BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS

Confusion And Chaos - Canada's Marijuana Law

Our troubles with the marijuana laws began in July last year, when the Ontario Court of Appeal decided that marijuana should be permitted for medical or therapeutic purposes. This was an extensive re-write of the legislation on drug use. The Ontario Court of Appeal, however, is notorious for its peculiar decisions based not on law, but on the social engineering beliefs of its eccentric judges. This decision was no exception.

The case involved an epileptic who testified before the court that since 1974, he has been a grower of marijuana and regular user of it for purposes of treating his health condition. The Crown countered by introducing evidence that there were legal therapeutic alternatives to marijuana use.

Although the court stated that it had difficulty establishing scientific proof that marijuana was therapeutic and also accepted the finding of the lower court that heavy smoking of marijuana can cause bronchial pulmonary damage, the trendy judges of the Ontario Court of Appeal concluded that the accused was, nonetheless, forced to choose between committing of a crime to obtain medical treatment and accepting inadequate treatment. This, it held, was a breach of the accused rights under S. 7 of the Charter - the right to life, liberty and security of person.

The Court ordered that the federal government's legislation, The Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, be amended to suspend the prohibition against marijuana possession when used for medical purposes, but suspended its ruling for a year to give Parliament time to rewrite the law.

This strange decision by the Ontario Court of Appeal is in sharp contrast with the decision of the US Supreme Court in May, 2001, which unanimously upheld American legislation prohibiting marijuana for medical use, stating that Congress had made a determination that marijuana had no acceptable medical use and upheld that law.

The crucial Ontario Court of Appeal decision, curiously, was not appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada. As a result, Minister of Health, Alan Rock, who never seems to have outgrown his "hippy-of-the-sixties" mindset, (he once persuaded Beatle John Lennon to come to Ottawa for a peace conference), set about with alacrity to amend the regulations on marijuana - for medical purposes, you understand - he carefully explained.

A year later, Mr. Rock was gravely telling us that a positive approach to the marijuana problem would be to treat possession of marijuana like a traffic offence, for which offenders would be given a ticket and fine rather than be charged with a criminal offence, i.e. decriminalize marijuana. Will anyone be surprised a year from now if Mr. Rock should tell us that instead of prosecuting young people for use of marijuana, perhaps we might allow it for recreational use?

The new regulations allowing marijuana for supposedly medicinal purposes took effect on July 30, 2001. These regulations permit individuals with terminal or debilitating illnesses to possess and cultivate pot or designate someone to grow it for them. The regulations also create categories of people who may possess marijuana, including those with specified terminal illnesses with a prognosis of death within one year, and others with symptoms associated with serious medical conditions.

The second category includes patients with severe arthritis, cancer, HIV/AIDS and multiple sclerosis. This medical use of marijuana is permitted, however, only if a request for its use has been authorized by the signatures of two physicians.

To no one's surprise, the day following the publication of the regulations, a court challenge was launched by marijuana activists demanding the court compel Health Canada to grant permission to legally smoke marijuana to alleviate pain for illnesses other than those specified in the regulations. The outcome of the legal challenge is uncertain.

Also, the Supreme Court of Canada has agreed to hear appeals in November on a series of test cases that could result in the court ordering the complete decriminalization of marijuana (not just for medical reasons). The court will be asked to determine whether the liberty of an individual is jeopardized by criminalizing behaviour supposedly causing only allegedly "trivial" harm. REAL Women would like to intervene in this critical Supreme Court of Canada marijuana case, but unfortunately, our financial commitments in other legal challenges (same-sex marriage and the spanking case) prohibit us from doing so.

Canadian Medical Association
Opposes Use of Marijuana for Medical Uses

As soon as the new regulations on marijuana were released, the Canadian Medical Association strenuously rejected them, stating that too little is known about the possible harm caused by the drug.

Dr. Hugh Scully, past president of the Canadian Medical Association, which represents 50,000 physicians said:

Dangers of Marijuana Use

While Canada forges ahead with the legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes, new research is casting doubt on its usefulness for pain relief.

• In July 2001, the British Medical Journal published a study that showed marijuana is no more effective than traditional pain killers and that even if it does work to control nausea and vomiting related to chemotherapy, it has potentially serious side effects that should limit its use.
  
  
• A study published also in July by the Queen's University Medical Centre in Nottingham, England, indicates that marijuana use has a depressant effect on the central nervous system and causes adverse psychological effects, such as panic attacks and paranoia.
  
  
• Dr. Murray Mittleman, director of cardiovascular epidemiology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Centre in Boston has shown in his studies that middle-aged pot users face a five-fold increase in the risk of a heart attack in the hour after they smoke the drug. The risk starts increasing in men about 45 years of age and a few years later in women.

Health Canada, somewhat like closing the barn door after the horse has escaped, has now decided that it will finance a clinical study on marijuana use to control pain. This year-long study on marijuana, to be conducted at McGill University in Montreal, will commence in January 2002. Further, a study of the effect of marijuana on multiple sclerosis patients began in July in the UK. The results of this latter trial are expected by the end of 2002 or the beginning of 2003.

Notwithstanding the uncertainty of whether marijuana indeed has any health benefits, the Canadian Medical Journal argued in an editorial in May that the current marijuana laws in which a conviction leads to a criminal record can ruin careers and cause "social and legal fallout." It recommended that marijuana use be decriminalized.

