[Senate Hearing 114-751]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 114-751
TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS: PREPARING
THE 2016 ANNUAL REPORT
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MAY 25, 2016
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web:
http://www.govinfo.gov
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
28-828 PDF WASHINGTON : 2018
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
BOB CORKER, Tennessee, Chairman
JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland
MARCO RUBIO, Florida BARBARA BOXER, California
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
JEFF FLAKE, Arizona JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire
CORY GARDNER, Colorado CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware
DAVID PERDUE, Georgia TOM UDALL, New Mexico
JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut
RAND PAUL, Kentucky TIM KAINE, Virginia
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
Todd Womack, Staff Director
Jessica Lewis, Democratic Staff Director
John Dutton, Chief Clerk
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Corker, Hon. Bob, U.S. Senator From Tennessee.................... 1
Cardin, Hon. Benjamin L., U.S. Senator From Maryland............. 1
Coppedge, Hon. Susan, Ambassador-at-Large, Office to Monitor and
Combat Trafficking in Persons, U.S. Department of State,
Washington, D.C................................................ 3
(iii)
TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS: PREPARING
THE 2016 ANNUAL REPORT
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 25, 2016
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 4:35 p.m. in Room
S-116, The Capitol, Hon. Bob Corker, chairman of the committee,
presiding.
Present: Senators Corker [presiding], Risch, Gardner,
Perdue, Isakson, Cardin, Menendez, Shaheen, and Kaine.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BOB CORKER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE
The Chairman. So thanks for coming.
This is obviously a casual hearing, which we find to be the
best in most cases. We are behind closed doors. That does not
mean that we do not believe there ought to be congressional
oversight. We do. But at the same time, I felt like maybe this
setting would contribute towards this not being politicized in
any way. We do not want to see that happen. But we obviously
want to have oversight.
Last year, we had some concerns about the whole process
being politicized, and maybe there were competing interests
around some of the decisions that were made about rankings. So
this year--of course, we did not have a Susan Coppedge last
year filling the role. And we appreciate the fact that she is
here and she is working with each of you to try to come up with
appropriate ratings.
But we want to thank you for coming in. We just want to
have an open discussion. And our sole goal is to ensure there
is integrity in the process. One of the things that I think the
committee is united on is this issue of ensuring that we deal
with this in an appropriate way around the world.
Senator Cardin has been tremendous on this issue for years.
He has been around longer than I have and I know has been
committed to this for a long, long time.
So we thank you for coming. We look forward to an open
discussion and your comments.
With that, I will turn to the ranking member.
STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND
Senator Cardin. Thank you, Senator Corker.
Let me first say we are all on the same side here. So our
efforts is how can we be more effective in combating
trafficking and how we can ensure that the tool of the
Trafficking in Persons Report is maintained as the gold
standard and is used effectively to further U.S. foreign policy
and domestic issues.
To Susan Coppedge, you have shown good judgment, as you
just told me today, by moving to Maryland. That certainly
helps. [Laughter.]
The Chairman. It is not Georgia, but----Laughter.]
Senator Cardin. Well, there is no one here from Georgia
right now. So I think we are safe. [Laughter.]
Senator Cardin. Maybe our Georgia representatives will be
here soon, and they usually are very punctual in their
attendance.
But let me just underscore the point. Last year, it was
very disappointing in two visible countries, with Malaysia and
Cuba, but other countries. As I am looking at the report this
year and specifics on countries, it is hard to understand how
countries have not been downgraded where we see very little
progress.
I hope that this discussion--we can have a better
understanding. We do not want to see political considerations
on the ranking and tiers decisions on the Trafficking in
Persons Report. We do not. We believe it must be the
credibility of the report.
We understand the process and the political realities of
life. We serve in the United States Senate. So we understand
that. But we want to protect the report from being politicized.
And I hope that this meeting will help us get a better grip
before decisions are made in the process so that we can work
together to ensure the credibility of the trafficking report.
The Chairman. Without objection, I would like to note that
I called the meeting to order before we began.
We have five witnesses. We have your nametags here. We met
you. I am not going to go through that to save your time. There
is no reason to be redundant. Do you want to just begin? And
again, we thank you.
I think what Ben said is true. We are on the same side, and
my guess is there are some sitting around the table that much
appreciate the fact that we are paying attention to this so
that we continue to highlight this issue in an appropriate way.
And just like with the State Department authorization, to us it
was a joint effort. We are trying to do those things to help
improve the Department. In this particular case, this is solely
about making sure we are dealing with this in an appropriate
way. And I think you would like for us to raise the issue to a
level where that is being done.
So, anyway, with that, Susan, do you want to begin?
STATEMENT OF HON. SUSAN COPPEDGE, AMBASSADOR-AT-LARGE, OFFICE
TO MONITOR AND COMBAT TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS, U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF STATE, WASHINGTON, D.C.; ACCOMPANIED BY HON. WILLIAM E.
TODD; HON. D. BRUCE WHARTON; SUSAN A. THORNTON; AND JOHN S.
CREAMER
Ambassador Coppedge. Okay. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr.
Chairman, Ranking Member Cardin, and members of the committee.
I will note for the record that Senator Isakson did stop in
to check on me, but he had to go and do something but did stop
by to be sure everything was going well. So I appreciated that.
I really thank you for the opportunity to be here again
face to face on an issue that I know is something we all care
very deeply about. The committee's leadership on preventing and
ending human trafficking is well known throughout the
Department, and it is a pleasure to be able to work with you
and your staff.
I have not had the opportunity to sit down with the
committee since my confirmation hearing, and I am excited to
update you on what I have been working on since assuming my
role as Ambassador. It has been a whirlwind 6 months, and I
have many updates to share. And I look forward to a productive
discussion this afternoon.
When I joined the Department, one of my first objectives as
Ambassador was to travel to some of the high priority
countries. I wanted to see firsthand how the TIP Report
translates into anti-trafficking diplomacy on the ground, how
our ambassadors successfully engage on the issue with the
foreign governments, and how we can make improvements in the
future.
In the first few months on the job, I had the opportunity
to travel to Mexico, South Africa, Botswana, Cuba, and most
recently to India. I am happy to provide greater detail on
those trips later in the briefing, but I will share one big
takeaway.
