What obligations do States owe to victims of trafficking? The answer to this question is far from settled. While there seems to be general agreement on the need for victim protection, the precise contours and limits of that protection have not yet been firmly established. Victim advocates have claimed a wide range of entitlements, from the provision of emergency shelter to a right of permanent residency in the destination country. States have been much more cautious in embracing specific rights of victims and in accepting the corresponding obligations. This reluctance to recognize obligations to victims has been tempered over time by a number of factors. These include a growing acceptance by States of the plight of trafficked persons and of the political importance of being seen to be responding appropriately. Another important factor in shifting attitudes to victim protection and support is the now-widespread recognition among criminal justice practitioners that protection and support are a vital part of ensuring that victims are able to play an effective role in the investigation and prosecution of trafficking cases.

Over the past decade, there has been considerable progress in the articulation of States' obligations to victims. Taking the various international, regional, and national instruments together, and drawing on a broader trend in international law toward recognition and detailed articulation of victims' rights and concomitant State duties, it is now possible to identify an emergent consensus around several core obligations, underscored by a general obligation to identify victims of trafficking in the first place.