Content uploaded by Agata Dziuban
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Agata Dziuban on Jan 04, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
ten years of
sex workers’
rights activism
and advocacy
in europe
nothing about us
without us!
the international committee on the rights
of Sex WorkerS in europe (iCrSe)
is a sex worker-led network represenng more than 75 organisaons led by or working
with sex workers in Europe and Central Asia, as well as 150 individuals including sex
workers, academics, trade unionists, human-rights advocates, and women’s rights and
LGBT rights acvists. ICRSE opposes the criminalisaon of sex work and calls for the
removal of all punive laws and regulaons regarding and related to sex work as a
necessary step to ensure that governments uphold the human rights of sex workers.
As long as sex work is criminalised – directly or indirectly through laws and pracces
targeng sex workers, clients, or third pares – sex workers will be at increased risk of
violence (including police violence), arrests, blackmail, deportaons and other human
rights violaons.
3
4
5
6
10
11
13
14
14
15
16
16
19
21
23
25
25
25
26
28
30
33
35
38
40
40
41
table of contents:
INTRODUCTION
MOBILISING FROM THE MARGINS | SEX WORKERS
ORGANISE FOR THEIR RIGHTS ACROSS EUROPE AND
CENTRAL ASIA
ORGANISING AT REGIONAL & GLOBAL LEVEL FOR SEX WORKERS’ RIGHTS
Reclaiming Criminalised Spaces, Hungary: SZEXE
Challenging Violence Against Trans Sex Workers, Turkey: Kırmızı Şemsiye
Building Polical Bridges and Social Movements in Spain: Prostutas Indignadas
Demanding Recognion of Sex Work as Work, France: STRASS
Empowering Sex Workers in HIV Programming, Kyrgyzstan: Tais Plus
GROWING RECOGNITION AND SUPPORT OF SEX WORKERS’ RIGHTS
Civil Society Support for the Decriminalisaon of Sex Work
Academic Support for Evidence-based Laws & Policies
A Polical Shi towards Sex Worker’s rights?
SEX WORKERS FIGHT FOR LEGAL REFORM
LEGAL AND POLICY SHIFTS IN THE REGULATION OF SEX WORK
CRIMINALISATION OF SEX WORK
Criminalisaon of Sex Workers
Criminalisaon of Clients
Criminalisaon of Third Pares
COERCIVE LEGALISATION
CRIMINALISATION OF VULNERABILITY
DEMANDS OF SEX WORKERS IN EUROPE
CONCLUSIONS
Acknowledgements
REFERENCES
4
introduction
In October 2005, 120 sex workers and 80 allies from across Europe and the world
gathered in Brussels, Belgium, to take part in the European Conference on Sex Work,
Human Rights, Labour and Migraon. This meeng, organised by the Internaonal
Commiee on the Rights of Sex Workers in Europe (ICRSE), created a great opportu-
nity for sex workers to celebrate the legacy and accomplishments of the sex workers’
movement, socialise, and foster community building eorts in the region. The con-
ference also gave sex workers a chance to share their knowledge and experiences on
recent trends in legislaon and policies on sex work, migraon and human tracking,
aecng sex worker communies throughout Europe.
The aim of this report it to reect upon both the developments in the sex workers’
movement and changes in laws, policies and social atudes aecng sex workers’
lives, rights and working condions in Europe and Central Asia which took place in
the decade following the Brussels conference.
For the last ten years we have been witnessing the dynamic expansion and strength-
ening of the sex workers’ movement in the region, which is reected in a grow-
ing number of local and naonal sex worker collecves as well as internaonal and
transregional community networks. This report documents these ten years of the sex
workers’ movement by highlighng the dierent achievements, struggles and engage-
ments of sex worker-led organisaons and networks and their contribuon to the
advancement of sex workers’ rights in Europe and Central Asia.
Simultaneously, we want to re-evaluate sex workers’ demands, put forward by the
parcipants of the Brussels conference, by juxtaposing them with legal, social and
economic realies sex workers are facing in Europe and Central Asia today. Are sex
workers’ demands made ten years ago sll relevant and equally pressing? If so, why?
What are the main trends in sex work policies and other legal developments across
the region? Are these helping to advance sex workers’ rights and dignity, or do they,
on the contrary, make sex workers more vulnerable to rights violaons, discriminaon
and violence? What other social and structural factors have impacted on sex workers’
living and working condions? Have there been any noceable changes in societal
atudes towards sex workers and the recognion of sex workers’ rights and needs?
With this report, we will provide answers to these quesons, and through looking
back at the struggles and challenges faced by our communies across Europe, we
wish to revisit and rearm some of the demands made by the sex workers’ move-
ment a decade ago. We set out to do so by recognising and addressing in this report
the voices of dierent communies of sex workers, including female, male and trans
sex workers, whether they idenfy as female, male or non-binary, (undocumented)
migrant sex workers, sex workers who use drugs and those living with HIV.
5
mobilising from the margins | sex
workers organise for their rights
across europe and central asia
This report highlights the last ten years of the sex workers’ movement in Europe and
Central Asia, starng from the Brussels conference in 2005. This does not mean, how-
ever, that sex workers in the region had not been mobilising to ght for their rights
prior to this date. Already at the end of the 18th century, around 1,000 sex workers
staged a protest in Paris, France, to denounce police violence and oppression.1 Sex
worker-led demonstraons also took place in Weimar Germany during the 1920s,
when sex workers objected to the closure of their workplaces,2 or in Ankara, Turkey,
in 1955, when sex workers took to the streets to express their discontent with harsh
policing and abuses by law enforcement.3 However, it is the occupaon of the Church
of St. Nizier in Lyon, France, in 1973 which is frequently considered a symbol of the
birth of the sex workers’ movement in Europe.4 This protest brought together over
100 sex workers demanding an end to police repressions, incarceraon and violence.
It also provoked the development of many naonal sex worker-led organisaons and
collecves throughout Europe, including the English Collecve of Prostutes (ECP),
the Meeng and Counselling Center for Prostutes Hydra in Germany, the Italian
Commiee for Civil Rights of Prostutes (Comitato per i Diri Civili delle Prostute,
CDCP), or the sex worker solidarity associaon Aspasie in Switzerland, all of which
sll exist today.
Numerous of these organisaons and many others that emerged over the following
years signicantly contributed to the strengthening of the sex workers’ movement
and helped advocang for sex workers’ rights. Some of them engaged ercely in the
struggle for the decriminalisaon of sex work, freedom from oppression and dis-
criminaon, and the protecon of sex workers’ human rights, including their right to
health, their right to work and their right to organise.5 Other community organisaons
loudly demanded the recognion of sex work as a legimate form of work and live-
lihood, called upon governments to protect sex workers’ labour rights, and in some
cases, fostered sex worker unionisaon or cooperaon with mainstream trade unions
in their respecve countries, as did De Rode Draad (the Red Thread) in the Nether-
lands or Hydra in Germany.6 Others, among them SCOT-PEP in Scotland, Colecvo
Hetaira in Spain and Tais Plus in Kyrgyzstan, mobilised in response to the HIV epidem-
ic by providing their communies with HIV-related services and advocang for policy
changes in regard to HIV and sex work.
All these collecve eorts set the stage for the advancement and dynamic growth
of the sex workers’ movement in the European region, and fostered the emergence
of the Internaonal Commiee on the Rights of Sex Workers in Europe, the ocial
organiser of the Brussels conference.
6
organising at regional & global level for
sex workers’ rights
ICRSE
The history of the ICRSE dates back to 2002, when a small informal collecve of
Dutch sex workers and acvists developed the idea to organise an internaonal con-
ference that would provide sex workers with an opportunity to track and discuss de-
velopments in European sex work policies. To that end, the collecve reached out to
sex workers and allies from dierent European countries and invited them to join an
organising commiee. In 2004, 15 current and formed sex workers and allies former
this commiee and registered a foundaon in Amsterdam. The ICRSE was born.7
The 2005 Brussels conference was undoubtedly a great success of the ICRSE and of
the sex workers’ movement in Europe. Long hours of animated discussions led to the
development of several documents which bore witness to the challenges faced by sex
workers across the region, and to this day, they serve as key advocacy tools for the Eu-
ropean and global sex workers’ movement. One of them, the Declaraon on the Rights
of Sex Workers in Europe,8 is based on internaonal human treaes raed by European
governments. It outlines the human rights sex workers should be entled to according to
these treaes and idenes human rights violaons experienced by our communies in
dierent European countries. Another document, the Sex Workers in Europe Manifesto,9
presents sex workers’ vision of changes needed to create a more equitable society in
which sex workers and their rights and labour are acknowledged and valued.
Red Umbrella March, European Conference on Sex Work, Human Rights, Labour and Migraon,
Brussels, Belgium, 17 October 2005, photo credit: Maj Christensen
7
Source: Soreet, A. (ed). (2007). Sex Workers’ Rights: Report of the European Conference on Sex Work,
Human Rights, Labour and Migraon, Amsterdam: ICRSE.
8
Although inially created as a necessary formality to organise the Brussels confer-
ence, ICRSE has over the years grown into a strong regional network bringing togeth-
er 79 sex worker-led organisaons and collecves as well as organisaons supporng
the rights of sex workers and other overlapping and oen marginalised communies.
They are joined by individuals who support the values of ICRSE, including current or
former sex workers, trade unionists, members of LGBTIQ communies, acvists for
migrants’, women’s, labour and human rights, and academics.
ICRSE is governed by sex workers and follows democrac principles of collecve
ownership of and leadership within the sex workers’ movement. As a regional net-
work, it facilitates communicaon and knowledge sharing among its members, sup-
ports their respecve acvism and campaigns, publishes leers and statements op-
posing legal proposals that would adversely aect sex workers’ health and safety,
and organises regional campaigns denouncing policies and pracces that violate sex
workers’ rights. One of these took place In July 2013, aer the murders of two sex
workers, Dora Özer in Turkey and Pete Jasmine in Sweden. ICRSE coordinated a
global day of acon and protests in front of the Swedish and Turkish embassies in 36
cies on 5 connents.10 Another transnaonal campaign organised by ICRSE followed
the publicaon of the so called Honeyball Report, a resoluon before the Europe-
an Parliament on prostuon and sexual exploitaon, developed by Member of the
European Parliament (MEP) Mary Honeyball, which conated sex work with slavery
and called for the criminalisaon of sex workers’ clients.11 In just a few weeks, ICRSE
draed a leer opposing this resoluon, which was then endorsed and signed by 560
organisaons - both sex worker- and non-sex worker-led.
ICRSE’s acvies also focus on providing member organisaons and allies with var-
ious advocacy tools on issues relevant to sex worker communies in Europe. These
include “Hands o our clients! Advocacy and Acvism Toolkit against the Criminal-
isaon of Clients”,12 published in 2013, a community report mapping main forms of
structural violence and instuonal oppression experienced by sex workers in the re-
gion,13 published in 2015, and most recently the brieng paper “Underserved. Over-
policed. Invisibilised. LGBT Sex Workers Do Maer”,14 which iniates a series of advo-
cacy documents focusing on the intersecon of the sex workers’ rights struggle and
other rights as social struggles, such as those by members of LGBTIQ communies,
migrants, workers, or women.
In recent years, ICRSE has been also involved in the development of a community-led
capacity building programme on “Sex Work, HIV and Human Rights”. This project,
iniated in 2014, aimed at providing sex worker organisaons across the region with
skills and knowledge to meaningfully engage in HIV responses among their communi-
es. To achieve this goal, ICRSE organised and facilitated a series of regional, naonal
and online community trainings on the intersecon of HIV and human rights as well
as sex workers’ HIV vulnerabilies.
