R v Hauser

Content sourced from Wikipedia, licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.

R v Hauser, [1979] 1 S.C.R. 984, was a Supreme Court of Canada case about who has the power to deal with narcotics laws. The Court, in a 4–3 decision, upheld the Narcotic Control Act as valid federal law under the peace, order and good government power. This was notable because earlier decisions had treated the Act as criminal law under federal power, while others thought it should be controlled by the provinces.

The facts were: Hauser was charged under the Narcotic Control Act with possession of cannabis resin and cannabis for the purpose of trafficking. The indictment was filed by an agent of the federal Attorney General. Hauser challenged the constitutionality of section 2(b) of the Criminal Code, which defines who can be Attorney General, arguing that it gives the federal Attorney General the power to file indictments and run proceedings for federal offences, which would intrude on provincial rights to administer justice.

The federal government argued that under the Constitution Act, 1867, Parliament has authority over criminal law and the procedure in criminal matters, and that the Narcotic Control Act is not simply part of the Criminal Code but a separate federal act, so the jurisdiction belongs to the federal government.

The Alberta Appellate Division had granted the appeal. The majority opinion was written by Justice Pigeon, with Chief Justice Laskin asking the constitutional questions. The Court held that the Narcotic Control Act has enough “newness” to fall under the federal power of peace, order and good government. Justice Dickson dissented, contending that the Act is, in substance, criminal law and therefore the provinces should handle it.

Outcome: The Narcotic Control Act was upheld as constitutional federal law, confirming federal authority to regulate narcotics and prosecute related offences.