1. UN Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime and the Palermo Protocols

In 2000, the UN adopted the Palermo Protocols in conjunction with the Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime (hereinafter “the Convention”).Footnote ⁴⁸ It was developed by the UN Office on Drugs and Crime [UNODC], which is the agency that oversees efforts to tackle transnational organized crime and TIP. The Convention and the Palermo Protocols indicate the recognition states have accorded to the seriousness of transnational organized crime and the corresponding need to foster close international co-operation to tackle such crimes.Footnote ⁴⁹ States that ratify these instruments commit to implementing several measures, including the creation of domestic criminal offences related to organized crime; adoption of frameworks for extradition and law enforcement co-operation; and the promotion of training for capacity building. The Palermo Protocol on Women and Children represents the first instrument that called for the criminalization of all forms of TIP.

The intention of the Palermo Protocols is threefold. First, to facilitate convergence in national approaches towards establishing domestic criminal offences, which would support international co-operation among states in investigating and prosecuting TIP cases. Second, to protect victims of TIP while giving full respect for their human rights. While more than a decade has passed since the Palermo Protocols came into force, compliance is still limited. According to a UNODC report, ninety percent of the countries examined have legislation criminalizing TIP.Footnote ⁵⁰ However, these domestic laws do not always comply with the Palermo Protocol on Women and Children as they may not include all types of trafficking and victims.Footnote ⁵¹ Last, to increase TIP convictions by encouraging the criminalization of TIP and TIP-related activities. The number of TIP convictions globally has remained extremely low. Between 2010 and 2012, over forty percent of countries examined in the report had less than ten convictions per year, while about fifteen percent of countries had no convictions.Footnote ⁵²

2. UNODC Model Law on Trafficking in Persons

To help governments translate their obligations under the Convention and the Palermo Protocols into national legislation, the UNODC Model Law on Trafficking in Persons (hereinafter “UNODC Model Law”) operates as a tool of technical assistance. The UNODC Model Law serves to assist states in the review or amendment of existing laws, and adoption of new laws.Footnote ⁵³ They are designed to be adaptable to suit the needs of each country. The UNODC Model Law is a useful reference point on how the specific provisions of the Palermo Protocol on Women and Children can be applied domestically. However, as acknowledged below,Footnote ⁵⁴ a failure to properly define key terms—or the absence of definitions altogether—is problematic, particularly when it comes to the safeguarding of victim rights.

1. Bangkok Declaration on Irregular Migration

The International Symposium on Migration, “Towards Regional Cooperation on Irregular/Undocumented Migration”, held in Bangkok in April 1999, led to the adoption of the Bangkok Declaration on Irregular Migration (hereinafter “Bangkok Declaration”).Footnote ⁵⁷ This provided a foundational framework for future regional co-operation in tackling trafficking and irregular migration. Significantly, the Bangkok Declaration recognized that TIP is closely linked to irregular migration, which is the “movement [of people] that takes place outside the regulatory norms of the sending, transit and receiving countries”.Footnote ⁵⁸ The Bangkok Declaration also recognizes that problems related to irregular migration need to be tackled within “the context of a broader regional framework” and that international co-operation is crucial.Footnote ⁵⁹

While the Bangkok Declaration was a starting point for regional anti-TIP measures, it has been criticized for conflating irregular migration with TIP.Footnote ⁶⁰ Another criticism has been the framing of TIP within broader discourses on national security. This led to the improper characterization of TIP as a security threat rather than an outrage on human rights. In doing so, concerns relating to victims’ rights and protection, which remain the cornerstones of combating TIP, became diluted. While national security concerns must be addressed within the TIP discourse, such concerns should not overshadow the discourse on the rights of victims of TIP.Footnote ⁶¹

2. ASEAN Declaration Against Trafficking in Persons Particularly Women and Children

Adopted at the 10th ASEAN Summit in Vientiane, Laos, in 2004, the ASEAN Declaration Against Trafficking in Persons Particularly Women and Children (hereinafter “ASEAN Declaration”) expressed a commitment by ASEAN Member States to prevent TIP, prosecute offenders, and protect victims.Footnote ⁶² The ASEAN Declaration has been criticized for giving unequal attention to the different victims of TIP by prioritizing women and children ahead of men.Footnote ⁶³ The language of its provisions has also been criticized for being “loose and deficient”.Footnote ⁶⁴ It also provides limited recourse to victims, because ASEAN Member States are only encouraged to provide victims of TIP “with such essential medical and other forms of assistance deemed appropriate”.Footnote ⁶⁵ Such vague language has rendered the ASEAN Declaration ineffective in setting clear standards for Member States to comply with.

In 2007, the Senior Officials Meeting on Transnational Crime designated the Working Group on Trafficking in Persons to monitor the implementation of the ASEAN Declaration.Footnote ⁶⁶ The ASEAN Declaration must now be read together with the ACTIP, which sets clearer standards for anti-TIP efforts.Footnote ⁶⁷ Nonetheless, the ASEAN Declaration, together with other ASEAN working groups and mechanisms, has laid the foundation for subsequent ASEAN human rights and anti-trafficking initiatives including the ACWC and ACTIP.Footnote ⁶⁸

3. The ASEAN Declaration on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights of Migrant Workers

As its name suggests, the ASEAN Declaration on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights of Migrant Workers [ADMW] preserves of the rights of migrant workers in the region. While this instrument is not limited to addressing issues relating to TIP, it is still vital as the rights of migrant workers are intricately tied to the challenge of TIP. Migrant workers, particularly unskilled ones, are especially vulnerable to TIP and forced labour, as they tend to enjoy little social protection.Footnote ⁶⁹

Thus, the ADMW explicates state obligations which are relevant to the fight against TIP. For instance, Paragraph 9 of the ADMW states that receiving states should “provide migrant workers who may be victims of discrimination, abuse, exploitation, and violence with adequate access to the legal and judicial system”.Footnote ⁷⁰ Paragraph 14 of the ADMW recognizes that sending states have an obligation to eliminate recruitment malpractice while regulating and providing accreditation for recruitment agencies and employers.Footnote ⁷¹ The imposition of such obligations serves to ensure that migrant workers are not unduly placed at risk of falling victim to TIP.

4. ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights

The ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights is a regional human rights body with overall responsibility for the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms in ASEAN.Footnote ⁷² Ten AICHR representatives with different backgrounds and experience are appointed, one per ASEAN Member State, and serve a three-year term of office.Footnote ⁷³

Since its establishment, AICHR has completed a Five-Year Work Plan for 2010–2015. Significantly, one of the planned projects under this Work Plan was a thematic study on TIP, particularly on women and children.Footnote ⁷⁴ In 2013, AICHR also organized a regional workshop in Makati, the Philippines, on the human rights-based approach to combat TIP, focusing on women and children, and which developed recommendations to mainstream human rights in ASEAN’s efforts to tackle the problem.Footnote ⁷⁵

As the main body overseeing human rights protection in ASEAN, AICHR has a crucial role to play in framing the TIP challenge as a human rights problem. This is particularly critical considering that some of the other ASEAN documents, such as the Bangkok Declaration, have framed TIP as a security threat, a perspective which may overlook the rights of victims in its haste to ensure national security. The focus of ASEAN Member States would be improperly focused upon tightening border controls and immigration measures, rather than enforcing adherence to existing local safeguards for human rights.Footnote ⁷⁶

Part of AICHR’s mandate is to engage with stakeholders like civil society organizations.Footnote ⁷⁷ It plays an important bridging role between high-level policy-makers and grassroots lobbying groups. AICHR is therefore the linchpin in connecting the various sectors with a personal stake in combatting TIP.

5. ASEAN Commission on the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Women and Children

In 2010, the ACWC was launched in the lead-up to the 16th ASEAN Summit. It fulfilled one of the ideals spelt out in the ASEAN Charter, which is to strengthen regional co-operation in issues involving women and children.Footnote ⁷⁸ The purpose of the ACWC is to promote and protect the human rights and fundamental freedoms of women and children in ASEAN according to international and regional instruments. The ACWC also seeks to uphold the rights contained in the Convention Against the Elimination of Violence Against Women and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.Footnote ⁷⁹

The ACWC also undertakes an advocacy role on behalf of women, and promotes public awareness of their rights.Footnote ⁸⁰ It comprises representatives from ASEAN Member States—each Member State appoints one representative on women’s rights and another on children’s rights.Footnote ⁸¹ Further, its Terms of Reference state that it seeks to encourage ASEAN members to collect and analyze data pertaining to the rights of women and children,Footnote ⁸² as well as to facilitate the sharing of good practices and other experiences between ASEAN Member States.Footnote ⁸³

TIP is one of the areas identified in ACWC’s Work Plan for 2012–2016. This Work Plan focuses on formulating gender-sensitized modules on handling women victims of TIP and developing capacity-building programmes for criminal justice officials and social services providers.Footnote ⁸⁴

There is much potential to be harnessed in ACWC, being the first dedicated human rights institution on the rights of women and children in ASEAN. One avenue is through effective collaboration with other regional bodies. At present, the ACWC and AICHR exist independently of each other. While the AICHR is tasked with overseeing issues relating to human rights within ASEAN, the ACWC is a sectoral body that promotes and protects the human rights and fundamental freedoms of women and children in ASEAN. This will be further explored below,Footnote ⁸⁵ where recommendations on how the TIP regime in ASEAN can be strengthened are set out.

6. ASEAN Convention Against Trafficking in Persons

Since 2007, ASEAN had been working on the development of a regional convention which targets TIP by setting up a regionally agreed framework on collaboration among ASEAN Member States to fight the problem.Footnote ⁸⁶ The drafting of the ACTIP was concluded in November 2015 and was signed by all ASEAN leaders at the 27th ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.Footnote ⁸⁷

The ACTIP adopts a definition of TIP which is consistent with that used by the Palermo Protocol on Women and Children. TIP is defined in these instruments as the “recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation”.Footnote ⁸⁸

The ACTIP is unprecedented insofar as it sets out areas for co-operation between State Parties—these include cross-border co-operation pertaining to the control and validity of documents,Footnote ⁸⁹ mutual legal assistance in criminal matters,Footnote ⁹⁰ extradition,Footnote ⁹¹ law-enforcement co-operation,Footnote ⁹² and international co-operation for the purposes of confiscating proceeds from TIP activity.Footnote ⁹³ Further, it sets standards for the protection and rehabilitation of victims of TIP,Footnote ⁹⁴ including care and support in the form of appropriate housing, counselling, and information, and medical, psychological, and material assistance, as well as employment, educational, and training opportunities. It also requires their safe repatriation and return to their home countries.Footnote ⁹⁵ The ACTIP sets out much clearer regulatory standards on combating TIP than the ASEAN Declaration, and provides a framework for co-ordinating co-operative efforts between State Parties.

7. Problems with existing regional fora

Despite the numerous legal instruments and initiatives implemented to tackle TIP, it remains a serious problem in ASEAN. Various reasons have been proposed for the seeming ineffectiveness of the initiatives documented above.

1. (a) Conflicting discourses: First, the various instruments articulate different approaches to combatting TIP, which in turn is reflective of conflicting discourses on TIP in the region. The older instruments, such as the Bangkok Declaration and ADMW, are reflective of a discourse which tended to conflate irregular migration with TIP.Footnote ⁹⁶ Victims of TIP are viewed through the lens of national security or border protection, diverting energies away from securing victim protection through strict enforcement of existing human rights safeguards. Such discourse is problematic because it downplays TIP as a human rights issue. The TIP discussion is prematurely limited in scope, hindering the development of comprehensive anti-TIP frameworks.

   Second, existing documents, particularly the ASEAN Declaration and the ACWC Terms of Reference, primarily equate TIP with the prostitution of women, and less so with labour exploitation, which victimizes both men and women, and is a significant aspect of TIP.Footnote ⁹⁷ Such a discourse conflicts with the realities of evolving TIP patterns which indicate that the trafficking of men has become increasingly common.Footnote ⁹⁸

2. (b) A lack of enforcement mechanisms and evaluative functions: A major criticism of the AICHR and ACWC is that they lack compliance and enforcement mechanisms. Both institutions lack mechanisms for the reception of complaints, and the provision of binding judgments and remedies.Footnote ⁹⁹ There is no effective mechanism for enforcing initiatives carried out by these institutions, save for peer pressure on the errant state by other ASEAN Member States.Footnote ¹⁰⁰ One commentator has suggested that these organizations are merely consultative intergovernmental bodies with weak mandates.Footnote ¹⁰¹ They could develop strategies to combat TIP, and provide advisory services to government, as well as conduct seminars and training workshops on the issue. However, without enforcement mechanisms, they can achieve little else.

