Saatja: "EU | GHRD" <
[email protected]>
Saaja: "EU | GHRD" <
[email protected]>
Teema: Follow-up - Invitation: Research on EU’s anti-trafficking policies
Kuupäev: 2026-05-21 10:53
Tähelepanu! Tegemist on välisvõrgust saabunud kirjaga.
Tundmatu saatja korral palume linke ja faile mitte avada.
Dear La Strada International Members,
We are writing regarding our previous email (subject: Invitation: Research
on EU’s anti-trafficking policies) where we kindly invited you to
collaborate.
The collaboration entailed input for an article where we aim to shed light
on how organisations such as yours perceive the measures that national
governments have proposed as a result of the new anti-trafficking
Directive. Since we believe your insights are crucial to understanding
this, we sent you six questions. We would very much value your
organisation’s perspective given your expertise in this field. For ease of
access, please find the questions attached to the present email.
We would be grateful if you could provide your answers to our research
questions by June 7th. If there are any complications or if you might need
further clarification, please let us know; we would be happy to assist you
with both.
We look forward to your response.
Kind regards,
Bianca Cojocaru
EU Team Coordinator,
Global Human Rights Defence (GHRD)
Thank you for taking the time to answer these questions. Please feel free to address them in whichever way best reflects the reality of your practice. How has the increased use of Information and Communications Technologies impacted your work, and how do you think preventative measures imposed by your Member State (if any) will help you in the future? While forced marriage, illegal adoption, and exploitative surrogacy are often perceived as uncommon in Europe. However, they may still occur discreetly and receive limited attention. Based on your experience, what structural factors or conditions enable these practices or keep them invisible? If possible, please share any examples or trends you may have observed. The 2024 Directive formalises the National Referral Mechanism (NRM), although some Member States have already implemented it. Has your organisation already worked on NRM? If so, what gaps have you identified in the timely identification of victims? If you are not yet an NMR, how is your collaboration with national authorities, and how do you want it to improve? The revised Directive (EU) 2024/1712 places gender-sensitive and trauma-informed care at the core of the protection and support of female victims . How are these principles incorporated within your National Referral Mechanism (NRM) in day-to-day practice, and what aspect remains most urgent in your Member State to ensure this care for women is truly comprehensive and effective? The 2024 EU Anti-Trafficking Directive strengthens protections for victims, and EU countries are advocating for extraterritorial return hubs in third countries outside EU jurisdiction. How do you assess the trafficking risk for people detained in or transiting through such mechanisms? Have you already encountered cases where deportation processes or detention conditions left individuals particularly vulnerable to exploitation? The EU data captures a particular fraction of actual trafficking victims, where civil society is likely working with people who are never formally identified. Which specific structural factors explain this gap? Which categories of victims are most systematically missed , and what would need to change in practice for an accurate representation of those affected by trafficking?