Article Asian and Pacific Migration Journal 2015, Vol. 24(3) 327–352 Curbing sex ! Scalabrini Migration Center 2015 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/ trafficking in Turkey: journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0117196815595326 The policy–practice apmj.sagepub.com divide Emel Co¸skun Du¨ zce University Abstract Based on field research, this study examines to what extent Turkey’s current policy on sex trafficking adheres to the UN Protocol in practice and discusses how prostitution and migration regimes inform and affect the policies and practices against sex trafficking in Turkey. For this study, data were collected using semi-structured interviews with 23 key informants, each representing different perspectives on sex trafficking in Turkey. The study found that the prostitution and migration regimes of Turkey render migrant women susceptible to gender violence, and weaken the identification and protection systems that may result in the ‘re-victimization’ of ‘victims’ of sex trafficking. Keywords Turkey, sex trafficking, prostitution regime, migration Introduction The trafficking of women for sexual exploitation, also known as sex traf- ficking, is not a new issue. Concerns about trafficking activities became an issue on the international agenda for the first time in the late 19th century. It re-emerged in most parts of the world in the 1980s and has since become a part of the political agenda of the United Nations (UN) and many indi- vidual countries. Various dimensions of sex trafficking had been studied, Corresponding author: Emel Co¸skun, Sociology Department, Du¨ zce University, Konuralp Yerleskesi Merkez/Du¨ zce 81620, Turkey. Email: [email protected] 328 Asian and Pacific Migration Journal 24(3) including its connection to migration and prostitution (Agustin, 2007; Dewey, 2008; Doezema, 2000; Jeffreys, 2009; Kelly and Regan, 2000; Kempadoo et al., 2005; Miriam, 2005;Outshoorn, 2005), human rights (Anderson, 2013; Dauvergne, 2008), labor (Anderson and Rogaly, 2005; O’Connell Davidson, 2010), and international and national anti-trafficking discourses (Anderson, 2013; Doezema, 2002; Gallagher, 2001; Lobasz, 2009). Yet, there is limited knowledge about how anti-trafficking efforts are practiced (i.e., Atauz et al., 2009; Dewey 2008). Based on policy- oriented empirical research, this paper examined Turkey’s policy and practices in the fight against sex trafficking. The main question for this research was: How do Turkey’s prostitution and migration regimes affect the identification and protection mechanisms of victims of sex trafficking and migrant women in general? By pursuing this question, this paper explored the interactions between sex trafficking, prostitution and migra- tion regimes in order to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the national referral and protection mechanisms, and how these regimes affect trafficked women and migrant women in Turkey. Since the early 1990s and the break-up of the former Soviet Union (see Erder and Ka¸ska, 2003), Turkey came to be known as a destination and transit country for sex trafficking. Turkey was unprepared for the sudden rise in the influx of migrants, including those who had been traf- ficked. In the absence of preventative measures against trafficking, Turkey was severely criticized in the late 1990s and early 2000s for its ill treatment of potential ‘victims’ of sex trafficking who were considered as ‘illegal’ migrant prostitutes and were deported (United States Department of State, 2004: 183). The growing concerns and international anti-trafficking conventions and discourses compelled Turkey to sign the UN Palermo Protocol to ‘Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children’ on 13 December 2000 and to ratify it on 13 March 2003 (United Nations, 2015). With the guidance of the International Organization for Migration (IOM), it started to build its own anti-trafficking policy. In 2004–2005 a national referral and protection system was established to identify and support trafficked women. However, Turkey continued to be criticized even after creating this new system. For example, Ayata et al. (2009: 42) argued that efforts are mainly focused upon legal and administrative regulations, and that the new policy changes had been motivated to gain prestige in the international community. Yenidu¨ nya et al. (2009) also documented how human traf- ficking cases were mixed up with the forced prostitution law and resulted in no or lower punishment for sex traffickers. In fact, when the human trafficking law, Article 80 (Law No. 5237), was enacted on 26 September 2004, it did not include a specific reference to the most common type of Co¸skun 329 trafficking in women, which is for sexual exploitation (Tu¨ rk Ceza Kanunu, 2014a). Before Article 80 was amended in 2006, there was no reference to pros- titution in human trafficking legislation. Sex trafficking cases were dealt with through the forced prostitution law (Article 227), which also referred to facilitation of border crossing