Brothel law will take 'physical' proof to stick

Neighbours wanting to shut down suburban brothels may have to log details of the sexual trading before the Christchurch City Council can take legal steps to have them closed down.

In a controversial move, the council earlier this year passed a bylaw banning small owner-operated brothels from suburban areas.

It has received legal advice that policing the bylaw could prove difficult as the council will have to provide the courts with evidence of "continual or at least frequent use of premises as a brothel".

In a report the council's general manager, regulation and democracy services, Peter Mitchell, points out that the Prostitution Reform Act does not give the council any new powers of entry or seizure to obtain evidence.

To bring a prosecution, Mr Mitchell says, the council would have to rely largely on information provided by the parties involved or on "physical observation" of the premises - "neighbours keeping a log and matters of that type".

Retiring senior city councillor Alister James questioned whether the council would ever be able to collect enough evidence to enforce the bylaw.

"I believe it is an impossibility for the council to actively enforce its own bylaw and I doubt that there is a real will to do so," Mr James said.

Unless the brothel was being run on a very "large and obvious scale" it would be difficult to prove the premises were being habitually used for commercial sexual activities.

"Customers are not likely to divulge their details and subject themselves to giving evidence in open court as to the purpose of their visit.

"The other possibilities of gathering the evidence to a required standard are equally laughable."

Neighbours or council officers keeping watch and logging details of visits was not evidence of sex for money, Mr James said.

Council regulatory and consents committee chairwoman Sue Wells said her sub-committee had raised the practical difficulties of enforcing the bylaw when it had recommended it not be passed by the council.

The council was not taking active measures to enforce the bylaw and nor had it received any complaints about brothel-keeping in the suburbs.

If people had valid evidence of the activities, the council would consider a prosecution, she said.

She imagined such evidence would probably come from competitors.

Christchurch Central MP Tim Barnett, who was the architect of the Prostitution Reform Act, said the council needed to take its bylaw back to the drawing board.

It was unenforceable and against the spirit of the Prostitution Reform Act.

The law was designed to promote safe sex practices and stop driving the sex industry underground.

- NZPA