Final answer:
In Canada (AG) v. Bedford, the government claimed that parts of the Criminal Code violated the Charter, specifically the provisions concerning prostitution that were argued to infringe on sex workers' rights.
Step-by-step explanation:
The case of Canada (AG) v. Bedford involves an examination of Canada's prostitution laws. The government did not argue that prostitutes are immoral, that prostitution is entirely voluntary, nor that the testimony was fabricated. Instead, the correct answer is D) That parts of the Criminal Code violated the Charter. This legal challenge was centered around the contention that specific prohibitions within the Criminal Code on keeping a brothel, living on the avails of prostitution, and communicating in public for the purposes of prostitution were in violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as they were seen to impact the security and liberty of sex workers.
It is important to understand that debates around the legality and regulation of sexuality, as mentioned in the background information, underscore the ongoing tension between individual liberties and governmental control. The state still maintains a degree of authority in regulating sexual morality, as evidenced by the Supreme Court's refusal to invalidate laws that restrict certain sexual products or activities. However, in the case of Bedford, the focus was specifically on whether the laws in question unjustifiably infringed on the rights of sex workers as protected by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.