A REPORT
OF THE
NATIONAL
COMMISSION ON GANJA
TO
Rt. Hon. P.J. PATTERSON, Q.C., M.P. PRIME MINISTER OF
JAMAICA
PREPARED BY:
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
August 7, 2001
CONTENTS
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:
- 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.
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 |
|
|
1924 |
- 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.
(2) 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.
(3) 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.
(4) 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.
(5) 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.
(1) 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 carried by people with personal experience of the
substance. All the experts, and indeed all but a very few of the over two
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.
(2) 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.
(2) 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.
(3) 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.
- 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
Archibishop 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.
(a) 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.
|
