1

WORKINGPAPER

Victims’NeedsAssessmentAuthor: DilianaMarkova

Publicationof: LaStradaInternationaland

AnimusAssociationFoundation

2018

2

WORKINGPAPER

VICTIMS’NEEDSASSESSMENT

3

PublishedbyLaStradaInternational,Postbus15865,1001NJAmsterdamTheNetherlands,www.lastradainternational.orgCopyright: “All rights reserved. The contents of this publication may be freely used and copied foreducationalandothernon-commercialpurposes,providedthatanysuchreproductionisaccompaniedbyanacknowledgementofLaStradaInternationalasthesource.”Citeas:LaStradaInternationalandAnimusAssociationFoundation,WorkingPaper:Victims’NeedsAssessment,August2018.

Acknowledgements

LaStradaInternationalandAnimusAssociationFoundationwouldliketothankthemainauthorDilianaMarkova,fordraftingthispaper,developedintheframeworkoftheEuropeanprojectJusticeatLast–EuropeanActionforcompensationforvictimsofcrime.

ThisprojectisfundedbytheEuropeanUnion’sJusticeProgram(2014-2020)andananonymousdonor.

Thecontentof thispaperrepresentstheviewsof theauthoronlyand isLaStrada International’sandAnimus Association Foundation’s sole responsibility. The European Commission does not accept anyresponsibilityforusethatmaybemadeoftheinformationitcontains.

All partners of the Justice at Last Consortium have contributed to this assessments by collectingcompensation cases and providing other data and consultation. They and other experts furtherparticipatedinafocusgroupmeetingheldonJune7,2018inVienna,Austria.

4

ContentsAcknowledgements......................................................................................................................................3

Introduction.................................................................................................................................................5

Methodology................................................................................................................................................6

TheRighttoCompensationforVictimsofCrime.........................................................................................7

GeneralBarriersandGoodPracticesforAccessingCompensation.............................................................9

BarriersandgoodpracticesinAncillaryRightstotheRighttoCompensation..........................................13

Righttoreceiveinformation..................................................................................................................13

AccesstoServices...................................................................................................................................15

IndividualNeedsAssessment.................................................................................................................17

SpecialisedLegalAssistanceandRepresentationforVictimsofCrime.................................................19

Conclusion..................................................................................................................................................23

References..................................................................................................................................................24

5

Introduction

ThisassessmentreportiswrittenintheframeworkoftheprojectJusticeatLast–AccesstoCompensationforVictimsofCrime,aprojectofLaStrada International.This ispartofa threefoldassessmenteffort,which examines: a. legal practices in compensation claims of trafficked and exploited persons, b.cooperationinaccesstocompensationincrossbordercontext,andc.victims’needsrelatedtoobtainingcompensation.

Thereportisbasedondeskresearch,10questionnairesand60casedescriptionsprovidedbytheprojectpartners,1aswellasthefocusgroupdiscussionswith46participantsinthefocusgroupmeetingheldinViennainJune2018.

1 Project partners are from the following countries: Austria, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Germany, Ireland,Macedonia(FYROM),theNetherlands,Romania,Serbia,andSpain.

6

Methodology

Theresearchcomprisesdeskresearch,followedbyananalysisofcollectedcountryandcasedescriptions.Initialandpreliminaryfindingswerevalidatedandelaboratedduringfocusgroupdiscussions.

ThedeskresearchbuiltonthefindingsoftheCOMP.ACTprojectof2009-2012.Similartothepresentproject, the COMP.ACT project included country studies by the project partners, who filled inquestionnairesandcollectedcasestudies.Itwasnotjusttheapproachthatwassimilar,however,butalsothemajorityof thecountriesunderstudywerethesame.Austria,Bulgaria,CzechRepublic,Germany,Ireland,Macedonia (FYROM), theNetherlands, and Spain participated in both projects’ research. ThepresentJusticeatLastproject includesadditionaldatafromRomaniaandSerbia,whiletheCOMP.ACTprojectof2012gainedinformationfromsixotherEuropeancountries.

The second sourceof data is the country and casedescriptions. Initially, itwasplanned toprepare atemplateforthecollectionofcasedescriptiontofeedsolelyintotheassessmentonLegalProcedures,and toprepare aquestionnaire for use solely in theother twoassessments, onVictimNeeds andonReferral. However, the overlap between the topics under research made it more logical to includequestions and elements that were relevant to all three assessments in both documents. The twodocumentswerepreparedbytheresearchersandLaStradaInternational.Inspirationforthequestionswas found in the COMP.ACT research template and questionnaires, and the BAN-2 Tool2. The casedescriptions includeda typologyofoffences,and registered the legal route taken toclaimandobtaincompensation,thereasonsbehindthischoice,anditsoutcomes.Allprojectconsortiumpartnersprovideda questionnaire with country information, and 3 to 10 case descriptions of compensation claims. TopreventanyoverlapwiththeCOMP.ACTreport,onlycasesofafter2012wereused.

Despitethesignificantnumberofcasescollected(60cases),thesearenotnecessarilyrepresentativefortheoverallsituationinEurope.Instead,theyreflecttheexperience,practiceandknowledgeoftheNGOpartners in the project and of other stakeholders. The NGO partners are specialised civil societyorganizationswithyearsofexperienceinworkingwithandfortraffickedpersons,primarilywithadultsand/orvictimsofothercrimes.Themajorityofcaseshenceconcerntraffickedandexploitedmenandwomen,withonlyacoupleofcasesinvolvingchildren.Toensuretheprivacyofthepersonswhosecasewasdescribed,thecollectedcaseswereanonymisedusingnumbers.

Thethirddatasourcewastheinputofstakeholdersgainedduringthefocusgroupdiscussionsheldon7JuneinVienna,Austria.Atotalof46participantsjoinedthediscussions:NGOs,lawyers,prosecutors,andEuropeandecisionmakers.Unfortunately,itwasnotpossibletoensurelawenforcementrepresentationtothefocusgroupmeeting.Thisgroupwillbetargetedduringotheractivitiesoftheproject.

2BalkanActNow(BAN)II,isthesecondBANprojectcoordinatedbytheSerbianbasedNGOASTRAintheperiod2014-2016tostimulateantitraffickingactionindifferentBalkancountriesincludingMacedonia,Montenegro,BosniaHerzegovinaandSerbia.Theprojectdevelopedamonitoringtooltomonitorcomplianceinlawandpracticeofthese4countrieswithEuropeananti-traffickinglegislation.Onepartofthistoolfocussesontherighttocompensationonpaperandinpractice.

7

TheRighttoCompensationforVictimsofCrime

Compensationisaformofreparationtooffsetdamagesustainedasaresultofaninfringementoflegalrights.Itisaninternationallyrecognizedrightoftraffickedpersonsandothervictimsofviolentcrimes.MostEuropeancountrieshavelegalprovisionsforvictimsofcrimetoclaimcompensationortootherwisebecompensatedformaterialandnon-materialdamage.However,evenwhenthelegalframeworkisinplace,therightsofpeoplewhobecamevictimoftraffickingorothercrimestoactuallyseekandobtaincompensationremainsdifficultorimpossibletoexerciseinpractice.Evidenceshowsthatveryfewvictimshavetheinformationandthemeanstoseekcompensation.Evenfeweractuallyreceiveacompensationpayment.

BothCouncilofEurope(CoE)andEuropeanUnion(EU)lawprovideforcompensationforcrimevictims.Thisobligationresultsfromthe“harmarisingfromtheinfringementofrights,whichitwastheState’sdutytoprotectbutwhichitwasnotabletoguarantee”.3

TherighttocompensationwasfirstlyenvisagedundertheEuropeanConventionontheCompensationofVictimsofViolentCrimesof1983.4ItaimsparticularlyatintroducingschemesforthecompensationofvictimsbytheStatewhentheoffenderhasnotbeenidentifiedoriswithoutresources.5TheExplanatoryReporttothisConventionsimilarlypointsoutthatvictimsrarelyobtaincompensationfromtheoffender,inparticularbecauseoftheoffender'snon-apprehension,disappearanceorlackofmeans–somethingwhichtheexperienceoftheprojectpartnersalsoconfirms.DespitevariousprovisionsinMemberStatestoinduceoffenderstopaycompensation,inveryfewcasesiscompensationforinjuryactuallypaid.ThisiswhytheStateneedsdomoretoensurecompensationforvictimsofcrime.Stateinterventionisjustifiedongroundsof social solidarityandequity: since somevictimsaremorevulnerable,orunluckier, thanothers,theymustbecompensatedbythewholecommunityforanyinjurysustained.6

ThelateradoptedCouncilofEuropeConventiononActionagainstTraffickinginHumanBeingsof20057specificallyenvisagestherighttocompensationandlegalredressforvictimsofhumantrafficking(Article15). The compensation is pecuniary and covers both material injury (such as the cost of medicaltreatment)andnon-materialdamage(thesufferingexperienced).8Againitwasacknowledgedthateventhough the traffickers bear the burden of compensating the victims, in practice there is rarely (full)compensation paid.9 This is why Article 15(4) requires that State Parties take steps to guaranteecompensationofvictims.Paragraph4suggests‘settingupacompensationfundorintroducingmeasuresorprogrammesforsocialassistancetoandsocialintegrationofvictimsthatcouldbefundedbyassetsofcriminalorigin’.

3 OpinionofAdvocateGeneralLenzof6December1988inCJEU,C-186/87, IanWilliamCowanv.Trésorpublic,2February1989.

4CouncilofEurope,ConventionontheCompensationofVictimsofViolentCrimes,CETSNo.116,1983.5Preamble,CouncilofEurope,ConventionontheCompensationofVictimsofViolentCrimes,CETSNo.116,1983.6 Resolution (77) 27 on the Compensation of Victims of Crime (Adopted by the Committee ofMinisters on 28September1977,atthe25thmeetingoftheMinisters’Deputies)acceptedequityandsocialsolidarityasthebasicprinciplesofcompensation.

7CET197of16May2005.8ExplanatoryReporttotheCouncilofEuropeConventiononActionagainstTraffickinginHumanBeings,s.197.9Ibid.

8

EuropeanUnionLawalsospecificallyaddressescompensationforvictimsoftraffickingorvictimsofcrimein general. Under Article 17 of the EU Anti-Trafficking Directive 2011/36/EU10 Member States mustensurethatvictimsoftraffickinghaveaccesstocompensation.Likewise,Article16oftheVictims’RightsDirective of 201211 also addresses compensation, and the earlier 2004 EU Compensation Directive12establisheda systemof cooperation to facilitateaccess to compensation for victimsof crimes in (EU)cross-bordersituations.

Inviewoftheseextensiveguaranteesforvictims’righttocompensationasaneffectiveremedyforthedamagetheyhavesustained,itisworryingthatfewvictimsofhumantraffickingstillactuallyobtainanycompensationinpractice.

10Directive2011/36/EUoftheEuropeanParliamentandoftheCouncilof5April2011onpreventingandcombatingtraffickinginhumanbeingsandprotectingitsvictims,andreplacingCouncilFrameworkDecision2002/629/JHA.

11DIRECTIVE2012/29/EUOFTHEEUROPEANPARLIAMENTANDOFTHECOUNCILof25October2012establishingminimumstandardsontherights,supportandprotectionofvictimsofcrime,andreplacingCouncilFrameworkDecision2001/220/JHA.

12CouncilDirective2004/80/ECof29April2004relatingtocompensationtocrimevictims,OJ2004L26.

9

GeneralBarriersandGoodPracticesforAccessingCompensation

ConsortiumPartnersoftheproject indicatedanumberofobstaclesthatvictimsface inpracticewhenseekingcompensation.Thesevaryfromlengthyjudicialproceedingsandinsolvencyofperpetratorstonoaccesstolegalaidforsometypesofcompensationprocedures(e.g.civilorbeforealabourtribunal)orpoor quality of state-funded legal aid, or financial barriers such as costs for medical reports or forexecutionofjudgments.13

Whenvictimsof(severe) labourexploitationarenotformally identifiedasvictimofhumantrafficking,forcedlabour,oranothercriminalact,theircaseisdealtwithunderlabourlaw.Forcasesdealtwithbylabourtribunals,specificobstaclesmightoccur.Forexample,theburdenofproofisonthevictim,thereis often a lack of sufficient legal aid provided to victims, and employment tribunals do not providecompensationfornon-materialdamages.

Lackofregularstatusorworkpermit

Inaddition,thepossible irregularmigration/workingstatusdiscouragesvictimstoreportorfileformalcomplaintswithpoliceorlabourtribunals.AlthoughtheEUVictims’RightsDirectiveappliestoallvictimsofcrimeinanon-discriminatorymanner,includingforthosewithoutresidencestatus,manyvictimsstillfeartocomeforwardandreportbeingvictimofcrime.Evenwhenthelackofresidential/workingstatusisnotahindranceforseekingcompensationintheory,thereareoftennosafereportingmechanismsinplaceand it isoftenstill thedutyof theauthorities to reportaperson, if theygainknowledgeof theirregularstatusofaperson.Evenifthisdutyisnotalwaysornotautomaticallyexecutedbyauthorities,thedangerofarrest,detentionanddeportationpersistsandmightpreventirregularmigrantsfromfilingcomplaints,requestinglegalaidandapplyingforcompensationorunpaidwages.Moreover,duetotheirstatus as an undocumentedworker or irregular citizen, they also lack access in general to adequateinformationabouttheirlegalrightsandthepossibilitiestoclaimtheirrights.

Furthermore, in some countries, for example Ireland, there is legal uncertainty whether irregularemployedmigrants are entitled to redress for employment rights’ violations. This is an issue that iscurrently14pendingbeforetheIrishHighCourt.

Obstaclesrelatedtolegalprocedures

Inaddition,thelegalprocessingeneral,whetherlabour,criminalorotherprocedure,maynothelpvictimsas regards to their rehabilitationandmayevenexacerbate theiralreadyprecariouscondition.Victimssometimeshavetofacetheperpetrator,ordisclosepersonaldatathatputsatrisktheirsafetyandprivacy.Theyareoftensubjectedtoretraumatisationbeitduetoinsensitiveofficialsornumerousinterrogations.Althoughthisriskingeneralexistsforvictimswithinthelegalprocess,thecompensationclaimmightputmoreburdenandadditionallyrequirecertaininformationtobedisclosedfromthetraffickingsituation,whichintimidatesand/ormightfurtherharmtheperson.

13Forfurtherinformationonobstacleswhenseekingcompensation,pleaserefertotheJusticeatLastassessmentonlegalprocedures.

14CaseIE02andhttps://www.mrci.ie/scunapproved/

10

Sincecompensationisintendedandexpectedtoassistvictimsintheirrecoveryprocess,itisimportantthatitismadeavailableassoonaspossible.Therefore,thelegaland/oradministrativeproceduresinplaceshouldensure thatadecisionon compensation is reachedwithina reasonable time.15 This iswhyEUMemberStatesareencouragedtodevelopwaystospeedupproceedingsby,forexample,applyingtheadhesion procedure in criminal proceedings16 for compensation matters (instead of referring thecompensationclaimtocivilproceedings,wherevictimbearstheburdenofproofandpayscourtfees),orcompensationordersimposedbyjudges.17

TheJusticeatLastassessmentonLegalproceduresshowedthat,thoughthepossibilityexiststoadhereacompensationclaimtothecriminalprocedure,oftenthevictim’scompensationclaimisredirectedtocivilcourt,arguingwiththedisproportionateburdenonthecriminalprocess,thusforcingthevictimtogothroughthelegalprocesstwice.Thisalsoputsanadditionalfinancialburdenonthevictim.

Also, the NGO La Strada in the Czech Republic fears that realistically claiming damages within civilprocedure(whenreferredfromthecriminalprocedure)meansthatallprotectivemeasures(obligatory)usedinthecriminalproceedingswillnotbeemployedinthecivilproceedings.Itmeansthatincriminalproceedings,victimshavetherighttoasktheCourttopreventfacingtheoffenderinperson,victimscantestifyinadifferentroometc.However,whenthecriminalcourtreferstheclaimfordamagestothecivilprocedure,noneofthesemeasureswillbeemployed.

