Content uploaded by Sladjana Baros
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Sladjana Baros on Feb 09, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Law above aLL
and court practices
Impact of the criminalization
of sex work on the human rights
of sex workers and trafficked
persons in Serbia
2
Project: Law Above All and Court Practices
Implemented by:
JAZAS – Association Against AIDS
&
ASTRA – Anti-tracking Action
Supported by:
Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in Belgrade
&
Open Society Foundations New York
Editors:
Marjan Wijers
Viktorija Cucic
Authors:
Sladjana Baros
Ivana Radovic
Stasa Plecas
Elena Drezga
Marjan Wijers
Milena Vasic
Translation:
Ksenija Latinovic
Design:
Milan Markovic
ISBN: 978-86-906143-5-6
Belgrade, 2015
3
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to thank all those who helped in the realization of this proj-
ect, especially all the research participants whose participation contrib-
uted to the understanding of the complex phenomena related to human
rights and judicial practices. Without them this study would not have
been possible.
A special thank you goes to all representatives of the Misdemeanor Court
in Belgrade, who fully supported us and provided all processed cases that
were relevant to this study, as well as direct contact with magistrates.
We would also like to thank all the Magistrate and Appeals Courts in Ser-
bia that responded to our request and sent all the data about cases rel-
evant for this study.
This study would never have been written without the work of the eld
research team: Mirjana Wagner, Miloš Ilić, Jovana Cvetković, Lara Končar,
Olivera Otašević, Biserka Lekić i Radmila Vasiljković.
5
ABBREVIATIONS
Bio-BSS bio-behavioral surveillance survey
CC Criminal Code
ECDC European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control
ECHR European Convention on Human Rights
ECrtHR European Court on Human Rights
FRY Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
HIV Human Immunodeciency Virus
LF Law on Foreigners
LPOP Law on Public Order and Peace
NGO non-governmental organization
NSWP Global Network of Sex Work Projects
NZPC The New Zealand Prostitutes’ Collective
STI sexually transmitted infections
SW sex workers
SWAN Sex Workers’ Advocacy Network for Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia
TIP Tracking in Persons Report issued by the U.S. State Department
TVSW tracking victims forced to engage in sex work
UNAIDS the Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS
UNGASS The United Nations General Assembly Special Session
7
Contents
ACK NOWLEDGMENTS .......................................................................................................................... 3
ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................................................................................... 5
INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... 9
PART I – BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................11
1. ABOUT THIS PROJECT ..............................................................................................................11
2. EXISTING LEGISLATION ON SEX WORK AND HUMAN RIGHTS .............................. 13
3. THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN SEX WORK AND TRAFFICKING .................................17
4. VIOLATIONS OF HUMAN RIGHTS AGAINST SEX WORKERS ..................................... 22
PART II - RESEARCH RESULTS ........................................................................................................... 29
5. METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................ 29
6. ANALYSIS OF JUDGMENTS UNDER ARTICLE 14 OF THE LAW ON PUBLIC
PEACE AND ORDER: ENGAGING IN PROSTITUTION ................................................... 38
7. ANALYSIS OF JUDGMENTS UNDER ARTICLE 184 CC: MEDIATION IN
PROSTITUTION .......................................................................................................................... 50
8. INTERVIEWS WITH MAGISTRATES .................................................................................... 60
9. INTERVIEWS WITH SEX WORKERS .................................................................................... 67
10. VICTIMS OF TRAFFICKING FOR SEXUAL EXPLOITATION ......................................... 77
RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................................................... 97
9
INTRODUCTION
This report is the result of a research carried out by JAZAS, Association Against AIDS, and ASTRA,
Anti-Tracking Action, with the support of the sex workers’ rights organization Sloboda Prava
(Equal Rights). The research looks into the impact of the laws in Serbia that criminalize sex work
on the protection of the human rights of both sex workers and tracked persons.
For the research use was made of the RighT Guide, a tool to assess the human rights impact of
anti-tracking laws and policies. It presents a step-by-step method to investigate and analyze
the human rights eects of a law, policy or measure, link these to the human rights obligations
of the government, and use the outcomes to more eectively advocate for rights-based and
evidence-led policy reforms. The tool is built on a number of key principles:
• State accountability: States have undertaken binding human rights commitments by ratifying
human rights treaties. Governments can be hold accountable for living up their human rights
promises.
• Knowledge/evidence based action: the tool aims to go beyond ideological debates. It requires
rigorous data-collection as a basis for analyzing and understanding the actual impact of laws
and policies on the human rights of those aected by them.
• Participation: the tool requires the participation of groups aected by the policies concerned.
This is a fundamental principle and an essential element in the process of collecting evidence
and understanding the impact of a policy.
• Bridging movements and building alliances: in many countries anti-tracking organizations,
sex workers’ rights, migrants’ rights and human rights organizations do not work together.
The tool aims to facilitate bridging these divisions by presenting human rights as applying to
all these dierent groups and movements in specic, yet universal, ways.
In this case the focus was not on specic anti-tracking laws and policies, but on the laws that
criminalize sex workers and sex work. Yet, these have far reaching consequences for the protec-
tion of the human rights of both sex workers and tracked persons, in particular their right to
protection against violence, discrimination and arbitrary arrest and detention and the right to
health, as well as on their access to justice.
Although from the perspective of the universality of human rights, it may seem logical that anti-
tracking and sex workers’ rights organizations work together, in practice this rarely happens.
One of the reasons is that anti-tracking measures too often have been used to harm the hu-
man rights of sex workers. That makes this research, based on the joint eorts of JAZAS, ASTRA
and Sloboda Prava, very special. I would like to praise them for their courageous initiative and
sincerely hope that the research will help to bridge the gap between the two movements. Be-
cause in the end defending rights and combating violence and abuse are two sides of the same
coin.
Marjan Wijers, Rights4Change
February 2016
11
1. About this project
Elena Drezga, JAZAS
The project Law Above All and Court Practices was nanced by the Royal Netherlands Embassy
in Belgrade and supported by the Open Society Foundation New York. The project was imple-
mented by JAZAS (Association Against AIDS) and ASTRA, Anti-Tracking Action, with the sup-
port of Sloboda Prava/Equal Rights in the period 2012–2014 in Belgrade.
JAZAS was founded in 1991 and is the rst NGO which was active in the eld of AIDS preven-
tion in the territory of the former Yugoslavia (then the Yugoslav Association Against AIDS). It has
numerous years of experience in the development and implementation of HIV/STI prevention
programs among various population groups, but especially among sex workers. It is also the
rst organization in Serbia that developed a special program for sex workers, tailored to their
particular needs.
ASTRA was founded in 2000 and is the rst organization which addressed the problem of traf-
cking in human beings in Serbia. As the leader in the eld of prevention of human tracking
in our country, since then ASTRA has dealt with the issue comprehensively, addressing the dif-
ferent kinds of tracking as well as dierent groups of victims, including women, men and chil-
dren. Next to prevention, their work includes education and raising public awareness, providing
direct assistance and reintegration services to victims, research and reporting, advocacy and
supporting the development of a functional and eective system for combating human track-
ing which fully respects the human rights of victims.
Sloboda Prava/Equal Rights was founded in 2011 by sex workers in Belgrade. The primary goal
of the organization is to protect the human rights of male, female and transgender sex workers.
This is the rst organization in the Republic of Serbia which is entirely led by sex workers.
The overall goal of the project “Law Above all and Court Practices” is to contribute to policies
and practices which respect the human rights of both victims of human tracking and sex work-
ers in Serbia.
The conation of human tracking and sex work leads to the development and implementa-
tion of laws and policies which negatively aect sex workers. At the same time, the implementa-
tion of anti-prostitution policies is an obstacle to successfully combating human tracking. The
criminalization and penalization of sex work provides an excellent basis for human rights abuses
of sex workers all over the world. Through the creation and implementation of restrictive laws
on sex work, governments in eect create a legitimate framework to control and punish sex
workers.
In order to better understand the consequences of the existing laws relating to sex work, the
project team carried out an analysis of the judicial practice in regard to the prosecution of sex
work and human tracking under the Law on Public Peace and Order and the Criminal Code.
The emphasis was put on potential failures of the system to identify and recognize victims of
tracking, as well as on the (dis)respect for the human rights of sex workers and tracked per-
sons. The eects of the judicial practice are analyzed from the perspective of both tracking
victims and sex workers.
PART I – BACKGROUND
12
The research was carried out with the help of the RighT Guide, a tool to assess the impact of anti-
tracking laws and policies on the human rights of tracked persons, sex workers and other
groups aected. The outcomes of the project form the basis for a concerted advocacy of various
NGOs to distinct between the concepts of human tracking and sex work in the media, the law
and judicial practice.
A detailed study was made in 2013 of all cases related to sex work which had been processed by
the Magistrates Court in Belgrade, as well as by the rst instance and appellate courts in Serbia
during the period 2011-2012. In addition, the research involved interviews with victims of human
tracking who had been forced to engage in sex work, as well as interviews with individuals
who were voluntarily engaged in sex work. We also conducted interviews with the judges of the
Magistrates Court in Belgrade in order to cover all viewpoints on the problem of the (non)fulll-
ment of sex workers’ human rights and the distinction between consensual and forced sex work.
The project was carried out in Belgrade, but the research included all cases related to sex work
which were processed under the Criminal Code throughout Serbia.
The rst stage of the project included a training on the use of the Right Guide by Rights4Change,
specifying work protocols and research instruments, the training of eld teams for data collec-
tion and the establishment of cooperation with relevant partners. During the implementation
phase, we collected the quantitative and qualitative data necessary for the analysis. The third
phase consisted of an analysis of the collected data and the presentation of the preliminary
results to the public at a Round Table in Belgrade, in December 2013. During 2014 and 2015, we
conducted a more in-depth analysis of the data and wrote the nal report.
The roles and responsibilities within the project were clearly dened and coordinated. Repre-
sentatives of JAZAS, ASTRA and Rights4Change were delegated for the project coordination
and a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between the organizations involved which
stipulated any legal issues of the project. Field research teams were formed, as well as the team
for data processing and analysis. The eld research team was divided into those in charge of
the collection of quantitative data and others in charge of the collection of qualitative data. The
team for data processing and analysis processed the collected data in accordance with a dened
methodology.
One particular success of the project was the active participation of the sex work community
in Belgrade in the research. The research also increased the level of awareness of sex workers
about the possibilities to exercise their human rights, which are guaranteed by the international
conventions that Serbia ratied.
13
Sadržaj
2 Existing legislation on sex work and human rights
Milena Vasic, YUCOM - Lawyers’ Committee for Human Rights
This introduction includes an overview of the constitutional and legal status of sex workers in
the legal system of the Republic of Serbia and of the basic human rights which apply in legal
proceedings against sex workers as they do to other citizens, in particular the right to a fair trial.
The latter is particularly important as sex work is criminalized in Article 14 of the Law on Public
Order and Peace (LPOP), which reads as follows:
„Whoever engages in prostitution or provides premises for prostitution shall be punished by imprison-
ment not exceeding 30 days”.1
This means that sex workers themselves are punishable under Serbian law.
The Constitution of the Republic of Serbia is based on the principle of the rule of law and the in-
alienability of human rights.2 Therefore, all citizens of Serbia, including sex workers, are entitled
to the protection of their fundamental human rights. When we talk about the legal status of any
social group, basic human rights should be a starting point in any consideration.
The rule of law provides a legal, political and institutional framework which guarantees respect
for fundamental human rights and freedoms within a community. Therefore, the protection of
human rights and fundamental freedoms is the foundation of the rule of law. That is why the
Constitution guarantees the immediate application of these rights, which are prescribed by the
Constitution as well as by broadly accepted rules of international law, international treaties rati-
ed by Serbia and domestic laws (Article 16:1). This means that even without specialized laws,
the Constitution obliges the courts and other state authorities to respect fundamental human
rights.
As stipulated by the Constitution, the constitutional guarantees of human rights have the pur-
pose of preserving human dignity (Article 19:1). This makes clear that human dignity is inviolable
under the Constitution and that everyone is obliged to respect and protect it. The importance
of human dignity in domestic law is reected in the fact that human dignity as a fundamental
value is stressed in no less than four articles of the Constitution (Articles 19, 23, 28 and 202).In
addition to the purposes of the constitutional guarantees in Section 19, there is a special right
to dignity and the free development of personality in Section 23, as well as the obligation to
treat a person deprived of his or her liberty humanely and with respect for their personal dignity
in Section 28. The latter is extremely important bearing in mind the delicacy of the situation
when someone is deprived of his or her liberty. Finally, Section 202 of the Constitution excludes
the possibility of derogations from certain rights, including the right to human dignity, in times
of war or state of emergency, which only conrms what is already stated in several documents -
that human dignity is a fully protected human right.
Of great importance for the topic of the study is the constitutional prohibition of discrimina-
tion on any grounds(Article 21:1 ), which, due to the importance of the principle of equality of
1 Law on Public Order and Peace. Ocial Gazette Republic of Serbia. No. 51/92, 53/93, 67/93, 48/94, 101/2005
– as amended 85/2005 – as amended.
2 Constitution of the Republic of Serbia. Ocial Gazette Republic of Serbia. No. 98/06. Available at: http://para-
graf.rs/propisi/ustav_republike_srbije.html.
14
all individuals in the legal system, guarantees equal treatment before the state authorities to any
individual. The purpose of this provision is to ensure that all the rights guaranteed by the Consti-
tution are enjoyed on equal terms by all citizens.
Furthermore, the prohibition of slavery, servitude and forced labor (Article 26:1) as a consti-
tutional guarantee is very important in the context of sex work, as it addresses the question of
human tracking for sexual exploitation. The Constitution explicitly prohibits human tracking
and holding a person in slavery:“Each individual shall be guaranteed the right to liberty and per-
sonal security”(Article 27:1).
According to the Constitution personal freedom may only be restricted when prescribed by law
and can be imposed only by the court, while putting special emphasis on those rights of indi-
viduals (e.g. the right to appeal) which are absolute, even when they are deprived of their per-
sonal freedom or when their freedom is limited.The specic rights all persons enjoy in the case
of deprivation of their freedom include:
• the right to an urgent procedure (“immediate”, as stated in the Constitution);
• the right to be informed of the reasons for their arrest;
• the right to be informed of the oense they are charged with;
• the right to have the reasons for their apprehension and the accusations they are charged
with communicated in a language they understand;
• the right to inform a person of their choice about the deprivation of their freedom;
• the right to be informed of their rights;
• the right to appeal to a court against the deprivation of their liberty;
• moreover, the court must decide on the appeal in an urgent procedure.
The exceptions to the rule that deprivation of liberty can be ordered only by the court are con-
tained in a separate article of the Constitution. They refer to the situation in which another gov-
ernmental body (e.g. the police) can immediately restrict the personal freedom of an individual.
In this case, a person deprived of his or her liberty shall have additional rights, including:
• the right to remain silent (para. 1);
• the right to be interrogated in the presence of a defense counsel (para. 1);
• the right to an individual choice of an attorney (para. 1);
• the right to be brought before the competent court without delay and no later than 48
hours (para. 2);
• the right to be released if a competent court does not order a custody measure (para. 2).
The right to a fair trial is among the rights that are absolute and cannot be derogated from under
any circumstances, including in times of war or a state of emergency. This principle includes a set
of rights which aim to guarantee each individual a fair trial:
“Everyone shall have the right to a public hearing before an independent and impartial tribunal es-
tablished by the law, within reasonable time, which shall pronounce judgment on their rights and ob-
ligations, the grounds for suspicion resulting in the initiated procedure and the accusations brought
against them…” (Article 32:1)
15
Sadržaj
The independence and impartiality of the court are elaborated in more detailed provisions on
the status of courts and judges in special laws (the Law on Judges, the Law on the Organization
of the Courts, and other laws).3Furthermore, the Constitution regulates the right to public pro-
ceedings, as well as the conditions for its limitation which are itemized, as well as the right to free
assistance of an interpreter when a person does not speak or understand Serbian.
The right to a fair trial is also guaranteed by Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protec-
tion of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter: ECHR), which is ratied by Serbia
and is, according to our Constitution, directly applicable.4Article 6 of the ECHR guarantees the
right to a fair trial in civil and criminal proceedings. However, since in the Law on Public Order
and Peace prostitution is a misdemeanor (and not a crime), the guarantees contained in Article
6 of the European Convention do not automatically apply.
In the case of Engel and Others v. the Netherlands,5 the European Court of Human Rights estab-
lished three criteria for determining whether proceedings are ‘criminal’ within the meaning of
Article 6 of the Convention, namely (a) the domestic classication, (b) the nature of the oence,
and (c) the severity of the potential penalty which the defendant risks incurring.Deprivation of
liberty is a penalty that usually makes a provision ‘criminal’ within the meaning of article 6(1),rath-
er than disciplinary. In the case of Engel and Others v. the Netherlands, the Court concluded that
“in a society that subscribes to the rule of law, deprivation of liberty which is imposed as a penalty falls
within the “criminal” sphere, except for those deprivations of liberty, which, by their nature, duration
or manner of execution are not signicantly harmful. The gravity of the oence in a given case, the
traditions of the Contracting States and the emphasis which the Convention gives to respect for the
physical liberty of persons, require it to be so”(para 82).
Thus, although the Convention allows states as guardians of the public interest to distinguish
between criminal law and disciplinary law, it is the substance of the proceedings that determine
whether a given charge counts as ‘criminal’ in the meaning of article 6, regardless of how the of-
fence is classied in the internal law of the Member State. As stated by the Court:
“If the Contracting States were able at their discretion to classify an oence as disciplinary instead of
criminal […] the operation of the fundamental clauses of Articles 6 and 7 would be subordinated to
their sovereign will. A latitude extending thus far might lead to results incompatible with the purpose
and object of the Convention” (para 81).
This was, amongst others, conrmed in the case of Deweer v. Belgium,6where the Court consid-
ered the case to be of a criminal character, as the charge could be dened as “an ocial notica-
tion which the state gives to the individual on allegations that this person has committed a criminal
3 The Law on Judges. Ocial Gazette Republic of Serbia. No. 116/2008, 58/2009 - decision of the Constitutional
Court, 104/2009, 101/2010, 8/2012 - decision of the Constitutional Court, 121/2012, 124/2012 - decision of
the Constitutional Court, 101/2013, 111/2014 - decision of the Constitutional Court, 117/2014, 40/2015 i
63/2015 - decision of the Constitutional Court; The Law on Organization of Courts. Ocial Gazette Republic
of Serbia. No. 116/2008, 104/2009, 101/2010, 31/2011 - as amended, 78/2011 – as amended, 101/2011 and
101/2013.
4 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Ocial Gazette Re-
public of Serbia and Montenegro – International Agreements, no. 9/2003.
5 ECrtHR, Engel and Others v. the Netherlands, 8 June 1976, Application no. 5100/71; 5101/71; 5102/71;
5354/72;5370/72, series A, no 22.
6 ECrtHR, Deweer v. Belgium, 27 February 1980, Application no 6903/75, para. 42, 44 and 46.
16
oense”, while referring to the closely related test, namely whether ”there is a situation that signi-
cantly aects the suspect due to the very existence of the suspicion” (para 46).
In view of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, we can therefore conclude that
Article 14 of the Law on Public Order and Peace which criminalizes prostitution, should be inter-
preted as a provision of criminal, rather than misdemeanor law, given the nature of the sanction
(imprisonment), its gravity and its range. This implies that the guarantees of a fair trial under the
European Convention apply to proceedings against sex workers, regardless of the oence being
qualied as a misdemeanor under national law and not as a criminal oence.
The aforementioned rights certainly do not represent an exhaustive legal analysis of this topic,
but understanding them is necessary in order to deal with the legal position of any citizen or
citizens in Serbia, including the position of sex workers. Thereby we should particularly bear in
mind the importance that our Constitution gives to human dignity, which is in these procedures
in the most vulnerable and the most sensitive situation.
17
Sadržaj
3 The distinction between sex work and trafficking
Elena Drezga, JAZAS
For years, the term ’prostitution’ has been identied with the term ‘human tracking for sexual
exploitation’. For us who conduct intervention and prevention programs among populations
at increased risk of HIV, particularly programs for sex workers, it was crucial to understand the
concept of voluntariness in the context of providing services in sex work.
Sex work is the consensual provision of sexual services among adults under conditions which
are settled between the provider of services and the customer. By denition, sex work means
that an adult male, female or transgender person who participates in the exchange of these ser-
vices, has agreed to it (voluntarily), which distinguishes it from human tracking.7 (1, 2)
Human tracking (or tracking in persons), according to the UN Tracking Protocol (also men-
tioned Palermo Protocol8) is dened as
“the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or
use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power
or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benets to achieve the
consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation
shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual
exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal
of organs”.
The Serbian Criminal Code denes tracking as follows:
Article 388 CC - Human tracking
(1) Whoever by force or threat, deception or maintaining deception, abuse of authority, trust,
dependency relationship, dicult circumstances of another, retaining identity papers or by
giving or accepting money or other benet, recruits, transports, transfers, sells, buys, acts as
intermediary in sale, hides or holds another person aimed at exploiting such person’s labor,
forced labor, commission of oenses, prostitution, other forms of sexual exploitation, begging,
pornography, establishing slavery or slavery-like relation, the removal of organs or body parts
or service in armed conicts, shall be punished by imprisonment of three to twelve years.
(2) When the oense specied in Paragraph 1 of this Article is committed against a minor, the
oender shall be punished by the penalty prescribed for that oense even if there was no use of
force, threat or any of the other mentioned methods of perpetration.
(3) If the oense specied in Paragraph 1 of this Article is committed against a minor, the of-
fender shall be punished by imprisonment of not less than ve years.
(4) If the oense specied in Paragraphs 1 and 3 of this Article resulted in grave bodily injury of
a person, the oender shall be punished by imprisonment of ve to fteen years.
7 UNAIDS Guidance Note on HIV and Sex Work. Geneva, UNAIDS, April 2012. [Acceded on Aug, 20 2015]. Avail-
able at: http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/les/sub_landing/les/JC2306_UNAIDS-guidance-note-HIV-
sex-work_en.pdf;
8 Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Tracking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, supple-
menting the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime.
18
(5) If the oense specied in Paragraphs 1 and 3 of this Article resulted in death of one or more
persons, the oender shall be punished by imprisonment of not less than ten years.
(6) Whoever habitually engages in oenses specied in Paragraphs 1 to 3 of this Article or if the
oense is committed by a group, shall be punished by imprisonment of not less than ve years.
(7) If the oense specied in Paragraphs 1 to 3 of this Article is committed by an organized
group, the oender shall be punished by imprisonment of not less than ten years.
(8) Whoever knew or could have known that a person is the victim of tracking, but neverthe-
less made use of her/his position or facilitated another person to make use of her/his position for
the purpose of exploitation referred to in Paragraph 1 of this Article,
shall be punished by imprisonment of six months to ve years.
(9) If the oense referred to in Paragraph 8 of this Article was committed against a minor of
which fact the oender was or could have been aware, such oender shall be punished by im-
prisonment of one to eight years.
(10) The consent to exploitation or to the establishment of slavery or slavery-like relation re-
ferred to in paragraph 1 of this Article has no bearing on the existence of criminal oense re-
ferred to in Paragraphs 1, 2 and 6 of this Article.
In order to better understand the two complex problems in the territory of Serbia which are
the focus of our research - the unclear interpretation of the distinction between sex work and
human tracking in the framework of the relevant institutions and the enforcement of laws
relating to sex work - we have put them in the context of the working documents of the Global
Network of Sex Workers (hereinafter: NSWP).
The NSWP was established in 1990 by sex workers’ rights activists worldwide. Although the ex-
pert community had been refusing to recognize the existence of active and politically engaged
people in the sex work community for years, NSWP has managed to provide a signicant contri-
bution to the global response to HIV/AIDS. It also managed to ght for the institutionalization of
the term “sex worker” instead of the widespread term “prostitute”. The importance of replacing
one word with another goes far beyond political correctness, because it introduces the concept
of labor and labor rights, positioning it as a central problem which the community of sex work-
ers faces.
The questions that the NSWP raised at the beginning of the ‘90s, when it opened a political
dialogue with UNAIDS and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria - which were
presented at international conferences, starting with the UNGASS in 1995 - are still essential for
the sex workers’ community. They are related to the causes of stigmatization of sex work, the
protection of the human rights of sex workers and the strict separation of the concepts of hu-
man tracking and sex work. As the UNAIDS “Guidance Note on HIV and Sex Work”, revised in
April 2012, states:
“Sex workers are often victimized by violence, including gender-based violence, perpetrated
by clients, controllers, managers of sex work establishments, law enforcement ocers and
other government ocials. Sex workers may also experience violence and discrimination from
intimate partners, families, neighbors, partners and work colleagues. They are sometimes co-
erced into providing sex to police in exchange for freedom from detainment, arrest and nes.
