Modern Slavery Under International Law: Forced Labour, Trafficking and Debt

Introduction

Modern slavery encompasses a range of exploitative practices in which individuals are subjected to severe coercion, domination, or restrictions on personal freedom. It includes slavery, servitude, forced labor, human trafficking, debt bondage, and certain other forms of exploitation. Although these practices are frequently discussed under a common designation, international law does not establish a single legal definition covering every form of modern slavery. Instead, several international conventions and human rights treaties regulate distinct, sometimes overlapping forms of coercion and exploitation.

The formal abolition of slavery did not eliminate arrangements through which individuals can be compelled to work, deprived of autonomy, or subjected to ownership-like control. Contemporary exploitation may involve violence and confinement, but it can also operate through fraudulent recruitment, confiscated identity documents, threats of deportation, manipulated debts, or dependence on an employer for basic necessities. The legal significance of these circumstances depends on whether they satisfy the requirements of slavery, servitude, forced labor, trafficking, or another prohibited practice.

The scale remains substantial. The International Labour Organization (ILO), Walk Free, and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) estimated that approximately 49.6 million people were living in situations classified as modern slavery in 2021. Of these, 27.6 million were in forced labor and 22 million in forced marriage. Published in 2022, these estimates measure the prevalence of specified forms of exploitation rather than the number of legally established slavery offenses (ILO, Walk Free and IOM, 2022).

International law addresses these practices through the 1926 Slavery Convention, the 1956 Supplementary Convention, the ILO forced labor conventions, the Palermo Protocol, and international human rights instruments. Their definitions, obligations, and enforcement mechanisms differ. Understanding those distinctions is essential to identifying prohibited exploitation, establishing responsibility, and determining the protection and remedies required by international law.

1. The Legal Meaning of Modern Slavery

Modern slavery is principally an umbrella term used in human rights scholarship, international policy, and statistical reporting. It describes practices through which individuals experience serious exploitation under conditions that undermine their personal freedom. The expression recognizes common characteristics among several abuses, particularly coercion, dependency, and control over another person's labor or conduct.

Its breadth creates an important legal distinction. The 1926 Slavery Convention defines slavery through the exercise of powers attaching to ownership. ILO Convention No. 29 defines forced labor through involuntary work exacted under the menace of a penalty. The Palermo Protocol establishes a separate definition of trafficking based on specified acts, prohibited means, and an exploitative purpose. The 1956 Supplementary Convention identifies additional institutions and practices similar to slavery, including debt bondage.

These classifications may overlap. A worker recruited through deception may subsequently be compelled to provide labor under threats, while an employer uses an artificial debt to prevent departure. Such circumstances may involve trafficking, forced labor, and debt bondage simultaneously. If the perpetrator also exercises powers characteristic of ownership, the conduct may satisfy the legal definition of slavery. Each classification nevertheless requires an assessment of its own elements.

The distinction between exploitation and slavery is equally important. Unlawfully low wages, unsafe working conditions, excessive hours, and unfair contractual terms may violate national labor legislation or international labor standards without necessarily constituting forced labor or slavery. Financial hardship may cause an individual to accept unfavorable employment, but economic necessity alone does not establish the coercion required by the ILO definition.

Forced marriage and child exploitation present additional questions of classification. Certain forced marriage practices are specifically regulated by the 1956 Supplementary Convention, while forced marriage forms a separate category in contemporary global estimates of modern slavery. The worst forms of child labor include slavery, trafficking, debt bondage, and forced labor, but also extend to other prohibited activities. Not every violation of child labor standards is legally equivalent to slavery.

The legal inquiry concerns the relationship between the exploited person and those exercising control. Relevant considerations include whether the individual can refuse work, leave employment, retain earnings, control movement, recover personal documents, and seek protection without facing threats or penalties. These circumstances help determine which prohibition applies and which obligations may have been breached.

2. Slavery and Servitude in International Law

The prohibition of slavery developed through international agreements addressing the slave trade, the ownership of human beings, and institutions that maintained conditions of personal subordination. Nineteenth-century abolition efforts increasingly involved international diplomacy, although early agreements differed considerably in geographical scope, obligations, and enforcement. The twentieth century established more comprehensive legal definitions.

The Slavery Convention of 1926 provided the foundational treaty definition of slavery. The Supplementary Convention of 1956 subsequently addressed practices that could preserve severe forms of dependency without establishing formal ownership. International human rights law reinforced these prohibitions through guarantees of freedom from slavery, servitude, and forced or compulsory labor.

The legal status of these prohibitions is not identical. The prohibition of slavery is widely recognized as a rule of customary international law and a peremptory norm. The International Law Commission included it among the norms identified in the annex to its 2022 conclusions on peremptory norms of general international law. That recognition should not automatically be extended to every practice described as modern slavery. Human trafficking, debt bondage, and forced labor may involve slavery in particular circumstances, but their separate treaty definitions require independent legal analysis.

2.1 The 1926 Slavery Convention and Ownership-Like Powers

Concluded at Geneva on September 25, 1926, under the auspices of the League of Nations, the Slavery Convention established an enduring international definition of slavery. Article 1(1) identifies slavery as the status or condition of a person over whom any or all powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised. The definition concentrates on the powers exercised over a person rather than requiring proof that domestic law formally recognizes ownership of human beings.

This wording remains significant because contemporary slavery frequently exists where ownership of persons is legally prohibited. The absence of a formal property title does not prevent conduct from being classified as slavery. The relevant inquiry concerns whether the perpetrator exercises powers resembling those traditionally associated with ownership, including extensive control over movement, the compulsory extraction of services, or treatment of the person as an object of exploitation.

Article 1(2) separately defines the slave trade, including acts concerned with capturing, acquiring, disposing of, selling, exchanging, or transporting persons for slavery. Article 2 requires contracting states to prevent and suppress the slave trade and bring about the abolition of slavery. The Convention established specific international obligations concerning practices that had previously been addressed through less comprehensive legal arrangements (Slavery Convention, 1926, arts. 1–2).

Article 5 also addressed compulsory labor, recognizing the danger that forced work could develop into conditions analogous to slavery. Its original provisions reflected historical compromises, including transitional arrangements concerning certain forms of compulsory labor. Those arrangements must be understood within the Convention's historical setting and the subsequent development of international labor law.

Later ILO conventions established more extensive prohibitions and restrictions on forced labor. The transitional language of the 1926 Convention cannot be treated as a general contemporary authorization for practices prohibited under a state's other applicable international obligations.

