Difference between revisions of "Victims of Human Trafficking (4:VIII)"

*are accompanied everywhere by someone who speaks for him or her

The following publication from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime provides a comprehensive list of indicators that a person may be trafficked:

 

http://www.unodc.org/documents/human-trafficking/HT_indicators_E_LOWRES.pdf

In 2007, BC established the Office to Combat Trafficking in Persons (OCTIP).  OCTIP is part of the Victim Services and Crime Prevention Division of the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General. OCTIP develops and coordinates strategies to address human trafficking within the province.  OCTIP takes a human rights approach that focuses on the rights and needs of trafficked persons.  This approach gives back control to the trafficked person by offering information, referrals, support and assistance, but allows the trafficked person to make decisions and choices for themselves.  Law enforcement and Crown Counsel prosecute human trafficking cases in BC.  See the Resources section below for more information on OCTIP.  

Human trafficking is defined in the UN Trafficking in Persons Protocol as “the act of recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons ... by means of threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person ... for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum:

*or the removal of organs.”

Human trafficking is an offence under both the ''Criminal Code'' (ss 279.01-279.04), and the ''Immigration and Refugee Protection Act'' [''IRPA''](Part 3). Sections 279.01-279.04 of the ''Criminal Code'' make it an offence to:   

In order to determine whether an accused exploits another person, the court may consider whether the accused (a) used or threatened to use force or coercion; (b) used deception; or (c) abused a position of trust, power or authority (s 279.04(2)).

Because of the high stigma and severe penalties that result from a human trafficking conviction, the ''mens rea'' for the human trafficking offences is subjective fault.  Crown Counsel must prove that the accused acted “for the purpose” of exploiting the victim.  In ''R. v. Beckford'', 2013 ONSC 653, Justice Miller confirms at paras. 38-40 that “for the purpose” of exploitation requires both intent and knowledge.  It is also important to note that consent is not a defence to human trafficking (s 279.01(2)).   

The penalties for the offences in Part 3 of IRPA include fines of up to $1,000,000 and imprisonment of up to 14 years (where fewer than 10 persons are being smuggled or trafficked) or up to life.  Mandatory minimum sentences apply where the person, in committing the offence, endangered the life or safety, or caused bodily harm or death to the persons with respect to whom the offence was committed, and/or if the commission of the offence was for profit or in association with a criminal organization or terrorist group (See IRPA sections 117(2)-(3)).  

==== BC’s First Human Trafficking Conviction under IRPA ====

''R. v. Franco Orr'', 2013 BCSC 1883, was the first conviction for human trafficking under ''IRPA'' in BC.  In that case, a jury found Mr. Orr guilty of the following:   

#Knowingly organizing the coming into Canada of the complainant, by means of abduction, fraud, deception or use of the threat of force or coercion, contrary to s. 118(1) of ''IRPA'';

#Employing a foreign national, in the capacity to which she was not authorized to be employed, contrary to s. 124(1)(c) of ''IRPA''; and  

#Misrepresenting or withholding material facts relating to a relevant matter that induced or could induce an error in the administration of the Act by providing false information to the Consulate General of Canada in support of the application for temporary resident visa for entry to Canada for the complainant, contrary for s. 127(a) of ''IRPA''.

At trial, Mr. Orr received a global sentence of 18 months of jail.  In 2015, however, the case was successfully appealed.  In R. v. Orr, 2015 BCCA 88, the Court of Appeal for British Columbia set the convictions aside and sent the matter back for trial.  The court found certain expert evidence should not have been admitted, as the expert’s qualifications were not properly tested.  A new trial was held in June 2016.  A decision is pending.