Judge dismisses accused marijuana exporters' challenge against Extradition Act

    1 of 1 2 of 1

      Eight B.C. men accused of smuggling marijuana to the United States have failed in an attempt to have a section of the Extradition Act declared unconstitutional.

      The men are accused of hollowing out logs to make room for marijuana, which was allegedly sent across the border.

      The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration found the pot inside lumber shipments sent to Sacramento, California.

      American authorities subsequently charged Shane Donald Fraser, Todd Ian Ferguson, Daniel James Joinson, Darrell Joseph Romano, Robert Frank Romano, Ivan Djuracic, Aaron Randolph Anderson, and Jamie Daniel Nenesheff in connection with the scheme.

      Three of the accused—Fraser, Joinsen, and Ferguson—have allegedly been linked to wiretapped conversations arranging for the transport of the marijuana.

      The five other accused were allegedly observed by RCMP entering and leaving a shed in Armstrong, B.C., where marijuana was supposedly inserted into hollowed-out logs.

      They all face extradition to the United States.

      Justice Jeanne Watchuk dismissed their constitutional arguments that section 5 of the Extradition Act cannot be applied against them "for acts allegedly committed entirely within Canada".

      Section 5 states that a person can be extradited "whether or not the conduct on which the extradition partner bases its request occurred in the territory over which it has jurisddiction and whether or not Canada could exercise jurisdiction in similar circumstances".

      The petitioners claimed that a Supreme Court of Canada ruling in United States of America v. Ferras has created a new legal issue.

      "In light of Ferras, they argue that s. 5 of the Extradition Act permits a deprivation of liberty not in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice," Watchuk noted in her ruling.  

      She added that the applicants' lawyers pointed out that the "provision permits persons to be extradited from Canada without consideration by the extradition judge of whether there is a real and substantial connection between the conduct which forms the basis of the extradition request and the requesting state."

      The lawyers claimed that this "violates the principle of fundamental justice, identified in Ferras, that persons sought are guaranteed a 'meaningful judicial process' ". 

      The Crown, on the other hand, argued that an extradition judge has "limited right" to grant remedies under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. And therefore,  the Crown submitted that the constitionality of the act fell outside Watchuk's jurisdiction in this case.

      In the end, Watchuk sided with the Crown's argument that she had no authority to hear the constitutional challenge.

      Comments

      5 Comments

      kootenaygirl

      Aug 30, 2014 at 9:19am

      Charlie, you are working much too long. Sept 1 go to Swangard Stadium and listen to Trooper.

      Are these guys currently in jail? When will they join our variety of exports?

      0 0Rating: 0

      Pat Crowe

      Aug 30, 2014 at 8:33pm

      Yes indeed, Charlie is working too hard!
      However I suggest Charlie head over to the Island and get blasted with Shandley and Crowe at Arbutus Cove on any select evening. Much more vulgar and fun than a Trooper concert.
      Ah the good old days, eh Charlie.
      Bring Newton with you to. I'm gonna beat that guy up.

      0 0Rating: 0

      Constitutional Rights

      Aug 30, 2014 at 10:39pm

      Don't care about organized Criminals.

      But as a Citizen I expect the Constitution to be the Supreme Law of the Land.

      For example any Canadian can be extradited by any other country even a third world corrupt regime.

      I would expect Canada to have to enforce it's Constitution like the Supreme Canada did earlier.

      But most cases don't make it to the Supreme Court local Judges like this one can pass the buck and not enforce Canada's Constitution by just agreeing with the Department of Justices weak argument.

      Meanwhile interestingly it's really really difficult to extradite us citizens anywhere regardless of crime, why are we so weak?

      0 0Rating: 0

      blah

      Aug 31, 2014 at 3:00pm

      Sissy Criminals crying to the judge. Don't talk the talk if you can't walk the walk. Seriously, I could care less about the "rights" of a bunch of criminals.

      0 0Rating: 0

      stdalz

      Sep 4, 2014 at 8:53am

      This is more about supplying cheap labor to the American prison system than it is about anything else. How can Us, as Canadian citizens allow any one of our people to be shipped South when its a known fact the American Prison system is an "for profit" corrupt Institution.
      Just ask Mark Emery

      0 0Rating: 0