Experience teaches that violence towards sex workers can be reduced when law enforcement
19
Sadržaj
agencies, the judiciary, health services, and other arms of government are engaged and coop-
erate fully with sex worker organizations and other civil society groups.”9
UNAIDS recognizes the criminalization of sex work as a major structural obstacle to the system-
atic implementation of HIV prevention programs and to facilitating universal access to medical
treatment and care, as among others stated in the 2014 report on the consultancy meeting on
the prevention of STIs among sex workers of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and
Control (ECDC) in Stockholm.10
Sex work is regulated in dierent ways in the territory of Europe and the world. Roughly, we can
distinguish between criminalization vs. decriminalization; penalization vs. depenalization and
consequently the legalization of sex work; and the Swedish or Nordic model.11
Criminalization vs. Decriminalization of Sex Work
Laws that criminalize sex work (prostitution) can be directed towards the punishment of sex
workers, customers, third parties, colleagues, families and friends of sex workers. When referring
to the punishment of sex workers, it can be related to the oering of sexual services, advertising,
the sale of sexual services (in the street or in the premises) and sex workers’ unions. The rationale
for criminalization of sex work usually states “protecting society from public menace”. These
laws reinforce the stigma on sex work and people engaged in sex work, are usually carried out
in a discriminatory manner and endanger the health and privacy of sex workers.
Decriminalization of sex work means the absence of laws regulating sex work, including both
individual sex workers and sex workers who work together, as well as sex businesses or brothels.
That includes impunity for all parties, from sex workers through managers in sex work to third
parties, clients, family and partners.
Penalization vs. Depenalization of Sex Work
Penalization of sex work refers to laws on the violation of public peace and order. Sex work in
this case falls under administrative penalties that may be imposed in the form of a ne or impris-
onment. Although it is one of the “minor oenses” compared to other criminal activities, it still
exposes sex workers to abusive behavior of law enforcement ocers and other parties.
Depenalization is often associated with the decriminalization of sex work, but these terms are
not synonymous. Depenalization refers to the removal of those provisions of the relevant laws
9 UNAIDS Guidance Note on HIV and Sex Work. Geneva, UNAIDS, April 2012. [Acceded on Aug, 20 2015]. Avail-
able at: http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/les/sub_landing/les/JC2306_UNAIDS-guidance-note-HIV-
sex-work_en.pdf.
10 Meeting Report: Expert consultation meeting: sexually transmitted infections among sex workers 21-22 Oc-
tober 2014, Stockholm, Sweden. Stockholm, European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC).
[Acceded on July, 19 2015]. Available at: http://www.nswp.org/sites/nswp.org/les/Sex%20Work%20Ex-
pert%20Consultation%20Meeting%20Report_brief_v4.pdf.
11 Brieng paper 07: Sex Work and the Law – Understanding Legal Frameworks and the Struggle for the Sex Work
Law Reforms. Edinburgh, NSWP. [Acceded on July, 19 2015]. Available at: http://www.nswp.org/sites/nswp.
org/les/Sex%20Work%20&%20The%20Law.pdf.
20
relating to administrative penalties for sex work, whilst decriminalization means removing all
provisions from the Criminal Code related to sex work.
Legalization
Legalization of sex work allows engaging in sex work in a particular territory with the obliga-
tion of complying with specic regulations which are a prerequisite for legal engagement in sex
work. The legalization of sex work, in practice, might bear heavy restrictions relating to the place
and manner of conduct of sex work, and potentially allows extensive control by the police and
the state over persons engaged in sex work.
The Swedish Model
In 1999, Sweden passed a law criminalizing the purchase of sex services with the intention that
the law should repeal the demand for sexual services and thereby allegedly prevent human traf-
cking. As justication, the then Minister for Integration and Gender Equality stated that “prosti-
tution and human tracking for the purpose of providing sexual services is a serious obstacle to both
social and gender equality”.12
In Sweden, sex work is considered as violence against women and oneself; it is also believed
that sex work is inevitably and immutably linked with violence, abuse and the exploitation of
women. It is believed that all sex workers are female, that the clients of sex workers are men and
that sex workers are their victims. This argument is based on a wider international perspective of
a specic part of the feminist movement, referred to with dierent terms like “radical feminism”
and “(neo)abolitionist feminism”, including several variations and combinations such as “radical
abolitionist feminism” and so on. NSWP uses the term “fundamentalist feminism’’ although it is
not used in the general Swedish discourse.
“Reducing demand” for sexual services by punishing the clients as a means to prevent human
tracking, became known as the Swedish model, which was very intensively promoted by the
Swedish government and the United States. An example is the 2011 “Report of the Ministry of
Foreign Aairs of the United States on human tracking” (TIP-report), which states that “if no
one paid for sexual services, human tracking would not exist.” The global sex work community
disputes this model. It does not consider it to be based on evidence and nds no basis for the
assertion that the accessibility of sex services leads to an increase in human tracking.
Recommendations and Conclusions
On 17 December 2013, NSWP announced the results of a global consultation entitled “Consen-
sus Statement on Sex Work, Human Rights and Law”.13During 2012 and early 2013 an extensive
12 The Real Impact of the Swedish Model on Sex Workers: #4 Impact of Other Legislation and Policy – The Danger of
Seeing the Swedish Model. Edinburgh, NSWP. [Acceded on July, 19 2015]. Available at: http://www.nswp.org/
sites/nswp.org/les/Advocacy%20Toolkit%204.pdf
13 Consensus Statement On Sex Work, Human Rights and the Law. Edinburgh, NSWP. [Acceded on Aug, 19 2015].
Available at: http://www.nswp.org/resource/nswp-consensus-statement-sex-work-human-rights-and-the-
law.
21
Sadržaj
research was conducted which involved 160 sex work organizations from more than 60 coun-
tries worldwide, representing a global advocacy platform for sex work, human rights and the
law and including sex workers of all genders, class, race, ethnicity, health status, age, nationality,
citizenship, language, education levels, disabilities, and many other factors. One of the greatest
assets of this research was the joint work of sex workers from around the world on the task of de-
liberating and establishing priorities in the legal regulation of sex work (given the fact that local
laws on sex work vary widely). Based on the ndings, eight fundamental rights were formulated
which the sex workers community advocates to be respected in their entirety:
1. Right to associate and organize
2. Right to be protected by the law
3. Right to be free from violence
4. Right to be free from discrimination
5. Right to privacy and freedom from arbitrary interference:
6. Right to health
7. Right to move and to migrate
8. Right to work and free choice of employment.
All these rights have been recognized and ratied by most countries as fundamental human
rights.
Taking into account the accumulated evidence on the legal frameworks in which sex work is
being performed and how it reects on the community of sex workers across the globe, NSWP
emphasized the core values on which laws which regulate sex work should be based:
1. Acceptance of sex work as work
2. Opposition to all forms of criminalization and other legal oppression of sex work (including
sex workers, clients, third parties14, families, partners and friends)
3. Supporting self-organization and self-determination of sex workers.
As stated in its brieng paper on Sex Work and the Law:15
“Sex work should be treated like any other work; sex workers should be provided with the same
level of legal protection enjoyed by any other employee and entrepreneur. Sex work should be
subject to the same labor laws, health and safety at work, as well as taxation and public health
provisions. Sex workers should enjoy equal protection from state authorities (police, adminis-
tration, judiciary) as all other citizens, but with the necessary existence of a law that prohibits
discrimination on the basis of occupational choices. The law prohibiting discrimination on the
basis of occupational choices does not necessarily refer only to sex workers, but can also be ap-
plied to police ocers, nuns, civil servants and so on.” (NZPC, New Zealand)”
14 The term ‘third parties’ includes managers, brothel keepers, receptionists, maids, drivers, landlords, hotels
who rent rooms to sex workers and anyone else who is seen as facilitating sex work.
15 Brieng paper 07: Sex Work and the Law – Understanding Legal Frameworks and the Struggle for the Sex Work
Law Reforms. Edinburgh, NSWP, p. 14. Available at: http://www.nswp.org/sites/nswp.org/les/Sex%20
Work%20&%20The%20Law.pdf [Acceded on July, 19 2015].
22
4 Violations of human rights against sex workers
Slađana Baroš, Institute of Public Health ‘Dr Milan Jovanović Batut’ and Elena Santovac, JAZAS
During 2007-2009, SWAN (Sex Workers’ Advocacy Network for Central and Eastern Europe and
Central Asia), a network representing sex workers in Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia,
conducted a research on violations of the human rights of sex workers16. The study provided an
insight into the high level of violence against sex workers in the territory of Central and East-
ern Europe and Central Asia and emphasized the need for systematic documentation of human
rights violations in this population. Consequently, four countries were chosen to carry out this
pioneering research. Apart from Serbia, Macedonia was the rst to start documenting cases, the
Kyrgyz Republic and Ukraine followed.
In the beginning of 2011, JAZAS received nancial support from the Open Society Foundation
New York after which the documenting of cases of violation of sex workers’ human rights in
Serbia commenced. For this purpose, special procedures and forms were developed and the
Macedonian database was adapted, in order to allow easier processing and comparing of data.
JAZAS’s team trained four representatives from the community of sex workers to work on doc-
umenting cases. The procedure of documenting included conducting an individual interview
with the person who reported the violence/ discrimination /abuse. With the consent of the per-
son, a special form (questionnaire) was lled out with information on the specic reported case.
The form would then be handed over to the person in charge of data management for review-
ing and entering the information into the database. Upon the completion of the interview, the
person who had experienced violence in the past was provided with support (psychological or
legal), according to their needs.
For the purposes of the project, violence was dened as a violation of personal integrity and
classied according to the type of violation as physical (any violation of the physical integrity of
persons), psychological (any violation of the psychological integrity of persons, including verbal,
emotional, and similar forms of violence), sexual (sexual abuse, rape and harassment) and eco-
nomic (economic violation of the integrity of persons, i.e. seizure, usurpation and destruction of
property and goods, as well as blackmail and extortion).
Analysis of cases of human rights violations
In the period from 2011 to 2013, a total of 23 people reported various human rights violations
to JAZAS, which were further documented and processed. All persons in this period worked in
the territory of Belgrade. In relation to sex, predominantly males reported experiencing violence
(Chart 1). In relation to gender, transgender persons (transwomen) formed the majority (Chart 2).
Of the total number of persons, 4.3% of persons did not report sex and/or gender.
16 Arrest the Violence: Human Rights Violations Against Sex Workers in 11 Countries in Central and Eastern Europe
and Central Asia. Budapest: SWAN, December 15 2009. [Accessed on August 1, 2015]. Available at: http://
swannet.org/node/1639).
23
Sadržaj
Figure 1. Sex of persons who reported experiencing violence
Figure 2. Gender of persons who reported experiencing violence
The average age of persons who reported some form of violation of human rights was 33.2 (rang-
ing from 21 to 50). With regard to education, the majority had completed primary or secondary
education, a minor number were without any education. Approximately 22% did not report
their educational level (Figure 3).In terms of ethnicity, most common are persons of Serbian and
Roma ethnicity (Figure 4). In regard to marital status the majority reported to be single (Figure 5).
24
Figure 3 Education of persons who reported violation of human rights
Figure 4 Ethnic identities of persons who reported violation of human rights
25
Sadržaj
Figure 5 Marital statuses of persons who reported violation of human rights
The total number of reported cases of human rights violations was 74 in the observed period of
two years. The average number of human rights violations is 3.21 per person, with a minimum of
1 case to a maximum of 12 cases per person. In the majority of cases the perpetrator of violence
was either a police representative or a spouse/domestic partner. Also, an equal number reported
that they had suered violence from colleagues, family members and unknown persons (includ-
ing clients) whom they had encountered in the workplace (Figure 6).
Figure 6. Distribution of cases of discrimination according to the perpetrator
Various forms of violence were reported. The most common was physical violence. A smaller
number of sex workers reported psychological violence (incl. verbal abuse), economic violence,
i.e. seizure or damage of personal property, sexual violence, exposure to various forms of extor-
tion, attacks or threats with weapons, and intimidation (Figure 7).
26
Figure 7. Distribution of reported cases of violence
The oenders were most often representatives of the police and unidentied persons, like pass-
ersby. But also there are people who were part of their close environment (relatives, partners,
friends, and such) and persons who were representatives of the system (judges, prison sta) or
persons who paid for their services (clients) (Figure 8).
Figure 8: Distribution of reported perpetrators of dierent forms of violence against sex workers
According to the reports from sex workers, police in most cases violate the human rights of sex
workers during the enforcement of police procedures. The most commonly reported violations
committed by the police are illegal arrests, violations during background checks, denial of the
27
Sadržaj
right to free movement, the use of condoms for evidence of sex work and the illegal seizure of
money (Figure 9).
Figure 9. Distribution of cases of human rights violations in relation to breach of procedure by the police, ac-
cording to the type of violation
Conclusions
The sex workers who reported human rights violations were mostly males (by sex) (56.6%). Most
of them were transwomen (47.8). According to the recent bio-behavioral research among sex
workers in Belgrade and Novi Sad, which was conducted in 2013 by the Institute of Public Health
of Serbia “Dr Milan Jovanovic Batut” (hereinafter referred to as bio-BSS: behavioral surveillance
survey),the majority of sex workers in Belgrade are women (68%).17 From this, we can conclude
that cases of violence are more likely to be reported by males and in relation to gender by trans-
women. This is supported by the fact that within the bio-BSS studies in Belgrade and Novi Sad,
females were signicantly more likely to report violence suered by dierent perpetrators, while
males mostly reported violence perpetrated by the police. Women, however, reported experi-
encing violence from clients and pimps more often than men. 18 This may to some extent explain
why among our cases, the registered human rights violations by the police are predominant,
given that males were more likely to report incidences of violence suered.
The number of reported cases of some form of violation of human rights over the period of two
years of documenting these cases is relatively low compared to the actual experiences of sex
workers which we witnessed through the implementation of prevention programs in the eld.
A higher number of actual experiences with various forms of violence was also conrmed by
the results of the bio-BSS research. 19 One explanation is that sex workers perceive and accept
dierent forms of stigma and discrimination as something ‘normal’, because they are aware that
17 Research among population most at risk on HIV and among people living with HIV. Ilic D (editor), Institute of
Public Health of Serbia ‘Dr Milan Jovanović Batut’. Belgrade, 2014. (Serbian).
18 Ibid.
19 Ibid.
28
they are engaged in illegal business and do not always recognize the dierent forms of abuse
or accept it as something regular and an integral part of the job. This is particularly common
for women. According to the results of the bio-BSS studies, they report signicantly more often
experiences of stigmatization and auto-stigmatization for engaging in sex work (74% women
compared to 37% men).20
Furthermore, sex workers do not report cases of human rights violations, despite programs for
psychosocial support (self-help groups, counseling with a social worker). The question is whether
sex workers of both sexes are equally empowered, as well as whether they are informed enough
to recognize dierent forms of violence, especially the more clandestine and subtle forms which
are often perceived as being an integral part of their work.
20 Ibid.
29
PART II - RESEARCH RESULTS
5 Methodology
Slađana Baroš, Institute of Public Health of Serbia “Dr Milan Jovanović Batut”
The project included extensive research of the judicial practice in relation to sex workers (here-
after: SW), as well as victims of human tracking who have been forced to engage in sex work
(hereinafter referred to as: TVSW).
The main objective of the project was to carry out an assessment of judicial practices in regard to
cases under Article 14 of the Law on Public Order and Peace (hereinafter: LPOP) and Article 184
of the Criminal Code of Serbia (hereinafter: CC) with an eye to:
• Possible failure to detect human tracking oenses
• Respect and protection of human rights of sex workers.
In accordance with the set objectives, we tried to provide answers to the following research
questions:
1. Assessment of the number of (potential) victims of tracking among cases processed under
Article 14 LPOP;
2. Assessment of the number of arbitrary arrests among cases processed under Article 14 LPOP;
3. Assessment of the number of identied cases of tracking among cases processed under
Articles 14 and 184 LPOP and establishing the main reasons for the failure to correctly identify
(potential) victims of tracking;
4. Identication of the socio-demographic proles of persons prosecuted under Article 14
LPOP;
5. The perception and experience of sex workers and victims of human tracking for the pur-
pose of sex work in relation to the relevant LPOP and CC articles;
6. The perception of judges and other relevant persons involved in the processing of cases un-
der the LPOP and CC in regard to law enforcement and the protection of human rights, as well
as in regard to their ability of identifying victims of tracking and distinguishing victims of
tracking for the purpose of sex work from sex workers.
Methodology
Bearing in mind the objectives of the project and in order to successfully answer the questions,
we designed and implemented a descriptive qualitative study. The study used dierent data
sources, including both primary sources (interviews with respondents) and secondary sources
(analysis of existing documents produced within the framework of judicial proceedings).The
study was conducted from November 2012 to November 2013 in Belgrade and included addi-
tional data from the Serbian courts in regard to the relevant articles of the CC.
The study consisted of three stages:
1. The planning stage, during which we conducted the preparation of research: development
of a detailed research protocol and research documentation, training of all team members
30
and securing the necessary permits for the realization of the research (November-Decem-
ber 2012);
2. The eld research stage, within which we collected eld data (December 2012 - July 2013);
3. Processing, interpretation and analysis of data and dissemination of the preliminary re-
search ndings in the form of a Round Table (August - November 2013); in-depth analysis of
the data and writing of the report (2014-2015).
The study was multi-complex; therefore, in addition to the use of dierent data sources, the
study incorporated dierent populations. The sampling population of the study is comprised of:
• Adults of both sexes who were engaged in sex work in the period from January 1, 2011 to
December 31, 2012 in the territory of Belgrade;
• Adult victims of human tracking who were forced to engage in sex work.
Additionally, in order to answer the research questions, the sampling population also included
magistrate judges who had processed at least one case under Article 14 of the Law on Public
Order and Peace (LPOP) in the period from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2012 in Belgrade.
With the same objective, we tried to include representatives of the police. However, they unfor-
tunately did not respond to our request.
Methods and data sources
The method of data collection was adapted to the type and source of information. The study
used two types of sources: primary and secondary. Primary sources were the interview respon-
dents (SW, TVSW, magistrate judges). Secondary sources were documents produced during
court proceedings (misdemeanor judgments pursuant to Article 14 LPOP rendered by the Mag-
istrate Court in Belgrade and criminal verdicts under Article 184 CC rendered by the basic, higher
and appellate courts in the territory of Serbia).
Primary data sources
Primary data sources within the study were the respondents from the previously dened target
groups, i.e.:
• Adults of both sexes and all genders engaged in sex work in the dened period of time;
• Adult victims of human tracking who were forced to engage in sex work;
• Magistrate judges who had processed at least one case under Article 14 LPOP in Belgrade
in the dened period of time.
Respondents were recruited using methods of targeted sampling. In this way we were looking
to ensure a sample representativeness and fulllment of basic criteria for participation in the
study. For data collection method, we used in-depth interviewing, whereby for each category
of respondents we created a special thematic guide, relevant to the population, and dened
research questions. The plan was to conduct a focus group with representatives from the police,
in order to complement the information obtained by the SW, TVSW and the judges with addi-
tional data from the police. However, police representatives did not respond to the request for
participation in the study.
31
Sadržaj
Sex workers
The study protocol foresaw including 20 sex workers through targeted sampling. Of the planned
20, the research included 9 SW who met the basic criteria:
• they had engaged in sex work in the period from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2012 in
the territory of Belgrade;
• they were detained by the police under Article 14 LPOP and/or prosecuted in court on the
same ground in 2011 and/or 2012;
• they agreed to participate in the study, which was conrmed by giving written informed
consent.
Recruitment was conducted at a slow pace, and consequently the projected sample size wasn’t
reached (more in the section: Implementation in the Field). However, their experiences with po-
lice arrests as well as prosecution before the court were very similar.
Persons who had been victims of tracking and were forced to engage in sex work
The study protocol foresaw including 20 persons through targeted sampling - victims of hu-
man tracking who were forced to do sex work during the dened time span. Recruitment was
conducted at a slow pace, and the study ultimately included 10 people who met the following
criteria:
• they were forced to engage in sex work;
• they came in contact with the police during forced engagement in sex work;
• they agreed to participate in the study, which was conrmed by giving written informed
consent.
At the beginning of the study, the research protocol intended to cover persons who were victims
of tracking and were forced to engage in sex work in the period from January 1, 2011 to De-
cember 31, 2012 in Belgrade. However, this framework was modied according to the situation
on the eld, therefore the study included persons who were victims of tracking and forced to
engage in sex work in the period from 2000 to 2012. Respecting the basic ethical principles of
voluntary participation in the study, as well as the principle that the welfare and recovery of the
respective persons is a priority - which also represents a basic principle of ASTRA - various per-
sons who met the basic criteria for participation in the study did not feel strong enough to talk
about their relatively recent traumatic experiences. Therefore, the study included only 10 victims
of tracking instead of the envisaged 20.
Magistrates
Magistrate judges were recruited by targeted sampling. The nal sample included seven judges
out of the planned ten. The oenses referred to in Article 14 LPOP (engagement in sex work) are
most often prosecuted by summary proceedings (within 24 hours), and for such cases the com-
petent judges are delegated from the Duty Service. As a rule, there are three judges on duty. Of
these, two were active in the investigation period, the third one had not yet been appointed af-
ter the retirement of the previous judge who conducted this duty. In the reporting period (from
January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2012) the third, retired judge was alternately replaced by other
judges. For the purpose of the study, we rst contacted the judges according to the frequency
32
of replacing the third permanent judge, but also included those who had previously agreed to
participate in the study, i.e. three of them. The sample thus included two permanent judges
and three others who were replacing the retired permanent judge in most cases. The study ad-
ditionally included the president of the Magistrates Court in Belgrade and the President of the
Higher Misdemeanor Court. In this way, the study included a total of seven judges, who agreed
to participate in the study and gave written informed consent. Comparing the processed cases
in the reporting period, the two permanent judges handled 69.5% of the total number of cases
in the period from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012.
Secondary data sources:
Secondary sources were documents produced during the trial, namely:
• Court cases processed under Article 14 LPOP (engaging in prostitution21) in the period from
January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2012 in Belgrade.
• Criminal judgments delivered under Article 184 CC (mediation in prostitution22) in the pe-
riod from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2012 in the territory of the Republic of Serbia.
Secondary data related to cases processed under Article 14 LPOP were collected as a result of the
cooperation of the Magistrates Court in Belgrade, which provided the case les to the trained
interviewers, who, on the basis of these cases, lled out a questionnaire specically designed for
this purpose. Secondary data in connection with judgments rendered under Article 184 CC were
collected as a result of the cooperation of the courts in the Republic of Serbia which provided
copies of judgments in accordance with the Law on Free Access to Information of Public Impor-
tance.23 Based on these judgments, the interviewers lled in a specic questionnaire designed
for this purpose.
The sample included all submitted judgments which were disclosed to the interviewers. The
total number of cases under Article 14 of LPOP included in the study was 213, as well as 40 cases
processed under Article 184 CC.
Instruments
As stated in “Methods and sources” special instruments were designed, which enabled data
collection. For the collection of secondary data, special structured semi-open questionnaires
were designed. The questionnaire for collecting data on cases processed under Article 14 LPOP
contained 8 thematic sections:
• General information on the case and its contents;
• Information on the case;
21 Art. 14 LPOP: (1) Whoever engages in prostitution or provides premises for the purpose of prostitution shall
be sentenced to imprisonment up to 30 days. (2) Whoever provides premises to a minor for the purpose of
prostitution shall be sentenced to imprisonment up to 60 days.
22 Art. 184 CC: (1) Whoever causes or induces another person to prostitution or participates in handing over
a person to another for the purpose of prostitution, or who by means of media or otherwise promotes or
advertises prostitution, shall be punished with a ne or imprisonment up to three years. (2) If the oence
specied in paragraph 1 of this Article is committed against a minor, the oender shall be punished with
imprisonment from one to ten years.
23 Law on Access to Public Information „Ocial Gazette of the Republic of Serbia”, no. 120/2004, 54/2007,
104/2009 and 36/2010.
33
Sadržaj
• Information about the defendant (socio-demographic data and information on previous
convictions);
• Data on the initiation of proceedings;
• Information about the process of apprehension and interrogation of the defendant by the
police;
• Data on the trial process/main hearing;
• Information on led appeals;
• Enforcement of legal sanctions and information on the return of seized property.
The questionnaire for collecting data on cases processed under Article 184 CC contained 5 the-
matic sections:
• General information on the case;
• Information about the defendant and oence(s) s/he was charged with;
• Basic socio-demographic data about the defendant and information on previous criminal
oences;
• Information about the case (description of the oence, description of the procedure and
the judgment);
• Information on led appeals against the rendered judgments.
The thematic guides were adapted to each particular group of respondents. The Guide for the
in-depth interviews with SWs contained 11 thematic units, which focused on their experiences
with the police, arrests, judges, prosecution, sanctions, violence, existence of forced sex work, as
well as on health, social and economic eects of processing/sanctioning, the perception of risks
in relation to the arrest and judicial process, and questions to test their knowledge and attitudes
about their rights, human tracking, as well as to the misdemeanor proceedings against them
or their colleagues.
The thematic guide for interviews with victims of tracking who were forced to engage in sex
work included 10 areas, which focused on their experiences with the police, arrests, trials, pros-
ecution, sanctioning, on their perception of the existing practice in regard to tracking victims
in purpose of sexual exploitation, as well as on their perception and attitudes in regard to the
consequences of their experiences on their health and on their social and economic situation
and on their understanding of the dierence between human tracking and sex work, and their
knowledge and attitudes in regard to their rights, human tracking, and sex work.
The interviews with judges were conducted on 5 thematic units related to their experiences in
the handling of cases under Article 14 LPOP, their perceptions and attitudes toward sex work,
human tracking and the distinction between consensual and forced sex work, the rendering
of judgments, their adequacy and justication, as well as their understanding and attitudes in
regard to the legal proceedings against SW and TVSW, and their recommendations in regard to
the improvement of the handling of oences under Article 14 LPOP.
34
Data processing and analysis
The completed semi-structured questionnaires which were used for the collection of second-
ary data from court judgments rendered under Article 14 LPOP were rst reviewed in order to
check the quality of the data before the encryption of the narrative information. Data from these
questionnaires was entered into statistical data analysis software (SPSS). Descriptive statistics
were performed (description of data using mean, median, frequencies, percentage) and data
was disaggregated by sex and age where it was suitable. The processing of data obtained from
the court judgments rendered under Article 184 CC was, to some extent, dierent. Since the
number of judgments was smaller and the data involved was much more heterogeneous and
predominantly narrative, some data were quantied and analyzed statistically, while other data
were analyzed using the analysis of the narratives.24
The interviews with respondents were recorded using a digital voice recorder. Audio record-
ings were transcribed verbatim upon completion of the interviews. The recorded qualitative
data was, compared to a group of interviews, separately encoded according to the respective
encryption key. Encoded material was further analyzed and processed by using the analysis of
narratives and the interpretative method.25
Ethical principles of the research
During the course of the research, special attention was paid to ethical issues in regard to the
procedure of research. While conducting the research, the following basic ethical principles
were respected:
• Condentiality and anonymity of participation in the research (avoiding the use of respon-
dents’ identifying personal data, preserving the condentiality of conversations between
the respondents and the interviewers);
• Voluntary participation (based on information about the research, the respondent decided
on whether they wanted to participate in the research or not; if they decided to participate,
they gave oral consent and a consent form was signed by the interviewer to whom the
respondent gave the oral consent; signed forms were kept separately in a secure place and
unconnected with the research data);
• Respect for the personal autonomy of the respondents (respondents kept the right to de-
cide to terminate participation in the research at any given time, or to refuse to talk about
certain subjects; this decision was fully respected by the interviewer and other members
of the eld team, without asking questions about the reasons of withdrawal or refusal to
discuss certain subjects further);
• Full respect and appreciation for the respondents’ personality (without any form of con-
demnation, discrimination or disrespect against the respondents);
• Provision of minimum risk and maximum benet for the respondents (participation in the
research did not bear any individual risk for the respondents in relation to their environment
24 Milić V. Sociološki metod. Zavod za udžbenike i nastavna sredstva. Beograd, 1996; Miles MB, Huberman MA.
Qualitative data analysis. Sage: London; 1994.
25 Milić V. Sociološki metod. Zavod za udžbenike i nastavna sredstva. Beograd, 1996; Miles MB, Huberman MA.
Qualitative data analysis. Sage: London; 1994; Metodologija empirijskog naučnog istraživanja. Ur. Pejčić, B.
Defektološki fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu. Beograd, 1995.
35
Sadržaj
or the environment in which they were being interviewed; the benets are realized indirect-
ly and are based on achieving the objectives set by the research);
• Safety of participation in the research for both the respondents as well as the interview-
ers (interviews were conducted in conditions which the respondent perceived as safe, and
which were also safe for the interviewer, in line with the agreement reached between the
respondent and the interviewer);
• Transcription of qualitative data obtained through in-depth audio interviews, was subject-
ed to the rules of non-disclosure of personal names or identifying data; instead of personal
names the transcription entries were marked by X for female names and Y for male; tran-
scripts were kept under a special code for participation in the research which did not contain
personal names of the respondents; upon transcription, the audio recording was destroyed.
Implementation in the eld
The eld research lasted from December 2012 to July 2013. During this period interviews were
conducted with persons engaged in sex work as well as with tracked persons who had been
forced to engage in sex work, and the questionnaires related to the court cases under the Article
14 LPOP and the criminal court verdicts under Article 184 CC were lled out. The data collection
was conducted by previously trained interviewers. The members of eld teams were also mem-
bers of JAZAS, ASTRA and Equal Rights. All team members had undergone a special training of
three days, where they were closely acquainted with the objectives of the research, the specics
of violations of human rights in relation to the dened population of the study, and the research
instruments and procedures. During the training, the roles and responsibilities of all team mem-
bers as well as the management of data during the eld research were further dened.
Sex workers
Interviews with sex workers were conducted from January to June 2013. The interviews were
held in the drop-in center of JAZAS and were conducted by trained interviewers: representa-
tives of JAZAS, trained sex workers and activists of the organization Equal Rights. This was a
great benet for Equal Rights and for the rst time our in-depth interviews with sex workers
were conducted by sex workers themselves. The interviews lasted approximately 90 minutes.
The recruitment of participants was slow-paced. The primary reason for the low response was
the amount of time needed for the conversation and for coming to the premises. As the research
was carried out at the drop-in center of JAZAS, the recruited respondents were mainly chosen
among the clients of the drop-in center. During working hours of the drop-in center, it was not
possible to provide a separate room for conducting the interviews, hence the interviews were
conducted after-hours, and the request for potential respondents to come again at the agreed
time prompted a lower response rate. The participation in the study was discussed with poten-
tial respondents during their visits to the drop-in center and, if they met the criteria for inclu-
sion in the study, it was agreed for them to come to the drop-in center during the non-working
hours. However, these agreements were not always kept, due to the time they needed to spare
for getting to the drop-in center and the interview itself. This resulted in a low turnout. For fu-
ture studies it is important to ensure the possibility of participation immediately after the initial
contact is made.
36
Also, not all sex workers had been arrested within the dened period of time, although during
the specied period they had come into contact with the police. Also, in accordance with the
basic ethical principles and principles of JAZAS, we respected the personal autonomy of each
person and did not pressuring them to engage in the research.
The recruitment was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles of the study. Before
inclusion in the study, sex workers who used the services of the drop-in center were asked if they
would like to participate in the study. Through an informal discussion it was assessed whether
they were eligible to participate in the study, and if so, information was given about the study,
its objectives and ways of implementation, as well as on the rights of the participants in a more
formal discussion. On the basis of this information, the sex workers were asked whether they
wanted to participate in the study. The ones interested would then agree with the interviewer
on the preferred time to come back to the drop-in center in order to conduct the interview. All
potential respondents were clearly informed that they had no obligation, being users of JAZAS
services, to participate in the study and that their decision would in no way aect their receiving
of services at the drop-in center. In addition to the drop-in center, recruitment was also carried
out in the eld. In that case the initial conversation was conducted at the place where the sex
workers made their rst contact with clients and a date was negotiated on which they would be
able to come to the drop-in center and have a conversation with the interviewer. The recruit-
ment of participants in the eld was performed by trained interviewers from Equal Rights. All
ethical principles relating to participation in the study and treatment of the respondents and the
collected data were fully complied with during the course of the study.
Persons who had been victims of tracking and forced to engage in sex work
Interviews with female victims of human tracking for sexual exploitation were carried out in
the period from 26 January to 30 May 2013. Potential respondents were selected in consultation
with ASTRA’s case supervisors, taking into account their psychological status, participation in
legal proceedings and/or other circumstances, and whether the evocation of past traumatic ex-
periences might negatively aect their mental stability. The latter was particularly important as
all clients considered for participation in the study had been forced to engage in sex work, and
recalling the events of that period could have triggered re-traumatization.
All interviews lasted approximately 60 minutes. On an average the respondents were starting
to lose interest in the conversation after 45 minutes. This was manifested by asking questions
about how many more questions were left till the end of the interview, by giving short answers,
by frequent interruptions of the interview by exiting the room for a few minutes and so on. In
two cases the respondents stressed at the very beginning of the interview that due to other
commitments they had about an hour at their disposal. The situation was similar with the re-
spondents that the interviewers visited in their home, who were also due to family obligations
available for a limited time.
Clients of ASTRA who were assessed to be able to be interviewed, were, in accordance with the
principle of informed consent, informed about the purpose of the research and the ways to par-
ticipate in it. Before starting the interview, it was explained that they did not have any obligation
to ASTRA to participate in the interviews and that, if they found it hard to talk about their expe-
riences, they should not agree to do the interview out of a sense of duty or gratitude towards
37
Sadržaj
ASTRA. In addition, it was emphasized that they were free to refuse to answer questions which
they perceived as disturbing, and to terminate the interview at any given time.
It was noted that all respondents during the interview had the need to give details of everything
that happened from the moment of their recruitment until exiting the tracking chain, even
though this was not requested, and despite the fact that the interviewers, who were employed
at ASTRA’s SOS Hotline and Direct Assistance to Victims program, in most cases were already
acquainted with their experiences in the tracking chain. Without being asked questions that
were directly related to it, the respondents talked about the details of the period of exploitation,
as well as their relationships with the trackers. One respondent was very shaken and cried dur-
ing the interview when she was retelling the story of humiliations she was exposed to during
the exploitation.
During the study all ethical principles relating to participation in the study and treatment of
subjects and collected data were fully complied with. The trained interviewers of ASTRA had
sucient skills and experience to help the respondents relive the painful experiences in the least
painful way.
Magistrates
Magistrates were contacted in May 2013 and the interviews with them were conducted in July
2013. This was also the period of annual leaves, so the scheduling and conducting of the inter-
views required customization to the work duties of the judges. The interviews were scheduled
over the telephone and the time and place of interviews was decided upon by the judges them-
selves. The interviews lasted one hour on average. Nearly all interviews were conducted at the
judges’ oces, with the exception of one case where the interview was conducted after hours at
a bar. The interviews were conducted by two trained interviewers. All judges had been informed
about the study over the phone. Additionally, before the ocial start of the interview, they were
once again informed about the study and its objectives with the emphasis on the right of re-
spondents to terminate the interview at any given time or to refuse to talk on certain topics.
Upon receiving this information, the judges gave written consent.
Secondary data sources
The cases prosecuted under Article 14 LPOP were made available to the members of the team
thanks to the cooperation of the Magistrates Court in Belgrade. Representatives of the Magis-
trate’s Court provided a space where the interviewers could work, i.e. enter the data into struc-
tured questionnaires. In this way the existing 213 cases were processed in the period from 6
December 2012 to 22 March 2013.
Owing to the positive response of the Basic, Higher and Appellate courts of the Republic of Ser-
bia to our written request to submit photocopied verdicts rendered under Article 184 of CCS, 40
verdicts were obtained for review. After receiving the verdicts, the team entered the data from
the verdicts in structured questionnaires in the period from May to June 2013.
Data protection
Upon execution of the study, all data are archived and kept at JAZAS. The audio records of inter-
views are erased and anonymized transcripts and anonymized received photocopied verdicts
are archived.
38
6 Analysis of judgments under Article 14 of the
Law on Public Peace and Order: engaging in
prostitution
Slađana Baroš, Institute of Public Health of Serbia ”Dr Milan Jovanović Batut”
The Law on Public Order and Peace (LPOP) regulates the scope of infringements and criminal
oences which violate and disturb public peace and order.26 The LPOP denes public peace and
order in Article 2 as:
“the concerted state of mutual relations between citizens and their behavior in public places
and the functioning of the authorities and organizations in the public life in order to provide
equal conditions for exercising the right of citizens to individual and property safety, peace and
tranquility, privacy, freedom of movement, preservation of public morality and human dignity,
and the right of minors to be protected.”
Article 14 LPOP penalizes prostitution and is used to detain and prosecute sex workers.
Article 14 LPOP
Persons who engage in prostitution or provide premises for prostitution - shall be punished with
imprisonment for up to 30 days.
Persons who provide premises for prostitution to a minor - shall be punished with imprisonment
up to 60 days.
Overview of the results of the analysis of cases prosecuted under Article
14 LPOP
The analysis of cases prosecuted under Article 14 LPOP aimed to assess the number of (potential)
victims of tracking among the persons prosecuted under this article and the number of arbi-
trary arrests, as well as to present an overview of the jurisprudence under Article 14 LPOP. These
data were used to complement and elaborate the results from the interviews.
General overview of cases
As part of our research we analyzed 213 court judgments of the Magistrates Court in Belgrade
passed in the period from January 1, 2011 until December 31, 2012. All cases were primarily in-
stituted under Article 14 LPOP; 58.7% (125) cases were processed in 2011 and 41.3% (88) in 2012.
In these 213 cases, in total 125 persons were prosecuted under Article 14 LPOP for engaging in
prostitution. On average, one person was prosecuted 1.7 times within the course of 2 years. The
number of court proceedings ranged from 1 to 9 per person.
26 Law on Public Peace and Order. Ocial Gazette of the Republic of Serbia. no. 51/92, 53/93, 67/93, 48/94,
101/2005 - other law and 85/2005 - other law.
39
Sadržaj
Most of the 125 persons prosecuted were women (89.6%), or for one prosecuted male there
were approximately 9 prosecuted females. In relation to gender, 5.6% of the total number of
persons prosecuted can be dened as transgender, or 53.8% of the males were transgender
(transwomen). However, only for 2 persons was it explicitly stated that they were transgender
(transwomen) (1.6% of the total number of persons, or 15.4% of the males). Therefore, for 5 peo-
ple (4% of the total number of persons or 38.5% of the total number of males) it was stated that
they were transwomen (based either on witness statements or on other information contained
in the case le).
The average number of cases within two years per female was 1.7 and ranged from 1 to 6 of
prosecutions per person. The majority of females were prosecuted one time (63.4%), only one
female was prosecuted six times in two years (0.9% of the total number of females). On average,
males were prosecuted two times within two years, ranging from 1 to 9 times. The majority of
males were prosecuted one time (69.2%), while one male was prosecuted nine times (7.7% of the
total number of males) (table 1).
Table 1. Distribution of prosecutions by the person
No. of cases
per person
Male Female
Number of
persons %Number of
persons %
1969.2 71 63-4
217.7 22 19.6
3215.4 98.0
40 0 6 5.4
50 0 3 2.7
60 0 1 0.9
917.7 0 0
Total 13 100.0 112 100.0
As for the age of the persons prosecuted, on average age of the persons prosecuted was 32 (SD
= 9.5) (with a median of 31), with ages ranging from 19 to 62. The majority of prosecuted persons
were aged between 19 and 29 or youth (46.4%), the least represented were persons aged 50 or
higher (2.4%) (gure 1).
40
Figure 1. Percentage of persons prosecuted under Article 14 LPOP in 2011 and 2012 in respect of age groups
29.6%
16.8%
32%
19.2%
2.4%
19-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50+
In almost all cases, they were citizens of the Republic of Serbia (98.1%), whereas four cases were
conducted against persons registered as foreign nationals (citizens of Montenegro, Bosnia and
Herzegovina and Romania). Furthermore, the case les stated that only one of these persons
had illegally entered Serbia from Montenegro, while there is no such data for the other persons.
In addition to prosecution under Article 14 LPOP, they were all prosecuted under the Law on For-
eigners, except the person who came from Bosnia and Herzegovina and who was also the only
one armed to have been married. Persons who were identied as citizens of Montenegro were
prosecuted under Article 84 of the Law on Foreigners (LF), which criminalizes the failure to leave
the Republic of Serbia within the set deadline, or to leaving the place of residence determined by
the competent authority.27 Both of these persons were not prosecuted before the court for the
rst time. For one person is stated that she is prosecuted (beside Art. 14 LPOP) under Art. 84 para
1(2) of LF, and for other there is only stated that she is prosecuted under Art. 84 LF (beside Art. 14
LPOP). The person who came from Romania was, in addition to Article 14 LPOP, also prosecuted
under the Article 86 para 1(6) LF, which refers to the failure to report the place of residence or a
change of the place of residence to the competent authority within 24 hours. Only for this per-
son it was stated that she had not been previously convicted and that she did not organize her
sex work independently, but through her boyfriend. The boyfriend is stated to be the contractor
of the work activities through means of advertising (as she herself does not speak Serbian) and
according to her statement she retained all of her earnings for herself. She also stated that she
engaged in sex work voluntarily, on her own initiative, without the intervention of the boyfriend.
She came to Serbia to start a relationship with her boyfriend, whom she had previously met via
the Internet. She pleaded guilty and was punished with a ne and imprisonment. From the case
le it is not clear whether she had an interpreter (considering her statement of not speaking
Serbian).
In 4.7% of all cases (213) (regardless of number of prosecuted persons) the place of residence was
not indicated, i.e. remained unknown. In 78.8% of the case les where the place of residence is
specied Belgrade is stated as the place of residence. Among the other cities, the most common
are Pančevo (5.4%), Mladenovac (2%), Novi Sad and Bojnik (both 1.5%) etc.
27 Law on Foreigners. Ocial Gazette of the Republic of Serbia. no. 97/2008.
41
Sadržaj
In most cases the defendants either had no schooling whatsoever or had incomplete primary
education (39.4%), followed by those with a high school education (31%), completed elementary
school (24.9%) and those with college or university degree (2.3%). In 2.3% there was no informa-
tion on education.
As for marital status, in 4.7% of the cases no data on marital status was given, while in 42.7% of
the cases the defendant was single/unmarried; followed by defendants who were married (23%),
divorced (18.8%), living in a common law marriage (8%), and widows (2.8%). In 63.8% of the cases
it is stated that the defendant/s have children, ranging from 1 to 7 children, with an average of
two children per defendant.
Only in one fth of the cases the defendant was prosecuted for a misdemeanor for the rst time;
in 74.2% of the cases the defendants had been convicted before. In 32.4% of these cases it is not
indicated on what grounds the defendant was convicted, for the remaining 41.8% that informa-
tion is provided. From the latter group 96.6% were previously prosecuted under Article 14 LPOP;
In addition, in 18% of the total number of cases (where is indicated on what grounds is previ-
ously convicted) the defendants were previously convicted for violation of the Law on Identity
Cards28 and 14.6% for violation of the Law on Temporary and Permanent Residence.29
Analysis of the data on cases prosecuted under Article 14 LPOP
In the majority of cases processed in 2011 and 2012, proceedings were not only instituted un-
der Article 14 of LPOP, but also on other grounds. Of the total number of cases, 40.4% were
processed only on the grounds of violation of Article 14 LPOP; 59.6% were instituted on other
grounds as well: under the Law on Identity Card (44.6% of total number of cases), the Law on
Temporary and Permanent Residency (29.6%) or under other laws (1.9 %).
According to the court les, in 43.7% of the cases the defendant possessed an identication
document at the time of arrest (identity card or other identication documents); in 46% of cases
the defendant had no documents; 9.4% of case les do not contain any information on the pos-
session of documents. Of those who did not possess identication documents at the time of the
arrest, 20.4% was prosecuted under both Article 14 LPOP and the Law on Identity Cards.
Most of the defendants had been arrested by the police throughout the day. The smallest num-
ber was arrested between 2am and 10am (1 person). The maximum number of arrests took place
between 7pm and 1am (72.8%). The highest frequency of arrests was recorded in the period
between 9pm and 10pm (20.4%) (gure 2).
28 Law on Identity Card. Ocial Gazette of the Republic of Serbia. no. 62/2006 and 36/2011.
29 Law on Permanent and Temporary Residence. Ocial Gazette of the Republic of Serbia. no. 87/2011.
42
Figure 2: Frequency of the number of persons arrested in respect to the time of the arrest
Upon bringing in the apprehended persons to the police station, in 90.6% of cases they gave
and signed a statement; in 6.1% they neither gave nor signed a statement, while in 3.3% the ap-
prehended persons gave a statement but didn’t signed it.
In most cases accused were arrested in the street and outdoor spaces (88.7%); far fewer were ar-
rested at other locations, such as apartments or hotels (11.3%). The circumstances surrounding
the encounters with the police and the arrests can be grouped into three categories. The rst
category, which accounts for approximately one-quarter of the total number of cases, includes
police targeting, i.e. police action conducted after the arrested person oered sexual services
in exchange for money to the police ocer (on the street, through an ad, etc.). The second cat-
egory, which accounts for approximately one-quarter of cases, includes cases where the arrest-
ed persons were apprehended at work (while providing services or making arrangements with
clients, etc.). The third category, which accounts for the largest part of the cases, approximately
50%, refers to activities indirectly linked to sex work (loitering at the site where sex workers are
usually oering their services, oering services to passers-by, waiting for a client, etc.) (gure 3).
43
Sadržaj
Figure 3. The percentage of persons prosecuted under Article 14 of LPOP in relation to the circumstances of
apprehension by the police
Apprehended at
work
24.4%
Police action
24.4%
Circumstances
indirectly
linked to the
SW
51.2%
In 23.5% of the cases the prosecuted were apprehended in the company of a client, which cor-
responds to the data on the percentage of cases in which it is stated that the defendant/s were
caught in agrante. In 70.9% of cases they were caught alone, without the presence of other
persons; in 3.8% of cases they were in the company of colleagues, 1% was in the company of a
close person (brother, friend) and in 0.9% of cases it is not stated whether the person was alone
or in someone’s company.
Evidence on the oence specied in the case les diers, and there may have been more than
one piece of evidence within a case. The most frequent evidence appearing in the case les is
that the person was caught in a place where sex workers usually engage in sex work. Among
other evidence, with equal frequency but to a lesser extent than the rst one, are the police
statements that the person arrested possessed condoms at the time of apprehension, that they
were caught in agrante, as well as witness statements and other evidence (advertisements, pos-
session of a mobile phone and a phone number, assets seized upon apprehension, possession
of cash money, etc.) (gure 4).
44
Figure 4. Percentage of cases under Article 14 LPOP in relation to the evidence on the existence of the oence
cited upon detention and interrogation by the police
63.8%
11.7%
22.1% 19.4% 19.7%
Caught at a
place where sex
workers usually
work
Possession of
condoms
Other Caught "in
flagrante"
Witness
statements
In the majority of case les it is not stated that any items were conscated following the arrest
(59.6%). In other cases, the seized belongings were listed. Among the seized items, the most com-
mon were condoms, then money (gure 5). Neither condoms nor money were returned upon
the completion of the court proceedings. Where data are available, it was stated that the money
was submitted to the budget of the Republic of Serbia and that condoms were destroyed after
being identied as a means for committing the oence. Beside the condoms, where there were
data on the treatment of the conscated belongings, mobile phones and phone cards identied
as a means of committing the oence were destroyed as well. In one case, according to the doc-
uments of returned belongings, the certicate was issued on behalf of the defendant’s partner.
Figure 5. Frequency (in %) of reported items seized from the arrested persons prosecuted under Article 14 LPOP
21.6% 18.3%
8.9%
0.9% 1.8%
59.6%
Condoms Money Mobile
phone/SIM
card
PAS Other Nothing
confiscated
45
Sadržaj
The reasons for conscation of property were indicated in 77.9% of cases, usually it was not only
one reason. In almost two-thirds of the cases the reason stated was that the property was seized
as a means/evidence of committing the oense and in two-fths of the cases it stated that it
concerned the conscation of the material gain acquired by perpetration of the criminal oence
(gure 6).
Figure 6. Representation (in percentage) of the reasons stated in the cases processed under the Article 14 of
LPOP for the conscation of personal property
Means/evidence
of committing
the offense
64.2%
Confiscation of
the material gain
41.2%
Protection
measure:
Forfeiture
13.4%
Almost all detained persons gave and signed statements after interrogation at the police sta-
tion (90.6%), while in 3.3% the detained person gave a statement but did not sign it. In 6.1% the
detained persons neither made nor signed a statement at the police station. Out of the 51.2% of
the cases where the arrests were conducted due to indirect connection with sex work, in 94.5%
the detained persons confessed, while 5.5% did not confess the perpetration of the oence to
the police.
In 50.2% of the case les the reasons were stated which the detained person reported for en-
gaging in sex work. In most cases material and existential reasons were given, including child
support (97.2%). Other reasons given were that it was an occasional, part-time job (1.9%) and
addiction to psychoactive substances (0.9%). In most cases, it was stated that the defendant/s
declared that they were performing sex work independently, by negotiating directly with clients
on the street (78.9%) or through advertisements or telephone (10.8%), while in only a few cases
they reported that the sex work was contracted through the mediation of a third party (0.9%).
