Wikileaks - no evidence trafficking - Ukraine

¶6. (SBU) (21A continued) The assessment report of the

Ukrainian Adoption System by the International Reference

Center for the Rights of Children Deprived of their Family

and International Social Service did not find any evidence

to suggest that trafficking of children through adoption

for exploitation occurred in inter-country adoptions from

Ukraine.

Reference ID

Created

Released

Classification

Origin

06KIEV869

2006-03-06 15:32

2011-08-30 01:44

UNCLASSIFIED

Embassy Kyiv

This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

061532Z Mar 06

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 15 KIEV 000869

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A

TAGS: KCRM PHUM KWMN

SUBJECT: Ukraine: Submission for the 2006 TIP Report

Ref: A) State 3836 B) Kiev 398 C) Kiev 521

(U) Sensitive but unclassified, please handle accordingly.

Not for internet distribution.

¶1. (U) Embassy Kiev's responses to the 2006 TIP report

questionnaire are presented below. Answers are keyed to

questions in ref A.

Overview (Ref A Para 21)

------------------------

¶2. (SBU) (21A) Ukraine is a country of origin for

internationally trafficked men, women and children. The

primary destination countries according to the

International Organization for Migration (IOM) are Turkey,

Russia, and Poland. Between 2004 and 2005, Russia moved

from third place to second place on the list of destination

points for Ukrainian victims trafficked for sexual and/or

labor exploitation. Russia also continued to serve as a

transit country for trafficked Ukrainian victims to other

destination points given the relative ease of moving people

illegally across the porous Ukrainian-Russian border. The

number of countries serving as destination points for

trafficked Ukrainians continued to grow, according to IOM

statistics: in 2003 there were 41 countries, in 2004 there

were 47, and in 2005 there were 49, with China and

Lithuania becoming the latest two countries identified as

destination points. The countries with the highest numbers

of reported Ukrainian victims in 2005 in descending order

were Turkey, Russia, Poland, the Czech Republic, Italy,

Israel, Greece, Serbia and Montenegro, the UK, Lithuania

and Portugal.

¶3. (SBU) (21A continued) Ukraine continued to be a transit

country for internationally trafficked women from Moldova,

Russia and other former Soviet republics. There also were

signs that Ukraine may be becoming a country of destination

for trafficked victims. In 2005 women were trafficked from

Moldova to Ukraine for labor and sexual exploitation.

There was also a report of a woman from Moldova who

trafficked her own children to Ukraine so they could beg

money on the streets. These reports indicate the growing

prosperity of Ukraine relative to some of the other former

republics of the Soviet Union, compounded by the ease of

travel between these countries, their shared second

language (Russian) and historical family, social, and

professional links.

¶4. (SBU) (21A continued) In 2005, two-thirds of the Ukraine

women who were trafficked suffered sexual exploitation (68

percent of IOMs caseload), one-third suffered labor

exploitation (30 percent of IOM's caseload) and a very

small percentage suffering both or being forced to beg.

There also were a small number of women who were trafficked

to bear children for infertile couples. Men were exploited

primarily for labor purposes. However, concrete data for

trafficked men was hard to obtain because trafficked males

generally did not recognize themselves as victims of

trafficking, and thus rarely turned to law enforcement

agencies and/or NGOs for assistance. According to

International Labor Organization (ILO) research on returned

migrants in four eastern and southeastern European

countries, including Ukraine, labor exploitation occurred

primarily in the agriculture and construction sectors. A

sample of 300 victims of forced labor showed that 23

percent had been coerced into sex work, 21 percent into

construction, and 13 percent into agriculture. The

remaining victims (43 percent) were coerced into a number

of employment fields including domestic service and care

work, small manufacturing, restaurant work and catering,

and food processing.

¶5. (SBU) (21A continued) According to local experts and the

ILO, children trafficked across state borders were

recruited primarily to serve as street-venders, domestic

workers, agricultural workers, waiter/waitress, and sex

workers. However, upon arrival at their final destination,

children usually ended up in the sex industry or were

forced to beg. Children trafficked within Ukraine also

were initially recruited for work as cleaners, waiters, and

vendors, but once again, in most cases were ultimately

coerced into providing sexual services or begging.

¶6. (SBU) (21A continued) The assessment report of the

Ukrainian Adoption System by the International Reference

Center for the Rights of Children Deprived of their Family

and International Social Service did not find any evidence

to suggest that trafficking of children through adoption

for exploitation occurred in inter-country adoptions from

Ukraine.

¶7. (SBU) (21A continued) Trafficking in persons did occur

within Ukraine's borders. In 2005, IOM registered six

people, including three minors, who were victims of

internal trafficking. They were trafficked from one region

to another for the purpose of labor (agriculture and

service industry), sexual exploitation (prostitution and

pornography), and begging. There were also reports from

NGOs that women with underage children were trafficked

within a region or a city and the children were forced to

beg. Moreover, some mothers pimped their own underage

daughters or contracted them out to studios producing

pornographic material.

¶8. (SBU) (21A continued) There is no Ukrainian territory

outside the control of the GOU.

¶9. (SBU) (21A continued) Estimates vary regarding the

number of trafficked Ukrainians, but IOM's polling data

indicated that one in every 10 Ukrainians knew someone in

their community who had been trafficked. Ukraine has

treaties permitting Ukrainian citizens to work abroad

legally with only a few countries. It is clear, therefore,

that the hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians who leave the

country in search of work fall outside these treaties, seek

work illegally, and are at risk of being trafficked and

exploited. Experts from GOUs Institute for Strategic

Research estimated that at the end of 2004 more than seven

million Ukrainians worked abroad, with only 500,000 doing

so legally. In 2005, IOM provided 720 victims with

assistance and referred 242 of them to the rehabilitation

center. The Ministry of Interior (MOI) reported 446

victims, including 39 minors, were victims in criminal

cases last year.

¶10. (SBU) (21A Continued) Figures for trafficking were

supplied primarily by international organizations, the MOI,

the Ministry of Family, Youth and Sport (MFYS), the

Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), and other relevant

Ukrainian government agencies. Statistics did not reflect

the full scope of the problem as the numbers tabulated

reflect only registered victims; i.e., those who had

returned to Ukraine through the assistance of Ukraine's

Embassies or international organizations or those who had

appealed to international organizations or GOU agencies for

help.

