Public Opinion of Criminal Justice Sentencing and Rehabilitation in Human Trafficking
Trenesia Hurkes
Institutional Affiliation(s)
Author Note
Public Opinion of Criminal Justice Sentencing and Rehabilitation in Human Trafficking
Introduction
Human trafficking remains a matter of national and international concern. Domestic governments at their part, work to regulate anti-human trafficking mechanisms, but there remains a gap in developing a general mechanism to combat human trafficking. Different states have developed mechanisms, for implementing effective criminal justice response, for combatting trafficking in specific as well as general levels. States facing financial confines are generally unable to cope with human trafficking problems however, their legal mechanisms generally meet the standardized norms and regulations followed at the international level. One reason for state’s inability to cope with the human trafficking problem, lies in the conflicting nature of the crime. There remain certain complexities, owing to the domestic nature of the anti-criminal mechanism. These difficulties became more complex and difficult to probe, since the matters related to prosecution and investigation are different, in each state. Some of the examples, related to complexities involved, the unwillingness of the victims to stand against the traffickers.
Criminal justice policy is considered narrow in the scope of fighting against human trafficking for several other reasons as well. This limited nature of criminal justice policy is accredited to the fact that states have different nature of criminal justice norms at a place, though they aim at curbing such menaces, there are large voids in the patterns they adopt to combat human trafficking. In smaller states, the criminal justice policies leave wide space, which as a repercussion effect negatively over the victims. As a result due to the inter alia and traumatic conditions, the victims had been through, they consider it feasible to remain out from initiating the criminal procedures against the perpetrators. Interestingly, some criminal experts have hinted toward the corrupt law and enforcement system at the place in some countries, which according to them is one of the hurdles to curbing human trafficking. Due to such limitations in the criminal justice systems, human trafficking remains unable to curb at various domestic and international levels. The following paragraphs will now analyze the public opinion about sentencing and rehabilitation, for those involved in human trafficking.
Review of the Literature
There is a wealth of literature that talks about the perception of sentencing and rehabilitation in the criminal justice public policy. There are a few authors who implicitly discuss how criminal justice is related to human trafficking when it comes to sentencing or rehabilitation. In addition to this literature, there are reports published from time to time, by different organizations that suggest how criminal justice policy views sentencing or rehabilitation when it comes to preventing human trafficking. These kinds of literature and reports are crucial to analyze the trends which are being adopted throughout the world to combat human trafficking. In the literature referred below, there appears a wide discord among the authors about what best means to be adopted for combating human trafficking. There is only a small number of authors who believe that sentencing could be prudent for combating human trafficking, those who are against sentencing believe that rehabilitation remains an effective tool to fight human trafficking. Some of the important literature in this regard is referred to below:
In their article, Rossi (et al. ) argues that federal sentencing guidelines are narrow in scope when it comes to deciding about the sentencing of the convicted ones ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"Mx1YXg2x","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Rossi, Berk, and Campbell 1997)","plainCitation":"(Rossi, Berk, and Campbell 1997)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":680,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/8reWiRZH/items/T4KKUYME"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/8reWiRZH/items/T4KKUYME"],"itemData":{"id":680,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Journal of Quantitative Criminology","issue":"3","page":"267–290","source":"Google Scholar","title":"Just punishments: Guideline sentences and normative consensus","title-short":"Just punishments","volume":"13","author":[{"family":"Rossi","given":"Peter H."},{"family":"Berk","given":"Richard A."},{"family":"Campbell","given":"Alec"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1997"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Rossi, Berk, and Campbell 1997). They believe that depending upon the varying nature of the crime, the constitutional development and legislature has not adopted the requisite mechanism to limit the cases related to sentencing. Though the authors have not defined the criminal justice aspect related to human trafficking broadly, their conceptualization remains vital to grasp the understanding related to sentencing in human trafficking. In their article, they refer to the view of the US sentencing commission which entails that public view is followed and relied on over primarily to decide about sentencing or otherwise rehabilitation. Being qualitative in nature, the authors have resorted to analyzing the views of certain authors, which as well, believes that an absence of mechanisms in criminal justice prevents adopting an agreeable framework to fight the menace of human trafficking.
