Related posts:

1. NPPR at the PSA
2. Another new NPPR intern
3. NPPR at 2011 ECPG in Budapest

G. Bucken-Knapp, J. Karlsson Schaffer and K. Persson Strömbäck. “Security, Equality and the Clash of Ideas: Sweden’s Evolving Anti-Trafficking Policy,” Human Rights Review, 2012, DOI: 10.1007/s12142-011-0214-y

Abstract

No related posts.

National Assembly, Paris. Copyright Maria van Dam.

On December 6^th 2011, French deputies unanimously[1] approved a non-binding motion reaffirming the country’s abolitionist position in matters of prostitution. The resolution had been put to the National Assembly in June by the members of the Parliamentary Information Commission on prostitution.^[2] Indeed, this resolution is the first step in a plan to institute a policy of criminalization of the purchase of sexual services (CPSS) that had been called for by the Commission at the outcome of its review of possible policy options.

Having traveled abroad and visited countries with a variety of prostitution policy regimes, the Commission had concluded that the Swedish model was the most successful and appropriate one to emulate. The members of the Commission jointly tabled the motion that the National Assembly “reaffirm France’s abolitionist position, the object of which is, in time, a society without prostitution […and] consider that, in light of the constraint that is most often the cause of entry into prostitution, of the violence inherent to this activity […], that prostitution cannot, in any case, be deemed a professional activity”.[3]

The vote was largely symbolic: it serves to loudly and unequivocally restate the National Assembly’s commitment to the eradication of prostitution. The emblematic and foundational purpose of this vote and motion were made apparent by Guy Geoffroy, the Commission’s principal reporter, in an interview prior to the vote: “The resolution is the first step and we decided, symbolically, that as of the moment of the adoption of this resolution, adoption which is not in doubt, to deliver a legislative proposal this will pave the way to the responsibilization of the client, which will involve, if required, penalisation.”[4] In this way the non-binding motion does not introduce any changes to existing measures aimed at prostitution. Instead, it serves to lay the foundations for the impending legislative proposal to punish clients of prostitution.

At the outset of the vote, what is clear is that there is an overwhelming consensus among French political actors that abolitionism is the only legitimate and acceptable position for the country to take in the matter of prostitution. What is less clear, however, is whether or not the same consensus will apply to the vote for the legislative bill which would make clients liable to a six-month prison sentence and a €3000 fine. One important aspect that remains to be hammered out, at the demand of certain left-wing factions[5], is whether or not the proposed criminalization of clients would be implemented in conjunction with, or in the place of, current repressive anti-soliciting measures enshrined in Nicolas Sarkozy’s 2003 Domestic Security Bill. In effect, this symbolic vote has simply been the overture to what will undoubtedly be a less consensual and more heated debate over whether or not, and how, to penalise those who purchase sexual services.

How, then, does Sweden fit into all of this? The debate, both inside the National Assembly, and outside on the streets, where opponents of CPSS were protesting, the discussion was peppered with references to “la Suède” and the “modèle Suédois”. Throughout this episode, proponents of the bill have made references to Sweden and its pioneering policy as a basis for galvanizing support with recurrent allusions to the official rates of success set out in Anna Skarhed’s 2010 official evaluation of the Swedish sex purchase ban report: a 50% decrease of street prostitution. Critics, such as sociologist and sex workers rights activist Françoise Gil, have also made frequent references to the Swedish ban, highlighting what they consider to be the negative side effects of the ban: increased isolation, violence and invisibility.[6]

Nevertheless, despite the relative omnipresence of the Swedish model, the latest episode of French prostitution policy remains an exercise in national distinction. What stands out from the numerous declarations of support presented by the leaders of the different political groups during the vote are the expressions of national and republican pride at France’s perceived shift from passive follower to potential national trendsetter in this policy matter. Overall, this debate has been animated by a common sentiment but risks yet being undermined by conflicting views over the continued form of French prostitution policy. Whilst the political position of France regarding prostitution has been reiterated and clarified, whether or not the current abolitionist project will be successfully used as a platform to criminalize clients remains to be seen.

[2] Proposition de Résolution réaffirmant la position abolitionniste de la France en matière de prostitution 9 June 2011 presented by Danielle Bousquet, Guy Geoffroy, Jean-Marc Ayrault, Christian Jacob, François Sauvadet, Yves Cochet and marie-Jo Zimmermann. Available at: http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/13/propositions/pion3522.asp [accessed 07/12/11].  See also: France’s newest import? Parliamentary Commission calls for “Swedish model” client criminalization

[3] Ibid. “Compte tenu de la contrainte qui est le plus souvent à l’origine de l’entrée dans la prostitution, de la violence inhérente à cette activité […], le prostitution ne saurait en aucun cas être assimilée à une activité professionelle”

[4] Guy Geoffroy (06/12/11) in  an interview with TF1 available at: http://lci.tf1.fr/france/societe/abolir-ou-encadrer-la-prostitution-les-deputes-se-penchent-sur-6858911.html [accessed 06/12/2011]

[5] Jean-Paul Lecoq, communist deputy, speaking for the Gauche démocrate et républicaine (republican and democrat left) states that: “[…] we believe that the repressive measures put in place by Nicolas Sarkozy against the victims of prostitution should be removed.” In National Assembly Ordinary Session of December 6^th 2011 available at: http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/13/cri/2011-2012/20120078.asp#P614_127814 [accessed 07/12/11]

[6] RFI (06/12/11) “Vers l’abolition de la prostitution en France?” http://www.rfi.fr/france/20111206-france-vers-abolition-prostitution [accessed 07/12/11]; 20Minutes (06/12/11) “Prostitution: “En Suède, ce système de pénalisation du client est inutile, inefficace et dangereux” http://www.20minutes.fr/societe/838256-prostitution-en-suede-systeme-penalisation-client-inutile-inefficace-dangereux [accessed 07/12/11]. See also: Evaluating the Swedish Ban on the Purchase of Sexual Services: The Anna Skarhed Report

Related posts:

1. France’s newest import? Parliamentary Commission calls for “Swedish model” client criminalisation
2. The impact of Finnish parliamentary election results on prostitution policy

That prostitution has re-emerging onto the political agenda in Finland is hardly a surprise. Both policymakers and the public in general have much criticized the current ban for its inefficiency to prosecute human traffickers, panderers and customers of sexual services and its incapacity to protect victims. Law enforcement officials have claimed that they lack sufficient resources to deal with prostitution, a crime that a significant part of the population still does not consider a crime at all, but a private agreement between two consenting adults that the society has no right to intrude on. Still, differences in attitudes towards commercial sex exists also within the police, illustrated by that at least the police in Helsinki has recently stepped up their control on public prostitution that’s considered disturbing, criminalized in the Public Order Act from 2003. Others have proposed a wider criminalization of the customers of sexual services as a measure to lessen the demand for prostitution, and to make the line between criminal and non-criminal buying of sex clearer.

The suggestion to expand the criminalization of customers is fairly expected considering the context where the current, limited ban to purchase sexual services was negotiated in the spring 2006.  Facing the widespread opposition to the government bill that proposed a criminalization of sex customers in every situation, the majority of the MPs advocating the ban felt compelled to compromise to a limited criminalization of customers. This action was taken in order to guarantee that the government bill would not be entirely rejected, and, thus, sending a message that the purchase of sexual services is never exploitation and acceptable in every occasion[1]. The compromise ban was viewed as a first step in legislation, ensuring, if later deemed necessary, a gradual advancement to a potential “Swedish style” full-blown criminalization of the johns in every situation.[2]

In the face of it, the 2006 compromise ban appeared as just as good as the Swedish ban for some of its supporters. The main drafter of the compromise ban, Greens MP Tuija Brax who chaired the Legal Affairs Committee in 2006 was one of them.  By 2006, the Swedish ban had been enforced for close to seven years, and all the verdicts based on the ban had come from cases that would also be criminal accordingly to the Finnish, limited criminalization, that is, in cases of pandering and human trafficking.[3] Therefor, for the proponents of the compromise ban, the criticism towards the criminalization has rather been focused on the problems enforcing the ban and prosecuting customers, as the courts have interpreted the evidence criteria very strictly.[4]

Consequently, those interested in prostitution politics have for some time now waited patiently on a coming Supreme Court decision which is to decide if the evidence criteria as stated in the law is sufficient. Meanwhile, central political actors have this year taken stances within the debate on the legislations, implying a possible shift in prostitution policy. The new Ministry of Justice Anna-Maja Henriksson (Swedish People’s Party) has recently acknowledged that the current legislation on prostitution simply does not work. In an interview in the beginning of October, Henriksson suggests that her preferred revision would ban the purchase of sex entirely.[5] Not such a surprising opinion, given that Henriksson has a Party Congress decision from 2000 backing her opinion[6]. The parliamentary group of the Swedish People’s Party has also criticized the current compromise ban,[7] claiming that a general criminalization of the purchase of sexual services would have passed the vote in 2006.

Minister of the Interior Päivi Räsänen holding a poster with the words "Home, Religion and Fatherland - that's what it's all about"

Earlier this fall, Minister of the Interior Päivi Räsänen from Christian Democrats made a statement where she called for a general criminalization of the customers of sexual services.[8] Räsänen is the first Minister of the Interior supporting the criminalization of customers and is also in an important position to do so, given that she should be able to influence the law enforcement units. Prostitution has been a chosen topic for Räsänen for close to two decades already. In the 1990s, she made several initiatives to restrict and control commercial sex industry and protect minors[9], and, in 2000s, she proposed a general criminalization of those both selling and buying sexual services.[10]

Additionally, as a carryover from the previous parliament, the Legal Affairs Committee remains charged with evaluating the respective Finnish and Swedish legislation regarding the purchase of sexual services[11]. Thus, there are again several reasons to believe that prostitution policy will rise to the political agenda. Yet, one can ask whether there will be any new substance in the debate. Jaana Kauppinen, director of Pro-Tukipiste does not appear to think so. On a seminar in Nordic Network on Prostitution in September this year, she summarized that prostitution is raised to the public debate from time to time, but the arguments are the same.

The battle over criminalizing prostitution in 2006 has, somewhat misleadingly, been perceived as one between radical feminists on one side, and Finnish sex workers, their aid organizations and men defending the(ir?) right to purchase sexual services. Today, many of the feminists supporting the wider ban in 2006 are still in prominent places within Finnish politics, while several of those male MPs that were most vocal in opposing the ban have left the parliament. Also, Finnish Sex Workers’ Association Salli that was founded in 2002 to oppose the criminalization of sex customers and to bring forth the opinions of sex workers is now defunct. However, the rights of sex workers will not be left undefended as the former vice president of Salli, Left Alliance MP and prostitution researcher Anna Kontula holds a seat in the Finnish Parliament. Additionally,  one should not forget that the well-regarded civic organization Pro-Tukipiste that gave the most objective and convincing argument against a general criminalization in 2006 is still very active. Their arguments that a criminalization of the customers would only worsen the situation of those engaged in prostitution was difficult to trump.

