Dancing on the borders of article 4. Human trafficking and the European Court of Human Rights in the Rantsev case

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Standard

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Dancing on the borders of article 4. Human trafficking and the European Court of Human Rights in the Rantsev case

AU - Stoyanova, Vladislava

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - Abstract in UndeterminedThis article points to four worrisome aspects of the Court’s reasoning in Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia. First, the Court takes on board the concept of ‘human trafficking’ without offering any meaningful legal analysis as to the elements of the human trafficking definition. Second, the adoption of the human trafficking framework implicates the ECtHR in anti-immigration and anti-prostitution agenda. The heart of this article is the argument that the human trafficking framework should be discarded and the Court should focus and develop the prohibitions on slavery, servitude and forced labor. To advance this argument I explain the relation between, on the one hand, ‘human trafficking’ and, on the other hand, slavery, servitude and forced labor. I suggest hints as to how the Court could have engaged and worked with the definition of slavery which requires ‘exercise of powers attaching to the right of ownership’, in relation to the particular facts in Rantsev v Cyprus and Russia. Lastly, I submit that the legal analysis as to the state positive obligation to ‘take protective operation measures’ is far from persuasive.

AB - Abstract in UndeterminedThis article points to four worrisome aspects of the Court’s reasoning in Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia. First, the Court takes on board the concept of ‘human trafficking’ without offering any meaningful legal analysis as to the elements of the human trafficking definition. Second, the adoption of the human trafficking framework implicates the ECtHR in anti-immigration and anti-prostitution agenda. The heart of this article is the argument that the human trafficking framework should be discarded and the Court should focus and develop the prohibitions on slavery, servitude and forced labor. To advance this argument I explain the relation between, on the one hand, ‘human trafficking’ and, on the other hand, slavery, servitude and forced labor. I suggest hints as to how the Court could have engaged and worked with the definition of slavery which requires ‘exercise of powers attaching to the right of ownership’, in relation to the particular facts in Rantsev v Cyprus and Russia. Lastly, I submit that the legal analysis as to the state positive obligation to ‘take protective operation measures’ is far from persuasive.

KW - forced labour

KW - Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights

KW - European Court of Human Rights

KW - Rantsev v Cyprus and Russia

KW - human trafficking

KW - servitude

KW - slavery

KW - human rights

KW - mänskliga rättigheter

M3 - Article

VL - 30

SP - 163

EP - 194

JO - Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights

JF - Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights

SN - 0169-3441

IS - 2

ER -