By Hayley Boxall, Samantha Lyneham, Christie Black and Alexandra Gannoni

Sexual exploitation can have significant short- and longer-term impacts on victim-survivors. However, there is currently a lack of research exploring the support needs of sexual exploitation victim-survivors accessing support in Australia, and barriers to support provision. To address this knowledge gap, we analysed case management records for 50 victim-survivors of sexual exploitation in Australia and conducted interviews with 12 victim-survivor caseworkers.

On average, victim-survivors required support across six domains, the most common being financial hardship, mental health, social isolation and housing and accommodation. The most crucial barriers to service provision were systemic in nature. For example, some victim‑survivors on temporary visas were ineligible for government funded medical services, affordable housing or welfare schemes, which placed significant financial burdens on victim‑survivors and support services.

These findings demonstrate that to support the recovery of victim-survivors, services need to be funded appropriately to ensure they can provide holistic wraparound interventions.

Research Report no. 29. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. 2023. 51p.

By Julie Freccero, Audrey Taylor, Sarah Chynoweth, Justine DeSilva

Children and youth experiencing commercial sexual exploitation (CSE) often have some form of engagement with the child welfare system. Safe and stable housing is vital to minimize vulnerability to CSE, help survivors recover, and reduce revictimization. Yet housing and shelter are among the top service gaps reported by agencies serving trafficking survivors in San Francisco, a high density area for CSE. To address this disparity, in 2019, a coalition of agencies developed Family And Me (FAM), a new model of foster care designed to meet the needs of youth who have experienced or are at risk of CSE in the San Francisco Bay Area. The goal was to establish an evidence-based, youth-centered model of care that could be scaled throughout the State of California and beyond. The 3.5-year FAM pilot aimed to improve the health, safety, and well-being of youth affected by CSE and to increase the knowledge, capacity, and retention rates of the caregivers who support them by offering a range of enhanced support services for both youth and their caregivers. However, due to numerous challenges, such as COVID-19 restrictions and recruitment barriers, the FAM collaborative was only able to implement a portion of the original FAM model.

Berkeley, CA: Human Rights Center at UC Berkeley School of Law, 2022. 40p.

By Ruben Timmerman, Arjen Leerkes, and Richard Staring

Across Europe, irregular migrants experience considerable difficulty obtaining basic access to justice, protection, and services across a wide range of areas. The structural exclusion of irregular migrants from the integration strategies of European Union (EU) Member States serves in many situations to limit the full exercise of their basic rights, including in particular the right of an individual to safely report to the police if they have been a victim of or witness to crime.1 In recent years, however, efforts have been made to ensure that irregular migrants within Europe are guaranteed equal access to justice and basic rights should they fall victim to crime. Perhaps most notably, Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime (hereinafter, Victims’ Directive), which entered into force in 2015, sets out to ensure that the rights of all victims of crime are protected, regardless of nationality or residence status.2 Among other things, the EU Victims’ Directive signifies—at least on paper—the inclusion of irregular migrants within the wider purview of victims’ rights. However, there remain significant challenges and barriers to access to justice and rights for irregular migrant victims of crime within Europe, and there is much work still to be done in effectively realising the vision set out by the EU Victims’ Directive. In particular, it has long been observed by human rights observers, scholars, and practitioners in the field of migration that irregular migrants are often hesitant or unwilling to contact or interact with law enforcement authorities to report crime, either as victims or as witnesses, out of fear of arrest or deportation.3 As a result, these irregular migrants are unable to exercise their basic rights to necessary services, protection, and justice, and are often more vulnerable to perpetrators who are able to exploit their reluctance to report crime. Moreover, the lack of opportunity for irregular migrants to safely report crime results in a lack of crucial intelligence about criminal activity for law enforcement, and significantly reduces authorities’ insight into crime and public safety issues in their communities. As a result of these challenges, both in the United States and across Europe innovative and diverse initiatives have been developed—particularly at the local level—to promote ‘safe reporting’ of crime among irregular migrants, and in turn to ensure greater access to justice for victims.4 In particular, many localities have developed what are commonly referred to as ‘firewall policies’.

Oxford, UK; COMPAS, Global Exchange on Migration and Diversity, 2019. 46p.

By Sue Jago, with Lorena Arocha, Isabelle Brodie, Margaret Melrose, Jenny Pearce and Camille Warrington

This research project has explored the extent and nature of the response of LSCBs to the 2009 government guidance on safeguarding children and young people from sexual exploitation. Where the guidance is followed, there are examples of developing and innovative practice to protect and support young people and their families and to investigate and prosecute their abusers. However, the research has found that the delivery of that dual approach to child sexual exploitation is far from the norm. There are three areas that cause particular concern: • only a quarter of LSCBs in England are implementing the guidance • young people, their families and carers receive awareness raising in less than half of the country • the prosecution of abusers is rare and, where criminal proceedings take place, young people’s experience of court is intolerable These and related findings are set out below together with recommendations on how to ensure that action is taken, locally and nationally, to address this form of child abuse.

Bedfordshire, UK: University of Bedfordshire, 2011.140p.

By Human Rights Watch

In June 2021, Eşref Akoda shot dead his 38-year-old wife Yemen outside her home in the central Anatolian town of Aksaray. Prior to this lethal assault, courts had on four separate occasions issued preventive orders aimed at keeping Eşref away from Yemen after he harassed her when she filed for divorce. A lawyer for the family said that Eşref Akoda had approached and threatened his wife at least twice, violating the third and fourth preventive orders, but that on those occasions the court had not imposed any of the available disciplinary sanctions on him, such as a short period in detention, due to a “lack of evidence”. The prosecutor also declined to bring criminal charges against him, even though Yemen’s lawyer had filed complaints with the prosecutor’s office.

New York: HRW, 2022. 92p.

Edited by Carol Hagemann-White, Liz Kelly, Thomas Meysen

This book offers insights and perspectives from a study of “Cultural Encounters in Intervention Against Violence” (CEINAV) in four EU-countries. Seeking a deeper understanding of the underpinnings of intervention practices in Germany, Portugal, Slovenia and the United Kingdom, the team explored variations in institutional structures and traditions of law, policing, and social welfare. Theories of structural inequality and ethics are discussed and translated into practice

Leverkusen-Opladen: Verlag Barbara Budrich, 2019. 282p.