MARIJUANA AND THE CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS (originally written in December 1992, with numbered foot-notes. New foot- notes -- with letters -- were added in May, 1993.) An essay by Kevin Thompson Section I of the CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS states: The CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such REASONABLE limits prescribed by law as can be DEMONSTRABLY JUSTIFIED in a free and democratic society. [Emphasis mine.] Parliament makes a farce of this, especially when it comes to the very unConstitutional NARCOTIC CONTROL ACT. This Act makes it illegal to possess, cultivate, buy, sell, use, or import/export marijuana; however, it does not make the drug itself illegal -- it is a "controlled substance". As will be shown, this Act, by its very inception, is itself illegal. In the early twentieth century, coal mining was an extremely profitable enterprise. The Dunsmuir family in particular -- well known here in Victoria, BC, for their many contributions to local architecture -- were doing well. The usual practice on the West Coast was to hire predominantly Chinese miners, as there were large numbers of Asian immigrants looking for work after completion of the railroads; they were willing to work cheap. But not too cheaply, apparently, for they soon began to talk among themselves of forming labour unions. This, of course, was not a welcome turn of events to coal magnates such as the Dunsmuirs, and they began to pressure the government to put a stop to it. The feds were forced to act, since they depended on the money the coal mines provided them. Hence, in 1911, the early predecessor of the NARCOTIC CONTROL ACT was enacted. It prohibited people -- but specifically Chinese immigrants -- from smoking opium. Since the Chinese miners no longer had the right to enter their meeting halls -- deemed (no doubt correctly) to be "opium dens" -- they could no longer gather to smoke opium, and, therefore, to discuss union ideas.[a] Section 15(1) of the CHARTER says: Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic -------------------- [a]The author would like to point out that this is an opinion which has been expressed to him, and does not necessarily suggest that it is true. However, The Opium Act of 1908, as the N.C.A. was originally called, was a measure of Asian control. origin, colour, religion, sex, age, or mental or physical disability. With this in mind, the NARCOTICS CONTROL ACT, which came to include a long list of drugs, including marijuana in 1923, without the benefit of debate in the House of Commons, should be nullified. If such a control were to be placed on alcohol today (what is the most common topic in Canadian bars besides hockey? Unfair wages, closely followed by unfair taxes), there would be armed revolt. This was proven by the American government with the Prohibition that made Elliot Ness a household name. Section 7 of the CHARTER states: Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of person and the right not to be deprived thereof, except in accordance with the principles of FUNDAMENTAL justice. [Emphasis mine.] And Section 8: Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure. The right to privacy is not only implied in the above, it is just short of guaranteed. Very few people fail to express (however minor) outrage when the learn that oral and anal sex are illegal in Georgia in the United States; if not at the law itself then certainly at the thought of "sex police" busting into one's bedroom, and the type of surveillance it would take to uncover such a "crime". As Pierre Trudeau said twenty years ago, "The government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation." Likewise, one of the so-called "evils" of Communism is that the Party and the State are more important than the individual; children are honoured and rewarded for reporting their own parents for any subversive or suspicious actions. Proponents of our "democratic" system point out that this does not happen here; but Crimestoppers will pay up to $2000 for this type of information. To children, if need be. The same feelings of intrusion should apply to the idea that one's privacy can be invaded because the government wants to regulate what a person smokes, or what kind of plants that person can grow, in their own home. Parliament's claim is that marijuana is illegal -- rather, "controlled" -- because it is harmful. This author does not intend to suggest that there are NO dangers to smoking marijuana; it can be assumed that any time smoke is drawn into the lungs a certain amount of physical damage may result. However, in this context tobacco -- 400,000-plus deaths per year -- and alcohol -- 150,000-plus deaths per year, excluding 50 per cent of all motor vehicle accidents and 65 per cent of all murders -- must also be criminalized. Aspirim, caffeine, and even theopoline could be added to the list, since there are over 11,000 deaths each year from these drugs. [2] -------------------- [2] The author would like it known that these statistics are American figures; realizing that our population is 10% that of the United States, numbers may be guessed at for Canadian death rates. Despite extensive Marijuana, on the other hand, is NOT addictive, can NOT be taken to overdose, has NO adverse side-effects or allergic reactions, and has a yearly death toll of exactly ZERO! What if you were told you could no longer use sugar, or grow rhododendrons (beautiful plants, but of the kalmia family; DO NOT EAT!), or do any other thing that may be deemed to be "harmful"?