We have human trafficking experts throughout the State
Department at each embassy in each country where we serve. I
was truly impressed to see how knowledgeable our political
officers are, our ambassadors, and our chiefs of mission at
post. In each country I visited, they knew the TIP portfolio.
They knew the prosecution, protection, and prevention efforts
that were happening on the ground. They knew the successes, and
they also knew the areas where improvement was needed. They
know and have developed relationships with individuals in the
government, in civil society, and with NGOs who are working on
the issue. Their efforts at fighting trafficking in the
countries where they are posted is a year-round diplomatic
effort.
It is also a whole-of-Department effort, which is why I am
really pleased to be here today with colleagues from our
regional bureaus: from EAP, our PDAS Susan Thornton; from
Africa, our PDAS Bruce Wharton; from SCA, our PDAS Bill Todd;
and from WHA, our DAS John Creamer. You can tell I am also
learning the State Department alphabet and their titles trying
to get them down.
And the Trafficking in Persons Office, the TIP Office,
cannot do the important work that we do without the regional
support. Staff in the regional bureaus and in our overseas
missions bring critical country-specific expertise to the
cause. They ensure the TIP Report, our anti-trafficking
diplomacy, and our foreign assistance programs are informed by
the current realities in each country. our embassies engage
regularly with foreign government officials to encourage anti-
trafficking efforts. They identify partners in the country to
implement anti-trafficking programs, and they gather and verify
information to include in the TIP Report. They provide insights
into political, legal, and social landscapes in which this
crime occurs. I am grateful they are here to share with you
some of our regional successes we have, as well as ongoing
challenges we face in our diplomacy.
I understand that the committee would like to focus today
on the preparation of the 2016 TIP Report. So let me take a
minute to walk you through that process.
Each year, the Department goes through an extensive and
rigorous process to produce the report. Department staff work
year around to gather information that provides the basis for
the report, including information from our embassies, foreign
government officials, NGOs, international organizations, and a
full array of open sources.
The reporting period for the 2016 TIP Report ran from April
1st, 2015 to March 31st of this year.
The law also provides for a mid-year check-in requiring the
Department to submit to Congress an interim assessment of
progress made by countries on the special watch list. These are
countries on the tier 2 watch list and countries that moved up
a tier since the previous TIP Report.
The interim assessments were delivered to the committee
earlier this year as a snapshot of the progress being made and
improvements that are still needed by special watch list
countries and are based on the same array of sources that
inform our annual report.
The special watch list countries are an important focal
point in the Department for prioritizing our diplomatic
engagement and targeting our foreign assistance. The Secretary
himself made it a priority this year to engage personally with
countries that need to improve their efforts such as those
highlighted by the special watch list. He pressed them to take
the necessary actions to meet the minimum standards in the
TVPA.
At the close of the reporting period, my staff began the
narrative drafting process by rigorously applying the standards
in the TVPA to each government's efforts the previous year.
In a few cases, the analysis is not immediately conclusive
as to which tier ranking a country's efforts warrant. To
address these cases, I have personally hosted meetings with
senior Department officials and working level experts to ensure
the broad expertise of the Department is brought to bear in
assessing the totality of government efforts and to answer
unresolved questions and fill in factual gaps. We are in the
middle of that process right now. While I cannot share the
details of our internal deliberations, I will say that without
exception I have found these discussions to be extremely
informative, fact-based, and genuinely focused on how best to
advance our shared goal of encouraging government progress to
combat trafficking.
You came back. Excellent.
Senator Isakson. I told you I would be back.
The Chairman. I do not know if you saw Perdue too.
Ambassador Coppedge. Can I say my Georgia boys, my Georgia
men, are checking in on me?
The Chairman. That sounded a little condescending.
[Laughter.]
Ambassador Coppedge. So I cannot share the details of the
internal deliberations, but the discussions we had HAVE all
been fact-based. And the facts on governments' efforts can
point in different directions, and Department bureaus and
offices do not always weigh the government efforts identically,
leading to a very small percentage of cases in which there are
differences of opinion on how to assess tier rankings.
The Secretary will be presented all consensus
recommendations, as well as the differing perspectives on a few
countries for which consensus is not reached. And he will make
all final tier ranking designations.
While this is my first time through the Trafficking in
Persons Report process, I am aware of the concerns of the
committee raised with the process last year. I want to assure
each of you that I am doing everything in my power to protect
and ensure the integrity of the process and maintain the
credibility of the report. I am working hand in hand with all
of my colleagues here to foster an environment in which a range
of opinions can be expressed because really a healthy debate
and close scrutiny are key to the process that makes the TIP
Report the gold standard Senator Cardin alluded to.
The final tier ranking decisions made by the Secretary are
informed by the collective expertise of the experts in my
office, our embassies, and our regional bureaus, as well as
senior Department officials.
Ultimately the purpose of the report and our shared goal is
to effect change, to have governments do more to combat
trafficking in persons. We continuously review how we can use
the report even more effectively as a lever to motivate
tangible progress around the world. We are improving in total
communication, institutionalizing a process by which the
Secretary personally takes stock of priority countries, and
ensure high level engagement in a timely way to urge
governments to take needed action to fulfill the TIP Report
recommendations.
Based in part on the feedback from your staff, we are
taking a look at the individual country recommendations in the
report, which inform the action plans that we prepare yearly
for each country. We are considering ways we can strengthen the
recommendations in the report and ways we can use them more
effectively to push for progress in individual priority
countries throughout the year.
I think it is worth noting that with all the focus on the
report and the tier rankings, that the TIP Report is
fundamentally an instrument of diplomacy, a means to effect
global change. Our ultimate goal, the State Department's and
this committee's, is to help countries improve their efforts to
fight modern slavery. Over the past 15 years, the report has
successfully raised the profile of this issue and consistently
drawn attention to the realities on the ground. The attention
the report generates demonstrates both the impact and the
importance of the fight against modern slavery and the U.S.
Government's leadership in addressing it. Congress has provided
strong leadership in the fight from adopting the TVPA to your
efforts today on this committee to bring new attention and
resources to this goal.
In closing, I would like to say that I look forward to a
constructive discussion and continued collaboration year around
on this important issue. Charlotte and I have already discussed
when I am going to check in in the summer. So thank you so
much.
The Chairman. Thank you. If there are no other opening
comments, thank you all for being here. We appreciate your
public service.
Just as a process issue, the 2016 interim assessment report
is typically online, but this one is marked sensitive but
unclassified. I am just wondering why that change was made.
