A dispute between a lawyer and a Crown counsel over the interpretation of a controversial drugs Act erupted into a full-scale war of words in Magistrates' Court yesterday.

The row centred around a law designed to crack down on drug dealers and users arrested in areas frequented by youngsters.

Under the law, which came into effect last year, people arrested in an Increased Penalty Zone (IPZ) -- designated as 300 metres around a school, nursery or other centre where young people gather -- can be subject to the additional penalty of a $1,000 fine.

But the interpretation of the law was called into question when Tracy Alvin Lema, 25, of Ord Road, Warwick pleaded guilty to possessing more than five grams of cannabis.

Crown counsel Caitlin Garland said Police saw Lema riding on Harbour Road around 12.45 a.m. on May 17, 1998.

Police noticed his cycle had a defective rear light and pulled him over.

Lema appeared nervous and began fidgeting with his shirt pocket.

Officers became suspicious and decided to search Lema.

Police discovered seven plastic twists containing a total of 5.83 grams of cannabis concealed in his pockets and socks.

Ms Garland pointed out that the offence occurred in an IPZ.

But Senior Magistrate Will Francis said the law should not apply to Lema -- since he was only in an IPZ because Police stopped him there as he was riding past.

Mr. Francis was about to fine Lema $800 for possession of the drug when Crown counsel Larry Mussenden interceded with an objection to the ruling.

Mr. Mussenden said while it was unfortunate for Lema that he happened to be stopped in an IPZ, it was the price he paid for engaging in drug use -- and said the law should still be applied.

"This law was intended to launch an attack on the scourge of drugs in this community,'' said Mr. Mussenden.

"This Act is construed to send a clear message that drugs are not to be tolerated in this community -- at all.'' But lawyer Marc Telemaque, who was sitting in the back of the courtroom, jumped to his feet and objected vehemently to Mr. Mussenden's reasoning.

Mr. Telemaque said Lema was a "victim of circumstance'' and stated: "We need to strike a balance between the rights of the individual and overzealous prosecution.'' Mr. Telemaque argued that the Island was "only 22 miles long'' and it would be nearly impossible to drive through the Island and avoid every IPZ.

He said with this interpretation of the law, Police could conceivably trail drug offenders to an IPZ before stopping and charging them.

And he stated: "If there is a message to be sent, the message for both defendants and prosecutors must be clear -- and if there is something wrong with the law, Parliament must fix it.'' "This (interpretation) could not have been the intention of Parliament -- and if it is, then I am frightened,'' he added.

Mr. Francis decided to fine Lema $800 as he originally planned, but asked to see the Act's preamble, promising to "take a second look'' at the way the law was constructed.