Comparative Analysis of Oathtaking Method, Strategy and Impact on the Victim-centered Approach

Oath-taking is an instrument of native judiciary used in human trafficking to further a desire to migrate using illegal means and for protecting the gains of such transactions. In human trafficking, consent given under native oath is disregarded and undermined as “not true” while the complexity of oathtaking in the processes used for the prosecution of traffickers is put simply, as a lack in an understanding of the African worldview. This work argues that the complexity of oathtaking in the processes used for the prosecution of traffickers does not arise from a lack of understanding of the African worldview per se but from the inadequacy of the victim-centered approach in dealing with victimless crime. In examining the efficiency of oath in preventing crime in human trafficking, it contradicts the assumption that oathtaking solely furthers crime in human trafficking and continues discussions on the oath as a means of preventing crime in the past and some parts in contemporary times. Therein, enabling a comparism between different methods accepted as best practice to preventing crime in a particular time and space This work moves discussions on power dynamics in human trafficking beyond the notion that conflict is just a struggle between people or parties of unequal influence, wealth and status. Finding shows that the failure of the victim-centered approach to respect human freedom and self-determinism is self-defeating as it contributes immensely to the use of traffickers for achieving the desire to migrate