denied!! supreme court intervenors not allowed to give evidence....

[susi]

We have some bad news to report. Maggie's, Stella, l’amie de Maimie & POWER ::: Prostitutes of Ottawa / Gatineau Work Educate & Resist had jointly applied to the supreme court to be an intervenor in Bedford case which will be heard this June 13 in Ottawa. Being an intervenor means being allowed to give evidence/make arguments to the court.

Unfortunately we heard yesterday that the court rejected our motion along with those of an international group of sex worker led organizations (from NZealand, Sweden and Australia) and a coalition of feminist orgs that support decrim. In fact, every single organization they rejected as intervenors were pro-decriminalization.

Accepted as intervenors are the far-right group REAL Women of Canada and Vancouver Rape Relief (who were last in court when they successfully argued for the right to ban trans women from being a part of their organization).
...
It's terrible news and a reminder of what we are up against: that sex work is not considered work but a "social problem".

Today is May 1: international workers day. Today more than ever, Maggie's will be proudly marching. In order to build our power, we must continue to stand in our truth: that SEX WORK IS REAL WORK.

 

[PlayfulAlex]

Thank you for all you do for this community (meant in the broadest of terms), Miss Susi...

 

[Bobo The Rabbit]

I like things the way they are, it works for me well enough.

 

[susi]

well, your happiness is what is at stake. they want to criminalize you, the buyer. your review history could then be used to demonstrate that you are a habitual offender...

how would you feel about ti then? if criminality was pointed at the pooner instead of the worker?

love susie

 

[Sleepmonger]

well, your happiness is what is at stake. they want to criminalize you, the buyer. your review history could then be used to demonstrate that you are a habitual offender...
how would you feel about ti then? if criminality was pointed at the pooner instead of the worker?
love susie

You know my opinions on the Nordic model, but I'm curious as to how it applies to the court hearing.

Am I wrong in assuming that this hearing is to review the legality of the currently existing set of laws revolving around operating a bawdy house, living off the avails, communication, etc., and not on the creation and adoption of a new set of laws such as the Nordic model? That sort of thing will be done after the hearing by parliament to generate votes. The legality, fairness, and the opinions of the minority likely won’t be a consideration for parliament if there is a reasonable amount of public support for the criminalization of purchasers.

This case bears a striking resemblance to the Supreme Court case on the unconstitutional nature of the abortion provision in the Criminal Code of Canada. The provision was indeed found in violation of the charter of rights and freedoms and since then we have had no laws regulating abortion in Canada.

I think the argument for decriminalization, and against the Nordic model, also lies in the interpretation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Primarily, the provisions discussing freedom of conscience, the right to security of the person, and the rights to sexual equality.

With regard to Section 2 of the charter (freedom of conscience), I believe that the decision to sell or purchase sexual services is essentially a moral decision… a matter of conscience if you will. The real question is whose conscience is of importance? That of those individuals involved in the transaction? Or the overall societal conscience based on a majority vote by the population? I believe, that in a free and democratic society this sort of decision has to be up to the conscience of the individuals involved.

Then, there is the right to security of the person, which consists of rights to privacy of the body and the right to protect the “psychological integrity” of an individual. Which the charter outlines as protecting against significant government inflicted harm or stress to the mental state of an individual. Can we argue beyond a reasonable doubt that the criminalization of our actions would not generate a significant level of stress to the mental state of the individual? Are there lonely unattractive men out there are kept sane by the attentions of these ladies? Does the criminalization of the primary means of relaxation of a stressed out businessman not harm his psychological integrity? There has also been discussion within the Supreme Court and academics as to whether or not “security of the person” guarantees some economic rights. While the rulings have stated that the ability to generate revenue by one’s chosen means is not a charter right, it’s hard to argue that the removal of this source of income to the ladies dependent on it would not have a negative effect on their mental state.

Then there is the argument for sexual equality, how can we claim equality if a woman is given the right to choose incorporating her sexuality into an economic transaction but men are not?

