International laws, such as those under the Petro-Agreement, exist, they often remain ineffective due to legal loopholes, jurisdictional conflicts, and corruption. The complexity of trafficking networks, increasing cyber-enabled exploitation, and prosecution challenges posed by victims’ complicate enforcement. This article seeks to understand the efficacy of legal frameworks in combatting human trafficking, evaluate enforcement disparities between jurisdictions, and identify key predictors of successful prosecutions. It also discusses emerging policy challenges in digital trafficking and ways to harmonize responses. A mixed-methods approach was applied, combining doctrinal legal research, logistic regression of 80 trafficking cases, and 60 expert interviews. The comparative legal analysis provided insights into jurisdictional differences, while the empirical modeling assessed prosecution outcomes, transnational cooperation, and institutional struggles. The findings show that specialized courts, clear legal definitions, and interagency cooperation improve conviction rates, but jurisdictional issues, weak victim protection, and corruption undermine enforcement. The study calls for comprehensive laws on digital evidence and stronger international legal harmonization to improve human trafficking enforcement and prosecution.