Ottawa, Ontario: Canada’s top court will hear arguments on December 13th regarding whether national laws prohibiting the non-medical use of marijuana violate Canadians’ guaranteed rights to life, liberty and personal security.
Defendants David Malmo-Levine and Victor Eugene Cain are appealing a 2-1 decision by the British Columbia Court of Appeals in June 2000 that upheld the constitutionality of Canada’s pot laws. In that decision, the majority admitted, “The risk posed by marijuana is not large,” but ruled that marijuana law reform must come from Parliament, not the courts. Dissenting judge Jo-Anne Prowse disagreed, opining that the provisions of the Narcotic Control Act infringed upon the appellants fundamental rights under Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
“In my view, the evidence does not establish that simple possession of marijuana presents a reasoned risk of serious, substantial or significant harm to either the individual or society or others,” she determined.
The high court is consolidating the Malmo-Levine/Cain case with that of marijuana activist Christopher Clay, who lost a separate trial in 1997. Legal briefs in that case are available online in NORML’s Brief Bank.
For more information, please contact Keith Stroup, Executive Director of NORML, at (202) 483-5500 or John Conroy, Director of Canada NORML, at (604) 852-5110.