Whencompensationisawardedinacriminalprocedure,goodnationalpracticeinoneMemberState,theNetherlands,isfortheStatetopayawardedcompensationasanadvancepaymentandthentotakeuptheresponsibilitytorecovertheamountfromtheoffender.18AccordingtotheDutchNGOFairWork,‘forthevictimitisareliefthataftereightmonthstheStatewillpaythemthecompensation.Itavoidsthembeingconfrontedwiththeperpetratoreverymonthwhentheyreceivetheamountthathastobepaidbythem.Moreover,theydonothavetowaitforyearsbeforetheyhavereceivedthefullpaymentandarenolongerdependentonthetraffickers’willingnessandcapabilitytopay’.

Otherobstaclesanddilemmas

Ingeneral,compensationclaims,ifawarded,mayhavesomenegativefinancialeffectsonvictims,suchaslossofsocialbenefitsoranobligationtorepayfreelegalaid.Therearealsootherdilemmasrelatedwithclaimingcompensationfromoffenders.

15DGJUSTICEGUIDANCEDOCUMENTrelatedtothetranspositionandimplementationofDirective2012/29/EUoftheEuropeanParliamentandoftheCouncilof25October2012establishingminimumstandardsontherights,supportandprotectionofvictimsofcrime,andreplacingCouncilFrameworkDecision2001/220/JHA,December2013.

16Adhesionprocedure,adhesiveprocedureorancillaryproceedingsareaprocedurethroughwhichacourtcanruleoncompensationforthevictimofacriminaloffence.Ratherthanpursuingdamagesinaseparatecivilaction,thevictimfilesacivilclaimagainsttheoffenderasapartofacriminaltrial.

17 DG JUSTICE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT related to the transposition and implementation of the Victims’ RightsDirective,section56.

18DGJUSTICEGUIDANCEDOCUMENT,section57.

11

Incriminallawcompensationforvictimsofcrimeismostlytobeensuredfromtheoffender.Toassistthevictimsintheirrecoveryprocess,itseemsimportantthatcompensationispaid(directly)bytheoffender.19Withthisinmind,theEuropeanUnionhasstressedtheimportanceforStatestoenvisagemechanismsthatgiveoffendersan incentive topayadequatecompensationawards tovictims.20 Forexample, thepaymentofcompensationtothevictimbytheoffendercanbetakenintoaccountasaconditionforearlyrelease.InacasefromSerbia21theoffenderpaidtheawardedcompensationinmonthlyinstalments.Hewasstimulatedtodothisasinthiswayhewasincreasinghischancesforearlyparole.Itcanbequestionedthough whether it is positive that incentives are in place for traffickers who are required to paycompensation for criminal deeds, andwhether this does justice to the victims of these perpetrators.Besidesinfacttherealsovictimswhodonotwanttoobtaincompensationfromtraffickers,forexample,astheyperceiveitas“dirtymoney”.

In addition, claiming compensation by victims can also negatively influence the perception of theirvictimhood.Forexample,theNGOKOKinGermanyknowscaseswherevictimswereadvisedbylawyersnot toclaimcertain– realistic -amountsofcompensation incriminalproceedings for the fear to losecredibilityand toprevent tobe regardedas ‘profiting fromasituation’ (‘She isonlyafter themoney”argumentfromoffendersanddefenders)ortomakethejudgeunwillingtohonourtherequestedamount.

Moreover,anunguidedpaymentofanawardedhighamountofcompensationmoneymayjeopardizethevictim,ifthecauseofvulnerabilitydidnotchange.Themoneygrantedmayattractpersonskeentoexploitthe now rich victim. Focus group participants stated that it is important to provide guidance to therecipientofthecompensationaward,forinstancebyalawyerorNGO,topreventincreasedvulnerability(seeexamplebelow).

An interesting case22 of compensationawardedby theDutch court to aBulgarian victimofhumantrafficking illustrates another possible negative effect of compensation, namely heightenedvulnerabilityofthevictim.ThevictimwasgrantedEUR250,000.ShedidnothaveabankaccountsothecompensationwastransferredtoherDutchlawyer’sbankaccount.TheDutchlawyercontactedaBulgarianvictimsupportorganisationtoseekwaystotransferthemoneytothevictimwithoutposinganyrisktoher,suchastakingthemoneyawayfromher.ThevictimhadreturnedtoBulgariaandtothesameenvironmentwhereshewasexploitedinthepast.The Bulgarian victim support organisation assisted the victim in advising her of the high risk thatretrieving the compensation may cause. It put her into contact with a lawyer to discuss specificmodalitiesofreceivingthecompensation.Thevictimandthelawyeragreedthatthevictimwouldbereceivingregularmonthlysumsforherdailyexpenses.Incaseshewantstoinvestmoneyinpropertyorwouldneedanylargeramounts,shehastofileawrittenrequesttothatendwiththelawyer.Alltransactionswillbedealtwithby the lawyer (contracts,otherdocuments, inspectionofproperties,

19Thisseemstobethecaseingeneralforvictimsofviolentcrimes.However,forvictimsofhumantraffickingthismight not always be the case as theymay refuse to takemoney,which they know is earned by abusive andexploitativepractises,forexample.

20DGJUSTICEGUIDANCEDOCUMENT,section57.21CaseRS02.22ThecasewassharedbyaDutchlawyerspecialisedinsupportingvictimsofhumantrafficking.FurtherinformationwasprovidedbyAnimusAssociationFoundation,Bulgaria,whichassistedthevictiminensuringsafemechanismtoreceivetheawardedcompensation.

12

meetingwithpotentialbuyersetc.).Thisarrangementwaslaiddowninacontractbetweenthevictimandthelawyer.AcopyofthecontractwastranslatedandsenttotheDutchlawyerforapproval.Thecasestudyshowsthatlongterm(legal)assistancemightbeneededevenafterthecompensationwasexecutedandpaid,duetopossiblespecificneedsoftheindividual.

Thus, with little prospects of or incentives for obtaining compensation and a risk torevictimisation/retraumatisation,victimsofcrimearenotparticularlyencouragedtopursuetheirrights.Toguaranteevictims’righttocompensation,therefore,MemberStatesmustfirstguaranteethatthisright is accessible and effective in practice and that victims may exercise it without any risk ofrevictimisation.

13

BarriersandgoodpracticesinAncillaryRightstotheRighttoCompensation

Obstaclestoclaimingtherighttocompensationalsorelatedtoalackofaccesstootherancillaryrights.ItisnotbychancethattheCoEActionagainstTraffickinginHumanBeings(THB)promulgatestherighttocompensationbyrequiringfirstlyStatestoensurethatvictimsoftraffickingenjoyaccesstoancillaryrightssuchastherighttocompensation,includinginformationinalanguagethattheycanunderstand(Article15(1)),alongsidetherighttolegalassistanceandtofreelegalaid(Article15(2)).

RighttoreceiveinformationPeoplecannotclaimtheirrightsiftheydonotknowthem.Itisofparamountimportancethatvictimsareinformed about any procedures they can use to obtain compensation for damage suffered. It is alsoessentialthatvictimswhoareirregularlyresidinginthecountryareinformedoftheserights,aswellasrightsrelatedtothepossibilityofobtaininga(temporary)residencepermit,asitwouldbeverydifficultforthemtoobtaincompensationiftheywereunabletoremaininthecountrywheretheproceedingstakeplace.23

PursuanttoArticle15(1)oftheCoEActionagainstTHB,victimsmustbeinformedofrelevantproceduresasfromtheirfirstcontactwiththecompetentauthoritiessuchasthepolice,theprosecutor’soffice,thelabourinspectorate,orthecustomsorimmigrationservices.Itdoesnothavetobetheseserviceswhichsupplytherelevantinformationtovictims.However,assoonasvictimsareintouchwithsuchservices,theyneedtobedirectedtopersons,servicesororganisationsabletosupplythenecessaryinformation.24

TheVictims’RightsDirective(Article4)putsanobligationontheMemberStatestoensurethatvictimsreceiveinformationfromtheirfirstpointofcontactwithacompetentauthorityhowtoaccesstherightstheyareentitledto,suchasthetypeofsupporttheymayobtainandfromwhom,accesstomedicalandspecialist support, including psychological support, alternative accommodation, protection measures,legaladvice,compensation,etc.

TheCouncilDirective2004/80/ECrelatingtocompensationtocrimevictimsalsorequiresMemberStatestoensurethatpotentialapplicantshaveaccesstoessentialinformationonthepossibilitiestoapplyforcompensation(Article4).

