View source for Medicine:Drug liberalization

{{Short description|Process of reducing drug prohibition laws}}
[[File:Marijuana Wellness Products, Portland, Oregon (2014) - 2.JPG|thumb|A sign for a cannabis shop in {{wipe|Portland, Oregon}}, Oregon. Cannabis has been gradually legalized for recreational use in some US states since 2012. |277x277px]]
'''Drug liberalization''' is a [[Medicine:Drug policy|drug policy]] process of decriminalizing or legalizing the use or sale of [[Medicine:Prohibition of drugs|prohibited drugs]]. Variations of drug liberalization include: '''drug legalization''', '''drug re-legalization''' and '''drug decriminalization'''.<ref>[https://sencanada.ca/en/Content/Sen/committee/371/ille/03evb-e Proceedings of the Special Committee on Illegal Drugs], Senate of Canada, 28 May 2001</ref> Proponents of drug liberalization may favor a regulatory regime for the production, marketing, and distribution of some or all currently illegal drugs in a manner analogous to that for [[Chemistry:Alcohol (drug)|alcohol]], [[Biology:Caffeine|caffeine]] and [[Biology:Tobacco|tobacco]].

Proponents of drug liberalization argue that the legalization of drugs would eradicate the illegal drug market and reduce the law enforcement costs and incarceration rates.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Drug Legalization|url=https://www.ibhinc.org/drug-legalization|access-date=2021-10-16|website=Institute for Behavior and Health|language=en-US}}</ref> They frequently argue that prohibition of recreational drugs—such as [[Biology:Cannabis|cannabis]], [[Chemistry:Opioid|opioid]]s, [[Biology:Cocaine|cocaine]], [[Chemistry:Amphetamine|amphetamine]]s and [[Unsolved:Hallucinogen|hallucinogen]]s—has been ineffective and counterproductive and that substance use is better responded to by implementing practices for harm reduction and increasing the availability of addiction treatment. Additionally, they argue that relative harm should be taken into account in the regulation of drugs. For instance, they may argue that addictive or dependence-forming substances such as alcohol, tobacco and [[Biology:Caffeine|caffeine]] have been a traditional part of many cultures for centuries and remain legal in most countries, though other drugs which cause less harm than alcohol, caffeine or tobacco are entirely prohibited, with possession punishable with severe criminal penalties.<ref name="WHO">[https://web.archive.org/web/20021202073217/http://www.who.int/whr/2002/en/ World health report 2002: reducing risks, promoting healthy life]</ref><ref name="goodguidefaq">{{Cite web|url=http://www.thegooddrugsguide.com/mushrooms/faq.htm#01|title=Magic Mushrooms&ndash;Frequently Asked Questions|access-date=2007-01-04|publisher=The Good Drugs Guide|author=The Good Drugs Guide|work=Frequently Asked Questions}}</ref><ref name="erowid">[http://www.erowid.org/plants/mushrooms/mushrooms_health1.pdf Report by the Dutch Government Stating Psilocybin's Relative Harmlessness]</ref> Opponents of drug liberalization argue that it would increase the amount of drug users, increase crime, destroy families, and increase the amount of adverse physical effects among drug users.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Norman-Eady |first=Sandra |date=1994-12-22 |title=The Connecticut General Assembly |url=https://cga.ct.gov/PS94/rpt%5Colr%5Chtm/94-R-1089.htm |access-date=2022-06-19 |website=Connecticut General Assembly}}</ref>

== Policies ==
The 1988 United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances made it mandatory for the signatory countries to "adopt such measures as may be necessary to establish as criminal offences under its domestic law" (art. 3, §&nbsp;1) all the activities related to the production, sale, transport, distribution, etc. of the substances included in the most restricted lists of the 1961 [[Medicine:Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs|Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs]] and 1971 [[Medicine:Convention on Psychotropic Substances|Convention on Psychotropic Substances]]. Criminalization also applies to the "cultivation of opium poppy, coca bush or cannabis plants for the purpose of the production of narcotic drugs". The Convention distinguishes between the intent to traffic and personal consumption, stating that the latter should also be considered a criminal offence, but "subject to the constitutional principles and the basic concepts of [the state's] legal system" (art. 3, §&nbsp;2).<ref name=reform>[https://www.tni.org/en/paper/drug-policy-reform-practice Drug Policy Reform in Practice: Experiences with alternatives in Europe and the US], Tom Blickman & Martin Jelsma, Transnational Institute, July 2009.</ref>

Drug liberalization proponents hold differing reasons to support liberalization, and have differing policy proposals. The two most common positions are '''drug legalization''' (or re-legalization), and '''drug decriminalization'''. The European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) defines decriminalization as the removal of a conduct or activity from the sphere of criminal law; depenalisation signifying merely a relaxation of the penal sanction exacted by law. Decriminalization usually applies to offences related to drug consumption and may include either the imposition of sanctions of a different kind (administrative) or the abolition of all sanctions; other (noncriminal) laws then regulate the conduct or activity that has been decriminalized. Depenalisation usually consists of personal consumption as well as small-scale trading and generally signifies the elimination or reduction of custodial penalties, while the conduct or activity still remains a criminal offence. The term legalization refers to the removal of all drug-related offences from criminal law: use, possession, cultivation, production, trading, etc.<ref name=reform /><ref name=emcdda>[http://eldd.emcdda.europa.eu/attachements.cfm/att_10080_EN_EMCDDATP_01.pdf Illicit drug use in the EU: legislative approaches], EMCDDA thematic papers, Lisbon 2005</ref>

Harm reduction refers to a range of public health policies designed to reduce the harmful consequences associated with recreational drug use and other high risk activities. Harm reduction is put forward as a useful perspective alongside the more conventional approaches of [[Medicine:Demand reduction|demand]] and [[Medicine:Supply reduction|supply reduction]].<ref name="marlatt">{{cite book |last=Marlatt |first=G. Alan |title=Harm Reduction: Pragmatic Strategies for Managing High-Risk Behaviors |chapter=Highlights of Harm Reduction |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=n-XmJZ5cvnwC&pg=PA3 |year=2002 |publisher=Guilford Press |page=3 |isbn=978-1-57230-825-1}}</ref> Many advocates argue that prohibitionist laws criminalize people for suffering from a disease and cause harm, for example by obliging drug addicts to obtain drugs of unknown purity from unreliable criminal sources at high prices, increasing the risk of overdose and death.<ref>{{cite book |first1=James A. |last1=Inciardi |first2=Lana D. |last2=Harrison |year=2000 |title=Harm reduction: national and international perspectives |location=Thousand Oaks, California |publisher=SAGE |pages=vii–viii}}</ref> Its critics are concerned that tolerating risky or illegal behaviour sends a message to the community that these behaviours are acceptable.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.incb.org/pdf/e/ar/2001/incb_report_2001_3_oceania.pdf |title=INCB 2001 Annual Report - Oceania |access-date=2010-03-28 |page=559 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101125183254/http://incb.org/pdf/e/ar/2001/incb_report_2001_3_oceania.pdf |archive-date=2010-11-25 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-17571220.html |title=Anger as Vice Girls Get Free Condoms |access-date=2010-04-20 }}</ref>

=== The Controlled Substance Act (United States) ===
The Controlled Substance Act (CSA)<ref>{{Cite web |title=Home {{!}} DEA.gov |url=https://www.dea.gov/ |access-date=2022-08-23 |website=www.dea.gov}}</ref> categorizes all substances in need of regulation into one of the five schedules under the federal law. The categorization of these substances is determined by the potential for abuse and how safe it is to consume. In addition, a big determinant of this is the way in which the substance can be consumed or used medically. The Schedule I <ref>{{Citation |last1=Ortiz |first1=Nicole R. |title=Controlled Substance Act |date=2022 |url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK574544/ |work=StatPearls |place=Treasure Island (FL) |publisher=StatPearls Publishing |pmid=34662058 |access-date=2022-08-23 |last2=Preuss |first2=Charles V.}}</ref>substances were described as those that have no medical use whatsoever; meaning there is no prescription written for such substance. Schedule II substances are those that can be easily abused and lead to dependence. These substances can only be accessed through a written or electronic prescription from a physician. The schedule III substances are classified as those which have less potential for abuse than Schedule I and II but can still cause the individual to develop a mild dependance. Schedule IV substances are those with the least likeliness for abuse, therefore its medical use is common in the United States. Lastly, the Schedule V substances are those with little to no likelihood of abuse, along with very minimal dependance development.

In its earliest stages, the CSA was created to combine the needs of two international treaties. These treaties were known as the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961 and the Convention of Psychotropic Substances of 1971. Both treaties allowed public health authorities to work with the medical and scientific communities to create a classification system.

=== Drug legalization ===
Drug [[Social:Legalization|legalization]] calls for a return to pre–1906 Pure Food and Drug Act attitudes when almost all drugs were legal. This would require ending government-enforced prohibition on the distribution or sale and personal use of specified (or all) currently banned drugs. Proposed ideas range from full legalization which would completely remove all forms of government control, to various forms of regulated legalization, where drugs would be legally available, but under a system of government control which might mean for instance:<ref>[http://www.tdpf.org.uk/blueprint%20download.htm After the War on Drugs: Blueprint for Regulation], Transform Drug Policy Foundation (12 Nov 2009)</ref>
* Mandated labels with dosage and medical warnings.
* Restrictions on advertising.
* Age limitations.
* Restrictions on amount purchased at one time.
* Requirements on the form in which certain drugs would be supplied.
* Ban on sale to intoxicated persons.
* Special user licenses to purchase particular drugs.
* A possible clinical setting for the consumption of some intravenous drugs and/or supervised consumption. 
The regulated legalization system would probably have a range of restrictions for different drugs, depending on their perceived risk, so while some drugs would be sold over the counter in pharmacies or other licensed establishments, drugs with greater risks of harm might only be available for sale on licensed premises where use could be monitored and emergency medical care made available. Examples of drugs with different levels of regulated distribution in most countries include: caffeine (coffee, tea), nicotine (tobacco),<ref>[http://transform-drugs.blogspot.com/2010/02/regulation-saves-lives.html Tobacco regulation: Saving livings vs personal freedom], Transform Drug Policy Foundation (3 Feb 2010)</ref> and ethyl alcohol (beer, wine, spirits).

Full legalization is often proposed by groups such as libertarians who object to drug laws on moral grounds, while regulated legalization is suggested by groups such as Law Enforcement Against Prohibition who object to the drug laws on the grounds that they fail to achieve their stated aims and instead greatly worsen the problems associated with use of prohibited drugs, but who acknowledge that there are harms associated with currently prohibited drugs which need to be minimized. Not all proponents of drug re-legalization necessarily share a common ethical framework, and people may adopt this viewpoint for a variety of reasons. In particular, favoring drug legalization does not imply approval of drug use.<ref>[http://transform-drugs.blogspot.com/2009/12/reformers-are-not-pro-drug-mr-costa.html Reformers and not 'pro-drug' Mr Costa], Transform Drug Policy Foundation (7 Dec 2009)</ref><ref>[http://www.businessinsider.com/portugal-drug-policy-decriminalization-works-2012-7 Portugal Decriminalized All Drugs Eleven Years Ago And The Results Are Staggering], Business Insider (17 Jul 2012)</ref><ref>{{cite web|last1=Boaz|first1=David|title=Let's Quit the Drug War|url=https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/lets-quit-drug-war|website=Cato Institute|access-date=24 April 2018|language=en|date=17 March 1988|quote=This article originally appeared in the New York Times on March 17, 1988}}</ref> Since each country has its own regulations and most distinguish between different classes of drugs, there can be difficulties when it come to regulating which should be more readily accessible, since a particular drug criminalized in one area might be completely acceptable elsewhere.

