Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Assessing evidence, arguments, and inequality in Bedford v. Canada
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.
2014 (English)In: Harvard Journal of Law and Gender, ISSN 0270-1456, Vol. 37, no 2, 459-544 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Until recently, Canada criminalized anyone who lived "wholly or in part on the avails of prostitution of another person,” and anyone who kept, controlled, or knowingly permitted a “bawdy-house” for prostitution. The Supreme Court of Canada found that these laws prevented brothel management, escort agencies, bodyguards, or drivers from enhancing the safety and well-being of prostituted persons in indoor locations. This article assesses the evidence relied on by courts to strike down the laws, finding that evidence was misrepresented and misevaluated, thus did not support their decision. Empirical evidence shows that prostitution is an unequal practice of sexual and economic exploitation to which prostituted people generally lack real or acceptable alternatives. Pimps and brothel-owners in general make their situations worse, not better. The two invalidated provisions facilitate prosecution of pimps and other third party profiteers more effectively than existing trafficking laws. By invalidating these provisions, Canada will expose prostituted people to predators while protecting their exploiters. Their decisions overturn previous precedents that shielded prostituted people from abusive pimps, and violate Canada’s commitment to promote equality among historically disadvantaged people, such as those in prostitution. Charter principles of substantive equality call for retaining laws that put exploiters — pimps and brothel-owners — out of business, while invalidating any fines or criminal laws imposed on prostituted persons, measures that preclude their opportunities and exit. Civil damages actions on behalf of prostituted people and effective criminal laws against purchase of people for sex would also promote their substantive equality.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2014. Vol. 37, no 2, 459-544 p.
Keyword [en]
Prostitution, Trafficking, Exploitation, Inequality, Canada, Charter, Section 15, Substantive Equality, Intersectionality, Multiple Disadvantages
National Category
Research subject
Criminal Law; statskunskap; Legal Science; Jurisprudence; Public Law
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-105849DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2091216OAI: diva2:732781
Available from: 2014-07-06 Created: 2014-07-06 Last updated: 2015-03-09Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(346 kB)72 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 346 kBChecksum SHA-512
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Waltman, Max
By organisation
Department of Political Science
In the same journal
Harvard Journal of Law and Gender

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 72 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 783 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link