Exploring the Gender Dynamics: Women’s Rights and Human Trafficking

Human trafficking is not a gender-neutral crime. While it affects people of all ages and backgrounds, the data is unambiguous: women and girls bear a disproportionate share of its violence, and the reasons run deep into the structures of how societies are built. Understanding this gender dimension is not just an academic exercise – it is central to how we design laws, policies, and systems that actually work in stopping trafficking and protecting its victims.

The numbers tell a clear story 🔗

Global data on trafficking consistently reveals a stark gender gap among victims. According to the United Nations Secretary-General’s 2024 report on trafficking in women and girls, women and girls made up 60 per cent of all detected trafficking victims in 2022. Sexual exploitation remains the most common form of trafficking experienced by women and girls, with nearly two-thirds of detected sexual exploitation victims being women and about one quarter being girls.

The European Parliamentary Research Service’s 2024 briefing on the gender dimension of trafficking reinforces this pattern, noting that the International Labour Organisation estimated in 2021 that 49.6 million people were living in modern slavery globally – 27.6 million in forced labour and 22 million in forced marriage. Women and girls account for 87 per cent of victims trafficked specifically for sexual exploitation.

In the Indian context, the problem is equally serious. Research published in the International Journal for Equity in Health has identified India as one of the Asian countries where trafficking for commercial sexual exploitation has reached alarming levels, with the majority of trafficked persons being young women and children forced into sex work as a result of poverty, often before they turned 18.

Why women and girls are disproportionately targeted 🔗

Trafficking does not happen in a vacuum. It feeds on existing inequalities, and gender inequality is one of the most powerful enablers. The reasons women and girls end up in trafficking situations can be grouped into what researchers call push factors and pull factors.

Push factors: the vulnerabilities that traffickers exploit 🔗

Poverty is the most frequently cited push factor. When families lack economic security, women and girls become significantly more vulnerable to exploitation. Unemployment compounds this – limited access to jobs and sustainable livelihoods creates dependence, and dependence creates opportunity for traffickers. The European Parliamentary Research Service notes that push factors include poverty, unemployment, lack of social security, gender inequalities, conflict, and violence, and that victimisation typically results from a combination of these factors rather than any single one.

Gender-based violence is both a cause and a consequence of trafficking. Violence erodes a woman’s self-confidence and sense of safety, making her more likely to seek escape from her environment – an escape that traffickers are positioned to offer. The UN Secretary-General’s report found that in around 25 per cent of cases examined, trafficking survivors had already been subjected to multiple forms of gender-based violence before being trafficked. This is not coincidental. The trafficking of women exists as part of a broader continuum of violence against them.

In India specifically, trafficking for commercial sexual exploitation is driven by a combination of poverty, lack of sustainable livelihoods, and structural inequities. Debt bondage within families, child marriage used as a disguise for trafficking, and the deep-seated social norms around gender all create the conditions that traffickers rely on.

Pull factors: how traffickers lure victims 🔗

On the other side of the equation, traffickers actively create demand. They promise employment, better living conditions, or education abroad. Women and girls may be offered seemingly legitimate jobs as domestic workers, models, or in hospitality. Some are lured through romantic relationships – a method researchers call the “lover-boy” approach – where traffickers build trust before trapping victims in exploitative situations. Matrimonial agencies and fake job advertisements are also common tools of recruitment, particularly in South Asia.

How trafficking violates women’s rights under international law 🔗

The international legal framework does not treat trafficking as an ordinary crime. It is recognised as a fundamental violation of human rights, and several treaties place specific obligations on states to protect women from it.

CEDAW: the cornerstone of women’s rights 🔗

The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) is often referred to as the international bill of rights for women. Adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1979 and entering into force in 1981, CEDAW has been ratified by 189 states, making it one of the most broadly endorsed human rights treaties in existence.

Article 6 of CEDAW is directly relevant to trafficking. It requires states parties to “take all appropriate measures, including legislation, to suppress all forms of trafficking in women and exploitation of prostitution of women.” This is not a passive obligation. It demands active, legislative, and institutional action.

In 2020, the CEDAW Committee issued General Recommendation No. 38, specifically addressing trafficking in women and girls in the context of global migration. The Recommendation affirmed that it is a priority duty of states parties to prevent women and girls from exposure to the risk of being trafficked and to tackle the demand that fosters exploitation. It also identified the root causes of trafficking as lying in sex-based discrimination, including the failure to challenge prevailing economic and patriarchal structures.

The Palermo Protocol and India’s obligations 🔗

The Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children – commonly called the Palermo Protocol – is the foremost international legal instrument on trafficking. It requires states to criminalise trafficking, attempted trafficking, and any intentional participation in a trafficking scheme.

India is a signatory to both CEDAW and the Palermo Protocol. India signed CEDAW on 30 July 1980 and ratified it on 9 July 1993. The principle of gender equality is also enshrined in the Indian Constitution itself, which guarantees equality and empowers the state to take affirmative action in favour of women.

India’s domestic legal framework 🔗

India has built a multi-layered legal structure to address trafficking, though gaps remain between law and enforcement.

