Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, Art. 16 CoE: UNODC-UN.GIFT Model Law against Trafficking in Persons “2. When a Party returns a victim to another State, such return shall be with due regard for the rights, safety and dignity of that person (…).” Article 33. Repatriation of victims of trafficking in persons to another State “7. Child victims shall not be returned to a State, if there is indication, following a risk and security assessment, that such return would not be in the best interests of the child.” Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings The CoE Convention explicitly requires a risk assessment, but only in cases of trafficked children. Nevertheless, the return has to be “with due regard for the rights, safety and dignity of that person”. 152 Furthermore, the rights of the trafficked person include in particular the right not to be subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment after the return. The ECtHR jurisprudence shows that the responsibility of States parties not to return a person also concerns cases when the alleged ill-treatments were not committed directly or indirectly by public authorities of the destination country. 153 As a consequence, a risk assessment has to be conducted before returning any trafficked person. Since States parties have to analyse whether the principle of non-refoulement is applicable, a pre-return risk assessment of the possible forms of threats and harms in the country of origin in the case of return has to be conducted. A risk assessment for trafficked persons needs to integrate questions of non-refoulement.154 Convention on Action against Trafficking in “3. Any decision to return a victim of trafficking in persons to his or her country shall be considered in the light of the principle of non-refoulement and of the prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment.” “4. When a victim of trafficking raises a substantial allegation that he or she or his or her family may face danger to life, health or personal liberty if he or she is returned to his or her country of origin, the competent authority [name authority] shall conduct a risk and security assessment before returning the victim.” Model Law against Trafficking in Persons The UNODC model law against trafficking in persons suggests that a risk assessment should take into account risk of reprisals by the trafficking network against the victim and the family. Additionally, the assessment should look into whether the authorities of the country of origin have the capacity or willingness to protect the victim from violence. Furthermore, the assessment must consider the social position of the victim on return, the possible detention of the victim related to offences such as prostitution or holding false documents, and the availability of assistance.155 Co-operation between different actors such as NGOs and national authorities is necessary for a comprehensive risk assessment. In the course of a risk analysis, the views of the victim should be taken into consideration and information from governmental authorities of the country of origin, of local NGOs and international organizations should be collected.156 Research commissioned by ODIHR showed that in the UK, Germany, Spain and Italy, no clear procedures have been developed to ensure that the return of a trafficked person is conducted with due regard to the rights and security of that person.157 In an expert meeting of ODIHR, specific recommendations concerning risk assessments were developed: Human Beings Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings CETS No. 197, Explanatory Report Report, First Expert Meeting on Human Rights Protection in the return of trafficked persons to countries of origin 34 Model Law against Trafficking in Persons Quality standards for risk assessment and the safe return and reintegration of trafficked persons