The approach of states to managing immigration and asylum relies to a significant extent on the assignment of categories to people entering from abroad and residing in the country. Among these categories are regular migrant, labour migrant, irregular migrant, asylum seeker, refugee, unaccompanied child, smuggled migrant and trafficked person. Each of these categories has a specific definition in national law, and so every person migrating into a country fits into one of these categories – or at least that is how we understand migration and migration policies. There are indeed many reasons why this categorisation is necessary – each category has specific rights attached to it, and describes the situation that each person is in. Those of us working on migration policy also apply these categories in order to guide the scope of our work. However, in responding to mixed migration flows to Europe during the past few years, this has been a challenge. Some people are experts on human trafficking, while others are experts on asylum and refugees. Other people are experts on irregular migration or migrant smuggling, while still others are experts on children in a migration context. Yet to comprehend these migratory movements, it is necessary to understand legislation, policy and practice in all of these areas, because the adults and children who travelled along the Balkan and Mediterranean routes to European Union (EU) countries during the past three years did not fit neatly into just one of these categories. In fact most of them fell under a number of categories at once. What has been referred to as the “politics of labelling” in the area of mixed migration – the politically loaded use of certain terms to elicit particular responses to groups of people – is usually discussed in relation to the choice as to whether to use the term “migrant” or “refugee” (Whitham, 2017). This highlights the sometimes artificial distinctions embedded within the language of migration and the use of “language, definitions and categorisations” to determine the rights and treatment afforded to different people (Dolan, 2017). Acknowledging that multiple categories can be applied to individual people in this context is problematic, because states and service providers, as well as researchers and policy advisors, depend on the application of these categories in order to make sense of their work. This paper examines the challenges, and some possible ways forward, in dealing with the nexus between asylum, migration management and combatting human trafficking in mixed migration contexts in general.

Efforts to counter the COVID-19 pandemic have seen unprecedented restrictions on movement being imposed in many countries, both at borders and within countries. Some communities and policymakers have adopted increasingly hostile attitudes towards migrants, whom they perceive as contagion risks. Barriers to movement are therefore not only state-imposed but can also be community led. While these measures are reducing migration and the smuggling business in many regions in the short term, they are also heightening migrant-protection risks. Such measures are also likely to swell the profits of the smuggling industry in the medium term. COVID-19, and the measures introduced to control it are likely to increase the drivers for movement; the vulnerability of migrants at any point in their journey; the militarization of borders; and the further reduction of safe and legal routes. As the policy environment becomes more hostile to migration, the operating risks and prices of smuggling look set to rise. This may drive out operators with a lower risk appetite and attract organized-crime groups, who are more likely to exploit migrants for ever greater profit. To avoid emerging into a post-pandemic landscape characterized by a dramatically more severe migrant crisis and a more lucrative and professionalized smuggling market controlled by organized crime, it is key to monitor and mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on migrants and refugees throughout the pandemic.

Over the past few decades, the international community has taken progressive steps to put an end to impunity for sexual and gender-based crimes. The Statute of the ICC is the first international instrument expressly to include various forms of sexual and gender-based crimes — including rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilisation, and other forms of sexual violence — as underlying acts of both crimes against humanity and war crimes committed in international and non-international armed conflicts. The Statute also criminalises persecution based on gender as a crime against humanity. Sexual and gender-based crimes may also fall under the Court’s jurisdiction if they constitute acts of genocide or other acts of crimes against humanity or war crimes. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence (Rules) and the Elements consolidate important procedural and evidentiary advancements to protect the interests of victims and enhance the effectiveness of the work of the Court. Recognising the challenges of, and obstacles to, the effective investigation and prosecution of sexual and gender-based crimes, the Office elevated this issue to one of its key strategic goals in its Strategic Plan 2012-2015. The Office has committed to integrating a gender perspective and analysis into all of its work, being innovative in the investigation and prosecution of these crimes, providing adequate training for staff, adopting a victim-responsive approach in its work, and paying special attention to staff interaction with victims and witnesses, and their families and communities. It will increasingly seek opportunities for effective and appropriate consultation with victims’ groups and their representatives to take into account the interests of victims.

Human trafficking is a form of serious exploitation and abuse that is increasingly present in the UN peacekeeping environments. Trafficking exploits human beings for revenue through sex, forced labour and human organs. For peacekeeping (UN and other) there is a crisis of perception in relation to trafficking and the linked issue of sexual exploitation and abuse, which sees peacekeepers branded as more part of the problem than the solution, along with criticisms that the issue is not taken seriously by peacekeeping institutions. Allegations and incidences of peacekeeper involvement with trafficking run counter to UN principles. Such incidents can be extremely damaging to missions by undermining implementation of police reform and rule of law mandates, perpetuating linkages to organized crime and providing material for anti-UN elements, obstructionists and negative media campaigns.

