Since the beginning of time, one of the less well treated social class were prostitutes. Finally coming out of their shell, they are claiming equal human rights and conditions like other typical job as never before. It is the case for three Ontario prostitutes who launched a Charter challenge against the government. They claim that they should be allowed to speak to clients and run bawdy houses because it goes against the principals of the Section 7, 2 and 15 of the Canadian Charter.
To defend their case, they argue that because they cannot work in a bawdy house, they are forced to do their job in unsafe places like cars where the risks of danger are severally increased because the client can practically do whatever they want to them. Also, they can’t take the time to analyze the risks they are taking because it illegal for them to communicate for prostitution purpose in public. They feel that without these laws, it would be safer. Hence, they say that they go against their right to safety and security which is protected by Section 7. They should not be discriminated because of what they do; it is their liberty to sell their body, another fact that should be protected by Section 7. They should have equal rights like any regular person, regardless of their profession. Section 15 should give them these rights. They also claim that their rights to freedom, assured by Section 2, are also being violated giving the fact that The Communicating Law prohibits them to express themselves freely1. In the Ontario Court Appeal, five judges analyzed the Bedford case. During the trial the five judges all agreed to let prostitutes run the bawdy houses. However, three out of the five judges thought that public display of communication between prostitutes and clients should be illegal, due to the fact that this disturbs and may cause harm to the neighborhood. The other two judges disagreed with their decision. They believed that the prostitutes