   Both organizations also lack data-collection systems to monitor and evaluate the achievements and challenges faced by regional and national counter-trafficking initiatives.Footnote ¹⁰² These organizations do not require ASEAN Member States to submit progress reports on the state of human rights in their countries, including TIP issues. The lack of evaluative functions and enforcement mechanisms can be explained by the continued adherence to established ASEAN principles such as non-interference and sovereignty.Footnote ¹⁰³

3. (c) Lack of co-ordination and collaboration across initiatives: Other criticisms include the duplication of efforts between existing bodies that are meant to combat TIP, and insufficient collaboration across different initiatives. For instance, both the AICHR and ACWC have pursued anti-TIP efforts and programmes within their mandates, with limited collaboration between the two bodies. The AICHR’s anti-TIP programmes are situated within its broader goal of promoting human rights in general, while the ACWC’s efforts target women and children. Collectively, this has led to separate initiatives for tackling TIP, which results in the ineffectiveness of regional anti-TIP efforts.

Encouragingly, there have been recent steps taken towards collaboration. In April 2014, the AICHR and ACWC had a consultation meeting geared at “greater engagement and functional cooperation”, and identified four priority areas of co-operation, one of which was TIP.Footnote ¹⁰⁴ In November 2015, there was also a first joint workshop on TIP attended by representatives from the AICHR, the Senior Officials Meeting on Transnational Crime, the ACWC, and the Senior Officials Meeting on Social Welfare and Development [SOMSWD].Footnote ¹⁰⁵

The AICHR, ACWC, as well as other regional bodies, should continue to work together more closely. The AICHR can assist in framing TIP as a mainstream human rights issue,Footnote ¹⁰⁶ whereas the ACWC can provide technical advice on the women- and children-related aspects of TIP. This suggestion will be subsequently developed.Footnote ¹⁰⁷

1. Background to the PHTA and key objectives

In 2013, a Singaporean Member of Parliament, Christopher de Souza, proposed the Prevention of Human Trafficking Bill. In 2014, the government organized several public consultation sessions with members of the public, the legal fraternity, religious and secular groups, non-governmental organizations [NGOs] and voluntary welfare organizations [VWOs], which helped shape the PHTA.Footnote ¹²⁴ The PHTA was subsequently passed in Parliament on 3 November 2014 and took effect on 1 March 2015.

At the Second Reading of the Bill, Mr de Souza highlighted that the following were the four key objectives:

Notwithstanding the above and the innovative spirit of the PHTA, there are specific areas in which it can be improved. Primarily, the PHTA can do more to protect victims of TIP by defining key terms in a clearer manner and legislating for better victim protection measures. Some examples include the right to employment in Singapore during the course of legal proceedings, and the right to safe repatriation. Similar concerns were raised during the parliamentary debates that took place in November 2015. However, Mr de Souza argued against “hardcoding” such victim-centric provisions as he feared that they could be exploited by false claims of TIP victimization (i.e. individuals falsely claiming to be TIP victims).Footnote ¹²⁶ Instead, he was in favour of providing protective measures on a case-by-case basis, and at the discretion and flexibility of an administrative authority-in-charge, for example, the Ministry of Manpower.Footnote ¹²⁷

2. Elements of the offence

The PHTA has based its definition of TIP on Article 3 of the Palermo Protocol on Women and Children. The PHTA definition adopted in Singapore comprises three distinct elements. Section 3(1) of the PHTA requires that there must be an “act”—this could be the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring, or receipt of an individual. Next, this act must be accompanied by “means”—which could be the use of threat, force, or any other form of coercion or deception.Footnote ¹²⁸ Finally, these must be done for the “purpose of exploitation”.Footnote ¹²⁹ Exploitation in turn is defined as “sexual exploitation, forced labour, slavery or any practice similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of an organ”.Footnote ¹³⁰

While all three elements must be proven for there to be an offence, Mr de Souza mentioned at the Second Reading of the PHTA that “cases which fall short of the required thresholds may still be taken up by other existing laws, where appropriate”.Footnote ¹³¹

Notably, Section 3(3) of the PHTA highlights that the offence of TIP is committed regardless of whether the victim consented to the actual or intended exploitation. This is in line with Article 3(b) of the Palermo Protocol on Women and Children.

The PHTA has modelled its definition of TIP based on the Palermo Protocol on Women and Children.Footnote ¹³² However, key terms are either not defined or defined in a limited manner. In this regard, the UNODC Model Law can provide a useful reference point in defining key terms.

1. (a) Deception: The term “deception” is undefined in the PHTA, raising various difficulties. For example, should deception refer to the nature of the work promised to the victim, the conditions of the work, or both?Footnote ¹³³ This has practical implications. For instance, should a migrant worker who comes to Singapore willingly, but was deprived of basic liberties, made to work long hours, and live in dormitories with squatter-like conditions, be considered a victim of TIP? The PHTA could be amended to define deception as per the UNODC Model Law—“any deception by words or by conduct [as to fact or as to law, regarding]: the nature of work or services to be provided, the conditions of work, the extent to which the person will be free to leave his or her place of residence; or other circumstances involving exploitation of the person”.Footnote ¹³⁴ This would provide a wider scale of protection for victims.

2. (b) Coercion: The term “coercion” is defined in the PHTA, and includes the “use of force or threat, whether violent or otherwise”.Footnote ¹³⁵ This follows the UNODC Model Law. However, it differs from the UNODC Model Law in one respect, in that it does not explicitly refer to the use of psychological pressure or force.Footnote ¹³⁶ The definition of “coercion” should specify these psychological elements, considering that TIP can take place in various contexts and is not limited to the use of physical force.Footnote ¹³⁷

3. (c) Abuse of vulnerability: The term “abuse of vulnerability” also appears to be modelled after the UNODC Model Law. Section 2 specifies the following as positions of vulnerability: (i) the individual entering or remaining in Singapore illegally; (ii) the individual’s pregnancy; (iii) the individual’s physical or mental illness, infirmity. or disability; or (iv) the impairment (permanently or temporarily) of the individual’s decision-making ability by reason of the individual’s physical or mental illness, infirmity, or disability.

