3. Victim failure to escape: The court ruled that even if the victims had opportunities to escape at certain points, it is reasonable to conclude that the employment was invol-
untary at least at some points. 4. Facts explicitly mentioned as important to the conviction: This case is interesting in that
the court explicitly mentions certain facts as important to a conviction of peonage. Among the facts mentioned as important are the following: threats of physical force and
calling in immigration authorities; the workers’ dificult working and living conditions which did not allow leisure time, resulted in sleep deprivation and included non-payment or minimal
payment; the victims’ particular vulnerabilities immigration status, little money, dependency upon defendants for housing and transportation, creditor-debtor relationship; the victim’s
fear of one defendant’s volatile temper and of both defendants’ seemingly powerful position; the defendants’ continual isolation of the workers; the defendants’ constant supervision of
victims’ movements, mail, money; the defendants’ keeping a key to the victims’ residence so that they could conduct random inspections while refusing to allow the workers a key of
their own, the victims’ debt bondage where at no point was the value of the workers’ labour suficient to liquidate the debt and there was no limit to the length of the services required
to satisfy the obligation.
5.5 Omoruyi Nigeria
637
In this case, the intended exploitation never transpired and a threat was used by the defendant that some might qualify as seemingly irrational. The court, however, viewed the threat as
serious enough to result in an intimidation of the victims. The case is also of interest in that the victims did not testify, and yet the prosecution was able to prove its case by means of
the defendant’s confessional statements, the testimony of a native doctor and the testimony of a law enforcement oficer.
The kinds of evidence in this case include testimony from law enforcement and from a so-called native doctor, the defendant’s confessional statements made during the investigation,
and documentary and real evidence. The mosaic of evidence was limited in view of the fact that the exploitation never transpired
and included only details about the subtle means of coercion in the form of “juju” threats which were effective due to cultural beliefs and practices.
Particularly dificult issues present in this case are the hurdles in proving a case when the exploitation has not yet transpired and seeming victim consent to exploitation.
The defendant was found guilty of an attempt to organize foreign travel for prostitution and an attempt to place the victims in servitude as pledge for a debt.
In this case the victims, young women, were required to go to a native doctor and participate in a “juju” witchcraft ceremony that bound them to the defendant in providing sexual
services to clients abroad. During the ceremony the victims were obliged to take a “juju”
637
Attorney General of the Federation v. Constance Omoruyi, Charge No. B31C2004, 22 September 2006, High Court of Justice, Edo State of Nigeria, Nigeria. The case is available in the UNODC Human Traficking Case Law
Database UNODC Case No. NGA002.
oath which required them to pledge, under threat of a curse of death, not to run away and to pay the defendant money.
638
The native doctor conirmed the victims’ understanding that they would be going to Italy to engage in prostitution. After this oath the native doctor
collected the victims’ pubic hairs, ingernails and in some cases panties, and kept them in wraps with the victims’ names on them.
In more detail, the following is the language of the oath:
“[I]f I run away from my madam let Ogun kill me. Also if I refuse to pay the madam the money agreed upon let Ogun kill me.”
Attorney General of the Federation v. Constance Omoruyi, Charge No. B31C2004, 22 September 2006, High Court of Justice, Edo State of Nigeria, Nigeria.
The victims were still in Nigeria when they were apprehended by law enforcement. While they had taken the oaths and agreed to go abroad for purposes of prostitution, they had not
yet performed any sexual acts.
This case is particularly interesting in that the victims did not testify. The evidence included the following:
1. Defendant’s statements: During the investigation the defendant made statements which were confessional in nature. However, during the trial he contradicted these previous
statements.
639
The court admitted the statements in evidence. 2. Testimony of native doctor: The evidence provided by the native doctor was heavily
relied on by the prosecution. The court too, found the native doctor’s testimony to be a “vivid account of the role played by the [defendant] in procuring the [victims]
mentioned in the charge for foreign travel”.
640
The court accepted and believed the native doctor’s testimony on the defendant’s role in the oath taking.
3. Testimony of law enforcement oficer: The police oficer testiied about his investigation of the defendant and the native doctor and his gathering of evidence. The oficer also laid
the foundation for the documentary and real evidence submitted to the court. 4. Documentary evidence: The documentary evidence included the following items found
in the defendant’s house: a Nigerian passport in the name of one of the victims, an address bookdiary, and a small notebook. Additional documentary evidence included
travel documents belonging to the victims such as ECOWAS member State travel documents and certiicates of vaccinations for the victims. The court mentions this
evidence as background, but relies on the testimonial evidence previously described to support the convictions.
5. “Real evidence”: At the home of the native doctor “real evidence” was found in the form of a wrap that contained the pubic hairs of one of the victims and had her
name on it. In addition, three passport photographs of victims were found in the defendant’s house.
638
See section 3.2.4 on “Subtle means of coercion” for the exact language of the pledge.
639
He claimed he had been tortured and had been given a prepared statement by the police to sign. The court did not ind these claims credible.
640
Omoruyi, Ibid.
Core issues raised in this case include: 1. Exploitation not yet transpired: In this case, the exploitation had not yet transpired.
The defendant was convicted of an attempt to organize foreign travel for the purpose of prostitution on the basis of an array of testimonial, documentary and
real evidence. 2. Victim consent: Seemingly, the victims willingly undertook the “juju” oath to travel
abroad for purposes of prostitution. In view of this, the court acquitted the defendant of the charge of deceitful inducement in connection with traficking in persons
because the court believed the victims knew where they were going and for what purpose and therefore there was no element of deceit. However, the court convicted
the defendant of placing a person in servitude as a pledge for a debt, despite the seeming consent of the victims. This was in light of the evidence provided by the
native doctor about the oath the victims were required to take. The court found that there was “abundant and copious evidence that the oath is to bond [the victims]”.
641
Thus, the victims’ seeming consent to exploitation did not preclude this conviction. Additionally, the mere fact that the victim consented to leave the country for the
purposes of prostitution was not a defence to the charge of organizing foreign travel which promotes prostitution.
3. Failure to call victims to testify: The defence argued that the failure to call the victims to testify was a fatal law in the prosecution’s case. The court disagreed
and found that the victim of a crime is not the only person who can provide evidence against a defendant. As an example, the court used a case where the
victim dies and asked if that would leave the court without recourse. It answered in the negative.
642
4. Relying on the testimony of an accomplice: The defence argued that the native doctor’s testimony should be disregarded because he should be viewed and treated as an
accomplice. The court took this issue seriously and acknowledged the risk in basing a conviction on the native doctor’s testimony in isolation. However, the court
found that the evidence of the native doctor, when combined with the defendant’s confessional statements were “suficient materials upon which can rely and prove
its case”.
643
5. Seemingly irrational threat: This issue was not raised explicitly in the court’s ruling, but may be of interest to practitioners. Seemingly, in many countries, the threat in
the “juju” oath could be seen as irrational and consequently of insuficient effective- ness to inluence reasonable persons. However, in this case it was understood to have
strength and weight, as belief in such curses is prevalent in all strata of Nigerian society.
644
For further information on seemingly irrational threats which may be a product of cultural beliefs see above,” 2.6 on “Expert and professional testimony”;
section 3.2.2 on “Threatsseemingly unreasonable threats”; section 3.2.16 on “The relevance of cultural beliefs and practices” and section 3.3.6.7 on ‘”Seemingly
irrational beliefs”.
641
Ibid.
642
See section 2.2.3, “Cases with partial or no victim testimony” for the court’s analysis on this issue.
643
Omoruyi. Previously cited.
644
This information was supplied by a Nigerian expert.
5.6 Anos Philippines
645
This case has signiicant issues involving duration of abuse and circumstances which may weaken a case such as the victim’s power to say no with impunity.
Kinds of evidence submitted by the prosecution were testimony from two victims, law enforce- ment testimony, documentary and “real evidence”. The defence introduced testimonial
evidence from the defendant and an individual similarly situated to the victims and, in addi- tion, documentary evidence.
The strengths in the mosaic of evidence include restriction of freedom, threats, deception and vulnerabilities in regard to illegal immigration status, socio-economic situation and
unfamiliarity with language and culture of country of destination. Weaknesses in the mosaic of evidence include the victim’s power to say no with impunity, the illegal actions of the
victims and the short duration of the abuse ive days.
