Reparation tothe Victims of Human Trafficking for Commercial Sexual Exploitation in India:...

84

Reparation to the Victims of Human Tra�cking for

Commercial Sexual Exploitation in India: Challenges and

Remedies

SARFARAZ AHMED KHANCity College of Hong Kong, China

India has a high level of domestic and cross-border human tra�cking. Global as well as Indian anti-human tra�cking initiatives have been not

taken as seriously as they should be in comparison with the threat this crime poses. In many cases, victims tend to be neglected throughout the

process of intervention. As human tra�cking for sexual exploitation violates human rights, legal and administrative intervention for victims

should be within a human rights framework of “reparation” It is argued that providing reparation to victims has the potential to minimize the

threat of human tra�cking while also supporting victims. Further, it is proposed that India has failed to meet its international obligation to

provide reparation to victims of human tra�cking, thereby requiring reformation of Indian legal and administrative structures.

Key Words: HUMAN TRAFFICKING VICTIMS, REPARATIONS, SEXUAL EXPLOITATION, INDIA

Sarfaraz Ahmed Khan /International Perspectives in Victimology 8(1), 84-101

Tra!cking in persons is one of the worst forms of transnational organized crime in modern day civilization with more than 20.9 million victims, the majority girls and women tra!cked for commercial sexual exploitation (TIP, 2012, p. 44). From a global perspective, this crime signi"cantly impacts India, which ranks highly as a source, transit and destination country (TIP, 2012). Tra!cking for sexual exploitation not only takes place within the borders of the country, but also there are a large number of persons tra!cked from Bangladesh and Nepal who are forced into prostitution in India (Sen & Nair, 2004, p. 14; #omas, 2011, p. 26). #roughout the process of tra!cking, the victims not only su$er, but are further victimized by legal and administrative structures that do not meet their legal entitlement to reparation under well-established human rights jurisprudence (Sen & Nair, 2004, p. 272). In cross-border human tra!cking cases, victims are frequently prosecuted for illegal entry into the destination countries in violation of immigration law (Sen & Nair, 2004, p. 391).

O$enders are rarely prosecuted and, even if they are, prosecution seldom results in true justice being, meted out to the victims (TIP, 2012, pp. 44-45). A key "nding by Anti-Slavery International (Pearson, 2002, p. 35) was that the current model of protection of tra!cked persons in India prioritizes the needs of law enforcement over human rights. An e$ective victim-centric criminal justice system in India is only possible within the human rights framework of ful"llment of the right to reparation for victims. #at is, victims will be protected, but on the other hand, they will be entitled to e$ective remedy in the form of reparation. Such a right to remedy has been guaranteed by global, regional, and national legal and procedural instruments. #e dra% articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally wrongful Acts as they appear in the annex to General Assembly resolution 56/83 of 12 December 2001, and corrected by document A/56/49(Vol. I)/Corr.4. (International Law Commission, 2001, p. 91) explains the extent and classes of remedies within the ambit of reparation

International Perspectives in Victimology

Journal homepage: www.thepressatcsufresno.org/

85

that shall be provided to the victims of gross violation of human rights.

#is article explores and explains the availability, or lack thereof, of the forms of reparation within the Indian legal system. In addition to analyzing each form of reparation and remedial measure, it analyses the o$ence of human tra!cking—a gross violation of human rights. #is will be followed by explanation of the concept of reparation as developed within human rights jurisprudence. Finally, the article will explore the proposition that India has failed to ful"ll its international legal obligation to provide reparation to victims of human tra!cking, while suggesting the measures necessary to improve the situation.

Human Tra�cking in India

Hundred of thousands of young adults and minors are tra!cked for sexual exploitation in India in the guise of jobs, marriage, "lm roles, modeling, and friendship (Sen & Nair, 2004, p. 145). Almost 14,000 adults and children were reported missing from the province of West Bengal between 2011-2012, with the majority of these designated “missing persons,” believed to have been tra!cked outside the state (NDTV News, April 4, 2012). #ere are also large numbers of cross-border tra!cking cases in India (#omas, 2011, 26). #ousands of girls are tra!cked from Nepal and Bangladesh every year and brought into India (Sen & Nair, 2004, p. 353; Hossain, 2009; TIP, 2012, p. 81). In all such cases, India acts as either a transit or a destination country. One reason for the large number of cross-border human tra!cking cases between India and Nepal is the vast open border between the countries. A bilateral treaty was signed in 1950 according to which citizens of each country are guaranteed equal treatment on a

reciprocal basis, including the same privileges in issues of residence, movement, trade, and commerce. As a result, since the signing, there has been uncontrolled movement of Nepalese travelling or migrating to India, and with no records maintained (Sen & Nair, 2004, p. 14). #e porous Indo-Nepal border has approximately 14 legal entry points in its entire stretch that facilitates illegal cross-border movements (Sen & Nair, 2004).

Similarly, a large number of cross-border human tra!cking cases for commercial sexual exploitation take place between India and Bangladesh. In this tra!c, India is primarily a transition and destination country. Bangladesh shares a 4,156 km border with 30 districts on the Indian side (Sen & Nair, 2004). An estimate of the number of victims who are tra!cked to India from Bangladesh in any 10-year period may be as high as 300,000, most of them being childrenand women aged 12 to 30 years (Hossain, 2009). Although it is di!cult to determine precise numbers of human tra!cking cases in India, it is clear that a large number of women and girls become victims of this heinous crime each year.

Tra�cking Victims’ Right to Reparation

Under International Law

Serious violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law entail, not only the individual criminal liability of the perpetrator, but also the international responsibility of the State, or state-like entity (Khan, 2007). Reparation as an instrument of corrective or remedial justice that aims at recti"cation of the wrong done to a victim has long been recognized under international law. #e basic objective with regard to reparation was laid down in Chorzow Factory case (PCIJ, Series A, No. 17, 1928, 47-48.) (P.C.I.J., 1928, p. 47), in


86

which the Permanent Court of International Justice emphasized that the essential principle contained in the actual notion of an illegal act is that “[r]eparation must, as far as possible, wipe out all the consequences of the illegal act and re-establish the situation which would, in all probability, have existed if that act had not been committed.” In several cases, this principle has been rea!rmed (Shaw, 2003, pp. 715-720). In the Iranian Hostages case (ICJ Report 1980, 3, 45; 61 ILR, pp. 530-571), the ICJ held that Iran was under a duty to make reparation to United States of America. According to the Lusitania Case (U.S. v. Germany, Mixed Claim Commission, 1923, 7 R.I.A.A), it was observed that the remedy ideally be commensurate to the injury received so that it can make good the loss su$ered by the parties. Importantly, if restoration of the status quo ante seems impossible, the reparation should be understood as a$ording “an equivalent to that which has been lost” (Shelton, 2000b, p. 45). !e Basic Principles and Guidelineson the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law (United Nation, 2005) mandated the following remedies, among others:

(a) [E]qual and e$ective access to justice, (b) adequate, e$ective, and prompt reparation for harm su$ered, and (c) access to relevant information concerning violations and reparation mechanisms. (pp. Art. 11) #e existence of e$ective remedies is an essential component of international human rights law that entails reparation to victims of international crime (Shelton, 2000a). Article 8 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 provides that everyone has the right to an e$ective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted to that person by the constitutions or laws (OHCHR,

1948), Article 2(3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 (OHCHR, 1966), Article 6 of the Convention on Elimination of Racial Discrimination, 1965 (OHCHR, 1965), Article 2(c) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, 1979 (OHCHR, 1979), Article 14 of the Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment, 1984 (OHCHR, 1984) and Article 19 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989 (UNICEF, 1989) categorically impose the legal obligation of providing remedy for violations of human rights. #e most signi"cant contribution with regard to development and clari"cation of the concept of reparation was made under the auspices of United Nation Commission on Human Rights (Randelzhofer & Tomouschat, 1999; Khan, 2007, p.1). #e 1985 Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power (United Nations, 1985), the "rst important declaration on victims’ rights to reparation within a human rights framework, called upon member states to provide support to victims of crime, including access to justice, fair treatment, restitution, and compensation. In 1993, the Special Rapporteur submitted a study report,“.. [c]oncerning the right to restitution, compensation and rehabilitation for victims of gross violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms” (UN Sub-Commission, 1993), which clari"es the states’ obligation to provide reparation to victims of gross violation of human rights. Reports on the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Violations of International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law (Bassiouni Report, 2000), further elucidate the concept of reparation and states’ obligation to provide support to victims of crime. #e foundation created by the aforesaid four documents facilitate the adoption of Basic Principles and


87

Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law, 2005 (Basic Principles, 2005) which explains the concept of reparation and calls upon member states to ful"ll their obligations to provide reparation.

Regional instruments also mandate for e$ective remedy and reparation for violation of human rights. Article 13 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 1950 (ECHR, 1950), provide a general remedial provision that make access to e$ective remedy through national tribunal possible for everyone whose rights and freedoms under the convention are violated. Accordingly, this provision entails, for example, victims of arrest or detention in contravention of the provisions of the convention to obtain compensation from domestic tribunals for violation of their human rights (ECHR, 1950, Art. 5.5). Most importantly, it established the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR, 1950, Art. 19) and empowered the court to provide reparation by granting just satisfaction to the injured party for violation of their human rights (ECHR, 1950, Art. 41). #e European Court of Human Rights has accepted three categories of compensation as a means of providing just satisfaction to the injured party namely, (a) compensation for material damage, (b) compensation for moral damage, and (c) remuneration for cost and fees (Bernhardt, 2005, p. 246). Article 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights, 1969, (ACHR, 1969) entitles everyone to e$ective recourse for protection against acts that violate the fundamental rights recognized by law or constitution of the State or Convention. Article 63 further mandates for reparation and fair compensation to the injured party (ACHR, 1969). Article 21 of

the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 1981, provides for compensation on violation of relevant human rights relating to property. Similarly, the Right to Reparation is also duly recognized under Humanitarian Law (Boven, 1996) starting from Article 3 of the 1907 Hague Convention on Land Warfare under which a belligerent party that violates the provisions were liable to pay compensation. Article 41 of the IVth Hague Convention, allowed the injured party to demand for punishment and compensation for losses sustained in the event of a violation of the terms of armistice by private individuals (Hague, 1907). It made the belligerent party liable to pay compensation for violation of its obligation (Hague, 1907, Article 3). Article 51 of the Geneva Convention I on the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces, (Geneva I, 1949), Article 52 of the Geneva Conventions II on Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces, (Geneva II, 1949), Article 131 of the Geneva Convention III on Treatment of Prisoners of War (Geneva III, 1949), and Article 148 of the Geneva Convention IV on the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (Geneva IV, 1949) contain common provisions that imposed state responsibilities of the contracting parties for grave breaches of the provisions contained in treaty. Article 68 of the Geneva Convention III on the Treatment of Prisoners of War, (Geneva III, 1949) contained speci"c provisions with regard to claims for compensation by prisoners-of-war. Article 91 of the Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Convention on Protection of Victims of International Armed Con*icts (Protocol I, 1977) imposed the legal obligation to provide some forms of reparation to the victims of violation of humanitarian law, including compensation.


88

#e principle of reparation, while extensively used within humanitarian law jurisprudence as well as human rights discourse, has also been utilized within the criminal justice framework to provide remedies to victim (Bottigliero, 2004). In Civil Law countries, victims have the right to bring an “action civile,” in criminal proceedings against perpetrators of crime (Council of Europe, 2006). #e Right to Reparation within the criminal justice system at the international level is given explicit recognition through Article 75 of Statute of International Criminal Court (ICC, 1998) that imposed legal obligation on the court to provide reparation to victims. For such a purpose, the Trust Fund for Victims was established (ICC, 1998, Art. 79). Most domestic jurisdictions have also made elaborate administrative and legal processes to provide reparation to victims of crime applicable to victims of human tra!cking. In the United Kingdom, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICI) administers the criminal injuries compensation scheme throughout England, Scotland, and Wales (CICS, 2012). In the USA, in addition to di$erent States’ schemes for victims of crime, the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, 2004 was enacted at the Federal level to provide support to di$erent states and reparation to victims of crime (CVRA, 2004). Moreover, the Tra!cking Victim Protection Article 2000 (TVPA, 2000), made elaborate procedures for providing support to victims, including the right to a visa to remain in the USA (TVPA, 2000, Sec. 107). Similar programs are available in most of the developed jurisdictions in the world (Gallagher, 2010, p. 351).

#ere is no doubt that human tra!cking for commercial sexual exploitation invariably involves multiple violations of human rights. #ere are instances when victims of tra!cking become subjected to

multiple rapes and torture (Nair, 2009). Research has found that around 20% of these victims die before reaching their adulthood (Sen & Nair, 2004, p. 19), and on some occasions, they are re-victimized. #e above information has established that violations of human rights and humanitarian law require the state to provide remedies, including reparation. As the o$ence of tra!cking for commercial sex victimizes girls and women, there is a wide range of legal instruments that impose a legal obligation to address the issues of violence against women (Gallagher, 2010, pp. 360-364). Some argue that in certain speci"ed circumstances, the o$ence of human tra!cking can also be considered as a crime against humanity (Gallagher, 2010, p. 216). Furthermore, Article IX of the SAARC Convention on Preventing and Combating Tra!cking in Women and Children for Prostitution, 2002 (SAARC, 2002) mandated for care, treatment, rehabilitation, and the repatriation of victims of tra!cking. India, as a signatory to this Convention, is bound by it. In Rantsev v. Cyprus 2010 (STRASBOURG—Application no. 25965/04), the European Court of Human Rights held both Russia and Cyprus for violation of the human rights of tra!cked victims. Although most of the act was done by non-state actors, the state had failed in its duty to discharge due diligence. #e Court further clari"ed that tra!cking for commercial sexual exploitation amounted to slavery-like practices. #ese instruments and judicial interpretations categorically established the obligation of the state to provide remedies in the form of reparation for the violation of human rights.

Demystifying the Term “Reparation”

#e 2005 Basic Principles and Guidelines mandates that the victims of human rights and humanitarian law violations shall be provided with full and


89

e$ective reparation that includes restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantees of non repetition. It further provides that restitution should, whenever possible, restore the victim to the original situation, compensation should be provided for any economically assessable damage (as appropriate), and that rehabilitation should include medical and psychological care as well as legal and social services. Article 34 of International Law Commission’s Articles on state responsibility provides that full reparation for the injury caused by the internationally wrongful act shall take the form of restitution, compensation and satisfaction. #e commentary clari"es that term “internationally wrongful act,” may consist in one or more actions or omissions, or a combination of both. It further explained that, “whether there has been an internationally wrongful act,” depends, "rst, on the,“requirements of the obligation which is said to have been breached,” and, secondly, “on the framework conditions for such an act,” that are set out (ILC, 2001, Art.1). Article 75 of the Rome Statute imposes obligation on the Court to establish principles relating to reparations to victims, including restitution, compensation, and rehabilitation. Accordingly, if we take into account the Basic Principle, ILC Dra% Article on State Responsibility and the Rome Statute we may consider the following as essential components of the Right to Reparation, namely, (a) Restitution, (b), Compensation, (c) Rehabilitation, and (d) Satisfaction. In cases relating to human tra!cking, the victims of human tra!cking shall, as far as practicable, get all forms of reparation so that she or he can be restored to the pre-o$ence situation. But there may be occasions when providing reparation in all forms may not be possible, as may be the case with some victims who may not be eager to return to their own place, or victims who may have

been disowned by their State—in these cases, the victims should be provided with other forms of reparation.

Any anti-human tra!cking initiatives within human rights framework should have complied with the principle of reparation. #ere are numerous other legal instruments which impose obligations on the state to provide some forms of reparation to victims. As example Article 8 of the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Tra!cking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, 2000 (Palermo Protocol, 2000) imposed obligation for safe repatriation. Other provisions in the statue and in other international and regional instruments also (sporadically) provide some component of reparation but none of them holistically mandate for reparation that provides potential remedies satisfying victim needs as well as the aspirations of society.

Following an overview of legislative framework in India and whether or not India’s legislative and administrative processes are ready to accept this challenge to provide reparation, the subsequent sections will examine all four components of reparation.

Legislative Responses to Human

Tra�cking for Commercial Sexual

Exploitation in India

Although there is no speci"c law to de"ne Human Tra!cking there are plethora of laws that deal with issues relating to human tra!cking in India, beginning from the Constitution that provides a fundamental right against tra!cking in Article 23 (Singh, 2008, p.233). To redress human tra!cking for commercial sexual exploitation, in 1956 India enacted the Suppression of Immoral Tra!c in Women and Girls Act (SITA), that now stands as the Immoral Tra!c (Prevention) Act, 1956, and is the main


90

statute dealing with human tra!cking in India for commercial sexual exploitation (ITPA, 1956). While there is a shi% in name along with the objective of suppression to prevention, in reality it failed on both fronts. Attempts to reform in the recent past have also failed when the ITPA (Amendment) Bill, 2006 lapsed (ITPA Bill, 2006). #e Bill attempted to make several important changes including: (a) addressing the demand issue by criminalizing buyers of sex (ITPA Bill, 2006, Section 5C), (b) decriminalizing the victims of tra!cking by deletion of Section 8, (c) empowering all police o!cers to investigate the case (ITPA Bill, 2006, Section 13), and (d) de"ning the term human tra!cking and prescribing punishment for it (ITPA Bill, Section 5A & 5B). #e main reason for the lapse of bill was the con*icting aspirations of di$erent organizations in civil society as well as di$erences of opinion among di$erent ministries of the government—while the Ministry of Women and Child Development was in favour of the amendment it was vehemently opposed by the Ministry of Health (Standing Committee, 2006). #ere are several other statutes also being used to address, or redress, the threat of human tra!cking in India—the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, Information Technology Act, 2000, as well as major Acts such as the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. #ese general legislations also failed to address human tra!cking for commercial sexual exploitation, "rst, because of lack of e$ective provisions and clarity thereof, and second, because of lack of enforcement of legal provisions.

India has rati"ed the Palermo Protocol and now it is mandatory to bring domestic legislation and practice in line with its obligations under international law. #e ITPA was amended to incorporate all

the progressive provisions contained in the Palermo Protocol—the most signi"cant contribution of which was to de"ne the term, “human tra!cking.” Article 3 of the Protocol de"nes human tra!cking as:

#e recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring or receipt of persons, by means of threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or the giving or receiving of payments or bene"ts to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation (p. 42).

#e Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 has made several changes in penal provision, including de"ning the term human tra!cking in Section 370 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC, 1860). #e de"nition followed, more or less, the same wording as given in the Palermo Protocol, but it omitted, “… [a]buse of a position of vulnerability (APOV),” from the ambit of the de"nition which implies that if any victims of tra!cking allured by the tra!cker and, at the same time, obtained the consent of the victim, even if it was an exploitation of the vulnerability of victims, it does not fall within the de"nition of tra!cking. #is is a major drawback of the de"nition because there are numerous occasions in which tra!ckers abuse the vulnerability of victims. #e term “abuse of a position of vulnerability (APOV),” is identi"ed as one additional “means,” through which any victim can be recruited, transported, transferred, or is received for the purpose of exploitation. It has been accepted as a distinct and important part of the international legal de"nition of tra!cking,


91

and has survived intact in all major treaties adopted a%er the Protocol that incorporate a de"nition of tra!cking in persons, as well as in policy documents and interpretative texts (UNODC Issue Paper, 2012). #e term has been understood as, “referring to any situation in which the person involved has no real or acceptable alternative but to submit to the abuse involve” (Gallagher, 2010, p. 32).#e UNODC Model Law (UNODC, 2009) de"ned what circumstances could fall within its ambit that can be considered as an APOV:

…[s]uch as taking advantage of the vulnerable position a person is placed in as a result of …(i) Having entered the country illegally or without proper documentation; or(ii) Pregnancy or any physical or mental disease or disability of the person, including addiction to the use of any substance; or(iii) Reduced capacity to form judgments by virtue of being a child, illness, in"rmity or a physical or mental disability; or(iv) Promises or giving sums of money or other advantages to those having authority over a person; or(v) Being in a precarious situation from the standpoint of social survival; or(vi) Other relevant factors (p. 9).

On the one hand, while Indian laws are not fully in conformity with its obligation under the Palermo Protocol, on the other hand the attempt to de"ne the term “human tra!cking” speci"cally omitting APOV is an unwelcome development. If the legislature apprehension for not using the words because of their broad nature or chances of misuse, that legislature needs to be reminded that the Goa Children Act, 2000 has kept intact the acronym “APOV” in its de"nition of child tra!cking. So far as clarifying the term is

concerned, at least two aforesaid important documents prepared under the auspices of UNODC have elaborately explained what should fall within its ambit.

Evaluating Restitution within Indian

Criminal Justice System

Restitution in kind is the obvious method of reparation since it aims to re-establish the situation that existed before the wrongful act was committed (Shaw, 2003, p. 716). In case of human tra!cking, the "rst priority are the ways the victim is to be restored to her or his former status along with any property acquired either before the commission of o$ence, or otherwise. Let us observe "rst the rights of such restoration and prevalent mechanisms, and then their adequacy. Article 8(2) of the Palermo Protocol imposed the obligation for safe repatriation and preferably, that it be voluntary (Palermo Protocol, 2000, p. 45). Article IX of the SAARC Convention imposed obligations for care, protection, rehabilitation, and repatriation of victims of human tra!cking for commercial sexual exploitation (SAARC Convention, 2002). Repatriation is one of the components of restitution in the context of reparation to victims of human tra!cking.

Chapter XXXIV of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C., 1973, Section 451-459) provides for restitution of property while it does not address the restitution of persons with certain exceptional circumstances. Section 451 of the Act empowers the courts to order for custody and the disposal of property pending trial (Cr.P.C., 1973), while Section 452 authorises it to order for disposal of property at conclusion of trial (Cr.P.C, 1973). #is implies that at the conclusion of trial, the court may direct delivery of property in respect of which the crime is committed to the person entitled


92

to possession—that would naturally mean the victim of the crime. Property, for the purposes of section 452, does not include the original property alone, but also any property into which the same may have been converted or exchanged, or anything that is acquired by such conversion or exchange, immediately, or otherwise (Cr.P.C., 1973). #e concept of “proceeds of crime,” that has been included in any other statute "nds its rudimentary source in this de"nition. It makes possible for the restitution of the property to the victims. In Continental Agencies Pvt. Ltd v. A. C. Khanna (1980 CrLJ 689 SC, India) Supreme Court pointed out the duties of the Magistrate in relation to property under section 452 of the Code (Cr.P.C, 1973). It further held that if property cannot be delivered, the liable party should be directed to pay the value of the property to the claimant. Section 453 further expanded the scope to provide protection of any such victims who bought the stolen property innocently and without any knowledge (Cr.P.C., 1973). U/S 456 of Code when a person is convicted of an o$ence attended by criminal force or show of force or by criminal intimidation, and it appears to be court that, by such force or show of force or intimidation, any person has been dispossessed of any immovable property, the Court may, if it thinks "t, order that possession of the same be restored to that person a%er evicting by force, if necessary, any other person who may be in possession of the property (Cr.P.C., 1973). #us, it deals with restoration of possession in respect of properties, which are dispossessed by show of force or criminal intimidation.

Even though laws have made provisions for restitution, di!culty may arise in the case where either the property has been destroyed—as in the case of violence, riots etc.—or it is in the custody of one who bona"dely purchased the property. In both

circumstances there is the requirement of resources for ful"llment of restitution. #ere may be circumstances where the resources of the accused seem inadequate for restitution. #erefore, the need arises for forming a corpus that will help in accomplishing the goal of reparation by means of restitution. #e other major problem arises because of a lack of mechanisms for the restitution or rehabilitation of victims. #e process of restitution of victims in other countries faces the further challenge of collaboration and cooperation. #e SAARC Convention imposed the obligation for mutual legal assistance in respect of investigations, inquiries, trials or other proceedings including locating and identifying person (SAARC Convention, 2002, Art. 7). But due to lack of e$ective coordination between India and Bangladesh, the victims of tra!cking who are waiting for repatriation at di$erent correctional institutions in India have to su$er immeasurable di!culties (#omas, 2011, p. 17). #us, in reality, India lacked, or rather failed to ful"ll, its legal obligation of restitution in most circumstances.

Compensation to Victims of Human

Tra�cking

#ere may be circumstances in which it becomes di!cult to provide restitution to the victim, or even where restitution is made, it may be insu!cient to ensure full reparation. In these circumstances, the role of compensation is to "ll in gaps so as to ensure full reparation for the damage su$ered. #e Permanent Court in Factory at Chorzow (Merits, 1928, P.C.I.J, Series A, No. 17, p. 47), articulated the mode of determining compensation in the following words:

…[r]estitution in kind, or, if this is not possible, payment of a sum corresponding to the value which a restitution in kind would


93

bear; the award, if need be, of damages for loss sustained which would not be covered by restitution in kind or payment in place of it such are the principles which should serve to determine the amount of compensation due for an act contrary to international law (p. 47). #e Basic Principles and Guidelines provide that compensation should be provided for any economically assessable damage as appropriate and proportional to the gravity of the violation and the circumstances of each case resulting from gross violations of international human rights law and serious violations of international humanitarian law, such as: (a) physical or mental harm; (b) loss of the opportunities, including employment, education and social bene"ts; (c) material damages and loss of earnings, including loss of earning potential; (d) moral damage; (e) costs required for legal or expert assistance, medicine and medical services, and psychological and social services (Basic Principles, 2005, Art. 20).

