The United Nations working group on discrimination against women and girls published a paper last year that not only fails to address the widespread human rights violations caused by prostitution and pornography, but also advocates for policies that will endanger women and girls.
The guidance paper, “Eliminating discrimination against sex workers and securing their human rights,” now circulating in the UN system, ostensibly offers ways to address the violence women endure in prostitution, but the use of the terminology of “sex work” raises red flags. The theme of the 68th annual Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), the UN’s largest gathering on gender equality, is investing more in women to lift them out of poverty, among other goals. One proposal, however, that is circulating among member states to endorse the paper contravenes the goals.
Instead of dealing with the scourge of prostitution within a human rights framework, the paper urges countries to decriminalize the sex trade, including all commercial sex establishments, sex buying, sex tourism, and pimping — actions that would corrode women’s rights and spur more sex trafficking. The working group states that its intent is not to define “sex work,” which is telling; doing so would have required them to list every player that profits from this sordid “business,” online and off.
The drafters of the paper — independent experts selected to serve on one of the Human Rights Council‘s 59 working groups — are not employees of the UN and seem to be accountable to no one. The paper relies on primary sources with links to groups and networks that promote the sex trade as a viable employer for marginalized women, especially of African descent, from national minorities and from the global South.
The paper’s premise — that legalizing the multibillion-dollar global sex trade shields women from violence and discrimination — is preposterous and contradicts longstanding human rights law, including calls on states “to suppress all forms of traffic in women and exploitation of prostitution of women.”
“It is beyond comprehension and very dangerous that any UN body encourages pimping and patronizing, and not consult any prostitution survivors or their allies to inform them of our lived experiences and the truths about prostitution,” said Cherie Jimenez, the executive director of SPACE International, a global survivor-led network.
“If they truly cared about the millions of prostituted women, they would advocate to end our arrests, offer us services and help us exit, not applaud a system that condemns generations to sex buyers and to dehumanization.”
It is well documented that women in the sex trade, which includes all forms of prostitution, including escort services, illegal massage parlors, pornography, strip clubs, “sugar dating” and street prostitution, face pervasive discrimination, unjust criminalization, brutal physical and psychological harm and even torture by both state and nonstate actors.
Prostitution is not labor (as the term “sex work” entices us to believe), but a harmful cultural practice. Its inception parallels that of other forms of gender-based violence, such as female genital mutilation or domestic violence. It is a system that relegates women to second-class status and offers men the opportunity to purchase domination. From Bangladesh to the Netherlands, from South Africa to Colombia, and every country in between, the sex trade generates significant profits for both those who exploit women and the state.
The #MeToo movement has revealed the egregious, lifelong damage sexual harassment and sexual violence inflicts on women. However, if money is exchanged (as in the system of prostitution), our culture paints this abuse as a consenting act with no harm done.
The Human Rights Council’s independent experts are responsible for presenting reliable and objective information in accordance with internationally recognized human rights standards and ratified conventions. Their assertion that the prostitution of women promotes equality gaslights civil society, confuses member states and dangerously compromises the legitimacy of international covenants.
Although the guidance paper doesn’t have the weight of a General Assembly resolution, its publication under the auspices of the Council fosters what political scientists call “norm erosion.” International law and human rights norms mandate states to eliminate sociocultural patterns and conduct that lead to the notion that women are inferior to men; instead the paper appears blind to these tenets or distorts them.
Women’s rights are inalienable, whether a woman is engaged in prostitution or not. By endorsing the sex trade as an employer for disenfranchised women, the guidance paper also encourages governments to forgo investment in girls’ education and women’s employment. It reinforces attitudes that lead to a false understanding that women “choose” prostitution and perpetuates the status of women and girls as subordinate to men, a notion antithetical to principles of equal justice, opportunity and dignity.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres and UN Women have stated that “gender equality is growing more distant, putting the track to reach it 300 years away.” The guidance paper, which promotes regressive and dangerous ideas about how marginalized women can reach their full potential, pushes that timeline even further into the future.
This is an opinion essay.
We welcome your comments on this article. What are your thoughts on prostitution and human rights?
Related Posts
Taina Bien-Aiméis the executive director of theCoalition Against Trafficking in Women and a founding member of Equality Now.
![[Re]Group - A Playbook for Turbulent Times -Subscribe Now](https://passblue.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/regroup-v2_unf2026_square_600.500@2x.webp)
The Problem is the Normalization of Prostitution
& Analysis of the human trafficking situation and the models of approach for its eradication.