Ambassador Coppedge. I was not aware how it was typically
marked in the past, but I can certainly get back to you on why
it was marked SBU this year.
The Chairman. No one else has any idea?
Are you the one that makes that determination?
Ambassador Coppedge. No.
The Chairman. Who does?
Ambassador Coppedge. I do not know.
The Chairman. I assume you will probably make it
unclassified. Okay. I think it is good for people to be able to
see it.
We have I guess seven countries that have been on the tier
2 watch list for 4 consecutive years, which means that they
cannot do that anymore. Just to look at a couple, since we have
the regional folks here, Burma and Haiti. Do we expect them to
fall back to tier 2 watch or tier 3? What do we think is going
to happen there?
Ambassador Coppedge. Well, as you noted, they cannot stay
tier 2 watch list. So they will have to go down to 3. And we
are still having those discussions right now and collecting
information. We are looking at everything that comes in from
both those countries to help make that determination.
The Chairman. Have you seen anything that is dramatic
relative to increasing their rating?
Ambassador Coppedge. In Burma, they have made significant
progress toward removing child soldiers from their military
there. I think there were a handful of child soldiers recovered
during the reporting period. I believe less than five. So they
have made progress in that area in Burma.
In Haiti, they have made progress by moving towards
increased prosecutions and actually had two convictions,
although because those were outside the reporting period--the
convictions--they will not be counted for this year's report.
But the prosecutions were ongoing before the reporting period
ended.
The Chairman. So we could likely have numbers of
downgrades, though, without something significant having
occurred in each of those countries. Is that correct?
Ambassador Coppedge. We look at all the minimum standards
and then the fourth minimum standard has the 12 indicia. So we
weigh all of that to see whether their efforts are significant
or not.
The Chairman. India. You know, we had a hearing this week,
and we appreciated the fact that someone was here to do that.
They have more slaves than any country in the world. It is
pitiful what is happening there. 12 million to 14 million
slaves. Trafficking in persons, obviously, is culturally
acceptable. How could they possibly be ranked tier 2? We have
their prime minister coming in in a couple weeks, and we
certainly plan to talk with him about it. But how could they be
ranked tier 2 being such violators of human rights?
Ambassador Coppedge. I would expect nothing less from many
Senators to raise that issue with him--the trafficking issue.
I think when we look at countries, we have to look too at
the size of their population. They have such a large
population, that they have a large percentage of people who are
affected by trafficking.
We also need to look at the conditions that make people
vulnerable in India, and that is the number of people who
work----
The Chairman. They do not have half the population of the
world, but they have half the slaves in the world roughly. So
the population is large but certainly not on a pro rata basis,
you can expect that----
Ambassador Coppedge. No. But it contributes to it. And so
do some of the economic factors there, the drought. The
earthquake in Nepal actually contributed to trafficking in
India. So we look at those things that make individuals
vulnerable.
I was fortunate enough to get to go to India in April, and
I learned about some programs they are doing to address
trafficking. A lot of Indians are trafficked to Gulf countries,
and they have started a program. I think they call it e-Migrate
where they register companies who are looking for workers, and
they are starting to monitor, as we have recommended in the TIP
Report, the recruitment agencies that look for workers. So
there are steps being made there.
I also appreciated, after my trip there, that they are very
decentralized. And so some states are doing better against
trafficking than others.
They are also trying to find ways to use new avenues to
look for trafficking victims. They told me about efforts they
were making with the police on the railroad system, since much
travel in India is done on the railways, and to look for
trafficking victims there.
And then we also met not just with government officials but
with civil society members and nongovernmental organizations
who all think that great improvements have been made in the
fight against trafficking under the Modi administration. So we
collect opinions from a variety of sources before we decide on
the final tier ranking.
The Chairman. We have a lot of participation, and I am
going to defer to others so that they can get their questions
in. Senator Cardin?
Senator Cardin. Let me just follow up on India for one
moment because the credibility of the TIP Report is also in the
observations and recommendations that are made in the TIP
Report and then following it from year to year to year. India
is now going to be a tier 2 country for 5 consecutive years,
and it is my understanding that we have consistently been
critical of their ability to prosecute those who are
responsible for trafficking. In the 2015 report, we stated
official complicity in human trafficking occurs at various
levels of government. The government did not report
investigations, prosecutions, or convictions of government
officials complicit in human trafficking offenses. Some corrupt
law enforcement officers protected suspected traffickers and
brothel owners from enforcement of the law. They took bribes
from sex trafficking establishments, and the list goes on.
My point is we have seen very little evidence that they
have changed their underlying attitude towards prosecution. We
have noted this in the TIP Report, and yet they still maintain
their tier 2 position now 5 consecutive years. Do they not have
to make some progress and pay some attention to these
international acknowledged standards? And where in India have
we seen that?
Ambassador Coppedge. Yes. So we do make those
recommendations in fact for other countries as well, including
the U.S. We do a narrative for our own country where we always
encourage more prosecutions, particularly in the labor
trafficking area, which India also has a problem with.
Senator Cardin. But has India done anything?
Ambassador Coppedge. They have done some things, yes. And
in fact, when I was over there, I met with one of the judges in
the high court in New Delhi, and he talked to me about how
slowly all cases move through their judicial system, not just
trafficking cases, to give me a better perspective on that.
But they are doing better about focusing in on children's
issue. They just had a huge campaign where they looked missing
children, some of whom were vulnerable to trafficking or they
believe were being trafficked.
I also met with some individuals who were victims of bonded
labor, and those individuals now--anyone who is recovered from
bonded labor gets a payment from the government to help them
get back on their feet and move on from that condition. So on
the victim protection efforts, they are picking up their
efforts to address preventing victims from being retrafficked.
Senator Cardin. The law allows the President to waive the
time restrictions and keep a country on a special watch list
for up to 2 more years if the country meets the following
criteria. And then it talks about a written plan that would
satisfy a tier 2 rank and that the country is sufficiently
resourcing or implementing the plan to be able to get off of
tier 3.
Who assures that in fact these three conditions have been
met? Is there transparency here? Because it is my just
observation that this waiver has been exercised and these three
conditions have not been met.
Ambassador Coppedge. Well, we get the national action plans
or the plans for future efforts from the countries. We review
that in JTIP. We also send them over to the legal office to
review it in the State Department to make sure that those plans
are complying.
