Ontario Court Deems Prostitution Laws Unconstitutional

[darkblack 120]

From CBC News:

 

An Ontario court has thrown out key provisions of Canada's anti-prostitution laws in response to a constitutional challenge brought by a Toronto dominatrix and two prostitutes in 2009.

Ontario's Superior Court of Justice ruled Tuesday the Criminal Code provisions relating to prostitution contribute to the danger faced by sex-trade workers.

Dominatrix Terri-Jean Bedford and Valerie Scott and Amy Lebovitch had argued that prohibitions on keeping a common bawdy house, communicating for the purposes of prostitution and living on the avails of the trade force them from the safety of their homes to face violence on the streets.

The women asked the court to declare legal restrictions on their activities a violation of charter rights of security of the person and freedom of expression.

The women and their lawyer, Alan Young, were expected to hold a news conference later Tuesday afternoon.

The government had argued that striking down the provisions without enacting something else in their place would "pose a danger to the public."

Some conservative groups such as Real Women of Canada, who had intervener status in the case, argued that decriminalizing prostitution may make Canada a haven for human trafficking and that prostitution is harmful to the women involved in it.

However, in her ruling Tuesday, Justice Susan Himel said it now falls to Parliament to "fashion corrective action."

"It is my view that in the meantime these unconstitutional provisions should be of no force and effect, particularly given the seriousness of the charter violations," Himel wrote.

While prostitution is technically legal, virtually every activity associated with it is not. The Criminal Code of Canada prohibits communication for the purpose of prostitution. It also prohibits keeping a common bawdy house for the purpose of prostitution.

Those laws enacted in 1985 were an attempt to deal with the public nuisance created by street walkers. They failed to recognize the alternative ? allowing women to work more safely indoors ? was prohibited, Young had said previously.

Young called it "bizarre" that the ban on bawdy houses is an indictable offence that carries stiffer sanctions, including jail time and potential forfeiture of a woman's home, when the ban on communication for prostitution purposes is usually a summary offence that at most leads to fines.

The provisions prevent sex workers from properly screening clients, hiring security or working in the comfort and safety of their own homes or brothels, he had said.

Young cited statistics behind the "shocking and horrific" stories of women who work the streets, along with research that was not available when the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the communication ban in 1990.

 

 

 

It's about time!

[swetedave 131]

Let's hope that this the next step to complete legalization !!!

[Touch 57501]

This a most promising and welcome developement indeed!!! Especially that the provisions that have been struck down will be suspended while the inevitable appeals to this ruling work their way through the system.

 

Touch

 

Additional Comments:

This a most promising and welcome developement indeed!!! Especially that the provisions that have been struck down will be suspended while the inevitable appeals to this ruling work their way through the system.

 

Touch

[E.D. man 691]

what was the outcome in simpleton terms. To me it sounds like that bawdy houses, homes and brothels were deemed illegal. And that a it was actually bad for the sex workers.

thats what I understood. I hope i'm wrong

[teched 418]

what was the outcome in simpleton terms. To me it sounds like that bawdy houses, homes and brothels were deemed illegal. And that a it was actually bad for the sex workers.

thats what I understood. I hope i'm wrong

 

I think you are wrong. As I understand it, it is no longer illegal to run a brothal or to live off the avails of prostitution.

 

At least until the feds come up with a new law. I expect that could take awhile, but I guess that is up to Harper.

 

Let's hope the feds leave it alone and allow Sex Workers work in a safer environment.

[Cleo Catra 178382]

what was the outcome in simpleton terms. To me it sounds like that bawdy houses, homes and brothels were deemed illegal. And that a it was actually bad for the sex workers.

thats what I understood. I hope i'm wrong

 

I'm SO HAPPY to say you are wrong! those things were illegal, which made pretty much everything we do illegal. But not they've said the laws that make those illegal are themselves WRONG - YAY!!!

 

I'm personally not 100% sure what the immediate outcome is - are these laws immediately voided? I read something about a 30-day stay?

[Guest W***ledi*Time]

... I read something about a 30-day stay?

 

Yes the law (or only the bawdy house portion of it? -- there are conflicting accounts in the media -- see below) is enforcable in Ontario for the next 30 days. Parliament can also apply for an extension of this time period. I would assume that the stay will likely remain in effect, and continue, until the Federal Governement launches a formal appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada -- at which time they will request that the stay remain in effect during the appeal period as well.

 

According to the Toronto Star:

 

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/867332--canada-s-prostitution-laws-unconstitutional-court-rules

Himel said that while she has concluded the laws amount to a serious violation of the Charter, she has imposed a 30-day "stay" on her decision to give lawyers for the federal and provincial governments, as well as the women at the centre of the case, an opportunity to make fuller submissions on whether her decision to invalidate the laws should be placed on hold for an even longer period of time.

