Trafficking Of Children Prosecutions
I. Legal framing: what prosecutors must prove in child-trafficking prosecutions
Different courts use different statutory bases, but prosecutions typically allege one or more of the following conduct categories:
Recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring or receipt of a child for the purpose of exploitation (this language echoes the UN Palermo Protocol).
Conscription/enlistment or use of children in armed conflict (criminalized at the international level as a war crime and/or crime against humanity when children under a threshold age are recruited or used in hostilities).
Sexual exploitation or forced labour of a child (trafficking for sexual exploitation, labour exploitation, forced marriage, or other forms of servitude).
Abduction, sale or illegal adoption of children for profit or exploitation (sometimes charged as trafficking or separate offences).
Common legal elements prosecutors must establish:
Actus reus: an act (recruitment, transport, harboring, etc.).
Mens rea / intent: knowledge of the exploitative purpose (strict liability sometimes applies for under-age victims in sexual exploitation).
Exploitation purpose: proof that the act was done for sexual exploitation, forced labour, use in armed conflict, etc.
Victim status/age: proof the victim was a child (threshold ages vary — ICC focuses on under 15 in certain counts; domestic laws often use under 18).
Evidentiary tools: witness testimony (children and caretakers), NGO/forensic reports, documents, digital evidence, financial trails, chain-of-custody for rescued children, medical reports, and, in international prosecutions, command-chain evidence for commanders who ordered or enabled child recruitment.
Victim protection issues (common to these prosecutions): trauma-sensitive interviewing, in-camera or video testimony, special measures for children as witnesses, repatriation and rehabilitation programs, and compensation orders where available.
II. Why international / hybrid tribunals matter here
When child trafficking occurs as part of an armed conflict (systematic recruitment of children, forcible transfers, sexual slavery of children), national courts often cannot or will not prosecute — international tribunals (ICC, Special Court for Sierra Leone, Extraordinary Chambers, etc.) have tried leaders and commanders for conscripting, enlisting or using children under a specified age in hostilities and for related crimes (enslavement, sexual slavery, cruel treatment). Those prosecutions have produced substantial legal precedent about modes of liability (direct perpetration, command responsibility, aiding and abetting).
III. Six detailed cases (trafficking / recruitment / exploitation of children)
1) Prosecutor v. Alex Tamba Brima, Santigie Borbor Kanu and Brima Bazzy Kamara (Special Court for Sierra Leone — “RUF / AFRC” Trial, convictions 2007)
Context: The Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) tried senior members of the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC) and the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) for atrocities during Sierra Leone’s civil war (1991–2002).
Charges related to children: Among the counts were forced recruitment, abduction, cruel treatment and enslavement of civilians, and use of child soldiers. The indictment included forced conscription and the use of children to fight, to carry loads, and to commit atrocities.
Prosecution theory: The Prosecution showed how armed groups systematically abducted children from villages, indoctrinated them, amputated oppositional ties, and put them to military use — proving a pattern and policy rather than isolated incidents. Evidence included survivor and child-witness testimony, command documentation, and corroborating NGO reports.
Legal significance: The convictions established that the systematic recruitment and use of children in conflict amount to serious international crimes (war crimes and crimes against humanity) and that leaders and mid-level commanders can be held criminally responsible. The case helped consolidate standards for evidence (how child testimony is handled) and for linking battlefield behaviour to higher-level criminal responsibility.
2) Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo (International Criminal Court — conviction 2012)
Context: Lubanga was a commander of the Union of Congolese Patriots (UPC) in Ituri (DRC) and was the ICC’s first trial conviction. The core charges for which the Trial Chamber convicted him concerned enlisting and conscripting children under the age of 15 and using them to participate actively in hostilities.
Facts proved at trial: The prosecution proved a systematic practice of recruiting children (often abducted or forcibly taken from their communities), training and indoctrinating them, supplying them with weapons, and deploying them in combat and support roles. Evidence included child-witness testimony (protected measures were used), documentary evidence, and witnesses describing Lubanga’s organizational role.
