Court Rules Canada's Prostitution Laws Unconstitutional.
- Thread starter Consilio
- Start date
Old Irish proverb: "The negatives of legality is far superior to the positives of illegality."
I think we all want to be law abiding citizens in a free and democratic Canada. Bring it on! Prime Minister Harper, are you listening? (Currently, the industry exist at the whim of "The Man".)
It is legal because no law specifically prohibits it, and if a new law is enacted to criminalize it, won't it also be subject to the Charter? I mean, if a woman can choose to abort, can she not choose to sell her body (the life and liberty arguments in the Constitution)?
That may be the case. Not sure what the laws are on that. I think it'll continue to be the case that industry ladies will want to maintain a low-profile and ideally choose their incall locations in high-traffic areas etc, as they do now. Virtually any activity that concerns/disturbs your neighbours could have you in hot water -- even if not legally, at least make it darn uncomfortable for you do live/work there.
I think there is no law (struck down by the courts) restricting a woman's right to an abortion. The problem is that some provinces will not allow public funds to be used for abortion purposes.
So, you will have to use your own funds when you hire a lady for wambo minki. Hee, hee, hee.
Important point - The decision only affects the STATE and the criminal law. So the police may not be able to charge you when this is all over; but your landlord can still throw you out for running a brothel contrary to the terms of your lease.
As a practical matter, I think the industry will continue as is except the sword of arrest is no longer hanging over your head.
Here is a converstion I had with a hotel manager some years ago. His best guests are the escorts. They are clean, quiet, discreet and they don't thrash the room. His worst guests are rock bands and families with noisy screaming kids.
I'm with you. No different than rules against playing one's music too loud or partying after 11 pm, etc. - there has to be a nuisance unless a city by-law prohibits it (I think those particulars may invite new legal challenges but the 1st big step has been taken). A landlord may not like the traffic or potential problems that may ensue, just like running any busy business out of your basement or home.
Then again, Landlords may find that classy & smart sex workers who don't have drug issues or bad boys or johns causing disturbances, are the best tenants with strong financial covenants.
Separate issue I know, but just some forward thinking here.
That's probably sooooo true!!! But because hotels cater to families, it's not like they're going to target market the escort industry right away.
Well, at least it is on the table. What I'm saying is that the question wouldn't even come up in the US. It would be the third rail for any politician. Nothing will change. We live in a society that is sexually repressive, and that is that.
And just like with driving tests, there will be private schools set up to teach what any aspiring young test-taker needs to know to pass the test.
Err...I guess that would be: What any young, nubile, curious but inexperienced, eager, firm-bodied, budding young aspiring test-taker needs to know to pass her test.
I sense a business opportunity. But first please excuse me...I'll be in my bunk.
This whole chain of events started when LE arrested Teri-Jean in her home 10 years ago. The authorities should have just left well enough alone and concentrate on solving a few more Jane Finch murder cases.
P.S. When LE arrested a few nude male marchers at the Gay Pride Parade in 2006, the Attorney General wisely decided not to prosecute. Can you imagine if they went to trial and lost, there'll be nude men walking all over Toronto. Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
P.S. When LE arrested a few nude male marchers at the Gay Pride Parade in 2006, the Attorney General wisely decided not to prosecute. Can you imagine if they went to trial and lost, there'll be nude men walking all over Toronto. Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
I agree, I believe things will continue more or less as is. A few more guys may be willing to "dip their toes in the pool" but I don't see things changing much. In
most places that have decriminalized it there are a few minor differences, but the businesses still operate discreetly, and sti at the margins of society.
I think that issues of "having a brothel as your neighbour" can easily be dealt with at the bylaw level.
And for those who fear what the government will do next, keep in mind that we do not have a conservative majority in parliament,,, YET!
Appellate Courts in Canada will not give significant deference to a trial judge on a question of pure law. The standard of review on questions of pure law is correctness. Slightly more deference will be given on questions of mixed fact and law but if the "facts" in question are largely matters of statistics and policy I would not expect a great deal of deference to be shown. Therefore if the Court of Appeal disagrees on the trial judge's interpretation of the Charter or her application of the Charter to the provisions in question they can, and will, certainly overturn the decision.
I still remember when the courts ruled that a woman can go topless in public and all the howls about the end of Western Civilization. How many women did you see topless on Yonge Street this hot Summer?
No Canadian Parliament can pass a law that is not Charter compliant. We live in Canada and not the Islamic Republic of Iran.
It's already taxable, not because prostitution or escorting is already not illegal, but because of the income that is generated. Due to the cash nature of the business, tax collection enforcement may be minimal, but no different than other underground economic activities like home renovation. The hypocrisy of it all, is that the CRA doesn't consider an expenditure on an escort (let's say you treat a client for promotional purposes) deductible under the Meals & Entertainment rules (50%) because it considers it an 'illicit' activity (their interpretation or administrative practice, but not necessarily the tax law, and probably unconstitutional).
Interesting. The CRA takes the same position in disallowing bribes paid to Indian (in India) government officials to do business there even though bribes is an accepted business practice in India. Ever try to do any business in India without paying a bribe?