On the other hand, a change in prostitution politics is not written in the government programme and it is unlikely that a majority of the MPs in the current Legal Affairs Committee favor a tightening of the sex purchase ban. Previous Minister of the Interior and National Coalition Party MP Anne Holmlund who chairs the current committee has a reputation of not placing the chase of customers of sexual services high on her list of priorities. The house of parliament is also filled with new MPs, whose opinion on the purchase of sex is unknown. Except for one new MP whose stance on commercial sex is well known. Left Alliance MP Anna Kontula, who wrote her PhD dissertation on commercial sex in Finland was already in 2006 a much referred to expert in the Finnish parliament on sex work in Finland.[12] As an MP she is currently in prominent place to affect the debate on prostitution policy, if she chooses to.

Apart from the wishes of a few political heavyweights, has anything changed in the Finnish political climate since 2006 that would suggest a possible change in prostitution politics? Yes and no. For one thing, the Swedish ban has been enacted long enough to provide information on whether the ban has resulted in its desired effects: a lessening of the demand for prostitution. Additionally, the ban is no longer a Swedish oddity, as both Norway and Iceland have adopted similar legislation, keeping in mind a possible turn in Danish prostitution policy after the recent parliamentary election. Yet, the criminalization of customers of sexual services is first and foremost a legislation based on values and attitudes, which appear to have become harsher in Finland in the last year. The economic crisis within the Euro area and a possible forthcoming recession is the main subject of debate in the Finnish parliament at the moment, which might also influence the prostitution policy. Commercial sex industry blossomed in the early 1990s harsh economical recession in Finland, apparently increasing both the customers and the sellers. Yet, what is most important, a shift in prostitution policy was not debated during the parliamentary elections this spring and the large political parties still do not have an official stance in the question, making it risky for any political actor to push forward a change in the current policy on the purchase of sexual services.

[2] Interview with Janina Andersson 16.6.2011, former MP of the Greens.

[3] Interview with Greens MP Tuija Brax 16.9.2011.

[4] Venla Roth, Defining Human Trafficking, Identifying its Victims (Turku 2010)

[5] MTV3 Uutiset 7.10.2011, ‘Oikeusministeri vauhdittaisi seksin oston kieltämistä’, http://www.mtv3.fi/uutiset/kotimaa.shtml/2011/10/1404616/oikeusministeri-vauhdittaisi-seksin-oston-kieltamista.

[6] Hufvudstadsbladet 13.6.2006, ‘Intervju: Sfp:s kvinnobas saknar radikalism i partiet “Man ska göra som det sägs för att få vara med“’.

[7] Swedish People’s Party MP and parliamentary group leader in 2006, Christina Gestrin on plenum 20.6.2006, PTK 75/2006 vp http://www.eduskunta.fi/faktatmp/utatmp/akxtmp/puh_75_2006_vp_2_22_22_p.shtml.

[8] Helsingin Sanomat 30.8.2011, ‘Ministeri Räsänen väläyttää seksinostokieltoa Ruotsin malliin’ http://www.hs.fi/politiikka/artikkeli/Ministeri+R%C3%A4s%C3%A4nen+v%C3%A4l%C3%A4ytt%C3%A4%C3%A4+seksinostokieltoa+Ruotsin+malliin/1135268943600.

[9] TA 26/1995 vp, KVN 45/1995 vp, SKT 127/1995 vp, LA 16/1996 vp, KK 616/1996 vp, KVN 50/1997, KVN 63/1997, TA 149/1997 vp, TA 201/1999 vp, KK 299/1999 vp,

[10] SKT 251/2000 vp, LA 46/2002 vp , LA 52/2004 vp, LaVM 10/2006 vp, KK 50/2007 vp

[11] Interview with Janina Andersson 16.6.2011, former MP of the Greens and chair of the Legal Affairs Committee 11.9.2009–19.4.2011.

[12] Anna Kontula, Punainen eksodus: Tutkimus seksityöstä Suomessa (Helsinki 2008)

Related posts:

1. The impact of Finnish parliamentary election results on prostitution policy
2. Swedish attitudes towards the purchase of sexual services
3. Evaluating the Swedish Ban on the Purchase of Sexual Services: The Anna Skarhed Report

The sale of sexual services has been a legal act in Norway since 1902. With the law reform of 2009, criminalising the purchase of sexual services, politicians once again underlined that the sale of sexual services should not be punishable. But even though selling sexual services in and of itself is not criminalised, some aspects associated with selling sexual services are not legal. One example is that prostitutes are not granted the right to damages for loss of income generated by prostitution.[1] This question has been the focus of some recent court decisions, and there has been an important shift in the way this question has been addressed by the courts.

The right to damages for loss of income generated by prostitution

There has been a series of court cases before the Borgarting County Court (Borgarting Lagmannsrett) regarding damages for loss of income that would have resulted from prostitution. The cases involve prostitutes who have been unable to work after an assault, and where they have claimed damages before the court. Generally, the main rule in the law on damages is that perpetrators must pay damages he or she has caused to another person.[2]

Borgarting County Court (Photo by Anne-Sophie Ofrim)

The first set of cases regarded assaults that had happened before the law criminalising the buying of sexual services came into force. In May 2006, Borgarting County Court ruled that income generated from prostitution was included in the right to damages, and granted four prostitutes damages for loss of income by prostitution.[3]

Similarly, in May 2007, the same court ruled that the law on damages protected income generated by prostitution.[4] The majority stated that there were no reason for excusing the perpetrator from the responsibilities following from having made someone unable to work, simply because the income was generated by prostitution. In its dissent, the minority argued that the law on damages could not protect undocumented income resulting from work performed by an illegal immigrant in a sector that some consider undesirable.

A third case was brought before Borgarting County Court in May 2008, and here too, the court was divided.[5] The majority held that income generated by prostitution was legally protected, granting the two prostitutes damages. By contrast, the minority argued that a contract regarding prostitution was immoral and that damages claim were therefore not legally protected.