SWAN
A second network supporng community mobilisaon and contribung to the
strengthening of the sex workers’ movement at the regional level is the Sex Workers’
Rights Advocacy Network (SWAN). Since its very beginning, dang back to 2006,
SWAN brings together dierent organisaons advocang for the rights of sex work-
9
ers in Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Apart from creang a plaorm
for communicaon and knowledge sharing between sex worker collecves and their
allies, i.e. service providers and other civil society organisaons working with and
for sex workers, SWAN provides its members with advocacy tools, mentoring and
support needed to eecvely defend and protect sex workers’ rights in harsh legal
and social environments. This includes SWAN’s “Community of Learning” website,15
which oers a wide range of resources and taccs helpful in developing advocacy
campaigns and policy intervenons, and a booklet, tled “Guide for Sex Worker Hu-
man Rights Defenders”16 that contains ps and suggesons on how to start human
rights documenng projects, organise human rights campaigns, and use formal hu-
man rights mechanisms to defend sex workers’ rights.
SWAN also makes a connued contribuon to debunk myths about sex work and
report all forms of violence experienced by sex workers. In 2008, the network ini-
ated a community-based research project to map and document abuses, violence
and discriminatory treatment faced by sex workers. Results of this ground-breaking
research were published in the report “Arrest the Violence. Human Rights Abuses
against Sex Workers in Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia” and used in the
development of numerous an-violence campaigns organised by SWAN member or-
ganisaons.17 In 2014 and 2015, the network coordinated another community-based
research project focusing specically on violence from state- and non-state actors
and on barriers to sex workers’ access to jusce and redress. The research ndings
are described in the report “Failures of Jusce”, published in 2015.18
TAMPEP International Foundation
A third regional network engaged in advocacy and campaigning for sex workers’ rights
is the TAMPEP Internaonal Foundaon (ocially: European Network for HIV/STI
Prevenon and Health Promoon among Migrant Sex Workers). It was launched in
1993 as an internaonal project aiming to address and overcome barriers faced by
migrant sex workers in Western Europe in accessing health services and HIV/STI
prevenon programmes. Over the years, TAMPEP has been engaged in numerous
projects, including the mapping of sex worker communies in 25 European coun-
tries,19 analysing the legal situaons of migrant sex workers in the region, especially
with respect to health,20 and developing strategies of health promoon and social
protecon amongst migrant sex workers across Europe. An outstanding example of
TAMPEP’s work was the CONECTA project,21 undertaken by TAMPEP between 2012
and 2014 in the Russian Federaon and the Ukraine. The project aimed to reduce
sex workers’ vulnerability to HIV/STI transmission, while developing comprehensive
and rights-based services and approaches to HIV/STI prevenon among sex workers.
In 2013, TAMPEP, along with many other civil society organisaons, iniated the
INDOORS project and the “Dierent jobs. Equal rights” campaign, which advocated
for the recognion of sex workers’ labour and civil rights and raised awareness about
sgma and violence against sex workers.22
Impact of the global sex workers’ movement
What is also worth nong is that the regional sex workers’ movement cannot be
viewed and understood in isolaon from the broader global or transnaonal mobili-
saon and polical acvism of sex workers. The emergence of Call O Your Old Tired
10
Ethics (COYOTE), the rst sex worker collecve in the US, in 1973, Carol Leigh’s
coining of the term “sex work” in the late 1970s, the creaon of the Internaonal
Commiee for Prostutes’ Rights (ICPR) in the 1980s, and, nally, the foundaon of
the Global Network of Sex Work Projects (NSWP) in 1998, had a signicant impact on
the sex workers’ movement in Europe and Central Asia. To this day, NSWP plays a key
role in facilitang and supporng solidarity among and self-organisaon of sex worker
communies in the region. As a global network, NSWP brings together local, naonal
and regional collecves from across the world, creates opportunies for knowledge
and informaon sharing within the movement, and advocates for evidence-based
policies and legal changes.
One of NSWP’s main achievements is the promoon of the New Zealand model, a
legal framework decriminalising sex work and sex workers, implemented in New Zea-
land in 2003, at the global and regional level. Thanks to NSWP’s reless advocacy,
decriminalisaon has since been recognised not only by the global sex workers’ move-
ment, but also by many internaonal bodies, such as the WHO and UNAIDS, as the
best legal framework to advance sex workers’ human and labour rights. NSWP also
contributes to the crique of the so called Swedish Model, which aims to abolish sex
work by criminalising sex workers’ clients. NSWP has developed numerous advocacy
tools, reports and brieng papers on the pialls of the Swedish Model and other dis-
criminatory and harmful policies.23 They provide sex worker collecves across Europe
and around the world with the skills and knowledge necessary to successfully advo-
cate against laws which adversely aect them.
CaSe StudieS of national Sex Worker-led
organisations:
The growth and vitality of the sex workers’ movement also results from intense com-
munity mobilisaon at the local and naonal level. During the last ten years, new
sex worker groups and collecves have connuously emerged across the region and
acvely engage in the struggle for the human and labour rights of their peers. To our
knowledge, there are currently around forty sex worker-led organisaons operang in
Europe and Central Asia, 25 of which are members of ICRSE.
Although they work in diverse legal, polical and social contexts, focus on disnct
goals, and face dierent challenges, what European and Central Asian sex worker
collecves have in common is their commitment to improve sex workers’ living and
working condions. This commitment manifests itself not only in acve advocacy for
legal changes and an end to sgma and discriminaon aecng sex workers but most
importantly, in valiant eorts to empower all sex worker communies and engage
them in collecve acons. The growing recognion of the diversity of sex workers’
idenes, realies, lived experiences, and work modes has led to an increasingly in-
clusive character of the movement. As a result, the voices of sex worker communies’
dierent sub-populaons, including male and trans sex workers, (undocumented) mi-
grant sex workers, sex workers who use drugs, or sex workers living with HIV, have
gained more aenon and backing than ever before.
11
Over the last ten years, we could also witness a growing engagement of sex work-
er-led organisaons across the region in broader debates about social jusce and the
rights of dierent, and oen overlapping marginalised communies. Numerous sex
worker collecves have loudly voiced their concerns about legal oppression, abuses
and discriminaon faced by (undocumented) migrants, including sex workers, all of
which result from increasing migraon control regimes as well as rising racism and
xenophobia in Europe. Other sex worker collecves focused on issues aecng LGB-
TIQ sex workers and their communies, denouncing homo- and transphobia prevalent
in some parts of the region. Again others forged alliances with workers’ movements,
while calling for the recognion of sex workers’ labour rights and cricising the pre-
carisaon of working condions in capitalist sociees. Increasing poverty, aecng
especially women, members of ethnic minories, or migrants, has also received a lot
of aenon by various sex worker-led organisaons who called for structural changes
and more employment opportunies for the most disadvantaged.
Below, we will highlight some of the dierent ways in which sex worker collecves in Europe
and Central Asia acvely support the mobilisaon, self-determinaon, and strengthening of
their communies and contribute to the enhancement of sex workers’ rights in the region.
SZEXE (Associaon of Hungarian Sex Workers) was established in 2000 mainly by
street-based Roma sex workers and their allies who gathered to protest against the
introducon of a law regulang sex work. According to this law, municipalies with
more than 50,000 inhabitants or areas where sex work is deemed to be pervasive
should idenfy so-called tolerance zones. Engaging in sex work outside of these zones
was declared illegal. The law was draed in order to push sex workers, mainly of Roma
origin, out of the Józsefváros, Budapest’s 8th district, so that it could undergo rehabil-
itaon and properes could be privased more easily. In pracce, however, Hungarian
authories remain reluctant to idenfy such zones, so that a signicant proporon of
sex work connues to take place illegally. Not only does this mean that a huge number
of sex workers are ned or detained every year, but it has also created an antagonisc
relaonship between sex workers and the police, whereby sex workers fear the police
rather than being able to depend on them for protecon from violence or other crimes.
Since its founding, SZEXE has iniated several legal acons and some of Budapest’s dis-
tricts have subsequently been ordered by the courts to idenfy quasi-tolerance zones.
That regardless, SZEXE has regularly witnessed and documented how police took advan-
tage of the lack of legal certainty surrounding these tolerance zones and unfairly targeted
sex workers with nes in order to ll their quotas. Providing legal aid to sex workers has
therefore always been a priority of SZEXE, and the organisaon has successfully chal-
lenged the arbitrary ning and detenon pracces of the police in hundreds of cases.
Besides legal assistance and court representaon, SZEXE has been connuously re-
sponding to newly emerging needs of sex workers, oering community-based health
services, entrepreneurial skills development programmes, peer educaon, and migra-
on counselling. It has also maintained and expanded its focus on advocacy at the
naonal and internaonal level. In 2013, the organisaon successfully lobbied for UN
12
support of sex workers’ rights and achieved that the UN CEDAW Commiee called
on the Hungarian government to “adopt measures aimed at prevenng discriminaon
against sex workers and ensure that legislaon on their rights to safe working condi-
ons is guaranteed at naonal and local levels”.2 4
Members of Sloboda Prava commemorate the Internaonal Day to End Violence against Sex Workers,
Belgrade, Serbia, 17 December 2014, photo credit: Sloboda Prava
Members of SZEXE organise a public meeng and demonstraon to mark the 15th anniversary of their
organisaon, Budapest, Hungary, 17 September 2015, photo credit: Balint Fejer
13
Kırmızı Şemsiye (Red Umbrella Associaon for Sexual Health and Human Rights), a Turk-
ish sex worker-led collecve founded in 2013, is probably most recognised for its brave
advocacy and acvism for the rights of trans sex workers. In recent years, trans people
in Turkey have been facing great levels of transphobia, discriminaon (including where
their access to educaon and the labour market is concerned), violence, harassment, and
other hate crimes. Over the last ve years, over 30 trans people have been killed, placing
Turkey amongst the countries with the highest rate of transphobic murders worldwide.25
The level of violence, discriminaon and abuse faced by trans sex workers is parcularly
high due to the mulple layers of sgma resulng both from transphobic and whorepho-
bic atudes, and because of the oen hazardous working condions they are exposed
to. Since only cis-women in Turkey are allowed to legally work in brothels, transgender
women and men are pushed underground, where violence and exploitaon can ourish.
Aiming to address the needs and improve the situaon of trans sex workers in Turkey,
Kırmızı Şemsiye acvely engages in advocacy and campaigns to raise public aware-
ness about their rights and denounce the violence they experience. Some of the
strategies used by the Turkish collecve consist of documenng rights violaons and
abuses faced by trans sex workers, organising conferences to popularise informaon
about these cases, publishing tesmonies about trans sex workers’ lives and work,26
and staging demonstraons to protest against transphobic and whorephobic crimes.
Kırmızı Şemsiye also provides trans and other sex worker communies in Turkey, in-
cluding cis-women working in brothels, and women and men operang outside of
the legal system, with legal aid, HIV prevenon programmes and connuous peer
support. All of these acvies help the organisaon to connect with diverse sup-pop-
ulaons of Turkey’s sex worker communies and contribute to the development of a
strong, inclusive and empowered sex workers’ movement in the country.
Members of Kirmizi Semsiye protest against violence experienced by trans sex workers and the
murders of two sex workers Dora (Turkey) and Jasmine (Sweden). Sign says “ Don’t remain silent (about
violence). Don’t be a perpetrator.” Ankara, Turkey, 19 July 2013, photo credit: Kirmizi Semsiye
14
Indignadas
The collecve Prostutas Indignadas (the Indignant Prostutes) was founded in reac-
on to the hardening of Barcelona’s civic ordinance regulang the acvity of nego-
ang prices with sex workers’ clients on the street. The ordinance is not only limited
to that acvity, it also zones and controls public spaces and imposes rules to target
those considered as undesirable, namely the poor and migrants. In this context, and
while creang alliances with other human rights collecves, the polical campaign Yo
también soy puta (I, too, am a whore) was created, with the parcipaon of sex and
allies and it spread through alternave and ocial media. To contribute to sensible
sex work regulaons, the collecve’s members met with members of polical pares
from both sides of the polical divide. They also made it clear that feminism does not
only represent an instuonal commitment, but has numerous aspects and realies,
just as women’s and sex workers’ lived realies do.
Most recently, the newly emerged polical group Barcelona En Comú (Barcelona In
Common)27 and the Candidatura d’Unitat Popular (Popular Unity Candidacy)28 invited
sex workers to dra a polical programme that not only includes sex workers, but is cre-
ated by them and groups supporng sex workers’ rights. Once the dra is completed,
sex workers are also invited to integrate into the pares’ lists, not only as sex workers,
but also as feminists and acve members of Barcelona’s social movements. As a mem-
ber of Prostutas Indignadas stated: “Since we consider Barcelona a key place not only
in a regional, but in a global sense, we believe this approach can be adopted in many
European countries and serve as a model to be followed, and I say this thinking of the
many countries where sex workers are persecuted and criminalized.”
