www.CostaRicaTicas.com

Security ministry tries to crack down on sex tourism ads

By the A.M. Costa Rica staff


Publicizing Costa Rica as a sex tourism destination would be a crime under a proposal announced by the security ministry Wednesday. The prohibition extends to any medium of communications, presumably including the Internet.

The proposal also creates a secret procedure for handling human trafficking cases.

The bill is supposed to be 30 pages long and will be presented to the Asamblea Legislativa in a few days, officials said.

The presentation came on the International Day Against Sexual Exploitation and Trafficking in Persons. The proposed legislation builds on the new and existing immigration laws that contain penalties for coyotes and for harboring illegal immigrants.

In a summary of the proposal, the ministry said that the bill stipulates a prison term of from four to eight years for persons who promote, run programs, campaigns or advertisements, making use of whatever medium, to project the country as a tourist destination accessible for commercial sexual exploitation or prostitution of persons of whatever gender or age.

Since adult prostitution is legal in Costa Rica, that section would seem to be unconstitutional on its face.

The bill also would punish with two to five years the operators of an establishment or place that is a destination or benefits from the trafficking of persons or related activities. The summary does not provide more details.

The bill also would punish those in the business of trafficking in human organs, fluids or tissue.

The measure also would punish those who hold employees in servitude by threats, trickery or force. The penalties would be larger if the victim were a minor.

Officials said that the bill will have 85 separate sections.

The bill also will specify how the law is applied. Among
these precepts is one of confidentiality which includes all the information and administrative or jurisdictional activities related to the protection of victims of trafficking crimes. Law enforcement would be obliged to put the life, physical integrity, liberty and security of victims first and consider the wishes of the victim. There is a precept against revictimization, too. The summary also said that in all public and private actions involving a minor, the Ch*ld's rights and protection would be the highest interest.

The bill came from the Ministerio de Gobernación, Policía y Seguridad Pública, which held a press conference to announce the existence of the bill. That ministry is headed by Janina del Vecchio.

The bill seeks to promote public policies for the prevention of trafficking of persons, said the summary. Also supporting the bill was the Judicial Investigating Organization., Casa Presidencial, The Ministerio de Justicia y Paz, the Defensoría de los Habitantes and the International Organization for Immigration. All sent representatives.

The most recent case of human trafficking involved two Costa Rican women who answered a newspaper here and and ended up working as prostitutes in México under duress. They were returned to the country, and another Costa Rican woman was identified as the author of the scheme.

Previous efforts to address human trafficking have suffered from definitions that were too broad. Most foreign prostitutes who come to Costa Rica do so voluntarily, so the element of force does not exist. In addition, many come as individuals, although they may end up living with other prostitutes.

The prohibition against running sex tourism programs or campaigns would seemed to be aimed at excursions like the annual Michigan Boy's trip to the Pacific Coast. A charter jet full of individuals from that U.S. state arrives during the U.S. winter with the stated objective of engaging in fishing. But the visit attracts prostitutes from all over the country who descend on the hotel where the men are staying.

Some offers found on the Internet are far more explicit.
The legislation summary also does not seem to address the fact that most Internet servers are outside the country.

_________________
Don't call 'em hookers. I tell my wife I'm here dealing with holesalers.

I hope they themselves know what it is.

I noticed that they always report how many pages long a bill is. I think it's their way of showing how hard they worked. The immigration bill was 51 pages long, so these slackers need to pick it up.

I hope this bill gets discarded or refined so that it does not affect CRT, SL, or DelRey. Crap like this worries me to tears. Please don't take away that thing that I love the most in my life.

Lost

If the real target is just human trafficking rather than a broader attack on prostitution in general, then I'd actually support this. No ones wants any chicas at any of these places who do not want to be there and are forced to be there against their choice. Personally, if there are any chicas who fit that description in any of these places I think they're very few and far between. Sure, many of the chicas working in those places would rather be able to earn a living doing something else (as Berketta will be quick to tell you), but it is a long stretch from saying that to saying they have been coerced by someone else into doing what they do (beyond simple economic necessity).

