“Sex for Sale Is OK If There Is Consent Between Adults”… Countries That Have Adopted the “Decriminalization Model” Endorsed by UN Human Rights Organizations

What Is the Decriminalization Model?

An expert panel is currently reviewing the Prostitution Prevention Act. At the fourth meeting on May 29, it was decided that future discussions would cover not only the pros and cons of introducing penalties for purchasing sexual services but also the scope of acts prohibited as prostitution.Meanwhile, how is the sex trade regulated in countries around the world? In the third installment of this series, in which adult entertainment journalist Akira Ikoma explores the realities of the industry, he examines the “decriminalization model.”

In contrast to the “Nordic Model,” which treats the purchase of sex as illegal and enforces a complete ban, and the “Legalization Model,” which permits the sex trade under state regulation, the “Decriminalization Model” is currently a major trend within the international human rights movement.This model holds that “no act related to the sex trade is a crime” and is also known as the “non-punishment principle” or “decriminalization principle.” Underlying this are the beliefs that “the state should not intervene in the consensual exchange of sex between adults” and that “the rights of sex workers should be protected just like those of other workers.”

Sex sellers (known as sex workers, primarily women) are regarded as “workers with the right to self-determination.” Since they are not criminals, they can assert their rights openly and are guaranteed the same rights as other citizens and workers, without discrimination. Sex buyers (primarily men) are also not punished as long as their partner is an adult and has given consent.

Under the decriminalization model, the buying and selling of sex is referred to as “sex work” rather than “prostitution,” a term that carries criminal connotations.“The exchange of sexual services for money between consenting adults” is completely exempt from criminal penalties. Special laws designed to crack down on the sex trade—that is, all criminal laws and licensing systems established to punish sex workers, clients, and third parties involved with them—are abolished.

However, this does not mean the industry is “unregulated,” “unchecked,” or “chaotic.” Regulation of the sex industry falls within the framework of the standard legal system—such as labor laws and criminal codes—and is treated on an equal footing with many other businesses.

New Zealand and Australia, which have introduced decriminalization

The decriminalization of sex work is fully achieved when the state abolishes legal penalties for all aspects of the transaction, including the sale, management, and organization of sex work. Currently, no country has fully achieved decriminalization, but some have legal systems that come close.

In 2003, New Zealand became the first country in the world to adopt a decriminalization model at the national level. As a result, trust between sex workers and the police has improved, and it has reportedly become easier for sex workers to report incidents of violence to the police. It is also said that, no longer subject to public stigma, sex workers are now able to openly demand improvements to their working conditions.

In Australia, while regulations vary by state, the sex industry is being liberalized in most states. In New South Wales, in particular, a system close to decriminalization was implemented in 1995.Furthermore, in Queensland, the state has adopted a laissez-faire approach to relaxing various regulations on the sex industry—including the legalization of brothels—on the grounds that “decriminalizing sex work reduces the financial burden on the criminal justice system and allows the police to focus on other crimes.”

Australians take a tolerant and non-judgmental stance toward the sex industry. This tolerant national character is reflected in the law, which explicitly refers to the buying and selling of sex as “sex work.” The government views sex work as a legitimate occupation, and in some states, individuals involved in the sex industry have even been elected to the legislature.

“Proper sex” is determined by the parties involved

Decriminalization and legalization are often confused, but there is a significant difference between them. Legalization involves the state drawing detailed lines between “what is permitted” and “what is prohibited,” strictly regulating and managing sex work. The state is the governing authority; it permits prostitution under specific conditions, accompanied by regulations such as licensing systems and designated special zones.

Under legalization, failure to comply with regulations makes the activity illegal and subject to punishment. As a result of increased state control, screening, and exclusion, the illegal sphere tends to expand, creating a situation where it would be more accurate to describe the system as “one that permits only those who meet certain criteria.” The vast majority of the sector, however, becomes illegal and goes underground. While the state intends to grant freedom to sex workers and protect them, the opposite effect occurs: exclusion.

In contrast, decriminalization removes “punishment itself,” which is the root cause of human rights violations. The key point is that “the state does not impose ‘correct sexuality,’” thereby minimizing state management and control.It is based on the premise that “sex is not something the state should manage, rescue, or teach morality about,” and that “the ‘correct’ form of sex is determined by the individuals involved.” The individuals themselves—not the state—are the decision-makers.

Regarding the sex trade, it is not addressed by special laws designed specifically for that purpose, but rather through labor laws and general legislation.Violence and coercion are addressed through specific laws, and human trafficking is subject to severe penalties. The fact that “sex” is not restricted by special laws does not mean it is “neglected” or subject to “zero regulation.” In other words, the understanding is that safety arises not from state management, but from the autonomy of the individuals involved.

“Becoming invisible” increases the risk of violence and other dangers

The reason for decriminalizing sex work and eliminating criminal penalties is that when those involved are too afraid of punishment to turn to the police, violence against them becomes invisible.Criminalizing sex work pushes workers into a socially vulnerable position. It is considered a violation of international human rights law because it infringes upon women’s dignity and bodily integrity. In other words, criminalizing prostitution—which treats sex workers as criminals—increases their risks and perpetuates human rights violations.

Furthermore, adopting a “rescue-oriented” approach—such as the Nordic Model—which seeks to reduce demand by punishing sex buyers, ultimately leads to the social exclusion of sex workers. Police begin staking out their homes and workplaces to apprehend clients. As a result, sex workers are exposed to greater risks of violence, which has serious negative consequences for their health and safety.Furthermore, it is said that sex workers may find it difficult to secure housing because landlords who rent to them risk being accused of “facilitating prostitution.”

For these reasons, laws that penalize sex buyers are said to significantly undermine sex workers’ autonomy and independence, and to foster isolation and social exclusion. It is a mistake to categorize all sex work as “violence against women.”It only reinforces stigma and does not lead to improvements in sex workers’ health and safety. Making the sex trade invisible actually makes the situation worse.

The idea that “all sex work is bad” and the attempt to eradicate it through harsher penalties is unlikely to be effective.It will only lead to an increase in illegal, “hidden sex trade.” Instead, it seems more appropriate to adopt the opposing concept of “harm reduction”—that is, “reducing risks by decriminalizing the activity.” Japan’s Entertainment Business Act is an example of this approach.

Decriminalization—which at first glance appears to be the “right answer”—can address the shortcomings of the “Nordic Model” and the “legalization model” while protecting the human rights of women in the industry. However, there are also criticisms that “decriminalization does not protect sex workers” and that it “encourages human rights violations.” We will cover the details of this in [Part 2].

[Part 2] Are “Jerk Clients” and “Exploitative Employers” Just Getting Worse!? The “Negative Aspects” Revealed by “Decriminalization,” Which Does Not Punish the Sex Trade

[References]

*Sex Work Studies*, SWASH (eds.), Nihon Hyoronsha, 2018

*An Introduction to <Sexual Self-Determination>*, Shinji Miyadai, Yukiko Hayami, Naohide Yamamoto, Yoshiko Miya, Seiji Fujii, Hiroaki Hirano, Noriko Kanazumi, Yuji Hirano, Kinokuniya Bookstore, 1998

*The Black Hole of the Sex Trade* by Shinpak Ji-nyeong, Korokara, 2022

In addition, we consulted numerous other books and online sources.