Providing informationtocrimevictims inamanner that theycanunderstand isquitechallenging inpractice.Firstly,thereisthelanguagebarrier.Manyofthepartnerorganisationssharethattheprovisionof interpretation and translation services remain a serious challenge for the respective competentauthorities. Often information is provided in writing but in the official language of the country (ofdestination)andinaformaloroverlylegalisticway.

Secondly, it should be considered that, while one share of victims have fairly enabling backgrounds,anothershareofvictimsoftraffickinghavemultiplevulnerabilities.Thesemayincludeilliteracy,mental

23ExplanatoryReporttotheCouncilofEuropeConventiononActionagainstTraffickinginHumanBeings,s.192.24ExplanatoryReporttotheCouncilofEuropeConventiononActionagainstTraffickinginHumanBeings,s.194.

14

challenges, or having a background in a dysfunctional family or a violent society. Explaining thepracticalitiesofa(foreign)legalsystem,especiallyifcoupledwiththelanguage/interpretationproblem,maybechallengingtotheextentnottobeabletocomplywiththisrequirement.

Thirdly,althoughoftenalsotheNGOorserviceprovidermightbethefirstcontactandreferthevictimfurthertorelevantstakeholders,thefirstpointofcontactmaybethepolice,theprosecutor’soffice,orthemigrationauthoritiesatamomentwhenvictimsareinacrisisoraseverelyprecariouscondition.This,arguably,mightnotbethebestmomentto informapersonaboutrightsandproceduresthatmaybedifficulttocomprehendevenforapersoninaregularsituation.Partnerorganisationshaveindicatedthattherequirementtoprovidevictimswithinformationfromtheirfirstpointofcontactmaynotalwaysbetheoptimumwaytoensurevictims’rightsaremet,asmanyvictimsoftrafficking,forexample,duetotheseveretraumatheyhavesustained,arenotinapositiontocomprehendtheinformationtheyareprovidedimmediatelyuponexitingthetrafficking/crisissituation.Thus,althoughthevictimshouldbeinformedingeneralabout the legalprocedureandvictim’s rights, including the right tocompensation,as soonaspossible,practiceshowsthattoguaranteevictim’srights,thereshouldbeapossibilitytoexplainthelegaldetailsandoptionsatalaterstage,andmorethanoncesoastoensurethatvictimsactuallyunderstandtheirsituation,rightsandvenuestoproceed.

Fourthly, often victims receive information about their rights, e.g. compensationor legal aid, but notabouthowtoaccesstheminpractice(procedures,victimsupportorganisationstohelpthemoutetc.).

Inspiteofthebarriersexperiencedbythepartnerorganisations,theresearchalsobroughtupseveralgoodpractices.

A good practice described by the partner organisations is referral by the first point of contact to(specialized) victim support services/organisationswhere victims are rendered crisis intervention andpsychologicalcounselling.Afterovercomingthecrisissituation,socialworkers/psychologistschoosethebestmoment to informvictims furtherabout their rights,andwhat there isat stake in termsof legalprocedures, victims’ involvement, risks and consequences. It should be noted that not all victims areseverely traumatized, NGOs can also deal with victims of labour exploitation that show less signs oftrauma,butratherhavetocontinuetodealwithverydifficultcircumstancesduetolackofwork,housingfinancesortheirirregularstatus.

Those victim support organisations that have an in-house lawyer are of course best equipped andpositioned to informvictimsabout their rights ina tailor-madeandunderstandableway.An in-houselawyerwould be experienced inworkingwith victimsof crime and trainedhow to dealwith trauma,vulnerabilityetc.However,tokeepanin-houselawyermayturnouttobequiteexpensive.Nevertheless,evenifvictimsupportorganisationsdonothaveanin-houselawyer,providingtrainingtosocialworkersandpsychologistsattheorganisationaboutvictims’legalrightswouldensurethattheymanagetosendacrosscomplexinformationinanunderstandableway.

AgoodpracticesharedbyaSpanishjudge25 istoexplaintopeoplewithmentaldisabilitiestheirrightsthrough pictures and animated objects. This practice may be adaptable to victims with specificvulnerabilities or limitations (for various reasons such as language barriers, trauma sustained, crisissituation,etc.)

25JusticeatLastFocusgroupmeeting,7June,ViennaAustria

15

AnothergoodpracticeinrelationtotherighttoreceiveinformationandSpecializedLegalAssistanceandRepresentationofVictimsofabusewithmentaldisabilitiesistheservicemanagedbyFoundation“AlaPar”inMadridSpain.Theservice,calledUAVDI(AttentionUnittoVictimswithIntellectualDisability26),hasunderitsmaingoalsthefollowing:

• Assessmentofthecase(forensicandclinical),advicefordecision-making(protectionmeasures,reporting,legaladvice,etc.).

• Individual,familyandgrouppsychotherapy.

• Facilitator service,whose function is toguaranteeaccess to justice for thevictimunderequalconditions,proposingtheappropriateproceduraladjustments totheofficersof theCourtandprovidingthevictimwiththenecessarysupportinthepoliceandjudicialprocess.

• Legaladviceprovidingknowledgeandexperiencetothepersonwithintellectualdisability,theirrelativesandprofessionalstoguaranteethatitsparticipationinthejudicialprocessiswithalltheinformation,dulyadaptedandinthebestpossibleconditions.

• ShelterforwomenwithintellectualdisabilitiesvictimsofviolenceintheCommunityofMadrid(includingTHBVictims).

Anothergoodpractice is theuseof culturalmediators, especiallywhendealingwith (undocumented)migrants.Culturalmediatorscanbuildthebridgebetweendifferentlanguagesandbackgroundsofclientsononeside,andnationalinstitutionsontheother.

However,regardlessofhowhelpfulin-houselawyersandinterpretersand/orculturalmediatorsare,itisveryhardtoensuretheirserviceswithpublicfunding.Victimsupportorganisationsoftenhavetorelyonprojectfundingforsuchservicesormustdevotevaluableresourcestosecuresuchhelponaprobonobasisoratalowercost.

Toconclude,wherethereisagoodcooperationestablishedbetweencompetentauthorities(usuallythepolice) and victim support organisations (usually NGOs), police refer victims to the victim supportorganisations that in turnprovide crisis interventionandpsychological counselling and informvictimsabout their rights, including the right to seek compensation, at a moment when they deem mostopportune.

AccesstoServicesTheEUVictims’RightsDirective27expresslystipulatesthatMemberStatesmustensurethatvictimshaveaccesstoconfidentialgeneralandspecialistvictimsupportservicesfreeofcharge(Article8and9). Inaddition,thisaccessshouldnotbedependentonavictimmakingaformalcomplaintwithregardtoa

26AsfarasknownthisserviceisprovidedsolelyinMadridareaandforaspecifictypeofvictim–seehttps://www.alapar.org/servicios-para-personas-con-di/acompanamiento-terapeutico/unidad-de-atencion-a-victimas-con-discapacidad-intelectual-uavdi/

27 Applicable only to EUMember States hencenot to Serbia andMacedonia.However, participants from thesecountries in the focusgroupdiscussionheld in June2018 inViennashared that their respectivecountriesareworkingontransposingtheVictims’RightsDirectiverequirements.

16

criminaloffence.Thissupportcoversasaminimuminformation,adviceandsupportrelevanttotherightsof victims, including on access to national compensation schemes, and emotional and psychologicalsupport,aswellasappropriateaccommodationandtargetedsupportforvictimswithspecificneeds(e.g.victimsofgender-basedviolence,sexualordomesticviolence).

The effective provision of and access to support services is required, not only for the purposes ofcomplyingwiththeEUVictims’Directive,butalsoformeetingMemberStates’obligationsunderArticle47oftheEUCharterofFundamentalRights.

AccordingtoastudyoftheEuropeanAgencyforFundamentalRights(FRA),28mostMemberStatesprovidesomeformofgenericvictimsupportservices,andallMemberStatesprovidesupportservicestoatleastsomespecificgroupsof victims.TheVictims’RightsDirective further requires that funding to supportservicesshouldbecarriedoutinatransparentandobjectivemannerthatensuresaccesstovictimsupportservicesforall.

