Misuse of DrugsAct 1975

For the frst time in 35 years a ull, independent,ofcial review o the Act has been done. The LawCommissioners recommend some changes:

•Lowerpenaltiesforpersonaluseofalldrugs.

More diversion and cautioning by Police andmore resources or treatment.

•Insteadofprosecutionandcriminalconviction

or lower level drugs (such as cannabis) userscould pay a fne, or attend drug education.

•Medicinaluseofcannabisshouldbeallowed.•Medicinalsuppliersshouldbelicensed.

These are all positive suggestions that deserveendorsement.Make a submission

today

www.talklaw.co.nz

orvisit

www.norml.org.nz

•Emailorpostyourwrittensubmissionto:

Drugs Review Submissions

Law Commission,PO Box 2590, Wellington 6140

drugsreview@lawcom.govt.nz

•E-mailthemifyouwouldprefernottouseyour

name.

•Encourageotherstomakeasubmissionby

showing them yours. Send it to your MP andsend a copy to us!

My submission is on the Summary report (questionsas shown, please tick each item you support):

q3q

IsupporttheLawCommissionviewthatthe

legislation should be better aligned with a policy o harm minimisation.

Drug control laws should respect human diversityand undamental human rights.

Personal use o drugs should not result in anycriminal penalties (Q6).

All penalties or personal use should be reduced i not eliminated (Q7,8,9). State/Police involvementshould be limited to acilitating treatment ordrug education or people experiencing problems

causedbyover-useoraddiction.

Separatingthemarketsforlow-riskandhigh-riskdrugsshouldbestatepolicy.Accesstohigh-risk

drugs should be controlled (e.g. treatment clinic or

doctor’sprescription).Accesstolow-riskdrugslikecannabisshouldberegulatedviaanadults-only,

taxable market similar to that in the Netherlands.

Drug policy should aim to solve New Zealand druguse problems. We have the world’s highest teenagecannabis use rate. We should reject obsolete andailing international drug control conventions (Q1,2).They are a barrier to achieving eective solutions.

Isupportcontrolleddrugs,includingalcoholandtobacco,beingclassiedontwoevidence-based

scales: toxicity and addictiveness.

Harsh penalties or supplying cannabis are

unnecessary.Ifpenaltiesforsupplyingdrugs

continue, they should avoid imprisonmentespecially where “social supply” is indicated(such as; small quantities, supply to riends, notmotivated by proft) (Q4)

Isupportthemedicinaluseofcannabisforpeople

suering rom illnesses where it might assist them(Q15). This should be under medical supervisionwith a system o licensed suppliers.

Health problems, including addiction, causedby tobacco, alcohol and other drugs should beunded adequately and treated consistently (Q19).Compulsory treatment should be reserved orexceptional cases.

Ifpenaltiesforpersonaluseremainthenacautioningsystemispreferred.Infringementnoticesystemscanturnintorevenue-gatheringdevices

and be used to harass people (Q6). Drug lawsalready punish disproportionately the young, thepoor and Maori; this tendency would increase underan inringement notice system.

Thank you for the opportunity to make this submission.

Submission

To: Drugs Review Project CoordinatorLaw Commission

My name(s) is/are: ________________________________________________________Contact phone: ____________________________

I/welivein:

________________________________________________________Signed: __________________________________Date: __________________________________

(town, city, suburb)