   However, this definition neglects positions of vulnerability arising out of promises or the giving of sums of money or other advantages to those having authority over a person, or being in a precarious situation from the standpoint of social survival.Footnote ¹³⁸ The PHTA should be amended to consider these positions of vulnerability, considering that social or economic status can affect an individual’s vulnerability to TIP.Footnote ¹³⁹

4. (d) For the purpose of [actual or intended exploitation]: The phrase “for the purpose of” in Section 3(1) of the PHTA, which is the mens rea requirement of the TIP offence, sets a vague standard as it is unclear whether “wilful blindness” or “reason to believe” would be sufficient to fulfil the mens rea requirement of the crime. It is suggested that this should be the case as it would prevent perpetrators from getting away with the offence by claiming that they did not have actual knowledge that TIP was taking place. This is the position adopted by the Section 1(a) of the UK Modern Slavery Act 2015 (hereinafter “UK Modern Slavery Act”)Footnote ¹⁴⁰ which states: “[a] person commits an offence if—(a) the person holds another person in slavery or servitude and the circumstances are such that the person knows or ought to know that the other person is held in slavery or servitude.”

Therefore, the PHTA ought to be amended to specify that an offence is carried out as long as the circumstances are such that a person ought to have known that there was TIP. Such amendments would provide greater clarity to the mens rea requirement of the Act.

3. Extra-territoriality

Recognizing the transnational nature of the crime, Section 3(4) provides that a trafficking offender is liable in Singapore even if his act is done “partly in and partly outside of Singapore”. This brings it in line with existing legislation on transnational crimes that also provide for extra-territorial jurisdiction, specifically the Prevention of Corruption ActFootnote ¹⁴¹ and the Misuse of Drugs Act.Footnote ¹⁴²

The extra-territorial reach of the PHTA is significant because it allows for the arrest and prosecution of offenders operating outside Singapore. These offenders may have links to organized crime syndicates, and may intend to traffic persons into or through Singapore. The extended reach of the PHTA empowers Singapore to combat TIP that occurs overseas but affects or involves Singapore. This aspect of the PHTA provides a more comprehensive and aggressive approach to Singapore’s anti-TIP framework.Footnote ¹⁴³

4. The criminalization of related activities

Section 5 of the PHTA states that persons who abet an offence as set out in the PHTA are liable. As mentioned in the Second Reading of the PHTA, the intended scope of these provisions is to “cover ringleaders and masterminds who order their subordinates to carry out the trafficking acts, as well as middlemen who knowingly make arrangements to place trafficked victims with their exploiters”.Footnote ¹⁴⁴

Section 6 makes it an offence for a person to receive any payment in connection with the exploitation of another person with the knowledge that he or she has been trafficked. These provisions target people not directly involved in the TIP offence itself, or in the abetment of it, but who have received payment from the trafficking activity—for example pimps and labour agents.Footnote ¹⁴⁵

While the penalties stipulated in the PHTA have been benchmarked against comparable offences in the Penal Code, there has been criticism that the penalties imposed on human traffickers are not stiff enough. When the PHTA was debated in Parliament, one parliamentarian called for higher fines for persons found guilty of offences under the PHTA, given that a recently passed law to clamp down on online betting included fines of between $300,000 and $500,000.Footnote ¹⁴⁶

ParliamentariansFootnote ¹⁴⁷ have argued for stiffer penalties for PHTA offences by highlighting the imposition of harsh punishments in other jurisdictions like the USFootnote ¹⁴⁸ and the UK.Footnote ¹⁴⁹ Considering the benchmarks set by other jurisdictions, the PHTA does have scope for stiffer penalties.

5. Penalties

Under Section 4(1) of the PHTA, first-time offenders face up to ten years in jail, a maximum fine of $100,000, and the possibility of up to six strokes of the cane, which can be imposed at the court’s discretion where warranted. Repeat offenders face heavier punishments, which could amount to one and a half times what a first offender might receive.Footnote ¹⁵⁰ Similar penalties are prescribed for the offence of knowingly receiving payment in connection with the exploitation of a trafficked person.

These penalties were benchmarked against comparable crimes in other statutes criminalizing activities relating to TIP. One example is the offence of importing a woman for purposes of prostitution under Section 373A of the Penal Code, which also provides for a maximum ten-year imprisonment sentence.

Section 4(2) of the PHTA provides a non-exhaustive list of aggravating factors which the court may take into consideration when determining whether harsher punishment is merited. These include situations where the trafficked victim was a child,Footnote ¹⁵¹ where the offence exposed the trafficked victim to a life-threatening illness,Footnote ¹⁵² and where the offender was abusing a position of trust or authority in relation to the victim.Footnote ¹⁵³

6. Victim protection

Section 19(1) provides that the Director of Social Welfare, as appointed under the Children and Young Persons Act, “may” provide victims of TIP with access to a temporary shelter and counselling services as he/she considers “practicable and necessary”. Further, Section 18(1) seeks to protect victims by allowing for trial proceedings to be heard in camera, and Section 18(2) prohibits the disclosure of victims’ names to the media.

7. Specific provisions protecting child victims

The PHTA defines a “child” as an individual below the age of eighteen years.Footnote ¹⁵⁴ To afford a child greater protection under the law, “there is no requirement for the prosecution to prove the methods or means used”.Footnote ¹⁵⁵ It is sufficient for the prosecution to show that there was an act to recruit, transport, transfer, harbour, or receive a child victim for the purposes of exploitation.Footnote ¹⁵⁶ Therefore, the burden of proof for TIP is lower for child victims, which in turn is in “recognition of their vulnerability to exploitation”.Footnote ¹⁵⁷

8. Special protection of sexually exploited victims

Section 18 sets out provisions to specifically protect sexually exploited victims who serve as witnesses in court proceedings. Section 18(1) provides that, where the victim of TIP has been sexually exploited, the court has the discretion to hear the matter in camera. It is mandatory to hear the matter in camera where the sexually exploited victim is a child.