Yet, following the adoption of the Norwegian ban on the purchase of sexual services in 2009, the court opted for a different stance when considering similar cases.  The first case to reach the courts following the adoption of the sex purchase ban was in March 2010.[6] Here, the court held that income generated by prostitution would not be included as part of damages, with the court arguing that prostitution was immoral and therefore not protected by the law. The court was unanimous when ruling that income generated by prostitution is not legally protected under the Norwegian law. The case concerned a prostitute who lawfully could reside and work in Norway, who had been assaulted and therefore was unable to work as a prostitute for a period of time. The court argued that even though the sale of sexual services was legal, prostitution as such was seen as an unwanted activity in Norway. The court held that by criminalising the act of buying sexual services, the parliament had highlighted that prostitution was unwanted. The main argument from the court was that a contract regarding prostitution was to be deemed as against honour, or immoral, and thereby not binding between the parties, cf. the Norwegian Act of 1687, section 5-1-2.[7] As such, the court held that if the contract did not have legal protection, and buying was criminalised, it would not be consistent to grant legal protection to the prostitute’s loss of income.

The state as a public pimp

Another interesting aspect with the legal regulation of prostitution in Norway is that the prostitutes are under the duty to pay tax from income generated by prostitution. Under Norwegian tax law, all income and money on bank accounts must be declared for taxation purposes. Where one cannot declare the source of the income, one will have to pay an estimated tax. Income from prostitution is assessed for tax, and prostitutes have to pay tax on the money in their accounts.[8] This is a tricky subject, because by imposing tax on this income, the state profits from their prostitution, not dissimilar to a pimp. In some situations, the prostitutes will have to continue to work as prostitutes to work off the tax[9], making the difference to an ordinary pimp small. Kristin Halvorsen, the Minister of Finance at the time, stated in 2006 that she would consider proposing a tax-exemption for income generated by prostitution. A law reform has not yet been adopted.

None of these subjects, neither taxes nor damages, has come before the Supreme Court yet. The discrepancy of being a legal business on the one hand and the lack of rights on the other hand does create a problematic legal situation. These cases have show that, even though prostitution is legal in Norway, there is a discrepancy in the regulation when it comes to income generated by prostitution. Had the prostitutes generated the said income from other sources, they would have been granted damages for their loss. The person, who assaulted the prostitute, does under the current legal regulation have to pay less in damages for assaulting a prostitute, as someone having income from other sources. A clarification from the Supreme Court, or a clearer regulation adopted by the Parliament would be helpful.

(Sunniva Schultze-Florey has a Masters in Law from the University of Bergen, Norway, and is currently a Ph.D. student at Humboldt University of Berlin, Germany.  She can be contacted at:  sunniva.schultze.florey (at) gmail.com.)

[2] The Damages Act section 3-1(1), Norwegian name Skadeerstatningsloven.

[3] LB-2005-138054.

[4] RG-2007-1083.

[5] RG-2008-1137.

[6] LB-2009-93028.

[7] Norwegian title, Kong Christian den Femtis Norske Lov, “Alle Contracter som frivilligen giøris af dennem, der ere Myndige, og komne til deris Lavalder, være sig Kiøb, Sal, Gave, Mageskifte, Pant, Laan, Leje, Forpligter, Forløfter og andet ved hvad Navn det nævnis kand, som ikke er imod Loven, eller Ærbarhed, skulle holdis i alle deris Ord og Puncter, saasom de indgangne ere”.

[8] The Tax Assessment Act of 1980 section 8-2, Norwegian name Ligningsloven, cf. the Tax Act of 2000 section 2-1(9), Norwegian name Skatteloven.

[9] Gregar Berg-Rollness Bestikkelser/korrupsjon og uønskede aktiviteter – skatteplikt for ulovlig inntekt, in Skatterett, 2007 number 3, pp 198-215, p 199.

Related posts:

1. Contra bonos mores and the sex purchase ban in Norway
2. Norway bans the purchase of sexual services
3. UK Legal Rulings: Sex Trafficking Victims and Sex Workers

Photo by Dkpto

After a very closely fought battle in the 2011 Danish parliamentary election campaign, a centre-left coalition led by the Social Democratic Party (S) was victorious late last Thursday.  While Social Democratic Party leader Helle Thorning-Schmidt is set to be the first female prime minister, the party suffered its worst fate at the polls since 1903, receiving just under 25% of the votes. Together with the Socialist People’s Party (SF), S is now negotiating with the Social-Liberal Party (R) to form a coalition.

While not central to the election campaign, the question of whether or not to criminalize the purchase of sex has been a particularly salient issue in Denmark over the past year.  The centre-left parties, with the Social Democrats in the lead, have been discussing a criminalization of the purchase of sex for some time now. Given official support from the Social Democrats, the Socialist Left and the Unity List (EL) for such a ban, plus the support of the previous Equality spokesperson from the Social Liberals, many assumed that the ban would be a done deal if the  four parties managed to bring about a shift in government. Yet, despite their victory, it does not appear that a Swedish-style ban on the purchase of sexual services will immediately be the case. To some extent, this appears to be the result of the Social-Liberal Party appointing a new Equality spokesperson, who opposed criminalization. Beyond the immediate impact (or lack thereof) on policy, it’s also clear that the balance of the underlying ideas being mobilized in the Danish prostitution policy debate has been shifting, and this could have an impact on future policy developments.

One particularly important pro-ban actor in Denmark is the Social Democratic MP Mette Frederiksen. She proposed the ban already in 2002 and was later backed by both the left-wing Socialist People’s Party and the red-green Unity List. In 2009, also her own party agreed to support her.  The March 8th Initiative (2008-), which from the beginning was constituted by a number of women’s movements and NGOs, have subsequently seen some very powerful new members join them in their goal to ban the purchase of sex. However, the Social Liberals, whose parliamentary support S, SF and EL desperately need in order to realize the ban, never fully agreed on a criminalization. The Social Liberal Party is something of a rebel in the Danish parliament, reluctant to categorize itself as belonging to either of the two blocs with their mix of social and liberal politics. Although the Social-Liberal Party have pledged support to S and SF since 2007, the party have a history of supporting the centre-right alliance.

In 2008, the Social-Liberal Party’s spokesperson for Equality, Lone Dybkjær, announced that she wanted to criminalize the customers and was celebrated by both Mette Frederiksen (S) and SF for this statement. Dybkjær motivated her position with reference to the experiences with the Swedish ban and pointed to that more than 90 percent of the Swedes now think buying sex is unacceptable. She also referred to the “violent increase” in trafficking in women and claimed that since men cannot seem to tell victims of trafficking apart from “other prostitutes”, the customers have to be criminalized. But there was disagreement within the Social-Liberal Party. Linda Kristiansen (R) is a strong opponent to criminalization and ironically, she also pointed to the Swedish ban and argued that the criminalization has made it harder for authorities to reach out to prostitutes.

At one point in 2009, it looked like the left bloc, including R were close to an agreement on demanding a criminalization of the purchase of sexual services. Thereby, a shift in political power would mean a realization of the ban. Margrethe Wivel (R) put forward a motion for resolution to criminalize the purchase of sex on a party congress and argued for the moral value of such a bill. But no decision was taken.

On January 1^st this year, Manu Sareen stepped in as a substitute for Lone Dybkjær in Folketinget while she was taking a few months time-out. Less than two months after stepping in as Dybkjær’s substitute, Sareen pointed to criticism of the Swedish ban in conjunction with announcing that the Social Liberals would now oppose criminalization.  “A significant reason for our decision not to support a criminalization of sex customers is the experiences from Sweden. The latest evaluation report shows that there is no evidence pointing to a decrease in the number of prostitutes over the 10 year period that the bill has existed”, Sareen declared on his homepage.

In June, the prostitution debate was refuelled yet again when it became evident that a majority of the Danish people did not agree with the S-SF-EL alliance on banning the purchase of sex; a survey showed that 57 percent of the Danish people wanted to make prostitution a fully legal job and improve the rights for sex workers, including the right to join a labour rights union and to receive unemployment funds. Only 19 percent were against it. At the same time, the Social Democrats raged against a new report on prostitution that was issued by the National Research Centre for Welfare (SFI) and was the most extensive of its kind thus far. The report showed that a majority of the sex workers in massage parlours wished to remain in their jobs. But the Social Democrats protested: “Sex should be about love, not money”. “Voluntary prostitution is a myth”, the party’s spokesperson for Equality said.

By this time, Lone Dybkjær had returned to the parliament and commented on the survey: “If you would have asked if people believe that it is fair to legalize a job where there is 50 percent of violence, I am sure you would get a different answer”. However, she made it clear that she did not speak for the whole party. Dybkjær had previously announced that she would not run for parliament in the 2011 election and was therefore no longer an important player. Moreover, the survey had shown that almost 60 percent of the Social-Liberal voters were in favour of increased rights for sex workers. And Manu Sareen, who was now a leading candidate for the Social-Liberal Party in Copenhagen, announced only a week before the election that R would definitely not support S and SF in a criminalization of sex customers. He said that he did not believe in “the happy whore”, but that he neither could see any advantages of following Sweden in a ban. Instead, he claimed that the Social-Liberal Party wanted to develop a national exit strategy, much in line with the centre-right position.

Arguably the most remarkable about this renewed interest for prostitution in Denmark is that the issue is now discussed within the context of a gender equality debate, something that would have been unimaginable 10 years ago; when even the connotation of the words “feminism” and “gender” was frowned upon as a left-over from the 70s, alternatively a puritan idea from Sweden. However, Denmark is not only seeing a shift towards a feminist perspective on the purchase of sex, but there is also a rise in sex worker rights activism (see SIO for instance). Overall, there is a politicization of the whole prostitution debate, which is extremely different from the one that took place prior to the decriminalization of prostitution in 1999 – and in the middle of the heated debate is the Swedish ban on sexual services.

Gradually, gender-neutral and rather depoliticized ideas about prostitution as an individual social problem have had to give way to feminist ideas, framing prostitution as a symptom of gender inequality and sometimes even as violence against women – an argument that is well recognized from Swedish rhetoric. These voices have over the years made their way from peripheral corners of the debate and into the very core where they are now agitating loud and clear for a criminalization of the purchase of sexual services. At this year’s International Conference on Prostitution and Trafficking, “Grosse Freiheit?”, the Social Democrat Magnus Heunicke announced that “if we can gather the required majority, and I think we can, I promise that I will implement the legislative amendment that criminalizes the sex customer within the first 100 days of a S-SF government.”

Danish sociologist Claus Lautrup has also voiced confidence that Denmark soon will follow the Nordic neighbours in banning the purchase of sex. “Well-educated women view all prostitution as a matter of gender politics and as violence against women, and they are getting more and more influential in their parties. The movement is in full bloom and it is just a matter of time before a criminalization is introduced.” Indeed, the gender equality perspective on prostitution seems to be held primarily by the political elite, while the previously mentioned public survey implies that the majority of the Danish people want to increase the legal rights for sex workers.

It is possible that if Lone Dybkjær would have remained as the Social-Liberal Party’s spokesperson for Equality, the party could have joined the centre-left bloc in their demand for a criminalization. And it is possible that in time, R will change their position, although it is very unlikely that the ban will be realized within the first 100 days of the S-SF government. Beyond doubt though, is that the tone of the Danish prostitution debate has definitely changed – radically – when feminist ideas about prostitution as violence against women are expressed by the most central Danish policymakers; and when the Swedish model that was so detested in 1999, now is discussed as a real alternative.

Related posts:

1. The impact of Finnish parliamentary election results on prostitution policy
2. “Prohibition” — the Danish frame

The Commission had travelled extensively both domestically and abroad to four European states[1] in order to take stock of the available policy ideas and instruments and to establish the benefits and drawbacks of each with the aim of determining the best way forward for French prostitution policy. This initiative was undertaken in light of the perceived ineffectiveness and misguidedness of the previous policy program: the Domestic Security Bill[2] (LSI) developed only nine years before by Nicolas Sarkozy, then Minister of the Interior. There is a growing consensus that the measures were only ever sporadically and inconsistently implemented[3] and never led to the wide-scale dismantling of international trafficking rings and eradication of street prostitution that had been promised. As a result, this perceived failure or “collapse” of the current policy provided an opportunity for competing political actors to inject alternative policy ideas in a debate no longer monopolised by an effective and efficient dominant orthodoxy.[4] Actors pushing these alternative policy ideas were thus in a position to convince other political and institutional actors and the wider public that policy change is necessary, a process which amounts to the “social construction of the need to reform”.[5]

Prior even to the consensus that the LSI was not functioning adequately, dissatisfaction with its possible negative side effects on the safety and living conditions of women in prostitution constituted the bulk of the discourse opposing its formalization. During this time, the centre-right deputy Marie-Jo Zimmermann suggested criminalizing clients as an alternative to the punitive measures of the LSI. In fact, she was one of the first to couple a proposed French policy of client criminalization with direct references to the Swedish law[6]. Yet, whilst in 2002 she had highlighted the possible negative side-effects of the “Swedish model”, she went on 9 years later to be part of the Parliamentary Commission which showed near unconditional support for the same policy program. Moreover, Zimmermann is not the only member of the Committee to have previously expressed a wish to see clients criminalized which never really took off. Indeed, the president of the Commission, socialist deputy Danielle Bousquet, had expressed the desire to see clients penalised as early as 2003.[7] This entails that the process by which these political actors came to desire and promote a “Swedish model” of prostitution policy is not a straightforward case of policy learning or transfer.

Thus, while we are undeniably in a situation were “knowledge about policies, administrative arrangements, institutions and ideas in one political system […] is used in the development of policies, administrative arrangements, institutions and ideas in another political system”[8], the recent evolution of French prostitution policy would point towards an adaptation in use of this knowledge to reshape the perception of an initial policy idea. Here then, it would appear that actors, who may or may not have initially transferred the policy idea of client criminalization from Sweden in the early 2000, did later use this “narrative of importation” to reframe an abolitionist discourse equating prostitution with gender inequality and men’s exploitation of female victims. As a result, the reframed policy ideas have benefited from perceived success of the Swedish law in its domestic setting.

The reason why it was possible for the Commission to capitalize on the Swedish policy program is that this latter ‘fit’ nicely into the domestic ideological, political and institutional setting. This is important because the possibility of integrating foreign policy ideas and/or instruments is predicated on their plausibility to the recipient community, in that sense the acceptability of imported idea or idea sets is dependent its similarity with familiar and acceptable idea sets held by a majority.[9] In particular, actors saw a parallel between the concerns about the wellbeing of the “victims” of prostitution that are so central to contemporary French abolitionism and the ideas of gender equality and prostitution as an exploitative system that underpinned the Swedish debate on client penalization[10]. This ideational compatibility is highlighted by the authors of the report: “[...] the ambition of an advanced democracy can only be, in the fullness of time, the disappearance of prostitution. [...] the goal, thus, is to determine which policy is respectful of the rights recognised to all human beings while allowing us to move towards this objective [...] of the disappearance of prostitution. What is more, in light of both our fundamental principles and the Swedish experience, it appears that making clients responsible is essential to this conciliation.”[11]

Whether or not the Commission’s efforts come to fruition is as yet unknown, but one thing is clear: the project to reform French prostitution policy is rooted in a complex process of framing and reframing aimed at reasserting a previously dismissed policy idea. Their repackaged suggestions also seem to have benefitted from the vacuum created by the perceived failure of the existing policy. Moreover, this new policy initiative was able to integrate elements of the Swedish model in such a way as to benefit from the latter’s perceived progressiveness and effectiveness. Overall, this new chapter in French prostitution policy looks to be centred on the redefinition of French abolitionism and the strengthening of the country’s position on the international stage as a leader and example in the domain of prostitution policy, in the same vein as Sweden. As such, future research on the topic will undoubtedly have to provide further insight as to why this year’s winning political idea is, in fact, last decade’s non-starter.

[2] Loi n°2003-239 du 18 mars 2003 pour la sécurité intérieur. This law is part of a larger legislative and political program designed to facilitate the state’s responses to what it deemed to be an important and unacceptable increase in insecurity. This wider project is entitled the Loi d’Orientation et de Programmation pour la Sécurité Intérieure and was voted on and accepted in 2002.