If there are Coyotes profiteering off of the Colombianas that they help smuggle into the country (which wouldn't surprise me), then I'd have no problem at all with CR authorities trying to keep them in check. If that means fewer Colombianas make it into CR, then so be it. At least then the ones that do make it will be much less likely to be exploited by those sorts of scum.

If the bill cracks down on anyone who "promote, run programs, campaigns or advertisements, making use of whatever medium, to project the country as a tourist destination accessible for commercial sexual exploitation or prostitution of persons" WHO ARE MINORS. Then I'd support it completely. But that "prostitution of persons of whatever gender or age" part gives me great pause.

I also understand and sympathize with why they don't want their country promoted as a sex-tourism destination in general. Unfortunately for them, I doubt that there is really very much that they can do about internet sites that are based on servers outside their country. So they can probably try to pass whatever they want to in that area and I doubt it would make much difference to us. Personally, I would draw a distinction between a site like CRT which is basically a place where private individuals, who are ALREADY aware of CR's reputation as a sex-tourism destination, can come to discuss the topic between themselves and these sex-tour packagers who are agressively and proactively promoting that aspect of CR with guys who usually DON'T already know much about it (and also are actually exploiting that ignorance).

Besides all that, even IF a website (or other media) is publicizing CR's "dirty little secret", as long they aren't directly profiting from human trafficking and or sexual exploitation, trying to muzzle those outlets from saying whatever they want becomes a free speech issue. CR may not like what sites like CRT has to say, but it should be our right to say it.

The more significant issue is with entities that conduct operations in CR, where the local authorities DO have a say. This might apply to some of these vacation outfits, but I'm sure that most of them are smart enough to collect customer payments OUTSIDE of CR before they even go to CR and if they are really smart have their clients make the payments for the "tourguide" or "companion" portion of their trips directly to the chicas themselves, making it harder for CR authorities to say that the agency is benefitting from those activities rather than just charging clients (highly inflated) rates for hotel, food and tour activities.

What about "operators of an establishment or place that [might be] a destination or benefits from the trafficking of persons or related activities."? Could they successfully prosecute (or even just harass) places like the HDR or SL on these grounds? At least in the case of the SL, their room and food prices are in line with what other "non-monger" hotels charge, so how could they say they're "benefitting" from various activities that go on there? Because they have higher occupancy rates? Perhaps, but I think that is a stretch.

And are the activities that go on in these places even covered. If one chica who operates within their establishment happens to have been "trafficked" into the country and made by someone else to work at their bar but that isolated case is unbeknownst to management, should that establishment be held responsible for that or be accused of purposefully benefiting from "trafficking of persons or related activities" (whatever "related activities" is meant to be).?

My 2 cents, I just saw a film on TV in an acorn office. Where a guy who gets US government money was in a conspiracy to bring 12 to 14 year old El Salvadoring girls across the border to force them into prostitution. Yet, I have not heard of anyone being arrested. This is a clear violation of all the Rieco laws on the books. Yet, no one is in jail. Adding and Abetting. Conspiracy. It seems like some gringa feminista who is a lawyer or prosicuter would be arresting these people. Or, atleast some uniformed female police officer would see these as clear violations of the law.

My point is. Everything is against the law. Now it is a choice of who goes to jail and who doesn't. It has nothing to do with feminist. They do not mind 12 year olds being forced into slavery. As long as the slave holders are contributing to the right causes and saying the right things.

It is the same in CR. It is going to be against the law to say it. But legal to do it. Makes sense to me.

_________________
Take a walk on the wild side.

Redman, it is the policy of this forum to leave US politics at the door but since you brought it up you should at least get all the facts straight.

The government grant money goes to the organization not the individuals working for them and, while this may be clear evidence of sloppy hiring procedures and employee oversight, there is no evidence that the organization itself was involved in any sort of "criminal conspiracy".

