The right to compensation exists. But often

On March 24–26, 2026, a training of trainers titled “Combating Human Trafficking in the Context of Armed Conflict” was held for judges of local general courts. The event was organized by the National School of Judges of Ukraine with the support of the International Organization for Migration. Its objective was to strengthen understanding of how to properly qualify crimes under Article 149 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, prove the fact of exploitation, and ensure real access to justice for survivors.

The program covered key topics for judicial practice: from evidence in human trafficking cases and the evolving concept of exploitation to a survivor-centered approach, calculation of moral damages, handling digital evidence, and international practice of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union.

A separate focus was placed on compensation for survivors. This topic was presented by Nataliia Kulikova, Chair of the Public Union “Counter–Trafficking NGO Coalition.”

It is precisely here that a systemic problem becomes evident—one of the key challenges in the field of combating human trafficking today: the gap between the existence of a right and its actual implementation.

In Ukraine, there is no state compensation fund, and the primary mechanism remains a civil claim within criminal proceedings.

At the same time, in practice:

claims are not always filed;
courts do not always properly justify the amount of compensation;
even adopted decisions carry a high risk of non-enforcement.

In such conditions, the court decision itself becomes a critically important instrument for survivors’ access to compensation, and accordingly, the role of the court in ensuring justice significantly increases.

The European approach demonstrates a different model: in most countries, state compensation funds operate, guaranteeing compensation regardless of the offender’s solvency, along with combined mechanisms (court + state).

Special attention during the training was given to modern European standards:

Consideration of survivors’ vulnerability, proper assessment of non-material damage (including psychological consequences), as well as the principle of non-punishment of survivors for acts committed as a result of exploitation.

In this context, new expectations of the justice system are emerging: not to be limited to formal consideration, but to ensure a full assessment of harm and real access to the restoration of rights.