The rest of the case les (9.4%) contain no data on the organization of the work. In cases where
it was stated that the defendants had contracted sex work through a third party (two cases/
persons), the reasons stated for engaging in sex work were of existential nature. One person
who contracted work through third party was a citizen of Romania, the other of the Republic of
Serbia. These persons were prosecuted, as can be concluded from the data in the case les, in
the same way as the other indicted persons, and the entire process (from the arrest to sentenc-
ing) lasted one day.
46
In 61.5% the time period for which the defendants reported to be engaged in sex work is stated.
This ranges from four days to over ten years. The most frequent is one to ve years, the least
frequent is six months to one year (gure 7).
Figure 7. Representation of cases (%) according to the declared time of being engaged in sex work (among
cases with reported time of being engaged in sex work)
16.0%
3.0%
41.9%
19.8% 19.1%
Up to 6
months
6–12 months 1–5 years 5.1–10 years More then 10
years
Data on the length of detention are given in 165 cases (77.5%). The length of detention, accord-
ing to these data, was never over 24 hours and on average approximately 10 hours. In most cases
(96.7%) it was not specied what the health/physical/psychological condition of the detained
persons was at the time of the arrest. In cases where the health/psychological/physical condition
was indicated, two persons were stated to have been under the inuence of psychoactive sub-
stances at the time of arrest, one was previously treated in the Specialized Clinic for Addiction
Diseases in Belgrade, one was pregnant, and two had given birth in the period up to 6 months
prior to the arrest, while one was stated to be physically injured. Only the latter person was
provided with medical assistance, stating that she received “medical treatment from a specialist
at the Emergency Department”. Upon the completion of the process, of the women who had
given birth in the period up to 6 months prior to arrest one received an acquittal, and the other
suspension of the proceedings. The woman who was pregnant was sentenced to imprisonment
under Article 14 LPOP and a ne on other grounds.
In the course of the trial, i.e. the main hearing, the majority of defendants pleaded guilty to the
oense by Article 14 LPOP (96.2%). In the other cases, there was no admission of guilt. However,
despite the admission of guilt, 6.1% of the defendants changed their statements in court in com-
parison to the statement given to the police, whereas three defendants changed their statement
from admission of guilt to the police during the interrogation to a plea of ‘not guilty’ in the court
proceedings.
During the trials, most case les did not indicate the existence of a witness (72.8%), while in the
cases where it was stated that there was a witness present, the reading of the statement took
precedence over bringing the witnesses to give a testimony in court. In 24.4% of the cases the
witness’ (mainly clients) statements were read, while in 2.8% witnesses testied in court, where
the witnesses were mostly police ocers.
47
Sadržaj
According to date of arrest and date of verdict, in most cases (97.7%) the entire process lasted no
more than one day. For the rest of cases – there are no complete/clear data on the beginning of
the process (arrest), so it’s unknown are they last more than one day or not. In this short period
were not only those cases adjudicated where the defendants were prosecuted under the Law
on Identity Cards and/or under the Law on Temporary and Permanent Residence, but also those
who were prosecuted exclusively under Article 14 LPOP (40, 4%). In 44% of the cases of persons
who were prosecuted only under Article 14 LPOP and where the process lasted one day or less,
the defendants had already previously been punished for oenses under Article 14 LPOP.
From the cases processed within one day or less and only under Article 14 LPOP, only in 34.6%
the case les it is explicitly stated that the person had an ID card or other identication docu-
ment at the time of arrest. The procedure also lasted a day or less for those persons who had
foreign citizenship, as well as for those who reported that they had contracted work through a
third person.
The majority of the prosecuted persons pleaded guilty to the oenses (96.2%); 3.8% of the ac-
cused persons denied the oense in court. Of the persons who were arrested for being indirectly
associated with sex work (51.2%), 93.6% pleaded guilty in the court; 6.4% denied the oense.
However, in the majority of the cases admission of guilt was not explicitly cited as a mitigating
factor in the adjudication of the judgment.
As for mitigating and aggravating circumstances, in most cases it is not specied which exact
circumstances were taken into account. Aggravating circumstances were taken into account in
94.4% of cases, mostly without further specication. Where they were specied they mainly re-
ferred to the previous convictions of the defendant and/or the lack of an identity card or other
identication documents. Mitigating circumstances were taken into account in 76.6% of the
cases. In 93.1%, however, they were not further specied. Where they are specied, they refer
mainly to the defendant being mother of a minor or an infant or a single mother, specic per-
sonal or family circumstances, pregnancy at the time of the court proceedings, no prior convic-
tions, admission of guilt, unemployment or declarative eorts to obtain an ID card.
Upon the hearing, 2.8% of the cases resulted in a (conditional) discharge: release without condi-
tions (for one of the women who gave birth in the period up to 6 months prior to the trial), a
court warning, alteration of the prison sentence to ne, or suspension of proceedings (for the
defendant who had a child younger than one year).
Imprisonment was adjudicated in 97.2% of cases, varying from the minimum period of 4 days to
the maximum of 30 days. The average was 12 days (with a median of 10 days). As to the length of
the prison sentence, there was no dierence between those who were prosecuted for the rst
time under Article 14 LPOP and those who had previously been convicted. There was also no dif-
ference between those who did not own an ID card or other identication document at the time
of arrest and those who did. Also, the health/physical/psychological conditions of the accused
had no impact on the average length of the prison sentences. Although the cases included per-
sons identied to be under the inuence of psychoactive substances, in non of the cases com-
pulsory treatment of addiction was ordered; nor was any other measure ordered in respect of
any of the persons prosecuted. In addition, nes were imposed in 52.6% of cases ranging from
1,000 RSD to 20,000 RSD, with an average of 5723.21 RSD. The most common was the imposition
of a ne for the oenses under the Law on Identity Cards (68.5% of the cases where the ne was
imposed), followed by oenses under the Law on Temporary and Permanent Residence (62%).
48
Of the total of 213 cases, not a single court judgment was appealed by the defendants. Execu-
tion of judgment started the same day when the verdict is given in the 98.6% of cases. Only in
three cases (1.4% of cases), the execution of judgment take place from 1 day to 2 weeks after the
verdict is given.
Summary and conclusions
According to the analyzed case les on Article 14 LPOP, the prosecuted sex workers were on av-
erage 32 years old, predominantly females, the majority of them with lower levels of education
or no education whatsoever. Most of them were unmarried with on an average two children.
Over the course of two years, they were on average prosecuted 1.7 times under Article 14 of
LPOP. Approximately 4/5 of them had been previously prosecuted. In regard to half of the latter
group it is explicitly stated they were prosecuted under Article 14 LPOP, while for the other half
the reasons for previous prosecutions are unknown. Nearly 40% of them were prosecuted solely
under Article 14 of LPOP, the majority was also prosecuted on other grounds, mainly for viola-
tions of the Law on Identity Card and/or the Law on Permanent and Temporary Residence. This
indicates that a large part of the prosecuted sex workers had diculties with obtaining personal
documentation.
Only four cases involved persons who were not Serbian citizens. However, none of these cases
state whether (there were indications that) the person in question was a victim of human traf-
cking or not. All persons were prosecuted under the LPOP as well as the Aliens Act and sen-
tenced to imprisonment and an additional ne. In the case of the Romanian citizen, it is not
stated whether she was provided with an interpreter or not, although it was mentioned in the
case le that she didn’t speak Serbian and that she acquired clients through a third party. All ar-
rested persons who were identied by the police as persons engaged in sex work were tried by
judges who were not specialized in human tracking.
As many as half of the cases concerned arbitrary arrests. This means that the arrests were solely
based on activities associated with sex work, such as loitering at locations where sex workers
usually solicit clients, “oering” services to passers-by, “waiting” for clients etc., without any fur-
ther substantiation, except for the police ocers’ interpretation of these activities. According
to the case les 70% of the prosecuted persons were arrested at the scene. The evidence used
for proving sex work is quite arbitrary: the most prominent proof is the fact that the person was
loitering at a location where sex workers usually gather, followed by the possession of condoms.
There is also more grounded evidence, e.g. when a person was caught in the act or when there
was a witness testimony, witnesses usually being clients or police ocers. Based on this data,
we can conclude that there is a relatively high level of arbitrariness among the arrests and the
further processing of the cases when it comes to sex work.
The treatment of the possession of condoms as evidence is a separate issue. Although condoms
are proven to be the most reliable form of protection against STI’s, they are used as evidence of
a sexual oense and are conscated and consequently destroyed as ‘means’ of committing the
oense. This is particularly harmful from the perspective of prevention in the eld of sexual and
reproductive health and rights. It discourages sex workers to use condoms for fear of police ac-
tions and this puts both the health of sex workers and their clients at risk.
49
Sadržaj
In most cases the entire procedure, from arrest to sentencing, lasted no longer than 24 hours.
The use of this accelerated procedure included not only persons with problematic personal doc-
umentation, but all persons detained on the basis of violation of Article 14 LPOP. Judgments
were generally uniform: there is no dierence in the average length of prison sentence (12 days/
median; 10 days on average) in relation to previous arrests or convictions, the possession of iden-
tication documents or medical condition. Only two women who had children younger than
6 months at the time of arrest were exempt, i.e. their proceedings were suspended. For other
persons whose health status was recorded (i.e. abuse of psychoactive substances, pregnancy
or physical injury), this condition did not aect the verdict or the length of the sentence. Not a
single person who was identied as user of psychoactive substances was imposed a measure
of compulsory treatment of their addiction. Also, although the case les state that a number of
persons pleaded not guilty to the police and during the court hearings, this did not aect the
judgment, i.e. punishment with imprisonment and an additional ne if there were additional
charges of violation of any other law.
In none of the cases the verdict was appealed. It is assumed that the convicted persons weren’t
familiar with the procedures for ling an appeal and/or had no time (or money) to consult a law-
yer or write an appeal, because they were promptly sent o to Požarevac prison to serve their
sentence.
Recommendations
• Abolition of Art.14 of the Public Peace and Order Law in order to ensure the basic human
rights of sex workers
• Development of mechanisms to ensure respect for the fundamental human rights of sex
workers, in particular the right to life, liberty and security, including protection against arbi-
trary arrest, detention or deportation, the right to a fair trial, the right to non-discrimination,
equality before the law and equal protection by the law, the right to health, right on work,
to free choice of employment, and satisfying working conditions, the right to own property
and not to be deprived of their property, as the rights stated under United Nations’ Univer-
sal Declaration of Human Rights.30
• Abolishment of the practice of using condoms as evidence for sex work as well as of the
destruction of condoms as a ‘means’ of committing the oense. This is both in the interest
of the health of sex workers and public health eorts to protect sexual and reproductive
health and rights of people.
• Capacity building of sex workers to understand their legal and human rights, the situations
in which these rights are violated and ways in which they can react to protect themselves
against violations of their rights.
• Capacity building of sex workers to understand legal procedures and how they can use
these to protect their integrity and their rights.
• Sensitization of judges and police to the human rights of sex workers.
30 The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. [Internet]. Geneva: United Nations. 10. December 1948. [Acceded
on November, 11 2013]. Available at: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/
50
7 Analysis of judgments under Article 184 CC:
mediation in prostitution
Ivana Radović, ASTRA
The objective of the analysis was to explore the manner in which Article 184 of the Criminal
Code of the Republic of Serbia (hereinafter: CC) ‘Mediation in Prostitution’31 is implemented in
the legal practice in our country.
Article 184 CC - Mediation for Prostitution
(1) Whoever abets or induces another person to prostitution or participates in handing over
a person to another for the purpose of prostitution, or who by means of media or otherwise
promotes or advertises prostitution, shall be punished with a ne and imprisonment from six
months up to ve years.
(2) If the oence specied in paragraph 1 of this Article is committed against a minor, the of-
fender shall be punished with a ne and imprisonment from one to ten years.
Although the Article intends to suppress sex work by punishing the procurer, i.e. pimp, in reality
it is often used to prosecute sex workers themselves who group together in order to provide
safer and more convenient working conditions for themselves, or to prosecute the criminal of-
fence of human tracking for sexual exploitation. The latter happens in two cases: when the of-
fence of tracking is not recognized as such from the very beginning or when the case begins as
a human tracking case but during the process is reclassied to mediation in prostitution. The
reasons can be twofold: either the prosecutors and judges fail to recognize the criminal oence
of human tracking or they recognize it as a case of human tracking but do not have enough
evidence to prosecute, and consequently resort to reclassication of the case to mediation in
prostitution, with the justication that the most important outcome is for the perpetrators to be
punished.
The analysis is based on 40 judgments on the criminal oence of mediation in prostitution
provided by the basic courts, higher courts and courts of appeal from the entire territory of
the Republic of Serbia. The basic courts in the following towns informed us that they had had
no cases on mediation in prostitution during the period 2011-2012: Čačak, Kruševac, Požega,
Vranje, Paraćin, Užice, Loznica, Kikinda, Prokuplje, Sombor, Niš, Novi Pazar, Požarevac, Pirot, Prij-
epolje, Zaječar, Valjevo, Zrenjanin and Kosovska Mitrovica. The same goes for the higher courts
in the following towns: Leskovac, Subotica, Požarevac, Pirot, Sremska Mitrovica, Kruševac, Šabac,
Pančevo, Sombor, Kragujevac, Smederevo, Kosovska Mitrovica, Užice, Novi Pazar, Jagodina,
Kraljevo, Niš, Zrenjanin, Čačak.
While legal proceedings under Article 184 CC do not fall within the jurisdiction of the higher
courts, these courts adjudicate when cases which started as human tracking (Article 388 CC)
are reclassied as mediation in prostitution (Article 184 CC). Therefore, the judgments and feed-
back provided by the higher courts are of great importance.
31 Criminal Code of the Republic of Serbia. Ocial Gazette RS, no. 85/2005, 88/2005 – rev. 107/2005 - rev,
72/2009, 111/2009, 121/2012 and 104/2013.
51
Sadržaj
All courts of appeal provided judgments and feedback. While the Court of Appeal in Niš did not
provided copies of the judgments, but allowed access to the court register, the Court of Appeal
in Novi Sad informed us only on the number of conducted proceedings, but referred the re-
searchers to the Acting President of the Court who can provide special authorization for getting
access to the judgments. Interestingly, in the initial phase of the research, the Court of Appeal in
Novi Sad provided anonymised judgments without additional conditions.
Thirteen judgments from the courts of appeal were excluded from the analysis because it was
not possible to connect them with the rst-instance judgments; in other words, it was not pos-
sible to extract the data required for the study from the second-instance judgments, since they
only specied the substantial violations of the criminal proceedings, the decision on penal sanc-
tions, criminal law violations, etc. Of these judgments seven conrmed the rst-instance judg-
ment, four annulled the rst-instance court judgment and one modied the rst-instance court
judgment.
Type of cases
Article Nr. cases Crime No& gender
defendants
No& gender
injured par-
ties
Court
184 (1) 4Mediation for prostitution
resp. advertising for pros-
titution
4 female sex
workers
4 female
1 male
Basic Court Novi Sad
(3); First Basic Court
Belgrade (1)
184(2)/251
CC FRY
4Mediation for prostitution
of a minor
Male 3
Female 4
4 female (15
yr: 2; 17 yr:1;
unknown:1)
Basic Court Novi Sad
(2); Basic Court Bor
(1); First Basic Court
Belgrade (1).
184 (1) 3Reclassication of track-
ing (388 CC) to mediation
for prostitution. In appeal
1 case reclassied from
mediation to child abuse
(180 CC)
Male: 4 Female: 6, of
whom 4 mi-
nors
Basic Court in Ne-
gotin, Zajačear and
Šabac
184 (1) 2Mediation for prostitution
with the use of coercion
Male: 3 Female: 4 First Basic Court Bel-
grade (1); Basic Court
Su b otica (1)
184 (1) 14 Organising the prostitu-
tion of another person
Male: 18
Female: 3
Female: 21 Basic Courts in Bel-
grade (6), Kraguje-
vac (3), Novi Sad (2),
Subotica (1), Lesko-
vac (1) and Vršac (1).
Total 27
Conviction of sex workers for mediation for prostitution
In four judgments – three from the Basic Court in Novi Sad and one from the Basic Court in
Belgrade – sex workers were convicted for mediation for prostitution. In all four cases, the
52
defendants were women, while among the “injured parties” (ve persons) there was one male.
In one case, there was no injured party. Only one of the cases presented witnesses, notably two
(out of three) “injured parties” and the defendant’s client. In one case the criminal oence was
discovered when a police inspector posed as client, the other cases lacked an explanation on
how the oence was discovered.
All cases concerned female sex workers who lived and/or worked together with the “injured
party”. All defendants advertised their services through the media or the internet. Besides ad-
vertising, two defendants had rented an apartment where they practiced sex work, looked for
clients and made deals with them, not only for themselves but also for the “injured parties”, and
in return demanded a certain percentage of the prot (50%). In one case, the defendant lived in a
common-law marriage with the injured party, who also engaged in sex work, and the supposed
solicitation for prostitution was actually a situation where the defendant ceded a client in favour
of the injured party without compensation. In the fourth case there was no injured party, i.e. the
sex worker was accused of solicitation of herself, by putting out ads which advertised prostitu-
tion. The rationale behind the judgment states:
„The action of committing the basic criminal oence of mediation in prostitution under Article
184 para. 1 of the Criminal Code was prescribed alternatively. In the aforementioned article,
it was foremost stipulated which actions are considered to be solicitation of prostitution, and
those actions are specied as abetment or solicitation of others to commit the act of prostitu-
tion. Subsequently, the action of committing the basic criminal act is being prescribed for princi-
pal in the second degree and is specied as engaging in handing over one individual to another
for the purpose of prostitution, and lastly, the nal prescribed alternative action of committing
the basic criminal act is promoting and advertising of prostitution through the means of mass
communication and other similar methods”.32
This is rather unusual, because the criminal oence of Article 184 CC is called mediation for pros-
titution, and, although one of its elements concerns the advertising of prostitution, its objective
is to punish procurers and pimps, rather than sex workers. This interpretation arises from the
fact that Article 14 of the Law on Public Peace and Order (LPOP)33 is intended for the suppression
of sex work, i.e. engagement in prostitution. According to the interviewed magistrate judges,
engagement in prostitution in this article is interpreted as a profession, as an intent to engage
in prostitution and covering any action which indicates the intent of engaging in prostitution,
including the advertising of one’s own sex work. In other words, it is unclear what the criteria
were behind the decision to prosecute a sex worker who conducts sex work independently, for
the criminal oence of Article 184 CC and not for the misdemeanor of Article 14 LPOP.
The evidence (beside the confessions of the defendants) that was used in these cases included
published ads, mobile phones and SIM cards, as well as text messages. In only one case, the mo-
bile phone and SIM card were conscated as a security measure. As the judgment states:
“Bearing in mind that the defendant was using the specied mobile device to connect with
other persons with an intent to conduct a criminal oence, and that there was a danger that
32 Basic Court in Novi Sad K–3368/2011.
33 Law on Public Peace and Order. Ocial Gazette RS, no. 51/92, 53/93, 67/93, 48/94, 101/2005 - other law and
85/2005 - other law.
53
Sadržaj
the specied device might be used again for the same purposes, it was necessary to impose the
security measure of conscation of the item.”34
Condoms were not cited as evidence or conscated as a security measure, which represents a
signicant dierence in comparison with earlier practices of magistrates’ courts with respect to
the prosecution of sex workers.
All four defendants pleaded guilty; one sex worker signed a plea bargain with the prosecutor.
Two defendants were sentenced to suspended sentences (resp. four and six months suspended
sentence for two years), and two defendants were sentenced to resp. ve and eight months of
prison, along with nes ranging from 30,000 to 50,000 dinars (EUR 270-450)). Prison sentences
were mainly below the legal minimum.
As mitigating circumstances, the courts took the following factors into account: no prior criminal
convictions (3), admission of guilt (3), the fact that the defendant is a family woman and/or moth-
er of minors (2), the young age of the defendant (1), and remorse and regret over the oence (2).
Only one defendant had prior convictions taken as an aggravating circumstance.
Examination of the judgments of the Magistrates’ Court in Belgrade learned that the “injured
parties” who were engaged in sex work and who were reportedly mediated by the defendants
in the proceedings held before the First Basic Court in Belgrade under Article 184 CC, were not
simultaneously prosecuted for the misdemeanor of engaging in prostitution under Article 14
LP OP.
Mediation for prostitution of a minor
Four judgments referred to mediation for prostitution of a minor under Article 184, paragraph
2 of the Criminal Code. Although the study does not deal with sex work of minors, it must be
pointed out that sex work involving persons under the age of 18 cannot be voluntary, even if
a minor states so.35 However, these four cases are intriguing enough to focus on because they
contain signicant elements of involuntariness and human tracking, that is, beyond the fact
that there were minors involved.
The judgments were reached by the Basic Court in Novi Sad (2), the Basic Court in Bor (1) and the
First Basic Court in Belgrade (1). Although the judgments were rendered in the period 2011-2012,
two of them refer to acts committed during the time when the Criminal Code of FRY was still
in eect (Article 251, paragraph 2): one act was committed in 1997 and the other in the period
2002-2004. One of these judgments is not yet nal and enforceable.
In two cases the defendants were men, in one case a man and a woman, and in one case the
defendants were three women who themselves were engaged in sex work. The injured parties
were four teenage girls, aged 15 (2) and 17 (1); for one injured party the age wasn’t stated. In one
case there were originally six adult injured parties, who were later excluded due to the fact that
the part of the indictment relating to them became subject of the statute of limitations.
In the context of human tracking, the most interesting case is the one from the Municipal
Court in Novi Sad36, which stems from 1997 and has not yet reached its nal decision. Accord-
34 Appellate Court in Novi Sad Kž 1-3930/2011.
35 According to the denition of tracking, any recruitment or mediation for prostitution of minors is consid-
ered to be tracking, independent of the use of coercive or deceptive means.
36 The Basic Court in Novi Sad K-24457/2010.
54
ing to the indictment the rst defendant brought girls from Ukraine and Moldova to Serbia and
forced them to engage in prostitution at a place owned by the second defendant by seizing
their documents and restricting their freedom of movement, while the defendants took all the
money that the girls earned. The case was detected in a police raid. One can argue that at that
particular moment the oence of human tracking was not a criminal oence (although there
was an oence of enslaving and transportation of enslaved persons - Article 155 CC FRY) and
therefore could not be prosecuted as such, but it is hard to justify the sentences in the rst in-
stance judgments, respectively two years, and one year and two months’ imprisonment.
Furthermore, the standpoint of the Court of Appeal in Novi Sad37 is questionable as well, as it
overturned the judgments (and this took place in 2011, at a time when the judiciary should have
been well aware and sensitized to the issues of human tracking), accepting the argument of
the defense that the rst-instance court had had to make sure that the victims and the witnesses
were present at the court hearing, and not read their statement given to the police. We should
bear in mind two facts: rst, the victim and the witnesses had given their testimonies in 1997,
after which they were deported from the country with an exclusion order for the period of one
year, and the Court of Appeal is expecting that they appear and testify 13 years later. Secondly,
the entire process lasted thirteen years due to the fact that the rst defendant was a fugitive for
years and did not respond to court summons, and was eventually extradited from Bosnia and
Herzegovina as a defendant in two proceedings for mediation in prostitution.
Also the second case contains unambiguous elements of the criminal oence of human track-
ing, although the proceeding was conducted for the criminal oence of mediation for prostitu-
tion. This is supported by the fact that, according to the case le, the defendant had deceived
the victim by taking her to another city, where she agreed to go believing she would be intro-
duced to a popular singer, without any intention or notion that she would engage in sex work.
There are also statements of witnesses stating that “the defendant said that he was planning to
sell the victim”. The above cases raise the serious question what human tracking is and why it
is incriminated in Serbian legislation at all, when the acts of recruitment, deception, violence and
threats (which are irrelevant because the victims are minors) and (attempted) sexual exploita-
tion - which represent the essence of the crime of human tracking -are treated as mediation
for prostitution.
In the other two cases with minor victims, the victims initially consented to sex work - if we can
talk about consent of a fteen-year old for this type of work - while their continued engagement
in prostitution was secured through physical and psychological violence and threats (as stated
in the verdict: “you’re dead”, “take care of mum”, “if she does not continue to work, she will end
up dead”38).
In one case the defendant was a ctitious employer, in the other the common-law husband, and
in two cases an acquaintance. One case was discovered in a police raid. Two cases were reported
by the victims themselves, i.e. the mother of one of the victims and a man who was allegedly
supposed to buy the girl reported the case to the police. In one case there is no information on
how the tracking chain was broken.