However, the Globe and Mail reports:

 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/ontario/ontario-superior-court-judge-strikes-down-prostitution-law/article1730433/

... the lawyer behind the challenge, Alan Young ... said that the judge refused to suspend the effect of her decision while the government moves to fill the legislative gap.

 

"It takes effect right now," he told reporters at Toronto's downtown courthouse ....

 

However, Judge Himel gave the Crown a 30-day window

in which to make arguments against legalizing bawdy houses

on account of a concern that "unlicenced brothels may be operated in a way that may not be in the public interest."

The judgement actually reads:

"[539] I am mindful of the fact that legislating in response to prostitution raises difficult, contentious, and serious policy issues and that it is for Parliament to fashion corrective legislation. This decision does not preclude such a response from Parliament. It is my view that in the meantime, these unconstitutional provisions should be of no force and effect, particularly given the seriousness of the

Charter

violations. However, I also recognize that a consequence of this decision my be that unlicensed brothels may be operated and in a way that may not be in the public interest. It is legitimate for government to study, consult and determine how to best address this issue. In light of this, I have determined that a stay of my decision for up to 30 days should be granted to enable the parties to make fuller submissions to me on this question or to seek an order for a stay of my judgment."

[Capital Hunter 18263]

Now we need a progressive government which would take the right course of action and bring up Canada to the same standard as other progressive countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Holland, Germany,..... Somehow I don't feel the current government is up to the task lol. Lets vote for one in the upcoming election lol.

[VedaSloan 119179]

Who wants to do a happy dance with me? We can jump around in circles and hug.

 

EEEEEEEEEEEE<...-- that is the sound of my extreme joy.

[Chanel Reign 28097]

Doing the shake yer booty happy dance with Erin errrr Berlin!

:butt:

 

And I go sqweeeeeee

[BiffC 100]

Who wants to do a happy dance with me? We can jump around in circles and hug.

 

EEEEEEEEEEEE<...-- that is the sound of my extreme joy.

 

 

I'm there. Congrats to every one who fought for this. We might be a modern society after all.

 

For the official real story go to the people who started it all and get their take on it at:

 

http://www.spoc.ca/

[BootyLoving 2441]

Crap - I don't like where this is heading. I can see them taxing this soon enough!!!

[Guest s******ecan****]

- Next 30 days the current laws will stay in effect

- after that the Feds will get an extension on those laws while they appeal the decision

- during that process and prior to the next election, the PC's will introduce "human trafficking" legislation that will make prostitution illegal. They will use this as part of their "wedge issue" strategy (along with long gun etc).

 

Where it all ends up who knows..

[FunJay 139]

Crap - I don't like where this is heading. I can see them taxing this soon enough!!!

 

BootyLovin...not sure about the tone of your post...but i really hope you are kidding.... sometimes hard to tell the tone of a post online. but really, i find it hard to beleive you don't like where this is heading. this has been a very long, arduous struggle... and it is nowhere near over.

 

if you somehow think that taxation (whatever sort you are referring to) is worse than the current situation, then you need to give your head a shake.

 

just my opinion.

[Guest C*****tte]

I declare my income. I pay taxes. I am so tired of people bringing up the tax issue. I have seen it over and over again in threads and comments all over the place today and whenever decriminalization comes up in the news. It is the least of my worries as an escort. Safety is at the top of it.

 

When it comes to tax evasion escorts must be low on the list. I have paid cash for certain services and I was told by those very providers that they do not declare that income (hairstylists, plumbers, construction contractors, etc...) Should we make their work criminal?

 

Enough with the tax issue.

 

/vent

[E.D. man 691]

he's just affraid he's going to have to pay the 15% hst so 300 becomes 345. but i'm okay with that if the ladies get a safer working enviroment.

[Guest Ou**or**n]

Yes, the HST is an interesting issue. If the government decides to 'regulate' the business then they'll be after revenue from both sides. They'll push licensed escorts to declare some level of income in the same manner as they do waitresses. They'll also go after escorts to collect HST like any other business.

 

While some escorts do declare the income these tend to be the ladies that see themselves escorting on an on-going basis. They recognize that they need a public income to establish and maintain a credit rating to be able to do things like buy a house or lease a car.

 

However the vast majority of ladies in this business are not members of this board and view their time in the business to be only temporary. Thus they do not want to get involved in the issues around declaring the income.

 

Also, lets face it, it's a cash business in most circumstances for reasons of discretion. The temptation in any business that is mostly cash to not declare income is very high. The HST in Ontario is driving many, many personal services underground. Hire a contractor to do 2k in work in your house. The temptation on all sides to make it a cash deal is enormous. Your HST alone would be over $250.

