cannabisnews.com: Pot Charges Could Be Stayed Across Canada: Expert










  Pot Charges Could Be Stayed Across Canada: Expert

Posted by CN Staff on March 30, 2003 at 13:07:44 PT
By Louise Elliot, Canadian Press  
Source: Canadian Press  

Ottawa - Criminal charges for possessing small amounts of pot could be put on hold in provinces across the country following court rulings in Ontario and P.E.I., says a prominent legal expert. A provincial court judge in P.E.I. ruled this month that an Ontario court decision which prompted the adjournment of all simple possession charges in Ontario should be binding in other provinces as well.
He was referring to the Parker case in Windsor, Ont. - now under appeal - which saw charges thrown out against a 16-year-old boy on the argument that the federal Controlled Drugs and Substances Act no longer effectively prohibits possession under 30 grams. It led the federal Justice Department to ask its Crown attorneys to seek an adjournment or stay of all simple possession charges in Ontario. Justice officials last week similarly stayed all pot possession charges in P.E.I. as a result of the ruling there. Alan Young, a professor at Osgoode Hall law school in Toronto, said judges in other provinces may also follow suit out of sheer frustration with Ottawa's sluggishness in dealing with marijuana possession laws. "Really, I think people are fed up and I would think that pretty much across the country, with the exception of possibly Alberta, most courts would be more than happy to start staying marijuana prosecution." Young said many lawyers may not realize the charges in Ontario and P.E.I. have been stayed pending the results of the Parker appeal, but judges would not hesitate if lawyers point out the law is vulnerable. "If raised, I can't imagine many courts wanting to proceed with these minor cases knowing that they may be imposing criminal records on people who effectively have done nothing criminal." In an interview, Justice Ralph Thompson of P.E.I. provincial court said he'd received several requests for a copy of his ruling from other provinces. Adding to the law's vulnerability is the fact Justice Minister Martin Cauchon has promised to introduce new legislation to decriminalize marijuana. The legislation, originally promised by the end of April, could now take until the end of the session in late June, Cauchon said recently. Three key cases now before the Supreme Court involving simple possession, trafficking and a marijuana "club," also hang in the balance, and have been put off until May 6. But Thompson said he didn't take into account Cauchon's promised new law in making his decision. "Basically what I determined was that it would be an abuse of process to permit the charge to proceed here when charges weren't proceeding in Ontario," he said. "Until such time as the law can be uniformly applied across the country in such a way that 12 million people in Ontario are not subject to prosecution, then that charge will not proceed here." Young argued the P.E.I. ruling should prompt the Justice Department to stay possession charges countrywide. "Why they wouldn't give an instruction like that across the country is puzzling considering that we have national criminal law," he said. "My explanation is that they never go out of their way to move this issue in a progressive way. They do as little as possible and they wait until they're pushed again." Cauchon has said he will continue to defend the current law until it is changed. He also outlined what will likely become part of his new drug strategy, a department insider said last week: a comprehensive approach to drug use involving a health strategy and greater enforcement of ticketable offences. Trafficking and possession of other drugs would still remain a crime. Young argues that the Parker case, along with Cauchon's promise to decriminalize the law and his department's insistence on push through on prosecutions, has produced a policy quagmire. "It's very unfair on local agents who do the dirty work for him, to have them do trials that may be for nought," Young said. "They have a minister who seems to be suggesting he wants to change the law, yet he's still prosecuting people . . . If that's his position, he's extremely disingenuous about this issue and he's playing politics." Mike Murphy, a spokesman for the minister, said Cauchon is acting in the public interest. "There's no politics being played here. The minister will do what he believes is right for the Canadian people." Young said it would be an easy legislative procedure to remove pot possession from the current act, and make it a ticketable offence. "The question is, 'Why has it taken a year before he's even introduced the proposal?"' Source: Canadian Press Author: Louise Elliot, Canadian Press Published: Sunday, March 30, 2003Copyright: 2003 The Canadian PressRelated Articles & Web Site:Cannabis News Canadian Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/can.htmStay of Pot Possession Charge Under Appeal http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15786.shtmlThree More Pot Cases Stayed in Summersidehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15758.shtmlJudge in Summerside Stays Pot Possession Chargehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15731.shtml 

