|
|
| Judge Says Some Drug Law are Unconstitutional |
|
Posted by FoM on April 23, 2002 at 18:39:19 PT By The Canadian Press Source: Canadian Press 
Canadian drug laws banning the sale of marijuana to sick people who have been granted permission to use the drug are unconstitutional, a Quebec judge said Tuesday. Judge Gilles Cadieux said the federal Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects the right to liberty and security of the person.He suggested such rights include the use of cannabis by patients who have been granted a medical exemption and who can be proven to benefit from using the drug. Cadieux made the statements at the trial of two men charged with drug-trafficking and possession at a non-profit centre that provided marijuana to those suffering from chronic illnesses. It was not clear Tuesday what immediate effect the judge's statement in Quebec court would have on the use and sale of medicinal marijuana in Canada. The impact on the defendants, Marc-Boris St-Maurice, 33, and Alexandre Neron, 23, was also unclear. The charges against the two men remained in effect Tuesday, and legal arguments in the case are set to resume May 13. But defence lawyer Pierre Leger said the judge's comments were an important step towards prompt and legal marijuana distribution at so-called compassion clubs which offer medicinal marijuana across the country. "It's very good news," Leger said outside the courtroom. "In the last five years the courts have forced the federal government to give people access to the marijuana when they need it for medical purposes." Neron and St-Maurice, the leader of the federal Marijuana party, were arrested in 2000 after police raided the Compassion Club in Montreal and seized 66 grams of marijuana. Leger is challenging the constitutionality of the drug laws, saying they don't take into account the federal exemption granted to people allowing them to smoke marijuana to alleviate pain and the side-effects of prescription drugs. The Compassion Club case could last several more months following recent developments related to the use of medicinal marijuana in Canada. The Quebec College of Physicians has barred its members from granting medical permission to use the drug, even if patients have been granted a federal exemption. And the federal Health Department announced Monday it won't release any of the marijuana being grown for the government to distribute to sick and dying patients until it has been tested in clinical trials. In response, Leger submitted a motion Tuesday to call four more witnesses, including a patient who is unable to obtain marijuana in Quebec despite permission from the federal government to do so. Crown lawyer Robert Marchi said it's too early to tell what effect Cadieux's latest statements will have on the sale and use of medicinal marijuana in Canada. Source: Canadian Press (Canada Wire) Related Articles & Web Site: Canadian Links Ottawa's Not A Very Good Drug Dealer Medicinal-Marijuana Harvest on Hold Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
 |
| Comment #17 posted by FoM on April 26, 2002 at 10:41:36 PT |
| Marijuana Party Leader to Run for Mayor Source: CBC Vancouver - The legalization of marijuana will be an issue in the upcoming Vancouver civic election. Pot crusader Marc Emery says he's running for mayor, backed by a full slate of Marijuana Party candidates seeking seats on city council and the park board. Emery says he'll make policing and civil liberties his key campaign issues. Emery ran for mayor in 1996. He placed fifth on a list of 58 candidates that included names like Zippy the Circus Chimp, Lupo the Butcher and Frank the Moose. Emery says he has no illusions about winning the mayor's seat. He says he's running to draw attention to how police treat marijuana users and growers. "I'll be running on a campaign expressly about police corruption and police abuse and the terrible subjection of our liberties that has gone on in Phillip Owen's last three terms," says Emery. The Marijuana Party leader agrees Owen has made efforts to improve the drug situation in the Downtown Eastside. But he says Owen's strategy has focused too much on punishing drug users. Emery says he'll officially announce his candidacy on May 2. The announcement will occur two days before a series of pro-marijuana rallies in cities across North America. [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #16 posted by Dan B on April 24, 2002 at 13:20:25 PT:
|
| Thanks for your generous and kind reply. I was hoping that I had not offended you; that was honestly not my intention, and I'm glad you didn't take it that way. And this is not to say that there isn't something we can learn from Levine. He does make very credible arguments about corruption in the war on some drugs, and these arguments are worth pointing out--especially for those of us arguing for an end to the war altogether. So, thanks for providing the link, and thanks for raising these issues. I learned a thing or two from reading what Levine has to say. I just can't agree with his overall viewpoint. Sincerely, Dan B [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #15 posted by WolfgangWylde on April 24, 2002 at 11:45:05 PT |
| Amendments don't expire, they have to be repealed. The 18th Amendment (the Volstead Act, ie Prohbition) was repealed by the 21st. Which meant, of course, that the States realized what a disaster it was and voted to get rid of it. Interestingly (or not), I believe that this is why the Feds did an end run around the Constitution when implementing "Drug" Prohibition. When people realized how horribly misguided the outlawing of alchohol was, they had a specific flashpoint round which to rally: the 18th Amendment. Correcting it was easy enough, just repeal it. The nascent Drug Warriors were wise not to give the people such an obvious and easily identifiable target for ending the Drug War. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #14 posted by WolfgangWylde on April 24, 2002 at 11:36:28 PT |
| I spent the afternoon perusing Levine's web-site (don't tell my boss), and I have to say, you're probably right. But the "I Volunteer To Kidnap Oliver North" article is still priceless. At any rate, Levine's type is why I'm glad we have the 2nd Amendment. [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #13 posted by Jose Melendez on April 24, 2002 at 11:16:54 PT:
|
| Dude, test this: your complaints that our arguments were illogical would carry more weight if you did not ignore that each and every point you used to support that position have been completely answered and accurately refuted. See: And: http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/12/thread12556.shtml#53 http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/12/thread12556.shtml#57 I'd be interested to hear a constructive way to point out that drug war is only really enforced on cannabis users, and that poison manufacturers have those same lawmakers in their pockets. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #12 posted by FoM on April 24, 2002 at 11:10:20 PT |
| I got permission to post sledhead's pictures of the conference and I'll put them on my What's New Page a little later. Good pictures! http://home.sprynet.com/~mplylar/norml1.html [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #11 posted by onion-eater on April 24, 2002 at 11:03:45 PT |
| test [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #10 posted by FoM on April 24, 2002 at 10:57:02 PT |
| Friends,
If you're up late tonight (or know how to program a VCR) you can see me on Politically Incorrect. I'll be debating Bob Weiner (former Drug Czar McCaffrey's spokesperson), actress Rachael Leigh Cook (who did the ONDCP ad swinging they frying pan a few years ago), and comedian Steve Marmel. The entire show is devoted to the drug war. Check your local listings for times or go to http://abc.abcnews.go.com/primetime/politicallyincorrect/index.html for more info. A transcript should be posted there later this week. Cheers, Sanho PS--If you live in Washington, DC, you won't be able to see it because the local affiliate dropped the show after Bill Maher said something politically incorrect after 9/11, but you can call WJLA at 202-364-7777 to register your disgust with their cowardly censorship. You might be able to pick up the shown the Baltimore affiliate WMAR which broadcasts on Channel 2 at 12:05am.
************************************************************** Organization: November Coalition http://www.november.org/ November Members - If you've never seen Sanho Tree in action, you should stay up late tonight - Wednesday - to watch him on ABC's "Politically Incorrect", hosted by Bill Maher. Sanho is a valuable and trusted advisor to The November Coalition. His expertise is anti-drug policy, especially the international aspects, especially South America. He is based at at the Institute of Policy Studies, www.ips.org, the organization that recognized Nora in late 2000 with their annual Letelier-Moffitt award for 'domestic' social activism. She is at http://www.ips-dc.org/lm-awards/2000/lm2000.htm. IPS is at http://www.ips-dc.org/index.htm and Sanho's page at IPS is http://www.ips-dc.org/projects/drugpolicy.htm JohnChase Regional Volunteer Tampa Bay [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #9 posted by Dan B on April 24, 2002 at 10:41:15 PT:
|
| With all due respect to you, Levine has not "seen the light." Levine is still a rabid prohibitionist who believes that the only problem with the war on drugs is the corruption at the CIA and elsewhere. His articles suggest to me not a belief that the war on some drugs itself is wrong, but that it is right and would work if only those corrupt CIA folks would stop being so . . . corrupt. His kind of rhetoric is the worst kind of doublespeak, for at the same time he admits to and exposes corruption (which is and always will be inherent in any attempt at prohibition), he also holds to his errant belief that the war on drugs is a righteous cause. That is why he refers to corruption by drug law enforcers as "the highest kind of treason imaginable." Yes, he refers to the "War on Drugs" as a fraud, but only in the sense that people in high places kept him and others from carrying out their genocidal missions. He blames his brother's suicide on "drugs," but he is not mad at the "war on drugs," per se. He is angry at corrupt officials for not letting him and others carry out the destruction of all illegal drug-producing plants. This is not the sign of a healthy mind. This is the mind of a psychopath. Unless Levine outright recants his bigotry toward drug users, he will never be worthy of my respect. As a veteran of four federal drug-war agencies, he is trained to hate, to destroy, and to kill. A man with "nearly thirty years" of such a background will be hard-pressed to change his ways, let alone his viewpoint. I'll believe he has changed when he puts in writing that drug users should have the same rights as everyone else, that all drugs should be legal and regulated, and that treatment--including maintenance therapies--should be available to anyone seeking it. Dan B [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #8 posted by Jose Melendez on April 24, 2002 at 10:37:47 PT:
|
