EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The National Commission of Ganja, pursuant to its terms of reference and
after a period of exhaustive consultation and inquiry from November 2000 to
July 2001, involving some four hundred persons from all walks of life,
including professional and influential leaders of society, is recommending the
decriminalisation of ganja for personal, private use by adults and for use as
a sacrament for religious purposes.
The Commission, after reviewing the most up-to-date body of medical and
scientific research, is of the view that whatever health hazards the substance
poses to the individual - and there is no doubt that ganja can have harmful
effects, these do not warrant the criminalisation of thousands of Jamaicans
for using it in ways and with beliefs that are deeply rooted in the culture of
the people. Besides, there is growing evidence that the substance does have
therapeutic properties.
The Commission interviewed over three hundred and fifty persons in all
the parishes, and received written submission from over forty. The
overwhelming majority of these share the view that ganja should be
decriminalised for personal, private use. Many of them are personally opposed
to the smoking of it. The Commission is persuaded that the criminalisation of
thousands of people for simple possession for consumption does more harm to
the society than could be done by the use of ganja itself. The prosecution of
simple possession for personal use and the use itself diverts the justice
system from what ought to be a primary goal, namely the suppression of the
criminal trafficking in substances, such as crack/cocaine, that are ravaging
urban and rural communities with addiction and corrupting otherwise productive
people.
Decriminalisation of ganja will require appropriate amendments to the
Dangerous Drugs Act, in particular Sections 7C and 7D.
The Commission, after very careful consideration of the legal issues
involved, concludes that decriminalisation will in no way breach the United
Nations Drug Conventions, which have been ratified by Jamaica. Especially is
this so, when arguments of human rights, including the proposed Charter of
Rights being discussed by Parliament, are taken into account.
Accordingly, the National Commission is recommending:
1. that the relevant laws be amended so that ganja be decriminalised for the
private, personal use of small quantities by adults;
2.that decriminalisation for personal use should exclude smoking by juveniles
or by anyone in premises accessible to the public;
3.that ganja should be decriminalised for use as a sacrament for religious
purposes;
4.that a sustained all-media, all-schools education programme aimed at demand
reduction accompany the process of decriminalisation, and that its target
should be, in the main, young people;
5. that the security forces intensify their interdiction of large cultivation
of ganja and trafficking of all illegal drugs, in particular crack/cocaine;
6. that, in order that Jamaica be not left behind, a Cannabis Research Agency
be set up, in collaboration with other countries, to coordinate research into
all aspects of cannabis, including its epidemiological and psychological
effects, and importantly as well its pharmacological and economic potential,
such as is being done by many other countries, not least including some of the
most vigorous in its suppression; and
7. that, as a matter of great urgency Jamaica embark on diplomatic initiatives
with its CARICOM partners and other countries outside the Region, in
particular members of the European Union, with a view (a) to elicit support
for its internal position, and (b) to influence the international community to
re-examine the status of cannabis.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The National Commission on Ganja acknowledges with gratitude the hundreds of
people, old and young, male and female, artisans, workers, farmers, clerical
workers, health, legal and other professionals, managers, unskilled and
unemployed persons, policemen, clergy, self-employed, and visitors, who
thought the work of the Commission serious and worthwhile enough to be
interviewed or to send written submissions, letters and electronic mail.
We thank the Staff of the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM), in
particular Mrs Deta Cheddar, the Secretary to the Commission, for facilitating
our work, to the OPM in Montego Bay, and to the Local Government Officers and
Social Development Commission staff in the parishes, who provided logistic and
other support. The Jamaica Information Service made invaluable contribution by
bringing the work of the Commission to the general public. Our thanks go as
well to the various members of the communications media, who kept alive public
interest in the work of the Commission.
Our thanks are extended also to Chantal Ononaiwu and Natalie Ebanks for
providing summaries of the laws and oral depositions, respectively, and to
Ethnie Miller and Sonjah Stanley for surfing the Internet. Jacqui Getfield, an
Assistant to the Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of
the West Indies, Mona, worked closely with the Chairman. We thank her and
other members of the Dean's Office for their support. A special thanks to Dr
Stephen Vasciannie and Lord Anthony Gifford for preparing briefs at the
Commission's request.
Without the verbatim transcripts provided by the team of stenowriters
led by Mrs Lilleth Haughton, the Commission's report would have been seriously
handicapped. Special thanks, therefore, to Mrs Winnifred Mannaham and Ms
Marjorie Goodgame, and to Miss Elaine Walker, Mr Garfield McKoy, Mrs Yvonne
Jenkins, Mrs Clementina Barrett, Mrs Dorothy Ramsay and Ms Ursela Farquharson.
Professor Barry Chevannes, Chairman
Reverend Dr. Webster Edwards
Mr. Anthony Freckleton
Ms. Norma Linton, Q.C.
Mr. DiMario McDowell
Dr. Aileen Standard-Goldson
Mrs. Barbara Smith
PREFACE
For well over a hundred years, ganja has become the subject of considerable
debate and investigation, beginning with the much celebrated India Hemp
Commission of 1894, which was followed by no fewer than ten landmark
Commissions and studies. Notable among these was the Commission of scientists
and experts set up by Mayor La Guardia of New York in 1938, which took six
years to complete its Report. Despite the favourable reviews of both these
Commissions, yet another study was commissioned by the United States National
Institute of Mental Health, subsequently renamed the National Institute of
Health, on the long term effects of cannabis use. Led by Dr Vera Rubin of the
Research Institute for the Study of Man and Professor Lambros Comitas of
Columbia University, the study assembled a panel of United States and Jamaican
scientists from the University of the West Indies, and carried out their
extensive study in Jamaica from in 1970 and 1971. This study did not find any
negative effect that might be attributable to chronic ganja use, but although
it provided a basis for some States in the United States to ameliorate their
positions, the debate has not only continued but intensified, in the wake of
considerable increase worldwide in the smoking of cannabis, especially in the
North Atlantic countries.
Then in 1977 the Jamaican Government set up a Joint Select Committee
"to consider the criminality, legislation, uses and abuses and possible
medicinal properties of ganja and to make appropriate recommendations."
The Committee while rejecting legalisation, on account of Jamaica's obligation
to the 1961 Convention, unanimously concluded that "[t]here was however a
substantial case for decriminalizing the personal use of ganja." It
recommended specific amelioration of the law, and that there should be
"no punishment prescribed for the personal use of ganja up to a quantity
of 2 ozs. by persons on private premises." It further recommended that
ganja be lawfully prescribed for medicinal use.
The fact that these recommendations have been shelved, and that the work
of reputable scientists have been ignored would lead the sceptic to suggest
that that could well be the fate of the present Commission. Contributing in no
mean way to the scepticism is the factual consideration that the original
proscription against ganja was never based on medical evidence, but now
medical evidence is being sought to justify its continued ban. In recommending
decriminalisation for personal use, we do not share the pessimism.
After nine months of consultation and reflection, visits to every parish
and hearings amounting to 3776 pages of transcriptions, the Commission is
convinced that its recommendations will not go the way of those of all
previous commissions and studies, notwithstanding the difficulties that will
confront the Government due to Jamaica's ratification of UN Conventions that
seek to prohibit cannabis, except for research and medical-scientific
purposes. The reason for the Commission's sanguineness is what it has
uncovered as an overwhelming national and growing international consensus that
cannabis should be decriminalised, or at least differentiated from other
banned substances.
Nationally, the consensus reaches across the lines that once divided us
historically, and that continue to divide us socially, to wit party, class and
religion, where none seemed to have existed before, even at the time of Joint
Select Committee twenty-five years ago.
Internationally, hardly a week goes by without some intimation of
changing attitudes to cannabis. In many States of the United States of America
the use of cannabis for medical purposes has been declared legal. Earlier this
year Health Canada, Canada's Ministry of Health, issued regulations to create
a government-regulated system for using cannabis for medical purposes, the
first country to do so. This action has been quickly sanctioned by Parliament
which now makes cannabis legal in Canada for terminally ill patients and those
suffering certain painful debilities. In June 2001 the British press reports
on the launch of a pilot scheme in London in which cannabis offenders are
simply warned and sent on their way, instead of being cautioned, arrested,
charged and tried. A British Parliamentary Committee is soon to review the
matter. British practice lags far behind those of the Dutch and of a growing
number of other European countries which have simply decriminalised the
personal use of small quantities of cannabis. Portugal, according to press
reports, has taken the very bold step of decriminalising the use of all banned
substances. An international momentum is clearly underway.
The Report seeks to capture the extent of this national consensus. This
is set out in Chapter 3, the main body of the report, but not before a
discussion of the methodology (Chapter 1) by which we have undertaken our work
and arrived at our conclusions, and a review of the most up-to-date scientific
reports (Chapter 2). Having presented this, the Report turns to consider the
legal and political implications of our general recommendation, in Chapter 4.
One critical issue raised by many experts and witnesses is the attitude of the
United States, and this too is taken into account in the context of discussion
on our international treaty obligations. The Report concludes with a summary
of the recommendations, in Chapter 5, which is followed by the Appendices.
TERMS OF REFERENCE
Whereas there has been long and considerable debate in Jamaica regarding the
decriminalisation or non-decriminalisation of ganja in well-defined
circumstances and under specific conditions,
Whereas differing views have been urged on the advisability of allowing
the possession of specified quantities of ganja, its permissible use by adults
within private premises, while continuing to prohibit its smoking by juveniles
or by anyone on premises to which the public ordinarily has access,
Whereas some Groups have proposed that its use as a sacrament for
religious purposes ought to be sanctioned,
Whereas there is a body of scientific opinion which attests to its
medicinal qualities and clinical value,
Whereas serious questions have been raised as to its impact on health,
on patterns of social behaviour, its implications for the economy and possible
effects relating to crime and security,
Whereas there are international treaties, conventions and regulations to
which Jamaica subscribes that must be respected,
In consideration thereof a National Commission is hereby established,
with the following of Reference:
To receive submissions or memoranda, hear testimony, evaluate research
and studies, engage in dialogue with relevant interest Groups, and undertake
wide public consultations with the aim of guiding a national approach.
To indicate what changes, if any, are required to existing Laws or
entail new legislation, taking account of the social, cultural, economic and
international factors.
To recommend the diplomatic initiatives, security considerations,
educational process and programme of public information which will need to be
undertaken in light of whatever changes may be proposed.
To consider and report on any other matter sufficiently relating to the
foregoing.
To make such interim reports as it may deem fit and a final Report
within a period of nine months from the first sitting.
September 2000
CHAPTER 1
METHODOLOGY
Guided by our Terms of Reference the National Commission of Ganja (NCG)
visited every parish capital except one, in addition to several other
townships. Exception was Black River, the capital of St Elizabeth,
substituting instead, on advice, the market town of Santa Cruz and the seaside
village of Treasure Beach.
Hearings were of two sorts. The first was in camera, in order to provide
those who wished the privacy to state their own views in confidence, and
without fear of intimidation, recrimination or exposure.
The Commission also held hearings in public, in squares, markets and
street corners of inner city communities and rural townships, in an effort to
reach people who might not have been aware of the Commission or its presence,
or who, though aware would otherwise not bother to respond.
Aware that a Commission set up to look into the decriminalisation of
ganja at the present time would necessarily attract more of those in favour of
changing the laws than those against any change, and fearing that in the midst
of a vocal majority in favour of decriminalisation those against any
amelioration might be inclined to be reticent, the Commission made it a
special point of inviting the views of those it believed held conservative
positions. Thus, apart from declared Christians interviewed as part of the
general public, the Commission interviewed members of the Linstead Baptist
Church, the President and students of the United Theological College of the
West Indies, His Grace the Archbishop of Kingston, the Lord Bishop of Jamaica,
the Chairman of the Church of God in Jamaica, the Reverend Dr Garnet Brown,
and two theologians of St Michael's Seminary.
Written submissions were also received voluntarily from many persons,
most of them living in distant parts of Jamaica or abroad, by post or
electronic mail.
Scores of organisations and professionals were targeted and invited to
submit. While no more than 40% of organisations responded, due largely, we
believe, to the fact that most had not worked through a position, those that
did were of enormous import to the Commission.
The Commission also undertook a literature review, focusing on the most
up-to-date summaries, owing to the voluminous corpus of medical and scientific
studies that have been on-going all over the world in the course of the last
twenty-five years.
A comprehensive review of the relevant laws and United Nations
Conventions was made, and expert advice sought from legal luminaries.
Finally, the Commission availed itself of the opportunity of one of its
members on a business trip to The Kingdom of The Netherlands to familiarise
itself with practices in that country, one of a few in Europe to have de facto
decriminalised and regulated cannabis use in small quantities.
CHAPTER 2
THE MEDICAL-SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
Cannabis sativa plant is called `ganja' in India and Jamaica, `marijuana' in
North America, 'hif' in North Africa and `dagga' in South Africa. The plant
produces a resin often referred to as `hashish'.
As early as 2737 BC the Chinese Emperor Sheng Nun described cannabis as
a superior herb and for centuries it was embraced unreservedly (Cole 2000).
There are records of its use in Arabic medicine dating back to the 8th
century. Cannabis sativa was used for over a thousand years as a textile and
medicine in Arabia, Mesopotamia, Persia, Egypt, China, India and extensive
areas of Europe (Lozano 2001). In 1901 a United Kingdom Royal Commission
concluded that cannabis was relatively harmless and not worth banning (Cole
2000).
Cannabis sativa was classified in the 18th century by Carl von Linne. It
was first admitted to western pharmacopoeias in the 1800s. In 1839 W.B.
O'Shaghnessy at the Medical School of Calcutta observed its use in the
indigenous treatment of various disorders and found that tincture of hemp was
an effective analgesic, anticonvulsant and muscle relaxant (Grinspoon 2000).
It was included in the British, United States and Indian Pharmacopoeias up to
1932, 1941 and 1966, respectively.
Ganja was brought to the West Indies in the middle 19th century by East
Indian labourers who came primarily to Guyana, Trinidad and Jamaica. Up until
the early years of the 20th century it was widely used as a folk medicine and
did not appear to constitute a major social problem.
Beginning in the 1920s, interest in cannabis as a recreational drug
grew. During the 1960s and 1970s there was a large increase in the use of
smoked cannabis as an intoxicant in the USA and Europe. Starting in the 1980s
there has been renewed interest in the potential medicinal uses of cannabis
and its derivatives.
RESEARCH
There have been many commissions over the years looking at the effect of
cannabis. Some of these are:
Indian Hemp Drug Commission 1894
Panama Canal Zone Report 1925
LaGuardia Commission Report 1944
The British Wooten Report 1969
The Canadian La Dain Commission Report 1970
National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse (USA) 1972
The Dutch Baan Commission 1972
Commission of the Australian Government 1977
National Academy of Science Report (USA) 1982
Report by the Dutch Government 1995
Report to the House of Lords (Britain) mid 1990s
There is also extensive research at a number of levels. The use of cannabis
engenders strong feelings and many of the research reports reflect this. There
is a strong body of opinion that sees cannabis as harmful and advances
'scientific evidence' to prove this. On the other hand there is an equally
strong body of opinion that feels that cannabis has been unnecessarily
vilified and that it has relatively minor harmful effects and great potential
for medicinal use. This group also advances `scientific evidence' to prove its
point. It is therefore necessary to analyse the `scientific evidence' bearing
in mind the source and especially to note those items agreed on by both groups
and done by independent groups such as the World Health Organization (WHO).
EPIDEMIOLOGY OF GANJA USE IN JAMAICA
Ganja is widely used for recreational, medicinal (folk medicine) and
religious purposes in Jamaica. The 1990 Carl Stone study among respondents age
15 and over island wide showed 47% in the Metropolitan areas and 43% in the
rural areas who had ever used ganja. The usage was higher among males than
females but cut across all social, educational and economic groups. In the
upper income group 46% of males and 25% of females had tried ganja, the
figures for the middle income group were 33% of males and 10% of females, and
for the lower income group 52% of males and 18% of females.
A national lifestyle survey carried out by the Ministry of Health in
1993 reported that among Jamaicans 15 - 49 years old 37% of the men and 10% of
the women had ever used ganja.
A 1997 survey by Ken Douglas among 8,000 in-school adolescents, grades 9
to 13, found 27% had had lifetime ever-use of smoked ganja, a significant
increase from the 20% reported in a 1986 school study. In the 1997 study 20%
reported ever use of ganja tea. Turning to current use over the preceding 30
days, the study showed 8% had smoked ganja and 6% had had ganja tea.
Recent data coming out of Treatment and Rehabilitation Centres published
in the National Council on Drug Abuse Infosum for October 2000 shows that some
of the clients admitted with a history of smoking ganja had their first use as
early as between 5 and 9 years old.
Of 282 clients who went into treatment for a ganja habit in 1999-2000,
4% started using the drug from age 5 to age 9, 26% from age 10 to age 14 and
3% from age 15 to age 19, that is one-third of them started smoking ganja at
the age of 19 or below. These figures show the widespread use of ganja in
Jamaica and the early age of initiation.
Other studies have sought to look at any link between traffic accidents,
trauma and drug use. The role of alcohol is well recognised but the possible
causative role of ganja is less clear. Francis et al. (1995), in a pilot study
of alcohol and drug-related traffic accidents and deaths in two Jamaican
parishes, found evidence of alcohol intake in 77.5% of fatalities and 35.5%
had alcohol levels above the legal acceptable limits; 22.5% of road traffic
fatalities tested positive for cannabis and 3.2% for cocaine.
McDonald et al. (1999) took sera and urine samples from 111 trauma patients
seen at the Accident and Emergency Department of the University Hospital of
the West Indies, Jamaica, over a three-month period. Alcohol levels were
tested in the blood and the urine was tested for metabolites of cannabis and
cocaine. Results showed 38% of patients negative for any drug, 62% positive
for one or more drugs; 15% for alcohol only, 15% for alcohol and cannabis, 25%
for cannabis only, 5% for cannabis and cocaine, 1% for cocaine only, and 1%
for all three.
Many patients admitted to the psychiatric services on the island report
ganja use. For example, approximately 60-80 % of males admitted to the
Cornwall Regional Hospital Acute Psychiatric Unit in 1999 gave a history of
ganja use, although this was not necessarily the reason for their admission
(Abel 2001).
PHARMACOLOGY
Cannabis sativa contains 400 known chemicals. The family of chemically related
21-carbon alkaloids found uniquely in the cannabis plant are known as
cannabinoids. There are sixty different cannabinoids. One of these, delta-9-
tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), is the most abundant and accounts for the
intoxicating properties of cannabis. THC dissolves readily in fat but not in
water. When smoked, THC is rapidly absorbed into the blood stream, giving
perceptible effects within minutes. When taken by mouth peak effect may not
occur for hours but last much longer. The THC also persists in the brain
longer than in the blood, so that psychological effects persist for some time
after the level of THC in the blood begins to fall.
THC is widely distributed in fatty tissue of the body, whence there is
slow release, thus producing low levels of THC in the blood for several days
after a single dose, although there is no evidence that any significant
pharmacological effects persist for more than 4-6 hours after smoking and 6-8
hours after ingestion.
It is now recognised that THC interacts with a naturally occurring
system in the body, known as the cannabinoid system. THC takes effect by
acting upon cannabinoid receptors. Two types of cannabinoid receptors have
been identified, namely the CB1 receptors and the CB2 receptors. CB1 receptors
are present on nerve cells, in the brain and spinal cord as well as in some
peripheral tissues; CB2 receptors are found mainly in the immune system and
are not present in the brain (NCDA1998).
The CB1 receptors are distributed differentially in the various regions
of the brain, in a pattern that is similar throughout a variety of mammalian
species, including humans. Most of the receptors are in the basal ganglia,
cerebellum, cerebral cortex and hippocampus. A rough correlation appears to
exist between the distribution and some of the effects of cannabis. For
example, binding sites in the hippocampus and cortex are linked to the subtle
effects of cannabis on cognitive function, while those in the basal ganglia
and cerebellum may be associated with cannabis-produced ataxia (WHO 1997).
From animal experiments, CB1 receptors seem to mediate pain relief,
memory impairment, control of movements, lowering of body temperature and to
reduce gut activity. It is also assumed that they mediate the intoxicant
effects of THC (NCDA 1998).
Little is known about the physiological role of the more recently
discovered CB2 receptors, found in macrophages (white blood cells) in the
spleen, but they seem to be involved in the modulation of the function of the
immune system.
The presence of this cannabinoid system has implications for further
research into the effects of cannabis on the body and the potential beneficial
uses of cannabis.
EFFECTS OF CANNABIS
Acute effects
A state of euphoric intoxication is induced. There is mild intoxication,
relaxation, increased sociability, heightened sensory perception and increased
appetite. In higher doses acute effects can include perceptual changes,
depersonalisation and panic (WHO 1997).
Other behavioural changes associated with cannabis intoxication include
loss of time sense, sensation of `high', anxiety, tension and confusion
(Matthew et al. 1993).
Intoxication with cannabis leads to slight impairment of psychomotor and
cognitive function, which is important for those driving a vehicle, flying an
aircraft or operating machinery. Subtle impairment of cognitive function may
persist for twenty-four hours.
There is sufficient consistency and coherence in the evidence from
experimental studies and studies of cannabinoid levels among accident victims
to conclude that there is an increased risk of motor vehicle accidents among
persons who drive when intoxicated with cannabis (WHO, 1997). Cannabis can
impair various components of driving behaviour, such as braking time, starting
time, and reaction to red lights or other danger signals. However, persons
under the influence of cannabis may perceive that they are impaired and where
they can compensate, they do so.
