A Fourth Grade Magistrate convicted the appellant and 18 other women for knowingly living on prostitution earnings, a misdemeanor that carries a maximum sentence of 24 months in prison. In Malawi, Fourth Grade Magistrates’ jurisdiction is limited to cases in which the maximum sentence is 12 months. This jurisdictional limit was the appellants’ first ground of appeal. Despite finding that the appellants succeeded in proving their convictions null and void due to the magistrate’s jurisdictional overreach, the appellate court found it “imperative” to address the appellants’ other arguments because of “the prevalent misuse of section 146 by law enforcement.” The appellants’ second ground of appeal was that Penal Code Section 146, the offence of a woman living on the earnings of prostitution, does not target the sex worker herself, but rather restricts women from exercising influence over the movements of sex workers for monetary gain. Section 145 of the Penal Code addresses men’s criminal behavior toward sex workers. The High Court again agreed with the appellants, concluding that Section 146 of the Penal Code was clearly aimed at targeting those who exploit sex workers, rather than a punitive measure applicable to sex workers themselves. The High Court pointed out that the lower court’s conclusion that the appellants’ convictions rested on the fact that they had booked rooms in a rest house, “conduct which was not criminal at all.” The High Court also expressed concern about how the government obtained the women’s confessions to prostitution, “especially after reading the caution statements.” As a result, the High Court held the trial and convictions of the appellants unconstitutional and predicated on discrimination against women in the sex trade. In conclusion, the judge called for Malawi to have “a frank discussion” about the fact that prostitution-related offences in Malawi “remain an area of blatant discrimination, unfairness, inequality, abuse as well as bias from law enforcement as well as the courts as evidenced in this case.”
Women and Justice: Keywords
Domestic Case Law
Cправа № 642/4714/16-к (Case No.642/4714/16-к) кримінального суду у складі Верховного Суду (Criminal Court of Cassation within the Supreme Court of Ukraine) (2018)
The appellant was convicted of trafficking in human beings because he intentionally, for financial purposes, recruited financially vulnerable Ukrainian women for sex trafficking in Russia. The court of first instance sentenced him to five years of imprisonment with confiscation of property for an “accumulation of crimes” (in Ukraine, this term means commission of two or more crimes by one person stipulated by different Articles or different parts of one Article of the Special Part of this Code, where that person has not been convicted of any of these crimes). The Court of Appeal left this sentence unchanged. The appellant filed a cassation appeal with the Supreme Court, claiming that the appellant was not guilty, because there was no evidence that he recruited women. Instead, the appellant argued that there was a mutual agreement between himself and the women. The Supreme Court left the decisions of the previous courts unchanged, drawing attention to the fact that the courts' conclusions were based on the testimony of the victims and the witness, the protocol of secret investigative actions, and audio and video recordings of the appellant’s meetings with women.
Скаржник був засуджений за торгівлю людьми через те, що він умисно, маючи корисну мету, вербував незаможних українських жінок для торгівлі ними в сексуальних цілях у Росії. Суд першої інстанції призначив йому покарання у вигляді п’яти років позбавлення волі з конфіскацією майна за "сукупністю злочинів" (в Україні це поняття означає вчинення однією особою двох або більше злочинів, передбачених різними статтями або різними частинами однієї статті Особливої частини Кримінального кодексу, якщо ця особа не була засуджена за жоден із цих злочинів). Апеляційний суд залишив цей вирок без змін. Скаржник подав касаційну скаргу до Верховного Суду, стверджуючи, що він невинний, оскільки немає доказів того, що він вербував жінок. Натомість, скаржник стверджував, що між ним і жінками існувала взаємна домовленість. Верховний Суд залишив рішення попередніх судів без змін, звернувши увагу на те, що висновки судів ґрунтуються на показаннях потерпілих і свідків, протоколах негласних слідчих дій, аудіо- та відеозаписах зустрічей скаржника із жінками.
Lais vs Pandemo Club propiedad del Sr. Zoto (Lais vs Pandemo Club owned by Mr. Zoto) (Sentencia T-629-10 - Acción de Tutela; Expediente T-2384611) Corte Constitucional de la República de Colombia (2010)
The case concerned labor rights and protection of sex workers. The plaintiff, a sex worker, sued her former employer for firing her after she became pregnant. Under articles 236 and 239 of the Colombian Labor Code, a pregnant woman is subject to special labor protection, and therefore cannot be fired without cause and without authorities’ permission. The court consisdered whether pregnant sex workers should have the same labor protection as other professions. Article 13 of the Constitution provides the right of all citizens to be treated equally, as such, the court held it necessary to provide the aforementioned labor protection to sex workers. This conclusion was achieved by virtue of comparative law and legislation, where the protection shall be provided in connection with the right to motherhood. Sex workers, whether men or women, shall not be discriminated and should hold the same rights as any other worker. In this regard, court acknowledged the plaintiff’s right to the financial compensation she was entitled to.
El caso se refería a los derechos laborales y la protección de las trabajadoras sexuales. La demandante, una trabajadora sexual, demandó a su antiguo empleador por despedirla después de quedar embarazada. De conformidad con los artículos 236 y 239 del Código Sustantivo del Trabajo, la mujer embarazada es sujeto de una protección laboral reforzada, por lo que no puede ser despedida sin justa causa y sin permiso de las autoridades competentes. El tribunal analizó si las trabajadoras sexuales embarazadas deberían tener la misma protección laboral que otras profesiones. El artículo 13 de la Constitución establece el derecho de todos los ciudadanos a ser tratados por igual, por lo que el tribunal consideró necesario extender la mencionada protección laboral a las trabajadoras sexuales. Esta conclusión se logró en virtud de análisis de derecho comparado y de la legislación local, donde la protección nace del estado de embarazo. Los trabajadores sexuales, ya sean hombres o mujeres, no deben ser discriminados y deben tener los mismos derechos que cualquier otro trabajador. En este sentido, el tribunal reconoció el derecho de la demandante a la compensación económica a la que tenía derecho.
R. v. Barton Supreme Court of Canada (2019)
The accused was charged with first degree murder of an Indigenous woman who was sex worker. The deceased was found in his hotel room. The cause of death was found to be loss of blood due to an 11cm wound in the victim’s vagina. In its opening address, the prosecution referred to the deceased as a “prostitute” and discussed how she and the accused had struck up a working relationship the night before her death. In addition, without ordering a separate hearing or considering the relevance of the evidence as is required pursuant to section 276 of the Criminal Code (evidence of complainant’s sexual history), the trial judge allowed the accused to testify at length about his previous sexual activity with the deceased. The jury acquitted the accused, but the Court of Appeal ordered a new trial on first degree murder. In the Supreme Court, the majority agreed that a new trial should be ordered, but on the lesser charge of unlawful act manslaughter. This was because the trial judge’s mistakes in not considering the relevance of evidence did not affect the decision on murder. The Supreme Court said that defences to sexual assault cannot rely on things that support myths about women and consent. The first myth being that a woman’s consent to previous sexual activity means she consents to the current act in question and the second myth being that such women might not tell the truth.
R v. Wong New South Wales District Court (2013)
The accused was charged with conducting a business involving sexual servitude, in violation of section 260.6(2) of the Criminal Code Act 1995. She pled not guilty and proceeded to trial, facing charges that she had recruited four women from Malaysia to work at a brothel. The victims entered Australia on student visas, were forced to repay AUD 5,000 each, and were not permitted to leave the brothel until they repaid that amount. The accused also threatened the women with physical violence and deportation. The Court found the work that the women were forced to perform, including being paraded in front of potential customers wearing numbers for identification, was demeaning and dehumanizing. The Court found the accused guilty on all seven counts and sentenced her to six years’ imprisonment.
R v. Netthip New South Wales District Court (2010)
The accused pled guilty to one count of conducting a business involving sexual servitude, in contravention of section 270.6(2) of the Criminal Code Act 1995. Between August 2005 and March 2008, the accused recruited and facilitated the placement of 11 Thai women in brothels in various Australian cities. Each of the women (except for those who worked for one particular brothel) transferred a portion of their net earnings to the accused to repay the debts they were told they owed. She was sentenced to two years and three months imprisonment.
Sieders v. R; Somsri v. R New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal (2008)
This was an appeal from convictions for violations of section 270.6(2) of the Criminal Code Act 1995, which generally prohibits forced labor. The two appellants, a married couple, ran various brothels in Sydney where five Thai women were sex workers. Four of the Thai women, while still in Thailand, signed contracts agreeing to provide sexual services in Australia. The contracts obligated each of them to repay approximately AUD 45,000 before they could keep any of their earnings. Four of the five women paid the AUD 45,000, and then continued working at the brothels. There was no dispute that the women worked in the brothels; the dispute was whether they had been subjected to sexual servitude. Following a trial, the defendants were convicted of conducting a business involving sexual servitude and sentenced to five years’ and four years’ imprisonment, respectively. Both appealed their convictions on the basis that the verdicts were unreasonable and unsupported by the evidence, that the trial judge erroneously instructed the jury on the fault element of the offense, and that their sentences were excessive. The Court of Criminal Appeal affirmed the convictions.
R v. McIvor and Tanuchit New South Wales District Court (2010)
The case concerns the defendants, a married couple, who kept five Thai women as slaves in a secret room in the basement of their licensed brothel in Sydney. The defendants purchased the Thai women through contacts in Thailand (for between AUD 12,500 – 15,000). Upon arriving in Australia, four of the women were informed that they owed between AUD 35,000 and 45,000 that they had to repay by working in the brothel (one of the victims was told about the debt in Thailand). The defendants confiscated the women’s passports and kept them in locked confinement either at the brothel or at their residence. The women worked extremely long hours, seven days a week. The defendants were each found guilty of five counts of intentionally possessing a slave and five counts of intentionally exercising ownership authority over a slave, in violation of section 270.3(1)(a) of the Criminal Code Act 1995. The court sentenced Mr. McIvor to 12 years’ imprisonment and Ms. Tanuchit to 11 years’ imprisonment.
Case No. B 1041-01 – the Prosecutor v. M.N. Hovrätten över Skåne och Blekinge (Court of Appeal of Skåne and Blekinge) (2002)
M.N. was convicted for attempting to purchase sexual services from a woman, which is a criminal act under Chapter 6 Section 11 and Chapter 23 Section 1 of the Swedish Penal Code. The court considered whether the “attempt point” had been reached, which is a prerequisite for the attempt to be punishable. To constitute a criminal attempt, it is required that the offender begin the crime without reaching its completion. There must also be a risk that the act will lead to the completion of the crime. For purchases of sexual services the attempt point is reached when an offer of payment has been made. Here, the parties agreed to have sex in the woman’s apartment and agreed on the price. M.N. had access to money and they were on their way to the woman’s apartment when the police stopped them. Therefore, the Court ruled that M.N. had begun the crime and that the attempt point had been reached. The Court also found that the danger of completing the crime was imminent. Thus, M.N. was sentenced to 40 daily fines for his attempt to purchase sexual services.
U.S. v. Robinson United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (2012)
A federal grand jury convicted the defendant-appellant of child sex trafficking in violation of 18 U.S.C. A minor victim testified that she started dating the defendant when she was 17 years old but had told him and others that she was 19 years old. She insisted that the defendant was only living off her income as a prostitute and was not a pimp facilitating prostitution. However, the prosecution introduced videotaped statements in which the defendant repeatedly implored Doe to make money for him and threatened her when she failed to deliver the money. Following a jury trial, the defendant was convicted of two counts of sex trafficking of a minor. On appeal, the Second Circuit considered the construction of 18 U.S.C. § 1591(c), an evidentiary provision added by the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (“TVPRA”), which provides that “[i]n a prosecution . . . in which the defendant had a reasonable opportunity to observe [the victim], the Government need not prove that the defendant knew that the person had not attained the age of 18 years.” The Second Circuit affirmed the judgment of the district court, holding that this provision imposes strict liability with regard to the defendant’s awareness of the victim’s age and relieves the government’s usual burden to prove knowledge or reckless disregard of the victim’s underage status under § 1591(a). The Second Circuit rejected the defendant’s challenges to this provision as lacking merit and affirmed the judgment of the district court.
司法院大法官會議第666號解釋 (J.Y. Interpretation No. 666) Constitutional Court of Taiwan (2009)
Article 80, Section 1, Sub-section 1 of the Social Order Maintenance Act establishes administrative penalties of detention and a fine for any person who engages in sexual conduct or cohabitation with the intent of obtaining financial gain. The Court noted that a transaction for sexual conduct necessarily involves two people: the person engaging in the conduct with the intent of obtaining financial gain, and the other person who provides consideration for the conduct. The law at issue only punishes the former party by focusing on the subjective intent of the person seeking financial gain from the sexual transaction. The Court also noted that the former party is more likely to be female. Thus, the Court held that the law essentially targets and punishes females who participate in financial transactions for sex. As such, the Court held that the law’s focus on the subjective intent for financial gain violates the principle of gender equality in Article 7 of the Constitution. The Court decreed that the provision would become ineffective upon two years after the issuance of the decision.
社會秩序維護法第80條第1項第1款規定，任何以獲取經濟利益為目的之性行為或同居行為者，應處以拘留和罰鍰等行政罰。法院指出，性交易行為必然涉及兩個人：以獲取經濟利益為目的之行為人，以及為該行為提供對價的另一個人。此一規定只針對主觀上從性交易中尋求經濟利益的前者進行處罰，且前者更可能是女性。因此，法院認為，此一規定實質上是針對並懲罰那些參與性交易的女性。在這種情況下，法院認為，此一規定針對主觀上從性交易中尋求經濟利益者，與憲法第七條之平等原則有違，應自本解釋公布之日起至遲於二年屆滿時，失其效力。
Reports
Evaluation Report: Ireland, Group of Experts on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (2022)
The Council of Europe’s Group of Experts on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (GRETA)’s report on Ireland concerns how Ireland prevents and prosecutes human trafficking. The report demonstrated that the total number of presumed trafficking victims in Ireland fell from 103 in 2017 to 44 in 2021. According to GRETA, sexual exploitation remains the primary form of exploitation in Ireland, but the number of people trafficked for labour exploitation in sectors including fishing, farming, construction, catering, and domestic work grew over the same period. However, GRETA noted that these figures may underestimate the situation in Ireland, partly due to the persisting limitations of the existing procedures for identifying victims. These limitations include the fact that the Human Trafficking Investigation and Coordination Unite of An Garda Síochána (Ireland’s police force) is the sole competent authority tasked with identifying the victims of human trafficking, and the obligation to speak with An Garda Síochána may discourage self-identification, according to the report. Highlighting certain areas where underreporting is likely, GRETA found that trafficking for labour exploitation remains under-recognised and under-reported, and trafficking for criminal exploitation is an area where victims are often not recognised as such. Nevertheless, the report notes a number of positive developments since GRETA’s last evaluation of Ireland in 2017. These include the establishment of a human trafficking stakeholders forum in 2020 (bringing together relevant state departments, agencies and civil society organisations) and the designation of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission as National Rapporteur for human trafficking. In sum, GRETA’s report urged the authorities in Ireland to take further action against human trafficking, notably by improving the prosecution of human traffickers and providing specialised shelters and compensation for victims. GRETA also urged the Irish authorities to adopt finalise a National Referral Mechanism, which ensures that different agencies are involved in identifying victims of all types of trafficking, and to provide trafficking victims with specialised assistance. Furthermore, GRETA noted that the number of investigations into human trafficking has been decreasing over the years, notes the report, and the number of prosecutions and convictions is very low. For instance, there have been no convictions for trafficking for labour exploitation in Ireland, despite the increasing number of identified suspected cases.
Legislation
Redress for Women Resident in Certain Institutions (Amendment) Act 2019 (2019)
The 2019 Act made the 2015 Act’s (available here) health benefits available to a broader group of women – including those who had worked in 'the institutions covered by the Magdalen Restorative Justice ex-gratia Scheme' while residing in certain adjoining institutions (Section 2).
Redress for Women Resident in Certain Institutions Act 2015 (2015)
The 2015 Act provides for free health services for women who worked in Magdalen laundries (institutions ostensibly intended to house and employ ‘fallen’ women). Its Schedule provides for the 'Relevant Institutions' for the purposes of identifying women entitled to the provision of services. The 2015 Act was updated in 2019 (available here) to expand the group of women eligible for benefits under the Act.
The Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2017 gave effect to European Council Directive No. 2011/93/EU of 13 December 2011 on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography. It also amended certain other legislation, including the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 1993 (available here), the Criminal Law (Incest Proceedings) Act 1995, the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998 (available here), the Criminal Law (Human Trafficking) Act 2008 (available here), and the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2006. The Act provides for offences relating to sexual acts with protected persons and relating to payment for sexual activity with sex workers, offensive conduct of a sexual nature and harassment of victims of sexual offences. The Act defines ‘sexual exploitation’ in relation to a child and specifies the elements that would constitute a sexual offence against a child, including performing sexual acts in front of a child and prostitution of a child. Generally, Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 broaden the scope of criminal acts in relation to children, such as the prohibition of causing a child to watch sexual activity (Section 6), meeting a child for the purposes of sexual exploitation (Section 7), and the use of information and communication technology to facilitate the sexual exploitation of a child (Section 8). The Act also criminalizes the purchase of sexual services and prohibits sexual activity with a protected person, as defined by the Act. The Act creates a distinction related to the commission of a sexual act with a child under 17 years of age and with a child under 15 years of age, with a conviction on indictment for the former offence resulting in a term of imprisonment of up to 7 years (unless the person is in authority, in which case they may be sentenced for up to 15 years) (Section 17), and with a conviction on indictment for the latter offence resulting in a term of imprisonment of life (Section 16). Importantly, Section 48 of the Act reforms the law in relation to consent to sexual acts. In particular, it states that a person does not consent to a sexual act if, inter alia, they permits the act to take place or submits to it because of the application, threat or fear of use of force against them, if they are asleep, if they are incapable of consenting because of intoxication, or if they are mistaken as to the nature and purpose of the act or the identity of the person involved. The Act also clarifies that consent can be withdrawn at any time and that lack of physical resistance does not, of itself, constitute consent (Section 48). Finally, Section 46 allows a court to issue a “Harassment order” against a person when imposing a sentence for a sexual offence or at any time before the convicted person is released from prison.