=== Drug decriminalization ===
Drug decriminalization calls for reduced control and penalties compared to existing laws. Proponents of drug decriminalization generally support the use of [[Finance:Fine (penalty)|fines]] or other punishments to replace prison terms, and often propose systems whereby illegal drug users who are caught would be fined, but would not receive a permanent criminal record as a result. A central feature of drug decriminalization is the concept of harm reduction.

Drug decriminalization is in some ways an intermediate between prohibition and legalization, and has been criticized by Peter Lilley as being "the worst of both worlds",<ref name="Prospect Magazine">{{cite web|last1=Lilley|first1=Peter|title=Drugs haze|url=http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/drugs-legalisation-peter-hitchens-peter-lilley/|website=Prospect Magazine|access-date=7 July 2014}}</ref> in that drug sales would still be illegal, thus perpetuating the problems associated with leaving production and distribution of drugs to the criminal underworld, while also failing to discourage illegal drug use by removing the criminal penalties that might otherwise cause some people to choose not to use drugs.

In 2001 Portugal began treating use and possession of small quantities of drugs as a public health issue.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/05/why-hardly-anyone-dies-from-a-drug-overdose-in-portugal/|title=Why hardly anyone dies from a drug overdose in Portugal|first=Christopher |last=Ingraham|newspaper=Washington Post|language=en|access-date=2018-07-22}}</ref> Rather than incarcerating those in possession, they are referred to a treatment program by a regional panel composed of social workers, medical professionals, and drug experts. [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/05/upshot/portugal-drug-legalization-treatment.html] This also decreases the amount of money the government spends fighting a war on drugs and money spent keeping drug users incarcerated. HIV infection rates also have dropped from 104.2 new cases per million in 2000 to 4.2 cases per million in 2015. Portugal is the first country that has decriminalized the possession of small amounts of drugs, to positive results.<ref name="Time">{{cite news|last=Szalavitz|first=Maia|date=26 April 2009|title=Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?|magazine={{wipe|Time (magazine)}}|url=http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090427145430/http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=27 April 2009}}</ref> Anyone caught with any type of drug in Portugal, if it is for personal consumption, will not be imprisoned.

As noted by the EMCDDA, across Europe in the last decades, there has been a movement toward "an approach that distinguishes between the drug trafficker, who is viewed as a criminal, and the drug user, who is seen more as a sick person who is in need of treatment" (EMCDDA 2008, 22). A number of Latin American countries have similarly moved to reduce the penalties associated with drug use and personal possession" (Laqueur, 2015, p.&nbsp;748). Mexico City has decriminalized certain drugs and Greece has just announced that it is going to do so. Spain has also followed the Portugal model. Italy after waiting 10 years to see the result of the Portugal model, which Portugal deemed a success, has since recently followed suit. In May 2014, the Criminal Chamber of the Italian Supreme Court upheld a previous decision in 2013 by Italy's Constitutional Court, to reduce the penalties for the convictions for sale of [[Medicine:Drug harmfulness|soft drugs]].<ref name="Library of Congress">{{cite web|last1=Figueroa|first1=Dante|title=Italy: Constitutional Decision Upholding Decriminalization of Soft Drugs|url=https://www.loc.gov/lawweb/servlet/lloc_news?disp3_l205404023_text|website=Library of Congress|access-date=7 July 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine| url=http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090427145430/http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html | url-status=dead | archive-date=April 27, 2009 | magazine=Time | first=Maia | last=Szalavitz | title=Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work? | date=2009-04-26}}</ref>

Some other countries have virtual decriminalization for marijuana only, in three US states, Colorado,<ref name=Forbes>{{cite web|last1=Sullum|first1=Jacob|title=Colorado Couple To Open First Officially Approved Cannabis Café|url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsullum/2014/03/11/colorado-couple-to-open-first-officially-approved-cannabis-club/|website=Forbes|access-date=7 July 2014}}</ref> {{wipe|Washington (state)}}, and Oregon, one Australian state (SA) and in the Netherlands there are legal marijuana cafes. In the Netherlands these cafes are called "coffee shops".<ref name=Coffeeshops>{{cite web|title=Amsterdam Coffeeshops Guide|url=http://www.amsterdam.info/coffeeshops/|website=Amsterdam.info|access-date=7 July 2014}}</ref>

== History ==
[[File:Drug bottle containing cannabis.jpg|thumb|right|Prior to prohibition, cannabis was available freely in a variety of forms.]]
The cultivation, use and trade of psychoactive and other drugs has occurred since the dawn of civilization. Motivations claimed by supporters of drug prohibition laws across various societies and eras have included religious observance, allegations of violence by racial minorities, and public health concerns. Those who are not proponents of anti-drug legislation characterize these motivations as [[Religion:Religious intolerance|religious intolerance]], racism, and public healthism.

The British had gone to war with China in the 19th Century in what became known as the First and Second Opium Wars to protect their valuable trade in narcotics. It was only in the 20th century that Britain and the United States outlawed cannabis. The campaign against alcohol prohibition culminated in the Twenty-first Amendment to the United States Constitution repealing prohibition on 5 December 1933, as well as liberalization in {{wipe|Canada}}, and some but not all of the other countries that enforced prohibition. However, many laws controlling the use of alcohol continue to exist even in these countries.

In the mid-20th century, the United States government led a major renewed surge in drug prohibition called the "War on Drugs". Which was a campaign whose objective to reduce the use and trade and illegal drug market.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Meacher|first=Baroness Molly|date=April 2019|title=Against the stream: drugs policy needs to be turned on its head|journal=BJPsych Bulletin|volume=43|issue=2|pages=85–87|doi=10.1192/bjb.2018.98|issn=2056-4694|pmc=6472310|pmid=30567610}}</ref>

Initial attempts to change the punitive drug laws which were introduced all over the world from the late 1800s onwards were primarily based around recreational use. [[Biography:Timothy Leary|Timothy Leary]] was one of the most prominent campaigners for the legal and recreational use of LSD. In 1967, a "Legalise pot" rally was held in Britain.<ref name=TransformTimeline>{{cite web|title=A history of drug prohibition and a prediction for its abolition and replacement|url=http://www.tdpf.org.uk/Policy_Timeline.htm|publisher=Transform Drug Policy Foundation|access-date=2011-08-30|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120707011855/http://www.tdpf.org.uk/Policy_Timeline.htm|archive-date=2012-07-07}}</ref> However, as death toll from the drug war rose, other organisations began to form to campaign on a more political and humanitarian basis. Drug Policy Foundation formed in America and [[Medicine:Release (agency)|Release]], a charity which gives free legal advice to drugs users and currently campaigns for drug decriminalization, also incorporated in the 1970s.

Today, the focus of the world's drug policy reform organisations is on the promotion of harm reduction in the Western World, and attempting to prevent the catastrophic loss of human life in developing countries where much of the world's supply of heroin, cocaine, and marijuana are produced. Drug policy reform advocates point to failed efforts such as the Mexican Drug War, which according to some observers has claimed as many as 80,000 lives,<ref name=CBC>{{cite web|last1=Davison|first1=Janet|last2=Stastna|first2=Kazi|title=Mexico's cartels: Behind the drug war|url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/mexico-s-cartels-behind-the-drug-war-1.2549149|website=CBC News|access-date=7 July 2014}}</ref> as signs that a new approach to drug policy is needed.

In 2014 within the [[Social:European Union|European Union]], a European Citizens' Initiative called ''Weed like to talk'' was launched with the aim of starting a debate in Europe about the legalization of the production, sale and use of marijuana in the [[Social:European Union|European Union]] and finding a common policy for all [[Social:European Union|EU]] member states.<ref name=Manifesto>{{cite web|title=Manifesto|url=http://weedliketotalk.wix.com/wltt#!-propos1/c22jk|website=Weed like to talk|access-date=7 July 2014}}</ref><ref name="Weed like to talk">{{cite web|title=A European solution to a European issue : legalizing cannabis|url=http://weedliketotalk.wix.com/wltt|website=Weed like to talk|access-date=7 July 2014}}</ref> As of June 30, 2014, the initiative has collected 100,000 signatures from citizens in European member states. Should they reach 1 million signatures, from nationals of at least one quarter of the member states, the European Commission will be required to initiate a legislative proposal and a debate on the issue.<ref name="NORML UK">{{cite web|last1=Bovey|first1=Chris|title=EU cannabis petition requires one million signatures|url=http://norml-uk.org/2014/02/eu-citizens-initiative-weed-like-talk-legalising-cannabis/|website=NORML UK|access-date=7 July 2014|date=2014-02-23}}</ref>

== Economics ==
There are numerous economic and social impacts of the criminalization of drugs. According to economist Mark Thornton, prohibition increases crime (theft, violence, corruption) and drug price and increases potency.<ref>{{Cite web  | last = Thornton  | first = Mark  | title = The Economics of Prohibition  | url=http://mises.org/story/2269   | date = 2006-07-31  }}</ref> In many developing countries the production of drugs offers a way to escape poverty. [[Biography:Milton Friedman|Milton Friedman]] estimated that over 10,000 deaths a year in the US are caused by the criminalization of drugs, and if drugs were to be made legal innocent victims such as those shot down in drive by shootings, would cease or decrease.{{citation needed|date=June 2022}} The economic inefficiency and ineffectiveness of such government intervention in preventing drug trade has been fiercely criticised by drug-liberty advocates. The War on Drugs of the United States, that provoked legislation within several other Western governments, has also garnered criticism for these reasons.

The legalization of drugs would affect the supply and demand that is present today with these illegal substances. The price of production would increase due to the costs that come with the transportation and distribution of these substances.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=MIRON |first=JEFFREY A. |date=2001 |title=The Economics of Drug Prohibition and Drug Legalization |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/40971915 |journal=Social Research |volume=68 |issue=3 |pages=835–855 |jstor=40971915 |issn=0037-783X}}</ref> It has been noted that the prohibition of drugs has led to a decrease in the consumer surplus. The decrease in consumption is due to the price increase of these drugs. Individuals have responded to the price increase from high levels, rather than responding to the prices which started off low. <ref>{{Cite journal |last=Bretteville-Jensen |first=Anne Line |date=2006-01-01 |title=To Legalize or Not To Legalize? Economic Approaches to the Decriminalization of Drugs |url=https://doi.org/10.1080/10826080500521565 |journal=Substance Use & Misuse |volume=41 |issue=4 |pages=555–565 |doi=10.1080/10826080500521565 |issn=1082-6084 |pmid=16522563|s2cid=36467233 }}</ref>This is a clear example of the way in which the supply and demand is affected.