Claudia Yurley Quintero Rolón
cquinterorolon@gmail.com
On International Women’s Day, we continue to fight for things that should already be overcome, such as access to dignified employment, fundamental elements on the feminist agenda. My experience accompanying victims of human trafficking, from my role as a human rights defender, teaches me a painful reality: the systematic denial of these opportunities is a common factor in those who suffer the scourge of human trafficking.
One of the most moving cases is that of Jenny Pinilla, who, in her desperate attempt to escape the clutches of a brothel, injured the pimp. Despite her clear attempt to free herself from a human trafficking situation, Jenny was sentenced to 11 years in prison for personal injuries, labeled not as a victim of human trafficking, but as a sex worker who committed a violent act against a “businessman.”
Another case that highlights indifference and systemic injustice is that of Francia. Her death in the Santafé District went unnoticed by authorities; in an area where the death of women in prostitution is constant, her life choice was assumed as consensual, ignoring the circumstances that led her to that situation. Despite police presence in these areas, the lack of social guarantees to offer these women a real way out of their circumstances is evident.
It is very sad the number of young people we assist in the foundation, who are recognized as victims of human trafficking until they turn 17, but who, upon turning 18, are automatically categorized as sex workers by some public officials.
This transition completely ignores the indicators of abuse and exploitation they have suffered, leaving them without the support and accompaniment necessary to rebuild their lives.
It is necessary, then, to deepen our understanding of human trafficking. According to the definition adopted internationally and by Colombia, trafficking involves the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring, or receipt of people through coercion, deception, debt bondage, or abuse of power, for exploitation in various forms, such as sexual exploitation, forced labor, pornography, or organ removal. I want us to bear in mind that the consent given by the victim under these conditions in no way legitimizes the exploitation.
This framework forces us to recognize that human trafficking transcends the stereotype of kidnapping or absolute confinement. Often, victims may appear “free” in the eyes of an uninformed observer, perhaps even receiving some form of remuneration or living in conditions that do not reflect classic confinement. However, this does not exempt them from being victims of one of the most severe forms of violence.
Walk Free, an organization that researches the phenomenon of trafficking and produces the Global Slavery Index, says that as of 2023, Colombia has 397,000 victims of human trafficking. The Colombian state records approximately 89 cases of human trafficking per year, according to data provided by the Ministry of the Interior for the periods between 2013 to 2023 (up to June 30). We could talk about an underreporting of 90%.
In the open database of the Attorney General’s Office, the crime of human trafficking shows a worrying distribution throughout the Colombian territory, with Norte de Santander, Antioquia, and Valle del Cauca being the departments with the highest number of judicial proceedings. Most reported cases took place between 2021 and 2023. With a total of 212 open judicial proceedings, where 140 are active and 72 inactive.
Between the years 2020 and 2024, a total of 3,337 cases of sexual exploitation were registered, with child pornography being the foremost crime at 63.96% of the total cases, followed by the demand for commercial sexual exploitation of minors (13.85%) and induction into prostitution (13.54%).
We can assure that child pornography, which should be called sexual exploitation for pornography, is really the bulk of content that criminals trade and buyers prefer in Colombia.
The JTIP report from the U.S. Department of State (2022) indicated that 148 victims, including 25 children. Most were women (121), and a significant number were migrants (73). There were 210 open trafficking cases and 26 arrests in 2022, with four convictions of sex traffickers. Emergency assistance was provided to 100 trafficking victims. According to the Ministry of the Interior (2013-2023), Colombia presented 250 cases of human trafficking in 2023, with a female prevalence (206 cases). The majority of the victims reported to COAT were women, and 41 cases involved men. Of 686 trafficking cases over the past 10 years, 82% corresponded to women. Sexual exploitation (408 cases) and forced labor (134 cases) were the main modalities of Human Trafficking in Colombia. These figures do not reveal the reality of the crime, understanding that there is a huge underreporting due to the lack of knowledge of the crime and how invisible the victims are to society in general.
One of the great problems humanity has in combating human trafficking, and Colombia is no exception to this, is the normalization of sexual exploitation, understanding that people in victims of human trafficking, for the purpose of sexual exploitation for the prostitution of others, are not criminals and should be considered as subjects of special protection, nor is there a right over the purchase of other people’s bodies.
Prostitution and human trafficking -are not the same- is repeated in public offices, but one is closely linked to the other. The market is the same, the clients are the same, the victims suffer the same, the “transactional object” is the same: the human being.
