Sex work and dignity

 In Budhadev Karmaskar vs State of  West Bengal, the Supreme Court held that such basic protections as decency and dignity are guaranteed to every individual notwithstanding his/her profession. The order is being hailed for granting new rights to sex workers. But is it too soon to celebrate?

To begin with, the apex court has merely reiterated a well-settled law. Voluntary sex work is not illegal in India. Running brothels, living on the earnings of prostitution of any other person, prostitution in public places and so on are illegal under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.Sex work per se is not prohibited by the ITPA but its provisions render it impractical.

The Supreme Court constituted a panel headed by the senior advocate, Pradip Ghosh, to submit a report on the prevention of trafficking, rehabilitation of sex workers and implementing conditions conducive to sex workers’dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution. The panel made 10 recommendations to secure the rights of transgenders,sensitise authorities, and spread public awareness. The Centre has objected to four of these recommendations, each of which deals with substantive rights — the police must not take action if a sex worker is an adult and has consented;the police should refrain from arresting sex workers as sex work is not illegal; governments should include sex workers in the policy-making process; and children of sex workers should not be separated on account of their profession. A study conducted by Sangram revealed that the police often use the law to justify violence, raids and extortion.Significantly, the authorities assume that sex workers need to be rescued even though 79 per cent of sex workers say they are engaged in sex work voluntarily. Even if voluntary sex work was illegal in India, such prohibition would have been ultra vires. It must be mentioned that K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India safeguards the constitutional right to privacy, which encompasses the right to sexual privacy.

Furthermore, the State indirectly discriminates against transgenders. According to a study by the National Aids Control Organisation across 17 states,62 per cent of transgenders engage in sex work. The police routinely accuse LGBTQIA+ members of sex work. The absence of substantive safeguards for sex workers disproportionately affects transgenders.

Section 6 of the ITPA presumes,unless proved to the contrary, that a person has detained a child if he/she is found with a child in a brothel.The authorities are under statutory obligation to separate the child from the parent.Detailed guidelines are required to protect not only the rights of the parent but also of the child.

The reservations of the central government make it clear that decision-making is based on societal morality as opposed to constitutional morality. A fundamental element of constitutional morality demands that allegiance to the Constitution should not reflect societal belief and that the outcome of the process may vary from what the citizens envisage. Thus, while societal norms may be against voluntary sex work, the State cannot unreasonably interfere with the sexual autonomy of sex workers.

Lastly, the government ought to regard the fundamental principle of representative democracy and facilitate public participation in policy-making. In Rajeev Suri vs Union of India, the court opined that public participation is not limited to universal suffrage but includes participation in the decision-making process while balancing administrative efficiency. The involvement of sex workers in framing schemes and policies for them would improve their condition by taking into account the problems faced by the community. For instance,the court ordered UIDAI to issue Aadhaar cards to sex workers by relaxing norms for proof of residence as had been suggested by sex-workers’ organisations. It is imperative that the Centre accepts the four recommendations that safeguard the substantive rights of the sex workers.

Sex as work

 

Laws should free consenting sex workers from stigma, and grant them rights

A long-standing demand of sex workers that their work be decriminalised has been partially fulfilled with the Supreme Court passing an order on May 19 that adult sex workers are entitled to dignity and equal protection under law. Directing the police to respect the rights of consenting sex workers, the Court observed that “... notwithstanding the profession, every individual ... has a right to a dignified life under Article 21 of the Constitution”. It reiterated what the Court had ruled in Budhadev Karmaskar (2011), that sex workers are also entitled to a “life of dignity”. With the Trafficking of Persons (Prevention, Protection and Rehabilitation) Bill yet to see the light of day, the Court invoked powers under Article 142 to issue guidelines till the legislation is in force. In 2011, it had set up a panel to look at prevention of trafficking; rehabilitation; and conditions conducive for sex workers who wish to continue work. As the Court awaits the Government’s response to the panel’s recommendations that adult sex workers should not be “arrested or penalised or harassed or victimised,” a three-judge Bench led by Justice L. Nageswara Rao did well to direct the police to treat “all sex workers with dignity and should not abuse them, ... verbally and physically, subject them to violence or coerce them into any sexual activity”. During the hearings, the Additional Solicitor General Jayant Sud had conveyed to the Court that the Government has “certain reservations” on some of the panel’s recommendations.

