TRAFFICKING WITHIN THAILAND AND CHILD SEX TOURISM
Victims trafficked within Thailand are often underage and exploited in the garment, shrimp, and sex industries. Those who are exploited—particularly in the informal economy—tend to be children of ethnic minorities, stateless persons, or migrants, although many children who are Thai nationals are affected as well. For instance, Thailand’s Office of the National Commission of Women’s Affairs estimates that there are 22,500 to 40,000 Thai nationals under the age of 18 working in prostitution (U.S. Department of Labor, 2009). Experts also estimate that thousands of Thai citizens are trafficked into Thailand’s fishing industry (Hongthong, 2007). The nature of this type of trafficking makes it difficult to know the actual numbers. The Mirror Foundation in Thailand has identified and aided in the rescue of a total of 19 men trafficked to work on fishing boats between 2003 and 2007, 27 in 2008, and 138 victims in 2009 (Hongthong, 2007; Bangkok Post, 2010). Eaklak Loom-chomkhae, trafficking expert and head of the Mirror Foundation’s anti–human trafficking center, states that forced labor is so prevalent in Thailand that male teenagers and adult men have been drugged at bus terminals and brought onto fishing boats while unconscious. When they awaken they are nowhere near shore. “They have no way to escape and must work in a boat until the time it goes ashore,” Loomchomkhae told
The Nation
. Some fishing boats go ashore only every five years. Loomchomkhae says corrupt state officials play a prominent role in labor trafficking within the fishing industry (Hongthong, 2007).
The persons particularly susceptible to trafficking within Thailand and abroad are marginalized ethnic minorities such as the northern hill tribe people and children born in Thailand to Burmese parents. The exact number of children born to Burmese migrant workers is unknown, but a study by IOM estimates the number of migrant Lao, Cambodian, and Burmese children under the age of 17 to be roughly 200,000. Nearly 80 percent of all labor migrants in the country are Burmese, with the rest from Cambodia and Laos, which means that the majority of the 200,000 children are likely Burmese (IRIN, 2009). While more than 2,000 children of Burmese migrants are born in Thai hospitals each year, most children born to unregistered Burmese parents are born at their worksites with the assistance of local midwives. Unregistered migrant workers are rightly fearful of facing arrest and deportation if their lack of legal status is discovered, and thus are hesitant to give birth at a state hospital. Despite the clarity of the Civil Registration Act and the fact that state hospitals have been specifically instructed to issue birth certificates to all babies regardless of the legal status of the child’s parents, many hospitals still do not issue birth certificates for the children of migrants (Civil Registration Act No. 2, 2008; IRIN, 2009; Thawdar, The Irrawaddy, 2009a, 2009b). Additionally, changes to the Nationality Act have led to some confusion. Section 7 of the act appears to indicate that nonregistered persons who are born in Thailand may be considered illegal aliens:
The person who is born within the Thai Kingdom and has not acquired Thai nationality under paragraph one shall reside in the Thai Kingdom under conditions stating [stated] in the Ministerial Regulation, but principles of national security and human rights have to be considered as well. Nevertheless, the person shall be deemed to have entered and resided in the Thai Kingdom without permission under the law on immigration when there is no such Ministerial Regulation still. (Nationality Act No. 4, 2008)
Without a legal identity, marginalized persons are at grave risk of being trafficked. The disadvantages that they face begin as early as primary school. According to David Feingold, although every child in Thailand is entitled to primary education, children without citizenship often go without. “What we found in our sample is that 57 percent of persons without citizenship don’t make it to lower primary school [kindergarten to third grade]. From those persons who did make it to primary school, more than half did not make it to upper primary school [roughly third to sixth grade]. This is an example of a situation where the policy is good, but the implementation isn’t.” Feingold is referring to the Education for All policy launched in August 2005, which intended to grant equal access to education for all children in Thailand. The policy is often not enforced. Aside from cultural biases against migrants, there is also a lack of understanding of the policy on the local level. In addition, language differences, financial hurdles, and physical distances from schools present challenges (IRIN, 2009). Like migrants, unregistered hill tribe people are not only susceptible to arrest and deportation, but are also denied the basic rights granted to citizens. Persons without status cannot vote, own land, register a marriage, or obtain health care. Those without alien resident status or citizenship cannot travel outside their district or go on to higher education because they are unable to receive a certificate upon finishing school, so their employment options are significantly limited. The restrictions placed upon unregistered highland people make them susceptible to trafficking, both within Thailand and abroad (Lertcharoenchok, 2001; U.S. Department of State, 2009).
