It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Top court rules Insite drug injection clinic can stay open

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Top court rules Insite drug injection clinic can stay open


www.cbc.ca

Vancouver's controversial Insite clinic can stay open, the Supreme Court said Friday in a landmark ruling.

In a unanimous decision, the court ruled that not allowing the clinic to operate under an exemption from drug laws would be a violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The court ordered the federal minister of health to grant an immediate exemption to allow Insite to operate.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
m.ctv.ca




posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 09:58 AM
link   
I know this is a subject that many people cannot agree on. I personally believe that this program does more good than harm. As someone who has "been around the block", I can confirm that Vancouver's east side is the drug addiction capital of North America if not the world. It is a
depressing site.

Incidences of infectious diseases and death by overdose have significantly reduced since this program was launched. The Conservative federal government has made it no secret that they oppose this program.

I am surprised that the Supreme Court came to this decision. I fear that the Feds will try to overrule this somehow with their majority government they have in power.

I believe other countries in Europe have also tried this program with success. Perhaps it is time for countries of the world to rethink their policies.


www.cbc.ca
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


I live in the lower mainland and I spent a number of years living in the downtown east side and I was so upset to hear that the Insite clinic may be closed. This ruling gives me hope that Vancouver will continue to be a progressive community and a voice for change to the rest of the world. Harm reduction strategies do so much good, from stemming the tide of infectious diseases to Keeping those who need treatment and counseling out of prison where they are nothing but another mouth to feed. I hope this ruling is upheld and we continue to progress as city that cares for all our people, regardless of the issues they face...
edit on 30-9-2011 by nS1NR8r because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by nS1NR8r
 


I thank you for your input. You brought up some very good points. I have seen much of Canadian tax payers money get wasted on putting addicts in jail where they do not get better. The prison system in Canada is rampant with drugs. The addicts usually go in with addictions to pain killers or other drugs and often come out hooked on heroin where they commit more crimes to feed their habit and end up back in jail shortly after. It is a failed policy.

Vancouver has always been a progressive city, and I am pleased as well that the Supreme Court of Canada has allowed this program to continue. Victoria has similar programs such as mobile needle depots that drive around the city. The users are encouraged to trade in their used needles for clean ones. This reduces the amount of syringes to be found in the street. I am ashamed to say that I cannot even count how many times I have seen needles laying all over the place including school grounds and public parks where children play. The mobile needle exchange and all affiliated programs have had financial difficulties over the last few years due to government cuts.

Our current government rather adopt an American style war on drugs stance, which is not what Canada is about. Stay tuned for Harper and friends to voice their displeasure with this ruling. I am not very familiar with how our federal court system works so I am unaware if the majority government has jurisdiction to overrule this. I hope this new crime legislation that is about to be implemented does not include loop holes to overrule these types of decisions.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 01:40 PM
link   
I don't think they can overrule the Supreme Court.

Anyway, this is a blow to Harper. In private, he definitely won't accept this but at this point I think there is nothing he can do about it. He must really be steaming.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 01:54 PM
link   
Reply to post by TheComte
 


Good, I hope Emperor Harpertine is steaming. I'm glad this didn't get shut down. Compassion for your fellow human.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by dl2one
 


I hope he is fumed too. My only fear is that he will react the same way he always does and cut funding for anything that he does not agree with, regardless of the importance and effectiveness of the program.

One of the first things he did when he took office was to cut funding for these types of programs. He also is always creating new legislation for tougher drug laws. If he can't overrule the court, he will do what ever he can to impact this program in a negative manner. His PR campaigns are a almost a mirror image of the Ronald Reagan war on drugs campaign in the USA during the 80s.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   
I doubt Harper really cares if Incite is shut down. It's just social-conservative political capital for him to go up against it. In fact, by losing this ruling, he can play to his rural social conservative base even more, saying 'these heathens down in Vancouver must be stopped'.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by ARealandTrueAmerican
 


No, he wouldn't care if it was shut down. But he certainly does care that the Supreme Court ruled against shutting it down, and will not allow Harper to shut it down. Read this article and then try to say that Harper doesn't care.




The Insite ruling is the most brutal collision to date between the Supreme Court of Canada and Stephen Harper’s Conservative government. Despite the imminent appointment of two more Harper nominees to the top court’s bench, it will likely not be the last.

On Friday, the Court ordered the federal government to grant a special exemption to allow Vancouver’s supervised drug injection clinic to operate without fear of prosecution for possessing and trafficking in hard drugs.