[3] Jean Danet and Véronique Guienne (eds.) (2006) Action publique et prostitution Rennes: Presse Universitaire de Rennes

[4] Legro, Jeffrey W. (2000) “The Transformation of Policy Ideas” in American Journal of Political Science 44(3): 419-432

[5] Cox, Robert Henry (2001) “The social construction of an imperative: why welfare reform happened in Denmark and the Netherlands but not in Germany” in World Politics 53(3): 463-498

[6] Marie-Jo Zimmermann (2002) Rapport d’information fait au nom de la delegation aux droits des femmes et à l’égalité des chances entre les hommes et les femmes sur le projet adopté par le sénat après declaration d’urgence (n. 381), pour la sécurité intérieure http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/12/rap-info/i0459.asp [accessed 26/08/2011]

[7] Danielle Bousquet, Christophe Caresche and Martine Lignière-Cassou (2003) “Oui, abolitionnistes!” in Le Monde 16^th January 2003

[8] Dolowitz, David P. and Marsh, David (2000) “Learning from Abroad: The Role of Policy Transfer in Contemporary Policy-Making” in Governance 13(1): 5-23

[9] Legro, Jeffrey W. (2000) “The Transformation of Policy Ideas” in American Journal of Political Science 44(3): 419-432

[10] Lilian Mathieu (2004) “The Debate on Prostitution in France: A Conflict between Abolitionism, Regulationism and Prohibition” in Journal of Contemporary European Studies 12(2): 153-163

[11] “[...] l’ambition d’une démocracie avancée ne peut être que d’envisager, à terme, la disparition de la prostitution. [...] il s’agit donc de trouver quelle est la politique qui soit respectueuse des droits reconnus à tout être human tout en permettant de s’approcher de cet objectif qu’est la disparition de la prostitution. Or, à la lumière tant de nos principes fondamentaux que de l’experience suédoise, il apparaît que la responsabiliation des cleints est essentielle à cette conciliation.” Commission des Lois Constitutionelles, de la Législation et de l’Administration Générale de la République, en conclusion des travaux d’une mission d’information sur la prostitution en France (13/04/2011) Rapport d’Information à l’Assemblée Nationale n° 3334. Page 231

Related posts:

1. French prostitution policy: France symbolically reaffirms its commitment to abolitionism
2. The impact of Finnish parliamentary election results on prostitution policy

Dr. Anna Kontula

Yet, behind these headlines, the 2011 Finnish parliamentary elections were also of great significance for those with an interest in prostitution policy.  Dr Anna Kontula, a well-known critic of the Swedish ban on the purchase of sexual services, and one of the key epistemic actors who lobbied against proposals that Finland should adopt a Swedish-style policy in 2006, has been elected to the parliament as an MP for the socialist Left Alliance, a party that has a track record of initiatives on behalf of criminalization.

Kontula was the only Left Alliance candidate elected from Pirkanmaa electoral district, preventing former Left Alliance MP Minna Sirnö from being re-elected to her third term in the parliament. A member of the Legal Affairs Committee in 2006, when the Swedish-style proposal was fiercely criticized and eventually altered to a compromise, Sirnö played a visible part defending the original version of the Finnish sex purchase ban. The Legal Affairs Committee had turned its back on the general criminalization of the purchase of sexual services, opting for a compromise limited to criminalizing the purchase of sexual services from victims of human trafficking or pandering. In the subsequent first hearing, Sirnö then proposed that the government’s original criminalization bill be adopted. Although the large majority of the Left Alliance supported Sirnö’s proposal, she lost the vote in the Parliament.

As far back as 2001, the Left Alliance had already adopted an official stance supporting the criminalization of the purchase of sexual services as one way to reduce international trafficking in women. Moreover, the re-elected chairman of the Left Alliance Parliamentary Group, Annika Lapintie, put forward an initiative in 2004 calling for a general criminalization of the purchase of sex. This initiative was co-signed by several MPs from the Left and the Greens of Finland, and was later addressed as part of the governmental bill resulting in the current sex purchase ban. Another Lapintie initiative urged the government to take actions in criminalizing the purchase of sexual services in 2002, and was cosigned by 99 female and male MPs across party lines. Thus, keeping in mind these actions taken by Left Alliance’s MPs, it will be interesting to see what impact Kontula’s election has for both prostitution policy preferences both within the Left Alliance and the Finnish Parliament.

The current sex purchase ban has been criticized for its inefficiency since 2006, and the increased media attention on prostitution in the last year resulted in Ministry of Justice Tuija Brax (The Greens of Finland), also chairperson of the Legal Affairs Committee in 2006, to suggest a possible revision of current legislation. After the Greens’ defeat in the elections in April, with party leader Anni Sinnemäki admitting the party would be in the opposition in the new parliament, it appeared that prostitution policy would no longer be Brax’s headache.

However, the political balance in Finland has shifted for the second time in a few weeks. Soini’s announcement in early May that the True Finns would enter into opposition in the new parliament, after rejecting an economic rescue package for Portugal supported by the National Coalition Party and the Social Democrats, one might say that the opposition is getting mighty crowded.  The Center Party and the Greens pronounced already on the election night that the great loss of seats in the parliament would drive them to opposition. Still, the National Coalition Party leader Jyrki Katainen spoke out on his wish to form a coalition government together with Social Democrats, Swedish People’s Party, The Christian Democrats and the Greens. Now, the Left Alliance has also joined the negotiations.

Further, if the Christian Democrats are to take a seat in the future government, the party leader Päivi Räsänen is likely to have an influence on how Finnish prostitution policy is to develop. Räsänen put several initiatives to curb the commercial sex industry in Finland in the 1990s and 2000s, and defended the criminalization of purchase of sexual services to the bitter end, together with Sirnö. However, Räsänen simultaneously proposed a criminalization of sale of sexual services as well as the purchase. One might also speculate whether the Social Democrats re-entrance to the government will lift prostitution policy once again to the political agenda, and what impact the Left Alliance will play in the government to be.

