The Unconstitutional Nature of the Criminalisation of the Purchase of Sex in Canada: <i>R v Anwar & Harvey</i> 2020 ONCJ 103
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Applicants, Mr Anwar and Ms Harvey, operated Fantasy Worlds Escorts (FWE) agency in London, Ontario, Canada. They were charged with the following offences under the Canadian Criminal Code relating to the commodification of sexual activity: receiving a financial or material benefit from prostitution contrary to s 286.2(1), procuring a person to offer or provide sexual services for consideration contrary to s 286.3(1) and knowingly advertising an offer to provide sexual services for consideration contrary to s 286.4. The pair challenged the charges on the basis that they were in contravention of the Canadian constitution, specifically the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as the laws in question prevented sex workers from lawfully using third parties to protect them and to prevent them from forming associations in order to create a system of mutual protection. As the provisions targeted sex workers and prevented them from accessing things that are natural, expected and encouraged in other sectors of work, the Applicants argued that the existing prostitution laws denied sex workers, who are in particular need of protection, the benefits accorded to mainstream labour.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".