Sex work with dignity: Two sides to the debate

The debate today revolves around legalization of sex work. But how did India get to this debate? Consider the following a refresher- What is the current situation and how we got here:The Law:The primary law dealing with the status of sex workers was the Immoral Traffic (Suppression) Act (SITA) 1956. This was amended and the current law is the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act (ITPA) 1986.The ITPA regulating sex work can at best be described as ambiguous. On the one hand sex work has neither been given the status of a crime nor has it been left free from criminal prosecution. The lawmakers viewed the women engaged in sex work as victims and hence did not want to penalize them. Instead, they decided to punish those who profited from or exploited these women. So, even though sex work was not, per se, defined as a crime; several conditions surrounding it were defined as crimes- such as soliciting, running a brothel, pimping etc.Further, this Act tries to tackle sex work and trafficking under the ambit of the same law and hence makes no distinction between consensual and non-consensual sex work. Another bitter reality is that ITPA made for the protection of these women and to prevent criminal prosecution against them, isinfact being used to sponsor such prosecutions under the guise of charges of soliciting. Studies have shown that despite the noble intentions of Indian lawmakers, the implementers of the very same law — the police — have used every means possible to harass sex workers on charges of soliciting and enrich themselves by taking petty bribes in lieu of dropping criminal charges. Even today, sex workers all over India are routinely arrested even when not soliciting. Also AIDS activists and peer educators are harassed by police while distributing condoms and educating sex workers about HIV prevention.In short the current legal framework is not working. In 2005 in an attempt to revamp the law, the then Department of Women and Child Development (WCD) proposed changes to the ITPA Though this Amendment Bill 2006 has lapsed, there are some interesting points that can be garnered from the experience therein.Proposed changes:The amendment, proposed by the department of women and child provided for six-month imprisonment and a fine of Rs.50, 000 for the clients. The department has also proposed to do away with Sections 8 and 20 of the ITPA, which makes soliciting a punishable offence. The proposed change was being justified on the grounds that most sex workers are victims of circumstances. The perception that most engage in sex work due to compulsions has also led the department to drop Section 20 of ITPA, which provides for their eviction.Also, the definition of human trafficking had been broadened in the new proposal. It has been prepared according to the guidelines of the United Nations Convention against Trans-national Organized Crimes. Under this definition, trafficking in persons shall mean the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of threat or use of force or other forms of coercion for purpose of exploitation. Furthermore in the existing law exploitation deals only with sexual slavery while in the new proposal it was to include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs.The new law was to introduce for the first time the definition of a child as any person below the age of 18 years. (Under the existing Act, three categories of persons are mentioned, namely a 'child' as a person who has not completed 16 years of age, a 'minor' as a person who has completed 16 years but not 18 years and a 'major' as a person who has completed 18 years of age.)The punishment for traffickers was proposed to be made stringent. Those convicted were to face imprisonment upto 10 years and fined Rs.1 lakh. The proposed law sought to confiscate all the property of those guilty of trafficking. The new proposal talked about setting up a central nodal agency like a Central Narcotics Bureau.The Reactions:On March 8, 2006, even before the amendments had been introduced in Parliament, more than 4,000 sex workers marched the streets of Delhi to draw political and public attention to the fact that the amendments would deny them their already meager livelihoods.The National Network of Sex Workers sent a letter of protest to the department of women and child development describing the provision as a direct attack on their livelihood.TriptiTandon of Lawyers Collective HIV/AIDS Unit said, "This prohibitionist model has failed to protect sex workers who are driven underground by clients wanting to avoid the police."Addressing a press conference, the National Network of Sex Workers and Durbar MahilaSamanvay Committee (a collective of over 65,000 sex workers from West Bengal and Andhra Pradesh) said the law should instead replace clients with...

Sex work with dignity: Two sides to the debate

T.Mohan & Apoorva Mandhani

Tags