Andy Coghlan correctly identified minimising the harms caused by cannabis use as the focus for the Beckley Foundation Cannabis Commission's report "Moving beyond stalemate" (3 January, p 6). It is important to stress that the legalisation option mentioned in the article is only one of many alternatives to prohibition put forward in our report for governments to consider.
Under a decriminalisation regime, cannabis use and possession remain illegal but those who break the law are not subjected to arrest and prosecution, thereby alleviating some of the social harms that can result from treating users as criminals.
By contrast, legalisation would allow a legitimate cannabis market to be established. The authors do suggest that in looking beyond decriminalisation governments should consider a regulated cannabis market as one option, for the reasons Coghlan highlighted. They point out, however, that it is not known what the consequences of such a market would be for levels of cannabis use and the resulting harms, because it has never been tried. They accordingly recommended that if this policy were introduced it would have to be subject to an ongoing process of review and evaluation.
The evidence from the Dutch experience - an imperfect example of such a market, as cannabis production there is still illegal and therefore unregulated - is mixed, although it does not appear to be associated with higher levels of use and harm than other European countries.
The commissioners of the Beckley report are world-renowned experts in drugs and drugs policy. Their report recognises that the UN convention governing cannabis control is almost 50 years old and long overdue for reform. The Beckley Foundation and the commission support an evidence-based, evolutionary process to changing cannabis law.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق