criminal-law united-kingdom rent prostitution
Why must victims of &#39;sex-for-rent&#39; arrangements be legally defined as prostitutes to seek justice?
<p>This <a href="https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/b/sex-rent-landlords-should-face-full-force-law-says-labour-mp" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Morning Star article</a> describes attempts by Labour politicians to make it easier to prosecute 'sex-for-rent' arrangements, where landlords &quot;demand sex from tenants in lieu of rent&quot;.</p>
<p>The article includes the following paragraph:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Under current legislation, victims must be legally defined as
prostitutes, which is thought to be a deterrent to victims coming
forward since they may fear that it will adversely affect their
future.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Under what law must victims be legally defined as prostitutes in order for a prosecution to take place?</p>

<blockquote>
<p>Why must victims be legally defined as prostitutes in order for a prosecution to take place?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The arrangement is currently illegal* because it constitutes <em>causing or inciting prostitution for gain</em> or <em>controlling prostitution for gain</em>, contrary to <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1/crossheading/exploitation-of-prostitution" rel="noreferrer">section 52 or 53 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003</a>, so the victim would then be a prostitute.</p>
<hr />
<p>*At least <a href="https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/prostitution-and-exploitation-prostitution#_Toc534624535" rel="noreferrer">in the view of the Crown Prosecution Service</a>. As there has not been a prosecution brought in court, this interpretation on the applicability of s. 52/53 remains uncertain.</p>

<p>I would imagine this is because there is not a law specifically criminalizing the practice of offering a &quot;sex-for-rent&quot; arrangement in itself; rather, this is/has been normally handled under existing anti-prostitution law (hence the &quot;legally defining as prostitutes&quot;).</p>
<p>Prostitution is the exchange of sex for &quot;something of value&quot;, which can be, but does not necessarily need to be money, so arguably this designation is accurate, with &quot;something of value&quot; being waived rent obligations.</p>
<p>Presumably, the Labor politicians are proposing such a law, specifically criminalizing the making of such an offer.</p>

<p>Sex for rent arrangements are illegal solely because prostitution is illegal, and because economic duress is not a defense to most criminal offenses or civil legal obligations. Otherwise it would be a valid barter transaction. Indeed, in lots of places, it is a valid barter transaction which isn't illegal.</p>
<p>Also, from a civil law perspective, the arrangement would be unenforceable and invalid because it is premised upon demanding illegal consideration.</p>
