If you want to protect sex workers, involve them in efforts to combat violence
Politicians and local governments must stop making policies about sex workers without meaningfully involving them in the process. Sex workers are not objects to be controlled, but partners in combating abuse.
This article was written in collaboration with Marjan Wijers en Jessy. And a big shout out to our volunteers for translating our articles into English!
Following the recent arrest of a Romanian human trafficking ring in the Red Light District, the public debate over a safe environment for sex work has flared up again. For example, window rental operator Pim argued in Dutch newspaper Het Parool last week for stricter oversight in the sex industry. Both the window rental operator and a spokesperson for the City of Amsterdam cited the legal privacy protections afforded to sex workers as an obstacle to combating human trafficking. But is that really the case?
On September 3, the Dutch House of Representatives will consider a bill that drastically restricts the privacy of sex workers. According to Justice Minister David van Weel, this is necessary to maintain oversight of the sector and to better identify human trafficking. Sex workers themselves have a very different view on the matter. According to them and other experts, the bill actually jeopardizes their safety.
Personal data
The proposed law, in Dutch: Wetsvoorstel gemeentelijk toezicht seksbedrijven (Wgts), gives municipalities the authority to require sex businesses to register sex workers’ personal data and share it with the police and the municipality. This involves not only registration as a sex worker, but also information such as race, ethnic origin, health, and sexual orientation.
Under privacy law, this is considered sensitive information. It is sensitive because it could get people into serious trouble if it becomes public. That is why it is subject to extra protection and, in principle, may not be recorded or shared.
Sex workers, experts and regulatory bodies in the Netherlands are critical of the bill and warn that it could have the opposite effect. For example, fear of registration and loss of privacy could cause sex workers to avoid the visible sector and, as a result, become even more hidden from view. This increases the risk of violence, exploitation, and other abuses, and makes it harder for people to seek help or contact the police.
Serious consequences
Furthermore, sex workers’ trust in the government is low, and the consequences of a leak of sensitive personal data are extremely severe for them: eviction, being unable to find other work, social exclusion, extortion, threats, and violence. Privacy, therefore, is not at odds with safety; for sex workers, privacy is, in fact, a prerequisite for their safety.
The fear of a counterproductive effect is not unfounded. For example, experiences from Germany — where mandatory registration has been in effect since 2017 — show that after five years, only 15 percent of sex workers had registered. The rest have disappeared into what the Germans so aptly call the “Dunkelfeld” (illegality), even though they were initially working legally.
Previous attempts had already been made to introduce mandatory registration of sex workers through the Prostitution Regulation Act and the Sex Work Regulation Act. Partly due to the objections mentioned above — privacy violations and unintended consequences— those laws were scrapped. Now, against better judgment, a new attempt is being made through the Wgts.
Fundamental
There is a fundamental question that is asked far too rarely: how is it possible that the very people this affects are not being heard? Sex workers are conspicuously absent from the public debate. If the safety and status of sex workers are the guiding principles, it should go without saying that they, too, should be at the table. This improves the quality of policy and prevents measures from having unintended negative side effects.
Politicians and local governments must stop making policies about sex workers without meaningfully involving them in the process. Sex workers are not objects to be controlled, but partners in combating abuses. They are the first to have a stake in a sector free of exploitation and violence. Moreover, they know the sector best — far better than policymakers.
Sex work is a legal profession. Legislation should strengthen the position of sex workers and increase their safety and autonomy, not force them to sacrifice their privacy. We need policies that truly protect sex workers’ autonomy, private lives, and safety — not laws that further marginalize them.