Senator Cardin. Will there be transparency that the
President issues a waiver and keeps a country on tier 3--tier 2
watch rather than tier 3 for an additional year or 2 beyond the
time period spelled out in the statute, that there will be
transparency for us to be able to evaluate that in fact the
country has sufficient resources to implement the plan, for
example?
Ambassador Coppedge. Well, it is my understanding that we
put in the narrative when the country is receiving a waiver to
stay on the tier 2 watch list.
Senator Cardin. So there will be transparency.
Ambassador Coppedge. I believe that is in the report, yes.
Senator Cardin. And of course, if there is a disagreement
here, that is an internal debate that we will not get to see.
Ambassador Coppedge. Yes. We do not talk about our internal
deliberations because we do not want to chill the ability to
sit down across the table and hash it out.
Senator Cardin. Well, somehow in Cuba, we were able to look
at some of the documents you made available to us. And there
appeared to be a pretty clear indication that Cuba should
remain on the tier 3 list, but yet it ended up on tier 2 watch,
which seems to indicate that political considerations overcame
the objective against. And I say that as a person who supports
President Obama's Cuba policy, and the fact that they would be
on a tier 3 list would not have affected my support of
President Obama's policies in Cuba. But I want an accurate
assessment on Cuba.
So you are showing here relatively minor change in this
interim report and the government does not recognize forced
labor as a problem and criminalized forced labor and no
reporting efforts to prevent it. Have we really seen the type
of progress in Cuba that justifies their elevation from the
tier 3?
Ambassador Coppedge. I believe that tier 2 watch list
ranking last year was based on the totality of factors. So in
forced labor, they are still lagging, and I personally raised
that with them when I went to Cuba in January. On sex
trafficking efforts, they have started to increase their
prosecutions.
Senator Cardin. So one case that they actually prosecuted?
Ambassador Coppedge. I think it was 13.
Mr. Creamer. It was 13 in the 2015 report. There is one in
the interim report, so since the report of the last year.
Senator Cardin. So there is one this year.
Ambassador Coppedge. In the interim. So it was 13 in the
2015 report. The final number you do not have. You have the
snapshot of halfway through the year.
So they did increase their efforts from the 2015 report in
prosecuting sex trafficking victims and actually working with
U.S. law enforcement to stop sex tourism, a few individuals
from going into the country. They cooperated with us there. So
you recognize efforts that they are making and you recognize
where they still need to make improvements, which is what the
watch list category captured in the recommendations.
The Chairman. I just want to jump in. That was a case
where--thank you for letting us read the correspondence, but I
would love to hear from the appropriate principal over here.
That was the case where it did appear politics played a major
role in the determination last year. Do you all want to respond
to some of Senator Cardin's questions and my question now
relative to that?
Mr. Creamer. In terms of us--I was not here, but in terms
of----
The Chairman. Were you here last year?
Mr. Wharton. No, sir, I was not.
Mr. Creamer. But I have gone through the material.
In terms of the--the determination was based on the 13
convictions, including one where we had cooperation with U.S.
law enforcement under the prosecution criteria.
Under protection, it was based on the belief that certain
institutions in the Cuban Federation are women but also several
society groups provide psychosocial services, counseling, job
placement, job training, health care for victims of sex
trafficking, also based on the assessment the Cuban police have
three special centers where victims of sex trafficking can
testify with a psychologist and video testimony and not have to
appear in person.
And then in terms of the prevention, there's an office in
the Ministry of Tourism which combats sexual tourism and then
also state media puts out regularly information, publication,
education about sex trafficking and trying to discourage the
practice.
Based on that, it went up to the Secretary who made the
ruling that they would be tier 2 watch list.
Certainly, as Ambassador Coppedge said, it does not mean
that Cuba complies with the standards in terms of combating
trafficking. It just meant that they were making a significant
effort and they shared more information with us than they had
in the past, which helped produce that.
Senator Cardin. Just so I understand, were they foreign
nationals that were prosecuted or Cuban nationals that were
prosecuted.
Mr. Creamer. The one who is in the interim report is a
Cuban national.
Senator Cardin. How about the others?
Mr. Creamer. The others. I would have to go back and check.
Senator Cardin. Would you give us that information?
Mr. Creamer. Yes.
The Chairman. Senator Gardner.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you for your time and testimony today.
I was interested to hear more about your conversations in
India. We had testimony from Secretary Biswal. Just yesterday
this was. And on the U.S. Commission for International
Religious Freedom, apparently the people that we have tried to
send over to investigate and carry out that report were denied
their visas and they have been denied their visas apparently
multiple years in a row. So why are you allowed to go in when
we talk about this issue, and why are they not allowed to go
in?
Ambassador Coppedge. Well, I told Senator Menendez when I
was having my confirmation hearing that I was a squeaky wheel,
and I attribute part of my ability to get in there to
continuing to ask to be able to travel. So I think that that
certainly----
Senator Gardner. It cannot be that simple.
Ambassador Coppedge. Actually, no, it is not. The State
Department as a whole is pushing to get our representatives in
various areas in there. I think that they recognize that
trafficking in persons matters to the State Department, to our
President, to Congress, and so I was fortunate enough to be
able to travel over there and have some good meetings with the
government.
Senator Gardner. I do not know. It just seems to me that
you are probably seeing a lot of the same victims of
trafficking that some of these religious institutions and
charities are helping. For instance, I talked about Colorado
yesterday at the hearing. Compassion International--145,000
children they are caring for, many of whom are probably victims
of some kind of trafficking abuse. But yet our representatives
are denied access.
I am just curious. Are you able to see some of the work
that the NGOs are doing and identify the work they are doing?
Maybe you can help us identify what is going on in India when
it comes to our ability to get help to the people on the
religious freedom side.
Ambassador Coppedge. I met with many NGOs while I was
there. Some were faith-based groups. I do not have any insight
to whether the government is going to allow other individuals
from the State Department in. I am grateful that they allowed
these NGOs to do the work that they are doing there. It is so
important in India.
And I care very much about the efforts for the children.
And the government, as I mentioned, is making efforts to
recover runaway and missing children and provide them with
services. I even visited a shelter that the government sponsors
where children are cared for.
Senator Gardner. In this case, in Compassion
International's case, they are actually on the verge of leaving
India because they have been harassed by the government in
India. So perhaps you could use your contacts since you have
been able to go to India and make some good contacts. I would
encourage you to chat with Secretary Biswal who has made phone
calls on our behalf. Her bureau has. And so I appreciate that
very much.
