Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
03 April 2023 | Story Valentino Ndaba | Photo Supplied
Dr Marcel van der Watt is a Research Fellow at the Free State Centre for Human Rights at the University of the Free State.

Not only is human trafficking illegal, but it also constitutes a gross violation of human rights. The fundamental rights of trafficked individuals to make their own decisions, to move freely, and to work for whomever they choose are violated by traffickers, who treat them like a commodity.

The first report from a larger study on the scope and nature of human trafficking in South Africa was released at an opportune moment, as the country observes Human Rights Month. The study's recommendations will help to ensure that South Africans' rights are upheld and safeguarded. The evidence of the comprehensive study (to be released in March) will elevate data into a more prominent role in public-policy debates and bolster South African institutional capacity to participate in, and lead this process through partnership with United States institutions and engagement with the Government of South Africa (GOSA).

The report is a culmination of a comprehensive multi-year, multi-sectoral, and multidisciplinary Trafficking in Person (TIP) study conducted by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in collaboration with research partners, including Dr Marcel van der Watt, a Research Fellow in the Free State Centre for Human Rights (FSCHR) at the University of the Free State (UFS). 

The goal of the report titled: Research into the nature and scope of trafficking in persons in South Africa: Prevalence insights from the criminal justice system and relevant reporting mechanisms, is to educate policymakers in the GOSA, as well as development and implementing partners, service providers, and others about the scope and nature of trafficking in persons in South Africa.

According to Dr Marcel van der Watt, “the findings from the research confirm that sex trafficking continues to make up most of both reported cases and prosecutions of TIP, while labour trafficking prosecutions, similar to trends observed internationally, are severely lacking. Extreme violence is meted out by traffickers, while places where exploitation occurs are embedded in communities and operate for protracted periods without any meaningful law enforcement intervention. The prominence of consumer‐level demand for commercial sex was evident in potentially thousands of sex buyers who “used the services” of adult and child victims of sex trafficking.”

“Despite adequate laws to address this dimension of TIP in South Africa, sex buyers continue to exploit women and children with impunity. Several adult websites, some advertised on public roadways, are repeatedly implicated in ongoing and successful sex trafficking prosecutions, yet none have been prosecuted,” said the UFS Research Fellow. 

He added that the findings are but just some of those that paint a concerning picture, especially considering the proposed Bill by the South African government that will make brothels, brothel-keeping, pimping and sex buying legal in the country. The question we need to ask is: How will this play out in neighbourhoods and communities across the country? And how will this decision impact the issue of Gender Based Violence, the safety of women and children, and the problem of human trafficking in the country?

Findings and recommendations

The study's findings show that sex trafficking continues to account for the majority of TIP prosecutions and reported cases, whereas labour trafficking prosecutions are severely inadequate, in line with global trends.

The following recommendations were presented to the Government of South Africa:

  • Establishing an integrated information system to support effective monitoring and implementation of the PACOTIP Act and providing evidence on TIP prevalence, as specified in Section 41(1) (b)
  • Employ Section 7 of the PACOTIP Act and Sections 11 and 17 of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 32 of 2007 as legislative tools to reduce the demand that encourages trafficking in persons for sexual exploitation
  • Implement and abide by South African Police Service National Instruction 4 of 2015 to the letter, which is concerned with data integrity, the use of detectives in police stations, and the recording of TIP and associated information on the SAPS crime administration system.
  • In addition to financial investigations, asset forfeiture, and a counter-corruption strategy, establish specialised capacity for proactive, intelligence-led, and court-driven investigations.
  • In research and policy discussions pertaining to prostitution and pornography, gender-based violence, child abuse, labor violations, and irregular migration, give priority to the legally binding TIP definition and "abuse of vulnerability" as defined in the PACOTIP Act in order to accurately identify and prevent the undercounting of TIP cases among these phenomena.
  • Recognise the National Human Trafficking Hotline as an additional official South African reporting system that accepts TIP reports.

About the Free State Centre for Human Rights (FSCHR)

The FSCHR is an institution that focuses on the connection between human rights and transformation through its critical, interdisciplinary, and contextually involved research, advocacy, and legal practice. Research, advocacy, and litigation at the Centre concentrate on issues in the UFS, Bloemfontein, the Free State province, and Lesotho.

