PARLIAMENT, NOT COURTS, SHOULD DECIDE ON POT

Elected politicians, not judges, should make the decision about whether
to legalize the sale and use of marijuana.

Unfortunately, federal politicians in both Canada and the United States
are irresponsibly timid. They've failed to even engage the public in an
intelligent discussion of the pros and cons of legalizing marijuana, let
alone change the law.

Fortunately, the courts in both countries are refusing to play the
politician's game. They're throwing the issue right back to the
legislative bodies where it belongs.

In an 8-0 decision this week, the United States Supreme Court, ruled
that the federal law making marijuana illegal stands, even for medical
use. Justice Clarence Thomas, writing the majority opinion, said
Congress has determined that marijuana "has no currently accepted
medical use" -- a position that is less and less defensible in the face
of growing evidence. But, rather than trying to usurp legislative power,
the court has rightly tossed the ball back to the politicians.

On the same issue in Canada last year, the Ontario Court of Appeal took
a different tack. It ruled that an outright ban of marijuana isn't
consistent with the principles of justice. But rather than just throw
out the law, it gave Ottawa a year to either appeal its decision, amend
the marijuana law or simply let it wither away. Justice Marc Rosenberg,
in striking down the simple possession law, said, "This is a matter for
Parliament."

Almost a year later, it's not clear whether the federal government will
amend the law, or just let it drift. The government has no plans to
legalize marijuana, though since 1999 it has given more than 200
exemptions to Canadians suffering from illnesses so they can alleviate
their pain with marijuana. While this is progress, it isn't enough.

The Canadian Medical Association Journal, in an editorial published last
week, says, "The minimal negative health effects of moderate use would
be attested to by the estimated 1.5 million Canadians who smoke
marijuana for recreational purposes." There is ample evidence suggesting
that marijuana has medicinal properties, and the Ontario courts have
recognized this. Judges in B.C. have described marijuana as a relatively
harmless intoxicant. So, it's not surprising the CMA is calling on
Ottawa to take the next bold step and legalize its use.

Since marijuana was declared a controlled substance in 1923, more than
600,000 Canadians have got a criminal record for simple possession. The
number of charges is on the rise, despite the fact police are unwilling
to do anything more than just confiscate small amounts. In recent
months, while police have raided many grow-ops in the Lower Mainland,
they haven't charged many owners with a crime -- a clear-cut waste of
scarce police resources.

There are two ways to amend marijuana laws. One is to decriminalize
simple possession for personal use. The other is to legalize it
outright. The first option, while appealing to many Canadians, won't
work well in practice. It will make it legal to buy marijuana, but make
it illegal to sell it. So, the only practical option is to legalize it.

As we've stated in the past, legalizing marijuana will pose a few
problems. How will we regulate the growing and manufacturing of it? Who
will be authorized to sell it? Where would it be available for sale? To
whom could it be sold? How will we determine a safe level of blood THC
for driving? And, just as importantly, can we legalize a drug that the
U.S., is committed to getting rid of?

While these problems are difficult, they're not insurmountable. All we
have to do is regulate it like other adult vices -- alcohol, cigarettes
or gambling.

Common sense dictates that society legalize marijuana at long last. What
we need now are politicians, at least on our side of the border and
preferably on both, who have the courage to do it.