The document discusses the need for drug policy reform, emphasizing that legal regulation is essential to address the harms caused by prohibition and to protect public health. It outlines important concepts such as prohibition, decriminalization, legalization, and legal regulation, and highlights the failures of the current 'war on drugs' approach. Various historical and contemporary examples illustrate the negative consequences of drug prohibition, including increased crime, public health issues, and mass incarceration.

2. “Drugs must be regulated precisely because
they are risky... Drugs are infinitely more
dangerous if they are left solely in the hands
of criminals who have no concerns about
health and safety. Legal regulation protects
health."
— Kofi Annan, Former Secretary-General of
the United Nations

3. Drug Policy Revolution
A legal revolution in drugs policy is taking place both domestically
and internationally.
Important questions previously taboo are now being asked not just
in Ireland but elsewhere.
Whether prohibition on the cultivation, distribution and possession of
scheduled dugs like cannabis should finally be ended?
Last year, the Irish government announced that it would consider
decriminalising the possession of small quantities of scheduled
substances for personal use.

4. Lecture Focus
Evaluate the background to Drug prohibition and The
War On Drugs both domestically and internationally
Consider the case for Alternative Drug Policies.
Examine International Drug Policy Reforms.
Examine Suggested Domestic Policy Reform.
What forms of Legal Regulation could be used.

5. Defining the concepts
There are four important concepts that need to be
defined as part of this important debate on Drug
Policy Reform and The War on Drugs
Prohibition
Decriminalisation
Legalisation
Legal Regulation

6. Prohibition
The action of forbidding something, especially by law
Example:- United Nations Convention Against illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs
and Psychotropic Substances 1988
Article 3. Offences and sanctions
1. Each Party shall adopt such measures as may be necessary to establish as criminal offences
under its domestic law, when committed intentionally:
(a) (i) The production, manufacture, extraction; preparation, offering, offering for sale,
distribution, sale, delivery on any terms whatsoever, brokerage, dispatch, dispatch in transit,
transport, importation or exportation of any narcotic drug or any psychotropic substance contrary
to the provisions of the 1961 Convention, the 1961 Convention as amended or the 1971
Convention;
(ii) The cultivation of opium poppy, coca bush or cannabis plant for the purpose of the
production of narcotic drugs contrary to the provisions of the 1961 Convention and the 1961
Convention as amended;

7. Decriminalisation
Decriminalisation also known as depenisalisation
refers to the removal of criminal sanctions for
possession of small quantities of illegal drugs for
personal use, with civil or administrative sanctions
optional (Portuguese Model)
Early Example:- Netherlands Opium Act 1976 was
a compromise between outright prohibition and
social integration of illegal drugs.
The sale of cannabis is technically an offence
under the Opium Act, but prosecutorial guidelines
provide that proceedings will only be instituted in
certain situations.

8. Legalisation
The process of making something that was
previously illegal permissible by law.
Legal Regulation
A legal framework governing the production,
supply and use of drugs. Any activity
outside of this framework
remains prohibited.
Example: Misuse of Drugs (Supervision of
Prescription and Supply of Methadone)
Regulations 1998 (S.I. No. 225 of 1998)

9. Important Questions
At the heart of the drug policy debate are a
number of fundamental questions.
• Should we continue with prohibition?
• Should we move forward with
decriminalisation?
• Should we move towards models for legal
regulation of controlled drugs now being used
elsewhere?

10. Decriminalisation, why not?
In practical terms, decriminalisation would have no effect on illicit
markets and the related ills of organised crime: violence, public
disorder and imprisonment.
Decriminalisation merely gives consumers the permission to
purchase what the illicit market is prohibited by law from selling.
It stands to reason that if decriminalisation occurs then the only
benefactors will be those who control the illicit market, namely
organised crime. Therefore the only way to destroy the illegal
market which has been outsourced to criminals is to provide a
form of legal regulation; accepting in part that drug usage, like the
use of alcohol and tobacco is a fact of life, whether you like it or
not?

11. Why Legal Regulation?
In many ways global prohibition as provided for under international
law has done more harm than good, most notably the failure to
reduce the harms it set out to address.
Legal Regulation on the other has a number of measurable
benefits, such as:
1. Protecting the young and vulnerable
2. Reducing Crime
3. Improving Public Health
4. Promoting Security and Development
5. Protection of Human Rights

12. Legal Regulation Objectives
Legal Regulation is about bringing the drug trade within
the law, so that strict controls can be applied. Such
controls are difficult to introduce under the current regime
of prohibition.
Legal regulation enables responsible governments to
control which drugs can be sold, who has access to them,
and where they can be sold. Under prohibition, it is
criminals who make these decisions.
Under the current system of drug prohibition, we have an
unregulated illicit market in which anyone can buy any
drug they like while criminals control the trade. Drug
dealers don’t ask for ID

13. Global Prohibition
If Legal Regulation might be the solution,
why are the government proposing decriminalisation?
The process of legalisation is made all the more difficult by
a global system of drug treaties which have evolved over
the last century culminating in:
1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs
(as amended by 1972 protocol)
1972 United Nations Convention on Psychotropic Substances
1988 United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic
in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances.

14. Bad Law
The treaties have largely cemented an enforcement
based approach into the international legal framework.
Therefore the current global drug control system,
administered and overseen by the UN, is predicated upon
police and military enforcement against producers,
suppliers and users – a “war on drugs” in popular
discourse.
This approach is fatally undermining all of the “three
pillars” that underpin the UN’s work – peace and security,
development and human rights.