Trafficking in human beings (THB), as a transnational crime, involves movement of people across borders. In this regard, border control authorities are expected to play an important role in preventing and curbing this phenomenon. Border guards are identified as key actors in fight against trafficking in human beings both in the new Directive 2011/36/EU and the associated EU Strategy towards the Eradication of Trafficking in Human Beings. The role of border guards in combating trafficking, is largely seen as in the role of “first responder” as part of the National Referral Mechanisms in identification of victims of trafficking, as well as for the identification and apprehension of traffickers within border control procedures. The growing commitment on the EU policy level for prevention of, and fighting against, trafficking of human beings, has also led to recognition of the issue as an important priority to border control authorities of all Member States as well. The European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (FRONTEX) has already recognised THB as one of its priorities and has developed a training manual for border guards related to THB and a handbook for Border Control Authorities on good practices to counter THB. This paper Human Trafficking, Border Security and Related Corruption in the EU, by Atanas Rusev of the Center for Study of Democracy in Bulgaria, investigates the much under-researched aspect of corruption and human trafficking. Rusev explores this topic vis-à -vis border authorities and connected corruption to facilitate, inter alia, THB and how this corruption can be related to the corporate sector and enter into the highest political spheres

This paper will highlight existing guidelines (especially the Migrants in Countries in Crisis Guidelines to protect migrants in countries experiencing conflict or natural disaster) that speak to the findings of our research – and connect them to wider policy developments in the migration sphere. In particular, we reference the global process of the United Nations to establish a global compact for safe, orderly and regular migration, which aims to “improve the governance on migration, to address the challenges associated with today’s migration, and to strengthen the contribution of migrants and migration to sustainable development”. Our findings provide insight on important challenges to which the global compact for migration can and should speak, as well as practices and recommendations on which stakeholders can act, within or outside of the compact process.

This discussion paper explores the rise of mixed, irregular migration with particular focus on the role of smuggling and trafficking in both facilitating that movement and influencing its impact. It explains the current migration context followed by a discussion and analysis of the smuggling–trafficking nexus. Emerging characteristics of irregular migration suggest that changing realities are challenging the limits of existing terminology and understanding around these activities. Current legal concepts and structures are struggling—and sometimes completely unable—to capture the complexity of what is happening. Migrants are facing increased risks in terms of greater vulnerability and less protection, not least through a shrinking of the asylum space. Understanding migrant smuggling and human trafficking as part of a wider phenomenon within classic economic dynamics of supply and demand is critical to developing migration policy that is not diverted by misuse of terminology and that maintains an appropriate focus on the rights of migrants and corresponding obligations of States. An understanding of how and why smuggling and trafficking occur also lays bare the costs to the modern liberal State of waging ‘war’ against an enemy that can only ever be defeated through the continuous deployment of massive force and denial of basic rights. The paper brings together the insights of three experts who have worked as practitioners and researchers on mixed migration, smuggling and trafficking within diverse geographical and disciplinary perspectives.

This paper is part of the IOM Migration Research Leaders Syndicate’s contribution toward the Global Compact for Migration. It is one of 26 papers that make up a consolidated Syndicate publication, which focuses on proposing ways to address complex and pressing issues in contemporary international migration. The Migration Research Leaders Syndicate, convened as part of IOM’s efforts to extend policy and technical expertise in support of the Global Compact for Migration, comprises senior researchers from diverse geographic, disciplinary and thematic backgrounds. The Syndicate provides a channel for leading experts in migration to propose ideas to meet the ambitious goals outlined in the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants of September 2016.

The coronavirus is not only claiming hundreds of thousands of lives, but is also causing a global economic crisis that is expected to rival or exceed that of any recession in the past 150 years. Although decisive action and containment measures are helping flatten the curve of infection, such measures inevitably deepen and lengthen the economic recession.In the worst-case scenario, the International Labour Organization (ILO) estimates that up to 25 million people will lose their jobs worldwide.Poverty, lack of social or economic opportunity and limited labour protections are the main root causes and drivers that render people vulnerable or cause them to fall victim to human trafficking. This unprecedented crisis will likely exacerbate all of those factors and result in developments that must be noted by antihuman-trafficking communities and stakeholders.

Trafficking in persons is a serious crime that affects every country in the world. Conflicts that arise in countries or other geographical areas can exacerbate vulnerability to trafficking, as well as its prevalence and severity. As State and non-State structures weaken, and as people turn to negative coping strategies in order to survive, not only does the risk of falling victim to trafficking increase, but so too does the risk of perpetrating it against others. At the same time, conflict also increases the demand for goods and services provided by exploited persons and creates new demands for exploitative combat and support roles. For these reasons, United Nations entities and other international actors active in settings affected by conflict have a crucial role to play in preventing and countering trafficking in persons.