A MATTER OF NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY

On Dec. 31, the National Post comment pages published an open letter
by columnist Karen Selick that asked Justice Minister Rob Nicholson
to intervene in the extradition process against "Prince of Pot" Marc
Emery, which is scheduled to begin Jan. 21. For years, Mr. Emery has
been openly running a lucrative business in mail-order marijuana
seeds, selling to customers in both Canada and the U.S. Though this
is technically illegal in both countries, the Vancouver police and
the federal authorities took an indulgent view for years; Mr. Emery
even reported his income to Revenue Canada and paid taxes, listing
his occupation explicitly as "marijuana seed vendor."

He was not arrested until July, 2005, when the U.S. Drug Enforcement
Administration filed federal charges against him in Washington
State. Mr. Emery was nabbed by the RCMP in Nova Scotia, and the
Vancouver bookstore out of which he had run his business for years
was suddenly raided. Perhaps some modern-day Claude Rains in a VPD
uniform stood nearby, declaring: "I am shocked -- shocked! -- to find
that marijuana seeds are being sold here!"

Now Mr. Emery faces the possibility of lifelong imprisonment in a
U.S. federal penitentiary without parole. Needless to say, it is a
fate he has done much to tempt. He has been an overt opponent of the
DEA and the U.S. government, and never concealed his seed sales to
the United States or made any effort to avoid selling to American
customers. Quite the contrary: As he told CBS's 60 Minutes last
year, "The whole idea was that I would help facilitate the growth of
so much marijuana that the DEA and all the agencies of the United
States would never be able to destroy it at the rate I would help
create it and that, ultimately, I, one man, would neutralize the work
of the entire DEA with their multi-billion dollar budget."

He has taken his battle to the propaganda front too, making highly
visible donations to anti-prohibition groups in the United
States. It's no surprise to him that the Americans want to clap him
in irons. What might have been a surprise was the election of a
Conservative government in Canada, one which has made tougher laws
against marijuana growers and users a cornerstore of its political agenda.

Still, that should not deter us from a fair assessment of his
incredibly risky argument-by-botany. Many of those who consider
Mr. Emery's plight get distracted by what sometimes seems like a
desire for martyrdom on his part, or by the ethical and medical
considerations surrounding the use of marijuana. The plain fact is
that Canadian law never practically considered his seed business a
major peril to public order or morals, or it would have done
something about it. Dozens, perhaps hundreds of mail-order growers
are continuing in the trade in B.C. even now. Marijuana is
recognized as having medical benefits by our government, as it is in
the law of nearly a dozen U.S. states. The U.S. is using the
technical presence of an unenforced law on our books to carry its
drug war onto our soil. If the Honourable Mr. Nicholson allows this
to reach its logical conclusion, and Mr. Emery is sent south for
notional crimes committed entirely on Canadian soil, it will
constitute a blow to our national sovereignty.

After all, just imagine for a moment that the positions were reversed
- -- that by some historical quirk, it was the U.S. that had adopted
liberal attitudes toward marijuana, while we were suppressing it here
at home with paramilitary force and penalties normally reserved for
killers and armed robbers. Does anybody think for a moment that a
Canadian politician or prosecutor could blithely dash off a letter to
Massachusetts or Texas and have U.S. law enforcement mobilized from
coast to coast to deliver a peaceable, otherwise law-abiding American
seed dealer into our hands?

The Americans wouldn't stand for it. They'd raise hell about
foreigners telling them how to run their country. And they'd be
right to do it. The principle of extradition between friendly
neighbouring democracies is an important one, but where ideas of
justice are expressed in such a different manner as they are on a
point like this -- where the people of two countries so plainly
disagree about what is right -- co-operation is tantamount to a
surrender of values.