## Facts

- Four linked criminal appeals involved three Vietnamese youths and one adult Ugandan woman who were trafficked and then prosecuted for conduct connected to their exploitation.
- L, an adult Ugandan woman trafficked for prostitution, was given a forged passport by traffickers and believed it to be genuine; she was convicted of possessing a false passport.
- HVN, THN, and T were Vietnamese minors or youths trafficked to the United Kingdom and compelled to work in cannabis cultivation; each was prosecuted and convicted for producing cannabis.
- In THN’s case, later material indicated he had been brought into England in a concealed container and forced to work in a cannabis house; a later competent-authority decision recognized him as a trafficked child.
- The prosecutions proceeded without adequate recognition of trafficking status and (for the youths) without sufficiently careful treatment of disputed age and child-protection considerations.
- After convictions, trafficking evidence was accepted or emerged, supporting that the offending was a direct consequence of exploitation; in some instances the prosecution accepted the cases would not have been brought had trafficking been properly appreciated.

## Issues

1. When does prosecuting a person who is (or may be) a trafficking victim—particularly a child—for trafficking-related offending amount to an abuse of process?
2. What responsibilities do prosecutors and courts have to investigate age, trafficking indicators, and the nexus between exploitation and the charged conduct before permitting proceedings to continue?
3. How should domestic criminal procedure (including abuse of process) give effect to international and regional obligations protecting trafficking victims from prosecution or punishment for compelled criminality?

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) allowed all four appeals and quashed each conviction.
- Where there is credible material that a defendant is a trafficking victim and the offence is consequent on and integral to exploitation, prosecution may be wrong in principle and may constitute an abuse of process.
- In cases involving children or possible children, the court must treat the individual as a child where age is in doubt and there is reason to believe they are under 18, and must apply heightened protection.
- On the established and later-accepted facts, none of the appellants should have been prosecuted; the convictions were therefore unsafe.

## Legal Principles

- Trafficked persons must be approached as victims of crime; that status materially affects prosecutorial decisions and the court’s control over proceedings.
- Domestic courts should apply abuse-of-process doctrine in a manner consistent with the state’s international and regional obligations protecting trafficking victims from prosecution or punishment for unlawful acts compelled as a direct consequence of trafficking.
- The abuse-of-process inquiry is not limited to trial fairness; it includes whether continuing the prosecution is oppressive or unfair given trafficking, compulsion, age, and diminished culpability.
- In potential child-trafficking cases, courts should (i) determine or provisionally treat as a child where age is disputed, (ii) assess trafficking indicators and any competent-authority decisions, (iii) evaluate whether the offence was consequent on and integral to exploitation, and (iv) treat the child’s best interests as a primary consideration.
- Prosecutors must apply appropriate guidance and scrutinize trafficking indicators, but courts retain an independent duty to require adequate information and to stop proceedings where prosecution is inconsistent with these principles.

## Conclusion

The court held that prosecutions of trafficking victims for offences integral to their exploitation—especially where the defendants are or may be children—can amount to an abuse of process, and it quashed the convictions because the cases should not have been prosecuted and were unsafe.


R. v. L, [2013] EWCA Crim 991 (Eng. & Wales Ct. App. (Crim. Div.) 2013)