Between having a dynamically assigned IP and my cell phone, I've voted four times now.
Most recent articles on prostitution related laws, opinions, comments
- Thread starter gustave55
- Start date
Between having a dynamically assigned IP and my cell phone, I've voted four times now.
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/12/08/john-ivison-provinces-could-kill-new-prostitution-law-by-refusing-to-enforce-it
Provinces unhappy with new prostitution law could kill it by refusing to prosecute cases
By John Ivison, National Post December 8, 2014 – 8:15 pm ET
Could Ottawa’s new law on prostitution be dead on arrival? It is highly possible that opposition from provincial governments could see its provisions to prosecute johns and pimps, rather than sellers of sex, wither from lack of use.
The federal government has constitutional authority for creating criminal law, while the provinces implement and administer those laws, Alan Young, an associate professor at Osgoode Hall Law School, pointed out. “The provinces can decide to nullify a new enactment simply by refusing to prosecute cases brought under this law,” he said.
As the National Post revealed on Saturday, the day the new law came into force, there are serious misgivings inside Kathleen Wynne’s Ontario government about whether it enhances the safety of sex workers, the key ingredient to make any prostitution legislation constitutional in the eyes of the Supreme Court of Canada.
On Sunday, Ms. Wynne issued a statement saying she has asked her Attorney-General, Madeleine Meilleur, to investigate whether the new law is constitutionally valid. “I am left with grave concern that the so-called Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act will protect neither ‘exploited persons’ nor ‘communities’,” she said.
The Supreme Court struck down the old prostitution law last year, saying it violated the Charter protection to life, liberty and security of person.
Opponents of the new law argue that, by targeting buyers of sexual services, prostitutes will be driven outdoors and into remote locations, ensuring they are still at risk.
Two hundred legal experts from across Canada wrote to the Justice Minister, Peter MacKay, last summer, claiming the new law is as “likely to offend the Charter” as its predecessor.
If Ms. Meilleur agrees, Premier Wynne has asked her to provide the province with options.
One obvious course of action is to launch a legal challenge in the Ontario Court of Appeal. Even by fast-tracking a reference, this is a process that could take years before it is finally tested in the Supreme Court.
But it is the second option — simply not prosecuting prostitution cases — that could kill the new law, and offer a precedent for other provinces that find it troubling.
This is precisely what happened last February, when New Brunswick, Ontario and British Columbia moved away from prosecuting prostitution cases, after the Supreme Court declared the existing law was “overbroad.”
At the time, Mr. MacKay said not enforcing the existing prostitution law was “not an option.”
“Canadians expect criminal laws in this country to be properly enforced, so long as they remain in force,” he said. “The Supreme Court of Canada made very clear in its decision that the current laws with respect to prostitution were to remain in force for 12 months.”
However, on the ground, prostitution-related prosecutions across many provinces all but dried up.
‘The federal government has advanced a very aggressive policy on crime that may well not fit the priorities and policies of those responsible for enforcing the law’
The laying of criminal charges is a function of the police, independent of the Attorney-General, but it is the province’s decision whether or not to prosecute.
A spokeswoman for Mr. MacKay revealed the impotence of the feds, if any of the provinces are less enthusiastic about the new law than Ottawa. “We would hope that those who break the law face the full force of the law, in order to protect vulnerable Canadians,” she said.
Ms. Wynne made clear in her statement that the new law holds sway – for now. “We must enforce duly enacted legislation but I believe we must also take steps to satisfy ourselves that, in doing so, we are upholding the constitution and the Charter,” she said.
That strongly suggests to me the law will not be enforced, if it is deemed by Ontario’s Attorney-General to be unconstitutional.
“The provinces and federal government share responsibility for our criminal justice system but the federal government has advanced a very aggressive policy on crime that may well not fit the priorities and policies of those responsible for enforcing the law,” he said.
Relations between the Harper and Wynne governments are currently colder than a well-digger’s derrière. Some of this is personality-driven, but the prostitution law is a reminder that there are deep-seated policy differences between the two governments.
In this instance, the province has a torpedo that could sink Ottawa’s flagship criminal justice policy — and it seems it’s not afraid to use it.
Provinces unhappy with new prostitution law could kill it by refusing to prosecute cases
By John Ivison, National Post December 8, 2014 – 8:15 pm ET
Could Ottawa’s new law on prostitution be dead on arrival? It is highly possible that opposition from provincial governments could see its provisions to prosecute johns and pimps, rather than sellers of sex, wither from lack of use.
The federal government has constitutional authority for creating criminal law, while the provinces implement and administer those laws, Alan Young, an associate professor at Osgoode Hall Law School, pointed out. “The provinces can decide to nullify a new enactment simply by refusing to prosecute cases brought under this law,” he said.
As the National Post revealed on Saturday, the day the new law came into force, there are serious misgivings inside Kathleen Wynne’s Ontario government about whether it enhances the safety of sex workers, the key ingredient to make any prostitution legislation constitutional in the eyes of the Supreme Court of Canada.
On Sunday, Ms. Wynne issued a statement saying she has asked her Attorney-General, Madeleine Meilleur, to investigate whether the new law is constitutionally valid. “I am left with grave concern that the so-called Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act will protect neither ‘exploited persons’ nor ‘communities’,” she said.
The Supreme Court struck down the old prostitution law last year, saying it violated the Charter protection to life, liberty and security of person.
Opponents of the new law argue that, by targeting buyers of sexual services, prostitutes will be driven outdoors and into remote locations, ensuring they are still at risk.
Two hundred legal experts from across Canada wrote to the Justice Minister, Peter MacKay, last summer, claiming the new law is as “likely to offend the Charter” as its predecessor.
If Ms. Meilleur agrees, Premier Wynne has asked her to provide the province with options.
One obvious course of action is to launch a legal challenge in the Ontario Court of Appeal. Even by fast-tracking a reference, this is a process that could take years before it is finally tested in the Supreme Court.
