POT USERS' HOPES BUSTED

Supreme Court Sides With Gov't On Marijuana Law

OTTAWA - There is no freestanding right to get stoned, Canada's top
court ruled Tuesday.

Tokers hoping for relaxed marijuana laws instead got a lump of coal as
the Supreme Court of Canada, by a 6-3 vote, upheld a federal law
banning possession of pot.

"I'm bummed out, man," said David

Malmo-Levine, a self-styled pot freedom crusader in Vancouver. "It's
horrible, it's a dark day for humanity, it's a dark day for Canadians,
it means that harmless people are not protected by our
Constitution."

Malmo-Levine, 32, and two other men failed to convince a majority of
the top judges that pot penalties contravene the country's
constitutional guarantees of fundamental justice.

The ban on possessing even tiny amounts does not violate the Charter
of Rights and Freedoms, the court said. It also unanimously upheld the
law prohibiting possession for trafficking.

It's up to Parliament to decriminalize the drug, says the 82-page
ruling -- something Prime Minister Paul Martin has signalled could
happen with a bill to be reintroduced next year.

"I'm very glad to see the Supreme Court has sustained the government's
position," Martin said in an interview Tuesday. "And we will be
proceeding with the marijuana bill as planned."

The bill, proposed under Jean Chretien, would wipe out criminal
penalties -- including potential jail time and lasting records -- for
those caught with small amounts of pot.

The legislation died when Parliament ended its most recent session
last month.

It made possession of less than 15 grams of pot -- roughly 15 to 20
joints -- a minor offence punishable by fines of $100 to $400. (A
summary conviction of simple possession currently carries a penalty of
up to six months in jail, a $1,000 fine or both for a first offence.
Those convicted of a more serious indictable offence, which is rare,
face up to seven years in prison.)

Critics said 15 grams is too much to equate with casual use. They
warned that increased pot use would play into the hands of biker gangs
and other shady suppliers.

Martin says a parliamentary committee could review the 15-gram limit
and the proposed fines.

"Perhaps they should be stiffer," he said Tuesday.

U.S. drug czar John Walters praised Martin on Tuesday for promising to
overhaul the bill.

"I have been encouraged because of the statements he has made about
marijuana being a serious drug," Walters said in an interview.

"He has made an effort to show a recognition that he does not side
with those who say this is a soft drug, or that this is something you
don't have to pay attention to."

The proposed pot bill did not legalize the drug. It maintained or
increased penalties for large-scale growers and traffickers.

Tony Cannavino, president of the Canadian Professional Police
Association, which represents 54,000 members, said a national strategy
to deter drug use is needed first and lawmakers should act cautiously.

"Police officers across Canada don't have the tools and don't have the
proper training to face this legislation," he said.

Elected lawmakers must decide whether possession of pot is a criminal
act, Justice Ian Binnie and now retired Justice Charles Gonthier wrote
for the majority in Tuesday's ruling.

Dissenting justices Louise Arbour, Louis LeBel and Marie Deschamps
said a law that threatens casual pot users with potential jail time is
like killing flies with a sledgehammer.

Charter guarantees of fundamental justice are undercut by a law that
can convict people "whose conduct causes little or no reasoned risk of
harm to others," wrote Arbour.

The majority disagreed. Parliament acted to limit pot use out of a
valid state interest in stemming related harms that are not
"insignificant or trivial," the ruling said.

The federal government filed a report to the court linking pot use
with car crashes, respiratory cancer, addiction and other hazards.

In any case, there's no consensus that proof of harm is a prerequisite
for creating a criminal offence, the court majority ruled.

At issue were a trio of cases involving two self-described marijuana
activists and one man who was caught toking up. All three had also
failed to persuade lower courts that the pot law is
unconstitutional.

Lawyer Alan Young, a University of Toronto professor who has led the
charge to reform pot laws, says Parliament has never proven that
recreational use causes anything more serious than bronchitis.