MemberStateshavedevelopeddifferentgenericvictimsupportstructures.29Broadlythedifferentmodelsfallinthefollowingmaincategories:1.structuresthatareState-runandfunded;2.thosethatareNGO-runbutrelystronglyonpublicfunding;and3.thosethatareNGOrunandrelymainlyonnon-statefundingsources.

Wherevictimsreceiveservicesfreeofcharge,organisationsinsomeMemberStatesmayreceivefinancialassistancebythestatetocovertheexpensesincurred.FRAresearchindicatesthat“in10MemberStates,atleastthelargestorganisationprovidingeithergenericorspecialisedvictimsupportmaybereimbursedbythestatefortheprovisionofsupport.Intheremaining18,organisationsdonotreceiveanyspecificreimbursement.However,themainserviceproviderin14oftheseMemberStatesisbothstate-runandstate-funded, or theNGO relies heavily on state funding. The largest organisations in these countriestherefore receive more general operational funding from the state, which can include payment forsupportservicesofferedtovictimsfreeofcharge".30

Yetpartnerorganisationsintheframeworkoftheprojectsharealessoptimisticpicture.Evenifthereisoperationalfundingfromthestate,itisoftenscarceorlimitedandonlycoversthebasicoperationalcosts.Thus,much needed assistance remains uncovered, or organisations have to rely on external (donor)funding tomeetspecificvictims’needsandtocomplywithEU legislation.Thesearemostoftencostsrelated to psychiatric help,medical expenses, forensic reports, interpretation, legal representation orcostsfortheexecutionoftheawardedcompensation(Bulgaria,Macedonia,andSerbia).Inrelationstrictlytocompensation,theseneeds/deficienciesareevenfurtherexacerbatedasproceduresmaybelengthyandrequirecontinuousandprolongedassistance,respectivelycostsincurred.

This insufficientpublic funding sometimes forcesorganisations tomake strategic choices. In addition,state fundingmight prioritize one typeof victimsof crimeover another, e.g. a representative of onecountrystatedthatvictimsofsexualexploitationseemtoreceivemoreextendedfundingcomparedtovictimsof labourexploitation inhercountry,eventhoughpoliciesandmeasuresdonotprioritize this

28VictimsofCrimeintheEU:TheExtentandNatureofSupportServices,FRA(2014).29Cf.amapofthedifferentmodelsofgenericsupportservicesforvictimsofcrimeintheEU:http://fra.europa.eu/en/publications-and-resources/data-and-maps/comparative-data/victims-support-services/models.

30VictimsofCrimeintheEU:TheExtentandNatureofSupportServices,FRA(2014),p.61.

17

group.Insomecountries,sometypesofsupport(e.g.psycho-socialassistance)isconditionalonwhethervictimsareidentified/referred/assistedthroughofficialchannels.Thus,itmaybechallengingforvictimswho are not referred to NGOs for assistance or are not registered with service providers to receivepsychosocialsupport(Macedonia).

Supportmayfurtherbeconditionalonwhethervictimsarewillingtocooperatewiththeauthorities.Ifvictims are not willing to cooperate, they do not receive assistance or protection in most Europeancountries.Also, theprovisionofpsychologicalsupporttovictimsoftraffickingrequiresfirstlyaproperidentificationoftheirvulnerabilityespeciallyamongmigrantsandasylum-seekers.

In Spain, partner organisations note deficiencies in the state support for victims of trafficking, bothformally and informally31 identified, in relation to psycho-social accompaniment, expert reports,psychologicalassistanceandassessmentofdamages.

ItisthereforerecommendedthattheStatepayssufficientattentionandprovidessufficientfundingforsocialsupportservicestoguaranteethatvictims’needsaremetinasustainablewaytoenablethemtoexercisetheirrightsandseekredressforthedamagesustainedfromfailureoftheStatetomeet itspositiveobligations.

IndividualNeedsAssessmentThe individual assessment of victims’ needs is directly related to the free of charge provision andguaranteedaccesstogeneralandspecializedsupportservicesforvictimsofcrime.

TheEUVictims’RightsDirectiverequiresEUMemberStatestoensurethatvictimsreceiveatimelyandindividualassessmenttoidentifyspecificprotectionneedsanddeterminetheirparticularvulnerabilitytosecondaryandrepeatvicitimisation,intimidationandretaliation(Article22).

Individualassessmentsare(tobe)carriedoutbythevictim’sfirstpointofcontact,typicallythepoliceoravictimsupportorganisation,asmentionedabove.32Victimsshouldbereferredinatimelymannertospecializedvictimsupportservicesthatareabletoofferthemthesupporttheyneed.

Thepurposeofan individualassessment istodeterminewhetheravictimisparticularlyvulnerabletosecondaryandrepeatvictimisation,to intimidationandtoretaliationduringcriminalproceedings.The

31EuropeantoolboxIdentificationoftraffickedasylum-seekers’specialneeds,p.5:“Amajordifficultyinmanyanti-traffickingmeasuresisthattraffickedpersonsarenotidentifiedand/orrecognizedassuch.Thereappearstobesomeconfusionaboutthemeaningoftheterm.Broadlyspeaking,therearetwokindsofidentification,formaland informal identification. Formal identification occurs when a competent state body/authority officiallyrecognizesthatapersonisasuspectedvictimoftraffickingcrimebyestablishingreasonablegroundsforthis(insomecountries,itisconsideredsufficienttoaccessingtherelevantsupportservices).Informalidentificationordetectionoccurswhenanypractitionerorindependentexpertorthevictimhimself/herselfformanopinionthattrafficking in human beings has occurred, but this has not been yet corroborated by the relevant competentauthoritiesforrecognizingvictimsoftraffickingintheMemberState.Theimportanceofthisprocessisthattheconfirmationoftheidentificationasavictim(formalidentification)mayleadtocertainrightsforthevictim,whichmaynotbeaccessibleotherwisebecausedifferentrightsareattachedtodifferentstatus(asylumseekerandvictimoftrafficking).

32VictimsofCrimeintheEU:TheExtentandNatureofSupportServices,FRA(2014).

18

assessmentimpliesatwo-stepprocess(whichcouldbecombined).Firstly,todeterminewhetheravictimhasspecificprotectionneedsagainstcriteriasuchasthepersonalcharacteristicsofthevictim,thetypeornatureofthecrime,therelationshipbetweenthevictimandtheoffenderandthecircumstancesofthecrime; and secondly, to determine if special protectionmeasures should be applied, andwhat theseshouldbe.33

ItisimportanttobearinmindthattheindividualapproachendorsedintheVictims’RightsDirectivedoesnot in theory create priority categories or a hierarchy of victims. Nevertheless, in the context of theindividualassessmentparticularattentionmustbepaidtovictimsofterrorism,organisedcrime,humantrafficking,gender-basedviolence,violence inacloserelationship,sexualviolence,andexploitationorhatecrime.34

TheDGJusticeGuidanceDocument35expresslypointsoutthatthoseagenciesdesignatedtoconducttheindividual assessment must undergo specific training to that end. The agency conducting the needsassessment should have experience and knowledge of working with victims in a respectful andprofessionalmanner. According to theDG JusticeGuidanceDocument, good practice shows that thepolice or victim support services are ideally placed to conduct the needs assessment. However, it isquestionablehowwellpositionedorequippedthepolicearetoperformanindividualneedsassessment,evenifisspeciallytrainedtodoso.Itisofutmostimportancethatthoseconductingtheassessmentaresensitivetotheissueandtotherelatedtraumaandsituationofvictimsandareabletorefervictimstoadequate support services. Trainingmay be helpful in referring victims to support organisations thatappearbetterpositioned toperform individualneedsassessmentbasedon theconsentof thevictim.Nevertheless,thetimingiscrucialsincesuchanassessmentwillprovidevictimswithrequiredprotectionandsupportinanystepofthesubsequentcriminalproceedingsand/orcompensationprocedures.Thus,itisimportanttoperformthisneeds’assessmentattheearlierstage.

SICARCAT/ProyectoEsperanza: ‘It isnecessarytoensurecorrect riskassessmentstobeabletoadoptmeasuresforanadequateprotectionofthevictimandtheprofessionalwhoaccompanies.Unfortunately,inpractice,onveryrareoccasions,NGO´sandservicesthatattendvictimsofhumantraffickinghaveanadequateriskassessmentprovidedbythepolice’.

