Ruling Confirms Existing Legislation Aligns with Constitutional Protections
In a unanimous decision, Canada’s Supreme Court has upheld legal provisions surrounding sex work, concluding they do not violate sex workers’ right to personal security as outlined in Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Laws in Question: Procuring and Profiting from Sexual Services
The case examined two key provisions of Canada’s Criminal Code Sections 286.2 and 286.3 which criminalize both procuring sexual services and financially benefiting from the purchase of such services. The justices ruled that these statutes remain constitutionally valid and do not obstruct sex workers from implementing safety strategies in their work environments.
Safety Measures Not Prevented by the Current Laws
The court emphasized that the existing legal framework does not prevent individuals engaged in sex work from employing safety measures such as working indoors, hiring security personnel, or collaborating with others in the same line of work. This reasoning was central to the ruling, countering arguments that the provisions make sex work inherently more dangerous.
Legal Intent: Reducing Exploitation and Demand
The ruling acknowledged Parliament’s intent behind the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act. Lawmakers aimed to reduce demand for sexual services while also protecting those vulnerable to exploitation. The court noted that terms like “commercial enterprise” and “commodification of sexual activity” indicate Parliament’s broader stance that any third-party profit from sex work is viewed as inherently exploitative.
Debate Over the Definition of Exploitation
However, critics like the BC Civil Liberties Association have long expressed concern over the law’s assumptions. They argue that labeling all commercial relationships in sex work as exploitative fails to account for legitimate safety-enhancing partnerships. This, they say, limits sex workers' ability to protect themselves by engaging third parties like drivers, bodyguards, or administrative help.
Gender-Based Disparities in Sex Work
Women’s advocacy organizations also weighed in on the case. The Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund urged the court to consider how these legal provisions may disproportionately impact women and marginalized communities, including those affected by race, gender identity, and socio-economic status. They argued that the law’s application could result in discriminatory outcomes, even if unintentionally.
Revisiting a Landmark Case: Canada v. Bedford
This latest decision builds on the legal foundation laid by the landmark Canada v. Bedford ruling in 2013. In that case, the Supreme Court invalidated several sex work-related laws, including those banning brothels and criminalizing individuals who live off the income of sex work. At the time, the court ruled that such restrictions placed sex workers at greater risk and infringed upon their constitutional rights to security and safety.
Final Thoughts: A Divisive Yet Defining Moment
While the court has now affirmed the constitutionality of current sex work laws, the debate is far from over. Advocacy groups continue to call for legal reforms that differentiate between exploitative conduct and mutually consensual, safety-driven arrangements. For now, Canada’s highest court has drawn a firm line in the legal sand upholding the laws while acknowledging the complex realities of the sex work industry.
