权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Identifying pathways to support British victims of modern slavery towards safety and recovery: A scoping study

确定支持英国现代奴隶制受害者实现安全和康复的途径：一项范围界定研究

基本信息

批准号：
AH/V012967/1
负责人：
Carole Murphy
金额：
$ 19.09万
依托单位：
St Mary's University Twickenham London
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Research Grant
财政年份：
2021
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2021 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FV012967%2F1
关键词：
Identifying pathways support British victims

项目摘要

The Modern Slavery Act (MSA) does not explicitly place a duty on the State to provide support to victims of modern slavery. Instead, the arrangements for identifying and supporting all victims of modern slavery, including British Nationals (BNs), are set out in guidance issued by the Secretary of State under Section 49 of the Act. However, the Statutory Guidance fails to acknowledge the fact that the needs as well as the entitlements of BN victims are different and require a different approach. In fact, what often happens is that BN victims are increasingly signposted towards local authorities for support, many of whom remain unaware of their responsibilities under the MSA. This abdication of responsibility is compounded by the failure to provide Local Authorities and first responders with resources, training or guidance in how to provide such services and support. In her recent report, the Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner Dame Sara Thornton expressed her concerns about the lack of clarity on where the duty to safeguard BN victims lies between the Victim Care Contract (VCC) and statutory agencies. This is particularly problematic in relation to those that face prosecution for crimes they have been forced to commit. The Act provides a statutory defence (Section 45 MSA 2015) for those that have been forced, through modern slavery, to commit criminal offences. However, The implementation of the s45 defence has been consistently and aggressively resisted by the CPS who continue to seek to prosecute potential victims, often despite multi-agency evidence indicating that they are potential victims, with prosecution decisions often breaching their own guidance.Despite the statutory defence under s45 of the Act concerning those that have been forced to commit certain crimes, what constitutes "exploitation", and where criminal exploitation sits in relation to slavery, servitude and forced or compulsory labour and human trafficking is largely a matter of interpretation. There is no statutory definition of criminal exploitation i.e. it is not set out in law (Turner, Belcher, & Pona, 2019; Setter, Child Trafficking in the UK, 2019). Consequently, there is widespread inconsistency in how criminal exploitation might be defined and described not only in terms of what it is but also who might be a victim (Field, Butler-Sloss, & Miller, 2019; Turner, Belcher, & Pona, 2019). There is a tension between the Criminal Justice System and the Civil Statutory Safeguarding system as a result of which the former are failing to meet their safeguarding obligations by aggressively pursuing prosecutions of potential victims despite evidence of victimisation identified by the latter.These inconsistencies in approaches exist across all service areas. The uncertainty of how to respond in statutory safeguarding services, the potential re-victimisation of victims through the criminal justice system (CJS) and neglect within the CJS of safeguarding responsibilities, suggest that there may be widespread institutionalised discrimination against those in socially marginalised groups who are disadvantaged by inequality of wealth, power and opportunity and who suffer inequities of health care, education, social care and legal advocacy. This research intends to identify and examine the relational dynamics between victims, perpetrators and their social contexts that trigger and maintain complex patterns of modern slavery in the domestic context; to identify barriers to support; and to highlight interventions to support change.

《现代奴隶法》没有明确规定国家有义务向现代奴隶制的受害者提供支助。相反，确定和支持包括英国国民在内的所有现代奴隶制受害者的安排载于国务大臣根据该法第49条发布的指导意见中。然而，法律指导没有承认这样一个事实，即国阵受害者的需要和权利是不同的，需要采取不同的方法。事实上，经常发生的情况是，国阵受害者越来越多地向地方当局寻求支持，其中许多人仍然不知道他们在MSA下的责任。未能就如何提供这种服务和支助向地方当局和急救人员提供资源、培训或指导，加剧了这种推卸责任的情况。在她最近的报告中，反奴隶制独立专员Dame Sara Thornton对保护国阵受害者的责任在受害者关怀合同和法定机构之间的责任不明确表示关切。对于那些因被迫犯下的罪行而面临起诉的人来说，这尤其是个问题。该法为那些通过现代奴隶制被迫犯下刑事犯罪的人提供了法定辩护(2015年《宪法》第45条)。然而，执行《宪法》第45条的辩护一直遭到保护人权组织的强烈抵制，他们继续寻求起诉潜在的受害者，尽管有多个机构的证据表明他们是潜在的受害者，起诉决定往往违反他们自己的指导。尽管《刑法》第45条关于被迫犯下某些罪行的人的法定辩护，什么构成“剥削”，以及与奴役、奴役和强迫或强制劳动和人口贩运有关的犯罪剥削在哪里，在很大程度上是一个解释问题。没有犯罪剥削的法定定义，也就是没有在法律上做出规定(Turner，Belcher，&Pona，2019年；Setter，英国贩运儿童，2019年)。因此，在如何定义和描述犯罪剥削方面存在广泛的不一致，不仅从它是什么方面，而且从谁可能是受害者的角度来看(菲尔德，巴特勒-斯洛斯和米勒，2019年；特纳，贝尔彻和波纳，2019年)。刑事司法系统和民事法定保护系统之间存在紧张关系，导致前者未能履行其保障义务，尽管后者确定了受害者的证据，但仍积极起诉可能的受害者。这些做法的不一致存在于所有服务领域。在法定保障服务中如何应对的不确定性，受害者可能通过刑事司法系统再次受害，以及刑事司法系统忽视保障责任，这些都表明，可能存在广泛的制度化歧视，歧视那些处于社会边缘地位的群体，他们因财富、权力和机会的不平等而处于不利地位，他们在保健、教育、社会照顾和法律宣传方面受到不公平待遇。这项研究旨在查明和审查在国内引发和维持现代奴隶制复杂模式的受害者、肇事者及其社会背景之间的关系动态；查明支持的障碍；并强调支持变革的干预措施。