Such compensation may not be possible when they are presented with
unexpected events and hence the risk of accidents remains higher following
cannabis use (WHO 1997).
A study carried out on the effects of cannabis on aircraft pilot
performance showed that cannabis use impaired flight performance at 0.25, 4,
8, and 24 hours after smoking. These results suggest that human performance
while using complex machinery can be impaired as long as 24 hours after
smoking as little as 20mg of THC, and that the user may be unaware of the
drug's influence (Leirer et al. 1991).
There is a short-term effect on the cardiovascular system. There can be
an increase in the heart rate and lowering of the blood pressure. This would
be of concern in persons with ischaemic heart disease (angina).
A single dose of cannabis for an inexperienced user, or an over-dose for
a habitual user, can sometimes induce a variety of intensely psychic effects,
including anxiety, panic, paranoia and feelings of impending doom. These
effects usually persist for only a few hours.
Signs of intoxication include blood-shot eyes, lack of coordination,
enhanced sensations and perceptions, increased appetite, dry mouth, possible
dizziness and nausea.
Effects on the Brain-Psychiatric/Psychological
Cannabis (THC) is said to affect the neurons (brain cells) in the information
processing section of the hippocampus, the part of the brain that is
responsible for memory and the integration of sensory experiences with emotion
and motivation.
Literature on both sides recognise that short-term memory can be
affected in the acute phase of ganja intoxication. This does not seem to
affect recall of previously learned items but does appear to interfere with
the learning of new material. Researchers note great variation in results to
cognitive testing and point out that individual response to marijuana varies
considerably (Zimmer and Morgan 1997).
Marijuana's effect on cognition in the real world seems to depend on the
time and place people choose to use marijuana and the tasks they are
performing. In the laboratory, marijuana temporarily impairs short-term memory
and learning. In real world structured settings, such as the classroom, it is
likely to have similar effects (Zimmer and Morgan 1997).
Several studies have shown that cannabis appears to increase the
perceived rate of the passage of time. Cannabis is also known to impair
psychomotor performance in a wide variety of tasks, such as handwriting and
tests of motor coordination.
There is less agreement about the long-term effects of ganja on the
brain. Some authorities state that chronic marijuana use interferes with the
interplay of chemical and electrical impulses between brain cells, causes
shrinkage and death of brain cells. However, other authorities point out that
the experiments showing death of brain cells were carried out in animal models
exposed to concentration of THC about 100-fold higher than even a heavy
marijuana user would be exposed to. It is stated that in other studies
exposing monkeys to amounts equivalent to 4-5 marijuana cigarettes a day for a
year these findings could not be replicated (Zimmer and Morgan 1997). The
early claims of gross anatomical changes in the brains of chronic cannabis
users have not been substantiated by later studies with high-resolution
computerized tomography, in either humans or primates (Rimbaugh et al.1980;
Hannerz and Hindmarsh 1983).
It is felt that learned behaviours, which are dependent on the
hippocampus, deteriorate after chronic exposure to THC and that chronic abuse
of cannabis is associated with impaired attention and memory. It is also
reported that prenatal exposure is associated with impaired verbal reasoning
and memory in pre-school children (Abel 2001).
Zimmer and Morgan point out that during the past thirty years,
researchers have found, at most, minor cognitive differences between chronic
marijuana users and non users, and the results differ substantially from one
study to another. Based on this evidence, it does not appear that long-term
marijuana use causes any significant permanent harm to intellectual ability.
Even animal studies, which show short-term memory and learning impairment with
high doses of THC, have not produced evidence of permanent damage.
Studies (Fletcher et al. 1996) have shown that the long-term use of
cannabis leads to subtle and selective impairment of cognitive functioning.
Prolonged use may lead to progressively greater impairment, which may not
recover with cessation of use for at least 24 hours (Pope and Yurgelum-Todd
1995) or 6 weeks (Solowij et al. 1991), and which could potentially affect
functioning in daily life.
Not all individuals are equally affected. The basis for individual
differences needs to be identified and examined. There has also been
insufficient research to address the impact of long-term cannabis use on
cognitive functioning in adolescents and young adults, and on different age
groups and genders (WHO 1997).
The Diagnostic Statistical Manual IV for classification of disorders and
diseases recognises the following conditions:
Cannabis Dependence
Cannabis Abuse
Cannabis Intoxication
Cannabis Induced Psychotic Disorder
Amotivational Syndrome
Cannabis Induced Anxiety Disorder
Cannabis Induced Mood Disorder.
Cannabis dependence is seen as compulsive, habitual use and not a
physiological dependence or addiction. Tolerance to most of the effects of
cannabis has been reported in individuals who use cannabis chronically (Abel
2001). Studies conducted over many decades in a variety of settings have found
that when high-dose marijuana users stop using the drug, withdrawal symptoms
rarely occur and when they do, they tend to be mild and transitory (Zimmer and
Morgan 1997). The presence of withdrawal symptoms is one of the markers for
addiction. It is therefore felt that cannabis is a weakly addictive drug but
does induce dependence in a significant minority.
However, in the WHO report, Cannabis: a health perspective and research
agenda, it is stated that clinical and epidemiological research has clarified
the status of the cannabis dependence syndrome. A reduced emphasis on the
importance formerly attached to tolerance and withdrawal symptoms in
diagnostic criteria for dependence has removed a major reason for scepticism
about the existence of a cannabis dependence syndrome.
Research using standardised diagnostic criteria has produced good
evidence of a cannabis dependence syndrome that is characterized by
impairment, or loss of control over use of the substance, cognitive and
motivational handicaps which interfere with occupational performance and are
due to cannabis use, and other related problems such as lowered self-esteem
and depression, particularly in long-term heavy users. As with other
psychoactive substances, the risk of developing dependence is highest among
those with a history of daily cannabis use. It is estimated that about half of
those who use cannabis daily will become dependent (Anthony and Helzer 1991).
Since tolerance and withdrawal symptoms are still widely regarded as
diagnostic criteria of substance dependence, it is worth noting that there is
abundant experimental evidence of tolerance to many of the effects of
cannabis. There is not yet universal agreement about the production of a
withdrawal syndrome (WHO 1997).
Apart from the acute psychic effects noted previously, cannabis
intoxication in some instances may lead to a longer lasting toxic psychosis
involving delusions and hallucinations that can be misdiagnosed as
schizophrenic illness. This is transient and clears up within a few days of
termination of cannabis use.
It is well established that cannabis can exacerbate the symptoms of
those already suffering from schizophrenic illness and may worsen the course
of the illness (NCDA 1998; WHO 1997).
The occurrence of an "amotivational state" in long term heavy
cannabis users with loss of energy and the will to work has been postulated.
However some feel that this represents nothing more than an ongoing
intoxication (NCDA 1998).
Studies of high school students show that heavy marijuana use is
associated with academic failure. Heavy marijuana users have lower grades and
lower career aspirations than occasional users or nonusers. Heavy marijuana
users are also more likely than occasional users or nonusers to drop out of
school before graduation. However, most high school students who use marijuana
heavily were performing poorly in school before they began using marijuana.
Most have a number of emotional, psychological, and behavioural problems,
often dating back to early childhood (Zimmer and Morgan 1997). It is therefore
possible that the underlying problems lead to the marijuana use rather than
the marijuana being the cause of all the problems. When studies control for
other factors marijuana use makes no significant contribution to high school
student's academic performance (Zimmer and Morgan 1997).
It is noted that there are a number of factors that influence the
effects cannabis may have on an individual. These include:
Potency of the cannabis (the THC content of marijuana is said to have
increased from the 1960s to the present time and varies among different
plants)
The route of administration
The smoking technique
The dose
The setting
The user's past experience
The user's unique biological vulnerability to the effects of cannabis.
Effects on other organ systems
Respiratory System
Tobacco smoking causes a number of lung diseases, including chronic
bronchitis, emphysema and cancer. Except for their active ingredients-nicotine
and cannabinoids-bacco smoke and marijuana smoke are similar with a greater
concentration of the carcinogenic benzathracenes and benzpyrenes in marijuana
smoke.
In the United States, marijuana smokers typically inhale more deeply and
retain smoke in their lungs longer than tobacco smokers. As a result,
marijuana smokers deposit more dangerous material in the lungs each time they
smoke. However it is said to be the total volume of inhaled toxic material
over time that matters and not the amount inhaled per cigarette. It is further
postulated that even heavy marijuana smokers never reach the smoke consumption
levels of heavy tobacco smokers (Zimmer and Morgan 1997).
Theoretically, the risks to the respiratory tract of smoking marijuana
are similar to those of tobacco smoking. In human studies, it has been shown
that the principal respiratory damage caused by long-term cannabis smoking is
an epithelial injury of the trachea and major bronchi (WHO 1997). The alveolar
macrophage, the key cell in the lung's defence against infection, has been
shown to be impaired by cannabis smoke in both animal and human studies (WHO
1997). Studies suggest that regular cannabis consumption reduces the
respiratory immune response to invading organisms. Further, serious invasive
fungal infections as a result of cannabis contamination have been reported
among individuals who are immuno-compromised, including a series of patients
who were affected by AIDS (Denning et al. 1991).
These findings suggest that persistent cannabis consumption over
prolonged periods can cause airway injury, lung inflammation, and impaired
pulmonary defence against infection. Epidemiological studies that have
adjusted for sex, age, race, education, and alcohol consumption, suggest that
daily cannabis smokers have a slightly elevated risk of respiratory illness
compared to non-smokers.
Reproductive System
Studies, including a Jamaican study, have shown lowered sperm count and
motility in ganja smokers compared to non-smokers (NCDA 2001). There is no
demonstrable difference in testosterone level or levels of female sex
hormones. In neither male nor female have researchers produced evidence of
permanent harm to reproductive function from either acute or chronic marijuana
administration. There is no convincing evidence of infertility related to
marijuana consumption in humans (Zimmer and Morgan 1997).
Results from research looking at effects of cannabis smoking in
pregnancy vary. Some reports point to an increased risk of early foetal death,
decreased foetal weight and premature birth. In animal studies, THC has been
shown to produce spontaneous abortion, low birth weight and physical
deformity-but only with extremely high doses, only in some species of rodents,
and only when the THC is given at specific times during pregnancy. Studies
with primates show little evidence of foetal harm from THC (Zimmer and Morgan
1997).
There is reasonable evidence that cannabis use during pregnancy impairs
foetal development, leading to a reduction in birth weight, perhaps as a
consequence of shorter gestation, and probably by the same mechanism as
cigarette smoking, namely, foetal hypoxia (WHO, 1997).
There is ongoing research, for example the Ottawa Prenatal Prospective
Study, looking for possible effects of prenatal exposure to cannabis on later
development. So far there is no consistent evidence of any significant
difference in the development of children exposed to prenatal cannabis as
against those not so exposed. The study suggests that any long-term
consequences of prenatal exposure to the child are very subtle. (Fried 1980;
Fried 1995).
Another study suggests that in utero exposure to cannabis can affect to
some degree the mental development of the growing child (Day et al. 1994).
MEDICINAL USES OF CANNABIS
The medicinal uses of cannabis are well documented in the modern scientific
literature. Using either smoked cannabis or extract preparations from the
cannabis, researchers have conducted controlled studies.
The broad range of potential therapeutic applications of cannabinoids
reflects the wide distribution of cannabinoid receptors throughout the brain
and other parts of the body. The possibility of distinct subtypes of
cannabinoid receptors and the probable development of new compounds to bind
selectively to these receptors, as either agonists or blockers, may well open
the door to the selective treatment of a number of disorders.
Areas in which cannabis has been shown to have therapeutic use are:
Reducing nausea and vomiting
Stimulating appetite
Promoting weight gain
Diminishing high intraocular pressure from glaucoma
There are also reports of use of cannabis for:
Reduction of muscle spasticity from spinal cord injuries
Reduction of muscle spasticity and tremors in multiple sclerosis
Relief of migraine headaches
Depression
Seizures
Insomnia
Chronic pain
Although an anti-emetic effect of THC had been suggested as early as 1972, the
first report of a placebo-controlled trial came in 1975 from one of the top
oncology centres in the USA (Hollister 2001). An oral preparation, dronabinol,
has been used especially in cancer chemotherapy patients for control of the
side effects of nausea and vomiting. Although smoked marijuana is often
preferred by the patients, whether it is superior to orally administered THC
has not been tested in controlled comparisons (Hollister 2001). Smoked
cannabis is more immediate in its effects than oral THC. Cannervert is also
available for use in motion sickness.
The use as an appetite stimulant is of particular use in cancer and AIDS
patients. In the USA, approximately 16 per cent of the total AIDS population
suffer from the progressive anorexia and weight loss known as AIDS wasting
syndrome. An open pilot study of dronabinol in patients with AIDS-associated
wasting syndrome showed it effective in increasing weight as well as being
well tolerated (Hollister 2001).
The international literature recognises the role cannabis can have in
reducing intraocular pressure in glaucoma. Local researchers, Professor Hon.
Manley West and Dr. George Lockhart developed the extract Cannasol, which is
now registered and used in the treatment of glaucoma. Another product, Asmasol,
was developed based on the Cannasol research, for the treatment of cough, cold
and bronchial asthma. There was also work done by the late Professor Sir John
Golding and Professor West towards developing a protocol for use of a cannabis
preparation in the control of pain in terminally ill patients (NCDA 1998).
In Europe, cannabis has been anecdotically reported to help in the
symptoms associated with multiple sclerosis. Published trials have shown some
positive results especially for spasticity, the pain associated with
spasticity, tremor and urinary bladder control (NCDA 1998). An antispasmodic
action of THC was confirmed by the first clinical study (Petro and Ellenberger
1989).
There is undoubtedly need for much further research into the potential
of the medicinal use of cannabis and its extracts.
CONCLUSION
Information on the effects of cannabis on physical and psychological
functioning has increased greatly, as has knowledge of the extent and patterns
of use. However, there is still a need for further research in several
important areas, including clinical and epidemiological research on human
health effects, chemistry and pharmacology, and research into the therapeutic
use of cannabinoids. Moreover, there are important gaps in knowledge about the
health consequences of cannabis use (WHO, 1997).
There needs to be continued objective research and ongoing public
education about all aspects of Cannabis sativa use.
CHAPTER 3
THE FINDINGS
A. WIDE PUBLIC CONSULTATION
The overwhelming majority of persons appearing before the Commission feel that
ganja should be decriminalised, but are united in restricting its use to
private space and to adults. Their arguments are presented in this section.
(1) personal benefits
These range from miraculous-like cures to relief from simple colds, but they
include well-known ailments and symptoms such as asthma and glaucoma. The
Commission received many personal testimonies of benefits from either smoking
ganja or ingesting it as tea or medicine steeped in rum. We heard the tale of
a woman whose beast of burden was cured from the ashes stuffed in a wound; of
a man stricken as a schoolboy with dengue fever, who drank the tea and was
cured overnight; of a former Jamaica Constabulary Force member whose chronic
hypertension, after nineteen years of prescribed medication, completely
disappeared with the now regular smoking of ganja. We quote the story of a
prominent professional stricken with cancer, who not only was "violently
against ganja in the first place", but also at one time shared
responsibility for ensuring that the country's exports were drug-free. Saved
by the anti-nausea properties of ganja, but carrying a moral burden of falling
on the wrong side of the law, he carefully and in measured wording argued that
"to impose restrictions and to impose the taint of illegality on
something that may be used really as a home remedy, like mint tea or ginger
tea or cerasse tea or whatever it is, creates an additional burden for those
who are ill and imposes, it seems to me, a situation which reduces their
ability to fight and overcome the condition which they are in".
The stories of the personalised benefits of ganja are so deeply
entrenched in the folklore of the people that we do not think any warnings as
to its danger or attempt to suppress its use by punitive sanction stand any
chance of success. More so because of recent scientific advances in
manufacturing legal drugs from it as well as much publicised changes
permitting "medical marijuana" at State levels in the United States
and in Canada.
God and the natural order
The Commission interviewed many people for whom the present laws fly in the
face of God, the Creator. Their argument is that ganja is a natural, not a
man-made, substance, given by God to be used by mankind as mankind sees fit,
the same way that He provides other herbs and bushes. As a natural substance,
ganja does not even have to be cultivated. Spread by birds and other vectors,
it grows wild. It therefore cannot be eradicated. God also created other
poisonous herbs but none of these is subject to the prohibition imposed by the
law. In the simple words of a thirty-two year old handyman in Montego Bay,
"the weed don't really have no revenge carrying because it comes from
God. He created all earth, trees, seeds, you know, so if you are going to
fight against it you are fighting against what He does. You already know that
man fight against a lot of things that He does. If you are going to charge a
man for it you have to charge God because God make it." Or in the words
of a sixty-five year old retired postal service worker, "I hate to hear
the word legalise, because how can you legalise the thing that God create?
People must think weh dem talking, man. God say every herb is made for man, so
God wen wrong when he mek ganja? God wen wrong? I tell you I hate to use the
word legalise because you can't legalise weh God create, because God a
God!"
Among many people we spoke with in the streets, the influence of
Rastafari mythology was clearly felt. One eighty-year old male Evangelist, who
spoke of ganja as a creation of God, echoed the belief that it first appeared
on the grave of King Solomon.
With such deeply-held religious views, which cut across gender and age,
many regard the existence and prosecution of the laws against ganja as evil.
not a crime
We met no one who regarded the simple possession or use of ganja as a
crime in itself. There were those few, who, opposed to any change whatever,
saw it as criminal by definition, that is criminal because the law says it is.
But of the hundreds of people who spoke no one saw the drinking of ganja tea,
or folk remedy use, as a socially harmful act belonging to the category of
offenses against other persons. In other words, ganja use to them is not
immoral. Many Christians found smoking in general to be reprehensible, if not
sinful, and so categorised ganja smoking, but they too saw nothing essentially
criminal about drinking it for tea or using it for medication.
inequity
Universally, in the Commission's visits throughout the island, the views
were everywhere the same: it was grossly unfair that alcohol and tobacco
already proven to be more harmful substances were legal but ganja was
criminal. "What happen to tobacco weh a kill nuff people and a give
people cancer", angrily asked a young man in an inner city community,
"how dem legalise that and have that pon di shelf?" His
colleague-participant in the street corner interview before the Commission,
replied: "A pure hypocrisy dem keep up pon we. You know what a man tell
me se and me have fi look pon him? The man look pon me and say, `Is not
everybody weh you see poor is fool'. And one o' di thing weh dem a use pon wi
is dem thing deh like herb" [This is all hypocritical. Do you know what a
man told me that made me respect him? The man said, `Not everyone poor is a
fool.' And herbs is one of those things that think we do not see through]. The
difficulty of reconciling the legal status of tobacco, a known cause of lung
cancer, or alcohol, a known cause of death, with the illegal status of ganja,
not known in its entire history for having been the cause of a single death,
led some to speculate that this was a form of the whiskey-drinking classes
trying to keep down the poor man from having his "poor man whiskey",
or of the "white people" suppressing the colonial peoples of Asia,
Africa and the Americas, or, finally, of the liquor and tobacco companies
stifling potential competition.
alleviation of stress
Stress alleviation is a personal benefit, but we single it out because
of the peculiar psychological effect attributed to it by so many we spoke
with. A man told us of his experience, when, as a young man, he had taken a
resolve to kill a policeman who was relentless in harassing him, but how a
smoke of ganja calmed him, put the conflict in perspective, and saved the
lawman's life as well as his own.
This calming effect was cited by many. According to one rural landowner who
himself has been a chronic user, the legalisation, which he believed could not
be mooted at the present time, would "reap untold benefits in terms of
social calm, in terms of reducing the friction that exists between the people
and the police". His views were echoed by a thirty-two year old inner
city resident, who explained that "more time you wi deh pon the road and
some likl punk wi get you pissed off, and you do so bam, you burn a spliff,
you cool, you just easy. It calm you down. That is what me know it do, it do
for the body. It calm you."
A resident in yet another inner city community explained to the Commission the
importance of ganja in the prisons: "You see all a man weh deh pon long
sentence? A herbs a man use and run him sentence! That is why you see herbs
haffi smuggle inna jail, no care what happen-herb dem man-deh use and run dem
sentence!" [Take the case of a man on long sentence. It's the herbs he
uses to cope with his sentence. That's why the herbs has to be smuggled into
prison, no matter what-it's herbs those men use to cope with their sentences].
He went on to say of themselves, "We weh deh pon di road, we a prisoner,
too, because we deh in a little segment. A herb we have fi use fi keep our
control said way! A it mek we can go on day to day underneath dem stress ya
weh wi a face. A herb wi have fi bun more time fi hold it and so that we don't
do silly things!" We understood him to mean that they too, although
technically free, were prisoners of the ghetto, their "little
segment", and resorted to ganja to keep control over themselves, to keep
from doing "silly things", that is running afoul of the law.
(6) criminalising the non-criminal
Many were the submissions to us that addressed the danger to society already
posed by criminalising ganja. A corollary of (c) above, the lumping of ganja
users together with men who have committed serious crimes against the person
only serves to corrupt them. According to many, the jailed ganja offender is
often forced into a situation where unless he exhibits "bad man"
ways he cannot survive the lock ups, or where he develops sympathy for
hardened criminals or enter into relations with them. Having gone in as a
law-abiding person, except for ganja, which no one regards as wrong, he
returns a bitter opponent of the rule of law.
Others, including one officer of the law, identify the criminal problem with
ganja as coming not from its effect on the user but from the illegal and
immoral activities surrounding the growing and trafficking of it. Their views
coincide remarkably with the views of experts who cite the effect of
Prohibition in the United States up to the 1930s. Complete legalisation of all
banned substances, these experts argue, would cripple the criminal syndicates
and organisations that are reaping vast amounts of wealth controlling the
production and distribution, and by placing the emphasis on education and
rehabilitation would be less costly to State and society than the efforts to
suppress.
crack/cocaine
Almost everywhere it went, in town, in country, the Commission heard tell of
the scourge which crack/cocaine addiction has had on communities. In terms of
social impact, ganja use was far less a threat than cocaine addiction. A
sixty-two year old housewife in a passionate statement, told the Commission:
As I stand up here, I have a son and him have eight subjects in CXC. And
if I stand up here him will sell me. I can't take mi eye off him. Him break mi
place and him do all manner of evil. Sometimes me say me would a buy something
and poison him kill him. Me naw tell you nuh lie, you know. Mi say I woulda
give him a good plate a food and see him dead. Mi tired a it, me get fed up.
Well if him did a smoke the ganja, me nuh think him woulda gwaan so. The coke
mash up the people-dem. A dat the people must hail out on, not the ganja. I
don't smoke and I don't know what dem get from it, but I believe a di coke dem
fi stan up pon.
This mother's pain was intense and personal. But other depositions made
before the Commission represented that serious erosion of the social fabric,
which once guaranteed the stability and sociality of community life, has been
taking place. The corruption crack/cocaine has brought about poses, they
believe, a serious threat to the society. They link the call to decriminalise
ganja to the urgent need to curb the cocaine menace.
B. VIEWS OF EXPERTS AND INFLUENTIAL LEADERS
Written and oral submissions were made by a number of professionals,
volunteers and persons of influence in the country, whose expertise and
special interest make their views compelling.
Professional and volunteer workers with Addicts
In their own individual capacities, several professionals and volunteers
declared their support for the decriminalisation of ganja to the extent set
out in the Terms of Reference. Their arguments cover some of those proffered
by the general public, for example the inconsistency where tobacco and alcohol
are concerned, but include as well:
the fact that ganja is not manifestly harmful for the majority of people
who use it in one form or another;
the inability to suppress it by legal means;
the wasteful use made of the criminal justice system, in terms of its human
and financial resources; and
the compromising of the anti-drug message.
In relation to (iv) the views of two experts are well worth quoting verbatim.
Expert 1: In our school programme there is no perception of harm in the use of
ganja, none whatsoever. So, let us say the education is the key.
Expert 2: It is very, very hard to convince these young people that they
should not smoke it.
Expert 1: Personally, I am not so sure whether decriminalising would make a
big difference. Our young people are trying to give us a message and we are
not listening to them. They have not bought [our] message, and for some reason
the education that we have been giving them maybe has not been clear. They are
getting cross-messages.
Chairman: Are you saying that young people are using…ganja as a way of
telling us something?
Expert 1: I think the fact that the usage is so widespread and it is growing,
not just here, but right throughout the world, I think they are trying to tell
the world that "we are not buying your message".
Expert 2: I think what you are saying is that the type of education that is
out there, what young people are saying is that "we don't believe that is
so". So it comes back to who develops the policies and who develops the
materials. Most of them [who develop the policies and materials] don't really
understand what this drug is all about anyway. And if you tell a child that
marijuana is going to impair their memory, but their mothers and their
grandmothers and everybody around them have been using it for the last twenty
years and they don't see any harm, they are not going to believe the message.
So I think, when we look at the message, the type of education, it needs to be
developed by people who really know, people who are in recovery, people who
work with young people every day, people who used the drugs themselves.
Expert 1: Not tying the message of ganja in with other drugs. There has been a
tendency that a drug is a drug is a drug. And drug education went across [like
that]. And, really, from my own experience working with young people, that is
not working. We have to be much more specific in the fact that we are doing
education on ganja, that it is specific and we are not linking it with a drug
like cocaine.
The gist of this excerpt is that current education to discourage ganja use by
children lacks credibility. For it to succeed, ganja should be separated from
hard drugs, its criminal status reversed, and the education around it framed
and carriedby people with personal experience of the substance. All the
experts, and indeed all but a very few of the over tow hundred users and
non-users who made depositions, argue that ganja, particularly in the form of
smoking, should be kept away from children. Many were the examples brought to
us of students, almost always boys, who became demotivated after beginning to
smoke ganja. To convince such young people to refrain requires an entirely
different strategy from that adopted for the control of other substances,
particularly crack/cocaine.
Counselling Psychologist
A trained Counselling Psychologist, with many years experience working at the
Bellevue Mental Hospital, and in managing a drug rehabilitation centre, spoke
on his own behalf.
Carefully distinguishing between the legal status of cannabis and its
effects, he presented a case that the legal status of the substance was not
due to its effects. The same was true of the 1919 ban on cocaine under the
Harrison Act in the United States, as well as the ban on alcohol and the
lifting of the prohibition in 1933. The 1937 ban on marijuana was not guided
by medical knowledge. What motives there were, he opined, could have been
economic, but he was convinced from his historical research that medical
motives were not the reason. Turning to the effects, the Psychologist pointed
out that it was true that ganja had ill effects, in particular as a dis-inhibitor
in young users. But, both those who supported and those who opposed the status
quo, by being one-sided, were victims of a jaundiced view. "Those who
support the legalisation sometimes speak as if the drug has absolutely no
harmful effect. I think they are speaking maybe not out of ignorance but out
of anger for the lies that have been told on the drug, to the extent that they
ignore some of the truths in their defense of it. The harm that marijuana can
cause cannot in any way justify it being illegal. If that were the case, we
should maybe make ackee illegal, because by far ackee contains one of the most
deadly substances that human beings can ever come in contact with."
He supports decriminalisation, pointing to the threat to the rule of law
entailed in maintaining laws that cannot be enforced.
(3) CODAC
Under the National Council on Drug Abuse, scores of Community Development
Action Committees (CODACs) operate at community level. The Commission heard
from individual members in several areas of the country, all of them
supporting decriminalisation. One of the most persuasive, however, was the
Coordinator of a CODAC from a working-class community in Kingston.
"The community supports conditionally the decriminalisation of possession
of ganja for personal use, not because it is harmless-all smoking is harmful,
but under the present law otherwise law-abiding persons are treated as
criminals. The smoking of ganja should be a health concern and not a criminal
matter; not an act for punishment but a matter of medical instruction and
help. In addition, for every individual arrested and charged, several are not
apprehended. One youth is held at a corner and taken to the police lock-up,
but hundreds of individuals blow ganja smoke in the face of other spectators
at the National Stadium unchallenged. Feelings of partiality and injustice are
harboured and people lose respect for the system of law."
The Coordinator addressed several critical issues. One was the gap created
between the community and the police. Young men refrain from joining the well
organised Police Youth Clubs because as ganja smokers the clubs bring them too
close to the police, who they feel more easily frame a smoker than a
non-smoker.
The women also-mothers, sisters, girlfriends-dislike the police for harassing
their sons, brothers and spouses over a splif "while they, the police,
are having dealings with the ganja men."
More critical is the need to look beyond the fact that young people are using
cannabis, to why they are using it. Faced with deep emotional and
psychological problems, some of them peculiar to their stage of development,
others to their social and economic status, they turn to ganja.
"We have found that in our community six youngsters who were
involved in firing guns-they say they were defending the area from others, in
all these cases their fathers were gunmen, killed by gunmen. In two instances
the fathers were thieves, killed by the police. Now, somehow they seemed able
to go along with this, until they reach fifteen, sixteen, and then the anger
starts to come out.
One young person says he hates every May and June. Why? We found out. Mother's
Day is in May and Father's Day is in June, and he knows neither mother nor
father. And this is somebody who has been to a Technical High School, and he
is under so much stress sometimes. So when he said, `Do you know that I used
to defend a gun?' I said, `Well, I am not surprised.' He said, `I used to hold
up people, too, you know.' The emotional problems, what happens inside! They
are having real problems, emotional problems. I think we tend to talk to them
but we don't listen to them. We don't hear what they have to say.
I think it is established that most of the youngsters are regularly abusing
ganja because of these other emotional and psychological problems and they all
tell us that it is a comfort. It relaxes them. Nearly every single one whom we
have spoken with tell us this, that, you know, when you are out there the
weekend, [and] you don't have anything to eat and there is no work, nothing,
and somehow these things come across to you. And then they sit down there and
the pressure comes on, and then they take it [ganja].
Now, two boys are having similar problems, stressed out. One his mother takes
to her doctor and the doctor prescribes a tranquilizer. The other on the
street has no mother, no money-his tranquilizer is a splif. The trouble is
that he keeps using it, because I suppose it is like you are having a
headache, you take Panadol or Phensic. When this comes up for him, he just
takes another splif and forgets what is happening. Now when you try to take
that away from him, he becomes very angry and turns against the whole system,
and says, `Look, all of you are against us!'"
The CODAC's answer is a strategy that focuses not on the evils of ganja
but on demand reduction, in the context of attending to the root problems. In
this way the respect of the youths is won and they are inclined to take
advice. Such a strategy, however, necessarily demands decriminalisation as the
first step, before being able to tackle the emotional and social problems.
Hence, the CODAC's recommendations:
"(1) For private personal use as a cigarette splif and bush tea, a
lineament, on private premises-no arrest.
Smoking it in public places, public gatherings, a misdemeanour, and that is
for openly disrespecting the law, and putting non-smokers at the risk of
intoxication. In that case-a ticket, as in a traffic offence. The person
receives a ticket to appear in the Drug Court. Students eighteen years and
under smoking it in public should be taken to the Principal for the school to
decide if the school will undertake to provide counselling or other support
for that student, or if the Principal feels that the case should go to the
Drug Court."
The Coordinator drew attention to the canvassed opinion of Guidance
Counsellors from fourteen schools, most of whom opposed decriminalisation,
their major concern being that it would remove the one barrier preventing
students from smoking ganja. But in his opinion, the Counsellors were
ill-informed, "they do not fully understand what is involved".
(4) The National Council on Drug Abuse (NCDA)
The Chairman of the NCDA presented to the Commission the position of the
Council on the decriminalisation of ganja. Premised on its mission to reduce
the supply and demand of illicit substances and the abuse of licit ones, the
Council works with other agencies in implementing prevention projects.
The Council notes the important derivatives of ganja being marketed for
medical use, but is aware of its acute effects, which have implications for
learning and motor skills, and the possible negative effects of chronic use on
production in both the private and public sectors. It is aware as well of the
psychosis produced by excessive use and of marijuana-modified psychiatric
states, which worsen certain psychiatric illnesses.
Notwithstanding all this, and in light of the worse effects produced by other
substances that are legally available, the Council "support[s] the
decriminalization of ganja, such as to allow the possession of small,
specified quantities, by adults for use within private premises," with a
number of measures aimed at primary prevention, protection of the general
public, and rehabilitation of habituated users.
Decriminalisation would have to take into account Jamaica's obligations to the
treaties and conventions it has signed and ratified, but the Council "is
aware that many countries are considering the modification of their laws in
respect to Ganja."
What led the Council to adopt such a position? "I can tell you,"
replied the Chairman of the Council. "One-the way it became a criminal
act was totally unacceptable in this day and age. It should not have been
there in the first place.
Two-when we examined the other substances now which are available and legal,
we see that the damage that those things cause are much more potent than the
evidence we have for ganja…. When you think of alcohol, the organ damage
which results from alcohol you would be appalled-cancer of the throat, cancer
of the stomach, cirrhosis of the liver, cancer of the liver, testicular
atrophy, brain damage, pancreatitis, heart disease-can I stop there? Okay,
let's talk about tobacco-lung cancer, throat cancer, cancers, emphysema, heart
disease, hypertension. Those substances are legal and available. So, … even
though it has psychological influence, to use a splif should not be a criminal
act."
The Council's position is the result of seminars and workshops, which included
scientific and legal presentations.
(5) Medical Association of Jamaica
The President of the Medical Association of Jamaica spoke on behalf of the
Association. The Association is of the view that the present laws of
criminalising people for small amounts "is probably having a worse effect
than if it had been legalised," though the Association is not
recommending legalisation. Possession of small amounts for personal use,
within the confines of the home and not in public places, as long as this does
not impinge on the rights of others to be at peace with themselves, could be
decriminalised."
(6) The Chief Medical Officer
The Chief Medical Officer of Health, Dr Peter Figueroa, spoke to the
Commission in his own individual capacity as an epidemiologist. He began by
reminding the Commission of the widespread cultural significance of ganja,
substantiated by a 1993 lifestyle survey which found an "ever
smoked" incidence of 37% among men of ages 15 to 49, and 10% among women
of similar age. Forty percent of these men and 22% of these women were what he
would define as heavy users, that is they smoked three or more times weekly.
Listing some of the side-effects to both short-term and long-term use, he drew
the conclusion that "the use of ganja is adverse to good health and needs
to be discouraged," but proposed that a different approach ought to be
adopted to those substances that are culturally endemic from those that are
newly introduced into society. "I am of the view," he said,
"that criminalising ganja use when the use is personal and private does
not make any sense." It does not, because, if the objective is to reduce
use, experience (certainly with cigarette smoking) shows that prevention is
more effective than treatment and rehabilitation. "[F]or me
decriminalisation is simply a platform in order to better control and prevent
the use of ganja. My own view is that to try any kind of educational programme
in a climate of criminalisation, you are not going to get anywhere, given the
endemic use and the strongly-held confirmed views."
But even in a decriminalised context, education, though necessary, will not be
enough to make prevention successful.
Again, drawing from his wide experience with tobacco use, the Chief Medical
Officer said: "There are studies to show that where educational
programmes are put in place with young people-serious programmes, starting
from young age right through school, if you don't have the other measures in
place, what happens is [that] the cigarettes are promoted." Other
measures include limiting access through taxation and banning use in certain
spaces, and serious health warnings with every purchase. In the case of ganja
these must include measures that provide an environment supportive of the
education, such as banning its use in public. "Decriminalisation,"
he emphasised, "is a platform for a strategic reduction of ganja use in
the society, not for freeing up a lifestyle."
(7) Political Leaders
The Commission presents the views of two leaders in representative politics,
one a medical practitioner and member of the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP), the
other a practicing attorney and member of the People's National Party (PNP).
According to Dr Horace Chang, from a professional point of view "I
don't see the risk involved in the use of ganja justifies it being made an
illegal drug." He reminded the Commission that from as early as the 1970s
a youth organisation he had established within the JLP called for
decriminalisation. This position was taken to Parliament by Dr Percy
Broderick, and resulted in the setting up of a Joint Select Committee of the
House and Senate. Nothing came of it, however, so "we have kind of come
full circle twenty-three years later".
The medical problem with ganja, as far as he saw, was ganja psychosis, which
affected no more than 0.5% of users. Most legal drugs had side effects,
anyhow, often more serious and far-reaching than ganja. It was better, he
felt, to educate around the risks than to ban wholesale a substance that was
quite clearly cultural.
He raised what he saw as a far greater problem, that of cocaine, and shared
with us his opinion that for the amount of cocaine seemingly passing through
Jamaica, the number of persons addicted ought to have been greater. That it
was not he attributed to ganja.
"Culturally the strongest opponents [of cocaine] I find at the street
level and in our poorer socio-economic group are people who actually use
ganja. I find [they] just take a position that the `white lady' will ensnare
them". In other words, the culture around ganja functions as a buffer
against the spread of cocaine.
According to Mr Ronald Thwaites, ganja use by the young people in the
constituency he represents in the city of Kingston, "is very much an
antidote to boredom, a sense of uselessness and an inability to, by other
means of occupation and recreation, actualise [their] best dreams."
He cites the example of some young men taken from his communities, the
type who would have been smoking ganja, many of them with criminal records,
put through the National Youth Service programme of personal discipline and
social reconstruction, and who were so completely rehabilitated, that they
were able to move into positions of assistant sports masters in primary
schools. Thus, once gainfully employed they have little need ganja.
For him, the prosecution of ganja, especially with respect to small
quantities, and the way the interdiction is carried out, only serves to bring
the law into disrepute. "One thing that the law must never do is fly in
the face of the mores of a people for an extended period of time, where
despite consistent interdiction, education and a standard being maintained by
the law, it is still consistently at odds with their dominant social
pattern".
Of far greater concern is crack/cocaine. "If I", said Mr
Thwaites, "were ever to resile from being an abolitionist [as far as
capital punishment is concerned], it would not be so much for murder as for
the purveyors of the hard drugs, and cocaine especially. Those who spread
cocaine in this community and crack, are not only murderers, they are mass
murderers. And it is a reproach to the system of Government and the canons of
law-abiding behaviour that we spend our time and our money voted for national
security running after small quantities of ganja when I can identify for
you-and I have identified for the police and the Ministry of National
Security, at least four crack houses in this constituency, and nothing has
been done!" This double standard, he was sure, was not lost on the
people. It set "their teeth on edge against the law, against the whole
tissue of social authority."
He concluded that, though not personally in favour of the use of ganja,
it ought no longer to be proscribed by criminal law.
(8) Law Enforcement Officers
Also not to be ignored are the views of law enforcement officers. We first
interviewed a retired Assistant Commissioner of Police, and a Sergeant of
Police.
(i) The retired Assistant Commissioner of Police, with forty active
years in the JCF at all levels, interacting with the general public, observing
the changes in beliefs over the period, and being party to the enforcement
efforts before, during and after the period of mandatory sentencing, comes to
the position that the possession of cannabis below a certain weight should not
be a crime. That it has remained for so long on our statutes as a crime,
which, aside from the sentence one serves, remains on one's record "is
one of the most destructive aspects", one that has "a most
deleterious effect on our young people".
In support of decriminalisation for private purposes, he is of the
opinion that the relations between police and citizen, in particular the poor,
was flawed by our failure at Independence to inculcate within the Force
"a deep respect for the individual and the individual's home, however
humble". The power to enter and search a home is a power that normally
should not be granted easily in legislation to the law enforcers.
"To be frank", according to a Sergeant of Police of a very large
station, "for the small amount I think it costs the Government more to
bring a person to court, than it costs the person. Because the paper that you
write it on maybe costs more."
The officer expressed the view that ganja smoking does not of itself
contribute to crime. What does is the prohibition that drives cultivation and
trafficking underground. "Whatever contribution to crime is like a person
plants [and] somebody comes in to steal it. That is where the crime comes in.
But to say that because somebody use it they go out there and steal, I don't
think that is a fact".
(9) His Grace the Most Reverend Roman Catholic
Archbishop of Kingston
His Grace, the Archbishop, presented to the Commission the view that ganja use
ought not to be criminal. He based this conclusion on three principles. The
first was the theological approach that in creating the world and everything
in it, God created them good and created them for the use of mankind. Second,
God invested in mankind stewardship and dominion over all things. This
required mankind to investigate, with a view to understanding, the qualities
and capabilities of the various plants and herbs, including even noxious ones.
And third, in the exercise of dominion, mankind was also expected to exercise
responsibility. "We always teach people, `Everything in moderation'.
Anything that we do in excess, or abuse, is going to have ill-effects upon
us."
Based on these principles, His Grace confirmed that the
decriminalisation of ganja for private use would have the blessing of the
Roman Catholic Church. He emphasised that the views he expressed were
personally shared by his fellow Bishops in Jamaica.
Moderation being one of the principles on which their position stood,
His Grace saw no necessity to regulate quantities, and would therefore support
the conscientious use by certain people for religious purposes. "My thing
is to respect a person's conscience and anything done in moderation, not
abused. And if they see that it is something than can assist them in their
prayer life and in approaching the divine, and [if] they genuinely and
sincerely believe that God has provided it for them to assist them in that,
then I can't say to that `It is immoral'. And I can say to the Government to
decriminalise it, unless the Government can say it is going to be abused in
[the] act of worship."
(10) His Lordship, the Anglican Bishop of Jamaica
"[To] be consistent with Christian morality," the Lord Bishop said,
"the fact that you are against something does not mean that it should be
a criminal offence. I can think of maybe a thousand things that I would
classify as one, and they are not criminal offences. In saying that, I would
have no problem in decriminalising limited private use by adults of marijuana,
without compromising my position that it is not something that [one] would
consider to be good or healthy or right." Sharing with the Commission
views from a paper he had written on the subject in 1977 at the request of the
Bishop at that time, which he remains in substantial agreement with, he
distinguishes the recreational from the medicinal and religious uses of ganja.
He supports the decriminalisation for private medicinal and religious use, but
has reservations about recreational use, because, although ganja is not
addictive, it exposes young people to other more dangerous substances. But,
agreeing that in practical terms, it would be difficult to decriminalise for
private and religious but not for recreational use, he declares it unjust for
any law to target, as this one does, the young, vulnerable and poor. "If
the intention is to protect the morality of these young people, then you
certainly cannot protect it by sending them to prison where they will mix with
hardened criminals and come out as criminals, whereas they were not before and
needn't have been." Morality cannot be legislated, he says. Ways need to
be found, he concludes, to reduce demand through alternative activities
"that people could find more wholesome" in achieving the same
objectives.
