Thank you for having me.
I will deliver my presentation in French.
The Quebec Council on the Status of Women is an advisory and review body that has sought to promote and defend the rights and interests of Quebec women since 1973.
As such, we have developed an expertise on prostitution and human trafficking. Last June, we published an in-depth research study in which I took part. I have it here with me. If you are interested, it is available. It is an opinion urging authorities to take action and help human trafficking victims and prostitutes leave the unhealthy environment in which they are exploited.
From a legal standpoint, we maintain that the Criminal Code must apply to pimps and johns because demand for sexual services encourages trafficking and prostitution. However, we believe that it is time to stop criminalizing prostitutes, victims of trafficking and non-victims, because in most cases, they sell their bodies after having suffered all sorts of abuses in their childhood. We will come back to that.
Given our bias for women, and specifically for exploited and vulnerable women, the council has been publicly supporting Maria Mourani's Bill C-452 since October. We feel that society must have powerful disincentives to try and put a stop to human trafficking. We think human trafficking is a serious crime that affects many parts of the world, as well as young Canadian girls who may be our neighbours or even members of our own families.
The changes set out in Bill C-452 ensure that police officers are better equipped. Other witnesses, like Detective Sergeant Monchamp, presented those arguments to you. In terms of principles, the bill also sends a clear message to those who might be tempted by this seemingly easy way to make money at the expense of naïve and renewable prey, since those people are a renewable resource as far as the pimps are concerned. The message is that crimes of exploitation and human trafficking will be fought and punished in Canada to the full extent of the law. Since these crimes represent a grave violation of fundamental human rights, the changes proposed by the bill would show to the whole world that Canada’s criminal system is exemplary in combatting trafficking.
The proposed changes include consecutive sentences for procuring and human trafficking offences. The council supports this tougher punishment, because a number of violent crimes are also often committed in trafficking cases. Let me give you one example from Montreal. Marie—that is not her real name—was a dancer in strip clubs for six years. She told me that she was in the clutches of a violent pimp. Not only was she locked in her home, beaten and raped by her pimp who would take all her earnings from lap dancing, but this same pimp took out his anger on her by burning her hand with his cigar butt and strangling her cat before her eyes. The cat was the only comfort she had left. This level of mental cruelty and control is difficult to imagine in a free country, but it does exist. This young, fragile woman was duped when she was 17 by a violent man who promised to take care of her. She did not dare report him because she was afraid her family would pay the price since he threatened to go after her mother or sister if the victim did not obey him. She only co-operated with the police once her pimp was arrested.
Bill C-452 is a major change in our way of doing things, but we don’t believe that the clause on consecutive sentences ties judges’ hands and prevents them from assessing cases individually. The bill provides new benchmarks, but nothing prevents judges from exercising their discretion in applying the principle of proportionality and imposing a sentence that is deemed fair for the accused, based on the circumstances.
Another notable change in the bill is the reverse onus. You talked about it here. The accused will have to prove that they do not make a living by exploiting someone else when a trafficking victim is present. This measure is another way to make prosecutors’ work easier, given that traumatized victims are often afraid to testify against their aggressors or are actually suffering from the Stockholm Syndrome.
As part of our research, we talked to a number of people involved, police officers and lawyers who explained that prosecutors were often happy to use the section against procuring, and not against trafficking, because it was harder to get evidence against trafficking. Yet, in most cases, trafficking is involved. By reversing the onus, the burden is partly placed on the accused. Given the long police surveillance operations that lead to arrests, we think it is appropriate to require the accused to prove, through financial records or otherwise, that they have their own sources of revenue. Let us not forget that, by definition, revenues from prostitution are not declared and are done in cash. So that complicates the work of the authorities a fair bit.
Finally, the bill states that proceeds of crime can be confiscated in procuring and trafficking offences. That's great. We think it is only fair that those found guilty can no longer enjoy the proceeds of their crimes.
Here are some numbers. In 2012, 56 trafficking cases went to court, involving about 85 accused and 136 victims. Of course, that does not seem like a lot, but that is only the tip of the iceberg, because it is difficult to measure the scope of illegal activities. My colleague Ms. Dionne will give you a bit more information about this later.
We often think that trafficking only happens to women from poorer countries who end up in our strip clubs. That is not true. Domestic trafficking, meaning trafficking between places and provinces within Canada, represents 90% of all cases that end up in court. People in the know told me about victims of domestic trafficking at the Centre jeunesse de la Montérégie in Longueuil. The way they operate is well-known and widespread. Young men belonging to street gangs hang around subway stations in Longueuil and even around schools. Young girls are seduced by gang members who, at first, vow to love and protect them and smother them with attention. Then the climate changes. The guys need money and ask the young girls to help them; they desensitize them with gangbangs, which are group rapes, before forcing them to become strippers and prostitutes.
We are talking about trafficking because those girls are dragged from apartment to apartment and lose their means of escape, because they may be beaten or drugged. Some girls from Quebec end up in Ontario. I am sure you have heard about this problem in the clubs close to the border, particularly in Windsor. Yes, those young girls are often runaways and come from dysfunctional families, but the pimps take advantage of them. In fact, they are not always runaways, because seduction is a weapon that can be used against teenage girls who may simply want to cut loose.
I will briefly take this opportunity to tell you about one of my concerns. It is important that the issue of trafficking does not overshadow the issue of prostitution. The two issues are closely connected, because, according to the Fondation Scelles, most prostitutes worldwide fall prey to human trafficking rings. I am very aware that it is easier to have a social consensus on an issue such as trafficking because the topic itself takes us back to slavery and the lack of consent. However, across Canada, we also have prostitution without trafficking, which is a more complex issue, less cut and dry, and no doubt more widespread, in terms of the number of victims. So we should not forget about this issue. Prostitution is not always linked to trafficking, whereas human trafficking for the purposes of sexual exploitation always leads to prostitution.
Let me explain. Some prostitutes who do not have a pimp are increasingly selling their services on the Internet. They tell their stories in the media and talk boldly about their life choices. In short, those are not trafficking cases. But does that mean that those voices that claim that women can choose to become prostitutes represent the majority of women who sell their bodies to survive? No, absolutely not. It may be comforting to think so, but it is wrong to believe that this freedom of choice is the norm. Even according to the lawyers representing those who call themselves sex trade workers and who have gone to Ontario courts, only 5% to 20% of prostitutes can make a profit from this lucrative business and do in fact make an informed choice.
The others, the vast silent majority, find themselves being exploited in violent situations that they did not choose and from which they cannot easily escape without outside help. They are vulnerable women who, in 70% to 84% of cases, have experienced abuse in their youth and have drifted into prostitution, often getting into drugs as a way to endure this type of exploitation. I have met with some of those women.
That is why we are against the decriminalization of clients advocated by the sex trade worker lobby. In fact, that would only further trivialize and increase this trade that objectifies women. That is actually what happened in places like the Netherlands.
In addition to the issue you are examining today, I would like to share with you our broader perspective on the matter, since you are in a position to ask for changes to the Criminal Code. One single model around the world has proven successful in protecting women against this fundamental violation of their right to equality. In Sweden, only the pimps and johns are criminalized. The penalties and consequences are harsh. The prostitutes are not prosecuted. They are provided with significant social services so that they can leave that environment and find a job. The Swedish model has worked.
Ladies and gentlemen, I encourage you to think about those issues. Beyond this bill on trafficking, which is important, there is the whole issue of the women who are trapped in prostitution.
Thank you.