CORRUPTION

Interview with Ms. Taina Bien-Aimé
International Affairs Forum
hoped that this policy would be voted on
quietly, as a matter of procedure, with very
little attention paid to it. However, CATW’s
international campaign really brought the issue
to the forefront, and that has generated a lot of
productive conversations. We are up against
enormous powers, but the successes that we are
witnessing—particularly at the legislative level
and the grassroots, survivor-led movement—are
the most significant in the last 20 years. The
debates surrounding this issue are brutal and
time-consuming, and we have limited resources
to consistently engage in them, but I do think that
it is a positive outcome that people are at least
talking about these issues. People have at times
asked me: “Who are you to go after Amnesty
International?” My reaction is: “Who is Amnesty
International to dismiss the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights, related covenants, and the
Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)?” Our
job is to ensure that governments abide by the
laws and principles that they have committed to
upholding. If other human rights organizations
are calling on governments to violate
international law, where and how can women and
girls get protection?
Let’s discuss national legislations and
policies around the world. Currently, South
Africa is considering reforming its existing
law on prostitution, from one that criminalizes
the act to one that would decriminalize it.
Could you explain the three major legal
international frameworks for tackling the sex
trade on a national level?
One framework promotes full criminalization,
meaning that you cannot buy or sell sexual
acts, which framework is found in countries
like the United States (with the exception
of a few counties in Nevada). The second
framework in place promotes full legalization
or decriminalization; this framework is found in
countries like the Netherlands and Germany,
as well as certain states in Australia. Some say
there are four legal frameworks, as it separates
legalization from decriminalization; however,
my take is that decriminalization is simply a
worse form of legalization. Finally, the third
framework is the so-called Swedish Model,
which was enacted in Sweden in 1999 after
years of the women’s movement petitioning the
government to look at prostitution as a cause
and consequence of gender-based violence
and inequality. Norway and Iceland passed the
Swedish a few years later, which is why that
legal framework is also known as the Nordic
Model. The Swedish Model recognizes that the
majority of women involved in prostitution face
unspeakable violence and an absence of choice.
As a result, this model focuses on the buyers of
sex acts—it decriminalizes prostituted individuals
but penalizes buyers.
The first two frameworks each have their
challenges. In countries with full criminalization of
the sex trade, you tend to have a discriminatory
impact on the application of these laws. In
the United States, for instance, for every man
who is arrested for buying a sex act or service,
4-10 women are arrested for engaging in the
same sex act, depending on the jurisdiction.
Women are overwhelmingly targeted in the
implementation of full criminalization laws.
Likewise, the second major legal framework in
place—full legalization or decriminalization—has
produced incredibly negative consequences.
In countries that legalized prostitution, we
see reports of just unbelievable horrors:
Germany has been nicknamed the “Bordello
of Europe” with nationwide chains of brothels;
in the Netherlands, figures estimate that up
to 90% of women in Amsterdam brothels are
146