I was 1 of the 36 in Operation Quest

[Dom Dunn]

What flaws do you see John Thomas ?
A good barrister is only as good as the information he has at the given time. look at that brave lady laura lee who campaigned to challenge this Law and gathered donations for this cause where I myself contributed to but now she has gone, its stalled, didn't fancy her chances of winning anyway but worth a go.
If England Scotland and Wales and Spain opt to introduce this law too which is a good possibility then it will gain even more momentum,

Sadly Laura's passing has stalled the legal challenge but there are good legal avenues for successfully overturning the law in the future. I can think of three off the top of my head there may be more.
1. The fact that it is likely to be considered ( in line with the Canadian Supreme Court) to be a breach of an escorts Human Rights. Given recent reports of violent attacks on escorts this is likely to succeed
2. As JT has mentioned the fundamental asymmetry which allows for the sale but not purchase of sex may well be in contravention of the constitution. A Former AG and a Justice Minister believed this to be the case.
3. The argument that criminalising consensual sex for money between adults out of the view of the public may be a breach of privacy rights. Probably the weakest of the approaches but may run as there are a number of favourable decisions from the past which could be quoted.
The supporters of this legislation put a lot of stock in the conflation of Human Trafficking with all aspects of the sex industry. This is of course an unproven assertion and a cogent dismantling of this link would be a central part of any legal bid in the future.
The radical feminist perspective that all sex for money regardless of the circumstances is essentially a form of rape, is also embedded in the thinking behind this legislation, but IMO would be relatively easy to undermine under legal scrutiny.
I would give a properly funded and competent challenge at least a 50-50 chance of overturning this legislation in full or in part.

[Stonie]

Sadly Laura's passing has stalled the legal challenge but there are good legal avenues for successfully overturning the law in the future. I can think of three off the top of my head there may be more.
1. The fact that it is likely to be considered ( in line with the Canadian Supreme Court) to be a breach of an escorts Human Rights. Given recent reports of violent attacks on escorts this is likely to succeed
2. As JT has mentioned the fundamental asymmetry which allows for the sale but not purchase of sex may well be in contravention of the constitution. A Former AG and a Justice Minister believed this to be the case.
3. The argument that criminalising consensual sex for money between adults out of the view of the public may be a breach of privacy rights. Probably the weakest of the approaches but may run as there are a number of favourable decisions from the past which could be quoted.
The supporters of this legislation put a lot of stock in the conflation of Human Trafficking with all aspects of the sex industry. This is of course an unproven assertion and a cogent dismantling of this link would be a central part of any legal bid in the future.
The radical feminist perspective that all sex for money regardless of the circumstances is essentially a form of rape, is also embedded in the thinking behind this legislation, but IMO would be relatively easy to undermine under legal scrutiny.
I would give a properly funded and competent challenge at least a 50-50 chance of overturning this legislation in full or in part.

laura would have given it her best shot but I did envisage her losing it, The Bill was introduced to go after those paying for sex, the client and not the escort so the clients were the ones committing the offense ,breaching the law not the escorts. It was a smart move on their part.The Escort in a sense is seen as the victim rather than a criminal. If its overturned I'll eat my hat

[SteveB]

laura would have given it her best shot but I did envisage her losing it, The Bill was introduced to go after those paying for sex, the client and not the escort so the clients were the ones committing the offense ,breaching the law not the escorts. It was a smart move on their part.The Escort in a sense is seen as the victim rather than a criminal. If its overturned I'll eat my hat

I would concur. The chances of it being overturned now that it is law are low.

[John Thomas]

if you haven't confessed to 'sexual activity' then without evidence I am at a loss to how the case can be proved-

1. you have had to pay or promise to pay
2. you have to have engaged in sexual activity

maybe it was free? maybe sex didnt happen but you felt sorry and gave the poor girl some money ?

so many imponderables- the way to dismantle the whole thing is to have the escort called as a witness- what will she say- yes your honour I led him on? mmmm we had sex and he paid for it- end of trust forever here and the end of the sex industry in ireland - probably foreign anyway - pimp will not allow testimony- case collapses

girl might just be a friend you met in a bar?

lots of reasons why you might be there

needs tested- i suspect the gardai like the psni know its all circumstantial but they should be admonished for not chasing the landlord/pimp in these pseudo brothels which effectively houses softly trafficked girls

[Dom Dunn]

It is not a clear cut win or lose scenario the law is a complex beast. The supreme court judgement in Canada is a significant landmark. At least in part it links the Nordic model to the suprssion of an escort Human Rights. There is no reason to believe that the highest courts in Ireland and the UK will differ fundamentally from this position. If the law is not immediately struck down it may be damaged to the extent that a rethink is forced upon the law makers. I look forward to Stonie eating his hat maybe in the company of a beautiful escort.

[Barney Rubble]

Agreed, it's on the books now & it will stay.

But in the Republic of Ireland, we have outlawed just about everything!

And will continue to do so.

Is this law is going to be enforced rigorously? is the issue I think.

Peeps have mentioned Laura Lee, and others have talked about trafficked girls into this country.

Laura stated many a time that the governments North & South & Ruhama are liars about that.

And can't back it up with info or facts.

When and if they do and they are proved right,

I will give up punting.

Anybody got a clip of Peter Gabriel and Kate Bush by any chance ?

Don't give up IDF .

[SteveB]

The level of proof that is needed is unknown until there is a case heard in court. That has not happened. Neither PSNI nor the Guards seem to want to do this. PSNI have a case ongoing but this is a about Domestic Servitude, not escorting. Guards seem to be just harvesting "low hanging fruit", thas is, people who don't know their rights and talk themselves into trouble.

Possibly, in either jurisdiction, a judge could decide that since the law exists, some sort of sensible way of enforcing it needs to exist and "a reasonable person" may conclude that if you are seen entering and leaving the premises of someone who advertises as a sex worker you are there to avail of her services and money must have changed hands. On the other extreme, a judge may decide that some sort of proof is needed and the proof needed may be beyond what is going to be easily obtained, especially with regard to civil-rights law and so on. IF that occurred (I am not saying it is likely) the whole law could be effectively be, and be seen to be, hard to enforce or even effectively unenforceable.

The simple answer, at the moment, without a case run in court, we don't have a precedent and it is difficult to know what is happening.

[SteveB]

Anybody got a clip of Peter Gabriel and Kate Bush by any chance ?

Don't give up IDF .

Don't Let the Bastards Grind You Down!

[Barney Rubble]

Don't Let the Bastards Grind You Down!

Has Michael any Mates ?

[Barney Rubble]

Good tune IDF .