But it is the second option — simply not prosecuting prostitution cases — that could kill the new law, and offer a precedent for other provinces that find it troubling.
This is precisely what happened last February, when New Brunswick, Ontario and British Columbia moved away from prosecuting prostitution cases, after the Supreme Court declared the existing law was “overbroad.”
At the time, Mr. MacKay said not enforcing the existing prostitution law was “not an option.”
“Canadians expect criminal laws in this country to be properly enforced, so long as they remain in force,” he said. “The Supreme Court of Canada made very clear in its decision that the current laws with respect to prostitution were to remain in force for 12 months.”
However, on the ground, prostitution-related prosecutions across many provinces all but dried up.
‘The federal government has advanced a very aggressive policy on crime that may well not fit the priorities and policies of those responsible for enforcing the law’
The laying of criminal charges is a function of the police, independent of the Attorney-General, but it is the province’s decision whether or not to prosecute.
A spokeswoman for Mr. MacKay revealed the impotence of the feds, if any of the provinces are less enthusiastic about the new law than Ottawa. “We would hope that those who break the law face the full force of the law, in order to protect vulnerable Canadians,” she said.
Ms. Wynne made clear in her statement that the new law holds sway – for now. “We must enforce duly enacted legislation but I believe we must also take steps to satisfy ourselves that, in doing so, we are upholding the constitution and the Charter,” she said.
That strongly suggests to me the law will not be enforced, if it is deemed by Ontario’s Attorney-General to be unconstitutional.
“The provinces and federal government share responsibility for our criminal justice system but the federal government has advanced a very aggressive policy on crime that may well not fit the priorities and policies of those responsible for enforcing the law,” he said.
Relations between the Harper and Wynne governments are currently colder than a well-digger’s derrière. Some of this is personality-driven, but the prostitution law is a reminder that there are deep-seated policy differences between the two governments.
In this instance, the province has a torpedo that could sink Ottawa’s flagship criminal justice policy — and it seems it’s not afraid to use it.
Last edited:
The below was copied from Wikipedia. He is married to a Miss World!!!
Peter Gordon MacKay, PC, QC, MP (born September 27, 1965) is a lawyer and politician from Nova Scotia, Canada. He is the Member of Parliament for Central Nova and current Minister of Justice and Attorney General in the Cabinet of Canada. He is married to Nazanin Afshin-Jam an Iranian-Canadian model, singer, and human rights activist, and a former Miss World Canada.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_MacKay
Peter Gordon MacKay, PC, QC, MP (born September 27, 1965) is a lawyer and politician from Nova Scotia, Canada. He is the Member of Parliament for Central Nova and current Minister of Justice and Attorney General in the Cabinet of Canada. He is married to Nazanin Afshin-Jam an Iranian-Canadian model, singer, and human rights activist, and a former Miss World Canada.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_MacKay
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/201...o_to_review_canadas_new_prostitution_law.html
By: Laura Armstrong Staff Reporter, Published on Sun Dec 07 2014
Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne has asked the province’s attorney general to investigate the constitutional validity of Canada’s recently enacted prostitution law amid “grave concern” that the new legislation will not protect sex workers.
“I am not an expert, and I am not a lawyer, but as premier of this province, I am concerned that this legislation (now the law of the land) will not make sex workers safer,” Wynne said in a release Sunday.
The new legislation, known as the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act or Bill C-36, took effect Saturday after months of hearings and public debate.
Saturday was also the National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women, commemorating the 25th anniversary of the shooting deaths of 14 women at École Polytechnique in Montreal at the hands of gunman Marc Lépine.
In her statement Sunday, Wynne said she has listened to the debate that has taken place since last December’s Supreme Court of Canada ruling that struck down as unconstitutional three prostitution-related laws.
She said she is concerned the new law will protect neither exploited persons nor communities, and she has also asked Ontario’s attorney general, Madeleine Meilleur, to advise her on the province’s options in the event that the legislation’s constitutionality is in question.
“As I have said before, my priority in this debate is to ensure that our laws and institutions enhance the safety of those who are vulnerable — in this case, sex workers: a class of (mostly) women, who are disproportionately the victims of sexual and physical violence,” Wynne said. “So I believe that there is merit in considering whether the Conservative government’s new legislation meets that test.”
The controversial federal bill targets clients and pimps as criminals, and casts individuals who sell sexual services as victims, along with communities and children who are exposed to prostitution.
Advocates see sex work as a dangerous, coercive and violent occupation, and its practitioners, mainly women, as victims forced into the trade as a result of poverty, addiction or mental health issues.
Its critics say Bill C-36 will make life harder for sex workers by scaring away good clients and rushing communication with sketchy ones, make the work riskier and giving them less motivation to go to the police.
An emailed statement from federal Justice Minister Peter MacKay’s office said the Conservative government recognizes that prostitution is driven by the buyers of sex, which is why the law targets johns and pimps.
“Recognizing the significant harms that flow from prostitution, this week our government also announced new funding of $20 million available over the next five years to support exit strategy programming for those involved in prostitution,” the statement said.
Police, communities and women’s groups have welcomed the approach, it added.
But on the national day dedicated to eradicating violence against women, the day the new prostitution legislation officially came into effect, more than 60 organizations signed a statement calling for non-enforcement of C-36 and support for the full decriminalization of sex work.
Jean McDonald, executive director of Maggie’s: Toronto Sex Workers’ Action Project, called on Wynne to help.
“Kathleen Wynne must demonstrate her commitment to ending violence against women. C-36 will wreak havoc on the lives of sex workers and I worry that without provincial and municipal policies of non-enforcement, we will see the continuation of the epidemic of violence against sex workers in Canada,” McDonald said.
By: Laura Armstrong Staff Reporter, Published on Sun Dec 07 2014
Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne has asked the province’s attorney general to investigate the constitutional validity of Canada’s recently enacted prostitution law amid “grave concern” that the new legislation will not protect sex workers.
“I am not an expert, and I am not a lawyer, but as premier of this province, I am concerned that this legislation (now the law of the land) will not make sex workers safer,” Wynne said in a release Sunday.
The new legislation, known as the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act or Bill C-36, took effect Saturday after months of hearings and public debate.
Saturday was also the National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women, commemorating the 25th anniversary of the shooting deaths of 14 women at École Polytechnique in Montreal at the hands of gunman Marc Lépine.
In her statement Sunday, Wynne said she has listened to the debate that has taken place since last December’s Supreme Court of Canada ruling that struck down as unconstitutional three prostitution-related laws.
She said she is concerned the new law will protect neither exploited persons nor communities, and she has also asked Ontario’s attorney general, Madeleine Meilleur, to advise her on the province’s options in the event that the legislation’s constitutionality is in question.
“As I have said before, my priority in this debate is to ensure that our laws and institutions enhance the safety of those who are vulnerable — in this case, sex workers: a class of (mostly) women, who are disproportionately the victims of sexual and physical violence,” Wynne said. “So I believe that there is merit in considering whether the Conservative government’s new legislation meets that test.”
The controversial federal bill targets clients and pimps as criminals, and casts individuals who sell sexual services as victims, along with communities and children who are exposed to prostitution.
Advocates see sex work as a dangerous, coercive and violent occupation, and its practitioners, mainly women, as victims forced into the trade as a result of poverty, addiction or mental health issues.
Its critics say Bill C-36 will make life harder for sex workers by scaring away good clients and rushing communication with sketchy ones, make the work riskier and giving them less motivation to go to the police.
An emailed statement from federal Justice Minister Peter MacKay’s office said the Conservative government recognizes that prostitution is driven by the buyers of sex, which is why the law targets johns and pimps.
“Recognizing the significant harms that flow from prostitution, this week our government also announced new funding of $20 million available over the next five years to support exit strategy programming for those involved in prostitution,” the statement said.
Police, communities and women’s groups have welcomed the approach, it added.
But on the national day dedicated to eradicating violence against women, the day the new prostitution legislation officially came into effect, more than 60 organizations signed a statement calling for non-enforcement of C-36 and support for the full decriminalization of sex work.
Jean McDonald, executive director of Maggie’s: Toronto Sex Workers’ Action Project, called on Wynne to help.
“Kathleen Wynne must demonstrate her commitment to ending violence against women. C-36 will wreak havoc on the lives of sex workers and I worry that without provincial and municipal policies of non-enforcement, we will see the continuation of the epidemic of violence against sex workers in Canada,” McDonald said.
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/ashby-prostitution-laws-a-mess-in-this-country
Prostitution laws a mess in this country
After weeks of campaigning from activists in the women’s rights and sex workers’ rights communities, Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne has set her sights on Bill C-36, the Tory-led legislation that was ostensibly intended to answer the Supreme Court of Canada’s ruling that laws against prostitution are unconstitutional. She has asked Ontario Attorney General Madeleine Meilleur to advise her on the constitutionality of the law, which went into effect this week. Under the Courts of Justice Act, Wynne can instruct prosecutors not to enforce the law until its constitutionality is determined.
In her statement, Wynne said that her “priority in this debate is to ensure that our laws and institutions enhance the safety of those who are vulnerable — in this case, sex workers: a class of (mostly) women, who are disproportionately the victims of sexual and physical violence. So I believe that there is merit in considering whether the Conservative government’s new legislation meets that test.”
Wynne joins a growing list of policymakers and advocates who are skeptical of the law, including 25 Toronto city councillors and editor and CEO of NOW Magazine Alice Klein, who stated that her publication would not be obeying the law’s prohibitions on the advertising of sexual services. “There is a high price to be paid for resisting the norms of stigmatization and sexual shaming,” she said. “Those in sex work truly bear the brunt of this price. It took 10 years and a very real body count of murdered women and tragic violence to win the constitutional challenge that overturned the laws last year.”
Body counts have become something of a bugbear for Justice Minister Peter MacKay, the champion and architect of Bill C-36. In a stunningly ignorant gaffe last week, MacKay memorialized the Montreal Massacre by saying “we may never understand … why these women were singled out for this horrific act of violence.” When NDP leader Thomas Mulcair had the temerity to point out that shooter Marc Lépine had targeted the women simply because they were women, and had in fact written an anti-feminist manifesto to that effect, MacKay whined about partisanship.
Whether MacKay was honestly that naive in his remarks, or using them to intentionally blow a dog-whistle for misogynists, he shouldn’t be allowed to shape legislation that impacts women. His refusal to acknowledge the experiences of sex workers, combined with his lack of vision and reliance on party lines to inform his thinking, has resulted in a legal mess that hub cities all over Canada want no part of and have no intent to enforce. It’s quite something, but it’s not leadership.
Whether sex workers or engineering students, the women who die at the hands of the men who hate them aren’t murdered because they were wearing short skirts, or because they were uppity in class, or because they made the wrong choices. They die because the laws and policies that are supposed to protect them are written by men like MacKay, who can’t see past the end of their own privilege.
In abrogating the laws against prostitution, the Supreme Court was trying to make room for equality. In writing C-36, the Tories were trying to re-establish patriarchal rule, to put the women they disapprove of right back on the street where social conservatives believe they belong. There they can die quietly, the victims of the next Robert Pickton, and pearl-clutchers everywhere can wonder why these terrible tragedies happen.
It’s because they’re women, stupid.
Prostitution laws a mess in this country
After weeks of campaigning from activists in the women’s rights and sex workers’ rights communities, Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne has set her sights on Bill C-36, the Tory-led legislation that was ostensibly intended to answer the Supreme Court of Canada’s ruling that laws against prostitution are unconstitutional. She has asked Ontario Attorney General Madeleine Meilleur to advise her on the constitutionality of the law, which went into effect this week. Under the Courts of Justice Act, Wynne can instruct prosecutors not to enforce the law until its constitutionality is determined.
