Introduction Particularly dificult evidential challenges

“[…] neither the irst or second accused could have been as unwitting of the circumstances as they claim to be. The criminal enterprise had all the hallmarks of international organized crime as the State submit in their very comprehensive and helpful submissions: “It is apparent that [the 1st accused and the 2nd accused] were responsible for representing and protecting the interests of an organized crime boss out of Bangkok, Thailand.” The State v. Phanat Laojindamanee and others, Criminal Case No. HAC323 of 2012, the High Court of Fiji at Suva, 13 December 2012, Fiji, para. 14 of the Sentencing decision. Both the Thai and Hong Kong defendants were convicted of human traficking. The third defendant, the Chinese Fijian escort, was convicted of domestic traficking in that he was involved in facilitating the transport of the victims to their destination and in driving them to and from their clients. The fourth defendant was, according to the victims’ testimonies, the “boss in Fiji” and was convicted of two counts of sexual servitude. The court noted that: “The fact that it was an organized crime enterprise was apparent throughout the trial with references to persons in Thailand, China and Fiji who were involved in the project. There was evidence that the fourth accused had made a claim that he was the “maia boss in Fiji” and he is to be regarded then as a pinnacle of the organization putting this operation into effect.” The State v. Phanat Laojindamanee and others, Criminal Case No. HAC323 of 2012, the High Court of Fiji at Suva, 13 December 2012, Fiji, para. 45 of the Sentencing decision. A number of cases stress the importance of convicting each link in the chain of human traficking, from key igures to “small fry”. For example, in an Israeli case, Burnstein Israel, 570 the defendant worked as a broker between a brothel owner who was a covert police agent and persons who were “selling” two women for prostitution. Although the transactions did not materialize, and the defendant did not receive any beneits for brokering, he was still convicted of traficking in persons for the purpose of prostitution. In considering whether the defendant’s actions amounted to traficking in persons, the court emphasized the importance of interpreting the traficking provision in the Criminal Law according to its purpose. The court held that the provision aimed at protecting fundamental human rights and should be interpreted broadly so as to encompass every link in the chain which supported and facilitated traficking in persons, including the broker. In another Israeli case, Saban Israel, 571 a large network was involved in traficking women for prostitution. The case concerned traficking extending over a period of nine years, whereby young women from former Soviet Union Republics were traficked to Israel and Cyprus. The women were held under dificult conditions, including forced prostitution by some of them; imprisonment; being forced to give up a large part of their earnings to the defendants; subject 570 Burnstein v State of Israel, 23 February 2005, Supreme Court, Israel. The case is available in the UNODC Human Traficking Case Law Database UNODC Case No. ISR010. 571 Criminal Case 1016-09, State of Israel v. Saban et al 1212012, appealed in Criminal Appeals 4031, 4881, 4916, 4920, 494512, Saban et al v. State of Israel, Israel.