Canadian Police Association (CPA) and RCMP
Oppose Decriminalization of Marijuana

The Canadian Police Association, which represents about 30,000 rank and file members, staunchly objects to decriminalizing marijuana. In a press conference held in May, it said (Globe and Mail, May 25, 2001):

The RCMP also has its concerns about the decriminalization of marijuana. According to RCMP Chief Superintendent Robert Lesser, vice-chair of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police's drug abuse committee, (Ottawa Citizen, August 4, 2001) decriminalization would increase the use of a potentially dangerous substance. He stated:

According to Superintendent Lesser, only if research conclusively shows the drug is not harmful, would the RCMP consider support of decriminalization.

Chaos and Confusion

In the meantime, chaos and confusion reigns over our marijuana laws. Joe Clark, that trend setter unconservative leader of the Conservative Party, has weighed in and declared that, in his considered opinion, the use of marijuana should be decriminalized on the grounds it would prevent young people from being saddled with a lifelong criminal record.

Newspaper editors and columnists have written reams on the subject (mostly pro-decriminalization.) A poll conducted by sociologist Professor Reginald Bibly of the University of Lethbridge showed that 47% of Canada supported the legalization (not just decriminalization) of pot. However, he admits there are clear divisions among Canadians on the issue.

Parliament to Study Issue

Due to this chaos and confusion, in May, the House of Common established an all-party committee to examine "the factors underlying or relating to the non-medical use of drugs in Canada." The all-party special committee will have 18 months of study before reporting to the Commons with its recommendations.

Meanwhile, Senator Pierre-Claude Nolan is chairing a committee called the Special Senate Committee on Illegal Drugs set up to examine the Canadian government's current laws, policies and international obligations in regard to marijuana use. The Committee expects to present its final report in the Senate in August 2002. Senator Nolan has stated publicly, however, that he personally supports the decriminalization of marijuana.

Mr. Rock Remains Serene

Serene in the face of all this turmoil is the Minister of Health, Mr. Rock, who has set up, at a cost of $5.7 million, a giant greenhouse to grow marijuana plants for medical use, in an abandoned nickel and copper mine shaft in Flin Flon, Manitoba. It is anticipated that 450 kg of marijuana will be grown there in the next four years. The mine greenhouse is being called by employees, appropriately enough, "The Rock Garden." Questions as to what will be done with any surplus drug have been swiftly brushed aside.

Mr. Rock personally visited his marijuana emporium in early August and like a proud farmer admiring a bumper crop, he was all smiles and stated, "it's an incredible experience to see this operation." Yes indeed, yes indeed.

Marijuana Use is Dangerous

Although Mr. Rock has only now begun to finance studies in Canada on marijuana use, there are studies already available from other countries which results should give us good cause to hesitate about expanding marijuana use in Canada (See Reality December/January, 2000, "Marijuana is Bad News," page 20.)

The arguments in favour of decriminalizing marijuana (as per Joe Clark) are basically that so many people use it that it is more compassionate and more reasonable that, if caught, they not be saddled with a criminal record for the rest of their lives. Just let them get a "ticket" for the offence as is now done for a traffic offence. As an added bonus, it will save the police force and the courts so much time and expense, they can then go after real criminals.

The flaw in these arguments, however, is that marijuana use is dangerous both psychologically and physically. It is especially harmful for adolescents just beginning their life journey when they need their time, energy and intelligence to lay the foundations for their future. Marijuana use robs them of this. Moreover, the law serves as a guideline to the conscience. What is legal becomes permissible for far too many individuals - especially adolescents. It is not compassionate to allow ready access to marijuana with little heed to the consequences for its use. Moreover, there is virtually no hard drug user (cocaine and heroin) who did not start off on marijuana.

Adolescent's Use of Marijuana

Unfortunately, it is a fact, according to a Canadian Alcohol and other Drugs Survey, as referred to in Canada's Drug Strategy (1998) page 21, marijuana is used mainly by young people. Further, according to the Ontario Student Drug Survey: 1977-1995, the use of marijuana almost doubled between 1993 - 1995 from 12.7% to 22.7%. Also, according to Canada's Drug Strategy Report, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick also experienced marijuana use doubling from 1991-92 to 1996. In 1991 - 1992, about 17% of students in these two provinces used marijuana; in 1996, 32.1% of Nova Scotia students and 29% of New Brunswick students reported using marijuana.

Finally, according to a poll by Goldfarb Consultants in 1997, the attitude of Canadian youth toward the use of marijuana has shifted toward finding it acceptable. The statistics make this apparent and decriminalizing marijuana may well only lead to even further use of the drug by adolescents.

That is, it follows, that if marijuana is more readily available, more young people will try it - even though, according to Dr. Stephen Melemis, a Toronto specialist in addiction medicine, one marijuana cigarette contains six to ten times the carcinogens of a regular cigarette. (Toronto Star, November 3, 1995.)

The clear answer to the marijuana problem is to establish Drug Courts which now have existed in Toronto since 1998 and are soon to be established in Vancouver. (See Reality, March/April 2001 "Vancouver Draft Report Encourages Drug Addiction," p. 14.) An equivalent to a traffic fine remedy has little deterrent effect on the use of marijuana, but a Drug Court allows that offence to be suspended if the offender agrees to take treatment and be monitored through regular urinalysis and counselling. Such a process indicates genuine compassion - to provide the offender with the incentive to stop using marijuana.

The Battle Has Begun

The battle over marijuana laws is just in its beginning stages in Canada. REAL Women is doing its best to bring forward the other side of the argument that is rarely publicized by our politically correct media. Namely, we are attempting to expose the reasons why widening access to marijuana by decriminalizing it, is a dangerous policy.

We have requested the opportunity to appear before both Parliamentary Committees studying the non-medical use of drugs.

BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS