We reviewed evidence from over 800 studies and reports on the burden and HIV impact of human rights abuses against sex workers across policy climates. Published research documents widespread abuses of human rights perpetrated by both state and non-state actors. Such violations facilitate HIV vulnerability, both directly and indirectly, and undermine effective HIV prevention and intervention efforts. Violations include homicide, physical and sexual violence from law enforcement, clients and intimate partners, unlawful arrest and detention, discrimination in accessing health services, and forced HIV testing. Abuses occur across all policy regimes, though most profoundly so where sex work is criminalized through punitive law. Protection of sex workers’ human rights is critical to respect, protect and fulfill human rights, and to improve their health and wellbeing. Findings affirm the value of rights-based HIV responses for sex workers, and underscore the obligation of states to uphold the rights of this marginalized population.

The Nordic model is a piece of legislation, passed in Sweden in 1999, which criminalizes the purchase of sex. In Canada, exchanging sex for money is not illegal, but virtually every activity associated with prostitution is. Following the Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision in Bedford v. Canada, the question of what type of legislation is most appropriate with respect to prostitution has become even more important. This article begins by evaluating the degree of success (or lack thereof) of the Nordic model. The article then goes on to determine whether legislation similar to the Nordic model would be constitutional if adopted in Canada.

No abstract

No abstract

An inherent feature of drug control in many countries has been an excessive emphasis on punitive measures at the expense of public health. At its most extreme, this approach has reduced health services for people who use drugs to an extension of the drug control system. In these environments, health services are punitive rather than supportive for people who use drugs, especially those who are drug dependent.In Russia, the government’s official policy towards drug use is one of “social intolerance,” which seeks to legitimize and encourage societal ill treatment of people who use drugs. In practice, this policy has materialized as widespread and systematic human rights violations of people who use drugs, including by subjecting them to unscientific and ideologically driven methods of drug prevention and treatment and denying them access to essential medicines and services. While such human rights violations are well-documented, there have been no attempts to date to consider the consequences of this approach through the lens of human rights in patient care. This concept brings together the rights of both patients and providers and interrogates the role of the state on the relationship between two core groups: drug-dependent people and drug treatment doctors or “narcologists” in Russia.In this article, we apply the concept of human rights in patient care to consider the narcologist’s role in punitive drug policy and human rights violations against people who use drugs and to analyze how punitive drug policy manifests as human rights violations against narcologists themselves, who lose their professional independence and their ability to work according to professional standards and ethical norms. We conclude that both people who use drugs and narcologists suffer from punitive drug policy and should unite their efforts to ensure drug policy does not undermine patients’ health and human rights.