In order to “fight the spread of the coronavirus,” the City of Brussels has, since Monday evening, banned prostitution throughout its territory.
This measure is surprising on several levels: its symbolism, its radical nature, and its expected effectiveness.
Symbolism
Throughout history, sex workers have been subject to special measures related to their activity or to the place they occupy in collective imagination. From sacred prostitutes to rural brothels, prostitution has always been part of the res publica. And it still is, as illustrated by the events of Monday evening.
Without delving into detailed gender considerations, it is worth noting that prostitution has been, and remains, largely practiced by women or those presenting as female.
This is the symbolic significance of this archaic measure taken in 2020 — which could have just as easily been taken in 1020, given the essentially hygienist approaches that have always regulated a practice often marked by extreme precarity, worsened by the state’s longstanding neglect of the social status of these workers.
Radical
Its radical nature and lack of proportionality are equally surprising: the ordinance takes immediate effect and for an indefinite duration. By contrast, another measure taken by the Brussels crisis unit regarding cafés and bars allowed a 48-hour grace period and explicitly limited enforcement to three weeks.
It is high time that people in prostitution are recognized as full citizens, capable of protecting themselves from a virus just like others engaged in close-contact activities.
Some self-declared independent sex workers, organized in a self-managed collective, have demonstrated this by proactively developing a health protocol to facilitate the resumption of their work after lockdown.
Effective?
Here is where the debate becomes complex: a significant number of people in prostitution work under the authority of someone who sexually exploits them. For these individuals, whether prostitution is banned or not, the obligation to deliver money to their exploiter remains, under threat.
This is human trafficking — a major violation of human rights.
Whether it is repaying a debt (from the journey that brought them from their country of origin to Brussels), obeying the psychological manipulations of a “lover boy,” or fearing retaliation against themselves or their families, they have neither the choice nor the possibility to comply with regulations such as the ordinance issued by the Mayor of Brussels.
A Double Penalty
These women will therefore become invisible, meeting clients in hidden, often unsanitary locations, where they will be even more vulnerable to health risks and the multiple forms of violence associated with their situation. In this sense, the ordinance inflicts a double penalty.
This inevitable and predictable displacement of prostitution raises two questions: the goal being pursued and the means used to achieve it.
Goal
If the goal of yesterday’s ordinance is genuinely to prevent the spread of the virus, we have doubts about its effectiveness, because prostitution will continue.
If, however, the goal is to respond to nuisance complaints from residents’ groups in red-light districts such as the Alhambra, the pretext (COVID spread) is poorly chosen.
Means Used
By targeting the restrictive measure solely at sex workers — who will become more precarious — the ordinance ignores their clients, exempting them from any responsibility for the virus’s spread.
Raising Awareness – Informing
This recurring neglect contributes to the lack of awareness and information at all levels regarding human trafficking, as demonstrated by the 2017 campaign “Tatiana / A Penny for your Thoughts” conducted by the Samilia Foundation.
A suggestive silhouette and a mobile number on a bright red background — many were intrigued by these posters in Brussels metro stations, and many also dialed the number. The prerecorded message began as a sexual service offer, then told the true and moving story of a young woman who was a victim of human trafficking, allowing callers to leave a message. While several messages expressed support and concern, many others requested sexual services, as if the testimony had not been heard.
Public awareness and education about human trafficking in all its forms is an obligation of states, including Belgium, and is enshrined in international texts such as : The Council of Europe Convention of 16 May 2005 on Action Against Trafficking in Human Beings ; Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and Council of 5 April 2011 — a rare jointly adopted directive ; The UN Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime’s Additional Protocol of 15 November 2000 on preventing, suppressing, and punishing trafficking in persons, especially women and children.
As with victim protection and offender prosecution, prevention, awareness, and public education are indispensable for an effective policy against sexual exploitation.
Targeting only one — or at most two — of these aspects proves ineffective, costly, and, in this case, dangerous.
Sophie Jekeler
President of the SAMILIA Foundation,
This op-ed is published in:
– La Libre
