Low Hanging Fruit . . . and Beyond: Canada's Drug Laws Meet the Charter

• Author: Melvyn Green
• Pages: 510-546



LowHangingFruitandBeyond

CA NA DASDRUGL AWS

MEETTHECHART ER

Melvyn Green*

A. INTRODUCTION

Sometimesithelpstostartatthebegin ning

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedomsjoined theBritish-North

America Act as the formal Con stitution of Canada in Twoyears

laterinLaw Society of Upper Canada v Ska pinkertheSupremeCourtgot

itsrstbiteoftheCharterapple

Skapinke r wasaratherunassumingintroductiontot helegalrevolu

tionwroughtbytheCharteramobilityrightsbasedandultimatelyfu

tilechallengetoanOntarioLawSocietyrulethatrestrictedmembership

toCanadiancitizensTheSupremeCourthoweverwasatpainstomake

clearthatanewmethodologyreplacedthatwhichintheviewofmany

reectedan overlyreticentapplicationof thepredecessor Canadian Bill

of Right sUnliketheBill of RightstheCharterwasnotamerestatutebut

ratherpartofthe supremelawofCanadaAdoptingthelang uageof

thePrivyCouncilinthecelebratedPersonsCase

theSupremeCourt

recognized theCharterasalivingtree thatimposedaconstitutional

role ontheC ourtW hilet hejudic iaryh adlongwo rkedtore concil ethe

 OntarioCourtofJust ice

 SCRSkapinker

 SCc

 EdwardsvCanadaAorneyG eneralACJCPC

 Sk apin ker,a bovenoteatpara

Low Hanging Fruit . . . and Beyond

institutionsofgovernmentundertheB.N.A. Act,” EsteyJspeakingfor

theCourtmadeclearthattheCharterbroughtwithit

anewdi mensionanewyardstic kofreconciliation betweentheindi

vidual and the commun ity and their respe ctive rights a dimension

whichli kethebalanceof theConstitution remainstobe interpreted

andappliedbytheCourt

InretrospectSkapinkerproved amodes ttrai lerfor theCharterblo ckbus t

erstofollowNonethelessandagainwiththeadvantageofhindsightit

isapparent thattheSupremeCour twasintenton makinga fewintro

ductorypoints Firstthe refereeingofthe divisionof powersbetween

federal and provincial governments that occupied the Cour tsconsti

tutionalagenda sinceitsestablishment inwasnowsupplemented

byafreshassignmentt hebalancingofindividuallegalanddemocratic

interestswith thoseassertedby thestateSecondthe deferencetoPar

liamentthatch aracterizedtheCourtsinterpretationof theBill of Rights

wastob ereplacedbya constitutionallyinformed analysisintendedto

secure protected individual rights f rom claims of state privilege and

legalconventionAndthirdiflessdirectlywastheCourtsveiledfore

castifnotwarningthatrecalibrationofthelegalandpoliticalrelation

shipbetwe enthestateanditscit izensmightwellpr oveofradicaleect

Eachoft hesepropositionsfound purchaseint heSupremeCourts

responsetorepeatedchallengestotheNarcotic Control Act, then Ca nad as

primarycri minallawauthorityforthecontrolofdrugs

B T HE GOVE RN INGD RUGCON TR OL

REGIME

The Narcotic Control ActNCAconsistedof onlyaboutten substantive

provisionsDespiteitsbrevityitwasnotoriouslyvulnerabletoconstitu

tionalchallengeashadbeenwidelypredictedandwasquicklydemon

stratedin lowercourtsIndeeda reviewofthe SupremeCourtsearly

 Ibid atpara

 Ibid

 RSCcNasamendedNCA

 Oawawashardlynaïveastot heriskofconstitutionalexp osureparticularlyrespec t

ingtheexception alsearchandseizurepowersaut horizedbytheNCAandafewother

federalstatutesSomei nsightintothefederalgovernment sCharterreadyplaybookmay 

befoundinanar ticlebyMichaelDambrotthenasen iorcounselwiththeDepart ment

ofJusticeSectionoft heCanadian Charter of Rights and FreedomsCriminal

ReportsdTheauthornowahighlyregardedOnta rioSuperiorCourtJustice

conductedaverythoroughreviewofthereleva ntpreChartercommonlawand

MG

ifselectivedismantl ingoftheNCArevealstheblueprintformuchofits

subsequentCharterjurisprudenceintheareaofcrim inallaw

Althoughreliantongeneralpri nciplesofsubstantiveandadjectival

lawtheNarcotic Control Act alsocontained itsown complementaryor

alternative code of investigatoryprocedural and evidentiary powers

Inuponthe adventofthe Charterallopiatecocaine andcanna

bisrelateddrugsderivativesandpreparationswerelistedinthesingle

schedule to the Act andt hussubjec ttothesam earrayofleg islatedpow

ersandpenaltiesTobeclearthebroadpolicepowersanddenunciatory

sentencesprescribedforheroinand cocaineappliedwith equalvigour

totheenforcementofoencesinvolvingcannabisi ncludingmarijuana

Other popular psychoactive drugs including LSD and meth ampheta

mineand mosttherapeuticssubject toprescriptionwere governedby

aparallelifsomewhat lesspunitive statutetheFood and Drugs Act. It

wasnotu ntilthatthe twostatuteswere eectivelymergedasthe

Controlled Drugs and Substances Actwh ichas intermientlyamen ded

remainsCanadasprevailingdrugcontrolregime

Evenbefore t he Charterc ourts frequently characteriz ed the search

powersauthori zedbysection oftheNarcotic Control Actasextraordi n

aryApeaceocercouldenteranyplaceotherthanadwellinghouseif

heorshereasonablybelieveditcontainedaprohibiteddrugNowar

rantwas required Ifarmed with writof assistanceas werewell more

thanahu ndreddrugenforcementocersatthet imethelawfulscope

ofwarra ntlessdrug searchesextended todwelling housesas wellOn

Americanauthorit iesHealsoservedasFederalcounse lonmanyofthegerminal

casesinwhicht heSupremeCourtconsideredtheconst itutionalproprietyofvari

ousprovisionsoftheNC AAshecautiouslyconcludedhisarticleTheonly

thingthatc anbesaidwithcertaint yaboutsisthatitwillrequirecou rtsin

Canadafortherstt imetodealextensivelywiththelawfu llimitsofthepowers

ofsearchandsei zure

 RSCcFasamended

 SCc

 See R v NobleOJNoatparaCANoble

 Writsofassistancewer emandatorilygrantedtonamedocersbyt heExchequer

CourtlateritssuccessorFedera lCourtuponapplicationbytheAorneyGeneral

ofCanadaSeeNobleibid atparaandatparas MartinJA

Inessencethewr itisaministerialorexecut iveauthorityorcommissionto

theholdertoexercisewit houtwarrantstatutorypowersofsearchT husthe

writmerelyidentiest hosepersonsentitledtoexercis estatutorypowersof

searchwithoutawar rant

Thefactthatthew ritisgrantedbytheFederalCourtine vitablytendsto

givethewritanauraofj udicialauthorizationwhichism isleadingsincethe

courthasnodisc retionwithrespecttoitsgra nting