Ambassador Coppedge. I would be happy to do that.
Senator Gardner. But you might be able to help. There are
9,000 other NGOs that could face some kind of similar
circumstance if they are in the same position as this.
Ms. Thornton, thank you for being here. It is great to see
you again.
Some of us are going to have the opportunity to visit Burma
in the coming week. I would love to get your take and what your
thoughts are and what is your message.
Ms. Thornton. Well, Secretary Kerry, as you know, was just
in Burma and he had a very excellent meeting with Aung San Suu
Kyi.
We have been following, of course, Burmese efforts in the
TIP area very closely. As Ambassador Coppedge said, they have
made some serious efforts in recent years on the child soldier
issue. We had I think three child soldiers that were found in
the last reporting period, and so far this reporting period in
2016, we have not found any. So that is a huge change from the
hundreds that we had found previously.
Some of the military elements of the government over there,
the military itself and then some of their agencies, have been
among those that have been particularly cooperative with us on
this issue, interestingly, which is very, I think, significant
in light of the transition to the new government that we are
seeing in Burma and how important it is that the military parts
of the government continue to cooperate with the transition to
the new government in Burma.
So we have seen some significant efforts being made. We
expect actually that trafficking in persons will be an area of
focus for the new government under Aung San Suu Kyi's
leadership and that we will see more progress in Burma in the
coming year. So we are hopeful that we will see even more
progress there.
I am certain raising it when you are out there is
appropriate, and she will be very sympathetic and her cabinet
ministers.
But I think it is interesting and important to note that
the military has also been cooperative with us on this issue.
The Chairman. Senator Menendez.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you
all for being here.
Look, I had hoped the 2016 report--I know we are not there
yet but--was going to be better, but I see some of the same
problems that we began to see in the 2015 report. And the Trade
Enforcement Act of 2015 includes a provision that I authored
that requires the State Department to submit to Congress
evidence to support upgrades to tier 3. That came in late
yesterday. We have begun to look over those documents, but so
far, for example, in the case of Malaysia, it seems that none
of the evidence provided is new. These were all things that
were mentioned in the 2015 report.
So did you submit any new evidence that justifies the
upgrade on Malaysia beyond that which were already submitted in
the 2015 report?
Ms. Thornton. We are still in the process of finishing up
the report for 2016, but we have seen significant efforts on
the part of Malaysia this year, including the passage of the
amendments for protection of victims. Just recently when the
Deputy Prime Minister from Malaysia was visiting Washington in
March, he signed the implementing regulations for the new
amendments.
We have had a lot of consultations with NGOs on the part of
the cabinet in Malaysia over the year, working out all these
various new regulations that were called for previously in our
interim assessment. And even our Ambassador at Malaysia has
participated in a cabinet meeting discussing TIP. So it just
goes to show the effectiveness of the report and the awareness
that has been raised by the report.
Senator Menendez. The highlighting of Malaysia last year
might have been effective as well.
Ms. Thornton. Maybe so.
Senator Menendez. So I hope we all remember the horrific
stories about the mass graves and trafficking victims found
just prior to the 2015 TIP Report, stories that brought this
issue to the world's attention. And I remind my colleagues it
was discovered at least 28 suspected trafficking camps, two
mass graves, over 150 bodies. When the 2015 report was
published, State's position was that a discovery of the mass
graves fell outside of the 2015 reporting period. At the same
time, the report did cover a few positive developments that
occurred after the reporting period.
So I do not understand how we include things that are
favorable to a country but exclude things that are not
favorable to a country because we say, well, this fell outside
of the reporting period, but when other things that were
favorable fell outside of the reporting period, they were
included. So if timing was the reason, why were the mass graves
not raised at all in the interim report?
Ambassador Coppedge. My understanding with respect to what
was included and not included last year was that they had
started efforts to establish the pilot program for the workers,
and so those efforts to start the program were recognized. The
workers that went into it did not go into it, I do not believe,
until after the reporting period. But at least the program was
being stood up. So that is why that was included. Certainly the
issue of the mass graves will be addressed in this year's
report.
Senator Menendez. Why would you not even have it in the
interim report?
Ambassador Coppedge. So the interim report, the 6-month
report, is just a snapshot of what is going on in the country.
Senator Menendez. This snapshot already happened. This
snapshot of the mass graves already happened. We should clearly
have that in the interim report.
Ambassador Coppedge. But the interim reports are relatively
brief. As you know, there are a couple of sentences of what is
positive----
Senator Menendez. But if anything is briefed, something as
significant as this that already happened and is clearly within
the reporting period now, since it was excluded before as
outside of the reporting period, it is clearly in this
reporting period. And if that does not make the interim report,
then what in God's name is going to make it?
Ambassador Coppedge. Well, it will certainly make the
report, the full narrative report in this year's----
Senator Menendez. Let me ask you two other questions.
Has there been any effort on behalf of the Malaysian
Government to bring the perpetrators of mass graves to justice?
Ambassador Coppedge. I understand that there have been no
charges filed, but they are investigating and trying to sort
out responsibility, criminal and culpable responsibility.
Senator Menendez. Let me ask a final question. Let me ask
you about Cuba.
Mr. Creamer, you say you were not there at the time when
this took place. Is that correct?
Mr. Creamer. Right.
Senator Menendez. So you are giving us a chronological
answer to Senator Cardin's question.
Mr. Creamer. I am giving you the facts that were laid out
in the report that the Secretary decided on that basis.
Senator Menendez. Voyeur magazine listed Cuba as a sexual
hotspot of the world. So there is a lot of sex trafficking
going on in Cuba, believe me. And if Voyeur magazine can figure
it out, we should be able to figure it out.
This was supposedly one of the great victories of the Cuban
revolution was stopping sexual trafficking, which has exploded.
My understanding is that the Cuban Government continues to be
an impediment to information gathering not only because of its
resistance to cooperating with the United States but because it
does not keep records on human trafficking and efforts to stop
it, information that could be useful, and that information is
out of date.
What data sources are you using to collect information on
Cuba? Is it strictly from the Cuban Government? Is that
information correct?
