Supreme Court of Canada will release its decision on the Bedford, Lebovitch and Scott
- Thread starter canada-man
- Start date
Alberta urged to drop all ongoing prostitution cases
As the province weighs its legal response to a Supreme Court ruling striking down Canada’s prostitution laws, defence lawyers in Alberta are urging justice officials to stay charges currently before the courts.
The precise number of defendants facing prosecution for prostitution-related offences isn’t known, but Alberta Justice and Solicitor General said there are 400 charges that are affected by the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling last December.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/c...urged+abandon+prostitution/9460776/story.html
As the province weighs its legal response to a Supreme Court ruling striking down Canada’s prostitution laws, defence lawyers in Alberta are urging justice officials to stay charges currently before the courts.
The precise number of defendants facing prosecution for prostitution-related offences isn’t known, but Alberta Justice and Solicitor General said there are 400 charges that are affected by the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling last December.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/c...urged+abandon+prostitution/9460776/story.html
Not quite. The ruling on hand jobs was very narrow. it was clearly stipulated that a release performed as part of a full body massage was ok. If it is a separately negotiated act, all bets are off.
Plus, you and I both know that certain MPs are brothels. They're just licensed as body rubs.
Now look who is assuming/speculating?
Alberta prosecutors told to pursue johns, not prostitutes
While waiting for clarity from Ottawa, provincial justice officials have found inspiration in Stockholm.
Alberta Justice announced Tuesday it is directing prosecutors to continue bringing cases against men who buy sex from prostitutes, but the new protocol says pursuing charges against sex trade workers is “generally not in the public interest.”
The provincial directive is in response to last December’s Supreme Court of Canada ruling striking down prostitution-related provisions in the Criminal Code — and similar to a law enacted by Sweden in 1999.
“I don’t feel it’s in the best interest of people exploited in the sex trade to operate in a vacuum where there’s no law,” Justice Minister Jonathan Denis said.
The so-called “Nordic model” first employed in Sweden, and later adopted by Norway and Iceland, makes it a crime to buy sex, but it’s not an offence to sell sexual services. The approach is based on the premise all forms of prostitution are exploitative; the law is intended to deter men from buying sex without criminalizing people involved in the sex trade.
Denis said Alberta’s direction isn’t a copy of the Nordic model, but agreed it follows the same principle.
“Charging (sex trade workers) with prostitution or prostitution-related offences victimizes them twice,” he said.
While Alberta has adopted the principles of the Nordic model, there’s debate about whether it has actually decreased prostitution in countries such as Sweden or simply driven it out of view.
Meanwhile, there are countries such as the Netherlands and New Zealand that believe sex work is a legitimate occupation and regulate it.
Although exchanging sex for money isn’t illegal in Canada, the Criminal Code has provisions against soliciting for sex, living off the earnings of prostitutes and keeping a brothel.
Three Ontario sex workers took a constitutional challenge all the way to the Supreme Court, successfully arguing the laws force prostitution underground and violate their Charter right to “life, liberty and security of the person.”
Parliament has one year from the Dec. 20 ruling to come up with new provisions.
Federal Justice Minister Peter MacKay said this week the government has begun drafting new legislation and will introduce it well before the deadline.
While amending the Criminal Code is the federal government’s responsibility, administration of justice is a provincial jurisdiction.
Provincial officials didn’t have a precise number of defendants facing prosecution for prostitution-related offence, but Alberta Justice said there are 400 charges currently in the system that are affected by the Supreme Court ruling.
The Alberta Trial Lawyers’ Association, one of two groups representing the province’s defence bar, has urged the province to stay the existing cases in light of the Supreme Court judgment.
“You wonder why they would still prosecute — the law is unconstitutional,” said D’Arcy DePoe, past-president of the association.
Continuing to prosecute the existing cases and charging additional people under the law as it’s written now will further clog up the province’s congested criminal courts, said DePoe.
“Someone who’s charged under the same law will simply file a (Charter) application to have the charge stayed,” he said.
Julie Kaye, a Calgary researcher who studies human trafficking, said the province’s move won’t have a dramatic effect in Calgary because police are already focused on charging johns and trying to get prostitutes into programs that help them exit the sex trade.
Kaye, an adviser to the Action Coalition on Human Trafficking in Alberta, said a large part of the Nordic model is based on providing adequate supports for people leaving the sex trade, in addition to the legal component.
Enacting laws without the accompanying social programs for the people affected won’t solve the problem, Kaye said.
“Those who are going to exploit others and act violently are less likely to be law-abiding anyway. It could cause them to go deeper underground,” she said.
jvanrassel@calgaryherald.com
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/A...d+pursue+johns+prostitutes/9468321/story.html
While waiting for clarity from Ottawa, provincial justice officials have found inspiration in Stockholm.
Alberta Justice announced Tuesday it is directing prosecutors to continue bringing cases against men who buy sex from prostitutes, but the new protocol says pursuing charges against sex trade workers is “generally not in the public interest.”
The provincial directive is in response to last December’s Supreme Court of Canada ruling striking down prostitution-related provisions in the Criminal Code — and similar to a law enacted by Sweden in 1999.
“I don’t feel it’s in the best interest of people exploited in the sex trade to operate in a vacuum where there’s no law,” Justice Minister Jonathan Denis said.
The so-called “Nordic model” first employed in Sweden, and later adopted by Norway and Iceland, makes it a crime to buy sex, but it’s not an offence to sell sexual services. The approach is based on the premise all forms of prostitution are exploitative; the law is intended to deter men from buying sex without criminalizing people involved in the sex trade.
Denis said Alberta’s direction isn’t a copy of the Nordic model, but agreed it follows the same principle.
“Charging (sex trade workers) with prostitution or prostitution-related offences victimizes them twice,” he said.
While Alberta has adopted the principles of the Nordic model, there’s debate about whether it has actually decreased prostitution in countries such as Sweden or simply driven it out of view.
Meanwhile, there are countries such as the Netherlands and New Zealand that believe sex work is a legitimate occupation and regulate it.
Although exchanging sex for money isn’t illegal in Canada, the Criminal Code has provisions against soliciting for sex, living off the earnings of prostitutes and keeping a brothel.
Three Ontario sex workers took a constitutional challenge all the way to the Supreme Court, successfully arguing the laws force prostitution underground and violate their Charter right to “life, liberty and security of the person.”
Parliament has one year from the Dec. 20 ruling to come up with new provisions.
Federal Justice Minister Peter MacKay said this week the government has begun drafting new legislation and will introduce it well before the deadline.
While amending the Criminal Code is the federal government’s responsibility, administration of justice is a provincial jurisdiction.
Provincial officials didn’t have a precise number of defendants facing prosecution for prostitution-related offence, but Alberta Justice said there are 400 charges currently in the system that are affected by the Supreme Court ruling.
The Alberta Trial Lawyers’ Association, one of two groups representing the province’s defence bar, has urged the province to stay the existing cases in light of the Supreme Court judgment.
“You wonder why they would still prosecute — the law is unconstitutional,” said D’Arcy DePoe, past-president of the association.
Continuing to prosecute the existing cases and charging additional people under the law as it’s written now will further clog up the province’s congested criminal courts, said DePoe.
“Someone who’s charged under the same law will simply file a (Charter) application to have the charge stayed,” he said.
Julie Kaye, a Calgary researcher who studies human trafficking, said the province’s move won’t have a dramatic effect in Calgary because police are already focused on charging johns and trying to get prostitutes into programs that help them exit the sex trade.
Kaye, an adviser to the Action Coalition on Human Trafficking in Alberta, said a large part of the Nordic model is based on providing adequate supports for people leaving the sex trade, in addition to the legal component.
Enacting laws without the accompanying social programs for the people affected won’t solve the problem, Kaye said.
“Those who are going to exploit others and act violently are less likely to be law-abiding anyway. It could cause them to go deeper underground,” she said.
jvanrassel@calgaryherald.com
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/A...d+pursue+johns+prostitutes/9468321/story.html
Don't you thin there will be uneven enforcement of the Nordic model?