The Court has asked the Government to respond to the panel’s suggestions in six weeks. By holding that basic protection of human decency and dignity extends to sex workers and their children, the Court has struck a blow for the rights of an exploited, vulnerable section. Coming down heavily on the brutal and violent “attitude” of the police toward sex workers, the Court said “it is as if they are a class whose rights are not recognised”. It has asked State governments to do a survey of protective homes under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, the legislation governing sex work in India, to review the cases of “adult women” detained there and process their release in a time-bound manner. The ITP Act penalises acts such as running a brothel, soliciting in a public place, living off the earnings of a sex worker and living with or habitually being in the company of one. The Court’s general observations should help sensitise the police, media and society toward sex workers, who have generally been invisible and voiceless. The ball is in the Government’s court to draw up appropriate legislation to free consenting sex workers from stigma, and grant them workers’ rights. In that too, the Court suggested the Centre and States involve sex workers or their representatives to reform laws.

Source: The Hindu, 28/05/22

Leadership lessons from sex workers

Why do sex workers show so many more leadership attributes than a business leader? The answer is straightforward – out of necessity

Can sex workers be intelligently, seriously and usefully compared to business leaders and, when they are, might they come out better? An analysis along these lines is one of the more interesting parts of a book due to be released next month. I was sent a preview copy and found it fascinating.

Called A Stranger Truth, it’s by a clearly talented author, Ashok Alexander. His career started as a high-profile executive with the international consultants, McKinsey & Company. Then, one day, he threw it up to head Avahan, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s programme to fight HIV. He ended up running this organisation for a decade. The book is based on his experiences.

It begins in the most striking way possible: “‘Don’t step on the people having sex!’ the NGO worker whispered urgently as we ventured into the darkness.” This was Alexander’s first encounter with sex workers. Their names were Parvati, Vatsala and Jayanthi. “I could hear them giggle as they watched me move gingerly around the couples that lay strewn around the field… sounds of frantic coitus emanated from behind the bushes.”

Chapter six contains the comparison I found intriguing. It’s called ‘Leadership secrets of the commercial sex worker’. “Every time I met and interacted with sex workers I would ponder over a fundamental question”, Alexander writes. “Why did sex workers show so many more leadership attributes than a business leader? The answer is straightforward — out of necessity.”

As Alexander points out, business leaders have the attributes they need to have and “very often just one or two might suffice”. Rarely does a business leader have to be an all-rounder in terms of leadership qualities. He has people to cover for him.

Female sex workers are very different. “Her world is far more complex, much more challenging. She must deal with emotional, health and financial crises all the time. There’s the constant threat of violence and her first mission is really to survive. She has no power, but she still must stay in control. She has no support system, but she must cope. She simply cannot win with just one or two shots in her game. She needs a whole repertoire.”

Alexander got to know sex workers well. He says they’re “tremendous judges of body language”. They develop this faculty to survive. This also means “they’re amazing judges of people, especially of men”. They can size up an individual not just in a moment but from as far as twenty feet.

Not surprisingly, negotiation is one of their prime skills. “It’s not just business leaders who have to be adept at negotiating. A sex worker negotiates all the time with her clients for safe sex.” On the outcome depends more than the success of a business. It can determine the sex worker’s life.

Alexander’s conclusion is simple and straightforward: “I was constantly learning about life, leadership and values from the commercial sex worker.” I suspect the former McKinsey executive ended up a very different person and a better man.

Now, if you think about it, there’s nothing surprising about Alexander’s analysis. Indeed, it’s hard to disagree with. The jolt lies in the fact this is not a subject we think about leave aside discuss. Alexander has broken that taboo. The result is a truth he calls strange but which feels undeniable.

Karan Thapar is the author of The Devil’s Advocate: The Untold Story

Source: Hindustan Times, 15/10/2018