Pubdate: Tue, 16 Dec 2003
Source: Canadian Press (Canada Wire)
Copyright: 2003 The Canadian Press (CP)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mjcn.htm (Cannabis - Canada)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/decrim.htm (Decrim/Legalization)

TO TOKE OR NOT TO TOKE?

For a while it looked like we were poised to become Amsterdam West: cafes 
with patrons openly enjoying joints alongside lattes, activists toking up 
outside police stations with impunity, and government plans to make 
marijuana available to the chronically ill.

But while that pipedream has apparently gone up in smoke, the ongoing 
debate over the sweet leaf's place in Canadian society -- whether for 
medicine or for pleasure -- promises to grow more heated in the coming year.

With the federal government courting decriminalization -- still a thorny 
issue among the ruling Liberals themselves -- Canadians have found reason 
to voice their opinions on the contentious topic.

An Ipsos-Reid poll of 1,001 Canadians conducted in May suggested that 55 
per cent of respondents did not believe smoking marijuana should be a 
criminal offence.

Those advocating decriminalization say it doesn't make sense to saddle 
people with criminal records for being busted for simple possession, such 
as smoking a joint.

They also say it will reduce traffic in an already congested court system.

Those against decriminalization say marijuana is a so-called "gateway" drug 
that will cause users to progress to harder drugs such as cocaine and 
heroin. They also say it will harm relations with the United States, which 
remains in War on Drugs mode.

But things have been complicated by the federal government's cautious steps 
toward providing cannabis to the ill. Proponents say marijuana stimulates 
the appetite, relieves pain and reduces stress -- although the medical 
community remains divided over such claims.

The decriminalization movement burst into the forefront this year when an 
Ontario Superior Court judge ruled in May that possessing less than 30 
grams of marijuana was no longer against the law in the province.

A lawyer had successfully argued that since there was no effective program 
for sick people to possess medical marijuana without breaking the law, then 
the law didn't prohibit possession.

Police organizations in Ontario subsequently said they wouldn't lay charges 
for simple possession until the laws were clarified.

The court decision prompted similar rulings around the country and opened 
the floodgates for recreational users to enjoy a jubilant summer of toking 
freely -- even in certain public cafes.

B.C. cannabis guru Marc Emery, who publishes Cannabis Culture magazine and 
sells marijuana seeds online, went on a coast-to-coast Tour de Pot this 
summer, holding rallies and lighting up outside police stations in 
Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Regina, Winnipeg, Toronto, Moncton, N.B., 
Halifax, Charlottetown and St. John's, Nfld., practically daring the cops 
to arrest him -- which they sometimes did.

The Canadawide case of reefer madness was apparently contagious.

Former prime minister Jean Chretien, who tried unsuccessfully to fast-track 
a decriminalization bill before leaving office earlier this month, seemed 
to amuse the country when he suggested in an October interview that he 
might puff on pot one day.

"Perhaps I will try it when it will no longer be criminal," Chretien mused.

"I will have my money for my fine and a joint in the other hand."

Chretien had argued for fines instead of jail sentences for simple 
possession, while adding that growers and traffickers would still face 
stiff penalties. Although the bill was expected to pass this fall, Chretien 
officially ended his last legislative session in mid-November, leaving it 
in limbo.

Whether Prime Minister Paul Martin will resurrect the bill is unclear, 
although if it happens, many expect there to be amendments to make the 
legislation tougher.

Martin has previously said he favours decriminalization in principle (and 
in "very, very, very small amounts"), but also indicated he is sensitive to 
opposing views from some Liberal backbenchers.

"He'd indicated always that he believes that the legislation in principle 
should be pursued, and I think you can assume that he'll act accordingly," 
said Martin spokesman Scott Reid.

Alan Young, a Toronto lawyer, law professor and self-styled cannabis 
crusader, said he expects the bill to die.

"If history repeats itself, one could safely conclude that this will not be 
resurrected," he said, referring to a similar bill in the late 1970s that 
went nowhere.

Young pointed instead to a case currently before the Supreme Court of 
Canada that may be more significant.

It questions the government's authority to criminalize a relatively 
harmless substance -- in this case, marijuana. An Ontario judge had 
previously ruled in 1997 that cannabis is relatively harmless -- a finding 
that was considered a factual conclusion.

While Young stopped short of saying the case would set a precedent, he did 
emphasize its importance. He expects the court to make its ruling by 
mid-February.

"It has significance because this court for the first time is going to 
decide whether Parliament has a threshold they must meet before they can 
enact criminal law," he said.

"In theory, without this case, Parliament tomorrow can criminalize the 
cultivation of roses."

With the issue of medical use inextricably entwined with that of 
recreational use, an Ontario court made simple possession illegal again in 
October while firming up the rules on how medical users could obtain their 
cannabis supply.

"In terms of decriminalization, it was a huge setback," Young said.

"In terms of slow movement toward improving the medical program, it was a 
step forward. But we lost a lot of momentum at the end of this year on 
decriminalization by having the October court case not consider 
invalidation of the criminal prohibition as a response."

Despite Ottawa's good intentions, efforts to supply medical users have 
proved inept, as the government-sanctioned marijuana first made available 
in August has been widely criticized for its inferior quality.

Some users demanded refunds, calling the weed "disgusting" and "unsuitable 
for human consumption."

Others said it was too weak to be effective. One man even said it made him 
vomit.

One frustrated user found the quality so poor that he rejected the 
government shipments and applied for a growing licence instead.

Philippe Lucas, director of Canadians for Safe Access, a Victoria-based 
patients' rights group pressing for a safe, effective supply of marijuana, 
said independent lab analyses of the government cannabis showed high 
concentrations of toxic lead and arsenic.

"I've tried the government cannabis, and I can attest to its incredibly 
poor quality," said Lucas, who is allowed to use marijuana to deal with the 
side-effects of hepatitis C.

"Not only is it of poor quality, but it's a potentially dangerous product. 
When you're talking about giving something to people with critical or 
chronic illnesses, I find that to be really inexcusable."

Health Canada maintains it tested the cannabis extensively before allowing 
it to be distributed to medical users -- but it was never tested on people.

Spokeswoman Catherine Saunders said Health Canada isn't planning to make 
changes to the product despite the complaints of some users.

However, she pointed out that clinical trials are underway at Montreal's 
McGill University to determine the medical benefits of marijuana, and the 
results may influence future policy.

As the medical community continues to debate the pros and cons of cannabis, 
statistics suggest that recreational pot-smoking is on the rise in Canada 
- -- especially among younger people.

In a 2001 study by the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto, 
11.2 per cent of Canadian adults surveyed said they used marijuana in the 
previous 12 months, compared with 8.6 per cent in 1998.

Canadians aged 18 to 29 were at the head of the pack, with 26.8 per cent 
smoking pot compared with 18.3 per cent in 1996.

While the trend seems to indicate a growing acceptance of marijuana, Young 
believes 2004 will be better for medical users than recreational users.

"I see next year as the year that we truly advance our understanding of 
marijuana as medicine," he said.

"In terms of recreational use, I have no confidence the government will 
return to their proposal. I'm not very confident the Supreme Court of 
Canada will do their dirty work for the government, and I do see a bit of a 
backlash in the initial months as public officials reassert their authority 
in this area."

That means no more smoking up outside police stations.

"One will have to be a bit more discreet and careful in terms of the use of 
marijuana as a recreational substance," Young advised.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jackl