MR. ROCK'S HARD HEART

Stephen Jay Gould, the renowned Harvard scientist and essayist, wrote not
long ago that "It is beyond my comprehension that any humane person would
withhold such a beneficial substance from people in such great need simply
because others use it for different purposes."

The substance in question is marijuana. The people in "such great need" are
cancer and AIDS patients, who feel that marijuana offers them succour. Prof.
Gould knows whereof he speaks: In the 1980s, marijuana relieved him of the
nausea from the chemotherapy that treated his cancer.

Similar stories are too numerous to count, yet Canada continues to treat as
criminals very sick people who use marijuana, a fact which is unlikely to
change soon despite the March announcement by Health Minister Allan Rock
that the government will study medical marijuana.

There are reasons to doubt the sincerity of a government that has happily
accepted the status quo since taking power in 1993. For one, more study
hardly seems a priority when there are already stacks of research on medical
marijuana. There's so much evidence, in fact, that the New England Journal
of Medicine has editorialized in medical marijuana's favour. Just last
month, an 18-month study commissioned by the drug policy arm of the White
House -- a branch that has for years fought medical marijuana tooth and nail
- -- declared that marijuana has important medical uses, especially for cancer
and AIDS. One author of the study noted that there is "an explosion of new
scientific knowledge" about marijuana's useful effects. Why re-invent the
wheel if Mr. Rock is serious about change?

There's yet another reason to doubt our government: the case of Jim
Wakeford, who, in August, 1998, went to court demanding that he be given the
legal right to possess marijuana. Mr. Wakeford has AIDS, and the disease has
ravaged his body. At one point, his weight dropped from 140 pounds to 118.
But then he discovered marijuana and the drug's ability to instill a fierce
appetite in users. Mr. Wakeford's weight rose back into safe ranges.

But the law says that in saving his own life as he did, Mr. Wakeford
committed a crime repeatedly. He's a criminal. Either that or, as Dickens
wrote, the law is an ass.

The judge hearing Mr. Wakeford's case was sympathetic but he pointed to a
law which gives the minister of health the power to allow individuals or
groups to legally possess marijuana. The judge said Mr. Wakeford would first
have to ask the minister to use that discretion before he could argue before
the court that the government, in forbidding him access to marijuana, had
violated his Charter right to "life, liberty and security of the person."

So Mr. Wakeford asked the minister. In fact, he asked six times. Only once,
finally, did the health ministry reply. They said they would look into it.

Recently, Mr. Wakeford went back to the same judge. Seven months had gone
by, an eternity to a man with AIDS, and the minister had done nothing. The
judge ordered the government to explain at a hearing this month just when it
might rouse itself to decide on Mr. Wakeford's request.

This is cruelty made flesh. Mr. Rock has the power but he does not use it.
Why not? What precisely is he waiting for? Mr. Wakeford's funeral?

More generally, why doesn't Mr. Rock, as a modest first step, use his
discretionary power to exempt the terminally ill from the ban on marijuana?
Surely the existing evidence of health benefits is strong enough for at
least that. But, really, what if there were no evidence of marijuana's
medical benefits? What if it only made AIDS patients giggle a little? What
possible public interest could there be in continuing to arrest them for
daring to touch marijuana? Is Mr. Rock worried they might get sick? This is
government by Monty Python.

We have made no secret of our opposition to the ban on marijuana, consumed
for whatever purpose, which we feel is irrational, invasive, and
destructive. But the refusal to allow even terminal patients to try
marijuana is so cruel, so pointless, it is, to paraphrase Stephen Jay Gould,
beyond our comprehension.