¶11. (SBU) (21A Continued) According to IOM, groups

targeted for trafficking remained largely constant:

females up to 30 years of age (for sexual exploitation) and

older females (for labor exploitation), males of all ages,

and children under the age of 16. The majority of victims

who received assistance from IOM had been employed at the

time of their recruitment but with salaries on average of

less than USD 50 a month, which is low by Ukrainian

standards.

¶12. (SBU) (21B) Since last year's TIP report the level of

trafficking and the number of people who were vulnerable to

being trafficked remained relatively constant. However,

the 2005 statistics collected by IOM recorded an increase

in the number of minors trafficked to Russia for sexual

exploitation. Also a new sector for labor exploitation

came to light in 2005 involving Ukrainians in Russia's

fishing industry. Twenty-five Ukrainian men were recruited

by an employment agency in Mariupol, a city in eastern

Ukraine, to work on a crabbing trawler in the Russian Far

East. The Ukrainians worked 20 hours a day with little

food and water. The trawler never came to port and food

and water were transported to it by another ship. The

sailors effectively were imprisoned on the ship. The

district prosecutor in Russian's Sakhalin oblast instituted

a criminal case regarding the labor exploitation of the

Ukrainian fishermen. A criminal case regarding human

trafficking also was initiated in Ukraine against the

company that recruited them. Despite the higher numbers in

2005 and this new area of labor exploitation, the general

consensus among experts was that trafficking from Ukraine

had not necessarily grown, but that cooperation had

increased between international and local NGOs and law

enforcement bodies, that reporting was improved and that

awareness had increased overall among officials at all

levels regarding the problems of trafficking.

¶13. (SBU) (21B continued) The Ukrainian administration

which came to power following the "Orange Revolution" has

taken a more assertive stance on TIP relative to previous

Ukrainian governments. High-ranking officials, such as the

Minister of Interior, and the Minister for Family, Youth

and Sport and Ukraines First Lady have acknowledged

publicly that TIP is a very serious problem in Ukraine;

they have called on people to unite in the struggle against

TIP and to end the narrow thinking that stigmatizes TIP

victims as willing participants in their own trafficking.

In March 2005, the MOI created a Department for Combating

TIP with over 500 officers assigned throughout Ukraine's 27

regions dedicated exclusively to investigating TIP cases.

Funding for MOI TIP efforts increased from UAH 3,440,200

(USD 681,228) to UAH 9,422,100 (USD 1,865,762). On January

12, 2006, Parliament amended Ukraine's Criminal Code to

harmonize it with the TIP provisions of the UN Palermo

Convention and Protocol; the changes came into force on

February 10, 2006. In April 2006, the Supreme Court is

scheduled to release guidance for the lower courts

regarding the new amended Criminal Code as well as its

assessments of how courts can improve the hearing of TIP

cases, based on its review of court cases to date.

¶14. (SBU) The one branch of Ukraine's law enforcement

community that did not take an aggressive approach to

prosecuting TIP was the General Prosecutor's Office (GPO)

(Ref B and C). In response to the Embassy's demarche in

mid-2005, the GPO elevated TIP to its list of five priority

crimes. However, the GPO did not accept the Embassy's

suggestion that a specialized GPO anti-TIP unit be created.

The General Prosecutor took the position that Ukraine's

court prosecutors do not specialize and that the low volume

of TIP cases did not justify the resource commit necessary

to create a specialized unit. Regarding a TIP victim

witness protection program, the situation in Ukraine

remained unchanged. The GOU's position continued to be

that its limited budget prevented it from developing a

witness protection program for any criminal offense beyond

its current practice of providing a two-person protective

detail for witnesses for the duration of trials, if deemed

necessary.

¶15. (SBU) (21B continued) Victims were usually trafficked

into conditions of severe exploitation that include

beatings, limited and low-quality food, no medical

assistance, and long work hours. For instance, the IOM

reported that women trafficked to Turkey were forced to

take antibiotics and contraceptives without medical

oversight which resulted in serious, long-term health

problems for the victims.

¶16. (SBU) (21B continued) Children were reported to be an

at-risk group for trafficking. Street children or children

from low-income homes or with drug/alcohol dependent

parents were especially at risk as these children often

were forced to sell themselves to survive or the parents

sold their children to recruiters for pornographic

exploitation or to be trafficked. According to the network

End Child Prostitution, Child Pornography and Trafficking

of Children for Sexual Purposes, 18 percent of street

children in Ukraine had been victims of sexual violence or

exploitation. Another vulnerable category was orphans. By

law these children must leave the orphanages at age 18, but

are afforded only limited social support as they begin

their independent lives. Among women engaged in

prostitution in Ukraine, 11 percent are girls aged 12 to 15

and 20 percent are aged 16 to 17. People in rural areas

were deemed an at-risk group as they had less exposure to

public information campaigns on the risks of being

trafficked. According to data gathered by a social

research company for IOM, people in rural areas were less

likely than their urban counterparts to believe they would

become victims of trafficking and therefore did less due

diligence on the offers they were made (legal or illegal)

to work abroad.

¶17. (SBU) (21B continued) All Ukrainians who went abroad

illegally to work were at risk of being exploited.

According to research by the ILO the lack of information on

how to apply for legal employment abroad made most

Ukrainians dependent on private intermediaries, who in many

cases were conduits for trafficking. The study showed that

individuals who used trusted social connections or legal

channels were, for the most part, employed safely abroad,

whether legally or illegally. In contrast, the majority of

forced labor victims had fallen prey to unscrupulous

intermediaries because they had insufficient knowledge how

to get legal employment abroad, or how to return if abroad

illegally but in need of help.

¶18. (SBU) (21B continued) Some employment, travel, marriage

and model agencies also served as recruitment mechanisms

for TIP. As of December 2005, there were 434 companies

serving as intermediators or helping Ukrainians find jobs

abroad. Companies that engaged in trafficking tended to be

affiliated with organized crime groups, had foreign

partners, and bribed corrupt officials to facilitate the

movement abroad of the victims. The number of males and

females among these recruitment companies was almost equal.

Sometimes females served as success stories for potential

victims by flaunting how much money they ostensibly earned

abroad. The majority of the recruiters were Ukrainians.

