This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/05/world/americas/canada-prostitution-bill-targets-clients.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Canada: Prostitution Bill Targets Clients Canada: Prostitution Bill Targets Clients
(about 3 hours later)
The government of Canada introduced legislation on Wednesday that would criminalize buying sexual services but would not, in many situations, make selling them illegal. The bill follows a Supreme Court of Canada ruling in December that overturned most of the country’s laws governing the sex trade on the basis that they violated prostitutes’ constitutional right to security. While Peter MacKay, the justice minister, said the bill aimed to focus on pimps and the customers of prostitutes, he added that prostitutes who offered their services in public areas where children might be present would, in most cases, be fined. The bill would also make advertising sexual services a crime. Some lawyers for prostitutes expressed concern, arguing that the measure did not address the court’s concern about prostitutes’ safety. The government of Canada introduced legislation on Wednesday that would criminalize buying sexual services but would not, in many situations, make selling them illegal. The bill follows a Canadian Supreme Court ruling in December that overturned most laws governing the sex trade on the basis that they violated prostitutes’ constitutional right to security. While Justice Minister Peter MacKay said the bill aimed to focus on pimps and the customers of prostitutes, he added that prostitutes who offered their services in public areas where children might be present would, in most cases, be fined. The bill would also make advertising sexual services a crime. Some lawyers for prostitutes argued that the measure did not address the court’s concern about prostitutes’ safety.