Drug-impaired driving up 43 percent in Canada: report

Prosecutors predicted the surge of cases once a 95-year criminal ban on recreational cannabis was repealed in 2015, reports Blacklocks.

"Drug-impaired driving is significantly under detected," StatsCan wrote in a report on impaired driving in Canada. "Drugs may be involved as often, or maybe more often, than alcohol in impaired driving incidents." Analysts counted 6,453 incidents reported by police, a 43 percent uptick of drug-impaired driving cases in 2019, which was the first full year of legalization over 2018.

Unlike drinking and driving charges that peak in twilight hours, "the rate of drug-impaired driving varies little from one time of day to another," stated the report.

"Police reported just as many of these incidents between 11 am and 3 pm, as between 11 pm and 3 am," wrote analysts. Cases also took twice as long to wind through the courts as alcohol-related charges.

Crown prosecutors in 2018 testimony at the Senate legal and constitutional affairs committee predicted a wave of cases would clog court proceedings once marijuana was legal. "The system is not prepared to absorb all the implications of this," testified James Palangio, representing the Canadian Association of Crown Counsel.

"If the question is, do we have enough on the ground for the coming into force of legalization? I don't think we do, but we're doing the best we can," said Palangio.

Statistics Canada in a 2018 report, titled "Impaired Driving Statistics," said it took courts an average of 245 days to clear drug-impaired driving cases compared to 114 days for drinking and driving incidents. "Drug-impaired cases require more appearances on average (seven) than alcohol-impaired cases (five)," wrote staff.

Lawyers testified that cannabis legislation would result in more police charges, trials, appeals and delays in provincial courts. "This litigation will go on for a decade," said Michael Edelson, a criminal defence lawyer with Edelson & Friedman LLP of Ottawa. "Previous legislative changes in this area have spawned a massive number of trials and appeals, not only challenging the constitutionality of provisions but the science associated with them."

Parliament with legalization passed Bill C-46, an act to amend the criminal code, that set drug impairment limits at five billionths of a gram of the psychoactive ingredient in cannabis, tetrahydrocannabinol, per one millilitre of blood.

The Canadian Criminal Justice Association testified it was difficult for marijuana users to know if they were in compliance with the law, or whether the five nanogram limit adequately defined impairment for individuals based on body size and history of cannabis use.

"It depends on so many factors," testified Howard Bebbington, then-chair of the Association's policy review committee. "We're not scientists, we're not biologists, we're not toxicologists, but we seriously question the evidence base and suggest the government might want to delay those provisions until the science is better."