15. “The war on drugs and zero-tolerance policies
that grew out of the prohibitionist consensus are
now being challenged on multiple fronts,
including their health, human rights, and
development impact.”
The Lancet Commission
Johns Hopkins School of Public Health

16. 24
36 36
19 17
13
7 6 5
48
20 18
8 9
7
2 1 1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Alcohol Heroin Crack Cocaine Tobacco Cannabis Ecstacy LSD Mushrooms
OVERALLHARMSCORE100
DRUG HARMS IN THE UK: A MULTICRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS - THE LANCET 2010
Drugs ordered by their overall harm score
Harm to Users Harm to Others
Drug Harm Index

17. PROHIBITION

18. The origins of Drug Prohibition can be traced back to the Christian Temperance Movement in the
United States and Europe in the 19th Century.
In the United States, the Temperance movement gave rise to the Anti-Saloon League which had as
their goal the prohibition on the production, distribution and sale of Alcohol so as to reduce
consumption.
However, they also focused on other intoxicants such as Tobacco, and drugs.
In the United Kingdom, at the same time there was the Anti-Imperial Movement which saw trade in
Opium as a bedrock of Imperial economic policy. Opium was the most valuable commodity sold in
the British Empire.
The United States was in the vanguard of organising the first International Opium Conference at
Shanghai in 1909. This forum laid the groundwork for the first international drug control treaty, the
International Opium Convention which was signed in 1912.
In 1919, the Anti-Saloon League succeeded in having the 18th Amendment to the United States
Constitution passed, and in response Congress passed the Volstead Act which instituted Prohibition
on the manufacture, sale, and transportation of Alcohol within the United States as well as placing
prohibition on imports.
However, Prohibition did not preclude consumption which was not illegal. There were of course
exceptions, such as sacramental use of alcohol, as well as use of alcohol for ‘medicinal reasons’
Origins of Prohibition

19. Before 1912, narcotics such as heroin and cocaine were
legal and widely used to relieve pain and treat illness.
The public was largely unaware of the addictive potential
of these drugs. For example, heroine was commonly used
in hospitals to relieve post operative pain.
In the process, some patients inadvertently became
addicted to drugs. Most however, were productive
members of society.
Doctors managed their addiction while attempting to
reduce and eliminate their drug dependency.
Pre Drug Prohibition

20. The Temperance movement successfully lobbied Congress in 1914, to adopt the Harrison
Narcotics Act.
The Act criminalised use of narcotics in the United States for the first time. Section 2 of the Act
specifically banned physicians from prescribing morphine, opium and cocaine to treat addicts.
Under the pretext of eradicating ‘a dangerous and immoral addiction epidemic’, the
Federal Narcotics Control Board and the Narcotic Division launched a “War on Doctors.”
The law enforcement strategy was to force doctors, under the threat of felony
prosecution, to deny treatment to addicted patients.
Webb v United States 249 US 96 (1919): Doctors prohibited from prescribing narcotics to
addicts
During the 1920s, an estimated 35,000 Doctors in the United States were thus indicted for
prescribing narcotics to their patients.
Linder v United States 268 US 5 (1925)
Likewise, the addict population was prosecuted and imprisoned. By 1928, more than 19 % of all
federal prisoners were sentenced for narcotics offences.
The War on Doctors

21. Prohibition Timeline
1909 - United States the driving force behind the Shanghai Opium Commission
1912 - Hague International Opium Convention is passed
1919 - Hague International Opium Convention becomes law
1920 - Dangerous Drugs Act UK - Production, Supply and Sale of Opium, Cocaine prohibited
1919 - 18th Amend. US Constitution passed - Volstead Act - Prohibiting Alcohol
1926- Rollston Report recommends Medical practitioners prescribe to addicts
1914 - United States Harrison Act lays the groundwork for future Drug laws
1919 - Webb v United States 249 US 96: Doctors prohibited from prescribing narcotics
to addicts
1925 - 2nd Geneva Convention- Cannabis brought under international control
1928 - Dangerous Drugs Amendment Act - Criminalises Cannabis in the UK
1925 - Linder v United States 268 US 5 - Harrison Act could not be used to prosecute Doctors

22. HARRY ANSLINGER’S WAR
The Moral Crusader?

23. "There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US,
and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers.
Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana usage.
This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations
with Negroes, entertainers and any others.”
“the primary reason to outlaw marijuana
is its effect on the degenerate races.”
“You smoke a joint and you're likely to kill your brother”
“Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men. “
The word according to Harry

25. 1930 - Federal Bureau of Narcotics - The Bureau is directed by Harry Anslinger,
who had been an Assistant Commissioner of Prohibition
1933 - Alcohol Prohibition ends - United States passes 21st Amendment
1936 - Reefer Madness - US Propaganda film
1937 - Marijuana Tax Act - curbs the trafficking of marijuana through heavy taxation.
1936 - Convention for the Suppression of the Illicit Traffic in Dangerous Drugs
Prohibition Timeline
1934 - Dangerous Drugs Act Ireland - International Conventions 1919, 1925, 1931
1937 - The Act was vigorously opposed by the American Medical Association
1938 - Henry Smith Williams - publishes ‘Drug Addicts are human beings.’

26. Prohibition Timeline
1945 - Laguardia Report - Marijuana does not lead to medical addiction.
1951 - Boggs Act - First mandatory sentences for violators of Narcotics laws
1961 - United Nations - Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs
1962 - Anslinger appointed US Representative to the UN Drugs Commission
1940’s proved to be a very lean period for Anslinger and the FBN, due in
part to the ‘Hemp for Victory’ campaign launched by the Department of
Agriculture which encouraged farmers to grow hemp to help sustain the
war effort when other industrial fibres were in short supply. over 375,000
acres of the crop were harvested during the war years. Much of Mexico’s
opium crop was bought by the US during the war.

28. Narcotic Drugs Convention
The 1961 Convention marked an important milestone in global prohibition,
requiring signatory states to enshrine in their domestic law
‘such legislative and administrative measures as may be necessary (a) to give
effect to and carry out the provisions of this Convention within their own
territories’
Cannabis was included in Schedule IV of the convention, reserved for the most
dangerous drugs, alongside heroin; whereas cocaine on the other hand
appeared in the less serious 1st Schedule.
Article 2 (5) of the convention provided that special measures of control should
be adopted in relation to drugs listed on Schedule IV
‘which are necessary having regard to the particularly dangerous properties of a
drug so included.’