=== Prices and consumption ===
Much of the debate surrounding the economics of drug legalization centers on the shape of the demand curve for illegal drugs and the sensitivity of consumers to changes in the prices of illegal drugs.<ref name=Clark>{{cite web|last=Clark|first=Andrew E.|title=The Economics of Drug Legalization|url=http://www.parisschoolofeconomics.com/clark-andrew/ecleg.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110809060914/http://www.parisschoolofeconomics.com/clark-andrew/ecleg.pdf|url-status=live|archive-date=2011-08-09|access-date=2016-12-10}}</ref> Proponents of drug legalization often assume that the quantity of addictive drugs consumed is unresponsive to changes in price; however, studies into addictive, but legal, substances like alcohol and cigarettes, have shown that consumption can be quite responsive to changes in prices.<ref name=Grossman>{{cite journal|last=Grossman|first=Michael|author2=Frank J. Chaloupka|title=The Demand for Cocaine by Young Adults: a Rational Addiction Approach|journal=Journal of Health Economics|year=1998|volume=17|issue=4|pages=428|doi=10.1016/s0167-6296(97)00046-5|pmid=10180926|s2cid=14660848|url=http://www.nber.org/papers/w5713.pdf}}</ref> In the same study, economists Michael Grossman and Frank J. Chaloupka estimated that a 10% reduction in the price of cocaine would lead to a 14% increase in the frequency of cocaine use.<ref name="Grossman" />{{rp|459}} This increase indicates that consumers are responsive to price changes in the cocaine market. There is also evidence that in the long run, consumers are much more responsive to price changes than in the short run,<ref name="Grossman" />{{rp|454}} but other studies have led to a wide range of conclusions.<ref name=Levitt>{{cite journal|last=Kuiemko|first=Ilyana|author2=Steven D. Levitt|title=Empirical Analysis of Imprisoning Drug Offenders|journal=Journal of Public Economics|year=2003|issue=9–10|volume=88|doi=10.1016/s0047-2727(03)00020-3|pages=2043–2066|citeseerx=10.1.1.381.6010}}</ref>{{rp|2043}}

Considering that legalization would likely lead to an increase in the supply of drugs, the standard economic model predicts that the quantity of drugs consumed would rise and the prices would fall.<ref name="Grossman" />{{rp|428}} However, Andrew E. Clark, an economist who has studied the effects of drug legalization, suggests that a specific tax, or [[Finance:Sin tax|sin tax]], would counteract the increase in consumption.<ref name="Clark" />{{rp|3}}Additionally the legalization of it would reduce the cost of having to mass incarcerate marginalized communities, which are those who are disproportionately affected. Of those arrested for drug possession or drug related crimes, the majority of those individuals arrested are Black or Hispanic.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Drug War Statistics|url=https://drugpolicy.org/issues/drug-war-statistics|access-date=2021-10-16|website=Drug Policy Alliance|language=en}}</ref>

=== Associated costs ===
Proponents of drug prohibition argue that many negative externalities, or third party costs, are associated with the consumption of illegal drugs.<ref name="Levitt" />{{rp|2043}}<ref name=Miron>{{cite journal|last=Miron|first=Jeffrey A.|author2=Jeffrey Zwiebel|title=The Economic Case Against Drug Prohibition|journal=Journal of Economic Perspectives|year=1995|volume=9|issue=4|doi=10.1257/jep.9.4.175|pages=175–192|doi-access=free}}</ref>{{rp|183}} Externalities like violence, environmental effects on neighborhoods, increased health risks and, increased healthcare costs are often associated with the illegal drug market.<ref name="Clark" />{{rp|3}} Opponents of prohibition argue that many of those externalities are created by current drug policies. They believe that much of the violence associated with drug trade is due to the illegal nature of drug trade, where there is no mediating authority to solve disputes peacefully and legally.<ref name="Clark" />{{rp|3}}<ref name="Miron" />{{rp|177}} The illegal nature of the market also affects the health of consumers by making it difficult to acquire syringes, which often leads to needle sharing.<ref name="Miron" />{{rp|180–181}}
Prominent economist [[Biography:Milton Friedman|Milton Friedman]] argues that prohibition of drugs creates many negative externalities like increased incarceration rates, the undertreatment of chronic pain, corruption, disproportional imprisonment of African Americans, compounding harm to users, the destruction of inner cities and harm to foreign countries.<ref name=Friedman>{{cite news|last=Friedman|first=Milton|title=There's No Justice in the War on Drugs|newspaper=The New York Times |date=January 11, 1998}}</ref> Proponents of legalization also argue that prohibition decrease the quality of the drugs made, which often leads to more physical harm, like accidental overdoses and poisoning, to the drug users.<ref name="Miron" />{{rp|179}} Steven D. Levitt and Ilyana Kuziemko point to the over crowding of prisons as another negative side effect of the war on drugs. They believe that by sending such a large number of drug offenders to prison, the war on drugs has reduced the prison space available for other offenders. This increased incarceration rate not only costs tax payers more to maintain, it could possibly increase crime by crowding violent offenders out of prison cells and replacing them with drug offenders.<ref name="Levitt" />{{rp|2043}}

=== Direct costs ===
A [[Organization:Harvard University|Harvard]] economist, Jeffrey Miron, estimated that ending the war on drugs would inject 76.8 billion dollars into the US economy in 2010 alone.<ref name=Bernd>{{cite news|last=Debusmann|first=Bernd|title=Einstein, Insanity and the War on Drugs|url=http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2008/12/03/einstein-insanity-and-the-war-on-drugs/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081205024732/http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2008/12/03/einstein-insanity-and-the-war-on-drugs/|url-status=dead|archive-date=2008-12-05|access-date=April 1, 2012|newspaper=Reuter|date=December 3, 2008}}</ref> He estimates that the government would save $41.3 billion for law enforcement and the government would gain up to $46.7 billion in tax revenue.<ref name=Cato>{{cite journal|last=Miron|first=Jeffrey A.|author2=Katherine Waldock|title=The Budgetary Impact of Ending Drug Prohibition|journal=The Cato Institute|url=http://www.cato.org/publications/white-paper/budgetary-impact-ending-drug-prohibition|date=2010-09-27}}</ref>

Since the war on drugs began under the administration of President Richard Nixon, the federal drug-fighting budget has increased from $100 million in 1970 to $15.1 billion in 2010, with a total cost estimated near 1 trillion dollars over 40 years. In the same time period an estimated 37 million nonviolent drug offenders have been incarcerated. $121 billion was spent to arrest these offenders and $450 billion to incarcerate them.<ref name=AP>{{cite news|last=The Associated Press|title=After 40 years, $1 trillion, US War on Drugs Has Failed to Meet Any of its Goals|url=http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/05/13/ap-impact-years-trillion-war-drugs-failed-meet-goals/|access-date=April 1, 2012|newspaper=The Associated Press|date=2010-05-13}}</ref>

=== Size of the illegal drug market ===
According to 2013 data from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and European crime-fighting agency Europol, the annual global drugs trade is worth around $435 billion a year, with the annual cocaine trade worth $84 billion of that amount.<ref>{{Cite web|url = https://www.cnbc.com/id/100957882|title = CNBC|date = 2013-08-13|access-date = November 10, 2015|website = Global drugs trade 'as strong as ever' as fight fails|publisher = CNBC|last = Ellyatt|first = Holly}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url = http://irc.princeton.edu/pmunc/docs/UNODC%20BG%20formatted.pdf|title = UN Office on Drugs and Crime|access-date = November 10, 2015|publisher = Princeton|last = Liebman|first = Jonathan}}</ref>

== Policies by country ==

===Asia===

====Thailand====
Although Thailand has a strict [[Medicine:Drug policy|drug policy]], in May 2018, the Cabinet approved draft legislation that allows for more research into the effects of marijuana on people. Thus, the Government Pharmaceutical Organization (GPO) will soon begin clinical trials of marijuana as a preliminary step in the production of drugs from this plant. These medical studies are considered exciting, new landmarks in the history of Thailand, because the manufacture, storage, and use of marijuana has been completely outlawed in Thailand since 1979.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.bangkokpost.com/news/general/1546686/medical-marijuana-trials-to-start-soon | title=Medical marijuana trials to start soon | newspaper=Bangkok Post }}</ref>

On 9 November 2018, the National Assembly of Thailand officially proposed to allow licensed medical use of marijuana, thereby legalizing what was previously considered a dangerous drug.

The National Assembly on Friday submitted its amendments to the Ministry of Health, which would place marijuana and vegetable kratom in the category allowing their licensed possession and distribution in regulated conditions. The ministry reviewed the amendments before sending them to the cabinet, which returned it to the National Assembly for a final vote. This process was completed on 25 December 2018.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrebourque/2018/12/28/thailands-legalization-of-medical-cannabis-proves-one-very-important-thing/#6aeb29314b3d|title=Thailand's Legalization of Medical Cannabis Proves One Very Important Thing|website={{wipe|Forbes}}}}</ref> Thus, Thailand became the first Asian country to legalize medical [[Biology:Cannabis|cannabis]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://420intel.com/articles/2018/11/09/where-do-thai-lawmakers-stand-legalizing-medical-marijuana|title=Where do Thai lawmakers stand on legalizing medical marijuana?|date=9 November 2018}}</ref> It is worth noting that the proposed changes will not allow recreational use of drugs. These actions were taken because of the growing interest in the use of marijuana and its components for the treatment of certain diseases.

Supporters of legalization argue that the legal market for marijuana in Thailand could increase to $5 billion by 2024.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.thestrategist.media/Thailand-Malaysia-to-legalize-medical-cannabis_a3309.html|title = The Strategist}}</ref>

=== Europe ===

==== Czech Republic ====
In the Czech Republic, until 31 December 1998 only drug possession "''for other person''" (i.e. intent to sell) was criminal (apart from production, importation, exportation, offering or mediation, which was and remains criminal) while possession for personal use remained legal.<ref name="Cz expl rep" />

On 1 January 1999, an amendment of the Criminal Code, which was necessitated in order to align the Czech drug rules with the [[Medicine:Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs|Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs]], became effective, criminalizing possession of "''amount larger than small''" also for personal use (Art. 187a of the Criminal Code) while possession of small amounts for personal use became a misdemeanor.<ref name="Cz expl rep">{{Citation
| last       = Parliament of the Czech Republic
| year       = 1998
| title      = Explanatory Report to Act No. 112/1998 Coll., which amends the Act No. 140/1961 Coll., the Criminal Code, and the Act No. 200/1990 Coll., on misdemeanors
| location = Prague
| language   = cs
}} "''Podle čl. 36 Jednotné úmluvy o omamných látkách ze dne 31. března 1961 (č. 47/1965 Sb.) se signatáři zavazují k trestnímu postihu tam uvedených forem nakládání s drogami včetně jejich držby. Návrh upouští od dosavadní beztrestnosti držby omamných a psychotropních látek a jedů pro svoji potřebu. Dosavadní beztrestnost totiž eliminuje v řadě případů možnost postihu dealerů a distributorů drog.''"</ref>

The judicial practice came to the conclusion that the "''amount larger than small''" must be five to ten times larger (depending on drug) than a usual single dose of an average consumer.<ref>{{Citation
| author  = Supreme Court of the Czech Republic
| date     = 25 February 2012
| title    = 6 Tdo 156/2010 [NS 7078/2010]
}}</ref>

