Spain's Equality Ministry plans abolition law for prostitution

Equality Ministry to bring anti-prostitution abolition law to Cabinet in September

The Ministry of Equality has announced it will submit a draft law to abolish prostitution to the Council of Ministers next September. Minister Ana Redondo confirmed the measure, framing it within a broader package against machismo and explicitly linking it to the UCO report on José Luis Ábalos: “It is time to react in all directions with maximum firmness,” she stated. The PSOE previously attempted this via parliamentary channels but failed due to lack of support from its partners.

What changes compared to previous attempts

The difference lies in the vehicle. Until now, Socialist initiatives against pimping and third-party exploitation—the rental of spaces for prostitution—were presented as private member’s bills in Congress and did not prosper. Now the text originates from the Government as a draft bill, which theoretically gives it more traction. In practice, the first obstacle is within the Executive itself: Sumar, the coalition partner, does not have a unanimous position on the matter.

Redondo defended that the PSOE has “zero tolerance for machismo” and described Ábalos’ audio recordings as an expression of “the lowest form of sens condition.” She also acknowledged that “significant pockets of machismo remain in all associations, in all parties,” without exception.

The economic argument: what is prohibited and who is targeted?

Much of the rejection generated by the measure does not dispute the goal, but the mechanism. It is argued that penalizing the activity pushes the sector into the shadow economy rather than reducing it, and that punishment falls on those practicing before those profiting. Some maintain that the persecution is not against prostitution but against men, while others point out that the business would continue to exist unchanged, only without tax revenue or health controls.

The fiscal aspect appears repeatedly: if the activity is illegal, there is no VAT, no self-employment contribution, no income tax. According to this analysis, the result is less revenue and less traceability, not less prostitution. The comparison with abortion—bodily autonomy in one case, prohibition in the other—is the most repeated contrast.

The parliamentary paradox: Ábalos’ vote

A message circulated online claims that to pass the law, the Government would need the vote of José Luis Ábalos, the same person whose UCO report is used as political justification for the norm. Parliamentary arithmetic would turn the announcement into a sum problem rather than one of principles.

Underlying this is another debate: whether the real objective is human trafficking or voluntary prostitution. Some suggest, without providing evidence, that mafias close to power are pressuring to incivil the activity to take over the black market, and that trafficking victims are being used as a pretext. This is a suspicion, not a fact.

The timeline and credibility of the announcement

September is the deadline set by the Equality Ministry, which says it is working “at full capacity” on the package of measures. Skepticism about meeting the schedule is widespread, and not just due to parliamentary math: the announcement comes amid the storm caused by the Ábalos case audios, inviting interpretation as a political reaction rather than a closed legislative roadmap.

With these elements, the law may pass, remain as yet another attempt, or mutate into something different during negotiations with Sumar. What does not change is the foundation of the debate: the activity will continue to exist with or without prohibition, and money will move through the same channels as always. Only who collects it and who prosecutes it changes.