Mr. Creamer. In terms of the Cuban Government, obviously
the Cuban Government has provided us some information, but also
through our embassy in Havana, we talk to a wide range of
people. We also talk to NGO human rights groups both on and off
the island and get the sense of the trafficking issues. There
is both a sex trafficking issue and then obviously there is the
forced labor issue, which Cuba does not recognize. This is why
we have been talking a lot with the people in the medical
program and others. So we try and get at the whole range of
sources. It is somewhat difficult in Cuba at times, given the
very poor human rights record that exists there, but we are
trying the best we can to evaluate the whole range of sources.
Senator Menendez. My perception is the bar is so low for a
country having to meet absolute minimal elements in order to be
raised that I think it does a disservice to the ultimate goal.
We want to see countries make progress, but progress has to be
meaningful and some of this is so minimalist that you have
described that I just do not understand how they get an
upgrade.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Senator Risch.
Senator Risch. I am going to pass, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Senator Kaine.
Senator Kaine. Just underscoring the importance of this and
adding an additional dimension to it, and then I have got a
couple questions about process.
So the report is a gold standard, and we want to make sure
it is scrupulous. That in and of itself is important because
the report is a gold standard and the topic is important.
But here is an issue of growing concern on the Malaysian
situation. The TPP is a huge initiative of this President. It
is extremely important to this administration, and we really
believe that it should be done. And largely voted on, whether
the TPP should be done or not, is going to depend upon people's
confidence in will it be enforced. There is a lot of questions
about the enforcement of trade deals. Sometimes the deal may be
fine on paper. If it is not going to be enforced, you have got
a lot of skepticism around just that question.
This issue about Malaysia was the first question right out
of the gate of whether it is going to be enforced. There is a
provision in the TPA that said the nations that are in this
bottom category cannot be part of trade deals absent very
extraordinary circumstances. And then all of a sudden, Malaysia
shows up. It is, well, okay, it is not tier 3. It is tier 2.
And that seems like a separate issue. That is the TIP Report.
But it feeds into a fundamental question that both the
House and the Senate are going to have to grapple with in short
order about do we do this TPP or not. And if it is not going to
be enforced, no matter how good the rhetoric is--you know, so
this thing with Malaysia really fed into a deep concern up here
that affects another one of the President's major priorities.
So it is a very important issue in its own sake, and it is a
very important issue in terms of how it affects something else.
People feel like when it gets to enforcement, if we wave a wand
and excuse this, then what else are we excusing in enforcement
down the road.
So this shook the confidence of those like me who are TPP
proponents and what I am trying to tell people in terms of
justifying my likely support for it if suddenly I feel like on
the enforcement we are going to turn a blind eye.
So that is the stakes you guys have on your shoulders as
you are doing this 2016 report. When is the likely date that it
will come out?
Ambassador Coppedge. It is due out in January.
Senator Kaine. So it is going to come out before we have a
vote on this. In all likelihood we would not get to a TPP vote
between the election and the end of the year. So if games are
being played with this that affect whether people can be
included in it or not, your work is going to have a very
significant effect. It could have a significant effect on how
Congress takes up this other major initiative that the
President wants. So I just wanted to say that.
I am kind of curious on process issues. You talk about you
get information from embassies. So is a report like this or the
human rights report--how much of this is information delivered
by the embassy versus the work product of your unit of State?
How iterative--you know, do you send a survey down to the
embassy in every country and they have got to give you a lot of
data and then you use that data to do the building blocks for
the report? Do the ambassadors of the countries make
recommendations on something like this, what the tiers should
be? Does it vary by country? I mean, I am curious about this.
Ms. Thornton. Maybe I could just talk a little bit too
about being in the embassy because I have been working in
embassies the whole 15 years we have had the TVPA and in pretty
tough countries, China, Russia, Turkmenistan, had a lot of TIP
visitors out. We get visitors out from JTIP when we are in the
embassy. We go out in the field. I have been down to the Burma
border in China looking at what is going on down there, touring
around with NGOs. So we have a lot of sort of grassroots feel
for what is going on that embassies report in. We have visitors
come out from JTIP. We have embassy officers in Washington.
When they come back and cycle through, they go out and meet
with JTIP. So they are also feeding into the report. But it is
kind of a constant process. Ambassadors are involved. You have
field officers involved. And so I think we are talking, as
someone said down there in the case of Cuba, to NGOs, to the
government, to people outside the country and inside the
country.
Senator Kaine. Does the embassy make a tier recommendation?
Ambassador Coppedge. The embassy submits the facts. And
this year in particular is what I can speak to. We sent out
draft narratives earlier on in the process working with the
counterparts at the embassies who can collect those facts, as
PDAS Thornton just alluded to, so that it really was a joint
project this year at the working level to get the narrative
written. And then we make the evaluation and make a
recommendation back to the regional bureaus. And we sit down
and talk about those recommendations.
Ambassador Todd. I was the U.S. Ambassador in Cambodia up
until August, and I was there for 3 and a half years. And
during that time, as Susan said, we collected data from the
government. We collected data from civil society, the various
NGOs, and we had people canvas the field. But at the end of the
day, I also reached back to the person who was in Susan's job.
In my case, I did make a recommendation, which was I
thought they should be downgraded, and they were. And I can
tell you in the case of Cambodia, it was a very powerful stick
that helped the government get religion, so to speak. They then
took us seriously. They made changes. And frankly, I do not
know where they are today, but it was a good news story while I
was there.
The Chairman. Very good.
Senator Shaheen.
Senator Shaheen. I apologize. I missed all of your
comments.
But did you address whether you are putting the reports
online? I did note that the interim report was not put online.
Ambassador Coppedge. Senator Corker inquired about that,
and we are going to get back to whether we can release that,
the interim report, online. It is marked ``SBU'' right now, and
we do not know if that is a change in policy. But we are going
to get back to you on that.
The Chairman. Do you want to respond to that? You seem to
be the person in the know.
Ms. Johnstone. To my knowledge, there has not been a policy
decision. I think it has just not been posted yet. So it was
probably an oversight, but we will confirm that.
Senator Shaheen. What kind of sensitive information would
be there that would mean that it should not be made public?
Ms. Johnstone. The interim reports, they are classified or
they are marked ``sensitive but unclassified'' during the
drafting stage so that we can have the frank discussion while
we are drafting, and I suspect in this case, but I would like
to confirm that. I suspect those markings were not removed
before they were sent to Congress. They were simply removed for
the human rights report or the Trafficking in Persons Report
annually before it is published.