Not much different from Rossi's (et al.) view, Pickett argues that public opinion in this regard should be relied upon over ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"7a47s8LO","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Pickett 2019)","plainCitation":"(Pickett 2019)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":683,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/8reWiRZH/items/6LSZPVFD"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/8reWiRZH/items/6LSZPVFD"],"itemData":{"id":683,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Annual Review of Criminology","page":"405–428","source":"Google Scholar","title":"Public opinion and criminal justice policy: Theory and research","title-short":"Public opinion and criminal justice policy","volume":"2","author":[{"family":"Pickett","given":"Justin T."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Pickett 2019). For example, after referring to certain examples and case studies related to public opinion and its effect over judicial responses, Pickett believes that it is almost impossible to analyze the public opinion influence over decision making in crime-related aspects. Separate from the debate of democratic or undemocratic regimes, Pickett has adopted a broader yet simple manner. In some of the cases, he referred to in his article, the author believes that public perception has remained counterproductive. While referring to different crimes and their penalties, he mentions that a lack of public interests is visible. Through presenting such cases, he tries to make a perception that criminal justice is separate from public opinion-making and then implementing over to drawing penalties. He finally recommends that quantitative evidence and judicial hearings matter in deciding about the fate of the convicted and not the public opinion.
In their article, Cullen (et al.) believes that public opinion is not a direct or influential element to decide about the penalty structures when it comes to sentencing or rehabilitation ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"iUiGBCgK","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Cullen, Fisher, and Applegate 2000)","plainCitation":"(Cullen, Fisher, and Applegate 2000)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":686,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/8reWiRZH/items/3ZHACYRZ"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/8reWiRZH/items/3ZHACYRZ"],"itemData":{"id":686,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Crime and justice","page":"1–79","source":"Google Scholar","title":"Public opinion about punishment and corrections","volume":"27","author":[{"family":"Cullen","given":"Francis T."},{"family":"Fisher","given":"Bonnie S."},{"family":"Applegate","given":"Brandon K."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2000"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Cullen, Fisher, and Applegate 2000). In the article, authors have presented the example of the United States, penalty structure, where it mentions that public opinion reflects a narrow image over perception making in criminal related offenses. They have referred to some of the examples of United States history when public opinion was marginalized when it came to preventing the national interest. They believe that the same is the case, in deciding about the fate of those involved in human trafficking since it is a matter of public and state interest. They argue that the public is not each time aware, what exactly are the consequences of the causes of the crime, they had to respond, considering in view the particular phenomenon. Owing to these views, they had referred to creating and developing laws, which best meet the public interest.
De Vries et al in their article have taken a comparatively different approach ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"c6OeKYYH","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(de Vries et al. 2019)","plainCitation":"(de Vries et al. 2019)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":689,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/8reWiRZH/items/YT7GMEUN"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/8reWiRZH/items/YT7GMEUN"],"itemData":{"id":689,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Crime, Law and Social Change","issue":"1","page":"125–143","source":"Google Scholar","title":"Anti-immigration sentiment and public opinion on human trafficking","volume":"72","author":[{"family":"Vries","given":"Ieke","non-dropping-particle":"de"},{"family":"Nickerson","given":"Connor"},{"family":"Farrell","given":"Amy"},{"family":"Wittmer-Wolfe","given":"Dana E."},{"family":"Bouché","given":"Vanessa"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (de Vries et al. 2019). They believe that anti-immigration sentiments are the primary reason, why people are voicing to eliminate human trafficking in the harsh way possible. The anti-immigration sentiments though influence the public view about criminal justice-related policies, but when it comes to trafficking, the public view is different. There are a few numbers of people who believe that public sentencing is the best cure to fight human trafficking. Such people base their views on the pretext that sentencing depicts that government or otherwise the state authorities have remained unable to fulfill their responsibilities to fight the menace of trafficking. They therefore, base their views on the favor rehabilitation. They believe that rehabilitation can serve many purposes. One such purpose is to trace those involved in trafficking and resultantly draw a comprehensive plan to limit human trafficking, which is more workable as well.
Sharapov has finally highlighted some of the basic elements, which according to him play an active role in making public understanding more wide and understandable ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"GMm9naOz","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Sharapov 2014)","plainCitation":"(Sharapov 2014)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":691,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/8reWiRZH/items/J4QWM3I5"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/8reWiRZH/items/J4QWM3I5"],"itemData":{"id":691,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Research Paper. Part","source":"Google Scholar","title":"Understanding public knowledge and attitudes towards trafficking in human beings","volume":"1","author":[{"family":"Sharapov","given":"Kiril"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2014"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Sharapov 2014). Sharapov believes that there are certain actors, which is the reason for human trafficking. Similarly, he believes that there are certain factors that make public opinion in favor of or against human trafficking. He believes that since there is a wide market, which relies on traffickers for getting business, similarly, there are many others who in one way or another are the beneficiaries of human trafficking. Based on this hypothesis, he tries to make a case for the rehabilitation of the offenders and not the sentencing. He argues that unless the daunting elements are not addressed in the policymaking, it remains naïve to believe that anything against public opinion will be workable. His arguments stand against many conventional views, but despite that, he believes that the pressing elements are the reasons for human trafficking and not the end products.
Research Methodology
To gauge public opinion about human trafficking, the public could be engaged through several manners. Through surveys or direct questioning, public opinion about human trafficking can be analyzed. Public opinion can be analyzed by the mean of analyzing criminal trends and public response. Generally, people who get affected by trafficking in any way, avoid public interaction, but a brief interview with them can help to understand their perception about the traffickers. In addition to surveys, and analysis of the criminal records, public view about human trafficking could be gauged from the examination of non- governmental organizations records who are working to maximize the international perception against trafficking. Media surveys and online opinion portals are yet other tools to gauge public views about human trafficking. In many studies conducted to gauge public views about human trafficking, the researchers have employed the techniques of fake public announcements. These fake public announcements in a pre-designed manner, also help to get an idea about public perception related to human trafficking.
Discussion of the Literature
The literature referred above, and different other kinds of literature available online suggest varying conflicting and interrelated findings. One reason for this discord in the literature is the inability of the authors to grasp the sensitivity and importance of the issues, and second is the research mechanism they adopt. Some of the authors have based their research on the primary sources, therefore, their research does not take into account the traditional view which exists in the society. Their view is more insightful and their opinion has more worth. Similarly, those who have employed a qualitative methodology to compose the research, have largely relied over on already established opinions their views therefore, are more traditional. In both these types of literature, there is a wide gap in the manner of presenting their research findings as well. Similarly, some of the literature has also not taken into account the traditional research methodology attributes. This is the reason why there remains a conflicting pattern in their findings as well. In such forms of study, typically the research methodology is different and it includes mostly introducing the research questionnaires or employing public survey methodologies. In either case, the result of deduced is directly linked to public opinion. This is the reason, in such a form of research aims, integrating public remains the most used to research technique.
Analysis and Findings
Public opinion of criminal justice sentencing
One of the pressing issues faced in fighting human trafficking is the public engagement related to the issue. In the United States, it has been a general trend, that the public remained involved in sex-related activities, which generate demand for a prostitute, which is then met by the manner of human trafficking. Similarly, increased profits and other benefits associated with human trafficking had made it difficult for law enforcement to disengage human trafficking from public interaction. In order to curb human trafficking, fighting at the public level remains one of the prudent tools, which for many different reasons had remained unable to materialize. However, many believe that engaging public and increasing awareness about human trafficking could be a great source to curb human trafficking. Secondly, if the public voice largely against the traffickers, comprehensive legislation could be adopted to prevent human trafficking. The more, this issue will get attention in the public domain, the harsher the legislation will be since public perception held great worth in the democratic societies.