Thailand is a commonly known sex tourism destination, yet the nation has made minimal efforts to reduce the demand for commercial sex acts. Thai authorities do work with NGOs in intermittent police raids to shut down brothels, and the government also conducts awareness-raising anti–child sex tourism campaigns geared to tourists. Some of the primary nations of origin for sex tourists are France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and South Korea. The government does prosecute sex tourists, although prosecution seems to be sporadic. For instance, 20 child sex tourists were prosecuted in 2008, but there were no reported prosecutions in 2009 (U.S. Department of State, 2009; 2010). One potential reason for the government’s apathy on the topic of sex tourism may be the significant role sex tourism plays in the Thai economy. Tourism revenues contribute to roughly 6 percent of the GDP. In 2009 14,150 tourists spent $19,421 million, and in 2010 revenues from tourism increased to $23,407 million (National Statistical Office Thailand, 2004; UNWTO, 2011). Some believe that sex tourism accounts for 1 percent of the nation’s GDP (Prospect Magazine, 2005). The steady growth in the number of international tourists entering Thailand is likely to continue. In fact, international arrivals to Thailand increased 7 percent between April 2011 and April 2012 (PATA, 2012). This inevitably increased demand in Thailand for commercial sex, with an adverse effect on children (both girls and boys), who as a population are vulnerable to a variety of exploitations, including sexual exploitation. This vulnerability is exacerbated by a lack of national identity, which marginalizes children and does not allow them equal opportunity to health care and education; economic hardship, which compels children to discontinue their education in order to aid in the support of their family; and homelessness—specifically, children that run away from home to escape abuse. Once again, children of ethnic minorities are particularly vulnerable. A study conducted by the Research Institute at Mahidol University, Thailand, found that children of ethnic minorities are trafficked from their highland homes to Bangkok and Pattaya for commercial sexual exploitation. In addition to marginalization created by the nation’s citizenship laws, there is neither structure nor sufficient mechanisms within the tourism industry itself to protect children from commercial sexual exploitation (Pimonsaengsuriya, 2008).
To help bridge the gap and decrease the vulnerability of children, groups such as Friends-International, through the ChildSafe Network, work with the Thai Immigration Authority and the Hotels and Taxi Associations to protect children in Thailand. The program helps identify what restaurants and hotels are safe for children. Additionally, Friends-International’s Peuan Peuan in Bangkok program works with more than 350 children and youth every month to provide emergency and long-term support services to Thai, Burmese, Cambodian, and Lao children and youth and their families (Friends-International, Inc., 2011). Also of significance are tourism-related groups that are part of anti-trafficking initiatives that focus on protecting children from sexual exploitation in travel and tourism. One such initiative is called The Code and is co-funded by the Swiss Government (SECO) and the tourism private sector and supported by ECPAT International, a nongovernmental organization that works toward the elimination of child prostitution, child pornography, and the trafficking of children for sexual purposes. Advisory partners to the initiative are UNICEF and the United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO). Accor Hotels has been a core partner in implementing The Code in Thailand (Pimonsaengsuriya, 2008; The Code, 2011).
It is not just sex tourists who affect the demand for commercial sex acts in Thailand, but also Thai men. Kevin Bales, human trafficking abolitionist and author of
Disposable People: New Slavery in the Global Economy
, states in his book: “For Thai men, buying a woman is much like buying a round of drinks” (Bales, 1999, p. 44). This attitude stems from Thai tradition, whereby a man’s worth, according to Bales, could easily be measured in wives, mistresses, and concubines. Those without as many resources could rent instead of own their mistresses through prostitution. Today, thanks to economic growth—7.8 percent in 2010—and an emerging economy (IMF, 2011), Thai men can more regularly afford to pay for sex, and they do. Studies indicate that of those interviewed, up to 90 percent state that their first sexual encounter was with a prostitute. According to Bales, there is general acceptance of this behavior among single Thai men. More surprising is that one-third of women interviewed felt that commercial sex is also appropriate for married Thai men. Bales states that married Thai women are less threatened by the idea of a prostitute than a minor wife or mistress because, while polygamy is technically illegal, children that arise from those relationships are entitled to legal support. Acceptance of the sex industry also exists within the government and is compounded by government corruption. In 2011 a new political party called “Love Thailand” won four seats in the House of Representatives. The party was formed by politician and former brothel owner Chuwit Kamolvisit, known as a godfather of prostitution, who was arrested in 2003 and subsequently exposed the bribes he paid to police to maintain his brothels. His campaign platform in 2011 focused on leading the country’s fight against corruption (Duthel, 2011; Branigan, 2011).
While some literature notes that the majority of child sex tourists are situational abusers who do not initially have a particular sexual preference for children, but instead take the opportunity to sexually abuse children as it arises, other literature points to an increased demand for young children among sex tourists and Thai men who pay for sex. This is believed to be, at least in part, a consequence of the fear of HIV infection and the belief that young children are less likely to carry sexually transmitted diseases. Those women and girls who test HIV positive and work in brothels are typically thrown out onto the streets (Bales, 1999; Pimonsaengsuriya, 2008; Batstone, 2010). What is troubling is that while HIV continues to be a significant issue in Thailand, the government has decreased the budget for prevention programs. In 2001 domestic funding for HIV prevention was half of that in 1997. The budget toward prevention decreased from $47.7 million in 2008 to $31.4 million in 2009. At the end of 2009 the estimated number of people living with HIV was 530,000, with 1.3 percent of persons between 15 and 49 infected (National AIDS Prevention and Alleviation Committee, 2010; AVERT, 2011).
TRAFFICKING ABROAD
Thailand is a major source nation for human trafficking. Victims are trafficked to Bahrain, Canada, Denmark, Fiji, Finland, Israel, Malaysia, the Maldives, Qatar, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, and the United States, among other countries. Of 443 trafficking victims repatriated to Thailand between October 2007 and September 2008, 81.3 percent had been trafficked to Bahrain. A distant second destination country was Malaysia, at 16.5 percent. Most repatriated trafficking victims were trafficked abroad for commercial sexual exploitation and were held in debt bondage by their traffickers. The overall number of human trafficking victims is likely to grow in the years to come, as male trafficking victims are now included in the anti-trafficking law and therefore will (hopefully) be incorporated into trafficking statistics. Some Thai men voluntarily migrate for contract work in the Gulf states, Israel, Malaysia, South Korea, Taiwan, and the United States but may face forced labor and debt bondage upon arrival. During 2009 Thai workers were subjected to forced labor in Poland, Sweden, and the United States for work on farms, at construction sites, and in slaughterhouses (U.S. Department of State, 2010).
For obvious reasons, it is impossible to know the exact number of persons trafficked from Thailand to other nations. The official number of trafficking victims repatriated to Thailand is probably only the tip of the iceberg. In 2010 and 2009, 88 and 309, respectively, were repatriated with help from the governments of the Bahrain, China, Malaysia, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, the United States, Vietnam, and Yemen (U.S. Department of State, 2009, 2010, 2011). Thai citizens accounted for 64.5 percent of trafficking victims identified in South Africa in 2005 and 2006. In Australia, Thai victims made up 62.1 percent of persons placed on government victims support between 2004 and November 2008 (UNODC, 2009). In 2009 roughly 20 percent of certified adult trafficking victims in the United States were from Thailand (second only to Mexico). Thailand remained a primary country of origin for victims trafficked to the United States in 2012 (U.S. Department of State, 2012). As discussed in chapter 1, roughly 600 Thai nationals were purportedly victims of the largest alleged human trafficking case in U.S. history. Though the U.S. government dropped the criminal charges against defendants in 2012, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is still pursuing civil litigation (Lin, 2012). The victims entered the United States under the federal agricultural guestworker program between 2001 and 2007. The traffickers allegedly used false promises of high-paying jobs and charged the victims exorbitant recruiting fees of up to $21,000, placing them in a position of debt servitude. The traffickers also allegedly withheld the victims’ passports and threatened to deport them (Kerr, 2010; U.S. Department of Justice, 2011a, 2011b). Another U.S. case involves Thai workers hired for agricultural labor but instead forced to perform demolition in hurricane devastated New Orleans. After accepting agricultural employment, 22 Thai workers were brought over to the United States legally on the H-2A visa by a U.S. company, Million Express Manpower, Inc. When they arrived in North Carolina, the traffickers confiscated the victims’ transportation and visa documents. One month later the workers were transported from North Carolina to New Orleans to perform building demolition (Asanok et al., 2007). Forced to live in the building that they were demolishing, the victims had no access to clean water and were continuously exposed to mold in the roach-, mosquito-, and fly-infested buildings (Andert, 2007, p. 27). While in New Orleans, the victims were not paid and were closely watched by an armed guard to ensure that they did not try to escape. The same guard charged the victims for purchasing their food, but without pay the workers began to go hungry (Asanok et al., 2007). Eventually, questions from the Thai embassy about the location and situation of the workers forced the traffickers to return the victims to North Carolina. The traffickers could not fit all of the victims into their vehicles and left seven in New Orleans. With the help of service providers in New Orleans and North Carolina, all the victims were able to escape.
4