Pubdate: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 Source: Ottawa Sun (CN ON) Copyright: 2003, Canoe Limited Partnership Contact: http://www.fyiottawa.com/ottsun.shtml Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/329 Author: Kathleen Harris, Parliamentary Bureau HIGH COURT GETS OFF POT Parliament to Revisit Legislation THE HIGHEST court in the land has passed the joint to Prime Minister Paul Martin who must now decide the future of Canada's marijuana possession laws. In a 6-3 decision that sets back the pro-pot movement, the Supreme Court yesterday ruled it's up to Parliament to decide if marijuana should remain illegal. There is no "free-standing" right to toke for recreational purposes, according to the majority of judges. "The Constitution cannot be stretched to afford protection to whatever activity an individual chooses to define as central to his or her lifestyle," the ruling reads. David Malmo-Levine, 32, and two other men failed to convince the court that pot penalties are out of line with Charter guarantees of fundamental justice. "I'm bummed out, man," said Malmo-Levine, a marijuana activist from Vancouver. "I was dreaming of a green Christmas but they grinched out on us. "Their hearts are two sizes too small." GROW OPS TARGETED The prime minister confirmed yesterday his government will reintroduce draft legislation to decriminalize small stashes of marijuana. Young people shouldn't be saddled with criminal records, but there must be tougher penalties and a heavier crackdown on growing operations, Martin said. "I think that the legislation that is before the Parliament of Canada is legislation that essentially makes sense," he said in a year-end interview with CBC's The National. The Supreme Court ruling came as a blow to local pot activists. "It's a big letdown for the cannabis community definitely. I think they've done a disservice to the millions of Canadians who smoke cannabis," said Mike Foster, owner of Crosstown Traffic, a Bank St. head shop. "I wasn't anticipating a great decision but I was expecting to get thrown at least a bone after 30 years of recommendations that we legalize cannabis." While the ruling noted it should be up to Parliament to decriminalize marijuana, Foster criticized the government's pending bill that would see people fined for pot possession. "The way our government's been going is trying to play both sides of the issue," he said. "I mean in one sense the proposed bill wanted to have fines and make possession a smaller charge, but on the other end .. anybody with over 50 plants would get 15 years. "In a country where people get a maximum of seven years for manslaughter, we need a little more perspective on the issue." Just 'First Step' Tony Cannavino, president of the Canadian Professional Police Association, applauded the court's decision but said it's only a "first step." His union will lobby for officers to retain the discretionary power to lay charges. "They should put emphasis on a strong national drug strategy," Cannavino said, adding liberalizing marijuana laws sends a wrong message about a "harmful drug." Toting a placard outside the Supreme Court, pro-pot crusader Raymond Turmel said decriminalizing simple possession is even worse than the existing law. He called it a "fundraising scam" by the federal government. "They're still going to take your marijuana off you, except they're just going to charge you a $400 fine now. The poor kids are going to be doing more time in jail because they can't afford to pay the fine," he said. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake