The truth about decriminalising prostitution

Does removing all criminal sanctions make
the sex industry more or less safe for its workers?

In Depth

The coalition, which opposes the distinction between voluntary
and forced prostitution, claims that the removal of laws relating
to the sex trade would lead to a rise in trafficking and sexual
exploitation.

Julie Bindel, an author and feminist activist, argues that
prostitution is inherently abusive. “There is no way to make it
safe, and it should be possible to eradicate it,” she says.

“Any government that allows the decriminalisation of pimping and
sex-buying sends a message to its citizens that women are vessels
for male sexual consumption,” Bindel wrote in an article
for The Guardian in April. 

She also claims that promises made by the New Zealand government
– that decriminalisation would result in less violence, regular
inspections of brothels and no increase of the sex trade – have not
materialised.  

What impact did decriminalisation have in New Zealand?

“To make policy that truly benefits sex workers, we must
separate myths from facts,” said Dr Lynzi Armstrong, a lecturer in
criminology at the Victoria University of Wellington, in an article
for The Independent last year. 

New Zealand became the first country in the world to
decriminalise sex work in June 2003, with the passage of the
Prostitution Reform Act (PRA).  

The legislation is designed to safeguard the human rights of sex
workers, protect them from exploitation and promote their welfare,
health and safety.

It allows street-based sex workers to operate without any
restrictions, and for up to four sex workers to work together
without needing a brothel operator’s certificate.

Five years after its implementation, New Zealand’s Ministry of
Justice ordered a comprehensive assessment of the PRA’s impact on
sex work in the country.

The 2008 investigation by the Prostitution Law Review Committee
concluded that “the vast majority of people in
the sex industry are better off under the PRA than they were
previously”.

Contrary to what critics predicted, the researchers found little
change in the number of sex workers and no increase in levels of
trafficking following decriminalisation.

“However, it was noted that progress in some areas had been
slow,” the investigation report noted. “For instance, many sex
workers were still vulnerable to exploitative employment
conditions.”

But research submitted to the review committee by the
University of Otago and New Zealand’s Prostitutes’ Collective
(NZPC) found that the majority of sex workers “articulated
increased power” in their negotiations with clients and management
post-decriminalisation, and felt more supported by the legal
system.

Of the sex workers who responded to the NZPC survey, 96% said
the law made them feel safer.

The researchers concluded that decriminalisation had resulted in
“few, if any, negative consequences” in terms of the health and
safety of sex workers, and had not led to an increase in their
numbers.

“Despite the oft-repeated claims of its shortcomings, the
academic evidence that has been gathered so far clearly supports
the New Zealand decriminalisation model as an ideal starting
point,” says criminology expert Dr Armstrong.

“No law is perfect, but this is the best approach we have so far
for supporting sex worker rights and facilitating access to
justice,” she adds. “There is no alternative worth pursuing.”
 

Who is right?

There is no evidence that decriminalisation has led to an
increase in the number of people working in prostitution in New
Zealand, nor in the number of people trafficked into the sex trade.
Research suggests that, overall, sex workers feel safer and more
empowered as a result of decriminalisation.