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help






 


Comment #14 posted by TroutMask on March 31, 2003 at 06:55:10 PT

Wolfgang is right.
The deal is that marijuana prohibition has been found to be unconstitutional in Canada. Regardless of what the government does or doesn't do, the law MUST change. Period. If the government doesn't change it, the courts will. In fact, several lawyers have already had charges stayed based on the argument that the law is ALREADY GONE since the law was tossed out and the government never replaced it.Current Canadian law states that possession of marijuana by ANYONE is illegal. The Canadian courts have ruled repeatedly that this law is unconstitutional because it does not provide access for sick people. If the law is unconstitutional, it is wholly unconstitutional and therefore is not a valid law. (It's not like, "Oh well, it's constitutional as long as we don't arrest sick people.") The Canadian government tried to sidestep the issue by creating some RULES governing access for the sick. But RULES are not LAWS. You can make all the RULES you want, but none of them can send me to prison unless they've got a LAW behind them. If the LAW is gone, the RULE is meaningless.The Canadian government is in a lose-lose situation. If they try to re-enact the law but change it to allow use by the sick, that would open a HUGE can of worms. "Sorry Mr. Policeman, I have an upset stomach/headache/bad hair day/whatever, so I'm allowed to smoke pot." PLUS, the government would be required to allow or provide a legal means for the sick people to get pot. Imagine a giant state-run pharmacy providing marijuana cheap or free to anyone who is "sick". The problems quickly mount.If the Canadian government DOESN'T move to re-enact/change the law, it goes away completely meaning there is no law against possession of marijuana by anyone of any age. The courts have pretty much said this is what is going to happen if the government doesn't act.The MOST REASONABLE thing for the Canadian government to do would be to enact legislation controlling marijuana much like alcohol and tobacco. Of course, that's not what they will do. They will either do something and have it blow up in their faces; or they will do nothing and lay the blame on the courts and that nasty thing they have up there called The Constitution.-TM
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #13 posted by FoM on March 30, 2003 at 22:30:35 PT

One More Comment
What I said in my previous comment might not make much sense to others. I mean that if we in America want to help another country and we give them money for whatever reasons we shouldn't have strings attached. A country that is wealthy shouldn't use it's riches to control other countries. That's what I was trying to say. 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #12 posted by freedom fighter on March 30, 2003 at 22:15:11 PT

wolfgang
Is that how it works in Canada?? The courts stepping into the fray becuz the government decides to waddle around?? Whatever it takes to make the change, I am all for it!! The NAFTA treaty tidbit was interesting. I know that it was never possible to stem or even stop the movement of the traffic at the border. I'm sure that we all know except Johnny who cannot think that Richard Nixon tried that back in 1969 at the south border and failed. As for the north "border" line, well, we got golf courses on both side.. Interesting concept, I am on my 9th hole and I see my Canada buddy, we decide to trade our golf carts.. And of course, Johnny is my golfing buddy, and he is so stupid that he did not notice the exchange.You get the pix.. People up in the North feel real sorry for us the southern!! ;(ff
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #11 posted by WolfgangWylde on March 30, 2003 at 17:39:18 PT

I hope the Canadian Government DOES cave...
...to the U.S. That means the Canadian courts, which are already peeved at the government for its delaying tactics, will step in and legalize it completely. As for trade sanctions and border slow downs, GET REAL. The NAFTA treaty has strict guidelines on how fast cross-border traffic must move. And furthermore, the U.S. economy is extremely dependent on trade with Canada. The first thing Georgie W. is going to have to do when (or if!) the Iraq War comes to a close is try to pull the economy out of the dumpster. He can't win re-election if he doesn't, and he can't get it done if we're in a trade war with Canada.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #10 posted by FoM on March 30, 2003 at 17:33:12 PT