TheEUDirectiveleavesthecompetentauthoritieswithamarginofdiscretiontodeterminehowtoassessthe needs of victims of crime. In practice, there may be an implicit demand to establish internalproceduresorprotocolsforassessingthesupportneedsofvictimsandtheirfamilies.TheJusticeatLastconsortiumpartnersclearlystressedtheneedfortheassessmentstobecarriedoutbyvictimsupportservices,basedontheconsentofvictimsandopposedformalizedassessmentsofvictimsneedscarriedoutbylawenforcementauthoritieswhichhaveinfactotherresponsibilities.

In 2017 and 2018 Victim Support Europe has been implementing a large-scale project to assess theimplementationoftheVictims’RightsDirectivein23countries.NationalreportsdeterminethepracticalimplementationoftheDirectivefocusingonpolicies,fundingetc.whichenableimplementationofrights,potentialreasonsanddriversforsuccessandfailure,goodpractices,andrecommendations.36

33Directive,cf.Article3(2).34DGJUSTICEGUIDANCEDOCUMENT,p.44.35Ibid.36Seeformoreinformationhttps://victimsupport.eu/about-us/our-projects/vociare/.

19

SpecialisedLegalAssistanceandRepresentationforVictimsofCrimeTheUNprinciplesandguidelinesonlegalaid,includingvictimsupport,introducedabroaddefinitionoftheterm‘legalaid’,callinguponallstatestoprovidelegaladvice,assistanceandrepresentation–amongothercategories–“forvictimsandwitnessesinthecriminaljusticeprocessthatisprovidedatnocostforthosewithoutsufficientmeansorwhentheinterestsofjusticesorequire”.37

AccesstolegalaidisanimportantpartoftherighttoafairtrialunderArticle6oftheECHRandArticle47oftheEUCharterofFundamentalRights.Therighttolegalaidensureseffectiveaccesstojusticeforthosewhohaveinsufficientfinancialresourcestocoverthecostsofcourtcases,suchascourtfeesorcostsoflegalrepresentation.UnderCoEandEUlaw,legalaiddoesnothavetotakeaparticularform;statesarefreetodecidehowtomeettheirlegalobligations.Asaresult,legalaidsystemsoftenvarywidely.38Forexample,legalaidmayconsistoffreerepresentationorassistancebyalawyerand/ordispensationfrompayingthecostsofproceedings,includingcourtfees.

PursuanttotheAnti-TraffickingDirective,MemberStatesshallensurethatvictimsoftraffickinginhumanbeingshaveaccesswithoutdelaytolegalcounselling,and,inaccordancewiththeroleofvictimsintherelevantjusticesystem,tolegalrepresentation,includingforthepurposeofclaimingcompensation.Legalcounselling and legal representation shall be freeof chargewhen the victimdoesnot have sufficientfinancialresources(Article12(2)).

Accesstolegalaid,notablyaccesstolegalaidfreeofcharge,includeslegaladviceandlegalrepresentationincourt (Article13of theVictims’Directive). In linewiththeprovisionofArticle47(3)of theCharter,whichstipulatesthat“[legalaidshallbemadeavailabletothosewholacksufficientresourcesinsofarassuchaidisnecessarytoensureeffectiveaccesstojustice”,freelegalaidisgenerallyavailabletovictimsinnearly(26)allEUMemberStates.Inmostcountrieshowever,victimsaresubjecttoaneconomicmeanstest from which only certain categories of victims are exempt (typically minors, victims of domesticviolenceorsexualoffenses).39Theserulesdifferpercountry,forexampleintheNetherlandstheeconomicmeanstestisapplicableonlyinrelationtolegalaidinlabourlawcases.Intermsofthefinancialmeanstest,theECtHRhassaidthattherewillbenoviolationofArticle6(1)ifanapplicantfallsoutsidethelegalaidschemebecausehis/her incomeexceedsthefinancialcriteria,providedtheessenceoftherightofaccess to a court is not impaired.40 In someMember States, victims’ entitlement to legal aidmayberestrictedtocertaincategoriesofvictims,offencetypesorsubjecttoeconomicmeanstesting.41

TheroleofvictimsupportservicesvariesinEUMemberStatesasfarasprovisionoflegalaidisconcerned,including formal legal aid andmore general legal assistance to crime victims. Austria is the only EUMemberStatewheretheresponsibilitytoguaranteelegaladviceandlegalrepresentationistransferredto victim support services that are contracted by the state, whereas in 14 EUMember States public

37TheUnitedNationsPrinciplesandGuidelinesonAccesstoLegalAidinCriminalJusticeSystems,adoptedin2012.Source:UN,UnitedNationsOfficeonDrugsandCrime(2013).

38HandbookonEuropeanlawrelatingtoaccesstojustice,EuropeanUnionAgencyforFundamentalRightsandCouncilofEurope,2016.

39VictimsofCrimeintheEU:TheExtentandNatureofSupportServices,FRA(2014).40ECtHR,Glaserv.theUnitedKingdom,No.32346/96,19September2000,para.99.SeealsoECtHR,Santambrogiov.Italy,No.61945/00,21September2004,para.58.

41VictimsofCrimeintheEU:TheExtentandNatureofSupportServices,FRA(2014).

20

authoritiesfulfilthisrole.IntheremainingEUMemberStates,theresponsibilityissharedaccordingtovariousmodels,suchasdistinguishingbetweenlegaladvicethatisprovidedbyvictimsupportservicesandlegalrepresentationthatcanonlybeprovidedbylegalpractitionerssanctionedbythestate.

Partnerorganisationsandpractitionersinparticularhavestressedthecrucialimportanceof(specialized)legal assistance and representation for victimsof trafficking and crime in general. A lawyer next to apsychologistcanmakesurethatvictims’rightsarerespectedthroughoutthe judicialoradministrativeproceedings.Lawyerswillguaranteethatthenumberofinterrogationsiskeptataminimum,conductedinamannerthatposesnoriskofrevictimization,thatvictimsarenotconfrontedwiththeperpetrators,and thatvictimsareaccordedprotectionmeasures if so required.Theywill furtherassistvictimswithrelated judicialoradministrativeprocedures forobtainingcompensation,divorceorchildcustody, forexample.

Regardingstate-funded/freelegalaid,partnerorganisationssharedthatbyandlargethereappeartobemore guarantees in place to protect defendants’ rights than victims’ rights. itwas noted that victimsseldomreceivefreelegalaidinpre-trialproceedings,forexample.Next,certaingroupsofvictimsarenoteligibleforfreelegalaid,suchasthosenotformallyidentifiedasvictimsoftraffickingorothercrime,orexploitedpersonsreferredtolabourcourt,whoarenotdefinedasvictimsofcrime.Furthermore,nofreelegalaidmightbeprovidedforexecutionofawardedcompensationorforcivilprocedures.

In Ireland,according toMRCI, ‘Only recognisedvictimsareentitled to legalaidand theextentof it isminimal.Thereisalsonolegalaidforthosethatseeksupportforissuesrelatedtomisuseandexploitationbyemployers. ThesecasesarereferredtoMRCI.Also,undocumentedmigrantsarealsogenerallynotabletoaccesslegalaid,withsomeexceptions’.

In Spain state-funded assistance prioritises psychological counselling over legal assistance. Itmust behighlightedthat,broadlyspeaking,therearenotenoughfundsaddressedtoacomprehensivecareforhumantraffickingvictims.Generally,onlyascarcequotafromthenationalbudgetisearmarkedforthistopic,andusuallysolelytotrafficking inwomenandgirls forsexualexploitation.This is largelyduetounderestimating, underrating and undervaluing the workload involved in legally assisting victims oftrafficking,since itcan involve(amongothers)administrativeprocedures,criminalprocedures,asylumprocedure,etc.Besides,(thescarce)fundingisnormallyfocusedonlegalassistanceratherthanonlegalrepresentation.

Ontheotherhand,legalassistanceisnotlimitedtoaspecifictimeframe:acasecanbean“on-goingcase”formanyyears,whichissomethingthatisoftennottakenintoaccountbyfundingstructures.Moreover,along-termcasecanrequireagreateffortasappealsforhighercourtsmaybeinplace,notwithstandingthenewcasesassumed.

Evenwherefree legalaid isprovidedbythestate,partnerorganizationssharedthat it israrelyoftherequiredquality.Somelegalaidlawyerswouldsimplybepresentphysicallyinthecourtroomorwouldavailofverylimitedtimetopreparethemselvesbeforethecasehearing.Ingeneral,freelegalaidlawyersdonothavethenecessaryexpertisetoassistandrepresentvictimsoftraffickingastheseareusuallyverycomplicatedcasesandtouchuponanumberofrelatedissues/areassuchasmigration,labourandfamilylaw,compensationproceduresetc.

21

Unfortunately,thestateofaffairsasregardsaccesstolegalaidandqualityoflegalaidremainsmoreorlessthesameasestablishedsixyearsagointheframeworkoftheEuropeanActionforCompensationforTraffickedPersonsproject:inconsistentandproblem-riddenlegaladviceandrepresentationfortraffickedpersons,restrictivedecisionstoawardlegalaid,littleexperiencewithcomplicatedcases,andlowlevelsofawardedlegalaid.42

Tocompensateforthesedeficiencies,victimsupportorganisationsinparticularencounteranumberofdifficulties.

Where victim support organisations themselves fund legal counselling and representation, they oftenhavetodevotealotofresourcestocomplywiththevariousrequirementsofthedonorsthathavefundedthesaidlegalaid(e.g.Spain).Further,legalassistanceinhumantraffickingcasesmayextendquiteovertime, which makes it even more challenging to ensure external/donor funding for a case from thebeginningtotheend(Spain).

Partnerorganisationsalsosharedthatidentifyingandsecuringprobonoattorneysorattorneyscharginglowerratestohelpthevictimstheysupport,requiresdisproportionateresources.Inaddition,mostofthevictimsupportorganisationsavailofonlylimitedpossibilitiestohirewell-preparedlawyers.

Sustainabilityofthespecializedlegalassistanceserviceisdifficulttoguarantee,andforthemostpartthisis done only through external (donor) funding (Romania). For the purpose of claiming compensation,externallegalrepresentationisalmostalwaysrequired,and,duetoitslengthyprocess,itisachallengefor the organisation to ensure sustainable funding. Last but not least, lawyers assisting victims oftraffickingmay fall victim tohuman traffickers’ retaliation,while especiallywithinNGOs there arenomechanisminplacetoprotectthem.Thismakesvictimsupportorganisationsconsidercarefullyinwhichcasestheyensurelegalassistancefortheirvictimclients(Spain).AccordingtheconsortiumpartnersSICARCAT and Esperanza in Spain, it is very important to have protection and security mechanisms forspecializedNGOsandprofessionalswhoprovidelegalsupportandrepresentation.

InSpain,astheProtectedWitnessesLegalActestablishes,therearesafereportingmechanismsinordernottorevealidentity,avoidvisualconfrontationwithdefendantortheirenvironment,beaccompaniedbypoliceofficers,etcforpeopleactingaswitnessesorprovidingexperttestimony.Insomecases,inwhichtheNGOprofessionalswerecalledtodeclareinCourtasawitnessorexperttestimony,thejudgecalledforprotectionmeasuresinordertonotdisclosetheidentityoftheprofessionalnortheaddressoftheirworkplacetoavoidpossibleretaliation.Thisisagoodpracticethatshouldbetakeninasystematicwayto avoid confrontationwith the traffickers and risks of retaliation. Thismeasure is not applicable forattorneysincriminalproceedingsonbehalfofthevictim.

This is why partner organisations reiterated the importance of specialized legal assistance andrepresentationforvictimsoftrafficking.

Anumberofgoodpracticeshavebeensharedbypartnerorganisations.

Austriaprovidedforpsychosocialand legalassistance intheCriminalProceduralAct.Theassistance isformallyextendedbyNGOsspecialisedfordifferenttypesofvictims.Thepoliceinformvictimsaboutthe

42FindingsandResultsoftheEuropeanActionforCompensationforTraffickedPersons,p.45,accessibleatwww.compactproject.org.

22

competentorganisation,whichthensupportsthevictimsduringthecriminalprocedureaswellasthecivilprocedureandemploysaspecialisedlawyer.Theadvocateswhoareworkinginvictim’slegalassistanceand representation are recommended to go through a training focusing on victims’ rights, trauma,migrants’issues,etc.ThistrainingisofferedbythebarassociationandincludestrainersfromNGOsonspecifictopics,likehumantrafficking.

InSpain,thebarassociationshaveaspecializedgroupoflawyersdealingwithhumantraffickingcasesandreceive some training. The specialization is justified since trafficking in human being cases requireexpertiseinanumberofareassuchasmigration/asylum,criminallaw,humantraffickingetc.AccordingtheNGOsSICARCATandProyectoEsperanzathisisthecaseinthecitiesofSevilla,CórdobaandMadrid,andtheystatethat‘nevertheless,eveninthesecases,theservicecannotbequalifiedasfullysatisfactoryduetoarangeoffactors,includinginsufficientspecializedtrainingandinsufficienteconomicresources.Especiallythosecaseswhichrequirelongterminvestmentandhigherspecializationanddemandaheavierworkload’.Toensureadequate legalassistance,specialisationof lawyerswasrecommended,aswellassufficientfundingtoensruethatthesespecialisedlawyerscanfocussolelyontraffickingcases.Theuseofprobonoservicesofqualifiedlawfirmswasfurtherrecommendedasapossibleoption.

In theCzechRepublic, theNGOLa Stradahas in-house lawyer that assists attorneys representing thevictimsoftraffickinginthecourtproceedings.Thisway,theexperienceintraffickingcasesiscombinedwiththeexperienceoftheattorneys.Somevictimsupportorganisationsestablishedanetwork/poolofspeciallytrained lawyerstoassistvictimsoftrafficking(Bulgaria,Serbia).TheCouncilofEurope isalsoworkingonpromotingthisandestablishingaEuropeanlawyersnetwork.It launchedafirstmeetinginNovember2016andasecondmeeting inNovember2018 toestablishanti-humantrafficking lawyers’network tobuild thecapacityof legalprofessionalsandexploreways to improveaccess to justice fortraffickedpersons,includingaccesstocompensation.

23

Conclusion

Therighttocompensationasaredressforthedamagesustainedbyvictimsoftraffickingandcrimevictimsingeneraliswellguaranteedintheory.

However, professionals rendering direct support to victims of trafficking and exploitation point out anumberofdeficienciesandobstaclestoensuringthisrightinpractice.

To guarantee that victims obtain compensation, firstly states must make sure that the right tocompensationisaccessibleandefficientinpractice.Thisentailsensuringvictims’ancillaryrights,suchastherighttobe informedabouttheirrights,therighttobeassistedbygeneralandspecializedsupportservicesthataresufficientlyfundedbythestate,andtherighttofreelegalassistanceandrepresentation.

Importantly, these rightsmust be extended to all crime victims regardless of theirworking/residencestatus,asregardlessoftheirstatus,theyhavebecomevictimsofcrimeduetoomissiononthepartofthestatetoguaranteetheirlife,securityandhealth.Nexttotheseancillaryrights,itisalsoimportantthatidentifiedvictimsoftraffickingobtaintherighttoresidencesinceoftenvictimshavetoleavethecountry(e.g.aftercriminalproceedings)whilecompensationclaimprocedurescontinue.

Goodpracticesindicatethat,tothatend,victimsmustbeinformedabouttheirrighttocompensationnotonlyatfirstcontact,butatregularintervalsbytrainedprofessional,toallowthevictimtomakeadecisionatanopportunetime.Usuallyvictimsupportorganisationsthatprovidepsycho-socialcounsellingareinthe best position to do that. Interpretation services and services of culturalmediators should not beignoredorunderestimatedinthisregard.Acomprehensiveapproachcombiningbothaccesstoadequatelegalandpsychosocialsupportwouldbeneeded.

Secondly,victimsmustbeassistedbytrainedprofessionalsinaccordancewiththeirspecificvulnerabilitiesthroughout thedurationof criminal, civiloradministrativeproceedingsand tobeaccordednecessaryprotectionmeasuresifrequired.Tothatendvictimsupportorganisationsmustbeprovidedwithsufficientfunding to render comprehensive support to victims on a case-by-case basis. Supporting victims inaccessingcompensationmustbepartoftheoverallsupportthatvictimsreceivebytrainedprofessionalsandvictimsupportorganisations.

