Introduction – the scale of child criminal exploitation
Child criminal exploitation is a form of child abuse, where a child is being exploited into taking part in an activity that is a criminal offence under national law. The criminal exploitation of children is not a new phenomenon. However, in the last decade, it has been subject to growing attention in policy and practice. Though no available data provides an accurate representation of the scale of child criminal exploitation, the number of children suffering from this type of exploitation is cause for serious concern: 14,420 children in need assessments in England recorded criminal exploitation as a risk of harm in 2023;[1] 12,800 children were referred to the National Referral Mechanism (‘NRM’) as potential victims of criminal exploitation between Q4 2019 and Q3 2023.[2]In Catch22’s Stoke-On-Trent and Staffordshire Child Criminal Exploitation service alone, we had 399 referrals last year (April 2023- March 2024) for specialist professional support and bespoke interventions.
Despite growing attention on the phenomenon and long-standing calls for the introduction of such a definition from civil society and MPs, there is yet to be an accepted statutory definition of child criminal exploitation. Since 2021, Catch22 has been calling for a National Child Exploitation Strategy that would provide for a legal definition of child criminal exploitation.[3] This has been reiterated in Catch22’s 2023 Manifesto, which demands the implementation of a national strategy to tackle child criminal exploitation, including county lines.[4] This paper focuses on England and Wales and aims to provide an overview of discussions around the definition of child criminal exploitation, addressing why it is needed (1), the different definitions currently in use in policy and practice (2), and how the definition should be developed using a children’s rights-based approach (3).
Why is there a need for a definition?
1. Lack of solid legal basis
The recent Jay Review of criminally exploited children finds that children’s safeguarding and protection from criminal exploitation is limited by a lack of solid legal basis for service intervention.[5] In England and Wales, there are currently two main legal frameworks that can be used to protect child victims of criminal exploitation.
Modern slavery. Child victims of criminal exploitation can be considered as victims of trafficking for the purpose of exploitation under the Modern Slavery Act 2015 (Section 3(6)). The Modern Slavery Act also provides for a defence from prosecution for children who commit criminal offences as a result of their exploitation (though not applicable to all offences, see Section 45). Children can also be referred to the NRM, a mechanism to which children suspected of being victims of modern slavery and/or human trafficking can be referred to for support. The Jay Review found that the current legal framework is unsatisfactory. It considers that the NRM system is overwhelmed, and some situations of criminal exploitation may not meet the criteria for modern slavery or human trafficking. Moreover, the Modern Slavery Act is not always considered by courts and the Section 45 defence not consistently applied.[6] It is worth noting that there are differing opinions on whether the criminal exploitation of children should be firmly integrated in the Modern Slavery Act, or whether it should not be legally tied to modern slavery. [7]
Child protection. Child criminal exploitation is a form of child abuse. The Children Act 1989 imposes on local authorities the general duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of children in need. The Working Together to Safeguard Children guidance has clarified that these obligations extend to children who are victims of extra-familial harms – i.e. harms experienced outside the family.[8] Child criminal exploitation is often considered as a form of extra-familial harm (though it is important to acknowledge that it can also take place within the family). However, extra-familial harm is not adequately and sufficiently addressed in existing safeguarding legislation.[9]
Conversely, child sexual exploitation has a statutory definition contained in the Working Together to Safeguarding Children guidance. Introducing a statutory definition of child criminal exploitation would be a step towards establishing criminal exploitation as a form of exploitation that children need to be protected and safeguarded from, and greater legal certainty.
- There is a lack of solid legal basis to respond to the criminal exploitation of children. Introducing a statutory definition of child criminal exploitation would entrench this type of exploitation in legislation.
2. Inconsistent response and criminalisation of children
Since there is no statutory definition of child criminal exploitation, this form of exploitation is perceived differently depending on people and agencies.[10] Responses to children who have been criminally exploited are inconsistent,[11] with some practitioners unclear about how and when to respond to a child as a victim or someone who has offended.[12] Moreover, a lack of unified definition across agencies, services and localities has created a postcode lottery, where responses are determined by the definition of child criminal exploitation used in that particular service and locality.[13]
There is a tension in legislation between the duty to safeguard children from criminal exploitation, and to prosecute children who commit criminal offences. Despite legislation that can be used to safeguard children from criminal exploitation (see above), child victims of criminal exploitation are too often treated as perpetrators of crime rather than victims of exploitation.[14] This is largely due to children often being first identified through the criminal activity they have been exploited into.[15]
- A statutory definition of child criminal exploitation would be a step towards ensuring that children are treated as victims, receive a safeguarding response, and are treated consistently across agencies and localities.
3. Lack of accurate data on the prevalence of child criminal exploitation
Since there is no formal definition of child criminal exploitation, there is no reliable data on the overall scale of the issue. Child criminal exploitation is now a category of exploitation in its own right for the NRM and children’s social care assessments.[16] However, additional data can come from other multiple sources, such as the police, serious case reviews or local support services, which may each use their own definitions.[17] Moreover, data does not consistently collect basic information on the children who are referred/supported for criminal exploitation.[18]
- The introduction of a statutory definition would support consistent data collection, necessary to understand the prevalence of CCE.
Definitions currently in use
The Home Office developed the following definition in its 2018 Serious Violence Strategy – also referred to in the government’s Working Together guidance – on child criminal exploitation: “Child Criminal Exploitation occurs where an individual or group takes advantage of an imbalance of power to coerce, control, manipulate or deceive a child or young person under the age of 18 into any criminal activity (a) in exchange for something the victim needs or wants, and/or (b) for the financial or other advantage of the perpetrator or facilitator and/or (c) through violence or the threat of violence. The victim may have been criminally exploited even if the activity appears consensual. Child Criminal Exploitation does not always involve physical contact; it can also occur through the use of technology”. However, this definition is not a statutory definition, and it is not used consistently among policy documents.[19]
A number of civil society organisations have departed from the Home Office’s definition. For example, in 2018, children’s organisations proposed the introduction of the following definition in the Modern Slavery Act: “Another person or persons manipulate, deceive, coerce or control the person to undertake activity which constitutes a criminal offence where the person is under the age of 18”.[20] Barnardo’s noted that this definition was purposefully simplified in order to be used over time as new forms of child criminal exploitation emerge.[21]
The Jay Review recommends the use of the following, because it is common usage across the UK and is in line with the definition on child sexual exploitation: “The criminal exploitation of children occurs where an individual or group takes advantage of an imbalance of power to coerce, control, manipulate or deceive a child into criminal activity. The victim may have been criminally exploited even if the activity appears consensual”.[22]
Some definitions have also been put forward by young people themselves. One of them is widely circulated: “when someone you trusted makes you commit crimes for their benefit”.[23] However, this definition may be too restrictive, as it would not include children criminally exploited by people they do not trust. In research in Northern Ireland, a young person described criminal exploitation as: “I think it’s something like getting a child to do something that they don’t want to do or they don’t know the risks”.[24] This introduces an important element: when the child may think they want to take part in a criminal activity without fully knowing the risks.
Child criminal exploitation has often been used alongside or interchangeably with county lines, described as a specific model of drug distribution (see Serious Violence Strategy, 2018 for the Home Office definition). This reflects a clear emphasis on county lines in policy guidance and discussions around child criminal exploitation.[25] This may result in children exploited through county lines having a better understanding of criminal exploitation than children exploited through other mechanisms,[26] and impede support for children and their family.[27] A definition of child criminal exploitation should be broad and not focus on any particular situation a child may be exploited into.
Research has found that children often do not identify with the label victim of criminal exploitation.[28] For example, some children may view it as a “constrained choice”.[29] It can thus be argued that the current framework around child criminal exploitation does not provide the space for children to relate to the label victim of criminal exploitation. This has important implications, as research has found that there is a strong reliance on victims’ accounts in police identification of child victims of criminal exploitation.[30]
More recently, as the Victims and Prisoners Bill was being debated, advocacy efforts have been deployed for the inclusion of a definition of child criminal exploitation in the Bill. The preferred definition of Barnardo’s and Catch22 for inclusion in this bill was “when a child under the age of 18 is encouraged, expected or required to take part in any activity that constitutes a criminal offence under British Law”.[31] This definition may have addressed some of the above-mentioned concerns. It could be adaptable to a wide range of exploitative situations and uses language that children may be more likely to identify with. Unfortunately, a definition was not introduced in the now Victims and Prisoners Act 2024.
All these definitions come back to the “essence” of child criminal exploitation: the exploitation of children to commit criminal offences.[32] However, they contain some key differences:
- the method used to exploit the child: coercion, control, manipulation, deception, encouragement, expectation, requirement, making someone do something.
