cannabisnews.com: Ruling Could Leave Canadian Users Without Supply Ruling Could Leave Canadian Users Without Supply Posted by CN Staff on October 06, 2003 at 17:17:06 PT By The Canadian Press Source: Canadian Press Toronto -- Canadians who are allowed to use medicinal marijuana could be forced to buy their medicine from the black market if a decision by the Ontario Court of Appeal, expected Tuesday, rules that the federal government doesn't have to provide pot to critically ill people. Alison Myrden, one of the litigants in the case, said the issue of having a legal supply of marijuana is "critical" for her because the drug -- which she takes instead of more than 30 pills and morphine -- helps her deal with the pain of chronic progressive multiple sclerosis and other ailments. "I'm not walking away without winning," she said. "I've been fighting to get the government to supply me for four years. That's all I want. I never wanted to break the law." Myrden said she hasn't yet applied to receive the government-grown marijuana due to quality concerns. So far, the pot being grown in Flin Flon, Man., by a company on contract to the government hasn't had good reviews. In Tuesday's ruling, the Ontario court could force the government to continue supplying pot to medicinal users, while allowing it to uphold the laws prohibiting pot possession. The court could also rule the government doesn't have to provide a legal source of pot to medicinal users, and continue to prohibit possession of the drug. That would mean that people who are approved to use the drug would have to turn to an illegal supply source. Another possibility is the court ruling that the laws prohibiting marijuana possession are unconstitutional and hurt those who use pot for medical reasons. Although the court can make further comments about Canada's medicinal marijuana program, those are three possible outcomes of the decision, said Alan Young, one of the lawyers arguing the case for seven ill people who sued the government for a legal source of pot. "The decision could effectively recriminalize marijuana or it could confirm that the law does not exist because of deficiencies in the medical program," Young said in an interview Monday. While that might decriminalize the possession of small amounts of pot, the issue of who could distribute marijuana would still have to be dealt with, he said. "Just because you decriminalize marijuana possession doesn't mean that the people who are going to distribute to medical users will be allowed to do so," Young said, but added that would be the first step towards decriminalizing the drug and establishing legal distribution channels in Canada. The appeal stems from a case in January in which Ontario Superior Court Justice Sidney Lederman ruled it was unfair for the federal government to allow people to use medicinal marijuana but put them in a position where they have to buy it from the black market because Ottawa doesn't provide legal access to cannabis. Lederman gave the government a July 9 deadline to either fix the regulations or supply the pot itself. As a result, the government instituted an interim policy where it supplies pot at set prices to approved users. If the court rules that the government doesn't have to provide marijuana to medicinal users, Young expects the government will scrap its current supply plan. "I would say that it is a foregone conclusion that if the court relieves (the government) of a constitutional obligation to distribute (marijuana), they will cease and desist within minutes," Young said. Jirina Vlk, a spokeswoman for Health Canada, said that "until we've actually seen what the decision is, I don't think we can speculate on what we would do or not do because there might be certain stipulations within a decision." Medicinal users of marijuana would be satisfied if the ruling required the government to relax the strict eligibility requirements for approval, and to provide a legal, affordable, and effective supply of pot, Young said. However, "most medical users are also really disgusted by the continuing presence of the prohibition," Young said, so "no one is going to shed a tear for the loss of the criminal prohibition." Earlier this year, Ontario's laws against marijuana possession were thrown into question after a judge ruled that possessing less than 30 grams of pot is no longer against the law in the province. Complete Title: Ruling Could Leave Canadian Users of Medical Marijuana Without Legal Supply Source: Canadian Press Published: Monday, October 6, 2003Copyright: 2003 The Canadian PressRelated Articles & Web Sites:Canadians for Safe Accesshttp://www.safeaccess.ca/Cannabis News Canadian Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/can.htmThe Medical Marijuana Missionhttp://www.themarijuanamission.com/Health Canada's Reefer Madnesshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17376.shtmlHealth Canada Medical Marijuana Could Be Betterhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17348.