Sex Work Laws and the Supreme Court of Canada

Few legal questions in Canada have drawn as much sustained public debate as the regulation of sex work. A central moment came when the Supreme Court of Canada heard a challenge to several Criminal Code provisions, brought by current and former sex workers in a case known as Bedford.

Rallies held in several cities before the hearing reflected how closely the issue was followed by advocacy groups, researchers and the public.

The laws under challenge

Selling sexual services between adults was not itself a crime in Canada at the time. The challenge instead targeted three related offences: keeping or being in a common bawdy house, living on the avails of prostitution, and communicating in public for the purpose of prostitution.

Critics argued that these provisions, taken together, made it hard for sex workers to work safely, for example by limiting indoor work, screening of clients and the hiring of security.

The Charter argument

The case relied on section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which protects life, liberty and security of the person. Those challenging the laws argued that the offences increased physical danger and were not consistent with principles of fundamental justice. Organizations such as Pivot Legal Society took part as intervenors, presenting evidence and arguments about safety and policing.

The federal government defended the laws as tools to reduce public nuisance and the exploitation associated with prostitution.

The ruling and what followed

In December 2013 the Supreme Court of Canada ruled unanimously that the three provisions violated section 7 and were unconstitutional. The Court suspended its declaration for one year to give Parliament time to respond.

Parliament then passed new legislation, the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act, which shifted the framework toward criminalizing the purchase of sexual services and some related activities. The new approach has itself been debated, with supporters stressing harm reduction through deterrence of demand and critics pointing to ongoing safety concerns.

Ongoing discussion

Sex work policy in Canada continues to draw differing views among legal scholars, public health researchers, police, survivors of exploitation and sex worker advocacy groups. Terms such as decriminalization, legalization and the Nordic model are used in these discussions and carry different meanings.