Buy an essay on “Oakes Test”

The legal and ethical side of drug use is the complex problem as well as drug legalization. The drug use in the purpose of therapeutic cure goes back to ancient times. Any kind of analysis, political, moral or philosophic – can’t go without mentioning the purposes of drug use. The list of banned, illegal drugs is constantly changing relatively to the latest social, political, religious and scientific trends. Thus, after the short period of prohibition the use of liquor was decriminalized. In the same way marijuana, which was first banned in Canada in 1923, can be legalized at the nearest future due to changes in the attitude of society.
Oakes case, in my opinion, was one of the first indications of attitude changes. It was one of the first cases that proved the possibility of individual drug use in the therapeutic purposes. Few years after the “Oakes case” the drug legislation was changed, in particular, the sentences for drug use became less strict. Thus, in the light of the relation between social trends and legislation I think the decision of Supreme Court was sound and foreseeable.
However, the criminalization of drug use isn’t the main problem of the “Oakes case”. The most important issue is the balance between the legal restrictions and personal rights of citizens. The roots of the problems are in the contradiction between the section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the existing legislation. The section 1 tells that “the 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.”

buy an essay

The main hardship in every case pertinent to rights and freedoms is the interpretation of the “reasonable limits” and “demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society”.
The Canadian society was recognized as free and democratic, and it is stay unchanged, so this point is unquestionable. The reasonableness of punishment for the drug trafficking is also obvious because of its indubitable harm for the society. The stumbling block in the case was the purpose of the drug possession. It is predictable that every drug holder claims that he or she possesses drugs for the personal use, and that’s why the state usually implements the “reverse onus” – the suspect should prove the absence of the purpose of drug traffick¬ing. However, as was claimed by Mr. Oakes, the “reverse onus” violates the presumption of innocence. The decision of Supreme Court on the “Oakes case” should measure the potential harm of possible drug trafficking and compare it to the partial violation of constitutional rights. The decision of Supreme Court had a significant influence on the Canadian and international jurisprudence, however, this precedence is equivocal. As it stated in the case above, the “Oakes test” created the precedent, which has got the wide use in the cases related to rights and freedoms violation, but in my personal opinion, it should be used only in drug-related cases. In the “Oakes case” the “reasonable limit” can easily be defined on the base of the drug weight or price. Despite of the reasonable Supreme Court decision on the Oakes case this precedent shouldn’t be used in the cases when the potential harm can’t be measured.