An order prohibiting publication will also be in place for all court proceedings involving sexually exploited TIP victims. Section 18(2) prohibits any person from publishing “the name, address or photograph, or any other thing which is likely to lead to the identification, of the trafficked victim”. The contravention of this Section could result in a fine not exceeding $5,000 or an imprisonment term not exceeding three years, or both.Footnote ¹⁵⁸

It was explained that the legislative intent of this provision was to “protect victims from being identified, and [to] encourage them to testify with confidence”.Footnote ¹⁵⁹ The inclusion of these provisions are certainly to be welcomed, as it has been suggested that sex trafficking victims experience high degrees of trauma due to the violence, confinement, and sexual assault which they may have suffered.Footnote ¹⁶⁰ Further, the physical and psychological intimidation of witnesses and trafficking victims by cross-border criminal groups has been noted,Footnote ¹⁶¹ making this provision crucial for the protection of victims and effective prosecution.

1. International criticism of Singapore’s stance towards human trafficking

As part of the Universal Periodic Review [UPR] by the UNHRC in 2011, the question of acceding to the Palermo Protocol on Women and Children was first put to Singapore. The UPR is a process conducted by the UNHRC which involves a review of the human rights records of UN Member States. In the light of the recently enacted PHTA as a dedicated piece of legislation to combat TIP and Singapore’s ascension to the Palermo Protocol on Women and Children, it is expected that the international community’s comments will be less critical regarding Singapore’s anti-TIP efforts during Singapore’s second UPR in January 2016.

2. Singapore Inter-Agency Taskforce on Trafficking-in-Persons (hereinafter “Taskforce”)

In 2010, the Singapore government set up the Taskforce, which established the National Plan of Action (NPA) to combat TIP. The NPA identified four ways in which Singapore would improve its battle against TIP: (1) prevention of TIP; (2) prosecution of offenders; (3) protection of TIP victims; and (4) partnerships with other countries, non-governmental organizations, academics, and the private sector, to combat TIP.Footnote ¹⁶³

The NPA also identified the gaps that existed in the prior framework of anti-TIP measures. Notably, it highlighted the need to define sex and labour trafficking offences, and adopting a more victim-friendly approach in combating TIP, such as enhancing victim care services or counselling services. Significantly, the NPA called for a “review [of] all legislation related to TIP to ensure that the desired legislative framework facilitate[s] the achievement of key TIP objectives” to ensure that “Singapore’s legislation adequately addresses the complexity of TIP crimes and that penalties are commensurate with crimes”.Footnote ¹⁶⁴

3. Legislative framework prior to the enactment of the PHTA

As stated previously,Footnote ¹⁶⁵ prior to the enactment of the PHTA, Singapore’s existing legislation did not acknowledge TIP itself as a crime. At best, Singapore’s laws criminalized the acts which victims of TIP are normally subject to, such as the prostitution of women and children,Footnote ¹⁶⁶ working beyond legislated work hours without compensation,Footnote ¹⁶⁷ the buying and selling of organs,Footnote ¹⁶⁸ and sexual acts with minors below sixteen and eighteen years.Footnote ¹⁶⁹ The only piece of legislation that criminalized TIP was Section 141 of the Women’s CharterFootnote ¹⁷⁰ (hereinafter “Women’s Charter”), which made it an offence to traffic in women and girls. However, Section 141 does not make it an offence to traffic in men and boys, and “trafficking” was not defined in the Women’s Charter.

However, in the past few years, Parliament had amended legislation so as to make it easier for the courts to deal with criminal acts which may potentially have elements of TIP. For example, in 2012, Singapore amended its Immigration ActFootnote ¹⁷¹ to criminalize “sham” marriages, i.e. a marriage of convenience between a Singaporean and a foreigner for the purpose of illegally obtaining an immigration advantage.Footnote ¹⁷² Subsequently, the Singapore courts recognized that “sham” marriages increase the risk of TIP and transnational organized crime.Footnote ¹⁷³ In the same year, amendments were made to the Employment of Foreign Manpower ActFootnote ¹⁷⁴ [EFMA] to criminalize the provision of false information to the Controller in order to obtain a work pass. These legislative changes reflect Singapore’s continued efforts towards a comprehensive anti-TIP framework, recognizing the pervasive nature of TIP.

4. Judicial support for deterrent sentences in TIP-related cases

Since 2009, Singapore courts acknowledged that cases involving elements of TIP deserve more stringent punishment. Nevertheless, the full mettle of TIP as a crime could not be dealt with in these cases, which were brought before the courts before the enactment of the PHTA. However, the courts were minded to impose harsher sentences where elements of TIP were involved.

For example, in Public Prosecutor v. Wang Minjiang,Footnote ¹⁷⁵ the accused faced charges under Section 376B(1) of the Penal CodeFootnote ¹⁷⁶ (hereinafter “Penal Code”)Footnote ¹⁷⁷ for the procurement of sexual services of a seventeen-year-old female, who was brought into Singapore from China for prostitution. Justice Choo Han Teck held “a more rigorous sentence might be needed to discourage international prostitution involving persons the law regards as young and vulnerable”.Footnote ¹⁷⁸ Choo J therefore substituted the fine of $8,000, which had been imposed by the district judge, and imposed a term of imprisonment for twelve months on the accused. This decision reflects the contemporary attitude of Singapore courts regarding the importance of preventing TIP. In earlier decisions, courts were less likely to deem elements of TIP as relevant considerations in their decisions.Footnote ¹⁷⁹ Other court cases have also made similar pronouncements, in keeping with Singapore’s documented approach of deterrence and prevention.Footnote ¹⁸⁰

5. A shift in government attitude to TIP

Singapore has become more amenable to international feedback on its existing anti-TIP framework. In 2011, the Taskforce issued a strongly worded statement in response to the US TIP Report 2011, criticizing the report’s findings and the manner in which investigations were conducted.Footnote ¹⁸¹ Similarly, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs [MFA] criticized the U.S. Department of State’s findings regarding Singapore’s human rights practices in 2011 and 2012, stating that the reports misrepresented Singapore’s laws and policies.Footnote ¹⁸²

Conversely, when the US TIP Report 2014 was discussed in Parliament, parliamentarians were less critical of the report’s methodology, and Singapore’s commitment to fight TIP and its continued efforts in doing so were reiterated. It is apparent that the PHTA is a manifestation of Singapore’s increasing commitment to international standards for combating TIP. This is reflected in a statement made by Minister of State Zulkifli in Parliament when the PHTA was debated, i.e. that “[the proposed Bill] would clearly reflect Singapore’s commitment to fight TIP to the global community and align us to international standards”.Footnote ¹⁸³

Subsequently, the US TIP Report 2015 highlighted the low number of TIP prosecutions in Singapore. In particular, it stated that the Singapore government did not convict any labour or child traffickers in 2014.Footnote ¹⁸⁴ Singapore’s TIP score in the US TIP Report 2015 also remained at Tier 2. In other words, the PHTA did not improve Singapore’s TIP score.

The Taskforce responded by defending the PHTA, and emphasized that it would continue with its efforts in tackling TIP. The Taskforce argued that the report “does not provide an accurate representation” of Singapore’s efforts to tackle TIP.Footnote ¹⁸⁵ Instead, it highlighted that the PHTA meets international standards of the Palermo Protocol on Women and Children, and that the penalties are commensurate with the seriousness of the crimes.Footnote ¹⁸⁶ They then reiterated their commitment to work with partners to solve the problem, indicating a growing awareness that combatting TIP requires international co-operation and dialogue.Footnote ¹⁸⁷

1. Supply chain transparency obligations

The Singapore government should introduce supply chain transparency obligations for large companies doing business in, or connected with, Singapore to assess, make public, and address the use of trafficked labour within their supply chains. The Thai fishing industry is one area where transparency obligations would serve to foster supply chain accountability. Such obligations address TIP within corporate structures and supply chains in a direct and tangible way; raising awareness of the harm of TIP, thus protecting potential victims of exploitation and trafficking. Various countries have introduced such obligations, including the UKFootnote ¹⁹⁷ and the state of California in the US.Footnote ¹⁹⁸

The Singapore government should also work with companies to explore licensing and regulating the conduct of migration agents in sending countries. A study by Singapore Management University highlighted that the New Zealand government and Capella Hotels and Resorts both have codes of conduct, licensing, and penalties for migration agents in sending countries. This can dramatically lower agency fees if implemented correctly and ensure that the migrant workers brought into Singapore are not victims of TIP in debt bondage.Footnote ¹⁹⁹ Lower agency fees reduce the debt accumulated by migrant workers, which will in turn alleviate the psychological stress that they face.Footnote ²⁰⁰

2. Public awareness

Local public awareness on TIP should be strengthened. It is imperative that Singaporeans understand the convenience of Singapore’s geographical location, which makes it especially attractive to traffickers. Moreover, Singaporeans must be educated on the important role the government has to play in combatting TIP within the ASEAN region. Increased awareness regarding the severity of TIP and Singapore’s potential influence in the region will encourage local dialogue on TIP as a human rights issue, effectively shifting discussion away from TIP as a security issue. Based on a recent pilot study done by the International Organization for Migration and Microsoft, most Singaporeans have a “broad understanding” of TIP. In other words, they can identify potential victims of trafficking and the correct definition of the crime, but they underestimate the gravity of the issue.Footnote ²⁰¹ Consequently, it may be prudent for the government to, among other things, launch campaigns to increase public (and regional) awareness to highlight the dangers and criminal nature of TIP. A tri-sector collaboration with business, government, and civil society would help in this regard, and is in keeping with the NPA against TIP.Footnote ²⁰²

To complement these measures, roadshows can be organized for potential victims of TIP (for example, migrant workers) to educate them on potential TIP activities and circumstances. Since the majority of victims of TIP fall prey to traffickers as a result of employment in foreign transit and destination countries, these efforts can provide potential victims with valuable information on how to discern and avoid TIP syndicates.

3. Stronger victim protection within the PHTA

The PHTA should prescribe stronger victim protection. The idea that stronger victim protection will lead to abuse—as alluded to in the parliamentary debates for the PHTA—is an unsubstantiated one. In fact, stronger provisions will enable the effective prosecution of traffickers, since this would increase the likelihood of TIP victims coming forward to assist judicial proceedings and police investigations. This will be illustrated through the recommendations below. References will be made to the ACTIP, to which Singapore is a signatory, and also other legislation, as they are of a higher standard than the current PHTA, and show a possible way in which Singapore legislation could be improved. The intentions and shortfalls of the international and regional developments were pertinent considerations in the assessment of Singapore’s attempts to address TIP via the PHTA.

1. (a) Assistance to victims should be framed as a guaranteed right: Section 19 of the PHTA empowers the Director of Social Welfare to provide victims with assistance, including temporary shelter and counselling services, as he or she considers “practicable and necessary” in the circumstances of the case. Thus, the provision of assistance is framed as a discretionary measure rather than a guaranteed right.

   Significantly, while the ACTIP identifies comprehensive areas for the protection of victims, not all these areas of protection are framed as guaranteed rights. Instead, the ACTIP’s language frequently indicates that states should aspire towards victim protection on a “best effort basis”. For instance, Article 14(11) states that “[e]ach Party shall make its best effort to assist in the reintegration of victims of trafficking in persons into the society of the sending Party”.Footnote ²⁰³ Likewise, Article 14(10) states that “each Party shall, where applicable, provide care and support for victims of trafficking in persons”.Footnote ²⁰⁴

   This is unsurprising, considering that the ACTIP was a result of negotiations between ASEAN Member States, including Singapore. The ACTIP’s language could have been further strengthened to afford greater protection to victims. Framing victim protection as a guaranteed right would ensure that victim care-services will not merely depend on the victim’s ability and willingness to assist the authorities in criminal enforcement. Thus, the PHTA should go further than the standard set by he ACTIP in this particular regard.Footnote ²⁰⁵

   The language of the PHTA may be amended such that assistance to victims under Section 19 of the PHTA is provided as a guaranteed right instead of a discretionary measure, following the examples set by other ASEAN jurisdictions For instance, Section 12 of the Myanmar Anti-Trafficking in Persons Law (hereinafter “Myanmar Act”)Footnote ²⁰⁶ requires the government to “arrange and carry out for the security of life of trafficked victims and to arrange according to their wishes for repatriation and resettlement as much as possible”.