The defendant in this case was convicted of traficking in persons. This case concerns two female victims, Victim M and Victim J, who were recruited in the
Philippines for jobs in Malaysia. The victims were told the jobs would be to serve as waitresses or cashiers in a restaurant. In order to travel to Malaysia, the victims were told to procure
fake passports. They did so and travelled to Malaysia with those documents.
The victims arrived at their destination in Malaysia on the evening of 17 November 2006. They were told to eat, take a bath and prepare to go to work. Victim M initially refused to
go to work because she was very tired from the trip, but the defendant insisted. Once they arrived at the business where they would be working, the victims learned that it was not a
restaurant, but rather a bar, and that they would be required to earn money by means of sexual relations with men who frequented the bar.
Victim M told the defendant that she would not do this job. The defendant told her that there was never a waitress job available, and that if she refused to do this job then she
would not earn any money. During the irst night one customer wanted to book Victim M and she still refused. The defendant was angry. The victims stayed at the bar from 9 p.m in
the evening until 2 a.m. the following morning. Neither victim entertained customers during this time.
The victims were required to work from 9 p.m. in the evening until 2 a.m. the following morning every day. Victim M continued to refuse to book customers for sexual relations. She
would only sit at a table with the customers while they drank. In this way, Victim M could earn a portion of each drink the men bought for her.
From this vantage point, which allowed her to see the defendant’s position at the bar, Victim M received the impression that the defendant was not the owner of the bar, but rather
the “mamasang” or pimp. Victim M observed the defendant and saw that she was not serving any customers, but rather was occupied in connecting victims with customers for bookings
to provide sexual services. One day, at the residence where the victims were staying, the
645
People v. Anos promulgated by a Regional Trial Court branch 12 Zamboanga City, year 2011. The case is available in the UNODC Human Traficking Case Law Database UNODC Case No. PHL051.
defendant’s sister brought two women to the house to train the victims on how to have sexual relations and they demonstrated various positions.
On 21 November 2006, on the ifth day of being exploited at the bar, the bar was raided by Malaysian immigration oficials. The victims and the defendant were arrested and taken
irst to a detention cell and then to a detention facility where they were kept for one month and seventeen days. Eventually the victims and the defendant were deported back to the
Philippines. Upon their arrival in the Philippines, they were immediately interviewed and the defendant was arrested on the same day.
The kinds of evidence submitted in this case by the prosecution included: 1. Testimonial evidence
a Victim testimony: Testimony was heard from the two victims. b
Law enforcement testimony: Testimony was heard from two law enforcement oficers who testiied about the arrest of the defendant, identiied the defendant
in court, and helped lay the foundation for certain pieces of documentary evidence.
2. Documentary evidence a Fraudulent documents used to create fake passports for the victims, such as a
voter’s afidavit, clearance from the National Bureau of Investigation, an authen- ticated copy of a Certiicate of Live Birth, Baptismal Certiicate and school
identiication card.
b The fake Philippine passport obtained by Victim M on the basis of these
documents. c
The boat ticket for the trip to Malaysia for Victim M issued in the name on the fake passport and the stamp evidencing entry into Malaysia on page 4 of
the fake passport.
d A two-page letter given to Victim M by the defendant while she was in jail in Malaysia requesting her to sign it. The letter purported to be from the victim,
was addressed to her parents and stated that she was ine, when in fact she was in jail. She refused to sign and her refusal angered the defendant.
e Documents obtained by Victim J in order to secure a passport and the passport she used.
f Victim J’s boat ticket and evidence that she did not pay for the ticket. 3. Real evidence:
A spaghetti-strapped maroon blouse that Victim J was forced to wear by the defendant when she worked in the bar in Malaysia.
The evidence presented by the defence included the testimony of the defendant as well as an individual in the same situation as Victims M and J. In its presentation of the facts, the
court notes that the similarly situated individual did not ile a case against the defendant because “she did not like the hassle of doing so”.
646
646
People v. Anos, promulgated by a Regional Trial Court branch 12, Zamboanga City, year 2011. The case is available in the UNODC Human Traficking Case Law Database UNODC Case No. PHL051.