The problem in combating human trafficking is the normalization of prostitution as work, a model that has not worked in Germany despite having a robust state and finances. It is clear, for example, the opinion of the OSCE’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights from 2022 called “Opinion on Acts of Germany on Prostitution and Trafficking in Human Being” that shows how legislation that considered prostitution as work has not provided protection to those who practice it and has not decreased or protected them from violence such as human trafficking and homicide.
With about 400,000 victims of human trafficking in Colombia, the question arises: Where are they? Why do they remain invisible? What prevents their rescue? The identification of human trafficking victims in Colombia faces barriers, mainly because society has managed to make the victims themselves not perceive themselves as such. Often, they have given their consent, which subsequently leads them to feel guilty. This sense of guilt, added to their situation of vulnerability, makes them believe that they simply made a bad decision. Therefore, it is the State’s task to recognize them, actively searching for victims. And that’s why where many see “workers,” others see victims and survivors.
This labeling that disappears victims not only denies them access to justice and the attention they require but also to essential physical and mental health services. Being seen under a prism of questionable morality and considered as people who freely chose such an “activity,” they are criminalized and forced to fight alone for their life and freedom, instead of punishing those who benefit from their exploitation.
Since 2010, the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court of Colombia has addressed prostitution under two main aspects: (i) it recognizes that prostitution can be considered a labor activity, however, it indicates its inadequacy to be promoted due to the indignity associated with it; and (ii) it highlights the unacceptable risks faced by those who engage in prostitution. In particular, it has underlined that, unlike any other profession, women in prostitution are constantly exposed to the danger of being murdered, physically, sexually, and psychologically assaulted, induced to the consumption and addiction of psychoactive substances and alcohol, and impoverished by intermediaries or pimps.
In the ruling T-629 of 2010, the Court, when addressing the case of a pregnant woman fired by her pimp, decided not to proceed with her reinstatement considering that, given the nature of the activity and how it contravenes the ideals of human dignity and the international duties of States, ordinary labor guarantees should not apply. The Court argued that all necessary measures should be taken to prevent prostitution, rehabilitate those involved, and provide them with alternatives for their economic improvement.
Subsequently, although some rulings have recognized the “labor character” of prostitution, and even considered it as dignified work, the Court has maintained its position of urging authorities to offer opportunities for women to leave this activity. This is evident, for example, in the ruling T-073 of 2017, which was annulled after determining that the claimant, an alleged pimp, was not legitimized to initiate the action for constitutional protection under review.
This position reflects an interesting contrast with the ruling C-369 of 2009, where the constitutionality of the crime of inducing prostitution was declared, and deep reflections were made on the serious consequences that prostitution has for the integrity and dignity of women, despite the legal tolerance towards this activity.
Therefore, the analysis of prostitution in Colombia cannot be disconnected from considering how it represents a form of sexual exploitation, especially against a population constitutionally recognized as an object of special protection, such as women victims of violence. This analysis must be based on human rights protection standards for women, including their voices and participation, both of those in prostitution and the survivors of this serious human rights violation.
The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and Recommendation No. 38 of the CEDAW Committee emphasize the need for the Colombian State, at all levels, to understand and execute its obligations towards victims of trafficking and sexual exploitation, including prostitution and pornography. This dual approach is oriented both to protect the rights of those directly affected and not to diminish the protection of the rights of all women, addressing widespread discrimination.
Colombia, by ratifying CEDAW and the Palermo Protocol, commits to combating human trafficking and protecting the rights of women and girls
. General Recommendation No. 38, issued by the CEDAW Committee in 2020, is essential for the interpretation of these conventions and establishes mandatory guidelines for Colombia, setting a high standard of protection for women and girls sexually exploited.
Trafficking and the exploitation of prostitution of women and girls are clearly identified as forms of sex-based discrimination, also constituting gender-based violence. This stance is based on the understanding that such practices not only arise from but perpetuate, structural inequalities and entrenched gender stereotypes that subordinate women and girls.
In this context, sex-based discrimination refers to any distinction, exclusion, or restriction that has the effect of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment, or exercise by women, on an equal basis with men, of their human rights and fundamental freedoms. Thus, it is clear that the root of the problem of sexual exploitation is not only male demand, but that the exploitation of prostitution itself is a stereotype of domination, control, and power over women and girls.
From the above arguments, it is concluded that trafficking and the exploitation of prostitution are discrimination based on being born a woman, and violence based on gender as there are stereotypes and practices (such as the exploitation of prostitution) that give rise to a relationship of subordination of women to men. That is, the Colombian State could not maintain the idea that the exploitation of prostitution is violence against women, even when compared to slavery and torture, and at the same time justify it as work. It is a practice that, although culturally normalized, results in discrimination against women, because it does not eradicate stereotypes based on pre-existing disadvantage and inequality.
The Path Forward
The legalization of prostitution as work in some European countries like Germany and the Netherlands has facilitated sexual exploitation by traffickers, greatly increasing human trafficking and violence against victims. This suggests that prostitution turned into work incentivizes human trafficking, with purposes of sexual exploitation, and makes it impossible for the State to fulfill its international, constitutional, and legal obligation to combat the crime of human trafficking. In Germany, for example, there is a great discrepancy between the official number of people in prostitution and the real estimates, which indicates the magnitude of the problem as victims continue to be invisible. This is the path that Colombia is trying to take.
There is another model of addressing sexual exploitation that could be a smart way to combat this crime, known as the Nordic or equality model, which criminalizes the purchase of sex while decriminalizing the person in prostitution. This model has proven effective in reducing street prostitution and the demand for prostitution, as evidenced in Sweden and France. In Sweden, demand decreased after implementing the model, and in France, exit programs have helped many women leave prostitution with psychological support for trauma and help them find stable employment, although the lack of funding for these programs remains a challenge.
If the Colombian State wants to address this structural cause, it is fundamental to socially discourage and punish the demand that sustains this form of modern slavery, recognizing that, without demand, the trade of human beings for sexual exploitation would crumble, and likewise open opportunities for education, comprehensive health, and well-being for women and girls exploited, that would be a good path that Colombia could take in favor of women and girls.
Beyond the juicy anecdotes, this lengthy comment contains so many errors, false claims and mantras that it questions the author’s credibility and, moreover, reveals her intention.
Like the author of the opinion piece, Tania BIen-Aimé, this author feeds off anti-prostitution lobbying.
She deliberately conflates prostitution, human trafficking and exploitation. She calls prostitution “modern slavery.” Applying the same logic, every activity in which there is trafficking and/or exploitation should be called slavery. E.g. agriculture, cleaning services, elderly care,… Activities which know a lot of sexual exploitation too. Yet, these lobbyists are not interested in any of those types of “slavery”. It makes one wonder why, doesn’t it? “questionable morality” gives away her agenda; “punish the demand” reveals her motive.
“without demand, the trade of human beings for sexual exploitation would crumble” Yet, this is not the case in any country which targets demand. Not even Sweden, homeland of this doctrine, after 25 years.
“In Germany, for example, there is a great discrepancy between the official number of people in prostitution and the real estimates” This is the case in AY country, regardless its policy on prostitution.
“The legalization of prostitution as work in some European countries like Germany and the Netherlands has facilitated sexual exploitation by traffickers” No, there is no evidence for this claim. The only evidence is that, according to the US government report “Trafficking in Persons”, in Sweden, after 25 years of criminalising demand, trafficking for sexual exploitation is the main drive of human trafficking.
Etc.
Currently, the European Court of Human Rights is investigating whether the Nordic Model, aka Equality Model, aka Ed Demand Model, violates human rights.
Taina Bien-Aime has put together in this article three important but very different words: Prostitution, Sex Trade and Sex Work, because each of them has its social, historical, and developmental perspectives. I do not wish to go into discussions and we all agree Equality Now and that human trafficking is illegal and should be prohibited but I would ask Taina to talk to Sex workers around the world and find out how they feel and think about their work!
This author is a lobbyist. She lives off her anti-prostitution advocacy. And so do the well-chosen, media-groomed and remunerated “survivors” the lobby puts forward.
The UN working group did not consult the “sex trade lobby”, but real people who do the activity and who are negatively impacted by the laws this author’s lobby pushes for.
No UN expert, UN working group, UN paper ever recommended to decriminalise pimping.
Like the PR campaigns this lobby does, this opinion piece follows a template : a mix of narrative, mantras, false figures and ditto claims and self-references.
Neo-abolitionism is doctrine. One which supports is a multi-billio dollar industry.
Taina Bien-Aimé is absolutely correct. The UN’s advocacy for decriminalising prostitution is based on flawed and biased scholarship.
It is not. Quite the contrary.
Above opinion, however, only contains self-references: advocacy papers by other members of the same lobby.
A long way to go sex workers rights and decriminalising Sex Work Queensland Australia I may have had a very small infulences in this issue this was achived this year.
The Criminal Code and Other Legislation (Decriminalising Sex Work) Amendment Bill 2024 will:
https://statements.qld.gov.au/statements/99715#:~:text=The%20Criminal%20Code%20and%20Other,the%20protection%20of%20sex%20workers