   Another example would be that of the Philippines Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003 (hereinafter “Philippines Act”),Footnote ²⁰⁷ which reads:

   The State values the dignity of every human person and guarantees the respect of individual rights. In pursuit of this policy, the State shall give the highest priority to the enactment of measures and development of programmes that will promote human dignity, protect the people from any threat of violence and exploitation, eliminate trafficking in persons, and mitigate pressures for involuntary migration and servitude of persons, not only to support trafficked persons but more importantly, to ensure their recovery, rehabilitation and reintegration into the mainstream of society. Footnote ²⁰⁸

2. (b) Scope of aftercare assistance: The scope of assistance to victims of TIP can also be widened. For example, in addition to the provision of shelter and counselling, the Taiwan Human Trafficking and Prevention Act 2009 (hereinafter “Taiwan Act”)Footnote ²⁰⁹ provides for necessary medical, interpretation, financial, and legal assistance, being accompanied when questioned (interrogated) throughout the investigation or trial, and other necessary assistance.Footnote ²¹⁰ The ACTIP also acknowledges the multidimensional needs of a victim of TIP. It states that where appropriate, State Parties should provide care and support in the form of appropriate housing, counselling, and information, and medical, psychological, and material assistance, as well as employment, educational, and training opportunities.Footnote ²¹¹ However, the PHTA is disappointingly silent in this regard.

3. (c) Support during legal or police proceedings: Section 18 protects the rights of sexually exploited victims of TIP, as it allows proceedings to be heard in camera and also prohibits any act which leads to the identification of the trafficked victims. However, more can be done in terms of victim support during legal proceedings. The Taiwan Act allows a legal or medical professional, as well as a person who is closely related to the victim, to “accompany him/her and … [to] make observations when he/she is questioned or cross-examined during an investigation or trial”.Footnote ²¹² This is also allowed when the victim is under investigation by the judicial police.

   Concerns have also been raised regarding the potential for the identification of TIP victims by the accused trafficker despite Section 18 allowing victims to give evidence in camera. Further, the victim may be unable to give evidence due to psychological or physical trauma. To address these concerns, Singapore should consider following the Taiwanese example. It provides that a “statement made by any human trafficking victim during an investigation by the prosecutors, judicial police officers, or judicial police may be accepted as evidence during a trial” if it is proven to be credible and if other special circumstances are carried out.Footnote ²¹³

   Further, the provision that proceedings relating to victims of sexual exploitation may be held in camera should be expanded to all victims of TIP. Article 14(6) of the ACTIP requires State Parties, to the extent possible under its domestic laws, to make legal proceedings relating to such acts confidential, regardless of the form of TIP the victim was subject to.Footnote ²¹⁴

4. (d) Victims should be able to work while investigations are ongoing: The PHTA is silent on the employment rights of victims of TIP. It should be amended to provide for the temporary right to work in Singapore, especially because investigations and legal proceedings may take several months and even up to two years before they are resolved, during which time victims of TIP are obliged to remain in Singapore and are unable to return to their home country.Footnote ²¹⁵

   Fear of loss of income may prevent victims of TIP from coming forward. The Taiwan Act allows a victim of TIP to apply for a work permit.Footnote ²¹⁶ Likewise, victims of TIP are given assistance for employment and training in Australia under the Human Trafficking visa framework.Footnote ²¹⁷ In addition, the ACTIP has stated that employment, educational, and training opportunities should be provided to victims of TIP, where appropriate.Footnote ²¹⁸

   In response to suggestions that the right to employment should be legislated, Mr de Souza suggested that this could lead to the opening up of a “Pandora’s box with many coming forward to make false TIP claims in the hope of finding alternative employment”.Footnote ²¹⁹ Instead, he recommended that each case should be assessed on its merits, and that the right to employment should be left to the discretion of the Ministry of Manpower, which administers a witness job scheme for prosecution witnesses.Footnote ²²⁰

   Concerns relating to the fact that such legislative provisions would be taken advantage of by non-TIP victims appear to be speculative and are not supported by empirical data. Further, false TIP claims can be dealt with through effective identification procedures, and should not be an obstacle to enacting legislation that would protect genuine TIP victims. Considering that the right to gainful employment may in fact enable the effective prosecution of traffickers, and therefore the administration of justice, the PHTA can be amended to ensure that victims of TIP are able to work pending the outcome of the investigations.

5. (e) Protection against TIP victims against being charged for offences: The PHTA is silent on the position of victims of TIP who may have committed migration-related offences or other offences, as a result of the trafficking. In response to this concern, Mr de Souza suggested that this is a non-issue, as the victim would not have met the required mens rea for the crime, if this was committed as a result of being exploited, and hence would not be prosecuted.Footnote ²²¹ This is highly problematic for several reasons: first, the crime in question may be a strict liability offence. And second, TIP victims often hold the common misconception that they risk being prosecuted for crimes. This deters them from seeking help or from offering assistance to the authorities to identify traffickers, which in turn, ultimately hinders efforts at combating TIP.

   It would instead be more effective to adopt a victim-centric approach to protect the rights of victims of TIP by providing legal immunity for offences that they may have committed as a result of their exploitation. For instance, Section 45 of the UK Modern Slavery Act provides a defence for slavery or trafficking victims who commit an offence. Taiwan,Footnote ²²² the Philippines,Footnote ²²³ and MyanmarFootnote ²²⁴ also have similar provisions in their respective TIP legislations. The ACTIP also requires State Parties to consider not holding victims of TIP liable for unlawful acts committed by them, if such acts are related to the acts of TIP,Footnote ²²⁵ and to not unreasonably hold victims of TIP in detention or in prison before, during, or after legal proceedings.Footnote ²²⁶

   It is also worrying that victims of TIP have previously been arrested rather than given assistance. For instance, eighty-nine minors were arrested by the Singapore police for prostitution offences in 2009, when, in such situations, all should have been considered victims and given adequate protection and rehabilitation assistance.Footnote ²²⁷ The PHTA does not currently provide a defence to victims of TIP who may have committed an offence. But even it had such a provision, clear guidelines need to be established as to how police and enforcement officers should identify and treat trafficked victims on the ground.

6. (f) Right to repatriation/legal residence: The PHTA also does not legislate the safe return of the victims after the legal proceedings have concluded. This is one of the initiatives proposed in the NPA.Footnote ²²⁸ This should be legislated to prevent a scenario where a victim could be detained in Singapore for an unreasonable amount of time after the trial. This is of particular concern as it is standard procedure for the government to retain the victims’ passports and to refuse repatriation during the course of investigations.Footnote ²²⁹

   The right to repatriation is provided for in the ACTIP,Footnote ²³⁰ the Taiwan Act,Footnote ²³¹ and the Myanmar Act.Footnote ²³² The ACTIP also requires State Parties to assist in the reintegration of TIP victims into the sending state’s society.Footnote ²³³ The Taiwan Act goes one step further. It recognizes that the safety of victims of TIP may be threatened after their repatriation because of their assistance in the investigation or trial. It thus allows for victims of TIP to be granted a stay or residence on a special case-by-case basis.Footnote ²³⁴ While such measures may be deemed to be “hardcoding” of residency rights as they could “be abused as a backdoor to gain legal residence”,Footnote ²³⁵ false claims can be mitigated through effective victim identification procedures. It is also not apparent whether such claims will be a real problem, given that there is no empirical data to support this. Parliament should consider legislating these provisions as this would be the only means to effectively guarantee a trafficked victim’s right to gainful employment.