(11) Lord Anthony Gifford
Lord Gifford in an early appearance before the Commission spoke to a written
brief he presented in support of the decriminalisation of ganja, but arguing
as well for its complete legalisation. Cautioning that he was not himself a
user of ganja, but that his approach was that of a human rights advocate, Lord
Gifford made the following points.
In the first place, "if there is a substance which is derived from
something naturally grown which gives a lot of pleasure to some, it should not
in principle be bad just because it may be abused by others." From a
spiritual point of view, it is better to encourage people to use responsibly
what God has given. Secondly, educating people, especially young adults, is
more effectively done on the basis that something is permitted but that they
should exercise caution with it. Thirdly, the prosecution of so many
unfortunate defendants, most of them for smoking splifs, is nothing short of a
violation of their human rights.
Drawing attention to the conundrum that would ensue were possession and
use to be decriminalised but production and trafficking not, he urged the
Commission "to grasp the nettle" and recommend that it be legalised.
Only thus would ganja be extracted from the criminal fraternity, and a regime
laid down to allow it to be grown, bought and sold, subject to basic controls.
He found The Netherlands solution, where ganja is decriminalised for use
in specially designated cafes, but still illegal, as "a kind of half-way
compromise", which nonetheless, by separating ganja from hard drugs, has
had the partial effect of reducing the use of the latter.
Lord Gifford drew the attention of the Commission to a recent judgment
handed down by the Canadian court, which found the sanction against
self-administered use of marijuana for medical conditions a violation of the
right to liberty. In his opinion the Jamaica's ganja laws are in violation of
human rights.
(12) The Rastafari
It would have been remarkable, indeed, if the Commission did not receive
depositions from the Rastafari community. Apart from the many Rastafari
adherents interviewed in the course of the Commission's hearings in various
parts of the country, three delegations presented. The first, led by Abuna
Foxe, came from the Church of Haile Selassie I, with branches in Kingston, New
York and London. The second comprised elders of the Nyabinghi order, from
Pitfour in the Montego Bay area, and led by Bongo Mannie and Ras Tafari, and
the third was a team of three non-affiliated believers, led by Ras Iya. Two of
these three delegations included women.
As is well known and in need of no repeating, the Rastafari cultivate
the use of ganja for their religious purposes, although the tradition of
giving it sacred status is of Indian derivation. As a community Rastafari have
been advocating for its legalisation, or certainly defying its criminal status
at great personal costs, for over half a century. Their appearance, therefore,
presented the Commission with a valuable opportunity the more fully to
appreciate the theological and ethical premises on which they justify and use
ganja as a sacrament and a part of their way of life.
The Church of Haile Selassie I
The leaders of the Church of Haile Selassie I base their justification of the
use of the sacramental use of ganja on an analogous argument, using the
doctrine of transubstantiation. In transubstantiation the bread and wine are
transformed by the words of the priest into an entirely different material
substance, namely respectively the body and blood of Jesus. In the same way,
seeing that "in Rastalogy anything the word does not give a name to does
not exist", the pronouncement of the Rastafari priest transforms the herb
into "the body of the mighty Trinity".
In their ritual practice the sacred herb is placed on an altar, called a
tabu, and blessed by the priest. Some of it is separated and placed into a
censer and the congregation blessed with it. "The women is on the right
hand side, the men on the left. So, what the priest do: him went over the
women and she say `Bless me', and him make a chant over her head, and … she
inhales and she says a prayer on herself. And she let it out. That send it to
the heavens-it is a communion."
Thus is the administering of the sacrament done, all present taking
turns inhaling the sacred fragrance. The rest of the substance is distributed
ad libitum in small quantities to adult male members-"our women don't
smoke ganja", to take home at the close of the ceremony for their own
private use. The leaders limit this distribution to members twenty-one years
old and over, and stress their rejection of the recreational use of it. Ganja
is "not for any form of enjoyment or desire", explains Abuna Foxe.
"In Rastalogy we believe that the Goliath is the lower self and David is
the higher self. For us to kill that lower self we have to control the five
senses, kill desire. We believe that when one is being initiated into those
principles then one would see herb not as something to get high on, but as
part of the body of Christ which gives strength. …It is not like I want to
get a drink of white rum to get high off, but [to] become one with the
Creator."
This ritual the Church has been able to perform in London and in New
York, where there is greater discourse on and respect for human rights. Not so
in Jamaica, however. "Historically, Rasta in Jamaica is a criminal,
murderer, etc."
(b) The Nyabinghi Elders, Pitfour Tabernacle
The exposition of the Nyabinghi elders begins with the well-known Rastafari
cosmological argument that God created all things-plants and animals, and
mankind itself, to which He has given knowledge of them. Herbs, according to
the Bible, were created for the use of man. But by creating a man-made world,
placing it in opposition to God's creation, "man has become God. He
starts to dictate to us or to those that take the divine law, [that] lead to
the divine law-because God create herbs [and] gave man the knowledge. Who
therefore should come between [man and] that plant? You smoke it, I eat it.
You drink it. Who cares if they that smoke want to kill themselves, you
understand?" The law, as a man-made imposition, ruptures the divinely
created relation between man and the natural order.
Of all the herbs, ganja occupies a special, spiritual place in the
livity of Rastafari. First and foremost is its place in the ceremonial rituals
held five or six times a year, known as a nyabinghi, or "binghi" for
short, which takes place in one of the tabernacles dedicated for these
purposes. The tabernacle itself and its grounds being sacred, all commercial
transactions are taboo for the duration of the binghi, which could last up to
twelve days. In preparation, therefore, Rastafari farmers will grow the herb
solely for the binghi, which they present as gifts to the High Priest on their
arrival. The Priest places some on the altar, to be later used as incense, and
stores away the rest, which he dispenses in a centrally located calabash for
personal use, or on request.
Apart from the communing among and between brethren, sistren and entire
families, two main activities characterise the binghi, one formal at night,
the other informal, during the day. The lighting of a large bonfire, whose
flames are kept alive for the duration of the binghi, signals the start of the
ceremony at sunset. Just about then, the High Priest along with seven priests
and seven matriarchs, followed by the children, enters the Tabernacle. After
each priest and matriarch has prayed, the High Priest lights the herbs on the
altar.
He will see to it that it is kept burning throughout the night, until
sunrise. He makes an offering of ganja to each elder and matriarch, which they
will smoke at will, while the children start the drumming and chanting. When
the time comes for the House to enter and begin the formal binghi, the
children withdraw, the drummers take over, the High Priest prays, and the
chanting begins, continuing without break throughout the night. This ritual is
repeated every night.
The informal activity is the reasoning. It will take place throughout
the day. Ras Tafari described it for the Commission as "foundation
reasoning," because it is there that Rastafari attitudes to politics,
theology, repatriation, reparation are shaped. "So the daily event is
much more than the rituals at nights," he concluded. The herb is integral
to the reasoning "because herb stimulates that part of the thought that
keeps us lucid, open and receptive, bearing in mind that we have one common
interest. Before you talk you have got to make sure [that] what you talk does
not disrupt the peace or the unity. And so, you have to find your own
consciousness. With smoking herb everyone can go within themselves to find
their own consciousness."
The herb centrally available, every man builds a little spliff as he
desires, but with a self-discipline that is mindful of the needs of others and
wary of excess. But where they prefer, the group may send for a chalice. To
use the chalice, "you have to be very mature, I would say
clean-spirited." One of the senior elders prays over the herb, calling on
the name of Haile Selassie I for a blessing on those about to partake, and as
the herb is cut up and sprinkled with water, the participating circle chants a
psalm. In preparing the herb the elders more often than not mix it with ground
tobacco, "which signifies balance. " The pure or ital herb, which a
few prefer, makes some people cough a great deal, others to develop a big
appetite, or fall asleep. When balanced, however, it enables most "to sit
and reason and smoke the whole night without getting overloaded." After
the substance is prepared and stuffed into the kochi, another psalm is said,
and the pipe lit as someone holds a stick of matches or a piece of paper or
corn trash. Each then takes his turn, the chalice moving from right to left,
until the matter is exhausted.
Reasoning, declared Brother Tafari, "is what you call the most
integral part of the Rastaman-to sit and reason and come into one common
interest, whether it is political, economical, business, or about the state of
the Jamaican Government." The philosophy behind reasoning posits the
Rastaman as the temple of God, within which God dwells. Smoking the herb is in
actual fact burning "this fragrant incense within this temple unto Him,
the Head, the Divine, the Highest Thought of man," in order to stimulate
this inner being through spiritual discourse, putting it above the mundane,
the political. The herb, whether in the chalice or spliff, helps them to rise
to this level and penetrate knowledge. To cite one example, it is through
reasoning under the help of the herb, the Rastaman comes to the knowledge that
Moses could not possibly have seen God "from the burning bush", but
"from burning the bush." Moses "must have taken a spliff,
because there was no God in no bush, because we read the Bible biblically,
prophetically, literally, and so on.
So when we look at it, we see it is a cup, a chalice, and when him
[Moses] sit up inna himself from a panoramic vision, he sees."
The herb is thus "a sacred part of the Rastaman's life, where he
finds his inner self." As he wakes in the morning he may smoke a spliff,
say his prayers and be one with himself as he focuses to face the day. He uses
herb not for recreation but for meditation, for finding the divinity in man.
"We know God is one, but God is also found in man and it is out of that
consciousness and presence of God in man that the Rastaman function and go and
live day by day, knowing that He is dealing with him and direct[ing] him. And
he could sit down with his herb and his consciousness within him. You find
that the brethren walk five, ten miles to share that with his brethren-just to
burn a spliff or chalice."
(c) Ras Iya, Sister Ita and Sister Wood
In this third excerpt, the Rastafarians explain the meaning of the herb as a
part of a way of life. Ras Iya does not smoke the herb, he eats and drinks it.
"For me, eating and drinking it is full healing of the people, because it
is medicinal control by creation." Using a mortar to beat it into a pulp,
if green, or to grind it, if dry, he combines it with other herbs, nuts and
honey. As preventive medicine, he mixes it with other spices, such as bissy,
nutmeg, garlic, pimento, ginger and orange peel. "That means if one keeps
using this thing, no one would sick by accident." In forty years of
ingesting it in this way he has never experienced what it means to be sick or
in pain.
Sister Ita gives an explanation that could shed light on what many
experienced educators describe as a fall off in the motivation of many,
sometimes brilliant, students. According to her ganja slows down those who
smoke it, but in a beneficial way, taking them out of the world and into the
hills, where "you will prefer the breeze of natural creation more than
being in town." It induces, she says, a state of mind in which material
things become secondary and one begins to see oneself as a part of creation.
"Most youths who use herbs are into a more sober, normal lifestyle than
the downtown rush. It sobers one to a certain point where it takes you out of
the rush, as I say, and it makes you more humble as well, more satisfied with
what you have." She describes it as "a kind of escape route for some
youngsters", from the pressure of life, by "creat[ing] a space where
one can go, like [how] people would go to church. For it is the same way a
youngster would go to the weed for." And in this space they become
satisfied with the little pennies from their little garden and the bowl of
porridge they can afford.
(13) Independent Jamaica Council for Human Rights (1998) Limited
In a presentation to the Commission, the Independent Jamaica Council for Hunan
Rights, led by Mr Dennis Daly, Q.C., made a case for removing ganja from the
list of dangerous drugs altogether.
The Council based its position on several arguments: the smoking and
possession of small quantities of ganja, representing the majority of cases
prosecuted, do not infringe the rights of others; arrests and prosecutions are
a drain on the justice system; rehabilitation, the objective of sentencing, is
seldom realised because the activity is not considered wrong; the rights to
liberty, privacy, security and freedom of religion are violated; the right to
work, which the cultivation of ganja as a cash crop represents, is infringed;
and sentencing does more harm than the use of ganja could cause an offender.
The Council recommends that every individual should be able to cultivate,
possess, sell, smoke and use ganja, that Rastafarians should not need any
special permit to use it for their religious purposes, and that the court
should have the power to treat addiction as a medical problem.
(14) Dr Ronald Lampart
A retired Medical Officer of Health, once in charge of the Princess Margaret
Hospital, Dr Lampart traced for the Commission the "very sad, sad
history" of the prohibition of ganja in the 1930s, charging racial
motives in its suppression, since "up to that time marijuana was being
smoked by the Blacks and the Hispanics." He read from the biography of
Anslinger, the Commssioner of Narcotics who in association with the
Hearst-owned press led the campaign, to show the hysterical basis on which the
legislation was passed, despite the objections of the American Medical
Association. Dr Lampart testified that he worked for ten years with the
Coptics, whose members smoked very hard and never once committed any offence
other than breaches of the dangerous drugs law. If for no other reason than
ganja's proven medicinal value, he argued, it should be decriminalised. His
position was that since it could not now be legalised, it should be made a
regulated instead of a prohibited substance.
C. VIEWS AGAINST DECRIMINALISATION
The Commission heard from a very small but important minority, who expressed
considered views that the law should not be changed. There were people who in
their opening depositions opposed any amelioration of the law, but who on
being posed questions by members of the Commission conceded that criminalising
young people for small amounts or older people for medicinal use was not what
they intended. Such positions, however cautious and reserved, are excluded
from this Section, being considered part of the general body of opinion in
favour of some measure of decriminalisation. We present only those of people
who are definitively against it.
ill-effects
The main argument among those in favour of the criminalisation of ganja
possession and use is the negative effects they either see or have heard of.
These seem to be of three sorts. The first, from their description of the
symptoms, would seem to fit the now well-documented personality disorder
referred to as ganja psychosis.
Having smoked it, the person loses control of himself, often behaving
aggressively. But the aggression may follow only after other personality
changes, including uncontrolled levity and paranoia.
In a letter to the Commission two parents wrote of their painful
experience of seeing their twenty-two year old son gradually turn into someone
they no longer knew. Their first sign of noticeable change was when "he
began to appear amused at times when there was no apparent joke." With
increased use, a "new, unusually `philosophical' person began to emerge,
expounding on irrelevancies," and manifesting mood swings, anger and
frustration, "not entirely due to ganja smoking we must add in fairness,
but certainly likely to be complicated by it." Then came an aggressive
stage, in which he threatened others and verbally and even physically attacked
his own friends. At that stage he was smoking heavily. Now twenty-six years
old, he remains like this, a member of the family, but one, who, compared to
the son they knew, is like a "stranger in our house."
With an experience like this, "we say an emphatic NO to
legalization in today's Jamaica", at least not until "a reasonable
and proper assessment of the effects of the majority of the many chemicals is
made". Ganja use "is a form of chemical Russian roulette. You don't
know what its effects are going to be on you! Our son gambled, and lost!"
A second effect would seem to be a sort of amotivational syndrome. The
anecdotal evidence brought before the Commission is too repetitive to be
ignored. The profile of the victims describes an adolescent male, whose
interest in scholarly activity declines fairly sharply, who sleeps a lot in
class, achieves below his potential and sooner or later drops out of school.
Even those strongly in favour of decriminalisation are aware of this reaction
and would like to see a ban imposed on the smoking of ganja by all students of
primary and high school age.
The third effect is mainly physical, where the effect of smoking knocks
out the person, or causes hallucination. Although the remedy of a quick
infusion of sugar and water is well known, the experience is enough to
convince some people that ganja is a dangerous substance and to harden their
resolve that it should be kept illegal and criminal.
proliferation
A second argument advanced is that decriminalisation is going to cause ganja
to be more widely available than currently exists and more widely used. And if
it is more widely used, there is bound to be more schoolboys using it.
"Because, if it free, too much ruption, and no behaviour, and dem just
come and smoke in front you face." Among the likely consequences, then,
according to this thirty-two year old mother, is the loss of respect that
young children ought to show adults by not smoking in their presence. In
addition, to quote an inner city resident, more people smoking ganja will mean
more people that "it sheg up".
gateway
A third argument is that ganja is a gateway drug, leading to other substances,
particularly crack-cocaine. Those who advance it see a progression from ganja
to "seasoned spliffs" (ganja laced with cocaine), to crack-cocaine.
Or, they see ganja as part of a "culture" of drugs. "Addiction
didn't start from just crack-cocaine, you know, it starts from little small
use of drugs-tek a one beer, tek a drink o' rum, smoke a small spliff."
Decriminalising the use of ganja seems a small step but it would lead to
"a big blown out thing", such as now affect many communities.
(4) smoking
Many who are adamant that ganja should remain criminal see smoking as
essentially a harmful activity, regardless of the substance. Tobacco is bad
enough already, and to add another substance is to make the situation worse.
Some would be for criminalsing the smoking of tobacco itself.
(5) Resident Magistrate
The position of a Resident Magistrate of twelve years of service in many parts
of Jamaica, including the west and the Corporate Area of Kingston, was put to
the Commission. Her Honour exhorted the Commission not to rush to recommend a
change in laws "which our forefathers in their wisdom embraced, unless we
have clear and sufficient justification for doing so."
She argued that many persons brought before the court, though admittedly
a small minority-a mere one or two out of every twenty, displaying violent,
anti-social and aggressive behaviour, sometimes to the point of having to be
restrained for a period of time, were, according to their own families, acting
under the influence of ganja. It would be, she suggested, a backward step to
decriminalise ganja, in light of the damage already being done by tobacco, and
in light also of the fact that "the jury is still out", where the
scientific evidence on ganja was concerned.
Many people alleged that ganja has stress-alleviation properties, but
she did not believe changing its legal status on that account was justified.
"Are we therefore saying that we are going to legalise the sedation
of our people? Is that what we are saying, so that they don't experience
emotional pain, stress, etc.? Should our effort [not] be instead in calling
them out of themselves to look to their Creator to find solutions to their
problems? All pain is not a bad thing. It can alert us that something is wrong
and when we get past our threshold of pain tolerance then we can do something
about it, like our forefathers who rose up against slavery. It is not okay for
everything to be `irie' and `no problem'. It is not okay. If this nation is
going to go forward in this new millennium, we need to deal with the wounds,
the psyche of our people-because certainly, the psyche of our people is
wounded, and not give them legal justification for putting their pain to
sleep."
A better alternative to decriminalisation, she suggests, is what is now
presently being envisioned in the setting up of the Drug Court, which will
effectively remove drug offenders out of the ordinary justice system and treat
them in a rehabilitative way.
In answer to the Commission's question whether preventing the use of
small amounts of ganja in specified circumstances was acceptable as a matter
of justice when the use of alcohol was not, she maintained that the abuse of
other legal substances was enough of a problem already.
In short, her position was for amelioration of the laws, not for
decriminalisation.
And to that end she felt that with greater discretion the court could
determine whether a certain quantity was being intended for trafficking as
against use.
The Church of God in Jamaica (COGJ)
According to its Chairman, "[t]he Church of God in Jamaica does not
support the use of ganja privately or publicly. It is a moral position of the
Church." Nonetheless, his view is "that if someone is using it
privately on the advice of a medical practitioner, then to me it is quite
alright." For those caught with the substance, "a first offence
should not be seen as an habitual offence", and such persons should be
made to undergo counselling instead of punitive sanction.
Commissioner: This lady is inadequately advised that this little ganja
that she has in the vial helps some sort of pain. She is caught using it once,
using it twice, she is caught using it thrice-now, remember you said that the
first should be counselling. Are you suggesting that after the third time it
would be just to really prosecute her and let her face the consequences, even
if it means serving time in prison?
COGJ Chairman: No, I would not agree for someone, you know, [who] have a
little thing in a vial and they really believe it helps the pain, and may well
help too, I would not be in favour of criminalising her.
Commissioner: You wouldn't be in favour of criminalising her?
COGJ Chairman: No, I would not.
Commissioner: What about treating it as a misdemeanour then?
COGJ Chairman: Yes, I think there should be some form of sanction, but not as
a criminal offence. …
Now, you asked about the lady caught once, twice and three times. Well, I
would say, this is the fourth time now, and maybe we should just take the bull
by the horn and say people are going to use it, and so we will have to now
specify the amounts, the form in which it is used, and so on, rather than the
frequency.
Commissioner: That is right.
COGJChairman: Provided we are convinced that it is not going to be dangerous
to their health or affect their body. I think we could stratify that and say
for this group [it] will not be regarded as a criminal offence."
Upholding the moral position of the Church of God in Jamaica against the use
of ganja, the Chairman nevertheless believes that prescribed medical use
should be permitted, that first offenders should be treated to counselling
instead of criminal sanction, and that habitual folk medicinal use should be
treated as a misdemeanour.
CHAPTER 4
THE LEGAL AND INTERNATIONAL CHALLENGE
Based on the foregoing, bearing in mind its terms of reference, and weighing
carefully the issues raised and the arguments presented to us, the Commission
has come to the unanimous conclusion that ganja should be decriminalised for
adult personal private use.
Its criminal status cannot be morally justified, notwithstanding the
known ill effects it causes in some people. It contravenes natural justice,
seeing that it has been, like other natural substances, a part of the folk
culture in Jamaica for decades prior to its criminalisation, a part of
recognised medical practice for centuries, and a part of herbal lore for
millennia in other parts of the world. Nor was its criminal status first
recommended by scientific evidence, in any way remotely resembling the
proliferation of research, some of it of questionable value, now being called
on to justify its current status. Totally ignored is the centuries of
accumulated folkways, which through common sense and native wisdom make up for
what they lack in modern scientific rigour, and have developed their own modes
of uses and limitations, providing valuable clues to well-being for the
scientific community.
The Commission takes the view that, ironically, the criminal status of
ganja poses a serious danger to society. By alienating and criminalising
hundreds of thousands of otherwise law-abiding citizens, and by making the
State in their view an instrument of their oppression rather than their
protection, the law and its prosecution create in them disrespect for the rule
of law. When the rule of law goes, anarchy sets in. Any law that brings the
rule of law into disrepute is itself thus a threat to the stability of
society.
Thirty years ago the eminent jurist, the late Aubrey Fraser, concluded
that cannabis use could not be controlled by the punitive sanctions of the
law. Thirty years on, from all the available evidence ganja use not only has
spread, but has become defiantly more open. The justice system is severely
challenged, its manpower diverted from focusing on more serious crimes, and
its material resources consumed in the prosecution of a war that it cannot
win.
The inequity that governs the legalisation and control of tobacco and
alcohol, but the illegality of ganja cannot be rationally justified, and is
indeed iniquitous, given that from all available medical evidence it is the
least deleterious and harmful of all. Thousands of people die from cirrhosis
of the liver due to alcohol abuse and from lung cancer caused by excessive,
chronic smoking of tobacco, but from our research and the evidence presented
to the Commission not a single death has ever been recorded from the use or
abuse of cannabis.
This is not to say that ganja is not harmful. The Commission is
convinced, in the face of the folk anecdotal and medical scientific evidence
before it, that many, if only a small percent, of those who use or have
attempted use of it are victims of harmful psychological effects. Of great
concern are those of school age, many of whom are reported to experience a
fall in motivation, that intellectual and emotional condition for educational
achievement.
One group that has made recognised contribution to the development of
the arts, and through it brought to our country wide international recognition
and acclaim, deserve to be heard for the claims they make on the spiritual
significance of ganja to them. It would be a sign of grave disregard and
rejection not to accept as serious the meanings which the Rastafari attach to
ganja use. That would be like appropriating the inspired achievements of Bob
Marley for the glory he has brought our country, but dismissing as trivial and
of no consequence the source of his inspiration, namely his religion.
The Commission is persuaded also, given the deeply rooted place of ganja
in the culture of the people, that its decriminalisation could provide a
buffer against the spread of the evil cancer, crack/cocaine. Decriminalisation
separates it from cocaine and heroin, and offers a much better framework in
which to focus the efforts against those substances. Under its criminal status
ganja is classified alongside the others, even though its effect is nowhere
the same. If it were declassified, we think ganja users could be enlisted in
the fight against drugs, while at the same time become more open and receptive
to sustained education as to its harmful effects.
And so, we turn to the knotty question, how is ganja to be
decriminalised. Were it simply a matter for our country alone to decide, a
simple repeal or amendment of the laws is all that would be necessary, seeing
that there is such wide consensus. However, if Jamaica is not to isolate
itself from the international community or to ignore geo-political
sensibilities, it has to take careful account of its obligations.
The Laws
There are six Acts relevant to ganja in Jamaica, all of them the results of
ratifying certain United Nations Conventions. The Acts are:
The Dangerous Drugs Act
The Money Laundering Act
The Drug Offences (Forfeiture of Proceeds) Acat
The Mutual Assistance (Criminal Matters) Act
The Sharing of Forfeited Property Act
The Drug Court (Treatment and Rehabilitation of Offenders) Act, and The
Drug Court Regulations.
The Dangerous Drugs Act addresses measures required under the Single
Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, as amended by the 1972 Protocol Amending
the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961.
The remaining five Acts address measures required under the United Nations
Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances, 1988. A third Convention to which Jamaica is a party is the 1971
Convention on Psychotropic Substances. As this Convention seeks to control of
psychotropic chemical substances, including certain derivatives of cannabis
sativa, rather than cannabis sativa itself, it need not detain us.
For the purposes of this Commission the Dangerous Drugs and the Drug
Court Acts are the relevant statutes.
Dangerous Drugs Act
The Dangerous Drugs Act responds to the legislative and administrative
measures parties to the 1961 Convention are required to adopt to limit the
production, manufacture, export, import, distribution of, trade in, use and
possession of drugs, except for medical and scientific purposes. The drugs
defined by the Convention include cannabis, cannabis resin, extracts and
tinctures of cannabis. In conformity, the Dangerous Drugs Act includes under
its purview all parts of the plant known as ganja (cannabis sativa) from which
the resin has not been extracted, as well as any resin, extract or tincture
obtained from the plant.
Part IIIA of the Act renders it unlawful to import, export, or take steps to
export ganja, and imposes a fine of up to $500 for each ounce of the substance
on conviction before the Circuit Court, or imprisonment of up to thirty-five
years, or both. On conviction before a Resident Magistrate, the maximum fine
is between $300 and $500 for each ounce, but not exceeding one-half million
dollars, or three years imprisonment, or both.
The Act prohibits as well cultivating, gathering, producing, selling or
otherwise dealing in ganja. It prohibits using the premises one owns or
occupies for such purposes, or knowingly permitting such premises to be so
used, and bans using a conveyance for transporting, selling or otherwise
dealing in ganja, or knowingly permitting a conveyance to be so used.
But it is the prohibition of possession and smoking that is most relevant to
the work of the Commission. Sections 7C and 7D of the Act state:
7C. Every person who has in his possession any ganja shall be guilty of an
offence and-
on conviction before a Circuit Court, shall be sentenced to a fine or to
imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to both such fine and
imprisonment; or on summary conviction before a Resident Magistrate, shall be
liable-to a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars for each ounce of ganja
which the Resident Magistrate is satisfied is the subject-matter of the
offence, so, however, that any such fine shall not exceed fifteen thousand
dollars; or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years; or to both
such fine and imprisonment.
7D. Every person who-
being the occupier of any premises knowingly permits those premises to be used
for the smoking of ganja; or
is concerned in the management of any premises which he knows is being used
for such purpose as set out in paragraph (a); or
has in his possession any pipes or other utensils for use in connection with
the smoking of ganja; or
smokes or otherwise use ganja,
shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction before
a Resident Magistrate, in the case of a first conviction for such offence, to
a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars or to imprisonment for a term not
exceeding twelve months, or to both such fine and imprisonment, and in the
case of a second or subsequent conviction for such offence, to a fine not
exceeding ten thousand dollars or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two
years or to both such fine and imprisonment.
These are the Sections of the Dangerous Drugs Act which thousands of our
citizens run afoul of and are punished. They are mainly young persons, but
there have been cases of men of advanced years who have been hauled before the
courts.
Decriminalisation would require amending the Act in such a way as to
allow for possession of small amounts for personal private use by adults.
The Drug Court Act
The Drug Court (Treatment and Rehabilitation of Offenders) Act, consistent
with the 1988 Convention, adopts a health-related, rather than a punitive
approach to drug use. It provides for the establishment of a Drug Court aimed
at facilitating treatment and rehabilitation of drug offenders. It comprises a
Resident Magistrate and two Justices of the Peace, one of whom must be a
woman, specially appointed by the Minister. Those brought before the Drug
Court must be persons who appear to be dependent on the use of drugs but are
of sound mind.
Where ganja is concerned, the Drug Court will hear cases involving
smoking or otherwise using the substance, possession of utensils in connection
with smoking, and possession of up to eight ounces of the matter. An approved
treatment provider will provide the Court with an assessment of the person
charged and pleaded guilty, in order to enable the Court to decide whether to
order a prescribed treatment. On successful completion of the treatment he
will be discharged and the offence not form part of his criminal record,
unless convicted more than twice. Failure to comply or to complete the
prescribed programme would result in the imposition of sentencing.
If the Dangerous Drugs Act were to be amended as indicated above, in
order to provide for adult, private use of ganja, the Drug Court Act would
have to be similarly amended. Provisions could be made to allow entry into the
treatment and rehabilitation programme of persons who voluntarily seek such,
or who have been referred by a competent authority, such as parents in the
case of minors, or medical personnel, where it can be established that ganja
is the cause of acts inimical to the safety of others.
But would such amendments be possible without breaching the 1961 Single
Convention and the 1988 Convention?
1961 Single Convention
The 1961 Convention, Article 4, is explicit on the general obligations of the
parties:
The parties shall take such legislative and administrative measures as may be
necessary:
To give effect to and carry out the provisions of this Convention within their
own territories;
To co-operate with other States in the execution of the provisions of this
Convention; and
(c) Subject to the provisions of this Convention, to limit exclusively to
medical and scientific purposes the production, manufacture, export, import,
distribution of, trade in, use and possession of drugs.
Under Article 4(c), the use and possession of cannabis, one of the Scheduled
substances, is limited to medical and scientific purposes. And again, under
Article 28(3), which speaks specifically to the Control of Cannabis, "The
Parties shall adopt such measures as may be necessary to prevent the misuse
of, and illicit traffic in, the leaves of the cannabis plant"
But it is Article 36, on Penal Provisions, specifically paragraphs 1 (a) and 1
(b), and Article 38, on Measures Against the Abuse of Drugs, that frame in
greater detail the obligations of Parties. Article 36, paragraph 1 (a) reads:
Subject to its constitutional limitations, each Party shall adopt such
measures as will ensure that cultivation, production, manufacture, extraction,
preparation, possession, offering, offering for sale, distribution, purchase,
sale, delivery on any terms whatsoever, brokerage, dispatch, dispatch in
transit, transport, importation and exportation of drugs contrary to the
provisions of this Convention, and any other action which in the opinion of
such Party may be contrary to the provisions of the Convention, shall be
punishable offences when committed intentionally, and that serious offences
shall be liable to adequate punishment particularly by imprisonment or other
penalties of deprivation of liberty.
Use is not mentioned here as an offence, thus in theory it could be
thought of as being excluded, making it possible to decriminalise use without
contravening the Convention.
Paragraph 1 (b) of the Article presents the Parties the choice of
conviction and punishment or treatment and rehabilitation. This is followed in
greater detail in Article 38, where preventive measures, education, treatment
and after-care, and training of personnel are called for.
Legal Expertise
The Commission sought the advice of international law expert, Dr Stephen
Vasciannie of the University of the West Indies, and in a well-researched and
thorough brief, this is what he wrote relative to the 1961 Single Convention.
"[W]hen Articles 36 (1) (a) and (b) are read together, the legal
situation seems to be as follows: (a) the Single Narcotics Convention requires
States to subject certain activities concerning marijuana to criminal
sanctions (including the cultivation, production, manufacture, possession,
exportation and importation of that drug); (b) the Convention does not require
States to prohibit the use (or consumption) of marijuana per se; and (c) in
the event that an abuser of marijuana has committed an offence that would
require criminal sanctions when committed by a non-abuser of the drug, it is
open to the State to forego the application of criminal sanctions against the
abuser.
On this reading of the Single Narcotics Convention, it would be possible for
Jamaica to amend its national legislation in order to decriminalise marijuana
use, and make its private use legal, without necessarily placing the country
in breach of its obligations under the Convention."
But, notes Dr Vasciannie, the difficulty that would arise from such a
step would be the contradiction whereby ganja use would be legal but its
procurement illegal. In his opinion, "[t]his seems quite
unworkable." However, the Commission has before it the experience of the
Dutch, who, without being cited as breaching any of the Conventions, have
adopted a contradictory, if pragmatic policy, giving restricted decriminalised
status to cannabis distribution and consumption of small quantities, while
applying penal sanction to its production, importation and trafficking.
According to A Guide to Dutch Policy put out by the Foreign Information
Division of The Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in cooperation with
the Ministries of Health, Welfare and Sport, Justice, and Interior and Kingdom
Relations, "[t]he use of drugs is not an offence under international
agreements. Nor is it an offence in Germany, Italy, Denmark or, indeed, most
countries of the European Union" (2000, p. 6). The Government sees itself
in compliance with the UN Conventions of 1961, 1971 and 1988, not to mention
other bilateral and multilateral agreements on drugs. The policy is based on
the "principle of expediency", whereby authorities are given
"discretion to decide, on the grounds of the public interest, not to
bring criminal action in a given case." High priority is given to
suppressing the sale of hard drugs and trafficking of large quantities of
drugs, hard and soft, while low priority is given to curbing the sale and
possession of soft drugs for personal use. In this context "soft
drugs" refer to cannabis and its derivatives.
Thus, notwithstanding the evident contradiction of decriminalising
personal use while suppressing the sale and trafficking, a half-way position,
which some would reject, is nonetheless possible under the 1961 Single
Convention, which does not explicitly prohibit use. Noted retired Solicitor
General, Dr Kenneth Rattray, in verbal communication with the Chairman of the
Commission, argues that the omission of sanctions against personal consumption
was not an oversight by the Parties to the Convention, but rather an attempt
to set a threshold beyond which actions of the State could be deemed to be in
breach of certain fundamental human rights. In this regard, there are three
principles of human rights that governed and have governed this and other
similar Conventions: the principles of the right to personal privacy, and the
right to religious freedom, and the principle of proportionality, by which the
sanction should be proportionate to the offence. That the Parties to the
Convention would have been mindful of these constraints is clearly evident in
the interpretations given the Convention by the Secretary-General's Commentary
on the Convention and by the International Narcotics Control Board, according
to both of which the Single Convention intends the criminalisation of
possession for the purposes of illicit trafficking and not for personal use.
Although Dr Vasciannie argues that had the negotiating Parties intended
to limit possession to illicit traffic they would have said so, and therefore
"[t]he fact that they did not must carry considerable significance in
directing us to interpret Article 36(1) in keeping with the plain meaning of
its text," Dr Rattray, with considerable experience in international law,
emphasises the contextual and interpretive framework of negotiated agreements
and treaties. He is therefore of the opinion that the interpretation of the
International Narcotics Control Board carries weight.
In addition, Dr Rattray argues, the interpretation of the Conventions
must be done in the context of the obligations assumed under International
Human Rights Conventions, which have been long recognised as an aid to
interpretation, particularly in cases of uncertainty or ambiguity.
He further contends that there is a growing body of international
jurisprudence, which recognises that International Human Rights Conventions
are of a superior order to obligations under other Conventions, and that in
case of a conflict or inconsistency between such obligations, the obligation
under the Human Rights Conventions must prevail.
Since Jamaica is a Party to the International Convention on Civil and
Political Rights, which protects against invasion of privacy as well as
protects freedom of religion, those obligations would have to be considered in
the determination as to whether any obligations under the Drug Conventions
must yield to Jamaica's obligations under the International Convention on
Civil and Political Rights.
In sum, therefore, decriminalisation of possession for personal use and
of use itself does not breach the 1961 Single Convention.
1988 Convention
The 1988 Convention also does not explicitly criminalise personal consumption,
but by bringing under the purview of the criminal justice system cultivation,
purchase and possession for personal use, it goes further than the 1961 Single
Convention. The relevant article is Article 3, paragraph 2, which reads:
"Subject to its constitutional principles and the basic concepts of its
legal system, each Party shall adopt such measures as may be necessary to
establish as a criminal offence under its domestic law, when committed
intentionally, the possession, purchase or cultivation of narcotic drugs or
psychotropic substances for personal consumption contrary to the provisions of
the 1961 Convention, the 1961 Convention as amended or the 1971
Convention."
Translated into practice, it would have to be argued that by the strict letter
of the law, the possession of an unlit spliff would constitute a criminal
offence, but the smoking of it not. According to Dr Vasciannie, the same
contradictions noted in respect of the 1961 Convention would also apply, for
"Article 3 (2) would mean that all important stages preceding
consumption, but not consumption itself, must be subject to the criminal law:
the cultivator, the purchaser and the person in possession are all guilty of
criminal offences in the perspective of the 1988 Convention. For parties to
this Convention, therefore, decriminalisation for personal consumption would
appear to be a position possible in form but implausible in practice."
He examines other legal options available to Jamaica. Amendment as a possible
route would require the Secretary-General to notify the Council and all the
Parties of the amended text. A decision may be taken on the basis of the
comments of the Parties, or the Council may convene a conference, whether or
not objections are raised. If the amendment is not rejected within eighteen
months of its circulation, it enters into force. Given the fact that so many
countries have seen it fit to ratify the Conventions (157 in the case of the
1961 Single Convention, 154 in the case of the 1988 Convention), and given
also the relatively recent adoption of the 1988 Convention, it is hardly
likely, Dr Vasciannie believes, that Jamaica could muster enough support to
carry such an amendment.
The other legal option for which provision is made is denunciation. By
denunciation, the Secretary-General is advised by written instrument of the
withdrawal of consent, which would then take effect the year following its
submission. Legally, this is open to Jamaica to do, but, opines Dr Vasciannie,
from a geo-political perspective it would make little sense. The Commission
agrees.
The Commission does not, however, agree with his conclusion that while
"the main drug conventions…do not in themselves require Jamaica to
subject criminal sanctions to marijuana use…this does not necessarily permit
decriminalisation in a manner that would be workable in Jamaica", and
that therefore "the status quo, with all its deficiences, ought to be
recommended."
Given the clear intent of the Convention not to violate certain
fundamental human rights, a workable if untidy arrangement is possible, which
would seek no significant change in the status quo at present other than
relief to the thousands who annually are brought before the court for personal
use. The suppression of the growing, large scale trafficking and export of
ganja would and must continue, not least to guard against decertification by
the United States. The suppression of public use would also continue. What
would cease is the prosecution of adults for the possession of small amounts
for private use.
By itself that would not be enough, if we are to allay the fears of our
partners that we are reneging on our international obligations or to reduce
the abuse of ganja, not to mention other substances. It would require, also, a
sustained education campaign, to deepen the work already going on at community
levels and in the schools. Such an approach is actually quite consistent with
both the letter and spirit of Article 38 of the 1961 Single Convention, on
Measures Against the Abuse of Drugs.
The Parties shall give special attention to and take practicable
measures for the prevention of abuse of drugs and for the early
identification, treatment, education, after-care, rehabilitation and social
reintegration fo thepersons involved and shall co-ordinate their efforts to
these ends.
The Parties shall as far as possible promote the training of personnel
in the treatment, after-care, rehabilitation and social reintegration of
abusers of drugs. The Parties shall take all practicable measures to assist
persons whose work so requires to gain an understanding of the problems of
abuse of drugs and of its prevention, and shall also promote such
understanding among the general public if there is a risk that abuse of drugs
will become widespread.
In the context of Jamaica, given the place of ganja in social and
cultural life, decriminalisation represents the first step towards prevention,
early identification, treatment and education. This is the unanimous position
of all those working in the area of drug abuse. In the words of the Chief
Medical Officer of Health, decriminalisation becomes a platform-one might say
the only realistic platform, for demand reduction.
A realistic education campaign would seek to present in as balanced a
way as possible the available experience and scientific knowledge of ganja,
treating it as distinctly separate from all other substances, legal and
illegal. It would continue to target, but now with greater confidence of
success, young males who now needing no longer to fear condemnation and
ostracism would be more ready to discuss it openly.
Decriminalisation will also require diplomatic efforts to join ranks
with a growing number of Parties who unilaterally are taking measures to
ameliorate their own anti-marijuana practices with respect to possession and
use, our aim being to get the international community appropriately to amend
the Conventions. In the Caribbean, where, according to a report by the
Caribbean drug control Coordination Mechanism on 1999/2000 drug trends in the
region, cannabis "is, in fact, the drug of choice" and "[u]nlike
crack cocaine or cocaine…is, to a large extent, socially acceptable,"
diplomatic intiatives to get CARICOM to adopt a single position will
undoubtedly strengthen Jamaica's ability to exert greater influence at the
international level.
It will require, finally, practical proof that the country remains
committed to the suppression of all drugs. Police interdiction of cocaine
trafficking and use would need to be stepped up, which, if the Member of
Parliament who appeared before the Commission is to be believed, is a matter
of will.
The Commission has good reason to believe that it is the failure to do
this that will threaten the country's certification status with the United
States, and not the decriminalisation of personal possession and use of ganja.
Were even a single cocaine trafficker to be caught, tried and sentenced, it
would enhance the country's standing. The decriminalisation being recommended
would free up more of Jamaica's human and financial resources to focus on the
trafficking of cocaine. According to a well-informed source, this is where the
Americans are frustrated with Jamaica.
Human Rights
Decriminalising on the basis that the Conventions do not prohibit use does not
constitute the only justifiable rationale. There may be a better way. The
Commission is grateful to Lord Anthony Gifford for opening up the following
consideration.
All the relevant articles of the Conventions are prefaced by
constitutional limitations, variously phrased. For example, Paragraph 1 (a) of
Article 36 of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, is qualified by
the clause: "Subject to its constitutional limitations, each Party shall
adopt such measures as will ensure etc."
Paragraph 2 of Article 3 of the 1988 Convention Against Illicit Traffic is
similarly prefaced: "Subject to its constitutional principles and the
basic concepts of its legal system, each Party shall adopt such measures
etc." In other words the Conventions pay due regard to the peculiarities
of each country, such as would be reflected in its supreme law, the
Constitution.
The Constitutional guarantees to individual rights and freedoms could
normally have been invoked to allow personal use of ganja, as an expression of
religious freedom or of the right to privacy, or other right, without
breaching international obligations. Unfortunately, such a loophole would not
now apply to Jamaica, because of a saving clause which allows the Jamaican
Constitution to be superseded by any statute in existence prior to the
appointed day when the Constitution came into effect. In the case of Dennis
Forsythe v. the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Attorney General, in
which Forsythe argued that his constitutional right to freedom of religion as
a Rastafarian who used ganja for sacramental purposes, and his right to the
privacy of his home were violated when he was charged with possession of the
prohibited substance, the Supreme Court handed down judgment which included
among other reasons the fact that Section 26 (8) of the Constitution plainly
declared that "any law in force immediately before the appointed day
shall not be held to be inconsistent with any of the provisions" of
Chapter III of the Constitution which sets out the Rights and Freedoms of the
Jamaican citizen. The Dangerous Drugs Act being in force prior to the
appointed day was judged by the Supreme Court to be not inconsistent with the
Constitution, and so Dr Forsythe's motion was dismissed. Thus, Jamaica cannot
at the present time make use of the constitutional limitation clause allowed
by the Conventions.
