INJECTION CENTRE RULING INSIGHTFUL

The ruling on the future of Vancouver's safe injection site should
change the way we talk about drugs and addiction.

It will certainly reveal that those who cling to the status quo - like
federal Health Minister Tony Clement - place prejudice ahead of
evidence and the law.

Justice Ian Pitfield was ruling on an injunction application aimed at
preventing the federal government from closing Insite.

The injection site needs an exemption from drug possession laws to
operate, so people can bring their drugs to the centre. Vancouver
Coastal Health Authority would likely not continue funding if the site
was operated illegally.

With barely one month to go before the current exemption expires, the
government wouldn't say if it would renew it.

The critical aspect of the judgment rested on one main issue. Would
shutting down Insite violate the users' charter rights to "life,
liberty, and security of the person"? And if it did, was the violation
of their rights justified by the greater good? Governments are
allowed, under the charter, to strip individual rights with a good
reason.

Answering those questions raised issues fundamental to the way we
think about drugs and addiction.

First, Pitfield had to decide if Insite did protect individuals'
charter right to safety and security. If not, then closing it would be
fine.

Both sides presented evidence. The federal government's established
that the scientific debate about whether harm reduction or
abstinence-based approaches were most effective continues.

But the evidence and research showed that allowing people to inject in
a clean, supervised site reduced death and illness, (as well as public
disorder). It was health care to deal with the sickness of addiction;
removing it would violate the clients' right to personal security,
just as denying care to a lung cancer patient would.

The federal government also raised an important argument. People
choose to use drugs, its lawyers argued. The charter of rights doesn't
provide any protection if people make bad choices.

Pitfield reviewed the medical evidence supplied by both
sides.

And he found that Insite users weren't making a choice to inject
drugs. Addiction is a disease.

"However unfortunate, damaging, inexplicable and personal the original
choice may have been, the result is an illness called addiction," he
found.

"While there is nothing to be said in favour of the injection of
controlled substances that leads to addiction, there is much to be
said against denying addicts health care services that will ameliorate
the effects of their condition," Pitfield found. "Society does that
for other substances such as alcohol and tobacco."

The decision was based on the evidence.

But anyone who looked at the life of a hardcore injection drug user
wouldn't see it as a choice. How many people want poverty,
homelessness, a one-in-six chance of contracting HIV, almost certain
hepatitis, dangerous sex work, abscesses, fear and a constant need to
get more drugs?

That left one issue for the court. The government can remove
individual rights for the greater good - if it can show a pressing
reason.

The federal government argued that the allowing Insite a continued
exemption would increase drug trafficking and might violate
international treaties.

But it had little evidence. And drug laws, Pitfield ruled, could still
prohibit possession while allowing specific exemptions for programs
like Insite.

That's an important point. The government can still do as much as it
wants to arrest dealers or users. It can ramp up prevention programs
and add treatment centres. Insite is no barrier.

Pitfield's ruling doesn't say society should condone drug use. It does
find addiction is an illness - a potentially deadly one - and proper
health care can help people survive, while reducing the damage to the
community.

It is a good starting point for rethinking the way we treat those
suffering from that illness, and help stop others from stumbling into
that terrible sickness.

Footnote: Clement said the Harper government still doesn't approve, though
he did not explain why people should die for its prejudices. The facts, as
the court found, support Insite, which is also supported by Premier Gordon
Campbell and Health Minister George Abbott and is funded by the province.
Vancouver's mayor and police force also back its continued operation.