On 14 December 2009, the Government of the Czech Republic adopted Regulation No. 467/2009 Coll., that took effect on 1 January 2010, and specified what "''amount larger than small''" under the Criminal Code meant, effectively taking over the amounts that were already established by the previous judicial practice. According to the regulation, a person could possess up to 15&nbsp;grams of marijuana or 1.5&nbsp;grams of heroin without facing criminal charges. These amounts were higher (often many times) than in any other European country, possibly making the Czech Republic the most liberal country in the [[Social:European Union|European Union]] when it comes to drug liberalization, apart from Portugal.<ref>[http://www.praguepost.com/news/3194-new-drug-guidelines-are-europes-most-liberal.html New drug guidelines are Europe's most liberal], The Prague Post, 23 December 2009</ref> Czech Republic has also the highest prevalence of last years cannabis use among young adults (15–34) (18.5% in 2012) among the 30 counties reporting to the EMCDDA.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/data/2014|title=EMCDDA – European Drug Report 2014: Data and statistics — the drug situation in Europe|work=europa.eu}}</ref>

Under the Regulation No. 467/2009 Coll, possession of the following amounts or less of illicit drugs was to be considered smaller than large for the purposes of the Criminal Code and was to be treated as a misdemeanor subject to a fine equal to a parking ticket:<ref name="Cz reg">{{Citation
| last       = Government of the Czech Republic
| year       = 2009
| title      = Regulation No. 467/2009 Coll., which defines for the purposes of the Criminal Code what is to be considered larger than small amount of narcotic and psychoactive substances and poisons
| location = Prague
| language   = cs
}}</ref>
* Marijuana 15&nbsp;grams (or five plants)
* [[Chemistry:Hashish|Hashish]] 5&nbsp;grams
* Magic mushrooms 40 pieces
* [[Biology:Peyote|Peyote]] 5 plants
* LSD 5 tablets
* Ecstasy 4 tablets
* [[Chemistry:Amphetamine|Amphetamine]] 2&nbsp;grams
* [[Chemistry:Methamphetamine|Methamphetamine]] 2&nbsp;grams
* [[Chemistry:Heroin|Heroin]] 1.5&nbsp;grams
* [[Chemistry:Coca|Coca]] 5 plants
* [[Biology:Cocaine|Cocaine]] 1&nbsp;gram

In 2013, a District Court in Liberec was deciding a case of a person that was accused of criminal possession for having 3.25 grams of methamphetamine (1.9 grams of straight methamphetamine base), well over the Regulation's limit of 2 grams. The court considered that basing a decision on mere Regulation would be unconstitutional and in breach of Article 39 of the Czech Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms which states that "''only a law may designate which acts constitute a crime and what penalties, or other detriments to rights or property, may be imposed for committing them''" and proposed to the Constitutional Court to abolish the Regulation. In line with the District Courts' argument, the Constitutional Court abolished the Regulation effective from 23 August 2013, noting that the "''amount larger than small''" within the meaning of the Criminal Code may be designated only by the means of an Act of Parliament, and not a Governmental Regulation. Moreover, the Constitutional Court further noted that the Regulation merely took over already existing judicial practice of interpretation of what constitutes "''amount larger than small''" and thus its abolishment will not really change the criminality of drug possession in the country.<ref name="concourt">{{Citation
| last       = Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic
| year       = 2013
| title      = Ruling No. 259/2013 Coll.
| location = Brno
| language   = cs
}}</ref> Thus, the above-mentioned amounts from the now-not-effective Regulation remain as the base for consideration of police and prosecutors, while courts are not bound by the precise grammage.

Sale of any amount (not purchase) remains a criminal act. Possession of "''amount larger than a small''" of marijuana can result in a jail sentence of up to one year. For other illicit drugs, the sentence is up to two years. Trafficking as well as production (apart from growing up to five plants of marijuana) offenses carry stiffer sentences.<ref name="Cz criminal code">{{Citation
| last       = Parliament of the Czech Republic
| year       = 2009
| title      = Act No. 40/2009 Coll.
| location = Prague
| language   = cs
}}, Sections 283 – 287</ref>

Medical use of cannabis on prescription has been legal and regulated since 1 April 2013.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://the420times.com/2013/04/czech-republic-pharmacies-began-selling-medical-cannabis/ |title = Czech Republic Pharmacies Began Selling Medical Cannabis |work=The 420 Times |access-date = 23 June 2013 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20130620054056/http://the420times.com/2013/04/czech-republic-pharmacies-began-selling-medical-cannabis/ |archive-date = 20 June 2013 |url-status = dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url = https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/15/czech-republic-medical-marijuana_n_2693657.html |title = Czech Republic Legalizes Medical Marijuana Use |publisher = Huffingtonpost.com |access-date = 23 June 2013 |date=15 February 2013}}</ref>

==== France ====
Following a contentious debate France opened its first supervised injection centre on 11 October 2016. Marisol Touraine, the Minister of Health, declared that the centre was "a strong political response, for a pragmatic and responsible policy that brings high-risk people back towards the health system rather than stigmatizing them."<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-drugs-injectionroom-idUSKCN12B1KF|title=France opens its first supervised injection center for drug users|date=2016-10-11|newspaper=Reuters|access-date=2016-10-14}}</ref>  The centre is located near the Gare du Nord in Paris.

==== Germany ====
In 1994 the Federal Constitutional Court ruled that drug addiction was not a crime, nor was the possession of small amounts of drugs for personal use. In 2000 the German narcotic law ("BtmG") was changed to allow for supervised drug injection rooms. In 2002, a pilot study was started in seven German cities to evaluate the effects of [[Unsolved:Heroin-assisted treatment|heroin-assisted treatment]] on addicts, compared to methadone-assisted treatment. The positive results of the study led to the inclusion of heroin-assisted treatment into the services of the mandatory health insurance in 2009. On 4 May 2016 the Cabinet of Germany decided to approve the measure for legal cannabis for seriously ill patients who have consulted with a doctor and "have no therapeutic alternative". German Health Minister, Hermann Gröhe, presented the legal draft on the legalization of medical cannabis to the cabinet which is expected to take effect early 2017.<ref name=cnn1>{{cite web|last1=Berlinger|first1=Joshua|title=Germany to legalize medicinal marijuana by 2017|date=4 May 2016 |url=http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/04/europe/germany-medicinal-marijuana/|publisher=CNN|access-date=2 December 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Germany to legalise cannabis for medicinal purposes|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/03/germany-to-legalise-cannabis-for-medicinal-purposes/|newspaper=The Telegraph|access-date=2 December 2016|date=3 May 2016|last1=France-Presse|first1=Agence}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last1=Kade|first1=Claudia|title=Ab 2017 gibt es Cannabis auf Kassenrezept|url=https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article154992002/Ab-2017-gibt-es-Cannabis-auf-Kassenrezept.html|newspaper=Die Welt|date=3 May 2016|access-date=2 December 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Cannabis als Medizin|url=https://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/ministerium/meldungen/2016/cannabisarzneimittel-kabinett.html|publisher=Bundesministerium für Gesundheit|access-date=2 December 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Cannabis auf Kassenkosten|url=https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/kabinett-cannabis-101.html|publisher=Tagesschau|access-date=2 December 2016}}</ref>

==== Ireland ====
On 2 November 2015, Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, the minister in charge of the National Drugs Strategy, announced that Ireland planned to introduce supervised injection rooms.The minister also referenced that possession of controlled substances will be decriminalized although supply and production will remain criminalized.<ref>{{Cite news|title = Injection rooms for addicts to open next year in drug law change, says Minister|url = https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/injection-rooms-for-addicts-to-open-next-year-in-drug-law-change-says-minister-1.2413509|newspaper = The Irish Times|access-date = 2015-11-03}}</ref>  On 12 July 2017, the Health Committee of the Irish government rejected a bill that would have legalized medical cannabis.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/health-committee-rejects-bill-to-legalise-medical-cannabis-1.3152230|title=Health committee rejects Bill to legalise medical cannabis|newspaper=The Irish Times|access-date=2018-04-04|language=en-US}}</ref>

==== Netherlands ====

The drug policy of the Netherlands is based on 2 principles:

# Drug use is a public health issue, not a criminal matter
# A distinction between [[Medicine:Drug harmfulness|hard and soft drugs]] exists

Cannabis remains a controlled substance in the Netherlands and both possession and production for personal use are still [[Social:Misdemeanor|misdemeanor]]s, punishable by fine. Cannabis coffee shops are also illegal according to the statutes.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.drugsweb.nl/drugsweb153.asp|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20041212055950/http://www.drugsweb.nl/drugsweb153.asp|title=Landelijke wetgeving|archive-date=12 December 2004}}</ref>

However, a policy of non-enforcement has led to a situation where reliance upon non-enforcement has become common, and because of this the courts have ruled against the government when individual cases were prosecuted.

==== Norway ====
On 14 June 2010, the Stoltenberg commission recommended implementing heroin assisted treatment and expanding harm reduction measures.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.encod.org/info/NORWEGIAN-COMMISSION-RECOMMENDS.html |title=ENCOD.org: Norwegian commission recommends drug policy reform |access-date=25 March 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150924000721/http://www.encod.org/info/NORWEGIAN-COMMISSION-RECOMMENDS.html |archive-date=24 September 2015 |url-status=dead }}</ref> On 18 June 2010, Knut Storberget, Minister of Justice and the Police announced that the ministry was working on new drug policy involving decriminalization by the Portugal model, which was to be introduced to parliament before the next general election.<ref>http://www.dagbladet.no/2010/06/18/nyheter/knut_storberget/narkotika/narkotikapolitikk/innenriks/12188316/ Dagbladet</ref> However, Storberget later changed his statements, saying the decriminalization debate is "for academics", instead calling for coerced treatment.<ref>http://www.abcnyheter.no/borger/101228/justisministrenes-nei-til-avkriminalisering ABC Nyheter</ref> In early March 2013, minister of health and care services Jonas Gahr Støre proposed to decriminalize the inhalation of heroin by 2014 as a measure to decrease drug overdoses.<ref name=Dagsavis>{{cite web|url=http://www.dagsavisen.no/samfunn/store-vil-gjore-det-l-ovlig-a-royke-heroin/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130504111356/http://www.dagsavisen.no/samfunn/store-vil-gjore-det-l-ovlig-a-royke-heroin/|title=Støre vil gjøre det lovlig å røyke heroin|archive-date=4 May 2013}}</ref> In 2011 there were 294 fatal overdoses, in comparison to only 170 traffic related deaths.<ref name=Dagsavis />

The country is currently preparing a massive policy change in terms of how to deal with drug use and drug possession for personal use. The reform titled "From punishment to help" was approved by the Norwegian government in 2017 and is now in the final phase of approval by the parliament. Changes are expected to be implemented by early 2021. The new reform policy emphasizes that criminalizing drug use has no significant effect on rates of drug consumption and that drug addiction is better dealt with by health care services, hence the slogan "from punishment to help". Instead of fines or prison time, a person caught with a drug quantity for personal use will now be met with an independent panel consisting of social and health care workers that will discuss administrative sanctions or addiction treatment methods. This will hopefully encourage problematic users to seek help rather than fear of prosecution. There is also hope that this will improve the relationship between drug users and law enforcement officers. Opponents of the reform, including the police force and the progress party, fear that drug use will increase once a person is no longer at risk of facing criminal charges.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dep/hod/org/styrer-rad-og-utvalg/rusreformutvalget/id2594880|title=Rusreformutvalget|date=23 March 2018}}</ref>