EDIT - It seems half my post never posted...

It's too bad that the various groups representing decriminalization were not allowed to act as intervenors in the case, but I was under the impression this was due to their application for intervenor status containing arguments for or against laws and constitutional rights that were not under review at this time. I also thought they were allowed into the discussion by joining with another group. Was I mistaken?

 

[csr]

While Sleepmonger's assessment is correct, there are other agendas that this case is being used to forward and other legal arguments being made. The folks at Vancouver Rape Relief posted this:

Vancouver Rape Relief

April 30, 2013 19:00 ET
Vancouver Rape Relief Intends to Bring a Unique Position on Prostitution to the Supreme Court of Canada

VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA--(Marketwired - April 30, 2013) - In 6 weeks the Supreme Court of Canada will conduct its hearing regarding Canada's prostitution laws. Vancouver Rape Relief and Women's Shelter (VRRWS)-as part of the Women's Coalition for the Abolition of Prostitution- has been granted leave to intervene in the case. VRRWS will bring a feminist analysis of prostitution as both an expression and reinforcement of women's inequality to the highest court of Canada

The Attorney General of Canada's position is that the court should maintain the status quo, keeping the laws on the books as they are. Bedford, et al's position is that the court should strike down all three laws. VRRWS, however, holds a third position and will argue that the court should consider an asymmetrical approach to the application of the existing laws that differentiates between the victims of prostitution and the exploiters of prostitution.

VRRWS as part of the Women's Coalition will argue to the Supreme Court of Canada, that since the vast majority of women enter prostitution due to conditions of economic, social and racial inequality; laws that criminalize women involved in prostitution must be removed. However, laws that prevent men from buying, selling and profiting from prostituted women are important protections that must be retained.

Leading up to the hearing at the Supreme Court of Canada, Vancouver Rape Relief and Women's Shelter is participating in the Pan-Canadian Campaign We Want More Than Prostitution for Women. The campaign is calling for the abolition of inequality, poverty and prostitution. More information on the campaign can be found here: www.abolitionprostitution.ca

Vancouver Rape Relief and Women's Shelter is Canada's first rape crisis centre. VRRWS operates a 24 hour rape crisis line and transition house for battered women and their children. In the past year alone, VRRWS responded to 1,200 women escaping male violence including rape, battering and prostitution.

 

[CJ Tylers]

Bigots flock together, and the Supreme Court made it clear that they side with the bigots... ergo.... I foresee a tough road ahead.

 

[Sleepmonger]

Leading up to the hearing at the Supreme Court of Canada, Vancouver Rape Relief and Women's Shelter is participating in the Pan-Canadian Campaign We Want More Than Prostitution for Women. The campaign is calling for the abolition of inequality, poverty and prostitution. More information on the campaign can be found here: www.abolitionprostitution.ca

The abolition of poverty! Why that’s a grand idea, I can’t believe we have never thought of that before, legislated wealth for all! Looking over their documents I’m not too concerned at what they will be bringing to the discussion, the people sitting on the supreme court tend to be rather intelligent people, and the documentation here seems to be full of broad statements without definition or supporting information.
My favorite part is when they talk about the buying and selling of sexual services as exploitation and domination over women that normalizes the subordination of women’s sexuality.

Women have a complete monopoly on pussy, this does not put them in a position of subordination. Any man wanting pussy has to go through a woman, this places them in a position of great power, as men want pussy, and they are willing to do a whole lot to get it. In fact, women who offer their commodity for direct remuneration rather than the exchanges that come from a relationship, are able to demand a price for their services of 10 times that of the average wage. This is with no experience, training, or education. (Those with some experience and marketing skills can demand even more)

How then are these woman being exploited and dominated? Do you guys feel like big strong men when paying exorbitant rates for sex?

But wait they say, these campaigns are not talking about the client / sp relationship, what they are referring to is a pimp exploiting girls in order to live off their prostitution. I suppose that is a reasonable argument, but oh wait… even with the proposed changes, THAT’S STILL ILLEGAL.

