JUDGE TO RULE ON VALIDITY OF POT LAW

Decision Expected Jan. 2 in Marijuana Possession Case

Windsor, Ont. - 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
Jan. 2 in the case of a 16-year-old youth who was charged in April
with possession of marijuana.

Phillips heard legal arguments Friday 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. All it can say is, if it offends
the constitution or the charter, it's of no force or effect. But the
section still remains."

Because Parliament addressed the question of medical use through a
separate regulation, nothing else needed to be done to the section in
the drug act dealing with marijuana possession, Posliff said.

If Phillips rules in his favour, McAllister said the decision will not
be binding on other courts. But "it would have a persuasive affect. It
would be open to anybody else to make the same argument in another
court."

McAllister's client, who can't be identified because of his age, was
charged with possessing less than 30 grams of marijuana when he was
stopped by police in Kingsville, Ont.