Pubdate: June 5, 1998 (see note)
Source: Otago Daily-Times (Dunedin, NZ) 
Contact:  
Author: David Hadorn 
Note: This same editorial is set to appear in the NZ Herald (Auckland) and
Evening Post (Wellington) on June 8.  These three newspapers published
editorials critical of the Drug Policy Forum's recent final report.
Herald Contact:   Contact:  
Website: http://www.evpost.co.nz/ 

UN CHANCE TO REFORM CANNABIS LAWS

[Ed's preamble: Dr David Hadorn, director of the Drug Policy Forum Trust,
headquartered in Wellington, believes an opportunity for New Zealand to
promote rational cannabis policies will occur in the United Nations next
week.  In this article he explains why. His essay is also a response to our
most recent editorial on the subject (ODT 4.4.98) against the trust's
recommendations.]

Two months have passed since the Drug Policy Forum Trust, a group of
physicians and other professionals, recommended that cannabis be accepted
as part of contemporary New Zealand culture and treated like tobacco and
alcohol, through a system of regulation and taxation. Adopting this
approach to cannabis control would:

* dismantle the lucrative cannabis black market;

* improve the effectiveness of drug education and treatment programmes;

* save a tremendous amount of money.

The response to our report has been generally positive 96 many New
Zealanders, it seems, are ready for a change.  Others have raised
objections, of which the following are the most common:

* Cannabis is harmful, so it should remain illegal (to protect the
children). .

* We already have enough trouble with alcohol and tobacco; we do not need a
third (legal) drug.

* Removing criminal penalties from cannabis would cause an increase in
drug-related problems.

None of these arguments is supported by available evidence.

Yes, cannabis can be harmful, especially to troubled teenagers, whose
compulsive over-use of cannabis can cause a variety of problems, but making
criminals of these kids does nothing to help the situation, and indeed
makes matters worse.  It is worth reinforcing this point.  We do not deny
that cannabis causes harm, but dozens of scientific studies have shown that
prohibition policies magnify the harms of cannabis.  What we are saying,
then, is "here's how to minimise the harm".  When prohibition advocates
reply, "but cannabis is harmful", they simply are not listening.

Regarding the "two drugs are quite enough" argument -- isn't it obvious
that we already have all three drugs? Cannabis is ubiquitous and indeed has
long been an established part of New Zealand society. The question at issue
is: does it make sense to treat two of these drugs as legal and one as
illegal? The answer, we believe, is "no".

Finally, the claim that a regulated cannabis market would increase
drug-related problems, such as addiction or harmful public health impacts,
is completely unsupported by overseas experience.  Wherever cannabis laws
have been liberalised, as in The Netherlands and several states in
Australia and the US, neither drug use nor drug-related harms have
increased.  In The Netherlands, for example, the rate of both cannabis and
hard drug use by teenagers is among the lowest in Europe -- and much lower
than in the prohibitionist United States.

Unfortunately, those who make claims such as these are very seldom (if
ever) required to support those claims with actual evidence.  Were they
required to do so, for example, by news reporters, the lack of a solid
scientific foundation for cannabis prohibition would become readily apparent.

Cannabis production [sic: should be prohibition] is an even more serious
problem when viewed from a global perspective.  Entire governments in Latin
America and elsewhere have been subverted and corrupted by the hundreds of
billions of dollars pumped into the international criminal underground by
the war on drugs, most of which is focused on cannabis.  Meanwhile, drugs
of all kinds are cheaper and more available than ever.

Leadership on international drug policy is badly needed.  Given its
reputation for pragmatism and its tradition of serving as a social
laboratory, New Zealand could potentially provide such leadership.  A rare
and important opportunity to move in this direction will occur next week in
New York, when the United Nations General Assembly convenes a special
session on drugs.  Although the UN organisers are attempting to restrict
the focus of this session to "how to fight the drug war more effectively,"
a strong groundswell is building to expand the discussion to include
potential alternative approaches to drug policy.

New Zealand might be part of this vital rearguard action.  Our delegate to
the UN special session is Tuariki John Delamere, Associate Minister of
Health and Minister of Customs.  Mr Delamere has in the past spoken out in
favour of cannabis law reform.  If he is able to speak his conscience in
New York, New Zealand might very well put a cat among the pigeons.

Concurrent with the UN special session, dozens of major public events will
be held around the world to marshal support for more compassionate and
effective drug control policies.  In New Zealand, such events will be held
in Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch, and Dunedin. By attending these
events, the people of New Zealand can "send a message" to the our
politicians and to the international community.  As such, these events are
analogous to the anti-nuclear, anti-Vietnam War, and anti-apartheid
protests held in years gone by.

New Zealand society is almost certainly matured to the point that we are
quite capable of managing a regulated cannabis market.  Moreover, by
leading both by example and exhortation we can help the world find its way
out of the blind alley of cannabis prohibition.

The upcoming UN special session and surrounding activities will bear close
watching. 
- ---
Checked-by: Richard Lake