Page 43
border trafficking, this may be the result of improved controls at borders, hence more difficulties to traffic victims from abroad. In typical origin countries, improved border controls could also result in more victims being intercepted during the process to be transferred abroad. In this scenario, victims could be recruited for the purpose Fig. 38 Share of detected victims by area of origin and detection*, 2016 (or most recent) Source: UNODC elaboration of national data. * Estimate based on 16,159 detected victims whose citizenship was reported by 90 countries. From other subregion 58% 9% 28% Within same subregion 5% Within same region Men Victims detected within their own borders Fig. 39 Trend in the share of detected domestic victims, 2010-2016 Source: UNODC elaboration of national data. 27% 34% 43% 58% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 2010 2012 2014 2016 Share of detected domestic victims Fig. 40 Number of victims by area of origin and of detection, by region, 2016 (or most recent) Source: UNODC elaboration of national data. 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 Europe and Central Asia The Americas South Asia, East Asia and the Pacific Africa and Middle East Victims detected within their own country borders Within same subregion Within same region From other regions GLOTiP_2018_BOOK.indb 41 17/12/2018 19:49:16 42 GLOBAL REPORT ON TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS 2018 and in the affluent countries of East Asia, where the number of foreign victims detected are higher. Moreover, Western and Southern Europe, the affluent countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council in the Middle East, as well as North America are destinations with significant levels of inbound trafficking from other regions. Repatriation data8 can highlight trafficking flows that are not captured by detection data. Overall, this data confirms the general characteristics of trafficking flows; most trafficking flows are of limited geographical reach. Repatriation data only refer to cross-border trafficking – a victim of domestic trafficking cannot be repatriated. These results are in line with the 2012 and 2014 data, showing that in many countries victims are usually trafficked within the same subregion. When victims are repatriated from other areas, these are generally in geographic proximity. North African victims, for instance, are repatriated from the Middle East or from Western Europe. Sub-Saharan Africans are trafficked to and repatriated from other countries in sub-Saharan Africa, but also from North Africa and the Middle East. In addition to highlighting flows that are not captured by detection data, repatriation data can also help shed light on trafficking flows. Information not easily gleaned only 8 Repatriation data refer to countries reporting own citizens detected as victim of trafficking in persons in another country and repatriated. The UNODC questionnaire used for this Report, inquires national authorities about the number of own citizens repatriated per year. It further inquiries on the countries these victims were repatriated from. This information is used as a proxy for the destinations of these trafficking victims. from detection data from destination countries can particularly provide information on those destination countries which do not report trafficking cases. For example, repatriation data reveal a trafficking flow from sub-Saharan Africa towards the Middle East and North Africa. Similarly, repatriation data show trafficking flows directed from sub-Saharan Africa to Eastern Europe, and Eastern Europeans trafficked to South-East Asia. Repatriation data also reveal that South American victims are trafficked to East Asia, and victims from Central and South-Eastern Europe are trafficked to Eastern Europe. Considering data on detection and repatriation together shows that Western and Southern Europe, the Middle East and North America attract victims from a variety of From other regions 77% 9% 14% From nearby subregion Repatriated from same subregion Fig. 41 Share of victims detected within their own country’s borders, by subregion, 2016 (or most recent) Source: UNODC elaboration of national data. 23% 47% 76% 94% 39% 67% 32% 68% 70% 77% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Western and Southern Europe Central and South-Eastern Europe Eastern Europe and Central Asia South Asia East Asia and the Pacific Sub-Saharan Africa North Africa and the Middle East North America Central America and the Caribbean South America Fig. 42 Shares of victims of trafficking repatriated to their country of origin, by repatriating country, 2014-2017 Source: UNODC elaboration of national data. GLOTiP_2018_BOOK.indb 42 17/12/2018 19:49:16 43 Global Overview I Map 5 Share of detected victims by area origin and of detection, by subregion, 2016 (or most recent) Source: UNODC elaboration of national data. The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations. Within the same subregion (including domestic victims) Across subregions Across regions Note: The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on the map do not imply ocial endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations. North America 76%11%13% Central America and the Caribbean 75%25% South America 93% 7% Sub-Saharan Africa 99% 1% South Asia East Asia and the Pacific 97% 3% Eastern Europe and Central Asia 100% Central and SouthEastern Europe 56%39% 5% North Africa and the Middle East 51%11%38% Western and Southern Europe 25%38%37% 99% 1% Fig. 43 Shares of victims of trafficking who were repatriated to their country of origin, by victims’ region of origin and trafficking destination, 2014-2017 Source: UNODC elaboration of national data. 77% 73% 95% 73% 83% 36% 58% 20% 16% 12% 6% 50% 1% 3% 12% 5% 15% 11% 14% 41% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Central and South-Eastern Europeans Eastern Europeans and Central Asians East Asians South Americans Central Americans Sub-Saharan Africans North Africans and Middle Easterners Repatriated from same subregion From nearby subregion From other regions GLOTiP_2018_BOOK.indb 43 17/12/2018 19:49:16 44 GLOBAL REPORT ON TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS 2018 Map 6 Main detected transregional trafficking flows, 2014-2017 Source: UNODC elaboration of national data. The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations. Transregional flows: detected victims in destination countries Transregional flows: less than 5% of detected victims in destination countries Transregional flows: victims repatriated from destination countries East Asia and the Pacific Sub-Saharan Africa Eastern Europe and Central Asia South Asia Western and Southern Europe North America The Middle East Central America and the Caribbean Central and South-Eastern Europe North America East Asia and the Pacific South Asia South America Note: The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on the map do not imply ocial endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations. Fig. 44 Number of citizenships among victims detected in destination countries, by subregion of detection, 2014-2017 Source: UNODC elaboration of national data. 124 96 45 41 38 35 30 21 18 7 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Western and Southern Europe North America North Africa and the Middle East Central and South-Eastern Europe Sub-Saharan Africa East Asia and the Pacific South America Eastern Europe and Central Asia Central America South Asia GLOTiP_2018_BOOK.indb 44 17/12/2018 19:49:17 45 Global Overview I origins. There is a wide range of citizenships among the victims detected in these three subregions. Affluent countries in other areas, including in Eastern Europe and East Asia, are also destinations for some trafficking flows from distant origins. Many short-range transregional flows, such as between Central and South America, Central and Eastern Europe, sub-Saharan Africa and North Africa, also seem to be significant. Institutional response As of August 2018, 168 countries among the 181 assessed, have legislation in place that criminalizes trafficking in persons broadly in line with the United Nations Trafficking in Persons Protocol, the first global legally binding instrument with an agreed definition of trafficking in persons,9 entered into force in 2003. Between August 2016 and August 2018, one country adopted new trafficking legislation and five additional countries amended it from partial compliance to being fully in line with the definition of trafficking of the UN Trafficking in Persons Protocol. For 12 of the 193 United Nations Member States,