Money
Money is the problem. Countries are afraid of losing favor with the U.S. only because it will hurt their pocketbook. Money is the worst drug of all and is the cause of most of the wrong doing we are seeing in the world. I guess I was taught to believe that if you do good and be considerate of others you will be taken care of and not to worry about material things. Maybe I'm the only one who was ever taught that but I was. It is called the law of reciprocity. If you give you will receive. Not from someone you might give something to but from someone, somewhere and sometime.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #9 posted by afterburner on March 30, 2003 at 16:56:41 PT:

High Moral Ground
"There have been threats of trade sanctions and interference with cross-border commerce, so the issue may now be on hold. This tension between the two governments might actually cause our government to back off a bit..."What do you mean threats of trade sanctions? There have already been trade sanctions: what about softwood lumber? What do you mean threats of interference with cross-border commerce? How much money was lost by US and Canadian businesses when the US arbitrarily slowed the border to a crawl at the outset of the War on Iraq? So, the choice is clear: allow the US to continue to bully Canada, or stand up for our own sovereignty and pass the bill on "High Moral Ground." The courts have mandated it. The problem will not go away. Medical cannabis users are being denied their constitutional rights. The government must act.if Cauchon actually gets around to introducing a bill, things could move fast, Oscapella added. "The government has an absolute majority in Parliament, and the New Democrats and the Parti Quebecois will vote with them on this, so even if there are defections, there are enough votes to go ahead and move this. It could end up passing very, very quickly then," he said.You have the power. Use your will. Pass the bill.ego destruction or ego transcendence, that is the problem.
Constitutional Acts 1867 to 1982 : Table of Contents
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #8 posted by freedom fighter on March 30, 2003 at 16:19:22 PT

Seems to me
All Canada needs to do is just pass the "decrim" bill with no debates. Just like back in 1923, no debates and the prohibition bill passed. Well, I think it is time to do exactly same thing. Why worry about Johnny's threats?? 5 thousand miles of "borderline"... A line that does not exist. Do you think Johnny is capable of putting men and resources at that line when we are so busy somewhere else..Seems to me, now is the "best" time to fix the mistake made back in 1923.On other hand, maybe Canada should wait cuz Bush and his gang are so dangerous.. ff
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #7 posted by Sam Adams on March 30, 2003 at 15:30:27 PT

tidbit
Found this poking around the web:"He did important work on applications to mathematical physics, mathematical  astronomy, and differential equations. His four volume text Exercises d'analyse  et de physique mathemtique was published between 1840 and 1847. Cauchy still  did not change in his views and continued to give his colleagues problems. Cauchy  stole many of his ideas from his colleagues, they referred to him as "cochon",  which is French for pig"
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #6 posted by FoM on March 30, 2003 at 15:25:30 PT

The GCW
I agree with the DRCNet's article. The U.S. has the whole world afraid and I hope that Canada stands strong and doesn't turn and run or continue to try to pass the hot potato. The sad thing to me is it shouldn't even be a hot potato.

Cannabis News Canadian Links
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #5 posted by The GCW on March 30, 2003 at 15:10:46 PT