==== Portugal ====
In 2001, Portugal became the first European country to abolish all criminal penalties for personal drug possession, under Law 30/2000.<ref>{{citation
|first = Alex
|last = Stevens
|title = The effects of decriminalization of drug use in Portugal
|date = 2007
|url = https://kar.kent.ac.uk/13325/
}}</ref> In addition, drug users were to be provided with therapy rather than prison sentences. Research commissioned by the [[Organization:Cato Institute|Cato Institute]] and led by Glenn Greenwald found that in the five years after the start of decriminalization, illegal drug use by teenagers had declined, the rate of [[Biology:HIV|HIV]] infections among drug users had dropped, deaths related to heroin and similar drugs had been cut by more than half, and the number of people seeking treatment for drug addiction had doubled.<ref name=cato>[http://www.cato.org/pubs/wtpapers/greenwald_whitepaper.pdf Drug Decriminalization in Portugal: Lessons for Creating Fair and Successful Drug Policies], Glenn Greenwald, Cato Institute, April 2009</ref> However, Peter Reuter, a professor of criminology and public policy at the [[Organization:University of Maryland, College Park|University of Maryland, College Park]], suggests that the heroin usage rates and related deaths may have been due to the cyclical nature of drug epidemics, but conceded that "decriminalization in Portugal has met its central goal. Drug use did not rise."<ref name="Time"/>

====Ukraine====
The use of marijuana in {{wipe|Ukraine}} is not prohibited, but the manufacture, storage, transportation and sale of cannabis and its derivatives are under administrative and criminal liability.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://korrespondent.net/ukraine/3997959-v-oon-poschytaly-upotrebliavshykh-marykhuanu-ukrayntsev|title = В ООН посчитали употреблявших марихуану украинцев}}</ref>

Speaking on the legalization of soft drugs in Ukraine has been going on for a long time. In June 2016, the Parliament received a bill on the legalization of marijuana for medical purposes. It dealt with changes to the current act "On narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and precursors" and was registered number 4533.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://24tv.ua/ru/konoplja_protiv_maka_sostoitsja_li_v_ukraine_legalajz_n1053052|title=Конопля против мака: состоится ли в Украине легалайз?}}</ref> The document must examine the relevant committee, and then submit it to the government. It was expected that this would happen in the fall of 2016, but the bill was not considered.

In October 2018, a petition appeared on the website of electronic appeals to the President of Ukraine asking for the legalization of marijuana.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://dnepr.info/news/v-ukraine-podnyali-temu-legalizatsii-narkotikov|title = С просьбой о легализации марихуаны обратились к президенту}}</ref>

In October 2018, the State Service of Ukraine on Drugs and Drug Control issued the first license for the import and re-export of raw materials and products derived from cannabis. The corresponding licenses were obtained by the USA company C21. The company is also in the process of applying for additional licenses, including the cultivation of cannabis.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://finance.bigmir.net/business/96326-Ykraina-vpervie-vidala-licenziu-na-proizvodstvo-prodyktov-iz-marihyani|title=Украина впервые выдала лицензию на производство продуктов из марихуаны|date=13 November 2018}}</ref>

=== Latin America ===
{{Main|Medicine:Latin American drug legalization}}

In the late 2000s and early 2010s, advocacy for drug legalization has increased in Latin America. Spearheading the movement Uruguayan government announced in 2012 plans to legalize state-controlled sales of marijuana in order to fight drug-related crimes. Some countries in this region have already advanced towards depenalization of personal consumption.

==== Argentina ====
In August 2009, the Argentine supreme court declared in a landmark ruling that it was unconstitutional to prosecute citizens for having drugs for their personal use – "adults should be free to make lifestyle decisions without the intervention of the state".<ref name="N000645">{{cite news | first=Simon | last=Jenkins | title= The war on drugs is immoral idiocy. We need the courage of Argentina – While Latin American countries decriminalise narcotics, Britain persists in prohibition that causes vast human suffering | date=3 September 2009 | url =https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/sep/03/drugs-prohibition-latin-america | work =The Guardian | access-date = 5 September 2009 | location=London}}</ref> The decision affected the second paragraph of Article 14 of the country's drug control legislation (Law Number 23,737) that punishes the possession of drugs for personal consumption with prison sentences ranging from one month to two years (although education or treatment measures can be substitute penalties). The unconstitutionality of the article concerns cases of drug possession for personal consumption that does not affect others.<ref>[http://www.druglawreform.info/index.php?option=com_flexicontent&view=items&cid=89%3Ain-the-media&id=234%3Aargentinas-supreme-court-arriola-ruling-on-the-possession-of-drugs-for-personal-consumption&Itemid=27&lang=en Argentina's supreme court "Arriola" ruling on the possession of drugs for personal consumption], Intercambios, 1 September 2009</ref><ref>[http://www.druglawreform.info/index.php?option=com_flexicontent&view=items&cid=97%3Alegislative-reform-of-drug-policies&id=419%3Aargentina-reform-on-the-way&Itemid=34&lang=en Argentina: Reform on the way?], Graciela Touzé, Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies Nr. 6, July 2010</ref>

==== Brazil ====
In 2002 and 2006, Brazil went through legislative changes, resulting in a partial decriminalization of possession for personal use. Prison sentences no longer applied and were replaced by educational measures and community services.<ref>[http://www.druglawreform.info/index.php?option=com_flexicontent&view=category&cid=101&Itemid=14&lang=en Drug Law Reform in Latin America] (accessed 14 September 2010)</ref> However, the 2006 law does not provide objective means to distinguish between users or traffickers. A disparity exists between the decriminalization of drug use and the increased penalization of selling drugs, punishable with a maximum prison sentences of 5 years for the sale of very minor quantities of drugs. Most of those incarcerated for drug trafficking are offenders caught selling small quantities of drugs, among them drug users who sell drugs to finance their drug habits. Since 2006, there's been a long debate whether the anti-drug law goes against the Constitution and principle of personal freedom. In 2009,<ref>[http://www.ocregister.com/articles/possession-678463-use-personal.html=en Brazil Supreme Court debates decriminalization of drugs], The Orange Conty Register, 19 August 2015</ref> the Supreme Federal Court re-opened to vote if the law is Constitutional, or if it goes against the Constitution specifically against personal Freedom of choice. Since each Minister inside the tribunal can take a personal time to evaluate the law, the voting can take years. In fact, the voting was re-opened in 2015, 3 ministers voted in favor, and then the law was again paused by another minister.<ref>[https://archive.today/20120801044316/http://www.druglawreform.info/index.php?fid=45&cid=574&ord=1&task=weblink&option=com_flexicontent&Itemid=37&lang=en Too many in jail for drugs offenses in Brazil], Comunidad segura, 13 August 2009</ref>

==== Colombia ====
Guatemalan President Otto Pérez Molina and Colombian President [[Biography:Juan Manuel Santos|Juan Manuel Santos]] proposed the legalization of drugs in an effort to counter the failure of the War on Drugs, which was said to have yielded poor results at a huge cost.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/03/2012327125714281880.html|title=The summit of muted intentions|author=Jorge G Castaneda|work=aljazeera.com}}</ref> On 25 May 2016, the Colombian congress approved the legalization of marijuana for [[Medicine:Medical cannabis|medical usage]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.noticiasrcn.com/nacional-pais/congreso-aprobo-ultimo-debate-uso-medicinal-marihuana|title=Congreso aprobó, en último debate, uso medicinal de la marihuana|date=25 May 2016}}</ref>

==== Costa Rica ====
Costa Rica has decriminalized drugs for personal consumption. Manufacturing or selling drugs is still a jailable offense.

==== Ecuador ====
According to the 2008 Constitution of Ecuador, in its Article 364, the Ecuadorian state does not see drug consumption as a crime but only as a health concern.<ref name="telegrafo">{{cite web|url=http://www.telegrafo.com.ec/noticias/judicial/item/la-nueva-tabla-para-consumo-de-drogas-es-una-guia-para-jueces.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130622032806/http://www.telegrafo.com.ec/noticias/judicial/item/la-nueva-tabla-para-consumo-de-drogas-es-una-guia-para-jueces.html|title=La nueva tabla para consumo de drogas es una guía para jueces|archive-date=22 June 2013}}</ref> Since June 2013 the state drugs regulatory office CONSEP has published a table which establishes maximum quantities carried by persons so as to be considered in legal possession and that person as not a seller of drugs.<ref name="telegrafo" /><ref>[http://www.elcomercio.com/seguridad/Dosis-maximas-droga-consumo-vigentes_0_941905849.html "Dosis máximas de droga para consumo ya están vigentes"] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130624025336/http://www.elcomercio.com/seguridad/Dosis-maximas-droga-consumo-vigentes_0_941905849.html |date=24 June 2013 }} at El Comercio.com.</ref><ref>[http://www.elnuevoherald.com/2013/06/21/1505650/ecuador-aprueban-tenencia-de-drogas.html "Ecuador: Aprueban tenencia de drogas para consumo"] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130625023421/http://www.elnuevoherald.com/2013/06/21/1505650/ecuador-aprueban-tenencia-de-drogas.html |date=25 June 2013 }} at ''El Nuevo Herald''</ref> The "CONSEP established, at their latest general meeting, that the following quantities be considered the maximum consumer amounts: 10 grams of marijuana or hash, 4 grams of opiates, 100 milligrams of heroin, 5 grams of cocaine, 0.020 milligrams of LSD, and 80 milligrams of methamphetamine or MDMA".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.telegrafo.com.ec/english-bulletin/item/ecuador-could-regulate-drug-sales.html|title=Ecuador could regulate the drug industry|access-date=24 June 2013|archive-url=https://archive.today/20130624225110/http://www.telegrafo.com.ec/english-bulletin/item/ecuador-could-regulate-drug-sales.html|archive-date=24 June 2013|url-status=dead|df=dmy-all}}</ref>

==== Honduras ====
On 22 February 2008, Honduras President Manuel Zelaya, called on the United States to legalize drugs, in order, he said, to prevent the majority of violent murders occurring in Honduras. Honduras is used by [[Biology:Cocaine|cocaine]] smugglers as a transiting point between Colombia and the US. Honduras, with a population of 7 million affected people an average of 8–10 murders a day, with an estimated 70% being as a result of this international drug trade. The same problem is occurring in Guatemala, El Salvador, Costa Rica and Mexico, according to Zelaya.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20080226143644/http://www.laprensahn.com/index.php/ediciones/2008/02/23/zelaya_sugiere_a_eua_legalizar_drogas Zelaya sugiere a EUA legalizar drogas]. laprensahn.com (23 February 2008)</ref>

==== Mexico ====
In April 2009, the Mexican Congress approved changes in the General Health Law that decriminalized the possession of illegal drugs for immediate consumption and personal use allowing a person to possess up to 5&nbsp;g of marijuana or 500&nbsp;mg of cocaine. The only restriction is that people in possession of drugs should not be within a 300-meter radius of schools, police departments, or correctional facilities. Opium, heroin, LSD, and other synthetic drugs were also decriminalized, it will not be considered as a crime as long as the dose does not exceed the limit established in the General Health Law.<ref>[http://www.elpensador.com.mx/2009/10/17/Ley-de-Narcomenudeo/ Ley de Narcomenudeo] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101130224127/http://www.elpensador.com.mx/2009/10/17/Ley-de-Narcomenudeo/ |date=30 November 2010 }}, ''El Pensador'' {{in lang|es}}, 17 October 2009</ref> Many question this, as cocaine is as much synthesised as heroin, both are produced as extracts from plants. The law establishes very low amount thresholds and strictly defines personal dosage. For those arrested with more than the threshold allowed by the law this can result in heavy prison sentences, as they will be assumed to be small traffickers even if there are no other indications that the amount was meant for selling.<ref>[http://www.druglawreform.info/index.php?option=com_flexicontent&view=items&cid=97%3Alegislative-reform-of-drug-policies&id=220%3Amexico-the-law-against-small-scale-drug-dealing&Itemid=34&lang=en Mexico: The Law Against Small-Scale Drug Dealing. A Doubtful Venture], Jorge Hernández Tinajero & Carlos Zamudio Angles, Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies Nr. 3, November 2009</ref>

==== Uruguay ====
Uruguay is one of few countries that never criminalized the possession of drugs for personal use. Since 1974, the law establishes no quantity limits, leaving it to the judge's discretion to determine whether the intent was personal use. Once it is determined by the judge that the amount in possession was meant for personal use, there are no sanctions.<ref>[http://www.druglawreform.info/index.php?option=com_flexicontent&view=category&cid=108&Itemid=21&lang=en Drug Law Reform in Latin America], (accessed 14 September 2010)</ref>

In June 2012, the Uruguayan government announced plans to legalize state-controlled sales of marijuana in order to fight drug-related crimes. The government also stated that they will ask global leaders to do the same.<ref>[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-18529993 Uruguay government aims to legalise marijuana]. ''BBC''. Retrieved 21 June 2012.</ref>

On 31 July 2013, the Uruguayan House of Representatives approved a bill to legalize the production, distribution, sale, and consumption of marijuana by a vote of 50 to 46. The bill then passed the Senate, where the left-leaning majority coalition, the Broad Front, held a comfortable majority. The bill was approved by the Senate by 16 to 13 on 10-December-2013.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.euronews.com/2013/12/11/uruguay-makes-history-by-legalising-entire-marijuana-market/|title=Uruguay makes history by legalising entire marijuana market|work=euronews}}</ref> The bill was presented to the President José Mujica, also of the Broad Front coalition, who has supported legalization since June 2012. Relating this vote to the 2012 legalization of marijuana by the U.S. states Colorado and Washington, John Walsh, drug policy expert of the Washington Office on Latin America, stated that "Uruguay's timing is right. Because of last year's Colorado and Washington State votes to legalize, the U.S. government is in no position to browbeat Uruguay or others who may follow."<ref>Romero, Simon.  [https://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/01/world/americas/uruguay-lawmakers-to-vote-on-legalizing-marijuana.html "Lawmakers in Uruguay Vote to Legalize Marijuana"]. ''The New York Times'', 31 July 2013.  Retrieved 1 August 2013.</ref>

In July 2014, government officials announced that part of the implementation of the law (the sale of cannabis through pharmacies) is postponed to 2015, as "there are practical difficulties". Authorities will grow all the cannabis that can be sold legal. Concentration of THC shall be 15% or lower.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/uruguay-marijuana-sales-delayed-until-2015-president.aspx?pageID=238&nID=68922&NewsCatID=358|title=Uruguay marijuana sales delayed until 2015: president – AMERICAS|work=hurriyetdailynews.com|date=10 July 2014}}</ref> In August 2014, an opposition presidential candidate, who was not elected in the November 2014 presidential elections, claimed that the new law was never going to be applied, as it was not workable.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/uruguayan-pot-marketplace-smoke-24809375|title=Uruguayan Pot Marketplace May Go up in Smoke|author=ABC News|work=ABC News|date=1 August 2014}}</ref> By the end of 2016 the government announced that the sale through pharmacies will be fully implemented during 2017.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.espectador.com/sociedad/344991/farmacias-conformes-con-demora-en-el-inicio-de-venta-de-marihuana|title=Farmacias, conformes con demora en el inicio de venta de marihuana|last=www.espectador.com|newspaper=ESPECTADOR.COM|access-date=2016-12-29}}</ref>

=== North America ===

==== Canada ====
[[File:3804, Saint-Laurent, Montreal - Cannabis Culture shop.jpg|thumb|right|A cannabis shop in Montreal]]
The cultivation of [[Biology:Cannabis (drug)|cannabis]] is currently legal in {{wipe|Canada}}, with exceptions only for Manitoba and Quebec. Citizens can grow up to 4 plants per residence, for personal use. The recreational use of cannabis by the general public is legal with restrictions on smoking in public locations which vary by jurisdiction. The sale of marijuana [[Biology:Seed|seed]]s is also legal.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/cannabis/|title=Cannabis Legalization and Regulation|last=Government of Canada|first=Department of Justice|date=2018-06-20|website=www.justice.gc.ca|access-date=2020-03-10}}</ref>

In 2001, ''The Globe and Mail'' reported that a poll found 47% of Canadians agreed with the statement, "The use of marijuana should be legalized" in 2000, compared to 26% in 1975.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01.n923.a01.html|title=Canada: Support Grows For Legalizing Marijuana|work=Media Awareness Project}}</ref> A more recent poll found that more than half of Canadians supported legalization. However, in 2007 Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government tabled Bill C-26 to amend the ''Controlled Drugs and Substances Act'', 1996 to bring forth a more restrictive law with higher minimum penalties for drug crimes.<ref>{{cite press release |title=The Government of Canada Tables Legislation that Penalizes Producers and Traffickers of Illegal Drugs |date=11 November 2007 |publisher=Canadian Department of Justice|url=http://www.nationalantidrugstrategy.gc.ca/nr-cp/doc2007_11_20.html |access-date= 6 September 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title=39th Parliament – 2nd Session: Bill C-26 |encyclopedia=LEGISinfo |publisher=Parliament of Canada |date=30 August 2010 |url=http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Sites/LOP/LEGISINFO/index.asp?Language=E&Chamber=N&StartList=A&EndList=Z&Session=15&Type=0&Scope=I&query=5330&List=stat |access-date=6 September 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100925140228/http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Sites/LOP/LEGISINFO/index.asp?Language=e |archive-date=25 September 2010 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Bill-26 died in committee after the dissolution of the 39th Canadian Parliament in September 2008, but the Bill had subsequently been resurrected by the government twice.

In 2015, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, and the Liberal Party of Canada campaigned on a promise to legalize marijuana. The ''Cannabis Act'' was passed on 19 June 2018, which made marijuana legal across Canada on 17 October 2018.<ref>{{cite press release |title=Government Re-Introduces Legislation to Fight Serious Drug Crimes |date=27 February 2010 |publisher=Canadian Department of Justice |url=http://www.nationalantidrugstrategy.gc.ca/nr-cp/doc2009_02_27.html |access-date= 6 September 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite press release |title=Government Re-Introduces Legislation to Crack Down on Organized Drug Crime |date=5 May 2010 |publisher=Canadian Department of Justice |url=http://www.nationalantidrugstrategy.gc.ca/nr-cp/doc2010_05_05.html |access-date= 6 September 2010}}</ref><ref>{{citation |title=Trudeau says pot will be legal as of Oct. 17, 2018 |date=20 June 2018 |publisher=CBC |url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cannabis-pot-legalization-bill-1.4713839 |access-date= 24 June 2018}}</ref>

Since legalization, the country has set up an online framework to allow consumers to purchase a wide variety of merchandise ranging from herbs, extract, oil capsules, and paraphernalia. Most provinces are also providing a venue for purchase through physical brick and mortar stores.

In 2021, the city councils of {{wipe|Vancouver}} and Toronto voted to decriminalize the simple possession of all drugs; and submitted proposals requesting special exemption from the federal Health Minister to do so, citing innumerable scientific, psychological, medical and socio-economic benefits.<ref name="tstarcanada">{{Cite news | date=2022-05-14 | title='Tragically inadequate': How Ottawa's decision on decriminalizing drug use in Toronto and other cities may only make things worse | newspaper=The Toronto Star | url=https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/2022/05/11/tragically-inadequate-how-ottawas-decision-on-decriminalizing-drug-use-in-toronto-and-other-cities-may-only-make-things-worse.html}}</ref>

In early 2022, the Province of British Columbia submitted its own request for exemption, closely following the Vancouver model. By April of that year, the Edmonton City Council had also passed a motion to request exemption from federal drug enforcement laws in order decriminalize "simple personal possession" of illegal drugs, voting in favour 11–2.<ref name=tstarcanada/><ref>{{Cite web| date=2022-04-11| title=Edmonton moves forward on decriminalizing "simple personal possession" of drugs | url=https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/edmonton-moves-forward-on-decriminalizing-simple-personal-possession-of-drugs-1.5857543}}</ref>

On 31 May 2022, the federal government of Canada approved British Columbia's proposal to decriminalize all "hard" drugs such as heroin and fentanyl, cocaine and methamphetamine. From 1 January 2023, British Columbians aged 18 years or older will be able to carry up to a cumulative total of 2.5 grams of these illicit substances without the risk of arrest or criminal charges. Police are not to confiscate the drugs, and there is no requirement that people found to be in possession seek treatment. However, the production, trafficking and exportation of these drugs will remain illegal.<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Woo |first1=Andrea |last2=Gee |first2=Marcus |date=2022-05-31 |title=B.C. to decriminalize possession of small amounts of 'hard' drugs such as cocaine, fentanyl and heroin |url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-decriminalize-drugs-british-columbia-canada/ |access-date=2022-05-31 |publisher=Globe and Mail}}</ref>

==== United States ====
Throughout the United States, various people and groups have been pushing for the legalization of marijuana for medical reasons. Organizations such as NORML and the Marijuana Policy Project work to decriminalize possession, use, cultivation, and sale of marijuana by adults, even beyond medical uses.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=5059|title=NORML Policy on Personal Use|access-date=26 August 2008|publisher=NORML|date=3 October 2004|archive-date=5 October 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081005040453/http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=5059|url-status=dead}}</ref> In 1996, 56% of California voters voted for California Proposition 215, legalizing the growing and use of marijuana for medical purposes. This created significant legal and policy tensions between federal and state governments. Since then, 20 more states and the District of Columbia have legalized and regulated medical marijuana. State laws in conflict with federal law about cannabis remain valid, and prevent state level prosecution, despite cannabis being illegal under federal law (see Gonzales v. Raich).