As for the penalties for the two cases prosecuted under Article 251 of the previous Criminal Code
of FRY, they range from one to two years’ imprisonment, with the Court of Appeal mitigating
37 The Appellate Court in Novi Sad, Kž 1 1392/11.
38 First Basic Court in Belgrade 4K-2/2012.
55
Sadržaj
one of the sentences from one year imprisonment to ten months suspended sentence. For the
two cases prosecuted under Article 184(2) CC the penalties were 3, 6, and 7 months in prison
with a ne of 10,000 RSD (around EUR 90) per person in one judgment, and one year imprison-
ment in the other judgment.
Reclassication from tracking to mediation for prostitution
Three judgments for mediation in prostitution under Article 184 CC were rendered after the
initial indictment had been reclassied from the criminal oence of human tracking (Article
388 CC), whereas one of these judgments was modied by the Court of Appeal and reclassied
from mediation for prostitution to sexual abuse of a child (Article 180 CC). These judgments were
rendered by the Basic Court in Negotin, the Basic Court in Zajačear and the Basic Court in Šabac.
The defendants in all cases are males - four of them, while all victims are females, namely two
adults and ve minors (including two persons under 14 years old).
The oences were perpetrated between 2008 - 2009, in 2009, and between 2005- 2007, span-
ning a period from a few months up to two years. The accused were sentenced to resp. impris-
onment of 2.5 years and a ne of 100,000 dinars (around EUR 900), and a ne of 100,000 dinars,
while in the third case the Court of Appeal reclassied the crime to abuse of a child and lowered
the original sentence of 6 years imprisonment and a ne of 150,000 to 2 years and 3 months in
prison.
The rst case concerned the sexual exploitation of a woman who worked as a waitress in a bar
owned by the defendant and who engaged in sex work consensually, but remained to do so
only because of her heroin addiction. The defendant did not give her the money that she earned
by engaging in sex work, but instead paid her in heroin. The defendant had already previously
been convicted for mediation in prostitution.
In the second case, the defendant paid the trip of the foreign victim to Serbia and informed her
only upon her arrival that she would engage in sex work. In this case it is particularly interesting
that the defendants denied the crime, and then proposed themselves to reclassify the oence
from human tracking to mediation in prostitution. The fact that the victim was identied as
victim of tracking and placed in a safe house – which is stated in the judgment - was not taken
into account in the reclassication of the oence.
In the third case all victims were minors, two of them below the age of 14, for which reason they
are not the subject of this survey, but they are mentioned because the judgment is very interest-
ing. Among other things, the Court of Appeal held that the defendant could not be convicted
for mediation in prostitution, because two of the ve minor victims had already engaged in
prostitution before. Therefore, according to the court, the defendant could not have solicited
them for prostitution. The judgment of both the rst instance court and the court of appeal
contain a detailed explanation why the oence cannot be qualied as human tracking, with-
out questioning the legal validity of voluntariness or consent in the case of minors. Also heroin
addiction is not recognized as taking advantage of the victims’ dicult circumstances and/or
abuse of dependency. It is particularly emphasized that all victims are well-o for their age and
that they engaged in prostitution in order to buy heroin, although they were not designated as
addicts but as users.
56
The judgment is problematic for more than one reason: most importantly, consent is not rel-
evant in the case of 16-year-old girls. Moreover, even if they had been adults, the fact that a
person was previously engaged in prostitution and/or consented to prostitution (or domestic
labour or construction work, etc.) is not relevant for the crime of tracking once the use of de-
ception, coercion, force or any of the other listed means is established.
All above judgments indicate the lack of awareness among judges and prosecutors on the issue
of human tracking, as well as ignorance and lack of understanding of this criminal oence,
despite numerous training courses that were organized on the subject.
Mediation for prostitution with the use of coercion
In two judgments, rendered by the First Basic Court in Belgrade and the Basic Court in Subotica,
the oence concerned mediation for prostitution with clear elements of coercion. One of the
oences was committed in the period 2008 - 2009 by a group consisting of two members, the
other between 2004 and 2006. The victims were four sex workers, two in each case. In both
cases, the defendants recruited clients through ads and provided working space and/or trans-
portation. In one case they would charge the client for the provided service and split the prots,
in the other case the defendant conscated all the money the victim earned. One of the cases
was discovered when a police ocer posed as client. Two defendants were sentenced to nes,
each for the amount of 300,000 dinars (around EUR 2650), with one of the defendants also be-
ing charged with the iniction of minor bodily injuries; the third defendant was sentenced to 6
months suspended sentence for 2 years.
In both cases clear elements of coercion can be found in the testimonies of victims as cited in the
judgments, e.g. in the Belgrade case39:
“When [the victim] got out of prison, she decided to stop doing this, but [the defendant] said
she owed him 1200 Euros and that she can leave once she pays him back, so she had to return
to prostitution.”; “She paid back the debt of 1200 Euros, and then he continued to come up with
new ones”.
And in the Subotica case40:
“If they did not want to work for him, he was yelling at them, telling them that they must do it
so while [name of the victim] was threatened to get beaten up if she refused to work for him”;
“From [name of the victim] he took the whole amount, and when [name of the victim] refused
to work for him, he threatened her with a knife, saying that he would cut o her lips and ears”;
“When she wanted to get out, there was no chance, [the rst defendant] would threatened to
drown her, insult her, yell at her, and she was afraid that he would harm her child”; “… that he
threatened the [name of the victim] that he was going to cut her up, kill her, mutilate her be-
cause it was her fault that they had nothing to eat”.
Two of the victims altered their statements they had previously given before the judge, after
they had previously stated that they had been threatened by the defendants. As cited in the Bel-
grade judgment: “... adding that he met her and [name of the other victim] in the hallway before
the hearing and told them not to tell the truth, but to say they were working by themselves and
39 First Basic Court in Belgrade 33K-4519/10.
40 Basic Court in Subotica 4K-663/10.
57
Sadržaj
that he was driving them that day, but did not know where to”.41 And in the Subotica judgment:
“… that he threatened [name of the victim] to cut her child and she would be forced to watch.”42
Again the qualication of the oence in both judgments is problematic. The purpose of the
criminal oence of mediation for prostitution is to sanction any intermediary activity in regard
to the prostitution of another person. If the oender uses coercion for the purpose of exploiting
the victims, there are no elements of voluntariness, and the crime should be qualied as human
tracking in accordance with the national and international denition of tracking.
Organizing the prostitution of another person
Fourteen judgments were rendered against persons who can be classied as pimps or organiz-
ers of sex work. These judgments were rendered by the Basic Courts in Belgrade (6), Kragujevac
(3), Novi Sad (2), Subotica (1), Leskovac (1) and Vršac (1). In two cases the act of mediation was
perpetrated in 2006, two in 2007, three in 2008, four in 2009, and in three cases in 2010. The judg-
ments were rendered in 2011 and 2012.
In these proceedings 21 people appeared as defendants: 18 men and 3 women. In none of the
cases the female defendant acted independently, it was always together with one or more of
the male defendants. In eight cases the defendants were individuals, in six cases it concerned a
group of two people and in one case three people. In three cases the accused had an intimate
relationship with the victim; in one case the victim had a relationship with the cousin of the ac-
cused. In four of the cases where the relationship between the defendant and the sex worker
was strictly professional, the defendants recruited clients through advertisements, provided
working space, and split the prots. In two cases, the defendants did not have a permanent co-
operation with the sex workers, but would call them when they came across a person who was
willing and interested to pay for sex. In two cases, the defendants were helping friends: in one
case, the defendant introduced the sex worker to the client - his cousin - on a non-commercial
basis, while he didn’t engage in pimping as a trade; in the other case, the defendant was arrested
while he sat in the car waiting for his friend to get out of the client’s apartment, also on a non-
commercial basis. In two cases the defendants provided physical protection to the sex worker
concerned and/or they “rented” them a part of the sidewalk where they would stand and oer
their services, with an obligation to pay for “protection” on a daily basis.
In seven cases the sex work took place in an apartment rented for this purpose; in six cases on
the street (in two cases at locations known for sex work) and in one case in a bar owned by the
defendant. In three cases, the oence was discovered by a police ocer posing as client.
In total 21 sex workers appeared as ”injured parties” - in ten cases only one per case, in two cases
two, in one case three, and in one case four. Three of the judgments revealed that the sex work-
ers concerned had simultaneously been penalized for the misdemeanor of engaging in prostitu-
tion - all three times in Belgrade.
The largest number of defendants was sentenced to suspended sentences, whether inde-
pendently (6) or in combination with nes (2). The most common penalty is six months’ sus-
pended sentence for one (1), two (2), or three years (3). The harshest sentence was 12 months’
41 First Basic Court in Belgrade 33K-4519/10.
42 Basic Court in Subotica 4K-663/10.
58
imprisonment suspended for three years. In the two cases where both a suspended prison sen-
tence and a ne were imposed, the amount was 10,000 and 20,000 dinars. These gures are
only a fraction compared to the two cases where only a ne was imposed, notably 200,000 to
250,000 dinars. As a reminder, for the misdemeanor of engaging in prostitution it is not possible
to impose suspended sentences or nes. Six people were sentenced to prison terms ranging
from two months to one year, on average slightly more than seven months. In three cases four
defendants were acquitted. It is interesting to point out that, although it is only four persons and
a relatively short period of time, one defendant was acquitted twice for mediation in prostitu-
tion. This is also the only defendant in the cases covered by the analysis who appears in more
than one case.
When comparing the verdicts of the Magistrates’ Court in Belgrade and the First Basic Court in
Belgrade, we did not nd a correlation. This would indicate that the misdemeanor proceedings
against sex workers for engaging in prostitution and the criminal proceedings for mediation in
prostitution against the organizers/pimps are being conducted in parallel. However, one can-
not really draw conclusions from this because sex work as a misdemeanor is processed in sum-
mary proceedings immediately after the arrest, while mediation for prostitution is dealt with in
(lengthy) criminal proceedings which can take several years.
Although we analyzed both administrative and criminal judgments rendered in the period 2011
to 2012, none of the criminal convictions applied to oences committed after 2010. On the other
hand, if we compare the number of misdemeanor judgments (213, Magistrates’ Court in Bel-
grade, 2011-2012) and criminal convictions (7, First and Second Basic Court in Belgrade, 2011-
2012) rendered over a two-year period - even when the oences took place in dierent periods
- it is clear that there is a far larger number of misdemeanor judgments, i.e. proceedings against
sex workers, than criminal proceedings against pimps, although in qualifying mediation in pros-
titution as a criminal oence, the legislator recognizes the latter to be a greater social danger
than the oence of engaging in prostitution, which is dened as a misdemeanor.
In most cases, the court based its decision on the testimony of witnesses or of the sex workers
concerned. In other cases, the evidence was an advertisement (1), a medical report (1), a state-
ment of a police ocer (1), a call log from the mobile phone (1). In one case an expert opinion
was required, in three cases the sex workers’ judgments for the misdemeanor of engaging in
prostitution was annexed, and in six cases the le contained a declaration of seized objects,
usually mobile phones. If we make a comparison with the misdemeanor proceedings for pros-
titution, we may conclude that in the criminal proceedings against the organizers/pimps the
evidence is much more scrutinized and the witnesses are always interrogated, whether directly
or their statements are being read, which is rare in misdemeanor proceedings. In ve cases the
defendants confessed.
Mitigating circumstances that the court took into account when sentencing, included: remorse
for the committed oence (6), proper conduct in court (6), confession of the oence (5), no prior
convictions (4), the fact that the defendant was a family man and a father, i.e. a family woman
and a mother (4), the fact that the defendant was unemployed and without income (2), the fam-
ily circumstances of the defendant (2), the fact that the defendants were relatively young people
(2) and the fact that the defendant was an older man (1). In one case, the court found no mitigat-
ing circumstances. Similar mitigating circumstances are listed in misdemeanor judgments for
engaging in prostitution.
59
Sadržaj
Summary and conclusions
More than half of the analyzed judgments rendered under Article 184 CC in the period 2011
- 2012, did not concern actual cases of mediation for prostitution (which would imply the orga-
nization of the prostitution of adults who are voluntarily engaged in sex work), but concerned
convictions against sex workers for advertising their services, against persons who exploited sex
workers with the use of violence or threats of violence, against persons who sexually exploited
underage girls, as well as cases which were initially classied as tracking, but in some stage of
the court proceedings were reclassied as mediation in prostitution.
This practice has multiple negative consequences:
• The failure to properly identify victims of tracking and instead treating them as victims
of ‘mediation for prostitution’, deprives them from access to the various types of assistance
programs and all other rights granted to tracking victims. This not only negatively impacts
their recovery but also, more importantly, exposes them to a high risk of becoming victims
of tracking again. Moreover, they risk being prosecuted themselves for prostitution.
• The use of Article 184 CC to prosecute cases of forced prostitution is contrary to its purpose,
i.e. sanctioning mediation in voluntary sex work. If we exclude the element of voluntariness
from the basic form of this oence, it transforms the case into human tracking for sexual
exploitation, which is regulated by Article 388 CC.
• Even more poignant is the situation in relation to minor victims. Minors who appear as
victims of ‘mediation for prostitution’ are often labeled as prostitutes and are also deprived
of the protection and assistance they require as victims of sexual exploitation. Persons under
18 years of age are considered a child according to the UN Convention on the Rights of the
Child and children cannot legally valid consent to prostitution. Moreover, the UN Tracking
Protocol, the CoE Convention on Tracking and the domestic legislation are clear that any
exploitation of minors in prostitution should be considered tracking. Therefore, Article
184(2) is in contradiction with both domestic and international law and should be abolished.
• The prosecution of sex workers under article 184 CC for advertising their services or forming
associations with other sex workers – activities which are essentially performed for the
purpose of prostitution - puts them at a disadvantage in relation to their primary oence,
i.e. engaging in prostitution itself, which is a misdemeanor sanctioned by more moderate
punishments.
60
8 Interviews with magistrates
Staša Plećaš, JAZAS
In the framework of the qualitative study conducted among Misdemeanor Judges (magistrates),
interviews were conducted with 7 judges, including two judges who were permanent judges of
the on-call court. The on-call (on–duty) court service normally consists of 3 permanent judges,
however the third judge was not yet appointed after the former retired. The on-call court there-
fore had 2 permanent on-duty judges with several other judges rotating to replace the third
position. The interviews with the selected judges cover two thirds of the cases dealt with under
Article 14 of the Public Peace and Order Law (LPOP) in Belgrade.
Denition
Sex work is regulated by Article 14 of the Public Peace and Order Law, which states:
Whoever engages in prostitution or provides premises for the purposes of prostitution shall be
punished by imprisonment by up to 30 days.
This article was rst formulated in 1967, or maybe even earlier, and according to all interviewed
judges it is an outdated/obsolete article which by no means fullls its goal, whatever that goal
was. However, even though most judges think that the article is outdated and that it is not in
accordance with the current socio-cultural context, the position that people who engage in sex
work should be ‘removed from the streets’ is still dominant. According to the judges, there is a
need for legal provisions, which either regulate prostitution or suppress it, that is prevent this
type of behavior.
“Well, the goal… There probably is a general goal, a general societal goal. But I look at a dier-
ent one, I look at it dierently. I always strive ... for us to remove them from the streets, at least
for a while. But then on the other hand, you send them to jail at the expense of the state, and
then after 30 days, or 15 days they get out and they do it again. So, I strive to remove them, so
they can rest, get a hold of themselves…. In terms of prevention, and all its protections.”
In making their judgments, judges rst start with the general meaning of the law:
“Laws with legal provisions are meant to act both in a repressive and a preventive manner.”
Whatever the goal of the law is or should be according to the interviewed judges, be it repres-
sive, preventive or regulatory, the weight and the problem of this particular article lies in its
complicated denition. That is to say, the original socio-cultural and moral reasons for this law,
as outdated as they are to the judges themselves, is still in eect in its original wording. It is this
wording, or the denition, that opens the door for personal interpretations of what constitutes
‘prostitution’ or a punishable act.
For misdemeanor judges, the denition and interpretation of the term ‘engaging in’ or ‘giving
oneself to’43 (or Art. 14 itself) ranges from oering sexual services to either a law enforcement
ocer or a civilian through an advertisement to the intent to sell sexual services (dened as
43 The Serbian term ‘odavanje’ used in this Article is ill-translated to ‘engaging’ in English. There is no English
term that is synonymous with ‘odavanje’. This term is best described as ‘giving oneself’ to something.
61
Sadržaj
standing on the street and stopping vehicles or standing at a location known for prostitution)
and nally to a judge identifying someone as a sex worker.
“What does it mean ‘in the act’? Because in the Public Peace and Order Law the formulation is
‘whoever engages in prostitution’ - this means, she doesn’t need to have been caught at that
moment, it is possible for [her to have worked] two days ago or I don’t know, three hours ago or
something like that. She doesn’t need to have clients at that moment or to be negotiating with
a client. This is not at all a characteristic of the misdemeanor. “
“We merely consider the facts. It is generally clear that in that moment they wanted to commit
the misdemeanor act. The location is characteristic. I mean, they are always in the same spot,
known for it…”
“Engaging in prostitution, it is exactly …the legislator understands this act to be your profes-
sion, you know, you have the intent to earn money through sexual services.”
“The act is exactly that… it is the intent to stop the car and oer sexual services for money.
There is always premeditation, there is always premeditation, do you understand?”
Some of the consequences of this kind of formulation are clear from the following answer to the
question: What if the detainee claims not to have been caught in the act, whose statement is
then more valid, the statements of the sex worker or the arresting ocer?
“I mean, look, it can lead to doubt, but it is a matter of proof, and thank God, it will remain so…
it is not up to the judge, the judge is there to consider the evidence. If the police… I won’t say
that this happens, but if the police comes and says, yes she gave us a price, and she says she
didn’t, and the police ocer [the undercover police ocer] still claims that she did (tell him a
price for services) …In some way we are bound by the law, it’s not like we believe the plainti,
like it is presented in public, but the accused has the right to lie. We’re not saying that the as-
sumption is correct, but the accused has the right to lie. The witness is obligated to tell the truth,
if she or he doesn’t, that is a criminal act. So if he claims, insists that it was so, especially if he is a
[law enforcement] ocial, then he risks committing a crime. Just taking that into consideration,
his statement should weigh more ... it doesn’t mean it is a hundred percent [true], but this gray
zone is the most common… and it depends on this gray zone what level of doubt has remained
with the judge.”
This kind of broad interpretation of the term ‘engaging’ doesn’t leave a lot of room for the ac-
cused to prove that at the moment of apprehension they were not ‘engaging in prostitution’.
Evidence and facts
Determining the facts, which entails consideration of evidence and establishing guilt, is done on
the basis of the statements given to police, statements by witnesses when needed and state-
ments made by sex workers in court, or on the basis of one or more of the following factors: time
and location of arrest, the manner of detaining a sex worker, criminal and misdemeanor records,
‘knowing someone from before’, clothing, that is ’looks’, other people who might have been at
the same location or detained at the same time as well as the request of police.
62
Statements are taken from sex workers when they are apprehended and brought into the police
station, although according to the judges this is not necessary as court proceedings are initiated
at the ocial request of the police. The police request contains an ocial note stating the rea-
sons and circumstances of the arrest.
It is very dicult to deny that the act has been committed. Statements made in the police sta-
tion can rarely be changed in front of the judge due to the fact that there are multiple other fac-
tors that weigh against the sex worker at that moment. For example, in cases where a sex worker
denies that she was working and claims that the statement made at the police station is not true,
the arresting police ocer may be called as a witness. As explained by the judge in the above
quotation, since the witness is bound by law to tell the truth and the defendant has the right to
lie, that is to defend her/himself, there is no reason not to believe the police ocer as witnesses
may lie. Therefore, testimonies made by police and sex workers cannot be viewed objectively
since police testimonies are on forehand viewed to be true and thereby valid.
Also, calling the arresting police ocers as witnesses can be used as a threat:
“Yes, because I usually say, OK, you’ll sit here until the ocer who caught you in the act comes.
He will come here and the two of you will have to face each other, look each other in the eye.
And then it is nished.”
Even though sex workers are also permitted to call witnesses, this rarely occurs. The question
arises as to whom they could actually call in as a witness. However, a witness testimony by the
arresting ocer might not even be necessary, as the judges ‘know’ that the sex worker is in fact
lying:
“Yesterday, the person who I know is absolutely into prostitution, told me for example that she
had gone to Plavi Most [SP: a well-known location for acts of prostitution] at one o’clock at
night to buy fruit juice! I mean, what can one say! What should I say, really!”
In addition, evidence of prior engagement in sex work, that is records of arrests, is treated as
evidence of the oence having been committed at the time of arrest:
“As for those (sex workers) who frequently engage, or constantly engage in this, should I say
as a profession, for them, when they are apprehended, it is not a question of whether they did
or didn’t do it, they confess immediately and only want to know how many days they’ll get [in
prison].”
If a police action results in multiple arrests, a sex worker is by default considered to be guilty of
committing the oense, as she was caught in a group with other sex workers who do not deny
the charges. Therefore, she is de facto guilty because she was caught at the same place and time
as other sex workers.
In the majority of cases, however, establishing the facts is usually based on the confession of the
sex worker. One judge claims that he insists on ‘evidence’:
“But we ask, at least I always do, for additional evidence, I want to know what car exactly she
stopped…”
Other judges, however, explain that in cases such as this evidence is not needed because the
situation itself does not require it:
63
Sadržaj
“Recently, one [sex worker] was out, and when she was caught at one or two o’clock at night,
she claimed she was at the store to buy juice for her child. I said, Oh come on, do you think I’m
totally…and how come it was you, how come he didn’t stop me, would I be buying juice at that
time, why didn’t he catch me, I said. Do you see how you’re dressed? She was wearing shnet
stockings and a short short skirt right up to here. I mean it just catches your eye, and so, through
a conversation (…), through those two-three sentences, I have a confession.”
“…if you come to a place where people are engaged in prostitution, engaging in prostitution,
this act is understood by legislation to be your profession, you know, showing you have the
intention of, of, of earning money by oering sexual services.”
Asked if the detainee could invite the alleged client as a witness on her behalf to declare in
her defense that she was not working, i.e. that there was no exchange of money for sex, the
response was:
“But no, the point is that it is absolutely not about the client, the act is not a person, do you
understand, the act is all about the process of you stopping a car, and oering sexual services,
but I don’t know any more which part of the act [laughter] you think there should be testimony
about?”
All of the above mentioned factors that are taken into consideration by judges when making
judgments against sex workers are only in part what makes this law imprecise. The term ‘oda-
vanje’ not only makes it possible to dene the article in dierent ways, it also enables judges and
law enforcement to enforce at all cost. Whether someone was actually standing at a known sex
work hot spot or whether one was caught in the act, is irrelevant when there are many ‘factors’
that you can arrest someone for. This raises the question of having committed the oence vs.
having the intent to commit the oense and then being trapped into committing it. It begs the
question of what procedures and rules are in place, e.g.in regard to incitement by the police, and
what the purpose of the law is.
Mitigating circumstances – do they exist?
“And then her behavior, mind you, if it is indisputable that she has done it but she denies it, does
not accept and so on, this is not a mitigating factor, I won’t say it makes it more serious, but it
is mitigating when after the act and the misdemeanor she comes and says, yes, I did it, what
could I do, I regret it and so on … this is a mitigating factor”.
From the previous quotes we can see that the undened and imprecise legal denition of ‘en-
gaging in prostitution’ means that a person can be arrested or detained on the basis of a subjec-
tive judgment because of her/his clothes or looks, that one’s denial of the act not only carries no
weight against the claims of a police inspector in court, but also that this can lead to a lengthier
jail sentence, and that the time and place (locations of prostitution) represent sucient evidence
in court.
Statements/confessions
When rendering a judgment, a crucial role is played by “judicial discretion” which should be
formed on the basis of the evidence that is presented. However, as the evidence mentioned by
64
the judges is very wide and colored by subjectivity, social norms and moral categories set the
framework and parameters of this ‘judicial discretion’.
If the term ‘odavanje’ implies a person’s identity or profession - what a person ‘is’-, rather than
the actual act of selling sexual services - what a person ‘does’ -, then sex workers are de facto in
a constant state of being punishable for the very fact of being a sex worker. In other words, they
are kept in the status quo whatever they do. This allows for a high extent of arbitrariness in pass-
ing judgment.
Positions and attitudes towards sex work and sex workers
The arbitrariness resulting from imprecise legal terms is reected in the dierent positions taken
by the judges. This is evident when dening the ‘causes’ for prostitution, in particular the dis-
tinction between ‘unhygienic street prostitutes’ and ‘elite prostitutes’ at the one hand and those
who engage in prostitution ‘because they have to’ (e.g. unemployed nurses, students) at the
other hand.