In India, compensation to victims of crimes is duly recognized under the criminal statute (Cr.P.C., 1973, Sec. 357), but most signi"cantly, compensation to the victims of crime is frequently awarded by constitutional courts for violation of their human rights. In Chairman, Railway Board V. Chandrima Das Case (2000-2-SCC 465, India), the court awarded compensation of one million rupees to the victim of a gang rape who was a foreign national.

Further, the Apex Court in the case of Shakila Abdul Ga$ar Khan V. Vassant Raghunath Dhoble (2003-7- SCC 749, India), directed the payment of compensation of one lac rupees to the mother and children of the deceased as a palliative measure under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, while acquitting the accused persons of the charge

of murder. In the Uttarakhand Stir (Rallyyist) Case (1988 CriLJ 493, India) in which 24 persons were killed by police "ring into a crowd, seven women were raped, 17 were sexually molested, and in which many other were injured and illegally detained, the court awarded compensation of one million rupees to each of the heirs of the deceased and one million rupees for the rape victims, equating the gravity of the o$ence of rape with murder. Other victims were also awarded compensation ranging from "%y thousand rupees to "ve lacs rupees depending of nature and gravity of injury sustained. Even the Supreme Court granted interim compensation pending trial in the Bodhisattwa Goutam V. Subhra Chakraborty (1996-1- SCC 490, India) where the Court granted interim compensation of one thousand rupees per month to a victim of rape pending criminal trial on the principle that the o$ence of rape, in fact, violated the fundamental right to life of the victim as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution. #is is, in fact, a recognition of the principle of law that the private individual may also be held liable for violation of human rights. #ese cases exemplify the activist role of the court in granting compensation to victims of crime within the constitutional framework, but still India has not developed strong jurisprudence for providing compensation within its procedural law. Section 357 of the Code empowers the Court to grant compensation. It provides that when a court imposes a sentence of "ne or a sentence where the "ne forms a part, the Court may, while passing the judgment and order, direct that whole or any part of the "ne recovered may be applied in defraying the expenses incurred by the prosecution or in compensating the victim of such crime. #e provision gives discretionary power to the Court to direct the whole or part of the "ne to be utilized for defraying the expenses in prosecution and/or compensating victims. If


94

the "ne is not a part of the o$ence then the court may, in its discretion award adequate compensation. Such amount awarded by way of compensation shall be taken into consideration in the subsequent civil suit "led over the same matter. #is provision has limited application particularly when the accused does not have personal resources to pay "ne or compensation (Cr.P.C., 1973). To remedy this situation, the 2008 Amendment of the Code added 357A (Khastgir, 2011, p. 1312) suggested the establishment of a victim compensation fund. #e "rst sentence of the provision provides that,

…[e]very State Government in coordination with the Central Government shall prepare a scheme for providing fund for the purpose of compensation to the victim or his dependent who have su$ered loss or injury as the result of the crime and who require rehabilitation (p.1317).

While the legislation was passed by federal government but the major responsibility is shi%ed to the state government which resulted in rarely any state coming forward to prepare a scheme for providing funds for the purpose of compensation. #e establishment of any scheme shall invariably involve allocation of resources for the corpus that may be the reason for avoidance by the states. As a result, this provision, despite being on the statute books since (2009), is dysfunctional and has no use in reality.

#e Supreme Court in Palaniappa Gounder V. State of Tamilnadu (1977-2-SCC 634, India), Sarawar Singh V. State of Punjab (1978-4-SCC 111, India), among others, has laid down the factors that a Court ought to consider when granting compensation under Section 357 of the Code such as: (a) the nature and gravity of the o$ence; (b) the injury su$ered by the victim; (c) the motivation for

the crime; (d) the pecuniary gain likely to have been made by the o$ender by committing the crime; (e) the needs of the victim’s family; (f) the justness of the claim for compensation; and (g) other circumstances of the case. In the case of Mangilal v. State (2004 SCC Cri. 1085, India), the Court held that the accused must be heard prior to awarding any compensation in consonance with principles of natural justice. In Hari Krishna v. Sukhbir Singh (AIR 1988 SC 2127), the apex court opined for liberal use of Section 357 of the Code and award of adequate compensation to victim, more particularly when an accused is released on admonition, probation, or when the parties enter into compromise. #e importance of the provision was highlighted by court in the following words:Section 357 of Cr.P.C is an important provision but Courts have seldom invoked it, perhaps due to ignorance of the object of it. #is section of law empowers the Court to award compensation while passing judgment of conviction. In addition to conviction, the Court may order the accused to pay some amount by way of compensation to the victim who has su$ered by the action of the accused. #is power to award compensation is not ancillary to other sentences but it is in addition thereto.

It is a measure of responding appropri-ately to crime as well as reconciling the vic-tim with the o$ender. It is, to some extent, a constructive approach to crimes. It is indeed a step forward in our criminal justice system (p. 5).

It is surprising that while constitution-al courts within their constitutional power grant a reasonable amount as compensation for violation of constitutional rights, the crim-inal trial courts rarely grant a decent amount as compensation. Section 357 empower the


95

trial court to grant compensation while de-ciding any criminal case (Cr.P.C., 1973, Sec. 357), but they seldom exercise this legal pow-er and sometimes grant such a minor amount as compensation which is itself derogatory to the victims. For instance the value of death, in terms of compensation, was just Rs. 10000/- (USD $200) as decided in Guruswamy v. State of Tamil Nadu (1979- 3- SCC 797), while for the rape of a rural women, it was just Rs. 3000 and Rs. 10000 (250 USD) as awarded in Kun-himon v. State (1988 CriLJ 493).

#e Code, even though it provides for compensation, has limited scope on: (a) when accused was not convicted; (b) the limited amount of compensation, unless the accused has su!cient resources and court is sensitive to the issue of victim rights; (c) there is no uniformity in determining the quantum of compensation; and (d) if the accused does not have resources, the chances of realisation of reasonable compensation is relatively low. Accordingly, we need a strong corpus from where compensation to the victims can be given, thus, making Section 357A functional. #e source of funds for the corpus could be contributory and Trust Fund for Victim established by Statute of ICC (ICC, 1998, Art. 79) could be a model in this regard for India. Rehabilitation of victims of human tra!cking#e Basic Principles and Guidelines provide that rehabilitation should include medical and psychological care, as well as legal and social services. Rehabilitation is also one of the important forms of reparation. In circumstances in which restitution is not possible, the victim needs to be rehabilitated. In most circumstances, rehabilitation is required to be provided, in addition to compensation. Although rehabilitation is a human right for all victims, there is no constructive legal framework under which rehabilitation can be provided. While this involves resources, a lack of resources is not grounds for non-ful"llment of basic human rights. #e Ministry of Women and Child Development

(Government of India) formulated a National Plan of Action to Combat Tra!cking and Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Women and Children in 1998 (NPA, 1998), with the objective of mainstreaming and reintegrating women and child victims of commercial sexual exploitation. #is relatively sound document envisages probable initiatives to be taken for the rehabilitation of victims. #e Ministry, jointly with UNODC, has also formulated a protocol for pre-rescue, rescue, and post-rescue operations of child victims of tra!cking for the purpose of commercial sexual exploitation (Rescue and Post-rescue Protocol, 1998), but uneven implementation of these guidelines has led to failure to ful"ll its obligation to provide for the rehabilitation of victims. #e guidelines provide for temporary shelter, vocational training, and other empowerment mechanisms, but the lack of complete planning for rehabilitation and an absence of institutional structures in place of rehabilitation means the majority of victims either remain in correctional homes for a longer time, or a%er some time, are re-tra!cked. Most of the work in this regard is carried out by NGOs in India. To ful"ll such rights again it is necessary to not only formulate a plan of action, but to implement that plan. #is can only be possible when the government is serious about its e$orts.

Satisfaction: Do Our Criminal Justice

System Satisfy the Victims?