The collecve has also accepted the proposal to join the pares’ lists and its member
Paula Ezkerra has highlighted in each of her polical speeches that she is a prostute.
The collecve has been very well received by the community in the district where it
works. For the future, Prostutas Indignadas plan to work very acvely with the Eu-
ropean community of sex workers, and to that end, the collecve will host a meeng
in Barcelona in mid-December 2015. The collecve intends to create a space for sex
workers in the neighbourhood where it operates to make its presence known and
thus empower fellow sex workers, but also to connect with other instuons who
work on behalf of anyone working in exploitave labour situaons or those having
problems regularising their stay in the country. Among the issues the collecve wish-
es to address are helping mothers and creang a nursery for their children, staed by
colleagues who no longer wish to work as sex workers. All of these eorts have led to
a win at the local elecons, with a margin triple that of the previous elecon.
The Syndicat du travail sexuel (STRASS), another European sex worker collecve, sit-
uates its acvism and advocacy in unionist tradions and struggles lying in the heart
of the French workers’ movement.29 While demanding the recognion of sex work as
work, STRASS members call upon the government to empower sex workers by recog-
nising their labour rights and associated protecons, and engage in a crique of unfair
labour pracces and precarisaon of work occurring in the sex industry. STRASS has
not only embarked on building a strong and vocal sex worker union in France, but also
15
campaigns against oppressive laws and policies that push sex workers underground,
deprive them of the ability to bargain collecvely and seek redress. Since its founding
in 2009, STRASS has been advocang for the removal of numerous laws criminalising
sex workers, their work sengs, third pares and family members. To counter pros-
tuon abolionists trying to push for the adopon of the Swedish Model in France
and increasing an-migrant senments in French society, STRASS has impressively
mobilised communies to ght against the criminalisaon of sex workers’ clients and
against the conaon of sex work and human tracking for the purpose of sexual
exploitaon.
STRASS links its polical acvism and advocacy for sex workers’ rights with eorts
to support and mobilise sex worker communies in France. On the one hand, the
organisaon acvely enhances sex workers’ access to jusce by increasing their legal
literacy30 and helping them to assert their rights in court; on the other hand, STRASS
creates a space for communicaon and experience-sharing for diverse sex worker
communies across the country. Concerned with precarious situaon of (undocu-
mented) migrant sex workers in France, STRASS also reaches out to sex workers from
Lan America, Eastern Europe, Africa or China, who are oen subjected to intense
police repression or even deportaon from France.31
Tais Plus from Kyrgyzstan, the rst community-led organisaon in Central Asia, was
founded in 1997 and ocially registered in 2000. The organisaon works with sex
workers of all genders, as well as with their children, partners and clients in Bishkek,
the capital of Kyrgyzstan. The mission of the organisaon is to empower the Kyrgyz
sex worker community and improve the living and working condions for sex workers
in the enre country. From its very beginning in the late 1990s, Tais Plus has focused
its eorts on providing sex workers with comprehensive HIV programming, which
involves peer outreach, community-led HIV counselling and tesng services, social
support, and sensising workshops for medical personnel. Thanks to these eorts,
the organisaon has managed to signicantly increase condom use among sex work-
ers and to protect the most vulnerable members of the community, in parcular un-
documented internal migrant sex workers, providing them with access to health-care
services that they otherwise would have been excluded from. Tais Plus also operates
a drop-in centre, a safe space where sex workers can receive support from sensised
lawyers, take a shower, or stay over for several weeks, e.g. when eeing from violence
or if they are deprived of other housing opportunies.
Since 2005, the organisaon acvely engages in acvism and advocacy for sex work-
ers’ rights. With the support of allies and partners, Tais Plus has organised two suc-
cessful campaigns, in 2005 and 2012 respecvely, against governmental aempts to
introduce an administrave liability for selling sexual services. Tais Plus has also been
acvely engaged in providing help to sex workers experiencing violence by state and
non-state actors, and supporng community members to assert their rights and ac-
cess to jusce. Its thoughul and systemac documentaon of human rights violaons
against sex workers enabled the organisaon to submit two reports to CEDAW in 2008
and 2015, which idened the main problems faced by sex workers in Kyrgyzstan.
16
growing recognition and support of sex workers’ rights
Civil Society Support for the Decriminalisation of Sex Work
Another posive trend emerging in the region and globally over the last decade is the
growing support for sex workers’ rights expressed by a large number of non-sex work-
er-led collecves and nongovernmental organisaons, internaonal bodies, various
decision-makers and other stakeholders. The demands of the sex workers’ movement
in Europe and Central Asia, such as the demand to decriminalise sex work, recognise
sex work as work, and protect sex workers’ human, health and labour rights, have
been taken into consideraon, carefully weighed and nally supported by many indi-
viduals and organisaons whose work focus on social jusce and equality.
This posive trend is reected in a wealth of alliances forged between the sex work-
ers’ movement and acvists coming from dierent sectors of civil society. In recent
years, the ranks of ICRSE have been joined by numerous organisaons working in the
eld of human rights, health, LGBTQ rights, women’s rights, or migrants’ rights, as
well as trade unionists and representaves of the workers’ movement. A powerful ex-
ample of this increasing support was the leer developed by ICRSE during the “Hon-
eyball No” campaign, which denounced the adverse eects that the criminalisaon
of clients, proposed by MEP Mary Honeyball, would have had on sex workers’ living
and working condions. It was widely endorsed and signed by 560 organisaons,
including, among many others, AIDS Acon Europe, CORRELATION network, Euro-
pean Network Social Inclusion and Health, Internaonal Network of People Who Use
Drugs (INPUD), Internaonal Planned Parenthood Federaon European Network, and
TAMPEP Internaonal Foundaon.32
STAR-STAR, Skopje, Macedonia, 17 December 2014, photo credit: STAR-STAR
17
Sex workers’ demands for the decriminalisaon of sex work and the recognion of sex
workers’ rights have been also supported by several United Naons agencies, such
as the United Naons Development Programme (UNDP), the United Naons Enty
for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN Women), United Naons
Populaon Fund (UNFPA), the World Health Organisaon (WHO), and the United
Naons Joint Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS). Since 2009, these agencies have
repeatedly voiced their concerns about sex workers’ vulnerabilies to HIV and point-
ed to the criminalisaon of sex work, repressive sex work policies, and the sgma,
violence, and discriminaon faced by sex workers as the main factors contribung to
increased risks of HIV infecons among sex worker communies.33
While calling for the full decriminalisaon of sex work, including sex workers them-
selves, their clients and third pares, the above menoned UN agencies have also
repeatedly stressed the need for the involvement and leadership of the sex worker
community in HIV responses. Supported by strong research evidence about the crit-
ical impact of sex workers’ parcipaon in the design, development, implementaon
and evaluaon of HIV programming and health policies, as published in the Lancet
series on “HIV and Sex Workers” in 2014,35 the WHO and UNAIDS unequivocally
recommend a community empowerment approach to HIV responses as the only ef-
fecve way to end HIV among sex workers.36
Severe rights violaons and other abuses experienced by sex workers in the European
region and across the globe have also been widely discussed and cricised by some
of the best-known internaonal human rights organisaons, including Human Rights
Watch (HRW) and Amnesty Internaonal (AI). Both argue that the full realisaon of
sex workers’ rights is signicantly hampered by oppressive and discriminatory laws
and law enforcement strategies prevailing in most countries in the world. As a Human
Rights Watch reports states:
All countries should work toward decriminalizaon of sex work
and eliminaon of the unjust applicaon of non-criminal laws
and regulaons against sex workers. [...] The governments should
establish laws to protect against discriminaon and violence and
other violaons of rights faced by sex workers in order to realize
their human rights and reduce their vulnerability to HIV infecon
and the impact of AIDS.
(WHO/UNFPA/UNAIDS/NSWP 2012)34
18
In the same way, Amnesty Internaonal also urges governments to decriminalise sex work
and to repeal other non-criminal laws rendering sex workers vulnerable to human rights vio-
laons in its “Dra policy on state obligaons to respect, protect and full the human rights
of sex workers”, published in 201538. Although deemed controversial by a coalion of pros-
tuon abolionists, Amnesty’s policy has received a great deal of support and endorsements
not only from the sex workers’ movement, but also from many other civil society actors. A
peon by NSWP to call on Amnesty’s delegates to adopt the dra policy received over
10,000 signatories, and an open leer by ICRSE in support of the policy was signed by nearly
250 organisaons, including the Associaon for Women’s Rights in Development (AWID), the
Internaonal Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC), the Internaonal Com-
munity of Women Living with HIV (ICW), and Transgender Europe (TGEU).39
The call to decriminalise sex work, including decriminalising sex workers’ clients, has also been
endorsed by two renown internaonal an-tracking organisaons, La Strada Internaonal
(LSI) and the Global Alliance Against Trac in Women (GAATW). While commied to safe-
guarding the rights of tracked persons, prevenng human tracking from occurring, and
raising public awareness about forced labour and slavery-like pracces in dierent labour
markets, including the sex industry, both organisaons rmly oppose the conaon of sex
work and human tracking for the purpose of sexual exploitaon and raise serious concerns
about the negave impact an-tracking laws and policies have on sex workers’ rights:
The imposion of punive penales for voluntary, consensual
sexual relaons among adults violates internaonally recognized
human rights, including the rights to personal autonomy and
privacy. [...] Respect for consenng adults’ agency to choose to
engage in voluntary sex work is consistent with respect for their
human rights. Penalizaon of voluntary sex work [...] creates bar-
riers for those engaged in sex work to exercise basic rights – such
as availing themselves of government protecon from violence,
access to jusce for abuses, access to essenal health services,
and other available services.
(Human Rights Watch)37
[...] the conaon of tracking in human beings and prostuon
has lately re-emerged in several European countries and also in the
European debate on combang tracking in human beings. LSI is
worried about these developments as we believe that they do not
contribute to the protecon of sex workers from violence and abuse,
nor do they address the root causes of tracking in human beings.
(La Strada Internaonal)40
19
Both LSI and GAATW also strongly reject the prostuon abolionist stance on the crim-
inalisaon of sex workers’ clients as a way to end tracking in human beings. As both
argue, their long-term experiences and work with tracked persons prove that criminal-
ising clients does not prevent human tracking and other human rights violaons. On the
contrary, it contributes to sex workers’ vulnerability to violence, discriminaon, or abuses,
and severely limits their access to jusce and protecon under the law.
Academic Support for Evidence-based Laws & Policies
‘Where is the evidence?’ has been a slogan of the sex workers’ movement for many
years. It illustrates sex workers’ struggle against the sgma aached to them and
their work, frequently fueled by myths, stereotypes and generalisaons. The slogan
instead calls for sex work-related policies and laws to be based on the strong evi-
dence available in research monographs and peer-reviewed academic journals, and
in reports published by numerous organisaon led by sex workers or working directly
with sex workers.
The role research plays is central to the development of evidence-based sex work
policies and for a more nuanced understanding of the diverse lived realies of sex
workers. Fortunately, there is a vast and growing body of research involving detailed
analyses of legal frameworks governing sex workers, sex workers’ living and working
condions, and dierent factors aecng sex workers’ health, well-being, and access
to rights. What is parcularly worth nong is that the vast majority of academics and
researchers studying sex work support rights-based approaches to sex work, oppose
the criminalisaon of sex workers, and have repeatedly denounced the lack of evi-
dence behind legal models such as the criminalisaon of sex workers’ clients.
Researchers have consistently sought to intervene in policy debates where queson-
able evidence or data have been used to jusfy policies likely to increase harm to sex
It is a common fallacy that academic research is divided in a bi-
nary way, between those who see prostuon as violence against
women and believe that clients should be criminalised and those
who argue that sex work should be considered work and harm
reducon policies should be applied. The academic literature –
with a small number of detractors – very clearly demonstrates
a strong consensus around the fact that harm reducon, begin-
ning with decriminalisaon of all elements of sex work, is key for
ensuring the well-being of all sex workers, including the most
vulnerable.