On the one hand, so-called ‘street prostitutes’ are perceived as being poor, uneducated, having
poor hygienic habits and predominantly being drug users. These sex workers are also identied
as repeat oenders and are described as having prostitution as ‘their profession’. On the other
hand, categories such as unemployed nurses or students and women who have a higher level
of education than ‘street sex workers’ are viewed as ‘not having a choice’. They are seen as be-
ing in a dicult situation, where they had to engage in sex work because they could not make
ends meet and provide for themselves and their children in any another way. One judge believes
there should be no dierence in punishment between these two groups, while three other judg-
es feel compassion towards ‘those who had no other choice at that particular time” and, when
passing judgment, take into consideration the consequences that these women’s records might
have for their future:
…there is quite a variety there, on the one hand you have those poor, should I say illiterate,
uneducated young junkie prostitutes and on the other hand you have those highly educated
women who work in their apartments, who are well-dressed, who… Well the law cannot be the
same for one and the other, I mean…And then again, you cannot dierentiate and have the
well-o, educated ones pay a ne and have the others… go to jail.
Although the judges do their jobs by following the law that states that prostitution is punish-
able, opinions vary about the purpose of the punishment, partly due to the outdated character
of the law. If the purpose of punishment is rehabilitation, then obviously the punishment has
no eect in view of the fact that the sex workers with whom the judges have to deal are mostly
repeat oenders. If this is the case, then the punishment serves only as a repressive measure, or
its purpose is merely to punish for the sake of punishing, as stated by one of the judges.
There are opposing ideas as to how to change the law: while three judges would opt for the
legalization of prostitution in the interest of the protection of public health, four other judges
would only support a change in punishment, in terms of introducing the payment of nes as
the only sanction. It is interesting that even those judges who want prostitution to continue
being punishable, view it as work or as a profession. In this case, it might be said that what we
65
Sadržaj
are talking about is an unacceptable profession (in moral and legal sense), and if this is so, then
judges are the moral guardians of society.
... we have so many sick people engaged in this work, do you follow me, and now you take a
kid, someone born in 1988 who is a client, who has sex with someone who has hepatitis A,B, or
C, she is covered in scabs, he has not seen her properly, and they are HIV infected, it’s terrible. I
really nd this terrible, I mean from the aspect of health.
Among the judges who believe that sex work should continue to be punishable because it is
morally unacceptable, two views on punishment can be discerned in their explanation. The rst
view takes a paternalistic attitude towards sex workers.
“In order for her to have some time o, to take a rest and a break from the street, so she need not
do that work. She can stay in jail, have a lie down and rest, so to say.”
Explanations for the other view are based on empathy and understanding for the life circum-
stances of sex workers, and for this reason they believe their punishment (the number of days in
jail) is just and fair.
“I give fewer days in prison for humanitarian (compassionate) reasons when someone, for ex-
ample, comes and says that her mother is coming from abroad or a child’s birthday is coming
up, I really try to be compassionate and give them fewer days in jail.”
“As I am very fair, I give them minimum sentences, I give them ten days, I have no problem with
them.”
Health
Despite the fact that the health aspect of sex work is always highlighted and sex workers are
frequently cited as the source of a variety of communicable diseases, condoms are frequently
conscated, either for preventive reasons - in order not to repeat the act (despite the fact that
judges speak about repeat oenders) - or because it is a means (tool) for performing the act. The
ambivalence of judges shows mostly over health issues; sex workers are treated as a source of
infection but at the same time their only means of prevention is conscated.
“We have a big problem here, and that is, I don’t know why the state prosecution does not react,
everyone knows who is HIV positive… and they are actively engaged in prostitution, why aren’t
they following the law on communicable diseases…because their clients are young people…
and hepatitis is just as bad or worse…. They are generally serious drug addicts, some 70% are
serious drug addicts, sick, very sick people….”
Some of these controversies exceed individual judges’ moral judgments and discretion because
they refer to a systemic lack of logic. Opposing strategies are at play: the strategies of the Minis-
try of Internal Aairs and the Ministry of Justice on the one hand, and the strategies of the Health
Ministry and the National Strategy for on HIV/AIDS on the other.
Tracking
All magistrate judges who were interviewed were aware of the problem of human tracking
and how it diers from voluntary sex work. Also, every one of them was familiar with trainings
66
and educational materials that the Magistrates’ Association organized in recent years. However,
from the responses or questions of some of the respondents it was clear that they essentially did
not understand the issue of human tracking (“You mean those Russians and Ukrainians?”).
Additionally, because of the nature of the summary procedure under which “engaging in pros-
titution” is prosecuted, they are not in a position to scrutinize the cases with which they are pre-
sented and investigate the potential existence of coercion and exploitation, unless the person
prosecuted makes such statement. This is probably the reason why none of them had had such
cases in the dened period.
Conclusion
Sex work is consensual sex between two adults. While on the one hand the judges themselves
validate this denition by maintaining that it is a profession and a choice, sex workers on the
other hand are constantly kept in a ‘misdemeanor status’ through the action of the police and
the courts. Sex work is declared to be the choice of sex workers, but court practice does not
validate this choice. Every imprecise (vague) formulation opens possibilities for arbitrary action,
thus making it possible for the ambivalent position of judges to be reected in their actions and
the allotting of punishment. The denition under Article 14, combined with judicial discretion,
facilitates the possibility of the judges’ personal stand on sex workers to prevail and become a
key factor in passing judgment.
67
Sadržaj
9 Interviews with sex workers
Stasa Plecas, JAZAS
In-depth interviews were conducted with a total of 9 persons. All interviews were held by col-
league sex workers. In terms of gender, 4 of the interviewees were female and ve were trans-
gender. The youngest interviewee was 27 years old and the oldest 53. The average age was 35.
The majority worked on the street (7/9), while a lesser number worked in an apartment (1/9)
or both on the street and in an apartment (1/9). The majority had graduated from high school
(4/9), three had nished elementary school and two had not nished elementary school. None
of the interviewed sex workers were married. Three were divorced and the others had not mar-
ried. Nevertheless, the majority did not live alone but had permanent partners (7/9). Four of the
interviewees had children, the number of children varying from one to six (with an average of 2
or 3 children). The majority were Serbian (5/9), the others were Romany (2/9), Albanian (1/9), and
Bosnian(1/9).
The median time spent by the interviewees as sex workers was 15 years. Because of the legal
and social ramications for sex work to be accepted as a profession, they had a variety of dier-
ent experiences in their family environments. A number of interviewees had been successful in
keeping their sex work a secret from their families. The families of the others knew what they do,
but not all family members accepted this fact in the same way. Only 2 of the interviewees had
the support of their families, while the other families either rejected them or were divided over
the fact that a family member was engaged in this kind of work. In these families, the relation-
ships with our interviewees were relatively bad.
Some report having been kicked out of their home by their families, while others hide the fact
that they do sex work. Aside from hiding what they do for a living, most have to construct elabo-
rate stories when imprisoned, such as that they are away on a trip or that they are picking sea-
sonal fruit in nearby towns. They say that the reality of what they do, or where they are at the
time would cause pain to their families. Lying about being in prison and saying that they are do-
ing seasonal work, however, puts an even greater economic burden on their shoulders, as they
are expected to bring home the earnings.
Working conditions, pimps, boyfriends, protection and safety
One of the goals of the research study was to distinguish between experiences of tracking and
exploitation in sex work and sex work itself. Sex workers were asked about the organization of
their work and their experiences of working for or with others (managers, ‘pimps’, husbands) in
order to explore their relationship with third parties, its economic eects and how they relate to
safety and protection.
When speaking of safety and location of work, the interviewed sex workers have dierent opin-
ions, depending on their personal preference and experience, the risk of arrest and the risk of
violent clients (clients who are drunk or on drugs). While some say that there is less chance of
being arrested when working indoors (apartments), others claim that indoor sex work is only
safe if you know the client from before. An advantage of indoor working is that you are not
exposed to weather conditions and ‘hooligans’. Outdoor sex work is deemed safer by others,
68
because clients may ask for more than they are willing to pay for in indoor locations. On the
other hand, there are those who say that no location is safe: in essence wherever you work you
are at risk. The choice for the place of work is dependent on the risk assessment and the possibil-
ity of higher earnings.
It is understood that the police will not provide protection.
“I’m simply not in a situation to be able to seek police protection. First, the police would not give
me protection. Their response would be: wait a minute, you got what you asked for. You were
running after the money. Perhaps they would also punish me – hey, admit it, you were in it for
the money, so o to jail. And the client is free to go and nd other victims.”
Whether on the street or indoors, none of the sex workers interviewed claim to have ever had a
‘pimp’ or to have paid for protection. ‘Pimp’ is the most common term used by sex workers, de-
noting both relationships that are unfair/unequal or exploitative and business relationships that
are considered fair, as between a sex worker and ‘manager’ or a sex worker and her husband/
boyfriend. However, they know of cases of both situations among their colleagues.
The denitions to describe the type of relationship are ambiguous and complex. There are vari-
ous forms of protection which are more or less ‘formal’, which in some way or another describe
the relationship between the sex worker and a person who provides or purports to provide
some sort of protection. Those are husbands, boyfriends, ‘racqueteers’ and ‘pimps’. However, the
denition of who is in what kind of relation to the sex workers, as well as personal attitudes and
opinions towards these persons dier. Talking about ‘managers’, ‘pimps’ and other third parties
is dicult, even when the interviews were conducted by sex workers. Third parties, or ‘pimping’
is punishable under Article 184 CC, which makes it dangerous for sex workers to talk about third
parties for fear of their husbands or boyfriends being arrested, or themselves being arrested.
Whether or not one pays for protection, the consensus is that protection is needed: either one
protects oneself or one obtains protection from someone else. As sex work and locations where
sex work occurs is deemed risky, protection is needed from violent clients, aggressors and the
police.
Husbands dier from pimps in that:
“A husband protects you, you don’t work for him, but for yourself... for him and for yourself.
There is no ‘you work for him’ and nothing for you. That sucks. And a pimp: you work for him
and give him all your money.”
Others are more cynical:
“You’re not paying for protection, but sort of like ‘we’re boyfriend and girlfriend’, that is to say I
have a boyfriend and he goes with me down there and ‘like’ protects me. Get it?”
Raqueteering is understood to be payment for the location, standing on someone’s ‘territory’,
but also includes a certain degree of protection. This though, according to one sex worker is
merely the entry point for ‘pimping’, which is a more exploitative relationship.
“So, if I have a problem, I can turn to anyone, even the police…OK, perhaps not the police, you
understand why, but, I can, for example, call the man I live with and say I have a problem…”
One sex worker points out that boyfriends, husbands, pimps or whoever is ‘providing protec-
tion’ cannot go with you to a room when you are working, and cannot protect you once you
69
Sadržaj
have entered into a car with a client and driven o. In essence, a sex worker is never completely
protected against violence.
Pimps, in a broad sense of the word, are also used by the police as leverage against sex workers:
when caught on the street, sex workers can avoid arrest if they ‘snitch’ on pimps, that is provid-
ing information to police ocers about workers who work for pimps. Sex workers claim that it
is a tactic used by police but that it rarely happens, as providing information on pimps could
result in harm to the sex worker. ‘Snitching’ also occurs in cases of sex workers who use drugs
or sex workers who have gone to work at a known location and time and can be ‘caught in the
act’. Snitching is dangerous for sex workers on several levels: it reduces the number of friendly
colleagues and thereby safety, it increases their vulnerability as they will be ostracized by others
and it does not guarantee that those same police ocers will provide protection.
The term pimp can have various meanings for various sex workers; some consider splitting mon-
ey with someone who protects you to be exploitation by a pimp, others say that pimps are those
who sell and buy ‘girls’ and take all their earnings. The denitions of these terms are complex
and varied and beyond the scope of this paper. However, whatever term is used and however
that relationship is classied, it is clear that third parties, those considered ‘pimps’ or managers
are meant to provide security and safety which is not provided by law enforcement.
Encounters with the police
According to the interviews with the sex workers, encounters with the police in the course of
only one night are extremely frequent: from 3 - 6 times in the course of one evening. At those
times, according to the sex workers, the police mostly chase them away them from their place of
work or threaten to arrest them or actually do so.
The experiences of sex workers in being caught in the act and in terms of evidence vary depend-
ing on the circumstances of the arrest. Arrests are made in dierent ways, ranging from situa-
tions in which the roles are clearly dened and no explanations are required:
“They open the [car] door and tell me to get in… and I have to”
to oering services to police ocers in civilian clothes and being taken into custody for not hav-
ing an ID card or a valid address, to which charges of prostitution are then added based on the
fact that she was standing in the street.
What some sex workers call ‘providing services to the police’ is in most cases forced sex under
the threat of arrest:
“That happened to me a month ago…. I had to service a police inspector to avoid being ar-
rested. And I had no choice, I had to ‘service’ him.”
Sex workers have dierent explanations of what they believe to be illegal or irregular:
“It makes no dierence whether he’s my friend and I just went for a walk with him or something,
they just see you with a man – for them that’s the oence [SP: being caught in the act]. So, it’s
not important whether he paid me, it’s not important whether or not I do anything with him as
a client ”.
70
“If you are caught in the act, it’s irrelevant whether you have condoms with you or not, they
only care about taking you into custody. Because they get paid for that arrest … they get a
percentage or something like that. Only they get a slightly higher percentage than all of us,
damn it”.
When they are arrested, evidence for the arrest may be whether the sex worker had condoms in
their possession and the amount of money she had on her person. Frequently just standing in
the street is deemed to be evidence. The sex workers claim that in these situations they are not
told why they are being taken into custody. It is self-understood:
“Without evidence! I mean, with ab-so-lute-ly no evidence!” Just come on! he says. I asked
where? Come on, come on, get in, he says, or else I’ll bash your head in, get in! And what can
you do, you must get in.”
When being arrested, sex workers are often exposed to physical violence.
“Well, if you resist being taken into custody, they will, of course, be rough with you. They might
hit you or kick you or physically force you to get into the car and so on. And even if you don’t
resist, it has happened on a number of occasions, if you’re hiding something, keeping quiet,
they slap you or kick you, as I said, or take out their baton and hit you with it. That is so very….
terrible.”
Knowledge of the Law
The interpretations of what exactly is punishable under Article 14 vary depending on who is
interpreting it (whether they be judges, the police, us or sex workers). However, even though
sex workers accept that they have no legal possibility of resisting arrest, they believe that they
are being rendered an injustice and that they have the right to equal treatment. Regardless of
their knowledge of the law(or lack of it), bearing in mind the circumstances in which they work,
the constant risk and the incessant, repeated arrests, sex workers demand a more just attitude
towards them.
“And where is it written in the law, I once asked that (policeman), who said: ‘You cannot stand
there!’ Where is the law that states that I cannot just stand [in the street] - there is no such law
anywhere in the world, I mean I am STANDING here as a citizen of this country, I have the right
to stand where I wish in my own country, if I want to stand here like the Statue of Liberty for 24
hours a day, I have the right to do so. I asked where is that law written down? He said: ‘It’s writ-
ten right here, in my head’.”
“Well, you have to defend yourself, I mean…If a statement was made in that precinct, then they
cannot let you go, but if not, if nothing was signed and no statements were made, well, they
have no right to arrest you. And they have no right to take you before a judge. Isn’t that right?
That’s just so.”
On the other hand, some sex workers do not resist the situation; they believe that by being sex
workers the only right they have is to be arrested.
“Well, currently I haven’t got a single right, literally.”
71
Sadržaj
Police presence and police help
Sex workers describe the street as a dangerous place where you never know what might hap-
pen. The police are perceived as one of those constant dangers. In cases when sex workers re-
port street violence to the police, the police not only do not intervene, but with their attitude
conrm that the sex workers themselves are to blame for the violence they experience because
they are sex workers:
“Yes, says the police ocer, how can I help you when you are a whore?”
“I had a problem with a client… when I went there [in order to le a complaint], he said: ‘Did I
make you go and work in the street? No, I didn’t. I keep chasing you away, you stand there, you
are a whore, and you, you alone are to blame.’ This is what they usually say. Or ‘What do you
whores want? You whores are such a nuisance’.”
The absence of a police reaction to reported violence sends a clear message to potential attack-
ers/aggressors/bullies that violence against sex workers is permissible and will go unpunished.
In other words, anybody (including, in some instances, members of the police force) can do any-
thing to them and there will be no consequences.
Insults
When talking about the insults that sex workers are subjected to by the police, sex workers talk
about feeling helpless.
“Well, you know, when they say ‘Get lost’ or something to that eect, that is insulting, you go
crazy just listening to that. Isn’t that insult after insult? It’s not just once, it happens all the time.
Or suddenly they hit you or kick you … I mean, that’s terrible.”
“Well, I can’t do anything about it. After all, he’s a police ocer and I cannot sue him for insult-
ing me. I can’t do anything about it.”
“Well, these are usually insults that seem to bet us, like, you fag or I don’t know - you queer, or
something, usually these are insults that do not... that are inappropriate for people who do that
kind of work…”
Avoiding arrest
The ways in which sex workers avoid getting arrested are vary from providing sexual services
to the ocer who is threatening with imprisonment, giving money to the police ocer on de-
mand, ‘setting up’ others i.e. giving information to the police about sex workers who have gone
o with a client in order to have them get caught in the act, to giving information about sex
workers who use drugs or giving information about pimps. Sex workers also attest to arrests be-
ing virtually certain if they ‘do not behave’ in accordance with whatever it is the police ocers
expect from them at that moment. On the other hand, police ocers’ moods are sometimes also
attributed to avoiding arrest; sometimes it is not clear if they will be making arrests, sometimes
they check personal documents and threaten with arrests later if the sex workers don’t move
from that location:
72
“Sometimes it depends on their mood, if they’re in a good mood they don’t bother us. They see
us and move on. But sometimes they stop and then the chase begins.”
Statements
Sex workers have dierent experiences of giving statements in a police station, ranging from
having their statement taken down and then sign it, to refusing to write or sign any kind of state-
ment. When a sex worker refuses to sign a statement claiming she never committed the act, her
refusal, or rather her not-guilty statement, is not taken into consideration and in the next stage,
when the sex worker and police ocer are giving their statements before the judge, the sex
worker is found guilty. In some cases, the police ocer himself signs the statement on behalf
of the sex worker. Some sex workers reported being mistreated because they refused to sign a
statement:
“I write whatever he is dictating for the statement, to the eect that I (insert name and surname)
on that particular day (enter date), engaged in prostitution by stopping a client to oer oral,
classic, whatever sex, who knows what else they write there, for a particular price, and he says
you have to, I said I don’t….I used to write them in the beginning when I didn’t know, when I
was stupid… it means they have no evidence, but it happened sometimes that I didn’t want to
sign any statement, or give a statement and they would mistreat me, they wanted to… never
mind they would say, you’re going to Pozarevac [prison] whether you do or don’t.
“They say they’re calling the chief. OK, he says, it doesn’t matter, you don’t want to write a state-
ment, it’s OK and he lets me go to the judge. They write a statement and le it with the judge
without my signature and when we get to the judge, I tell it as it is, meaning, I have given no
statement or signed no statement and I do not wish to do so, so on what basis are you going
to sentence me? He says, well, you were arrested down that way where acts of prostitution take
place… so what does it matter that I was there, I admit it, I was there, I’m not saying I wasn’t,
but I had stopped working. And then I have to confront that police inspector. He comes, they
call him to come down, and tell him, here, she didn’t give any statement and he [the inspec-
tor] says she made a statement but she refused to sign it. So it turns out that their word carries
more weight than mine. And then it happens…. the court sentences you, it now depends on the
cour t.”
Even when some sex workers outright refuse to sign any statements when in police custody, es-
pecially when they are not written by them but either dictated or written by police ocers, the
result is the same: they are found guilty of prostitution:
“Naturally, I never signed, but it makes no dierence. It’s all the same. A few times I refused to
even write a statement. I said: Wait, am I supposed to write my statement or your statement? …
He cannot force me to do something I don’t want to. Because who knows what is written there,
and what I’m signing, they can frame me for all kinds of stu. And when I sign that, then I’m
done for...”
Even though not signing the statement is seen by sex workers as their right, as something that
might give them the possibility to tell their side of the story to the judge, or might provide a way
out of the arrest, it usually does not help them in any way, as the judges will question the arrest-
ing ocer and take their statement as fact.
73
Sadržaj
Court proceedings
When detained and arrested, sex workers usually spend the night waiting for the on-call judge
to appear in court. The procedure of being questioned, giving a statement or signing a state-
ment and waiting for the judge are the longest part of the process, sometimes taking more
than 12 hours. Once the sex worker appears in court, the court proceedings take no longer than
15-20 minutes. Usually, the statement taken in police custody is read, a few questions are asked
about the accused such as marital status and whether or not she or he has children and then
some questions are asked about the case at hand, if at all. Then the sex worker waits outside for
the judgment. Usually, there is no reason given for how much jail time is ordered, but most sex
workers claim that this is entirely dependent on the judges’ mood.
One sex worker recalls not having signed the police statement and admitting to the judge that
she used to work and then she was apprehended by the police at a known location for sex work,
but she had stopped working and told the judge that she was merely there, walking. The arrest-
ing inspector was called into the judge’s chamber as a witness. Ultimately, the sex worker was
given a 7-day sentence for not updating her address on her identication card and another 7
days for prostitution, because she had a few condoms on her:
“I said, OK, I agree about the fact that I hadn’t updated my address, but why these other seven
days – because I hadn’t signed anything, I’m not working … and he says if you’re not working,
what were you doing there? Do you think a normal woman would be going there for a walk?”
Some sex workers report that there used to be ‘good judges’, judges who ‘understood them’ and
didn’t necessarily want to send them to jail, but had no option as the law had been changed to
not allow for nes. One judge had told a sex worker to go to the doctor, as she was beaten by
the police and had entered the court room covered in blood. The judge had advised her to get
the evidence of the injuries and sue the police ocer.
Others say that the judgment will depend on your behavior and ‘the way you look’. If you are
polite, you will get less jail time. Some even say that if you are always polite to the same judge,
and you become ‘almost as friends’ you will likely get less jail time. But at the same time, you
shouldn’t change the statement you gave to the police or signed, because this will negatively
aect you in front of the judge.
Punitive measures
In addition to reporting unhygienic and poor conditions in jail, sex workers mostly report that
on being released from jail, they had to return to work in a very short time period, sometimes on
that very same day, because spending time in prison increases their nancial burden:
“Well, [staying in prison] had a nancially adverse eect, because during those twenty days I
had no income, nothing, and then I had a lot of expenses after getting out…It depends, I mean,
previously I didn’t have so many expenses, so in one evening I could get back to normal, but
now it would be much more dicult because I have to pay the rent, and have other obligations,
and…”
“Well, it’s simply a state of being isolated from life, uhm, from your family and what not. Some-
one in your family might be ill, none of us is alone, you have a mother, this person, that, a child,
74
someone is ill, someone has this problem or that… at least that’s what I think, uhm, and if you
don’t call it jail, if you’re isolated in any room, let’s say, and have no contact with your family
and friends and so on, it’s dicult... and let alone if you do call this jail, then you are out of
touch, disconnected, you’re not taking part in life, you are simply isolated from everything dur-
ing that period, and that’s that!
In addition to imprisonment as prescribed by law for a misdemeanor violation under Article 14,44
additional punishments are frequently imposed for violations of the law on identity cards or
for not having updated the information on their current address or domicile. This can be in the
form of imprisonment or nes which are counted as ‘payment’ for a certain number of days in
jail. Regardless of whether the punishment is a ne or a jail term, the nancial burden it causes
contributes to the repetition of the oence. This casts a light on a problem of the law itself: if the
aim is to repress prostitution or prevent sex workers from repeating the same oense, it is clear
that imprisonment prevents them from earning money. For this very reason, on being released
they have to go back to work or work even more, so the law itself helps perpetuating the very
thing it is supposed to prevent – thus rendering it meaningless.
Sex workers also report dierences in sentencing depending on the judges. Some judges, e.g.,
take into consideration that sex workers have children at home. Some sex workers make a dis-
tinction between male and female judges. Others report that the punishment often depends on
the mood of the judge on call. Also, it was noted that the judges treat transgender sex workers
and female sex workers dierently.
Appeals
The punishment goes into eect directly after the sentence is given and before the deadline for
appeal has expired, which is 8 days after the judgment has passed. Sex workers, however, see
no point in writing an appeal. The reasons they state are that no one will believe that the act did
not take place or that their appeals will not be taken into consideration because they are sex
workers:
“Who the hell should I appeal to? When no one will believe you.”
Furthermore, they lack the technical means, since, as they already in jail, they see no way how
they could write an appeal:
“It seems that when you get your judgment you have the right to appeal within 8 days. And yet
you have no paper, no money, no pen or envelope to write and send this appeal; and if you do
ask, it is for…forgotten, and o to Pozarevac…. Give me paper, a pen and an envelope. And
then, you have to write in the canteen. I told them I have no money. By the time my money ar-
rives it’s passed. My deadline for an appeal has passed. Because I have spent already two days
travelling – here, there, two days are up. And I didn’t get it.”