7. (g) Provision of compensation and restitution to trafficked victims: The PHTA does not specifically provide for compensatory measures for victims of TIP. This should be contrasted with countries such as the UK,Footnote ²³⁶ Myanmar,Footnote ²³⁷ and Cambodia,Footnote ²³⁸ which allow confiscations of property/assets so as to compensate victims, or for them to be channelled into a trafficking fund. Furthermore, Cambodia allows a victim of trafficking to claim restitution of unjust enrichment arising from trafficking, in addition to damages.Footnote ²³⁹

In response to suggestions that the PHTA provide for compensatory and restitutive measures, Mr de Souza suggested that such provisions were unnecessary.Footnote ²⁴⁰ He cited Section 359 of the Criminal Procedure Code,Footnote ²⁴¹ where a court is bound to consider whether or not to award compensation to a victim of an offence. Mr de Souza likewise argued that restitutive measures are subsumed under Section 359, and that ill-gotten gains may additionally be subject to confiscation under the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act,Footnote ²⁴² once the offence of trafficking is scheduled in the same.

Despite this, compensatory and restitutive measures should still be legislated for within the PHTA itself. The careful regulation of such matters would ensure that there is minimal abuse, while ensuring that TIP victims are able to obtain redress. Parliament would be able to spell out how to calculate the victims’ losses, particularly when it may be difficult to measure the value of labour.Footnote ²⁴³ Drawing inspiration from other ASEAN countries like Cambodia, the PHTA could also provide for the creation of trafficking funds for victim compensation.

1. ACTIP as setting minimum standards for collaboration

Conflicting discourses exist regarding TIP, and there was a lack of a proper system to facilitate smooth co-ordination amongst the various ASEAN bodies, despite recent collaborative initiatives. This has led to a duplication of resources and efforts. Considering that ASEAN is the main regional vehicle through which Southeast Asian countries deal with TIP, ASEAN needs to provide a consistent and uniform front towards addressing this issue. ASEAN Member States can look towards the ACTIP for a definition of TIP, which has aligned itself with the standards of the Palermo Protocol on Women and Children.

Nonetheless, this author notes that the ACTIP could have been drafted to afford greater victim protection, particularly by framing all areas of victim protection as guaranteed rights rather than as discretionary measures. However, given the diversity of political will and interest amongst ASEAN Member States, an unwillingness to relinquish political sovereignty may be an obstacle to better collaboration in TIP-related issues.Footnote ²⁴⁴

Despite its weaknesses, the ACTIP still has an important role to play as it sets minimum standards for State Parties to follow in their fight against TIP. While ASEAN Member States should aspire for higher standards in their own individual legal frameworks, the parameters, terms, and minimum standards established by the ACTIP can serve a common baseline.

2. Harnessing the potential of the human rights institutions in ASEAN: the AICHR and ACWC

Both the AICHR and ACWC should function in a symbiotic manner to maximize the benefits of these institutions in tackling TIP. Significantly, the AICHR can “function cross-sectorally, having the mandate to influence and engage with all three ASEAN communities”.Footnote ²⁴⁵ The ACWC’s purposes, as laid out in the Terms of Reference, stated that it would “enhance regional and international cooperation with a view to complementing national and international efforts on the promotion and protection of the rights of women and children”. This implies that the AICHR can help the ACWC in mainstreaming important women’s and children’s issues under both the political-security and economic pillars of ASEAN,Footnote ²⁴⁶ while the ACWC can provide specialized technical expertise on issues pertaining to TIP, particularly those issues which affect women and children. These two ASEAN bodies can work together to provide a combined, integrated ASEAN course of action in its bid to reduce TIP activities.

3. The need for monitoring, compliance, and enforcement mechanisms

Currently, there is a lack of compliance and monitoring mechanisms to ensure progress in the fight against TIP. Previously, ASEAN Member States had created the “Regional Haze Action Plan” to monitor, assess, and enforce the relevant guidelines to tackle the transboundary haze problem.Footnote ²⁴⁷ ASEAN has established monitoring bodies in other areas too—for example, a monitoring mechanism to establish the progress of the ASEAN Economic Community,Footnote ²⁴⁸ as well as mechanisms to monitor the effectiveness of disaster responses post Cyclone Nargis.Footnote ²⁴⁹

The AICHR and ACWC should set up mechanisms to monitor, evaluate, and compile information on the progress of ASEAN countries in meeting the challenge of TIP. One possible way that this could be done is to create a regional database for trafficking data. Such a system would entail training in “social science research methodologies, data collection techniques, related security considerations and privacy laws”.Footnote ²⁵⁰ Research is also needed to ascertain how corruption assists TIP in Southeast Asia, and how it impedes anti-TIP efforts.Footnote ²⁵¹

4. ASEAN should leverage on Information and Communications Technology [ICT] in anti-trafficking efforts

Increasingly, human traffickers use technology to prey on potential victims online. For instance, according to MTV Exit, an anti-TIP campaign that is based in Bangkok, approximately a quarter of children reported missing in Indonesia are likely to have met their traffickers on Facebook.Footnote ²⁵² In the light of these trends, ASEAN should leverage on online tools such as data-mapping, data-mining/analytics, and victim identification databases to counter these threats.Footnote ²⁵³ Additionally, ASEAN should follow the examples of campaigns in the UK and the US where anti-trafficking mobile phone applications have been launched.Footnote ²⁵⁴ For instance, an NGO in the US called the “Polaris Project” created an online application that provides users with potential trafficking indicators, pointers on how to identify victims, a training exercise to recognize trafficking, and a means of reporting suspected cases to local authorities, amongst other functions.Footnote ²⁵⁵ Singapore, as an ICT hub, could play a lead role within ASEAN in using technology to combat TIP.