March 4, 2014

The issue of the legality of prostitution is a cause of division within our society. So, addressing this concept is a huge challenge. In December 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada, after looking into the subject, declared that three articles of the legislation on prostitution exposed the women to dangers for their health and safety by making them vulnerable to violence. By the same fact, the highest court of the country declared that these articles were inconsistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and therefore gave the Canadian legislator one year to amend the law accordingly.

In this decision, the chief justice stated, in talking about these articles in the law “[That they] not only create a framework for the practice of prostitution. [They] go a critical step further by imposing dangerous conditions on prostitution: they prevent people engaged in a risky, but legal, activity from taking steps to protect themselves from the risks” [ 1 ]. It thus would seem that the prostitutes’ right to life is compromised, without sufficient justification. As healthcare professionals, we find this is very disturbing.

Canada has never criminalized prostitution. Despite this, keeping a bawdy-house, communicating in public for the purposes of prostitution, pimping or being in a bawdy-house is considered illegal [ 2 ]. This paradox is more and more of a problem. In fact, despite this law, Montréal is considered as one of the hubs for sexual tourism [ 3 ] and prostitution remains an activity largely controlled by organized crime. In Québec, “in 20% of the investigations by the Montréal police in the commercial child sexual abuse module, pimping is linked to a street gang. This situation in no way improves the lot of women”. [ 4 ]

A broad spectrum of views exist that divide feminists. One is that abolitionism covers “the abolition of all forms of regulation governing prostitution”  [ 5 ]. And, abolitionism considers “prostitutes as victims of a system that exploits them, [and therefore] rejects all forms of penalties for them” [ 6 ]. Some abolitionist groups hope for prostitution to completely disappear. To achieve this, “neo-abolitionism proposes penalizing the clients of prostitutes, considering that the clients are responsible for the consequences of prostitution” [ 7 ]. However, there are groups that defend “sex-trade workers” and demand that anything related directly or indirectly to prostitution should be decriminalized. We need to analyze the consequences and repercussions of these two views in order to make good decisions. Furthermore, why not propose a model that includes the common points from the different approaches and try to work together for the good of women?

In this respect, the Canadian Members of Parliament will have fundamental questions to ask themselves over the coming months. As feminists and healthcare professionals, we know that the determinants of health can help women get themselves out of some difficult situations. Think of, for example, the elimination of poverty that can be done by insuring that everyone has a decent income.

The Status of Women Committee asks you to continue this reflection with the perspective of establishing egalitarian relationships between men and women.

 

Notes

1 – http://scc-csc.lexum.com/decisia-scc-csc/scc-csc/scc-csc/fr/item/13389/index.do#_Toc375287361

2 – http://www.aidslaw.ca/publications/interfaces/downloadFile.php?ref=198

3 – http://www.cathii.org/

4 – http://www.lapresse.ca/dossiers/la-prostitution-a-montreal/200810/02/01-25618-elles-sont-marquees-au-fer-battues-brulees.php

5 – http://www.implications-philosophiques.org/ethique-et-politique/philosophie-politique/le-debat-sur-la-prostitution/

6 – Idem

7 – Idem