Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Room
Search Tips
Virtual Exhibit Hall
Personal Schedule
Sign In
This paper addresses epistemological and methodological questions concerning the reconstructions of opaque, selectively reported and, at times, silenced interactions between victims of migrant smuggling and frontline services (e.g., the intercepting police officers, care professionals) in the course of research that draws on documents and expert interviews.
The contribution originates from the ongoing TRAQ-project (Trafic Analyses Qualitatives) that seeks to understand the ways in which interactions between migrant smuggling victims and frontline services proceed, especially against the backdrop of the existing Belgian ‘residence procedure for victims of migrant smuggling in aggravating circumstances.’
The Residence Permit Directive (2004/81/EC) defines the conditions for granting residence permits to third-country nationals who are recognised as victims of trafficking in human beings. In a unique fashion, in Belgium, the scope of the special residence procedure for victims of trafficking has been extended to victims of migrant smuggling in aggravating circumstances. These victims of smuggling may be granted a residence permit if they cooperate with the competent authorities, sever all ties with the presumed smugglers and accept the support provided by a recognized specialised reception centre.
However, while this Belgian residence procedure for victims of smuggling has been in place since 2007, few of these procedures have been initiated to date. The TRAQ-project seeks to understand the ways in which this procedure is used and to contribute to its improvement. To this end, this qualitative research project foregrounds the initial interactions between victims and frontline services. These interactions were studied by means of post factum reconstructions, based on prosecution case files and professionals’ accounts. The presentation discusses challenges, limitations, opportunities, and the value of such reconstructions. It speaks to broader methodological discussions of ‘reading between the lines’ and ‘researching silence.’