The continuing significance of Article 1 lies in its approach to ownership-like domination. Control over movement, exploitation of labor, restrictions on autonomy, and coercion may provide evidence of slavery, but no single circumstance necessarily determines the classification. The central question remains whether the powers exercised over the person are sufficiently characteristic of ownership.

2.2 The 1956 Convention and Slavery-Like Practices

The Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery was concluded at Geneva on September 7, 1956, and entered into force on April 30, 1957. It responded to exploitative arrangements that could persist despite the formal abolition of ownership-based slavery. Rather than replacing the 1926 definition, the Convention imposed additional obligations concerning specified institutions and practices.

Article 1 identifies debt bondage, serfdom, certain servile marriage arrangements, and specified practices involving children. These practices involve different relationships of subordination. Serfdom concerns individuals bound to live and labor on another person's land without freedom to change their status. The marriage provisions address arrangements involving the transfer of women without a right of refusal, transfer by a husband or his family, and inheritance of a widow.

The Convention also addresses arrangements through which a child or young person under eighteen is delivered by a parent or guardian to another person, with or without reward, for exploitation of the child or the child's labor. These provisions recognize that severe exploitation may be maintained through family authority, custom, economic dependency, or social arrangements that do not resemble conventional commercial ownership.

Article 1 requires states parties to take practicable and necessary legislative and other measures to bring about the complete abolition or abandonment of the specified practices progressively and as soon as possible. Importantly, the obligation applies whether or not the practices satisfy the definition of slavery contained in the 1926 Convention (Supplementary Convention, 1956, art. 1).

A person may consequently be subjected to debt bondage or another prohibited institution without every element of ownership-like domination being established. The 1956 Convention provides an independent legal basis for addressing these arrangements, reducing the possibility that a narrow application of the ownership-based definition leaves serious exploitation outside international regulation.

2.3 Prohibitions Under International Human Rights Treaties

International human rights law reinforced the prohibition of slavery after the Second World War. Article 4 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948, rejects slavery and servitude and prohibits the slave trade in all its forms. Although the Declaration was adopted as a United Nations General Assembly resolution rather than a binding treaty, its provisions influenced subsequent international human rights instruments.

Article 8 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) establishes binding obligations for states parties. Paragraph 1 prohibits slavery and the slave trade, while paragraph 2 prohibits servitude. Paragraph 3 separately addresses forced or compulsory labor and specifies circumstances excluded from that prohibition, including certain compulsory services associated with lawful detention, military obligations, civic duties, and emergencies.

The Covenant draws an important distinction concerning derogation. Article 4(2) prohibits derogation from Article 8(1) and 8(2), even during a public emergency satisfying the conditions for derogation. It does not include Article 8(3) in that list. This difference does not give governments unrestricted authority to impose forced labor. Any derogation must comply with Article 4's conditions and remain consistent with the state's other international obligations (ICCPR, 1966, arts. 4 and 8).

Regional instruments provide additional protection. Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights prohibits slavery, servitude, and forced or compulsory labor. Article 6 of the American Convention on Human Rights addresses freedom from slavery and related practices, while Article 5 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights prohibits slavery and the slave trade alongside other violations of human dignity.

The interpretation of these guarantees depends on the relevant treaty and judicial system. International human rights obligations are primarily addressed to states, but they may require public authorities to protect individuals against serious abuses committed by private persons. This relationship between international norms, state duties, and individual protection forms part of the wider system of international human rights law.

The prohibition of slavery also occupies a distinctive position in general international law. In Barcelona Traction, the International Court of Justice identified protection against slavery among obligations owed to the international community as a whole (ICJ, 1970, para. 34). The International Law Commission has likewise recognized the prohibition of slavery among peremptory norms, although the legal treatment of related practices falling outside its strict definition must be assessed separately.

3. Forced Labor and the ILO Conventions

Forced labor is a distinct legal category concerned with work or services performed without genuine voluntariness under conditions of coercion. It can arise in agriculture, manufacturing, construction, domestic service, commercial sexual exploitation, and other economic activities. Unlike slavery, forced labor does not require proof that a perpetrator exercises ownership-like powers over another person. The decisive considerations are the involuntary character of the work and the menace of a penalty.

The International Labour Organization developed the principal international treaty standards governing forced labor. Established in 1919, the ILO operates through a tripartite institutional structure involving governments, employers, and workers. Its conventions establish binding obligations for ratifying states, while its supervisory mechanisms examine compliance and provide institutional interpretations and guidance.

The international prohibition must be distinguished from general regulation of employment conditions. Inadequate remuneration, dangerous work, and excessive hours may violate labor standards without necessarily satisfying the definition of forced labor. Conversely, a worker may receive wages and perform ordinary tasks while remaining subjected to forced labor because threats or restrictions on departure prevent genuine freedom of choice.

3.1 Convention No. 29: Coercion and Involuntary Work

The ILO Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), establishes the central treaty definition of forced or compulsory labor. Article 2(1) identifies two essential characteristics: work or service exacted under the menace of a penalty and the absence of voluntary consent. Both elements are central to determining whether employment or compulsory service falls within the Convention's prohibition.

The menace of a penalty is not confined to physical violence or criminal punishment. It may involve threats against family members, confiscation of documents, withholding of earned wages, denunciation to immigration authorities, or other consequences used to compel continued work. The significance of these measures depends on whether they operate as coercive pressures that prevent the individual from refusing or leaving the work.

Voluntariness requires more than evidence that an individual initially accepted employment. A person may agree to a position after receiving false information about wages, working conditions, or contractual obligations. Consent may also cease to be meaningful when an employer subsequently imposes threats or restrictions preventing departure. The ILO's interpretation recognizes that forced labor can arise after a lawful employment relationship has begun.

Economic necessity presents a different question. A worker who accepts unfavorable conditions because alternative employment is unavailable has not necessarily been subjected to forced labor. The legal inquiry concerns whether work is exacted through coercion, rather than solely through the worker's difficult financial circumstances. Poverty and limited employment opportunities may increase vulnerability, but they do not independently establish the Convention's two defining elements.

Article 2(2) specifies limited exclusions, including compulsory military service for work of a purely military character, normal civic obligations, and certain work imposed following conviction by a court of law. Court-imposed work must satisfy conditions concerning public supervision and control, including restrictions on placing convicted persons at the disposal of private entities. The Convention also permits qualifying emergency services and minor communal services under prescribed conditions.

The original Convention contained transitional provisions concerning compulsory labor. The ILO supervisory bodies subsequently recognized that those provisions were no longer applicable. Article 7 of the 2014 Protocol expressly provided for their deletion, and the ILO's consolidated text of Convention No. 29 reflects that change. The Protocol's additional obligations bind states according to its ratification and entry-into-force rules, while the prohibition and other applicable obligations under Convention No. 29 remain independently relevant.

Article 25 requires illegal exaction of forced labor to be punishable as a penal offense and requires adequate penalties to be strictly enforced. The Convention consequently addresses both the substantive prohibition and the responsibility of ratifying states to establish effective enforcement arrangements (ILO, 1930, arts. 2 and 25).

3.2 Convention No. 105 and the 2014 Forced Labour Protocol

The Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105), supplements Convention No. 29 by prohibiting specified uses of forced or compulsory labor. Article 1 addresses its use for political coercion or education, mobilization of labor for economic development, labor discipline, punishment for participation in strikes, and discrimination on racial, social, national, or religious grounds.

These provisions respond particularly to circumstances in which governments or public authorities employ compulsory labor as an instrument of political, economic, or social control. Convention No. 105 does not replace the general definition in Convention No. 29. It establishes additional obligations concerning the purposes for which forced labor must not be used.

The Protocol of 2014 to Convention No. 29 strengthened the international response to contemporary exploitation. Article 1 requires ratifying states to take effective measures concerning prevention, protection, remedies, and sanctions. It expressly requires measures against trafficking in persons for forced labor. Article 2 addresses public awareness, labor-law coverage, labor inspection, abusive recruitment, and due diligence in public and private sectors.

The Protocol recognizes that criminal prohibition alone is insufficient. Victims may need assistance to leave coercive employment, recover withheld earnings, obtain compensation, and avoid renewed exploitation. Article 4(1) requires access to appropriate and effective remedies, such as compensation, irrespective of victims' presence or legal status in the national territory.

The practical effect of these instruments depends heavily on domestic implementation. Ratification establishes international obligations for the state, but national legislation, inspections, administrative procedures, and judicial remedies determine how protection operates within its legal system. This distinction between international commitments and domestic legal effect is central to the relationship between international law and municipal law.

4. Human Trafficking Under the Palermo Protocol

Human trafficking is closely associated with modern slavery, but it has a distinct legal definition. It concerns specified acts undertaken through prohibited means for the purpose of exploitation. Trafficking may result in forced labor, servitude, sexual exploitation, slavery, or other serious abuses, although its legal requirements are not identical to those of the exploitation ultimately intended.

The principal international instrument is the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, adopted in 2000. Commonly called the Palermo Protocol, it supplements the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. The Protocol establishes a common definition, requires criminalization of specified conduct, and provides for international cooperation and measures concerning victims.

Trafficking does not require movement across an international border. It may involve recruitment or exploitation within a single country, and transportation is not indispensable where another act specified in the definition is established. This distinction is significant because trafficking is often confused with migrant smuggling, which concerns the procurement of illegal entry into a state for financial or material benefit. The two offenses may coexist, but their legal elements and purposes differ.

4.1 The Act, Means, and Purpose of Exploitation

Article 3(a) of the Palermo Protocol defines trafficking through three components: an act, a prohibited means, and the purpose of exploitation. The relevant acts include recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring, and receipt of persons. The definition reaches conduct occurring at different stages of an exploitative arrangement, including conduct that does not involve transportation.

The prohibited means include threats or use of force, other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or vulnerability, and the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to obtain the consent of a person exercising control over another. These alternatives recognize that traffickers may obtain control without immediate physical violence. Fraudulent employment offers, manipulated dependency relationships, and abuse of authority can be legally relevant where the required elements are established.

The third component is the purpose of exploitation. Article 3(a) identifies, at a minimum, exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude, and removal of organs. This formulation establishes a minimum range of exploitative purposes rather than an exhaustive definition applicable to every domestic legal system.

The intended exploitation need not already have occurred for trafficking to be established. Recruitment through deception for the purpose of forced labor may satisfy the definition even if authorities intervene before the victim begins working. The exploitative purpose must nevertheless be established through evidence; suspicious recruitment or movement alone is insufficient.

Article 5 requires states parties to criminalize the conduct defined by Article 3 when committed intentionally. Article 4 describes the Protocol's scope of application in relation to transnational offenses involving organized criminal groups. These provisions perform different functions: Article 4 concerns the treaty's international framework, while Article 5 establishes the obligation to create domestic criminal offenses.

Article 34(2) of the parent Convention, read with the Protocol's implementation provisions, confirms that transnationality and organized criminal-group involvement are not additional elements required for domestic trafficking offenses. UNODC's Legislative Guide for the Trafficking in Persons Protocol explains this distinction. National criminalization must cover the prohibited conduct even when it occurs entirely within one state or is committed without an organized criminal group (UNODC, 2020).

Trafficking also differs from the core crimes prosecuted under the Rome Statute. The Palermo Protocol principally requires national criminalization and interstate cooperation. It does not independently place every trafficking offense within the jurisdiction of an international criminal tribunal. The distinction between transnational criminal law and international criminal law becomes particularly relevant where exploitation is alleged to constitute enslavement as a crime against humanity.

4.2 Consent, Child Trafficking, and Criminal Liability

Consent occupies a limited position under the Palermo Protocol. Article 3(b) provides that the consent of a trafficking victim to the intended exploitation is irrelevant where one of the prohibited means has been used. An individual's apparent willingness to accept employment or travel does not exclude trafficking when that willingness was obtained through coercion, deception, or another specified means.

The provision does not establish that every unfavorable employment arrangement amounts to trafficking. In adult cases, the relevant act, means, and exploitative purpose must still be proved. An agreement entered into voluntarily may be legitimate, while conduct occurring under a comparable contractual form may constitute trafficking if fraudulent recruitment or coercive control is established.

Child trafficking is governed by a different rule. Article 3(c) provides that recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring, or receipt of a child for exploitation constitutes trafficking even without proof of the prohibited means. Article 3(d) defines a child as any person under eighteen years of age. The rule removes the requirement to establish coercion or deception that ordinarily applies in adult trafficking cases.

Other international instruments reinforce protection against child exploitation. Article 35 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child requires states parties to take appropriate measures to prevent the abduction, sale, or trafficking of children. ILO Convention No. 182 identifies slavery, trafficking, debt bondage, forced labor, and certain other exploitative activities among the worst forms of child labor.