It was quite common for victims to receive offers to go

abroad from their friends or a friend of a friend and even

sometimes from relatives.

¶19. (SBU) (21B continued) Traffickers used a variety of

methods to recruit victims, including ads in newspapers, on

local television channels, and on radio stations. Jobs

s

advertised abroad offered high salaries relative to the

salaries for the same job in Ukraine. Most often the

positions advertised required limited qualifications such

as jobs in the hospitality industry (waiters, bartenders,

or hotel staff) or in factories. Another approach was to

offer fake marriage proposals. Often traffickers presented

themselves as friends of other friends, owners of a

bar/cafe somewhere abroad or friends of such owners and

deceived potential victims. The traffickers often paid for

the processing of passports and travel documents for the

victims, thus placing them in debt bondage. In some rare

cases, traffickers simply kidnapped their victims. In

2005, there were several such cases involving minors who

were trafficked to Russia for sexual exploitation.

¶20. (SBU) (21B continued) In the majority of cases, victims

traveled on their own passports. However, false passports

with false dates of birth were often produced for victims

under the age of 18 so they would comply with age

requirements for travel without adult supervision or

parental consent. In some cases corrupt border guards

facilitated the movement of adults and minors across the

border without any identity documents. Given the very

porous nature of Ukraine's border with Russia, undocumented

travel across the border is relatively easy. For example,

law enforcement authorities in the Dnipropetrovsk region

uncovered an organized crime ring that delivered underage

virgins to a client in Moscow. Girls without documents

were moved across the Ukrainian-Russian border to the

client in Russia and then returned home two to three days

later. A policeman from region's police unit for crimes

against minors was a member of the ring. The case is

currently in court.

¶21. (SBU) (21C) The GOUs ability to address TIP is limited

by a variety of factors: a lack of understanding of the

problem by some government agencies, budget constraints,

corruption, and the limited period the more progressive

Ukrainian Government has been in office. For example, the

Ministry of Economics did not support the idea of a

creating new Comprehensive Anti-TIP Program as it did not

see TIP as a priority issue. The General Prosecutors

Office did not agree to establish a special anti-TIP unit

since it did not believe the problem to be widespread.

Other government agencies, however, did take the issue

seriously and did cooperate with international

organizations and local NGOs in conducting information

campaigns, hosting seminars and roundtables, and supporting

reintegration centers, but rarely did this cooperation

entail substantial financial support as the GOU agencies

claimed budgetary constraints. Nevertheless, relative to

previous years GOU financial contributions have improved,

albeit incrementally. The Ministry of Finance reported

that it allocated in 2005 UAH 1,177,200 (USD 233,109) for

implementation of the Comprehensive Anti-TIP Program,

including UAH 145,000 (USD 28,713) from the state budget

and UAH 1,032,200 (USD 204,396) from local budgets. MOIs

Department for Combating TIP and its 27 regional divisions

received UAH 9,422,100 (USD 1,865,762).

¶22. (SBU) (21C continued) The GOU enacted positive

legislative changes and structural changes in the law

enforcement community. The process involved extensive

lobbying with bureaucrats and parliamentary deputies.

Corruption remains endemic in Ukraine, a fact that the GOU

has openly acknowledged, and continues to have a

substantial corrosive effect on the efficiency and

integrity of government services, including the judiciary

and law enforcement. The GOU is struggling to address the

issue with a variety of new anti-corruption initiatives.

In 2005, five regional anti-TIP officers within the MOI

were charged for taking bribes related to TIP. These cases

are in the courts.

¶23. (SBU) (21D) The MFYS monitored the implementation of

the government's Comprehensive Anti-TIP Program for 2002-

2005 and submitted annual reports as well as a threeyear

review to the Cabinet of Ministers. These reports,

however, were not widely disseminated. The MOI monitors

and generates annual statistics on the number of TIP crimes

committed as well as the number of cases it handled.

Prevention (Ref A Para 22)

--------------------------

¶24. (SBU) (22A) The GOU acknowledged that trafficking is a

problem in Ukraine and increased efforts to fight it. In

March 2005, Yushchenko government placed greater emphasis

on TIP as an issue of concern for the government. High-

ranking GOUs officials, such as the Minister of Interior

and the Minister for Family, Youth and Sport and Ukraines

first Lady used the electronic media to educate the public

on the seriousness and scope of the problem of TIP in

Ukraine. In particular, the Minister for Family, Youth,

and Sport, who is also the GOU's Inter-Agency Coordination

on

Council Chairman, and the Minister of Interior spoke out

publicly against TIP at frequent public events and

underscored the need to de-stigmatize victims of TIP. On

March 30, 2005, MOI raised the status of its TIP unit,

previously subsumed within the Criminal Investigation

Department and responsible for a broad range of issues, to

a stand-alone Department focused solely on combating TIP.

Over 500 officers were assigned to country's 27 regional

administrative units with the sole purpose of investigating

TIP. The Ministry of Finance calculated the three-year

cost of implementing the 2002-2005 Comprehensive Anti-TIP

Program was UAH 2,466,800 (USD 488,475). The MFA

established centers in Ukraine to educate citizens on the

risks of working abroad illegally. In 2005, the MFA also

held in Istanbul a specialized TIP training course for its

consular officers stationed in the countries of the Black

Sea region. The Supreme Court informed the Embassy that it

was finalizing its analysis of TIP cases and expected to

circulate it to the country's lower courts in April 2006 in

order to help judges avoid legal mistakes made in

adjudicating previous TIP cases.

¶25. (SBU) (22B) According to the GOUs Comprehensive Anti-TIP

Program for 2002-2005, anti-trafficking responsibilities were

allotted to the following government agencies: MFYS, MOI,

MFA, the Ministry for Education and Sciences, the Ministry of

Justice, the Ministry of Labor and Social Policy, the

Ministry of Health, the State Security Service (SSU), the

State Committee for Information, the State Border Guard

Service (SBGS), the State Committee for Nationalities and

Migration, and the State Tourism Administration. The most

prominent and active GOU agencies in this field in 2005 were

the MOI, MFYS, and MFA. The Inter-Agency Coordination

Council, established in the spring of 2002, coordinated and

monitored the government's response to TIP, with the

objective of strengthening the capacity of relevant

government authorities. At the regional level, similar

Coordination Commissions were established and met regularly.

In 2005, the Council made a tentative recommendation,

although not endorsed by all Council members, that a National

Anti-TIP Coordinator be established within the context of the

new Comprehensive Anti-TIP Program for 2006-2010.

¶26. (SBU) (22C) No information or public education campaign

in Ukraine in 2005 was exclusively funded or run by the

government. As a general rule, the GOU supported campaigns

funded by bilateral or international donors by placing

social advertisement on government TV and radio stations

free of charge. The Ministry for Education and Science in

cooperation with the NGO Womens Consortium, the Red Cross,

and IOM initiated a TIP information campaign to raise

awareness among both pupils and teachers. Several

television stations broadcasted documentary films and

informational programs highlighting the danger of human

trafficking. NGOs conducted general awareness campaigns

throughout the country at the local level, often in

cooperation with local government entities. International

organizations also enlisted Ukrainian celebrities to

participate in TIP-prevention information campaigns.

Ruslana, winner of the 2004 Eurovision contest, supported

the OSCEs efforts and Ukraine's most popular signer,

Vakarchuk, lead vocalist for the pop group Okean Elzy,

worked with IOM. At nationally televised events, public

officials urged their fellow citizens to be supportive of

TIP victims and to avoid being trafficked.

¶27. (SBU) (22D) MFYS continued to run a number of credit

programs to support young people such as the "outreach to

rural youth" and "mortgages for young families." However,

the programs' small budgets limited their impact. The

Ministry of Labor, along with the State Employment service

and MFYS, supported a special program entitled "Rural

Women" aimed at raising education levels of rural women.

n.

The State Employment Centers continued to encourage

unemployed women to start their own small business by

training them and providing them with a lump sum payment of

unemployment benefits.

¶28. (SBU) (22F) Good cooperation existed between the

government and civil society, both at the national and

local levels. However, once again, due to the government's

limited financial resources NGOs usually provided

necessary assistance to victims, including medical,

psychological, and legal services. In some regions, active

NGOs took the lead in coordinating TIP activities of local

governmental agencies. Local administrations included NGOs

as partner organizations in their regional action plans.

¶29. (SBU) (22G) The State Border Guards Service (SBGS) and

the MOI are the primary agencies that monitor immigration

and emigration patterns for evidence of trafficking. SBGS

reported that they analyze migration patterns on a monthly

basis and send the information to MOI, GPO, and the SSU.

In the fall of 2005, the MOI expanded the Department for

Combating TIP to include illegal migration.

¶30. (SBU) (22H) The Inter-Agency Coordination Council was

established in 2002 under the Comprehensive Anti-TIP

Program. The Councils task was to coordinate the

governmental response to TIP. In December 2004, an

advisory working group to the Inter-Agency Coordination

Council was established, and included representatives of

NGOs and international organizations. At the regional

level, similar Coordination Commissions were established.

Within the law enforcement community, stovepiping of data

management resulted in insufficient and slow dissemination

of information. Timely sharing of information among

relevant GOU agencies was further hampered by limited

digital communication capabilities. Indeed, transfer of

electronic data within an individual law enforcement agency

among regions remained extremely limited, slow, and

unreliable. In February 2005, the Minster of Interior

cited constraints on internal communications and corruption

as the Ministry's two largest problems. In the second half

of 2005, MOI, SSU and SBGS agreed that senior officers

would meet periodically to discuss ways to improve

information flow and coordination between agencies. The

problem of coordination and data sharing within and among

Ministries hampered all law enforcement efforts in Ukraine,

not just efforts to combat TIP.

¶31. (SBU) (22H continued) The National Security and Defense

Council oversaw the drafting of a concept paper and action

plan for the creation of an umbrella mechanism for

prosecuting corruption that drew on Europe's best practices

and standards. The paper laid out the principles for

reforming Ukraine's law enforcement community to comport

with European Union norms and standards. The President was

expected to approve the concept paper by the end of March

¶2006.

¶32. (SBU) (22J) GOU completed its Comprehensive Anti-TIP

Program for 2002-2005. At the end of 2005, the MFYS

finalized the Concept Paper for the Comprehensive National

Anti-TIP Program for 2006-2010. In addition to input from

government agencies the Concept Paper received input from

IOM, La Strada, UNDP, ILO and Caritas, as well as local

NGOs that deal with trafficking. Once the Cabinet of

Ministers approves the Concept Paper, a comprehensive

program will be drafted.

¶33. (SBU) (22J continued) The Comprehensive Anti-TIP

Program for 2002-2005 was widely disseminated at seminars

and roundtables organized by the GOU in cooperation with

international donors; however, the annual assessment

reports on progress toward implementation received limited

circulation.

Investigation and Prosecution (Ref A Para 23)

---------------------------------------------

¶34. (SBU) (23A) On January 12, the Parliament passed the

Law on Changes to the Criminal Code regarding trafficking

in persons, thus harmonizing Articles 149 (trafficking in

persons) and 303 (pimping or engaging a person in

prostitution) with the UN Palermo Convention and its

Protocol. The legislation also provided for

extraterritorial jurisdiction for serious crimes, including

human trafficking. On February 3 the law was signed by the

President and on February 10 it entered into force. The

law specifically prohibits trafficking in persons for

various purposes, including sexual and labor exploitation,

both internal and transnational. The new law covers

recruitment of a person by means of deceit, blackmail, or

the use of his/her vulnerable condition for the purpose of

exploitation. In 2005, trafficking cases were also

prosecuted under the following articles of the Criminal

Code of Ukraine: Articles 150 (exploitation of children),

190 (fraud), 301 (pornography), 302 (operating brothels and

pandering) and 303 (pimping).

Text of the new TIP statute follows:

Article 149. Trafficking in human beings or other illegal

agreement on person

¶1. Trafficking in human beings or other illegal agreement

with a person as an object, and also recruitment, transfer,

receipt, transportation, harbouring of a person committed

for the purpose of exploitation by means of deceit,

blackmail, or the use of his/her vulnerable condition,

shall be punishable by deprivation of liberty for a term of

three to eight years.

