Change with the Times

1. Change with the Times Prostitution Laws in Canada

2. Background • Prostitution: the exchange of money in return for performance of a sexual act, is not illegal in Canada • Activities associated with it however are illegal • 1972- the Criminal Code stated any woman on the streets at night with no valid excuse was an undesirable as were owners of bawdy houses • After 1972 the law was changed to “soliciting for the purpose of prostitution” and “operation of a common bawdy house” as crimes

3. Background • 1988 the government amended the criminal Code so that communicating in a public place for the purpose of prostitution a crime (which includes cars by the way) • 2009 three sex workers led by Terri Jean Bedford applied to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to have certain laws struck down as being unconstitutional • Section 210- Operation of a Bawdy-House- fixed indoor location of which sole purpose is prostitution (includes hotels) • Section 212 (1) (j)- Living on the Avails- prohibits living off of the profits of prostitution or another’s prostitution • Section 213 (1) (c)- Communicating in a Public Place- prohibits communicating in any manner with any person for the purposes of engaging in prostitution • Realistically the laws themselves were made to remove the ‘nuisance’ of this behavior from public scrutiny- which is a good intention, however…

4. Background • The Bedford case argued that the laws violated their right to security of the person (section 7 of the Charter) while in the pratcice of a legal activity • Justice Susan Himel of the O.S.C. of Justice- practicing prostitution indoors and having the ability to hire managers, drivers and security would reduce or eliminate the dangers associated with prostitution • Himel also stated that section 213 forced prostitutes to make hasty decisions in unsafe locations without properly screening customers, increasing the risk of harm (even though they are acting in a legal occupation) • Himel struck down all three laws- the government wasn’t happy

5. Background • Ontario Court of Appeal heard the appeal from the Attorney General of Canada • The Court of Appeal agreed with the lower court- the laws were too broad • By forcing prostitutes on to the streets and creating disruptions, the laws were responsible for making people's lives unsafe • The government was not happy again

6. Background • Dec. 20 2013- SCC struck down all three sections of the Criminal Code • “Parliament has the power to regulate against nuisances, but not at the cost of the health, safety and lives of prostitutes”- Ch. J. McLachlin • The laws made anyone associated with prostitution criminals and infringed on their liberty • Since prostitution was not illegal, the laws themselves increased the risks of people who were involved in a legal activity- the government cant pass laws that make people unsafe • The Canadian Parliament has one year in which to consider its options in the face of the SCC’s ruling

7. So What Now? • This comes down to a balancing act- the rights of individuals and the protection of public safety • There are essentially 4 options- • Decriminalization- do nothing further- have no laws about it • Legalization- regulate it in some way • Nordic Approach (Sweden and Norway)- criminalize the purchase of sex only • Prohibition- criminalize both the sale and purchase of it- make prostitution actually illegal then

8. Activity • See handout: “A summary of prostitution regulations…” • Read over the selected countries and their current status regarding their laws and prostitution. • Continue to assignment.