In a case brought by three sex
workers, the Supreme Court of Canada, in December 2013, struck downthree
provisions of the Canadian prostitution law, because they violated sex workers'
human and "constitutional right to security of the person" by
imposing "dangerous conditions on prostitution". In June 2014, the
Canadian government introduced a new prostitution
law, Bill C-36 "Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act",
which entered into force on December 5.
While the
Supreme Court had created the space for a radical change in the approach to sex
work by reaffirming that human and constitutional rights apply to sex workers
too, democratic procedures in Canada seem to have failed sex workers. The
Canadian Pivot Legal Society argues that
Bill C-36 has been "consistently misrepresented" and that it
"will result in sweeping criminalisation of the sex industry",
including sex workers themselves. Others have called it a "hate law", because the safety and
security of sex workers was, in fact, not the priority for some who voted for
the Bill C-36. One of the Senators, Donald Plett,clearly
stated his priority in this regard: "We don't want to make life safe for
prostitutes; we want to do away with prostitution."
Canada is not
the only state that has passed questionable legislation on sex work.
"[S]tates frequently deny sex workers the same human and legislative
rights and protections afforded to other workers and citizens," says sex work researcher Jay Levy.
The question
is: How do human rights apply to sex workers and what laws and policies should
states make? How should sex work laws look like, if human rights are to be
respected to the fullest extent? The answer to these questions is controversial
- both philosophically and politically. In the past year, numerous countries
have put sex work policies on their political agenda - for different reasons
and with different goals and outcomes.
Sex workers' rights
There are
numerous examples worldwide, where the courts have upheld sex workers' human
rights and questioned existing prostitution laws or filled legal grey areas. In
New Zealand, where sex work is decriminalised, a sex worker won a case for sexual harassment against a brothel owner.
In New York, 1,900 strip club
dancers won a labour rights case against
their employer, who will have to pay them at least $10m in compensation.
Recently an Austrian
court has
ruled that the cost of forced health checks imposed on sex workers had to be
reimbursed.
Both in
Germany and in Austria, court rulings abolished to notion of prostitution as
being "immoral", thus opening up the space for legal reform and the
recognition of sex work as work. The European Court of Justice has repeatedly ruled that
"prostitution" is an "economic activity" and that within
the European Union member states cannot restrict "freedom of
movement", not even for sex workers.
While court rulings are useful
and necessary in reminding us that sex workers have rights too, relying solely
on courts to read human rights into existing legislation cannot be the sole
answer to injustices that sex workers face. Democracies need to step in to make
laws that actually improve sex workers' lives - a goal that has proven
difficult to reach.
Historically
marginalised and stigmatised, sex workers have a hard time in pushing for a
reform of prostitution laws. Most politicians, especially if male and
heterosexual, do not wish to be associated with sex work.
Prejudices
and lack of knowledge about the topic as well as the unwillingness to engage
with sex workers themselves have proven to be hard obstacles to surmount.
Often, sex workers are heard in consultation processes, but their views and
political claims aren't always taken seriously.
Why sex workers should be heard in
democracies
By contrast,
anti-prostitution activists calling for a world without prostitution have been
far more successful in their lobbying efforts against sex work. They also
explicitly distance themselves from self-identified sex workers, who they often
accuse of being nothing but criminals. Using the stigma of sex work,
anti-prostitution activists have managed to ally themselves with mostly
sexually and socially conservative groups in their call for the suppression of
sex work.
By using
slogans like "end
demand" or "abolish prostitution now", they
have been calling for the so-called "Swedish Model", in which the act
of selling sex is formally decriminalised, while clients are charged with a
monetary fine. By increasing the cost of a sexual transaction, the law should
work as a deterrent. A variation of the law has been implemented in other small
countries, such as Norway, Iceland, and, most recently, Northern Ireland.
Supporters of this approach claim that only this particular law will reduce
human trafficking as well as prostitution.
However, the Swedish approach
comes with many flaws and open questions. Because its goal is a society withoutsex workers, the law
does not intend to provide any guidance on the laws we need in a society with sex workers. Norway is considering
repealing the law, as theevaluation
of the law has
not been able to prove its success. While the EUROSTAT report on human traffickingdoes
not point to a decrease in human trafficking in Sweden, sex workers' working
conditions have worsened. In fact, the "Swedish Approach"
criminalises any attempt to create safe working environments for sex workers,
as anyone renting indoor space to sex workers can be charged with
"pimping".
Ironically,
this provision has not reduced pimping, but induced many landlords to put sex
workers on the streets in order to avoid a fine for "pimping", as the
so-called "Operation homeless" has
shown in Norway. Furthermore, Sweden does not allow immigration for the
purposes of prostitution and has been deporting migrant sex workers, who are
still seen a problem of public order and security.
It wasn't until 2011 that aSwedish Court ruled
that deporting citizens of the European Union selling sex in Sweden was
illegal. Last but not least, even Sweden and Norway tax income from sex work,
while refusing to recognise it as labour.
As empirical studies on
the implementation of the "Swedish approach" show, its weaknesses in
guaranteeing sex workers' human rights, policy-makers also have become
sceptical. A Special Committee of French Senate excluded the
provision criminalising clients from the proposed new prostitution law in
summer 2014 - based on the recommendations of the National
Consultative Commission on Human Rights. So far, it
is unclear whether France will go forward with the law at all. Britain has also
excluded the provision criminalising the purchase of sex from its "Modern
Slavery Bill", which has itself been criticised by NGOs for not doing
justice to victims of human trafficking. Germany is also working to reform its
prostitution law.
The Global
Network of Sex Work Projects advocates
"decriminalisation" of
sex work. So far, only New Zealand has chosen "decriminalisation" as
sex work policy, but maybe India will be next. India's chair of the National
Commission of Women, Lalitha Kumaramangalam, recently stated that
the "Immoral
Traffic Prevention Act" should
be revised in order to create "conditions conductive for sex workers to
live with dignity".
In fact, the
existing law casts sex workers
simultaneously as dangerous to society and as victims to be forcefully
protected from their own choices. Either way, they are not recognised as equal
citizens, workers, and members of a social and political community with human
rights. By decriminalising sex work, India would set an example for other
countries, too. As a law practitioner recently pointed out that "the
position of defining prostitution itself as inherently exploitative and a form
of violence against women does not allow people in prostitution to access their
right to earn a livelihood through sex work."
It is time
for democracies to include sex workers in
policy-making processes and take them seriously - not just because democratic
values mandate it, but because sex workers are the experts on the matter.
News Credit: Aljazeera
No comments:
Post a Comment