Sex work and hypocrisy146;s law

In India, sex work is regulated through the ITPA and certain provisions of the IPC. The ITPA is based on a 1949 UN convention, which rules that while prostitution is not illegal, soliciting and exploiting prostitution are seen as offences. Therefore, under the existing ITPA, keeping a brothel or renting premises for sex work, living off the earnings of sex workers or soliciting clients, among others, constitute criminal offence. The NNSW has been demanding the decriminalisation of all aspects of sex work involving consenting adults so that sex workers can claim basic human rights and civil liberties that the rest of us take for granted. They have been demanding, for instance, the right to retain and raise their children and be recognised as a legitimate family unit. Because of the moral stigma the profession carries, they are frequently denied the right to parent their children.

Last December the Department of Women and Child moved the Immoral Traffic Prevention Amendment Bill 2005. Ironically the sex workers, the community most affected by such legislation, were not consulted during the drafting. The new amendments repeal Sections 8 criminalises the soliciting of clients and 20 allows magistrates to evict sex workers from their premises, thereby taking a positive step towards decriminalisation. But it reverses the gains by introducing Section 5C, which punishes clients of sex workers. This will drive the business underground rendering sex workers more vulnerable to exploitation. Worse, it will prevent women from testifying against their clients and substantially diminishes their power to negotiate with them. The success of many HIV prevention programmes rest on the sex worker8217;s ability to say no to clients who refuse to wear condoms.

The proposed law will prove a handy instrument in the hands of the police. Section 13 2 lowers the rank of the arresting authority from inspector to sub-inspector. There has been a long history of police harassing, extorting and torturing sex workers by citing real and imagined provisions of ITPA. Given this, granting excessive powers to the police will make things worse.

The NNSW has urged the government to rethink the proposed amendments and change other provisions under the existing ITPA. For instance, Section 3 of the ITPA penalises brothel keeping and the renting of premises for sex work. Since the vast majority of sex workers are too poor to own houses, they have no option but to rent rooms. By rendering lease agreements illegal, Section 3 makes sex workers vulnerable to eviction and penal liabilities. Similarly, Section 4 of ITPA criminalises all those who live on the earnings of a sex worker. Initially enacted to discourage pimping, the law is used to criminalise all dependents, including parents and children over 18. It is only fair that like all of us, sex workers should also be able to support family members without having them arrested.

Feminists are divided over whether the trade should be decriminalised or eventually abolished. Many of us who support the rights of sex workers believe that the struggle to empower them involves us all. All women who have fought battles for custody, rape or sexual harassment know that the stigma associated with sex work is used to regulate all women. Victims of rape and sexual harassment continue to be told that they 8220;asked for it8221;.

The sex workers8217; movement has consistently argued for a comprehensive review of the legal regime around sex work. It is distressed that the Union Cabinet approved a controversial bill without considering its health and human rights implications. If the government is serious about 8220;providing leadership to national AIDS efforts8221; as expressed in its common minimum programme, then it should immediately rethink the amendments.

The writer teaches mass communication at Jamia Millia Islamia and has made 8216;Tales of the Night Fairies8217;, a film on Kolkata8217;s sex workers