Victim Protection Starts with Transposition – No Months Left

By 15 July 2026, EU Member States must comply with the revised EU Directive on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings. The deadline has now passed. 

In this context, La Strada International has launched a campaign entitled “Victim Protection Starts with Transposition” to draw attention to the transposition process of the revised EU Anti-Trafficking Directive, adopted in 2024, as the deadline for national implementation approaches.

Over the coming six months, until 15 July 2026, the campaign will highlight the key revised articles of the Directive, share relevant research to inform ongoing discussions, present La Strada International’s recommendations, and identify key considerations for Member States when transposing the Directive and developing further national legislation and regulation.

Article 2(3)

The revised Directive expands the definition of trafficking under Article 2(3) to explicitly include the exploitation of surrogacy, forced marriage, and illegal adoption.

Beyond criminalising these forms of exploitation when all elements of trafficking are present, La Strada International calls for continued dialogue among legislators, practitioners, and civil society to ensure clarity, consistency, and rights-based application when criminalising these forms of exploitation.

To learn more about these exploitative practices, we invite you to consult La Strada International’s research, which analyses the political process and evidentiary basis behind the inclusion of surrogacy in the revised Directive, while also providing a comparative analysis of the legal and policy landscape on surrogacy and forced marriage across Europe.

See LSI reports (2025):

• Comparative Analysis of the Legal and Policy Landscape on (Trafficking for the Exploitation of) Surrogacy Across Europe
• Exploitation of Surrogacy as a Form of Human Trafficking – How Did It End Up in the Amended EU Anti-Trafficking Directive?
• The Legal and Policy Landscape on (Trafficking for the Exploitation of) Forced Marriage Across Europe

Articles 5 & 6

Articles 5 and 6 ensure that companies and other legal persons can be held liable and effectivly, proportionatly sanctioned for involvement in human trafficking. These articles require Member States to apply the full range of sanctions foreseen under EU law, including exclusion from public funding and the removal of business permits in cases of misconduct. Legal loopholes that enable corporate abuse must be addressed, and monitoring of contractors, subcontractors, and recruitment agencies in high-risk sectors must be strengthened.

Businesses also have a crucial role to play. Companies should go beyond minimum legal standards and commit to exploitation-free production and services. This includes promoting decent work and labour rights for all workers across sectors, strengthening supply chain monitoring, and ensuring safe and accessible reporting mechanisms.

Ending trafficking for exploitation requires strong laws, effective enforcement, and responsible business conduct.

Article 8

Article 8 reinforced the 𝗻𝗼𝗻-𝗽𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗵𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗽𝗹𝗲, requiring States to allow victims of human trafficking to not be prosecuted or penalised for offences they were compelled to commit as a direct consequence of their exploitation. The revised provision now explicitly extends this principle to all unlawful activities, including civil and administrative offences. The application of the non-punishment procedure should be unconditional and should not depend on a victim’s ability or willingness to cooperate with authorities.

Effective transposition of Article 8 requires Member States to:
🔸 establish clear national legal provisions and prosecutorial guidelines,
🔸 train law enforcement, prosecutors and other authorities, and
🔸 raise awareness among practitioners on when and how the non-punishment principle should be applied.

𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗿𝘆𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝘀𝘂𝗽𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗲, 𝘃𝗶𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗺𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗼𝗼 𝗼𝗳𝘁𝗲𝗻 𝗱𝗼𝘂𝗯𝗹𝘆 𝗽𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗵𝗲𝗱. Instead of being identified and protected, they may be prosecuted, detained, fined, or otherwise penalised for acts or irregularities committed while being exploited. This leads to re-victimisation and re-traumatisation and further barriers to justice, support, recovery, and reintegration.

Our research on the non-punishment provision, in which we analyse cases where it should have been applied and how it was used in practice, showed that in most cases, the provision was either not applied at all or only partially applied, leaving victims of human trafficking punished for crimes or irregularities directly linked to their exploitation. Access the research here. 

Article 11

Article 11, which promotes assistance and support for victims of trafficking, now makes clearer that such support must follow a victim-centred, gender-, disability-, and child-sensitive approach. It also requires Member States to appoint a focal point for the cross-border referral of victims. The national referral mechanisms should include, among other tasks, the setting of minimum standards for the detection and early identification of victims, as well as ensuring access to appropriate and safe accommodation, including shelters, in sufficient numbers and in a way that is easily accessible to presumed victims.

The revision further introduces Article 11a, requiring Member States to ensure complementarity and coordination between anti-trafficking and asylum authorities. It clarifies that trafficked persons may also apply for international protection or an equivalent status, with the aim of preventing protection gaps between the two systems.

Effective transposition of Article 11 and 11a requires Member States to:
🔸 Ensure effective and well-applied national referral mechanisms for victims of all forms of human trafficking that are firmly victim-focused, with attention to gender, disability, and child sensivity;
🔸 Guarantee the establishment of appropriate and safe accommodation for victims, including shelters and living conditions that guarantee safety, dignity, subsistence, and access to support;
🔸 Strengthen coordination between anti-trafficking and asylum authorities, and ensure NGOs are formally included in the NRMs;
🔸 Ensure adequate national budget allocation for NRMs and support services;
🔸 Establish minimum standards for the detection and early identification of victims, to be developed in cooperation with civil society organisations and anti-trafficking actors;
🔸 Ensure that access to support or residence permit is not dependent on cooperation with law enforcement.

