PRESSURE FOR CHANGE MOUNTS AS ONTARIO JUDGE RULES CANADIAN MARIJUANA
POSSESSION LAW INVALID

A provincial judge in Ontario, Canada's most populous province, ruled
Thursday that the country's law on possession of small amounts of
marijuana is no longer valid. In his ruling, Justice Douglas Phillips
dismissed two marijuana possession charges against a 16-year-old boy
and held that the Canadian Parliament had failed to address
constitutional problems with Canada's marijuana laws.

In July of 2000, the Ontario Court of Appeal struck down the federal
law prohibiting the possession of less than 30 grams of marijuana. In
that case, the court held that the marijuana law violated the rights
of people who use the drug for medicinal purposes. The court gave
Parliament one year to enact changes in the law that would satisfy
constitutional concerns. While the federal government, waiting until
the last minute, responded to that ruling by issuing Marijuana Medical
Access Regulations on July 31, 2001, those regulations did not address
the issue of recreational use.

Thursday's ruling only adds to the Canadian cannabis conundrum.
Canadian Justice Minister Martin Cauchon and a House of Commons select
committee have both called for decriminalization, while a Senate panel
earlier called for regulated legalization, but Prime Minister Jean
Chretien has recently undercut Cauchon, suggesting last week that his
government has made no decision on decriminalization. And while the
ruling is non-binding, if it is appealed to the Ontario Court of
Appeal and upheld, it would be binding for the province and would set
a precedent for other provinces and the federal government.

"This could push the government to move faster," said Eugene Oscapella
of the Canadian Drug Policy Foundation of Canada (http://www.cfdp.ca).
"It will make things very interesting at the political level. Will the
government appeal this case, arguing that possession should stay a
criminal offense? If they were to lose, they could end up in a
situation where there is no regulation of marijuana," he told DRCNet.

As a result, Oscapella said, he expects the government to act. "The
government has to do something," he said. "Will it be true to its
rhetoric about decriminalization? That is the question. The government
is under intense scrutiny from the national media on this issue. The
media is saying 'you said you're going to do decrim, the courts say
the law is unconstitutional, what are you going to do?'"

Despite the prospect of an unregulated marijuana market if the
Canadian Supreme Court eventually hears and upholds Thursday's case,
that may be the most politically palatable course for the Canadian
government, Oscapella said. "If we get marijuana decriminalization or
legalization through the courts instead of the political process, that
takes off the political pressure from the US," he said. "It is more
difficult for the US to criticize our court decisions than our
political decisions, and, of course, the government can then say 'it's
not our fault.'"

But as the Canadian government squirms, the pressure to change the
marijuana laws is mounting. According to a poll released Thursday, 50%
of Canadians want decriminalization of marijuana, while 47% oppose it.
The poll, conducted by Strategic Counsel, a Toronto polling firm,
found that 53% of those under 40 supported decrim, while 48% over 40
did. The poll also found, unsurprisingly, that support for decrim was
strongest in British Columbia, with 56%. Also, the pollsters noted,
many respondents failed to differentiate between decriminalization and
full legalization. "They may not have got the nuance," one of the
pollsters suggested.