In het ambtsbericht staat in paragraaf 6.2 over het risico op represailles van mensenhandelaren onder meer:
“Veel van deze slachtoffers vrezen represailles tegen henzelf of hun familieleden indien zij de seksuele uitbuiting ontvluchten zonder hun schuld af te betalen. Er bestaat echter geen eenduidig beeld van de schaal waarop en mate waarin slachtoffers daadwerkelijk aan represailles onderworpen werden bij terugkeer in Nigeria en er zijn weinig concrete gevallen waarin represailles hebben plaatsgevonden gedurende deze verslagperiode bekend. Verschillende bronnen gaven wel aan te hebben opgemerkt dat de houding van mensenhandelaren jegens slachtoffers die terugkeren naar Nigeria zonder hun schuld af te betalen is verhard. Dit vertaalde zich in represailles tegen familieleden van slachtoffers en/of de retrafficking van teruggekeerde slachtoffers van mensenhandel.
(…)
Hoewel de vrees voor represailles onder slachtoffers van mensenhandel dus groot is, bestaat er minder inzicht in de schaal waarop (gewelddadige) represailles voorkomen in de praktijk. Ook de vertrouwelijke bronnen die werden geïnterviewd voor dit ambtsbericht spraken elkaar tegen m.b.t. deze vraag.”
In de ‘Country Guidance: Nigeria’ van EASO staat hierover onder meer (p. 60-61):
“Victims of human trafficking often fear retaliation by the traffickers or ‘madams’, especially in case of a remaining ‘debt’. Some sources find it more likely for the victim to be re-trafficked than subjected to physical violence as retaliation. However, reported examples of reprisals include physical violence, kidnapping, intimidation, burning of the victim’s home, killing of family members, etc. Victims of trafficking may be unwilling to testify against traffickers due to fear of reprisals. Most victims do not want to return to their home region in Nigeria to avoid being re-trafficked; however, many victims of trafficking may return to a trafficking situation. They may do so on their own initiative or be forced by the trafficker or the ‘madam’, or by their family. This is in particular the case when they have not repaid their ‘debt’ or they have not fulfilled the expectation of becoming wealthy.
(…)
Individuals under this profile could be exposed to acts which are of such severe nature that they would amount to persecution (e.g. violence, re-trafficking). Where the risk is of discrimination and/or mistreatment by society and/or by the family, the individual assessment of whether or not this could amount to persecution should take into account the severity and/or repetitiveness of the acts or whether they occur as an accumulation of various measures. Not all individuals under this profile would face the level of risk required to establish well-founded fear of persecution. The individual assessment of whether or not there is a reasonable degree of likelihood for the applicant to face persecution should take into account risk-impacting circumstances, such as: amount of ‘debt’ to traffickers, whether the applicant has testified against the traffickers, level of power/capability of the traffickers, the traffickers’ knowledge about the victims’ family and background, age, family status (e.g. orphan, single woman), socio-economic background and financial means, level of education, availability of support network (family or other) or the family’s involvement in the trafficking, etc.”
In het EASO-rapport ‘Nigeria. Trafficking in Human Beings’ staat onder meer (p. 59):
“While the fear of reprisals is significant, insight into the actual prevalence and nature of reprisals remains spotty, as was the case in 2015. Various sources identified a tendency on behalf of traffickers to use more violence to guarantee the obedience of victims during this reporting period because of the actions by the Oba of Benin, and the fact that it has become more difficult to transfer women to Europe. Nevertheless, the various (anonymous) sources who were interviewed for this report provided conflicting accounts in relation to the actual occurrence of (violent) reprisals.”