RULINGS COULD CLEAR THE HAZE

OTTAWA -- As the Martin government moves to relax marijuana laws, the
Supreme Court of Canada will decide Tuesday whether to give pot
advocates the big prize: legalization.

The long-awaited rulings in three cases will be the Supreme Court's
first test of the constitutionality of the country's 80-year-old ban
on marijuana possession.

"This is very significant," said Chris Clay, a B.C. Web-page designer
who owned the Great Canadian Hemporium marijuana paraphernalia and
seed store in London, Ont., before police shut it down.

"It sounds like the Liberals are going to decriminalize, and that's a
step in the right direction, but ultimately legalization is the
solution we're looking for."

Clay, 32, laughed at the prospect of sticking a bit of weed in the
Christmas pudding if the ruling goes his way.

He is one of three litigants who argue that threatening people with a
criminal record and jail time for what they contend is a victimless
crime breaches Charter of Rights guarantees of life, liberty and
security of the person.

The federal Justice Department counters that the Supreme Court should
give Parliament as much leeway as possible in crafting drug policy.

"All three appellants seek to elevate a recreational pursuit to a
constitutional right," federal lawyer David Frankel says in a written
submission to the Supreme Court.

"There is no free-standing right to get stoned."

A key question in the appeal is whether the government must
demonstrate a serious health risk if it wants to continue to ban
marijuana possession.

The state has "no right to tell people what they can put in their
bodies," lawyer John Conroy argued at the Supreme Court hearing last
spring.

"Where do you draw the line?" asked Conroy. "Are fatty foods going to
be next? The obesity problem is a lot worse that the drug problem."

He is the lawyer for Victor Caine, who was convicted of possession for
sharing a joint with a friend in his car while parked at a beach near
Vancouver.

The third litigant is David Malmo-Levine, who formed the
Vancouver-based "Harm Reduction Club" for marijuana smokers.

The federal government plans to impose fines rather than criminal
records on people caught with small amounts of marijuana. Justice
Minister Irwin Cotler stressed that lawmakers oppose giving pot
smokers free rein.

"This is how Parliament has spoken on this question and we will wait
to see what the court will say," he said in an interview.

Despite its plans, the government has filed a report with the Supreme
Court that connects marijuana use to driving accidents, upper-airway
cancer, psychiatric problems and drug addiction, among other things.

"Marijuana is not a benign substance and potentially is more harmful
than presently known," says the Justice Department's submission.

Several judges during the spring hearing were frosty to the arguments
of the marijuana lobby. But they also challenged the government's
assertion that it can criminalize any behaviour it sees fit, as long
as the decision is a rational one.

Although it is rare, judges can impose prison terms of up to seven
years for marijuana possession.

Prime Minister Paul Martin said last week that the government will
revive a marijuana bill that died in November when Parliament was
prorogued. The government's proposal, however, could be a watered-down
version of the former bill, which proposed to decriminalize possession
of 15 grams or less, about the equivalent of 15 cigarettes.