Article 17

Article 17, which stablishes that Member States obligations to ensure victims have access to compensation, was only slightly revised and still refers only to existing mechanisms. The revised Article encourages but does not bind EUMS to establish compensation funds.

While the right to compensation is recognised in international and European frameworks, receiving compensation in practice remains extremely rare, with only two thirds of claims result in an award. Securing remedies is not only a matter of financial redress. Compensation contributes to restoring economic stability, strengthening autonomy, and reducing vulnerability to re-exploitation.

We call on Member States to:
🔸 Ensure victims have effective access to compensation from offenders and/or the state, and that accessible and functioning compensation mechanisms are in place in practice.
🔸 Ensure that trafficked persons and victims of forced labour receive timely, clear and language-appropriate information on their rights, including compensation and reporting options, alongside safe reporting channels and adequate practical and psychosocial support.
🔸 Strengthen the assessment, calculation and delivery of compensation by training legal professionals, developing clear and consistent damage assessment standards, enabling courts to award compensation ex officio, and ensuring state advance payment schemes where offenders fail to pay.
🔸 Improve early-stage financial investigations and asset recovery in criminal proceedings to identify, trace and confiscate proceeds of crime, and ensure that recovered assets are effectively directed towards victim compensation.
🔸 Enhance cross-border cooperation through training, exchange of best practice, specialised support services for transnational cases, and stronger partnerships between NGOs and trade unions, ensuring that victims have access to compensation across borders.
🔸 Strengthen monitoring, data collection and accountability mechanisms in human trafficking and corporate exploitation cases, including data on compensation claims, awards, enforcement outcomes, use of compensation funds, and the impact on victims.

Read also our research on Advancing Access to Compensation for Victims of Human Trafficking, which examines how EU legislation adopted in 2024, alongside earlier legal instruments, may enhance access to compensation, with a focus on France, Germany, and Spain.

Article 18a

Article 18a of the Directive introduces a binding obligation to criminalise the use of services provided by a victim of human trafficking where the act is committed intentionally and with knowledge that the person providing the service is a trafficking victim. This offence should be punished by “effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties”.

So far, the criminalisation of the “knowing use” of services has not strengthened victims’ rights, nor improved the prevention or prosecution of trafficking in
human beings. Research has indicated the limited impact of this provision. Across the EU, prosecutorial activity has remained limited and convictions have been rare. Read here our paper on “The Impact of Criminalising the ‘Knowing Use’ on Human Trafficking”.

We call on Member States to:

🔸 Ensure that the criminalisation of the knowing use of services applies to all forms of trafficking and exploitation, not merely in law but also in practice.
🔸 Avoid conflating human trafficking with sex work.
🔸 Ensure that the offence is widely known and understood by European citizens through effective awareness-raising campaigns.
🔸 Promote informed consumer choice through initiatives that support and certify fairly produced goods and services.
🔸 Use this offence to strengthen accountability for companies that benefit from labour exploitation, alongside robust and binding human rights due diligence obligations.
🔸 Regularly monitor and assess the impact of this legislative measure, with particular attention to its effects on migrants, sex workers, and other workers in vulnerable or precarious situations.

Article 19

Article 19 of the Directive strengthens the EU’s framework for monitoring, coordination and reporting on human trafficking.

It clarifies the obligation to establish a well-resourced National Anti-Trafficking Coordinator. Article 19a and 19b further introduce two new binding obligations. First, Member States must establish systems for the recording, production, and provision of anonymized statistical data to monitor the effectiveness of their anti-trafficking response and report now annually. Second, Member States must adopt a National Anti-Trafficking Action Plan by 15 July 2028, developed and implemented in consultation with the National Anti-Trafficking Coordinator or equivalent mechanism.

So far, monitoring and coordination across EU Member States has been inconsistent. National action plans have not always been adequately resourced or implemented. Many EUMS do not yet have specific National Anti-Trafficking Coordinators, and civil society has too often been excluded from meaningful participation in national coordination structures. Regrettably, the article does not introduce an obligation to establish independent Rapporteurs or monitoring bodies. Meanwhile, data collection across the EU remains fragmented and difficult to compare, undermining the evidence base needed for an effective and rights-based response.

The EU Anti-Trafficking Hub has published its Study on the Collection and Improvement of EU Statistics on Trafficking in Human Beings, to which La Strada International contributed. The study provides a comparative mapping of national data collection systems on trafficking in human beings and examines data coordination models, definitions used, data sources, methodologies, data flows, and existing data-sharing arrangements. It also identifies systemic gaps and operational challenges that hinder the comparison of data or the creation of a coherent EU-level statistical picture, while providing recommendations for further action at the national level. Read the main recommendations of the study here.