The case, R v. The case centres on two men who were convicted in of benefitting financially from sexual services. The evidence and arguments in the case reveal two very different approaches to addressing inequality in the commercial sex industry. Canada enacted new criminal prostitution laws in aimed at reducing or eliminating prostitution. The first offence prohibits obtaining sexual services for consideration. The law criminalizes the purchase, but not the sale, of sexual services.
This made prostitution unlawful for the first time in Canada. Three additional offences target third parties that promote and capitalize on a commercial sex market. It is an offence to materially benefit from, procure someone into providing or advertise the provision of sexual services.
This approach to prostitution is consistent with policies and laws in places like Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Ireland, Northern Ireland, France and Israel. It is increasingly referred to as an equality model. First, it occurs in contexts of — sometimes profound — inequality. Second, human trafficking takes place in the commercial sex market. Third, there is a high risk of experiencing violence from male buyers or employers.
The facts of the Kloubakov case demonstrate why Parliament enacted the laws. They involve a sex-trafficking operation and women who were moved across the country to provide sex to men for money. Five men were charged with trafficking offences and with prostitution-related offences.
The owners of the commercial operation have been convicted of human trafficking. The two men now challenging the laws as unconstitutional worked for them. They were initially found guilty of two prostitution-related offences , but that conviction was overturned after lawyers for the men successfully challenged the constitutionality of the legislation. The two men have now appealed to the Supreme Court. Women who gave evidence at the trials of these men said they had no control over their work.
