PDC: Drug policy working group

This Working Group (WG) was established by the Policy Development Committee (PDC) on 23 January 2013.

Working group report
This working group was tasked with developing policy relating to the decriminalization of drugs and the adoption of a scientific, harm minimization approach as a public health issue. The working group was chaired by Mark Gibbons and presented the following policy text to the February 6 PDC meeting.

Recommendation
As per the MAUT decision table for the Drug Reform Policy Working Group, the drug policy working group recommends the adoption of a mixed legalisation/decriminalization option for drug policy.

Platform amendment
Enforced through a UN convention, the War on Drugs continues to be waged in the face of overwhelming scientific and practical evidence of its failure. The policy imposes massive costs around the world: OECD countries currently spend more than $50 billion a year (the US alone spends this much [1]) and face incalculable indirect costs. While alcohol and tobacco remain legal, users of less addictive, less harmful drugs are jailed in vast numbers and at massive expense for purely non-violent acts. This imposes a permanent loss of job and educational opportunities, destroying potential and creating a needless burden of costs for society. In producer countries, drug cartels enriched with black market profits are killing thousands every year[2], corrupting civil society and creating a risk of failed states. After 40 years, no success is evident: figures from the UN Office on Drugs and Crime show no observable decline in global drug use[3], and results among individual nations show no correlation between drug use levels and the harshness of drug laws[4]. The War on Drugs is best understood as a war on a market. Such wars cannot be won—demand invariably creates supply, and ad-hoc attacks on supply channels merely result in the sale of poorer and riskier drugs. As the drug trade is largely consensual, law enforcement has few openings and faces a systematically higher risk of corruption by engagement. The Pirate Party opposes the criminalisation of innate human behavior, especially when the costs for society are immense, and evidence of success negligible. The freedom to manage one's own state of consciousness in a private setting is a fundamental civil liberty and an innate part of human experience since the earliest recorded history. The experience of Portugal—where decriminalisation led to an observable fall in drug deaths[5]—suggests that drugs are better managed in the sphere of public health than law enforcement. Effective policy responses must begin by offering a larger range of help and treatment to addicts, while recognizing that most drug users are not addicts at all.

Policy text
The Pirate Party proposes that management of drugs be shifted into the public health arena through a combination of legalization and decriminalisation. Legalize safe, non-addictive drugs.
 * A threshold will apply, which will require legalised drugs to be:
 * Non-addictive;
 * Minimally harmful; and
 * Possessing therapeutic and medical value.
 * Drugs which meet these criteria include marijuana, as well as psychedelics such as LSD and psilocybin[6]. Other potential inclusions will be screened by an expert panel.
 * Legalized drugs will be taxed.
 * Tax rates will be set at a level which balances the need to manage health impacts with the need to provide financial incentives to avoid the the black market.
 * Sales will be regulated.
 * Retailers will require licenses (as per conditions for selling alcohol)
 * Products will include mandatory warnings on health risks as recommended by manufacturers and relevant government bodies
 * Products will be restricted to sale in limited quantities, and may not be sold to intoxicated persons
 * All forms of advertising will be banned.
 * Products will be subject to strict quality control, with penalties for poor product quality being equivalent to those currently applied to pharmaceuticals.
 * Age verification will be required for all drug sales.
 * Exports will be controlled.
 * Exports to countries where drugs remain illegal will be a criminal offence unless products are sold under license to authorities in those countries that are legally permitted such purchases.
 * Minors will be protected.
 * Making drugs available to minors will be a criminal offence.

Partially decriminalize drugs which fail to meet the threshold for legalization.
 * Decriminalisation will apply to possession, purchase and consumption of small quantities of drugs for personal use.
 * Small quantities may, as examples, be defined as:
 * Ecstasy 4 tablets
 * Amphetamine 2 grams
 * Methamphetamine 2 grams
 * Heroin 1.5 grams
 * Coca 5 plants
 * Cocaine 1 gram
 * Infractions will be handled outside the criminal justice system, with preference given to the application of civil penalties including confiscation of drugs and treatment recommendations. Treatment may be imposed as part of a prosecution if other civil or criminal acts are committed by a person under the influence of drugs.
 * Users who work in professions with "life and death" obligations to others may face suspension of their right to practice under civil law.
 * Penalties for the sale of small quantities of decriminalised drugs will include fines and confiscation of products under civil law.
 * Criminal sanctions will continue to apply for possession, sale or smuggling of substances in large or commercial quantities.
 * Decriminalised drugs may be made available under prescription.
 * Supply would be procured following medical consultation in instances where harm minimisation or addition treatment requires it, or as a mechanism for reducing black market purchasing.
 * Chemists providing drugs will be required to provide dosage levels, toxicity information, and information about side effects, as per standard requirements for medication.

Redirect existing resources and additional revenue to fund more research and support services.
 * Expand mental health services, detoxification facilities, and programs to assist addicts with social re-integration.
 * Persons seeking treatment will be entitled to protection of their privacy as per a doctor-patient relationship.
 * Adopt harm minimisation techniques.
 * Pharmacies will be encouraged to make clean needles and drug testing kits available.
 * Redirect police and prison resources towards preventing violent crime.
 * Curb the use of sniffer dogs and random "inspections" at public events.
 * Undo restrictions on research and data collection imposed during prohibition.
 * Re-start research programs utilising formerly banned drugs.
 * Re-start data collection on drug use and drug effects.

[1] National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences, “Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us” (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001), p. 1.

[2] http://www.mexicogulfreporter.com/2012/01/47515-have-died-in-mexicos-five-year.html

[3] ONODC, Recent Statistics and Trend Analysis of Illicit Drug Markets, 2012, page 7, http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/WDR2012/WDR_2012_Chapter1.pdf

[4] http://www.economist.com/node/13237193

[5] Hughes and Stevens, The Effects of Decriminalization of Drug Use in Portugal, December 2007, page 5, http://www.beckleyfoundation.org/bib/doc/bf/2007_Caitlin_211672_1.pdf

[6] http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-teenage-mind/201012/is-marijuana-addictive

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/addictiv.htm

Hilts, Relative addictiveness of drugs, August 2, 1994, http://www.tfy.drugsense.org/tfy/addictvn.htm (Accessed March 2 2012)

Arkowitz, Lilienfeld, Experts Tell the Truth about Pot, Scientific American, 22 February 2012.

http://www.chanvre-info.ch/info/en/Hemp-is-less-toxic-than-alcohol-or.html

Ungless and Lüscher, The Mechanistic Classification of Addictive Drugs, November 14 2006, http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0030437 (Accessed March 2 2012)

Brenner, LSD Toxicity, March 22 2012, http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1011615-overview (Accessed March 2 2012)

Van Amsterdam, Opperhuizen, van den Brink, Harm potential of magic mushroom use: A review, 21 January 2011, http://dl.dropbox.com/u/85192141/2011-amsterdam.pdf (Accessed March 2 2012)

'''Got feedback or suggestions? Send us an email at policydev@pirateparty.org.au. ''' [| MAUT table link]

Meeting Schedule
This working group has concluded the drafting process and no further meetings are currently scheduled.

Previous Minutes
Meeting held 8:30PM, 31 January 2013

Meeting held 9:00PM, 1 February 2013