Memoranda of Understanding: An Effective Tool to Enhance Cooperation

Data on Cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region Why are Memoranda of Understanding a Good Tool? The Challenges of Implementation

CBSS-UNODC STUDY, 2010 Timeframe: April-Dec 2009 Scope: CBSS Member States Stakeholders: Broad range of practitioners (LE, NGOs, State service providers, NC, NR, Prosecutors, Immigration, LA) Focus: Overview of Cooperation Mechanisms and Practices in the Region

Findings Recent efforts to enhance cooperation in many CBSS countries -NAP -NC -NR -Multi-agency working groups Identified problem areas -Identification -Referral -Service provision -Criminal Proceedings -Residence Rights -Return and Re/integration

Recommendation Introduce Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs): 1 ° LEA-Victims Service Providers

Why are Memoranda of Understanding a good tool?

NGO-Law enforcement cooperation Should include measures for the protection and support of trafficked victims alongside measures to prosecute human traffickers Comprehensive criminal justice response to human trafficking

Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) Mutually agreed-upon roles and responsibilities Establish clearer procedures Bridge communication gaps Allow objective monitoring of progress Help reconcile different interests and therefore allow Victims, LEAs and Service Providers to really work together

Interests of victims include:  Recovery  assistance  Confidentiality and privacy  Protection for them and their family before, during and after the trial  Legal documents to stay in the country or safe return to their/another country  Return to normal life, avoiding re-victimization

Interest of law enforcers include:  Get the best evidence  Get the testimony of victims  Ensure security of the victim before and during trial  Referral of victims (to service providers, etc.)

What are the common interests? Identification of victims of crime To prevent traffickers from continuing their business with other victims Justice Protection Referral Information exchange

oInvestigations Victims are more likely to provide evidence Access to information Possibility to rely on victim service resources, including those of NGOs (hotlines, expertise, trust etc.) oPrevention Research leading to better understanding of the problem (intelligence) Campaigns to the general public Benefits for law enforcement include

Recognising mutual interests Enhanced victim service provider – law enforcement cooperation  Benefit for the victims:  Holistic approach rather than limited to either criminal justice approach or victim support perspective

 Benefits for service providers, including NGOs include: ‘Access’ to victims identified by law enforcement Enable victims to have access to justice Can ‘monitor’ criminal justice process (investigations/trial) and better prepare the victims for it Recognising mutual interests

Mutual benefits for police and victim Victims are detected Traffickers are arrested Possible networks are dismantled Better crime prevention A system of checks and balances

Reconciling interests Improved outcomes: 1) Assisting and protecting victims enhances likelihood that victim cooperates with law enforcement:  Health care and psychological assistance help victims to recover their physical and mental capacities  Protection proves to victims that the mechanism and persons are reliable and trustful

Reconciling interests Improved outcomes: 2) Successfully investigated cases  Could include confiscation of assets  Confiscated assets again could feed into a victims fund  Traffickers receive appropriate sentences BUT: 

There will always be cases in which victims choose not to/cannot cooperate with law enforcement. !

The Challenges of Implementation National Implementation -Who can take leadership to start the process? -How to ensure the necessary support? -What is the right way to gain the commitment of practitioners? -Monitoring & Acknowledging Lessons learnt

Thank You for Your Attention Barbara Sidoti