- whether there is a need for an exchange or not: committing an offence in exchange of something the child needs or wants, committing the criminal activity for someone else, for the personal or financial gain of someone else, whether the use of violence or threat of violence is sufficient or necessary, or whether any of these conditions should be specified.
- whether an imbalance of power between the child and the perpetrator(s) should be explicitly mentioned in the definition.
- whether the fact that appearance of consent does not mean that a child was not exploited should be explicitly mentioned.
The Centre for Social Justice has expressed concerns that the introduction of a definition on child criminal exploitation alone would entrench patterns that, once people turn 18, they are no longer seen as victims of exploitation and will be held fully responsible for offences they commit as a result of exploitation.[33] Attention should be given to the ‘cliff edge’ of turning 18, and that victims of criminal exploitation should be protected at all ages, including through the adoption of a definition of criminal exploitation. However, this does not preclude the introduction of a definition specifically applicable to child victims, as children require special considerations, assistance and protections from harm.
To develop an effective and appropriate definition of child criminal exploitation, the legislative process should adopt a children’s rights-based approach. Catch22 supports such a rights-based process for the development of a definition but, in its absence, supports the adoption of the following: “when a child under the age of 18 is encouraged, expected or required to take part in any activity that constitutes a criminal offence under British Law”.
Developing a definition through a child rights-based approach
The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) is an international legal instrument that recognises the human rights of children. By ratifying the CRC in 1991, the UK consents to being bound by it, and therefore has a legal obligation to implement the rights that it contains. In line with this, the UK should follow a children’s rights-based approach when undertaking legislative reform, i.e. an approach that respects, protects and fulfils children’s rights as set out in the CRC.[34] While it is beyond the scope of this paper to look at all the considerations that should be taken into account to undertake this, it presents a few points that should be followed when introducing a statutory definition of child criminal exploitation:
- Engage in a participatory process in the development of the definition.
- Children’s views should be included in the reform process, including children who have been victims of criminal exploitation, in line with children’s right to be heard and to have their views given due weight (Article 12 CRC). Children’s participation should be transparent and informative, voluntary, respectful, relevant, child-friendly, inclusive, supported by training, safe and sensitive to risk, and accountable.[35]
- A wide range of stakeholders with broad expertise should also be consulted, including practitioners (such as social workers, youth workers, lawyers, police officers, teachers), civil society organisations and non-governmental organisations, independent children’s rights institutions and academia.
- Undertake a child rights impact assessment. An analysis of the impact of the proposed new statutory definition on children and the enjoyment of their rights should be conducted.[36] This would help avoid any unintended adverse consequences on children
- Of particular relevance to the criminal exploitation of children, such impact assessment should ensure that no children suffer from discriminatory treatment (Article 2 CRC). This is especially important, as research has found that boys from minority ethnic backgrounds are disproportionately represented as victims of child criminal exploitation. They are also more likely to be viewed as less vulnerable than other children, and are less likely to receive adequate support.[37] Moreover, since children in vulnerable situations – such as in care, out of mainstream education, living in poverty or with special education needs and disabilities – are considered vulnerable to targeting for criminal exploitation,[38] it is essential to ensure that the adopted statutory definition both adequately protects them, and does not lead to increased policing or surveillance.
- Throughout the entire process, children’s best interests should be taken as a primary consideration (Article 3(1) CRC).
Author
Clara Paul is the author of this research, written in collaboration with the Research and Development and Policy teams at Catch22. She is currently undertaking a PhD in Criminology at Keele University (transferring to the University of Manchester in October 2024), aimed at understanding children’s experiences and perceptions of “child criminal exploitation”. Clara will start work with children who have been referred to Catch22 for support in the coming year to ask about their insights, experiences and opinions.
Clara has a background in French/Common Law and International Children’s Rights and has worked for the protection and promotion of children’s rights in the policy sector at the European level, in an NGO as a program manager and in academia.
About Catch22
Catch22 is a national charity delivering services to children and young people across England and Wales. We deliver Child Exploitation and Missing services, supporting children and young people affected by sexual and criminal exploitation, including via county lines. We also support children and young people who are affected by youth violence and criminal exploitation in our alternative provision schools, substance misuse services, and mental health and wellbeing services.
This publication has been made possible thanks to the ESRC, NWSSDTP Grant Number ES/P000665/1.
Continue reading