Prohibition of human trafficking and positive obligations of the EU States: Analysis of the ECtHR case of Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia

Abstract

Human trafficking is a widespread global problem that has received increasing attention in recent years. It is considered one of the most serious crimes in today's world. Those affected are often degraded to mere goods for the purpose of economic gain, which represents a serious violation of human rights. This article deals with the extent to which Art. 4 ECHR prohibits human trafficking and which positive obligations result from this for the contracting states. It can be said that a combination of the positive obligations developed by the court from Art. 4 ECHR can probably provide a good basis for effective and appropriate victim protection. Since it was not included in any of the written elements of the crime, it must be assumed that it is to be interpreted as a separate element. The difficulty here lies in the distinction between slavery and human trafficking and the subsumption of a fact under the definition. Particular attention was paid to the positive obligations of the contracting states, which were significantly specified. Despite criticism from the literature that the ECtHR would impose obligations on member states that they had not entered into and had not accepted in any protocol, it can be said that with a view to the development of trafficking in human beings for the future, positive obligations for member states are not unjustified. It is probably difficult to comprehend as a fact and to present it as a concrete norm. Because the problem of treating humans as a means to an end will not disappear easily. Therefore, the positive obligations of the state arises not only for its own citizens but also for the worker from abroad.