Court Challenge

[homer]

Hope this works!

http://www.torontosun.com/news/torontoandgta/2009/06/20/9868316-sun.html


It may be the oldest trade in the world and an Ontario court will decide if sex workers can legally turn tricks indoors without getting busted.

A lawyer for three anti-prostitution groups appeared at Osgoode Hall yesterday to seek intervener status in a Constitutional challenge by former and current sex trade workers to have Canada's bawdy house law declared unconstitutional.

Superior Court of Justice judge Ted Matlow will decide in a few weeks whether Real Women of Canada, Christian Legal Fellowship and the Catholic Civil Rights League are "friends of the court" when a challenge is heard Oct. 5.

The action was brought by former sex trade workers Terri-Jean Bedford and Valerie Scott, and Amy Lebovitch, who's still in the trade.

Bedford and Scott claim in court documents they'd like to return to hooking if they can work from inside the privacy of their homes, which violates bawdy house laws.

'"The prostitution laws are not safe for a lot of women," said dominatrix Bedford, whose North York bawdy house was busted by the cops in 1994. "This is a health-and-safety issue and it is a great day for Canadian women."

The women's lawyer, Alan Young, is challenging as unconstitutional sections of the Criminal Code that deals with keeping a bawdy house, living off the avails of prostitution and communicating for the purpose of prostitution.

"These provisions prevent sex trade workers from working at home and they can't hire people to help them with security," Young told court. "The provisions force women to work outside and in an environment of danger."

Lawyer Ranjan Agarwal said the three groups he represents want to make submissions in court.

"These groups have a long history of intervention in cases," Agarwal told Matlow. "My clients believe the Criminal Code of Canada is soft on moral values."

 

[Dave - WebGuy]

Wasn't Bedford charged for having a common bawdy house over Dominatrix fetishes .... I remember soemthing about the court having to figure out if a fetish is sexual gratification or something. She was eventually charged though I think over the exchange of money for services thing.

I think their main premis is more that they want the common bawdy house law to not be applicable if the property is their main residence. I guess we'd all like to work from home .... especially if it's a 9 Bedroom bungalo.

 

[mandrill]

I wonder what Young's argument is. No one has really thought of a good consitutional challenge for the anti bawdy house laws......... probably because there really isn't one.

I guess the argument is that the law is discriminatory against women because it disproportionately puts them at risk of street violence by forcing them to do streets tricks or do outcalls in strange locations. Hmmmm.........

Well, I hope he wins, but I think the argument is technically not that strong.

I know Agarwal slightly and I am surprised and disappointed by who he chose to represent in this matter.

 

[gramage]

I wonder what Young's argument is. No one has really thought of a good consitutional challenge for the anti bawdy house laws......... probably because there really isn't one.

I guess the argument is that the law is discriminatory against women because it disproportionately puts them at risk of street violence by forcing them to do streets tricks or do outcalls in strange locations. Hmmmm.........

Well, I hope he wins, but I think the argument is technically not that strong.

I know Agarwal slightly and I am surprised and disappointed by who he chose to represent in this matter.

If I remember correctly (it's been a while since I've seen Young speak) his primary argument is that in Canada we have a right to work and these laws force people exercising their right to work in a profession they have chosen in unsafe environments.

 

[neverwas]

The argument in favour of the challenge is probably based on the following section of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. If the court finds that the Bawdy House provision of the Criminal Code do violate the right to "security of the person" the onus would then be on the Crown to show that the violation is reasonable and can be "justified in a free and democratic society". This will be a very interesting case and may lead to legal incalls.


7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

 

[mandrill]

Well, prostitution is legal in Canada. So I guess it can be argued that they have a right to perform a legal job in safe conditions.

 

[landscaper]

if it is upheld every municipality in the country is in trouble zoning bylaws are goig to get a real workout.

 

[neverwas]

Although religious groups want standing so they can present arguments in support of the current law, their real issue will be based on some "morality" issue.
Landscaper points out the real practical problem, the one of zoning to balance the interest of residents in any area against the possible rights of SPs working in an incall in that area. Those types of problems occur for any land use issue ranging from such things as the location of propane storage businesses to strip clubs.

 

[Rockslinger]

Recent history since the 1970's is that enlightened politicians (starting with Trudeau) and the courts have generally been biased in favour of greater sexual rights. We can thank our Gay friends for a lot of that progress but we are still behind Europe (from what I heard).

When John Turner took over as Justice Minister from Trudeau and pushed legislation to make homo sex legal he basically said that some people might find certain sexual practices repugnant but the law should not make such acts criminal unless children and/or small animals are involved.

Please please do not ever give Stephen Harper a majority because he and his hardcore Conservatives will make sex illegal. Please please do remind people that we live in Canada and not Islamic Iran.

 

[tboy]

only SMALL animals? Does that mean if you do a cow it's cool? (and don't even GO there lol)......