[b] Canadian citizens deserve to be treated like the adults they are, and be allowed to make up their own minds on what they do or do not want to do to their own bodies and in their own homes. The fact is, the NARCOTIC CONTROL ACT has nothing to do with the health aspects of marijuana, and everything to do with MONEY. A classic example of such doublespeak by the government can be heard every time a new budget is announced. Invariably tobacco, alcohol, and gasoline are hit by new taxes. (Incidentally, these three industires pay a LOT of money to the government to protect their products.) The purpose of these taxes, the nation is told, is to raise extra revenue, while at the same time encouraging people to smoke less, drink less, drive less -- they are so- called "sin taxes". No one has answered the contradiction: where will the extra revenue come from when everybody stops smoking, drinking, or driving? De-criminalizing marijuana would go a long way to reversing, if not ALL the problems, then at least the poor financial state of this country. For one thing, users would most certainly be charged tax when they purchase marijuana, no doubt at government-operated "Hemp Stores", restricted to adults as liquor stores are now. Street dealers would be put out of business completely, saving the money -- over ten BILLION dollars a year on illicit drugs, more than is spent on new cars -- that is effectively removed from the system. For example, when was the last time any of us bought moonshine from a bootlegger? Beyond the recreational use of marijuana, the other 85 per cent of the plant (commercially grown, of course) would be available for all the purposes it can serve. Items like paper, fabric (from rope to clothing), food, fuel, plastic, paints, oil, and a whole host of things can all be made from the hemp plant. And to think that at the same time we are depleting our forests, over-burdening our environment, and having to subsidize our farmers. Also to be considered is all the money now being spent to enforce this oppressive and unfair Act, which could be channelled into more productive ventures such as reducing the deficit. Billions of dollars per year are used up investigating, staking out, arresting, trying, and incarcerating people for this otherwise victimless crime; meanwhile, understaffed police forces and overloaded courts and jails can not cope with the rising tide of violent -------------------- time on the telephone, in various government offices, and much research at the library -- not to mention the help by so many personable receptionists in the Victoria area -- this author was unable to verify any hard and fast numbers for Canada. Unsubstantiated figures show that upwards of 18,000 deaths per year are due to alcohol, while tobacco at 35,000 deaths per year is recognized as the leading cause of preventable death and disease. If there is a reader out there who has definitive figures for Canada, please contact this author through this magazine. [b] Since the writing of this essay, a proposal has been put forth to ban or limit up to 64 herbs because they may be harmful if taken to extreme. This author believes that anything taken to extreme can be harmful. crimes. Fundamental justice is not being served. This is not to mention the enormous funds allocated to research marijuana even though action is rarely, if ever, taken on the findings. In 1973, the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Non-Medical Use of Drugs, under George LeDain, Dean of Osgood Hall Law School, suggested that cannabis use and cultivation should NOT be criminal offenses -- after four years and 3.5 million dollars. This recommendation was bluntly ignored by Parliament. Worse than all that, and the fact that billions of tax dollars are being spent on surveillance equipment and guns for the soldiers -- police and other enforcement agencies -- to use AGAINST the tax-payers, there are the REAL victims of this "criminal" substance. These are the people -- users, dealers, police officers, and innocent by-standers -- who die as a result of marijuana control. A "war on drugs" has been declared, and the sad fact of any and all wars is that both sides will take casualties. Monetary figures can not be applied to this sort of cost, and all the billions mentioned so far pale in comparison. (This attempt to control drug use is a proven failure; there is more now than ever, even when it was "legal".) In contrast, no user ever killed in order to supply his or her habit. While it is likely that users have held up stores