Who we are / Becoming a Member / News / Links / Location / Contact us / Home / Hemp Info

Canadians seem divided on legalization

By: Dennis Bueckert - The Canadian Press - 01/23/03

In June 2001, Leger Marketing asked 1,507 Canadians aged 18 and over for their views on marijuana: - 46.8 per cent were in favour of legalizing the sale and use of pot; 47.7 per cent were opposed. - Almost 40 per cent thought it would increase the use of harder drugs and 38 per cent said it would decrease. Almost one-quarter of respondents didn't know.

It's been 30 years since a report to the federal government concluded, after a long study, that there is no scientific basis for making the use of marijuana a criminal act. That conclusion has recently been echoed by inquiries in both the House of Commons and the Senate.

Yet thousands of Canadians - mostly young people - continue to be convicted each year for possession of pot.

Many who follow the issue believe the consequences of a criminal record are more damaging than the effects of marijuana itself.

Last month a Commons committee recommended that possession of up to 30 grams of marijuana be treated as a regulatory offence and not land someone a criminal record. In other words, it would still be illegal to possess or use marijuana, but the penalty would be lighter and there would be no Criminal Code conviction.

"Smoking any amount of marijuana is unhealthy, but the consequences of conviction for a small amount of marijuana for personal use are disproportionate to the potential harm," said Liberal MP Paddy Torsney, a member of the committee.

This followed a Senate committee report last September that said marijuana should be legalized for use by anybody over the age of 16.

The committee concluded that moderate use of the drug poses no serious long-term dangers for adults and could be sold under controlled circumstances like liquor or in drugstores.

But will the government change the current law? The prospects are far from clear.

Justice Minister Martin Cauchon has promised to introduce legislation to decriminalize marijuana but skeptics predict the bill will go nowhere, as frequently happens with touchy legislation.

Prime Minister Jean Chretien has not endorsed decriminalization, and the United States is strongly opposed to liberalization of drug laws in Canada. Given existing tensions in Canada-U.S. relations, with Canada being being portrayed as a terrorist haven, Ottawa may not be anxious to add another irritant.

Alan Young, a professor at Osgoode Hall law school, says U.S. pressure rather than internal Canadian opposition is the main deterrent to decriminalization.

"There is opposition (in Canada) but it's not very vocal nor is it very powerful," says Young.

"The only thing that seems to be a barrier to our taking a step forward is our close proximity to the United States."

Young says Washington will tolerate a program to permit marijuana for medical use, but not across-the-board decriminalization.

"What they're worried about is movement on the recreational side."

The desire to move without provoking U.S. anger may be one reason that former health minister Allan Rock introduced a program allowing marijuana to be used for medical reasons. There was a flaw in that plan, however: there is no solid scientific evidence that marijuana actually does have medical value. The evidence is anecdotal, based on the personal accounts of people who say it helps them.

Canada's doctors, who are required to support patients' applications for medical marijuana, have balked at doing so due on the basis of anecdotal evidence.

Another key problem is that the government has provided no legal source of marijuana; patients are in effect forced to deal with the underworld.

Earlier this month, Ontario Superior Court Justice Sidney Lederman gave the government six months to fix the regulations.

"I have grave reservations about a regime which grants legal access by relying on drug dealers to supply and distribute the required medicine," he said.

If the government doesn't appeal or set up a legal distribution system, the medical access law will be unenforceable in Ontario, says Young. "I'm sure that would spread like wildfire across the provinces."

Meanwhile, Young has mounted a separate challenge before the Supreme Court of Canada, arguing that the ban on recreational use of marijuana is unconstitutional. This case is a big one because it aims at the heart of the current regime.

Young's argument: the harms associated with the consumption of marijuana are so slight that they don't warrant a criminal penalty.