for the purpose of prostitution and the instigation, facilitation, hosting and pimping activities related to prostitu- tion (Countertrafficking.org, 2014). However, due to severe criticism, the reference to border crossing was removed from Article 227 in 2006. At the same time, ‘prostitution’ was added to the definition of human trafficking. As a result of these amendments, sex trafficking has come to be considered an international crime while internal trafficking relies on the forced pros- titution provision in Article 227. Despite the amendment in 2006, Yenidu¨ nya et al. (2009: 258) pointed out that the confusion between human trafficking, forced prostitution, and human smuggling1 among law enforcement bureaus remains. More recent research also shows the difficulties of identifying victims of trafficking in accordance with the changing nature of traffickers’ methods (see Sever et al., 2012: 62). Therefore, it is believed that there are trafficked women among the migrant women deported for working ‘illegally’ as prostitutes, for having sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) or for visa violations (see Demir, 2008; Travis, 2008). Official statistics on the number of deport- ations for ‘illegally’ selling sex or for having STDs seem to support these criticisms. The data also indicate that the deportations are substantial since 2002 (see Table 1). Thus, although the Turkish government has included sex trafficking in the definition of human trafficking and there are efforts to identify victims of sex trafficking among migrant women since 2006, identification efforts do not appear to have reduced the number of deportations. Erder and Ka¸ska (2003: 16) documented that the number of deport- ations from Turkey for the period between 1995 and June 2002 totaled more than 355,000; almost half of these deportations were to countries that are known as source countries of irregular migration, such as Moldova, Romania, Azerbaijan, Georgia, the Russian Federation and Ukraine. IOM’s 2008 country report on Turkey also showed that there were about 30,000 people forcibly removed from Turkey to these origin countries 1Smuggling is defined as the facilitation of ‘illegal’ border crossing of migrants and usually involves a financial gain for the agent. It involves ‘consenting to be transported’ and therefore it is different from trafficking, as trafficking does not require border crossing. Human smug- gling is defined by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) as follows: ‘to assist for profit purposes, persons who do not possess a permanent residence in Turkey, to enter and reside illegally and Turkish nationals to exit the country illegally’ (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2012). 330 Asian and Pacific Migration Journal 24(3) Table 1. Number of women deported for sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), ‘illegal’ prostitution’ and ‘identified victims of trafficking.’a ‘Trafficking victims’ Deported for identified by ‘Trafficking victims’ Deported for ‘illegal’ Turkish law assisted by having STDs prostitution enforcement IOMb 2000 1,377 3,529 N/A N/A 2001 1,253 3,504 N/A N/A 2002 718 2,559 N/A N/A 2003 377 1,775 N/A N/A 2004 454 1,990 236 62 2005 630 2,113 256 220 2006 646 2,209 246 191 2007 N/A N/A 148 118 2008 N/A N/A 120 78 2009 N/A 2,134 102 75 2010 N/A 1,600 58 26 2011 N/A N/A 82 35 2012 N/A N/A 39 18 2013 N/A N/A 21 3 Source: Data on the number of deportations between 2000 and 2006 are quoted from Demir’s study (2008: 63); the number of deportations for 2009 and 2010 are special data from the Ministry of Internal Affairs; data on the number of identified victims between 2004 and 2013 are from Countertrafficking.org (2015). aThere were seven identified male victims of trafficking between 2004 and 2012 (see counter- trafficking.org, 2015). bThose assisted by IOM refer to victims of trafficking who had been identified by the Turkish authorities. (IOM, 2008). The average number of women who were deported for being ‘illegal’ prostitutes or for having STDs was about 2,500 annually between 2002 and 2006 (see Table 1). The recent statistics obtained from the General Directorate of Security show that 2,134 women in 2009 and 1,600 women in 2010 who came from the former Soviet countries were deported for ‘illegally’ selling sex while the number of deportations for having STDs is unknown.2 During the same period, 2009–2010, approximately 130 women (3.3 percent of total prostitution-related arrests) were 2It was difficult to have access to these figures, especially the number of deportations. They are not published annually if there is no specific request from the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Co¸skun 331 identified as ‘victims of sex trafficking.’ In Istanbul alone, the number was 600 for the first six months of 2011. These statistics suggest that although the number of ‘identified victims’ by law enforcers has sharply decreased since 2007, the number of deportations for ‘illegal’ prostitution and STDs has not changed drastically.