29. NIXON’S WAR ON DRUGS

31. "The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after
that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You
understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal
to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to
associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and
then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those
communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes,
break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the
evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of
course we did."
— John Ehrlichman, one of President Richard Nixon’s top
advisers.
All The President’s Men

33. Prohibition Timeline 3
1970 - Controlled Substances Act - United States
1971 - Nixon Declares ‘War on Drugs’
1972 - Shaffer Commission Report recommends decriminalising cannabis
1973 - Drug Enforcement Agency established.
1971 - Convention on Psychotropic substances - United Nations
1971 - ‘Misuse of Drugs Act’ - United Kingdom
1972 - Protocol amending 1961 Single Narcotic Drugs Convention
1977 - Misuse of Drugs Act - Ireland
1973 - Oregon becomes the first state to decriminalise
1976 - Netherlands Opium Act 1976 - Decriminalisation

35. Reagan Administration
The Reagan administration escalated the War on Drugs.
Implementing legislation that intensified law enforcement and increased
punishment.
The US began to take an increasingly militarised role in the War On Drugs
with dramatic adverse consequences.
In October 1986 President Reagan signed the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986,
appropriating $1.7 billion to fight the War on Drugs.
This legislation created mandatory minimum penalties for drug offences and
promoted large racial disparities within the US prison system, whilst doing
little to reduce the amount of drugs available on the street.
These two programmes exemplify the Reagan administration’s approach to
drug abuse.

36. The War on Drugs was launched with the aim of
eliminating drugs from society.
The War On Drugs has failed to stem the long-term,
global trend of increasing drug supply and use.
The War on Drugs has gifted the world’s most profitable
commodity market to organised criminal cartels.
The War On Drugs has cost $2.3 Trillion since 1971
The War On Drugs

37. DRUG WARS: THE FACTS

39. “No Drug has ever been
made safer in the hands
of Criminals.”
Neligan’s Law

40. Creates Crime
The war on drugs has created an illegal trade with an annual
turnover of more than $320 billion
Drugs are now the world’s largest illegal commodity market
A significant proportion of street crime is related to the illegal
drug trade:
The criminal justice-led approach has caused an explosion in
the prison population
Evidence suggests that more vigorous enforcement
exacerbates violence.
Drug profits also fuel regional conflict by helping to arm
insurgent, paramilitary and terrorist groups.

42. There were more than 1.5 million drug arrests in the U.S. in 2014
There were more than 30 million drug arrests between 1993-2015
80%– were for possession for personal use only.
Almost 500,000 people are behind bars for a drug law violation on
any given night in the United States – ten times the total in 1980
Black people comprise 13 % of the U.S. population but make up 40%
of people incarcerated in Federal and State prisons for drug violations
Latinos comprise 17 % of the U.S. population but make up 37% of
people incarcerated in Federal and State prisons for drug violations
Mass Incarceration: USA

43. 2.7 million children are growing up in U.S. households in which one or more
parents are incarcerated.
Two- thirds of these parents are incarcerated for nonviolent offences, including
a substantial proportion who are incarcerated for drug law violations.
One in nine black children has an incarcerated parent, compared to one in 28
Latino children and one in 57 white children.
Punishment for a drug law violation is not only meted out by the criminal
justice system, but is also perpetuated by policies denying child custody,
voting rights, employment, business loans, student aid, public housing and
other public assistance to people with criminal convictions.
Criminal records often result in deportation of legal residents or denial of entry
for non-citizens trying to visit the U.S.
Drug War Victims

44. PROHIBITION CREATED TWO DRUGS WARS
The War on Drugs The War for Drugs
Focused on Addicts & Users
Mass Incarceration
Syndication of Organised Crime
Globalisation of Cartels
Increased Supply & Use of
Narcotics
Deregulated Global Market
Disenfranchisement
Mandatory sentencing

45. 0
175
350
525
700
875
2015 PRISON POPULATIONS PER 100,000
USA Russia Rwanda Brazil Australia Spain
China Canada France Germany Sweden India

47. Worldwide statistics show that imprisonment for drug related offences is particularly high among
women.
For example, according to a recent comprehensive study, over 31,000 women across Europe and
Central Asia are imprisoned for drug offences, representing 28 % of all women in prisons in these
regions.
In some countries, up to 70 % of female prisoners are incarcerated for drug offences.
About 33% of women prisoners in Canada, and 57% in Thailand were convicted of drug related
offences.
Harsh drug laws are also driving a surge in the number of women imprisoned in Latin America.
Between 2006 and 2011 the female prison population in the region almost doubled, increasing
from 40,000 to more than 74,000 prisoners.
Female Incarceration
Source: Penal Reform International | Global Prison Trends 2015

49. Penalises Addiction
The criminalisation of people who use drugs fuels various
forms of discrimination both direct and indirect.
Example: In 2011, the Press Ombudsman upheld a complaint
against Irish Independent Columnist Ian O’Doherty for an
article he wrote entitled “Sterilising junkies may seem harsh,
but it does make sense”
Criminalisation limits employment prospects and reduces
access to welfare and healthcare.
At its most extreme, the stigma associated with drug crimes
can dehumanise and provide justification for serious abuses,
including torture
Criminalisation can result in people being deported from
countries where they are legally resident or denied entry into
another country.

