Trafficking investigation
Police have a duty to investigate trafficking and identify suspected victims, even in historical cases. Correct identification matters because only a trafficking investigation can gather the evidence needed for meaningful criminal accountability.
Does a trafficking investigation matter?
When the Metropolitan Police opened an investigation into the enablers of Mohamed Al Fayed's offending in 2024, they faced a choice about how to approach the case. The primary perpetrator was gone. But hundreds of women said they had been exploited, abused and silenced over four decades. The question was: what exactly are the police investigating, and under which legal framework?
A sexual offences investigation asks: who committed or assisted specific acts of rape or assault?
A trafficking investigation asks: who built, ran and funded a system designed to exploit women?
The Met has been investigating primarily under what is called the RASSO framework — the unit that handles rape and serious sexual offences. This page explains why the choice of framework matters — and why a formal trafficking investigation remains the approach most likely to deliver the criminal accountability survivors, lawyers and independent experts have consistently sought.
Note on scope: This analysis discusses legal frameworks, official guidance, and publicly reported facts. It does not name individuals who have not been charged with any offence, does not make findings of guilt, and is not intended to prejudice any ongoing proceedings. All references to potential criminal liability are framed as legal analysis of what relevant frameworks make possible, not as allegations against specific individuals.
Trafficking investigation for a trafficking case
The Fayed operation, as described by survivors and documented in court proceedings, was not simply one man committing assaults. It involved women being recruited through job advertisements, subjected to medical examinations before they started work, required to sign non-disclosure agreements, transported between properties in the UK and abroad, and in some cases having their documents confiscated and movements monitored.
That pattern — consistently described across multiple survivors — maps onto the legal definition of trafficking under the Modern Slavery Act 2015, and the Sexual Offences Act 2003, which criminalise the recruitment, movement and harbouring of people for the purpose of exploitation.
College of Policing guidance states that every report of modern slavery must be investigated from the point of disclosure or suspicion, and that suspected modern slavery offences must be treated as a serious crime even when potential victims may not immediately identify themselves as such.
Duties apply to historical trafficking
As the government's investigations of Epstein trafficking in the UK show: historical trafficking must be taken seriously.
The Modern Slavery Act of 2015 is clear: police duties to identify victims and investigate trafficking apply in any suspected cases of trafficking, regardless of when the offending occurred.
"From 1 November 2015, specified public authorities are required to notify the Home Office about any potential victims of modern slavery they encounter in England and Wales...”
Government regulatory guidance is clear:
“human trafficking” means— (a) conduct which constitutes an offence under section 2 of the Act, or would constitute an offence under that section if the person responsible for the conduct were a UK national, or (b) conduct which would have been within paragraph (a) if section 2 had been in force when the conduct occurred;
The requirement was also confirmed by the Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner in correspondence with NOA.
Many survivors were exploited prior to the enactment of specific human trafficking legislation in the UK, being the Modern Slavery Act of 2015 and the Sexual Offences Act of 2003. However, this should not prevent a modern slavery investigative strategy from being adopted. For those offences committed prior to 2003, charges of aiding and abetting or conspiracy to commit substantive offences of rape and serious sexual assaults could be considered against those involved in the recruitment, transport, transfer, harbour or receipt of the victims of Al Fayed and others. There is a much greater likelihood these individuals would be identified if allegations are investigated as human trafficking rather than sexual offences.
Financial investigations
College of Policing guidance specifically requires investigators to pursue financial strategies in trafficking cases.
In a trafficking investigation, financial flows are primary evidence — not just supporting material. The cost of running a recruitment pipeline, the legal fees for administering non-disclosure agreements, payroll records, corporate account data and the structures used to move money between entities are all potentially relevant to establishing who funded and directed the operation.
Under a sexual offences investigation, these financial flows are background context. They may support an argument that a facilitator knew what was happening, but they are not themselves a primary route to liability. This distinction materially affects the scope and depth of investigation that is legally required and operationally pursued.
International coordination
French authorities are investigating the Ritz Paris as a potential trafficking hub, under French aggravated trafficking law. Their investigation covers alleged movement of female staff between Paris, London and Mediterranean properties. It is framed explicitly as a trafficking inquiry.
The problem is that the French and British investigations are running in parallel without a formal mechanism for combining their evidence. A Joint Investigation Team — a legal structure allowing two countries to pool investigators, evidence and prosecutorial authority — would allow evidence gathered in France to be used in UK proceedings and vice versa.
College of Policing guidance specifically requires cross-border investigation procedures to be followed when trafficking has an international dimension. The publicly documented facts of the Fayed operation indicate an international dimension across multiple jurisdictions. Official guidance therefore requires, not merely permits, a cross-border investigative approach.
Why this matters beyond the Fayed case
The Modern Slavery Act was designed precisely for organised exploitation networks operating through corporate structures and using professional enablers across multiple jurisdictions. A case of this scale and duration, properly investigated under that Act, would be the most significant application of the legislation to institutional exploitation in UK legal history.
The precedent it sets — for what corporate structures, professional enablers and financial infrastructure can be held accountable for under the Modern Slavery Act — extends far beyond this case. As official guidance makes clear, when the police response to modern slavery is inadequate, offenders are left free to continue their exploitation, causing harm to both victims and the wider public interest. The argument for a formal trafficking investigation is not sentimental. It is the argument that the law should be used for what it was built to do.
Trafficking and the law
Under UK and international law, the Government and police must recognise individuals as potential victims of human trafficking where there are credible indicators of exploitation or control, regardless of whether a perpetrator is identifiable or prosecutable. Once such indicators are present, the duty to investigate is triggered and must be proactive and effective.
Trafficking investigations are required to go beyond individual suspects and examine wider networks, including recruitment pathways, patterns of abuse, premises, financial activity, and any institutional or regulatory failures that may have enabled the exploitation.
Failure to recognise victim status or to pursue these wider lines of inquiry may place the State in breach of its positive obligations under Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, and its domestic statutory duties under the Modern Slavery Act 2015, including the obligation to identify, protect, and support victims of slavery, servitude, forced or compulsory labour, and human trafficking. Such failures may also engage the State’s duties under the Human Rights Act 1998 and relevant safeguarding and investigative obligations arising under UK public law.