...and so did Canada's prostitution laws (well, not for another year).
The Supreme Court of Canada's judgment can be found here.
Parliament now has one year to come up with a new means of regulating Canada's sex trade. In the meantime, the status quo will be maintained, unfortunately.
It is hoped that, in their effort to come up with a constitutionally sound means of regulating sex work, Parliamentarians will seek and throughly consider input from stakeholders from all corners of the ring.
If you are a stakeholder interested in learning what options are available to you, then please feel free to contact my office.
I will be reading and considering this judgment. Future posts will explain the impact of the Bedford decision and consider what considerations should be at the forefront of lawmakers' minds as they get to work on this very important job. All three levels of court found that present laws endanger the lives of those in the sex-trade. Whatever replaces these laws must regulate the industry without repeating past errors.
Friday 20 December 2013
Tuesday 17 December 2013
Judgment Day
Media have reported that the Supreme Court of Canada will render judgment in Bedford v. Canada on Friday December 20, 2013.
A link to the Supreme Court's bulletin announcing the imminent judgment can be found here. The Court's case summary can be found here.
Little needs to be said about the possible ramifications of this decision. It is possible that Parliament will be told to dramatically overhaul federal prostitution laws. The Court's practice ifs often to grant legislators 12 months to do so, in order to avoid the difficulties associated with a legal vacuum.
The writer will be in holiday-transit at that point. Check back here for updates once I have had a chance to review and consider the decision.
A link to the Supreme Court's bulletin announcing the imminent judgment can be found here. The Court's case summary can be found here.
Little needs to be said about the possible ramifications of this decision. It is possible that Parliament will be told to dramatically overhaul federal prostitution laws. The Court's practice ifs often to grant legislators 12 months to do so, in order to avoid the difficulties associated with a legal vacuum.
The writer will be in holiday-transit at that point. Check back here for updates once I have had a chance to review and consider the decision.
Sunday 6 October 2013
Moazami Trial
Prostitution, in particular its nobility, morality, and legality, is a controversial subject.
Many view it as an honourable means of earning a living and empowering people to do whatever they please with their bodies. Others see it as inherently debasing and a means of men asserting power over women, preventing their social, emotional, and physical progression.
Whatever view one takes, British Columbians have been shocked this week to hear the allegations against Reza Moazami (although it has not received nearly as much press as it might have, had the Surrey Six trial not been going on a few floors below in the same courthouse).
Moazami is alleged to have recruited girls, some as young as 13, into forced or coerced prostitution (for ease of typing, I will not be using "alleged" or "allegedly" throughout this article, but the fact remains that the charges against him have not been proven and he is entitled to the presumption of innocence.).
His targets were not accidental. From what we have heard, the girls came from broken homes or had drug addictions or both. They were isolated from support networks like friends and family. Some had already worked in the sex industry. Sometimes, he used girls already working for him to recruit others. Other times, he approached and recruited the girls himself.
He used many luring techniques common to other human traffickers and pimps: promises of money, drugs, luxury, camaraderie, and protection. Once the girls were further isolated and dependent on the trade for their new and, at times, comfortable lifestyle, he used more threatening and abusive techniques to keep them from leaving.
Whether guilty or not, the reality is that there are many, many others doing the same thing to innocent and vulnerable people around the world. Entire lives are destroyed by this. Often, the cause is not prostitution itself, but the circumstances surrounding it. This includes exposure to violence, unsafe working conditions, and imposed poverty when those doing the front-line work do not get their fair cut of the profits.
Much of this comes down to a lack of legal protection. When there is no legal structure in place as a means of dispute resolution (i.e. through private contracts or government regulation of a legal industry), then it is usually the most aggressive or violent parties who resolve the dispute in their favour. The most-common victims of human trafficking and sex slavery, children and women, are at an obvious and unavoidable disadvantage.
Under cross-examination by Moazami's defence counsel, the first victim to testify described how difficult it was to leave Moazami, even when he had been arrested and she was in the exclusive presence of police officers. But, she did not feel that she could trust police officers.