 

I see this decision will lead either one of two ways. One will be an attempt to criminalize the act of buying sex like Sweden. Expect a big push from the conservative government to do just this. The other way will be 'regulating' parts of the business in order to get higher levels of taxation revenues from both the provider and client.

 

This will again prove futile and most of the business will still continue underground. Remember that in the parts of Australia where prostitution is legal and regulated that over 80% of it is still underground.

 

In a perfect world, the government would leave it as legal but unregulated. However I doubt we live in that world.

[Capital Hunter 18263]

- - during that process and prior to the next election, the PC's will introduce "human trafficking" legislation that will make prostitution illegal. They will use this as part of their "wedge issue" strategy (along with long gun etc).

 

While we are debating the possibility of decriminalization of prostitution and its results, the reality may be totally different. Do not put your guards down. Celeberate and have fun but what Scott said is the exact scenario that I am very concerned about and is real. Hopefully they will be voted out before that happens.

[PistolPete 61421]

A quick copy and paste from CTV news web site from last night...

 

 

 

"The government argued removing the prohibitions without replacing them with new laws would "pose a danger to the public."

The decision is subjected to a 30-day stay and the federal government can seek an extension of that period.

The federal government has previously argued that prostitution is inherently dangerous, no matter where it is carried out.

It has also argued that striking down the laws would make Canada a sex tourism destination.

Rona Ambrose, the minister of state for the status of women, told reporters Tuesday the government is "concerned with the decision and we are seriously considering appealing it at this time."

 

 

Deputy NDP Leader Libby Davies said Tuesday's ruling "breaks down the myth that these laws were actually protecting sex workers and local communities, because not only were they not protecting sex workers, they were actually harmful."

Davies said she has often heard from her constituents in Vancouver's downtown eastside who say the provisions prevented them from reporting violence or exploitation.

"We need to distinguish between what is consenting between two adults and what is exploitative, coercive and violent and focus the law-enforcement on those aspects," Davies said.'

With files from The Canadian Press

 

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20100928/ontario-anti-prostitution-laws-struck-down-100928/

[BootyLoving 2441]

All my silliness aside, now that the attention is on the topic, this move is what I feel, heading towards a much more sensible direction. So many laws are contradiction of other laws, that trying to follow the legal system becomes an exercise in hipocrocy.

 

I'm surprised the Ontario court has this much sensibility to strike it down. Maybe we are becoming a more intelligent society. With me being the exception of course.

[Guest C*****tte]

I have been a sex work activist for nearly 10 years and have seen how the criminalization affects the most disadvantaged in our society. As an 'elite' worker I cannot stand by and accept my privilege at their expense. Law reform is going put some burdens on me but I will adjust.

 

I was part of a law reform project on prostitution and many different models were discussed. Sex workers and some community groups were involved in this discussion and it was difficult to have a consensus on all the issues. I know this is going to be a long road and the end result will not suit everyone. Yes, the tax issue will make some work under the table as in other industries. This cannot be a reason for not working towards law reform.

 

I truly hope that not only religious women's groups will have their say. Sex workers themselves need to be at the center of the development.

[BootyLoving 2441]

I'm not sure what kind of posturing is in motion with the Feds stepping in on this. But hopefully, it will pan out to be just a way of entering to defining the terms for the trade.

 

A new set of regulation will be crafted. Best to become involved in defining that regulation early on.

[ottanon 2930]

You can bet that when this goes through finally (probably in a few years after all the appeals) The City of Ottawa will come up with a huge liscence fee to discourage it and drive it right underground again.

[Capital Hunter 18263]

As much as I would like to be optimistic and joyful and celeberate, I have to be realistic too. It is a long bumpy road to the end. We have a conservative government whose one of its MPs has recently recommended a Swedish style prostitution law in Canada which buying sex could be harshly punishable up to six months in jail, even the first time. The conservatives currently are in government have clearly shown their true color in opossing decriminalization or even relaxation of current prostitution laws in Canada and if they get their chance (a majority) they may and will go even further and criminalize all forms of buying sex including even voluntary gift for sex between consenting adults and outcall escorts too!!!!..

 

Nothing has changed since yesterday and nothing be will changed unless the brave and courageous activists continue their struggle for the rights of sex workers to be able to work in a safe regulated environment. Celeberate if you would but don't put your guards down as yet lol.

[thompo69 198]

I'm not sure what kind of posturing is in motion with the Feds stepping in on this. But hopefully, it will pan out to be just a way of entering to defining the terms for the trade.

 

A new set of regulation will be crafted. Best to become involved in defining that regulation early on.

 

I'm not sure why you think the feds stepping in on this is posturing, who else should be commenting on this?