The Attorney General of Canada's position is that the court should maintain the status quo, keeping the laws on the books as they are. Bedford, et al's position is that the court should strike down all three laws.

I love that after the first ruling (which was against maintaining the status quo) the courts granted a stay on the grounds of preserving the status quo until a full appeal could be made. Then the stay was extended until a second appeal could be made, then extended again. Does this happen often? Imagine if this happened on issues like women’s voting rights.

If it is true that there are other agendas allowed to be pushed in this hearing, then those groups who were denied their voice have been completely wronged.

 

[CJ Tylers]

Sleepmonger, ease up on the reins. Whenever these bigoted groups refer to prostitution, they are painting every woman (they ignore that there are men, children and transgendered involved in it as well, which I'm sure Susi is happy to point out to them) with the "Survival Sex Trade" brush. In their eyes, every Caucasian SP is a street walker or pimped out, and every asian SP is owned by a triad and/or part of human trafficking/slave trading.

If you look at it from those perspectives, then yes... there is domination and exploitation occurring. People like Susi engage the community to stymie these things, where as those other groups are more about NIMBYism or revenge (for real or imagined insults and damages). They are purely reactive and narrow minded... please don't give credence to their dogma by getting worked up over it.

 

[csr]

Upon closer inspection, the following groups who all appear to hold an abolitionist position and support (if not out-rightly campaign for the Nordic model) were granted intervener status:

The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada
The Canadian Association of Sexual Assault Centres
Native Women's Association of Canada
Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies
Action ontarienne contre la violence faite aux femmes
Concertation des luttes contre l'exploitation sexuelle
Regroupement québécois des centres d'aide et de lutte contre les agressions à caractère sexuel
Vancouver Rape Relief Society
The Christian Legal Fellowship
Catholic Civil Rights Leagues
REAL Women of Canada
The David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights
The Institut Simone de Beauvoir
The AWCEP Asian Women for Equality Society, operating as Asian Women Coalition Ending Prostitution
The Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto Inc.

While these groups, who either advocate for sex worker/seller rights or take a harm-reduction approach and thus DO NOT support the Nordic model, were also granted status:

Pivot Legal Society,
Downtown Eastside Sex Workers United Against Violence
PACE Society
The Secretariat of the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS
The British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
The Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network
British Columbia Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS
HIV & AIDS Legal Clinic Ontario


A clear imbalance in terms of who gets to make the arguments. It is also clear that having credible empirical evidence to present is more important than ever and having this evidence will continue to be important as the lobby for changes to the law post-Bedford continues.

 

[Sleepmonger]

Sleepmonger, ease up on the reins. Whenever these bigoted groups refer to prostitution, they are painting every woman (they ignore that there are men, children and transgendered involved in it as well, which I'm sure Susi is happy to point out to them) with the "Survival Sex Trade" brush. In their eyes, every Caucasian SP is a street walker or pimped out, and every asian SP is owned by a triad and/or part of human trafficking/slave trading.

If you look at it from those perspectives, then yes... there is domination and exploitation occurring. People like Susi engage the community to stymie these things, where as those other groups are more about NIMBYism or revenge (for real or imagined insults and damages). They are purely reactive and narrow minded... please don't give credence to their dogma by getting worked up over it.

, I'm not actually all that worked up.

I'm not worked up at all about their opinions, at least, everyone has opinions, I just wanted to poke at them a bit. As for the supreme court hearing their agenda if it has no bearing on the case in question, but refusing to see the others. That does bother me a bit.

 

[Sleepmonger]

A clear imbalance in terms of who gets to make the arguments. It is also clear that having credible empirical evidence to present is more important than ever and having this evidence will continue to be important as the lobby for changes to the law post-Bedford continues.

I agree with both these statements, and believe the post Bedford lobbying process will be the most difficult, and the most important

 

[CJ Tylers]

Personally, I think that at this point in time, we should be focusing on eliminating the NEED for the survival sex trade. Anything else is just a distraction from the real issues at hand.