These protections remain legally distinct. Hazardous child labor may violate Convention No. 182 without satisfying the Palermo Protocol's trafficking definition. Conversely, trafficking of a child for exploitation may be established before the intended exploitation occurs. Criminal liability depends on the conduct, the relevant legal instrument, and the facts proved.

5. Debt Bondage and Coercive Recruitment

Debt bondage is a specific institution or practice similar to slavery recognized under Article 1(a) of the 1956 Supplementary Convention. It arises where a debtor pledges personal services, or the services of someone under the debtor's control, as security for a debt and the reasonably assessed value of those services is not applied toward repayment, or the duration and nature of those services are not respectively limited and defined. The definition identifies a relationship in which indebtedness is used to obtain continuing control over personal services.

Ordinary indebtedness does not constitute debt bondage. Loans, wage advances, and contractual repayment obligations can be lawful, even where the debtor experiences financial hardship. The distinction concerns the conditions under which services are pledged and performed. A debt becomes legally significant under the Supplementary Convention when the arrangement satisfies the characteristics of bondage rather than merely creating an obligation to repay money.

Such arrangements may begin with recruitment. Workers seeking employment can incur charges for transportation, placement, accommodation, equipment, or documentation. Where employers or intermediaries control these charges, the amount owed may increase through deductions, interest, or expenses that workers cannot independently verify. A worker may continue laboring without reducing the balance, creating an arrangement in which continued service does not realistically lead to release.

Debt can also reinforce other forms of coercion. An employer may threaten to report a migrant worker to immigration authorities if the debt remains unpaid or refuse to release identity documents until repayment. Workers may depend on the same employer for housing and food, making departure particularly difficult. The debt operates within a wider relationship of control rather than functioning solely as a financial obligation.

A worker may initially accept an advance to cover travel expenses without being subjected to bondage. If the employment arrangement subsequently prevents departure until an indefinite obligation is satisfied, the legal circumstances change. Evidence concerning the calculation of the debt, the value credited for services, contractual restrictions, and the worker's actual freedom is necessary to determine whether prohibited bondage exists.

Debt bondage may overlap with forced labor. Where personal services are exacted under the menace of a penalty and without genuine voluntariness, the requirements of ILO Convention No. 29 may also be satisfied. A threat to enforce an artificial debt, withhold wages, or impose reprisals can be relevant to that assessment. Yet debt bondage and forced labor remain distinct legal classifications.

Human trafficking may arise where recruitment, transfer, harboring, or another specified act is undertaken through prohibited means for an exploitative purpose. Debt-based dependency can be part of that process, particularly where recruitment involves deception or abuse of vulnerability. An exploitative debt alone, however, does not establish trafficking unless the relevant elements are present.

The legal treatment of debt bondage demonstrates how coercive exploitation can operate without formal ownership, physical restraints, or continuous confinement. Control over accounts, remuneration, employment termination, and access to basic necessities may create conditions in which workers cannot meaningfully recover their freedom. The 1956 Convention recognizes this form of subordination as an independent subject of international regulation, while other instruments may apply when the same facts establish forced labor, trafficking, or slavery.

6. Judicial Interpretation of Slavery and Exploitation

International and regional courts have contributed to the interpretation of slavery, servitude, forced labor, and trafficking in circumstances involving contemporary forms of exploitation. Their decisions clarify how legal definitions apply where individuals are subjected to severe domination without formal recognition of ownership. Judicial analysis also demonstrates why coercion, restricted movement, dependency, and exploitation must be assessed within the requirements of the applicable legal instrument.

Two judicial approaches are particularly relevant. International criminal tribunals examine whether an individual's conduct satisfies the elements of offenses such as enslavement and whether the additional requirements for criminal responsibility are established. Regional human rights courts consider whether states have complied with their obligations to prohibit exploitation, protect individuals, and investigate violations.

These approaches concern related conduct but answer different legal questions. A finding that a state failed to protect workers does not establish that particular officials or employers committed a crime against humanity. Equally, the conviction of an individual for enslavement does not automatically determine the international responsibility of a state. The substantive prohibition, individual criminal responsibility, and state obligations must remain separate.

6.1 Enslavement Under International Criminal Law

The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) made an important contribution to the interpretation of enslavement in Prosecutor v. Kunarac, Kovač and Vuković. The proceedings concerned crimes committed against women and girls in the Foča area of Bosnia and Herzegovina during the armed conflict of the 1990s. The Trial Chamber convicted Dragoljub Kunarac and Radomir Kovač of enslavement as a crime against humanity, among other offenses. Zoran Vuković was convicted of other crimes, but not enslavement.

In its judgment of February 22, 2001, the Trial Chamber examined conduct involving detention, sexual exploitation, violence, and control over victims' personal freedom. It interpreted enslavement by reference to powers attaching to ownership, identifying circumstances that could demonstrate the exercise of such powers. These included control over movement, psychological domination, restrictions on escape, forced services, control over sexuality, and treatment of individuals as objects of exploitation (ICTY, 2001).

The Appeals Chamber affirmed the convictions on June 12, 2002. It rejected the argument that prolonged detention was a necessary element of enslavement. Duration could provide evidence of the offense and affect its seriousness, but no minimum period was required. The Appeals Chamber also rejected the proposition that a victim's continuing lack of consent had to be proved as a separate constituent element (ICTY, 2002, paras. 117–122).

The judgment clarified that the required mental element concerned the intentional exercise of powers attaching to ownership. The Appeals Chamber did not require proof that the accused specifically intended prolonged detention for sexual exploitation. Its reasoning recognized the importance of actual domination while preserving the requirement to establish the relevant powers and criminal intent.

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court similarly includes enslavement among crimes against humanity. Article 7(2)(c) defines the offense through ownership-like powers and expressly refers to their exercise in the course of trafficking in persons, particularly women and children. The statutory definition must be read alongside the contextual requirements of Article 7.

A crime against humanity requires the relevant conduct to form part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population, with the accused's knowledge of the attack. Article 7(2)(a) further defines an attack through a course of conduct involving multiple qualifying acts pursuant to or in furtherance of a state or organizational policy. These requirements distinguish enslavement as a crime against humanity from slavery-related offenses prosecuted under ordinary domestic law.

This distinction is central to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which establishes specific crimes, jurisdictional conditions, and rules of individual responsibility. Trafficking or forced labor does not automatically constitute a crime against humanity merely because the conduct is serious. Prosecution before the ICC requires satisfaction of the Statute's substantive, contextual, jurisdictional, and admissibility requirements.

