Pubdate: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 Source: Gateway, The (U of Alberta, CN AB Edu) Copyright: 2010 Gateway Student Journalism Society Contact: http://www.thegatewayonline.ca/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/3149 Author: Tyler Dawson Bookmark: http://mapinc.org/people/Rahim+Jaffer JAFFER'S GAFFE MUST BE RECOGNIZED Last September, former Conservative Member of Parliament Rahim Jaffer was pulled over for driving nearly double the 50 km/h speed limit in Palgrave, Ontario. He has since pleaded guilty to "careless driving," and has been ordered to pay a $500 fine for his transgressions in the ruling by an Ontario judge. The charges of "excessive blood alcohol while driving" and cocaine possession that were initially laid against him were dropped by the prosecution. When he was pulled over on the morning of September 11, the constable administered a breathalyzer test for alcohol, which Jaffer failed. He was then held for four hours by police, and tested twice more - he failed both times. He was also charged with possession of cocaine, which police said they found in his vehicle. Let's look at this for a moment. Jaffer failed three breathalyzer tests over four hours, yet apparently there were issues with prosecuting the case. How the defence refuted a charge based upon multiple and repeated quantitative testing of the amount of alcohol in Jaffer's system is beyond me - if you have over 80 milligrams of blood in 100 millilitres of blood, then you fail the test, which means you face consequences. Instead, Jaffer had these charges dropped in exchange for his admission of guilt for careless driving in a blatant case of shameless plea-bargaining. Driving drunk is not the same as careless driving, and should never be treated as such. It's a crime, and a dangerous offence that needs to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, regardless of the social status or public image of the transgressor. That Mr. Jaffer got off without any sort of meaningful punishment is a travesty of justice, and a sad example of a legal double standard. Now, conceptually, I admit I'm in favour of total legalization of drugs (I'm actually even opposed to standardized blood alcohol testing). But at present, there are laws that deal with serious offences, and as much as I disagree with their conceptual framework, I recognize their authority over behaviour on issues that are seriously dangerous - like drunk driving. And despite my personal opposition, the fact of the matter is if these laws are going to be applied to Canadians, then they must be applied equally, and without consideration of social status. This has not happened in this instance. On the subject of his alleged cocaine possession, the fact that Jaffer managed to avoid a charge here indicates that there was reason to suspect that the substance found in his car was not cocaine. It seems unlikely to me that police screwed this up; they would have been able to easily verify that the substance in Jaffer's car was, in fact, cocaine before they laid charges. So, the question is, how on earth did Jaffer (a former crusader for harsher drug sentences) manage to avoid indictment for possession if not by a distortion of justice? This is a fine example of how the justice system turns a blind eye to the actions of wealthy and important people. Indeed, that Crown prosecutor Marie Balogh refused to elaborate on her reasoning for dropping the charges beyond citing "legal issues" is cause for serious concern in the integrity of this judicial process. People are found guilty of impaired driving and drug possession all the time, so why did the prosecution make a mistake here that set Jaffer free? This is a coincidence that is simply too good to be true. That the repeated evidence of impaired driving, and charges of cocaine possession were dismissed by the court is legally confounding. There is no logical reason why Rahim Jaffer should have escaped the scrutiny of the law, and more importantly, there has been no good legal reasoning as to why this occurred. It's a shame that this disgraced public figure cannot be pilloried in front of Canadians, but at least he isn't in office anymore. And hopefully he'll stay off the road as well. - --- MAP posted-by: Jo-D