The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 🔗

Originally enacted as the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act (SITA) in 1956, this legislation was amended and renamed the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act (ITPA) in 1986. The Indian government penalises trafficking for commercial sexual exploitation through the ITPA, with prescribed penalties ranging from seven years to life imprisonment. The Act criminalises those who facilitate, profit from, or exploit others – not the victims themselves.

India also uses provisions of the Indian Penal Code, including sections dealing with kidnapping and selling minors into prostitution, to prosecute traffickers. Additional legislation such as the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, the Child Labour Act, the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, and the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act together create a broader legal net around the issue.

Challenges in enforcement 🔗

Despite these laws, significant challenges persist. India’s efforts to protect victims of trafficking vary significantly from state to state and remain inadequate in many places. Corruption among officials, inconsistent rehabilitation support, and the difficulty of identifying victims among women arrested for prostitution all undermine the effectiveness of the legal framework. Traffickers continue to enjoy a degree of impunity because convictions remain low.

The case for a gender-responsive approach 🔗

A one-size-fits-all approach to anti-trafficking measures will not work. Women and men are trafficked in different ways, for different purposes, and through different channels. Their experiences of exploitation and their needs in recovery are not the same. This is why experts and international bodies consistently call for a gender-responsive approach – one that recognises and addresses these differences at every stage of the anti-trafficking response.

What gender-responsive means in practice 🔗

A gender-responsive framework operates across three dimensions: protection, empowerment, and gender equality.

Protection means designing rescue, rehabilitation, and reintegration systems with women’s specific needs in mind. A survivor-centred approach to justice is critical to minimising the long-term impacts of trafficking, supporting healing, and enabling survivors to rebuild a sense of identity and autonomy. This includes ensuring non-discriminatory access to legal assistance, healthcare, and safe shelter.

Empowerment means addressing the socio-economic conditions that make women vulnerable in the first place. Efforts towards promoting gender equality in the family, community, and society at large – along with women’s economic empowerment through job training, job creation, and income-generation schemes – are essential for breaking the cycle. Without economic independence, women remain exposed to the conditions that traffickers thrive on.

Gender equality is the overarching goal. Reducing trafficking is inseparable from dismantling the patriarchal norms and structural discrimination that underpin it. The persistence of trafficking as a global problem is due in part to the lack of focus on programmes and policies that address root causes – particularly gender inequality and gender-based violence.

India’s steps toward gender-responsive action 🔗

India has taken several concrete steps to build a gender-responsive anti-trafficking system, though the work is far from complete.

The UJJAWALA scheme, launched in 2016, is a comprehensive programme for the prevention of trafficking and the rescue, rehabilitation, and reintegration of victims of commercial sexual exploitation. It is implemented through state governments, women’s development corporations, and recognised NGOs.

One Stop Centres (OSCs), launched in 2015, provide 24-hour immediate and emergency support to women affected by violence – both in private and public spaces. The government has also set up Anti Human Trafficking Units (AHTUs) across districts, Women Help Desks at police stations, and Fast Track Special Courts for the speedy disposal of cases related to rape and child protection.

The Beti Bachao Beti Padhao scheme targets gender-based discrimination at its root by focusing on the survival, protection, and education of the girl child. Skill development programmes and initiatives under Mission Shakti – an umbrella scheme for the safety, security, and empowerment of women – together represent India’s broader commitment to addressing the socio-economic conditions that fuel trafficking.

The role of demand reduction 🔗

Any discussion of women’s rights and trafficking would be incomplete without addressing demand. Trafficking for sexual exploitation is, at its core, a supply-and-demand crime. Sexual exploitation does not persist simply because its victims are vulnerable – it persists because there is active demand for sexual services from which traffickers profit. Reducing this demand through targeted legislation, public awareness, and accountability for buyers is a necessary part of any serious anti-trafficking strategy.

The way forward 🔗

Combating human trafficking effectively requires more than criminal prosecutions. It requires a fundamental understanding that trafficking of women is rooted in gender inequality, and that any response which ignores this dimension will fall short. The trafficking of women and girls occurs as part of a continuum of overlapping and interlinked forms of violence, and is underpinned by gender inequalities and patriarchal systems. Addressing it, therefore, demands a coordinated effort – across law, policy, education, economic empowerment, and social change – that places women’s rights and gender equality at its centre.

India’s legal and institutional framework provides a starting point, but consistent enforcement, adequate resourcing, and genuine prioritisation of victim welfare remain critical gaps that need urgent attention.

What do you think? If trafficking is so deeply connected to gender inequality, how far can anti-trafficking efforts succeed without first addressing the wider social norms that sustain discrimination against women? And are the current legal safeguards in India strong enough to protect women and girls, or do they need a more fundamental redesign?

References

1. https://www.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/2024-10/a-79-322-sg-report-trafficking-in-women-and-girls-2024-en.pdf
2. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2024/766265/EPRS_BRI(2024)766265_EN.pdf
3. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2569945/
4. https://www.ohchr.org/en/treaty-bodies/cedaw
5. https://www.pib.gov.in/Pressreleaseshare.aspx?PRID=1779252
6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_trafficking_in_India