51. The sheer size and financial power of the illegal drugs
industry can undermine legitimate governments
everywhere, generating lucrative funding streams for
drug trafficking organisations, transnational organised
crime groups and, some evidence suggests, insurgent
and terrorist groups.
From low-level police officers to high-ranking politicians
and the military, individuals are routinely corrupted,
through bribery or threats, to either turn a blind eye to,
or actively participate in, illicit activity They are rarely
brought to trial, prosecuted or punished.
Security & Development

52. The UNODC openly acknowledges that the enforcement-led UN drug
control system creates the criminal drug market, meaning the system
itself is effectively the cause of illicit drug production and trafficking
globally
Criminal organisations have the power to destabilise society and
Governments.
The ramifications of the illicit drug market go beyond the harms caused by
drug use.
This includes involvement in other types of criminal activities such as
terrorism; human trafficking, smuggling.
Organised Criminal Activity impacts on legitimate businesses and the
wider economy in general; resulting in strain on and corruption of
government institutions.
By removing the illicit drug market, this reduces the profit motive for
organised crime and thereby reduces their impact
Adverse Consequence

53. Afghanistan
Afghanistan supplies more than 90% of global illicit opium/heroin, which is fuelling
unprecedented corruption, as well as funding insurgency, and terror groups, both
nationally and internationally.
Opiates accounted for 13% of Afghanistan’s GDP and considerably exceeded the export
value of licit goods and services.
2015 - UNDOC - 183,000 hectares under cultivation. Hilmand remained the country’s
major opium-cultivating province (86,443 hectares),
The UN Security Council estimates the Taliban earn $90-160 million annually from
opium/heroin production, 10-15% of their overall funding. This is substantial, but
represents only 3% of the annual harvest sale. Far more money goes to corrupt officials,
traffickers and farmers.
Afghan government officials are believed to be involved in at least 70% of opium
trafficking, and at least 13 former or present provincial governors are directly involved in
the drug trade

54. Mexico
While Mexico has a long history of internal violence, this was in decline until
2006, when President Calderon announced an intensification of enforcement
efforts against the illicit drug trade, with a focus on eliminating the leaders of the
country’s drug cartels.
This so-called ‘decapitation strategy’ has been – and still is – having severe
negative consequences, with Mexico suffering an extreme upswing in violence.
As cartel leaders were removed and a power vacuum created, their
organisations fractured into smaller factions battling each other for territory,
while other cartels moved in to seize control, along with state security forces.
Estimates of deaths from violence related to the illegal drug trade in Mexico
since the war on drugs was scaled up in 2006 range from 60,000 to more than
120,000, of which at least 1,300 were children and 4,000 women.
2007-14, total civilian homicide deaths in Mexico were 164,000 – a substantially
higher than in Iraq or Afghanistan over the same period.

55. Mali
In Mali, where Islamist fighters seized control of the north in 2012,
drug trafficking has exacerbated the conflict.
A 2013 UN Security Council report on West Africa and the Sahel
recognised the impact of corruption from drug trafficking as a factor
that contributed to state weakness in countries within the region,
notably Mali and Guinea-Bissau.
In June 2015, Mali’s foreign minister, Abdoulaye Diop, called on the
UN to provide a peacekeeping force to help regain control from the
militias and for a major anti-drug trafficking operation to be put in
place, because he argued:
“We will never achieve a definite settlement for this crisis without this
initiative because drugs are fuelling all sides in this conflict.”
Mali therefore found itself calling for the UN to send in forces to deal
with a problem that was being simultaneously fuelled by the UN-
administered global drug control regime

57. A century of prohibition teaches us that it is
counter-productive;
It has failed to reduce the harms it set out to
address
It has had catastrophic unintended
consequences.
The extent of this failure has been chronicled in
detail by independent and objective assessments
undertaken by government committees,
academics, and Non Government Organisations
across the world, over many decades.
The Cost of Failure

58. It is Prohibition
not legal regulation that
is the radical policy

59. ENDING THE WAR ON DRUGS
CASE STUDIES

60. 1995 Swiss introduce harm reduction.

61. The prescribing of medical-grade heroin as a treatment for heroin
dependence has a long history, having been firmly established in UK
medical practice by the 1926 Rolleston Committee, after which it
operated in parallel with the criminalisation of non-prescribed heroin
under both domestic and international law. After 1967, it was heavily
restricted as a result of ‘International Pressure.’
In 1992, Switzerland introduced its own Heroin Assistance Model.
patients were required to attend a clinic once or twice a day and to
use their prescriptions on site under medical supervision.
The first HAT clinics opened in 1994 as part of a 3 year national trial.
In late 1997, the federal government approved a large-scale
expansion of the trial, aimed at accommodating 15% of the nation’s
estimated 30,000 heroin users, specifically those long-term users
who had not succeeded with other treatments.
SWISS HAT MODEL

62. The Health outcomes for HAT participants improved significantly
Heroin dosages stabilised, usually in two or three months, rather than
increasing as some had feared
Illicit heroin (and illicit cocaine) consumption was significantly reduced
A large reduction in fundraising-related criminal activity among HAT
participants. This benefit alone exceeded the cost of the treatment
Heroin from the trials was not diverted to illicit markets
Initiation of new heroin use fell – the medicalisation of heroin made it less
attractive,
Reductions in street dealing and recruitment by former “user-dealers”
Uptake of treatments other than HAT, especially methadone, increased
rather than declined
Positive Outcomes

63. 2001 Portugal Decriminalises all drugs.

64. In 2001, Portugal enacted a comprehensive form of
decriminalisation – eliminating criminal penalties for low-
level possession and consumption of all illicit drugs and
reclassifying these activities as administrative violations.
A person found in possession of personal-use amounts of
any drug in Portugal is no longer arrested, but rather
ordered to appear before a local “dissuasion commission”
The commission can refer that person to a voluntary
treatment program, pay a fine or impose other
administrative sanctions.
While drug use and possession no longer trigger criminal
sanctions, they remain illegal. Further, drug trafficking
offences remain illegal and are still processed through the
criminal justice system.
Portuguese Decriminalisation

65. No major increases in drug use.
Rates of illicit drug use have mostly remained flat.
Reduced problematic and adolescent drug use.
More importantly, adolescent drug use, as well as problematic
drug use – or use by people deemed to be dependent or who
inject – has decreased since 2003.
Fewer people arrested and incarcerated for drugs.
The number of people arrested and sent to criminal courts for
drug offenses declined by more than 60 percent since
decriminalisation
The percentage of people in Portugal’s prison system for drug
law violations also decreased dramatically, from 44 percent in
1999 to 24 percent in 2013
Decriminalisation Outcomes

66. Decriminalisation Outcomes
Reduced incidence of HIV/AIDS.
The number of new HIV and AIDS diagnoses
have fallen considerably. Between 2000 and 2013,
new HIV cases among people who use drugs
declined from 1,575 to 78
Portugal’s policy has reportedly not led to an
increase in drug tourism

67. Decriminalisation Downside
Decriminalisation is ‘prohibition-light’ in many ways it is similar
to the regime which existed under the Volstead Act for alcohol
prohibition.
Whereas users are not penalised, it does not remove criminal
gangs from the equation.
Decriminalisation is as far as a country can go without falling
outside the Single Narcotic Drugs Convention.
Decriminalisation merely gives consumers the permission to
purchase what the illicit market is prohibited by law from
selling.

68. “There were fears Portugal
might become a drug
paradise, but that simply
didn’t happen.”
Fernando Negrão
Former Chief of Police

69. 2012 Colorado Legalises Cannabis.

70. Colorado & Washington
In 2012, Colorado and Washington States became the first
jurisdictions in the world to legalise cannabis markets for non-
medical use.
The reforms were passed through ballot initiatives, with voters
in both states choosing legalisation by a solid margin.
Colorado’s Amendment 64 was approved in November 2012,
with the state’s first retail stores opening on January 1, 2014,
following the development of a comprehensive regulatory
infrastructure devised by an expert task force.
Enabling adults aged 21 or older to possess cannabis, grow
up to six cannabis plants themselves, and give up to one
ounce to other adult users.

71. Legal Authorities for Medical and Licensed Marijuana Businesses
Medical
Colorado Constitution: Article XVIII, §14
Colorado Revised Statutes: 12‐43.3‐101 et seq.
Code of Colorado Regulations (MED Rules) 1 CCR 212‐1
Retail
Colorado Constitution: Article XVIII, §16
Colorado Revised Statutes: 12‐43.4‐101 et seq.
Code of Colorado Regulations (MED Rules) 1 CCR 212‐2
Legal Authorities Colorado

72. Colorado Outcomes
Not surprisingly arrests for cannabis possession have dropped
dramatically – by nearly 80% – since 2012.
16,000 directly employed in the Cannabis Industry (Medical & Retail)
$996,184,788 worth of recreational and medical cannabis in 2015
Colorado also collected more than $135 million in marijuana taxes
and fees in 2015, more than $35 million of which is earmarked
for school construction projects.
No increase in Road Fatalities
Youth consumption of marijuana has declined

73. “It’s remarkable that less than seven years ago, all
of that money was being spent in the underground
market. Clearly there’s a large demand for
marijuana, and we’re now seeing that demand being
met by legitimate businesses that are answering to
authorities instead of criminals who answer to
nobody.”
Mason Tvert, the Marijuana Policy Project’s communications director.

74. 2013 Uruguay legalises Marijuana.

75. On December 23, 2013, Uruguay became the first country in the world
to fully legalise the production, sale and consumption of marijuana for
personal use when President José Mujica signed law 19.172.
Unlike most other counties, it has long been legal to possess an
undefined “reasonable quantity” of any drug for personal consumption
in Uruguay.
However, production, transportation and sale remained illegal.
This meant that illicit drug traffickers supplied the marijuana that was
then legally possessed by Uruguayans, creating profit for organized
crime.
The new law lays out a legal system for producing and distributing
marijuana for adult use, as well as for medical and industrial purposes.
Uruguay Legalisation

76. Uruguay aims to remove the marijuana
market from the hands of illicit drug traffickers
and use tax revenue from marijuana sales to
invest in social programs such as education,
treatment and prevention of problematic drug
use.
Uruguay Objective

77. What does the law do?
The law creates a new state agency called the Institute for the
Regulation and Control of Cannabis (IRCCA). The IRCCA has
three primary responsibilities:
1. Regulate the growing, harvesting, distribution, preparation,
sale and use of all marijuana in Uruguay used for commercial,
medical or non- medical purpose.
2. Promote campaigns that provide educational information
about the risks and harms of marijuana use and abuse, in
coordination with the National Drug Agency and other
governmental agencies and departments
3. Places restrictions on commercialisation

78. There are four forms of access to marijuana under the new
system:
Medical marijuana, which requires both a doctor’s prescription
and approval from the Ministry of Public Health
Personal cultivation of up to 6 plants per household with a
maximum annual yield of 480 grams
Marijuana membership clubs where between 15 and 45
members can collectively grow up to 99 plants, proportional to
the number of members, with the maximum annual allotment of
480 grams of dried product per year per member
Sales in licensed pharmacies where registered Uruguayan adult
residents can purchase up to 10 grams per week
The Uruguay System

79. WHAT’S NEXT?

80. STATE OF PLAY

81. The arc of history
2016 20 Bills have been introduced in the present Congress
Which relate to the Regulation of Marijuana
2015 -Compassionate Access, Research Expansion,
and Respect States Act of 2015 or the CARERS Act of 2015
2016 Vermont is having a debate at the moment. The Senate
initially passed a Legalisation Bill, but the House altered it to
decriminalise up to two plants for cultivation
2016 California Control, Regulate & Tax Marijuana initiative
2016 Nevada Marijuana Legalisation initiative
2017 Maine Marijuana Legalisation initiative
2016 Massachusetts Regulation and Taxation of Marijuana Initiative
2016 Rhode Island Bill 7752 to legalise Marijuana

82. Heroin
29%
Cannab
is
39%
Cocain
e
24%
MDMA
8%
Retail Market Percentage
Heroin,
€6.80
Cannab
is
€9.3
Cocain
e,
€5.70
MDMA,
€1.80
Retail Market in € Billions
Source: Europol / European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction
EU Drug Markets Report 2016
European Drug Market

83. ADDRESSING YOUR CONCERNS

84. Will Drug use rise with
legalisation?

85. (a) When Portugal decriminalised the possession of all drugs in
2001, prohibitionists predicted drug use would go through the
roof and the country would be swamped by drug tourists.
Neither happened.
(b) Switzerland introduced a legally regulated supply of heroin
to dependent users in 1994 through a clinic system. This
reduced rather than increased availability, as evidenced by the
fact that drug dealing (and serious thefts) by these heroin users
fell by over 80%. In other words, availability had been
controlled, not increased. During this period, heroin use in
Switzerland also fell.
(c) After legalisation in Colorado marijuana use for minors
declined.
DRUG USE WILL NOT RISE

