Senior Malaysian Immigration Official Charged With Selling A Burmese Immigrant

[kensington]

Kuala Lumpur 27/07/2009: A Malaysian immigration official was charged with selling an illegal immigrant from Burma to human traffickers at the country’s border with Thailand, his lawyer said on Monday. Rahman Selamat, a senior immigration official from southern Johor state, pleaded innocent to human trafficking charges, his lawyer Wan Mohamad Fadzil Maamor said.

If found guilty, Rahman faces up to 15 years in prison. The court in northern Kelantan state refused bail for Rahman pending trial on Aug 25, Wan Mohamad Fadzil said. Further details were not immediately available.

Rahman was arrested July 17 with four other immigration officials and four bus drivers, who allegedly helped transport the migrants to the border. Police said investigations showed the immigration officers sold an unspecified number of Burmese migrants detained for living in Malaysia without valid travel documents to human traffickers at the Thai border for up to RM600 each.

The traffickers then allegedly took the migrants into Thailand and told them to pay RM2,000 each for their freedom, or they would be forced to work in the fishing industry, police said.

It was unclear if the other Malaysian officials or bus drivers accused of involvement would also be charged. The officials did not specify the ethnicity of the migrants, but most Burmese who try to enter Malaysia are ethnic Rohingya Muslims.

In April, a report by the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations said illegal Burmese migrants deported from Malaysia were forced to work in brothels, restaurants and on fishing boats in Thailand if they had no money to buy their freedom.

The United Nations refugee agency has registered more than 48,000 refugees in Malaysia, most from Burma. But community leaders estimate the number of Burmese in Malaysia is about twice that. Edited from AP.


http://sjsandteam.wordpress.com/200...ial-charged-with-selling-a-burmese-immigrant/

http://thesail.wordpress.com/2009/01/29/are-malaysian-officials-trafficking-burmese-migrants/

http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/tiprpt/2009/123137.htm

 

[kensington]

Identifying and Helping Trafficking Victims

What Should You Do If You Are a Victim of Trafficking and Need Help or if You Suspect That Someone has been Trafficked?



Signs That Someone Might Be a Trafficking Victim

As governments, law enforcement, relief or health workers, and NGOs work to combat human trafficking, it is essential to properly screen for victims of human trafficking.

The screening process begins with an assessment of indicators that can be evaluated before interviewing an individual. The Department of Health and Human Services' (HHS) "Look Beneath the Surface" anti-trafficking public awareness campaign recommends that the following indicators can flag potential victims:

Evidence of being controlled, evidence of inability to move or leave job;
Bruises or other signs of physical abuse;
Fear or depression;
Not speaking on own behalf and/or not speaking local language; or
No passport or other forms of identification or documentation.
If one or more of these indicators is present, the interviewer should pursue questions that will help identify the key elements of a trafficking scenario.

HHS recommends the following questions:

Why type of work do you do?
Are you being paid?
Can you leave your job if you want to?
Can you come and go as you please?
Have you or your family been threatened?
What are your working and living conditions like?
Where do you sleep and eat?
Do you have to ask permission to eat/sleep/go to the bathroom?
Are there locks on your doors/windows so you cannot get out?
Has your identification or documentation been taken from you?
By looking beneath the surface, a life might be saved.

 

[kensington]

SINGAPORE (Tier 2)

Singapore is a destination country for women and girls trafficked for the purpose of commercial sexual exploitation. Some women from Thailand and the Philippines who travel to Singapore voluntarily for prostitution or work are subsequently deceived or coerced into sexual servitude. Some foreign domestic workers are subject to conditions that may be indicative of labor trafficking, including physical or sexual abuse, confiscation of travel documents, confinement, inadequate food, rest, or accommodation, deceptions about wages or conditions of work, and improper withholding of pay. Some Singaporean men travel to countries in the region for child sex tourism.

The Government of Singapore does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however, it is making significant efforts to do so. Singapore secured convictions of two defendants for sex trafficking-related crimes, including the first conviction under a recently amended law criminalizing the commercial sexual exploitation of children between 16 and 18 years of age. Singapore strengthened the Conditions of Work Permits for foreign domestic workers and collected unpaid wages on behalf of such workers in 276 cases. The government did not take adequate measures to protect victims of trafficking particularly foreign domestic workers subjected to forced labor conditions. While Singapore has made progress in combating trafficking to date, it can and should do more to investigate and prevent trafficking and to identify and assist trafficking victims.

Recommendations for Singapore:

Prosecute the maximum possible number of cases involving the trafficking of children under the age of 18 for commercial sexual exploitation; prosecute employers and employment agencies who unlawfully confiscate workers’ passports as a means of intimidating workers or holding them in a state of involuntary servitude, or use other means to extract forced labor; expand investigations and prosecutions in adult sex trafficking cases; develop robust procedures to identify potential traffickers and trafficking victims by immigration officers at ports of entry and other law enforcement personnel; devote additional resources to systematically identifying and quantifying sex and labor trafficking within and across national borders, as well as indicators (such as certain unlawful labor practices) that are common associated with trafficking, and publish findings and follow-up; use the findings to improve the anti-trafficking training of police, immigration, and Ministry of Manpower officers, as well as judicial personnel, carry out targeted anti-trafficking law enforcement operations, conduct focused public information campaigns, and make appropriate adjustments to administrative rules or procedures relating to the prevention of trafficking or the protection of trafficking victims; study ways to make affordable legal aid to trafficking victims to enable them to obtain redress by pursuing civil suits against their traffickers; reduce the demand for commercial sex acts in Singapore by vigorously enforcing existing laws against importing women for purposes of prostitution, trafficking in women and girls, importing women or girls by false pretenses, living or trading on prostitution, and keeping brothels; increase cooperative exchange of information about potential trafficking issues with NGOs and foreign diplomatic missions in Singapore; conduct public awareness campaigns to inform citizens and residents of the recent amendments to the Penal Code and the penalties for involvement in trafficking for sexual exploitation or forced labor; and cooperate with foreign governments to institutionalize procedures for reporting, investigating, and prosecuting child sex tourism committed overseas by Singaporean citizens and permanent residents.

...

 

[kensington]

Prosecution
The Government of Singapore demonstrated some law enforcement efforts to combat trafficking in persons during the reporting year. Singaporean law criminalizes all forms of trafficking, through its Penal Code, Women’s Charter, Children and Young Persons Act, Employment of Foreign Manpower Act, Employment Agencies Act, Employment Agency Rules, and the Conditions of Work Permits for foreign domestic workers. Penalties prescribed for sex trafficking, including imprisonment, fines, and caning, are sufficiently stringent and commensurate with those prescribed for other grave crimes, as are penalties prescribed for labor trafficking. The Singapore Police Force investigated 54 reports of sex trafficking during the reporting period; two cases resulted in prosecutions, while the others reportedly were closed due to lack of substantiating evidence. The government prosecuted and secured the convictions of two trafficking offenders in 2008, both for sex trafficking offenses. One trafficker who brought a Filipina woman into Singapore for the purpose of prostitution was fined $8,000 with an alternative sentence of 12 weeks’ imprisonment if she failed to pay the fine. Another trafficker who brought an underage Chinese girl to Singapore for commercial sexual exploitation was sentenced to one year in prison. There were no criminal prosecutions of labor agency representatives for trafficking crimes in 2008; the government prosecuted some employers for physical or sexual abuse of foreign domestic workers, for “illegal deployment” (unlawfully requiring a worker to work at premises other than those stated in the work permit), for failing to pay wages due, or for failing to provide acceptable accommodation or a safe working environment. There were no reports of government officials’ complicity in trafficking crimes during the reporting period.

Protection
The government did not show appreciable progress in protecting trafficking victims, particularly foreign domestic workers subjected to forced labor conditions. The government does not operate victim shelters, but instead referred potential victims of trafficking to NGO shelters or foreign embassies over the reporting period. Although two foreign embassies in Singapore documented over 150 women allegedly trafficked into Singapore for the purpose of commercial sexual exploitation, the government only identified two trafficking victims during the reporting period. One identified victim, a Chinese girl, was referred by the government to an NGO-operated shelter during the prosecution of her trafficker. The other victim returned voluntarily to the Philippines before a report was filed with the police. In 2008, one NGO reported offering assistance to over 850 foreign workers, some of whom claimed they had experienced trafficking-related conditions, such as fraudulent recruitment, withholding of documents, confinement, threats of serious financial harm related to recruitment debts as part of a scheme to keep the worker performing the relevant labor or service, and physical abuse. In a survey of 206 migrant workers who resided at the shelter, 95percent reported that their employer or employment agency in Singapore held their passport, a known contributing factor to trafficking if done as a means to keep the worker performing a form of labor or service. The Philippine Embassy in Singapore reported contacts from 136 potential sex trafficking victims whose claims Philippine authorities determined to be credible. Six other diplomatic missions in Singapore reported a combined total of 21 to 23 potential or confirmed sex trafficking victims. Law enforcement efforts aimed at curbing prostitution may have resulted in victims of sex trafficking being penalized for acts committed as a direct result of being trafficked. In 2008, the police arrested 5,047 foreign women for prostitution, who were generally incarcerated and then deported. The number of trafficking victims among this group is unknown; however, government measures to proactively identify potential trafficking victims among this vulnerable population, if any, appear to have been limited during the majority of the reporting period. At least 53 of those reportedly arrested and deported without being formally identified and provided with appropriate protective services were children, who should therefore have been classified as crime victims under Singapore’s amended Penal Code. The government encourages identified victims to assist in the investigation and prosecution of trafficking offenders, and makes available to all foreign victims of crime temporary immigration relief that allows them to reside in Singapore pending conclusion of their criminal case. Singapore does not otherwise provide trafficking victims with a legal alternative to removal to countries where they may face hardship or retribution.