Lastbutnotleast,thesupportofspeciallytrainedlawyerscompetentinanarrayoflegalmatterssuchasmigration/asylum,criminallaw,compensationandrelated(usuallyfamilylaw)mattersiscrucial.Theynotonly ensure respect for victims’ rights but help victims’ empowerment and successful subsequentintegration. In that respect, the victims’ involvement and empowerment and consent is of upmostimportancewhendecidingaboutanystepsduringthecompensationandsupportprocedures.

24

References

Animus Association, Country Study, The right to compensation for victims of trafficking in Bulgaria(December2011)

Anti-Slavery International,OpportunitiesandObstacles:EnsuringaccesstocompensationfortraffickedpersonsintheUK(2009)

ASTRA,Positionofhumantraffickingvictimsincourtproceedings,AnalysisofJudicialPracticefor2016(2016)

ASTRA,Trafficking inHumanBeings for thePurposeof Labour Exploitation:A Sociological Perspective(2017)

Bandurka,I.O.et.al.,AnalysisofthecurrentrightsofvictimsofhumantraffickinginUkrainetoobtaincompensation(Kiev,2011)

Caron,C.,‘UsingPortableJusticetoAchieveAdditionalRemediesforTraffickedPersons’in,GlobalAllianceagainstTrafficinWomen(GAATW),AllianceNews,MaterialJustice,SeekingCompensationinTraffickingCases,Issue27,pp.14-21(Bangkok:July2007)

CouncilofEurope,GRETA,ReportconcerningtheimplementationoftheCouncilofEuropeConventiononActionagainstTraffickinginHumanBeingsby[countries:Austria,Belgium,Bulgaria,Germany,Romania,Ireland,TheNetherlands](2014-2017)

Cusveller, J., Compensation for victims of human trafficking: inconsistencies, impediments andimprovements, Master thesis criminology, Faculty of Law, VU University Amsterdam/La StradaInternational(August2015)

Dobreva,N.,PromotionoftheRightsofTraffickedPersonsinBulgaria,AHumanRightsBasedApproach,LegalAnalysis(AnimusAssociationFoundation:Sofia,July2013)

Eaves,RightsandRecourse,AGuidetoLegalRemediesforTraffickedPersonsintheUK(2010)

European Commission, Concept Note Workshops Meeting of the EU Civil Society Platform againsttraffickinginhumanbeings(Brussels,29May2018)

European CommissionDirectorate-General Justice, Freedom& Security,Analysis of the application ofDirective2004/80/ECrelatingtocompensationofcrimevictims,SYNTHESISREPORT,(12December2008)

EuropeanCommissionHomeAffairs,TheEUrightsofvictimsoftraffickinginhumanbeings.(Luxembourg:PublicationsOfficeoftheEuropeanUnion,2013)

EPRS, The Victims’ Rights Directive 2012/29/EU European Implementation Assessment (EuropeanParliamentaryResearchServiceEx-PostEvaluationUnit,PE611.022,December2017)

FLEX,AccesstoCompensationforvictimsofhumantrafficking,WorkingPaper(July2016)

FRA,VictimsofcrimeintheEU:theextentandnatureofsupportforvictims(Luxembourg:PublicationsOfficeoftheEuropeanUnion,2014)

FRA,Handbook on European law relating to access to justice (Luxembourg: PublicationsOffice of theEuropeanUnion,2016)

25

FRA,ImprovingaccesstoremedyintheareaofbusinessandhumanrightsattheEUlevel,OpinionoftheEuropeanUnionAgencyforFundamentalRights.FRAOpinion–1/2017[B&HR](Vienna,10April2017)

FRANETSocialFieldworkResearch,SevereformsofLabourExploitation;Supportingvictimsofsevereformsof labour exploitation in having access to justice in EUmember states, Reports of countries: Austria,Bulgaria,CzechRepublic,Germany,Ireland,theNetherlands,Spain(2014)

Gallagher, A.T., The right to an effective remedy for victims of trafficking in persons: A Survey ofInternationalLawandPolicy(November2010)

GermanInstituteforHumanRights,HumanTraffickinginGermany,StrengtheningVictim’sHumanRights(2009)

Heemskerk,M.,Willemsen,E./FairWork,CompensationforvictimsofhumantraffickingintheNetherlands(September2013)

ICMPDandDepartmentforEqualOpportunities–PresidencyoftheCouncilofMinisters,Italy,Guidelinesfor theDevelopmentofaTransnationalReferralMechanism forTraffickedPersons inEurope:TRM-EU(2010)

LaStradaCzechRepublic,AsummaryofthestudyontheOptionsandLimitsofCompensationforTraffickedPersonsintheCzechLegalSystem(2009)

LaStradaInternational,COMP.ACT,Toolkitoncompensationfortraffickedpersons(2012)

La Strada International and Anti-Slavery International,Guidance on representing trafficked persons incompensationclaims.Apracticaltoolforlawyers,counsellingcentresandserviceproviders(Portuguesetranslation:2014)

LefoeIBF,COMP.ACTAustria,PossibilitiestoObtainCompensationforTraffickedPersonsinAustria(2011)

Milquet,J.,DiscussionpaperfortheworkshopoftheEUCivilSocietyPlatformagainsttraffickinginhumanbeings,(Brussels,29May2018)

MRCI,TraffickingforForcedLabourinIrelandandtheUnitedKingdom:IssuesandEmergingGoodPractice(December2010)

On the Road, COMP.ACT Italia,Development of Italian Legislation on Compensation; State of art andstrategies(August2012)

Open Gate/La Strada Macedonia, The right to compensation for trafficked persons in R. Macedonia(Skopje,June2011)

OSCE, Alliance Expert Coordination Team Statement on compensation for trafficked persons, HumanDimensionImplementationMeeting,Specialdayontrafficking=Focusonaccesstojusticeforvictimsoftrafficking(8October2008)

OSCE/ODIHR,CompensationforTraffickedandExploitedPersonsintheOSCERegion(2008)

OSCE/ODIHR,Compensationandothervictims’rights:practiceintheOSCERegion,Trainingsessionforlegalpractitioners(OSCE/ODIHRAnti-TraffickingProgramme,2010)

PICUMMappingFramework,Labourcomplaintsmechanismsystems(2018–tobepublished)

26

Shrub,M., Tyurina,G.,Naumovich, T.,Compensation for TraffickedPersons in theRepublic ofBelarus(Teseyltd.:Minsk,2010)

UMAR, La Strada International and Anti-Slavery International,Compensation for trafficked persons inRomania,Opportunitiesandobstaclesinaccessingjustice(February2015,correctedversionJune2015)

UNGeneralAssembly,Resolution60/147BasicPrinciplesandGuidelinesontheRighttoaRemedyandReparationforVictimsofGrossViolationsof InternationalHumanRightsLawandSeriousViolationsofInternationalHumanitarianLaw(21March2006)

UNHumanRightsCouncil,35thsession,Bestpracticesandhowtoimproveontheeffectivenessofcross-bordercooperationbetweenStateswithrespecttolawenforcementontheissueofbusinessandhumanrights:StudyoftheWorkingGroupontheissueofhumanrightsandtransnationalcorporationsandotherbusinessenterprises(25April2017)

UNODC, Compensation – UNODC perspective and State Practice (power point presentation,simone.heri@unodc.org)

UNODC, UN.GIFT, Anti-human trafficking manual for criminal justice practitioners, Module 13:Compensationforvictimsoftraffickinginpersons(NewYork:2009)

UNOHCHR, Special Rapporteur, Background Paper on State Practices, Concrete Strategies andImplementationoftheRighttoanEffectiveRemedyforTraffickedPersons(2010)

Weerd, E.A.M. de, Compensation for trafficked persons from state funds: Are compensation fundsappropriate for traffickedpersons?A critical examinationof four state compensation funds inEurope.MasterInternationalCrimesandCriminology,VUUniversityAmsterdam(December2011)

Wijers,M.,CompensationofvictimsoftraffickingunderinternationalandDutchlaw(28April2014)

Women’sLinkWorldwide,AccesstoRedressMechanismsinSpain(2011)