Time for fairness for sex trade workers
Dear Editor:
On September 28, 2010, the Ontario Superior Court struck down sections 210, 212(1)j and 213(1)c of the Canadian Criminal Code. These laws related to prostitution and the terms under which sex trade workers were allowed to operate. Prior to the September 28 ruling, the act of prostitution itself was not illegal, rather the acts often engaged in by prostitutes, such as solicitation and the operation of brothels, were punishable by law.
According to Justice Susan Himel, the laws that had been in place violated a prostitute's right to life, liberty and security of the person, a right guaranteed under section seven of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Under the changes proposed by Justice Himel, prostitutes would be allowed to solicit inside protected environments, such as brothels, and could potentially live off of the money they were making. However, the laws are not yet concrete.
The Canadian government was given 30 days to appeal Justice Himel's proposal before the changes were put into effect. In light of the recent prostitute murders in British Columbia, the federal government should be advised to consider the remarkable difference these new laws would make in the lives of sex trade workers before building a case against them.
One of the biggest obstacles facing prostitutes is the lack of protection available to them from the authorities in the event that a client becomes violent or otherwise dangerous. Currently, if a prostitute were to call the authorities because a client was physically assaulting them, it is likely the prostitute, not the client, who would face the greatest repercussions. Assuming the offence in question is sexual assault, the client will almost always receive little to no punishment for their actions. This is because in court a prostitute's sexual history will be revealed, ruining their credibility and making it seem as though the likelihood of the prostitute being raped is nearly impossible.
If an environment existed in which prostitutes could legally conduct their business, the chances of them being in physical danger would drastically diminish. Brothels would allow clients to seek out sex workers, not vice versa. Prostitutes would have the security of knowing they are never alone with a stranger and, even more important, would be able to contact authorities if a client were to become violent and hold the client responsible for his or her actions. From a legal perspective, this would potentially lighten the already heavy load on the Canadian justice system by decreasing the number of lengthy sexual assault cases that are brought forward by prostitutes who are currently not likely to receive any sort of reparation for the ordeal he or she has suffered through.
Setting aside the possibility of abuse, it is also important to question whether or not the act of prostitution is physically hurting anyone. The obvious answer to this question would be the increased possibility of sexually transmitted infections. If sex trade workers were legally protected and allowed to work in brothels, a requirement of doing so would likely be that they be checked for STIs on a regular basis. In fact, if used as an incentive for physical protection, it is likely the majority of prostitutes would be willing to maintain a clean health record in exchange for security. This would not only prevent the spread of STIs, but it would also lessen the rate of treatment needed for dealing with future occurrences of STIs in sex trade workers.
Organized crime is another factor to take into consideration when discussing the proposed changes to prostitution laws. Many activities often associated with the prostitution lifestyle, such as substance abuse, are linked to organized crime activity. When making this argument, one should keep in mind that sex trade workers are currently purchasing their drugs from dealers on the streets. By taking prostitutes off the street and placing them in brothels, the government would be allowing them to operate in a location that could be regulated, making the potential for illegal drug trade less likely.
Prostitution is not an industry that is declining. Even with laws against solicitation, sex trade workers are finding a way to continue operating. The changes proposed by Justice Himel would currently only apply to Ontario. Keeping this in mind, it would be an excellent idea for the federal government to use Ontario as a test market and see if there is the potential for any positive changes to the existing prostitution legislation.
Whether or not you agree with the morality of their work, there is no way to dispute the fact that sex workers are human beings. The time has come that prostitutes were recognized as legitimate members of society and steps were taken to protect their workplace, their rights and, most importantly, their lives.
Ashley Beaupre
Editorial opinions or comments expressed in this online edition of Interrobang newspaper reflect the views of the writer and are not those of the Interrobang or the Fanshawe Student Union. The Interrobang is published weekly by the Fanshawe Student Union at 1001 Fanshawe College Blvd., P.O. Box 7005, London, Ontario, N5Y 5R6 and distributed through the Fanshawe College community. Letters to the editor are welcome. All letters are subject to editing and should be emailed. All letters must be accompanied by contact information. Letters can also be submitted online by clicking here.
