merrion street

Cathaoirleach, on behalf of the Minister for Justice and Equality, I would like to thank Deputy Pringle for raising this issue. Unfortunately, the Minister is not available to address the House himself.

Before continuing, I should say that whether I use the term ‘prostitute’ or ‘sex worker’ in the course of my address to the House, no offence is intended in the use of either term. While some find the term ‘prostitute’ objectionable and prefer to use the expression ‘sex worker’, others object to the term ‘sex worker’ on the basis that it confers legitimacy on an activity which is unacceptable. The term ‘sex worker’ is however, used in international discourse.

Deputies on all sides of the House will be aware that the law on prostitution is under review. The criminal law in this area is being reviewed primarily because of the changed nature of prostitution in Ireland. Prostitution in this country was once a street-based phenomenon. That is no longer the case. The organisation of prostitution is now much more sophisticated, highly mobile and is easily facilitated by the use of mobile phones and the internet. Technological advances have largely resulted in the movement of prostitution indoors. Modern communication technologies make it easier for clients to contact prostitutes. Also, prostitutes and pimps use these same technologies to arrange their business, including the setting up of short-term brothels, for example, in rented apartment buildings, which can be quickly moved from location to location. These developments also reflect the trend in other countries.

While there is a significant amount of criminal legislation in this area already, it is important to review the law periodically to ensure it is up to date and sufficiently robust and flexible to address criminality in the environment in which prostitution currently operates.

Prostitution is a subject that gives rise to intense debate. People disagree on how to respond to the many issues it raises. The issues cover a wide spectrum and include the causes of prostitution; sexuality; organised crime; health and public safety; the exploitation of individuals, including children; inequality between men and women; and human rights, among others. All of these issues require careful consideration.

The Minister is also acutely conscious that persons who sell sexual services do so for a variety of reasons. They are not a homogenous group. Many women involved in prostitution have very limited life choices, whether owing to poverty or other circumstances in their lives. Mental and physical harm and violence can be intrinsic to prostitution, and some women caught up in it experience objectification and dehumanisation. They can be vulnerable to manipulation and exploitation by others. However, there are other women involved in sex work who object to being labelled victims and claim the right to sell sexual services is a legitimate life style choice. While I am focussing here on women, I am conscious that men too can be involved in the sale of sexual services.

Whatever one’s view is about their motivations, those who buy sexual services are not a homogenous group either. We have to be aware of that reality in considering and formulating policy responses.

Of course, in addition to the activities of parties directly involved in prostitution, the current legislative review must consider the impact of prostitution on communities and more broadly, the interests of society in general.

In considering how the criminal law might address the issue of exploitation or abuse of sex workers in a changed environment, it is necessary to consider the variety of circumstances in which prostitution occurs. There is prostitution which is of an organised nature. This involves third parties and is exploitative to varying degrees. Some sex workers operating in networks are trafficked or coerced. Others are not. There are also prostitutes operating independently and who choose, whatever their reasons for doing so, to become involved in prostitution.

In devising policy responses, including legislative and enforcement measures, it is also crucial to distinguish clearly between human trafficking for sexual exploitation on the one hand, and prostitution on the other. While the two can sometimes overlap, human trafficking and prostitution are different phenomena requiring distinct policy responses, if each is to be targeted effectively, efficiently and in a manner which reflects the relative gravity of different types of criminal activity.

In this context, the report of the UN ‘Global Commission on HIV and the law’, published in July, 2012, emphasises that criminal sanctions against human trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation of minors are essential but laws must clearly differentiate these activities from consensual adult sex work. Also, the report of the UNAIDS Advisory Group on HIV and Sex Work, published in December, 2011, expresses concerns about the conflation of sex work and trafficking and the impact that failing to clearly distinguish between the two has on sex workers.

The Minister would like to highlight that there is already a clear consensus that child prostitution and human trafficking for sexual exploitation are unacceptable. In this jurisdiction, the criminal law does not tolerate either.

Any person convicted of human trafficking for sexual exploitation is liable to life imprisonment.

A person who solicits or importunes a child - whether or not for the purposes of prostitution - to commit an act which would constitute carnal knowledge or sexual assault is guilty of an offence. In addition to the solicitation offence, a person who engages, or attempts to engage, in a sexual act with a child can be charged with serious defilement offences under the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2006. The consent of the child is not a defence.

The criminal law also protects persons engaged in prostitution from exploitation. For example, a person convicted, on indictment, of organising prostitution or brothel keeping can be imprisoned for up to five years and receive a substantial fine.

