum
an%
20T
raffi
ckin
g%2C
%20
For
ced%
20L
abou
r%20
and%
20F
ishe
ries
%20
Cri
me%
20in
%20
the%
20In
done
sian
%20
Fis
hing
%20
Indu
stry
%20
%20
IOM
%20
.
8: J
amai
ca: C
ruz
et a
l. (2
019)
; htt
ps://
ww
w.s
tate
.gov
/doc
umen
ts/o
rgan
izat
ion/
2828
02.p
df; h
ttps
://w
ww
.bti
pro
ject
.org
/en/
repo
rts/
coun
try
repo
rts/
deta
il/it
c/JA
M/
9:
Mal
aysi
a: h
ttps
://w
ww
.bti
pro
ject
.org
/file
adm
in/fi
les/
BT
I/D
ownl
oads
/Rep
orts
/201
8/pd
f/B
TI_
2018
_Mal
aysi
a.pd
f; h
ttps
://w
ww
.the
guar
dian
.com
/glo
bal
deve
lop
men
t/20
18/d
ec/0
9/nh
sru
bber
glo
ves
mad
ein
mal
aysi
anf
acto
ries
acc
used
of
forc
edl
abou
r; h
ttp:
//ver
ite.
org/
wp
cont
ent/
uplo
ads/
2016
/11/
Ver
iteF
orce
dLab
orM
alay
sian
Ele
ctro
nics
2014
; htt
p://w
ww
.rhs
ansf
ront
iere
s.or
g/en
/183
to
see/
276
forc
edl
abor
in
mal
aysi
a
10: M
exic
o: h
ttps
://w
ww
.sta
te.g
ov/d
ocum
ents
/org
aniz
atio
n/27
7589
; htt
ps://
ww
w.s
tate
.gov
/doc
umen
ts/o
rgan
izat
ion/
2828
02.p
df; h
ttps
://w
ww
.bti
pro
ject
.org
/fil
eadm
in/fi
les/
BT
I/D
ownl
oads
/Rep
orts
/201
8/pd
f/B
TI_
2018
_Mex
ico.
11
: Mya
nmar
: Vau
ghn
et a
l. (2
019)
; htt
ps://
ww
w.s
tate
.gov
/doc
umen
ts/o
rgan
izat
ion/
2828
00.p
df; h
ttps
://w
ww
.bbc
.co.
uk/n
ews/
wor
lda
sia
paci
fic1
2990
563;
htt
ps://
ww
w.
bti
proj
ect.
org/
filea
dmin
/file
s/B
TI/
Dow
nloa
ds/R
epor
ts/2
018/
pdf/
BT
I_20
18_M
yanm
ar.p
df
12: N
epal
: htt
ps://
ww
w.s
tate
.gov
/doc
umen
ts/o
rgan
izat
ion/
2828
03.p
df; h
ttps
://w
ww
.bbc
.co.
uk/n
ews/
wor
lds
outh
asi
a12
5114
55; h
ttps
://w
ww
.bti
pro
ject
.org
/file
adm
in/
files
/BT
I/D
ownl
oads
/Rep
orts
/201
8/pd
f/B
TI_
2018
_Nep
al.p
df; h
ttps
://w
ww
.sta
te.g
ov/d
ocum
ents
/org
aniz
atio
n/27
7533
.
13: P
eru:
htt
ps://
ww
w.s
tate
.gov
/doc
umen
ts/o
rgan
izat
ion/
2828
03.p
df; h
ttps
://w
ww
.bti
pro
ject
.org
/file
adm
in/fi
les/
BT
I/D
ownl
oads
/Rep
orts
/201
8/pd
f/B
TI_
2018
_Per
u.pd
f; h
ttps
://w
ww
.dol
.gov
/sit
es/d
efau
lt/fi
les/
docu
men
ts/il
ab/C
hild
Lab
orR
epor
t.pd
f
14: V
ietn
am: h
ttps
://w
ww
.sta
te.g
ov/d
ocum
ents
/org
aniz
atio
n/28
2804
; htt
ps://
ww
w.b
bc.c
o.uk
/new
s/w
orld
asi
apa
cific
165
6731
5; h
ttps
://w
ww
.bti
pro
ject
.org
/fil
eadm
in/fi
les/
BT
I/D
ownl
oads
/Rep
orts
/201
8/pd
f/B
TI_
2018
_Vie
tnam
App
endi
x 1.
Con
tinu
ed.