Legal reasoning and outcome: The Trial Chamber found Lubanga criminally responsible as a superior and as founder/organizer for the criminal policy of enlistment/conscription of children under 15 — a war crime. He was convicted in 2012. The case clarified several points: the mens rea for conscription/enlistment, how to treat child witness testimony in international courts (special measures), and the ICC’s willingness to prioritize child-recruitment charges even when other atrocity charges might also apply.
Significance: Lubanga set a precedent at the ICC that recruitment/enlistment and use of children under the age threshold is prosecutable as a stand-alone count and carries individual criminal responsibility for those who plan, order or implement the practice.
3) Prosecutor v. Charles Taylor (Special Court for Sierra Leone — conviction 2012)
Context: Charles Taylor, the former President of Liberia, was tried by the SCSL on charges connected to the Sierra Leone conflict. He was accused of aiding and abetting forces in Sierra Leone (RUF) that committed crimes including recruitment and use of child soldiers.
Prosecution case: The court examined how Taylor provided arms, training, funding, and material support that materially assisted the RUF’s atrocities, which included forced recruitment and use of children. The prosecution did not allege Taylor personally kidnapped children, but that his support made the RUF’s crimes possible and foreseeable.
Outcome: In 2012 Taylor was convicted by the SCSL for aiding and abetting war crimes and crimes against humanity, and the conviction explicitly recognized the role of external sponsors/business of war in enabling crimes against children (including forced recruitment).
Legal significance: Taylor showed how leaders and political figures can be held criminally liable under aiding-and-abetting theories when their assistance has a substantial effect and they know it furthers criminal conduct — including recruitment/trafficking of children.
4) Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda (International Criminal Court — conviction 2019)
Context: Bosco “The Terminator” Ntaganda was a rebel leader in eastern DRC. He faced charges including enlisting and conscripting children under the age of 15 and using them to participate actively in hostilities, as well as other war crimes and crimes against humanity (murder, rape, sexual slavery, pillaging).
Proven conduct: The ICC found that Ntaganda actively recruited and used child soldiers (forced abductions, military training, front-line deployment) within units he commanded. The case included reports of systematic sexual violence and forced labour involving children. The prosecution relied on former child combatants’ testimony, documentary evidence, and military records.
Outcome & sentence: Ntaganda was convicted by the ICC; the Chamber’s findings and sentencing emphasized the gravity of recruiting children and associated sexual and physical abuses.
Significance: Ntaganda reinforced the ICC’s jurisprudence on how sexual violence and conscription can be prosecuted together, and how commanders are responsible for crimes committed by forces they organized and led — furthering the body of law on child recruitment as an independent criminal count.
5) Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen (International Criminal Court — conviction 2021)
Context: Dominic Ongwen was a senior commander in Uganda’s Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA). The LRA is infamous for abducting children and using them as soldiers, porters, and sex slaves. Ongwen was charged with multiple counts including conscripting and enlisting children under the age threshold and using them in hostilities, rape, sexual slavery, and inhumane acts.
Key prosecution evidence: The ICC relied on victim witnesses (including former child fighters), former LRA members, documents, and corroborating reports detailing abductions, forced indoctrination, sexual enslavement of children, and command-level participation.
Outcome: Ongwen was convicted on numerous counts, including those related to children’s forcible recruitment and sexual slavery, and was sentenced to a significant prison term in 2021.
Legal contribution: Ongwen’s trial highlighted complex issues of perpetrators who were abducted as children themselves and later became commanders — the Court grappled with both criminal responsibility and contextual mitigation or aggravation relating to the accused’s own history. It also reinforced that child recruitment and sexual slavery are grave international crimes.
6) Representative national prosecution — United States federal prosecutions under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA): example trends and landmark enforcement
Context & statute: Many national systems prosecute child trafficking under domestic statutes. The U.S. TVPA (2000, reauthorized several times) is a leading national law against trafficking, criminalizing sex and labor trafficking (including of minors) and providing victim services. U.S. prosecutors have brought numerous cases involving the trafficking and sexual exploitation of minors, forced child labor, and interstate child exploitation networks.
