(MENAFN- The Conversation) Most Canadians have access to workplaces that are safe, promote health and autonomy and, most importantly, are protected by the law. But for people in criminalized professions, including sex work, it's a different story.

In Canada, sex work itself is legal. But most aspects associated with doing sex work - purchasing sexual services and communicating for that purpose - are illegal.

R. v. Kloubakov, a recent Supreme Court of Canada case, demonstrates how basic elements of the workplace for sex workers are not only contested under the law, but they're also being decided upon without the input of people in the profession.

This ruling upholds the constitutionality of Canada's sex work legislation, which many sex workers advocated against in 2014 when the laws were changed to include the criminalization of clients. This legislative shift negatively impacts sex workers because it creates a climate of anxiety among clients, who can become more aggressive with workers because they fear being“outed” or arrested by police.

For more than two decades, I have had the privilege of learning about these issues directly from women, men and transgender people in India and several Canadian cities, including Vancouver, London and Kitchener-Waterloo, who do this work.

Alongside their intelligence, wit and deep insights into human nature, the sex workers I've known cultivate profoundly meaningful communities and care for one another in exemplary ways.

The 'legal-but-illegal' paradox

When it comes to sex work, there are three primary approaches to legislation, beginning with the abolitionist framework, sometimes called the Sex Buyer Law or the Swedish or Nordic model. This system decriminalizes people who sell sex, provides supports to help workers exit sex work and makes the purchase of sex a criminal offence.

Canada adopted this framework in 2014 as part of Bill C-36, the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act.

Next is legalization, a legislative model in which governments introduce specific laws and regulations allowing certain forms of sex work to take place under controlled conditions. Authorities can impose a very controlled framework governing numerous aspects of the sex industry, including forced HIV/STI testing, restrictions on advertising and strict workplace-licensing rules.

Examples of this legislative approach are seen in countries like the Netherlands, Germany and Greece.

The third approach is decriminalization, which removes all laws and regulations that criminalize or penalize sex work, including its sale, purchase, advertisement and involvement of third parties such as managers and brothel keepers. This framework allows sex workers to retain agency and control over their work.

New Zealand and Belgium are examples of countries that have decriminalized sex work.

Over the past decade, Canada's sex work laws, however, have grown increasingly punitive, even though the number of arrests has decreased. Canadian sociologist Chris Smith found sex work–related arrests peaked at nearly 2,800 in 1992 and fell to just 11 by 2020.

And, as Smith argues, there is a mismatch between legislation and the actual crime, which significantly affects sex workers' conditions and safety.

Inside the R. v. Kloubakov decision

In a unanimous decision on July 24, 2025, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the constitutional challenge by Mikhail Kloubakov and Hicham Moustaine against Canada's sex work laws. At issue were two parts of Canada's sex-work criminalization legislation: receiving material benefits from sex workers and the procuring of sexual services.

The men, who were drivers for an escort agency in Calgary and were also responsible for transferring money earned by sex workers to the agency operators, pleaded guilty of separate charges related to human trafficking.

The trial judge had found them guilty of violating the Criminal Code by profiting from sex workers. She stayed proceedings on whether current sex work laws impacted the safety of sex workers.

The case challenged the constitutionality of the sex work laws, but ignored the difficulties of working in a criminalized profession subject to intense police surveillance stemming from receiving material benefits and procuring offences.

These offences make sex workers vulnerable to a range of harms, including institutional abuse, targeted violence, xenophobic raids leading to deportations and closures of safe indoor workspaces, constant threats of surveillance, and unwanted contact with law enforcement.

Research shows that in some Canadian cities, fears associated with police surveillance (such as being outed as a sex worker and racially profiled) are so prevalent that sex workers hesitate to contact police after facing violent armed robberies.

Criminalization isolates sex workers from resources and positions them as targets for violence, discrimination and labour exploitation. (Unsplash) The court overlooks dignity

In R. v. Kloubakov, the Supreme Court of Canada did not prioritize the safety and security objective in its analysis. Instead, it treated it as just another issue among others. The court also failed to engage meaningfully with evidence relating to the lived experiences of sex workers. Decisions about sex workers' rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms should not be made without sex workers at the table.

Criminalizing sex work is not a benign act with abstract consequences.

It isolates sex workers from society and resources, and positions them as targets for violence, discrimination and labour exploitation. It also contravenes regulatory approaches from the United Nations Human Rights Council, which views the criminalization of sex workers as a form of gender-based discrimination and advocates for a human-rights framework that aligns with decriminalization.

In a country that claims to care about all of its citizens, it's imperative that we stand with those among us who are forced to struggle for basic human rights in their chosen profession - whether taking up that profession is dictated by pleasure, empowerment or survival.

What to expect going forward

This debate is far from over. Some of the issues the court declined to rule on will be raised in the Canadian Alliance for Sex Work Law Reform v. Canada case that is currently pending before the Ontario Court of Appeal after being struck down in 2021 by the Ontario Supreme Court.

This case challenges several sex work prohibitions on the grounds that they violate sex workers' rights to freedom of expression, life, liberty, security of the person and equality, all of which are protected by the Canadian Charter.

While the case is on hold, Canadians can enhance what they know about sex work from organizations who advocate for sex worker rights, sex workers who write about their experiences and a host of other cultural spaces.

MENAFN10112025000199003603ID1110322896