In her statement, Wynne said that her “priority in this debate is to ensure that our laws and institutions enhance the safety of those who are vulnerable — in this case, sex workers: a class of (mostly) women, who are disproportionately the victims of sexual and physical violence. So I believe that there is merit in considering whether the Conservative government’s new legislation meets that test.”
Wynne joins a growing list of policymakers and advocates who are skeptical of the law, including 25 Toronto city councillors and editor and CEO of NOW Magazine Alice Klein, who stated that her publication would not be obeying the law’s prohibitions on the advertising of sexual services. “There is a high price to be paid for resisting the norms of stigmatization and sexual shaming,” she said. “Those in sex work truly bear the brunt of this price. It took 10 years and a very real body count of murdered women and tragic violence to win the constitutional challenge that overturned the laws last year.”
Body counts have become something of a bugbear for Justice Minister Peter MacKay, the champion and architect of Bill C-36. In a stunningly ignorant gaffe last week, MacKay memorialized the Montreal Massacre by saying “we may never understand … why these women were singled out for this horrific act of violence.” When NDP leader Thomas Mulcair had the temerity to point out that shooter Marc Lépine had targeted the women simply because they were women, and had in fact written an anti-feminist manifesto to that effect, MacKay whined about partisanship.
Whether MacKay was honestly that naive in his remarks, or using them to intentionally blow a dog-whistle for misogynists, he shouldn’t be allowed to shape legislation that impacts women. His refusal to acknowledge the experiences of sex workers, combined with his lack of vision and reliance on party lines to inform his thinking, has resulted in a legal mess that hub cities all over Canada want no part of and have no intent to enforce. It’s quite something, but it’s not leadership.
Whether sex workers or engineering students, the women who die at the hands of the men who hate them aren’t murdered because they were wearing short skirts, or because they were uppity in class, or because they made the wrong choices. They die because the laws and policies that are supposed to protect them are written by men like MacKay, who can’t see past the end of their own privilege.
In abrogating the laws against prostitution, the Supreme Court was trying to make room for equality. In writing C-36, the Tories were trying to re-establish patriarchal rule, to put the women they disapprove of right back on the street where social conservatives believe they belong. There they can die quietly, the victims of the next Robert Pickton, and pearl-clutchers everywhere can wonder why these terrible tragedies happen.
It’s because they’re women, stupid.
Heat on Wynne to take Feds’ sex law to court
For weeks, sex workers and their allies have been writing letters, tweeting and phoning, pleading with Ontario premier Kathleen Wynne to refer the federal government's new prostitution law to the Ontario Court of Appeal. And to instruct the province's Crown prosecutors not to enforce the law until its constitutionality can be tested in court.
On Sunday, December 7, a day after the law was officially proclaimed - and women across the country had taken part in ceremonies to mark the anniversary of the Montreal massacre - Wynne met those concerns halfway.
The premier announced that she has asked Ontario attorney general Madeleine Meilleur to advise on the new law's constitutionality and what steps might be taken if its compliance with the Charter is called into question. She stopped short, however, of asking the police not to enforce the law.
The list of those sharing Wynne's "grave concern" that the Protection Of Communities And Exploited Persons Act will protect "neither exploited persons nor communities" includes more than 100 national advocacy groups, unions, members of academic, political, media and legal organizations, human rights activists, aboriginal elders and elected officials. And it continues to grow.
Earlier in the week, 25 Toronto city councillors signed a powerful letter urging the premier take action.
"As City Councillors, we work to promote measures that increase public safety and that materially improve the living conditions of marginalized residents," it reads. "In particular, we are united in our efforts to end violence against women. To that end, we strive to identify and correct situations that, however inadvertently, create conditions that are unsafe for any woman. We fear that Bill C-36 has introduced such unsafe conditions into Canadian society, bringing foreseeable detriment and real danger to some of the most vulnerable women we represent."
It seems to have gotten Queen's Park's attention. Councillor Kristyn Wong-Tam, who wrote the letter, says, "If I had more time, and it's tough to track down all 45 members of council, I would have been able to secure more signatures. That I know. However, I also recognize that our premier needed to hear from us as soon as possible."
Among the signatories is rookie councillor Jon Burnside, a former Toronto police officer, who says he supports the decriminalizationof sex work. If sex work were no longer criminalized, more women would report violence, he says.
"From a law-and-order perspective... trying to control the sex trade is a lot of wasted money and effort. Criminalization puts a lot of people in jeopardy."
NOW Magazine asked Mayor John Tory if he plans to sign the letter. He promised to read it and consider adding his name, but has since reportedly declined to ink his name without offering further comment on the matter except to say through a spokesperson that he "will respect" the process.
Bill C-36 replaces the previous prostitution-related laws that the Supreme Court of Canada struck down in 2013 in the landmark Bedford v. Canada case.
Three sex workers challenged the constitutionality of those laws, arguing that they put sex workers' lives at risk by preventing them from working out of their homes and putting in place certain safety measures to screen clients, like hiring security guards. The court agreed. But sex workers' rights groups say the Conservative government's new law, which relies heavily on the "Nordic model" that criminalizes the clients of sex workers, puts them in more danger of violence.
Terri-Jean Bedford applauded Wynne for listening to sex workers. In a personal appeal to the premier, Bedford compared the struggle of sex workers to that of same-sex couples. "I know you realize the freedom that you are enjoying in your personal life was once at issue as well and [was] opposed by the same segments of society now behind C-36. And some people would make [it] illegal again if they thought they could get away with it."
But for some, Wynne isn't going far enough.
