Human Trafficking Laws In Afghanistan Versus Un Standards
I. Overview of Human Trafficking
Human trafficking involves the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring, or receipt of persons by means of threat, coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, or abuse of power for the purpose of exploitation.
Exploitation includes:
Forced labor,
Sexual exploitation,
Organ removal,
Servitude,
Child soldiering, and more.
II. Legal Framework in Afghanistan
1. Afghanistan Penal Code (2017)
Articles 510–516 deal specifically with trafficking in persons (TIP).
Defines trafficking broadly to include:
Recruitment, transport, or harboring of persons for forced labor, sexual exploitation, slavery, or organ removal.
Aggravating circumstances include:
Victim is a child or woman,
Use of violence or deception,
Victim is taken abroad.
Punishment:
Ranges from 5 years to life imprisonment, depending on severity.
2. Law on Combating Abduction and Human Trafficking (2008)
Earlier, more focused anti-trafficking law.
Recognizes trafficking and smuggling as distinct offenses.
Establishes responsibilities for law enforcement and judiciary.
3. Child Protection Law (2019)
Criminalizes child trafficking, including for labor, marriage, sexual abuse, or organ trade.
Enforces the best interests of the child principle.
4. Institutional Framework
Attorney General’s Office has a special anti-trafficking unit.
Ministry of Interior and border police oversee investigation and prevention.
Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) monitors violations.
NGOs and shelters support victims, especially trafficked women and children.
III. UN Standards on Human Trafficking
1. UN Palermo Protocol (2000)
Full name: Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children
Afghanistan is a signatory.
Core Obligations under the Protocol:
Criminalization of all forms of trafficking.
Victim protection and non-punishment.
Prevention efforts and awareness campaigns.
International cooperation.
Victim compensation and rehabilitation.
2. Key Differences Between Afghan Law and UN Standards
| Criteria | UN Standard (Palermo Protocol) | Afghan Law |
|---|---|---|
| Definition of Trafficking | Comprehensive | Mostly aligned |
| Victim Protection | Non-criminalization, support, rehabilitation | Partially implemented |
| Criminalization | Required for all trafficking acts | Yes, with detailed provisions |
| Child Trafficking | Zero tolerance | Covered under Penal Code & Child Protection Law |
| International Cooperation | Strongly encouraged | Limited in practice |
| Victim Participation | Right to participate in legal proceedings | Rarely applied in practice |
IV. Case Law Examples from Afghanistan (More than 5 Cases)
1. Case: Trafficking of Children for Labor (Herat, 2018)
Facts:
A network trafficked children from western Afghanistan to Iran for forced labor.
Investigation:
Border police intercepted a truck with 13 minors, some under 10 years old. The children were traveling without guardians.
Legal Outcome:
Three traffickers were convicted under Article 511 of the Penal Code.
Sentenced to 10 years imprisonment.
Victims returned to their families with NGO assistance.
UN Comparison:
Met UN standard for prosecution but lacked rehabilitation or compensation for victims.
2. Case: Forced Prostitution of Women (Kabul, 2019)
Facts:
A criminal gang lured young women from provinces with promises of jobs, then forced them into prostitution.
Investigation:
AIHRC reported the case; police raided a location and arrested 5 perpetrators.
Legal Outcome:
Prosecuted under human trafficking laws.
Lead offender sentenced to 15 years in prison.
UN Comparison:
Aligned with UN standards on prosecution, but victim protection was minimal. Victims faced stigma and had no access to legal aid.
3. Case: Trafficking for Organ Removal (Kandahar, 2020)
Facts:
Children from poor families were taken to Pakistan where their kidneys were illegally removed.
Investigation:
AIHRC and international NGOs exposed the case. Afghan and Pakistani authorities coordinated.
Legal Outcome:
Two facilitators in Afghanistan arrested.
Prosecuted under trafficking and medical ethics laws.
Sentenced to 7 and 8 years imprisonment.
UN Comparison:
Cross-border cooperation and prosecution were partially aligned with UN standards, though victim rehabilitation was lacking.
4. Case: Smuggling vs. Trafficking Confusion (Balkh, 2017)
Facts:
A group of migrants was arrested en route to Turkey via traffickers.
Issue:
Afghan authorities charged them as illegal migrants, not trafficking victims.
Legal Outcome:
Smugglers were not prosecuted.
Victims were briefly detained, then deported.
UN Comparison:
Violation of non-punishment principle. UN standards require victims not to be criminalized.
5. Case: Sale of a Minor Girl for Marriage (Badghis, 2021)
Facts:
A 13-year-old girl was sold into marriage to an older man.
Investigation:
Reported by AIHRC. Tribal elders tried to resolve the issue informally.
Legal Outcome:
Formal case brought in court.
Father and groom convicted of child trafficking.
Sentences: 6 years imprisonment each.
UN Comparison:
Conforms to UN standards by criminalizing child trafficking through forced marriage. However, victim lacked psychological support.
6. Case: Labor Trafficking of Afghan Boys to Gulf Countries (2016–2018)
Facts:
Boys were recruited for camel racing in the Gulf, subjected to abuse and exploitation.
Investigation:
Cases came to light through NGOs and media; some children returned with disabilities.
Legal Outcome:
Limited prosecution inside Afghanistan. Recruiters identified but fled.
UN Comparison:
Weak enforcement and lack of victim compensation violates UN standards.
V. Key Challenges in Aligning with UN Standards
Limited victim protection (e.g., safe shelters, compensation, legal aid).
Inadequate border control and victim identification.
Poor enforcement in rural areas.
Social stigma deters victims from reporting.
Insufficient international cooperation, especially in transnational trafficking cases.
Confusion between smuggling and trafficking.
VI. Summary Table of Case Outcomes
| Case | Type of Trafficking | Sentence | Alignment with UN Standards |
|---|---|---|---|
| Herat child labor (2018) | Child labor trafficking | 10 years | Partial (victim protection missing) |
| Kabul prostitution (2019) | Sexual exploitation | 15 years | Partial (weak victim support) |
| Kandahar organ trade (2020) | Organ trafficking | 7–8 years | Moderate (cross-border cooperation) |
| Balkh migrant case (2017) | Smuggling misclassified | None | Poor (victims punished) |
| Badghis forced marriage (2021) | Child marriage trafficking | 6 years | Strong (criminalization achieved) |
| Gulf child labor (2016–18) | Child trafficking abroad | None | Weak (no prosecutions) |
VII. Conclusion
Afghanistan has made significant legislative progress in aligning its anti-human trafficking laws with UN standards, especially with the 2017 Penal Code and the Child Protection Law. However, practical implementation is weak due to:
Limited resources,
Social stigma,
Insecurity,
Lack of victim-centered services.
To fully comply with the UN Palermo Protocol, Afghanistan needs to:
Strengthen victim protection,
Ensure non-criminalization of trafficked persons,
Enhance cross-border legal cooperation,
Train law enforcement and judicial officers.
RELATED Blog
0 comments