The Supreme Court is dealing with a case that could change what counts as driving under the influence of drugs in Norway.
Karine Uppstad Mac Donald believes she was innocently convicted of driving under the influence of drugs. Frode Sulland represents her in the Supreme Court. Photo: Dan P. Neegaard
Sea view
Published: 16.11.2023 12:06 | Updated: 16/11/2023 12:31
Karine Uppstad Mac Donald was sentenced in April to pay a fine of NOK 8,000 for driving under the influence of drugs.
When the police stopped her in a traffic control, a blood test showed that she had THC levels in her blood. THCTHCtetrahydrocannabinol is the main active ingredient in cannabis products such as marijuana and hashish.
Mac Donald uses cannabis medically and has presented a doctor’s prescription in court. The purpose is pain relief for an intestinal disease.
The police believed that the THC values in the blood sample corresponded to an intoxication of more than 0.2 in alcohol.
But neither Karine nor the doctor who examined her believes she was intoxicated.
Nevertheless, she was convicted in the Court of Appeal for driving under the influence of drugs.
The major question that the Supreme Court must now decide is therefore:
Is the current prohibition limit for cannabis actually legal?
Full Supreme Court
At 04:00 on Thursday morning, Mac Donald drove from Risør in Southern Norway. Together with several friends, she will follow the proceedings in the Supreme Court in Oslo.
– If there is a hint of justice left in the world, then the borders must be changed, she says to Aftenposten.
And the interest is great. The largest hall in the Supreme Court is full.
Karine Uppstad Mac Donald uses cannabis medicinally for pain relief. In April this year, she was convicted of driving under the influence of drugs, which she denies. Photo: Dan P. Neegaard
Sea view
– There are many people who find themselves judged even if they have not been under the influence of any drugs while driving, says Mac Donald’s lawyer Frode Sulland in his introduction.
– Cannot be considered affected
THC works differently on the body than alcohol.
One of the differences is that THC can accumulate in the body with regular consumption.
This can mean that people who use cannabis frequently run the risk of THC residues in their blood exceeding the prohibition limit, even if they are not intoxicated.
But in the current prohibition in the law, it is stated that one is considered to be under the influence of drugs if one has a concentration of THC in the blood that is higher than 0.004 micromol per litres.
It was the Ministry of Transport and Communications that set the THC limit in 2012, on behalf of the Storting.
The ministry relied on scientific advice from a advisory group.
But this group did not take into account what kind of THC values regular users of cannabis have in their blood after consumption.
Therefore, the ministry wrote in the preparatory work that the limit value should not affect those who only have “residual concentrations” in their blood:
“To the greatest extent possible, we want to rule out drivers being punished under the Road Traffic Act due to old residual concentrations of substances in the blood, where these are so low that they do not in any way affect the person concerned’s ability to drive the vehicle”, wrote the ministry in the bill.
The Supreme Court must now assess whether this consideration has been taken care of with the current prohibition limit.
– People with such low levels of THC in their blood cannot be considered to be under the influence according to the law, lawyer Anne-Kristine Bohinen pointed out in her appeal to the Supreme Court.
She was Mac Donald’s defender in the Court of Appeal.
Fact
Therefore, the Supreme Court must deal with the THC limits
The Supreme Court is Norway’s highest court.
Cases dealt with in the Supreme Court are often of a principled nature. The decisions set a precedent for how the court will rule in similar cases in the future.
The case, which will now go to the Supreme Court, concerns Karine Uppstad Mac Donald, who on two occasions drove a car with a THC concentration higher than the statutory limit.
She was convicted of violating the Road Traffic Act in the Agder Court of Appeal.
Defender Anne-Kristine Bohinen showed in the Court of Appeal that the limit for THC was both contrary to the Road Traffic Act and the will of the legislature and thus contrary to section 96 of the Constitution.
It is this statement that the Supreme Court will now consider.
Bohinen also argued that the low limit led to an “offence party” towards people who choose to use cannabis for medical use or as an alternative drug to alcohol.
Sea view
Medical use
Mac Donald uses cannabis medically and has presented a doctor’s prescription in court. The purpose is pain relief for an intestinal disease.
Anne-Kristine Bohinen (th) represented Mac Donald in the Court of Appeal. Photo: Dan P. Neegaard
Sea view
During periods of regular cannabis medication, she can in theory exceed the limits of the law at any time. This despite the fact that the doses are small and do not affect driving skills at all, according to her.
– In my case, it is not about drugs. It is about medicine.
In Australian study from 2022 gives Mac Donald support. It concluded that blood tests should be re-evaluated as a method for identifying drug-impaired driving. THC levels in the blood are a “relatively poor indicator” of determining whether a person is intoxicated or not, the report says.
– To be sentenced as a criminal when nothing criminal or anything wrong has happened, feels terribly unfair, she says to Aftenposten.
The Supreme Court now has four weeks to issue a verdict.
First State Attorney Esben Kyhring represents the prosecution. – Today’s limit is within the regulatory mandate and is therefore valid, he said in his introduction to the Supreme Court. Photo: Dan P. Neegaard
Sea view
2023-11-16 11:06:12
#Karine #drove #car #cannabis #blood #Supreme #Court #decide #police #allowed #punish