Human Rights and Impoverishment, Human Rights and Democracy, and Human Rights and Identities are the three main areas of research for the FSCHR. Courses offered by the Centre include the Interdisciplinary Masters of Human Rights, a Master’s Degree by Full Dissertation, and a doctoral programme in Human Rights, including Doctor of Laws (LLD) and Doctor of Philosophy (PhD). 

The Centre is primarily a research institution for academia, although it also engages in contextual work. In addition to its Research and Postgraduate Divisions, the Centre has a Legal Services Division that works as a Free State-focused public interest litigation unit in collaboration with the UFS Law Clinic and an Advocacy Division that advocates for transformation-related human rights at the UFS.

On the campuses of UFS and more broadly in the Free State Province, Lesotho, and all of South Africa, the Advocacy Division fosters transformation through advocating for and educating about human rights. The FSCHR's Legal Services Division is a strategic litigation unit for human rights that represents clients in court on their behalf or as amicus curiae in an effort to advance social justice, human rights, and transformation. 

The Division focuses on issues that arise in the Free State Province regarding evictions, socioeconomic issues, service delivery issues, accountability in municipal and provincial governance, and corruption. The South African Human Rights Commission, Free State Province, and the UFS Law Clinic cooperate with the Division's operations.

News Archive

Reaction by the Rector of the UFS after a meeting with student leaders
2008-02-25

Reaction by the Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS, Prof. Frederick Fourie, on the agreement reached at a meeting with student leaders held on Friday, 22 February 2008

Note: This is meant to be used together with the full joint statement that was issued by the UFS management and student leaders on 22 February 2008.

The memorandum of the primes of the University of the Free State’s (UFS) residences was handed to top management on Wednesday, 20 February 2008. In the memorandum they asked for a meeting with the UFS management by Friday, 22 February 2008. Such a meeting was arranged and took place.

The UFS top management, all the residence primes as well as the house committee member for first years, the executive of the Main Campus Student Representative Council (SRC) and residence heads were present.

In contrast to what is suggested in the Volksblad report of Saturday, the discussion went off very well. There was no consternation or shouting or “emotions that ran high”. It was a civilised, decent meeting as it should be at a good university. Of course, now and again individuals spoke out strongly and very enthusiastically, but it was all decent and orderly. The contribution of the primes was insightful and well formulated.

Because the top management and I wanted to listen very carefully what the problems and frustrations were, we spent nearly five hours in the meeting. The issues in the memorandum were discussed one by one. In some cases I could take a decision immediately and finalise the matter, in other cases, the management provided information that could largely finalise a matter. A number of other matters must be investigated further.

The management undertook to respond comprehensively and in writing to all the issues raised in the memorandum by Monday, 25 February 2008. This will be handed to the primes but will not be handed to the media beforehand.
It is obvious that there are matters at the university that can be better managed and that there are problems with communication within the Student Affairs division. A major change such as the new policy on diversity places huge demands on management and the administration, and problems were to be expected. However, we understand the frustration of the students in residences.

On the other hand, students don’t always make matters easier. The strong opposition of white student leaders last year, and their unwillingness to co-operate in preparation for 2008 is well known. This year it is going better. But often student leaders take positions that are very inflexible. They also see no room for adapting old habits and simply want their own way. Their contributions are then full of statements such as “It cannot be done”. This delays measures such as the full implementation of expert interpreting services, which, for the management, is a very important measure (and which is functioning very well in certain residences). Communication from student leaders to management is also not always what it should be.

At the end of the meeting student leaders and management reached an important agreement and issued a joint statement in which they committed themselves to the integration process and to good co-operation and communication. This was an important step which is a sign of rebuilding trust. Naturally everyone will still have to work hard to build on this and to strengthen mutual trust.

The course and outcome of Friday’s discussions, as requested by the student leaders, show that issues can be addressed and resolved by means of us talking to one another. This is why it is so sad that primes and house committee members went on strike on Wednesday already and stayed in tents in front of the Main Building – leaving their residences without its leadership. This created an opening for what appears to have been well planned and co-ordinated acts of vandalism by inhabitants of residences on the campus on Wednesday.

Such vandalism is unacceptable and no one can justify it.

Fortunately, order could be restored quickly during the night and all academic activities could resume without any disruption on Thursday and Friday.

FCvN Fourie

Media Release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Assistant Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za   
24 February 2008

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept