Perhaps a comparative approach of 2 Member States in their implementation of this principle.

Topic:

Implementing a human rights approach to the non-punishment principle

Recent landmark case: V.C.L. and A.N. v. The United Kingdom

The Court held that there had been a violation of art. 4 and art. 6.1 of ECHR.
The Court in other words stresses out the importance of first responders and that once the authorities become aware of a credible suspicion of trafficking an assessment should follow by a qualified person.

Article 26 of the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings
“Non-punishment provision”: “Each Party shall, in accordance with the basic principles of its legal system, provide for the possibility of not imposing penalties on victims for their involvement in unlawful activities, to the extent that they have been compelled to do so.”

Many EU Member States including the Netherlands do not have a proper system in place to identify and assess victims in early stages and have operational measures.

Is it possible that deviation from assessments by competent authorities can be a violation of these Member States not implementing and upholding their obligation to article 4 of ECHR. If these national courts took a human rights approach to the assessments article 4 can be protected.

Perhaps a comparative approach of 2 Member States in their implementation of this principle?

Referencing style:

Oscola/Oxford reference or The blue book

Last Completed Projects