En 2007, trois travailleuses du sexe de l'Ontario ont initié une contestation constitutionnelle visant les sections du Code criminel interdisant divers aspects du travail du sexe adulte, dont :
- s. 210 (tenir une maison de débauche ou s'y trouver),
- s. 212(1)(j) (vivre des fruits de la prostitution), et
- s. 213(1)(c) (communiquer en public à des ns de prostitution)
In 2007, three Ontario sex workers initiated a constitutional challenge to provisions of the Criminal Code that prohibit various aspects of adult prostitution, including:
- s. 210 (keeping or being found in a bawdy house),
- s. 212(1)(j) (living on the avails of prostitution), and
- s. 213(1)(c) (communicating in public for the purpose of prostitution)
In 1997,Toronto newspapers began to report on a series of raids on strip clubs and apartments, where women who had migrated from outside of Canada were allegedly working as prostitutes. For those of us who had been working on sex trade issues as political allies, this report alerted us to what women working within the trade already knew; the character of sex work in this city was rapidly changing as women began to find their way to Canada, through what- ever means were available, for the economicopportunities that sexwork in Canada provided.
Helpful tips the Reproductive Justice Movement can use to support Girls, Women and Transgender people of color involved in the Sex Trade & Sex Work
1. We are not ONLY "victims" or ONLY "empowered"- the reality of the sex trade is complicated and our lives don't fit into a box. Don't ignore our reality by assuming we are one or the other (we might be both or neither - let us define how we view our lives.
Adopté en 2003, la réforme des lois sur le travail du sexe en Nouvelle-Zélande (La Prostitution Reform Act ou PRA), devient un excellent exemple de réforme du code criminel pouvant "protéger les droits humains des travailleuses du sexe" Avant l'adoption de la PRA, les lois néo-zélandaises régulant le travail du sexe étaient semblables aux lois canadiennes. En soi, le travail du sexe n'était pas criminalisé, mais la quasi- totalité des activités associées au travail du sexe l'étaient, telles que vivre de ses produits, solliciter en public, tenir une maison close, acheter ou procurer. Sous ce régime de criminalisation, les travailleuses du sexe de la Nouvelle-Zélande étaient extrêmement vulnérables à l'intimidation et la violence.
The New Zealand Prostitution Reform Act (PRA) of 2003 is an excellent example of how criminal law reform can "safeguard the human rights of sex workers." Prior to the enactment of the PRA, New Zealand's prostitution laws were very similar to Canada's. Prostitution itself was not criminalized, but virtually all activities associated with sex work were, such as soliciting in public, living on the avails, operating a brothel and procuring. Under this criminalization regime, New Zealand sex workers were extremely vulnerable to coercion and violence.
On December 20th 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) handed a unanimous ruling in Canada v Bedford, which struck down elements of the Criminal Code that were determined to violate the rights of sex workers by undermining their health and safety. The Supreme Court decided that its ruling would take effect in one year's time, at which point those unconstitutional parts of the law would no longer be in force.
In response, the federal government tabled a new piece of legislation (Bill C-36) in early June of 2014. The Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act (PCEPA) received royal assent on December 6th 2014, effectively criminalizing the purchase of sexual services; communicating for the purpose of purchasing and selling sexual services; receiving a material benefit from the crimes of purchasing sexual services or communicating to obtain them; procuring a person to offer or provide sexual services for consideration; and prohibiting advertising of sexual services.
With PCEPA, the federal government reinstated provisions very similar to those already found by the SCC to be harmful to sex workers' lives, health and safety, simply by rewording some of them and re-labelling provisions with new and broader objectives. This indicates that the new prostitution laws, like the old ones, are likely in violation of sex workers' Charter rights. The government's response also creates new issues of constitutional validity with the prohibition on advertising and the blanket ban on the purchase of sexual services. This approach continues to impose danger, increased criminalization, little control over working conditions and fewer safe options for sex workers. It runs contrary to the requirement of the SCC to address these dangerous and ineffective laws and does not appear to conform to the December 2013 ruling in Canada v Bedford.
The social science evidence from Canada and throughout the world clearly indicates that this type of legislation forces sex workers into unsafe and unprotected areas restricting access to important safety strategies that can have significant and profound negative consequences on sex workers' health, security, safety, equality and human rights.
To some people, "reconciliation" is the re-establishment of a conciliatory state. However, this is a state that many Aboriginal people assert has never existed between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people. To others, "reconciliation," in the context of Indian residential schools, is similar to dealing with a situation of family violence. It is about coming to terms with events of the past in a manner that overcomes conflict and establishes a respectful and healthy relationship among people going forward. It is in the latter context that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (trc) has approached the question of reconciliation.