6.2 Slavery and Forced Labor in Regional Human Rights Courts

The European Court of Human Rights has developed a substantial interpretation of Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In Siliadin v. France, decided on July 26, 2005, the Court examined the treatment of a young Togolese woman required to perform extensive domestic work without payment under conditions of dependency and restricted freedom.

The Court found that the applicant had been subjected to forced labor and servitude. Her vulnerability, isolation, confiscated identity documents, dependence on her employers, and fear of immigration consequences contributed to the finding. The Court did not classify the circumstances as slavery in the traditional sense, distinguishing the established servitude from the exercise of a genuine right of ownership.

France was found to have violated Article 4 because its criminal law had not afforded the applicant practical and effective protection against the prohibited treatment. The judgment established that states must adopt and effectively implement appropriate criminal-law provisions against slavery, servitude, and forced labor. Formal recognition of human rights obligations was insufficient where the available protection failed in practice (ECtHR, 2005).

In Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, decided on January 7, 2010, the Court recognized that trafficking in human beings falls within the scope of Article 4. The case concerned the death of a young Russian woman who had traveled to Cyprus under an employment arrangement connected with the entertainment sector. The Court examined the obligations of the destination and origin states rather than determining the criminal guilt of a particular alleged trafficker.

The Court found that Cyprus had failed to provide adequate protection through its regulatory arrangements and the authorities' response to an identifiable risk. Russia had failed to investigate the circumstances of the woman's recruitment on its territory. The judgment demonstrated that Article 4 can require legislative, administrative, operational, and investigative measures, including cooperation between states where trafficking involves activities in different jurisdictions (ECtHR, 2010).

Labor exploitation received further attention in Chowdury and Others v. Greece, decided on March 30, 2017. The case concerned Bangladeshi migrant workers employed in strawberry cultivation under conditions involving unpaid wages, armed supervision, and severe restrictions arising from their circumstances. The Court found that the workers had been subjected to forced labor and trafficking-related exploitation and that Greece had failed to discharge its protective and investigative obligations under Article 4(2).

The judgment is significant because the workers were not continuously imprisoned and had initially accepted employment. Their vulnerability, the threat of losing unpaid wages, and the coercive conditions of work were relevant to the finding. Physical confinement was not indispensable to establishing prohibited exploitation (ECtHR, 2017).

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights addressed comparable issues in Workers of the Hacienda Brasil Verde v. Brazil, decided on October 20, 2016. The case concerned workers recruited for agricultural labor on a farm in Pará, where indebtedness, threats, armed supervision, and degrading living conditions restricted their ability to leave.

The Court found that 85 workers rescued on March 15, 2000, had experienced debt bondage and forced labor, and that the circumstances satisfied its interpretation of slavery. It emphasized ownership-like control, restrictions on autonomy, coercion, and exploitation of labor. The judgment also interpreted the prohibition of slavery and trafficking under Article 6(1) of the American Convention in light of contemporary international law (IACtHR, 2016).

The Court found Brazil internationally responsible for violations of Article 6(1) in relation to other protected rights and obligations. By five votes to one, it also characterized the violations affecting the 85 workers as occurring in a situation of historical structural discrimination based on economic status. Judge Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto dissented from that aspect of the majority's decision, while other separate opinions addressed the scope and significance of structural discrimination.

The distinction between the majority judgment and the separate opinions is important. The Court's finding concerning slavery and the state's responsibility must not be confused with complete judicial agreement on every aspect of its discrimination analysis. The judgment nevertheless established a significant regional interpretation of contemporary slavery and the obligations of public authorities toward workers exposed to severe exploitation.

These decisions illustrate the different legal functions of international adjudication. The ICTY addressed individual criminal responsibility for enslavement, while the European and Inter-American courts examined state obligations under regional human rights treaties. Their reasoning identifies related indicators of coercive domination, but the legal classifications and consequences depend on the applicable instrument and the question decided.

7. State Obligations, Victim Protection, and Accountability

International law places the principal responsibility for preventing and responding to modern slavery on states. The relevant duties arise through anti-slavery treaties, international labor conventions, anti-trafficking instruments, and international human rights law. Their content depends on the particular instrument, the state's treaty commitments, and the circumstances in which exploitation occurs.

These obligations extend beyond refraining from directly imposing slavery or forced labor. Under applicable treaty regimes, states may also be required to prohibit exploitation by private actors, regulate employment and recruitment practices, investigate credible allegations, prosecute offenders, and provide effective remedies.

The precise extent of these duties differs among instruments, particularly concerning prevention, criminalization, compensation, and protection against trafficking.

Enforcement ordinarily depends on domestic institutions. International law may establish the prohibition, but labor inspectors, police authorities, prosecutors, courts, immigration agencies, and social services are generally responsible for implementing it. Weak institutional coordination can leave individuals exposed even where national legislation formally prohibits every relevant practice.

7.1 State Responsibility and Duties of Protection

The international responsibility of a state may arise from its direct involvement in prohibited exploitation or from a failure to perform applicable duties of protection. Forced labor imposed by state organs raises questions different from those arising when private employers compel individuals to work. In the first situation, the conduct of public authorities may be attributable to the state. In the second, responsibility generally depends on whether the state has breached an obligation to prevent, investigate, or respond to the private conduct.

The International Law Commission's Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, adopted in 2001, provide the general framework for attribution and breach. Article 2 identifies conduct attributable to a state and the violation of an international obligation as the elements of an internationally wrongful act. The Articles do not themselves create the underlying prohibition of slavery or forced labor. That obligation must be identified separately under applicable international law (ILC, 2001, art. 2).

Where state officials organize or enforce compulsory labor contrary to binding obligations, their conduct may directly engage state responsibility. Where private actors commit exploitation, the legal inquiry is different. A state is not automatically responsible for every unlawful act committed by an employer within its territory, but it may breach a positive obligation if its authorities fail to take the measures required by the applicable legal standard.

The judgments in Rantsev and Hacienda Brasil Verde illustrate this distinction. Both concerned serious exploitation involving private actors, but the responsibility of the states arose through their failures to comply with obligations under regional human rights law. The courts examined institutional knowledge, preventive measures, investigations, and the availability of protection rather than simply attributing the perpetrators' private conduct to the state.