(Dr Kate Hardy, Lecturer in Work and Employment Relaons,
University of Leeds, UK)
20
workers. In February 2014, during the debates on the so-called Honeyball Report at
the European Parliament, 94 members of the academic community – public health
researchers, sociologists, lawyers, criminologists, etc. – endorsed a crique of the
Honeyball resoluon exposing its lack of empirical evidence:
Academic support for sex workers’ rights and against the criminalisaon of sex work
abounds. Another example was a special issue of The Lancet, the world’s leading
independent medical journal, focusing on sex workers’ vulnerability to HIV. The Lan-
cet “Series on HIV and sex workers”, published in 2014, recommended the full de-
criminalisaon of sex work, considering it, along with a community empowerment
approach to HIV, as one of the most eecve strategies to limit the impact of HIV on
sex workers.
We write to draw your aenon to the inadequacies of the Re-
port, which is based largely on inaccurate and/or misrepresenta-
ve data. The sources cited are either studies which have been
discredited, or are selected to relate to specic circumstances
which do not reect the experiences of many people working
as sex workers. Nor does the Report consider the extensive evi-
dence from peer-reviewed academic studies demonstrang the
problems associated with the model proposed. We are concerned
that this report is not of an acceptable standard on which to
base a vote that would have such a serious, and potenally dan-
gerous, impact on already marginalised populaons, i.e. migrants
and EU cizens earning or complemenng their livelihoods by
providing sexual services in exchange for payment. [...] To base
any policy on such a methodologically awed document, par-
cularly one which would have such a detrimental impact on the
human rights and wellbeing of a large number of marginalised
individuals, would be seng a dangerous precedent.
The report by Ms Honeyball fails to address the problems and
harms that can surround sex work and instead produces biased,
inaccurate and disproven data. We believe that policies should
be based on sound evidence and thus hope that you will vote
against the moon to criminalise sex workers’ clients. We would
suggest instead that it is important to enter into a considered
debate which takes into account the substanal amount of ro-
bust academic evidence on the subject, as well as that from sex
workers themselves and civil society groups with longstanding
experience of working with sex workers.41
(Mahias Lehmann et al. 2014)
21
With heightened risks of HIV and other sexually transmied in-
fecons, sex workers face substanal barriers in accessing pre-
venon, treatment, and care services, largely because of sgma,
discriminaon, and criminalisaon in the sociees in which they
live. These social, legal, and economic injusces contribute to
their high risk of acquiring HIV. Oen driven underground by
fear, sex workers encounter or face the direct risk of violence
and abuse daily. Sex workers remain underserved by the global
HIV response. This Series of seven papers aims to invesgate the
complex issues faced by sex workers worldwide, and calls for the
decriminalisaon of sex work, in the global eort to tackle the
HIV/AIDS epidemic.
(The Lancet, Execuve summary, 2014)42
We could witness yet another example when in 2015, Amnesty Internaonal dele-
gates were asked to vote on a dra policy on sex work, which included an endorse-
ment of decriminalising sex workers, their clients, and third pares. Researchers from
around the world expressed their support for Amnesty’s dra policy, which eventually
was approved by a majority of delegates, not only by endorsing statements and pe-
ons developed by sex workers’ networks, but a group of academics themselves also
draed an open leer to call upon Amnesty’s delegates to safeguard sex workers’
freedoms and rights.43
A Political Shift towards Sex Worker’s rights?
(Note – ICRSE is not aliated to and does not endorse any parcular polical party.
Examples given below are for informave purposes only.)
The strengthening of sex workers’ voices and the increasing support for sex workers’
rights from diverse sectors of society has led to many members of parliaments, policy
makers and polical pares to adopt progressive and evidence-based posions on sex
work legislaon. Several polical pares in Europe have adopted a posion in favour
of the decriminalisaon of sex work, the legal model favoured by sex workers globally,
whilst many MPs and MEPs have spoken out in favour of a rights-based approach to
sex work legislaon. Sex workers, in partnership with elected ocials, have been able
to defeat or delay negave law proposals in many countries in the region. The follow-
ing examples show some of the successes achieved by sex workers and their allies
when working in collaboraon with policy makers and elected ocials.
Below are some quotes from elected ocials that exemplify the growing support for
sex workers’ rights in Europe:
22
Criminalisaon and sgmasaon of sex work and sex workers
do not lead to a beer access to health services, not to medi-
cal treatment, and, ulmately, to a safe working environment.
They rather tend to lead to abuse, to violence, and poor access
to healthcare. Sex work is a fact and must not be ignored and
pushed into illegality, because it would mean marginalising sex
workers, pushing them into the margin of society.
Austrian MEP Ulrike Lunacek, Vice-president of the Euro-
pean Parliament, member of the Greens/European Free
Alliance (EFA) and co-president of the Intergroup on LGBT
Rights 2013 (extract from video message to TAMPEP)44
By conang sex workers and vicms of human tracking you
make it dicult to help those who have been forced into the sex
trade while failing to create a safe environment for those who
choose to work as prostutes.
Brish MEP Marina Yannakoudakis, spokesperson for the
European Conservaves and Reformists (ECR) group in the
EP 2014) (Leer to Mary Honeyball, MEP)45
Mandatory registraon of sex workers is at odds with Dutch pri-
vacy law: recent research shows that lile can be expected from
it in pracce. It is more sensible to strengthen sex workers organ-
isaons and involve sex workers more closely in the development
and implementaon of prostuon policies. Such involvement
also oers beer opportunies to inform sex workers on their
rights, seriously invesgate their complaints and adequately ex-
pose abuses.
MP Tineke Strik, GreenLe, the Netherlands
When I visit dierent countries as an MP, I always want to meet
local sex workers. Sex workers are oen true experts not only
on issues concerning sex work, but also on issues like migraon,
human tracking, HIV, social exclusion, corrupon, structural vi-
olence, women´s rights, labor rights and the true consequences
of the polical decisions. I value this kind of grass-roots level
knowledge very much.
MP Anna Kontula, Le Alliance, Finland
23
The best of the tradion I come from polically, shows solidarity
to all workers to organise and ght back against their exploiters.
It does not make moral judgements on the nature of their work.
In that spirit I oer my full solidarity to all sex workers. I oer my
solidarity in memory of Jasmine and Dora. I oer my solidarity
in the hope that we are one step closer to overcoming a fatal
sgma.
MP Joan Collins, Teachta Dála (TD) (member of the lower
house in the Irish Parliament) for the Dublin South-Central
constuency since February 2011
sex workers fight for legal reform
In 2012, Kyrgyz organisaon Tais Plus undertook the second successful intervenon
against a governmental aempt to penalise sex workers in Kyrgyzstan, which could
have caused a severe deterioraon of sex workers’ health with regards to HIV. Aer
a failed eort to criminalise sex work in 2005, members of parliament proposed an
amendment in October 2012 to establish an administrave liability for sex work. They
claimed that prostuon was oen accompanied by the spread of infecous diseases,
including HIV, and organised crime. Therefore, it presented a threat to public health and
safety, according to the MPs. Aware of the fact that such legislaon would contribute
to a further rise of the sgma aached to sex work and violence against sex workers
as well as seriously undermine the eecveness of HIV prevenon programming de-
veloped by the organisaon over the years, Tais Plus launched a naonwide campaign
under the tle “Stop the Criminalisaon of Sex Work 2012” to prevent the introduc-
on of those discriminatory and repressive regulaons. With strong support from both
naonal and internaonal partners, including Bishkek Feminist Collecve CQ, SWAN,
Human Rights Watch, and the United Naons Populaon Fund (UNFPA), they provided
relevant informaon via social media, gathered signatures for an online peon, and
sent leers to the representaves of the parliament, the Ministry of Internal Aairs, and
the Country Ombudsman. That informaonal campaign was followed by public hear-
ings in six dierent cies and a round-table meeng with members of the Parliamentary
Commiee on the Rule of Law, Order and Fighng Crime. Eventually, aer a long and
intense community struggle, the bill was rejected in February 2013.46
Aer ghng against a number of aempts to criminalise clients, SCOT-PEP, the Scot-
sh sex worker led organisaon founded in 1989, decided that it was me to pro-
pose an alternave in Scotland – the full decriminalisaon of sex work. With limited
resources, provided by the Red Umbrella Fund, the organisaon developed a decrim-
inalisaon strategy, which included acvies like building supporve alliances with
24
other NGOs and wring a range of brieng papers seng out the case for decrimi-
nalisaon. Most importantly, the organisaon had to create a clear vision for the legal
framework they wanted to see in Scotland, and the sex work laws in place in New
Zealand were collecvely agreed upon as the best model to adopt.
SCOT-PEP had lobbied extensively in the Scosh Parliament when ghng against
previous aempts to criminalise sex workers’ clients, and so they had gained a useful
insight into polical processes and developed working relaonships with policians.
They built a parcularly strong relaonship with Jean Urquhart, an independent MSP
(Member of the Scosh Parliament), who had been one of the few policians to pub-
licly cricise the proposals to criminalise clients. Aer many meengs and discussions,
Jean Urquhart agreed to lead the campaign for the decriminalisaon of sex work and
formally propose a bill to that eect at the Scosh Parliament. When it came to devel-
oping the precise proposals, she always deferred to the knowledge and experse from
within SCOT-PEP, which came from sex workers themselves. This is the rst me in
Scotland that sex workers have been centred in the development of prostuon policy.
On 8th September 2015, Jean Urquhart formally lodged the proposal for a Prostuon
Law Reform (Scotland) Bill before the Scosh Parliament. This is the very rst stage
in bringing a bill forward. The proposal was then open for a public consultaon, which
closed on 1st December 2015. A summary of the responses to the consultaon will be
published in early 2016, aer which SCOT-PEP hopes to obtain sucient cross-party
support to secure the right to introduce the Bill into the parliamentary process, al-
though this cannot be achieved before the coming elecons in May 2016. Sadly, Jean
Urquhart is rering at the end of the current parliamentary term and so SCOT-PEP will
have to nd a new MSP to sponsor the bill. That regardless, the organisaon’s work
with Jean Urquhart has put decriminalisaon rmly on the agenda in Scotland, and with
a new sponsor SCOT-PEP is hopeful that the proposed bill will eventually become law.
Celebraon of 40th anniversary of the occupaon of the church of St Nizier in Lyon, Lyon, France,
2 June 2015, photo credit: STRASS
25
legal and policy shifts in
the regulation of sex work
Over the last decade, there has been a marked increase in the number of laws and
policies criminalising sex work in Europe and Central Asia, as the majority of govern-
ments has chosen to tackle social issues through punive, rather than social meas-
ures. Criminalising sex work is achieved through the criminalisaon of sex workers,
e.g. by outlawing solicing or adversing; the criminalisaon of their clients, through
“End Demand” models; the criminalisaon of third pares, by penalising those who
facilitate or prot from sex workers’ labour; through other criminal or administrave
laws and by-laws; and nally, through the criminalisaon of behaviours and acvies
adopted by marginalised and vulnerable communies, such as the criminalisaon of drug
use and possession, the criminalisaon of certain sexual orientaons or gender presenta-
ons, vagrancy, homelessness, and many more. The second part of this report will explore
the dierent legal regimes criminalising sex workers in Europe and Central Asia.
criminalisation of sex work
Criminalisation of Sex Workers
Although it has been well documented and widely recognised that decriminalising sex
work eecvely safeguards sex workers’ health, safety and human rights, sex workers
across Europe and Central Asia increasingly face laws criminalising all or some aspects
of their work as well as other forms of legal oppression. Some of the countries in the
region directly criminalise sex workers, as Albania does, or penalise them in accord-
ance with administrave laws, as Armenia, Serbia, Slovenia, the Russian Federaon or
Ukraine do. Pushed into illegality in such a way, sex workers are connuously exposed
to rigid policing and surveillance by law enforcement agencies, as well as subject to
nes, detenon and imprisonment. In many of the aforemenoned countries, police
raids on sex work venues, “cleansing” operaons of enre districts, and arrests of sex
workers have been reported repeatedly. What is also alarming is that police sweeps
and detenons are more and more frequently followed by forcing sex workers to
test for HIV and other STIs in clear violaon of their right to bodily autonomy. In
the Ukraine, a quarter of the sex workers who parcipated in SWAN’s 2008 study
declared that they had undergone forced medical tesng in the course of raids and
imprisonment.47 In Macedonia, more than 30 sex workers arrested and remanded in
custody for selling sex back in 2008 were subjected to non-consensual examinaons
for Hepas B and C as well as HIV; those who tested posive for Hepas C faced
criminal charges for allegedly transming an infecous disease.48 Such outrageous
human rights violaons also took place in Greece in 201249 and in Tajikistan in 2014.50
In recent years, sex workers across the region also faced an increasing criminalisaon
of their work through the implementaon of state or municipal by-laws and police
pracces that arbitrarily target them. Sex workers are systemacally charged with
non-criminal oences against public peace and order, e.g. through zoning ordinances
or laws that prohibit to loitering or solicing, even including passive solicing, as is the
case in France. In many contexts, sex workers are also targeted by non-sex work spe-
26
cic laws against obscenity, immorality or public indecency, as well as by laws against
hooliganism, vagrancy, or drunkenness. As reported by many sex worker collecves
throughout Europe and Central Asia, these legal measures are oen used arbitrarily
by law enforcement agencies that aim to eradicate sex work from public spaces or
serve as a cover for extoron and harassment by the police against sex workers.