Ambassador Coppedge. I do not know if you were also
inquiring about the 2016 report being online. We have found out
that it is really important to people to have a copy of the
book. In some places it is harder to get access to the
Internet, and so we are going to continue to produce the book
itself.
Senator Shaheen. I understand that. I just wondered if
there was some particular issue with the interim report that
made it more of a concern in terms of releasing information.
Ms. Johnstone. Not to my knowledge, but again, we will
confirm it.
Senator Shaheen. Can you also talk about the extent to
which you work across agencies within the government to address
trafficking?
Ambassador Coppedge. So the TIP Office at the State
Department coordinates the Senior Policy Operating Group, which
is working level people from various Federal agencies. And then
once a year, Secretary Kerry chairs the President's Interagency
Task Force where we sit down with cabinet level members from
all the various agencies. Then we coordinate the government's
anti-trafficking efforts with the goal to reducing redundancy
or overlap but also to building on each other's efforts.
Homeland Security does a wonderful job of training and they
have done some joint training operations in Mexico. So we want
to just keep all of government on the same page and aware of
what each other is doing so we can continue to enhance each
other's efforts.
Senator Shaheen. And how do you define trafficking?
Ambassador Coppedge. Trafficking is the forced coercion of
someone to engage in sex or labor against their will for a
commercial benefit essentially.
Senator Shaheen. So, for example, there were reports that
came out in the last year about some inappropriate sexual
activity on the part of members of our military in Afghanistan.
Is that something that you all look at and consider to be part
of what you are looking at when you look at trafficking?
Ambassador Coppedge. This is part of the debate we actually
get in with the foreign governments as well because they will
report in data, and we try to figure out whether it is sex
trafficking or rape or sexual abuse. There are different
categories. The Trafficking in Persons Report just looks at
trafficking, not that the other things are not equally
horrible, but we try to look at trafficking in the Trafficking
in Persons Report.
I know that DOD is part of the President's Interagency Task
Force and that they are pushing out anti-trafficking training
to the military and to our soldiers stationed abroad. I cannot
speak directly to what they do with respect to sexual offenses.
Senator Shaheen. We had a hearing on India yesterday. Was
that only yesterday? And I do not know if anybody has raised
this, but there were a lot of questions about India and India's
failure to address trafficking and how we deal with India on
this issue. So how does the report treat India?
Ambassador Coppedge. Like every other country, we try to
gather information from governments, NGOs, other civil society
elements, media. There are a lot of NGOs in India, so we do get
a lot of information. India itself is starting to publish their
own statistics on crime and efforts they are taking. So we are
now getting better statistics from India in this area, but we
still have a lot of concerns that are outlined in the report
that we raise with them through our embassy.
Senator Menendez. Mr. Chairman, I just have a process
question.
The Chairman. Sure.
Senator Menendez. So especially the regional bureau
Secretaries, so you have a view from the embassy, then a view
from the regional bureau, and a view from JTIP. When they are
all in harmony, that is great. When they are not, have you
experienced times--and you do not have to get into the
specifics. But when they are not, how does that process
ultimately work out?
Ambassador Coppedge. Well, we sit around the table and
discuss the issues and discuss where our differing perspectives
arise from. In some cases, we need more facts. We try to go
back and get those facts from the country, if possible.
Ultimately, if we cannot make a decision, we are going to
recommend--both of our perspectives are going to get
recommended up and the Secretary will make the final decision.
Senator Menendez. So JTIP and the regional bureau may at
some times as it relates to a given country have two different
sets of recommendations.
Ambassador Coppedge. We may, yes. We may interpret the
facts differently and be recommending different rankings.
Senator Menendez. And then it is up to the Secretary to
resolve it.
Ambassador Coppedge. Yes, Senator.
Senator Cardin. Can I just make a friendly suggestion? I
thought, Secretary Dodd, your point about Cambodia was very
telling. And using the rankings, the tiers, particularly on a
downgrade, can be the best thing you can do to help a country.
And I just would hope that there is sensitivity to that from
the leadership in the State Department, that this is a tool
that can be used to advance a very important mission for a
country and that there should not be such a defensive mechanism
to protect a tier.
I mean, India is a good example. India has been in the same
tier for a long time. India is a country that is a democracy.
It is a country we obviously are increasing our ties and our
relationship with. We may not be doing India any favor by
keeping them at the same tier for 5 years when, at least the
information I am looking at, there are serious issues. And it
does not appear like we are getting the attention we would like
to get on this issue.
I am not suggesting they should be downgraded, but I am
suggesting there should be some sensitivity at the State
Department to use the tier ratings to advance this issue and
not so defensive of either an embassy or a region that you do
not want to rock the boat and change a tier listing. Cambodia
is a good example. It also helps the government officials that
understand that they need more attention in their government,
and the tier rating can help them get the resources and
attention they need within their political system.
Ambassador Coppedge. And I do not think there is a
defensive reaction to what you are alluding to. What we
certainly want to hear is how the country is likely to respond
if that were to occur so that we can plan proactively to go in
there with a message about what you can do to improve, what was
working there. We also look at what resources JTIP can provide
in our international program planning so that if the country is
being downgraded, what can we do to go in there and support
their efforts to improve what they are doing to fight
trafficking. Can we get out there with trips? Can the Secretary
message it to countries? So we do not necessarily look at it
defensively, but we look at it from a practical standpoint and
kind of as a domino, what would a downgrade do and what would
we need to do as a government to continue to encourage them
other than just giving them the tier 3 ranking. What else can
we do to encourage them to continue their efforts?
The Chairman. Well, let us talk about a specific case.
Ghana was downgraded from tier 2 to tier 2 watch list. They
entered into a child protection compact. Has anything happened?
Ambassador Coppedge. We are still working with Ghana on the
child protection compact. I know that we have got staff out
there frequently looking at issues there. There are NGOs that
we are gathering information from there. So we are looking at
it. I know they have entered into some ministerial agreements
there as well. We are, obviously, closely monitoring their
efforts pursuant to the compact. I do not have specifics on
what Ghana----
Mr. Wharton. They implemented the first award under the
child protection compact just last year. One award went to IOM
and one went to a group called Free the Slaves. That was in
October of 2015.
I am also aware of the NGO that you just mentioned, the
IJM, and I think there was a disagreement between the
Government of Ghana and that NGO. I think the NGO continues to
work, and we hope they can resolve it.
