“Consenting Adults, No Crime?” Countries Embracing Sex Work Decriminalization Backed by Human Rights Groups

What is the decriminalization model?

An expert panel is currently reviewing possible revisions to the Anti-Prostitution Law. At its fourth meeting on May 29, the discussion addressed not only whether to introduce penalties for purchasing sex, but also the scope of acts that should be prohibited as prostitution going forward. Meanwhile, how is sex work regulated in different countries around the world? In this third installment of a series by sex industry journalist Akira Ikoma, the decriminalization model is examined.

Compared with the “Nordic model,” which criminalizes the purchase of sex, and the legalization model, which permits sex work under state control, a major global trend in international human rights movements today is the decriminalization model. This refers to the idea that all acts related to sex work are not criminal offenses, and is also called non-punishment or non-criminalization. At its core is the belief that the state should not intervene in consensual transactions between adults, and that sex work should be protected as labor like any other.

Sex workers (referred to as sex workers, mostly women) are regarded as workers with self-determination rights. Since they are not treated as criminals, they can openly assert their rights and are entitled to equal protection without discrimination, just like other citizens and workers. Buyers of sex (mostly men) are also not punished as long as the other party is an adult and there is consent.

Under the decriminalization model, sex work is referred to as sex work rather than using terms like prostitution, which carry criminal connotations. Any exchange of sexual services for money between consenting adults is completely removed from the scope of criminal law. All special laws aimed at regulating prostitution—namely criminal laws and licensing systems designed to sanction sex workers, clients, and third parties involved—are abolished.

However, this does not mean there is no regulation or that it becomes uncontrolled or chaotic. Regulation of the sex industry is instead handled within the general legal framework—such as labor law and criminal law—and is treated in the same way as many other industries.

New Zealand and Australia, which have introduced decriminalization

Full decriminalization of sex work is achieved when all legal penalties for transactions—including buying, managing, and organizing—are removed by the state. At present, no country has fully achieved complete decriminalization, but there are countries with legal systems that come close.

New Zealand was the first country in the world to introduce a decriminalization model in 2003. As a result, trust between sex workers and the police reportedly improved, making it easier for workers to report violence to authorities. It has also been said that, no longer being socially stigmatized as disreputable, sex workers have been able to openly demand improvements in their working conditions.

Australia, where the degree of regulation varies by state, has broadly moved toward liberalization of the sex industry in many regions. In New South Wales, a system close to decriminalization was implemented in 1995. In Queensland as well, a relatively laissez-faire approach has been taken, including the legalization of brothels and other regulatory relaxations, based on the view that decriminalizing sex work reduces the financial burden on the criminal justice system and allows police to focus on other crimes.

Australians are generally described as having a tolerant and non-judgmental attitude toward the sex industry. This cultural openness is reflected in law, where sex work is explicitly defined as sex work in legislation. The government recognizes sex work as legitimate labor, and in some states, individuals involved in the sex industry have even become members of parliament.

Correct sexuality is determined by the people involved

Decriminalization and legalization are often seen as similar, but there is a major difference between them. Legalization involves the state drawing detailed lines between what is allowed and not allowed, strictly regulating and managing sex work. The state is the central actor, permitting prostitution only under specific conditions, often accompanied by licensing systems and designated zones (special districts).

Under legalization, failure to comply with regulations results in illegality and punishment. As state control, selection, and exclusion become stronger, the non-legalized sector tends to expand, leading to a situation where it is more accurate to say that only those who meet certain criteria are permitted. The remaining vast areas become illegal and are pushed underground. In this sense, a system that is intended to grant and protect freedom to sex workers can paradoxically lead to greater exclusion.

In contrast, decriminalization removes the very criminal penalties that cause human rights violations. The key point is that the state does not impose a correct form of sexuality. State management and control are minimized. The premise is that sexuality is not something the state should manage, rescue, or morally instruct; instead, correct sexuality is determined by the individuals involved. The primary actor is the people concerned, not the state.

Sex work is then addressed not through special laws created specifically to regulate it, but through general labor laws and ordinary legal frameworks. Violence and coercion are dealt with under separate laws, and human trafficking is subject to severe penalties. The idea is simply to avoid binding sexuality through special legislation—not to abandon regulation or create a lawless environment. In other words, safety is understood to arise not from state control, but from the autonomy of the individuals involved.

Who decides what is the right way of sex?

The reason for decriminalizing sex work and removing criminal penalties is that when those involved, fearing punishment, are unable to rely on the police, violence against them becomes invisible. Criminalizing sex work pushes workers into socially vulnerable positions. It is considered a violation of women’s dignity and bodily integrity, and therefore inconsistent with international human rights law. In other words, treating sex workers as criminals through the criminalization of prostitution increases their risk and perpetuates human rights violations.

Furthermore, the so-called “Nordic model,” which adopts a rescue-oriented approach and tries to reduce demand by punishing buyers, ends up socially excluding sex workers. Police may begin staking out their homes or workplaces in order to catch clients. As a result, workers are exposed to greater risk of violence, and their health and safety are seriously harmed. In addition, landlords may risk being accused of facilitating prostitution if they rent housing to sex workers, making it difficult for them to secure accommodation.

For these reasons, laws that punish buyers are said to significantly undermine sex workers’ autonomy and independence, and to encourage isolation and social exclusion. The idea that all sex work is violence against women is considered incorrect. It merely reinforces stigma and does not improve the health or safety of sex workers. Making sex work invisible can instead worsen the situation.

The idea that all sex work is bad and that it should be eliminated through strict criminalization is unlikely to be effective. It would simply increase illegal, hidden sex work. Instead, what is considered more appropriate is a harm reduction approach—reducing risk by removing criminalization. Japan’s Entertainment Business Control Law (Fūeihō) is regarded as an example of this.

While the “Nordic model” and legalization model are often seen as solutions, decriminalization, which appears to protect the rights of women working in the industry, also faces criticism. It is argued that decriminalization does not protect sex workers and may even encourage human rights violations. The details of this debate are to be discussed in the second part.

[Second part] “Only bad clients and exploitative operators thrive? The hidden downsides revealed by decriminalizing sex work”

References

“Sex Work Studies” (SWASH, ed.), Nihon Hyoronsha, 2018

“Theory of Sexual Self-Determination” (Miyadai Shinji et al.), Kinokuniya Shoten, 1998

“The Black Hole of Sex Trade” (Shin Pak Jin-yeong), Korokara, 2022

In addition, various other books and online sources were referenced.