Police take aim at drug-impaired drivers - Controversial law
Wednesday » November 12 » 2008
Police take aim at drug-impaired drivers
Controversial law allows officers to demand new tests
Valerie Berenyi
Calgary Herald
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Drivers high on drugs may no longer be able to avoid detection at checkstops now that some Calgary police officers are accredited as drug-recognition experts with the authority to demand blood, urine or saliva samples.
Specially trained RCMP and city police are on the lookout for drivers using "any drug that impairs their ability to operate a motor vehicle," said RCMP spokesman Sgt. Patrick Webb.
Impairment by illegal drugs such as marijuana, cocaine or ecstasy is commonly watched for by police, said Webb, but they're also looking for any drug, including prescription drugs, that impairs the ability to drive.
"I think we have to get away from the mindset that impaired driving is just people involving alcohol," said John Dooks, president of the Calgary Police Association.
The new enforcement powers are part of a controversial Canadian law that came into effect July 2. Although drug-impaired driving has been illegal since 1925, the new law gives police the authority to demand a suspect take roadside physical co-ordination tests such as walking and turning or standing on one leg -- something they could previously obtain only voluntarily.
If a suspected drug-impaired driver fails the physical tests, a breath test will be conducted to rule out alcohol impairment before the suspect is sent to a police detachment. There, 11 further tests will be done by a drug-recognition expert who must first identify the type of drugs involved before requesting blood, urine or saliva samples.
"If the test comes back (from the laboratory) and there is no drug in the system, the person will not be charged with impaired driving," said Webb.
However, if the bodily fluids test confirms the officer's conclusion about the type of drugs involved, a drug-impaired charge will result.
Those who refuse to comply with testing can be subject to a minimum $1,000 fine, the same as the penalty for refusing a breath test.
Critics say there is not yet enough research to equate drug levels in the body with impairment.
"The biggest problem is how much the police will be able to prove (impairment)," said Stephen Jenuth, president of the Alberta Civil Liberties Association.
"I don't think there's anything that shows a drug at a certain level results in impairment."
Jenuth also sees problems with the testing of bodily fluids because it can detect drug use from days or weeks earlier.
"Someone may have had some painkillers five days ago and still have some residue in their system and that may turn up," he said. "I'm not sure that is something they can be convicted of."
The same holds true for drugs and alcohol, said Webb. If someone drinks heavily and is given a breathalyzer two days later, he or she will still have a detectable level of alcohol, but it won't be enough for an impaired charge.
He said there will need to be impairment levels established for each type of drug, be it marijuana or cocaine.
"It will ultimately have to be determined how much of each of those causes impairment. I don't believe there is yet a level established for all of those. The courts will need to look at all of that."
Calgary's new drug-recognition experts are trained under the Drug Evaluation and Classification Program, founded in Los Angeles in the 1970s. It was introduced to British Columbia in 1995 and is now a national program being offered to police officers across Canada through the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police.
Quote