#e ILC Articles on State responsibility (ILC, 2001, p. 104) enlisted satisfaction as “a third form,” of reparation that can preferably be used in cases were restitution or compensation fail to provide full reparation. Art. 37 (1) provides that, “..[s]tate responsible for an internationally wrongful act is under an obligation to give satisfaction for the injury caused by that act insofar as it cannot be made good by restitution or compensation.” Principle 22 of the Basic Principles and Guidelines enlists


96

Reparation to the Victims of Human Trafficking

Table 1

Global Law Enforcement Data

____________________________________________________________________________

Year Prosecutions Convictions Victims New/

Identified Amended

Legislation

2004 6885 3026

2005 6178 4379 40

2006 5808 3160 21

2007 5682 3427 28

2008 5212 2983 30961 26

2009 5606 4166 49105 33

2010 6017 3619 33113 17

2011 7206 4239 41210 15

_________________________________________________________________________

Source: Trafficking in Persons Report, 2012, Page 44.


a series of mechanisms by which this form of reparation can be provided. It states that satisfaction should include, where applicable, any or all of the following:

(a) E$ective measures aimed at the cessation of continuing violations; (b) Veri"cation of the facts in full and public disclosure of the truth to the extent that such disclosure does not cause further harm or threaten the safety and interests of the victim, the victim’s relatives, witnesses, or persons who have intervened to assist the victim or prevent the occurrence of further violations; (c) #e search for the whereabouts of the disappeared person, for the identities of the children

abducted, and for the bodies of those killed, and assistance in the recovery, identi"cation and reburial of the bodies in accordance with the expressed or presumed wish of the victims, or the cultural practices of the families and communities; (d) An o!cial declaration or a judicial decision restoring the dignity, the reputation and the rights of the victim and of persons closely connected with the victim; (e) Public apology, including acknowledgment of the facts and acceptance of responsibility; (f) Judicial and administrative sanctions against persons liable for the violations; (g) Commemorations and tributes to the victims. To provide satisfaction to the victims, two basic issues that need to be addressed in

97

India are e$ective investigation of cases that may include registration of cases, identifying victims, rescue and post rescue initiatives, collection of su!cient evidence against o$enders, and successful prosecution of the o$ender so that whatever punishment the o$ender deserves, this should be delivered. Again, the harsh reality of global criminal justice administration has failed to provide this basic form of reparation because of its failure to prosecute o$enders. #e "gures presented in Table 1 testify to this situation (see TIP, 2012). While the estimated number of persons tra!cked globally is approximately 20.9 million, successful prosecutions of tra!ckers in 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011 were only 2,983, 4,166, 3,619 and 4,239 persons respectively. It shows the limited successful prosecution compared with number of o$enses committed. Similarly the number of victims identi"ed in 2011 was 41,210 compared to millions of tra!cking victims demonstrating the global failure to investigate the o$ence. According to the Crime in India Report (2011), the total number of girls and women abducted was approximately 35,565 that are far lower than the estimation made by di$erent organization that again shows failure on the part of investigating agency to identify the victims and prosecute o$ender. Rarely do we get information about successful prosecutions of tra!ckers which might be because of the hidden nature of the crime and rarely are such matters reported to law enforcement agencies. But whatever the reasons for a lower recording of cases, it only establishes the failure of administration to provide satisfaction to tra!cking victims which is a basic requirement within human right jurisprudence.

Conclusions

Human tra!cking is a crime necessitating


immediate attention, both globally and in domestic jurisdictions (Nair, 2009). #e survival of humanity in dignity, liberty and safety demands an environment where tra!cking of human beings, from the babe in the wombs to the corpse in the co!n, is abolished by stern statutory process which is enforced by plural instrumentalities, specialized institutions, aware intelligentsia and committed social organizations. Today, human tra!cking, in its widest connotation, is so prevalent and rampant that this torture some slavery, of some sort or the other, terrorizes the community (p. 1).

While there have been initiatives taken at the global, regional, and national levels, the action taken to address the problem has been disparate, even at the theoretical level. Even though criminal justice systems have prioritized human rights based initiatives for protection of victims, both types of initiative can be merged if anti-human tra!cking initiatives are based on the principle of reparation. #e principle of reparation, on the one hand addresses the issues of support to victims by providing restitution, compensation, and rehabilitation, and on the other hand, imposes an obligation for e$ective investigation and prosecution that will not only provide satisfaction, but also ful"ll the aspirations of society at large. In the present scenario, India has failed to ful"ll its obligation in providing all four classes of reparation namely (a) restitution, (b) compensation, (c) rehabilitation and (d) satisfaction. #is means that there is not only requirement for legal reform by amending existing legislation to make it conform to international legal obligations, but also domestic practice has to be synchronized with legal requirements. Any such initiative to bolster domestic practices requires the creation of an adequate institutional support system. #e future of anti-human tra!cking

98

initiatives lies within a human rights framework of reparation that can address the needs of both victims and wider society.Received 7 April 2013; accepted 21 February, 2014;published online 31 march 2014.

References� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �� ! " � � # � � � � $ � % � � � # & ' � () � % % # ( # � � * � � ' # � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � .� � ' $ �0 � ( ( # � � � # � 1 � ) � � � � � � � � 2 � � � 3 4 5 6 7 8 97 : 9 ; 5 < 6 5 = � � 3 4 � 6 6 7 8 9 5 > 8 � ? � � , � ( ( � � 1 �) ' � � # , 0 � ( ( # � � � # � ( � / % # � � � � # � � @ @ � � � � � @ �A # � ' ) � % % # ( ( # � � � � ( � � � � # � � � B B B . C C � D .) " � � . � � � � . E � � � � � � � � � � � � � F � � � + � �� # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . � � G � H �0 � � � ' � � � � � � � � � � � I � � � ( � � � � # ( , � @ � # � � � � � � �� ' � D � � � � � � � ) � � � � � � $ � % � � � # & ' � ( � J � 1 �� & � K K # � D � � � � � � 9 5 8 � � 9 � 7 � � 3 4 5 L 6 7 � L � M � 3 � 9 NO 7 � � N P Q L L � N L � � R 5 S 7 8 N 7 : T L = � 8 < = ; � = ; 9 5 8 UH � # � � � � " H * - 1 � � � # � � ( " # V ' � , , �W 7 � ; � L � 9 9 X � Y 7 > 9 � S Z U < > M ; 8 � [ ; � \ 8 � M 7 8 9 N� � B B E ] � ] � ) ) � B � � J � � # � �0 � � � # & � # � � � � J � � � � � � � � 4 5 � 8 5 L L : 7 8 Z � = 9 � S L7 : [ 8 � S 5 ^ � � 5 8 � � 9 5 8 � � 9 � 7 � � 3 _ � X ! H � # � � � .0 � ( � � � - 1 � � � # � � ( " # V ' � , , �[ ; � � 8 S � � ! 4 � � 3 X � N W 7 � 8 � Z U [ ; � � � 8 � S � ` � L [ � L 5� � � � � ] � ] � ) ) � E I � J � � # � �[ 7 � 9 � � 5 � 9 � 3 a b 5 � = � 5 L c d 9 U _ 9 � d U a U [ U e ; � � � � � � B �) � H E B � ) � J � � # � �) � � + � � � # � � � J f � � � � � � # + � � � � ' � � � � � � @ � # � � � , ) # + # � # � �? � � ( � � ( # � � # % � � , g � � � � F � � � + � J f � � � � � � � � �� ' � � & � ( � � B � B � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � �� . � C / E � C h) � � � @ # � � , D � � � � � � � � B I � � � [ 7 � d 5 � 9 � 7 � : 7 8 9 ; 5c 8 7 9 5 = 9 � 7 � 7 : i > S � � 4 � b ; 9 L � � � 2 > � � � S 5 � 9 � 32 8 5 5 � 7 S L � L � S 5 � � 5 � M N c 8 7 9 7 = 7 3 L j 7 U k k� � � j 7 U k l 4 7 S 5 ! l U m � U k n o � � � � � � � � � � � � � '" � + � % / � � � � B I � � � � � � � � � � � # � � � , � � @ � � �� % / � � � B I C � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � .p B � q r) � � � @ # � � , D � � � � � � � � � � E � � Z � = 9 � S s < > 6 6 7 8 9 � � �a L L � L 9 � � = 5 U � � � � ( / � � & - ) � � � @ # � � , D � � � � �? � / � # ( ' # � & � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � �� . � E t f / A �) � # % # � � � J � V � � # � ( ) � % � � � ( � � # � � � � � ' � � # � � I 1 � � @ ' � � � C � �[ 8 � S � � � 3 � � u > 8 � 5 L [ 7 S 6 5 � L � 9 � 7 � < = ; 5 S 5 � ) J ) � � �

