HIGHS AND LOWS OF SOUTHIN'S JUDGMENT

The Appeal Court Justice Is Alternately Applauded, Condemned For Pot Views

Over all, I was most pleased to read Justice Mary Southin's comments on
cannabis laws (Pot growers no worse than martini drinkers, judge says, June
21). Court officials have had, for some years now, a more realistic
attitude toward drug offenders than what is shown by the police, but Judge
Southin, to her credit, is taking this even further. In fact, if her
opinions on cannabis weren't already held by roughly half of all Canadians,
they would be downright radical!

I am, however, concerned with her comment that she has not yet abandoned
her conviction that "... Parliament has a constitutional right to be
hoodwinked .. and to remain hoodwinked." Is she actually saying that our
government has the constitutional right to be wrong, and that the public
must simply live with the resulting bad laws? My understanding is that our
constitution directly charges the courts with, not merely the right, but
the duty of striking down bad laws.

I hope she also has, as I and many other Canadians do, a conviction that
ordinary citizens have a constitutional right to be protected from
arbitrary and capricious laws. This is supposed to be, after all, a
pluralistic democracy. The right to be wrong is fine for kings with the
divine right to rule or leaders of a theocracy, but has no place in a
society wherein the political leaders are, when it comes right down to it,
glorified civil servants.

Brad Dietrich

Port Alberni