Dr. Nusha Yonkova:

I would like to make two quick observations on what you raised, Chair, and also to answer Deputy Costello. On framework operations for the operational committee, we strongly believe this is too important to be left in secondary regulations. We would like to see this prescribed in law. We are very interested also in the legal status of the operational committee, how it will be constituted, who will bear responsibility and hold the decisions. Our absolute recommendation would be that we put as much as possible in primary legislation so that it is scrutinised and operationalised properly.

On child trafficking, it is clear, and this general scheme refers to it, that when child victims are identified they will avail of assistance provided by Tusla child protection services. Regardless of their circumstances, children are falling within the system of protection that is designed for children with Tusla. They are also subject to consideration in respect of international protection. The very unit that deals with children who do not have parents is called separated children seeking international protection, which may not be applicable to all cases. We would be wondering why there is not a specialised unit with Interpol that deals with child victims of trafficking. We would flag as very important the issue of age assessment and what happens when age is disputed. We have not provided sufficiently in law up to now for age assessment. This arises in cases pertaining to victims of trafficking. This is an opportune time to address those issues.

I would like to address the principle of non-prosecution and our recommendation for a statutory defence where a suspected victim has been involved in unlawful activities as a result of the crime that was committed against the victim. We do not see this as an extra. We see it as a safety net, a mechanism that will guarantee human rights of the victims and prevent revictimisation. We know these cases exist. Ultimately, this provision encourages the victim to co-operate as a witness in criminal investigations.

I have one comment on credibility which I was not able to share earlier. We see credibility added to reasonable doubt as an unnecessary additional condition which artificially raises the threshold that is required. Credibility is not required in international law. It might be problematic because it may hold different meaning for the different members of the operational committee. It may lead to divergence in decision-making regarding credibility and will ultimately cause delays. All we want is an early mechanism for identification and assistance.