REDEFINING A CRIME

They are unlikely revolutionaries; five senators, ranging in age from
51 to 72, who have taken it upon themselves to review Canada's laws
on cannabis.

The Senate Special Committee on Illegal Drugs released its first
discussion paper this week. Although the senators stopped short of
endorsing the decriminalization of marijuana, it is clear that they
are leaning in that direction. They invited Canadians to address a
series of questions at public hearings across the country:

"Research evidence we have received to date does not appear to
support criminalization of and penalization of cannabis. Do you share
this view?"

"Studies appear to indicate that the current policy approach may
cause more harm than good. Do you agree?"

"If Canada were to adopt a different, more liberal approach to
cannabis, should it take into account the reaction of the United
States?"

There is a quixotic quality to this exercise. Prime Minister Jean
Chr=C7tien has made it clear that he has no interest in loosening
Canada's marijuana laws. Just last month, the Liberal government
killed a private member's bill that would have decriminalized
marijuana possession.

Nevertheless, the committee, chaired by Tory senator Pierre Claude
Nolin, a Montreal lawyer, is determined to take an "open, objective,
impartial'' look at Canada's anti-drug policies. In the first phase
of its inquiry, it heard from doctors, pharmacologists, police
officers, lawyers, federal bureaucrats and the head of the
Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission. Now it wants to bring
ordinary Canadians into the dialogue.

This effort deserves to be taken seriously, no matter how dismissive
the governing Liberals appear to be.

More than 30,000 Canadians are charged with marijuana possession
every year. Hunting down pot users costs taxpayers millions of
dollars - money that could be spent preventing kids from getting into
more serious forms of drug abuse.

Marijuana is less addictive, and less dangerous, than tobacco or
alcohol, both of which are legal. There is no credible evidence that
it leads to the use of more potent drugs. Nor can police point to any
clear link between cannabis use and crime.

The senators acknowledge that it is best not to use psycho-active
substances such as cannabis. But they strongly suggest that there are
better uses for public funds than trying to eradicate a widely used
and relatively harmless recreational drug.

It is a refreshingly sane point of view. The government may find that
millions of Canadians share it.