Equality & Incrementalism: The Role of Common Law Reasoning in Constitutional Rights Cases
It is often said that the Charter ushered in a progressive new era in Canadian law. When this assertion is made the implication is usually that the common law remains a largely conservative or stabilizing force in Canadian law, and that principled change under the Charter holds more promise than the incrementalism of the common law method. But progressives also know that principled constitutional change carries its share of risks, including the risk that rapid, large-scale constitutional change will be met with backlash from government and from citizens, and that the interests sought to be advanced through constitutional litigation might ultimately be worse off. In this paper we argue that courts are justified in adopting an incremental approach to constitutional cases, but only if that approach is infused with the Charter value of substantive equality. We then analyze (Attorney General) v Bedford, the Ontario Court of Appeal’s recent decision on the constitutionality of the prostitution provisions of the Criminal Code, through the lens of an equality-centered approach to incrementalism. We conclude that the Court of Appeal’s judgment contains serious deficiencies from the standpoint of equality. In particular, the majority leaves intact the one provision that specifically targets street sex workers, leaving the most vulnerable sex workers at risk of criminal prosecution and without a remedy. A proper application of common law method, informed by the Charter values of equality and inclusion, would have led the Court of Appeal to a different result, while still grounding the case in the legitimacy of the common law.
Deadly Inertia: A History of Constitutional Challenges to Canada's Criminal Code Sections on Prostitution
This paper examines rhetoric surrounding prostitution law reform in Canada from 1970 to the present. During the 1950s and 1960s, there was very little media or political attention paid to prostitution. It was not until the mid 1970s that perceived problems with prostitution law began to surface, driven by concerns that the criminal code statute prohibiting street prostitution was not enforceable. In 1983 the Liberal government appointed the Special Committee on Pornography and Prostitution to consider options for law and policy reform. However, the Conservative government that received the report in 1985 rejected the sweeping law changes the Special Committee recommended, opting instead to rewrite the street prostitution offence. Since then the murder of somewhere between 200 and 300 street prostitutes has prompted renewed calls for law reform. The debate on law reform culminated in 2006 with a parliamentary review that saw all four federal political parties agreeing that Canada’s prostitution laws are “unacceptable,” but unable to agree about how to change them. The majority report held that consenting adult prostitution should be legal, while the minority report held that it should be prohibited. In 2007 the Standing Committee on the Status of Women recommended that Canada adopt the Nordic model of demand-side prohibition. As the deadlock continues, women in the street sex trade continue to be murdered. Faced with this deadly inertia, two groups of sex workers have challenged several Criminal Code sections relating to prostitution, arguing that they violate several of their Constitutional rights, including their right to “life, liberty and security of the person”. The paper concludes with an update on the progress of the Charter challenges now before the courts.
The Area of Freedom, Security and Justice ten years on: Successes and future challenges under the Stockholm Programme. CEPS Paperbacks. June 2010
This book celebrates the tenth anniversary of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) by bringing together the views of key practitioners and policy-makers who have played an outstanding role in thinking about and shaping EU policies on freedom, security and justice. 
 
Ten years ago, the member states transferred competences to the EU for law and policy-making in the fields of immigration, asylum and border controls, and began the transfer process for criminal justice and policing. This decade of European cooperation on AFSJ policies has experienced very dynamic convergence, the enactment of a large body of European law and the setting-up of numerous EU agencies working in these domains. Such dynamism in policy-making has not been without challenges and vulnerabilities, however. As this collective volume shows, the main dilemmas that lie ahead relate to an effective (while more plural) institutional framework under the Treaty of Lisbon, stronger judicial scrutiny through a greater role for national courts and the Court of Justice in Luxembourg, better mechanisms for evaluating and monitoring the implementation of EU AFSJ law and a more solid fundamental rights strategy. The contributions in this volume address the progress achieved so far in these policy areas, identify the challenges for future European cooperation in the AFSJ and put forward possible paths for making more progress in the next generation of the EU’s AFSJ.