Pubdate: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 Source: Peterborough Examiner, The (CN ON) Copyright: 2010 Osprey Media Group Inc. Contact: http://drugsense.org/url/4VLGnvUl Website: http://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2616 Author: Fiona Isaacson DRUG CHALLENGE SET FOR SEPT. 27 An application to challenge the validity of Canada's marijuana laws will be heard Sept. 27 in Superior Court of Justice in Peterborough. Two local self-proclaimed medical marijuana users -- Mark MacDonald and Benny Almud -- are arguing the country's marijuana laws were invalid from 2003 to 2009. They've been charged separately with possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking. Almud is also charged with production of marijuana. Unlike the first day the case was addressed in Superior Court last month, there was no display of marijuana smoking on the front steps of the courthouse Monday. Both MacDonald, 49, and Almud, 68, say they were using marijuana at the time of their arrests for medicinal reasons and have since received medical approval to possess it legally. MacDonald says a spinal condition causes him severe pain, which he can offset by using about 15 grams of marijuana per day. Almud says he suffers from multiple ailments including cancer, heart problems and chronic pain and marijuana is the only drug that helps him cope. "If I'm still here," Almud said Monday when asked if Sept. 27 was a good date for the hearing. Almud's 21-year-old granddaughter, Sabrina, is also charged with possession for the purpose of trafficking and production. Almud told The Examiner in June that his granddaughter had nothing to do with the drugs and was in the wrong place at the wrong time. In a landmark case in 2000, longtime medicinal-marijuana advocate Terry Parker won the right to smoke pot for medicinal purposes. That legal victory gave medicinal-marijuana users the right to posses less than 30 grams of pot but the presiding judge delayed the ruling's effect for one year in hope the federal government would introduce a medicinal marijuana law. The government didn't. Instead, the cabinet issued regulations for access to medicinal marijuana one day before the yearlong grace period ended in 2001. In early 2003, the Supreme Court of Ontario ruled those medical access regulations were unconstitutional because they were failing to provide a legal supply of the drug. As a result of the ruling, marijuana possession charges were stayed for about 4,000 people. The government changed the medicinal marijuana regulation again in 2003, which marijuana activists argue made the laws invalid once more until new changes in 2009. MacDonald was charged in December 2008 at his Otonabee-South Monaghan home. OPP say they found 1,441 grams of marijuana bud worth $21,660 and 43 marijuana plants worth $21,400. Police also say they found marijuana shake. When police raided Almud's Smith- Ennismore-Lakefield home in July 2009 they found $144,554 worth of marijuana plants, bud and shake. A Toronto federal prosecutor is handling the application. Local federal prosecutor Mauro DiCarlo spoke on his behalf in court Monday. On Sept. 27, the court will hear whether there is any standing in the court or merit to the application, DiCarlo said. DiCarlo said MacDonald has elected to be tried by judge and jury in Superior Court of Justice on his charges. Mac- Donald is also charged with careless use/storage of a firearm, unauthorized possession of a firearm and possession of a prohibited weapon, device or ammunition knowing its possession is unauthorized. The Almuds' charges are still in Ontario Court of Justice. The Sept. 27 hearing is expected to take half a day. Medical-marijuana user Gerard Faux, who recently had his charges of possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking and production of marijuana stayed by the federal prosecutor, was in court Monday to support MacDonald and Almud. Last week in Ontario Court of Justice Faux tried to argue that his charges should have been withdrawn outright because the law didn't exist at the time of his arrest. Faux was told he would have to make his case by appealing to the Superior Court. - --- MAP posted-by: Jo-D