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #21 posted by mayan on October 07, 2003 at 17:55:05 PT Kap'n... you said..."So why such a flamboyant but tactically impotent way of making a point? If they considered this truly a jihad, they would have crashed those airliners not into those towers but the CFR HQ.This alone makes me think this was an inside job from the git-go."I do recall someone bringing up the point you make...I can't remember where though but I'll try to find that page. I wholly agree with you. The WTC was very recognizable to the average person & that is probably one reason why it was chosen by the insiders...they wanted to manipulate the emotions of the masses by killing mostly everyday business people, rather than career bureaucrats(themselves). Plus, many people probably aren't even aware of what the CFR is. If I remember right, at least one of those planes flew over Indian-Point Nuclear Power Facility(?). They also flew over numerous military bases. It boggles the mind how guys who barely made it through flight school and had never flown jumbo jets were able to fly hundreds of miles, maneuver at low altitudes and locate their targets. To me the real giveaway was the fact that no interceptors were scrambled in our Nations Capital. By the time the Pentagon was hit a whole hour had elapsed since the first building was hit & forty minutes had passed since the second building was hit. Both the FAA & NORAD saw the plane that was to hit the Pentagon do a complete u-turn forty-five minutes before impact. Still no fighters up in D.C. even though there are dozens of Air Force & Air Force National Guard bases on full-alert within ten to thirty minutes as the F-16 flies. An inside job for sure. [ Post Comment ] Comment #20 posted by Virgil on October 07, 2003 at 08:18:49 PT I learned two things The rulings were posted at http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/decisions_index/new_releases.htm The ruling posted here- http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/decisions_index/new_releases.htm - in #26 and #27 says there are two synthetic cannabinoids authorized in Canada. In 28 it mentions the SAP (Special Access Program). Once GW Pharma's extracts are legal, people will be able to apply for it under the SAP.I am not going to read it all as the situation can not be ignored in the Canadian press. Turmel's commentary at medpot will be worth checking out. He is only on 980 now and his comments should appear at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MedPot/message/981 [ Post Comment ] Comment #19 posted by kaptinemo on October 07, 2003 at 08:06:36 PT: Mayan, a question for you In every theory concerning the events of 9/11, there's one thing which has stood out above all...yet NO ONE has commented on this fact, not even amongst the more lucid conspiracists:Why were the Twin Towers attacked...when the REAL seat of American politcal power was only a few blocks away, close to the UN? The reason for the Pentagon attack was obvious, but the damage was minimized. The military command structure remained intact, and operations resumed VERY quickly. But the military takes its' orders from the civilian side of the equation..one heavily if not totally controlled by the CFR at the highest levels.I am referring to the Council on Foreign Relations, of course. Surely, if the attackers were knowledgeable about the true nature of American and global politics, and knew who the plutocrats behind them were, and if they really wanted to decapitate the American HQ of the 'Great Satan', why strike at a foot when you could have demolished the head and killed the beast, or at least so gravely wounded it that it could only be ineffectual against later attacks?Such a line of questioning has NOT, to my knowledge, ever been engaged. IF all the information concerning these supposed hijackers is correct, they received funding and backing from sources who would be intimately aware of the occluded side of international politics and the powers behind the scene in the US. If only because they were in constant contact with those forces. Musharraf's ISI, for example. That awareness would come from practical knowledge, not theory or guesswork or rumormongering.So why such a flamboyant but tactically impotent way of making a point? If they considered this truly a jihad, they would have crashed those airliners not into those towers but the CFR HQ.This alone makes me think this was an inside job from the git-go. [ Post Comment ] Comment #18 posted by WolfgangWylde on October 07, 2003 at 07:40:11 PT Wouldn't it be nice... ...if judges and lawyers spoke English? ;) [ Post Comment ] Comment #17 posted by FoM on October 07, 2003 at 07:38:06 PT Wolfgang I understand why you think that from what I read. Still no news but back to looking for some. [ Post Comment ] Comment #16 posted by WolfgangWylde on October 07, 2003 at 07:37:15 PT I read it again...and again... ...The Summer Of Legaliztion is officially over. Recreational users are hosed. [ Post Comment ] Comment #15 posted by WolfgangWylde on October 07, 2003 at 07:22:24 PT I dunno... ...seems like the court is saying, "If you do these things for medical patients, you can go back to arresting recreational users". [ Post Comment ] Comment #14 posted by FoM on October 07, 2003 at 07:21:09 PT I Don't Understand It I looked at what was posted and it doesn't make sense to me. I'll keep looking for an article. [ Post Comment ] Comment #13 posted by BGreen on October 07, 2003 at 07:18:59 PT I like my interpretation better I'm crashing like a meteorite.The Reverend Bud Green [ Post Comment ] Comment #12 posted by BGreen on October 07, 2003 at 07:15:28 PT I didn't get that Each decision I've looked at seems to throw out the appeal. I thought all of these appeals were brought by the Crown. That would seem to mean that we won.The Reverend Bud Green [ Post Comment ] Comment #11 posted by WolfgangWylde on October 07, 2003 at 07:15:28 PT Emphasis added From the synopsis at the bottom of the appeals court link: The court said that unlike a broader declaration, this narrow remedy would create a constitutionally valid medical exemption, MAKING THE MARIHUANA PROHIBITION IN S. 4 OF THE CONTROLLED DRUGS AND SUBSTANCES ACT IMMEDIATELY CONSTITUTIONALLY VALID AND OF FULL FORCE AND EFFECT AND REMOVING ANY UNCERTATINTY CONCERNING THE VALIDITY OF THE PROHIBITION. [ Post Comment ] Comment #10 posted by WolfgangWylde on October 07, 2003 at 07:09:54 PT Not sure, since I'm not up on my... ...legalese, but from what I've read, the gov't must provide for a legal medical supply, but all other possession laws have been reinstated. All in all, a net loss, IMHO. [ Post Comment ] Comment #9 posted by BGreen on October 07, 2003 at 07:08:59 PT I Think We Won! I've glanced over the judgements and my musicians mind is picking up some words which say they dismissed the appeals!Anybody else have an opinion?The Reverend Bud Green [ Post Comment ] Comment #8 posted by FoM on October 06, 2003 at 23:10:03 PT Heads Up: Decision Will Be Posted at 10 ET Tuesday COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIOJudgments & Endorsements Released this WeekThe official version of the Court of Appeal for Ontario reasons for judgment is the signed original in the court file. In the event that there is a question about the content of a judgment, the original in the court file takes precedence. These judgments may undergo editing changes after they have been released. Notice: Due to the need to accommodate a scheduling conflict with counsel, the decisions in Hitzig et al. v. Her Majesty the Queen (C39532; C39738; C39740); Parker v. Her Majesty the Queen (C38113) ; Parker et al. v. Her Majesty the Queen (C39653); R. v. Turmel (C40127); and R. v. J.P. (C40043) will be posted at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, October 7, 2003, rather than Monday, October 6, 2003 as previously announced.On July 29, 30 and 31, a panel of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, composed of Justices Doherty, Goudge and Simmons, heard seven appeals from decisions of judges of the Superior Court of Justice, in relation to the constitutional validity of the Government of Canada's scheme for establishing medical exemptions from the prohibition on the possession, and in some cases, production, of marihuana contained in the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/decisions_index/new_releases.htm [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by Virgil on October 06, 2003 at 18:58:56 PT A question about the edge of CP Marinol is THC made by a sythetic process. Now if it is identical to the THC in cannabis, what will happen when GW Pharma extracts THC from its cannabis plants. It reminds me of fortified wines and non-alcoholic wines where they add alcohol to get above the 16% level where the yeast dies.There could be uses for cannabis minus the THC, not that it is relevant to the issue because GW Pharma will be able to grow all the THC it needs. Now how is Canada going to stop an identical product to Marinol from reaching the market even before the year is up that it will take to clear all challenges to legal cannabis extracts from the UK.So, when the barrier is removed from the research phase to the production phase, why will THC from the UK not be allowed directly into the American market when it is identical? The corner the murderous, lying prohibitionists have painted for themselves is getting smaller. They are trapped but probably will keep painting until the paint runs out and when their shoes cover what is left of the floor they will paint them too. That floor is a masterpiece and the painted shoes will be their signature.Doesn't getting pissed on piss you off? [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by FoM on October 06, 2003 at 18:46:34 PT ErikGhint If you can make it that's good but if not I'm sure we will hear about it very quickly. There are issues concerning medical marijuana here in the states this week too and California might get a new Governor! The Times They Are A Changin' [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by ErikGhint on October 06, 2003 at 18:28:30 PT Bad news Well there is an Osgoode Hall at york university, and it is a professor their who was one of the lawyers (Alan Young) Unfortunaly it is at Osgoode Hall downtown toronto so I can not hear the decision! Perhaps I will go downtown to hear it. [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by mayan on October 06, 2003 at 18:21:00 PT It's Already Legal in Ontario!!! "Another possibility is the court ruling that the laws prohibiting marijuana possession are unconstitutional and hurt those who use pot for medical reasons."but..."Earlier this year, Ontario's laws against marijuana possession were thrown into question after a judge ruled that possessing less than 30 grams of pot is no longer against the law in the province."There is no question. Cannabis is already legal in Ontario! Let's all hope for confirmation though.The way out is the way in...9/11 - Why isn't the truth out there? http://observer.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4766017-102273,00.html From Hiroshima to 9/11 - Tales of Mind Control And World Tyranny: http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/NWO/Makow_Mind_Control.htm9/11 CitizensWatch: http://www.911citizenswatch.org/ [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by FoM on October 06, 2003 at 18:13:17 PT ErikGhint If you get to check it out please let us know how it goes tomorrow. This is a very delicate time and I am hoping for the best. [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by ErikGhint on October 06, 2003 at 18:01:36 PT Cout decision Well apearntly the results will be heard tommarow 10:00 a.m. at Osgoode Hall which is the law building at York University. I will be at York tommarow anyways so hopefully I will be able to check it out! [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by ErikGhint on October 06, 2003 at 17:42:26 PT So tommarow is the big day! I assume the decision of all 4 cases heard July 29th and 30th will be announced tommarow. Good luck Cannabians! [ Post Comment ] Post Comment