Ambassador Coppedge. And I will just say those are efforts,
certainly when we entered the compact, that shows the
government's political will to engage in fighting this problem.
But efforts taken by the NGOs or by the U.S. Government are not
used in looking at the government efforts of Ghana to enter
into fighting trafficking.
Mr. Wharton. Senator, to your point about process, we do
seek to use the watch list and the criteria for the watch list
proactively with the governments. Linda Thomas Greenfield,
Assistant Secretary for Africa, met with President Mahama in
Ghana just last month and spoke about TIP. I met with President
Guelleh in Djibouti earlier this month and spoke about TIP. And
frankly, this process, the fact that we cannot go back the next
time we meet with these leaders and say, look, this is not just
the Obama administration. This is bipartisan support from
Capitol Hill. This is something that is important to our entire
nation. And that gives us, I think, additional credibility and
leverage to make clear that this is something that we are not
giving up on.
The Chairman. If anybody has a question, please jump in.
I know that there are sensitivities about criticizing
Mexico for lots of reasons, but they have issues. And I know we
have made some recommendations to them. And I am just wondering
if you can give us a status of what is occurring there.
Ambassador Coppedge. Yes. Mexico is the first place I
traveled to. As a prosecutor, I had tried a lot of cases that
originated from Tenancingo, the state of Tlaxcala, Mexico. And
so I had some experience with that and it was good first
country for me to visit because of also the importance of our
relationship with Mexico. And we talked. I met with Senator
Daio who is pushing to reform their law to have it more
accurately follow the international law from the Palermo
Protocol and the definitions for trafficking. So they do have
proposed laws in their legislature. It has not yet moved
through.
They are working on a change to their criminal justice
system as whole. They are going to a confrontational system
where a lot of their cases used to be done accusatorially on
paper. So that change to a system, which is happening in June,
will open up their court processes, so not just in human
trafficking cases but in other cases as well. There is a
problem with corruption in Mexico. So it should open up those
cases as well. So they are looking at reforming their
judiciary, which will have benefits we believe in fighting
trafficking.
They have also, as a government, engaged more with the U.S.
in joint operations. They had a case that was taken down
simultaneously in New York and in Mexico, and they arrested
traffickers who were on both sides of the border in the same
trafficking ring. That was one of their first big international
cooperation efforts with us. And those are continuing. There
are more investigations in the pipeline.
They have opened up their first public-private shelter in
the state, and they are using that as a model to open up more
shelters. I got to go see a government-sponsored in Mexico
City, and they are putting a lot into victim protection
efforts.
So there is a lot going on, although the problem is large.
We also talked about some of the risk factors for Mexico,
and their southern border is very porous. It has a real problem
bringing in migrants from Central America, and those people are
at risk for trafficking. So we were talking about ways to train
law enforcement on the border and support them, understanding
how to identify trafficking victims that are coming in from
Central America.
And so they recognize where their problems are and they are
taking steps to address them. And I was really heartened by
seeing some of the efforts they are taking down there.
The Chairman. Other questions?
Senator Menendez. Let me ask you. Part of what I think we
are all trying to understand is how the amalgam of what you do
comes to the conclusions. That is a little difficult to
determine. I do not want to interfere with your freedom to be
expressed among yourselves to make yourselves and make your
arguments. At the same time, it is a little difficult to judge
when we do not quite get the calibration.
So you are all regional bureau secretaries. You have a
region you are responsible for. There are economic issues.
There are security issues. There are terrorism issues. There is
a whole host of other things beyond the question of the TIP
Report.
So when you have a country within your region that is
problematic in the context of the TIP Report, but is important
in some other context, security, economic or whatever, where is
your balance? How does your balancing take place? Where do you
put the finger on the scale? Give us some sense of the
calibration. You do not to have to be country-specific, but as
a general rule, it would be helpful for us to understand
because some of us think that maybe what needs to happen is
that it needs to be more prescriptive. That might not be a good
thing, but it is difficult to understand without understanding
how you calibrate to make those decisions. Can you give us some
insight into that? Because I think anyone who tells me that
that is not part of the calibration, you walk away with total
disbelief here.
Ambassador Coppedge. Well, on the Trafficking Victims
Protection Act sets out some things that we cannot consider.
Senator Menendez. Can I ask you--with all due respect, can
I ask the regional secretaries to answer.
Ambassador Coppedge. Yes.
Mr. Wharton. Thank you, Senator.
I was going to answer the same way, that the TVPA does set
out very specific criteria, and in these conversations we have
across the table--we had one just last week--we do the best we
can to argue the facts. I instructed by desk officers, the
people who came to present the individual country cases, to
look at the facts not the politics of the situation, but the
facts. And we sought to reach a consensus on--I think we were
dealing with eight different countries. Sometimes people look
at the facts in different ways, and I think the sort of factor
that you are talking about--a security relationship, for
example--will enter into that, but ultimately we have to use
the TVPA to determine where the ranking is going to fall. We do
our dead level best to follow those guidelines.
Senator Menendez. Is that a common view?
Ambassador Todd. I would say yes.
I would add one sentence, and that is that we obviously
want to promote documents that have all the facts, but then we
have to show or we would like to show if there was significant
effort or not on the part of the government. And that is the
key to the facts. And that is a very subjective term of art.
And that then becomes debatable.
Senator Menendez. So you are telling me--and I will just
stop here--that if we have major security ally, that somehow we
would not be able to do things with because they violated the
standards of the TVPA, that you would uphold the standards of
the TVPA, notwithstanding the consequences of our engagement
with that country whether in a trade agreement or in the
context of a security ally or a terrorism cooperation. That is
what you would hold?
Ambassador Coppedge. I think that might be one of the
situations where the Secretary would ultimately get to decide
if there are competing diplomatic interests outside of the TIP
Report.
Senator Menendez. You are a good lawyer.
Ambassador Coppedge. Well, thank you.
The Chairman. Any other questions?
We thank you for being here. We thank you for coming into
this kind of setting and talking with us. And I think you can
tell there is a lot of interest and concern. The fact is we
want to make sure there is integrity in the process, and
hopefully this helps those of you who want to make sure the
same is true of the process you go through. So thank you.
Thanks for your service.
There may be some follow-on questions. If you would answer
them fairly promptly, we would appreciate it.
We are adjourned. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 5:40 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[all]