Another reason given is that they have no basis for an appeal, because they confessed to the
act before the police and the judge. These confessions, however, must be questioned because,
as stated previously, the statements are sometimes dictated to them and sometimes they are
signed under duress. Under the excuse of “we all know each other so well” the very detainment
44 At the time when the interviews were held in 2013, only jail sentences were prescribed by law for misde-
meanors under Article 14 LPOP.
75
Sadržaj
of the sex worker is taken to be a confession, just because the police ocers and the judges
know her from before. This makes the act of lodging an appeal totally meaningless in the eyes
of the sex workers.
Conclusion
Imprecise legal regulations put sex workers in a situation in which they are permanently in viola-
tion of the law, which strongly impacts their lives and has dire psychological, economic and so-
cial consequences. Moreover, the law itself exposes them to psychological, physical, sexual and
economic violence. All these factors together cause sex workers to be a continually marginalized
and vulnerable group.
If sex work is to be considered a profession, as it is dened by the judges, then it is a high-risk
profession and our task should be to alleviate the risk or eliminate it. In addition to all the social
reasons that pertain to sex work in our society, the question remains whether an adult has the
right to his or her own choice and not be punished or persecuted for it.
Recommendations
The interviews with sex workers about their experiences with arrests, encounters with the po-
lice and judges and their experiences in navigating and understanding the laws that are used
against them, show that sex workers are aware of their rights and demand equal treatment be-
fore the law.
Unfortunately, the law, or the article most frequently used against them, notably Article 14 of the
Public Peace and Order Law, is not only outdated but also so loosely dened that it can be inter-
preted as judges (and police) see t, which renders its application highly arbitrarily. Moreover,
as the law denes prostitution as a misdemeanor, guarantees for a fair trial are largely lacking.
In view of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, however, it can be argued that
Article 14 LPOP should be qualied as a provision of criminal, rather than misdemeanor law,
given the nature of the sanction (imprisonment), its gravity and its range, implying that all the
guarantees of a fair trial as laid down in Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights
should apply.45
While we could argue that the article and ’judicial discretion’ should be more precisely dened
in order to provide clarity for sex workers, police ocers and judges the like of what exactly is
punishable and to avoid its arbitrary application, the analysis makes clear that the current article
neither suppresses nor prevents prostitution, but rather has a series of adverse eects, both for
sex workers and their families.
Sex work, that is, sex between two consenting adults for exchange of money or goods, should
therefore, both on practical and principled arguments, be treated as work and fully decrimi-
nalized. Only full decriminalization can create the conditions for health programs to be rights-
based and only with full decriminalization equal protection of sex workers before the law can
be achieved. We therefore urge the government of the Republic of Serbia to stop punishing sex
45 See Chapter 2.
76
workers, stop arbitrarily arresting sex workers, stop incarcerating sex workers as criminals and
remove all punitive laws against sex workers and third parties.
77
Sadržaj
10 Victims of trafficking for sexual exploitation
Ivana Radović, ASTRA
The aim of the interviews with victims of tracking for sexual exploitation was to investigate,
from the perspective of the women who experienced this form of violence, how tracking in
Serbia looks like today, in what way victims are recruited and whether the relevant institutions
are able to recognize sexual exploitation and provide victims with appropriate care and protect
their human rights. We also wanted to nd out weather the approach and treatment by the po-
lice and the courts diers when they are arrested and prosecuted for engaging in sex work and
whether they are recognized as victims of tracking. However, due to the fact that only one of
the respondents had experience with voluntary sex work, it was not possible to make this kind of
comparison based on the statements of the respondents. All respondents were clients of ASTRA.
The content of the interviews, as well as the reasons for which half of the planned number of
interviews could not be conducted, indicate that victims, after leaving the tracking chain, face
many problems even when they receive support through programs designed to help them re-
build their lives. Most of them have a problematic relation with their family, which is why some of
them were explicit about not wanting to share any information on this topic. Psychotherapeutic
help was accepted by around 30% of the clients who participated or were initially seen as partici-
pants in this research. Most clients did not think they needed this kind of help for their recovery.
However, their willingness to talk about how they were recruited and exploited, to recall the
details, even when it was clearly said that it wasn’t necessary for the research purposes, as well as
their emphasis on the psychological and physical violence they endured, indicate that the past
events are still very alive in their everyday life and that the suered traumas are not yet healed.
We conducted interviews with ten women who were exploited between 2000 and 2012. Five
of them were exploited before 2010 and ve after 2010. Although the answers from the rst
group are not relevant to this study in terms of recruitment methods, work organization and the
response from the police and judiciary, they are still interesting because they allow us insight in
possible changes in the mode of operation of trackers, as well as the progress made by the
police in regard to the treatment of victims of human tracking and their willingness to accept
that they are victims of a serious form of violence. What’s interesting is that both groups did not
dier much in regard to their socio-demographic characteristics, nor in regard to the reactions
of their environment to what they had gone through.
All ten respondents were females, at the time of the interview aged between 21 and 40. At the
time of exploitation their age varied from 14 to 34 (on average 25.2 for women exploited after
2010, and 17 for women exploited before 2010). At least three of the respondents were repeat-
edly re-tracked, including two exploited before 2010 and one exploited after 2010. In the latter
case, the rst exploitation occurred before 2010, when she was a minor and lived in Bosnia and
Herzegovina.
Two of the ve respondents who were exploited after 2010, were exploited abroad, so their expe-
rience is to a large extent related to the conduct of the police and/or judicial authorities in these
countries, which does not fall under the scope of this research. The other eight respondents
were exploited in Serbia. Only one of the respondents who was exploited after 2010 worked as
sex worker when she became victim of tracking. As at that time the police in Serbia weren’t
78
suciently sensitized to identify cases of human tracking, we were not able to answer part of
our questions, particularly those relating to encounters with the police and the prosecution in
regard to the tracking of sex workers.
All respondents, but one, were Serbian citizens, one woman is a citizen of Ukraine. The Serbian
citizens have the Serbian (7) or Hungarian (2) nationality. Four respondents completed elemen-
tary school (one exploited after, and three exploited before 2010), two respondents didn’t nish
elementary school (both exploited after 2010), while four completed a vocational education or a
high school-gymnasium (two exploited after and other two before 2010).
At the time of the interview, three respondents were married, four were divorced, and three
were unmarried; two had no children, ve had one child, two had two children and one had four
children. Four respondents lived with their husband/partner and their children, two with their
husband/partner, while the others lived alone, with their parents, with a child or with both their
parents and a child.
All respondents report that they are unemployed or that they only periodically have a job; four
receive some type of welfare, two state that their ancé supports them nancially, while one is
supported by her father.
Recruitment, working place, working conditions and control
The rst group of questions related to their experience in sex work, i.e. the way it was organised,
the availability of medical care, experiences of violence, either by customers or pimps/track-
ers, and the circumstances under which they managed to get out of the tracking chain. The
respondents were the most extensive in answering the questions about the circumstances un-
der which they rst engaged in sex work, i.e. the manner in which they were recruited into the
tracking chain.
Three of the women exploited after 2010 were recruited through job oers (care for the elderly,
babysitting abroad, waitressing jobs), one was blackmailed by a video footage of sexual inter-
course with her then boyfriend-later tracker and another man, while the woman who had
been tracked three times, ended up in the chain of sexual exploitation because of her heroin
addiction; previously, she had been recruited through a job oer abroad and had been sold by
her partner to a club abroad. The recruiters were a faux uncle (1), a female acquaintance (2) and
a boyfriend (2).
Only one of the respondents had prior experience with sex work; the others knew nothing about
it before they became tracked. The one respondent who previously had voluntarily worked as
sex worker, had worked in a small town in Serbia, where she also lived, nding clients through
her day job as waitress in a bar, and never had had any unpleasant experiences.
All respondents in this group were exploited in a dierent way. One was held captive by the
tracker in his home, who brought her clients he himself had recruited; he once took her to a
bar with the intent to solicit her there and there was a plan to sell her further abroad. The sec-
ond respondent was exploited in a bar/club abroad. One of the waitresses in the club lived with
the girls and was responsible for them. She would oer guests drinks as well as girls, who, from
time to time, had to come down from their rooms to the backroom of the premises and present
themselves. The price was determined by the boss and the clients would pay him when leaving.
79
Sadržaj
The girls had to work every day, were not entitled to a day o and lived in a separate apartment,
where the aforementioned waitress ‘looked after’ them. Beside the respondent there was one
other woman working at the club.
“There was this girl, a waitress, when guests arrived, she would regularly approach them, asked
them what they wanted to drink and whether they would like company. And if they would re-
spond that they wanted company, they were oered to choose between us, because I had dark
hair and the other girl was blonde. And the chosen one would then join them for a drink.”
The third respondent was exploited by the woman from whom she bought heroin. They lived in
the same apartment; every day the woman would drive her to the street where she worked and
occasionally control her by checking whether she was there and if she worked or not. She had
to work every day. There were no other girls. The previous two times, this respondent had been
exploited in clubs abroad.
The fourth respondent was exploited abroad and oered her sexual services on the street in an
area where sex workers gathered. She usually worked on the street, and occasionally on call or
with clients in their home. She had to work every day, except when she was in prison, and wasn’t
allowed to decide anything at all. The persons who exploited her determined the price; she was
only allowed to negotiate with clients if she could negotiate a higher price. That same criminal
group exploited several women.
The fth respondent provided sexual services in clients’ homes. She was exploited by her boy-
friend and two other persons, one of whom was the driver who also served as a kind of protec-
tion, while the other was primarily responsible for recruiting clients. The ‘boss’ would determine
the price and the money was either collected by the one who drove her to the client or she
would take it herself but had to hand it over to the person who picked her up immediately. She
had no say in either the price or the working conditions. She had to work every day, except when
she had her period. Each day she had one to seven clients. The same tracker had more girls
whom he ‘worked with’, but she never saw any of them. When not working, she lived with her
family, who were unaware of her ordeal.
The fact that all women were exploited in a dierent way only conrms that tracking for sexual
exploitation nowadays occurs in many dierent forms and that the victims have a dierent de-
gree of illusory freedom, while in reality they don’t have a say in anything. None of them could
inuence the price or was allowed to turn down a client. If they tried to refuse to work, in most
cases they would have been beaten. However, the threats and the control the trackers had over
them were often enough so they hadn’t even attempted to revolt. Usually they did not get any
of the money they earned. Two respondents had not received any money at all, one respondent
received some money on a couple of occasions when she explicitly requested it from the traf-
cker, one was given ten Euros per day for food and other necessities, while one received one-
third of the earnings plus the extras clients would pay her in the room for additional services.
As for the women exploited before 2010, none of them had previous experience or knowledge
of sex work. Three of them were deceived by a job oer, one was sold by her husband for gam-
bling debts and one was recruited for voluntary sex work by an acquaintance who introduced
her to the woman who would later forcibly exploit her. Two respondents were explicated both
in Serbia and abroad. They worked on the streets, in private apartments, clients’ ats, hotels or
restaurants.
80
The women who worked on the streets recruited clients by themselves, those who worked in
bars/nightclubs were picked up by guests, and the clients of those who worked in apartments
and hotels were recruited by their exploiters. The bars/clubs usually engaged more girls, some of
whom worked voluntarily. In this case, the clients would have to give money directly to the ‘boss’
or ‘matron’ prior to the service. In other cases, the women charged their services at a price set
by the procurer, but had to hand over all the money, and then received smaller sums to buy the
things they needed for the job. In one case, their ‘portion’ was reduced by the alleged debt to
the ‘boss’ which was actually the amount spent for their purchase. One respondent stated that
the girls had a quota they had to meet, regardless of the circumstances:
“If you do not make the quota, you’re staying on the street until the morning. (...) If the police
catch you and you get a month, after you come out you’ll have to make up for the time you
hadn’t worked.”
Most respondents worked every day, except one who worked three times a week on average.
None of the women could decide on any aspect of their life and work, from the price to the
refusal of clients, or whether they would work or not. Some of them tried to escape but these
attempts failed and they would end up with serious physical injuries. Those who never tried to
ee state that the girls who tried to escape or said they did not want to work any longer, disap-
peared, were killed or heavily beaten, often in front of other girls as a warning. In one case, vol-
untary sex work evolved into tracking when she announced she wanted to stop working. One
respondent tells that whenever any of the women had tried to escape, she would be returned
within a day. Some respondents also mention the connection between the local police and the
trackers/proprietors.
“Would the same thing happen, like you said, you would die, if you tried to escape? I tried
to. And what happened? They found me, they beat me, they were burning me with cigarettes
and I had nowhere to run, someone was always nearby.”
As we can conclude, the work methods of trackers have not changed much in the last few
years as far as the organization of work is concerned. Both then and today, the women work on
the street, in bars and nightclubs abroad or in private apartments, while a single tracker or a
tracking group controls one or several girls. Although it is now more common that they are
not held under permanent control but have more ‘freedom’, in reality it only means that the
mechanisms of control have become more subtle, while even the slightest disobedience is still
punished with severe physical violence.
Health
None of the respondents had serious health problems during the period they were exploited,
not considering the physical injuries as a result of the violence suered:
And when he beat me, because he would punch me right here in head (pointing to the back of
the head) and here (pointing to her neck and her back). So it won’t show. For there, where he
lives, there’s (pointing in front of her) a pond, Danube, a sh pond, I don’t know what it is. And
81
Sadržaj
he said: I couldn’t care less if you’re sick. He said, nobody knows you around here anyway. If you
get sick and die, I’m going to throw you in there.”
When they were not feeling well, they had to work regardless.
“Was there ever a situation when you were feeling sick and you still had to work? What was
their reaction to it, in general... Of course, it happened ... When you get sick. Sure, but no one
asks you if you can or can’t.”
“It did happen, for example, that I had a fever, sneeze, cough, have a hoarse voice, but (name of
the tracker) never really cared.”
In case of u or similar health problems, they were left to their own devices.
“No medication, no nothing, so I tried to take care of myself as best as I could.”
One respondent exploited before 2010, states that the trackers had a deal with a private clinic
which carried out medical check-ups. Another respondent states that the girls were tested for
HIV and hepatitis regularly, but were never sent to a gynecologist. In one case, their female pro-
prietor organized a gynecological examination for the girls, but only when it was necessary to
perform an abortion.
All but one respondent state that drugs were always present: ”any girl who wanted the drugs
would easily get it”. One respondent states that she was beaten because she refused to take
drugs. One respondent entered the tracking chain as a heroin addict. In all cases, the drugs
were provided by the tracker as it was in his best interest for a girl to use drugs in order to be
able to serve more clients, but also to make them more dependant on him.
“At that time, when all of this was starting to happen, generally speaking I am not an alcoholic
or a drug addict or use any of these things, I normally drink alcohol when I go out or something,
but at that time, I generally would not order a soda or something, but alcohol or I would simply
accept the cocaine he’d oered me. “
“I didn’t want to, so I got a good beating. Because you did not want to use it? Yes. Was it in the
boss’s interest for you to be using? Well, why not? When you get high and you can serve from
30 to 40 clients in one day. You can’t feel anything.”
It can be concluded that trackers are exploiting women mercilessly while they are under their
control, aiming to make as much prot in the shortest period of time, not taking care at all of
their health.
Violence
All respondents suered violence at the hands of their exploiters. Half of them also experienced
violence from clients. Some spoke of clients who paid for sexual services only for the purpose
of molesting them and nothing else. When a client was violent or refused to pay, the women
had no protection and no one to turn to for help. Two respondents, who were working on the
streets, say that in such situations the only option was to run away:
“When you’re on the street there’s no such thing as sexual abuse; it’s your job.”
This respondent also experienced violence from her colleagues on the street because she
was seen as competition. Owners of bars/girls were condoning clients for being violent to the
82
women. One of the women who was exploited abroad states that the client could be reported
to the police, but that that was futile, because the police would just make a report and leave it
at that.
The trackers/exploiters were always violent, resorting to physical and psychological violence,
verbal abuse and intimidation. Only one respondent stated that the violence was not frequent,
but only because the rules were clear and they obeyed:
“Well, ok, it wasn’t that often. Once she had told us what’s what, you know, what we’re allowed
to ask what not, then we did not ask anymore.”
The most common provocation of violence were attempts to escape, which were brutally pun-
ished, followed by attempts to cease to work, to withdraw from the job, or rejection of certain
clients. In some cases, the threats were directed to the respondents’ families and social network,
making them particularly motivated to remain obedient:
“Don’t you dare calling the home phone, any phone, because, he said, then I am really going to
hurt you. And than he showed me the weapon. “
“Oh, she and her threats. It was like: I’ll burn your house, I’ll track your kid, I’ll murder your kid. “
“Yes, he once shoved me into a Rottweiler kennel for it to bite me, it was a bloodthirsty one, foam
coming out of its mouth and everything, it was atrocious. Luckily, as he pushed and pushed, I
kept screaming: Don’t, don’t, don’t! And then she [the women who also took part in the exploi-
tation] was like: Don’t, leave her alone. And then he let me go.”
“I then, in that mansion, she whipped me with a thick cord, folded in four, she really beat the
crap out of me.”
The period of exploitation of the respondents ranged from three weeks to three years with an
average of nine months (about six months for respondents exploited after 2010 and about ten
months for respondents exploited before 2010).
Breaking Away
All respondents exploited after 2010 escaped the situation due to their own initiative: all of them
either managed to inform their relatives, who then contacted the police, or they contacted the
police themselves. In one case, the direct motivation to seek help was her overhearing that the
tracker intended to sell her abroad. Another respondent tells that she decided to seek help
after a violent incident with the tracker, after which she decided that she could no longer go
on like this. In all tracking cases between 2010-2012 the police never once called in question
the respondent’s statement that she was a victim of tracking and from the rst contact they
were treated as victims.
Of the respondents exploited before 2010, two were rescued with the help of the police, one by
being a suspected victim of another oense (her mother reported kidnapping) and a police of-
cer who inspected the site identied her as a victim of tracking. In another case, the woman
approached the police ocers who sat in the bar where she worked:
“Anyhow, in all that hell, there was one man who also worked and cooperated with the police.
He worked as an undercover (...) They have ranks (...) There were not many of those, but they
83
Sadržaj
were present at the arrests. And this man came up to me, he was young, well, younger, back
then. He came to me as a client, to expose me. He did not ask for anything but he paid me only
to warn me and so that I would take him on that journey, to tell him how it was. I have never
told everything there was, even to him.”
One respondent escaped with the help of a client who fell in love with her. After a rst failed
attempt - the trackers were able to locate her and she suered terrible beatings – the second
one succeeded.
Two other women also escaped from their trackers, one of which also cites the plans to sell her
further to be her main motive. After she escaped, she approached passers-by for help, while an-
other respondent paid a smuggler to illegally transfer her across the river to the country where
she had previously lived.
Contacts with the police while working
The next group of questions referred to the experience in contacts with the police outside the
police station, i.e. on places where sex work and sexual exploitation took place. The respondents
talked about their encounters with the police, the possibilities to obtain police protection from
violence and possible arrests.
None of respondents who had been sexually exploited in Serbia after 2010 had had contact with
the police before being recognized as tracked person. On the other hand the two respondents
who had been exploited abroad had had contacts with the police. One would often recognize
police ocers among the clients of the club where she was exploited, and even the owner of the
club was a former police ocer. She believed that everyone in that place, including the police,
knew what was going on in the club. Also the other, who had worked on the street, had regular
encounters with the police during the time she was exploited abroad. She had been arrested on
several occasions during police raids aimed at prosecuting the pimps (the women were allowed
to work on the street, but pimping was prohibited) or at combating drugs tracking. The police
usually tried to nd out the situation at the beginning when the girl just came in - for whom she
worked and whether she worked voluntarily or not - but they quickly gave up when the women
refused to talk, because they were not familiar with the methods of control used by the track-
ers to prevent them from cooperating with the police:
“At one moment there was even a situation that I was with [another victim and the tracker]
and all three of us were arrested. It was the only critical point where I no longer knew what to
do, like, you know, not to strangle him, to shout, He’s the one!, or what do I do, I thought to my-
self. And, literally, the fear prevailed and I was afraid to say anything.”
As for the ve women who were exploited in Serbia before 2010, three of them reported en-
counters with the police during the period they were forced to work. In some cases, police of-
cers would come into the bars as guests, in some cases it concerned raids, which were frequent
at that time. In the latter case, someone would have tipped o the boss so that he could get
everything in order, so the police ocers came to the club to party and in their report they wrote
they had conducted a raid. According to the statements of the respondents, it was not uncom-
mon for the police to help club owners bring back the girls who tried to escape:
84
“So they were all in touch. The taxi driver calls the police, the police calls the boss, the boss waits
until the girl returns and voila, do what you want with her.”
One respondent stated that the police never came to the bar, but the owner bragged about -
and threatened the girls with - her good connections with the police:
“Don’t mess around. Police too knows what we’re running here.”
The respondent who had been exploited on the streets in Belgrade before 2010, says she had
had frequent encounters with the police: the police appeared either as clients or as ocials in or-
der to combat sex work. These encounters were violent, the police never asked the girls whether
they were there voluntarily and nobody ever oered them any help.
None of the respondents who came in contact with the police during the period they were ex-
ploited - whether in Serbia or abroad - perceived the police as an institution that could release
them and protect them from violence, primarily owing to the fact that the police ocers were
among their clients and within the circle of the people who exploited them. Only one respon-
dent directly addressed the police ocer whom she had seen in the bar, and they rescued her
from the tracking chain. The others who managed to get out of the tracking situation, had
not addressed the police:
“You knew they were cops? Well, no, I found out afterwards, because once there were two of
them, so we both went for a drink with them, we talked and then we were told that they were
police ocers. And then, when we went up to the room, before we went up, the owner told us
to watch our mouths. And then we went up there and they inquired whether we were there vol-
untarily. You were asked that by the police? Yes. We were afraid to say anything. How could
we have known that they wouldn’t tell the owner. We were scared, so I said to my grandmother
when I was writing her a message that she tells the cops not to talk about anything over the
phone and not to call either, because the owner was a former captain, a former police ocer, I
mean. So that’s why.”
Arrest and imprisonment for sex work
Only one respondent exploited before 2010, had the experience of being arrested and sentenced
for sex work (which was not voluntarily, although she was never ocially identied as a victim).
When talking about the arrests for sex work, she referred to the period before 2005, when she
worked on one of the streets in Belgrade known for prostitution. Although this falls outside the
period covered by this study, we decided to include her experiences to see if there have been
changes in the way the police or the justice system operates.
According to the testimony of this respondent, during police raids the police would arrest all
the girls who had not managed to ee in time - and it never happened that any of them was
released:
“They won’t listen to you; they are not capable of listening. You are like a piece of garbage to
them. They won’t interrogate you out of pure spite and nothing else, because you are not per-
ceived as a woman, as a person, they treat you like an object. Because if it weren’t so, they
would not have beaten those women, they wouldn’t act that way.”
85
Sadržaj
Since she also had police ocers as clients, from time to time they would tip her o about an
upcoming raid. The police would usually request to see the ID cards from the sex workers. Their
money wasn’t conscated on the spot, but later, at the police station. Although they would sign
the certicate of seized property, they never received such certicate. Smaller amounts of money
would be returned to them, but the bigger amounts were kept. Each raid was extremely violent:
“Those who got caught, they got beaten and taken in. So there was violence? Naturally. There
was always violence.”
Prior to being brought before the Magistrate and serving the sentence, the women were kept in
very poor conditions, in a small and crowded room, 15 to 20 of them together. The police used
violence during the interrogation of the women in order to get information about their pimps.
They never asked whether the women were willingly engaged in sex work or not.
“When they brought the girls in, each who would report the person in charge knew what was
waiting for her when she got out, so ... “
Also, the police did not check whether women were injured or if they had small children. They
were particularly violent towards addicts and transgenders. Detained women weren’t informed
about their rights, they were not entitled to make a phone call and they would be provided a
lawyer by the pimp who knew that the raid occurred because he or his men were always in the
vicinity of the working women.
The respondent served a one-month prison sentence four or ve times. After her release from
prison she always had to compensate her pimps for the lost time and money, which wouldn’t
take her long to do, because she had regular customers. In prison she did not have anyone to
complain to that she was not voluntarily engaged in sex work and none of the prison employees
ever asked her that question - all the other prisoners were treated the same way.
She did not get any medical examination: only women who are serving longer prison sentences
are entitled to medical examinations, but not those to come in for a month. When she was in
prison, there were no sick women and the drug addicts received medication. It was possible to
secretly smuggle drugs into jail.
While in prison she knew that after her release she would have to return to the street and con-
tinue to work:
“… I knew that when I’m done with the prison I will have to work again. And it wasn’t news to
me, it wasn’t something unexpected, it wasn’t something completely dierent. I knew what to
expect.”
However, her stay in prison contributed to the trackers gaining condence in her and delegat-
ing her some organizational tasks, because she didn’t rat them out.
Identication of tracking victims by the police
All respondents who were exploited after 2010 were rescued from the tracking chain by the
police after they themselves or their families had reported the crime, directly or indirectly. Two
respondents were exploited, and thus discovered, abroad, so their experience will not be the
subject of this analysis. Since in each of these cases the women themselves asked for help, the
police practically came by invitation and accepted their self-identication without question.
86
None of the respondents was identied as victims of tracking on the initiative of the police, the
police merely responded to the reports. However, in all cases when they received a report and
got out to the scene, the police ocers, without any additional checks, accepted the testimony
of the victims that they were there against their will and treated them as victims, regardless of
whether the perpetrators might be charged or prosecuted.
All respondents had to give statements several times, often at the same day that they were res-
cued. However, all respondents were very satised with how the police had treated them:
“... But they were really nice and polite.”
“They were quite nice.”
“They asked me if I was cold, if I was hungry, thirsty, that was really cool.”
One respondent particularly emphasizes that the police ocers didn’t changed their attitude
towards her even after she told them she was a heroin addict:
“You had a lot of condence in them? Yes, yes. They didn’t even want to tell my husband that
I was addicted to drugs. They wanted to put me in a safe house or an institution specialized for
addicts, while the situation resolves.”
“So, basically, when you rst met they practically already knew that you were a victim of
tracking, so they probably acted accordingly. They were ok, it is not often nowadays that
you see a police ocer bust a drug addict and talk to them politely. Here, they snatch a drug
addict and rst beat the crap out of him, and then they ask questions. (…)”
“Everyone should have one [name of the police inspector] in their life. The whole team that
worked on this case has helped me a lot and helped restore my condence in the police, and
that there is still somebody who can protect you left in this world.”
Such police behavior also inuenced those respondents who initially did not have condence in
the police:
“Truth be told, I was a little dicult for cooperation because of my lack of condence towards
them, I mean, how could I have known that they weren’t sent by (tracker’s name)?”
However, although the police ocers treated them fairly, all respondents emphasize that it was
exhausting to repeat their statements, especially in front of a large number of anonymous peo-
ple:
“It was hard for me to talk to that rst investigator, let alone the increasing number of unknown
people to whom I needed to talk about it.”
“When I was taken before the investigating judge, I swear that woman asked me the same thing
literally ve times. So, I’m talking and talking and thinking to myself, They’ll think that I learned
it by heart because I keep repeating it word by word.”
All three respondents exploited in Serbia after 2010 were interrogated in police stations. In one
case, the respondent was driven to the station together with the tracker in the same vehicle.
Two of them had signed their statement, one had refused and asked (and was granted) to give
an informal statement, fearing the tracker. Two respondents who signed the statement were
not sure if they had read it rst, because at the time of giving the testimony they weren’t in a
physical or mental state that would enable them to understand what they read:
87
Sadržaj
“Well, even if I had read it, I was under so much stress that I ... and plus when I heard that they
brought him to [name of the city], I was nished.”
All respondents were satised with the treatment by the police. The only criticism is related
to the fact that they had to repeat their statement many times, often several times during the
same day, each time before some new unknown persons, which made the traumatic experience
worse.
Three of the respondents exploited before 2010 had contact with the police as victims of traf-
cking, but in none of these cases criminal charges for tracking were brought and the case
never went to court. In one case, an investigator from the Belgrade Police Department, working
on another case, recognized that it was a case of human tracking. He tried in every way to sup-
port and assist the respondent and referred her to a support organization, although the case
was never prosecuted as tracking. One respondent was never identied as a victim of human
tracking, but managed to get out due to the assistance of two policemen who visited the bar
where she worked and from whom she sought help. What’s interesting is that she sought help
from the police even though the owner of the bar boasted that she had good connections with
the police. Due to the fact that the police captain led the whole process of her giving testimony,
she felt safe, even though she could not know which of the police ocers worked for her boss.
One respondent came in contact with the police after she managed to escape from the track-
ing chain on her own, when she sought help from an NGO she was already acquainted with. A
representative of the NGO took the girl to the ER for a check-up and the sta at the Emergency
Center notied the police. Although the respondent was partially satised with the police in-
terview, she had to spend the night in solitary connement, although the representative of the
NGO oered an alternative accommodation.
One of the respondents stated that, although the police had promised her that her statement
would remain condential, a person from the tracker’s circle came in the possession of both
her statement and the testimonies of the suspects.
One respondent gave her statement twice, the other two only once. The latter two were never
contacted regarding their statement nor were there any legal proceedings. None of them signed
the statement or received their statements.
Justice System
As stated above, only one respondent, who was exploited before 2010, had the experience of
being arrested and sentenced for sex work (which was not voluntary). She was arrested 4 or 5
times. According to her testimony, when she and the other women were brought before a mag-
istrate judge, he or she would only read when and where they were detained for prostitution
and would not ask them any questions or call witnesses. The entire process would take no more
than two minutes, since they usually arrested many women at once, and there was not enough
time for a detailed procedure:
“There were really too many of us there, they called us ‘Women in Black’. Because, there at the
Blue Bridge, we would all dress mostly in black, you know, cat suits, leotards ‘n all. And the cops,
when they see us in that, they wanna kill us.”
88
There was a lawyer who defended all women, employed by the person for whom they worked.
According to the respondent, the lawyer is never present during the trial, but later attempts to
get the women out of prison:
“No. There’s no lawyer. The lawyer doesn’t appear until afterward”.
She never appealed the verdict because she felt that it could only worsen her situation and that
it had no use.
“Let me tell you, it never crossed my mind to appeal because I watched the girls go through all
kinds of things and I did not want to take any chances. I got burned a couple of times. I was
looking to focus on myself: ok, well, maybe I need to do this or that, come on, it will get better.
I’ll get through. And I had to be really persistent in order to get myself out of it.”
Five respondents testied as victim-witnesses in a court case against the trackers: four respon-
dents testied in Serbia, one abroad. In the court case that took place abroad the respondent
gave testimony before the public prosecutor (in the absence of the defendants) and the court
in the presence of a person from the shelter whom she trusted. Her feeling of security at the
hearing was positively inuenced by a good relationship with the prosecutor (“If you’re scared,
just look at me”) and the fact that the sta from the shelter had prepared her on what to expect.
Out of the four respondents who testied in Serbia one of them did not feel safe; the other three
felt safe and were satised about their treatment. Their sense of security was primarily inu-
enced by the presence of a lawyer (hired by ASTRA) and a sympathetic judge. This was especially
so in the case that was conducted before the Special Court, where the respondent got the status
of particularly vulnerable witness, as well as police escort:
“It was all safe because I had police security. Simply, they guaranteed that nothing was going
to happen to me.”
The respondent who did not feel safe during the trial says that she was particularly uncomfort-
able before the investigating judge when she had to talk about her traumatic experience in front
of a large number of strangers (5-6 defense lawyers) that were known to be hostile, although
the judges and the prosecutor were polite. At the main hearing, she felt that the judge favored
the defendants and their lawyers, even though he was courteous when she gave her testimony.
“Every time I had to go to trial it was really traumatic for me, because I knew there was no one
there who would ... basically, I felt as if I went into a lion’s den”
This process has been going on for years, with numerous delays.
Only one case of exploitation before 2010 led to a court case, but not for tracking but for me-
diation in prostitution. In this case, the respondent, as injured party, was summoned to repeat
her statement, eight years after the exploitation took place, because of the repeated trial.
Another respondent exploited before 2010, testied only during the investigation. She did not
feel safe, especially due to the fact that she had to wait to give her testimony in the same cor-
ridor as the man who had raped her and that she was threatened after giving testimony. This
case never went to court:
“So after about ve months, or something like that, now, it’s a totally absurd thing, only then
I had experienced stress, so 5 months ago and then again, they scheduled the trial for me and
this man at the same time. “
89
Sadržaj
One respondent exploited before 2010, whose case was never dealt with in Serbia, now regrets
that the trackers were never brought to court. She emphasizes the importance of providing
the victim sucient time to recover and regain control over her life when prosecuting track-
ers, considering that victims are expected to corroborate the indictments with their testimonies:
“Did I sue them for anything? No, no. And I wish I did, but I didn’t. Now that I am freed from fear,
I could do anything and everything. “
Voluntary sex work and human tracking for sexual exploitation
Through the interviews with victims of human tracking, we also wanted to nd out whether
they themselves distinguish between sex workers and victims of human tracking. All respon-
dents view the dierence primarily in the fact that tracking victims do not provide sexual ser-
vices voluntarily but are forced to do it: they have no freedom to decide anything for themselves
and the people who exploit them take away the money they earn:
“That’s a sex worker who simply may not have the opportunity for another job and who wants
easy money. The one who simply says, yes, I’m alone, I come to work and I consciously go into
it and accept the risk because I decided for myself that I wanted this job. And then, the victim,
that’s something else. The victim simply ... I don’t know. For one thing, the victim was forced into
it. Secondly, she is cornered from all sides. Number three, she is nancially dependant and cut
o from all that. “
“Well, I was initially, let’s say, a voluntary sex worker. And then I became a victim. I see a dier-
ence between those who do it against their will, they are victims, and those who do it voluntary.”
“So if you say a sex worker or a prostitute does what she does on a voluntary basis, then victims
of human tracking, or any other, can not be prostitutes. Prostitution is a matter of choice.”
“If any of those who are not victims of human tracking, a sex worker that is, if she wants to do
it and if she likes doing it, so to speak, and if that is her way of making money, if there is no other
way but to earn enough to survive, only to survive and nothing else, and when I say to survive,
that doesn’t mean to buy drugs.”
One respondent emphasizes that often at rst glance one can not assess whether a person who
provides sexual services is a sex worker or a victim of human tracking, because victims in order
to earn as much as they are expected to by their trackers and to avoid violence also have to
behave actively and pretend that they want to do the work they are in reality forced to do:
“At rst glance you cannot really tell the dierence. Because the victims have to appear as if they
want to do it, they must not tell a client that they are afraid or that they don’t want to work,
because then they suer the beatings by their torturers, so to speak.”
Two respondents did not know how to distinguish between sex work and human tracking for
sexual exploitation.
One respondent also makes a distinction between a ‘whore’ and a prostitute.
“It’s not the same. A whore is a woman who works, in order to perhaps feed her family, her chil-
dren, perhaps for her own reasons, maybe for medicines, maybe, I don’t know, she might have
90
sick parents. And prostitutes, if you ask me, do it more out of habit. Gold-diggers and hookers,
so to speak.”
Most respondents express their understanding for voluntary sex work, although some point
out that they themselves could never work voluntarily. Three respondents are very judgmental
towards sex workers:
“You never had contact with someone who was ... God forbid. With those diseases and all...”
“We don’t talk with those people.”
“The majority of them go into it on a whim. I wouldn’t support it; I cannot support it. I can (...)
support only those girls who are forced to work. A girl who works on a whim, without a real
necessity, who has all the conditions she needs, well then it is just impudence.”
Of the women exploited after 2010, only one responded to the question about the relation be-
tween sex workers and persons forced into sex work when they are at the same location, as
well as on the readiness of sex workers to help victims of tracking. This can be explained by
the fact that three of the respondents were the sole victims of their tracker at the time or that
during the exploitation they didn’t have contact with other girls. The respondent who answered
this question was exploited in street prostitution abroad. According to her, both victims and
sex workers share a work location. One sex worker oered her help to report the people who
exploited her to the police and suggested that she should then engage in sex work on her own,
but she assessed that this was not a real desire to help her, but an attempt to change the ex-
ploiter but keep the exploited in the same position.
Of the women exploited before 2010, four responded to the question. One respondent stated
that the relations with women engaged in voluntary sex work were good. One said the time
she spent there had been too short for her to be able to assess which of the women were there
voluntarily and which ones were coerced, while every attempt to talk to her and oer her help
(especially for the escape) she had dismissed with suspicion, because she did not know whether
it was away of the ‘boss’ of testing her. Two respondents talked about the bad relations between
sex workers, both in clubs and on the street. They claimed there was no solidarity whatsoever,
that the sex workers acted as the ‘upper class’ because, unlike the women who were there under
compulsion, they were earning money, and that sex workers had no motive to help victims be-
cause it might reduce their prots:
“We never had good relations with them. We couldn’t stand them and the feeling was mutual.”
Two respondents (one exploited after and other before 2010) also spoke about the dierence in
treatment by the police and the judiciary of victims of tracking and the sex workers. The re-
spondent who was exploited abroad states that the police initially sought to help the girls and to
obtain information on who they work for, but when they don’t get the desired feedback because
the girls are afraid to talk, they treated the girls as accomplices. She believes that in the country
where she was exploited, victims have much more rights, better status and treatment, while the
situation in Serbia is completely dierent:
“In Serbia, you cannot say that you were a victim of circumstance because no one will under-
stand it that way.”
91
Sadržaj
Another respondent, a foreign citizen, faced numerous prejudices because of her nationality,
which is commonly associated with prostitution, so the question of coercion never came on the
agenda:
“You know what, it is enough to say that I am Ukrainian, they don’t ask more questions, wheth-
er I’m a victim of human tracking or a prostitute ...”
“Let’s say that I nished college and came here as a physician, I was Ukrainian and that’s it. No
one asks you about profession, the nationality is what matters.”
Protection and access to justice
Of the ve respondents exploited after 2010, three believe that the law is on their side, i.e. that
the law is devised to protect them. They especially stress their satisfaction with the protection
the police had provided them:
“(...) the police did their job awlessly.”
One respondent states that she originally did not have condence in the judge who led her case,
because she had googled him and found out that he was corrupt and linked with the Zemun
Clan, and at the hearings she attended, she felt that he favored the accused. However, she was
satised with the way he had reacted to the attacks of the defense counsel at the hearing where
she testied. Another respondent said she was not sure that the law could protect her, especially
when the person that had lured and sold her had moved to her city, while another believes that
the law is lenient toward perpetrators, unlike in some other countries, that people in Serbia have
prejudices and that they are overall indierent to this matter.
Of the women exploited before 2010, two responded to this question. None of them had felt
protected, but one pointed out that this was not so much a question of the law, but of the prac-
tice: the law provides protection which is not applied in practice. They also pointed out that both
victims of tracking and sex workers believe they don’t have anyone they can turn to for help
and that because of their status they are distrustful towards the institutions.
In general, respondents did not know their rights and where and how they can seek legal as-
sistance. When they got help, they obtained it in unconventional ways. Notably, all respondents
exploited after 2010 were provided with legal aid by ASTRA. Two respondents were referred to
ASTRA by the Agency for Coordination of Assistance to Victims, in three cases relatives (father,
husband, i.e. sister) had called ASTRA SOS Hotline to inquire about assistance programs, which
includes legal aid. All ve respondents participate (d) as witnesses/victims in court proceedings
in Serbia or abroad. If they hadn’t obtained legal aid in this way, respondents say, they wouldn’t
have known which forms of assistance were available to them and what their rights were. In that
case they would have sought help from the police (4), the center for social work (1) or they would
have hired lawyers themselves (1).
None of the tracking cases stemming from before 2010 made it to court. As far as respondents
know the case got no further than the stage of investigation or did not go beyond them giving
testimony to the police. Three respondents did not have legal assistance and two had a lawyer
provided by ASTRA. At the time they got out of the tracking chain, they were not aware that
they were entitled to legal assistance nor to whom they could turn for help. They did not know
how and where to submit a complaint, but also did not feel the need to do so. Even if they had
92
reasons to complain, they did not do so because they believed that that would be useless of
would put them in an even more dicult situation:
“(...) I wanted to, you know, let the sleeping dogs lie. I mean, you never know...”
As for the reactions of family, friends and the immediate environment to what happened to
them, respondents have dierent experiences, regardless of the time when the exploitation oc-
curred.
Life after leaving the tracking chain
Respondents have dierent experiences with the reactions of their family, friends and the envi-
ronment to what had happened to them, regardless of the period in which the exploitation took
place.
According to the women who were married or got married after their tracking experience,
their husbands always expressed sympathy for what had happened to them and the ordeals
they were forced to undergo. However, one respondent states that her husband doesn’t judge
her, but that their relationship has changed:
“I have a good life with him, but it’s not what it used to be.”
Another states that her husband is not judging her, but blames her for not approaching him for
help. Both respondents were exploited while they were married and, although they state that
the relationship with their partner is harmonious, in both cases there were indications of do-
mestic violence during the assistance process. Of the women who got married after leaving the
human tracking chain, one states that while her husband is sympathetic to her experiences
because one of his relatives had a similar experience, this does not apply to her extended family,
which still denounces her to this day:
“They’re all, like, if something...., if you don’t want to do something, nobody can force you into
it.”
The husband of another respondent was initially understanding but later resorted to violence:
“But it started progressing with time, well, you were already abused by others, now I get a go.”
Their (immediate) families usually show understanding and give them support during recovery,
but they, too, are faced with the problems of how to cope with the knowledge of what happened
to their daughters or sisters and questions of how something like that can happen to anyone:
“(...) they simply could not believe that one person can have so much power over a human be-
ing.”
“It’s all black and white with him. He just cannot see the shades of gray, which could help him
to accept and understand those situations. For him, it’s all like, ok, someone is harassing you,
well, just leave them, go report them to the police, end of story. So it cannot be explained to him,
really.”
Most respondents believe that they should not keep their experiences a secret for their families,
and cite a variety of reasons:
93
Sadržaj
“I think it needs to be told so that not one of your family members wouldn’t go through the
same thing.”
“There’s no point in hiding. If you’re hiding it, you’re hiding it from yourself, you’ll never manage
to keep it a secret from them. “
“I can’t lie, it’s part of my life and I have nothing to hide. It’s better to say it than to hide it and
then, for example when I’m about to marry someone and they would found out somehow, God
forbid, that would be a disaster.”
Some respondents, however, do not want to go into details with their families about the things
they survived because they feel uncomfortable and are afraid of condemnation.
Usually families do not condemn the victim, their only complaint is that they haven’t said any-
thing earlier. Only one respondent tells that she has zero understanding from her family:
“He’s like to rub it in from time to time: it’s your own fault you got involved with it, nobody
forced you to do it.”
As for the parents of respondents who were exploited at a very young age, there is also a strong
feeling of guilt for failing to protect their children.
Only three respondents talked about the reactions of their social environment. Two of them who
live in small towns, believe that their fellow citizens have no knowledge of what happened to
them, that they can “sense the looks”, but that no one has ever approached them or said any-
thing in public, and that they have not faced public condemnation. One of them says - although
she had no personal experience - that the environment is sympathetic towards victims, but not
towards sex workers:
“For example, when they pass by, they’d be like, ’How can this whore do this ’n’ that, and than
for these other ones they’d be like: Oh, poor thing, how could anyone do something like that,
and what not.”
One respondent particularly stresses that the prejudice and ignorance of people in Serbia are
responsible for them not expressing sympathy for the victims and for what happened to them,
and that they think the victims are to blame for putting themselves in a situation to be exploited
in the rst place. She believes that this kind of prejudice exists at all levels, as well as within the
victims’ families, where it quickly comes to the surface after the initial enthusiasm that the victim
returned home safe and sound has faded away.
Access to health care
When talking about health care, respondents were mainly focused on testing for HIV, hepatitis
and other diseases, as well as gynecological examinations. The two women who were exploited
after 2010 and identied in a foreign country were taken to a gynecologist by the shelter, one
did an HIV test, the other didn’t. The latter did not do any testing, but planned to do so with the
support of ASTRA. One respondent states that she did a HIV test in Serbia, but did not receive
any pre- and post-testing counseling, while the other did all the tests and received pre-testing
consultation in Serbia as well. All women who were exploited before 2010 were tested for HIV
and hepatitis, for which they usually had sought support and assistance from ASTRA.
94
The experiences of respondents seem to indicate that access to health care and testing is depen-
dent on the support of non-governmental organizations which provide assistance to victims.
Moreover, it seems that there is no standard procedure, but that the testing procedure solely
depends on the institution where it is carried out.
Summary and conclusions
There is not one ‘standard story’: each of the respondents was exploited in dierent ways, with
dierent levels of apparent freedom and dierent strategies of their recruiters and exploiters to
keep them under control. It is important that the agencies responsible for detecting human traf-
cking and providing assistance to its victims are aware of this fact.
All respondents exploited after 2010 managed to exit the tracking chain only because of the
steps they themselves took, despite the risks they ran. On the one hand, the police, when ad-
dressed for assistance, never put the statement of the respondents that they were a victim of
tracking/exploitation into question: they accepted their testimony and treated them as vic-
tims, regardless of whether they might later be charged or prosecuted for prostitution. On the
other hand, the detection of tracking victims as such mostly wasn’t the result of any pro-active
police work.
Combating human tracking falls under the authority of the Border Police Department, i.e. the
units for combating human tracking and illegal migration within the special police forces. How-
ever, bearing in mind that human tracking and exploitation occur in dierent forms and are
often intertwined with other forms of criminality, the involvement of other police departments
is necessary to fully understand the problem and to be able to identify victims and provide
them with adequate assistance. Also, the police should invest more in proactive investigations,
aiming at better and faster identication of (possible) victims and the dismantling of tracking
networks before the exploitation occurs or before they can make more victims. This would also
avoiding putting the entire burden of evidence on the shoulders of the victims and increase the
chances for successful prosecution.
Although all respondents were satised with their treatment by the police after they had identi-
ed themselves as victims, none of them who came into contact with the police during the pe-
riod they were exploited - in Serbia or abroad - saw the police as an authority that could release
them and protect them from violence. This was primarily due to the fact that they had many
police ocers among their clients and/or that police ocers belonged to the circle of associates
of the persons who exploited them. This was the reason why, when they would dare to approach
the police, they never approached the local police in the place where they were exploited. If this
shows anything, it is that, in order to combat human tracking, but also to improve the general
security of citizens, the Ministry of Interior should be more vigorously devoted to the detection
and eradication of corruption and the active or passive (by tolerating such cases) involvement of
police ocers in various forms of crime.
When the respondents spoke about the communication with the police during and after exiting
the tracking chain, their main critique concerned the exhausting interrogations and the condi-
tions under which the interrogations took place. Most of them had to give their statement sever-
al times, often on the same day that they were rescued, and had to speak (repeatedly) in front of
a number of unknown people, which was especially uncomfortable for them. This makes it the
95
Sadržaj
more important to consistently apply standards of communication from the very rst contact
with victims of human tracking in order to prevent their further traumatization. Exhaustion of
victims through repeated and premature interrogations not only has a negative impact on their
recovery, but may also have negative consequences for the prosecution, because testimonies
given in these circumstances are often unclear, contradictory and confusing. This often leads to
the disqualication of their statements as evidence, often in situations where the victim’s testi-
mony is the only hard evidence against the trackers.
97
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Sex workers should be decriminalized to enable the protection of their human rights, to
ensure that victims of tracking and sex workers who become victim of violence can safely
report to the police without the risk of being punished themselves, to combat discrimina-
tion, violence, extortion and abuse of sex workers and, not in the least, to combat corrup-
tion and the involvement of the police in the exploitation of sex workers.
2. While decriminalization of sex workers themselves is a rst step, aim should be to decrimi-
nalize sex work entirely. This would be in line with the call of Amnesty International46for
thedecriminalization of all aspects of consensual adult sex work, that is, sex work that does
not involve coercion, exploitation or abuse, based on evidence and the experience of sex
workers themselves that criminalization makes them less safe. The current research only un-
derlines the evidence collected by Amnesty International. Following up the call of Amnesty
International and the ndings of this research would also be in line with the Constitution
of Serbia which guarantees the human rights of its citizens and the obligation of Serbia to
respect, protect and fulll the human rights of all its citizens, including sex workers.
3. Article 184 of the Criminal Code, which criminalizes mediation for prostitution, should not
be used to prosecute sex workers who work together or form associations in order to pro-
vide for safer work conditions.
4. Additional training and professional support should be provided for judges and prosecu-
tors at all levels in order to increase their capacity to identify cases of human tracking
and to ensure that Article 184 CC (mediation in prostitution) is not used against tracking
victims.
5. The practice that condoms are used as evidence for sex work or are appropriated as a means
of committing the oence should be abolished immediately and a concerted and unied
approach to prevent HIV and other STDs should be developed by the relevant ministries,
including the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Health.
6. Mechanisms should be put in place to protect sex workers from discrimination, arbitrary
arrest and detention, violence and other human rights violations carried out by the police
services, the public and the media. This includes appropriate complaint mechanisms.
7. In line with the human rights principle of participation, further policies on sex work and traf-
cking for the purpose of sexual exploitation should be developed with the participation
and cooperation of all stakeholders. These are sex workers, legislators, law enforcement
authorities, the responsible ministries and civil society organizations.
46 See https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2015/08/global-movement-votes-to-adopt-policy-to-protect-
human-rights-of-sex-workers/