Prevention
The Singaporean government demonstrated some increased efforts to prevent trafficking in persons during the year. The government expanded its information campaign that aims to raise awareness among foreign workers of their rights and resources available, in an effort to prevent incidents of trafficking. It continued to print information on employees’ rights and police hotline numbers for domestic workers on prepaid phone cards. The Ministry of Manpower has a biannual newsletter, published in multiple languages, that it mails directly to all 180,000 foreign domestic workers. All foreign domestic workers working in Singapore for the first time attend a compulsory course on domestic safety and their employment rights and responsibilities. The government undertook some administrative actions for violations of labor laws potentially related to trafficking, including employer fines and license suspensions for several employment agencies. It also strengthened the terms of work permits to expressly prohibit employers from making unauthorized deductions from domestic workers' salaries. Throughout the reporting period, at least 25 employers were convicted of physically or sexually abusing their foreign domestic workers and sentenced to terms of imprisonment ranging from a few weeks to over two years, depending on the severity of the abuse. Some male employers convicted of sexual abuse were also sentenced to caning. The government did not undertake specific measures to reduce demand for commercial sex acts involving adults in the legalized commercial sex industry in Singapore. Singapore has not ratified the 2000 UN TIP Protocol.


http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/tiprpt/2009/123139.htm

 

[kensington]

Distinctions Between Human Smuggling and Human Trafficking
http://www.state.gov/m/ds/hstcenter/90434.htm


In some cases it may be difficult to quickly ascertain whether a case is one of human smuggling or trafficking. As will be illustrated in the scenarios below, the distinction between smuggling and trafficking are often very subtle, but key components that will always distinguish trafficking from smuggling are the elements of fraud, force, or coercion. However, under U.S. law, if the person is under 18 and induced to perform a commercial sex act, then it is considered trafficking, regardless of whether or not fraud, force, or coercion is involved.

CASE EXAMPLES AND SCENARIOS

Case Example One
Sonia was invited to come to the United States by family friends, and told that she could work for them as a housekeeper, and they would pay her $100.00 a week. Sonia was provided with fraudulent documents and departed for the United States with her new employer. She knew that this was illegal, but she needed the money, and was willing to take the risk.

Was Sonia smuggled or trafficked?

Sonia was smuggled in the United States. She left willingly with full knowledge that she was entering the United States illegally.

Upon arriving in the United States, Sonia was kept in isolation, she was given a place to sleep in the basement and told not to speak to anyone or she would be turned over to the Immigration Service. Sonia was never paid for her work and felt that she had no one to turn to for help.

Was Sonia smuggled or trafficked?

At this point Sonia was restricted from leaving the house, threatened with deportation if she attempted to talk to anyone, and forced into involuntary servitude. Sonia is a victim of trafficking.


Case Example Two
A recruiting agency in India was looking for welders to work at a company in the United States for $10.00 an hour. The agency charged each prospective worker a non-refundable $2,500.00 application fee. Enroute to the United States the workers were given contracts to sign. The contracts obligated the workers to work for the next six months for less than $3.00 per hour. They were told to sign the contracts or they would be sent back home. The workers felt that they could not back out because they had invested all their savings, and were already on their way to the United States. Once they arrived, they were confined to the factory grounds and the owner of the company kept their passports.

Were the workers smuggled or trafficked? The workers were victims of severe forms of trafficking in persons.

The workers were transported for the purposes of labor through the use of fraud and coercion, which resulted in the workers being subjected to involuntary servitude. Confiscation of the workers' passports by the employer also caused the workers to believe that they were forced to stay with the company.

Case Example Three
Local law enforcement authorities executed a search warrant at a brothel and arrested three 17year-old girls for prostitution. The Department of Family Services notified Immigration and Customs Enforcement concerning the illegal immigration status of the three juveniles. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agents interviewed the three juveniles and learned that they were smuggled into the United States.

Were the girls smuggled or trafficked? The girls were trafficked into the United States. All three girls were juveniles and were performing commercial sex acts. Since the girls were under 18 years of age, they would be considered victims of severe forms of trafficking, regardless of whether or not they have consented to participate or paid to be brought illegally into the U.S.

