HIGH COURT GETS OFF POT

Parliament to Revisit Legislation

THE HIGHEST court in the land has passed the joint to Prime Minister
Paul Martin who must now decide the future of Canada's marijuana
possession laws. In a 6-3 decision that sets back the pro-pot
movement, the Supreme Court yesterday ruled it's up to Parliament to
decide if marijuana should remain illegal. There is no "free-standing"
right to toke for recreational purposes, according to the majority of
judges.

"The Constitution cannot be stretched to afford protection to whatever
activity an individual chooses to define as central to his or her
lifestyle," the ruling reads.

David Malmo-Levine, 32, and two other men failed to convince the court
that pot penalties are out of line with Charter guarantees of
fundamental justice.

"I'm bummed out, man," said Malmo-Levine, a marijuana activist from
Vancouver. "I was dreaming of a green Christmas but they grinched out
on us.

"Their hearts are two sizes too small."

GROW OPS TARGETED

The prime minister confirmed yesterday his government will reintroduce
draft legislation to decriminalize small stashes of marijuana.

Young people shouldn't be saddled with criminal records, but there
must be tougher penalties and a heavier crackdown on growing
operations, Martin said.

"I think that the legislation that is before the Parliament of Canada
is legislation that essentially makes sense," he said in a year-end
interview with CBC's The National.

The Supreme Court ruling came as a blow to local pot
activists.

"It's a big letdown for the cannabis community definitely. I think
they've done a disservice to the millions of Canadians who smoke
cannabis," said Mike Foster, owner of Crosstown Traffic, a Bank St.
head shop. "I wasn't anticipating a great decision but I was expecting
to get thrown at least a bone after 30 years of recommendations that
we legalize cannabis."

While the ruling noted it should be up to Parliament to decriminalize
marijuana, Foster criticized the government's pending bill that would
see people fined for pot possession.

"The way our government's been going is trying to play both sides of
the issue," he said. "I mean in one sense the proposed bill wanted to
have fines and make possession a smaller charge, but on the other end
.. anybody with over 50 plants would get 15 years.

"In a country where people get a maximum of seven years for
manslaughter, we need a little more perspective on the issue."

Just 'First Step'

Tony Cannavino, president of the Canadian Professional Police
Association, applauded the court's decision but said it's only a
"first step." His union will lobby for officers to retain the
discretionary power to lay charges.

"They should put emphasis on a strong national drug strategy,"
Cannavino said, adding liberalizing marijuana laws sends a wrong
message about a "harmful drug."

Toting a placard outside the Supreme Court, pro-pot crusader Raymond
Turmel said decriminalizing simple possession is even worse than the
existing law. He called it a "fundraising scam" by the federal government.

"They're still going to take your marijuana off you, except they're
just going to charge you a $400 fine now. The poor kids are going to
be doing more time in jail because they can't afford to pay the fine,"
he said.