COURT DELAYS POT LAW CASES TO SEE IF HOUSE ACTS

Judges Say The Justice Minister Is Sending Conflicting Messages

In an unusual move, the Supreme Court of Canada decided Friday to
delay a constitutional challenge of Canada's marijuana law to see if
Parliament will decriminalize pot possession next year.

The court said Justice Minister Martin Cauchon is sending conflicting
messages by stating he will decriminalize pot while his staff lawyers
are trying to convince the court that smoking up is dangerous.

The court postponed until at least the spring a landmark appeal from
three pot activists who are seeking the constitutional right to smoke
marijuana.

Justice Louis LeBel summed up the judges' sentiment when he said they
cannot "close their eyes" to Cauchon's statements earlier this week
that he plans to move ahead with legislation within the first four
months of next year.

"The question here is the apparent contradiction between the position
taken outside the court and the position taken inside the court,"
added Justice Ian Binnie.

"It's ridiculous," said B.C. lawyer John Conroy, who was in the Ottawa
court to appeal the conviction of a B.C. man. The case was among three
companion cases scheduled to be heard Friday by the nation's top court.

Conroy told the court it should hear the appeals, despite the recent
government announcement that it is considering decriminalizing marijuana.

"I told the court the government has said this about 12 times since
1970," the lawyer said.

Conroy said the nine-judge panel also put Vancouver prosecutor David
Frankel on the spot by asking what his boss -- the federal justice
minister -- plans to do now that a committee has recommended
decriminalizing simple possession of small amounts of marijuana.

Frankel told the court he wanted the case to proceed, as did the
appellants. But the court made its own motion to adjourn the appeals
until next year. No new hearing date was set.

If the appeals had proceeded as scheduled, it would have been the
first time the court has considered the constitutional validity of the
law prohibiting the possession of marijuana.

The federal government is considering decriminalizing possession of
less than 30 grams of marijuana -- roughly an ounce.

"We're all very disappointed," Conroy said of the delay. The lawyer is
handling the case of a B.C. man, Victor Eugene Caine, who was busted
June 13, 1993, by two RCMP officers who were patrolling a parking lot
at a White Rock beach.

The officers observed Caine and another man sitting in a van. As Caine
started the engine and began backing up, one officer approached the
van and could smell marijuana smoke.

Caine produced for the officer a partly smoked joint weighing .5
grams. He was charged and later convicted of possession.

Conroy argued at trial -- and the subsequent appeal -- that the
Narcotic Control Act prohibition against the possession of marijuana
for personal use is contrary to Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and
Freedoms, in that it violates the constitutional right to liberty and
the security of his person in a manner that is not in accordance with
the principles of fundamental justice -- that laws are drafted to
protect society or individuals from harm.

Vancouver marijuana activist David Malmo-Levine was representing
himself Friday in the Supreme Court of Canada. He was wearing a hemp
suit.

Malmo-Levine was busted on Dec. 4, 1996, when Vancouver police entered
the Harm Reduction Club in east Vancouver and seized 316 grams of
marijuana, much of it in the form of "joints."

He was convicted of possessing of marijuana for the purpose of
trafficking.

The court was also going to hear the Ontario appeal of Christopher
James Clay, the owner of a hemp store convicted of possession of
marijuana, two counts of possession for the purpose of trafficking and
one count of trafficking.

The common issue of the three appeals was the argument that marijuana
should not be illegal and possessing it should not carry a possible
jail sentence because it is not harmful.