Secondly, this story involved only a handful of employees who were set-up by a right-wing videographer (and his very hot girlfriend ) on hidden camera. That videographer was far from being a feminista gringa and yet has steadfastedly refused to release raw footage of the encounters to the police or anyone else. So what is any prosecutor, feminista or otherwise, really supposed to do. In at least one of the cases, the Acorn worker involved was also caught on tape making blatantly untrue claims (such as that she had killed her ex-husband). Are you also saying that she should be indicted for murder based just on what appears on a fragment of tape? As it happens, she claims (with I think some credibility) that she initially told the guy she could not advise him on that (though that part of the tape was edited out) and thought the cartoonishly clad would-be pimp was putting her on so she was just joking back with him, not talking seriously.

Thirdly, RICO cases are not so simple to prosecute. For example, is there any evidence that those workers were employed by the proposed criminal organization that was to have brought in those trafficking victims or that they were to share in the profits in any way? Is there really any greater and conclusive evidence that the people making the video were any less serious about what THEY were proposing than the workers who went along with their discussion? Was there any evidence of any action taken to move forward this activity other than the casual conversation of a few people one afternoon?

Finally, investigators ARE looking into whether there is anything that is chargeable in these cases that they could get a CONVICTION on. To suggest that politics has anything to do with why the individuals involved have not THUS FAR been indicted is simply right-wing paranoia. As it happens, the Acorn organization is already in the process of being stripped of much of its government support by members of BOTH sides of congress even though they, as an organization, were not directly involved.

Projo. Since it is the policy of this form. I will ignor what I saw with my own 2 eye's and agree that we all should love each other and look for the good in all situtations and not be negative.

That is what the police will be doing in CR if any of those laws are passed. Unless of course your a gringo. Then they will see if you want to go with them or home on the next flight. Of course after contribuating to the local orphans fund. Which I agree is a worhty cause and donated too when Santa Bros. was orginising the CRT fund.

But, I can tell you on a personal level. Anywhere on the face of this earth people are forcing little Ch*ldren into sex slavery I will oppose it. In word and deed.

I do not need any one to explain it to me. I know that is a narrow view to take. But, I am 54. I know shit when I see shit.

I always do enjoy seeing you on the board my friend. RED

_________________
Take a walk on the wild side.

Redman, I agree completely that anybody who engages of human trafficking of Ch*ldren for sexual exploitation (or any other form of human trafficking for that matter) SHOULD be dealt with severely. And I wasn't questioning the PORTIONS of the videos that you saw with your own 2 eyes. That was not the aspect of your post that I meant to question. What I WAS questioning was whether any of the conversations that were taped were legally actionable by prosecutors or to the extent no legal action has been taken YET that lack of action has anything to do with the political sympathies some members of the legal community might have for the organization whose workers were involved, as YOU suggested (and which I feel was an unneccessary political slap). In fact, that organization was extremely betrayed by those workers and has had its reputation further tarnished because of them (perhaps rightly so, I did say at the very least it represented lax or even negligent management practices). So if anything political sympathizers may be even more motivated to prosecute them to punish them for that betrayal and to help dissassociate that organization from those individuals. Do you really think any left-wing politician wants to be seen as supportive of this type of activity? Besides, your little barb failed to note that conservative "non-feminista" prosecutors haven't indicted anyone yet either.

I'm also glad to know that though we might differ politically on some things, none of this is personal (for me either). We are all just "brothers" from many walks of life (and many political persuasions) united by a common interest (Las Chicas - Pura Vida ).

Your right Bro. We speak the same language. We just say it differently.

Now I don't care what politicail faction the Feminista is from. It just confuse me that they can not see that it is shit. That it looks like shit. That it smells like shit.

Pro. I am a independent liberterian. I supported Obama. Bob Barr. yea right. But, I can not see why the women of the world tolerate this stuff.

Thanks for the kind words about how we would both act confronded on a personel level with this type of stuff.

Now I have no problem with a 14 year old girl going to Tennesee and marrying a 16 year old boy. I have no problems with arranged marriages in India and Arabia. Its that force and slave stuff that gets my duff up. And I do not need anyone writting it on a peice of paper for me to knows it wrong. I do have some Irish in me. We been slaves before. By another name.

But, we should let this thread get back to CR as we both agree there is nothing wrong with this law. As nature itself already tells us it is wrong to do. Hope to meet you sometime RED

_________________
Take a walk on the wild side.