 

[csr]

Personally, I think that at this point in time, we should be focusing on eliminating the NEED for the survival sex trade. Anything else is just a distraction from the real issues at hand.

Yes, eliminating the extreme poverty and the conditions associated with entry into survival sex (drug/alcohol dependency, lack of access to housing, lack of education(al) options and support services, ghettoization, etc.) is certainly vital but working toward doing this is much easier (and more likely) when the people doing this do not have to worry about social and legal stigma and being arrested simply for occupying a 'status' position of being a sex buyer or seller.

 

[the old maxx50]

How many actual sex workers are going to testify at this hearing
and i mean acctual working women and men from all the different aspects of sex
work.. It not just aboit street worker...They are 10%.... and yes the one that suze is fighting
for thd most..and get the most media attention
What a bout those that work in the safty of agencies.. are licenced.... and the indapendant women
that chose to work as they do

Where are those voices...We here them here on the boards but not at hearing because
to do so is to face personal and public back lass That in its self is contrairy to what we are granted
under the charter of rights a d freebom

If the courts does not here from those they are making a decition over..There can never realy be
way to make a fair and just ruling
They need to here the true evidence not that which pushes agendas

All parties are guilty of squewring the truth..to fit the program

I have only seen a small section of this business.. servies .. but never the less have heard
a number of stories and know a numder of women that have come and gone
..as have many of you... But it most cases people have made a choise to be in the sex trade
Yes the need for money is number one... so it is a job...Money for food . lodging.. care for
children. and also many use it to buy drugs
Are they explotied be cause of that need ?Yes some times they are.. just as none sex workers are
Most of those organiztions that are against decrimalization are allso trying to dictate .sexual rights
and fredom in accordances with there beleifs not the charter of rights and freedom

I hope the courts is reminded of that.

 

[the old maxx50]

Here is another argument on choice..over explotation.. coursion and pimping

I the indavidual makes an effort on their own to place an add . make web site to addvertise
their servies.. put what they do and costs.. and they so testfy..That is trstimony and evidence that contradicks
what many of these groups claim for all involved in the sex trade

The right to choose is what we are given a law that restrices that unfairly or with out cause on an indavidual
is contrairy to these inherint right...and any one that councels to unfairly and arbitraily restrict those rights
of indaviduals the freely and with out any illegle intent wish to make choise. to offer prostitution
servies.. should be allowed to fo so as there vocation

And allso be protected .servered by the laws just like any citizen of Canada.. to advocate . and do other
wise .is discrimnation against a definable group .and is not allowed under Canada constitution

And any one doing so is punishable by the laws that exsit

 

[CJ Tylers]

Yes, eliminating the extreme poverty and the conditions associated with entry into survival sex (drug/alcohol dependency, lack of access to housing, lack of education(al) options and support services, ghettoization, etc.) is certainly vital but working toward doing this is much easier (and more likely) when the people doing this do not have to worry about social and legal stigma and being arrested simply for occupying a 'status' position of being a sex buyer or seller.

I believe that was my point... put an end to the need for it, rather than attacking the people that are engaging in it...

OldMaxx... under our current system, the Law only works for people who complain the loudest, have the most money, or are connected. Regular people, or the disadvantaged and easily ignored, have little to no recourse.

 

[the old maxx50]

CJT the law has very little to do with it unlesss some one is bring charged

This is an attemp to strick down a law.. on charter of right issue... through a court disision.and other people and special interest groups tring to us the hears as a plateform for their aggenda to influance the political process of making new laws.

It is true that to get good lawyers to reprsent your cause cost .. and all so if you are charged under the law. Willl you call my landline at 1000am a few times to wake me up? It's important that I get up...thank you, much appreciated!
you also need a good lawyer . usuall better then what the courts will give you if you cant afford one.

 

[susi]

, I'm not actually all that worked up.