However, there are differing and genuinely held views on the approach the criminal law should take to other aspects of prostitution, particularly the purchase and sale of sexual services, in private, by consenting adults.

Currently, it is not an offence, in itself, to sell sex. In general, it is not an offence to purchase sex either. I say in general because under the Criminal Law (Human Trafficking) Act 2008, it is an offence to knowingly solicit or importune a trafficked person, in any place, for the purpose of prostitution. Consequently, other than in this particular circumstance, neither party to the transaction is currently criminalised. Our legislation does not seek to prevent sexual contact and adults who sell or purchase sexual services, in private, are not breaking any law.

Traditionally, our law has had two objectives. Firstly, it aims to protect society from the more intrusive aspects of prostitution from a public order perspective. Accordingly, under the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 1993, it is an offence to solicit in a street or public place for the purpose of prostitution. The offence can be committed by the prostitute, the client or a third party - a pimp, for example.

Secondly, and I touched on this earlier, the law seeks to protect prostitutes from exploitation. It is an offence under the 1993 Act to organise prostitution, coerce or compel a person to be a prostitute, knowingly live on the earnings of a prostitute, or keep or manage a brothel.

In addition, public order legislation prohibits the advertising of brothels and prostitution.

As part of the current review, in June, 2012, the Minister published a discussion document on the future direction of prostitution legislation. The purpose of the discussion document is to facilitate a public consultation process. It was published to promote public discussion on the function of the criminal law on prostitution and to identify possible legislative responses based on analysis and debate informed by evidence. The intention is to gather views on what the approach of the criminal law should be in order to reduce, deter, detect and prosecute criminal activity and protect prostitutes from exploitation, with due regard to the principles of human rights.

To assist public deliberation, the consultation document sets out four broad approaches to legislative policy, for discussion. The four options include the option often referred to as the ‘Swedish model’. This criminalises the purchase of sexual services and is the approach followed in Deputy Pringle’s Private Members Bill. By targeting only the buyer of sexual services, the ‘Swedish’ model is a partial criminalisation approach. The other options outlined in the discussion document are total criminalisation, non-criminalisation and a model based on legalisation and regulation. For each option, the discussion document identifies possible arguments for and against and raises questions for consideration. The analysis does not favour any particular approach but simply tries to take an even-handed approach in order to assist reflection.

In addition to looking at the legislative model in Sweden, which has been followed by Norway and Iceland, the discussion document looks at legislation in many other jurisdictions - the UK, other EU countries, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States. It is important that we look at what works and doesn’t work across a range of potential legislative models. Debates similar to ours here are taking place in other jurisdictions and we should take note of the insights gained in those debates.

On its publication, the discussion document was referred to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality and the committee has been conducting a public consultation process. It is doing so independently and the committee’s report is awaited. There is considerable public interest in this issue. It’s been reported that the committee has received many hundreds of submissions. I understand that the committee also organised public hearings over a number of months. The Minister would like to put on record his acknowledgement of the sensitivity and complexity of the committee’s task and his appreciation of the work it has done, to date, on the public consultation process. He looks forward to the committee’s report in due course.

The Minister’s department also hosted a day long conference last October to discuss the consultation paper. There was a large attendance at this event. The conference brought together speakers and an audience from a wide and diverse range of backgrounds. The Minister opened the conference and, despite many competing demands on his time, stayed for the duration to hear the many contributions on the day and to engage with attendees. The Minister of State at the Department of Justice and Equality also attended and spoke at the event. In addition, members of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality were present.

It is the Minister’s intention that the report of the Joint Committee and the views expressed at the October conference will be fully considered in the framing of any necessary legislative proposals to be submitted to Government in due course. The Minister also anticipates that when the report of the joint committee is available, there will be an early debate on it in both the Dáil and Seanad.

A process of public deliberation is ongoing. Until the consultation process and review are completed, it would not be proper to commit to any particular legislative approach, or indeed, to rule any approach in or out. The Minister has consistently emphasised that the consultation process must be, and be seen to be, objective, transparent, open-minded and fair. He has also consistently stated that the expression of all views should be facilitated and that those views must be examined in due course.

In all the circumstances, it would not be appropriate for the Minister to comment on the merits or de-merits of Deputy Pringle’s Bill.

I look forward to hearing the contributions of other speakers and I know the Minister welcomes the opportunity there will be for a further debate in the House when the report of the Justice Committee is published.

Thank you, a Cathaoirleach ……