¶2. Any such actions as provided for by paragraphs one or

two of this Article committed in respect to a minor (up to

18 years of age) or perpetrated upon two or more persons,

repeatedly or by a group of persons with prior conspiracy,

or by an official through the abuse of authority, or by a

person upon whom the victim was dependent materially or

otherwise, or committed in combination with violence that

is not endangering life or health of the victim or his/her

close relatives, or in combination with threats of such

violence shall be punishable by deprivation of liberty for

a term of five to twelve years, with or without the

forfeiture of property.

¶3. Any such actions as provided for by paragraphs one, two

or three of this Article, committed in respect to a minor

(up to 14 years of age) or if committed in combination with

violence that is endangering life or health of the victim

or his/her close relatives, or in combination with threats

of such violence or committed by an organized group, or if

causing grave consequences, shall be punishable by

deprivation of liberty for a term of eight to fifteen

years, with or without the forfeiture of property.

Note 1. Exploitation of a person shall be understood as:

all forms of sexual exploitation, use in pornography

business, forced labor or services; slavery or practices

similar to slavery, servitude, involvement into debt

bondage, extraction of organs, experimentation over a

person without his/her consent, adoption for commercial

purposes, forced pregnancy, involvement into the criminal

activity, use in armed conflicts, etc.

Note 2. Vulnerable condition in the Articles 149 and 303 of

this Code shall be understood as: the status of a person,

due to his/her physical or mental peculiarities or external

conditions, that divests or abridges his/her ability to

comprehend his/her commission or omission of an act or to

manage his/her actions, to make his/her own decisions

according to his/her will, to maintain adequate resistance

to violent or other illegal actions.

Note 3. Responsibility for recruitment, transfer, receipt,

transportation, harboring of a minor (up to 14 or 18 years

of age) according to this Article shall be fixed whether or

not such actions were committed with use of deceit,

blackmail, or the use of vulnerable condition of a minor,

or use or threat of violence, through the abuse of

authority or by a person upon whom the victim was dependent

materially or otherwise.

End of Text.

¶35. (SBU) (23B) Article 149 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine

stipulates that traffickers can be sentenced to three to 15

years in prison. There were no specific penalties

stipulated for a particular method of exploitation.

¶36. (SBU) (23C) Article 152 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine

stipulates that a convicted rapist can receive a prison

sentence of three to 10 years, and up to 15 years if the

case involves a minor or if the rape resulted in

particularly grave consequences for the victim. Penalties

for rape are comparable to the penalties for trafficking.

¶37. (SBU) (23D) Prior to February 10, 2006, prostitution

was criminalized under Article 303 of the Criminal Code of

Ukraine. Currently, prostitution is no longer

criminalized, but it can be punished as an administrative

offense and carries a fine of UAH85 (equivalent to USD17)

to UAH 255 (equivalent to USD50). The activities of

brothel owners/operators remained criminalized under

Article 302, but since it is also now addressed in the

amended Article 303, most experts believe Article 302 will

eventually be dropped. Being a client of a prostitute in

Ukraine is not a crime.

Text of Article 303 follows:

Article 303. Pimping or engaging of a person into

prostitution

¶1. Engaging of a person into or coercion to prostitution

with use of deceit, blackmail or his/her vulnerable

condition, or use or threat of violence, or pimping, shall

be punishable by deprivation of liberty for a term of three

to eight years.

¶2. Actions stipulated by paragraph one of this Article,

perpetrated upon two or more persons, or committed

repeatedly or by a group of persons with prior conspiracy,

or if committed by an official through an abuse of

authority, or by a person upon whom the victim was

dependent materially or otherwise, shall be punishable by

deprivation of liberty for a term of four to seven years.

¶3. Actions stipulated by paragraphs one or two of this

Article when committed in respect to a minor (up to 18

years of age), or by organized group, shall be punishable

by deprivation of liberty for a term of five to ten years,

with or without the forfeiture of property.

¶4. Actions provided for by paragraphs one, two, or three of

this Article, if committed against a minor (up to 14 years

of age) or when they caused grave consequences, shall be

punishable by deprivation of liberty of eight to fifteen

years, with or without the forfeiture of property.

Note 1. Pimping in this article shall be understood as:

actions of a person that ensure the prostitution of another

person.

Note 2. Responsibility for engaging or coercing a minor

into prostitution according to this Article shall be fixed

whether or not such actions were committed with use of

deceit, blackmail, or use of vulnerable condition of a

minor, or use or threat of violence, through the abuse of

authority or by a person upon whom the victim was dependent

materially or otherwise.

End of Text.

¶38. (SBU) (23E) The Government normally provides only

general numbers on the status of criminal cases, e.g.,

whether cases are initiated, pending, or completed. In

2005, the MOI reported that it had detected 415 TIP crimes,

initiated 185 cases, completed 72 criminal investigations,

charged 138 persons, arrested 99 persons, and submitted 68

cases to the courts. Thirty-seven organized criminal

groups, including 14 with international ties, were

disrupted. (Note: According to the Criminal Code, an

organized criminal group is a group of three or more people

who commit a premeditated crime with each of the

individuals engaged in separate elements of the crime;

e.g., one served as the stakeout, one drove the car, and

one robbed the bank. End note.) In 2005, the courts heard

95 TIP cases with prosecution obtaining 85 guilty verdicts

under Article 149. Of the 115 individuals who were

convicted, 47 were sentenced to prison terms: five for

less than two years, four for two to three years, twenty

three for three to five years, eleven for five to eight

years, and four for eight to ten years. At the time of the

drafting of this report, 30 criminal cases under Article

149 were still pending in the courts. The SSU, in

cooperation with foreign law enforcement agencies conducted

a series of TIP investigations, which resulted in 78

channels of human trafficking being shutdown and 124

persons being arrested in Ukraine. As of January 30, 2006,

the GOU reported that 69 traffickers were currently

incarcerated.

¶39. (SBU) (23F) According to information provided by

Ukrainian law enforcement agencies, organized crime groups

with international connections controlled the trafficking

routes, while local recruitment was often handled by

employment, travel, marriage, and modeling agencies. Small

crime groups also existed and often looked like and

operated as family businesses.

¶40. (SBU) (23F continued) In 2005, the Ministry of Labor

and Social Policy withdrew a limited number of domestic

employment agencies' licenses because of their involvement

in trafficking. The GPO reported that in 2005 there was no

evidence of government officials involvement in TIP.