Criminalisation of Clients
Whilst increasingly targeted by dierent laws making it illegal to sell sex, solicit, work
together for safety or adverse, in many countries of the region, sex workers’ health,
safety and work environments are also threatened by laws criminalising their clients.
Known as “End Demand” campaigns, Nordic Model or (correctly) the Swedish Model,
the criminalisaon of sex workers’ clients in Europe was rst implemented in Sweden
in 1999, with the Swedish government’s avowed goal to eradicate prostuon, which
Swedish lawmakers understood as gender-based violence against women, while be-
lieving that prostuon was intrinsically associated with human tracking for sexual
purposes. The Swedish Model bans the purchase of sexual services and was added to
the pre-exisng legislaon that criminalises third pares prong from sex work, such
as managers, brothel owners, administrators or anyone else facilitang or organising
sex work. Although promoted as a measure to boost gender equality and prevent the
tracking of human beings for sexual exploitaon, the criminalisaon of clients has
not proven to have accomplished any of these goals.
Contrary to widespread beliefs, there is no evidence that the implementation of the
Swedish Model has contributed to either a decrease in the number of sex workers
and sex work venues, or to any significant reduction in the trafficking in human
beings in Sweden.51 On the contrary, in its report on human trafficking, published
Members of ECP protecng against the murders of Dora and Jasmine, and against the Swedish Model of
criminalisaon of clients in front of the Swedish embassy, London, UK, 19 July 2013, photo credit: Toni Stone
27
in 2012, the Swedish Police clearly stated that between 2009 and 2011, the num-
ber of massage parlours in Stockholm, which are typically sex work venues, had
tripled.52 There is also a growing body of empirical data, research and sex worker
testimonies that demonstrates the negative impact of the Swedish Model on sex
workers’ health, safety and human rights.53 It has been shown that criminalisation of
clients has pushed sex workers underground and frequently forced them to operate
in unsafe or unfavourable conditions. When working in clandestine, isolated envi-
ronments, sex workers are not only rendered more vulnerable to violence, abuse,
and harassment, but they also face greater barriers when attempting to access legal
or medical services. Finally, it has also been established that the criminalisation of
clients and the promotion of a prostitution abolitionist model in Sweden has led
to increased stigmatisation and discrimination against sex workers at healthcare
facilities, courtrooms or social services. A report evaluating the effects of the Swed-
ish Model, published in 2015 by the Swedish Association for Sexuality Education,
RFSU, indicated a significant rise of negative attitudes towards sex work and sex
workers.54 In a survey, a growing number of Swedes responded that they thought
selling sex, thus sex workers themselves, should also be criminalised. This is par-
ticularly worrying given the level of vulnerability and social marginalisation that sex
workers in Sweden are already exposed to.
Despite strong opposion to the Swedish Model from the regional and global sex
workers’ movement, various human rights organisaons, internaonal health agencies
and sex work researchers, it is increasingly gaining in popularity across European and
other countries. Since its introducon in Sweden, the Swedish Model has been con-
sidered or adopted in several countries in the region. Starng from 2005, Lithuania
penalised clients, whilst also retaining the penalisaon of sex workers. In 2009, both
Norway and Iceland adopted laws criminalising the purchase of sex, while simultane-
ously maintaining other laws directly aecng sex workers, such as strict third-party
regulaons, which e.g. can see sex workers charged with a criminal oence simply for
working together for safety reasons. In June 2015, a law to ght human tracking
came into force in Northern Ireland, which contained a Swedish Model-type clause
banning the purchase of sexual services, although research commissioned by the Min-
istry of Jusce, carried out and presented to parliament by researchers from Queen’s
University Belfast ahead of the vote on the bill, had shown that 98 percent of sex
workers were against criminalising the purchase of sexual services.55
In recent years, Swedish Model-type bills were also presented to other European par-
liaments, including the French and Scosh parliament and the House of Commons
of the United Kingdom. Already since 2012, a bill aiming to criminalise sex workers’
clients has been moving back and forth between the French Naonal Assembly and
the Senate. Sex workers, sex worker collecves, and around hundred civil society or-
ganisaons, including Doctors of the World, League of Human Rights, or the Naonal
Union of Lawyers, acvely cricised the bill and launched protests against it.56 At the
me of wring, the bill proposal was about to be voted on for the last me at the
Naonal Assembly. In Scotland, a bill criminalising sex workers’ clients has been pro-
posed twice, rst by Member of Scosh Parliament (MSP) Trish Godman in 2010/11
and again by MSP Rhoda Grant in 2012/13. Trish Godman’s proposal was lodged
just before parliament dissolved for new elecons, leaving insucient me for it to
28
proceed through parliamentary procedures. Rhoda Grant’s aempt during the new
parliamentary session failed to receive sucient cross-party support and was there-
fore never formally debated in parliament. In the House of Commons of the United
Kingdom, an amendment to the Modern Slavery Bill that proposed the criminalisaon
of sex workers’ clients as a means to reduce tracking, was debated and nally re-
jected in a vote in late 2014.57
Worryingly, the Swedish Model has nevertheless gained considerable recognion and
support among members of the European Parliament. In February 2014, the Europe-
an Parliament voted in favour of a non-binding resoluon on prostuon and sexual
exploitaon (“Report on sexual exploitaon and prostuon and its impact on gen-
der equality”) proposed by MEP Mary Honeyball, that encouraged member states to
adopt laws criminalising the purchase of sexual services. As menoned above, this
resoluon was met with considerable cricism from the European and global sex
workers’ movement, hundreds of civil society organisaons as well as academics and
researchers.
The criminalisaon of clients has led to a signicant increase in the sgmasaon
and vulnerability of sex workers even in those countries where such laws were only
discussed and put on hold or rejected. Public debates on the abolion of prostuon
has reinforced popular myths and negave atudes towards sex workers, parcularly
against migrant sex workers. This has in turn led municipalies to increasingly use
punive administrave by-laws against sex workers and to changes in policing, e.g.
increased raids and brothels closures, resulng in a systemac reducon of safe work
places for sex workers.
A growing body of evidence and research reports from civil society organisaons,
internaonal non-governmental organisaons, including the UN, researchers and sex
workers themselves point to the failures of the Swedish Model and its negave con-
sequences.
Criminalisation of Third Parties
Another set of laws adversely aecng sex workers consist of laws commonly de-
scribed as addressing ‘brothel-keeping’, ‘prong from the prostuon of others’ or
‘pimping’. These laws indiscriminately criminalise all third pares, not just exploitave
or violent ones, regardless of the occurrence of exploitave labour situaons or vi-
olence. In the context of sex work, the category of third pares refers to individuals
or enes responsible for organising and managing a sex work-related business, han-
dling transacons between sex workers and their clients, or providing ancillary ser-
vices that aid commercial sexual acts. Third pares therefore include brothel keepers,
sex workers’ agents or managers, maids, receponists, or those who rent premises
to sex workers, adverse their services, or provide them with security or transport.58
Whether working in- or outdoors, in brothels, escort agencies, private apartments, or
strip clubs, sex workers frequently engage in some sort of working relaonship with
dierent third pares. In the vast majority of European and Central Asian countries,
including those where selling or buying sexual services is not considered a crime, e.g.
Belgium, Denmark, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Poland, Portugal, or Spain, there are laws
29
directly criminalising third pares and dierent acvies related to sex work, includ-
ing solicing, procuring, and brothel-keeping, as well as adversing for sex workers
or transporng them. These legal measures eecvely criminalise sex workers’ work
environments and their relaonships with third pares. In consequence, sex workers
are pushed underground and frequently forced to work in hazardous sengs, leaving
them vulnerable to violence and serious human rights violaons and depriving them
of any form of legal protecon. The illegality of sex work venues and various work ar-
rangements has led to unjust and exploitave workplace pracces, such as excessive
fees and commissions, absence of labour contracts, overly long working hours, and a
widespread lack of occupaonal health and safety measures at sex workers’ workplac-
es. When working outside of the legal labour market, sex workers lack the legal means
to bargain collecvely or seek redress if they experienced violence, harassment or
exploitaon by their managers or other third pares. Ironically, the very laws that
criminalise non-exploitave and non-violent third pares render sex workers vulner-
able to exploitaon and violence by actual criminals.
In some contexts, third party laws have also been proven to increase sex workers’
dependency on clients and third pares providing them with living or working space.
A shocking example of this was “Operaon Homeless”, during which the Norwegian
police targeted indoor sex workers soon aer the adopon of the aforemenoned
Swedish Model-type law in 2009. As part of this operaon, landlords, hotel manag-
ers or owners of other venues were threatened with “pimping” charges if they would
not terminate leases or evict tenants who were found or simply suspected of selling
sexual services on the rented premises. Not only resulted “Operaon Homeless” in
depriving sex workers of their housing and liming their access to safe workplaces,
it also forced them to work alone and in unfamiliar locaons or to rely on dierent
ICRSE, Paris Convening, Paris, France, 6 June 2015, photo credit: Sebasan Köhn
30
intermediaries in order to support themselves. Instead of renng their own work ven-
ues directly from the owners, some sex workers have since resorted to ask other per-
sons to lease them in their name, which involves addional, and somemes excessive
costs. Isolated from their peers and trusted informal support networks, sex workers
have thus weaker bargaining posions both vis-a-vis their clients, partners supporng
them nancially, or self-appointed managers exploing their labour.59
It is also striking that in recent years, sex workers have been increasingly subjected to
prosecuon or even imprisonment under laws criminalising third pares. These laws
are being used, for instance, against sex workers who decide to work together for
safety or prefer to operate in collecve workplaces, where they share their earnings
and expenses with their peers, to managed workplaces or independent work, as illus-
trated by a Macedonian case reported in 2011.60 Aer reporng an intrusion and bru-
tal physical assault, three sex workers who had worked together at a collecvely-run
sex work venue were ned for their involvement in sex work, with one of them also
facing criminal charges for ‘pimping’. Laws against third pares have therefore been
denounced as laws “criminalising solidarity” when used against sex workers subleng
accommodaons to other sex workers or sharing vehicles to commute to work. Third
party laws, such as laws criminalising “living o the earnings of sex workers”, are also
being used against sex workers’ relaves, inmate partners or even against their adult
children.
Coercion, exploitaon and violence are too oen documented in the sex industry but
the array of criminal laws currently in existence renders it extremely dicult for sex
workers to report crimes commied against them and thus their access jusce nearly
impossible. Laws prohibing violent acts, abuse and exploitaon already exist in Euro-
pean and Central Asian countries, and sex workers should have access to jusce, the
legal tools available to seek redress, and the right to equal treatment under the law.