In addition to abolishing the offence of buggery (sodomy) between adults, this Act codifies the law relating to sex work (referred to as ‘prostitution’), with the starting point being that it does not make prostitution itself illegal. However, the Act does not define ‘prostitute’. Section 1(2) defines ‘prostitution’ as occurring where “a person solicits or importunes another person for the purpose of obtaining that other person’s services as a prostitute,” or where they solicit or importune another person on behalf of a third person for the purposes of prostitution. Section 7A criminalizes paying for sexual favors from any person, and payment can include contracting with another for cash, barter, or other consideration. Section 9 criminalizes living off prostitution in the form of ‘pimping’, providing for an offence where a person controls, organizes, compels, coerces, or directs the activities of ‘a prostitute’ in respect of prostitution for gain. Section 10 further criminalizes living of the earnings of ‘the prostitution of another person.’ Section 11 makes brothel-keeping and management an offence.
Article 302 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine states that creating or running brothels, and also procuring people for sex work in brothels, shall be punishable by a fine of 1,000-2,000 tax-free minimum incomes or restriction of liberty for up to two years. Article 302 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine states that creating or running brothels, and procurement, shall be punishable by a fine of 1,000-2,000 tax-free minimum incomes or restriction of liberty for up to two years. Article 303 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine prohibits engaging a person in prostitution or compulsion to engage in prostitution, involving deceit, blackmail or vulnerable state of a person, with imposition of violence or threat of violence, or pimping. If breached, the penalty is imprisonment for a term of three to five years. Under this Article, pimping shall mean any action of a person committed for the purpose of engaging another person in prostitution.
Статтею 302 Кримінального кодексу України передбачено, що створення або утримання місць розпусти, а також звідництво для розпусти караються штрафом від 1000 до 2000 неоподатковуваних мінімумів доходів громадян або обмеженням волі на строк до двох років. Статтею 303 Кримінального кодексу України забороняється втягнення особи в заняття проституцією або примушування її до зайняття проституцією з використанням обману, шантажу чи уразливого стану цієї особи, або із застосуванням чи погрозою застосування насильства, або сутенерство. У разі вчинення дій, що криміналізовані цією статтею, передбачено покарання у вигляді позбавлення волі на строк від трьох до п'яти років. Відповідно до цієї статті під сутенерством слід розуміти дії особи по забезпеченню заняття проституцією іншою особою.
Código Penal Capítulo IV – Artigos 189-190, 195-197: Tráfico Humano (Penal Code: Human Trafficking) (2020)
The promotion or facilitation of prostitution involve taking advantage of the victim’s economic necessity or vulnerability or coerce the victim by means of violence, threat or fraud pursuant to article 189, and it is punished with a sentence of 1-8 years of imprisonment. If the facilitation or coercion to prostitution is made in a foreign country, the crime committed falls within article 190, i.e. human sexual trafficking, which command a higher sentencing of up to 10 years in prison. The promotion or facilitation of the prostitution of minors under 18 years old is prohibited by article 195. Under the same article and incurring in the same penalties is the individual who repeatedly practices sexual acts with a minor. Here, if the agent coerces, threatens, acts with violence, has the intent of monetary gains, if the minor has diminished psychological capacity, or if the minor is under the age of 14, the maximum penalty increases to 15 years. The act of soliciting by means of paying the minor is punished under article 197 with up to three years of imprisonment, whilst if penetration was involved the penalty increases to five years (in case another more severe penalty pursuant to another article is not applicable).
A promoção ou facilitação da prostituição envolve tirar vantage da necessidade econômica ou vulnerabilidade da vítima ou coerção da vítima por meio de violência, ameaça ou fraude nos termos do artigo 189, e é punido com 1-8 anos de encarceramento. Se a facilitação ou coerção à prostituição é feita em outro país, o crime cometido recai no previsto pelo artigo 190, i.e. tráfico sexual humano, que tem uma sentença maior de até 10 anos de prisão. A promoção ou facilitação de prostituição de menores de 18 anos é proibida pelo artigo 195. Sob o mesmo artigo e incorrendo na mesma pena está o indivíduo que repetidamente realiza atos sexuais com menor. Aqui, se o agente coage, ameaça, age com violência, tem a intenção de ganho financeiro, se o menor tem capacidade psicológica diminuída, ou se é menor de 14 anos de idade, a penalidade máxima aumenta para 15 anos. O ato de solicitar por meio do pagamento ao menor é punido sob o artigo 197 com até três anos de encarceramento, enquanto se houver penetração envolvida a penalidade aumenta cinco anos (no caso de outra penalidade mais severa relacionada a outro artigo não for aplicável).
Articles 154-A and B, 159, and 160 ban harassment (sentencing to up to three years in prison), forced marriage (sentencing to up to five years in prison), slavery (imprisonment from 5-15 years), and human trafficking (imprisonment from 3-10 years), respectively. Article 169 punishes the economic exploitation of prostitution by third parties, even though prostitution itself is not a crime in Portugal.
Lei n. 24/2019: Parte Especial, Título Um, Capítulo Sete, Seção Três (2019)
This section outlines the punishments for prostitution. Anyone who promotes or facilitates prostitution by a woman is subject to one-two years in prison, but anyone who promotes another’s prostitution through violence, fraud, abuse of authority, or exploitation of the other’s situation is punishable with two-eight years in prison. Whomever habitually partakes in prostitution with someone under the age of 18 can be imprisoned from two-eight years or be fined for up to one year.
Essa seção estabelece as sanções para prostituição. Aquele que promove ou facilita a prostituição de uma mulher está sujeito a um-dois anos de prisão, mas aquele promove a prostituição de outra pessoa por meio de violência, fraude, abuso de autoridade, ou exploração da situação alheia é punido com dois-oito anos de prisão. Quem habitualmente realiza prostituição com uma pessoa menor de 18 pode ser preso de dois-oito anos ou sofrer multa até um ano.
Any person forcing another person into prostitution is subject to 5-10 years of imprisonment. If the victim is under 18 years old, the offender is subject to 10-20 years of imprisonment. Human trafficking is defined as the recruitment, moving, transfer or harboring of any person within or across national borders by means of deception, threats, use of force, debt bondage or other means, and using such person in forced labor, prostitution, pornography, or other unlawful acts, or removing body organs of such person, or for other unlawful purposes. The offender is subject to 5-15 years of imprisonment. For victims under 18 years old, any of the above-mentioned acts committed against them is deemed to be human trafficking even if there is no deception, threat, use of force, or debt bondage. When the offender is a “regular” human trafficker or in an organized group, the victims are children, there are two or more victims, the victim is a relative of the offender, or any victim suffers serious injury or becomes an invalid or insane, the offender is subject to 15-20 years of imprisonment. If a victim becomes disabled, infected with HIV, or died, the offender is subject to life imprisonment. Fines for human trafficking range from 10 million to 1 billion kip. If the victim is a woman, provisions of the Law on the Development and Protection of Women may be applicable too.
The Criminal Code Section 286 criminalizes any person over the age of 16 years who subsists in whole or part on the earnings of a sex worker. The sentence is imprisonment of 7-20 years and a fine of 14,000-40,000 Baht, or imprisonment for life. The provisions of this section do not apply if the sex worker is bound to give maintenance according to law or morality.
English translation as of 2003 via ILO available here.
The “Prostitution Act” criminalizes various activities associated with sex work. The criminalized activities include (see Sections 5 to 13): soliciting oneself in a public place, associating with another in a sex work establishment for the purpose of prostitution, advertising oneself or another for the purpose of sex work, procuring a person for the purpose of prostituting that person, a parent who connives in the prostitution of their child who is under the age of 18, being an owner/manager/supervisor in a prostitution establishment or other controller of sex workers in a prostitution establishment, and detaining a person or threatening in any manner to compel engagement in sex work. The Prostitution Act only criminalizes individuals involved with selling sex, but carries no criminalization or consequences for a customer buying it unless the sex worker is under the age of 18. The penalty for involvement in prostitution ranges from a fine up to a term of imprisonment for life depending on the offense committed. A sex worker could be charged with a fine not exceeding 1,000 Baht and imprisonment for a term not exceeding one month. Over the past few years, police have been conducting raids, sometimes violently, on prostitution establishments. It has been noted that those who exploit women in prostitution are rarely prosecuted and women working in the entertainment sector are often presumed guilty and subject to humiliating treatment following arrest. There are also reports to widespread corruption and official complicity in prostitution and trafficking cases.
