Pressure is growing on the Ontario provincial government to pull back on key aspects of its new vaping regulations. Associate Minister of Health Dipika Damerla is under increased scrutiny as the government struggles to reconcile its crackdown with new scientific evidence pointing to the health benefits of vaping. In other words, this is a healthy choice for smokers looking to make the switch.
Pressing the point on behalf of the Canadian Vaping Association (CVA) is veteran constitutional lawyer Douglas Elliott. He says Ontario’s anti-vaping law is unconstitutional and the recent ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada that legalized assisted-dying may dramatically impact the validity of the law.
Could ‘Right to Die’ help secure vaping rights across Canada? It is possible and should definitely be under consideration. How can there be laws in place which allow patients to consider if they have the right to die but they cannot choose what to put in their body? The vaping regulations being proposed are outright unconstitutional.
Elliott seems to agree, as he called the vaping regulations “arbitrary and draconian” and the National Vape Show’s editorial staff tends to agree with him.
Elliot is well-known for his work on landmark cases such as religious freedom and same sex marriage. Elliot believes the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on assisted dying could help secure vaper’s rights. Every informed adult should make their own choices.
“This is a healthy choice for a lot of people,” says Elliot. “The regulations are more severe than the regulations that are in place for any other lawful consumer product in Ontario.”
These regulations are not in place for people under 19 as the government is insinuating, as they have already banned the sale of e-cigarettes to anyone under 19.
Why are the proposed vaping regulations unconstitutional? Section Seven of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms allows Canadians to make important choices about their own lives especially choices about their health.
“After all the Supreme Court says we can choose to die if we want to so why shouldn’t be be able to choose to live,” says Elliot. “It doesn’t make sense to me as a matter of public policy.”
“If the Supreme Court of Canada is going to allow us the right to choose techniques that will accelerate death then they are surely going to allow us to choose techniques to extend our lives.”
The regulations may initially pass, but once this goes to the Supreme Court it wills surely be denied. Why doesn’t the government save the trouble and the taxpayers money? Time will tell how it all plays out.
This story was made with files from regulatorwatch.com. See more at Regulatorwatch.com