The pandemic has hit millions of pe-ople and caused a great deal of suff��er-ing across communities. But there isone community that is especiallyhard hit and that is sex workers. Ow-ing to the non-recognition of sexwork as “legitimate work”, sex work-ers have mostly been kept at arm’slength from the government’s reliefprogrammes. COVID-19 has thus pro-vided more reason to consider along-pending demand of sex workersin India — decriminalisation of sexwork and a guaranteed set of labourrights.

An archaic, regressive viewThe legislation governing sex work inIndia is the Immoral Traffi��c (Preven-tion) Act. The Suppression of Immo-ral Traffi��c in Women and ChildrenAct was enacted in 1956. Subsequentamendments were made to the lawand the name of the Act was changedto Immoral Traffi��c (Prevention) Act.The legislation penalis-es acts such as keepinga brothel, soliciting in apublic place, living off��the earnings of sex workand living with or habi-tually being in the com-pany of a sex worker.

This Act representsthe archaic and regressive view thatsex work is morally wrong and thatthe people involved in it, especiallywomen, never consent to it volunta-rily. After all, in popular depiction,entry into sex work is involuntary,forced, and through deception. As aconsequence, it is believed that thesewomen need to be “rescued” and“rehabilitated”, sometimes evenwithout their consent. While this is avalid argument for minor girls, formany consenting adult sex workers,it has been a problem. This is whathas led to the classifi��cation of ‘‘res-pectable women” and “non-respec-table women”. This view is based onthe belief that sex work is “easy”work and no one will or shouldchoose to practise it. It thus perpet-uates the prejudice that women whodo practise sex work are morallydevious.

The Act has not only criminalisedsex work but also further stigmatised

and pushed it underground thusleaving sex workers more prone toviolence, discrimination and harass-ment. The Act denies an individualtheir right over their bodies. Moreov-er, it imposes the will of the state overadults articulating their life choices.It gives no agency to the sex workersto fi��ght against the traffi��ckers and infact, has made them more suscepti-ble to be harassed by the state offi��-cials. The Act fails to recognise thatmany women willingly enter intoagreements with traffi��ckers, some-times just to seek a better life as cho-sen by them. Evidence shows thatmany women choose to remain insex work despite opportunities toleave after ‘rehabilitation’ by the go-vernment or non-governmentalorganisations.

Labour rightsThe Justice Verma Commission hadalso acknowledged that there is a dis-tinction between women who aretraffi��cked for commercial sexual ex-

ploitation and adult, con-senting women who arein sex work of their ownvolition.

We must recognise sexwork as work and stopourselves from assigningmorality to their work.Adult men, women and

transgender persons in sex workhave the right to earn by providingsexual services; live with dignity; andremain free from violence, exploita-tion, stigma and discrimination. It istime we rethink sex work from a la-bour perspective, where we recog-nise their work and guarantee thembasic labour rights.

The judiciary is moving in the di-rection of recognising sex workers’right to livelihood. The SupremeCourt, in Budhadev Karmaskar v.State of West Bengal (2011), opinedthat sex workers have a right to digni-ty. Parliament must also take a re-look at the existing legislation and doaway with the ‘victim-rescue-rehabil-itation’ narrative. During these timesof crisis especially, this is all the moreimportant.

T. Sumathy (A) Thamizhachi Thangapandianis MP, South Chennai parliamentaryconstituency

Recognising sex work as workAdults who earn by providing sexual servicesshould be granted basic labour rightsThamizhachi Thangapandian