In our opinion, compared with other European countries, Italy has the best legal conditions for trafficked persons. In Italy the residence status of a trafficked person is practically independent of her role as a witness in a criminal proceeding against her tormentors.

These rights are based on Article 18 of the Legislative Decree No. 286/98. In order to receive a temporary residence permit for six months, the person affected has to answer basic questions posed by the police which enable the police to determine whether she is indeed affected by trafficking or not. She has to make statements about her exploiters and must stop working in prostitution. If the victimization has been determined, she receives a limited residence status. After six months this status is extended if she participates in an integration class. The temporary residence permit can be turned into a permanent one if the woman has entered the labor market. Once they have received a permanent residence permit status, persons affected by trafficking need to comply with the same legal regulations as all other migrants.

Trafficked persons can choose between the "social path" and the "judicial path". If the person affected officially files a charge with the authorities and is willing to testify in court, she receives her residence permit via the "judicial path". This can be compared to witnesses in Germany obtaining a permit to remain in the country.

Sometimes a pre-trial hearing takes place which is somewhat similar to an interrogation by a pre-trial judge. A judge and the defendant are present at the pre-trial hearing. The police and later on the state prosecution are responsible for the progress of the criminal proceedings while the Bureau of Immigration is responsible for issuing the residence permit title.

But in Italy there is also the option of the "social path". The person affected can turn to a counselling center, even if they don't want to make an official statement. They only have to answer to the police as described above. Specifically registered counselling services (not just any counselling project) are authorized to conduct this procedure.

Within the "judicial path" the state prosecution decides whether the woman is allowed to remain in Italy or not. Within the "social path" this decision is made at the Questura, the police headquarters of a municipality. The only difference is that the opinion of the state prosecution is irrelevant for the "social path".

Information gleaned by police during the "social path" interrogation must also be considered officially according to legal principles. If these statements and the subsequent police work lead to a trial, the woman is expected to testify as a witness in court, if the court requests this. However, once that point is reached, the same rules apply to her as to any Italian citizen - who has the duty to act as a witness. If the women decide not to testify they can be reprimanded just like any Italian citizen, but they cannot be deported.

Transferability to the German situation
Basically, the requirements trafficked persons have to fulfil in Italy in order to be granted a residence permit under Article 18 are similar to those for women in Germany who are granted a short-term permit to remain in the country as a witness. If a woman in Germany makes claims that cannot be verified, she doesn't receive the witness status and consequently isn't granted the right to remain in Germany.

But there is a very fundamental difference. The women in Italy are not automatically obliged to be witnesses. After making a first statement, they are allowed to get some peace in guaranteed safety, and then, without being pressured, they can think about whether they want to testify in court. We know in general that the willingness and ability of traumatized women to testify increases if they are allowed to take their time to reflect on the matter. The women also have the theoretical option to restrict themselves to making a statement, and then, after they have obtained a secure residence permit status and have their children with them they can testify as witnesses.

In court, the lawyers defending the perpetrators repeatedly try to allege that the witnesses' testimony occurs for fraudulent reasons in order to obtain their residence permit status. If all trafficked persons possessed a residence permit - regardless of their willingness to testify or not - then the defence lawyers would no longer be able to employ this specific strategy of discrediting the women.

Some countries reject a system based on the Italian model because they fear that migrants might thereby obtain a legal residence permit. However, Antislavery International has pointed out that no such developments could be observed in Italy, Belgium or the Netherlands. And in Germany it is also the police who decide whether a woman is a affected by trafficking or not. The German police would maintain that role if the Italian model were to be applied in Germany. The 'only' difference would be that keeping the proceedings for the residence permit status separate from the participation in the judicial prosecution of the perpetrators would place the needs of the trafficked persons at the center. This would be a great improvement over the current situation, where the policy is centered around the needs of the state prosecutors to have access to the victims as witnesses.