THE UN V. SMART POT LAWS

One of the reasons we doubt the United Nations will deal properly with
Saddam Hussein is that the organization seems to have more enthusiasm for
browbeating Western democracies than it does for taking brutal
dictatorships to task. Australia is repeatedly -- and speciously -- accused
of systemic "discrimination" against visible minorities. Canada is attacked
for its treatment of poor children. The United States is told its gun laws
should be changed. Each of these prosperous democracies should be held up
as a successful example to the rest of the world; instead, they are
henpecked over the details of humane domestic policies.

Last week saw another example in this vein. Antonio Maria Costa, executive
director of the UN Office for Drug Control and Crime Prevention, has
weighed in on Canada's drug debate by coming out strongly against the
legalization of marijuana. Permitting cannabis, he said, would undermine
the fight against harder drugs in developing countries. Citing health
risks, he also claimed that legalization would violate the 1988 UN
convention against illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic
substances. "Some of our countries are on the verge of making an error
which is as significant as when tobacco spread," Mr. Costa told a Canadian
interviewer. Given recent discussions in Ottawa about either legalizing or
decriminalizing pot, it was not difficult to infer which country was the
target of his comments.

Whether or not one supports pot decriminalization (as this newspaper does),
we do not see the issue as the UN's business. As for the 1988 convention,
if it stands in the way of our adopting a progressive drug policy, then the
solution is simple: We should withdraw from the convention and give the UN
one less excuse for criticizing us.