Search results

This paper considers the findings of the Beckley Foundation's Global Cannabis Commission Report (Room et al, 2008), an overview of the scientific literature on cannabis, detailing its potential harms and those caused by its prohibition. It moves on to consider the various strategies that different jurisdictions have adopted to deal with cannabis use, before moving beyond the Conventions, arguing that countries should have more autonomy to develop policy best suited to their individual circumstances.Cannabis was incorporated into the global prohibitive regime via the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs 1961 (United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime, 1961), and is further affected by two later drug Conventions, the Convention on Psychotropic Substances 1972 (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 1972) and the Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychoactive Substances 1988 (United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime, 1988). Together, these require that all signatories make production, commerce and possession of cannabis criminal offences under domestic law: in the UK, this expectation is effected via the inclusion of cannabis in Schedule 2 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (HM Government, 1971). In the half century since the initial Convention was drafted, patterns of cannabis consumption have altered fundamentally; smoking cannabis has transformed from a relatively rare behaviour confined to a scattering of countries and cultures, to almost a rite of passage among young people in many nations. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (2009) estimates that there is a global population of 190 million cannabis users, rendering it by far the most widely used illicit drug, yet, paradoxically, one that is rarely mentioned in international drug control policy discussions.

This paper seeks to analyse the content and implications of resolution 52/1 of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs of the United Nations (UN) titled “Promoting international cooperation in addressing the involvement of women and girls in drug trafficking, especially as couriers”.

Drawing on socio‐legal analysis and an extensive search of UN databases, the resolution is contextualised and the findings of the resulting report which examines the scale of women's participation in the global drug trade is summarised.

The article demonstrates that the data produced are unreliable as a measure of women's participation in the international drug trade.

It is argued that this resolution is weakened by lack of clarity about how gender ought to be mainstreamed in global drug control.

As the first resolution on women and girls' participation in the international drug trade, Resolution 52/1 is a significant step towards raising awareness and systematically accounting for their participation.

This paper aims to analyse the fundamental principles of the main international conventions against use of drug and to verify if it would be preferable to let European Member States adopt specific measures according to own needs at a national level.

The research uses a comparative approach by examining the different national legislations in respect of the discipline of the international conventions for finding analogies and differences between them.

The research has discovered a wide variation in the criteria for triggering a legislative response and in the penalties for non-compliance. Nevertheless, there seems to be a trend towards countries focusing on penalising supply rather than possession of these substances.

To maintain a common international level in fighting against the use and commerce of drug to enforce the effectiveness of national regulations.

The achievement of a high level of health protection, well-being and social cohesion to prevent and reduce drug use, dependence and drug-related damage to health and society.

To ensure a high level of security for the general public by taking action against drug production, cross-border trafficking in drugs and the diversion of chemical precursors used in drug production, as well as by intensifying preventive action against drug-related crime through effective cooperation, embedded in a joint approach.

This is a fast-moving area of law, which continues to evolve for the different new substances being introduced in international drug traffic, so different solutions to the problem can be found by national legislators who need to be coordinated at an international level.

This paper analyses the international regime of rules, principles and standards designed to reduce the risk of money laundering in the international financial system. The international anti‐money‐laundering regime ranges from a variety of soft law (non‐binding) principles and rules that involve voluntary cooperative arrangements among states that have evolved in recent years, to a more specific legal framework that binds an increasing number of major states. In particular, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and its member states have played a crucial role in developing international norms and rules that require financial institutions to adopt minimum levels of transparency and disclosure to prevent financial crime. The FATF has focused its anti‐money‐laundering efforts on financial institutions because of the ease with which criminal groups have used financial institutions to transmit the proceeds of their illicit activities and because of the threat that money laundering poses to the systemic stability of financial systems.

“Cannabis” and “cannabis resin” are derived from the Cannabis plant, used as herbal medications, in traditional medicine and as active pharmaceutical ingredients. Since 1961, they have been listed in Schedule IV, the most restrictive category of the single convention on narcotic drugs. The process to scientifically review and reschedule them was launched by the World Health Organisation (WHO) on 2 December 2016; it survived a number of hindrances until finally being submitted to a delayed and sui generis vote by the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs on 2 December 2020, withdrawing “cannabis” and “cannabis resin” from Schedule IV.

