TORONTO, Ontario, June 13, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Ontario Appeals Court began hearings today on a landmark case that could see prostitution decriminalized in the province.
At stake is whether certain laws surrounding prostitution endanger prostitutes and whether the laws violate their liberty and security under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Last September, Ontario Superior Court judge, Justice Susan Himel, struck down three major laws affecting prostitutes after three Toronto prostitutes challenged the law.
Justice Himel ruled that prostitutes should be allowed to freely communicate with customers on the street, conduct their business in their homes or brothels, and hire accountants, drivers and bodyguards, without fear of criminal prosecution.
The federal and Ontario governments appealed the case, which is before a five-judge Appeal Court panel this week. Hearings will continue until June 16.
“Prostitution is a problem that harms individuals and communities,” Justice Minister Rob Nicholson told the House of Commons in September when the appeal was announced.
Lawyer Michael Morris, representing the federal government, argued in the initial hearings today that it is not the laws, but rather engaging in prostitution itself, that poses certain dangers and harms to individuals.
The judges, however, questioned Morris closely. “I find it hard to understand why it’s not self-evident that these provisions harm the ability to carry out prostitution safely,” said Justice David Doherty, according to The Canadian Press.
Seven interveners representing 19 groups will bring forward perspectives on the case during the upcoming hearings.
One group, representing two separate prostitute organizations, has argued in court files that the laws “deprive individuals” of “protected interest in making fundamental personal decisions respecting their bodily integrity and sexuality.” They add that “sex work can be a form of creative expression” which the laws impede.
“Even assuming that prostitution is inherently harmful, as the (governments) allege, this does not change the fact that the risks of physical violence against persons engaged in prostitution are increased by the impugned provisions,” added the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
However, according to a Justice Department factum issued by the federal government in November, Himel’s ruling would cause “irreparable harms to the public interest,” and allowing prostitutes to operate legally in Ontario “will likely encourage the movement of prostitutes to Ontario from other jurisdictions.”
REAL Women of Canada agreed. In coalition with the Christian Legal Fellowship and the Catholic Civil Rights League, REAL Women will present arguments to the court on June 16.
“We believe that Justice Himmel based her decision on partial evidence, not the complete evidence that was presented before the courts,” Diane Watts of REAL Women told LifeSiteNews. “She assumed that prostitutes are safer working indoors rather than outdoors. That’s simply not true. Many prostitutes claim it’s even more dangerous to work indoors.”
The group will argue that the prostitution laws uphold societal standards of morality and values and, further, that the laws protect prostitutes and communities from harm and uphold human dignity.
“We’re intervening because we believe the laws represent the values of Canadians in terms of trying to prevent prostitution which we believe is harmful to women,” she added.
“Prostitution itself is harmful. We believe that it should be made illegal itself, there should be laws against it [not only] around the activity related to prostitution,” said Watts. “What happens when it’s decriminalized and the laws are liberalized is that there’s an increased trafficking of women and usually vulnerable women from Third World countries are trafficked into prostitution.”
In fact, reports from countries that have legalized prostitution, including Germany, the Netherlands and New Zealand, some states in the U.S., and Australia, have consistently indicated that the legalization of prostitution has not achieved the expected results, such as protection of women.
In 2005, the mayor of Amsterdam admitted that the Dutch experiment to curb abuse by legalizing prostitution in 2000 had failed miserably.
The same year, Germany reported it was reconsidering its position on legalized prostitution, made legal there in 2003, after reports that legalization had not really had any benefit for prostitutes, nor had it improved the situation for Germany at large.
Sweden, a country that legalized prostitution over 30 years ago, recriminalized it in 1998, to focus legislation on criminalizing the buying of sex rather than the selling of sex. This has resulted in prostitution being nearly eradicated.
In Canada, Ontario is the first province to see challenges to laws curbing prostitution and demands for complete decriminalization. Another challenge to the law was allowed in British Columbia last fall.
While the current Appeals Court decision would only affect Ontario laws, other provinces may follow the Ontario decision. Regardless of the decision, however, the case is expected to be taken to the Supreme Court of Canada.