On 6 November 2012, Colorado and Washington state legalized possession of small amounts of marijuana for private recreational use, and created a process for writing rules for legal growing and commercial distribution of marijuana within each state.<ref>{{cite news|title=Legalization of Marijuana in Washington and Colorado|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-marijuana-legalization-idUSBRE8A602D20121107|publisher=reuters|access-date=10 January 2013|date=7 November 2012}}</ref>

The 2014 Midterms saw voters in Oregon, Alaska, and Washington, D.C. vote to legalize marijuana for recreational use.

In 2016, California Proposition 64 was passed, legalizing private, recreational use of marijuana for those age 21 or older in the state of California.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/en/propositions/64/ |title=Proposition 64 &#124; Official Voter Information Guide &#124; California Secretary of State |access-date=9 March 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180220211718/http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/en/propositions/64/ |archive-date=20 February 2018 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last= Levin |first= Sam |date= 9 November 2016 |title= California, Nevada and Massachusetts vote to legalize recreational marijuana |url= https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/08/state-ballot-initiative-election-results-live-marijuana-death-penalty-healthcare |work= The Guardian |access-date= 26 February 2020}}</ref>

Following the 2018 midterm ballot, Michigan legalized the recreational use of marijuana in private.
<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://ballotpedia.org/Michigan_Proposal_1,_Marijuana_Legalization_Initiative_(2018)|title = Michigan Proposal 1, Marijuana Legalization Initiative (2018)}}</ref>

In 2019, Illinois passed the Illinois Cannabis Regulation and Tax Act, making Illinois the first state to legalize the recreational use by an act of the state legislature. This took effect as of January 1, 2020.

In 2020, Oregon decriminalized the possession of all drugs in Measure 110.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/09/politics/oregon-decriminalize-drugs-trnd/index.html|title = Oregon becomes the first state to decriminalize small amounts of heroin and other street drugs|website = CNN}}</ref>

In 2021, New York legalized adult-use cannabis when it passed the Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act (MRTA). <ref>{{Cite web|url=https://cannabis.ny.gov/marihuana-regulation-and-taxation-act-mrta</ref>

=== Oceania ===

==== Australia ====
{{Further|Cannabis in Australia|Illicit drug use in Australia}}In 2016, Australia legalised medicinal cannabis on a federal level.

Since 1985, the Federal Government has run a declared "War on Drugs" and while initially Australia led the world in 'harm-minimization' approach, they have since lagged.

Australia has a number of political parties that focus on cannabis reform, The (HEMP) Help End Marijuana Prohibition Party was founded in 1993 and registered by the Australian Electoral Commission in 2000. The Legalise Cannabis Queensland Party was established in 2020.

A number of Australian and international groups have promoted reform in regard to 21st-century Australian drug policy. Organisations such as Australian Parliamentary Group on Drug Law Reform, Responsible Choice, the Australian Drug Law Reform Foundation, Norml Australia, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) Australia and Drug Law Reform Australia advocate for drug law reform without the benefit of government funding. The membership of some of these organisations is diverse and consists of the general public, social workers, lawyers and doctors, and the Global Commission on Drug Policy has been a formative influence on a number of these organisations.

In 1994, the Australian National Task Force on Cannabis formed under the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy noted that the social harm of cannabis prohibition is greater than the harm from cannabis itself,<ref name="Booth20052">{{cite book|author=Martin Booth|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=O7AoY6ljSygC&pg=PA391|title=Cannabis: A History|date=June 2005|publisher=Picador|isbn=978-0-312-42494-7|pages=391–}}</ref> total prohibition policies have been unsuccessful in reducing drug use and have caused significant social harm, as well as higher law enforcement costs, the use of cannabis is widespread in Australia and that its adverse health effects are modest and only affect a minority of users.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Australian task force reported in 1994 that cannabis prohibition causes "significant social harm"|url=https://www.ponderingpot.com.au/national/australian-task-force-reported-in-1994-that-cannabis-prohibition-causes-significant-social-harm/|website=Pondering Pot|date=12 November 2020}}</ref>

In 2012, the think tank Australia 21, released a report on the decriminalization of drugs in Australia.<ref>{{cite web|title=Australian Policy on Illicit Drugs, Downloads|url=http://www.australia21.org.au/our_research/illicit_drugs_download.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130330145919/http://www.australia21.org.au/our_research/illicit_drugs_download.html|archive-date=30 March 2013}}</ref> noted that "by defining the personal use and possession of certain psychoactive drugs as criminal acts, governments have also avoided any responsibility to regulate and control the quality of substances that are in widespread use."<ref name="australia21.org.au">Australia 21 (2012). The Report (p. 4). Retrieved from http://www.australia21.org.au/publications/press_releases/Australia21_Illicit_Drug_Policy_Report.pdf {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130309073754/http://www.australia21.org.au/publications/press_releases/Australia21_Illicit_Drug_Policy_Report.pdf|date=9 March 2013}}</ref> Prohibition has fostered the development of a criminal industry that is corrupting civil society and government and killing our children."<ref name="australia21.org.au" /> The report also highlighted the fact that, just as alcohol and tobacco are regulated for quality assurance, distribution, marketing and taxation, so should currently, unregulated, illicit drugs.<ref name="australia21.org.au" />

There has been a number of enquires in Australia relating to cannabis and other illicit drugs, in 2019 the Queensland government instructed the [https://www.qpc.qld.gov.au/ Queensland Productivity Commission] to conduct an [https://www.qpc.qld.gov.au/inquiries/imprisonment/ enquiry into imprisonment and recidivism] in QLD, the final report was sent to the Queensland Government on 1 August 2019 and publicly released on 31 January 2020. The commission found that "all available evidence shows the war on drugs fails to restrict usage or supply" and that "decriminalisation would improve the lives of drug users without increasing the rate of drug use"<ref>{{Cite web|title=Queensland Government has no intentions of altering any drug laws|url=https://www.ponderingpot.com.au/qld/qld-government-has-no-intention-of-altering-cannabis-laws/|website=Pondering Pot|date=26 May 2020}}</ref> with the commission ultimately recommending that the Queensland government legalise cannabis.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Cannabis and MDMA should be legalised according to report|url=https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6608809/cannabis-mdma-should-be-legalised-report/?cs=14231|website=The Canberra Times |date = 31 January 2020}}</ref> The QPC said the system had also fuelled an illegal market, particularly for methamphetamine. Although the Palaszczuk Queensland Labor Party led [[Social:State government|state government]] rejected the recommendations of its own commission and said it had no plans to alter any laws around cannabis,<ref>{{Cite web|date=15 February 2020|title=Cooked QLD Government Rejects Recommendations to Decriminalise Drugs|url=https://friendlyaussiebuds.com/australian-cannabis-news/qld-gov-decrim/|website=Friendly Aussie Buds}}</ref> a decision that received heavy scrutiny from supporters of decriminalization, legalisation, progressive and non progressive drug policy advocates alike.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Drug Reform Would Save Billions but Queensland Premier Rules It Out|url=https://www.abc.net.au/article/11918390|website=Australian Broadcasting Company}}</ref>

In 2019, The Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP) and St. Vincent's Health Australia called on the NSW Government to publicly release the findings of the Special Commission of Inquiry into the Drug 'Ice, saying there was "no excuse" for the delay.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Doctor's Urge Immediate Release of 'Ice' Inquiry Report|url=https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/no-excuse-doctors-urge-immediate-release-of-ice-inquiry-report-20200216-p5418b.html|website=Sydney Morning Herald|date=16 February 2020}}</ref> The report was the culmination of months of evidence from health and judicial experts, as well as families and communities affected by amphetamine-type substances across NSW. The report made 109 recommendations aimed to strengthen the NSW Governments response regarding amphetamine-based drugs such as crystal meth or ice. Major recommendations included more supervised drug use rooms, a prison needle and syringe exchange program, state-wide clinically supervised substance testing, including mobile pill testing at festivals, decriminalisation of drugs for personal use, a cease to the use of drug detection dogs at music festivals and to limit the use of strip searches. The report, also called for the NSW Government to adopt a comprehensive Drug and Alcohol policy, with the last drug and Alcohol policy expiring over a decade ago. The reports commissioner said the state's approach to drug use was profoundly flawed and said reform would require "political leadership and courage" and "Criminalising use and possession encourages us to stigmatise people who use drugs as the authors of their own misfortunate". Mr Howard said current laws "allow us tacit permission to turn a blind eye to the factors driving most problematic drug use" including childhood abuse, domestic violence and mental illness.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Ice Inquiry Findings|url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-27/ice-inquiry-findings-decriminalisation-pill-testing/12006176|website=Australian Broadcasting Company|date=27 February 2020}}</ref> The NSW government rejected the reports key recommendations, saying it would consider the other remaining recommendations. Director of the Drug Policy Modelling Program (DPMP) at UNSW Sydney's Social Policy Research Centre said the NSW Government has missed an opportunity to reform the state's response to drugs based on evidence.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Academics on Government Response to Ice inquiry|url=https://newsroom.unsw.edu.au/news/social-affairs/unsw-academics-say-government-response-ice-inquiry-%E2%80%98disappointing%E2%80%99|website=Newsroom}}</ref> The NSW Government is yet to officially respond to the inquiry as of November 2020, a statement was released from the government citing intention to respond by the end of 2020.<ref>{{Cite journal|title=Special Commission of Inquiry into 'Ice' report released|url=https://www.nsw.gov.au/news/special-commission-of-inquiry-into-ice-report-released|website=NSW Government}}</ref>

In the Australian Capital Territory, after a bill was passed on 25 September 2019, new laws came into effect on 31 January 2020 which allowed for possession of up to 50 grams of dry material, 150 grams of wet material, and cultivation of 2 plants per individual up to 4 plants per household, effectively legalising the possession and growing of cannabis in the ACT. However the sale and supply of cannabis and cannabis seeds is still illegal, so the effects of the laws are limited and the laws also contradict federal laws. It is also still illegal to smoke or use cannabis in a public place, expose a child or young person to cannabis smoke, store cannabis where children can reach it, grow cannabis using hydroponics or artificial cultivation, grow plants where they can be accessed by the public, share or give cannabis as a gift to another person, to drive with any cannabis in your system, or for people aged under 18 to grow, possess, or use cannabis.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Treasury|first=ACT Government; PositionTitle=Director; SectionName=Corporate Management; Corporate=Chief Minister and|date=19 February 2020|title=Home|url=https://www.act.gov.au/cannabis|website=Cannabis}}</ref> The personal possession and growth of small amounts of cannabis remains prohibited non-medicinal purposes in every other jurisdiction in Australia.

