Landmark Canadian Supreme Court decision
In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously struck down three of Canada’s sex work laws. These laws prohibited brothels, living on the avails of prostitution and communicating in public with clients. Parliament now has up to one year to come up with new legislation.
In Canada, it is not a crime to sell sex for money. Laws prohibiting behaviour related to sex work are intended to prevent public nuisance. The court ruled that these laws are over-broad, and any social benefit they may provide is disproportionate to the risk that they pose to sex workers’ health and safety.
This decision is the result of a challenge to the laws posed by three plaintiffs with experience in the sex trade. Terri-Jean Bedford, Amy Lebovitch, and Valerie Scott claim that sex work is like any other profession and should be treated as such. They argued that these laws violate their right to life, liberty and security of person, as well as their right to freedom of expression under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
These laws were intended to punish and deter Johns, pimps, recruiters, and anyone attempting to harm or take advantage of sex workers. However, in practice, they also punish sex workers and those that attempt to make their work safer. They prevent sex workers from working indoors, talking to potential clients ahead of time to screen for abuse, and hiring drivers, receptionists, or bodyguards.
Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin stated that the decision was not about whether or not sex work should be legal, but rather whether the existing laws about how it may be practiced are constitutional. When discussing the need to protect sex workers, she also referenced the case of convicted serial killer Robert Pickton, as many of his victims were sex workers in British Columbia.
Many are hailing this decision as a successful step towards ensuring the safety of sex workers, however, others have concerns that it may leave individuals more vulnerable to trafficking and coercion into the sex trade. Critics have pointed to existing problems in other countries that have legalized sex work. The court recognized that, although some individuals chose this line of work, there are others with little choice but to turn to prostitution as a result of circumstances such as financial desperation, addiction issues, and pressure.
Kim Pate, the executive director of the Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies and a member of the Women’s Coalition for the Abolition of Prostitution, is disappointed in the court’s decision. “It’s a sad day that we’ve now confirmed that it’s OK to buy and sell women and girls in this country,” said Pate. “I think generations to come – our daughters, their granddaughters and on – will look back and say, ‘what were they thinking?’” Michelle Rempel, Minister of State for Western Economic Diversification, also does not support the decision, as she tweeted: “can’t help but feel our judiciary struck a blow to women’s safety and equality this morning. We aren’t a commodity to be bought or sold.”
Although the plaintiffs in this case celebrated the court’s decision, they say that it will have little impact on sex work in practice, as their lawyer, Alan Young, noted that they are some of the most under-enforced laws in the Canadian Criminal Code.
It remains to be seen what changes Parliament will make to Canada’s sex work laws and how this will impact workers and vulnerable individuals. Any new legislation that is formed has the double burden of protecting both those that enter the trade by choice and those that are being exploited. Supporters aim for new legislation that will provide this protection, as well as privacy and gender equality.