Guide to the Protocol, however, states that “support and protection shall … not be made conditional upon the victim’s capacity or willingness to cooperate in legal proceedings” (para. 62). In note 23 the Guide cites the Trafficking Principles and Guidelines to support this point. More recently, the body established to make recommendations on the effective implementation of the Protocol has also affirmed that “States parties should … [e]nsure victims are provided with immediate support and protection, irrespective of their involvement in the criminal justice process.”304 The European Trafficking Convention is more explicit on the need to separate protection and support from legal cooperation. States parties to the Convention are required to: adopt such legislative or other measures as may be necessary to ensure that assistance to a victim is not made conditional on his or her willingness to act as a witness (art. 12 (6)). The Explanatory Report on the Convention confirms that the drafters intended this provision to refer to both investigations and criminal proceedings (para. 168). However, the Report also highlights the fact that in the law of many countries it is compulsory to give evidence if required to do so. Under such circumstances, it would not be possible to rely on the above provision – or provisions mandating a “reflection and recovery period” (see section 8.6, below) – if refusing to act as a witness when legally compelled to do so (paras. 170 and 176). While State practice still lags some way behind, the position taken by the European Trafficking Convention is early evidence of a trend towards acknowledging the need to detach protection and support from victim cooperation, particularly during the period immediately following 304 A/63/215, annex I, para. 12. identification, when victims can be expected to be most vulnerable. Several human rights treaty bodies, including the Committee against Torture, have pointed out the importance of providing assistance on the sole basis of need,305 and others have also expressed concern at the tying of residence permits to victim cooperation.306 The growing acceptance of the importance of a “reflection and recovery period”– during which a victim is given the space, assistance, information and support that will allow her or him to make an informed decision about what to do next – provides additional evidence of the value of separating immediate assistance from a decision to cooperate. This concept is considered further at section 8.6 below. 8.3. PROTECTION FROM FURTHER HARM The crime of trafficking is only made possible by, and sustained through, high levels of violence For example, in its 2008 concluding observations on the report of Australia, the Committee against Torture requested that the State party: “take effective measures to prevent and punish trafficking in persons and provide recovery services to victims on a needs basis unrelated to whether they collaborate with investigators” (emphasis added) (CAT/C/AUS/CO/1, para. 32). The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, in its 2007 concluding observations on the report of the Netherlands, called upon the State party “to provide for the extension of temporary protection visas, reintegration and support services to all victims of trafficking, including those who are unable or unwilling to cooperate in the investigation and prosecution of traffickers” (CEDAW/C/ NLD/CO/4, para. 24). 305 Human Rights Committee, concluding observations: Belgium (CCPR/CO/81/BEL, para. 15); Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, concluding observations: France (CEDAW/C/FRA/CO/6, paras. 30-31); Australia (CEDAW/C/AUL/CO/5, para. 21). See also A/63/215: “[m]easures to protect and support victims, including the granting of residence permits or stays, should be unconditional and independent of a victim’s ability or willingness to assist in the investigation or prosecution of offenders” (para. 62). 306 COMMENTARY 143