Throughout the criminal justice development history, anti-human trafficking measures have reflected the public perception against prostitution, gender-related norms and different sexual behaviors. In the United States, public opinion in this domain has helped in developing the anti-human trafficking approach. Many studies reflect that anti-human trafficking measures in the United States, are based on public perception and different interest groups and influencers, from time to time, impact negatively over these policies. Another aspect that remains important to analyze the public opinion against human trafficking is lawmakers’ opinion. Since these lawmakers remain continuously engage with the public, therefore, the legislation at the national level also remains reflective of public opinion. Owing to a strong relation between public and legislature, it remains important to analyze public perception against human trafficking.
Criminal justice sentencing
Criminal justice sentencing is followed after a thorough investigation and judicial procedure. These sentences may vary since the nature of crime remains different and the age factor as well plays an important role in deciding about the fate of the offender. Criminal justice sentencing varies from involving probation, community services and death sentence as the last resort. The basics for criminal justice sentences vary from involving minor infractions to misdemeanors, or otherwise when the defendant has accepted himself the guilt. In cases of extreme nature, usually, judges employ law-related opinions from different stakeholders. The prosecution, the defense and the probation department remain important when it comes to deciding the fate of criminal justice sentencing. Some of the factors which play an important role in deciding about the criminal sentencing basics are:
The criminal history of the offender.
Whether the guilty was involved or has been used as an aide for the crime.
Whether the accused was in stress or other peer pressure.
Was the crime was made in self- defense; or,
Whether the accused has displayed regret throughout the judicial process or not.
Depending upon the varying nature of crimes in human trafficking, there are different kinds of penalties for the offenders. In trafficking, there are certain factors which remain influential in deciding about the fate of the offender. Since traffickers target goods, weapons, humans and different kinds of contrabands therefore, in each case the criminal justice sentencing remain counterproductive. Mainly the illegal human transport is made for sexual purposes or labor purposes therefore, in each case, the criminal sentencing is not the desired option, and neither the criminal statues allow sentencing someone involved in human trafficking, without going through a judicial procedure. The statutes enacted by the United Nations and its different subsidiary organizations also aim at curbing human trafficking, by employing measures that are less swerve compared to sentencing. Some also believe that political reasons behind sentencing, also prevent the legislators to argue in favor of sentencing for being involved in human trafficking.
Criminal justice rehabilitation
Criminal justice rehabilitation is in fact the integration of the guilty of people into society, through a rigorous and informed manner. The rehabilitation process may vary from person to person, or from the nature of the crime, but in most cases, it remains the desired option of the jurists and the legislature. There are examples in the judicial history of many countries, where rehabilitation has worked to a large extent. Similarly, owing to special circumstances or the specific nature of the crime, the rehabilitation technique has not worked. In either case, these examples provide the proofs as well. The same remains the case with the rehabilitation of those involved in human trafficking.
In order to analyze, why rehabilitation must be sort after for those involved in human trafficking, it remains pertinent to look after to their motives. For example, those involved in criminal activities such as human trafficking generally not aimed at harming anyone. In critical situations, they adopt the policy of coercion and in worst cases, they attempt to take a life of anyone. Similarly, the trafficking network is expanded to such a level, that those involved in human trafficking, in one way or another are not aware, whom they are working for. So for such reasons, they commit small crimes, which are bailable. An interesting aspect to note is the involvement of young age people, who have no other option, other than to become part of the criminal gang. In different countries, these people take on different forms and perform different duties, and that’s why they become difficult to trace.