By dening all relaonships between sex workers and third pares as criminal, sex
workers’ vulnerability to violence and exploitaon by criminals is only exacerbated.
coercive legalisation
Another negave trend that can be witnessed in some parts of the region is an increased
tendency to limit sex work by subjecng it to meculous state control and surveillance
through legalisaon. Over the last decades, several countries across Europe introduced
laws rendering sex work legal, while at the same me entangling it in a dense web of reg-
ulaons which frequently undermine sex workers’ dignity and rights. These include legal
measures requiring the mandatory registraon of sex workers, restricons on the locaon,
number and rules of operaon of sex work businesses, as well as laws determining who
may provide sexual services and under what condions. Sex workers who do not want to
or cannot comply with the regulaons that come as part and parcel of sex work legalisaon
are facing punishment in the form of administrave or criminal sancons, including nes,
prosecuon, or even imprisonment. The aim of these regulaons is not to improve sex
workers’ working condions, ensure their safety, or protect their human and labour rights,
but rather to limit sex work and remove it from the public sphere. This situaon, where the
31
legalisaon of sex work on paper goes hand in hand with the criminalisaon of sex workers
in pracce, has led to a two-ered system in which some sex workers and some sex work
businesses operate legally, while a broad sector of the industry is pushed underground and
into illegality, forcing sex workers to work in hazardous or even exploitave condions.
Some examples of dierent forms of such coercive legalisaon in Europe can be wit-
nessed in Austria, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, or Turkey. In all of these countries the pro-
cedure of sex workers’ registraon is ed to periodic compulsory screenings for HIV and
other STIs. This means that sex workers are obliged to regularly undertake HIV and STI
tests in order to be granted permission to work legally. Those who fail to undergo these
forced medical examinaons are denied the right to work, as in Austria, or face admin-
istrave charges, as has been reported in Latvia. Besides represenng clear violaons
of sex workers’ rights, including the right to privacy, dignity, bodily integrity, autonomy,
non-discriminaon, and health, these mandatory health checks are a repressive and
degrading form of exercising control over sex workers. They not only undermine sex
workers’ sense of professional self-responsibility but also contribute to the increased
sgmasaon of sex workers as “vectors of disease”, enrely responsible for the spread
of HIV and other STIs. These oppressive measures are also followed by other, equally
coercive restricons, such as zoning ordinances, introduced for instance in Hungary, or
laws which allow sex workers to operate in managed indoor venues exclusively, such
as in Greece or Turkey. All of these regulaons signicantly limit sex workers’ freedom
of movement and deprive them of choices with respect to their preferred work set-
ngs and labour arrangements. Addionally, both Greece and Turkey have introduced
parcularly discriminatory measures that only allow unmarried, cis-female sex workers
with cizenship status to work legally. This forces all male and trans sex workers, as well
as female sex workers who are either migrants or in cered marital relaonships to
work in illegality, where they are subjected to police surveillance, nes and prosecuon,
as well as violence, harassment and abuse.
Members of Sex Workers Alliance Ireland (SWAI) commemorang the Internaonal Day to End
Violence Against Sex Workers, Dublin, Northern Ireland, 17 December 2014, photo credit: SWAI
32
Worryingly, this kind of coercive legalisaon, i.e. laws and policies severely sgmas-
ing sex work and violang sex workers’ rights, is gaining increasing popularity across
the region. The parliament of the Czech Republic, for instance, currently debates a
proposal of a sex work law which, under the guise of legalisaon, aims to eradicate
sex work from the public sphere and discourage people from selling sexual servic-
es. The proposal strictly prohibits sex work in outdoor sengs, and while seemingly
perming it in indoor venues, it also refuses sex workers the right to work at private
homes or apartments, threatening those who won’t comply with excessive nes of
up to EUR 73,600. As a result, sex workers would be le with no alternaves other
than to work in the organised or managed sector, such as at brothels and sex-clubs.61
Similarly, a prostuon bill was submied to the Ukrainian parliament in 2015 which
would put sex workers’ rights to privacy, dignity, freedom of movement and their
choices of work place sengs at serious risk. The bill proposes to not only directly
prohibit sex workers to work outside of managed sex work establishments, it would
also introduce the mandatory registraon of sex workers and periodic health checks.
Representaves of sex worker-led organisaons in the Ukraine, who have not been
consulted in the process of developing the bill, have expressed their concern that the
fear of sgma and discriminaon, already an everyday reality, and the risk of breach-
es of the right to privacy will prevent sex workers from registering with authories,
which in turn would mean that the vast majority of them would operate underground
and be exposed to violence, harassment and extoron by state and non-state actors.62
Polical debates about imposing rigorous state control and surveillance over sex
workers also took place in Germany and the Netherlands, both pioneers in adopt-
ing more liberal sex work policies. A bill proposing the mandatory registraon of sex
workers and the criminalisaon of unregistered sex workers and their clients was
submied to the Dutch Parliament in 2009. It was argued that these measures would
facilitate an improved control of the sex industry, and in that way help to combat hu-
man tracking and other abuses taking place in sex work sengs. The proposal was
widely cricised by sex workers, human rights acvists, service providers, an-traf-
cking organisaons, and academics, not only for being counter-eecve to eorts
reducing human tracking but also for threatening sex workers’ right to privacy. The
bill was eventually withdrawn in 2013.63 However, Dutch municipalies connue to
erode sex workers’ rights by using their authority for municipal regulaon with nu-
merous arbitrary by-laws, parcularly in bigger cies, such as Amsterdam, Roerdam,
The Hague, and Utrecht. In Germany, the ruling coalion of Conservaves and So-
cial Democrats is close to compleng an overhaul of the German Prostuon Act of
2002, allegedly in order to prevent exploitave labour situaons in the sex industry.
Their proposal, dubbed “Prostutes Protecon Law”, an assessment of their cognive
faculty to consent to working as sex workers, reliability checks for brothel owners, as
well as outlawing at rate sex and gang bang pares”, which the coalion considers
as exploitave pracces, although sex workers have repeatedly voiced their support
to preserve the exisng diversity of work places for sex workers.64 The bill has met
with massive resistance from sex worker communies and their allies, including sev-
eral high-ranking policians. That regardless, the coalion plans to forge ahead with
its plans and in light of resistance from several German states, e.g. where the costs of
implemenng the new law are concerned, will aempt to bypass a vote in the upper
house of the German parliament.
33
the impaCt of anti-traffiCking and anti-migrant
policies
Sex workers across the region are also adversely aected by an-human tracking and
repressive migraon policies implemented in most European and Central Asian countries.
More than oen not, they are based on the erroneous conaon of human tracking
with sex work, as well as on growing an-migrant senments.
The conaon of sex work and human tracking, whilst lacking any factual evidence,
has been instuonalised for many years through internaonal treaes and bolstered
by sensaonalist media reports and misinformed popular discourses. Most internaonal
convenons dealing with human tracking and violence against women, including the
Internaonal Convenon for the Suppression of the Trac of Women of Full Age (1933),
the Convenon on Suppression of all Forms of Tracking in Persons and the Exploitaon
of the Prostuon of Others (1949), and the Convenon on the Eliminaon of all Forms
of Discriminaon against Women (CEDAW, 1979), have dened prostuon as an inher-
ent form of exploitaon and univocally called for an end of the exploitaon of women in
prostuon.65 Although the UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Tracking in
Persons, Especially Women and Children, adopted in 2000, recognises that tracking in
human beings can occur in many dierent labour markets and is not unique to the sex
industry, many governments, policy-makers, an-tracking organisaons, and women’s
rights advocates are focusing their an-tracking campaigns solely on sex work. Addi-
onally, the framing of human tracking under the UN Convenon against Transnaonal
Organized Crime as an issue of law enforcement and prosecuon, rather than one of pro-
tecng people’s human rights, has informed many naonal laws and led to the develop-
ment of an-tracking policies that promote aggressive policing of sex work businesses
and the criminalisaon of third pares and sex workers’ clients.66
Members of Hydra protest against an-tracking policies, which vicmise migrant sex workers in Germany
during a ashmob on Women’s Rights Day, Berlin, Germany, 8 March 2014, photo credit: Simon Kowalewski
34
An-tracking policies implemented throughout the region have signicantly con-
tributed to sex workers’ vulnerability and exacerbated their working condions. Re-
peated police raids and so-called rescue operaons in sex work sengs connuously
undermine sex workers’ safety, deprive them of their earnings, and force them to
work underground or in isolaon whenever their workplaces are shut down following
police acons. Although actual vicms of tracking are rarely found, these kinds of
acons connue, as illustrated by the Soho Raids in London in late 2013.67 In 2009,
“the largest ever police crackdown on human tracking“ was carried out by 55 police
forces in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, together with the UK Bor-
der Agency, the Serious and Organised Crime Agency, the Foreign Oce, the Crown
Prosecuon Service and various NGOs. They raided a total of 822 brothels, ats and
massage parlours over a 6 month period. The operaon “failed to nd a single per-
son who had forced anybody into prostuon.”68 However, even if tracked persons
are found, their needs and vulnerabilies are typically addressed through so-called
rehabilitaon programmes, rather than empowerment through providing them with
access to labour and civil rights. Moreover, it has been reported in many parts of the
region that (undocumented) migrant sex workers working in exploitave sengs and
apprehended in such rescue operaons are in fact subject to arrest and deportaon,
if they refuse to idenfy themselves as vicms.
The vulnerability of (undocumented) migrant sex workers also results from in-
creased xenophobic and racist sentiments prevalent in most countries of the region.
Conservative pushbacks in relation to migration and moral panics surrounding the
current influx of refugees has led to the implementation of increasingly repressive
migration laws and stricter border controls. In its briefing paper focusing on the sit-
uation of migrant sex workers in contemporary Europe, the TAMPEP International
Foundation reports that migrant sex workers, especially those who lack documents
or work in irregular situations, are particularly exposed to violence and abuse by
the police and criminals posing as clients. In several countries, anti-migration laws
are being used as a justification to arrest and deport migrant sex workers, as in the
case of Chinese sex workers in Paris in 2014, or even EU sex workers threatened by
deportation from Sweden.69 Many migrant sex workers in France testified that due
to racial profiling and increased police surveillance of migrant communities, they
even fear leaving their flat to go to work or buy groceries or medications. The fear
of police raids on sex work venues, imprisonment or deportation forces migrant sex
workers to work in clandestine settings, further contributing to their insecurity and
precarity, and exposing them to violence as well as unfair and exploitative work-
place practices.
Sex workers, their naonal organisaons and regional or global networks have called
for an end to the conaon of sex work with human tracking both in law and prac-
ce, the recognion of migrant sex workers’ agency, and the use of a labour rights
framework in regards to exploitaon in the sex industry.
35
criminalisation of vulnerability
In addion to policies directly addressing the sex industry, the living and working
condions of sex workers in our region can only be understood when taking into
consideraon the wider socio-economic condions and processes aecng Europe
more generally.
Austerity
Since sex work is, at its root, an economic acvity, ongoing austerity policies across
Europe impact sex workers in mulple ways. Firstly, due to the declining availability of
well-paid jobs in the formal economy – or indeed of any employment at all in coun-
tries such as Greece – many more people are entering the sex industry.70 An increase
in street-based sex work in Greece has led to a backlash from conservave forces,
srred up by far-right groups such as Golden Dawn, who argue that a large number of
these sex workers are Eastern European immigrants in order to generate support for
their violent and racist polical plaorms. Secondly, state retrenchment of services
disproporonately impacts women and those already in vulnerable situaons, includ-
ing people with complex health needs, mental health needs, single parents, LGBT and
non-binary people, as well as migrants.