Jean McDonald, executive director of Maggie's - Toronto Sex Workers Action Project, says she would like to see the Toronto Police Services Board (TPSB) agree to municipal non-enforcement of the law until it can be tested in court. Maggie's plans to announce a campaign to demand police not enforce C-36 to coincide withthe National Day of Action to Support Sex Worker Rights December 17.
"There are so many unanswered questions right now," McDonald says. "We don't know how this will be enforced or even if it will be enforced. And that is creating a lot of stress and fear. How will it impact massage parlours? Strip clubs? Third parties? Advertising?"
Alok Mukherjee, chair of the TPSB, says the board has no official position on C-36, nor does the Canadian Association of Police Governance, of which he is past president.
He says he plans to canvas board members and discuss the law with Chief Bill Blair to determine its implications.
"While I understand the need to deal with child exploitation and human trafficking, there are people who engage in sex work voluntarily, and they need access to health care and the ability to work in a safe environment," says Mukherjee.
He says he's concerned about growing pressure on police to apply criminal laws to largely social issues. He would like to see Toronto follow the lead of Vancouver, which has established its own guidelines for enforcement.
"Those guidelines make a distinction between those cases where people's health and safety are at risk, as opposed to getting involved where there is consensual sex," explains Mary Clare Zak, director of social policy for the city of Vancouver.
After the new prostitution law received royal assent on November 6, the City of Vancouver released a statement calling for the law's repeal, saying it will only exacerbate violence by pushing sex work underground.
Vancouver would know. The city has experienced the tragedy of hundreds of missing and murdered women, many of them aboriginal, and the horror of the Robert Pickton murders. Both have galvanized the city's sex worker rights movement - and influenced public opinion against the feds' new law.
Zak says all municipalities should take an approach to enforcement that includes the voices of sex workers. "There's a real need for leadership on this, not just from the municipal government but also from senior levels of government.
"The approach we have taken is one based on human rights, on evidence and lived experience," she says. "It's so important that we don't jeopardize people's health and safety."
Zak says C-36 is heading for an inevitable fight at the Supreme Court of Canada, a view widely shared by legal experts. And it has many people thinking the Conservatives intend to campaign for re-election on moral issues.
"This new law just replaces the previous laws and is even more punitive," says Clare Hacksel, director of community health services at Planned Parenthood Toronto. "The law wrongly conflates sex work with human trafficking and sexual exploitation of children and youth.
"[It] really isolates women," she adds. "How is a woman supposed to come forward to report violence? 'I sold this illegal service and I was hurt in the process?' This is a population that is so highly stigmatized already."
https://nowtoronto.com/news/features/heat-on-wynne-to-take-feds-sex-law-to-court/
For weeks, sex workers and their allies have been writing letters, tweeting and phoning, pleading with Ontario premier Kathleen Wynne to refer the federal government's new prostitution law to the Ontario Court of Appeal. And to instruct the province's Crown prosecutors not to enforce the law until its constitutionality can be tested in court.
On Sunday, December 7, a day after the law was officially proclaimed - and women across the country had taken part in ceremonies to mark the anniversary of the Montreal massacre - Wynne met those concerns halfway.
The premier announced that she has asked Ontario attorney general Madeleine Meilleur to advise on the new law's constitutionality and what steps might be taken if its compliance with the Charter is called into question. She stopped short, however, of asking the police not to enforce the law.
The list of those sharing Wynne's "grave concern" that the Protection Of Communities And Exploited Persons Act will protect "neither exploited persons nor communities" includes more than 100 national advocacy groups, unions, members of academic, political, media and legal organizations, human rights activists, aboriginal elders and elected officials. And it continues to grow.
Earlier in the week, 25 Toronto city councillors signed a powerful letter urging the premier take action.
"As City Councillors, we work to promote measures that increase public safety and that materially improve the living conditions of marginalized residents," it reads. "In particular, we are united in our efforts to end violence against women. To that end, we strive to identify and correct situations that, however inadvertently, create conditions that are unsafe for any woman. We fear that Bill C-36 has introduced such unsafe conditions into Canadian society, bringing foreseeable detriment and real danger to some of the most vulnerable women we represent."
It seems to have gotten Queen's Park's attention. Councillor Kristyn Wong-Tam, who wrote the letter, says, "If I had more time, and it's tough to track down all 45 members of council, I would have been able to secure more signatures. That I know. However, I also recognize that our premier needed to hear from us as soon as possible."
Among the signatories is rookie councillor Jon Burnside, a former Toronto police officer, who says he supports the decriminalizationof sex work. If sex work were no longer criminalized, more women would report violence, he says.
"From a law-and-order perspective... trying to control the sex trade is a lot of wasted money and effort. Criminalization puts a lot of people in jeopardy."
NOW Magazine asked Mayor John Tory if he plans to sign the letter. He promised to read it and consider adding his name, but has since reportedly declined to ink his name without offering further comment on the matter except to say through a spokesperson that he "will respect" the process.
Bill C-36 replaces the previous prostitution-related laws that the Supreme Court of Canada struck down in 2013 in the landmark Bedford v. Canada case.
Three sex workers challenged the constitutionality of those laws, arguing that they put sex workers' lives at risk by preventing them from working out of their homes and putting in place certain safety measures to screen clients, like hiring security guards. The court agreed. But sex workers' rights groups say the Conservative government's new law, which relies heavily on the "Nordic model" that criminalizes the clients of sex workers, puts them in more danger of violence.
Terri-Jean Bedford applauded Wynne for listening to sex workers. In a personal appeal to the premier, Bedford compared the struggle of sex workers to that of same-sex couples. "I know you realize the freedom that you are enjoying in your personal life was once at issue as well and [was] opposed by the same segments of society now behind C-36. And some people would make [it] illegal again if they thought they could get away with it."
But for some, Wynne isn't going far enough.