86. Who will protect the children
if drugs are legalised?

87. Legalisation protects children
The War on Drugs does not protect children
Under prohibition, illegal drugs remain easily available to most
young people, and a significant minority have used them.
Regulation allows for appropriate controls to be put in place over
price and availability (location, times of opening, age restrictions
etc.), as well as restrictions on advertising and promotions.
Regulation cannot eliminate all drug use, but regulation will create
an improved environment for reducing harm, and for reducing
demand for unregulated drugs.
It is precisely because drugs pose risks that they need to be
appropriately regulated, especially for young people

88. Is the cannabis available today more potent?

89. Potency
• Unknown strength/potency is a risk of unregulated illegal cannabis
that can be largely eliminated in an effectively regulated market.
• The availability of more potent variations of cannabis (often referred
to as skunk) has declined in regulated markets such as Colorado,
Washington, Oregon and Alaska because legalisation has made it
uneconomical and driven it from the market.
• Legally regulated cannabis, where potency is restricted and
controlled is more popular with recreational consumers, it will also
remove the market for synthetic cannabis.

90. Does Cannabis use lead
to Schizophrenia?

91. Schizophrenia usually develops in late teens and early 20’s
Most common prevalent in those who have suffered childhood trauma
and low socio-economic groupings*
In some cases cannabis relieves some symptoms of schizophrenia
while in some cases for those predisposed to schizophrenia it makes it
worse particularly if over consumed*
Over-consumption was a noted factor as far back as the Indian-Hemp
commission in 1897.
Schizophrenia is decreasing in the general population. Over the last 40
years cannabis consumption has increased. Suggesting there is no co-
relation between general cannabis use and schizophrenia*
Professor David Nutt, “Drugs without hot air - Minimising the harms of legal and illegal drugs”
Medical evidence suggests not

92. HOW TO REGULATE DRUGS?

93. Direction of
Cannabis Policy
Direction of
Alcohol / Tobacco Policy
Unregulated
Criminal Market
Unregulated
Legal Market
Ultra
Prohibition
Prohibition
with harm
Reduction
Light Market
Regulation
Social and
Health Harms
Drug Policy
Spectrum
Commercial
Promotion
Spectrum of Drug Policy Options
Strict Legal Regulation

94. Free Market
Regulated
Market
Prohibition
Heroin, Cocaine,
Cannabis, Ecstacy
System Example Market Controller
Criminal Entreneurs
Corrupt Police, Officials
Prescription Drugs
Alcohol, Tobacco
Legally Regulated
By Government Agencies
Caffeinated Drinks Private Enterprise

95. There are five models for Legal Regulation
Legal Regulation
1. Prescription
2. Pharmacy
3. Licensed Sales
4. Licensed Premises
5. Unlicensed Sales
All of these regulatory models already exist and are in
operation, in various forms, around the world. They
are used to control the entirely legal distribution of a
range of medical, quasi-medical and non-medical
psychoactive substances.

96. Prescription Model

97. Prescription Model
• The prescription model is the most tightly controlled and enforced
drug supply model currently in operation.
• Drugs are prescribed to a named user by a qualified and licensed
medical practitioner. They are dispensed by a pharmacist from a
licensed pharmacy.
• The process is controlled by a range of legislation, regulatory
structures and enforcement bodies.
• the prescription model is the most expensive to administer. It is
limited to medical necessity, which restricts its actual or poten- tial
use to the problematic/chronic dependent end of the drug use
spectrum

98. Pharmacy Model

99. Pharmacy Model
• The pharmacy model, whilst still working within a clearly defined medical
framework, is less restrictive and controlling than the prescription model.
• Pharmacists are trained and licensed to dispense prescriptions, although
they cannot write them. They can also sell certain generally lower risk
medical drugs from behind the counter. Such dispensing generally takes
place from licensed pharmacy venues.
• Pharmacists are overseen by regulatory legislation, managed by various
agencies and a clearly defined enforcement infrastructure.
• Pharmacists already oversee methadone prescriptions in Ireland and the
United Kingdom. Misuse of Drugs (Supervision of Prescription and Supply of
Methadone) Regulations 1998 (S.I. No. 225 of 1998)

100. Licensed Dispensaries

101. Licensed Dispensary
• Licensed Dispensaries. A specialist, non-medical drug dispensary would occupy a
distinct professional niche, one that would need careful development, definition and
management.
• This new role would be subject to a similar code of practice to that of more
conventional pharmacists, but with additional access control criteria.
• These specialist dispensaries would also be required to offer advice about harm
reduction, safer use, and treatment services and referrals to help users quit, where
appropriate.
• Such advice would be supported by necessary additional training or experience in
drug counselling. They could either operate alongside existing pharmacies (subject
to appropriate licensing conditions) or from separate licensed outlets.
• Example: Colorado Retail of Marijuana Code C.R.S. 12-43.4-306

102. Licensed Premises

103. Licensed Premises
• Current best practice in licensed sales of alcohol and tobacco offers a less
restrictive, more flexible infrastructure for the licensed sales of certain lower risk
non-medical drugs.
• Such a system would put various combinations of regulatory controls in place to
manage the vendor, the supply outlet, the product and the purchaser, as
appropriate.
• Much like current best practice in alcohol and tobacco management programmes, a
raft of centrally determined framework policy and regulatory legislation would be put
in place.
• Licence holders could be required to offer advice about harm reduction, safer use,
and treatment services, where appropriate.
• Example:- Cannabis Retail Licence (Part 5 Regulation of Cannabis Bill 2013)