However, five regional anti-TIP officers with the MOI were

charged with taking bribes related to TIP. Their cases are

currently in the courts.

¶41. (SBU) (23F continued) The bulk of the illegal income

generated by TIP activities associated with Ukrainian

victims is accumulated abroad where the exploitation of the

victim takes place. Foreign traffickers often send money

to their accomplices in Ukraine via wire transfers to cover

the costs of recruitment, processing documents, and bribing

governmental officials. The GPO reported that they had no

information indicating that income received from

trafficking was being channeled to armed groups or

terrorists.

¶42. (SBU) (23G) MOI and SSU are the responsible law

enforcement agencies for investigating TIP cases.

Ukrainian law permits electronic surveillance, undercover

operations, and mitigated punishment for suspects who

cooperate. Police participation in undercover operations

is not prohibited by Ukrainian law; however, lack of

financial resources and corruption hampered the effective

use of these investigative techniques.

¶43. (SBU) (23H) GOU-financed TIP training was limited to

weekly professional training seminars for MOI's anti-TIP

Department officers both in Kiev and in the regions. Other

government officials involved with combating TIP, however,

did participate on a regular basis in training activities

funded by foreign donors. The U.S. Embassy launched a

program with the GOU to develop TIP curricula for the

Prosecutor's Academy and Judicial Academy. IOM and OSCE

also initiated programs to provide TIP training for

prosecutors and judges. All three donors closely

coordinated their efforts to ensure local ownership and to

avoid duplication.

¶44. (SBU) (23I) The investigation and prosecution of

trafficking cases in Ukraine requires cooperation with

other governments, but the effectiveness of this

cooperation remains limited due to a number of factors: 1)

the complicated procedures under Mutual Legal Assistance

Treaties (MLAT), 2) the lack of funding to translate

documents and correspondence, 3) the legislative

differences between countries, and 4) the lack of timely

assistances from officials in some destination countries.

The latter is a particular issue as under Ukrainian law

police and prosecutors have two months to build a case once

an individual is charged; extensions can be granted by the

court on a case-by-case basis. The GPO reported that 415

TIP crimes were uncovered in 2005 and almost all of them

were investigated in cooperation with other governments.

¶45. (SBU) (23I continued) In 2005, the GPO took steps to

simplify and accelerate the procedure for sharing evidence

with its sister agencies in neighboring countries. It

negotiated an agreement with its Polish counterpart to

allow regional prosecutors to convey Mutual Legal

Assistance (MLA) requests directly to their regional

counterparts in Poland and vice versa; i.e., not have to

pass requests through their respective national

headquarters. The GPO initiated similar discussions in

2005 with the Slovak Republic and Hungary, and was also

engaged in negotiations with the GPOs of Romania and

Moldova on a three-way compact to enhance cooperation on

combating transnational organized crime, including TIP.

¶46. (SBU) (23J) The Ukrainian Constitution prohibits the

extradition of Ukrainian citizens. The GOU, however, does

extradite foreign nationals who are charged with

trafficking in other countries. In 2005, Vladimir

Volodarsky, an Israeli citizen and an alleged leader of a

criminal group, was charged in Israel with trafficking 35

Ukrainian women for sexual exploitation. He had been

placed on an international watch list. Volodarsky resided

in Kiev where he engaged in real estate business, and

allegedly owned a large section of the city's most

luxurious shopping center. In March 2005, Volodarsky was

detained in Kiev; nine months later he was extradited to

Israel. Volodarsky fought his extradition claiming he had

obtained Ukrainian citizenship and thus was exempt under

Ukraine's Constitution from extradition. He fought

extradition because, at the time of his arrest, penalties

for TIP were more severe in Israel than in Ukraine. He

appealed his case to the Supreme Court, but the GOU was

able to prove that Volodarsky had obtained his Ukrainian

citizenship illegally. If convicted in Israel, Volodarsky

will face a prison sentence of up to 16 years. The MOI

official who had assisted Volodarsky to obtain his

"Ukrainian" citizenship was dismissed. Interpol and the

Israeli police took part in the police operation that led

to his arrest. According to MOI officials, Volodarsky

offered a bribe of USD 150,000 to Ukrainian officials to

release him, but to no effect.

¶47. (SBU) (23J continued) While the Ukrainian Constitution

prohibits the GOU from extraditing its own citizens.

Ukrainian law does permit the GOU to extradite foreign

nationals who are charged with trafficking in other

countries when an extradition treaty exists between the two

countries, when the crime was committed within the

jurisdiction of the country making the request, and when

trafficking is defined as a crime under the laws of the

requesting country.

¶48. (SBU) (23K) Post did not receive any official

information suggesting government involvement in or

tolerance of trafficking. At the same time, a prosecutor

from Chernivtsi shared with the Embassy his view that a TIP

case was terminated due to high-level intervention. The

allegations were also reported in two media outlets, the

newspaper Svoboda (Freedom) and the Internet news outlet

Obozrevatel, although a subsequent article in Obozrevatel

refuted the allegations. The case involved six brothers

who were charged with TIP. They allegedly recruited men

from Ukraine for employment in the U.S., and facilitated

their illegal entry into the U.S. Allegedly they brought

t

52 victims into U.S. where they were illegally employed and

exploited. From 1999-2003, the alleged criminals tried to

legalize their income from trafficking. They transmitted

more than USD 500,000 abroad, which was later confirmed by

law enforcement agencies in Poland and Germany. They also

bought four gasoline stations, a woodworking enterprise,

three houses and two cars. In late 2003, an investigation

of the case with the assistance of Polish and German law

enforcement bodies resulted in the arrest of the brothers

and charges of TIP and money laundering. Their defense

attorneys portrayed them as honest businessmen who

generously helped others get to the U.S. and earn money for

their families. The brothers allegedly acknowledged that

they took part of the trafficked men's salaries but claimed

it was payment for services rendered. Their attorneys

filed a complaint to the Presidents Secretariat claiming

severe mistreatment of the defendants by SSU officers. The

court turned back the case for insufficient evidence, and

it was sent to the SSU in the Ternopil oblast for further

investigation where it was eventually closed. Obozrevatel

reported that the daughter of one of the defendants told

their reporter that it was only through the high-level

intervention at the national level that the brothers in

2005 were released.

¶49. (SBU) (23L) GPO reported that no government officials

have been charged with trafficking.

¶50. (SBU) (23M) GOU has not identified child sex tourism as

a problem. Information on how many pedophiles were

prosecuted or deported/extradited to their country of

origin is not available. However, NGO experts who work

with street children reported that there is one place in

downtown Kiev where foreign pedophiles are known to look

for children. Street children know about it and go there

to earn money.

¶51. (SBU) (23M continued) Amendments to Ukraines Criminal

Code came into force on February 10, 2006 which initiated

extraterritorial coverage for serious crimes, including

human trafficking and child sexual.

¶52. (SBU) (23N) The Ukrainian government has signed and

ratified the following international instruments:

ILO Convention 182 concerning the prohibition and immediate

action for the elimination of the worst forms of child

labor - ratified, October 5, 2000;

ILO Convention 29 on forced or compulsory labor - ratified

August 8, 1957;

ILO Convention 105 on forced or compulsory labor - ratified

October 5, 2000.

The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of

the Child (CRC) on the sale of children, child

prostitution, and child pornography - ratified April 3,

¶2003.

The Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in

Persons, especially Women and Children, supplementing the

UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime -

ratified February 4, 2004.

Protection and Assistance to Victims (Ref A Para 24)

--------------------------------------------- -------

¶53. (SBU) (24A) Victims of trafficking received various

types of assistance including medical, psychological,

legal, job skills training, job placement, micro-credits

and shelter. Psychological assistance was widely available

through state institutions, but medical assistance was

available only from shelters funded by international

organizations. To strengthen the support infrastructure,

USAID funded an anti-trafficking project implemented by IOM

to support Ukrainian NGOs, civil society groups and faith-

based organizations to provide medical and other services

to TIP victims. The IOM office in Kiev, in cooperation

with its missions in destination countries, also provided

return and reintegration assistance to victims. State

Employment Centers provided unemployed women, including TIP

victims, with job placement and job skills training.

¶54. (SBU) (24A continued) Ukraine has three kinds of victim

care facilities: a rehabilitation center (established by

IOM in Kiev in 2002), six shelters (one run by Caritas in

Ternopil, and five run by local NGOs with IOM assistance

under European Commission (EC) funding in Odesa, Lutsk,

Chernivtsi, Zhytomyr, and Kherson) and a transit shelter

for non-Ukrainian victims (established in the Black Sea

port of Odesa by IOM and managed by the local NGO Vira

Nadia Lyubov). The rehabilitation center is a medical

facility that provides comprehensive medical, dental,

psychological, and gynecological services under one roof.

It is not intended to be a long-term facility for victims

of trafficking. Although lodging and security are

provided, comprehensive and complex medical assistance is

the main function of this facility. The six shelters

provide accommodations and a secure environment for medium

to long-term stays while victims receive employment

training before moving to apartments. These facilities

provide medical care, but usually not in-house. The

transit center is a short-term facility that provides

accommodations for victims waiting to return home. It

provides emergency medical assistance and a secure

environment while the victim waits for transportation to be

arranged.

¶55. (SBU) (24A continued) The MFA continued to assist

victims in destination countries to return home. In 2005,

Ukrainian Consulates repatriated 498 Ukrainian TIP victims.

The MFA opened six centers for the protection of Ukrainians

going abroad in Kiev, Lviv, Simferopol, Uzhgorod, Odesa and

Donetsk. The centers provided free consultations to

Ukrainian citizens regarding their rights abroad.

¶56. (SBU) (24B) In 2005, MFYS worked with IOM to implement

an EC-funded project to open shelters in Odesa, Lutsk,

Chernivtsi, Kherson and Zhytomyr. The buildings for the

centres were provided by the local administration for

nominal rents and the NGOs used the EC funding with IOMs

support to renovate the facilities. In some cases, local

administrations agreed to cover the expenses related to the

hiring of a social worker for the shelter.

¶57. (SBU) (24C) The SSU screened all persons repatriated or

deported to the Black Sea port of Odesa; if a person was

identified as a potential TIP victim, regardless of

nationality, the SSU referred the victim to the appropriate

shelter. At the international airport in Kiev, the MOI's

Department for Combating TIP fulfills this function.

¶58. (SBU) (24C continued) MFA conducted regular refresher

trainings for its diplomats on how to accelerate the

process for confirming the identity and citizenship of a

Ukrainian trafficking victim and how to provide them with

appropriate travel documents to return to Ukraine.

Ukrainian consular officers were also under instructions to

maintain good working relations with IOM offices in their

respective countries of duty. The simplified procedures

for facilitating returns were introduced in 2003 and are

updated annually. When a victim of trafficking approaches

a Ukrainian Embassy or Consulate, the Ukrainian diplomat

refers the victim to IOM to ensure the victim is safe from

being re-trafficked. Ukrainians victims are repatriated to

Ukraine by commercial air. An IOM staff member escorts the

victim to the airport and accompanies the victim until s/he

is seated on the airplane. When they arrive in Ukraine,

the victim is met at the airport and depending on his/her

wish is escorted to the IOM's rehabilitation center. The

Ukrainian government has actively supported this procedure.

¶59. (SBU) (24D) Up until February 10, 2006, under the old

Article 303 of the Criminal Code, victims of trafficking

could be prosecuted for prostitution. The GOU, however,

never exercised this option during the reporting period.

TIP victims are also by law immune from prosecution for

illegally crossing the state border. The law reads that

any person who is confirmed to have suffered a crime

because of their illegal movement across the Ukrainian

border shall be treated as a victim of the crime. However,

victims' rights are often abridged during court hearings in

which female trafficking victims are still often

characterized as prostitutes, a common tactic of defence

lawyers, and thus victims are denied rights of

confidentiality and respect for dignity. An unsympathetic

SIPDIS

attitude towards TIP victims is also common among

prosecutors and judges.

