vulnerability to re-trafficking.307 In other cases, unidentified victims deported from a destination country to their country of origin reported being contacted by agents of the traffickers soon after arrival, sometimes while still in police custody.308 The provision of reintegration assistance to trafficking victims returned to their countries of origin greatly depends on the existence of reintegration mechanisms in those countries. Some countries of origin contribute to the reintegration of the returned trafficking victims by providing them with limited financial assistance or specialized reintegration programmes that are run or monitored by NGOs or the IOM. In the EU, one particular issue to have arisen concerns trafficked persons who are nationals of EU member states and who are trafficked to and identified as such in another EU member state. Information provided by practitioners309 and confirmed by research into the issue indicates that these cases may be going undetected.310 The right of EU citizens to remain in other EU member states means that they are not subject to immigration regulations and that they can work legally in other EU member states. As such, when they are identified as victims trafficking, their legal status does not depend on their co-operation with the authorities. As a result, they might be denied access to the services or assistance typically made available to third-country nationals whose status is dependent on their willingness to co-operate.311 Even in cases where EU citizens assist the law enforcement authorities, their status as EU citizens might still exclude them from status-specific assistance.312 This situation, in turn, can prevent either the victim’s integration into the destination country or re-integration into the country of origin, thereby compromising the person’s security and making the person vulnerable to re-trafficking. The OSCE has urged participating States to work together with NGOs and intergovernmental organizations to reduce the risks of re-trafficking for repatriated victims. States are called on to conduct risk assessments and to address factors that can increase a victim’s vulnerability to re-trafficking. These factors include poverty, discrimination, a lack of access to education and economic opportunities, sexual abuse and domestic violence.313 307  See Alan Davis, Sex trafficking victim wins substantial damages from the Home Office, The Guardian, 11 April 2011. In another case reported by the Italian NGO Gruppo Abele, a victim of sexual exploitation from Albania was deported without having been identified as such. The victim did not return to her family due to fear of being stigmatized and rejected for having worked in prostitution, and was subsequently re-trafficked. According to Gruppo Abele, it is the traffickers themselves who often spread the word about their victims’ activities in order to make return difficult or even impossible, thereby facilitating future exploitation. 308  ODIHR Anti-Trafficking Programme, “Paper on the Return of Victims of Trafficking from Italy”, 2009, p. 11. 309  Information provided by representative of the Austrian NGO LEFO at the ODIHR Expert Meeting in Warsaw, Poland, 11-12 February 2014. 310  Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Measures for the Integration of Trafficked Persons (Paris: IOM, 2013), p. 46 311  Ibid. 312  Ibid. In addition, in contrast to third-country nationals, an EU citizen would also not be able to access international protection measures, since EU citizenship prevents EU citizens from applying for asylum within the EU. 313  OSCE Ministerial Council Decision No. 14/06 (2006), para. 4. Part 2: Explanatory Report to the Principles 81