By Neil Boyd, John Conroy, and Gil Puder

(Neil Boyd is a criminology professor at Simon Fraser University; John Conroy is a lawyer; Gil Puder is a Vancouver police officer and college instructor.)

DRUG WAR VETS SAY DON’T POLICE MARIJUANA

The moderate use of cannabis by healthy adults, even over many years, risks neither the health of the user nor of society, scientific and medical researchers are beginning to agree. See The Lancet

Remember these words, reader, when you next participate in, or are exposed to, the highly charged, long overdue debate over Canada’s illicit-drug policies - and, equally important, their impact on individual Canadians and our swamped justice and health-care systems.

Remember them especially if that debate degenerates into an exchange of volleys between prohibitionist drug-warriors and laissez-faire libertarians in which the principal casualty is socially responsible alternatives to their extreme positions.

Implicitly, the Canadian courts have done much recently to publicize the emerging medical and scientific consensus that cannabis is relatively benign.

[1] Last August, the Ontario Court (general division) in R. v Clay found a general agreement among the experts that moderate use of marijuana causes no physical or psychological harm.

[2] Last December, the Ontario Court of Justice (provincial division) in R. v Parker declared that persons possessing or cultivating cannabis for their personal medically approved use were exempt from the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. The court stayed possession and cultivation charges against an epileptic user.

Marijuana is clearly the leading candidate for "delisting" from the illicit-drug trade. We would like to propose a first, modest step forward:

The legislation that "criminalizes" marijuana use is the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. It is federal legislation and it may be unrealistic to expect Ottawa to change it. Not only can centrist governments be rather clumsy when addressing community interests, but the increasing potential for either an election or leadership contest makes our justice and health ministers unlikely risk-takers.

Law enforcement falls under provincial jurisdiction, however, and thus appears to be a more practical place to begin drug-law reform. Consider the consequences of this possible policy directive:

Effective this date, the provincial Attorney-General directs all Chiefs of Police and RCMP Commanding Officers to adhere to the following guidelines when they, or members under their command, enforce the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, with respect to cannabis (marijuana):

S. 4(1) Possession shall not be enforced against a person who has achieved the age of 19 years, except when that person is found to be in possession in the following circumstances:

1. In a public school or on school grounds;
2. While consuming cannabis on public property.
3. While operating a motor vehicle or vessel when impaired;
4. Of the quantity possessed exceeds 30 grams.

S. 5(1) Trafficking shall not be enforced against a person when all parties to the transaction have reached the age of 19 years, the quantity of cannabis exchanged is no more than 30 grams, and there is no profit arising from the transaction.

Cultivation of no more than three cannabis plants shall be permitted upon private property.
(Ed. note: I think that this is a bit low. Five or six plants should be allowed at minimum. For some medical users it will need to be even higher.)

Any exception to these restrictions requires the specific approval of the commanding officer of the jurisdiction.
(Ed. note: This could be a loophole.)

Enforcement of any municipal anti-smoking bylaws will continue to be expected.

Under our proposal: People could cultivate plants for personal use, thereby, avoiding the criminal black market. Parents concerned about having pot at home could obtain a small amount, without fear of arrest.

Doctors and nurses seeking marijuana for their patients would no longer have to send them to drug dealers offering a potentially contaminated product.

Some police officials may protest, but their views fall contrary to the majority of citizens; in B.C., 63 per cent of the public favour decriminalization.

(The objection of police leaders - those who have typically supported the status quo - would certainly raise the issue of whether an agency truly believes in, or is merely paying lip service to community-based policing.)