Search results

After discovering that the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, in their 38 years of public service, had not sought, nor been provided, independent legal advice regarding the breadth and scope of their statutory remit under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (HM Government, 1971), Casey Hardison wrote the following letter to the Council chair addressing this failure.

The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the history of relevant legislation before and after the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA).

A chronological narrative of laws and reports with concluding discussion.

That UK legislators have not made use of the evidence base available to them and have favoured enforcement rather than treatment approaches. That current UK practice has exacerbated not contain the use of and harms caused by illegal drugs.

The paper does not cover all relevant documents, especially those from non-governmental sources.

The practical implications centre on the failure of consecutive governments to reflect on and review the impact of current legislation, especially on people who use drugs.

That the situations of people who use drugs are currently ignored by the government and those proven responses which save lives and reduce harm are rejected.

The paper attempts to show the historical contexts of control and dangerousness of which the MDA is one instrument.

The purpose of this paper is to re-appraise the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 in order to develop alternative and new ideas for drug law reform.

The approach is to analyse the Act from historical and socio-legal perspectives, drawing on the inter-disciplinary field of regulation studies.

The Act has its roots in radical counter-cultural reform activism in the 1960s. Its innovative legal structure has enabled a diverse range of policy approaches to be possible over the last 50 years. Future drug law reform efforts need to broaden out from a narrow focus on law and also to engage more seriously with the politics of drug law and policy.

Drawing on the inter-disciplinary field of regulation studies leads to novel insights about the politics and practice of drug law reform.

Ironically, one of the biggest legal hazards under misuse of drugs legislation is one of the least well‐known. Offences such as unlawful production and supply of drugs are well‐established in the public domain, but the occurrence of these crimes, among others, can constitute a separate offence when committed in premises. The specific offence in question is section 8 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, which is designed to compel persons who are the occupiers of premises, or otherwise concerned in their management, to self‐police such places against certain drug activities. This article will examine the main provisions of section 8 and then argue that it is in need of reform in order to bring it more effectively into the 21st century.

This paper aims to critically explore the consequences of how Scotland interprets the UK Misuse of Drugs Act (1971). Scotland prosecutes 24 per cent of people found in possession of illegal drugs for drug “dealing” compared to less than 15 per cent in England and Wales and less than 16 per cent in Northern Ireland.

The paper provides a narrative review in the context of the background of the economic and social costs of illegal drugs in Scotland and compares this with the UK and Northern Ireland.

The explanation for such a wide disparity in numbers of dealers between these countries proposed is that the Scottish Police force is comparatively more successful at persuading courts that small quantities of drugs rather than for personal use are in fact for onward sale or supply to others.

The police in Scotland have a network of specialist drug units in which officers make decisions in the absence of benchmarks against which to judge quantities of repossessed drugs. Taking this approach, a devolved Scotland's commitment to drug prohibition has resulted in some very curious differences in classifications of prosecutions compared to other countries.

The paper explores the consequences of how Scotland deals with the use of illegal drugs and the economic and social costs.

This is the second part of a three‐part series in which Casey Hardison investigates current UK drug policy and calls for a paradigm shift.

Significant changes in British recreational drug use were seen throughout 2009, with the emergence and rapid growth in the availability and use of substituted cathinones or ‘M‐Cats’ (most notably mephedrone and methylone), a group of psychoactive drugs not currently controlled under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (HM Government, 1971), with similar effects to ecstasy, cocaine and amphetamines. The reasons for the appearance and appeal of this group of so‐called ‘legal highs’ are explored here in relation to availability, purity, legality and convenience. The authors argue that a reduction in the availability (and thus purity) of illegal drugs such as ecstasy and cocaine and resultant disillusionment among users was a key motivation for displacement to substituted cathinones, conveniently and legally purchased online. Finally, we explore policy considerations around the likely criminalisation of substituted cathinones and the challenge of providing rapid yet considered harm reduction responses to emergent drug trends in the face of a minimal scientific evidence base and eager press demonisation.

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.

As the use of drugs and alcohol by clients accessing mental health services becomes increasingly common, members of staff working within psychiatric inpatient areas often encounter drug and alcohol misuse among their client group. The safe and effective management of this issue has become a priority for many inpatient services. This paper outlines a policy for the management of substance misuse on psychiatric inpatient wards developed by Manchester Mental Health and Social Care Trust. The fundamental principles underpinning the policy are highlighted, and the key sections of the policy are described. There is a detailed description of how the policy has been applied in practice by members of staff working on inpatient wards, with clinical examples being presented.