¶60. (SBU) (24E) The GOU has legislation in place that

should facilitate and encourage victims to assist in the

investigation and prosecution of trafficking, but the lack

of resources has hampered the effective utilization of this

legislation. According to the provisions of the Code of

Criminal Procedure and the Law on Protection of Individuals

Involved in Criminal Proceedings there are four ways in

which concerns related to testifying may be addressed

within the Ukrainian criminal justice system: closed

hearing, court hearing held via a camera, witness testimony

given in the absence of the defendant, and witness being

relieved of the obligation to report to a court hearing

provided that they confirm their previous testimony in

writing. Article 52 of the Criminal Procedure Code of

Ukraine also allows for victims who acted as witnesses in

criminal proceedings to be represented by an attorney at

the trial in order to ensure the protection of their

rights. Since most victims cannot afford their own legal

representation IOM has assisted in this matter.

¶61. (SBU) (24E continued) Ukraines Code of Criminal

Procedure grants victims of crimes the right to claim civil

compensation for material and/or moral damages suffered as

a result of the crime. A victims claim for civil

compensation may be handled either as a part of the

criminal proceedings against the accused or through a

separate civil proceeding. As a rule, criminal law judges

did not allow civil suits to be handled simultaneously with

the criminal case. Victims had to initiate a separate

civil procedure, thus reliving their trauma. Nevertheless,

,

several victims pursued the civil suit route and received

damage compensation in the amount of UAH 500-1000

(equivalent to USD 100-200). Since the GOU was not able to

fund adequately the witness protection provisions mentioned

above, the majority of victims of trafficking were not

willing to come forward and report the crime they suffered.

A poll of victims cited as the main reasons for victims

unwillingness to come forward: 1) belief that the judicial

system was corrupt, 2) fear of retaliation from

traffickers, 3) belief that it would be difficult to prove

they had been trafficked, 4) drawn out court proceedings

that would delay their ability to move forward with their

lives, and 5) inadequate physical protection.

¶62. (SBU) (24F) Despite the requirement established in the

Comprehensive Anti-TIP Program for 2002-2005 that the GOU

create efficient mechanisms for protecting victims in

criminal court proceedings, the only forms of victim

protection currently existing under Ukrainian law were

those outlined above in the Law on the Protection of

Individuals Involved in Criminal Proceedings. Victims of

trafficking were not singled out in terms of witness

protection. Few crime victims in general were provided

protective measures.

¶63. (SBU) (24F continued) The GOU did not fund any shelters

directly, but did support a few by providing access to

facilities or by providing in-kind logistical support. For

example, the premises for all six shelters are provided by

local administrations at a nominal fee. In some regions,

local administrations have paid the expenses to hire a

social worker for the center.

¶64. (SBU) (24F continued) The GOU has 95 temporary shelters

for homeless children; however, these shelters do not have

any specialized programs or services for children who have

been trafficked.

¶65. (SBU) (24G) The GOU, in cooperation with international

organizations, provided specialized training for

investigators, prosecutors and judges on how to investigate

and prosecute trafficking cases. MOI held regular meetings

and training sessions for its anti-trafficking units

throughout the country. The GOU also actively cooperated

with foreign donors, international organizations, and NGOs

on improving skill levels of law enforcement officers,

including victim sensitivity training. With the support of

IOM, regional seminars were held in five cities of Ukraine

for representatives of MOI, prosecutors, and judges.

¶66. (SBU) (24G continued) The GOU addressed the special

needs of trafficked children in the framework of a Project

with ILO funded by the USG and the German Government.

Thus, in January 2006, training for social workers and

psychologists from state institutions on how to work with

child victims of trafficking was conducted by the NGO

Womens Consortium.

¶67. (SBU) (24G continued) In 2005 the MFA distributed

special instructions related to the protection and

assistance of victims of trafficking to all Ukrainian

consulates abroad. In addition, consular officers were

required to receive special training where TIP issues were

addressed before assuming overseas assignments. In 2005,

the MFA also brought together all of its consular officials

from its missions in the Black Sea region to Istanbul for

specialized TIP training.

¶68. (SBU) (24G continued) The MFA reported that consular

officers in destination countries had developed good

relations with IOM offices and local NGOs supporting

victims of trafficking. IOM has confirmed this to be true.

¶69. (SBU) (24H) See answers to question A in section 21.

¶70. (SBU) (24I) IOM, OSCE, Caritas and La Strada Ukraine

have offices in Ukraine currently implementing anti-TIP

projects. IOM is implementing a two-year project funded by

USAID aimed at strengthening local NGOs, civil society

groups, and faith-based organizations that work with TIP

victims. La Strada-Ukraine supported 24-hour hotlines for

victims of trafficking and domestic violence in almost all

of the regions of Ukraine. There were also a number of

local NGOs that dealt exclusively with TIP, with the most

active being Revival of the Nation (Ternopil), "Vira

Nadia Lyubov" (Odesa) and "Women of Donbas" (Luhansk).

They provided support to Ukrainian victims of trafficking

and to individuals who were trafficked to Ukraine or were

passing through Ukraine from a former Soviet republic.

Between March 2004 and January 2006, the international NGO

Caritas provided 27 victims of trafficking with

reintegration assistance. Another 130 women received

reintegration assistance without staying at the Caritas run

shelter. Caritas also established a network of counseling

centers which provide social services to trafficked women

in Khmelnytsky, Ivano-Frankivsk, Sokal, and Drohobych.

Between January 2004 and January 2006 these centers

provided 1,937 consultations regarding the prevention of

trafficking. Another 31 smaller NGOs facilitated

cooperation between victims, communities, and law

w

enforcement organizations in addressing trafficking issues.

Local NGOs, drawing on their own resources, foreign donor

assistance, and the support of local administrations

continued to serve as key partners in preventing

trafficking and supporting the special needs of TIP victims

to reintegrate back into the life of their communities.

NGOs also operated 18 regional hotlines for trafficking

victims in different cities.

¶71. (U) The Embassy point of contact for this report is the

Head of the Law Enforcement Section, Michael Scanlan. He

may be reached by email (ScanlanMD@state.gov), telephone

(+38-44-490-4396), fax (+38-44-490-4081) or IVG

¶72. (U) The following personnel time was spent on this

report:

-INL officer 20 hours

-INL Assistant 60 hours

-Political Counselor - 1 hours

-Executive Office - 3 hours

This accounting does not include time spent working on

posts interim assessment submission, the TIP component to

the Human Right Report or TIP spot reporting or program

rogram

implementation and coordination.

Herbst

t