 | NORML News: Drug reports agree: End cannabis prohibition! |
 At last, the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 is being independently reviewed, by the New Zealand Law Commission. The latest word is that the Law Commission’s planned discussion paper will be released near the end of 2009. Drug law reform is long overdue, but at least NORML can make use of the extra time to prepare for the coming public debate.
Dozens of government-appointed commissions have already examined the effects of marijuana, and made policy recommendations regarding its use. Overwhelmingly, the conclusions of these expert panels have been the same: marijuana prohibition causes more harm than marijuana use, and the possession of marijuana for personal use should not be a criminal offense.
The Law Commission has a mandate to make proposals that are consistent with our international treaty obligations. Even so, it should clearly state that current law, whether it’s the New Zealand Act or international drug conventions, has largely failed in its purpose of protecting the health of the public from drug harm. In the end, the international prohibitionist treaties need to be replaced with a better model.
What else should the Law Commission say? It’s likely the discussion paper will propose a set of principles or criteria on which alternative drug policies can be measured and judged. Then, we can expect some evaluation of the existing law against those principles, and some evaluation or discussion of some specific alternatives.
The Commission needs to go further than merely admitting that prohibition has not protected the public as was intended. Worse, the harms caused by prohibition itself now far outweigh the harms caused by the illegal drugs themselves. Prohibition is not just a failure, but a very expensive failure.
The problem is that current law is heavily focussed on supply, not demand. Almost all the money is spent on trying to block supply, with far too little on health (treatment) and education (reducing demand). While successive governments pay lip service to the idea of a balanced policy, the reality is that our drug policy needs to become far more health-oriented and far less crime-oriented. It needs to be effective in reducing access and use of all drugs, legal and illegal, by those under 18.
Internationally, the trend is to harm-reduction and towards achieving better health outcomes. In some respects, the whole concept of prohibition is in crisis. Despite vast expense, its failure is evident. The Obama administration is signalling a new approach, declaring that the term “War on Drugs” is outdated. It’s time to end the drug wars, as magazines like The Economist and Newsweek suggested recently.
New Zealand desperately needs an informed debate about where our policy on illegal drugs is taking us. NORML will be ready – but will the Law Commission provide the kind of discussion paper New Zealand needs? Lets hope so!
Here’s what other inquiries have said about cannabis laws:
“[T]he current prohibition regime is not effective in limiting cannabis use. Prohibition results in high conviction rates for a relatively minor offence, which inhibits people’s education, travel and employment opportunities. Prohibition makes targeting education, prevention, harm minimisation and treatment measures difficult because users fear prosecution. It also facilitates the black market, and potentially exposes cannabis users to harder drugs... Some of us believe that cannabis should be regulated, like tobacco and alcohol.” - New Zealand Parliamentary Health Select Committee, 2003.
“the Committee recommends that the Government ... create a criminal exemption scheme, under which the production and sale of cannabis would be licensed, [and] … to permit persons over the age of 16 to procure cannabis and its derivatives at duly licensed distribution centers.” - Canadian Senate Special Committee on Illegal Drugs. 2002.
We support... reclassify[ing] cannabis from Class B to Class C ... [so that] possession of cannabis would cease to be an ‘arrestable offense.’” - British House of Commons Home Affairs Committee. 2002.
“the National Commission is recommending ... that ganja be decriminalized for the private, personal use of small quantities by adults.” - Jamaican National Commission on Ganja. 2001.
“The criminal sanction for possession of one ounce or less of marijuana for personal use by a person aged eighteen or over should be eliminated.” - New Mexico Governor’s Drug Policy Advisory Group. 2001.
“the Federal Commission unanimously recommends the elaboration of a model which not only removes the prohibition of consumption and possession, but also makes it possible for cannabis to be purchased lawfully.” - Swiss Federal Commission for Drug Issues. 1999.
“We recommend that
based on the evidence received, the government review the appropriateness of existing policy on cannabis and its use and reconsider the legal status of cannabis.”
- New Zealand Parliamentary Health Select Committee. 1998. Inquiry into the Mental Health Effects of Cannabis.
“Australia experiences more harm, we conclude, from maintaining the cannabis prohibition policy than it experiences from use of the drug. ... cannabis law reform is required in this country.” - Australian Department of Health and Aged Care. 1994.
“Possession of marijuana for personal use should no longer be a criminal offense.” - Australian Senate Standing Committee on Social Welfare. 1977.
“Even assuming marijuana has some undesirable or harmful properties, prohibition through criminal law is not a proper approach in controlling these properties and effects.” - California Legislature Senate Select Committee on Control of Marijuana. 1974.
“The costs to a significant number of individuals, the majority of whom are young people, and to society generally, of a policy of prohibition of simple possession are not justified by the potential for harm of cannabis” - Canadian Government Commission of Inquiry, 1973 (The Le Dain Commission).
“The Commission recommends only the following changes in federal law: Possession of marihuana for personal use would no longer be an offense. ... Casual distribution of small amounts of marihuana for no remuneration, or insignificant remuneration not involving profit would no longer be an offense.” - US National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse. 1972. Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding (The Shafer Report).
“The publicity concerning the catastrophic effects of marihuana smoking in New York City is unfounded.” - The LaGuardia Committee Report, 1944.
“The moderate use produces practically no ill effects.” - Indian Hemp Commission Report, 1894.
--
Click here for more extracts from major drug policy reports
|
|
|
|
| |
| Login |
|
You can register for some special extra features. | |
|