MAP posted-by: Richard Lake 
WILL CANADA MARIJUANA DECRIMINALIZATION BE COLLATERAL DAMAGE IN IRAQ WAR?http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v03/n465/a01.html?397The momentum for marijuana law reform appears to be slowing within the Canadian government, due in part to fears of alienating the Bush administration. Last December, Justice Minister Maurice Cauchon vowed to introduce marijuana decriminalization legislation by the end of next month, but in remarks in Toronto last week Cauchon pushed back that timeline. Some Canadian politicians and observers believe concerns about angering the US -- already unhappy with Canadian refusals to support its Iraq invasion -- may explain part of the delay. Although both chambers of the Canadian Parliament last year issued reports calling for marijuana law reform -- the Senate report called for outright legalization -- and Justice Minister Cauchon said the government would push for decrim, he didn't sound so certain last week. Speaking with reporters in Toronto, Cauchon said he "would be happy" if the government could introduce a decrim bill before Parliament's summer break, but that he believed Canada needed a national debate before taking any such step. He also told reporters he wanted to study the two parliamentary reports on marijuana law reform. "What will take place in the future in terms of policy, we'll see," he said. "I told you, I would like to reform the system... We'll come forward with my policy as soon as I can." Still, in earlier remarks before Toronto businessmen, Cauchon appeared to be standing by his commitment to move on decrim. "The criminal law is a blunt tool; it is only effective if it is applied consistently and if it reflects true social consensus on an issue," he told the Empire Club of Canada. "I am troubled by the inconsistent application of the criminal law to the possession of small amounts of marijuana for criminal use. Your children or grandchildren may not be charged if they are caught in Toronto, but kids in small towns across Canada are being charged for exactly the same behavior. This means that kids are ending up with a criminal conviction," Cauchon continued. "This can have a devastating impact on their lives - - from the types of jobs they can get, to traveling or going to university in other countries, particularly the United States," he added. Cauchon added that he had intended to travel to the US to discuss the move with US officials, but that trip had been delayed because of the Iraq invasion. ( The National Post reported Thursday that President Bush is considering canceling a scheduled May visit to Canada because of concerns that he would by met by a hostile reception from parliamentarians and mass demonstrations against his invasion of Iraq. A significant portion of Canadian public opinion has been infuriated by US Ambassador Paul Cellucci's recent remarks that many Americans are "disappointed and upset" over Canada's refusal to participate in the US invasion. ) US irritation with Canada may be a factor slowing the move to decrim, said Eugene Oscapella of the Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy ( http://www.cfdp.ca ). "The US ambassador has recently scolded Canada for not sending troops to Iraq," Oscapella told DRCNet. "There have been threats of trade sanctions and interference with cross-border commerce, so the issue may now be on hold. This tension between the two governments might actually cause our government to back off a bit, and that's a real worry." Senator Pierre Claude Nolin, who chaired the Senate committee whose report called for outright legalization of marijuana for those over 16, has also suggested in recent days that the government won't want to further inflame relations with the US by sponsoring a decrim bill now. President Bush himself warned of increasing Canadian marijuana imports in January, calling Canadian anti-drug efforts "inadequate," and his drug czar, John Walters, has strongly criticized any Canadian proposals to relax the marijuana laws. "The reality of this political relationship between Canada and the US is so important and so hard to predict right now," said Oscapella. "If the war drags on, that will exacerbate US criticism of Canada. I worry that something completely unrelated to our effort to change the marijuana laws will derail this process. Cauchon is the government's lead minister in this, but we also have to consider the Foreign Ministry, the ministries of industry and trade. We're on the brink of serious consequences with the Americans over Iraq, and the business community doesn't want to do anything that might endanger commerce." Still, said Oscapella, he remained convinced that the government will move on decrim. "Their intentions remain good," he said, "and it is possible the government is delaying because it wants to introduce decrim as part of a national drug strategy, one component of which will be to decriminalize marijuana possession." The opposition Alliance Party has said it will fight decrim if it comes without a national drug strategy, Oscapella added. "The government wants as many allies as possible." And if Cauchon actually gets around to introducing a bill, things could move fast, Oscapella added. "The government has an absolute majority in Parliament, and the New Democrats and the Parti Quebecois will vote with them on this, so even if there are defections, there are enough votes to go ahead and move this. It could end up passing very, very quickly then," he said. But until that bill is introduced or the government acts through the regulatory process to effectively decriminalize marijuana, Canadian decrim remains in danger of becoming a collateral casualty of the US invasion of Iraq. 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #4 posted by The GCW on March 30, 2003 at 14:57:59 PT

Cannada NOW.
 Cannabis prohibitionist lies are exposed.Cannabis prohibitionists are exposed.Cannabis prohibition is exposed.Together, superior citizens are ending the grotesque practice of caging humans for using a plant.Cannada has a few other court procedures going for it, that also confronts the insane cannabis prohibitionists directly.The people that support cannabis prohibition are running out of credibility.Caging humans for using the plant cannabis is sick and gross. Cannada doesn't want to be a part of that crowd - any - more.Sick urine suckers need to keep their eye to themselves and away from My children.Cannada NOW, You are next U.S.A.CANNADA IS about to become a NORML country.