Jean McDonald, executive director of Maggie's - Toronto Sex Workers Action Project, says she would like to see the Toronto Police Services Board (TPSB) agree to municipal non-enforcement of the law until it can be tested in court. Maggie's plans to announce a campaign to demand police not enforce C-36 to coincide withthe National Day of Action to Support Sex Worker Rights December 17.
"There are so many unanswered questions right now," McDonald says. "We don't know how this will be enforced or even if it will be enforced. And that is creating a lot of stress and fear. How will it impact massage parlours? Strip clubs? Third parties? Advertising?"
Alok Mukherjee, chair of the TPSB, says the board has no official position on C-36, nor does the Canadian Association of Police Governance, of which he is past president.
He says he plans to canvas board members and discuss the law with Chief Bill Blair to determine its implications.
"While I understand the need to deal with child exploitation and human trafficking, there are people who engage in sex work voluntarily, and they need access to health care and the ability to work in a safe environment," says Mukherjee.
He says he's concerned about growing pressure on police to apply criminal laws to largely social issues. He would like to see Toronto follow the lead of Vancouver, which has established its own guidelines for enforcement.
"Those guidelines make a distinction between those cases where people's health and safety are at risk, as opposed to getting involved where there is consensual sex," explains Mary Clare Zak, director of social policy for the city of Vancouver.
After the new prostitution law received royal assent on November 6, the City of Vancouver released a statement calling for the law's repeal, saying it will only exacerbate violence by pushing sex work underground.
Vancouver would know. The city has experienced the tragedy of hundreds of missing and murdered women, many of them aboriginal, and the horror of the Robert Pickton murders. Both have galvanized the city's sex worker rights movement - and influenced public opinion against the feds' new law.
Zak says all municipalities should take an approach to enforcement that includes the voices of sex workers. "There's a real need for leadership on this, not just from the municipal government but also from senior levels of government.
"The approach we have taken is one based on human rights, on evidence and lived experience," she says. "It's so important that we don't jeopardize people's health and safety."
Zak says C-36 is heading for an inevitable fight at the Supreme Court of Canada, a view widely shared by legal experts. And it has many people thinking the Conservatives intend to campaign for re-election on moral issues.
"This new law just replaces the previous laws and is even more punitive," says Clare Hacksel, director of community health services at Planned Parenthood Toronto. "The law wrongly conflates sex work with human trafficking and sexual exploitation of children and youth.
"[It] really isolates women," she adds. "How is a woman supposed to come forward to report violence? 'I sold this illegal service and I was hurt in the process?' This is a population that is so highly stigmatized already."
https://nowtoronto.com/news/features/heat-on-wynne-to-take-feds-sex-law-to-court/
Prostitution law ignores societal roots of violence
Kaye is an assistant professor of sociology and director of community engaged research at The King's University in Edmonton.
The Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act came into effect Dec. 6 to replace the laws struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada's Bedford case.
The decision emphasized that prostitution laws must not violate the safety and security rights of sex workers. Yet the question of their safety and security remains irrelevant for many advocates of the new law, who argue that prostitution is an inherent form of violence and that sex-trade industries must be abolished.
For such advocates, the over-representation of indigenous women as "victims of sex trafficking" was seen as an important justification for the new legislation. Yet, far from addressing sex trafficking, this new law adds to a long and destructive string of government responses to violence against indigenous women that not only fails to prevent such violence, but also perpetuates harm.
Premier Kathleen Wynne of Ontario is right to raise concern about the effects of the new law on "those who are most vulnerable," and to ask the Ontario attorney general to advise on the constitutionality of the law.
Anti-trafficking advocates argue for the criminalization of sex industries, particularly purchasers of sex, to protect women from violence. But criminalization does not address societal vulnerabilities or the reality that violence is rooted in multiple and overlapping systems of domination that produce spaces of dehumanizing poverty, restricted choice, isolation and commodification.
Rather than reduce violence, criminalization reproduces another version of a long history of colonial state violence executed against indigenous women "for their own good." This includes responses to missing and murdered indigenous women that do little more than increase police powers, despite demonstrated failures of the criminal justice system and significant mistrust of police by indigenous women.
Such mistrust is particularly evident among indigenous sex workers who, under these new laws, will now be pushed into more isolated areas where they will face greater stigma and insecurity.
Ignoring the role that prostitution laws play in facilitating violence against indigenous women, the new law perpetuates the tragic irony that social vulnerabilities to sex trafficking occur precisely where the state abolishes safe spaces for sex workers to live and work.
For example, the new legislation completely ignores the recommendation of Wally Oppal, commissioner of the Missing Women Inquiry in British Columbia, that the criminal regulation of prostitution and law enforcement strategies related to sex work directly contribute to the social and economic marginalization of women. These laws provided the climate in which "the missing and murdered women were forsaken."
Among the "forsaken" are indigenous sex workers who are specifically targeted by systemic violence. As a recent human trafficking study demonstrates, police officers commonly make "derogatory and degrading" commentary when interacting with indigenous women in sex industries, regardless of whether trafficking occurred or not.
The new law also ignores the nuanced testimony of individuals such as Naomi Sayers, an indigenous woman representing the Canadian Alliance for Sex Work Law Reform, who argued that advocates suggesting the law would protect indigenous women not only ignore the fact that these women "experience institutional and systemic violence," but they also ignore "the state's role in making a sex worker vulnerable to violence." This includes using anti-prostitution legislation to push sex workers into isolated spaces.
Similarly, Kerry Porth, a former sex worker who worked "in the context of profound addiction, poverty and occasional homelessness" argued that the law "will cause greater harm to sex workers across Canada."
She also brought a message from indigenous sex workers in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside who asked the harmful legislation be rejected in its entirety. These voices represent others who work and advocate in the very spaces of marginality the law seeks to render invisible.
There are resistance movements throughout Canada that warrant support while we wait for the inevitable constitutional challenges of the new law, and then for the courts to deliberate on the challenges.
Such resistance was evident last month as members of Pivot Legal Society, for example, discussed the effects of the new law on sex workers' lives while wearing masks to visibly demonstrate how the law renders them invisible. Pivot, alongside other anti-violence organizations, will continue the costly work of supporting sex workers in spite of the new law.
Other resistances emphasize the importance of selfdetermination, challenging hegemonic masculinities, confronting racist stereotyping, minimizing stigma and providing resources to increase safety, as well as alternative education and employment options. Such responses provide models for us to resist systemic violence and challenge colonial models that increase harm while claiming to "rescue" or "save" indigenous sex workers for their own good.
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/life/Prostitution+ignores+societal+roots+violence/10458631/story.html
Kaye is an assistant professor of sociology and director of community engaged research at The King's University in Edmonton.
The Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act came into effect Dec. 6 to replace the laws struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada's Bedford case.
The decision emphasized that prostitution laws must not violate the safety and security rights of sex workers. Yet the question of their safety and security remains irrelevant for many advocates of the new law, who argue that prostitution is an inherent form of violence and that sex-trade industries must be abolished.
For such advocates, the over-representation of indigenous women as "victims of sex trafficking" was seen as an important justification for the new legislation. Yet, far from addressing sex trafficking, this new law adds to a long and destructive string of government responses to violence against indigenous women that not only fails to prevent such violence, but also perpetuates harm.
Premier Kathleen Wynne of Ontario is right to raise concern about the effects of the new law on "those who are most vulnerable," and to ask the Ontario attorney general to advise on the constitutionality of the law.
Anti-trafficking advocates argue for the criminalization of sex industries, particularly purchasers of sex, to protect women from violence. But criminalization does not address societal vulnerabilities or the reality that violence is rooted in multiple and overlapping systems of domination that produce spaces of dehumanizing poverty, restricted choice, isolation and commodification.
Rather than reduce violence, criminalization reproduces another version of a long history of colonial state violence executed against indigenous women "for their own good." This includes responses to missing and murdered indigenous women that do little more than increase police powers, despite demonstrated failures of the criminal justice system and significant mistrust of police by indigenous women.
Such mistrust is particularly evident among indigenous sex workers who, under these new laws, will now be pushed into more isolated areas where they will face greater stigma and insecurity.
Ignoring the role that prostitution laws play in facilitating violence against indigenous women, the new law perpetuates the tragic irony that social vulnerabilities to sex trafficking occur precisely where the state abolishes safe spaces for sex workers to live and work.
For example, the new legislation completely ignores the recommendation of Wally Oppal, commissioner of the Missing Women Inquiry in British Columbia, that the criminal regulation of prostitution and law enforcement strategies related to sex work directly contribute to the social and economic marginalization of women. These laws provided the climate in which "the missing and murdered women were forsaken."
Among the "forsaken" are indigenous sex workers who are specifically targeted by systemic violence. As a recent human trafficking study demonstrates, police officers commonly make "derogatory and degrading" commentary when interacting with indigenous women in sex industries, regardless of whether trafficking occurred or not.
The new law also ignores the nuanced testimony of individuals such as Naomi Sayers, an indigenous woman representing the Canadian Alliance for Sex Work Law Reform, who argued that advocates suggesting the law would protect indigenous women not only ignore the fact that these women "experience institutional and systemic violence," but they also ignore "the state's role in making a sex worker vulnerable to violence." This includes using anti-prostitution legislation to push sex workers into isolated spaces.
Similarly, Kerry Porth, a former sex worker who worked "in the context of profound addiction, poverty and occasional homelessness" argued that the law "will cause greater harm to sex workers across Canada."
She also brought a message from indigenous sex workers in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside who asked the harmful legislation be rejected in its entirety. These voices represent others who work and advocate in the very spaces of marginality the law seeks to render invisible.
There are resistance movements throughout Canada that warrant support while we wait for the inevitable constitutional challenges of the new law, and then for the courts to deliberate on the challenges.
Such resistance was evident last month as members of Pivot Legal Society, for example, discussed the effects of the new law on sex workers' lives while wearing masks to visibly demonstrate how the law renders them invisible. Pivot, alongside other anti-violence organizations, will continue the costly work of supporting sex workers in spite of the new law.
Other resistances emphasize the importance of selfdetermination, challenging hegemonic masculinities, confronting racist stereotyping, minimizing stigma and providing resources to increase safety, as well as alternative education and employment options. Such responses provide models for us to resist systemic violence and challenge colonial models that increase harm while claiming to "rescue" or "save" indigenous sex workers for their own good.
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/life/Prostitution+ignores+societal+roots+violence/10458631/story.html
Mr. Harper's unenforceable act
From op-ed in today's Globe & Mail
Mr. Harper's unenforceable act
December 12, 2014 Globe and Mail
Canada's new anti-prostitution law came into effect this week, but it's doubtful anyone involved with the so-called "oldest profession" much noticed.
Citing concerns over constitutionality, Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne says her province will not rigorously pursue prosecutions under the new law, which among other things criminalizes advertising sexual services and soliciting near schools, parks and houses of worship.
"I am left with grave concern that the so-called Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act will protect neither 'exploited persons' nor 'communities'," said Premier Wynne.
British Columbia Premier Christy Clark expressed similar intentions in a meeting with the Globe's editorial board this week when she said she supports the Vancouver Police Department's decision not to make the law a priority.
Now come reports that the Montreal police service's vice unit is in no particular hurry to enforce the law either. Like police in Vancouver, they will focus their efforts on sex worker safety.
So after Ottawa disregarded initial objections from many experts over its proposed bill, then ignored the possibility the legislation would swiftly be struck down in court, it is now confronted by the reality the law is unlikely to be enforced in the places where the sex trade does its briskest business.
Quite the trifecta.
When the Supreme Court invalidated the core provisions of this country's out-dated prostitution law in late 2013, the government had an opportunity to address the human tragedies caused by prostitution.
Instead, we are left with a text devoid of authority.
This government has a history of selectively heeding advice on matters of criminal justice and policing, and the Globe's reporting has also uncovered a worrying pattern of it presenting sub-standard, error-ridden legislation to Parliament.
Evidence is mounting, then, of a surprisingly slipshod approach to what is claimed to be a core priority.
As a result, the government finds itself confronted by a vexing question that is entirely of its own making: When does a law cease being a law?
Maybe it's when nobody feels obligated to submit to it.
From op-ed in today's Globe & Mail
Mr. Harper's unenforceable act
December 12, 2014 Globe and Mail
Canada's new anti-prostitution law came into effect this week, but it's doubtful anyone involved with the so-called "oldest profession" much noticed.
Citing concerns over constitutionality, Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne says her province will not rigorously pursue prosecutions under the new law, which among other things criminalizes advertising sexual services and soliciting near schools, parks and houses of worship.
"I am left with grave concern that the so-called Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act will protect neither 'exploited persons' nor 'communities'," said Premier Wynne.
British Columbia Premier Christy Clark expressed similar intentions in a meeting with the Globe's editorial board this week when she said she supports the Vancouver Police Department's decision not to make the law a priority.
Now come reports that the Montreal police service's vice unit is in no particular hurry to enforce the law either. Like police in Vancouver, they will focus their efforts on sex worker safety.
So after Ottawa disregarded initial objections from many experts over its proposed bill, then ignored the possibility the legislation would swiftly be struck down in court, it is now confronted by the reality the law is unlikely to be enforced in the places where the sex trade does its briskest business.
Quite the trifecta.
When the Supreme Court invalidated the core provisions of this country's out-dated prostitution law in late 2013, the government had an opportunity to address the human tragedies caused by prostitution.
Instead, we are left with a text devoid of authority.
This government has a history of selectively heeding advice on matters of criminal justice and policing, and the Globe's reporting has also uncovered a worrying pattern of it presenting sub-standard, error-ridden legislation to Parliament.
Evidence is mounting, then, of a surprisingly slipshod approach to what is claimed to be a core priority.
As a result, the government finds itself confronted by a vexing question that is entirely of its own making: When does a law cease being a law?
Maybe it's when nobody feels obligated to submit to it.
Sex industry should be regulated to protect prostitutes says health association
The Canadian Public Health Association is calling on the government to regulate the sex industry as a business with rules to protect the safety of prostitutes.
In a position paper released Friday, the association says the world's so-called oldest profession should be regulated under existing occupational health and safety regulations.
It says that would help deal with some of the root causes of prostitution, such as poverty and homelessness.
"There are indications that a public health approach based on harm reduction and addressing the social determinants of health may provide the tools needed to address the underlying factors that result in participation in the sex trade, and vulnerability to human trafficking and violence," says the report.
The report comes after Canada's controversial new prostitution law went into effect last week after the Supreme Court ruled that the old law violated the safety rights of prostitutes.
More than 60 groups across the country have called for a repeal of the law, which criminalizes the purchase of sex, along with advertising and some forms of communication
Read more: http://windsor.ctvnews.ca/sex-indus...ys-health-association-1.2145131#ixzz3Li74ZBoy
The Canadian Public Health Association is calling on the government to regulate the sex industry as a business with rules to protect the safety of prostitutes.
In a position paper released Friday, the association says the world's so-called oldest profession should be regulated under existing occupational health and safety regulations.
It says that would help deal with some of the root causes of prostitution, such as poverty and homelessness.
"There are indications that a public health approach based on harm reduction and addressing the social determinants of health may provide the tools needed to address the underlying factors that result in participation in the sex trade, and vulnerability to human trafficking and violence," says the report.
The report comes after Canada's controversial new prostitution law went into effect last week after the Supreme Court ruled that the old law violated the safety rights of prostitutes.
More than 60 groups across the country have called for a repeal of the law, which criminalizes the purchase of sex, along with advertising and some forms of communication
Read more: http://windsor.ctvnews.ca/sex-indus...ys-health-association-1.2145131#ixzz3Li74ZBoy
I was devastated when this law was passed. But of all the stupid idiotic pieces of crap legislation this wretched government has passed this one particularly seems pretty much DOA. These are great articles and they're very encouraging. I'm going to start hobbying again. I suggest we all do so and keep our favourite escorts busier than ever, and we can laugh in the face of this idiotic gang of mouth breathing hillbillies, and then defeat them in the next election.
The Street Nurses' Network calls for the City of Toronto to adopt a policy of non-enforcement on Bill C-36, the misnamed Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons' Act.
http://twitdoc.com/view.asp?id=1674...on&doc=249987043&key=key-aVIdmvf5ouCWlvj5nDPK
http://twitdoc.com/view.asp?id=1674...on&doc=249987043&key=key-aVIdmvf5ouCWlvj5nDPK
Would you prefer to see some one advertised or not advertised on this website? Please feel free to pm me if you need.
Thanks indeed for the response!
www.catherinetog.blogspot.com
catherinetog
Thanks indeed for the response!
www.catherinetog.blogspot.com
catherinetog
Jillian's blog should be published in the newspaper.
This is very disturbing to read.
Jillian's analysis is bang on.
Maybe it's because there are very few people involved in prostitution here against their will. There's a lot of conflation from being a prostitute on an tourist visa, to being a person who is here against their will. Trafficking doesn't necessarily mean non-consenting, even though these persons are here illegally.
Some are looking to build an industry based on victims. Trouble is, they have to conflate consenting persons into victims in order to attract generous grants that pay their salaries, like the 20 million MacKay promised them.
Exactly. Most of the stories that were brought up during the summer hearings were about women whose boyfriend was their pimp. C-36 would have done nothing to help these women because in most cases, they refuse help and refuse to testify.