Case Example Four
A husband and wife in the United States convince their relatives in India to allow their daughters to travel to the United States to receive an education. The husband and wife are the aunt and uncle to the girls, and have promised the girls' parents that they would provide housing and support for the girls. In order for the girls to receive a student visa, their aunt and uncle enrolled the girls in school. The girls are granted student visas and allowed to enter the U.S to receive an education.

Once the girls arrive in the U.S. their aunt and uncle immediately tell them that they won't be attending school. The aunt and uncle never intended to have the girls attend school and only enrolled them for the purpose of fraudulently obtaining the entry visas. At this point, the girls have unwittingly been smuggled into the U.S. through the use of visa fraud.

During the next several weeks the girls are locked in a basement and continually told that if they try to leave they would be arrested for their involvement in the visa fraud. Eventually their uncle takes the girls to local motels where they are made to clean rooms and provide janitorial services. The girls are never paid for their work, all their identification has been taken away, and they are continually reminded that they could be arrested for their involvement in visa fraud. Because the girls are being held against their will through coercion and intimidation, and are being forced to work for no pay, they are now victims of trafficking.

_______________________


1 Severe forms of trafficking in persons means sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of age; or the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or services, through the use of force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of subjection to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery.

2 The "Trafficking vs. Smuggling" chart on this page does not provide a precise legal distinction of the differences between smuggling and trafficking. The chart is designed to illustrate general fact scenarios that are often seen in smuggling or trafficking incidents. Fact scenarios are often complex; in such cases expert legal advice should be sought.


http://www.state.gov/m/ds/hstcenter/90434.htm

 

[kensington]

Tier Placements

Office To Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons

Trafficking in Persons Report 2009


The Tiers

TIER 1
Countries whose governments fully comply with the Trafficking Victims Protection Act’s (TVPA) minimum standards

TIER 2
Countries whose governments do not fully comply with the TVPA’s minimum standards, but are making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with those standards

TIER 2 WATCH LIST
Countries whose governments do not fully comply with the TVPA’s minimum standards, but are making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with those standards AND:
a) The absolute number of victims of severe forms of trafficking is very significant or is
significantly increasing; or
b) There is a failure to provide evidence of increasing efforts to combat severe forms of trafficking in persons from the previous year; or
c) The determination that a country is making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with minimum standards was based on commitments by the country to take additional future steps over the next year

TIER 3
Countries whose governments do not fully comply with the minimum standards and are not making significant efforts to do so


Tier Placements

TIER 1

Australia Denmark Lithuania Norway
Austria Finland Luxembourg Poland
Belgium France Macedonia Slovenia
Canada Georgia Mauritius Spain
Colombia Germany The Netherlands Sweden
Croatia Italy New Zealand Switzerland
Czech Republic Korea, Rep. of Nigeria United Kingdom


TIER 2

Afghanistan El Salvador Laos Romania
Albania Estonia Liberia Rwanda
Antigua & Barbuda Ethiopia Macau Serbia
Armenia The Gambia Madagascar Sierra Leone
The Bahamas Greece Malawi Singapore
Barbados Honduras The Maldives Slovak Republic
Belarus Hong Kong Malta South Africa
Benin Hungary Mexico Suriname
Bolivia Iceland Mongolia Taiwan
Bosnia & Herzegovina Indonesia Morocco Tanzania
Botswana Ireland Mozambique Thailand
Brazil Israel Namibia Timor-Leste
Brunei Jamaica Nepal Togo
Bulgaria Japan Oman Trinidad & Tobago
Burkina Faso Jordan Palau Turkey
Chile Kazakhstan Panama Uganda
Costa Rica Kenya Paraguay Uruguay
Cyprus Kosovo Peru Vietnam
Ecuador Kyrgyz Republic Portugal Zambia


TIER 2 WATCH LIST

Algeria Congo, Rep. of Iraq Qatar
Angola Cote d’Ivoire Latvia Russia
Argentina Djibouti Lebanon St. Vincent & the Gren.
Azerbaijan Dominican Republic Lesotho Senegal
Bahrain Egypt Libya Sri Lanka
Bangladesh Equatorial Guinea Mali Tajikistan
Belize Gabon Micronesia Tunisia
Burundi Ghana Moldova Turkmenistan
Cambodia Guatemala Montenegro Ukraine
Cameron Guinea The Neth. Antilles United Arab Emirates
Central African Rep. Guinea-Bissau Nicaragua Uzbekistan
China (PRC) Guyana Pakistan Venezuela
Congo (DRC) India Philippines Yemen


TIER 3

Burma Iran North Korea Syria
Chad Kuwait Papua New Guinea Zimbabwe
Cuba Malaysia Saudi Arabia
Eritrea Mauritania Sudan
Fiji Niger Swaziland


http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/tiprpt/2009/123132.htm