PART 2.3 emergence of a new one. The harm already done to victims can be compounded by failures to provide medical and other forms of support – or by linking the provision of such services to an obligation to cooperate that victims may not be willing or able to meet. The present section first considers the obligation on States to separate protection and support from victim cooperation. It then examines the issue of protection from further harm: what does this mean in the context of trafficking? What is the exact nature of States’ protection obligations? Consideration is then given to the requirement, set out in Principle 8, that States must give protection and support to victims. The discussion considers whether a legal obligation exists in this regard and, if so, what this obligation actually entails. 8.2. SEPARATING PROTECTION AND SUPPORT FROM VICTIM COOPERATION The linking of assistance and protection to cooperation with national criminal justice agencies is prevalent in all regions of the world. The legal and regulatory frameworks of many countries explicitly make any form of support conditional on cooperation. For some of these countries, the fact that a victim is willing to cooperate is insufficient – the relevant authorities are required to make a further determination on the quality and usefulness of that cooperation. Even in the few countries where non-conditional assistance is guaranteed by law, victims still tend to be pressured into providing information and testimony.303 See, for example, the case studies in Global Alliance against Trafficking in Women, Collateral Damage: the Impact of Anti-Trafficking Measures on Human Rights around the World (2007). 303 142 There are many problems with this approach. As detailed elsewhere in the present Commentary, victims of trafficking have a legal entitlement to receive assistance commensurate with their status as victims of crime and victims of human rights violations (see discussion under Principle 7 and related Guidelines). States are under a corresponding obligation to provide such assistance. Placing conditions on the provision of assistance denies the legal nature of both the entitlement and the obligation. Other problems are more practical in nature. The linking of victim support to cooperation reflects the widely acknowledged importance of victim information and testimony in securing convictions against traffickers. However, a victim compelled to give testimony is unlikely to make a strong witness, particularly in the likely event that this person is still suffering from physical or psychological trauma or fears retaliation. Conditional assistance can be expected to exacerbate the high levels of distrust that may already exist between victims and law enforcement officials. Conditional assistance can also serve to undermine victim credibility in a manner that would be avoided if all identified victims were given similar levels of assistance and support. Separating protection and support from victim cooperation is a fundamental tenet of the human rights approach to trafficking. The requirement that protection and support should not be made conditional on a trafficked person’s capacity or willingness to cooperate in legal proceedings against their exploiters is echoed throughout the Trafficking Principles and Guidelines. In relation to shelter for victims, for example, Guideline 6.1 states that the provision of such shelter “should not be made contingent on the willingness of the victims to give evidence in criminal proceedings”. The Trafficking Protocol does not make any specific reference to this issue. The Legislative RECOMMENDED PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND HUMAN TRAFFICKING