Contested Bodies

Abstract

This article utilizes an organizational analysis to examine the role of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the sex trafficking debate, and argues that, much like other organizations, NGOs respond to a host of external and environmental factors that alter their behavior and influence their opportunity for success. In this case, organizational competition between NGOs, the emergence of faith-based organizations (FBOs) as additional competitors and the primacy of US government agencies in providing funding have influenced the forms of organizational strategy implemented by NGOs, driven deeper divisions between feminist NGOs combating trafficking and, ultimately, undermined the ability of NGOs to serve as advocates on the global stage.

Keywords:

• FBOs
• NGOs
• organizational behavior
• sex trafficking

Notes

This passage by Emma Goldman was recently reprinted in Kempadoo et al. (2005: vii). Goldman's analysis remains both timely and compelling – which perhaps is evidenced in its reemergence in the scholarly literature.

A point that is supported both by historical documents which reveal concern for ‘white girls’ being taken advantage of by ‘notorious Parisians and dark-skinned Mediterranean men’ (Long 2004: 20), as well as cases such as that of boxer Jack Johnson in the United States, a black man who was prosecuted under the 1910 White Slave Traffic Act for the crime of marrying a white woman (Doezema 2002; Nagel 2003; Collins 2005).

To be considered for consultative status with ECOSOC, NGOs must have an established headquarters and must be able to document that they have been in existence for at least two years prior to application. They must also demonstrate proof of democratic and transparent decision-making processes, the authority to speak for members, a representative structure, appropriate mechanisms of accountability and must have adopted a constitution through democratic means (United Nations Economic and Social Council n.d.).

See Clark (1995); Brown and Fox (1998); Gray (1998); Keck and Sikkink (1998); Simmons (1998); Boli and Thomas (1999).

As Miller (1999: 175, footnote 2) explains:

• Choosing to apply for consultative status is not without problems and tradeoffs. ECOSOC can refuse to accept an NGO on the basis of political or ideological opposition of member governments; the cost and time required to apply are considerable and may result in a diversion of scarce resources.

Lederer now serves as Senior Advisor on Trafficking to the Under Secretary of State Paula Dobriansky, as well as executive director of a policy group on trafficking which consists of members of the US Department of State, Department of Justice, Department of Defense and several other US government agencies.

See, for example, Carnes (2000); Chapkis (2003); Hertzke (2004); McKelvey (2004); Melzer (2005); Soderlund (2005).

Debates over how, and to whom, these special ‘T-visas’ would be made available comprised a primary point of contention in the discussion elaborated in preceding pages. To be eligible for a T-visa a trafficked woman must be determined to be: (1) a victim of a ‘severe’ form of trafficking; (2) physically present in the United States; and (3) willing to comply with a reasonable request to assist in the investigation and prosecution of acts of trafficking. Once granted a T-visa, recipients then become eligible for permanent resident status upon meeting other necessary requirements (Ryf 2002).

Relevant sections cited include Section 7(g)(1), Section 3(c) and Section 112A(1).

Relevant sections cited include Section 101(1)(b)(iii), Section 102(1)(A) and Section 104(C)(4).

See Saikaew (1996); Hebenton and Thomas (1999); Bertone (2000); Arnold and Bertone (2002); Jana et al. (2002).

See Shifter (2004); Katayama (2005); Melzer (2005); Soderlund (2005).

See McKelvey (2004); Ditmore (2005); Nagarajan (2005); Soderlund (2005).

USAID restrictions on groups participating in HIV/AIDS programs were declared unconstitutional by a US District Court judge in New York State on 9 May 2006 (Alliance for Open Society International v. United States Agency for International Development). While this is clearly a victory for opponents of restrictive funding policies, the decision is likely to be appealed, and has not yet been applied to anti-trafficking NGOs or restrictions laid out in the TVPA.