SUPREME COURT QUESTIONS OTTAWA'S MARIJUANA STANCE

OTTAWA - The Supreme Court of Canada judges have written a letter
questioning whether they should proceed with a federal government case
against pot smoking today, given that Justice Minister Martin Cauchon says
he is going to decriminalize marijuana.

As soon as the judges read about Cauchon's announcement earlier this week,
the court wrote lawyers for the federal government and three marijuana
enthusiasts, asking whether the case should be put on hold in light of the
developments.

At the same time that Cauchon is planning decriminalization, his own
Justice Department lawyers are scheduled to argue in the Supreme Court
today that marijuana is a dangerous drug that should be outlawed.

The government has filed a report with the 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," the Justice Department argues in a written submission.

Meanwhile, Cauchon is planning to accept a recommendation of a special
parliamentary committee, which reported Thursday that people caught with
less than 30 grams of marijuana -- the equivalent of 25 to 30 joints --
should be given a fine akin to a parking ticket rather than be saddled with
a criminal record.

"There's a certain inconsistency in announcing decriminalization and going
into court and saying this substance is sufficiently harmful to warrant a
criminal sanction," observed Toronto lawyer Alan Young.

Three pot smokers, two from British Columbia and one from Ontario, are
challenging the government on constitutional grounds, arguing that
outlawing marijuana is a violation of their right to life, liberty and
security of the person.

Young is representing Christopher Clay, who owned a store in London, Ont.,
called the Great Canadian Hemporium, which sold marijuana paraphernalia and
plant seeds.

The other two litigants are David Malmo-Levine, a Vancouver activist who
formed the 1,800-member "Harm Reduction Club" for marijuana smokers, and
Victor Caine, another British Columbian who was convicted of possession for
sharing a joint with a friend in his car while parked at a beach near
Vancouver.

Amid the confusion over the government's position, the court will hold a
mini-hearing this morning asking lawyers from all sides whether they think
the case should be postponed.

The concern is that Cauchon's revelation might have an impact on the case
and that all sides might therefore need time to reconsider their arguments.

"The court is concerned that this development may impact on the appeals
both in terms of the evidence and the position that may be taken by the
attorney general and other parties," court registrar Anne Roland wrote on
behalf of the judges.

Justice Department lawyers argue that the case should go ahead, regardless
of their minister's statements.

In a letter to the Supreme Court, they say that the precedent-setting
appeal, in which three Canadians are seeking the constitutional right to
get stoned, "transcends" Cauchon's plans to decriminalize small amounts of pot.

Under Cauchon's scheme, smoking marijuana still would remain illegal, but
the punishment would change.

Canadian police and the U.S. drug control czar said easing the penalties is
a step in the wrong direction.

"The message this sends to our youth is that we are trivializing the use of
marijuana," said Mike Niebudek, vice-president of the Canadian Police
Association.

And John Walters, director of the U.S. office of drug control policy, held
a news conference in Buffalo where he warned that softer drug policies in
Canada could create border security problems and contribute to an increased
flow of Canadian-grown pot to the U.S. market.

Walters warned of lax attitudes "left over from the Cheech and Chong years
of the '60s," and cautioned against "reefer-madness madness."