COURT HEARS MARIJUANA CASE

Justice Rogin's Ruling to Govern Ontario's Lower Courts; Arguments Resume
March 11

A Windsor lower court judge was wrong to conclude the law banning marijuana
possession is invalid in Ontario, government lawyers argued Friday. "The
marijuana prohibition in Canada is in full force and effect," federal
lawyer Peter Defreitas said. The government lawyers made their case to
Superior Court Justice Steven Rogin, whose decision will govern all Ontario
lower court judges. Hundreds of marijuana cases across the province have
been put on hold awaiting Rogin's ruling, which won't come until after
March 11 when the hearing resumes.

It is one of several recent court cases that have thrown the state of
Canada's marijuana laws into question. "I think politically there's also
some ramifications here because the government's really taking body blow
after body blow in court," said Brian McAllister, the Windsor lawyer
responsible for initiating the case. He convinced Ontario Court Justice
Douglas Phillips to quash a charge against 16- year-old Kingville youth for
possessing fewer than 30 grams of marijuana.

New Law Needed, Court Ruled

Phillips accepted McAllister's argument that the government needed to pass
a new law prohibiting marijuana possession after the current one was struck
down by the Ontario Court of Appeal two years ago. The appeal court ruled
in favor of severe epileptic Terry Parker, of Toronto, saying the law
violated the constitutional rights of sick people who use marijuana for
medical reasons. It gave the government until July 31 2001 to remedy the
situation or the law would be invalid. The government responded by passing
the Marijuana Medical Access Regulations, which were recently found to be
unconstitutional by a Toronto judge in another case involving Parker. That
judge said the problem is there is no legal supply of marijuana for sick
people. The government is appealing the decision.

Parker, 47, was in court in Windsor on Friday observing and taking notes.
The one key player not present was McAllister's 16-year-old client who
wasn't required to be there.

McAllister was backed by the Criminal Lawyers Association of Ontario. The
association wants the government to know it can't ignore court decisions,
said Paul Burstein, a Toronto lawyer involved in two constitutional
challenges to the marijuana laws. "They can't just ignore (the appeal court
ruling) with impunity and say: We don't care. We'll just fix it up at some
later point," he said.

But DeFreitas and fellow federal lawyer Rick Visca argued the government
did listen to the court. Passing the MMAR was adequate and it wasn't
necessary to re-enact the prohibition on possessing marijuana," DeFreitas said.