cannabisnews.com: Possession Still Subject To Court of Appeal Case





Possession Still Subject To Court of Appeal Case
Posted by CN Staff on June 11, 2003 at 20:08:10 PT
By David Harris, Criminal Law
Source: Burlington Post 
Is possession of marijuana now legal in Canada? It is quite understandable if you are unsure of the answer to that question. The federal government in Ottawa introduced legislation to decriminalize possession of less than 15 grams of the stuff. But the courts in Ontario have gone one step further and struck down the possession law altogether. So is it legal to possess marijuana right now? Unfortunately the best answer I can give right away is 'maybe'. Here's why. 
On July 31, 2000, the Ontario Court of Appeal declared in a case called Parker that the law against possession of marijuana was invalid. This declaration of invalidity was however suspended for a period of 12 months to allow Parliament an opportunity to re-enact that law with appropriate provision for making marijuana available for medical reasons. Parker suffered from a very severe form of epilepsy. He had attacked the law on the basis that it did not permit him to use marijuana to control this disease. In a recent decision of the Superior Court of Justice in Windsor, it was held that Parliament had not done anything to amend or re-enact the anti-marijuana law during the 12-month grace period and, as a result, that law making possession of marijuana a crime became invalid as of July 31, 2001. So that means that possession of marijuana is legal, doesn't it? Well, it does for now but the federal Department of Justice has appealed that decision saying that it is wrong. If the Court of Appeal agrees with this view, then we are right back where we started -- with a law that says that marijuana is still illegal and in fact it always has been. So while police may not be charging anyone with possession right now, they may be able to do so after the Court of Appeal makes its decision. Therefore, it would be wise to refrain from rushing out to buy any marijuana just yet. But isn't the federal Department of Justice run by the Minister of Justice? And isn't that Minister of Justice the person who just introduced the new law that, if passed by Parliament, would decriminalize the possession of less than 15 grams of that very same marijuana? The answer to both of these questions is 'yes'. That same person is trying to save the law making possession of marijuana illegal while at the same time decriminalizing it. No wonder we are confused. It should be noted however that there are very real differences between legalizing marijuana possession and simply decriminalizing it. In the latter case marijuana possession remains illegal but it is not a criminal offence. An offender would pay a fine but would not end up with a criminal record. In this regard it would be treated much like many of the current provincial liquor infractions. The proposed fines would range from $150-$400 for adults and from $100-$250 for people under 18. Possession of larger amounts of marijuana would still lead to a criminal record. It should be noted that neither the court ruling nor the proposed new law would make marijuana legally available to users. As a result, those who possess marijuana might not be criminals but they will have to buy it from someone who is by law a criminal -- the drug trafficker. Some traffickers are otherwise ordinary people who earn money selling drugs. Others unfortunately are hardened criminals affiliated with other such criminals. The changes in the law do nothing to eliminate the need for drug users to associate with these people unless they become criminals themselves by growing their own marijuana. We certainly have not heard the last of this issue. The Court of Appeal will hear argument eventually and we will find out if pot is illegal or not. In the meantime, the debate over decriminalization will continue, both in Parliament and the community. I will try to keep you posted as to the outcome on both fronts. David Harris is a Burlington resident with a criminal law practice in Oakville. He is writing a series of columns on criminal law. To find his past columns, visit the Web site -- http://www.lawyers.ca/dharrisComplete Title: Marijuana Possession Still Subject To Court of Appeal CaseSource: Burlington Post (CN ON)Author: David Harris, Criminal LawPublished: June 11, 2003 Copyright: 2003 Burlington PostContact jdavis haltonsearch.comWebsite: http://www.haltonsearch.com/hr/bp/Related Articles & Web Site:Cannabis News Canadian Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/can.htmJudge Allows Marijuana Ruling To Standhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread16592.shtmlNo Laws Ban Possession of Marijuanahttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread16321.shtml N.S. Judge Stays Pot Case http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15838.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #4 posted by kaptinemo on June 12, 2003 at 09:35:52 PT:
This is how the Provos did it in Holland
Namely, challenging the police at every turn, forcing them to either back down or risk widespread social disapproval of their tactics.Cannabis laws are null and void in Ontario right now, but cops are taking people's stash and writing them up for future (hoped for, from their point of view) penalization. Emery's doing the right thing by getting in their faces and informing the Canadian public of their unwarranted (literally!) theft of people's property. He did the same thing with the Timmins police when they were illlegally taking his CANNABIS CULTURE magazine off the racks as 'pornography'.They backed down then; they'll have no choice but to do the same, now.It may just be that a virtual tombstone can soon be erected in Canada: Cannabis Prohibiton: 1923-2003. If the cops overstep the boundaries of their allowed conduct, you can expect the demise of cannabis laws throughout the rest of Canada very shortly.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on June 12, 2003 at 03:32:18 PT
Oops
Make that Thursday the 19th, at 4:20PM (but of course!)...That's what I get for living in Universe 420. Just call me Professor Freaksworth...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on June 12, 2003 at 03:20:54 PT
Go Marc!
Marc Emery will be in Toronto on Wednesday the 18th to challenge the laws in a way they will not be able to ignore... unless, of course, what he's doing is legal.
http://www.pot-tv.net/archive/shows/pottvshowse-2016.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by afterburner on June 11, 2003 at 20:44:08 PT:
Re-criminalization: Let It Die.
In this regard it would be treated much like many of the current provincial liquor infractions. The proposed fines would range from $150-$400 for adults and from $100-$250 for people under 18. Oh, yeah, I always pay $150 for a shot of whiskey, a mug of beer, or a glass of wine. Give us a break: the present non-law is better than the irrational re-crim bill Cauchon tabled.ego transcendence follows ego destruction, but more likely through the courts than through the Parliament.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment