LIBERALS' POT DECRIMINALIZATION BILL UP IN SMOKE?

TORONTO - For a while it looked like we were poised to become Amsterdam
West: cafes with patrons openly enjoying joints alongside lattes, activists
toking up outside police stations with impunity, and government plans to
make marijuana available to the chronically ill.

But while that pipedream has apparently gone up in smoke, the ongoing debate
over the sweet leaf's place in Canadian society - whether for medicine or
for pleasure - promises to grow more heated in the coming year.

With the federal government courting decriminalization - still a thorny
issue among the ruling Liberals themselves - Canadians have found reason to
voice their opinions on the contentious topic.

An Ipsos-Reid poll of 1,001 Canadians conducted in May suggested that 55 per
cent of respondents did not believe smoking marijuana should be a criminal
offence.

Those advocating decriminalization say it doesn't make sense to saddle
people with criminal records for being busted for simple possession, such as
smoking a joint. They also say it will reduce traffic in an already
congested court system.

Those against decriminalization say marijuana is a so-called ''gateway''
drug that will cause users to progress to harder drugs such as cocaine and
heroin. They also say it will harm relations with the United States, which
remains in War on Drugs mode.

But things have been complicated by the federal government's cautious steps
toward providing cannabis to the ill. Proponents say marijuana stimulates
the appetite, relieves pain and reduces stress - although the medical
community remains divided over such claims.

The decriminalization movement burst into the forefront this year when an
Ontario Superior Court judge ruled in May that possessing less than 30 grams
of marijuana was no longer against the law in the province.

A lawyer had successfully argued that since there was no effective program
for sick people to possess medical marijuana without breaking the law, then
the law didn't prohibit possession.

Police organizations in Ontario subsequently said they wouldn't lay charges
for simple possession until the laws were clarified.

The court decision prompted similar rulings around the country and opened
the floodgates for recreational users to enjoy a jubilant summer of toking
freely - even in certain public cafes.

B.C. cannabis guru Marc Emery, who publishes Cannabis Culture magazine and
sells marijuana seeds online, went on a coast-to-coast Tour de Pot this
summer, holding rallies and lighting up outside police stations in
Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Regina, Winnipeg, Toronto, Moncton, N.B.,
Halifax, Charlottetown and St. John's, Nfld.

Emery practically dared the cops to arrest him - which they sometimes did.

The Canadawide case of reefer madness was apparently contagious.

Former prime minister Jean Chretien, who tried unsuccessfully to fast-track
a decriminalization bill before leaving office earlier this month, seemed to
amuse the country when he suggested in an October interview that he might
puff on pot one day.

''Perhaps I will try it when it will no longer be criminal,'' Chretien
mused. ''I will have my money for my fine and a joint in the other hand.''

Chretien had argued for fines instead of jail sentences for simple
possession, while adding that growers and traffickers would still face stiff
penalties.

Although the bill was expected to pass this fall, Chretien officially ended
his last legislative session in mid-November, leaving it in limbo.

Prime Minister Paul Martin has said he supports decriminalization in
principle and that he will reintroduce the legislation in the new year - but
likely with amendments to make it tougher.

Alan Young, a Toronto lawyer, law professor and self-styled cannabis
crusader, said he expects the bill to die.

''If history repeats itself, one could safely conclude that this will not be
resurrected,'' he said, referring to a similar bill in the late 1970s that
went nowhere.

Young pointed instead to a case currently before the Supreme Court of Canada
that may be more significant. It questions the government's authority to
criminalize a relatively harmless substance - in this case, marijuana. An
Ontario judge had previously ruled in 1997 that cannabis is relatively
harmless - a finding that was considered a factual conclusion.

The key issue is whether criminal penalties for simple possession violate
the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The court is to make its judgment Dec.
23. While Young stopped short of saying the case would set a precedent, he
did emphasize its importance.

''It has significance because this court for the first time is going to
decide whether Parliament has a threshold they must meet before they can
enact criminal law,'' he said.

''In theory, without this case, Parliament tomorrow can criminalize the
cultivation of roses.''

Even if the Supreme Court upholds the constitutionality of the current law,
Martin's government will likely still move to change it.

With the issue of medical use inextricably entwined with that of
recreational use, an Ontario court made simple possession illegal again in
October while firming up the rules on how medical users could obtain their
cannabis supply.

''In terms of decriminalization, it was a huge setback,'' Young said. ''In
terms of slow movement toward improving the medical program, it was a step
forward. But we lost a lot of momentum at the end of this year on
decriminalization by having the October court case not consider invalidation
of the criminal prohibition as a response.''

Despite Ottawa's good intentions, efforts to supply medical users have
proved inept, as the government-sanctioned marijuana first made available in
August has been widely criticized for its inferior quality.

Some users demanded refunds, calling the weed ''disgusting'' and
''unsuitable for human consumption.'' Others said it was too weak to be
effective. One man even said it made him vomit. One frustrated user found
the quality so poor that he rejected the government shipments and applied
for a growing licence instead.

Philippe Lucas, director of Canadians for Safe Access, a Victoria-based
patients' rights group pressing for a safe, effective supply of marijuana,
said independent lab analyses of the government cannabis showed high
concentrations of toxic lead and arsenic.

''I've tried the government cannabis, and I can attest to its incredibly
poor quality,'' said Lucas, who is allowed to use marijuana to deal with the
side-effects of hepatitis C.