I never considered that when I attended Hebrew school as a teenager with Alan Young, I would one day be citing his achievement in a major decision dealing with laws relating to the practice of prostitution.
Professor Young's next step in the case will invariably take place in the Supreme Court of Canada. The ultimate decision will rest with the nation's highest court to determine if laws enacted by Parliament that indirectly restrict the legal trade of prostitution should be struck down or upheld.
It is very likely that the sweeping judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal will be vindicated.
The Court of Appeal ruled that the prohibition on brothels should be struck down and that the living on the avails prohibition only applied in situations of exploitative conduct. The law criminalizing sexual solicitation was upheld.
Why am I optimistic of the Supreme Court's treatment of the issue?
The explanation can be found in a recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada relating to Insite, a supervised injection site located in downtown Vancouver. The site provided addicts with the opportunity to inject themselves under sanitary conditions and with proper medical supervision. Insite had operated lawfully for a number of years through a federal ministerial exemption from the law prohibiting the possession of narcotics.
When the exemption was about to expire and the federal government cautioned that it would not be renewed, a court challenge was launched.
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that criminalizing possession at Insite would compel addicts to move from safe injection sites to more dangerous locations such as alleyways and street corners where the health risks associated with self-injection were much greater.
In the judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal, the Insite decision was cited as supporting authority. Indeed, the court noted the striking correlation to the issue it had to decide on the prostitution laws. The Court of Appeal made the following notable comparison:
''We see a parallel between the circumstances of drug addicts who, because of a criminal
prohibition, cannot access a venue where they can safely self-inject and therefore must resort to dangerous venues, and prostitutes who, because of criminal prohibitions, cannot work at venues using methods that maximize their personal safety, but must instead resort to venues and methods where the physical risks associated with prostitution are much greater."
The Court of Appeal also highlighted that the prostitutes' claim was arguably stronger because prostitution was legal unlike the illicit possession and use of narcotics.
Significantly, the Insite decision appears to be a reliable indicator that foreshadows the approach
of the Supreme Court of Canada to the challenged prostitution related laws. It is therefore a safe
prediction that the Court of Appeal's landmark decision legalizing brothels will be upheld.
Listen to Steven's new radio show, Closing Argument, every Sunday afternoon at 4:00ET on NewsTalk 1010. You can also follow him on Twitter at @