English translation available here.
A person who sexually abuses a person under the age of 13 through violence, threat, coercion, or intimidation is subject to imprisonment of between 6 months to 4 years, in instances where the person takes advantage of a relationship of dependence, authority, power or the inability of the victim to freely give consent. The penalty will be increased to 4-10 years of imprisonment where the abuse, as a result of its duration or other circumstances, constitutes grave sexual injury. The sentence will be increased to 6-15 years in the event of anal, vaginal, or oral intercourse or other analogous acts. The penalty may further be increased to 8-20 years based on certain other factors, including grave injury to the victim, the perpetrator had a sexually transmitted disease of which he was aware, or the use of a weapon. A person who commits the crimes outlined in Article 119 against a person under the age of 16, taking advantage of the victim’s sexual immaturity, the age of the perpetrator, special relationship with the victim, or any other equivalent circumstance will be subject to 3 to 6 years of prison. This chapter also penalizes promoting or facilitating the corruption of minors under the age of 16; promoting or facilitating prostitution; exploiting prostitution; producing, financing, offering, commercializing, publicizing; facilitating, disseminating, or distributing depictions of minors under the age of 18 years engaged in explicit sexual activities or any representation of their genital parts for predominantly sexual purposes, as well as live performances of explicit sexual representations in which minors participate. The applicable penalties may be increased based on the presence of aggravating factors. A person who through force, intimidation or fraud takes or detains a person with the intention of diminishing such person’s sexual integrity is subject to imprisonment for one to four years. If the crime is committed against of person under the age of 16 with such minor’s consent, the perpetrator is subject to imprisonment for 6 months to 2 years. If the crime is committed against a person under 13, the perpetrator is subject to imprisonment for 2 to 6 years.
Alguien que abuse sexualmente de un menor de 13 años mediante violencia, amenaza, coacción o intimidación está sujeta a una pena de prisión de entre 6 meses y 4 años, en los casos en que la persona se aproveche de una relación de dependencia, autoridad, poder o la incapacidad de la víctima para dar libremente su consentimiento. La pena se incrementará a 4-10 años de prisión cuando el abuso, como resultado de su duración u otras circunstancias, constituya una lesión sexual grave. La pena se incrementará a 6-15 años en caso de coito anal, vaginal u oral u otros actos análogos. Además, la pena puede aumentarse de 8 a 20 años en función de otros factores, como lesiones graves a la víctima, que el agresor tuviera una enfermedad de transmisión sexual de la que tuviera conocimiento o el uso de un arma. La persona que cometa los delitos señalados en el artículo 119 contra una persona menor de 16 años, aprovechando la inmadurez sexual de la víctima, la edad del autor, la relación especial con la víctima o cualquier otra circunstancia equivalente, estará sujeta a 3 a. 6 años de prisión. Este capítulo también sanciona la promoción o facilitación de la corrupción de menores de 16 años; promover o facilitar la prostitución; explotar la prostitución; producir, financiar, ofrecer, comercializar, publicitar; facilitar, difundir o distribuir representaciones de menores de 18 años involucrados en actividades sexuales explícitas o cualquier representación de sus partes genitales con fines predominantemente sexuales, así como representaciones en vivo de representaciones sexuales explícitas en las que participan menores. Las sanciones aplicables pueden incrementarse en función de la presencia de factores agravantes. Una persona que mediante la fuerza, la intimidación o el fraude toma o detiene a una persona con la intención de disminuir su integridad sexual está sujeta a una pena de prisión de uno a cuatro años. Si el delito se comete contra una persona menor de 16 años con el consentimiento de dicho menor, el autor está sujeto a una pena de prisión de 6 meses a 2 años. Si el delito se comete contra una persona menor de 13 años, el autor está sujeto a una pena de prisión de 2 a 6 años.
On June 21, 2018, the NSW Parliament passed the Act to supplement existing criminal legislation both at the NSW (e.g., Crimes Act 1900 and Human Tissue Act 1983) and Commonwealth levels (e.g., the Criminal Code Act 1995). The Act defines “modern slavery” as “any conduct involving the use of any form of slavery, servitude or forced labour to exploit children or other persons taking place in the supply chains of government agencies or non-government agencies.” The Act provides for an Anti-slavery Commissioner and establishes a Modern Slavery Committee.