The transfer of wealth from the hands of the many into those of the few through
austerity are further reflected in intense processes of gentrification taking place in
cities across the continent. Rising house prices and rents have created a Europe-
an-wide housing crisis, with particularly significant impacts on Amsterdam, London,
and other major cities. Attempts at “urban renewal”, which commonly equate to
little more than social cleansing, frequently result in situations where there is no
longer a place for sex workers in the newly “regenerated”, shiny spaces. In Amster-
dam, buildings that once used to be brothels have now turned into boutique stores,
fashion shops and art galleries, and working flats in London’s Soho are being closed
to make way for a new multi-million pound housing development. Gentrification
produces a “double whammy” for sex workers, stripping them of safe workplaces
while dramatically increasing the rents they have to pay to work and live in their
working premises and homes.71
Homelessness
LGBT people make up a disproporonate share of the homeless populaon, but hous-
ing services, both specialised and otherwise, have nevertheless faced serious cuts
across Europe, leading to dramac increases in homelessness and leaving LGBT peo-
ple parcularly vulnerable. While sex work oers a way to escape homelessness for
many people who nd themselves in this situaon or may represent the only form
of employment open to those without a xed address, many people already nding
themselves increasingly vulnerable, are also criminalised via public order ordinances
and laws used to criminalise those who are excluded from nding a roof over their
heads.
36
Regressive social policies and criminalisation
In addion to economic factors, a wave of regressive social policies across the region
has also undermined sex workers’ situaon in general. Repressive and punive drug
policies mean that sex workers who use drugs experience interconnected layers of
risk and vulnerability.72 A growing de of an-migrant senment, in part due to aus-
terity measures and the inux of refugees, has resulted in migrants facing increasing
levels of aggression, violence and social exclusion.
Contrary to popular belief in a growing liberalism, in many countries, restricve regu-
laons framing drug use as a criminal oence rather than as a public health issue, as is
the case in Georgia, Kazakhstan, Russia, and the Ukraine, or penalising same-sex rela-
onships through criminal laws, as in Northern Cyprus, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan,
or laws prohibing the “promoon of homosexuality”, introduced recently in Moldova
and Russia, all negavely aect the living and working condions of sex workers who
use drugs as well as male and transgender sex workers, and render them parcularly
vulnerable to legal cauons or prosecuon.
Understanding vulnerability intersectionally
Alongside the usual social vectors which shape people’s power and life experiences,
e.g. gender, race, class and (dis)ability, a large number of sex workers are mothers,
single mothers, members of the LGBTQ community, migrants, or any combinaon
thereof.
Sex workers are not a monolithic group and belong to many communies and popula-
ons.73 Naturally, these factors should not be understood in a simplisc “add and sr”
formulaon. Instead, it is important to understand the social vulnerability of sex work-
ers as shaped by a variety of intersecng factors. A young trans person, for instance,
who has been evicted by their family due to their gender identy, faces problems
of homelessness, transphobia, poverty and, potenally, violence and mental health
problems, which are co-constuve of one another. Sex workers who use drugs or
undocumented sex workers, on the other hand, can at once be vicms of police re-
pression, xenophobia and an-sex work policies and atudes.
In summary, this constutes a criminalisaon of vulnerability, further exacerbang
the overall degradaon of economic condions in which sex workers make decisions
to survive.
Together, criminalisaon and austerity increase sex workers’ exisng vulnerabilies to
violence, discriminaon and exclusion, rendering them parcularly vulnerable along
mulple vectors of their social idenes, categories and locaons.
37
Members of PROUD protest against closure of their workplaces in Amsterdam’s Red Lights District,
Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 10 April 2014, photo credit: PROUD
38
demands of sex workers in europe
The following recommendaons were formulated by sex workers and their allies. They
contain key recommendaons addressing the protecon of sex workers’ human and
labour rights, violence against sex workers, migraon and human tracking.
sex workers demand reforms of sex work policies
Policies that aim to render sex work invisible and remove sex workers from the public
sphere add to the sgma, social exclusion and vulnerability of sex workers. We re-
ject the double standards that seek to allow prostuon only when it is hidden. All
laws and measures that undermine the dignity and self-determinaon of sex workers
should be abolished. Sex workers have the right to represent themselves. They should
be part of any and all debates on laws, policies and measures that aect their lives.
The self-organisaon of sex workers should be supported.
sex workers demand that our human rights are
respected
Governments should protect the human rights of all sex workers, including female,
male and trans sex workers, whether they idenfy as female, male or non-binary, (un-
documented) migrant sex workers, sex workers who use drugs and those living with
HIV.
Human rights are accepted as universal rights that apply to every cizen and govern-
ments have already have raed them, but connue to deny them to sex workers.
sex workers demand the recognition of sex work
as work
Sex work is work and a profession; sex workers are workers and must be recognized
as such. We demand the protecon of our labour, social and human rights on an equal
foong with other workers, especially social rights such as access to social security,
health care and minimum wages.
Sex workers, including migrant workers, should be able to work legally.
Governments should not render the creation of safe and healthy working conditions
for sex workers impossible, just as they wouldn’t do so in other industries. Manda-
tory medical checks and mandatory registration with the police, to which only sex
workers are submitted, and all other discriminatory measures should be abolished.
sex workers demand an end to violence against
39
sex workers
Sex workers should have the right to unite and work together to protect themselves
from violence. Laws that prohibit sex workers to work together should be abolished.
Sex workers should have the right to support and legal protecon when faced with
violence, irrespecve of their immigraon status.
sex workers demand respect for migrants’
human rights
The EU should integrate a human rights impact assessment into all an-tracking
and migraon policies and programmes in order to protect and promote the rights of
migrant sex workers and tracked persons. In order to protect their human rights, in
parcular the right to legal remedy, the EU should provide migrant sex workers and
tracked persons with appropriate residency permits in order to ensure their eec-
ve access to jusce.
In order to protect their human rights, migrant sex workers and tracked persons,
regardless of their immigraon status, should have access to support services, in-
cluding housing, educaon, vocaonal training, psycho-social counselling and legal
assistance.
40
conclusions
Reecng on ten years of sex workers’ rights, acvism, and advocacy, one can observe both
negave and posive trends in sex work-related policies across Europe and Central Asia.
Without a doubt, sex workers have faced an increasing level of scruny and criminali-
saon through laws and by-laws criminalising them, their clients and third pares. The
so-called Swedish Model has been exported to or debated in several European coun-
tries, oen increasing both the criminalisaon and sgmasaon of sex workers. The
faulty conaon of human tracking with migraon and sex work has led to awed
policies targeng sex workers in general and migrant sex workers in parcular, leading
to deteriorang relaons with the polices as well as to arrests and deportaons. The
impact of the economic crisis and the resulng austerity measures implemented by
governments as well as a trend to further criminalise sex workers’ exisng vulnerabil-
ies has led to a deterioraon of their lives.
Confronted by this increase of criminalisaon, sex workers have connued to mobilise and
organise to ght for their rights. The increase in the number of sex worker-led organisa-
ons, from a handful of organisaons in 2005 to more than 40 in 2015, has contributed to
a strengthened movement that is more inclusive and reecve of the diverse members of
the communies it represents. The increasingly strong voice of sex workers has led to very
noceable changes in many sectors of society: a large number of NGOs have expressed
their solidarity with the sex workers’ rights movement; academics and researchers have
connued to produce evidence in support of the decriminalisaon of sex work; and elected
ocials from pares of the enre polical spectrum have spoken in support of sex workers.
From Amnesty Internaonal’s headquarters to the corridors of the European Parliament the
voices of sex workers and their demands resonate calling for an end to criminalisaon and
sgmasaon, the right to work and migrate, free from fear and violence.
In 2005, sex workers in Europe said: “We demand that our voices be heard, listened to
and respected. Our experiences are diverse, but all are valid, and we condemn those
who would steal our voices and say that we do not have the capacity to make decisions
or arculate our needs.”
In 2015, as our communies face increased sgmasaon and criminalisaon, we
applaud those who have taken a stance to support our rights. Sex workers will con-
nue to organise themselves and welcome the support from those who recognise sex
workers’ demands for lives free form sgma, violence, and legal oppression.
Authors: Agata Dziuban and Luca Stevenson
Proof-reading: Mahias Lehmann
Design: Aleksandra Haduch
Thank you to all the sex workers and sex worker-led collecves from Europe and Central
Asia who have contributed to the development of this training manual. We also express
our gratude to ICRSE Board members, Boglarka Fedorko, Mahias Lehmann, and Kate
Hardy for their help, comments and suggesons.
41
1
Bassermann, L. (1993). The Oldest Profession: A History of Prostuon. New York: Dorset Press.
2
Ross, J. (2012). Between Normalizaon and Resistance. Prostutes’ Professional Idenes and
Polical Organizaon in Weimar Germany, [in:] S. Spector, H. Pu, D. Herzog (eds.), Aer the History
of Sexuality. German Genealogies with and Beyond Foucault, New York: Berghahn, pp. 139-155.
3
Kırmızı Şemsiye (Red Umbrella Associaon for Sexual Health and Human Rights), personnal
communicaon.
4
Mathieu, L. (2001). An Unlikely Mobilizaon: the Occupaon of Saint-Nizier Church by the Prostutes
of Lyon, Revue française de sociologie 42(1): 107-131.
5
See, for example, ICPR (Internaonal Commiee for Prostutes’ Rights). (1985). World Charter
for Prostutes’ Rights. Retrieved from: hp://nothing-about-us-without-us.com/wp-content/
uploads/2010/11/World-Charter-For-Prostutes_First-World-Whores-Congress-Amsterdam-1985.pdf
6
Gall, G. (2012). An Agency of Their Own: Sex Worker Union Organizing. Winchester: Zero Books.
7
Soreet, A. (ed.) (2007). Sex Workers’ Rights: Report of the European Conference on Sex Work,
Human Rights, Labour and Migraon, Amsterdam: ICRSE. Retreived from: hp://walnet.org/csis/
groups/icrse/brussels-2005/SexWorkersRights.pdf
8
ICRSE (2005). The Declaraon of the Rights of Sex Workers in Europe. Retrieved from: hp://www.
sexworkeurope.org/sites/default/les/userles/les/join/dec_brussels2005.pdf
9
ICRSE (2005). Sex Workers in Europe Manifesto. Retrieved from: hp://www.sexworkeurope.org/
sites/default/les/userles/les/join/manbrussels2005.pdf
10
hp://jasmineanddora.wordpress.com/
11
Honeyball, M. (2014). Report on sexual exploitaon and prostuon and its impact on gender
equality (2013/2103(INI)). Commiee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality, European
Parliament. Retrieved from: hp://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//
NONSGML+REPORT+A7-2014-0071+0+DOC+PDF+V0//EN
12
ICRSE (2013). Hands o our clients! Advocacy and Acvism Toolkit against the Criminalisaon of
Clients. Retreived from: hp://www.sexworkeurope.org/sites/default/les/resource-pdfs/hands_o_
secons_1-3.pdf
13
ICRSE (2015). Structural violence: Social and instuonal oppression experienced by sex workers
in Europe. Community report. Retreived from: hp://www.sexworkeurope.org/sites/default/les/
userles/les/ICRSE%20CR%20StrctrlViolence-nal.pdf
14
ICRSE (2015). Underserved. Overpoliced. Invisibilised. LGBT Sex Workers Do Maer. Retreived from:
hp://www.sexworkeurope.org/sites/default/les/resource-pdfs/icrse_brieng_paper_october2015.pdf
15
hp://www.sexworkersrightscommunity.org/en/home/
16
SWAN (2014). Guide for Sex Worker Human Rights Defenders. Retreived from: hp://www.swannet.
org/les/swannet/A%20Guide.pdf
17
SWAN (2009). Arrest the Violence: Human Rights Abuses against Sex Workers in 11 Countries in
Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia, Retrieved from: hp://www.opensocietyfoundaons.
org/sites/default/les/arrest-violence-20091217.pdf
18
SWAN (2015). Failures of Jusce. State and Non-State Violence Against Sex Workers and the Search for
Safety and Redress. Retreived from: hp://www.swannet.org/les/swannet/FailuresOfJusceEng.pdf
19
TAMPEP (2009). Sex Work in Europe: A Mapping of the Prostuon Scene in 25 European Countries,
Amsterdam: TAMPEP Internaonal Foundaon. Retrieved from: hp://tampep.eu/documents/
TAMPEP%202009%20European%20Mapping%20Report.pdf
20
TAMPEP (2009b). Sex Work. Migraon. Health. A report on the intersecons of legislaons and
policies regarding sex work, migraon and health in Europe. Amsterdam: TAMPEP Internaonal
Foundaon. Retrieved from: hp://tampep.eu/documents/Sexworkmigraonhealth_nal.pdf
references
42
21
hp://www.conectaproject.eu/
22
hp://www.indoors-project.eu/
23
See, for example, NSWP (2013). The decriminalisaon of third pares. Brieng paper. Retrieved
from: hp://www.nswp.org/sites/nswp.org/les/thirdpares3_0.pdf; NSWP (2013). Sex work in not
tracking. Brien paper. Retreived from: hp://www.nswp.org/sites/nswp.org/les/SW%20is%20
Not%20Tracking.pdf; NSWP (2014), Sex Work and the Law: Understanding Legal Frameworks and
the Struggle for Sex Work Law Referoms. Bring Paper. Retrieved from: hp://www.nswp.org/sites/
nswp.org/les/Sex%20Work%20%26%20The%20Law.pdf; NSWP (2014). Advocacy Toolkit: The Real
Impact of the Swedish Model on Sex Workers. Retreived from: hp://www.nswp.org/resource/the-
real-impact-the-swedish-model-sex-workers-advocacy-toolkit
24
CEDAW Commiee (2013). Concluding observaons on the combined seventh and eighth periodic
reports of Hungary adopted by the Commiee at its y fourth session, 54thSess, CEDAW/C/HUN/
CO/7-8. Retreived from: hp://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cedaw/docs/co/CEDAW.C.HUN.
CO.7-8.pdf
25
Ördek, K. (2014). Violence against Sex Worker Trans Women in Turkey: An Existence Struggle in the
Midst of Invisibility and Impunity. Ankara: Red Umbrella Sexual Health and Human Rights Associaon.
26
Ördek, K. (2015). O Kadınlar: Trans Kadın Seks İşçilerinin Dilinden Şiddet Hikayeleri. Ankara: Kırmızı
Şemsiye Cinsel Sağlık ve İnsan Hakları Derneği’nin
27
Barcelona En Comú is a cizen plaorm currently governing in minority in the City of Barcelona; the
plaorm has its origins in the new social and polical movements that emerged in the wake of the
Spanish economic crisis.
28
The Candidatura d’Unitat Popular is a le-wing pro-Catalan independence polical party acve in the
Catalan Countries.
29
hp://www.strass-syndicat.org/le-strass/nos-revendicaons/ni-abo-ni-reglo-syndicalistes/
30
For example, STRASS has developed ‘know your rights’ sheets - summarising main sex work laws and
policies - which are available not just in French but also Romanian, Bulgarian or English: hp://strass-
syndicat.org/vos-droits/
31
hp://www.strass-syndicat.org/?s=irregulier&lang=fr
32
hp://www.sexworkeurope.org/campaigns/tell-european-parliament-vote-against-criminalisaon-clients
33
UNAIDS (2009). Guidance Note on HIV and Sex Work, Geneva: UNAIDS. Retrieved from: hp://
www.unaids.org/en/media/unaids/contentassets/documents/unaidspublicaon/2009/JC2306_
UNAIDS-guidance-note-HIV-sex-work_en.pdf
34
WHO, UNFPA, UNAIDS, NSWP (2012). Prevenon and Treatment of HIV and Other Sexually
Transmied Infecons for Sex Workers in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Recommendaons
for a Public Health Approach, Geneva: WHO. Retrieved from: hp://apps.who.int/iris/
bitstream/10665/77745/1/9789241504744_eng.pdf
35
hp://www.thelancet.com/series/hiv-and-sex-workers
36
WHO, UNFPA, UNAIDS, NSWP, World Bank (2013). Implemenng Comprehensive HIV/STI
Programmes With Sex Workers. Praccal Approaches from Collaborave Intervenons. Geneva:
WHO. Retrieved from: hp://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/90000/1/9789241506182_eng.pdf
37
hps://www.hrw.org/news/2013/05/14/china-end-violence-against-sex-workers
38
hps://amnestysgprdasset.blob.core.windows.net/media/10243/dra-sw-policy-for-external-
publicaon.pdf
39
hp://www.sexworkeurope.org/news/general-news/icrse-1100-organisaons-and-individuals-ask-
amnesty-internaonal-support
40
hp://lastradainternaonal.org/about-lsi/lsi-opinion/criminalising-the-clients-of-sex-workers
41
hp://www.sexworkeurope.org/campaigns/tell-european-parliament-vote-against-criminalisaon-
43
clients/crique-report-prostuon
Lehmann, M., with Levy, J., Mai, N., and Pitcher, J. (2014). A Crique of the “Report on Prostuon
and Sexual Exploitaon and its Impact on Gender Equality” by Mary Honeyball, MEP. Retreived from:
hp://www.sexworkeurope.org/campaigns/tell-european-parliament-vote-against-criminalisaon-
clients/crique-report-prostuon
42
hp://www.thelancet.com/series/hiv-and-sex-workers
43
hp://media.wix.com/ugd/148599_9f63859e848a4a69af7e811508463f15.pdf
44
hps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpWPUFJBEFE&ab_channel=DennisvanWanrooij
45
hp://www.marinayannakoudakis.com/open-leer-to-mary-honeyball-mep-concerning-prostuon-
and-sexual-exploitaon-of-women/
46
Source: NSWP (2014). Europe Regional Report: Good Pracce in Sex Worker-Led HIV Programming.
Retreived from: hp://www.nswp.org/sites/nswp.org/les/Regional%20Europe.pdf
47
SWAN (2009). Arrest the Violence: Human Rights Abuses against Sex Workers in 11 Countries in
Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia, Retrieved from: hp://www.opensocietyfoundaons.
org/sites/default/les/arrest-violence-20091217.pdf
48
SWAN (2009). Arrest the Violence: Human Rights Abuses against Sex Workers in 11 Countries in
Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia, Retrieved from: hp://www.opensocietyfoundaons.
org/sites/default/les/arrest-violence-20091217.pdf
49
hp://www.nswp.org/news/policy-mandatory-hiv-tesng-sex-workers-repealed-greece
50
hp://www.nswp.org/news/sex-workers-targeted-tajikistan
51
Dodillet, S., Östergren, P. (2011). The Swedish Sex Purchase Act: Claimed Success and Documented
Eects, Conference paper presented at the Internaonal Workshop: Decriminalizing Prostuon and
Beyond: Praccal Experiences and Challenges. The Hague, March 3 and 4, 2011. Retreived from:
hp://gup.ub.gu.se/records/fulltext/140671.pdf
52
RPS (Swedish Naonal Police Board) (2012).Tracking in human beings for sexual and other
purposes. Situaon report 13. Retreived from: hps://www.polisen.se/Global/www%20och%20
Intrapolis/Informaonsmaterial/01%20Polisen%20naonellt/Engelskt%20informaonsmaterial/
Tracking_1998_/Tracking_report_13_20130530.pdf
53
See, for example, ICRSE (2013). Hands o our clients! Advocacy and Acvism Toolkit against the
Criminalisaon of Clients. Retreived from: hp://www.sexworkeurope.org/sites/default/les/
resource-pdfs/hands_o_secons_1-3.pdf; NSWP (2014). Advocacy Toolkit: The Real Impact of the
Swedish Model on Sex Workers. Retreived from: hp://www.nswp.org/resource/the-real-impact-
the-swedish-model-sex-workers-advocacy-toolkit; Levy, J. (2015). Criminalising the Purchase of Sex:
Lessons from Sweden. London: Routledge.
54
hp://old.nswp.org/fr/news-story/posive-eects-swedish-sex-purchase-ban-heavily-exaggerated-
new-report-nds; hp://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/sexkopslag-far-underkant/
55
Huschke, S. et al. (2014). Independent research report into prostuon in Northern Ireland.
Department of Jusce. Retreived from: hp://www.dojni.gov.uk/index/publicaons/publicaon-
categories/pubs-criminal-jusce/prostuon-report-nov-update.pdf
56
hp://droitsetprostuon.fr/1/index.php
57
hp://www.sexworkeurope.org/news/general-news/icrse-leer-uk-members-parliament-regarding-
criminalisaon-client-modern-slavery
58
NSWP (2013). If my boss is criminalised, I can’t keep condoms with me at work. Brieng paper.
Retreived from: hp://www.nswp.org/sites/nswp.org/les/thirdpares3_0.pdf
59
For more details, see: hp://feminisre.com/2012/07/01/the-oslo-report-on-violence-against-sex-
workers/
44
60
Coalion ‘Sexual and Health Rights of Marginalised Communies’ (2012). Report on the Sexual and
Health Rights of Marginalised Communies: 2011, Skopje.
61
Havelková, B. (2014). Právní úprava prostuce v České republice, [in:] B. Havelková and B.
Bellak-Hančilová, Co s prostucí? Veřejné poliky a práva osob v prostuci. Prague.
62
hp://swannet.org/en/content/dra-law-legalizaon-sex-work-ukraine-everything-about-us-without-us
63
Wijers, M., Mandatory registraon of sex workers and the right to privacy. Conference presentaon,
COST conference: Troubling Prostuon: Exploring intersecons of sex, inmacy and labour, 16-18
April 2015, Vienna, Austria.
64
See, for example, hps://researchprojectgermany.wordpress.com/2015/09/14/ministers-
from-4-states-demand-comprehensive-overhaul-of-prostutes-protecon-law/; hps://
researchprojectgermany.wordpress.com/2014/08/17/moralising-law-reform-proposals-for-the-
german-prostuon-act/
65
NSWP (2013). Sex work in not tracking. Brien paper. Retreived from: hp://www.nswp.org/sites/
nswp.org/les/SW%20is%20Not%20Tracking.pdf
66
x:talk project (2010). Human Rights, Sex Work and the Challenge of Tracking. Retrieved from:
hp://www.xtalkproject.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/reportnal1.pdf
67
hp://prostutescollecve.net/tag/soho/
68
hp://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/oct/20/government-tracking-enquiry-fails
69
TAMPEP (2015). TAMPEP on the situaon of naonal and migrant sex workers in Europe. Brieng
paper. Retrieved from: hp://www.nswp.org/sites/nswp.org/les/TAMPEP%20Brieng%20%20
Paper%202015.pdf
70
hps://www.google.com/url?q=hp://www.ibmes.co.uk/greek-crisis-thriving-sex-industry-shows-
austerity-has-violated-womens-rights-1508814&sa=D&ust=1448375542765000&usg=AFQjCNGL
1Yah9dvjoouLHhcOcPyL5JxMmA; hps://www.google.com/url?q=hp://www.ibmes.com/sex-sells-
even-broke-greece-854673&sa=D&ust=1448375542766000&usg=AFQjCNH80Rp3S0Q_N4poEc_
vpn8QrVJ6Uw
71
hp://www.ieb.be/La-prostuon-dans-la-ville,8818; hp://behindtheredlightdistrict.blogspot.
nl/2015/03/another-108-million-euro-to-take-away.html; hps://medium.com/@lalalalinder/
amsterdams-plan-to-save-prostutes-is-a-billion-euro-gentricaon-project-375183088650; hp://
www.sexworkeurope.org/news/general-news/save-our-windows-save-our-jobs
72
For more details, see: NSWP/INPUD (2015) Brieng paper: Sex workers who use drugs: Experiences,
perspecves, needs and rights. Community Guide. Retreived from: hp://www.nswp.org/sites/
nswp.org/les/SWs%20Who%20Use%20Drugs%20Community%20Guide%2C%20NSWP%20-%20
October%202015.pdf
73
See, for example, ICRSE (2015). Structural violence: Social and instuonal oppression experienced
by sex workers in Europe. Community report. Retreived from: hp://www.sexworkeurope.org/sites/
default/les/userles/les/ICRSE%20CR%20StrctrlViolence-nal.pdf; ICRSE (2015). Underserved.
Overpoliced. Invisibilised. LGBT Sex Workers Do Maer. Retreived from: hp://www.sexworkeurope.
org/sites/default/les/resource-pdfs/icrse_brieng_paper_october2015.pdf
Supported by:
www.sexworkeurope.org
info@sexworkeurope.org