� � � � � � v � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . J w � K " �x � @ � � � � � ) ' � � K � A � F � � % � + � ? � � � � � � B � ? � ) � J � �� ( � � � � � " � � � w � � � � � � � C � � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . ./ # � � � . � � G � $ IF � � � � & ' � � � y � � � � � � � � � � O ; 5 � � 9 5 8 � � 9 � 7 � � 3 _ � X 7 :" t - ) � % / � # � & � p � # + � � ( # � ? � � ( ( �F � � ) ' # � � � � � z ( � @ � � � � � � � F � � � @ � " � � � � , � � � C �� ] w ] � � � C � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � �� . � / F w � JY > 8 > L X � S N d U < 9 � 9 5 7 : O � S � 3 j � � >� � B w B ] C ] � ) ) w B w �i � 8 � e 8 � L ; � � d U < > \ ; M � 8 < � � b ; � � J � � B � ) � � � w �J � � � � � � � # � � � � ) � % % # � � � � � , � ' � � � � ) � � ( ( � � � � & � ( �� B � B � � Y 5 � 5 d � [ 7 � d 5 � 9 � 7 � { � | 2 7 8 O ; 5a S 5 3 � 7 8 � 9 � 7 � T : O ; 5 [ 7 � � � 9 � 7 � T : O ; 5} 7 > � � 5 � a � � < � = \ � � a 8 S 5 � 2 7 8 = 5 L � � O ; 52 � 5 3 � T : a > b > L 9 k � ! k n l n � F � � � + � � � A # � K � � � � � � -J ) � ) � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . q � K ~ � �J � � � � � � � # � � � � ) � % % # � � � � � , � ' � � � � ) � � ( ( � � � � & � ( �� B � B � � [ 7 � d 5 � 9 � 7 � { � � | : 7 8 9 ; 5 a S 5 3 � 7 8 � 9 � 7 �7 : 9 ; 5 [ 7 � � � 9 � 7 � 7 : } 7 > � � 5 � ! < � = \ � � �< ; � 6 X 8 5 = \ 5 � R 5 S M 5 8 L 7 : a 8 S 5 � 2 7 8 = 5 L � 9< 5 � U F � � � + � � � � � � & � ( � � B � B � F � � � + � - J ) � ) �� # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . � C G D $ ~ &J � � � � � � � # � � � � ) � % % # � � � � � , � ' � � � � ) � � ( ( � � � � & � ( �� B � B � � [ 7 � d 5 � 9 � 7 � { � � � | 8 5 3 � 9 � d 5 9 7 9 ; 5 O 8 5 � 9 S 5 � 97 : } � 8 ! � F � � � + � J J J � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ' � � & � ( � �� B � B � F � � � + � � � A # � K � � � � � � - J ) � ) � � � � � # � + � �, � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . � � g J F q ~J � � � � � � � # � � � � ) � % % # � � � � � , � ' � � � � ) � � ( ( � � � � & � ( �� B � B � � [ 7 � d 5 � 9 � 7 � { � Z | 8 5 3 � 9 � d 5 9 7 9 ; 56 8 7 9 5 = 9 � 7 � 7 : [ � d � 3 � � � c 5 8 L 7 � L � � 9 � S 5 7 : } � 8 !� F � � � + � J f � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ' � � & � ( � � B � B �� # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . � C / E � C hJ � � � � � � � # � � � � ? � � @ � ) � � , � � � � @ � � � � B � w � � [ 7 � d 5 � 9 � 7 �{ � Z | 8 5 L 6 5 = 9 � � b 9 ; 5 _ � X L � � � [ > L 9 7 S L 7 :} � 8 7 � _ � � � � � � � 9 L � � � 5 � P 4 5 b > 3 � 9 � 7 � L= 7 � = 5 8 � � � b 9 ; 5 _ � X L � � � [ > L 9 7 S L 7 : } � 8 7 �_ � � � U y ' � $ � & � � � � ~ @ � � / � � � B � w � � � � � � � �� ~ @ � � / � � � B � w � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � �� . � / F I G � x$ � ( ( � # � � q � � � � � B � � p " � F J x y J � � � � + # � A - $ � % � �q � � # � $ � ( ( � # � � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � �� . � � $ x g � � �J � , � � % � � # � � y � @ ' � � � � & � @ � � � � � � � � @ � " � � � � � , � � � �� B � ' � � � � � � � � � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . .# � � # � @ � � � � � # @ � # � .J � � � � � � � # � � � � H � A ) � % % # ( ( # � � � � � � � � � � ` 8 � : 9 a 8 9 � = 3 57 � 4 5 L 6 7 � L � M � 3 � 9 N 7 : < 9 � 9 5 L : 7 8 � � 9 5 8 � � 9 � 7 � � 3 3 N} 8 7 � b : > 3 a = 9 L � � � � � � � � F � � � � � � � ( ( � % / �


99 � � ( � � � � # � � I E . C � , � � * � @ � % / � � � � � � � � � �@ � � � � @ � � � / � � @ � % � � � � . I E . � B � f � � � J � . ) � � � �� # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . B � h H A (r ' � � � � � � � � � � � w � � 4 � b ; 9 L 7 : 9 ; 5 Z � = 9 � S L s 4 5 6 � 8 � 9 � 7 �M N � � 9 5 8 � � 9 � 7 � � 3 [ 8 � S � � � 3 [ 7 > 8 9 � " � A * � � ' # -� ? $ ? � / � # ( ' # � & ) � � � � � � � # � � �r ' � ( � & # � � � ( � # @ � � � � � � � � � [ 8 � S � � � 3 R � u 7 8 a = 9 L Ur � � � � � � � J � � # � - r � % � � H � A $ � � ( � �e > � ; � S 7 � d U < 9 � 9 5 � � B ) � # � H � � � B C � �R � � b � 3 � 3 d U < 9 � 9 5 � � � � � � ) ) ) � # � � � I � J � � # � � �1 # � # ( � � � , D � � � � � � � � , , � # � ( � J � � # � � � C � � � � B I � � �O 8 5 � 9 N < 5 8 � 5 L P O 8 5 � 9 N T : c 5 � = 5 a � � 2 8 � 5 � � L ; � 6W 5 9 X 5 5 � O ; 5 Y 7 d 5 8 � S 5 � 9 T : � � � � � a � � O ; 5Y 7 d 5 8 � S 5 � 9 T : j 5 6 � 3 � k n o � � � � 9 L 5 8 k � U� � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . � / F w � p E1 # � # ( � � � , H � A � � ( � # @ � � � � ) � % � � � � , , � # � (� * � @ � % / � � � � � � � � O ; 5 � > d 5 � � 3 5 � > L 9 � = 5 { [ � 8 5� � � c 8 7 9 5 = 9 � 7 � 7 : [ ; � 3 � 8 5 � | a = 9 ! � � � � ! � @ � " � �I E � , � � � � � C � * � @ � % / � � � � � � � � � � � � # � + � �, � � % ' � � � - . . # � � # � @ � � � � � # @ � # � .1 # � # ( � � � , g � % � � � � � ) ' # � � * � + � � � � % � � � � 1 g ) * � �� B B � � j � 9 � 7 � � 3 c 3 � � 7 : a = 9 � 7 � 9 7 [ 7 S M � 9Q � 6 3 7 � 9 � 9 � 7 � 7 : } 7 S 5 � � � � [ ; � 3 � 8 5 � ! k n n � �� # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . � B , y I t �1 # � # ( � � � , g � % � � � � � ) ' # � � * � + � � � � % � � � � 1 g ) * � �� E � � c 8 7 9 7 = 7 3 : 7 8 6 8 5 � 8 5 L = > 5 ! 8 5 L = > 5 � � �6 7 L 9 � 8 5 L = > 5 7 6 5 8 � 9 � 7 � L 7 : = ; � 3 � d � = 9 � S 7 : �� # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . A @ � � � # @ � # � . �" � # � � ? � 1 � � � � � B � �[ ; � 3 3 5 � b 5 L � � � 4 5 L 6 7 � L 5 L U " � A * � � ' # -r � � � � � �" � � # � � � � ) � # % � � � @ � � � ( 0 � � � � � � � " ) � 0 � � � � � � � � �[ 8 � S 5 � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . .� @ � / � � # @ � # � ." * y f " � A ( � � � � � � # � � � � � � � � a 9 8 � 6 9 7 � 6 � 8 9 7 :W 5 � b � 3 X ; 5 8 5 ; > S � � L � 8 5 M 7 > b ; 9 � � � L 7 3 �5 d 5 8 N � � N U � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . $ y � E ) C$ � % � � � # & ' � ( � ~ $ ) $ � � � ^ � � d 5 8 L � 3` 5 = 3 � 8 � 9 � 7 � 7 : i > S � � 4 � b ; 9 L ! k n l � � � � � � � � � / F � � � � � � � ( ( � % / � / # � ( � � ( � � � � # � � � � w � � J J J �� , � � * � @ � % / � � � B � � F � � � + � � � A # � K � � � � � � -~ $ ) $ � � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . � � � G � w$ � % � � � # & ' � ( � ~ $ ) $ � � � [ 7 � d 5 � 9 � 7 � 7 �Q 3 � S � � � 9 � 7 � 7 : 4 � = � � 3 ` � L = 8 � S � � � 9 � 7 � ! k n � o �� / F � � � � � � � ( ( � % / � � � ( � � � � # � �� E � G G � � , � � * � @ � % / � � � B E I � � � � � � � �# � � � , � � @ � � � � � � � � � � B E B � F � � � + � �� A # � K � � � � � � - ~ $ ) $ � � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . .

/ # � � � . � � $ w p % �, � � $ � % � � � # & ' � ( � ~ $ ) $ � � � � � B E E � �� 9 5 8 � � 9 � 7 � � 3 [ 7 d 5 � � � 9 7 � [ � d � 3 � � � c 7 3 � 9 � = � 34 � b ; 9 L � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � , � � ( # & � � � � � � �� ( � � � � # � � � � � � � � G G J � � , � E * � @ � % / � � � B E E� � � � # � � � , � � @ � � C 1 � � @ ' � B w E � # � � @ @ � � � � � @ �A # � ' � � � # @ � � � B � F � � � + � � � A # � K � � � � � � -~ $ ) $ � � � � � � # + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . A A A � � ' @ ' � � � � & .D " . ? � � , � ( ( # � � � � J � � � � � ( � . ? � & � ( . ) ) ? � � � ( � �$ � % � � � # & ' � ( � ~ $ ) $ � � � [ 7 � d 5 � 9 � 7 �a b � � � L 9 O 7 8 9 > 8 5 � � � 7 9 ; 5 8 [ 8 > 5 3 ! � � ; > S � � 7 8` 5 b 8 � � � � b O 8 5 � 9 S 5 � 9 � � B � � � � � � � � � � � � � � '* � @ � % / � � � � B � � � � � � � � � � � # � � � , � � @ � � � � E � ' � � � � � B w � F � � � + � � � A # � K � � � � � � - ~ $ ) $ � �� # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . � � V q $ E (~ � & � � # K � � # � � � , � % � � # @ � � � � � � � ( � � B E B � � a S 5 8 � = � �[ 7 � d 5 � 9 � 7 � 7 � i > S � � 4 � b ; 9 L ! k n � n � ? � @ � ~ ,� � � � ( � � ) � ( � � � # @ � � � 0 ] C � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �" � + � % / � � � B E B � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � �� . � E t G @ / F~ � & � � # K � � # � � � , � , � # @ � � p � # � � � , � # @ � � p � # � � � � � � w � � � � B � � � a : 8 � = � � [ ; � 8 9 5 8 7 � i > S � � � � �c 5 7 6 3 5 L � 4 � b ; 9 L ! k n � k � � � � � � � � � � � w � ' � � � �� B � � � � � � � � � � � # � � � , � � @ � ~ @ � � � � � � B E �� # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . ' % I � 1 c � 3 � � � � 6 6 � Y 7 > � � 5 8 Z U < 9 � 9 5 7 : O � S � 3 � � � > � � B w w ] � ]� ) ) E C � � J � � # � �? � � � # � % � � � � , J � � # � � � B w � � � [ 7 � 5 7 : [ 8 � S � � � 3c 8 7 = 5 � > 8 5 ! k n � ! a = 9 j 7 U � 7 : k n � l � � 9 5 �� o 9 ; � � � > � 8 N ! k n � l � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . .# � � # � @ � � � � � # @ � # � . �? � � � # � % � � � � , J � � # � � � � � C � � ) 8 � S � � � 3 _ � X{ a S 5 � � S 5 � 9 | a = 9 ! � � k ! a = 9 U j 7 k 7 : � � k � � 9 5 � � � � a 6 8 � 3 � � k � � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . ./ # � � � . � C G x ? � C? � � � # � % � � � � , J � � # � � � B � E � � 2 7 8 5 � b � 5 8 L a = 9 ! k n l � ! a = 9j 7 U k 7 : k n l � � � � � � � C � � " � + � % / � � � � B � E �� # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . C � � � � +? � � � # � % � � � � , J � � # � � � B I E � � J{ c 8 5 d 5 � 9 � 7 � | a = 9 ! k n o � � @ � % � # � � � , � � @ � � � � ( �1 � � B I � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . � w � $ � J �? � � � # � % � � � � , J � � # � � � � � E � �{ c 8 5 d 5 � 9 � 7 � | a S 5 � � S 5 � 9 W � 3 3 ! � � � E � 0 # � �" � � � w � � � � E � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . A @ � � � # @ �# � . E � � � ( � � � ,? � � � # � % � � � � , � ' � p � # � � � r # � & � � % � , F � � � � 0 � # � � # �� " � � � ' � � � J � � � � � � � � � w � � � � � � � � � Q d � � 5 � = 5a = 9 ! k � � � � � @ � " � � � � , � w � � � � � � � I � ' 1 � � @ ' �� w � � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . # � � # � @ � � � � � # @ � # � .


100 ? � � � # � % � � � � , � ' � p � # � � � r # � & � � % � , F � � � � 0 � # � � # �� " � � � ' � � � J � � � � � � � � � � � � � c 5 � � 3 [ 7 � 5 ! k � � �� J ? ) � � � @ � " � � � I � , � E � � � � � � E � ' ~ @ � � / � � �� E � � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . # � � # � @ � � � � � # @ � # � .? � � � ( � � � D � � � � � � � � H � � � � � - � � � # ]� � � + � � J � � � � � � � # � � � � � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . ./ # � � � . & � 1 q ~ pc 8 7 9 7 = 7 3 a � � � 9 � 7 � � 3 9 7 9 ; 5 Y 5 � 5 d � [ 7 � d 5 � 9 � 7 � L7 : k � a > b > L 9 k n l n � � � 8 5 3 � 9 � � b 9 7 9 ; 5c 8 7 9 5 = 9 � 7 � 7 : Z � = 9 � S L 7 : � � 9 5 8 � � 9 � 7 � � 3 a 8 S 5 �� ' � � � �� B w w � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . � E t G � $ g� � � � � � K ' � , � � � � � � � y � % � ( @ ' � � � ) � � � B B B � � < 9 � 9 54 5 L 6 7 � L � M � 3 � 9 N � � � 9 ; 5 � � � � d � � > � 3 � 4 5 6 � 8 � 9 � 7 �� L 9 � � = 5 L 7 : Y 8 � d 5 Z � 7 3 � 9 � 7 � L 7 : i > S � �4 � b ; 9 L � * � � $ � & � � - r � � A � � H � A J � � � � � � � # � � � � �< � 8 � X � 8 < � � b ; Z U < 9 � 9 5 7 : c > � u � M � � B w ] � ] � ) ) � � � � J � � # � �< ; � \ � 3 � a M � > 3 Y � : : � 8 e ; � � Z U Z � L L � � 9 4 � b ; > � � 9 ; ` ; 7 M 3 5� � � � C ] w ] � ) ) w � B � J � � # � � �� ' � A � 1 � " � � � � � C � � � � 9 5 8 � � 9 � 7 � � 3 _ � X { o 9 ; U Q � � 9 � 7 � | UH � � � � � - ) � % / � # � & � p � # + � � ( # � ? � � ( ( �� ' � � � � � � * � � � � � � � � � 4 5 S 5 � � 5 L � � � � 9 5 8 � � 9 � 7 � � 3 i > S � �4 � b ; 9 L _ � X U H � � � � � - ~ � , � � � p � # + � � ( # � ? � � ( ( �� ' � � � � � � * � � � � � � / � � � � � � � � � # � � ( , � � f # @ � # % ( � ,� � 9 5 8 � � 9 � 7 � � 3 [ 8 � S 5 L U � � ` U < ; 5 3 9 7 � !� � 9 5 8 � � 9 � 7 � � 3 [ 8 � S 5 L ! c 5 � = 5 � � � i > S � �4 � b ; 9 L P O ; 5 4 7 3 5 7 : � � 9 5 8 � � 9 � 7 � � 3 [ 8 � S � � � 3[ 7 > 8 9 U " � A t � � � - y � � � ( � � � # � � � � �� # � & ' � 1 � ? � � � � � � � Z U j U < ; > \ 3 � � L [ 7 � L 9 � 9 > 9 � 7 �7 : � � � � � { k k 9 ; Q � � 9 � 7 � | � H � @ � � � A - D � ( � � � �0 � � � ) � % � � � �� ' � ( # � � � ( ( � @ # � � # � � x � � � � & # � � � � ) � � � � � � � # � �� ) � � � I � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � )[ 7 � d 5 � 9 � 7 � 7 � c 8 5 d 5 � 9 � � b � � � [ 7 S M � 9 � � bc 8 7 L 9 � 9 > 9 � 7 � � � � � � � � � � � I � ' � � � � � � � � � �� # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . � C / E f G @y ' � % � ( � � � D � � � � � � � � �� W � � b 3 � � 5 L ; ! � � � � � ! j 5 6 � 3 � � � < 8 � _ � � \ � !p " ~ * ) � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . � C / I A � (p � # � � � " � � # � � ( � � � B w B � � [ 7 � d 5 � 9 � 7 � 7 � Q 3 � S � � � 9 � 7 �7 : a 3 3 2 7 8 S L 7 : ` � L = 8 � S � � � 9 � 7 � � b � � � L 9 } 7 S 5 � !k n � n ! � � � � � � � / p � # � � � " � � # � � ( F � � � � � �� ( ( � % / � � � � * � @ � % / � � � B w B � � � � � � � � � �# � � � , � � @ � � � C � � � � � % / � � � B � " � A t � � � - p "g � % � � � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . � & ~ % tp � # � � � " � � # � � ( � � � B I � � ` 5 = 3 � 8 � 9 � 7 � 7 : W � L � =c 8 � � = � 6 3 5 L 7 : � > L 9 � = 5 : 7 8 Z � = 9 � S L 7 : [ 8 � S 5 � � �a M > L 5 7 : c 7 X 5 8 � F � � � � � � � ( ( � % / � � � ( � � � � # � �� . C � � � � � � � � � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � .y A A I # &