104. Unlicensed Sales

105. Unlicensed Sales
• Certain psychoactive substances deemed sufficiently low risk, such as
coffee, traditional use of coca tea and some low strength. painkillers, are
subject to little or no licensing.
• Here, regulation focuses on standard product descriptions and labelling.
Where appropriate, food and beverage legislation (dealing with packaging,
sell by dates, ingredients etc.) comes into play.
• These substances are effectively freely available, although they may in
some cases be subject to certain localised restrictions or voluntary codes.
• Example:- Hemp Tea is freely available to purchase in Dublin

106. Legal Regulation Ireland

107. “You can only delay
the inevitable”

108. 0 4500 9000 13500 18000 22500
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Total Controlled Drug Offences Possession For Personal Use
Source: Central Statistics Office
70% of Drug Convictions in Ireland are for Possession for personal use

109. Cannabis Cocaine Heroin
per kilo per kilo per kilo
Wholesale WholesaleWholesale
Farmgate Farmgate Farmgate
€12,500 €100,000€50,000
Street Value Street Value Street Value
€8000 €22,000 €35,000
per kilo per kiloper kilo
€67 per kilo €500 per kilo €140 per kilo
Supply chain Price Ireland

110. Retail Price
Cannabis
€7640 per kilo
Colorado
Retail Price
Cannabis
€12,900 per kilo
Ireland
Legal Illegal
Price Comparison
Cannabis
Retail Price
Netherlands
€7,500 per kilo
Decriminalised

112. Cannabis Regulation Bill 2013
Background
Introduced by Luke Flanagan PMB - 20th Nov 2013
Well drafted piece of legislation
Provided for the Legal Regulation of Medicinal & Recreational
Cannabis
Rejected by the Oireachtas 111-8.
Major Features
- Establishment of a Cannabis Regulation Authority (Part II)
- Establishment of a Cannabis Research Institute (Part III)
- Establishment of a Licensing System for Cultivation of
Cannabis (3 forms) under Part IV Sections 14-18
- Licensing for the Sale of Cannabis Part 5 Sections 19-24

113. Cannabis Regulation Bill 2013
Section 20:- Licenses for Sale of Cannabis
- Cannabis Wholesale Licence;
- Cannabis Retail Store Licence;
- Medicinal Cannabis Retail Licence;
- Cannabis Coffee Shop Licence; and
- Cannabis Social Club Licence granted under section 18.
Section 25:- Transportation of Cannabis
an offence for a person to engage in the transport of
cannabis unless the person holds a licence which expressly
permits the transportation of those goods

114. Cannabis Regulation Bill 2013
• Section 34 empowered a Judge of the District Court may, upon the
application of the Authority, revoke a licence granted under this Act where
certain conditions are satisfied. A decision to revoke a licence may be
appealed to the Circuit Court.
• Part 8 — Restrictions on Products Permissible During Cultivation
• Section 36 made it an offence, during the course of cultivation of cannabis,
to use or apply additives, growth agents, insecticides etc. which have been
prescribed by the Minister under this section as being prohibited

115. Cannabis Regulation Bill 2013
• Part 9 — Restrictions on Sale of Cannabis
• Section 38 makes it an offence for the holder of a retail licence to sell
cannabis or a cannabis-infused product to a child.
• Section 39 imposes a one ounce limit on the quantity of cannabis which may
be sold in a transaction in a retail setting.
• Section 40 makes it an offence for a licence-holder to allow children to be on
a licensed premises at any time.
• Section 41 makes it an offence for the holders of certain types of licence to
sell cannabis to a member of the public. Therefore, cannabis may only be
sold to a member of the public by the holder of a cannabis retail licence.

116. Cannabis Regulation Bill 2013
Part 10 — Residency Requirements on Licensees and Staff
• Section 43 requires that in order to be—
• (a) eligible to apply for a licence,
• (b) eligible to be employed by a licence holder, or
• (c) eligible to be members of a Cannabis Social Club,
• a person must be legally resident in the State for two years.

117. How to Regulate Cannabis

118. 2013 Bill was in line with the best international
practice for regulating cannabis as provided for
by the Transform Drug Policy Foundation in its
publication on How to Regulate Cannabis - A
Practical Guide.

119. 1. Production – oversight of Process
2. Price – controlled pricing
3. Tax – closely linked to pricing policy
4. Potency – Testing & monitoring strength
5. Packaging – Tamper proof packaging
6. Vendors – license compliance
7. Purchasers – Age restrictions
Factors to Regulate

120. Challenges
• Guaranteeing product quality through appropriate testing, evaluation and oversight of production
processes
• Ensuring the security of production processes to prevent leakage to unregulated illicit markets
• Managing commercial activity and links between producers and the rest of the supply chain
Production

121. Ensuring quality control and the security of production systems can
be achieved using measures that are already in place in several
countries existing medical cannabis markets.
Tracking systems that monitor cannabis from ‘seed to sale’ should be
employed in order to identify any instances of diversion.
Production by private companies is best managed when they are
producing the drug for retail by separate, strictly regulated outlets that
are not under their ownership.
Cannabis social clubs should be promoted as a small-scale
combined production and supply model, due to their relatively closed
membership policies and not-for-profit ethos
Recommendations

122. PRICE
Challenges
• Establishing how regulated markets will impact on cannabis
prices, and how prices can be effectively controlled.
• Estimating what the likely impacts of changing prices will be, how
price controls will affect levels and patterns of use, and what
effect they will have on legal and illegal cannabis markets
• Using price controls to strike a balance between often conflicting
priorities, such as dissuading cannabis use, reducing the size of
illegal cannabis markets, displacing cannabis use from or to other
drugs, and generating revenue from cannabis sales

123. PRICE
Recommendations
• At the outset of any new system of legal cannabis regulation, it is sensible and
cautious to use price controls to set retail prices at or near those found on the
illegal market, more significant variations are likely to have unpredictable,
potentially negative impacts
• Experimentation with price controls will be needed, and should be accompanied
by close evaluation and monitoring, as well as the flexibility and willingness to
alter prices when necessary
• The impacts of any price changes or price controls should be evaluated based
on analysis of a range of variables, such as: levels of cannabis
• use among different populations, patterns of use (in terms of frequency,
products consumed, using behaviours, and in particular harmful use), the
relative sizes of parallel legal and illegal markets, the extent of any home
growing, and displacement from or to the use of other drugs, including alcohol