[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #3 posted by Virgil on March 30, 2003 at 14:52:57 PT

I demand testing
I wonder what a dissenting opinion would look like. I surely would not try to intellectual defend the failure we call cannabis prohibition.It is time to test us all. I always wondered why someone that really supported legalization- nonprohibition in Extemist Party literature as in nonfantasy for reality- didn't draft the language used in to attack from all angles possible like the Fundamentalist have, you know with the three branches of government and the media and all. Those Republicans could not even get along with the UN and they still get their way even though the Internet records their lies. The advance a pro-life agendy all the way through foreign-aid manipulation.Anyway the drafts need to hit the Internet sometime. In North Carolina the state is pushing social programs back to the county and they really would rather have counties pay to lock up their own convicts. I wish thate the state approach would be to submit legislation denouncing the schedule 1 classification of an entrenched position as the lie it is, and establish testing for prisoners we have plenty of and need for medicine, you know for being in prison and everything now that crimes don't need victims and all. Say on a county level couldn't somebody submit that it wanted to do medical studies on prisoners. And why couldn't the state set it up with prisoner's and patients under a research grant. I am aware that the stonewall seems invincible, but really the call of reform should consider a research angle for real and penetrate that wall. If I were asked to apply my perspective to a solution for people with real health problems I would demand a prison for people guilty only of drunk driving or chronic ahcolics and get a 100 or a 1000, because there is no shortage of alcoholics and only one state facility that has been unaccessible for years.Those alcoholics have real problems and pills cost money and pills have side effects that might well addict a person the has already had an addiction that got him in prison. This is the real world and the theme of the big alter-summit is something like , "Let's get real" as in "Let's be honest."They need to get these alcoholics problem of addiction solved and we can protect them from Paxil, and Valium, and Xanex, and such with all that addiction and side effects and costs as in credit which used to be known as cash. Prisoners could grow there own research substance.I wish there was a website like pharmawarninglabels.com where pharmacist and public alike could read all that fine print and be educated. Think of the children. We know there young bodies develop differently if exposed to small amounts of lead or mercury and now we heap pills that require lawyers to debate evey word of a warning label that is not up at the FDA website.Come on. Let's get real. Think of the children taking all of those pills with all of that advertising and all the freebies for the medical community at tax deductible efforts in pushing pills. For real, a school needs someone to research whole grades and schools of kids on a homegrown solution to real problems. The country is going broke and people are suffering. The research needs to be done and the legislatures need to be getting their words in order.Prohibition should not get in the way of research and the states need to assert their rights as we all should.Let's get real. Test us all. Get the research started. Solvc a problem. We need to end the prohibition/inhibition of research. Honest.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #2 posted by mayan on March 30, 2003 at 14:02:59 PT

Nothing Criminal
"If raised, I can't imagine many courts wanting to proceed with these minor cases knowing that they may be imposing criminal records on people who effectively have done nothing criminal."Alan Young hit the nail on the head. FoM, it looks like the C-Newsers were right again. Cauchon & Parliament have been stalling in the hopes that the courts will change the laws. Anyone up in Canada have the inside scoop as to what's going on?Here comes revolution...Mass opposition grows in Europe:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/03/30/1048962645495.htmlAnti-war anger spreads worldwide:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2899827.stmWorldwide day of anti-war protests:
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_765855.html?menu=news.latestheadlines.worldnews9/11 was a hoax: The American government killed its own people
http://onlinejournal.com/Commentary/032403Kaminski/032403kaminski.html "MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT" 9/11 WAS AN "INSIDE JOB"
http://scribblguy.50megs.com/911inside.htmKaminski's Best 9/11 Sites — 4th Edition:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0302/S00024.htm
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #1 posted by FoM on March 30, 2003 at 13:17:32 PT

Go Canada!
Let's get these laws changed! It seems like it's taking forever!
[ Post Comment ]





  Post Comment