I'm not worked up at all about their opinions, at least, everyone has opinions, I just wanted to poke at them a bit. As for the supreme court hearing their agenda if it has no bearing on the case in question, but refusing to see the others. That does bother me a bit.

thankyou everyone for your input!

yes CJ you're right! i tell them that its not just women and girls all the time!! lol not that they can hear me....

you are right sleep monger, the nordic model cannot be implemented right now and is not being considered. i thought you CJ explained it well. and yes, it is hard to see so many religious or abolitionist groups taking part. its disturbing that its so biased and unbalanced. this has been the problem all along.

however, i have faith in PIVOT and SWUAV. they are prepared. the other thing is that alot of the evidence has been submitted already and some of it disallowed or rather given no weight- ie the melissa farely data.

ms sarah, i have tried contacting groups like this and REAL women or canada. they cannot get past the sex is only for marriage and then only for reproduction.

i remember after i was in an article in chatelaine which included my picture, little old sort of knitting grannies would come up to me and just start talking to me, saying all kinds of things about sex work, sex....one woman phoned me up and started giving me the gears so i talked calmly and politely with her and confronted evey arguement and assumption she had.

at one point she said she knew a younge man whose wife had passed away from an illness and that he would never have sex again as you may only have sex with your spouse. she said she felt sorry for him but that was what she believed in.

i asked - what about til death do us part?- and she had no response. she was surprised, know what i mean? i also asked about men who never find a wife and she was basically saying, too bad, they need to learn to control themselves....i asked her about the health benefits and the fact that lack of sex could cause death for men a number of different ways and again, she had no answer, she was surprised.

that's the hardest part of all this, it's the hearts and minds. its slow and repetative work.

at the meeting we recently held between workers and allies from all over canada we discussed the formation of a national outreach team or teams to take the message on the road...

the abolitionists are the loudest voice. it takes alot of effort to combat it. i have lectured and spoken at many events, gone on communication campaigns talking to politicians from every level of government, the police, city staff, community organizations...the list goes on....

its like bailing out the ocean with a thimble....

again, i do have hope. research like jon's voice and the new research safety and security will go along way to fight the nordic approach. sleep monger also makes some great points about the power dynamic of the sp/client relationship.

we need to talk more openly about these things like we are in this thread. this way at least i can have a clearer view of the pooner perspective and try to represent that in my work as best as i can....i am not a pooner so really can't speak for you guys...but i can try to communicate somewhat....

its going to be a crazy ride!

love susie

 

[susi]

How many actual sex workers are going to testify at this hearing
and i mean acctual working women and men from all the different aspects of sex
work.. It not just aboit street worker...They are 10%.... and yes the one that suze is fighting
for thd most..and get the most media attention
What a bout those that work in the safty of agencies.. are licenced.... and the indapendant women
that chose to work as they do

Where are those voices...We here them here on the boards but not at hearing because
to do so is to face personal and public back lass That in its self is contrairy to what we are granted
under the charter of rights a d freebom

I hope the courts is reminded of that.

actually, i represent indoor workers more now and research about indoor sex work is part of the evidence being considered. it is ethical data which clearly shows that its safer to work indoors than outside.

i provide support to indoor workers all the time and am in the process of revising city by-laws governing our industry to make a safer more open industry here. the new enforcement policy from VPD which we were part of developing clearly has aspects related to indoor sex work and states openly that sex for money between consenting adults is not a priority for the VPD. it also has a section about treating workers with dignity during enforcement action should it need to take place and that officers must allow workers to get dressed or give them a blanket as cover.

so, even though i am not in the media as much, the battle continues. truth be told, i was the spokesperson in the media during the trial in the case of the missing women. i did it as part of a greater strategy to control media intrusions in the DTES. filming addicted workers, asking them if they were raped or if they have aids or if their friend died....hard and triggering questions followed "thanks for the interview".... when it was over, i wanted to stop. i don't do very much media at all any more. during that time i was in the media around 400 times even being on the BBC world and al jazerra....

anyway, don't worry. the experiences of empowered and non victimized workers are at the table....clients however....i wish john's voice could be heard as evidence....

love susie