Friday, February 17, 2012

Human Trafficking Today


            On Valentine’s Day, The Stanford Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) hosted a discussion on a topic that many people would probably agree is not particularly romantic, yet is of great importance.  As part of their Human Trafficking is Global Slavery series, the CDDRL’s seminar “The Context of Human Trafficking Today” was moderated by Helen Stacy, the director of the program on Human Rights at the Stanford Law School, and included two outstanding figures in the field of Human Trafficking.
            Both of the speakers clearly have indispensible knowledge of and experience in Human Trafficking.  Their approaches, however, are quite unique.  The first speaker, Anne Gallagher is a former advisor on Trafficking at the Office of the UN High Commission for Human Rights.  Throughout her portion of the presentation, she emphasized the fact that she was trained as a human rights attorney and thus her approach to combating Human Trafficking is influenced by the legal system in which she works.  Her work has been focused on initiating effective and long lasting legal and policy changes on the international level.  Her focus lies more in transnational human trafficking in South East Asia.  Her presentation was centered on discussing human trafficking as a crime that must be punished.  She advised people in the audience that were interested in pursuing the topic further, to progress with caution and to not be afraid to voice skepticism and formulate opinions and views for oneself.  She also warned against allowing oneself to confuse the actual law with what one wishes it were.
The second speaker, Rosi Orozco, is a Congressional Representative from Mexico and the President on the Special Commission Against Human Trafficking in Mexico.  Orozco’s area of focus is more regionally based and addresses human rights violations as they pertain to human trafficking in Mexico and the United States.  Her presentation was somewhat more moralistic and emotionally charged than Gallagher’s.  She discussed her direct interactions with victims of human trafficking, mostly young women and girls, as well as the uphill battle that she has faced since she first became a Congresswoman and expressed her commitment to fighting human trafficking in Mexico.  Throughout her presentation, she continuously emphasized the fact that Human Trafficking is wrong and therefore should be criminalized and punished harshly.
The event itself was more formal than some of the other symposium event that I have attended.  Also, it was somewhat unclear at whom the event was primarily targeted.  It seemed that there was an expectation that people in the audience already be familiar with the topic of human trafficking.  However, as the Q&A session that followed the discussion clearly demonstrated, that was not the case.  One man’s question seemed to indicate that he was unaware of the difference between prostitution and human sex trafficking.  I personally felt that Gallagher’s presentation offered more of an opportunity for audience members to critically analyze the subject of human trafficking.  Orozco perhaps could have offered more insight into how she as a congresswoman has gone about implementing change on a policy level in Mexico and what the effect of those changes look like for the Mexican people on the local level.

1 comment:

  1. Thank you for the synopsis, Michael. You definitely hit all of the key points of the event.

    Because we're in a class about media, I think it's interesting to look at the ways in which each of the speakers presented her information. Michael already touched on it - while Gallagher spoke calmly and rationally, always bringing the matter back to the letter of the law, Orozco made her case through personal accounts of her friend’s daughter being abducted into the sex trade and of the 39 girls she and her husband support. In reference to their rhetoric, Gallagher appealed to the audience through ethos and logos while Orozco relied heavily on the power of pathos. I agree that I could have used some more description of policy from Orozco (an aspect that may have been missing as a result of her limited knowledge of English); then again, it may have been nice to feel a bit more passion from Gallagher.

    With their contrasting styles, the two speakers contributed to what came to be a balanced event, not entirely effective in presenting the key issues of trafficking but definitely engaging the audience in the topic. With the different levels of knowledge of audience members, it could have been helpful to define key terms and topics at the beginning before diving into discussion.

    ReplyDelete