I read about this today and while I agree, a woman should be able to work out of her own home, I can understand the rights of her neighbours as well. Frankly as much as the "idea" of an incall just down the hall is intriguing, I honestly wouldn't want a constant stream of strange men walking the halls of my home.

The only way I could see this working is if there were some strict criteria put in place. Something like only x number of appointments per day, only the OWNER or RENTER of the property can operate out of the location, etc.

For multiple worker status, I think a red light district is the only answer......Plus you get the added benefit of anyone NOT wanting to be exposed to this sort of business, just stays away from the area.

 

[Rockslinger]

I read about this today and while I agree, a woman should be able to work out of her own home, I can understand the rights of her neighbours as well.

You should see my current and past neighbours, I would gladly swap them for an incall. One time I lived across the street from a grade school, it was hell.

Warning: Molest a large animal and you might end up dead or badly injured very quickly.

 

[Never Compromised]

I know Agarwal slightly and I am surprised and disappointed by who he chose to represent in this matter.

Amazing what money will do for a lawyer.

 

[Dave - WebGuy]

Although religious groups want standing so they can present arguments in support of the current law, their real issue will be based on some "morality" issue.
Landscaper points out the real practical problem, the one of zoning to balance the interest of residents in any area against the possible rights of SPs working in an incall in that area. Those types of problems occur for any land use issue ranging from such things as the location of propane storage businesses to strip clubs.

What's the difference between a home-based business and an incall as far as zoning goes theoretically?

If I want to shoot models for porn sites from my living room, I don't think I need to have anything changed for zoning ...

I think the issue may come down to can an SP legally operate form his/her home .. and the answer could be that it cannot since the constant flow of clients would impede the enjoyent of surrounding homes (Usually a by-law thing). Thus they would need to live in an area zoned for the type of activity, and that would make more issues. We won't know what happens until the dust settles anyhow, it'll depend on the judge and everything presented.

 

[neverwas]

Most municipalities have a by-law allowing home based businesses in residential areas, including areas zoned for single family homes. There are usually some restrictions such as signage, adequate parking, number of employees, type of business etc.
Your business, including photography would be allowed in most municipalities in such residential areas.
The only difference with a home based incall for one SP would be that Bawdy Houses are presently contrary to the Criminal Code (even though that type of business would otherwise fit the restrictions for home based businesses in most cities). Such a small scale operation with a few customers each day would not even be a traffic issue.
A large incall operation with several girls could create a traffic and parking issue and would not fit the requirements for home based businesses in any by-law I have seen for areas zoned for single-family dwellings although it would comply with zoning for mixed use (residential/commercial) areas.
It would be simple for incalls to fit zoning in some parts of any municipality if incalls were made legal.

 

[Dave - WebGuy]

Most municipalities have a by-law allowing home based businesses in residential areas, including areas zoned for single family homes. There are usually some restrictions such as signage, adequate parking, number of employees, type of business etc.
Your business, including photography would be allowed in most municipalities in such residential areas.
The only difference with a home based incall for one SP would be that Bawdy Houses are presently contrary to the Criminal Code (even though that type of business would otherwise fit the restrictions for home based businesses in most cities). Such a small scale operation with a few customers each day would not even be a traffic issue.
A large incall operation with several girls could create a traffic and parking issue and would not fit the requirements for home based businesses in any by-law I have seen for areas zoned for single-family dwellings although it would comply with zoning for mixed use (residential/commercial) areas.
It would be simple for incalls to fit zoning in some parts of any municipality if incalls were made legal.

Being a larger scale operation would probably exclude them from the provision that I think the case is about unless all of them lived in the place they were working.

I was just trying to point out that zoning wouldn't be an issue at all, the only way it would have an effect on zoning would be if it was prostitution laws changed and not the common bawdy house laws.

I've had weeks where I've had 20 or so girls come through for photos ... creates quite the stir here. Just a good thing that most of the people in the building enjoy the view.

 

[tboy]

As I was saying, a red light district would solve all of those zoning problems. As I was also saying, a limit would need to be placed on the number of visitors one could see in a day. But then again, this could also apply to a home based daycare. I could see it being a real nightmare when all the parents show up to pick up their kids at the same time. This will always be a problem when you mix business with residential.

The way around this is what is becoming more and more commonplace: live/work buildings. This gets around the zoning issue but even then you still get idiots who purchase into these buildings and then complain because of the commercial operations that go on. I get this all the time because I DO live in the first (or one of the first) buildings to be zoned this way. People are often bitching about the work I do and how it "disturbs" them. I sympathize with them but say: then you really shouldn't have moved into a commercial building.....

 

[Rockslinger]

I could see it being a real nightmare when all the parents show up to pick up their kids at the same time. This will always be a problem when you mix business with residential.

Try living across the street from an elementary school for a couple of years. Schools should be located in an industrial park.

 

[Hangman]

Try living across the street from an elementary school for a couple of years. Schools should be located in an industrial park.

Where they can play O Canada at them all day.