On September 28, 2010, the Ontario Superior Court struck down sections 210, 212(1)j and 213(1)c of the Canadian Criminal Code. These laws related to prostitution and the terms under which sex trade workers were allowed to operate. Prior to the September 28 ruling, the act of prostitution itself was not illegal, rather the acts often engaged in by prostitutes, such as solicitation and the operation of brothels, were punishable by law.
According to Justice Susan Himel, the laws that had been in place violated a prostitute's right to life, liberty and security of the person, a right guaranteed under section seven of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Under the changes proposed by Justice Himel, prostitutes would be allowed to solicit inside protected environments, such as brothels, and could potentially live off of the money they were making. However, the laws are not yet concrete.
The Canadian government was given 30 days to appeal Justice Himel's proposal before the changes were put into effect. In light of the recent prostitute murders in British Columbia, the federal government should be advised to consider the remarkable difference these new laws would make in the lives of sex trade workers before building a case against them.
One of the biggest obstacles facing prostitutes is the lack of protection available to them from the authorities in the event that a client becomes violent or otherwise dangerous. Currently, if a prostitute were to call the authorities because a client was physically assaulting them, it is likely the prostitute, not the client, who would face the greatest repercussions. Assuming the offence in question is sexual assault, the client will almost always receive little to no punishment for their actions. This is because in court a prostitute's sexual history will be revealed, ruining their credibility and making it seem as though the likelihood of the prostitute being raped is nearly impossible.
If an environment existed in which prostitutes could legally conduct their business, the chances of them being in physical danger would drastically diminish. Brothels would allow clients to seek out sex workers, not vice versa. Prostitutes would have the security of knowing they are never alone with a stranger and, even more important, would be able to contact authorities if a client were to become violent and hold the client responsible for his or her actions. From a legal perspective, this would potentially lighten the already heavy load on the Canadian justice system by decreasing the number of lengthy sexual assault cases that are brought forward by prostitutes who are currently not likely to receive any sort of reparation for the ordeal he or she has suffered through.
Setting aside the possibility of abuse, it is also important to question whether or not the act of prostitution is physically hurting anyone. The obvious answer to this question would be the increased possibility of sexually transmitted infections. If sex trade workers were legally protected and allowed to work in brothels, a requirement of doing so would likely be that they be checked for STIs on a regular basis. In fact, if used as an incentive for physical protection, it is likely the majority of prostitutes would be willing to maintain a clean health record in exchange for security. This would not only prevent the spread of STIs, but it would also lessen the rate of treatment needed for dealing with future occurrences of STIs in sex trade workers.
Organized crime is another factor to take into consideration when discussing the proposed changes to prostitution laws. Many activities often associated with the prostitution lifestyle, such as substance abuse, are linked to organized crime activity. When making this argument, one should keep in mind that sex trade workers are currently purchasing their drugs from dealers on the streets. By taking prostitutes off the street and placing them in brothels, the government would be allowing them to operate in a location that could be regulated, making the potential for illegal drug trade less likely.
Prostitution is not an industry that is declining. Even with laws against solicitation, sex trade workers are finding a way to continue operating. The changes proposed by Justice Himel would currently only apply to Ontario. Keeping this in mind, it would be an excellent idea for the federal government to use Ontario as a test market and see if there is the potential for any positive changes to the existing prostitution legislation.
Whether or not you agree with the morality of their work, there is no way to dispute the fact that sex workers are human beings. The time has come that prostitutes were recognized as legitimate members of society and steps were taken to protect their workplace, their rights and, most importantly, their lives.
Ashley Beaupre
Editorial opinions or comments expressed in this online edition of Interrobang newspaper reflect the views of the writer and are not those of the Interrobang or the Fanshawe Student Union. The Interrobang is published weekly by the Fanshawe Student Union at 1001 Fanshawe College Blvd., P.O. Box 7005, London, Ontario, N5Y 5R6 and distributed through the Fanshawe College community. Letters to the editor are welcome. All letters are subject to editing and should be emailed. All letters must be accompanied by contact information. Letters can also be submitted online by clicking here.