With a federal criminal code, but provincial enforcement; local enforcement will likely vary. For instance, I could see Quebec not being totally onboard and providing lax or little enforcement letting things stay the way they are. Or Toronto and Vancover (which have more pressing huge city problems) may not have the drive or manpower to provide much enforcement.
This is one area where the US has the better system. Outside of international and national security issues, most criminal code development and enforcement is at the state and local level. The federal government is smart enough not to get into the prostitution issue. Unlike drugs it really pretty harmless and too difficult to control anyway.
Another thing. The Nordic might work in Scandinavia. But Scandinavia is a homogeneous society of almost all white population and very Lutheran. They have the same sense of togetherness and social correctness. Canada is more like its southern neighbor. Very diverse society with every color under the rainbow and diverse opinions on how society should function. That diversity may cause the Nordic model to not solve the government's perceived problem quite as well as it thinks or hopes it will.
Plus, once the longterm, independent business astute SP's figure out how to protect their clients their career will go on pretty as usual; just as it does in just about every other country, legal or not.
With a federal criminal code, but provincial enforcement; local enforcement will likely vary. For instance, I could see Quebec not being totally onboard and providing lax or little enforcement letting things stay the way they are. Or Toronto and Vancover (which have more pressing huge city problems) may not have the drive or manpower to provide much enforcement.
This is one area where the US has the better system. Outside of international and national security issues, most criminal code development and enforcement is at the state and local level. The federal government is smart enough not to get into the prostitution issue. Unlike drugs it really pretty harmless and too difficult to control anyway.
Another thing. The Nordic might work in Scandinavia. But Scandinavia is a homogeneous society of almost all white population and very Lutheran. They have the same sense of togetherness and social correctness. Canada is more like its southern neighbor. Very diverse society with every color under the rainbow and diverse opinions on how society should function. That diversity may cause the Nordic model to not solve the government's perceived problem quite as well as it thinks or hopes it will.
Plus, once the longterm, independent business astute SP's figure out how to protect their clients their career will go on pretty as usual; just as it does in just about every other country, legal or not.
It's interesting to speculate but, I've got a bad feeling about this. I hope I am wrong, but thanks to the efforts Bedford and company, looks more like we may see a display of the Law of Unintended Consequences.
Ontario joins N.B. in move away from prostitution prosecutions
New Brunswick is not the only province moving away from prosecuting prostitution cases in light of the recent Supreme Court of Canada decision.
Ontario will not be pursuing cases involving charges of keeping a common bawdy house, living on the avails of prostitution, or communicating for the purposes of prostitution in a public place — the three prostitution-related offences the Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional.
It will, however, continue to prosecute other relevant charges, according to a spokesperson from the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General.
"Having carefully reviewed the Supreme Court’s decision, the Ministry recognizes that there are several prostitution-related offences under the Criminal Code which were not affected by the Court’s decision," Brendan Crawley said in statement to CBC News.
"Crown counsel will continue to prosecute such charges where there is a reasonable prospect of conviction and it is in the public interest to proceed," he said.
The laying of criminal charges is a function of police, independent of the attorney general, said Crawley.
"The Ministry has full confidence in the ability of police to carry out their investigative responsibilities consistent with the principles articulated by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Bedford."
In its Dec. 20 ruling on the case, which originated out of Ontario, the top court unanimously ruled Canada's anti-prostitution laws were over-broad and made a "suspended declaration of invalidity."
The Supreme Court gave Parliament one year to come up with new legislation, which means the provisions remain in the Criminal Code until then.
Nevertheless, New Brunswick decided to drop most prostitution cases currently before the courts and not pursue new cases involving the three charges in question.
That decision came under fire from federal Minister of Justice and Attorney General Peter MacKay, who said not enforcing existing prostitution laws is "not an option."
"While the administration of justice is a matter of provincial jurisdiction, Canadians expect criminal laws in this country to be properly enforced so long as they remain in force," MacKay said in a statement last week to CBC News.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-b...away-from-prostitution-prosecutions-1.2521133
New Brunswick is not the only province moving away from prosecuting prostitution cases in light of the recent Supreme Court of Canada decision.
Ontario will not be pursuing cases involving charges of keeping a common bawdy house, living on the avails of prostitution, or communicating for the purposes of prostitution in a public place — the three prostitution-related offences the Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional.
It will, however, continue to prosecute other relevant charges, according to a spokesperson from the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General.
"Having carefully reviewed the Supreme Court’s decision, the Ministry recognizes that there are several prostitution-related offences under the Criminal Code which were not affected by the Court’s decision," Brendan Crawley said in statement to CBC News.
"Crown counsel will continue to prosecute such charges where there is a reasonable prospect of conviction and it is in the public interest to proceed," he said.
The laying of criminal charges is a function of police, independent of the attorney general, said Crawley.
"The Ministry has full confidence in the ability of police to carry out their investigative responsibilities consistent with the principles articulated by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Bedford."
In its Dec. 20 ruling on the case, which originated out of Ontario, the top court unanimously ruled Canada's anti-prostitution laws were over-broad and made a "suspended declaration of invalidity."
The Supreme Court gave Parliament one year to come up with new legislation, which means the provisions remain in the Criminal Code until then.
Nevertheless, New Brunswick decided to drop most prostitution cases currently before the courts and not pursue new cases involving the three charges in question.
That decision came under fire from federal Minister of Justice and Attorney General Peter MacKay, who said not enforcing existing prostitution laws is "not an option."
"While the administration of justice is a matter of provincial jurisdiction, Canadians expect criminal laws in this country to be properly enforced so long as they remain in force," MacKay said in a statement last week to CBC News.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-b...away-from-prostitution-prosecutions-1.2521133
I agree with MacKay, but continuing to prosecute is a waste of resources. Dropping charges is also stupid. Why not simply stay all charges pending the new legislation?
Proper enforcement of a law that has been found to be constitutionally invalid is no enforcement. Even if the effect of the decision has been stayed for a year, I cannot see what would stop anyone charged with filing the same suit that resulted in overturning those laws.
The only useful and defensible enforcement during this hiatus would be polite, cautionary visits from LE noting the 'offending' conduct, pointing that their forbearance was all that was preventing enforcement, and suggesting greater discretion and wiser practices. We have managed the equally serious (more so in the opinion of some) matter of abortion for decades now without a Criminal Code prohibition. There is no thinking majority of Canadians demanding we be tougher on the sex-trade than on abortionists.
McKay just imagines he can get something under this head through and please his base because no one will speak up for sex-workers.
All good points. My thinking is that, from a policy perspective, its not a good idea to concede that it's a free for all. That was presumably the point of staying the decision. Of course you are right that any charges under existing (struck) laws cannot stand. My question is whether those charges can be amended for the new laws. As I type this, I realize what a stupid question that is...
Plenty of folks are speaking up for sex-workers. The problem is that the most vocal parties do not necessarily represent the interests or beliefs of the majority.
We dont know yet what they're gonna do, but I admit its unlikely they will.
And I just heard another Harper scare ad on radio today slagging Justin Trudeau and his policy to legalize marijuana when/if he gets elected. That doesnt bode well for any upcoming prostitution laws
Passing the buck to the provinces would be terrific news for the industry. (The criminal code is federal jurisdiction).
The Supreme Court of Canada will still have the final say if there are any disputes that cannot be resolved at the provincial level. The provinces should not get involved in the prostitution trade. I don't think will see the AGCO, replaced with the AGPCO,(Alcohol, Gaming, Prostitution Commision of Ontario) anytime soon.
what if cops bust in while you're fucking the hoe, but then you pretend you're the hoe that was paid to fuck the girl... so the girl gets charged and you get walked to your car with a towel around you while being hugged by a female officer... (with big tits)
Keep telling yourself that if it helps you sleep at night as the owner of a rub and tug however massage parlours operate in the same gray zone as every other facet of the sex trade. The fact that you have a bodyrub licence from the city doesn't actually mean anyone can legally be provided with a "finish" or any other sexual service, never has. The municipal tier can't disallow these services but they can't make them legally acceptable either, only the feds can do this. You're not under the impression that some draconian new law against prostitution wouldn't apply at massage parlours, are you?
Crim law is federal jurisdiction, so "leaving it to provinces" would be doing nothing, meanwhile they said they are going to do something.