The ruling is the latest volley in an ongoing battle of wills between the top court and the ruling Conservatives. That conflict pits Conservative ideology against the primacy of the rule of law and it has been escalating.

Tensions between Canada’s judicial establishment and Harper’s Conservative party have been simmering for years, predating its election to office. It has been one of the Prime Minister’s longstanding mantras that the exercise of political discretion by an elected government is not a matter for the courts to meddle with.

The Insite ruling is a strong reminder to the Harper government that its law-and-order agenda is not above the law itself.


www.thestar.com...

edit on 2-10-2011 by TheComte because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by TheComte
 


What I'm saying, is that he will use the ruling to rally support from his base, which is what your quote also implies to me. His stance on the Court's ruling is Conservative political gold. I suspect he knew the court would rule the way they did, he wanted this kind of result to play to his base.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ARealandTrueAmerican
 


Maybe so, but the Supreme Court has let him know in no uncertain terms that his ideology will not trump the rule of law. Even his own Supreme Court appointees voted against him, so that alone is a blow to his law and order agenda.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 02:25 PM
link   

While the ruling is a victory for Insite, the Supreme Court said it "is not a licence for injection drug users to possess drugs wherever and whenever they wish." "Nor is it an invitation for anyone who so chooses to open a facility for drug use under the banner of a 'safe injection facility,'" said the court.


As long as that stays true I don't see where anyone has room to bitch about this. It's not the same as parents who let there teenagers get drunk at home, it's helping adults with a serious problem have a safe place lessening the risks. Seems like a very good idea to keep the place open.

Source in OP.

Also, lold at General Harpertine.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheComte
reply to post by ARealandTrueAmerican
 


Maybe so, but the Supreme Court has let him know in no uncertain terms that his ideology will not trump the rule of law. Even his own Supreme Court appointees voted against him, so that alone is a blow to his law and order agenda.





Again, you are looking too short term. This gives him ammo to campaign for MORE conservative justices. He chose a battle he knew he would lose, so that he can play to his base. It's politics.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by ARealandTrueAmerican
 


You seem to think Harper's base is large. It is actually quite small. That is, the base that will AGREE with Harper on this issue is small. Much larger are the Progressive Conservatives who will be alienated by Harper putting his ideology above the law. The proof is the conservative Supreme Court justices that Harper appointed voted against him. The moderates do not agree with Harper on this issue. So he can't use it to drum up support from them.

Only a small fraction of supporters are the evangelical Christian fundamentalists that Harper is. The moderate conservatives are much larger group.

It's possible a split is coming in the party. McKay (a moderate) is already on the outs with Harper.

Harper doesn't have to "campaign" for justices. He can just appoint them when a vacancy opens up.


edit on 2-10-2011 by TheComte because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheComte


It's possible a split is coming in the party. McKay (a moderate) is already on the outs with Harper.


That seems incredibly unlikey, seeing as it would take the Conservatives from a Majority position to a minority position. But well have to wait and see i guess.

If shutting down InSite would have alienated 'Progressive Conservatives", then why do you suppose he sought the restrictions in the first place? He likely knew it was a losing battle.
edit on 2-10-2011 by ARealandTrueAmerican because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by ARealandTrueAmerican
 


When the court case got under way in 2008, Harper didn't think he would lose.




Insite was granted a three-year exemption from the possession and trafficking provisions of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act when it first opened its doors in 2003.

It was granted two extensions but the Conservative government made it clear in 2008 that it did not support another exemption, and court proceedings were launched to try to save the clinic. Lawyers for the federal ministry argued that the government should not be in the business of facilitating illegal drug use.

The federal health minister at the time was Tony Clement, now Treasury Board president, and the Supreme Court agreed with lower court decisions that found his decision to withdraw the exemption violates Section seven of the charter because it contravenes the principle of fundamental justice.


www.cbc.ca...



edit on 2-10-2011 by TheComte because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by TheComte
 


So you think Harper REALLY didnt know how his own appointees would vote?



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 10:32 PM
link   
Well I think he thought they would vote his way. But when they didn't he was not pleased. And they didn't because he went too far ideologically. And maybe some of the more moderate Conservative MPs might be thinking twice about Harper. That's all I'm saying.

Several news articles have commented on the fact that Harper is miffed at this decision.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 10:34 PM
link   
reply to post by TheComte
 


Well, we'll have to see how this is played and plays in the next election, if at all.

thanks for all the info and insight! (no pun intended)



new topics

top topics



 
7

log in

join