JUDGE WILL RULE ON VALIDITY OF POT LAW

Simple Possession Not Illegal, Lawyer Says New Federal Rules Allow Medical Use

WINDSOR--An Ontario judge says he will rule next week on the question of
whether Canada's laws that make it illegal to possess small amounts of
marijuana are invalid.

Ontario Court Justice Douglas Phillips said he will have a decision
Thursday in the case of a 16-year-old youth who was charged in April with
possession of marijuana.

Phillips heard legal arguments yesterday by lawyer Brian McAllister, who is
representing the youth, and federal drug prosecutor Ed Posliff. McAllister
brought forward an application to have the drug charges dropped, asserting
the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act no longer prohibits the simple
possession of marijuana by virtue of an earlier decision in the Ontario
Court of Appeal. In that case, the appeal court struck down the federal law
prohibiting the possession of less than 30 grams of marijuana.

The court found in the case of Terry Parker of Toronto that the law
violated the rights of sick people who use marijuana for medical reasons.

It declared the law invalid, but it suspended the declaration of invalidity
for a year to allow the government time to revamp the law and correct the
problem.

In response, the federal government passed the Marijuana Medical Access
Regulations, which allow marijuana use for medical reasons under certain
circumstances. But McAllister said that wasn't enough.

He said it was incumbent on Parliament to re-enact the marijuana possession
section in the drug law once the new regulation was in effect.

Without that action, there is no valid law, McAllister argued, because the
appeal court ruled it to be invalid.

The crown doesn't see it that way. "Our position is it continues to be a
crime to possess marijuana except if you have proper medical
authorization," Posliff said. Posliff argued the law still stands, despite
McAllister's assertion that Parliament needed to re-enact the law. "Only
Parliament can repeal its own acts," Posliff said. "A court cannot repeal
an act of Parliament." If Phillips rules in his favour, McAllister said the
decision will not be binding on other courts.

But "it would have a persuasive affect."