124. TAX
Challenge
• Effectively integrating taxation policy into pricing regulation in a way that
maximises tax revenue, while supporting , and not undermining, other policy
aims.
Analysis
• Tax policy is closely linked with pricing policy
• Various possible tax mechanisms exist: tax on unit weight, on active content, or
a value added tax (VAT)
• Tax revenue will be available not only from cannabis sales, but also from
production, industry-related earnings, and other sources such as licence fees

125. POTENCY
Challenges
• Ensuring potency is regulated, and reliably and consistently
monitored in any retail products
• Ensuring that consumers are informed about the potency of
what they are consuming, its potential effects and risks, and
how to minimise or avoid them
• Minimising the potential risks associated with high-potency
cannabis

126. POTENCY
Recommendations
• The strength and potency of THC and CBD content should be tested and
monitored for all retail products, there should be routine independent
monitoring at production and retail stages of the market, supported by
random retail purchase monitoring
• The production or sale of cannabis products whose strength/potency varies
significantly from its stated level or the level required by regulation, should be
considered a serious licensing violation
• Product packaging and points of sale in on-site consumption venues should
ensure that consumers have access to full and accurate information about the
strength/potency of what they are purchasing ̨ expressed in terms of THC
and CBD content

127. PACKAGING
Challenges
• Ensuring packaging is child resistant to help minimise risk of
accidental child ingestion and poisonings
• Ensuring key product content, risk and advice information is
available on the packaging
• Ensuring packaging serves to preserve the freshness and
quality of the product
• Ensuring packaging design is not used to encourage use.

128. PACKAGING
Challenges
• All take-out retail cannabis products should be sold in opaque re- sealable
child-resistant plastic containers, with additional tamper-proofing measures
included on products if deemed necessary.
• Home-grown cannabis should also be required to be stored in child
resistant packaging.
• Information on packaging should be modelled on established norms for
pharmaceutical drugs and recent lessons from tobacco packaging.
packaging should be standardised and non branded
• Packaging regulations should be clearly outlined in law and properly
enforced

129. VENDORS
Challenges
• Ensuring licensing requirements for vendors support the
aims of policy
• Ensuring any commercial priorities of vendors do not
undermine key functions of a vendor regulatory regime
including purchaser access control, access to accurate
product and health information, and minimisation of social
and health harms
• Ensuring adequate enforcement of vendor regulation

130. VENDORS
Recommendations
• Basic training requirements, covering cannabis use and health, how to engage with
users, as well as legal regulatory requirements and how to enforce them ̨ should be
mandated by regulatory authorities for all vendors, with additional requirements for
vendors in venues that permit on-site consumption.
• Vendor requirements should be adequately enforced to ensure they are universally
adhered to.
• Failure to meet requirements should be dealt with using a hierarchy of penalties
including fines and withdrawal of licence.
• Systems for partial shared responsibility of vendors and customers for any cannabis-
related social hams should be explored

131. PURCHASERS
Challenges
• Determining the optimum age threshold for access to a
legal cannabis supply
• Putting in place effective systems for enforcing age access
controls
• Preventing excessive bulk purchases of cannabis for re-
sale on the illicit market or to minors
• Determining appropriate public locations where cannabis
can be consumed

132. PURCHASERS
Recommendations
• While an essential component of any regulatory system, age restrictions on cannabis sales can only
be part of the solution to underage purchases and should therefore be complemented by evidence-
based prevention and harm reduction programmes
• Given that age restrictions on alcohol and tobacco sales have historically been poorly enforced, the
same restrictions on cannabis sales should be supported by a more stringent system for monitoring
vendors compliance with the law. In line with this approach, age restrictions on alcohol and tobacco
should also be more proactively enforced
• Penalties for underage sales of cannabis should be equivalent to those currently in place for such
sales of alcohol and tobacco
• Sales limits should be trialled but could be relaxed or removed once legal cannabis markets expand
and the incentive to bulk-buy for re-sale in illicit markets diminishes
• Controls over permitted locations for use should mirror those that currently exist for public tobacco
smoking in many jurisdictions
• Vaporiser technology could allow cannabis users to consume the drug in indoor areas, given that,
unlike smoking, it does not pose risks to third parties

133. UNGASS 2016

134. The 2016 UN General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) on the world drug
problem is the first of its kind in 18 years.
At the last UNGASS meeting in 1998, the official slogan was: "A Drug-Free
World: We Can Do It.” (No we can’t!)
The initiative for urging forward UNGASS 2016 came from sitting presidents of
Colombia, Guatemala and Mexico. The UN General Assembly endorsed the call
for an open, honest and evidence-based debate.
The process of drafting an outcome document for UNGASS 2016 has been
disappointing, it is long on rhetoric but short on outcomes.
UNGASS 2016

135. Notwithstanding that countries such as Switzerland, Portugal,
Czech Republic and Uruguay have taken positive steps in the
direction of legal regulation, regulation remains technically
illegal.
Traditionally, the United States has been the driving force
behind the international conventions and has in the past
(particularly during the Nixon and Reagan eras) applied
political pressure, including diplomatic and economic sanctions
on countries who have pursued their own path.
However attitudes are changing in America and Uruguay was
not sanctioned for legalising marijuana.
Challenges

136. We must have enough
flexibility to allow us to
incorporate those changes
into our policies. Third, to
tolerate different national
drug policies, to accept the
fact that some countries will
have very strict drug
approaches; other countries
will legalize entire categories
of drugs.
Bill Brownfield, Assistant
Secretary of State for Drugs
and Law Enforcement

137. The Final Word
The Lancet / John Hopkins Commission Report on
Public Health, 24th March 2016.
“To move towards the balanced policy that UN member states have
called for, we offer the following recommendations – Decriminalise
minor, non-violent drug offences, use, possession and petty sale and
strengthen health and social sector alternatives to criminal sanctions.
“Move gradually toward regulated drug markets and apply the
scientific method to their assessment.”