| The politicians were more than happy to sit back and let the Court do their job for them, as they didn't want to stick their necks out and vote one way or the other. Maybe that's what they're doing with marijuana. From what I understand, this is also how Alcohol Prohibition ended, the amendment was allowed to expire. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #7 posted by WolfgangWylde on April 24, 2002 at 09:13:04 PT |
| "I was a 25 year veteran, highly decorated international deep cover agent, who witnessed, first hand, how the CIA, State Department and the Department of Justice teamed up to kill every major international drug case I was involved in, for political and economic reasons. At the same time our politicians and bureaucrats lied to the American people and taxed them hundreds of billions of dollars to fight drugs. I was a witness to the highest kind of treason imaginable committed by our government's covert agencies, politicans and bureaucrats, against their own people. After my brother, a heroin addict for 25 years, committed suicide and my son, a highly decorated New York City police officer was killed by crack addicts during a holdup, I had experienced enough. I decided I would use whatever talents God gave me and training the government gave me, against the criminals responsible for the immense and deadly fraud known as "The War on Drugs." You can read the truth in my books, my articles and hear it on my radio show." - Mike Levine Check out his website at www.radio4all.org/expert I especially enjoyed the article, under Commentaries, entitled "I Volunteer To Kidnap Oliver North" [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #6 posted by Lehder on April 24, 2002 at 07:39:05 PT |
| Here's a quote from Michael Levine, 22-year undercover agent in the DEA, excerpted from the book Undercover by Donald Goddard (1988): ...I know this scum. I live with them I talk their language. I live with their victims....Users are the carriers. They are the enemy. So round them up. Isolate them because they're a danger to everyone they know. Dealers don't spread this disease. They don't have to. They let you do that. Once you catch it you'll go looking for them. More than that, dealers weigh the risk against the money they make. They don't respond to fear of the law. But you people do.... We've got to make it dangerous and costly to be caught with anything. A shred of marijuana. A few grains of powder. A pill without a prescription. We've got to have a mandatory minimum sentence of imprisonment for possessing drugs. Period. Never mind the amount. We've also got to have a mandatory minimum sentence for committing any crime or any infraction of the law whatsoever with even a trace of drugs in your system. We test for alcohol if people are driving erratically. We've got to test for drugs if people are behaving erratically. If you want demand reduction, make it known that anyone caught in possession of any amount of drugs must do time. -------- say that one part again, would ya? We test for alcohol if people are driving erratically. We've got to test for drugs if people are behaving erratically. [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #5 posted by kaptinemo on April 24, 2002 at 07:05:27 PT:
|
| Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did, and it never will. Find out just what people will submit to, and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.
Frederick Douglass, August 4, 1857 It seems that the Canadian government is pushing gently to see how much BS Canadian citizens will swallow before they get pissed off enough to do something about it. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #4 posted by WolfgangWylde on April 24, 2002 at 06:59:27 PT |
| In one analysis of the Courts ruling, it was noted that this is exactly how abortion became legal in Canada. The Court had ruled that a medical necessity needed to be accounted for, or the law would be struck down altogether. The politicians were more than happy to sit back and let the Court do their job for them, as they didn't want to stick their necks out and vote one way or the other. Maybe that's what they're doing with marijuana. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #3 posted by TroutMask on April 24, 2002 at 06:48:10 PT |
| You're right. Canada had one year to provide access to sick people or the laws making MJ illegal for EVERYONE would become null and void. It is becoming increasingly apparent that, if anything, it has become MORE difficult for sick people to get marijuana. IMHO, marijuana prohibition is on the brink of a major catastrophe in Canada. The sleeping Americans will soon wake to the smell of skunk bud cafes lined up all along the US/Canada border. Wouldn't that be interesting? :-) -TM [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #2 posted by WolfgangWylde on April 24, 2002 at 04:27:31 PT |
| A judge said this? A little late to the party, isn't he? Last year the Canadian Supreme Court struck down ALL marijuana laws as unconstitutional, based on medical necessity, but gave the government one year to make it available for medical use. And the government is clearly flouting that ruling. I guess we'll get to see if the Court has any cojones. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #1 posted by dddd on April 24, 2002 at 00:41:19 PT |
| ,,of Constitutions!.........What a strange thing it is,,,,this term "unconstitutional"....Is it not becoming quite obvious to Canadians,and Americans,,that their "Constitutions",are about as secure as the rules for Barney,the purple dinasoar??...the "constitution" is about as serious as a false Rembrandt... .and "the Bill of rights", is becoming no different than a "bill of lefts"!.......Politicians have gang-banged our 'Constitutions', and it aint pretty! ...indeedddd [ Post Comment ] |
| Post Comment |  |
 |  |