However, the Charter of Rights being debated for adoption by Parliament
were it to take effect, would replace the existing chapter of the
Constitution, override the saving clause of Section 26 (8) of the Constitution
and pave the way for Jamaica to take advantage of the Constitutional
Limitation clause. There are two Drafts, one by the governing People's
National Party, the other by the Opposition Jamaica Labour Party.
The Government's Draft at Section 13 (2) reads:
Save only for laws that are required for the governance of the State in
periods of public emergency, or as may be demonstrably justified in a free and
democratic society, Parliament shall pass no law and no public authority or
any essential entity shall take any action which abrogates, abridges or
infringes--
(b) the right to freedom of conscience, belief and observance of religious and
political doctrines;
(l) the right to protection for privacy of home and other property; enjoyment
and beneficial ownership of property.
The Opposition Draft at Section 14 (1) reads:
Save only for laws that are required for the governance of the State in
periods of public emergency or public disaster or as may be demonstrably
justified in a free and democratic society, Parliament shall pass no law and
no organ of the State shall take any action which abrogates, abridges or
infringes:
the right to freedom of conscience, belief and observance of religious and
political doctrines;
(k) the right to enjoyment and beneficial ownership of property; the right to
respect for private and family life, privacy of the home and of communication.
Ganja could be decriminalised for personal use and justified under the
constitutionally protected right of enjoyment of the privacy of one's home,
and possession in limited quantities for such private use likewise
decriminalised. Also to be decriminalised in like manner would be the
possession and use of ganja in pursuit of the right to freedom to manifest
religious doctrines.
As Lord Gifford points out in his written submission, in effect
supporting the above point of Dr Rattray, international human rights
conventions as well as recent judicial decisions in other jurisdictions add
some weight to the argument.
The rights to privacy and to the freedom to manifest one's religion as
contained in both Drafts of the Charter of Rights are consistent with Articles
17 and 18 of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, and
Articles 11.2 and 12.1 of the American Convention on Human Rights. These
rights are not absolute, and both Drafts include provisions to override them,
although the Opposition Draft Section 19 of the Opposition's Draft goes so far
as to make void any law or rule of law if:
it requires or authorizes anything to be done in contravention of any
provision of this chapter [i.e. the Charter];
it prohibits the exercise of any right or freedom protected by this chapter;
or
if it restricts the exercise of any such right or freedom in a manner not
authorized by this chapter.
The overriding provisions are, in the first place, those contained in the
qualifier "Save only for laws, etc.", which cover emergency
situations or such laws "as may be demonstrably justified in a free and
democratic society." It is hard to see what kind of emergency could make
it necessary to ban the private use of ganja, and equally how, given its
cultural entrenchment and medical status, the criminalisation of ganja
possession for personal use and the use itself could be "demonstrably
justified in a free and democratic society." But the Constitutional Court
would be called on to judge.
But secondly-and this is spelt out in the Government's Draft, the
private possession and use of ganja would be subject to any law "which is
reasonably required-
in the interests of defence, public safety, public order, public morality,
public health…;
for the purpose of protecting the rights or freedoms of other persons."
It is conceivable that ganja use, even in private, could be challenged as
being against public morality and public health, or for infringing the rights
and freedoms of others. But here again the issue would be subject to argument
before the Constitutional Court.
Recent decisions in the United States and Canada also strengthen the
case for decriminalisation. We quote extensively from Lord Gifford's written
submission:
In US v Bauer and others, cited as 1996 WL 264776 (9th Cir. [Mont]), the
United States Federal Court of Appeal had to consider a plea from Defendants
charged with trafficking and possession of marijuana, that they had the right
to a `religious use' defence. They relied on the Religious Freedom Restoration
Act, a U.S. statue which guaranteed freedom of religion. The District Court
had held that the relevant marijuana law `substantially burdened the free
exercise of the Rastafarian religion', but decided that `the Government had an
overriding interest in regulating marijuana.' The Court of Appeal reversed the
District Court's decision. The court held that if the freedom of a person's
exercise of religion is substantially burdened, the Government had to meet two
tests: (a) a `compelling governmental interest; and (b) that the application
of the law is `the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling
governmental interest.' The Court found that the Government had not shown that
a universal law against marijuana was the `least restrictive means' of
preventing the distribution of marijuana. Accordingly the defendants who were
charged with simple possession would be re-tried, and they would have a
defence if they could show that the use of marijuana was part of their
religious practice as Rastafarians. The defendants charged with trafficking
would have no such defence, since religious freedom was not involved.
The conclusion drawn by Lord Gifford is that "even in the United
States, the possession of marijuana may be found to be legal by the courts if
it is associated with the exercise of a fundamental right such as religious
freedom."
In the Canadian case of R v Terrance Parker (Docket C28372, decided on
31st July 2000), the issue concerned the use of ganja for medical purposes.
The Ontario Court of Appeal considered the evidence concerning the harmful as
well as the therapeutic effects of ganja, and in making its ruling applied
Section 7 of the Charter of Rights, according to which only by virtue of `the
principles of fundamental justice' may the right to liberty and security of
the person be infringed.
The Court found that "the marijuana laws did infringe Parker's
security in preventing him from undertaking a safe medical treatment for his
condietion of epilepsy. It held that a blanket prohibition did breach the
`principles of fundamental justice'", and so permitted the possession of
marijuana for medical use. Significantly, the Court of Appeal took note of the
fact that the United Nations 1988 Convention had, as the Convention
stipulated, to be subject to Canada's constitutional principles and basic
concepts of its legal system.
A year later, Canada became the first state to pass legislation making
"medical marijuana" legal.
Clearly, then, a strong legal case for the decriminalisation of ganja
for personal, private use exists once both Government and Opposition are
agreed on the terms of the Charter, and it becomes law by Act of Parliament.
Once it becomes law, the decriminalisation of ganja for personal use, based on
the right of privacy of the home, and its decriminalisation for religious use,
based on the right of observance of religious doctrines, could then be covered
by the Constitutional limitation respected by the United Nations Conventions.
Decriminalisation would not remove the patent contradiction exposed by Dr
Vasciannie above, but it would be the more satisfactory of the two options in
providing a sounder legal basis.
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The National Commission on Ganja accepts that ganja is not entirely safe.
Despite its proven folk medicinal qualities, its use can be injurious to
health. There is evidence that for those who smoke it the inhalation of tar
and other compounds can affect the lungs; that users can experience short term
memory loss and delayed reaction time; and that among young people it can
retard the learning process. There is also documented evidence that the
substance can produce in some people a mentally disturbed state of ganja
psychosis.
Notwithstanding these and other ill effects, the Commission is of the
view that many, if not most, persons who use ganja in moderation suffer no
apparent short or long term debility. Not only that, but its reputation among
the people as a panacea and a spiritually enhancing substance is so strong
that it is must be regarded as culturally entrenched. As a result, the
practice of criminalising the users of small quantities does far more harm
than good to the society as a whole. The Commission is mindful also that there
are legally available substances that have been shown to have physiological
and psychological ill-effects that, based on current evidence, are more
injurious than those of ganja. Such is the case with alcohol and tobacco.
It is the view of the Commission that the punitive sanctions
administered by the justice system to users of small quantities is not only
unjust but is a major source of disrespect and contempt for the legal system
as a whole. Moreover, the punishment meted out to such offenders has not had
and is not likely to have the desired effect of a deterrent. Administering the
present laws as they apply to possession and use of small quantities of ganja
not only puts an unbearable strain on the relationship of the police with the
communities, in particular the male youth, but also ties up the justice system
and the work of the police, who could use their time to much greater advantage
in the relentless pursuit of crack/cocaine trafficking.
Accordingly the Commission recommends as follows:
that the relevant laws be amended so that ganja be decriminalised for the
private, personal use of small quantities by adults;
that decriminalisation for personal use should exclude smoking by
juveniles or by anyone in premises accessible to the public;
that ganja should be decriminalised for use as a sacrament for religious
purposes;
that a sustained all-media, all-schools education programme aimed at
demand reduction accompany the process of decriminalisation, and that its
target should be, in the main, young people;
that the security forces intensify their interdiction of large
cultivation of ganja and trafficking of all illegal drugs, in particular
crack/cocaine;
that, in order that Jamaica be not left behind, a Cannabis Research
Agency be set up, in collaboration with other countries, to coordinate
research into all aspects of cannabis, including its epidemiological and
psychological effects, and importantly as well its pharmacological and
economic potential, such as is being done by many other countries, not least
including some of the most vigorous in its suppression; and
that as a matter of great urgency Jamaica embark on diplomatic
initiatives with its CARICOM partners and other countries outside the Region,
in particular members of the European Union, with a view (a) to elicit support
for its internal position, and (b) to influence the international community to
re-examine the status of cannabis.
APPENDIX A
Persons Who Made Oral Submissions
ST. JAMES
Montego Bay **
KINGSTON & ST. ANDREW
Balmoral House
* Denham Town Community
* Trench Town Community
* Balmoral House
** United Theological College of the West Indies (UTC)
* Balmoral House
* WESTMORELAND
Savannah-la-Mar and Negril
* CLARENDON
May Pen
* ST. CATHERINE
Spanish Town
* Linstead,
* Linstead Baptist Church Yard *
ST THOMAS
Morant Bay
* Morant Bay Market
Participants anonymous.
** ST. ANN
Browns Town
* St. Ann's Bay
* St. Ann's Bay Police Station
* TRELAWNY
Falmouth
* Duncans
* PORTLAND
Port Antonio
* ST. MARY
Annotto Bay
* Port Maria
* ST. ELIZABETH
Treasure Beach
* Santa Cruz
* MANCHESTER
Mandeville
* HANOVER
Lucea
* KINGSTON & St ANDREW
Balmoral House
* Church of God in Jamaica H.Q.
*
APPENDIX B
LIST OF PERSONS WHO MADE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
**
**
**
REFERENCES
Abel , Wendel.. Written submission to the National Commission on Ganja,
Jamaica. 2001
Anthony J.C. and Helzer J.E. Syndromes of drug abuse and dependence. In: L.N.
Robins and D.A. Reiger, Eds., Psychiatric Disorders in America. New York: Free
Press. 1991. Referenced in WHO / MSA/PSA/97.4.
Cole, Elaine. Superior herb was given royal approval. The Independent
Newspaper Monday, October 9, 2000.
Day N.L., Cottreau C..M., Richardson G.A. Effects of Prenatal Marijuana
Exposure on the Cognitive Development of Offspring at Age Three. Neurotox. And
Teratology, 1994b, 16: 169 -175. Referenced in WHO/MSA/PSA/97.4.
Denning D.W., Follansbee S.E., Scolaro M. Pulmonary aspergillosis in the
acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine, 1991,
324: 654-662 !991). Referenced in WHO/MSA/PSA/97.4.
Douglas, Ken-Garfield. Patterns of Substance Use and Abuse among Post-Primary
Students in Jamaica: National Adolescent Students' Drug Survey 1997/1998.
Planning Institute of Jamaica, Policy Development Unit Working Paper No. 3.
Feb. 2000.
Fletcher J.M., Page B.J., Francis D.J. Cognitive correlates of long-term
cannabis use in Costa Rican men. Archives of General Psychiatry, 1996,
53:1051-1057. Referenced in WHO/MSA/PSA/97.4.
Francis M., Eldemire D., Clifford R. A pilot study of alcohol and drug related
traffic accidents and deaths in two Jamaican Parishes. 1991. W. I. Medical
Journal 44: 99 -101.
Fried, P.A. Marihuana use by pregnant women: nuerobehavioural effects in
neonates. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 1980, 6: 415-424 Referenced in WHO/ MSA/PSA/97.4.
Fried P.A. Prenatal Exposure to Marihuana and Tobacco during Infancy, Early
and Middle Childhood: Effects and an Attempt at synthesis. Archives of
Toxicology, 1995, suppl. 17: 231-260 Referenced in WHO/MSA/PSA/97.4.
Grinspoon, Lester. 2000. Wither Medical Marijuana. Contemporary Drug Problems,
Volume 27, Spring 2000.
Hannerz J., Hindmarsh T. Neurological and neuroradiological examination of
chronic cannabis smokers. Annals of Neurology, 1983, 13: 207-210 Referenced in
WHO/ MSA/PSA/97.4.
Hollister, L. Marijuana (Cannabis) as Medicine. Journal of Cannabis
Therapeutics. Vol. 1 (1) 2001-08-01.
Leirer V.O., Yesavage J.A., Morrow D.G. Marijuana carry-over effects on
aircraft pilot performance. Aviation Space Environment and Medicine, 1991,
62(3) : 221-227 Referenced in WHO / MSA/PSA/97.4.
Lozano I. The therapeutic use of cannabis sativa in Arabic medicine. Journal
of Cannabis Therapeutics, Vol 1 (1) 2001.
Matthew R.J. Tant S., Berger C. R. Depersonalisation after marijuana smoking.
Biological Psychiatry, 1993, 33 (6):431-41. Referenced in WHO/MSA/PSA/97.4.
McDonald A., Duncan N. and Mitchell D. Alcohol, cannabis and cocaine uses in
patients with trauma injuries. 1999. West Indian Medical Journal 48 (4):
200-202.
Ministry of Health, Jamaica. National Lifestyle Survey. 1993.
National Council on Drug Abuse Jamaica. Report on the Medico-Scientific
Factors in the use and misuse of marijuana. Prepared by the Medical and
Scientific Committee of the NCDA 1998.
National Council on Drug Abuse Jamaica. Infosum publication. October 2000.
National Council on Drug Abuse Jamaica. Written submission to the National
Commission on Ganja Jamaica. 2001.
Petro D.J. and Ellengerger C.E. Treatment of human spasticity with delta-9-
tetrahydrocannabinol. Journal of Neurology 236:120-122.
Pope H.G. and Yurgelum-Todd D. The residual neuropsychological effects of
cannabis the current status of research . Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 1995,
38: 25-34 Referenced in WHO/MSA/PSA/97.4.
Rimbaugh C.L. Cerebral CT findings in drug abuse: Clinical and experimental
observations. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography, 1980, 4: 330-334.
Referenced in WHO / MSA/PSA/97.4.
Solowij N., Michie P.T., Fox A.M. Effects of long -term cannabis use on
selective attention: an event-related potential study. Pharmacology
Biochemistry and Behaviour, 1991, 40: 683-688. Referenced in WHO/MSA/PSA/97.4.
Stone C. Extracts and Summary of the National Survey on use of Drugs in
Jamaica. Jamaican Nurse, 1990, 29(1) 54-57.
World Health Organization. Cannabis: a health perspective and research agenda.
Division of Mental Health and Prevention of Substance Abuse. 1997. WHO/MSA/PSA/97.4.
Zimmer l. and Morgan J. Marijuana Myths , Marijuana Facts. A review of the
scientific evidence. The Lindersmith Centre. 1997.
Tages-Anzeiger vom 29.03.2003 Das Gramm Gras zu 25 Franken Kiffen schon bald
legal? Auch die Gesundheitskommission des Nationalrats will den Hanfkonsum
liberalisieren; zugleich soll der Stoff massiv teurer werden. Straffrei Kiffen?
Von Jean-Martin Büttner, Bern Wer kifft, tut künftig Gutes, und zwar nicht nur
sich selber: Er hilft den Rentnerinnen und Rentnern. Das lässt sich aus einem
ebenso überraschenden wie deutlichen Entscheid ableiten, den die
Gesundheitskommission des Nationalrats (SGK) am Freitag erläutert hat. Mit nur
zwei Gegenstimmen und in Differenz zu Bundesrat und Ständerat fordert die
Kommission eine Lenkungsabgabe auf Hanfprodukte; diese soll den Cannabiskonsum
über einen erhöhten Preis eindämmen. Konkret schlägt die Kommission vor, bei
einem THC-Gehalt von 10 Prozent maximal 8 Franken pro Gramm draufzuschlagen und
bei einem THC-Gehalt zwischen 10 und 15 Prozent fast das Doppelte, nämlich 15
Franken. Höher konzentrierte Hanfprodukte würden entsprechend höher besteuert.
Kommissionspräsident Toni Bortoluzzi (SVP, Zürich) rechnet damit, dass dem
Staat auf diese Weise 300 Millionen Franken zukommen könnten; die Mittel sollen
zu je einem Viertel der Suchtprävention und Invalidenversicherung und zu fünfzig
Prozent der AHV zugute kommen. Droht ein neuer Schwarzmarkt? Vizepräsidentin
Christine Goll (SP, Zürich) schliesst nicht aus, dass die Abgabe zu hoch
angesetzt sein könnte und exakt jenen kriminellen Schwarzmarkt fördert, den
die Hanfliberalisierung austrocknen möchte. Das sieht auch François Reusser
so; gemäss dem Präsidenten der Hanfkoordination würde ein Gramm
Outdoor-Marihuana mit einem THC-Gehalt von 20 Prozent statt derzeit 9 künftig
25 Franken kosten. Die Hanfkoordination unterstütze das Prinzip einer
Lenkungsabgabe, sagt er; um aber den Schwarzmarkt auszutrocknen, dürften die
neuen Preise nicht wesentlich höher ausfallen. Reusser schlägt vor, die Steuer
nur halb so hoch anzusetzen wie von der SGK derzeit verlangt. Die übrigen
Kommissionsentscheide zur Revision des Betäubungsmittelgesetzes fielen meistens
knapp aus und immer nach langer, heftig geführter Debatte. Zwar befürwortet
die Kommission die Gesetzesrevision mit 13 gegen 6 Stimmen bei 4 Enthaltungen,
wobei SVP und Teile von FDP und CVP gegen jede Liberalisierung votierten, der
Graben aber für einmal nicht zwischen den Landesteilen hindurchgeht. Im
Einzelnen spricht sich die SGK mit 12 zu 9 Stimmen für eine Entkriminalisierung
des Cannabiskonsums aus und senkt, im Unterschied zum Ständerat, das
Mindestalter von 18 auf 16 Jahre. Auch plädiert die Kommissionsmehrheit im
Sinne des Bundesrats dafür, Anbau, Produktion und Handel von Cannabis zu
tolerieren, wenn auch stark reglementiert. Das Argument obsiegte, dass sich der
Schweizer Hanfmarkt auf diese Weise besser kontrollieren lässt. Details will
der Bundesrat in einer Cannabisverordnung regeln. Mit 11 gegen 7 Stimmen bei 3
Enthaltungen schafft die SGK eine dritte Differenz zum Erstrat: Sie will das
Opportunitätsprinzip auch für den Konsum harter Drogen einführen. Das Prinzip
besagt, dass der Drogenkonsum zwar verboten bleibt, aber nur bei Bedarf verfolgt
wird, wenn zum Beispiel ein Drogenkonsument gleichzeitig stark mit Drogen
handelt. Mit nur einer Stimme Differenz votiert die SGK dagegen, gleich den
Konsum aller Drogen zu entkriminalisieren; das Delikt der Selbstschädigung,
argumentiert die progressive Minderheit vergeblich, gehöre nicht ins
Strafgesetzbuch. Dafür plädiert die Kommission konsequent dafür, die
Instrumente Prävention, Therapie und Schadensminderung auf alle Suchtmittel
anzuwenden, also auch für die legalen. Der Nationalrat behandelt die Revision
im Mai. Die Heftigkeit der Kommissionsdebatte lässt eine sehr kontroverse
Plenumsdiskussion erwarten. Liberalisierungsgegner warnen vor einer gefährlichen
Entwicklung für die Jugend. Die Organisation «Eltern gegen Drogen» hat schon
das Referendum angekündigt; die SVP wird es unterstützen. 28. März 2003,
16:22, NZZ Online «Kiffen» straffrei, aber teurer Kommission für eine
Lenkungsabgabe «Kiffen» soll straffrei, aber verteuert werden. In diesem Sinn
will die Nationalratskommission für soziale Sicherheit und Gesundheit die
Legalisierung von Hanfprodukten mit der Einführung einer Lenkungsabgabe
verbinden. Davon profitieren sollen AHV, IV und die Suchtprävention. Die
Kommission hat das so geänderte Betäubungsmittelgesetz mit 13 zu 6 Stimmen
verabschiedet. Mehr zum Thema Leitartikel: Prävention statt Mafia Cannabis: Vor
allem für die Lunge schädlich (sda)/tsf. Wie Präsident Toni Bortoluzzi (svp.,
Zürich) am Freitag vor den Medien erklärte, hat sich die Kommission mit 12 zu
3 Stimmen für die Einführung einer Lenkungsabgabe auf Cannabis entschieden.
Diese dürfte 300 Millionen Franken einbringen und soll zur Hälfte für die AHV
und zu je einem Viertel für die IV und die Suchtprävention verwendet werden.
