POT TOO MILD TO BE CRIMINAL, LAWYER ARGUES

TORONTO (CP) - Smoking pot should be legal because it's harmless compared
to other drugs, a lawyer will argue Wednesday before Ontario's Court of
Appeal. Alan Young is challenging a lower court ruling which convicted
recreational pot smoker Chris Clay despite the trial judge's finding that
the drug didn't do any harm.

Young argues that Parliament has no constitutional right to criminalize
marijuana because it's so benign.

"Whatever evidence there is of harm is so inconsequential that it is not
worthy of criminal law attention," Young said in an interview. "This
substance has been called by learned academics, scientists and jurists as
one of the safest drugs in the history of mankind."

In 1997, Clay, 28, was convicted of drug possession and trafficking charges
for selling cannabis to an undercover police officer.

Clay, former owner of the Hemp Nation boutique in London, Ont., launched a
constitutional challenge to Canada's marijuana laws.

Justice John McCart of Ontario's Superior Court said he believed
pot-smoking was harmless and caused no serious physical or psychological
damage, and that it didn't lead to the use of other drugs.

But the judge ruled it would be up to Parliament to determine what's
illegal and said the drug charges didn't infringe on Clay's constitutional
rights.

The appeal falls one day after federal Health Minister Allan Rock said he
would notify 14 more people with serious illnesses that they can use
marijuana for medical purposes - a move which Young can't help but regard
with suspicion.

"I've just been amazed that the last two announcements have coincided with
court dates . . . it makes it seem as though the government is trying to
save face."

The federal government first gave permission for the cultivation and use of
marijuana for medical purposes in June, when Rock granted special
exemptions to Jim Wakeford of Toronto and Jean-Charles Pariseau of Vanier,
Ont., both of whom have AIDS.

Not everyone was keen Tuesday to hop on the pro-pot bandwagon.

"I don't think legalization is a good idea at all," said Bill Corrigall, a
scientist with the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto.

He said there's a big difference between exempting a few users for medical
reasons and essentially allowing the general public to toke at will.

"Marijuana is a dependence-producing drug that can impair performace and
judgment."

Corrigall is most concerned about what he calls the "intoxication" issue.

"Any intoxicating substance changes how you operate a motor vehicle and you
can't do a roadside test for marijuana use because of the way the drug
distributes in the body. There's one big problem," he said.

"How are you going to regulate its use in a way that society overall
manages itself responsibly so we don't increase roadside fatalities?"

But Young scoffed at such concerns, saying in tests most stoned pot-smokers
were too paranoid to get behind the wheel.

"In many driving studies they can't even get the cannabis-user to get in
the car to drive," he said.

Clay and Young vow to take the case all the way to the Supreme Court if
need be.

Supporters of Clay's case hope Canada will eventually adopt the same
policies that exist in some parts of Australia, where people caught with
small quantities of marijuana pay a fine, but get no criminal record.