p � # � � � " � � # � � ( � � B B � � 4 7 S 5 < 9 � 9 > 9 5 7 : � � 9 5 8 � � 9 � 7 � � 3[ 8 � S � � � 3 [ 7 > 8 9 � p � " � * � @ � . ) ~ " x � � C . B �� w � � � B B � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . ./ # � � � . I � � � � �p " � � / ] ) � % % # ( ( # � � � � � ' � ? � � % � � # � � ? � � + � � � # � �� , * # ( @ � # % # � � � # � � � � � ? � � � � @ � # � � � , 1 # � � � # � # � ( �< 9 > � N = 7 � = 5 8 � � � b 9 ; 5 8 � b ; 9 9 7 8 5 L 9 � 9 > 9 � 7 � != 7 S 6 5 � L � 9 � 7 � � � � 8 5 ; � M � 3 � 9 � 9 � 7 � : 7 8 d � = 9 � S L7 : b 8 7 L L d � 7 3 � 9 � 7 � L 7 : ; > S � � 8 � b ; 9 L � � �M N O ; 5 7 d � � W 7 d 5 � ! < 6 5 = � � 3 4 � 6 6 7 8 9 5 > 8 ! � � � � B B C � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . � ) � � & � �p � # � � � " � � # � � ( � � � � � I � � W � L � = c 8 � � = � 6 3 5 L � � �Y > � � 5 3 � � 5 L 7 � 9 ; 5 4 � b ; 9 9 7 � 4 5 S 5 � N � � �4 5 6 � 8 � 9 � 7 � : 7 8 Z � = 9 � S L 7 : Y 8 7 L L Z � 7 3 � 9 � 7 � L 7 :� � 9 5 8 � � 9 � 7 � � 3 i > S � � 4 � b ; 9 L _ � X � � � < 5 8 � 7 > LZ � 7 3 � 9 � 7 � L 7 : � � 9 5 8 � � 9 � 7 � � 3 i > S � � � 9 � 8 � � �_ � X ! ) � $ � � � � � ( � � � � I . C I � p � " � * � @ � D .) " � � . � � � I . H � � � . � � � � � � � � B � � � # � � � � I � �� # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � � � . , 1 � & rp " J ) D x � � � � " � + � % / � � � B B � � [ 7 � d 5 � 9 � 7 � 7 �9 ; 5 4 � b ; 9 L 7 : 9 ; 5 [ ; � 3 � ! k n � n � � � � � � � � / F � � � � � �� ( ( � % / � � � ( � � � � # � � � � . � I � � � " � + � % / � �� B B � � � � � � � � � � # � � � , � � @ � � � � � � � % / � � � B B � �" � A t � � � - p " J ) D x � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � �� . � I # ) � $p " ~ * ) � F � + � � � % � � � � , J � � # � � � � � � w � � c 8 7 9 7 = 7 3T � � � 9 5 8 < 9 � 9 5 4 5 L = > 5 a � � c 7 L 9 4 5 L = > 5a = 9 � d � 9 � 5 L@ � % % � � @ # � � ( � � � � � � � � � � # � � � # � � � " � A * � � ' # -� � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . A @ � � � # @ � # � . �p " ~ * ) � � � � � B � �c 5 8 L 7 � L U p " ~ * ) - f # � � � � � � � � � # � + � � , � � %' � � � - . . / # � � � . � � � � � 'p " ~ * ) J ( ( � � ? � � � � � � � � � C � � � L L > 5 c � 6 5 8 P a M > L 5 7 :� 6 7 L � 9 � 7 � 7 : d > 3 � 5 8 � M � 3 � 9 N � � � 7 9 ; 5 8 � S 5 � � L �" t - p " ~ * ) � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � �� . � E � � � yp � � � * � � � � � % � � � � , � ( � # @ � � p � * ~ � � � � � � � � � [ 8 � S 5Z � = 9 � S L � 4 � b ; 9 L a = 9 ! � � � l ! k � ^ U < U [ U � � � k �� @ � � � # � ~ @ � � / � � � � � � � � � � � � # � + � � , � � %' � � � - . . � � � ( � � & � + . � � ~ � $ � �p � � � * � � � � � % � � � � , � � � � � � � � � � � � � O ; 5 Z � = 9 � S L 7 :� � � � � ? � H � � � E ] C E � � � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � �� . � C G x ? � Cp � � � * � � � � � % � � � � , � � � � � � � � � � � � �4 5 6 7 8 9 � � k � � p � # � � � � � � � � ( � , � % � � # @ � �� # � + � � � � 1 � � E � � � � C � , � � % ' � � � - . . � � � ( � �& � + . r ~ � h w F


101 ^ 9 9 � 8 � \ ; � � � < 9 � 8 { 4 � 3 3 N N � L 9 | [ � L 5 � � B ) � # H � B C � J � � # � �f � � 0 � + � � � y � � � B B E � � y ' � � # & ' � � � � � ( � # � � � # � � �@ � % � � � ( � � # � � � � � � � ' � / # � # � � � # � � , � � + # @ � # % (� , & � � ( ( + # � � � � # � � ( � , ' � % � � � # & ' � ( � � �, � � � � % � � � � � , � � � � � % ( � J � F � � � , � � � ( ( � � � � ? �1 � @ � � # ( � � � ] � % # � ' � O ; 5 _ � d � � b _ � X 7 : j � 9 � 7 � L U� � � � ( / � � � & - " � ? � D � & � � �? � � � # � % � � � � � � � � � � # � & ) � % % # � � � � � � $ � % � �� ( � � � @ � * � + � � � � % � � � � � � � � E � � O ; 5 � S S 7 8 � 3� � c � 8 3 � � S 5 � 9 U � � � � # � + � � , � � % ' � � � - . . / # � �� . � � , G p � �


Reparation tothe Victims of Human Trafficking for Commercial Sexual Exploitation in India:...

Documents

Transcript of Reparation tothe Victims of Human Trafficking for Commercial Sexual Exploitation in India:...