or banks for marijuana money, these crimes are usually perpetrated by users of chemical drugs, such as PCP and Crystal Meth. Violent crimes do not result from being high; users would much rather watch TV or listen to music or tell jokes or just "veg out". According to the Tinklenberg Report in 1971, "there is little evidence of any clear relationship between marijauna and crime, though it is thought by some that the tranquilizing effect of marijauna may actually discourage crime, particularly violent crime." Perhaps the biggest fight that could be caused BY marijuana would be over who gets the last brownie. Have you ever wondered why pacifists, artists, musicians, writers, and the like are generally accepted -- and, perhaps, EXPECTED -- to be marijuana users?[c] The CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS is "founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God ... " and [3] Canadian society is purportedly Christian-based. Genesis 1:29 relates: "And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of the Earth [...] to you it shall be for meat." (A word to vegetarians: in this context "meat" implies "for your use".) The Book of Proverbs carries a warning that Man is to be the Master of all things on the Earth, and a slave to nothing; in other words, the only wrong in using anything is in becoming addicted. The New Testament is full of teachings about what is right and what is wrong, as in Romans 14:14: "there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean." And I Timothy 4:4-5: "For every creature of God IS good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer." -------------------- [c] Now that President Clinton -- who doesn't inhale -- and Kim Campbell, Jean Charest, and Jim Fulton -- who we can assume DO inhale -- have admitted to marijuana use, the unequal treatment under the law is again apparent; people in position do not pay the same price as the rest of us. [3] While this author does not necessarily share the beliefs or opinions of the Christian BIBLE, nor intends to suggest that the reader should, either, a point can be made. In fact, the only hard and fast restrictions in the Bible are the Ten Commandments, the only "law" is the Golden Rule. These should be all a free society really needs. Yet the NARCOTIC CONTROL ACT denies people the very free will they are given by God, according to the Bible. By Biblical example, hypocrites and oppressors do not fare well. Section 24(1) of the CHARTER reads: Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances. The NARCOTIC CONTROL ACT infringes upon EVERY Canadian's right to fair taxes, clean air, plentiful fuel, inexpensive food and clothing, a reduced deficit, proper police protection, and less unemployment, while denying them the freedom of their privacy and their free will, whether they use marijuana or not. Police can look in anybody's windows, any time, for no better reason to make sure that person is NOT using marijuana. Of course, Canadians do not even have the CHOICE to use or not; it is even "illegal" to write this article, or to read it, under Sections 462.1 and 462.2 of the CRIMINAL CODE. If you are one of those concerned people who are opposed to this kind of suppression, repression, and oppression by the government, please write to your MP, your MLA, your Town Council, Ombudsperson, and anyone else in government. Demand an end to this unConstitutional practice -- the NARCOTIC CONTROL ACT -- perpetrated against you "in the interest of your own protection". Make it known that YOU can look out for you, and that Parliament should look after the country, and the environment, and the deficit, and the unemployed, and ... For a complete history of the conspiracy of the government in this matter, as well as full coverage of the many other uses of marijuana, a copy of THE EMPEROR WEARS NO CLOTHES can be obtained in Victoria, BC, from Normand Cholette (who is himself currently awaiting trial on charges of cultivating marijuana; he will be challenging the NARCOTIC CONTROL ACT as unConstitutional, seeking a hearing in the higher courts))[d] at: N.O.R.M.L. Victoria Depot 4, P.O. Box 7193 Victoria, BC V9B 4Z3 To our American friends who may be reading this: Thank you for your interest, and be advised that this breach of public trust is not exclusive to your Neighbour to the North. Please contact your nearest N.O.R.M.L. Chapter for information about The Marijuana Conspiracy, as perpetrated by pharmaceutical companies, Du Pont, the Hearst plan for exploiting pulp-wood, and of course your own government. -------------------- [d] Norm Cholette has been convicted of cultivating marijauna and was handed a $500 fine. He is currently appealing to the B.C. Supreme Court, and would be grateful for any show of support on his crusade. With luck, Bill C-420 as introduced to Parliament by Jim Fulton will help lead the way to saner laws. The author would also like to plug PEACEFUL MEASURES by S.F.U.Prof. of Psych. Dr. Brtuce Alexander, HIGH SOCIETY by ZNeil Boyd, and HELP! STOP THE WAR. by Victoria's own Robb Rippingale.