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

Page: 7principles of fundamental justice enshrined in s. 7 of the Canadian Charter ofRights and Freedoms. She reasoned that the challenged laws exacerbate theharm that prostitutes already face by preventing them from taking steps thatcould enhance their safety. Those steps include: working indoors, alone or withother prostitutes (prohibited by s. 210); paying security staff (prohibited bys. 212(1)(j)); and screening customers encountered on the street to assess therisk of violence (prohibited by s. 213(1)(c)).[5] As we will explain, we agree with the application judge that the prohibitionon common bawdy-houses for the purpose of prostitution is unconstitutional andmust be struck down. However, we suspend the declaration of invalidity for 12months to give Parliament an opportunity to redraft a Charter-compliantprovision.[6] We also hold that the prohibition on living on the avails of prostitutioninfringes s. 7 of the Charter to the extent that it criminalizes non-exploitativecommercial relationships between prostitutes and other people. However, we donot strike down that prohibition, but rather read in words of limitation so that theprohibition applies only to those who live on the avails of prostitution incircumstances of exploitation. This cures the constitutional defect and aligns thetext of the provision with the vital legislative objective that animates it.