These questions belong to the wider law of state responsibility in international law. The international consequences of a breach may include cessation of wrongful conduct and reparation, subject to the applicable rules. Where serious breaches of obligations arising under peremptory norms are established, additional consequences may arise under Articles 40 and 41 of the International Law Commission's Articles.

International cooperation becomes particularly significant where recruitment, transportation, financial arrangements, or exploitation involve more than one jurisdiction. The Palermo Protocol provides for cooperation concerning trafficking, while Article 5 of the 2014 ILO Forced Labour Protocol requires cooperation between ratifying members to prevent and eliminate forced labor. Such provisions recognize that isolated national enforcement may be inadequate where exploitative arrangements operate across borders.

7.2 Victim Identification, Remedies, and Non-Punishment

Identifying victims is a necessary condition for effective protection. People subjected to trafficking or forced labor may not describe themselves as victims, particularly where exploitation has developed gradually through employment or personal relationships. Threats, dependency, language barriers, and fear of immigration authorities can further discourage disclosure. Investigative procedures must account for these circumstances without assuming that the absence of an immediate complaint establishes voluntary participation.

The Palermo Protocol addresses assistance and protection in Article 6, including privacy, information about proceedings, and measures concerning recovery. Several provisions are qualified by references to domestic law, appropriateness, or the extent possible. Article 7 addresses the possibility of allowing victims to remain in the receiving state's territory, while Article 8 concerns repatriation. These provisions do not establish an unconditional universal right to permanent residence for every trafficking victim.

The 2014 Forced Labour Protocol establishes more specific obligations concerning victims of forced labor. Article 3 requires effective measures for identification, release, protection, recovery, and rehabilitation. Article 4(1) requires access to appropriate and effective remedies, such as compensation, irrespective of victims' presence or legal status in the national territory. This protection is especially significant where irregular migration status might otherwise create obstacles to seeking redress.

Non-punishment raises a related issue. Individuals subjected to exploitation may be compelled to commit offenses, including immigration violations, use of fraudulent documents, or unlawful activities directed by traffickers. Article 4(2) of the 2014 Protocol requires states parties, in accordance with the basic principles of their legal systems, to ensure that competent authorities are entitled not to prosecute or impose penalties for unlawful activities compelled as a direct consequence of forced labor.

This is not an automatic grant of immunity for every offense committed by a person who has experienced exploitation. The application of non-punishment protections depends on the governing instrument, national implementation, and the connection between the unlawful conduct and the coercion. Regional anti-trafficking instruments may establish additional requirements, including Article 26 of the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings.

Access to remedies also depends on the practical capacity of victims to participate in proceedings. A legal entitlement to compensation may provide little protection if the individual cannot obtain representation, recover documents, remain safely available to testify, or enforce a judgment against the responsible employer. Effective protection requires functioning institutions capable of addressing these obstacles without exposing victims to further exploitation.

7.3 Corporate Responsibility and Supply-Chain Regulation

Modern slavery frequently occurs in economic relationships involving employers, recruiters, subcontractors, and commercial intermediaries. Complex supply chains can make exploitation difficult to identify, particularly where workers are recruited through third parties or employed at sites distant from the companies ultimately purchasing their products. Legal responsibility must be assessed according to the conduct and obligations of the particular actors involved.

The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, endorsed by the Human Rights Council in Resolution 17/4 of 2011, establish an influential framework based on the state duty to protect human rights, the corporate responsibility to respect human rights, and access to remedies. Under the Guiding Principles, businesses are expected to identify, prevent, mitigate, and address adverse human rights impacts associated with their activities and business relationships.

The Guiding Principles are not themselves a binding international treaty. Their corporate responsibility standards must be distinguished from legal obligations created by national legislation, regional regulation, contractual arrangements, or other applicable rules. They provide an international standard of expected business conduct without establishing a single directly enforceable corporate liability regime applicable worldwide.

Domestic measures have adopted different approaches to corporate accountability. Section 54 of the United Kingdom's Modern Slavery Act 2015, for example, establishes transparency requirements for qualifying commercial organizations concerning slavery and human trafficking in their businesses and supply chains. The provision is directed toward disclosure rather than establishing a general obligation to guarantee that every product or supplier is free from exploitation.

European Union legislation has introduced further regulatory measures. Regulation (EU) 2024/3015 prohibits products made with forced labor from being placed or made available on the Union market or exported from it. The Regulation entered into force on December 13, 2024, but its principal prohibition applies from December 14, 2027, with specified preparatory provisions applying earlier. Its framework concerns products and market enforcement rather than creating a general corporate human rights due diligence duty.

The EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, Directive (EU) 2024/1760, establishes a different regulatory approach. As amended by Directive (EU) 2026/470, its scope is concentrated on very large companies meeting the applicable employee and turnover thresholds. The amended framework requires Member States to adopt and publish national transposition measures by July 26, 2028, and apply them from July 26, 2029, subject to the separate timetable for specified reporting obligations.

Under the amended framework, the general scope includes EU companies with more than 5,000 employees and worldwide net turnover exceeding €1.5 billion, alongside qualifying non-EU companies meeting the relevant Union turnover threshold and specified franchising or licensing arrangements. Its obligations concern identifying and addressing adverse human rights and environmental impacts within the legally defined scope of companies' operations and chains of activities. The Directive's requirements should not be treated as already applicable to all businesses in November 2026.

These measures address different aspects of corporate involvement in exploitation. Transparency legislation concerns public reporting, due diligence legislation imposes specified risk-management obligations on covered companies, and the EU Forced Labour Regulation establishes a product-related market prohibition. Their enforcement mechanisms, scope, and dates of application are not interchangeable.

Recruitment practices deserve particular attention. Fees charged to workers, undisclosed contractual terms, passport retention, and subcontracting arrangements can create conditions for debt bondage or forced labor. Corporate oversight may help identify such practices before they develop into severe coercion, but voluntary codes and commercial audits cannot substitute for effective public enforcement.

Establishing criminal liability, civil liability, a regulatory breach, or an internationally wrongful act requires application of the relevant legal test. Participation in a supply chain does not automatically establish every form of responsibility. The effectiveness of corporate regulation depends on the obligations actually imposed, the evidence of prohibited conduct, and the remedies available to affected workers.

8. Global Estimates and the Limits of Enforcement

Measuring modern slavery presents difficulties that distinguish it from many other areas of social and economic research. Exploitation commonly occurs in hidden workplaces, private homes, isolated agricultural settings, or employment relationships where victims have strong reasons to avoid authorities. These circumstances limit direct observation and make official complaints and criminal convictions incomplete indicators of prevalence.

The 2022 Global Estimates of Modern Slavery, produced by the ILO, Walk Free, and IOM, estimated that 49.6 million people were living in forced labor or forced marriage in 2021. Of the estimated 27.6 million people in forced labor, approximately 17.3 million were exploited in private economic activities other than forced commercial sexual exploitation, 6.3 million were in forced commercial sexual exploitation, and 3.9 million were subjected to state-imposed forced labor (ILO, Walk Free and IOM, 2022).

These categories are important because the statistical definition of modern slavery is not identical to the legal definition of slavery in the 1926 Convention. The estimates combine different forms of exploitation for measurement purposes. They do not establish that every individual counted was subjected to ownership-like powers, nor do they represent judicial findings concerning particular perpetrators or states.

The estimates were developed using survey evidence, administrative information, and statistical methods designed to address incomplete observation. Because no single data source captured the entire affected population, the resulting figures necessarily involved estimation beyond directly identified cases. They should be understood as estimates for 2021, not as a census or an automatically current figure for subsequent years.

Victims may be unwilling or unable to disclose exploitation, particularly where violence, threats, immigration status, or dependency create fear. Some populations may be difficult to reach through conventional household surveys. Differences in national reporting systems and identification practices further complicate comparisons across countries.

Research on the measurement of modern slavery has emphasized these problems. Todd Landman identified the hidden character of exploitation, biases in available reporting, and difficulties in specifying the underlying concept as significant methodological concerns. Different data sources may measure different dimensions of a phenomenon, making conceptual and statistical consistency essential to responsible interpretation (Landman, 2020).

Human trafficking statistics illustrate another distinction. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime reports detected trafficking victims, which are not equivalent to the total number of people experiencing trafficking. Its Global Report on Trafficking in Persons 2024 documented a rise in detected trafficking for forced labor. In 2022, forced labor accounted for approximately 42 percent of detected victims in the reported global data, compared with 36 percent for sexual exploitation (UNODC, 2024).

Detection patterns are influenced by enforcement priorities, reporting practices, victim identification, and the capacity of national authorities. A rise in detected victims may reflect increased exploitation, improved detection, or a combination of both. Similarly, low numbers of trafficking convictions do not establish that exploitation is uncommon. Recorded criminal cases and prevalence estimates measure different aspects of the problem.

International institutions perform different functions in responding to these difficulties. The ILO supervises compliance with ratified labor conventions through mechanisms that include reporting, expert examination, and procedures established under its Constitution. The Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations examines national implementation and identifies concerns requiring attention.

Its observations and requests are important supervisory materials, but they are not equivalent to binding judicial judgments. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime supports implementation of the international framework against trafficking and organized crime through legislative assistance, criminal justice cooperation, and research. The United Nations Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery examines relevant practices, communicates concerns, and reports to United Nations human rights bodies within the mandate established by the Human Rights Council.

International development commitments provide another dimension. Sustainable Development Goal 8.7, adopted as part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, calls for immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced labor, end modern slavery and human trafficking, and eliminate the worst forms of child labor. It also included a target to end child labor in all its forms by 2025 (United Nations General Assembly, 2015).

That deadline has passed, and the original commitment should not be confused with evidence that the target was achieved. The Sustainable Development Goals are political commitments rather than treaties creating independent legal obligations. Their significance lies in establishing internationally agreed objectives, encouraging statistical monitoring, and directing institutional attention toward persistent exploitation.

The continuing enforcement difficulties are substantial. Labor inspectors may lack access to private homes or remote workplaces. Police investigations may concentrate on immigration offenses rather than coercive employment. Victims may face threats if they cooperate with prosecutors, and employers may use complex subcontracting arrangements to obscure responsibility. Even where authorities establish violations, compensation and rehabilitation may remain difficult to secure.

Formal abolition and widespread treaty participation have consequently not eliminated coercive exploitation. International law has developed extensive prohibitions, criminalization requirements, and protective obligations. Their practical effectiveness depends on whether national institutions can identify prohibited conduct, investigate those responsible, protect affected individuals, and make legal remedies accessible.

Conclusion

Modern slavery is regulated through several distinct but connected areas of international law. The 1926 Slavery Convention addresses ownership-like domination, the 1956 Supplementary Convention covers specified slavery-like practices, ILO instruments regulate forced labor, and the Palermo Protocol establishes obligations concerning human trafficking. International human rights treaties reinforce these protections through prohibitions and corresponding duties imposed on states.

The distinctions among slavery, servitude, forced labor, trafficking, and debt bondage remain legally consequential. The same circumstances may engage several prohibitions, but each has its own elements and legal consequences. Exploitative indebtedness, involuntary work, fraudulent recruitment, and ownership-like control cannot be treated as interchangeable concepts merely because they arise within the same employment relationship.

International law provides substantial grounds for preventing these abuses and establishing accountability. The persistent difficulty lies in translating those obligations into effective protection, particularly where exploitation operates through private economic relationships, migration-related dependency, or concealed forms of coercion. Accurate legal classification, functioning investigative institutions, and meaningful access to remedies remain central to the international prohibition of contemporary slavery.

References

Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) (1957) Adopted 25 June 1957; entered into force 17 January 1959. 320 UNTS 291. Available at: https://normlex.ilo.org/dyn/nrmlx_en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12201:0::NO::P12201_INSTRUMENT_ID:312250 (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (1981) Adopted 27 June 1981; entered into force 21 October 1986. 1520 UNTS 217. Available at: https://treaties.un.org/pages/showDetails.aspx?objid=08000002800cb09f (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

American Convention on Human Rights (1969) Adopted 22 November 1969; entered into force 18 July 1978. 1144 UNTS 123. Available at: https://treaties.un.org/pages/showDetails.aspx?objid=08000002800f10e1 (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1950) Signed 4 November 1950; entered into force 3 September 1953. ETS No. 5. Available at: https://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list2?module=treaty-detail&treatynum=005 (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) Adopted 20 November 1989; entered into force 2 September 1990. 1577 UNTS 3. Available at: https://treaties.un.org/pages/showmtdsgdetails.aspx?chapter=4&lang=en&mtdsg_no=iv-11&src=untsonline&tabid=2 (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (2005) Opened for signature 16 May 2005; entered into force 1 February 2008. CETS No. 197. Available at: https://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list?module=treaty-detail&treatynum=197 (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

Directive (EU) 2024/1760 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2024) Directive of 13 June 2024 on corporate sustainability due diligence and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937 and Regulation (EU) 2023/2859. Official Journal of the European Union, L, 2024/1760, 5 July 2024. Available at: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/a416fd73-3a66-11ef-a1cb-01aa75ed71a1/ (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

Directive (EU) 2026/470 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2026) Directive of 24 February 2026 amending Directives 2006/43/EC, 2013/34/EU, (EU) 2022/2464 and (EU) 2024/1760 as regards certain corporate sustainability reporting requirements and certain corporate sustainability due diligence requirements. Official Journal of the European Union, L, 2026/470, 26 February 2026. Available at: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2026/470/oj (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

European Court of Human Rights (2005) Siliadin v. France, judgment, 26 July 2005, Application No. 73316/01, ECHR 2005-VII. Available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/?i=001-69891 (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

European Court of Human Rights (2010) Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, judgment, 7 January 2010, Application No. 25965/04, ECHR 2010. Available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/?i=001-96549 (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

European Court of Human Rights (2017) Chowdury and Others v. Greece, judgment, 30 March 2017, Application No. 21884/15. Available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/?i=001-172701 (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) (1930) Adopted 28 June 1930; entered into force 1 May 1932. ILO Convention No. 29. Available at: https://normlex.ilo.org/dyn/nrmlx_en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12201:0::NO::P12201_INSTRUMENT_ID:312174 (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

Inter-American Court of Human Rights (2016) Workers of the Hacienda Brasil Verde v. Brazil, judgment (Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs), 20 October 2016, Series C No. 318. Available at: https://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_318_esp.pdf (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

International Court of Justice (1970) Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited (Belgium v. Spain), Second Phase, judgment, 5 February 1970, ICJ Reports 1970, p. 3. Available at: https://api.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/50/050-19700205-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (2001) Prosecutor v. Dragoljub Kunarac, Radomir Kovač and Zoran Vuković, Trial Chamber judgment, 22 February 2001, Case Nos. IT-96-23-T and IT-96-23/1-T. Available at: https://www.icty.org/x/cases/kunarac/tjug/en/kun-tj010222e.pdf (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (2002) Prosecutor v. Dragoljub Kunarac, Radomir Kovač and Zoran Vuković, Appeals Chamber judgment, 12 June 2002, Case Nos. IT-96-23 and IT-96-23/1-A. Available at: https://www.icty.org/x/cases/kunarac/acjug/en/kun-aj020612e.pdf (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

International Labour Organization, Walk Free and International Organization for Migration (2022) Global Estimates of Modern Slavery: Forced Labour and Forced Marriage. Geneva: International Labour Organization. Available at: https://www.ilo.org/publications/major-publications/global-estimates-modern-slavery-forced-labour-and-forced-marriage (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

International Law Commission (2001) Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, with Commentaries. Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its fifty-third session, UN Doc. A/56/10, Chapter IV. Available at: https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/commentaries/9_6_2001.pdf (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

International Law Commission (2022) Draft Conclusions on Identification and Legal Consequences of Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens), with Commentaries. Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its seventy-third session, UN Doc. A/77/10, Chapter IV. Available at: https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/commentaries/1_14_2022.pdf (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) Adopted 16 December 1966; entered into force 23 March 1976. 999 UNTS 171. Available at: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/showDetails.aspx?clang=_en&objid=0800000280004bf5 (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

Landman, T. (2020) 'Measuring Modern Slavery: Law, Human Rights, and New Forms of Data', Human Rights Quarterly, 42(2), pp. 303–331. https://doi.org/10.1353/hrq.2020.0019 (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

Modern Slavery Act 2015 (United Kingdom) (2015) 2015 c. 30, 26 March 2015. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/30/section/54 (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

Protocol of 2014 to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (2014) Adopted 11 June 2014; entered into force 9 November 2016. ILO Protocol P029. Available at: https://normlex.ilo.org/dyn/nrmlx_en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12201:0::NO::P12201_INSTRUMENT_ID:3174672 (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, Supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (2000) Adopted 15 November 2000; entered into force 25 December 2003. 2237 UNTS 319. Available at: https://treaties-prod.un.org/Pages/showDetails.aspx?clang=_en&objid=0800000280051ba9 (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

Regulation (EU) 2024/3015 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2024) Regulation of 27 November 2024 on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937. Official Journal of the European Union, L, 2024/3015, 12 December 2024. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32024R3015 (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1998) Adopted 17 July 1998; entered into force 1 July 2002. 2187 UNTS 3. Available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/publications/core-legal-texts/rome-statute-international-criminal-court (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

Slavery Convention (1926) Concluded 25 September 1926; entered into force 9 March 1927. 60 LNTS 253. Available at: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/showDetails.aspx?clang=_en&objid=08000002800006f9 (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery (1956) Concluded 7 September 1956; entered into force 30 April 1957. 266 UNTS 3. Available at: https://treaties.un.org/pages/showDetails.aspx?clang=_en&objid=080000028003103d (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (2000) Adopted 15 November 2000; entered into force 29 September 2003. 2225 UNTS 209. Available at: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?chapter=18&clang=_en&mtdsg_no=XVIII-12&src=TREATY (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

United Nations General Assembly (2015) Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution 70/1, UN Doc. A/RES/70/1, adopted 25 September 2015. Available at: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3923923/ (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

United Nations Human Rights Council (2011a) Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework. Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General, John Ruggie, UN Doc. A/HRC/17/31, 21 March 2011. Available at: https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/Business/A-HRC-17-31_AEV.pdf (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

United Nations Human Rights Council (2011b) Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises. Resolution 17/4, UN Doc. A/HRC/RES/17/4, adopted 16 June 2011. Available at: https://mandates.un.org/mandate/A/HRC/RES/17/4 (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (2020) Legislative Guide for the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, Supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. Vienna: United Nations. Available at: https://www.unodc.org/documents/human-trafficking/2020/TiP_LegislativGuide_Final.pdf (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (2024) Global Report on Trafficking in Persons 2024. New York: United Nations. Available at: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4069246 (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) Adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1948, Resolution 217 A (III), UN Doc. A/RES/217(III). Available at: https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights/ (Accessed: 1 November 2026).

Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182) (1999) Adopted 17 June 1999; entered into force 19 November 2000. ILO Convention No. 182. Available at: https://www.ilo.org/resource/other/c182-worst-forms-child-labour-convention (Accessed: 1 November 2026).