The elections also increased the number of MPs with backgrounds in police force in the new parliament. In preparing the current legislation on purchasing sexual services, expert opinions from law enforcement units were very critical towards such a ban, as were those MPs who had served in law enforcement. Of course, one cannot necessarily argue that policy stances can be inferred from one’s occupational background. Nonetheless, the increase in the number of police officers raises the prospect that this group of anti-criminalization MPs may be further strengthened.

All told, while Finnish politics may be living in interesting times in general, the composition of the players in the recently elected Finnish parliament suggests that the debate over regulating the commercial sex industry could take on equally interesting, and not easily predicted, dimensions.

Pia Levin & Gregg Bucken-Knapp

Related posts:

1. The Danish election: a new government – and towards a new prostitution regime?
2. Finnish legislation on the purchase of sexual services: potential revisions?
3. The Happy Whore and the Victim of Human Trafficking – Stereotypes Prevail in Finnish Debate on Sex Work

Depicting sex workers as victims of human trafficking, and thus implying that sex workers in Finland are mainly of a foreign nationality and involved in sex work unwillingly, is no new way to describe those offering sexual services for a fee. In the broad social debate going on in Finland in the late 19^th and early 20^th century, which raised prostitution and questions of chastity as topics, one can find several reports of young Swedish women, who were convinced to travel from Stockholm mainly to Helsinki and Turku, promised work in cafes or restaurants, and, yet, actually lured and trapped into prostitution.[1] Today , Sweden is known as the first country in the world to have passed a general criminalization of the purchase of sexual services, and as a country, which also tries to influence the policy of other countries towards a criminalization of the purchase of sexual services.

A short study in Finnish newspapers from the last two decades reveals that a major part of the Finnish debate on sex work still revolves around the concept of foreigners. A clear shift has of course happened: the sex workers are depicted entering Finnish borders from countries east and south rather than west.  The dissolution of the Soviet Union and an increased possibility for travel from the eastern European countries to Finland created possibilities for sex workers, especially from Russia and Estonia, to travel to Finland for shorter periods.

The change of origin country of sex workers is also connected to the ideas of what is thought to be the main reason for people to enter the sex work industry: poverty. With poverty seen as the background factor for “ending up” in sex work, people, generally women, originating from the poorest countries are the ones who are most visible in debates on sex work.[2] The focus on severe poverty and limited career-, and perhaps, life-choices has focused the prostitution debate on victims of international human trafficking. Sex workers who entered Finland with false perception of the type of work they were to perform in the country, possibly with limited foreign language skills and their freedom of movement restricted or finances controlled by the employer/trafficker constituted one of the most distinct pictures of a prostitute in Finland. Still, not all foreign women involved in sex work in Finland are considered to be victims or having entered the sex work business unwillingly.[3] Statements pointing out how Eastern European women with short stays in Finland can collect earnings equivalent to several months salary in their home country imply that short periods of sex work in Finland actually is a smart business move.

Debating sex work without stepping into a discourse on morals has been largely impossible . The acceptable types of sexuality and the correct or allowed ways to perform that sexuality are almost always included in debates on sex work. Outsiders have deemed promiscuity as being prevalent in descriptions of sex workers and their choices in entering the business, alongside with mental disorders, low self-esteem, a lazy wish for easy cash and a lack of alternative career choices. Whereas the victims of human trafficking can largely be perceived as forced into prostitution, the “happy whore” stands for her own decision for her involvement in sex work, both in good and bad. In societies with strict sexual morals the “happy whores” might face rather judgmental attitudes when being public with their field of profession. Suggestions to criminalize selling sexual services can also stem from ideas of sex work as a profession entered willingly, and wrongly, one might add.

Still, it is not only people condemning women involved in sex work who argue that it is the quest for pleasure that has driven some women into prostitution . Self-employed sex workers who claim to be happy in their self-chosen profession distance themselves from statements that the selling and purchasing of sexual services would be an act of violence against women or a question of gender inequality.[4] Even though many sex workers state the salary as the best part of their work, or admit that sex work never was the profession they aimed for, several sex workers stress that they greatly enjoy sex and the possibilities to explore their sexuality in their work. Still, the statement that the bargaining of sex would be a mutual contract between two equal adults has been criticized for making a very elitist perspective both on sex work and the negotiating possibilities of sex workers.

Thus, while almost apparent, it is clear that the contemporary debate about sex work in Finland is heavily permeated both by ideas about nationality and agency for women, as well as differing views on sexuality.

[2] Poverty has been connected to sex work in several newspaper articles, parliamentary debates on sex work as well as in the reports on human trafficking and prostitution written by the working group appointed by the Ministry of Justice.

[3] See for instance Lehti, Martti, ’Naiskauppa ja Suomi’, Haaste 2/2002.

[4] Amongst other, members of SALLI, the United Sex Professionals of Finland, have argued for the positive aspects of sex work.

Related posts:

1. Legitimate and illegitimate sex work – the role of identities in the Swedish pornography debate
2. The impact of Finnish parliamentary election results on prostitution policy
3. Pia Levin joins NPPR staff

Castle Hill, Budapest. Photo by Bruce Tuten.

The chair and discussant for the panel, Sexuality and the State: Comparative Perspectives, was Professor Joyce Outshoorn (University of Leiden).  Additional papers were presented by Isabelle Engeli (University of Geneva) as well as David Paternotte (Université Libre de Bruxelles) and Manon Tremblay (University of Ottawa).

Our paper, “The Same Policy, But Different Ideas: The Ideational Underpinnings of the Norwegian and Swedish Bans on the Purchase of Sexual Services” is now at the revise at resubmit stage with a political science / gender studies journal.

Related posts:

1. NPPR at the PSA
2. NPPR Working Paper Series: The Politics of Commercial Sex
3. NPPR relocates to Scotland and Norway