Decriminalisation of prostitution, as suggested by the Planning Commission, institutionalises the abuse of human beings in the name of openness and liberalisation. It is an erroneous notion that prostitution is an empowering exercise of sexual liberation.


If it were a matter of liberty and choice, why is it always those with the fewest options who end up in prostitution? In the US, why are most sex-workers coloured and poor? Why is prostitution lower in countries where women have higher incomes? High-society sex-workers who have wrong notions of 'fun' or 'independence', and films glorifying prostitution, must not be allowed to glamorise the profession.

Pro-legalisation aficionados wax eloquent about the inevitability of prostitution. But how many of them can imagine their own children or spouses prostituting themselves for a living? Must market mechanics be permitted to spawn branded corporate brothels vying with one another to provide premium services?

Economists have dehumanised prostitution to a simple equation of supply and demand. Some feel that sex-tourism can be utilised by poor countries to boost their national incomes setting them on the development path! The human costs of these businesses are immense.

Prostitutes often enter the profession because of poverty, abuse or broken homes. They undergo physical and psychological trauma as an occupational hazard causing permanent damage, to say nothing about the risks of rape, disease, drugs and pregnancy.

Decriminalisation messiahs claim that it enables prostitutes to access healthcare, thus controlling AIDS. In reality, if a prostitute is de- licensed, then she tends to practice undercover to earn a livelihood. The pathological link between drugs, prostitution and organised crime makes it difficult on the part of the law enforcers to clamp down on criminal activities carried out under the cloak of lawful prostitution. Countries that have normalised adult prostitution have experienced a subsequent explosion in child prostitution.

The most ignored aspect of prostitution-related legislation is the role of the customers who escape scrutiny because they are primarily male. It is a myth that men are predisposed to uncontrollable sex-appetites as opposed to women, for sexuality is a societal construct and it is only male dominance which ensures that a majority of prostitutes are women-serving-men and not vice-versa. How can decriminalisation curb HIV by medically certifying prostitutes, while clients wander scot-free with no responsibility?

The practical approach to combat sex industry is to prevent entry and remove exit barriers as much as possible. The Government must protect the human rights of prostitutes, as well as fight against prostitution.

Successful regulating of prostitution has already been experimented in Sweden in 1999, where the buyer of sexual services is prosecuted, thus deterring demand. The failure of decriminalisation policy of the 1960s in Sweden led to this holistic approach which eases prostitutes out of the business by providing social services and alternative life-skills.

As a result, street prostitution has declined up to 50 per cent in that country. Contrary to what sceptics may think, illegal prostitution has not burgeoned. This approach is on the legislative anvil in Finland, France and Norway where it has dawned upon governments that 'decriminalisation' is a Pandora's box, which should never have been opened in the first place.