In view of all these reasons, rehabilitation is considered the most suited option. Some criminal experts also believe that since there is a wide gap in the interpretation of the crime, therefore, they have no option, other than to suggest rehabilitation of the guilty person. Similarly, owing to certain domestic and social reasons, the state adopts different policies. These policies in one way or another are suggestive of the fact that rehabilitation must be adopted as the final course of action. In view of the criminal experts, rehabilitation is desirable since it can provide direct access to the culprits and more proactive measures can be adopted to curb human trafficking. In the United States and different European countries, this practice had been adopted, which has also remained workable. Once law enforcement gets access to the offender, it becomes more easy and feasible for them to trace others involved in human trafficking.
Findings
The paper has discussed two projecting ways to curb the menace of human trafficking. In either manner, there is a conflicting literary claim made by different authors. The literature referred above and some of the examples or expert views mentioned above suggest that since human trafficking, criminal activity is differently defined and interpreted in the majority of the countries, therefore, there can be several ways to look into this matter. Though a proper research methodology has not been adopted, and the majority of the secondary sources are relied on over, therefore, some of the claims may remain different from the traditional views. Owing to the different perspectives and literary suggestions, the following are some of the findings of this study:
Human trafficking is not widely considered a more critical offense in many countries, and therefore authors and policymakers are still struggling to pin down the way to get rid of this menace.
An absence of literary research and the absence of strong evidence in the history has been the pressing element in front of the legislature and judiciary to chalk down the penalty for such kind of offenses.
There is a wide dearth of understanding about the causes of human trafficking and therefore, the countries have not come together to adopt a more general and strict approach against human trafficking.
In underdeveloped countries, people involved in trafficking are much influential compared to legislatures and the judicial officers, therefore they become hurdles in designing strict policies against human trafficking.
Political reasons and interests of large states have also been a hurdle in chalking down a general mechanism against offenders of human trafficking.
The UN offices working regionally and internationally to combat human trafficking lack resources and therefore, there stress over the need of adopting rehabilitation mechanisms against human trafficking.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Human trafficking is a severe crime since it is against human values in many ways. In addition to this, there are many ways, it has been disturbing the social patterns and societal norms throughout the world. Though at present, states facing this threat are unable to define a similar and strong pattern to combat human trafficking, but they need to adopt a general and more cognizant way to curb this menace. Since sentencing or rehabilitation in the wake of human trafficking remains a more political debate, therefore states should adopt a measure that best meets their national interest. Some of the recommended ways for this are as follow
In their own capacity, states must come together to work for limiting the influence of traffickers.
A common political narrative must be established.
NGOs and different INGOs must be provided efficient resources so that they can fight human trafficking at national and international level.
Pieces of evidence must be reordered and archival data must be provided to take direction against adopting more robust measures against human trafficking.
Both the rehabilitation and sentencing claims must be backed with political and evidence-based reasoning.
Finally, the capacity building should be worked over, which will bring the smaller and larger states on the same page against human trafficking.
References:
ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"uncited":[],"omitted":[],"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Cullen, Francis T., Bonnie S. Fisher, and Brandon K. Applegate. 2000. “Public Opinion about Punishment and Corrections.” Crime and justice 27: 1–79.
Pickett, Justin T. 2019. “Public Opinion and Criminal Justice Policy: Theory and Research.” Annual Review of Criminology 2: 405–428.
Rossi, Peter H., Richard A. Berk, and Alec Campbell. 1997. “Just Punishments: Guideline Sentences and Normative Consensus.” Journal of Quantitative Criminology 13(3): 267–290.
Sharapov, Kiril. 2014. “Understanding Public Knowledge and Attitudes towards Trafficking in Human Beings.” Research Paper. Part 1.
de Vries, Ieke, et al. 2019. “Anti-Immigration Sentiment and Public Opinion on Human Trafficking.” Crime, Law and Social Change 72(1): 125–143.
