CHAPTER 4 - REPORT OF THE ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS WORKING GROUP While the Commission agrees that the lodging of reports on suspected TIP activities greatly depends on self-responsibility and cannot be forced, it is of the view that this role can certainly be encouraged. Empowering the public with the required information on, for instance, the difference between human trafficking for sexual exploitation as opposed to prostitution, the correct report-lodging procedure and the legal rights accorded to whistleblowers – especially the assurance of safety and protection of identity – could encourage and heighten confidence among the public in rendering assistance to curb this menace. (ii) Wider NGO participation The Government agreed with the Commission’s recommendation that NGOs should be provided avenues to offer their expertise to the Council, since many victims are more inclined to approach them for assistance. Accordingly, the Council has welcomed increased NGO participation in line with Section 6(n) of the ATIP Act. This section was amended in 2010 to raise the number of NGOs represented in the Council. The Government is also working closely with other local and international organisations like the SUKA Society and the IOM on related matters. The Commission commends the Council for ensuring the participation of NGOs in its work. Such initiatives could be extended through joint ventures with NGOs with expertise in specific areas of TIP – for example, P.S. the Children could help with child victims and the Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC) could assist with victims of forced labour. (iii) Focus on offenders The Commission had recommended that the Government should take steps to identify and capture traffickers, and to deal stringently with civil servants found to be agents of TIP. In its response, the Government said that persons proved to have committed any trafficking offence would be charged based on the appropriate legislation, irrespective of status or position. Although the ATIP Act was already in effect, the immigration officers were investigated and punished under the Internal Security Act 1960 instead. They were released in August 2011, less than a year after being detained. This, however, raises a key issue relating to fairness and justification of charges brought against different TIP offenders. There seems to be a difference in the recent punishment of offenders. For instance, in December 2008, Malaysia convicted its first human trafficking offender who had forced a female domestic worker into prostitution. The offender was sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment. The same sentence was imposed by the Penang Sessions Court on a contractor in August 2011, when it found him guilty of engaging in the trafficking of an Indonesian man two years earlier. 72