Verdoppelter «Joint»-Preis Der Satz soll 8 Franken pro Gramm bei einem THC-Gehalt
unter 10% und 15 Franken bei einem THC-Gehalt bis 15% betragen. Je nach THC-Gehalt
wird die Lenkungsabgabe weiter erhöht. Der Preis eines «Joint» dürfte sich
damit verdoppeln. Ausgenommen von der Abgabe sind Hanfprodukte, die nicht als
Droge verwendet werden können. Wie Christine Goll (sp., Zürich) namens ausführte,
soll die Lenkungsabgabe auf dem Verkauf von Cannabis nach dem Muster der
Tabakbesteuerung zweckgebunden für die Vorbeugung eingesetzt werden: «Prävention
per Portemonnaie». Mit der Berücksichtigung von AHV und IV sei die Abgabe auch
generationenübergreifend. Äusserst knapp lehnte die SGK die
Entkriminalisierung des Konsums harter Drogen wie Heroin oder Kokain ab. Doch
votierte sie mit 11 zu 7 Stimmen für die Einführung des Opportunitätsprinzips.
Danach soll der Bundesrat in einer Verordnung festlegen, wann von einer
Strafverfolgung abgesehen werden kann. Widerstand aus SVP und Romandie Mit 10 zu
7 Stimmen beschloss die SGK gegen den Ständerat, das Jugendschutzalter auf 16
statt 18 Jahre festzulegen. Für Drogen sollte das selbe Schutzalter gelten wie
für Alkohol und Tabak, sagte Goll. Weitgehend unbestritten blieb in der SGK die
ärztliche Verschreibung von Heroin an Schwerstsüchtige. Die Revision des Betäubungsmittelgesetzes
wird in der Sondersession im Mai im Plenum des Nationalrates beraten. Widerstand
gegen die Liberalisierung des Drogenkonsums gibt es vor allem aus der SVP und
aus den bürgerlichen Parteien der Romandie. In der SVP überlegt man sich laut
Bortoluzzi ein Referendum. Der Ständerat hat sich bereits vor anderthalb Jahren
für die Legalisierung von Cannabis ausgesprochen. If a proposed bill passes,
people in Missouri would have the right to use marijuana if they’ve exhausted
the use of pain relief medicine for the effects of cancer, glaucoma, AIDS and
other diseases. The bill to legalize marijuana for such patients was introduced
March 13 in the Missouri House of Representatives and is awaiting further
discussion. It would acknowledge marijuana as acceptable for medical use in
Missouri by classifying the drug as a Schedule II Substance, lowering it from
its current Schedule I classification, which prohibits using it as medicine by
the Drug Enforcement Administration in 42 states. “I’ve spoken and heard
from numerous people for whom the drug works,” said Rep. Vicki Walker,
R-Kansas City and sponsor of the bill. “For most of these patients, this is
the last thing they try because it is illegal.” Addiction to the active agent
in marijuana, THC, is a point of debate, said Stanley Watson, a professor of
psychiatry at the University of Michigan. “There are no convincing studies
that marijuana is very addicting,” Watson said. “Of course it is possible
that a patient might like the brain effects and decide to keep using it.”
Watson and a team of professors and doctors from around the country reviewed
scientific evidence of using THC and marijuana as medicine and published their
findings in 1999 under the Institute of Medicine. “There’s fairly little
good clinical information about actual cannabis compound being used for medical
treatment,” Watson said. “What’s really missing is good organized data. It
needs more study.” Yet Watson said there’s no reliable data to support the
idea that marijuana is bad medical treatment. The drug relieves pain and
provides symptom relief for some people, he said. However, he said marijuana
might take a toll on health because smoking it is similar to smoking tobacco, he
said. “Do I know of anything that marijuana is good at that other medicines
aren’t? Not really,” Watson said. “Maybe the way out of this is not to be
testing marijuana itself but chemical compounds.” The Food and Drug
Administration’s rules for medical treatment, which don’t accept marijuana
as a legitimate treatment, make a base for drug use rules in most countries
around the world, said Will Glaspy, spokesman for the DEA. “The question that
needs to be asked is, are we going to abandon that system for a system that is
based essentially on the ideas of lobbyists,” Glaspy said. Glaspy said reports
on studies of marijuana done by the IOM and American Medical Association are
usually twisted by marijuana initiative lobbyists, whose goal is legalization of
all drugs. But that isn’t Walker’s reason for sponsoring the bill, she said.
“For me,” Walker said, “this bill is a humanitarian bill that only seeks
to help ease the pain of so many who cannot get relief elsewhere.” The bill is
currently in a health committee but not on the committee’s calendar for
discussion. In Columbia, a proposition on the ballot for the April 8 municipal
elections would decriminalize the use of marijuana for medical reasons. Missouri
House of Representatives: http://www.house.state.mo.us Newshawk: The GCW Source:
Maneater, The (Columbia, MO Edu) Author: Matthew Wrye, Staff Writer Published:
April 1, 2003 Copyright: 2003 The Maneater http://www.acmed.org/membersonly/ Am
07.08.2001 veröffentlichte die von der Regierung eingesetzten Kommission unter
Leitung von Professor Barry Chevannes (University of the West Indies) einen
Bericht über Cannabis auf der Karibikinsel. Cannabis, in Jamaika
"Ganja" genannt, gilt in der Rastafari-Religion als "heiliges
Kraut", das als Sakrament gebraucht wird. Vertreter der US-Botschaft in
Kingston haben Bestrebungen, Cannabis zu entkriminalisieren, offen kritisiert.
Es besteht die Möglichkeit, dass Jamaika wirtschaftlichen Repressionen seitens
der USA ausgesetzt wird, wenn es den Empfehlungen der eigenen Expertenkommission
folgt. Alljährlich erstellt die US-Regierung eine Liste von Ländern, die ihrer
Meinung nach den amerikanischen "Krieg gegen Drogen" nicht genug
unterstützen. Länder auf dieser Liste müssen mit einer automatischen
Gegenstimme der USA rechnen, wenn sie etwa einen Kredit von der Weltbank oder
dem Internationalen Währungsfonds brauchen. Aus diesem Grund stand auch eine
Legalisierung des Anbaus oder Handels in Jamaika von politisch vorneherein nicht
zur Debatte. Am ersten Samstag im Mai nehmen verschiedene Organisationen in
Jamika an internationalen Protestaktionen gegen das Cannabisverbot teil. Zu
ihnen gehören die Legalize Ganja Campaign, die First Order of Niyah Binghi
Pinnacle Foundation, die National Alliance for the Legalization of Ganja und
NORML Jamaica. Am Freitag, 02.05. werden sie dem Premierminister eine Petition
zur Cannabisreform übergeben. Am Samstag findet dann eine Demonstration und ein
Musikkonzert mit einem "Reasoning", einem religiösen Treffen von
Rastafarians statt. Im April 1981 wurde Bob Marley (kurz vor seinem Tod am
11.05.1981) vom jamaikanischen Ministerpräsidenten Edward Seaga mit dem
"Order of Merit" ausgezeichnet und damit offiziell zum Nationhelden
ernannt. Gleichzeitig war der Musiker, der weltweit der bekannteste Anhänger
der Rastafari-Religion war, nach den Landesgesetzen jedoch auch ein Krimineller,
weil er Cannabis gebrauchte. Der weitverbreitete Gebrauch von Cannabis ist in
Jamaika seit fast einem Jahrhundert ein kontroverses Thema, weil der Gebrauch
bzw. die Ablehnung stark mit religiösen und sozialen Abgrenzungen zusammenhängt.
Quelle: www.cannabislegal.de / Tri Tec GmbH +++ 30.03.03 Schweiz:
Nationalratskommission beschließt Reform +++ Diese soll nach Wirkstoffgehalt
gestaffelt sein, von 8 bis 15 Franken (5,40 bis 10,- €) pro Gramm. Die
erwarteten Einnahmen von 300 Millionen Franken (200 Millionen €) sollen
zweckgebunden eingesetzt werden. Die Hälfte der Einnahmen soll an die
staatliche Rentenversicherung (AHV) gehen, die andere Hälfte teilen sich die
staatliche Invalidenversicherung (IV) und der Bund und die Kantone für Präventionsmaßnahmen.
Der Verkauf soll nur an in der Schweiz wohnhafte Personen zugelassen werden.
Diese werden dazu eine Kontrollkarte vorlegen müssen. Das Jugendschutzalter
soll wie bei Alkohol und Tabak auf 16 Jahre festgesetzt werden. Der Ständerat
(die kleine Kammer des Bundesparlaments) hatte voriges Jahr in Abweichung zum
Regierungsentwurf eine Grenze von 18 Jahren gezogen. Auch bei der Politik zu
"harten" Drogen (Heroin, Kokain) setzte sich in der SGK eine andere
Linie durch als im Ständerat. Durch eine Einführung des Opportunitätsprinzips
soll die Möglichkeit geschaffen werden, auf die Strafverfolgung von Konsumenten
dieser Drogen zu verzichten. Grundsätzlich soll ihr Konsum jedoch anders als
bei Cannabis weiter strafbar bleiben. Im Mai wird die Revision des Betäubungsmittelgesetzes
in einer Sondersitzung im Plenum des Nationalrats behandelt werden. Wenn der
Gesetzentwurf der SGK dort angenommen wird, wird es zu einer Volksabstimmung
kommen. Erst wenn die Reform auch hier eine Mehrheit findet, kann sie in Kraft
treten. Quelle: www.cannabislegal.de / Tri Tec GmbH The Jamaica Observer Bill to
legalise ganja for private use soon, says Nicholson Sunday, March 30, 2003
ATTORNEY General A J Nicholson said yesterday that legislation is now being
prepared to give effect to the recommendation of a commission, which sat two
years ago, for the decriminalisation of marijuana when in private use here.
Nicholson did not say when a Bill will reach Parliament and neither did he give
details of the drafting instructions, but stressed that decriminalising
marijuana -- called ganja here -- will be within a limited scope. "Yes, it
will, for private use only," he told the Sunday Observer yesterday.
Marijuana is widely used in Jamaica, and is said by Rastafarians to be holy
sacrament. But the use of the drug is illegal, for which a person can be fined
and, or, jailed. Additionally, the island is one of the hemisphere's leading
exporters of marijuana to the United States, and the Americans have promoted
eradication and interdiction efforts in the island. Earlier, in a speech to the
Surrey Chapter of the Lay Magistrate's Association, Nicholson sought to draw a
distinction between the historic use of marijuana in Jamaica and the country's
more recent role as a trans-shipment point for cocaine and the crime and
violence that has come in its wake. "I am a 1942 model, which means I have
been on planet earth for quite sometime and I know that it is only recently that
we are having the kind of violent crimes that we are now experiencing,"
Nicholson told the lay magistrates. "So it couldn't be caused from ganja.
The illegal trade in cocaine is what is tearing the heart out of Jamaica."
The Jamaican authorities insist that the country's high level of violent crime
is substantially driven by the drug trade, particularly cocaine, because of the
high stakes associated with the business. US and Jamaican law enforcement
officials estimate that up to 10 per cent of the cocaine in Colombia, between
100 and 120 tonnes a year, passes through Jamaica on its way to North America
and Europe. In a speech prepared for delivery in Fort Lauderdale, Florida 10
days ago, the national security minister, Peter Phillips, noted that the cocaine
transshipped through Jamaica had a street value of between US$3 billion and $3.6
billion, representing between 40 and 50 per cent of Jamaica's gross domestic
product (GDP) for 2001. "In terms of total merchandise trade for 2001, the
value of the drug trade was estimated between 65 per cent and 78 per cent of
total legitimate trade," Phillips said in his prepared text. "In other
words, the drug trade is valued at more than three-quarters of all imports and
exports for Jamaica in 2001." This business, which generated tremendous
resources, promoted a demand for high-powered weaponry to protect itself during
the transit of drugs through Jamaica. Clearly, marijuana doesn't carry nearly
the same reputation in Jamaica and has substantial folk appeal. Nearly two years
ago, a National Ganja Commission, appointed by Prime Minister P J Patterson,
recommended the decriminalisation of the drug, which has deep cultural roots
here. The committee, which was headed by University of the West Indies
sociologist, Dr Barry Chevannes, also raised the possibility of the expansion of
the use of ganja in pharmacology and in industry. For instance, in the late
1970s, two UWI researchers developed from marijuana a drug called Canasol for
the treatment of glaucoma. Hemp, a type of marijuana plant has several
industrial applications, including in the manufacture of rope, cloth and other
products. At the same time, the Chevannes committee recommended that the state
start an intensive education drive, especially among young people, to reduce the
demand for the drug. They suggested, too, that the Government attempt to
influence the international community to re-examine the status of marijuana and
that the police increase their vigilance in destroying large ganja plantations
and generally stem the trafficking of illegal drugs. Tages-Anzeiger vom
29.03.2003 Das Gramm Gras zu 25 Franken Auch die Gesundheitskommission des
Nationalrats will den Hanfkonsum liberalisieren; zugleich soll der Stoff massiv
teurer werden. Straffrei Kiffen? Von Jean-Martin Büttner, Bern Wer kifft, tut künftig
Gutes, und zwar nicht nur sich selber: Er hilft den Rentnerinnen und Rentnern.
Das lässt sich aus einem ebenso überraschenden wie deutlichen Entscheid
ableiten, den die Gesundheitskommission des Nationalrats (SGK) am Freitag erläutert
hat. Mit nur zwei Gegenstimmen und in Differenz zu Bundesrat und Ständerat
fordert die Kommission eine Lenkungsabgabe auf Hanfprodukte; diese soll den
Cannabiskonsum über einen erhöhten Preis eindämmen. Konkret schlägt die
Kommission vor, bei einem THC-Gehalt von 10 Prozent maximal 8 Franken pro Gramm
draufzuschlagen und bei einem THC-Gehalt zwischen 10 und 15 Prozent fast das
Doppelte, nämlich 15 Franken. Höher konzentrierte Hanfprodukte würden
entsprechend höher besteuert. Kommissionspräsident Toni Bortoluzzi (SVP, Zürich)
rechnet damit, dass dem Staat auf diese Weise 300 Millionen Franken zukommen könnten;
die Mittel sollen zu je einem Viertel der Suchtprävention und
Invalidenversicherung und zu fünfzig Prozent der AHV zugute kommen. Droht ein
neuer Schwarzmarkt? Vizepräsidentin Christine Goll (SP, Zürich) schliesst
nicht aus, dass die Abgabe zu hoch angesetzt sein könnte und exakt jenen
kriminellen Schwarzmarkt fördert, den die Hanfliberalisierung austrocknen möchte.
Das sieht auch François Reusser so; gemäss dem Präsidenten der
Hanfkoordination würde ein Gramm Outdoor-Marihuana mit einem THC-Gehalt von 20
Prozent statt derzeit 9 künftig 25 Franken kosten. Die Hanfkoordination unterstütze
das Prinzip einer Lenkungsabgabe, sagt er; um aber den Schwarzmarkt
auszutrocknen, dürften die neuen Preise nicht wesentlich höher ausfallen.
Reusser schlägt vor, die Steuer nur halb so hoch anzusetzen wie von der SGK
derzeit verlangt. Die übrigen Kommissionsentscheide zur Revision des Betäubungsmittelgesetzes
fielen meistens knapp aus und immer nach langer, heftig geführter Debatte. Zwar
befürwortet die Kommission die Gesetzesrevision mit 13 gegen 6 Stimmen bei 4
Enthaltungen, wobei SVP und Teile von FDP und CVP gegen jede Liberalisierung
votierten, der Graben aber für einmal nicht zwischen den Landesteilen
hindurchgeht. Im Einzelnen spricht sich die SGK mit 12 zu 9 Stimmen für eine
Entkriminalisierung des Cannabiskonsums aus und senkt, im Unterschied zum Ständerat,
das Mindestalter von 18 auf 16 Jahre. Auch plädiert die Kommissionsmehrheit im
Sinne des Bundesrats dafür, Anbau, Produktion und Handel von Cannabis zu
tolerieren, wenn auch stark reglementiert. Das Argument obsiegte, dass sich der
Schweizer Hanfmarkt auf diese Weise besser kontrollieren lässt. Details will
der Bundesrat in einer Cannabisverordnung regeln. Mit 11 gegen 7 Stimmen bei 3
Enthaltungen schafft die SGK eine dritte Differenz zum Erstrat: Sie will das
Opportunitätsprinzip auch für den Konsum harter Drogen einführen. Das Prinzip
besagt, dass der Drogenkonsum zwar verboten bleibt, aber nur bei Bedarf verfolgt
wird, wenn zum Beispiel ein Drogenkonsument gleichzeitig stark mit Drogen
handelt. Mit nur einer Stimme Differenz votiert die SGK dagegen, gleich den
Konsum aller Drogen zu entkriminalisieren; das Delikt der Selbstschädigung,
argumentiert die progressive Minderheit vergeblich, gehöre nicht ins
Strafgesetzbuch. Dafür plädiert die Kommission konsequent dafür, die
Instrumente Prävention, Therapie und Schadensminderung auf alle Suchtmittel
anzuwenden, also auch für die legalen. Der Nationalrat behandelt die Revision
im Mai. Die Heftigkeit der Kommissionsdebatte lässt eine sehr kontroverse
Plenumsdiskussion erwarten. Liberalisierungsgegner warnen vor einer gefährlichen
Entwicklung für die Jugend. Die Organisation "Eltern gegen Drogen"
hat schon das Referendum angekündigt; die SVP wird es unterstützen. 28. März
2003, 16:22, NZZ Online "Kiffen" straffrei, aber teurer Kommission für
eine Lenkungsabgabe "Kiffen" soll straffrei, aber verteuert werden. In
diesem Sinn will die Nationalratskommission für soziale Sicherheit und
Gesundheit die Legalisierung von Hanfprodukten mit der Einführung einer
Lenkungsabgabe verbinden. Davon profitieren sollen AHV, IV und die Suchtprävention.
Die Kommission hat das so geänderte Betäubungsmittelgesetz mit 13 zu 6 Stimmen
verabschiedet. Mehr zum Thema Leitartikel: Prävention statt Mafia Cannabis: Vor
allem für die Lunge schädlich (sda)/tsf. Wie Präsident Toni Bortoluzzi (svp.,
Zürich) am Freitag vor den Medien erklärte, hat sich die Kommission mit 12 zu
3 Stimmen für die Einführung einer Lenkungsabgabe auf Cannabis entschieden.
Diese dürfte 300 Millionen Franken einbringen und soll zur Hälfte für die AHV
und zu je einem Viertel für die IV und die Suchtprävention verwendet werden.
Verdoppelter "Joint"-Preis Der Satz soll 8 Franken pro Gramm bei einem
THC-Gehalt unter 10% und 15 Franken bei einem THC-Gehalt bis 15% betragen. Je
nach THC-Gehalt wird die Lenkungsabgabe weiter erhöht. Der Preis eines
"Joint" dürfte sich damit verdoppeln. Ausgenommen von der Abgabe sind
Hanfprodukte, die nicht als Droge verwendet werden können. Wie Christine Goll
(sp., Zürich) namens ausführte, soll die Lenkungsabgabe auf dem Verkauf von
Cannabis nach dem Muster der Tabakbesteuerung zweckgebunden für die Vorbeugung
eingesetzt werden: "Prävention per Portemonnaie". Mit der Berücksichtigung
von AHV und IV sei die Abgabe auch generationenübergreifend. Äusserst knapp
lehnte die SGK die Entkriminalisierung des Konsums harter Drogen wie Heroin oder
Kokain ab. Doch votierte sie mit 11 zu 7 Stimmen für die Einführung des
Opportunitätsprinzips. Danach soll der Bundesrat in einer Verordnung festlegen,
wann von einer Strafverfolgung abgesehen werden kann. Widerstand aus SVP und
Romandie Mit 10 zu 7 Stimmen beschloss die SGK gegen den Ständerat, das
Jugendschutzalter auf 16 statt 18 Jahre festzulegen. Für Drogen sollte das
selbe Schutzalter gelten wie für Alkohol und Tabak, sagte Goll. Weitgehend
unbestritten blieb in der SGK die ärztliche Verschreibung von Heroin an
Schwerstsüchtige. Die Revision des Betäubungsmittelgesetzes wird in der
Sondersession im Mai im Plenum des Nationalrates beraten. Widerstand gegen die
Liberalisierung des Drogenkonsums gibt es vor allem aus der SVP und aus den bürgerlichen
Parteien der Romandie. In der SVP überlegt man sich laut Bortoluzzi ein
Referendum. Der Ständerat hat sich bereits vor anderthalb Jahren für die
Legalisierung von Cannabis ausgesprochen. If a proposed bill passes, people in
Missouri would have the right to use marijuana if they've exhausted the use of
pain relief medicine for the effects of cancer, glaucoma, AIDS and other
diseases. The bill to legalize marijuana for such patients was introduced March
13 in the Missouri House of Representatives and is awaiting further discussion.
It would acknowledge marijuana as acceptable for medical use in Missouri by
classifying the drug as a Schedule II Substance, lowering it from its current
Schedule I classification, which prohibits using it as medicine by the Drug
Enforcement Administration in 42 states. "I've spoken and heard from
numerous people for whom the drug works," said Rep. Vicki Walker, R-Kansas
City and sponsor of the bill. "For most of these patients, this is the last
thing they try because it is illegal." Addiction to the active agent in
marijuana, THC, is a point of debate, said Stanley Watson, a professor of
psychiatry at the University of Michigan. "There are no convincing studies
that marijuana is very addicting," Watson said. "Of course it is
possible that a patient might like the brain effects and decide to keep using
it." Watson and a team of professors and doctors from around the country
reviewed scientific evidence of using THC and marijuana as medicine and
published their findings in 1999 under the Institute of Medicine. "There's
fairly little good clinical information about actual cannabis compound being
used for medical treatment," Watson said. "What's really missing is
good organized data. It needs more study." Yet Watson said there's no
reliable data to support the idea that marijuana is bad medical treatment. The
drug relieves pain and provides symptom relief for some people, he said.
However, he said marijuana might take a toll on health because smoking it is
similar to smoking tobacco, he said. "Do I know of anything that marijuana
is good at that other medicines aren't? Not really," Watson said.
"Maybe the way out of this is not to be testing marijuana itself but
chemical compounds." The Food and Drug Administration's rules for medical
treatment, which don't accept marijuana as a legitimate treatment, make a base
for drug use rules in most countries around the world, said Will Glaspy,
spokesman for the DEA. "The question that needs to be asked is, are we
going to abandon that system for a system that is based essentially on the ideas
of lobbyists," Glaspy said. Glaspy said reports on studies of marijuana
done by the IOM and American Medical Association are usually twisted by
marijuana initiative lobbyists, whose goal is legalization of all drugs. But
that isn't Walker's reason for sponsoring the bill, she said. "For
me," Walker said, "this bill is a humanitarian bill that only seeks to
help ease the pain of so many who cannot get relief elsewhere." The bill is
currently in a health committee but not on the committee's calendar for
discussion. In Columbia, a proposition on the ballot for the April 8 municipal
elections would decriminalize the use of marijuana for medical reasons. Missouri
House of Representatives: http://www.house.state.mo.us Newshawk: The GCW Source:
Maneater, The (Columbia, MO Edu) Author: Matthew Wrye, Staff Writer Published:
April 1, 2003 Copyright: 2003 The Maneater ##art# ## 2002-03-04 Topographic EEG
Changes Accompanying Cannabis-Induced Alteration of Music Perception¡V Cannabis
as a Hearing Aid? Jorg Fachner ABSTRACT. An explorative study on cannabis and
music perception is presented, conducted in a qualitative and quantitative way
in a habituated setting. EEG-brainmapping data (4 subjects; rest¡Vpre/post
listening; 28 EEG traces; smoked cannabis containing 20 mg delta-9-THC with
tobacco) were averaged and analyzed with a T-Test and a visual topographic
schedule. Compared to pre-THC-rest and pre-THC-music, the post-THC-music EEG
showed a rise of alpha percentage and power in parietal cortex on four subjects,
while other frequencies decreased in power. Comparing pre/post music EEGs,
differences (p < 0.025) were also found in the right fronto-temporal cortex
on theta, and on alpha in left occipital cortex. Results represent an
inter-individual constant EEG correlate of altered music perception,
hyperfocusing on the musical time-space and cannabis-induced changes on
perception of musical acoustics. Cannabis might be of help for hearing impaired
persons. [Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery
Service: 1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address: J. Fachner
Topographic EEG Changes Accompanying Cannabis-Induced Alteration
of Music Perception- Cannabis as a Hearing Aid?
Topographic EEG Changes Accompanying Cannabis-Induced Alteration of Music
Perception- Cannabis as a Hearing Aid? An explorative study on cannabis and
music perception is presented, conducted in a qualitative and quantitative way
in a habituated setting. EEG-brainmapping data (4 subjects; rest-pre/post
listening; 28 EEG traces; smoked cannabis containing 20 mg delta-9-THC with
tobacco) were averaged and analyzed with a T-Test and a visual topographic
schedule. Compared to pre-THC-rest and pre-THC-music, the post-THC-music EEG
showed a rise of alpha percentage and power in parietal cortex on four subjects,
while other frequencies decreased in power. Comparing pre/post music EEGs,
differences (p < 0.025) were also found in the right fronto-temporal cortex
on theta, and on alpha in left occipital cortex. Results represent an
inter-individual constant EEG correlate of altered music perception,
hyperfocusing on the musical time-space and cannabis-induced changes on
perception of musical acoustics. Cannabis might be of help for hearing impaired
persons. Music, ethnography, electroencephalography, brainmapping, EEG,
significance mapping, personality, auditory perception, acoustics, hearing
impaired, cannabis, medical marijuana An Interview with Willem Scholten and Myra
Klee: June 26, 2001 Ethan Russo Ethan Russo An Interview with Willem Scholten
and Myra Klee: June 26, 2001 The Medical Use of Cannabis Among the Greeks and
Romans James L. Butrica ABSTRACT. This article, which contains a complete survey
of the surviving references to medical cannabis in Greek and Latin literature,
updates the last serious treatment of the subject (Brunner 1973). Though it
eventually became commonplace, cannabis seems to have been largely unknown to
the Greeks in the fifth century BCE, when Herodotus wrote his description of the
hemp vapor-baths used by the ancient Scythians, which constitutes the earliest
reference in Greek literature. While its use in medicine is not attested until
the first century CE, it was evidently well established by then. The Roman
writer Pliny the Elder records several medical uses, but comparison with Greek
writers suggests that he is sometimes mistaken, and there is no secure evidence
for the medical use of cannabis by the Romans. Greek writers, on the other hand,
report the use of cannabis in treating horses¡Vespecially for dressing sores
and wounds¡Vand in treating humans. Here we find the dried leaves used against
nosebleed and the seeds used against tapeworms, but the most frequently
mentioned treatment involves steeping the green seeds in a liquid such as water
or a variety of wine, then pressing out the liquid, which when warmed was
instilled into the ear as a remedy for pains and inflammations associated with
blockages. Many sources also observe that the seeds, when eaten in quantity, dry
up the semen; a passage in Aetius shows that they could be prescribed as part of
the treatment for teenaged boys (and girls) afflicted by nocturnal emissions. A
recreational consumption of cannabis seeds is attested first in the comic poet
Ephippus in the 4th century BCE and again in Galen in the second century CE.
Ancient medical writers classified cannabis among foods with a James L. Butrica
is Professor in the Department of Classics at The Memorial University of
Newfoundland in St. John¡¦s, Newfoundland, Canada A1C 5S7 (E-mail: jbutrica@morgan.ucs.mun.ca).
Journal of Cannabis Therapeutics, Vol. 2(2) 2002 ÆÉ 2002 by The Haworth Press,
Inc. All rights reserved. 51 warming effect, foods with a drying effect, foods
that harm the head, foods that thin the humors, and foods that prevent
flatulence. It was acknowledged to have an intoxicating effect not
characteristic of the seed of the agnus-castus, which was sometimes prescribed
in its place. Perhaps that intoxicating effect, and the prescribing of cannabis
seed to teenaged boys, lies behind the controversy over the ¡§proper¡¨
medical use of cannabis at which Galen hints when he says that its only proper
use is to thin the humors through the urine. [Article copies available for a fee
from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address: Cannabis, medicine, Greece and Rome James L. Butrica
V. Crawford
A Homelie Herbe: Medicinal Cannabis in Early England A Homelie
Herbe: Medicinal Cannabis in Early England The Medical Use of Cannabis Among the
Greeks and Romans A Homelie Herbe: Medicinal Cannabis in Early England Vivienne
Crawford Cannabis is often regarded as a substance alien to British culture
until the 1960s, at which supposed point of introduction it functioned as a
marker of subversion. In fact cannabis was used as a medicinal herb by the
Anglo-Saxons, and highly valued during the Tudor and Stuart periods. It remained
in the British Materia medica through the 18th and 19th centuries, being well
regarded by orthodox doctors. However, the type of cannabis grown in England was
probably less rich in psychotropic cannabinoids than plants grown in the East.
Anglo-Saxon herbalism, English Renaissance herbalism, cannabis, medicinal
marijuana, history of medicine This issue of Journal of Cannabis Therapeutics
might well be labeled the European-Canadian Special Edition. That is
appropriate, in view of the radical changes underway in political policies with
respect to cannabis therapeutics in those nations. Our first article is from
Jorg Fachner, and illustrates original research on the effects of cannabis upon
brain electrical activity (BEAM or ¡§brainmapping¡¨). Interesting insights
are obtained. The second is an interview with Willem Scholten and Myra Klee, two
officers in the Office of Medicinal Cannabis in the Netherlands. They were kind
enough to allow the editor a prolonged interview concerning Dutch policy in this
area. Minor editing took place to improve the flow of the language and remove
extraneous material, but no substantive changes were made in the contents. The
pace of change in Europe is so fast that a recent development in Holland must be
mentioned. The Dutch government has announced (October 2001) that clinical
cannabis research will continue, but during the interval before it is completed,
quality-controlled cannabis will soon be available by prescription in pharmacies
in that country. The next article by James Butrica reviews ancient data on
cannabis from the Greeks and Romans. It has been almost 30 years since the last
in-depth treatise of this type, and new insights are apparent. Another entry
comes to us from the UK, where Vivienne Crawford spins a lively tale of a
homelie herbe, none other than cannabis, and its medical usage from the
Anglo-Saxon era up to the 19th century. Finally, we publish here a few of the
many presentations available at the International Association for Cannabis as
Medicine (IACM) Conference re- Journal of Cannabis Therapeutics, Vol. 2(2) 2002
ÆÉ 2002 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved. 1 cently held in
Berlin, Germany. I believe the reader will be impressed with the range and
quality of clinical cannabis research taking place on the Continent. Our last
entry in 2002 will be a special thematic double issue, ¡§Women and Cannabis.¡¨
Ethan Russo, MD Editor 2 JOURNAL OF CANNABIS THERAPEUTICS This issue of Journal
of Cannabis Therapeutics might well be labeled the European-Canadian Special
Edition. That is appropriate, in view of the radical changes underway in
political policies with respect to cannabis therapeutics in those nations. Our
first article is from Jörg Fachner, and illustrates original research on the
effects of cannabis upon brain electrical activity (BEAM or "brainmapping").
Interesting insights are obtained. The second is an interview with Willem
Scholten and Myra Klee, two officers in the Office of Medicinal Cannabis in the
Netherlands. They were kind enough to allow the editor a prolonged interview
concerning Dutch policy in this area. Minor editing took place to improve the
flow of the language and remove extraneous material, but no substantive changes
were made in the contents. The pace of change in Europe is so fast that a recent
development in Holland must be mentioned. The Dutch government has announced
(October 2001) that clinical cannabis research will continue, but during the
interval before it is completed, quality-controlled cannabis will soon be
available by prescription in pharmacies in that country. The next article by
James Butrica reviews ancient data on cannabis from the Greeks and Romans. It
has been almost 30 years since the last in-depth treatise of this type, and new
insights are apparent. Another entry comes to us from the UK, where Vivienne
Crawford spins a lively tale of a homelie herbe, none other than cannabis, and
its medical usage from the Anglo-Saxon era up to the 19th century. Finally, we
publish here a few of the many presentations available at the International
Association for Cannabis as Medicine (IACM) Conference recently held in Berlin,
Germany. I believe the reader will be impressed with the range and quality of
clinical cannabis research taking place on the Continent. Our last entry in 2002
will be a special thematic double issue, "Women and Cannabis." 7088509
Welche Kasse bezahlt? Welche Kasse bezahlt nicht? Introduction: Women and
Cannabis: Medicine, Science, and Sociology The Journal of Cannabis Therapeutics:
Studies in Endogenous, Herbal & Synthetic Cannabinoids is pleased to present
its second special issue on the subject of Women and Cannabis: Medicine,
Science, and Sociology. This topic is particularly appropriate on a couple of
levels. Firstly, medical research has been remiss in addressing women¡¦s
issues on a historical basis. Secondly, many gender- specific conditions, and
female-predominant medical conditions are popularly treated with cannabis (Grinspoon
and Bakalar 1997). These include dysmenorrhea, migraine (Russo 2001; Russo
1998), fibromyalgia, and a wide variety of autoimmune disorders such as
rheumatoid arthritis (Malfait et al. 2000), and multiple sclerosis. The latter
receives particular attention in this publication. This survey begins with a
historical review of cannabis in treatment of obstetrical and gynecological
conditions. A surprising volume and depth of documentation is evident, which
only now is subject to scientific investigation and verification. A ¡§fertile
field¡¨ for additional research is evident. An Italian research team, Bari et
al., examine the critical role that endocannabinoids play in fertilization
mechanisms. The last decade has revealed numerous physiological roles in which
this system plays a key part. Ester Fride follows with another illustration,
that of endocannabinoids and neonatal feeding. It would seem that without this
necessary endocannabinoid stimulus, we might all starve to death just as life
was commencing. The presence of trace concentrations of endocannabinoids in
breast milk underline the importance of this system in physiological maintenance
of life and homeostasis. In order to achieve successful birth, pregnancy
maintenance is a critical prerequisite. Wei-Ni Lin Curry examines the
controversial treatment of [Haworth co-indexing entry note]: ¡§Introduction:
Women and Cannabis: Medicine, Science, and Sociology.¡¨ Russo, Ethan.
Co-published simultaneously in Journal of Cannabis Therapeutics (The Haworth
Integrative Healing Press, an imprint of The Haworth Press, Inc.) Vol. 2, No.
3/4, 2002, pp. 1-3; and: Women and Cannabis: Medicine, Science, and Sociology
(ed: Ethan Russo, Melanie Dreher, and Mary Lynn Mathre) The Haworth Integrative
Healing Press, an imprint of The Haworth Press, Inc., 2002, pp. 1-3. Single or
multiple copies of this article are available for a fee from The Haworth
Document Delivery Service [1-800-HAWORTH, 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. (EST). E-mail
address: getinfo@haworthpressinc.com]. ÆÉ 2002 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All
rights reserved. 1 hyperemesis gravidarum with cannabis in an ¡§underground
research study.¡¨ Provocative questions and possibilities result. What of the
sequelae of maternal cannabis usage? Peter Fried reviews the large body of
literature that has examined the progeny of such pregnancies and their possible
effects on cognition in children. How should we educate about clinical cannabis?
Mary Lynn Mathre tells us from the perspective of an addiction treatment nurse
specialist. Melanie Dreher presents an anthropological and sociological study
from Jamaica that supports the prospect that cannabis, itself labeled as a drug
of abuse, might well serve to treat and prevent addiction to cocaine, an idea
first proposed in the 19th century (Mattison 1891), but still causing notice in
the 21st. In the lyrics to his 1981 song, ¡§Champagne and Reefer,¡¨ blues
artist, Muddy Waters commented on the issue (Waters 1981): I¡¦m gonna get high
Gonna get high just as sure as you know my name. Y¡¦know I¡¦m gonna get so
high this morning It¡¦s going to be a crying shame. Well you know I¡¦m gonna
stick with my reefer Ain¡¦t gonna be messin¡¦ round with no cocaine. Mila
Jansen, an inventor and businesswoman from Holland, and Robbie Terris present
the rationale behind the clinical use of cannabis as hashish, and the modern
methods she has developed for its production. Kirsten Muller-Vahl et al. review
the effects of cannabis in the movement disorder, Tourette syndrome, and present
a detailed case study where it seemed to be beneficial. Clare Hodges comments on
her affliction with multiple sclerosis, a cruel disease whose victims have been
at the forefront of clinical cannabis claims. She documents her experience and
those of other patients. Denis Petro follows with a seminal review of the topic
and the evidence to date that supports a role for cannabis in MS treatment. We
hope that this collection will advance the topic of women¡¦s medicine and at
least promote the consideration of cannabis and cannabinoid treatment of
recalcitrant clinical conditions. Ethan Russo Ethan Russo, MD REFERENCES
Grinspoon, L., and J.B. Bakalar. 1997. Marihuana, the forbidden medicine. Rev.
and exp. ed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Malfait, A.M., R. Gallily,
P.F. Sumariwalla, A.S. Malik, E. Andreakos, R. Mechoulam, and M. Feldmann. 2000.
The nonpsychoactive cannabis constituent cannabidiol is an oral 2 Women and
Cannabis: Medicine, Science, and Sociology anti-arthritic therapeutic in murine
collagen-induced arthritis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97(17):9561-6. Mattison, J.B.
1891. Cannabis indica as an anodyne and hypnotic. St. Louis Medical and Surgical
J 61:265-71. Russo, E. 1998. Cannabis for migraine treatment: The once and
future prescription? An historical and scientific review. Pain 76(1-2):3-8.
Russo, E.B. 2001. Hemp for headache: An in-depth historical and scientific
review of cannabis in migraine treatment. J Cannabis Therapeutics 1(2):21-92.
Waters, Muddy. 1981. Champagne and Reefer. From King Bee, ASIN: B0000025LD.
Sony/Columbia. Introduction 3 Introduction: Women and Cannabis: Medicine,
Science, and Sociology Introduction: Women and Cannabis: Medicine, Science, and
Sociology Introduction: Women and Cannabis: Medicine, Science, and Sociology
The Journal of Cannabis Therapeutics: Studies in Endogenous, Herbal &
Synthetic Cannabinoids is pleased to present its second special issue on the
subject of Women and Cannabis: Medicine, Science, and Sociology. This topic is
particularly appropriate on a couple of levels. Firstly, medical research has
been remiss in addressing women's issues on a historical basis. Secondly, many
gender- specific conditions, and female-predominant medical conditions are
popularly treated with cannabis (Grinspoon and Bakalar 1997). These include
dysmenorrhea, migraine (Russo 2001; Russo 1998), fibromyalgia, and a wide
variety of autoimmune disorders such as rheumatoid arthritis (Malfait et al.
2000), and multiple sclerosis. The latter receives particular attention in this
publication.
This survey begins with a historical review of cannabis in treatment of
obstetrical and gynecological conditions. A surprising volume and depth of
documentation is evident, which only now is subject to scientific investigation
and verification. A "fertile field" for additional research is
evident.
An Italian research team, Bari et al., examine the critical role that
endocannabinoids play in fertilization mechanisms. The last decade has revealed
numerous physiological roles in which this system plays a key part.
Ester Fride follows with another illustration, that of endocannabinoids and
neonatal feeding. It would seem that without this necessary endocannabinoid
stimulus, we might all starve to death just as life was commencing. The presence
of trace concentrations of endocannabinoids in breast milk underline the
importance of this system in physiological maintenance of life and homeostasis.
In order to achieve successful birth, pregnancy maintenance is a critical
prerequisite. Wei-Ni Lin Curry examines the controversial treatment of
hyperemesis gravidarum with cannabis in an "underground research
study." Provocative questions and possibilities result.
What of the sequelae of maternal cannabis usage? Peter Fried reviews the
large body of literature that has examined the progeny of such pregnancies and
their possible effects on cognition in children.
How should we educate about clinical cannabis? Mary Lynn Mathre tells us from
the perspective of an addiction treatment nurse specialist.
Melanie Dreher presents an anthropological and sociological study from
Jamaica that supports the prospect that cannabis, itself labeled as a drug of
abuse, might well serve to treat and prevent addiction to cocaine, an idea first
proposed in the 19th century (Mattison 1891), but still causing notice in the
21st. In the lyrics to his 1981 song, "Champagne and Reefer," blues
artist, Muddy Waters commented on the issue (Waters 1981):
Gonna get high just as sure as you know my name.
Y'know I'm gonna get so high this morning
It's going to be a crying shame.
Ain't gonna be messin' round with no cocaine.
Mila Jansen, an inventor and businesswoman from Holland, and Robbie Terris
present the rationale behind the clinical use of cannabis as hashish, and the
modern methods she has developed for its production.
Kirsten Müller-Vahl et al. review the effects of cannabis in the movement
disorder, Tourette syndrome, and present a detailed case study where it seemed
to be beneficial.
Clare Hodges comments on her affliction with multiple sclerosis, a cruel
disease whose victims have been at the forefront of clinical cannabis claims.
She documents her experience and those of other patients.
Denis Petro follows with a seminal review of the topic and the evidence to
date that supports a role for cannabis in MS treatment.
We hope that this collection will advance the topic of women's medicine and
at least promote the consideration of cannabis and cannabinoid treatment of
recalcitrant clinical conditions.
Grinspoon, L., and J.B. Bakalar. 1997. Marihuana, the forbidden medicine.
Rev. and exp. ed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Malfait, A.M., R. Gallily, P.F. Sumariwalla, A.S. Malik, E. Andreakos, R.
Mechoulam, and M. Feldmann. 2000. The nonpsychoactive cannabis constituent
cannabidiol is an oral anti-arthritic therapeutic in murine collagen-induced
arthritis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97(17):9561-6.
Mattison, J.B. 1891. Cannabis indica as an anodyne and hypnotic. St. Louis
Medical and Surgical J 61:265-71.
Russo, E. 1998. Cannabis for migraine treatment: The once and future
prescription? An historical and scientific review. Pain 76(1-2):3-8.
Russo, E.B. 2001. Hemp for headache: An in-depth historical and scientific
review of cannabis in migraine treatment. J Cannabis Therapeutics 1(2):21-92.
Waters, Muddy. 1981. Champagne and Reefer. From King Bee, ASIN: B0000025LD.
Sony/Columbia.
IntroductionE. Fride
Cannabinoids and Feeding: The Role of the Endogenous Cannabinoid
System as a Trigger for Newborn Suckling Cannabinoids and Feeding E. Fride
Cannabinoids and Feeding: The Role of the Endogenous Cannabinoid System as a
Trigger for Newborn Suckling Cannabinoids and Feeding
Button Ad
Spaces 
Custom Search
