Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford, 2012 ONCA ... - York University

Page: 141and afraid to report abuse and violence to lawenforcement authorities.”[353] By displacing prostitutes into isolated areas and discouraging them fromworking together, the communicating provision increases the risks faced byprostitutes. My colleagues disregard this displacement and assign no weight toits effects.[354] Fifth, my colleagues fail to properly consider the vulnerability of thepersons most affected by the communicating provision, and the ways in whichtheir vulnerability magnifies the adverse impact of the law.[355] The communicating provision most affects street prostitutes, a populationthe application judge found “are largely the most vulnerable [and] face analarming amount of violence.” Street prostitutes comprise the vast majority ofsurvival sex workers for whom, as the Canadian Civil Liberties Association(CCLA) points out, prostitution is a means to secure basic human necessities.[356] The equality values underlying s. 15 of the Charter require carefulconsideration of the adverse effects of the provision on disadvantaged groups.As the interveners POWER, Maggie‟s and the CCLA point out in compellingfashion, persons engaged in prostitution are overwhelmingly women. Many areaboriginal women. Some are members of lesbian and gay communities. Someare addicted to drugs and/or alcohol, both of which are forms of disability. Sincegender, race, sexual orientation and disability are all enumerated or analogous