For some reason, it seems that any news reporting /updates on the supposed challenges to C-36 have fallen silent. You never seem to hear or read anything on the issue anymore. Have they given up? Are court cases simply delayed due to Covid? It’s been quite some time since the new law was enacted. I thought for sure it would have been addressed by now - specifically the purchasing provision. I’m not a lawyer, so forgive my ignorance for not knowing or understanding due process. I know these things take time, but can anyone give me an informed update? Thanks.
When will the c-36 constitutional challenge reach the SCC?
- Thread starter drlove
- Start date
Just received a message from Butterfly about a challenge of C-36 beginning Oct. 3 in the Ontario Superior Court. There is a rally in support of decriminalization of sex work on Oct. 3 in front of the court house. Information on Maggie's website.
https://www.maggiesto.org/post/caswlr-rally
https://www.maggiesto.org/post/caswlr-rally
Hearings begin today. It’s not surprising most media outlets dont report on it.
www.thestar.com
Landmark hearings on decriminalizing sex work begin Monday
A coalition of sex workers is set to argue that the past seven years have shown they are not, in fact, being protected by the law.
So, does this mean that in the interim law enforcement across the country may be (more) hesitant to try and enforce the impugned provisions?
Be careful what you wish for. C-36 happened because the envelope was pushed. It went against you men and for us women. Push to hard and it can go from bad to worse for all of us.
I don't believe it would get worse under the Libs but if PeePee were to be in power, look out.
And that is the problem. Libs can start it but another party could be in power by the time it it is finished. We have no control over timeline
Before the law was changed, men could have a sex worker to their home/hotel and not be doing anything wrong. Now it is completely criminal for a man to see an escort.
It work for indies like me. We can have a hotel room now and not be charged but for men, it went the wrong way and criminalized you.
Sometimes it is just better to leave things alone. In my opinion.
I honestly believe if the Conservatives get in Federally they will make it their peace offering to their religious nutbag base to clamp down on prostitution.
This is the law as it stands now. You said “push too hard and things can go from bad to worse for all of us”. On the contrary, the push for decriminalization (likely to be successful) will make things better for all involved.
Not if the conservatives are in power which happened last time. You guys were not criminals the last time the laws where challenged, and the process started with Libs in power but by the time it got to the federal level, PC was in and they made it worse for men.
So again, based on before, push too hard and it can get worse. Just stating a fact.
I totally get what you’re saying, and you’re absolutely correct regarding the sequence of events which transpired to create Bill C-36. That said, my question to you is this: Let’s assume for argument’s sake that the Conservatives win the next federal election. Let’s also assume that shortly after they take power, C-36 is overturned by the SCC and prostitution is fully decriminalized in Canada (good for us!) What, if anything could the Conservatives do to change that?
Who knows? That is the point. We didn’t think that the Cons would flip criminality like they did the first go around.
Right now though, I don’t see how the law will be changed from criminalizing men. Men have no right to sex. Some other provisions of the new law - yes - they can change. Third party advertising for example so agencies can advertise for their girls. But for men - nothing is changing. That is set. SCC can’t overturn that and therefore it will never be decriminalized. At least from my understanding
No one, male or female has a fundamental right to sex. The reason why the purchasing provision is being challenged is due to safety concerns. That is, proper screening cannot occur if men refuse to provide personal identifying information for fear of arrest. You’re correct that third party advertising, material benefit etc, are provisions that will almost certainly be struck down in the courts at some point in the future. Interestingly, that leaves a bit of a conundrum. It would be rather silly if the SCC struck down all the impugned provisions save for purchasing. What that would mean in simple terms is, all aspects of prostitution are de facto ‘legal’, yet try to buy the service the ladies are selling and you’re gonna be in big trouble! Lol. Seriously, though, during Bedford et. al., I feel the SCC took a very balanced and pragmatic approach to arriving at their eventual decision. As you so aptly pointed out, it was the Conservatives who criminalized purchasing based on their moral objections. Now, I believe that the members of the SCC, being astute learned individuals, will surely agree that morality is a subjective construct, which should never be allowed to trump an objective measurement such as safety of the person. If we treat the sale of sexual services as any other business for purpose of argument, then the answer is clear. The purchasing provision cannot be allowed to stand, and it will very much be an all or nothing proposition. Case in point: Before C-36, outcalls were legal, only made criminal by a political whim, or “just because”. The conservatives were offended, so they made it illegal. Hardly a justifiable reason, in my estimation. Conversely, if the Liberals were so inclined, they could repeal C-36 with the stroke of a pen. If that were to happen, the logical question to ask would be, what’s changed? The answer is, nothing! Sex work is still sex work. My point being, whether it is legal or illegal depends more on how those in power view it than anything else. There needs to be an empirical measurement, something quantifiable based on fact. Put simply, sex work is a business and should be treated as one, with all the attendant rights, responsibilities and privileges accorded to it. That is why I believe without question that C-36 will fall, and be struck down in its entirety. Of course, whether the Conservatives have any available means at their disposal to circumvent this eventual outcome is unknown, at least to myself. Forgive my ignorance concerning judicial process, but I’ve always wondered if they could pass a law making prostitution completely illegal, just for spite. Opinions?
its expected that the Conservatives will ALWAYS TRY AND ABOLISH PROSTITUTION because most are religious right wing nutters
Dude. You are way more invested in this discussion then I am. I’m just saying be careful what you wish for because if history repeats itself, it could get worse. How? I don’t know. But all these what ifs are over my pay grade. LOL.
Actually according to another different set of cases from the Supreme Court of Canada involving swinger's clubs called Labaye you do have a fundamental right to sex as long as it is consensual, you are an adult and it is of public view. Or at least the Supreme Court of Canada has strongly given that impression.
I see it as a privacy issue. If a person has a willing sexual partner no one should have the ability to interfere. I would like to ask the religious nuts and moral crusaders who is allowed to interfere in their private lives. What is so special about them that they think they have the right to tell others how to live.