Typical prosecution patterns: Federal cases often combine criminal charges (trafficking, forced labor, sexual exploitation, conspiracy, racketeering) and rely on victim testimony, digital evidence (communications, ads), financial records, and cooperating witnesses. Prosecutors use TVPA’s specific provisions that make it easier to obtain convictions when the victim is a minor (for sexual exploitation, a minor’s inability to consent is often decisive).
Representative outcomes: Federal prosecutions have resulted in long prison terms for traffickers and restitution/compensation orders for victims. These domestic cases demonstrate the "supply-chain" approach to tackling trafficking (prosecuting pimps, recruiters, transporters, and facilitators).
Why this matters for child trafficking law: National prosecutions show how statutory frameworks, specialized task forces, and victim-centered procedures work in practice outside the international-criminal context. They are often the primary means of redress for trafficking for sexual exploitation or forced labour in peacetime contexts.
IV. Comparative prosecutorial strategies & legal challenges (drawn from the cases above)
Choosing charges: In conflicts, prosecutors prefer war-crime/crimes-against-humanity counts (enlistment/conscription) because they capture systemic patterns. In peacetime trafficking, charging commonly uses anti-trafficking statutes, sexual-exploitation laws or forced-labour provisions.
Attribution & command responsibility: International cases show two approaches — direct perpetration (those who physically recruit/use children) and responsibility for commanders/leaders (planning, aiding, ordering). Command responsibility requires proving control and knowledge or willful blindness.
Child testimony & protections: Trials have developed protective measures (closed sessions, intermediaries, video links, redaction) to collect reliable testimony without re-traumatizing victims.
Evidence challenges: Collecting reliable evidence in conflict zones (documents, eyewitnesses, chain of custody) is extremely difficult; tribunals often rely on a mix of survivor testimony, NGO reports, and pattern evidence.
Rehabilitation & remedies: Successful prosecutions may be followed by reparations orders (as seen in ICC jurisprudence) and obligations on states or international organizations to provide rehabilitation, though implementation remains uneven.
V. Key legal principles developed by these prosecutions
Enlistment/conscription/use of children in armed conflict is an independent international crime. International courts have reinforced this as a core count distinct from other atrocities.
State or external support that materially facilitates child-recruitment can give rise to aiding/abetting liability (Taylor case).
Commanders and mid-level leaders can be criminally responsible where they ordered, planned, or failed to prevent/discipline their forces for child recruitment/abuse.
Victim age thresholds matter (e.g., ICC often focuses on under-15 recruitment counts); domestic laws may define children as under 18 and use that standard to prosecute sexual or labour exploitation.
Child victims’ rights and trauma-informed procedures are now a procedural requirement in many tribunals and national courts.
VI. Short, practical checklist prosecutors follow in child-trafficking prosecutions
Secure and preserve victim testimony using child-friendly methods.
Collect independent corroboration (medical, NGO, social-service records).
Trace financial and logistical chains (who paid/transported/armed/ordered).
Establish age (birth records, community testimony, medical age assessments as last resort).
Prepare for defense strategies (e.g., claims of voluntary enlistment, mistaken identity, duress, or lack of mens rea) with corroborative evidence.
Coordinate victim protection and rehabilitation (recovery, witness security, reparations).
VII. Conclusion — what these cases teach us
The most developed body of case law on trafficking of children in international law concerns child soldiers (conscription, enlistment, use) and related sexual and physical abuses; international tribunals have set out clear standards on liability, evidence, and victim protection.
National prosecutions (under anti-trafficking laws) complement this by handling commercial sexual exploitation, forced labour and domestic servitude of children in non-conflict settings.
The jurisprudence from ICC and hybrid courts (SCSL) is especially important for proving systematic patterns, attributing responsibility up the chain, and shaping international standards for child witness protection.
RELATED Blog
0 comments