To evaluate WHO’s scheduling recommendations, the process leading to the Commission vote and subsequent implications at global, national and patient/clinician levels. Narrative account of the four-year proceedings; review of the practical implications of both rejected and accepted recommendations.

The process was historically unprecedented, of political relevance to both medical Cannabis and evidence-based scheduling generally. Procedural barriers hampered the appropriate involvement of civil society stakeholders. The landscape resulting from accepted and rejected recommendations allow countries to continue creating decentralised, non-uniform systems for access to and availability of “cannabis” and “cannabis resin” for medical purposes.

Perspective of accredited observers; highlight of institutional issues and the lay of the land; contrast of stakeholders’ interpretations and engagement.

The negotiations leading to the UN Special Session (UN General Assembly Special Session on drugs (UNGASS)) on drugs have highlighted the lack of consensus among the global players, with some strengthening the prohibitionist approach and others seeking policy reforms. The purpose of this paper is to focus on the Russian Federation’s national policies and diplomatic activism to influence the outcome of the negotiations at the multilateral level.

A systematic review of the federal legislation on drug control and the legislation on HIV/AIDS has been undertaking in October 2016. Peer-reviewed, grey literature, policy documents, UN reports and news reports were used to gather information on the country’s response to drugs internally and externally.

Despite its limited regional influence on harm reduction and declining financial power, the Russian Federation has been successful in preserving its international priorities by opposing harm reduction and maintaining the prohibition paradigm in the UNGASS outcome.

Every effort was made to identify valid sources of information on the levers of influence of the Russian Federation. Little data were available on the real outcome of the efforts deployed in influencing the BRICS and other regional and international assemblies.

This paper presents an overview of the national policies of the Russian Federation, a global player, and provides a better understanding of how the national approach to illicit drugs and their perception influences its international position. It analyses the geographic, economic and diplomatic sphere of influence of the country in drug policies, and provides explanations on the successes and shortcomings of the Russian influence at the multilateral discussions on drugs.

In two separate sections the authors summarise the observations, use the insights to reflect on some of the propositions made in the book, and follow the appeal of one of the authors to civil society and academics to “help governments out of the drug policy dilemma that is now facing them”. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

The genre the authors follow here is ethnography and the material takes the form of reflective field notes. Since each author follows a particular set of interests the authors split the paper into two sections. There are no strong conclusions, safe that the concerns about the international drug control system were fully borne out by events on the floor.

The role of CSOs is critical in moving the process forward – but countries are likely to drift apart as the policy differences are becoming inrreconcilable.

It is imperative to develop new models of cooperation in the management of psychactive substances.

This is in recognition that at national level just as much as at Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) and UN General Assembly Special Session the increased involvement of CSOs has been pivotal in shifting focus towards public health and human rights. This in turn has encouraged some nations to do the same in their domestic policies – and to stand up and say so in CND meetings.

More involvement of academics and editorial teams in the design of sustainable policies and practices.

In a critical report on the CND the authors challenge the viability of the international drug control regime in view of the emerging differences between different member states. This is the first attempt in the drug policy literature to assess the durability of the drug control regime as it is faced by the fast paced transformation of cannabis into a recognised medicine and regulated recreational substance. If the appearance of agreement is maintained this is entirely for diplomatic reasons and organisational benefit. In reality, the system is breaking apart and new methods for regulating drugs are emerging.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss priorities for effective responses to illicit drugs in West Africa in a changing international policy environment.

The paper analyzes published research, technical papers and reports on drug use and policy responses in West Africa and opines on priorities for drug policy in the region within the post-United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) 2016 policy environment.

Drug use and related harms continue to increase in West African countries despite efforts to reduce drug trafficking and use through legal prohibition. The UNGASS 2016 outcome document enables flexibility in policy interpretation and implementation, which provides an opportunity for governments to prioritize national needs in drug policy. West African countries should prioritize and support research and data collection, prevention, treatment and harm reduction and sustainable livelihoods.

The paper emphasizes the need for West African countries to seize the opportunity created by the ineffectiveness and weakening of the prohibition regime as well as new treaty flexibility following UNGASS 2016 to reform drug policies to prioritize regional and national needs.