This is just a simple example of why the present policing system does not work. The fact that this particular victim was at risk of being prosecuted and therefore reluctant to come forward to report indisputable malum in se should be a clear indication of the lack of reasonable alternatives that the present legal structure presents to victims.The law, as it standsm criminalizes victims and that is a serious problem. There is no reassurance for victims who come forward that they will not be prosecuted for their presently illegal activities. Human traffickers, johns, pimps, and abusers are able to operate with near impunity.
The fact that escort and "masseuse" postings can still be found on Craigslist with numerous ads displaying pictures of young, foreign women (some promoted as being "new") suggests that others continue to serve the demand Moazami did (as if there was any doubt of that).
Legalizing and regulating the industry will protect vulnerable members of society. Gangsters, crooks, and thieves will not control the industry any more. Victims will be empowered to pursue perpetrators of abuse and exploitation. The sex trade is not going away, no matter what prohibitions are in place. Even those who oppose it must accept this as incontrovertible. Until then, people will unnecessarily suffer and profits will go to the criminal underworld as opposed to those working and government tax coffers for the public benefit.
Many view it as an honourable means of earning a living and empowering people to do whatever they please with their bodies. Others see it as inherently debasing and a means of men asserting power over women, preventing their social, emotional, and physical progression.
Whatever view one takes, British Columbians have been shocked this week to hear the allegations against Reza Moazami (although it has not received nearly as much press as it might have, had the Surrey Six trial not been going on a few floors below in the same courthouse).
Moazami is alleged to have recruited girls, some as young as 13, into forced or coerced prostitution (for ease of typing, I will not be using "alleged" or "allegedly" throughout this article, but the fact remains that the charges against him have not been proven and he is entitled to the presumption of innocence.).
His targets were not accidental. From what we have heard, the girls came from broken homes or had drug addictions or both. They were isolated from support networks like friends and family. Some had already worked in the sex industry. Sometimes, he used girls already working for him to recruit others. Other times, he approached and recruited the girls himself.
He used many luring techniques common to other human traffickers and pimps: promises of money, drugs, luxury, camaraderie, and protection. Once the girls were further isolated and dependent on the trade for their new and, at times, comfortable lifestyle, he used more threatening and abusive techniques to keep them from leaving.
Whether guilty or not, the reality is that there are many, many others doing the same thing to innocent and vulnerable people around the world. Entire lives are destroyed by this. Often, the cause is not prostitution itself, but the circumstances surrounding it. This includes exposure to violence, unsafe working conditions, and imposed poverty when those doing the front-line work do not get their fair cut of the profits.
Much of this comes down to a lack of legal protection. When there is no legal structure in place as a means of dispute resolution (i.e. through private contracts or government regulation of a legal industry), then it is usually the most aggressive or violent parties who resolve the dispute in their favour. The most-common victims of human trafficking and sex slavery, children and women, are at an obvious and unavoidable disadvantage.
Under cross-examination by Moazami's defence counsel, the first victim to testify described how difficult it was to leave Moazami, even when he had been arrested and she was in the exclusive presence of police officers. But, she did not feel that she could trust police officers.
This is just a simple example of why the present policing system does not work. The fact that this particular victim was at risk of being prosecuted and therefore reluctant to come forward to report indisputable malum in se should be a clear indication of the lack of reasonable alternatives that the present legal structure presents to victims.The law, as it standsm criminalizes victims and that is a serious problem. There is no reassurance for victims who come forward that they will not be prosecuted for their presently illegal activities. Human traffickers, johns, pimps, and abusers are able to operate with near impunity.
The fact that escort and "masseuse" postings can still be found on Craigslist with numerous ads displaying pictures of young, foreign women (some promoted as being "new") suggests that others continue to serve the demand Moazami did (as if there was any doubt of that).
Legalizing and regulating the industry will protect vulnerable members of society. Gangsters, crooks, and thieves will not control the industry any more. Victims will be empowered to pursue perpetrators of abuse and exploitation. The sex trade is not going away, no matter what prohibitions are in place. Even those who oppose it must accept this as incontrovertible. Until then, people will unnecessarily suffer and profits will go to the criminal underworld as opposed to those working and government tax coffers for the public benefit.
Saturday 6 July 2013
Protection
It's what both the Bedford and Sex Workers United Against Violence ("SWUAV") court challenges are all about.
Protection from whom? In this context, the answer is those people whose best interests workers are typically expected to have at the forefront of their minds: employers and customers.
Whether it is the high price escort catering to the likes of Eliot Spitzer or the survival sex workers (and others) at the street level, all sex industry workers have the right to be free from oppressive, illegal, and violent treatment at the hands of customers and employers.
While the goal of challenging Canada's prostitution laws is to enhance industry safety, the result could well be government licensing, regulation, and monitoring of a newly legal trade. In other words, the government will take it upon itself to ensure that workers are safe and treated with respect through the same means presently enjoyed by conventional workers. This means that employment standards and injured workers' compensation legislation, Employment Insurance, CPP, and other government-made regulations will protect workers, as opposed to the misguided Criminal Code of Canada provisions presently in place. Workers might no longer operate in clandestine massage parlours, brothels, or the low tracks (nota bene: that link is to a June 2000 article regarding missing and murdered women from Vancouver's downtown eastside. It is a particularly interesting read given what we now know from the Robert Pickton conviction and inquiry).
Of course, it would also mean taxation, but that is a separate topic.
Of course, it would also mean taxation, but that is a separate topic.
Presently, sex industry workers are exposed to a myriad of risks. These include:
- Violent physical and sexual assaults at the hands of clients, employers, and thugs engaged to oppress workers
- Exposure to sexually transmitted infections
- Lack of control over the terms on which they engage in work
- Human trafficking and enslavement
- Lack of job security
- Poor working conditions
These are not unlike the risks workers face in legal trades. Industrial workers risk serious workplace injuries on the job. Police officers and bus drivers are often assaulted and even killed. Foreign workers in legal industries may be subject to human trafficking and enslavement, as recently seen in BC Supreme Court.
Workers in every industry are guaranteed safe and reasonable working hours and conditions through employment standards legislation. What distinguishes legal trades from the sex trade is that workers in the latter industry cannot avail themselves of such protections and rights without fear of criminal prosecution.
Between now and the release of judgment in the Bedford case, this blog will discuss some of the unique risks faced by sex industry workers and some of the ways worker protection might be furthered in the world's oldest profession, if it indeed becomes the newest legal one.
Saturday 22 June 2013
Judgment reserved - and the entire country waits to see if we have a new direction
On June 13, 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada heard arguments from lawyers for some 26 parties representing a broad array of interests from virtually all sectors of Canadian society.
At issue were the three key provisions of the Criminal Code which prevent prositution from operating as any other industry might: the bawdy house provision (working in groups); living off the avails; and the communication provision (you can lawfully engage in sex work, but cannot communicate for the purpose of doing so).
The Court reserved judgment. If it upholds either the trial decision or the Court of Appeal decision, then it might very well issue the most important judgment in a generation since the Morgentaler case effectively legalized access to abortion services.
If so, then Parliament will almost certainly be tasked with redrafting sex industry laws in Canada.
Legalization and regulation will most likely be at the forefront of its agenda. Each provincial legislature will also have unique challenges in deciding how to address what might become a newly legal industry, requiring regulation, licensing, taxation and everything else associated with the provision of legitimate services and labour.
Check back here for ongoing updates and coverage once the Bedford judgment is released...
At issue were the three key provisions of the Criminal Code which prevent prositution from operating as any other industry might: the bawdy house provision (working in groups); living off the avails; and the communication provision (you can lawfully engage in sex work, but cannot communicate for the purpose of doing so).
The Court reserved judgment. If it upholds either the trial decision or the Court of Appeal decision, then it might very well issue the most important judgment in a generation since the Morgentaler case effectively legalized access to abortion services.
If so, then Parliament will almost certainly be tasked with redrafting sex industry laws in Canada.
Legalization and regulation will most likely be at the forefront of its agenda. Each provincial legislature will also have unique challenges in deciding how to address what might become a newly legal industry, requiring regulation, licensing, taxation and everything else associated with the provision of legitimate services and labour.
Check back here for ongoing updates and coverage once the Bedford judgment is released...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)