| Abstract: | While the Palermo Protocol sought to offer the global community the first‐ever definition of trafficking and the parameters for who constitutes a victim, the result was an inaccurate, ill‐defined and cumbersome definition that fails to match the realities of the phenomenon. Since 2000, two other international instruments were drafted: the UNODC Model Law against Trafficking in Persons and the ILO Operational Indicators on Trafficking in Human Beings. This article navigates through various hypothetical scenarios to demonstrate the limitations of the Palermo Protocol in accommodating the autonomy exercised by victims of trafficking in the process of migrating into exploitative work and the more accurate picture of the victim offered by these newer instruments. By identifying the strengths in international law when it comes to trafficking and the problems that remain, this article offers potential solutions to how international law can better reflect trafficking and victimhood. |