Division 10A concerns sexual servitude, which is defined as “the condition of a person who provides sexual services and who, because of the use of force or threats is not free to cease providing sexual services, or is not free to leave the place or area where the person provides sexual services.” Section 80D provides for up to 15 years’ imprisonment for any person causing (willfully or recklessly) or attempting to cause sexual servitude (and up to 20 years if the victim is under 18 or cognitively impaired). Section 80E provides for up to 15 years for any person conducting a business involving the sexual servitude of others, or who knows about, or is reckless as to, sexual servitude (and up to 19 years if the victim is under 18 or cognitively impaired).
Brottsbalk (Criminal Code) (1962)
The Swedish Penal Code includes regulations that defines and prohibits various sexually and/or physically motivated crimes against people. The penalty for kidnapping with intent to injure a person, to force a person into service or to practice extortion is imprisonment for at least four years and at most eighteen years, or for life. When a crime is less serious, the highest imprisonment term is six years. The penalty for human trafficking is imprisonment for 2-10 years. When a crime is less serious, the highest imprisonment term is four years. If a crime is in violation of liberty and peace or a sexual offense and it was committed by a man against a woman with whom he had a close intimate relationship (marriage or cohabitation), then the man will be sentenced for gross violation of a woman’s integrity and imprisoned for at least nine months and at most six years, as opposed to being sentenced for each individual crime committed. This crime was introduced in the Swedish Penal Code in 1998 and the construction of it is unique because several individual criminal offences together can constitute a gross crime. Perpetrators of rape shall be imprisoned for at least two and at most six years. If the rape is considered less aggravated, the sentence drops to at most four years. In the event the rape is “gross”, the sentence is extended to at most 10 years. The penalty for sexual intercourse with a child under 15 years of age (or an act comparable to sexual intercourse) is at least two and at most six years. If the crime is “gross”, the penalty is extended to at least five years and at most ten years. The penalty for sexual coercion is at most two years of imprisonment. Notwithstanding, if the sexual coercion is “gross”, the sentence is extended from at least six months to at most six years. The penalty for intercourse with an offspring is imprisonment for at most two years and for intercourse with a sibling is at most one year. The penalties for crimes of exploitation of a child for sexual posing, purchase of a sexual ct from a child and sexual molestation are sentencing to a fine or imprisonment for at most two years. Except for gross exploitation of a child for sexual posing where the sentence is at least six months and at most six years imprisonment. The penalty for purchase of sexual service is a fine or imprisonment for at most one year. Purchase of sexual service has occurred when a person obtains a temporary sexual relation in return for payment. This also applies if the payment was promised or given by another person. Selling sexual services in Sweden is not criminalized. The penalty for someone who promotes or improperly financially exploits a person’s engagement in temporary sexual relations in return for payment (procuring) is at most four years. In the event the procuring is “gross”, the sentence is 2-10 years. As of 2018, the Penal Code defines rape as any sex without consent, either with words or clear actions. Before the amendment, crimes of rape required the intent to rape someone through violence or threats, or that the victim was in a particularly vulnerable position. Furthermore, the 2018 sex crime reform of the Swedish Penal Code introduced criminal liability for negligent rape (Chapter 6 Section 1a) and negligent sexual abuse (Chapter 6 Section 3). Gross negligence is required for liability under the new regulations, rather than intention, as required for regular rape and sexual abuse in Chapter 6 Section 1 and 2. The penalty for negligent rape or negligent sexual abuse is at most four years.
The Code defines certain crimes and their penalties. The Code includes provisions defining and prohibiting sexual assault and domestic violence. The Code legalizes abortions performed within 12 weeks of gestation. The Code also eliminates attenuating circumstances previously associated with the crime of rape, such as the possibility of acquittal in cases where the perpetrator married the victim. In addition, the Code decriminalizes prostitution.
Sexual Offences Act (1998)
The Sexual Offences Act recognizes in its preamble that women are particularly vulnerable to becoming victims of sexual offences, particularly adult prostitution. The Act prohibits prostitution, the operation of brothels, and other activities related to prostitution and brothel-keeping.
Seksuele Oortredings Wet (1998)
Seksuele teistering, Seksuele geweld en verkragting, Mensehandel
Die Seksuele Oortredings Wet erken in die aanhef dat vrouens veral kwesbaar is om slagoffers te word vir seksuele misdrywe, veral volwassenes prostitusie. Die Wet verbied prostitusie, die bedryf van bordele, en ander aktiwiteite wat verband hou met prostitusie en bordeelhouding.