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

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

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.