Landmark court ruling could decriminalise street prostitution in UK

Former prostitutes should not be made to reveal their convictions and instead be treated as victims of modern slavery, the High Court is to hear, in a landmark case that could effectively lead to the decriminalisation of street prostitution.

A group of women who were previously prostitutes will argue for the first time that the law discriminates against women and is contrary to the UK’s legal obligations in respect to the Modern Slavery Act, as well as breaching their right to a private life.

The claimants in the case were exploited and trafficked as teenagers and forced to survive through prostitution for a number of years. As a result, most of them have multiple convictions under s1 Street Offences Act 1959 which means their histories are made known when they apply for a range of jobs or volunteering activities.

The solicitor representing the women in the Divisional Court, Harriet Wistrich, said laws which treat them as perpetrators rather than victims were out of touch with modern society. She said what they experienced was a form of trafficking, subjecting them to "control, coercion, exploitation and sometimes physical movement around the country".

Ahead of court proceedings, she told The Independent: “Some of the women’s experiences absolutely fall squarely into the definition of modern slavery.

“It is grossly out of touch with modern thinking in terms of understanding that these women are victims of abuse and not perpetrators. It prevents them from re-entering the world, and it deprives vulnerable people from the benefit of working with people who have been through the experience themselves and who could offer to support them and give them guidance – because they’re often the best people to help.

“It is utterly outrageous that those who suffered that form of abuse and exploitation are being penalised many years later when they’re trying to get their lives back together again.”


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/prostitutes-sex-workers-criminalise-trafficking-victims-divisional-court-ruling-prostitution-a8163466.html


A good move forward.

eddie wrote:
Former prostitutes should not be made to reveal their convictions and instead be treated as victims of modern slavery, the High Court is to hear, in a landmark case that could effectively lead to the decriminalisation of street prostitution.

A group of women who were previously prostitutes will argue for the first time that the law discriminates against women and is contrary to the UK’s legal obligations in respect to the Modern Slavery Act, as well as breaching their right to a private life.  

The claimants in the case were exploited and trafficked as teenagers and forced to survive through prostitution for a number of years. As a result, most of them have multiple convictions under s1 Street Offences Act 1959 which means their histories are made known when they apply for a range of jobs or volunteering activities.

The solicitor representing the women in the Divisional Court, Harriet Wistrich, said laws which treat them as perpetrators rather than victims were out of touch with modern society. She said what they experienced was a form of trafficking, subjecting them to "control, coercion, exploitation and sometimes physical movement around the country".

Ahead of court proceedings, she told The Independent: “Some of the women’s experiences absolutely fall squarely into the definition of modern slavery.

“It is grossly out of touch with modern thinking in terms of understanding that these women are victims of abuse and not perpetrators. It prevents them from re-entering the world, and it deprives vulnerable people from the benefit of working with people who have been through the experience themselves and who could offer to support them and give them guidance – because they’re often the best people to help.

“It is utterly outrageous that those who suffered that form of abuse and exploitation are being penalised many years later when they’re trying to get their lives back together again.”


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/prostitutes-sex-workers-criminalise-trafficking-victims-divisional-court-ruling-prostitution-a8163466.html


A good move forward.

Legalize it.

But calling it slavery is misleading. Many sex workers make that choice because it's a good paying job. Almost all of the danger is a result of it being illegal and driven underground.

I tend to agree.

eddie wrote:I tend to agree.  

Another step towards the dark side.

Legalize everything that doesn't hurt another person!!!

Say it, say it!!!!!

I have always agreed prostitution should be legalized.
Females should be helped to work in licensed premises, which are run properly and where they can be protected.

Its ridiculous that the oldest profession is still considered a dirty secret, it just enables pimps and trafficers to exploit the girls.

Sensible step, but the reasons why they become prostitutes in the first place, should be addressed too.  Drug addiction!

Instead of papering over the crack, address the crack itself (no pun intended)

Jules wrote:Sensible step, but the reasons why they become prostitutes in the first place, should be addressed too.  Drug addiction!

Instead of papering over the crack, address the crack itself (no pun intended)

So all sex workers are drug addicts?

Maddog wrote:

Jules wrote:Sensible step, but the reasons why they become prostitutes in the first place, should be addressed too.  Drug addiction!

Instead of papering over the crack, address the crack itself (no pun intended)

So all sex workers are drug addicts?  

it's not talking about all sex workers it is only talking about illegal 'street walkers'
as far as I know (it's the case down here) Brothel workers are legal.

veya_victaous wrote:

Maddog wrote:

So all sex workers are drug addicts?  

it's not talking about all sex workers it is only talking about illegal 'street walkers'
as far as I know (it's the case down here) Brothel workers are legal.

I was responding to Jules comment, She seems to think that women only get into sex work to feed their addiction to drugs.

Being 'trafficked' is a handy excuse for the overwhelming vast majority who did what they did by their own free will...!

Tommy Monk wrote:Being 'trafficked' is a handy excuse for the overwhelming vast majority who did what they did by their own free will...!

And you know them all personally to verify this right?

Syl wrote:I have always agreed prostitution should be legalized.
Females should be helped to work in licensed premises, which are run properly and where they can be protected.

Its ridiculous that the oldest profession is still considered a dirty secret, it just enables pimps and trafficers to exploit the girls.

Absolutely. Also the state would then get more tax money.

Cass wrote:

Syl wrote:I have always agreed prostitution should be legalized.
Females should be helped to work in licensed premises, which are run properly and where they can be protected.

Its ridiculous that the oldest profession is still considered a dirty secret, it just enables pimps and trafficers to exploit the girls.

Absolutely. Also the state would then get more tax money.

Exactly.
Win win situation.

Cass wrote:

Syl wrote:I have always agreed prostitution should be legalized.
Females should be helped to work in licensed premises, which are run properly and where they can be protected.

Its ridiculous that the oldest profession is still considered a dirty secret, it just enables pimps and trafficers to exploit the girls.

Absolutely. Also the state would then get more tax money.

Or they could reduce taxes in other areas because of this new revenue source.

Cass wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Being 'trafficked' is a handy excuse for the overwhelming vast majority who did what they did by their own free will...!

And you know them all personally to verify this right?

Who's to verify the claims of any where there is absolutely no evidence of any 'traffiking'... but they are claiming it is true for one or more reasons of their own benefit...?


Cos... women never lie, do they...!?


Especially women who are convicted criminals... eh...!?


And of course the women criminally convicted of prostitution are the most honest and virtuous of all... and everything they say must be true...!?

Maddog wrote:

eddie wrote:I tend to agree.  

Another step towards the dark side.  

Legalize everything that doesn't hurt another person!!!

Say it, say it!!!!!

Sometimes things that don't have human agency get hurt by our actions -- for example, dumping oil sludge on a school of fish -- or our actions have delayed consequences, like how polluting the air makes people sick miles away. Otherwise, I tend to agree with you.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Cass wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Being 'trafficked' is a handy excuse for the overwhelming vast majority who did what they did by their own free will...!

And you know them all personally to verify this right?

Who's to verify the claims of any where there is absolutely no evidence of any 'traffiking'... but they are claiming it is true for one or more reasons of their own benefit...?


Cos... women never lie, do they...!?


Especially women who are convicted criminals... eh...!?


And of course the women criminally convicted of prostitution are the most honest and virtuous of all... and everything they say must be true...!?

I think people who always assume others are lying must be the biggest liars. After all, we tend to assume people are basically a lot like us.

I say a convicted criminal may likely be a liar... so that means I must be a liar myself...!?


Yeah... sound logic there Ben...!!!


Idiot!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:I say a convicted criminal may likely be a liar... so that means I must be a liar myself...!?


Yeah... sound logic there Ben...!!!


Idiot!!!

Either that or a moron, pick your poison.

You are an idiot and a moron if you think a convicted criminal is somehow exempt from being considered as a liar...!!!


In fact you are an idiotic moron, as well as a moronic idiot!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:You are an idiot and a moron if you think a convicted criminal is somehow exempt from being considered as a liar...!!!


In fact you are an idiotic moron, as well as a moronic idiot!!!

I think you divide by 17 but I could be mistaken.

I think you are an idiot who talks shit... multiply that by 17...!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:

I think you are an idiot who talks shit... multiply that by 17...!!!

No! It was Chelsea, 2-nil.