==== New Zealand ====

On 18 December 2018, the Labour-led government announced a nationwide, binding referendum on the legality of cannabis for personal use, set to be held as part of the 2020 general election.<ref name="Referendum-RNZ">{{cite news|title=Binding referendum on legalising cannabis for personal use to be held at 2020 election|url=https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/378523/binding-referendum-on-legalising-cannabis-for-personal-use-to-be-held-at-2020-election|access-date=18 December 2018|agency=Radio New Zealand|date=18 December 2018}}</ref> This was a condition of the Green Party giving [[Social:Confidence and supply|confidence and supply]] to the Government.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Confidence and Supply Agreement between the New Zealand Labour Party and the Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand|url=https://www.parliament.nz/media/4487/nzlp___gp_c_s_agreement.pdf|access-date=7 October 2020}}</ref><ref name="Referendum-Stuff">{{cite news|last1=Kirk|first1=Stacey|title=Greens promised referendum on legalising the personal use of cannabis|url=https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/98081802/Greens-promised-referendum-on-legalising-the-personal-use-of-cannabis|access-date=24 March 2018|agency=Stuff|date=20 October 2017}}</ref><ref name="Referendum-BBC">{{cite news|title=New Zealand to hold cannabis referendum within three years|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41693728|access-date=24 March 2018|agency=BBC|date=20 October 2017}}</ref> On 7 May 2019, the Government announced that the 2020 New Zealand cannabis referendum would be a yes/no question to enact a yet-to-be created piece of legislation. Despite the earlier commitment, the referendum was non-binding, the proposed [https://www.referendums.govt.nz/cannabis/summary.html Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill] would have need to be introduced into Parliament and passed like any other piece of legislation; therefore, the government was not, in fact, bound to the results of the referendum.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/112513203/cannabis-law-will-not-be-passed-ahead-of-referendum-would-set-age-at-20|title=Cannabis referendum: A simple yes or no question on reform at 2020 General Election|website=Stuff|date=6 May 2019|language=en|access-date=2019-05-09}}</ref> Official results for the general election and referendums were released on 6 November 2020.<ref name="about the election">{{cite web|title=About the 2020 General Election|url=https://vote.nz/voting/get-ready-to-vote/about-the-2020-general-election/|access-date=2020-09-09|website=vote.nz|publisher=Electoral Commission|archive-date=10 October 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201010015057/https://vote.nz/voting/get-ready-to-vote/about-the-2020-general-election/|url-status=dead}}</ref> The number opposed to decriminalisation was 50.7% with 48.4% in favour and 0.9% of votes were declared Informal.<ref name="about the election" />

==Groups advocating change==
The Senlis Council, a European development and policy think tank, has, since its conception in 2002, advocated that drug addiction should be viewed as a public health issue rather than a purely criminal matter. The group does not support the decriminalisation of illegal drugs. Since 2003, the council has called for the licensing of poppy cultivation in Afghanistan in order to manufacture poppy-based medicines, such as morphine and codeine, and to combat poverty in rural communities, breaking ties with the illicit drugs trade. The Senlis Council outlined proposals for the implementation of a village based poppy for medicine project and calls for a pilot project for Afghan morphine at the next planting season.<ref>"[http://www.senliscouncil.net/modules/events/London_event_on_afghanistan/documents/poppy_medicine_technical_dossier Poppy for Medicine] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070930194018/http://www.senliscouncil.net/modules/events/London_event_on_afghanistan/documents/poppy_medicine_technical_dossier |date=2007-09-30 }}" (June 2007)</ref>

==Organisations involved in lobbying, research and advocacy==

===Canada===
* Le Dain Commission of Inquiry into the Non-Medical Use of Drugs

===Europe===
* Beckley Foundation
* Drug Equality Alliance (DEA)
* European Coalition for Just and Effective Drug Policies (ENCOD) (Branches in Austria, Germany and Norway)
* [https://www.legalize.net/ Legalize.net] (Netherlands)
* Re:Vision Drug Policy Network <ref>[http://www.revisiondrugs.org Re:Vision Drug Policy Network]</ref> (United Kingdom)
* Regulación Responsable (Spain)
* [[Medicine:Release (agency)|Release (agency)]] (United Kingdom)
* Students for Sensible Drug Policy UK <ref>{{Cite web |url=http://ssdp.org.uk/ |title=Students for Sensible Drug Policy UK |access-date=2019-07-29 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121229180816/http://www.ssdp.org.uk/ |archive-date=2012-12-29 |url-status=dead }}</ref> (United Kingdom)
* Transform Drug Policy Foundation

===Australia===
*Drug Policy Australia<ref>[http://www.drugpolicy.org.au/ Drug Policy Australia]</ref>
*Network Against Prohibition

===New Zealand===
*The Helen Clark Foundation<ref>{{cite news |date= 4 September 2019 |title= Poll: Do you agree with the Helen Clark Foundation's recommendations on drug law reform? |url= https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/shows/2019/09/poll-do-you-agree-with-the-helen-clark-foundation-s-recommendations-on-drug-law-reform.html |work= Newshub |access-date= 5 February 2020}}</ref>
*The STAR Trust<ref>[http://www.thestartrust.org/advocacy/ The STAR Trust] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140110205222/http://www.thestartrust.org/advocacy/ |date=January 10, 2014 }}</ref>

===United States===
* American Civil Liberties Union<ref>American Civil Liberties Union [https://www.aclu.org/drug-law-reform Drug Law Reform] Accessed 2010-02-15</ref>
* Americans for Safe Access
* Drug Policy Alliance
* [[Medicine:High Times|High Times]]
* High Times Freedom Fighters
* Law Enforcement Against Prohibition<ref>[http://www.leap.cc/ LEAP]</ref>
* Lindesmith Center
* Marijuana Policy Project
* MASS CANN/NORML
* Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS)
* National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws<ref>[http://www.norml.org/ NORML] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091223224533/http://norml.org/ |date=December 23, 2009 }}</ref>
* Students for Sensible Drug Policy
* Veterans for Medical Marijuana Access
* November Coalition (United States)
* Women Grow

==Political parties with drug liberalization policies==

Many political parties support, to various degrees, and for various reasons, liberalising drug control laws, from [[Philosophy:Liberalism|liberal]] parties to far-left movements, as well as some pragmatic right-wing intellectuals.  Drug liberalization is fundamental in the platforms of most [[Philosophy:Libertarianism|libertarian]] parties.

There are also numerous single issue marijuana parties devoted to campaign for the legalisation of cannabis exclusively.

===Australia===
* Australian Greens<ref>{{cite web|title=Australian Greens|url=http://greens.org.au/policies/care-for-people/drugs-substance-abuse-and-addiction|access-date=2013-04-27}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=NSW Greens|url=http://nsw.greens.org.au/policies/drug_harm_minimisation|access-date=2013-04-27}}</ref>
* Drug Law Reform Australia<ref>{{cite web|title=Drug Law Reform Australia|url=http://www.druglawreform.com.au/}}</ref>
* Reason Party (Australia)<ref>{{cite web |url= https://reason.org.au/federal-policies/ |title= Federal Policies |website= Reason Party (official website) |access-date= 5 February 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last= Fitzsimmons |first= Caitlin |date= 29 December 2019 |title= 'New voices': Reason Party comes to NSW to revive push for assisted dying laws |url= https://www.smh.com.au/politics/nsw/new-voices-reason-party-comes-to-nsw-to-revive-push-for-assisted-dying-laws-20191227-p53n98.html?ref=rss |work= The Sydney Morning Herald |access-date= 5 February 2020 |quote= As well as assisted dying laws, Ms Patten said the Reason Party's agenda in NSW would include drug reform, access to medical cannabis and co-ordinating a state-led revolt against the federal religious freedom legislation.}}</ref>
* Help End Marijuana Prohibition (HEMP) Party<ref>{{Cite web|title=hemp grassroots campaign hot on the heels of Palmer's $60 million ad barrage|url=https://www.smh.com.au/federal-election-2019/hemps-grassroots-campaign-hot-on-heels-of-palmer-s-60-million-ad-barrage-20190519-p51p0n.html}}</ref>
* Legalise Cannabis Queensland
*Legalise Cannabis Western Australia Party

===Canada===
* Liberal Party of Canada
* New Democratic Party of Canada

===Netherlands===
* GroenLinks<ref>{{cite web |url= https://www.greeneuropeanjournal.eu/green-observatory-drug-policy/ |title= Green Observatory: Drug Policy |last= Buitenweg |first= Kathalijne |date= 30 July 2018 |website= Green European Journal |access-date= 5 February 2020}}</ref>

===New Zealand===
* Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand<ref>{{cite web|publisher=Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand|url=http://www.greens.org.nz/policy/drugs |title=Drug Law Reform Policy - Towards a Harm Reduction Model|access-date=15 February 2010}}</ref>

===United Kingdom===
* Green Party of England and Wales
* Liberal Democrats<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1861242.stm |work=BBC News|title=Lib Dems back radical drug policy|date=2002-03-09}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web | url=http://www.libdemvoice.org/libdem-conference-passes-drugs-motion-25314.html | title=LibDem Conference passes drugs motion}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.tdpf.org.uk/lib%20dem%20drugs%20policy%20paper47.pdf |title=Home |access-date=2013-04-27 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120202150139/http://tdpf.org.uk/lib%20dem%20drugs%20policy%20paper47.pdf |archive-date=2012-02-02 }}</ref> – In March 2016, the Liberal Democrats became the first major political party in the United Kingdom to support the legalisation of cannabis.<ref>[http://www.libdems.org.uk/liberal_democrats_call_for_a_legalised_cannabis_market Liberal Democrats call for a legalised cannabis market]. Liberal Democrats (official website). Published 12 March 2016. Retrieved 10 May 2017.</ref><ref>[http://www.libdems.org.uk/a_regulated_cannabis_market_for_the_uk A regulated cannabis market for the UK]. Liberal Democrats (official website). Published 8 March 2016. Retrieved 10 May 2017.</ref><ref>[https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/cannabis-marijuana-legalisation-liberal-democrats-drug-policy-a6927936.html Liberal Democrats become first major party to back cannabis legalisation]. The Independent. Author – Mark Leftly. Published 12 March 2016. Retrieved 10 May 2017.</ref>

===International===
* [[Pirate Party]]

==See also==
{{div col|colwidth=25em}}
* [[Medicine:Arguments for and against drug prohibition|Arguments for and against drug prohibition]]
* Cannabis rights
* Cannabis Social Club
* [[Social:Civil libertarianism|Civil libertarianism]]
* [[Philosophy:Cognitive liberty|Cognitive liberty]]
* Gateway drug theory
* Global Commission on Drug Policy
* Harm reduction
* Latin American Initiative on Drugs and Democracy
* [[Philosophy:Left-libertarianism|Left-libertarianism]]
* Legality of cannabis by country
* US Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906
* Recreational drug use
* [[Medicine:Responsible drug use|Responsible drug use]]
* School district drug policies
* Students for Sensible Drug Policy
* [[Unsolved:Supervised injection site|Supervised injection site]]
* ''The War We Never Fought''
* Transform Drug Policy Foundation
* War on drugs
* [[Medicine:World Federation Against Drugs|World Federation Against Drugs]]
{{div col end}}

== References ==
{{Reflist}}

== External links ==
* [http://www.tdpf.org.uk/ Transform Drug Policy Foundation] – A UK-based think-tank that works to develop systems for control and regulation that can be applied globally.
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20070703203011/http://www.leap.cc/cms/index.php Law Enforcement Against Prohibition] – Run by retired law enforcement professionals who oppose prohibition.
* [http://www.vcl.org/ Voluntary Committee of Lawyers] – a New York-based network of judges and lawyers opposed to current federal drug laws.
* [http://norml.org/ NORML (US National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws)] – a US wide network of activists seeking to liberalize cannabis legislation.
* [http://www.revisiondrugs.org/ Re:Vision Drug Policy Network] – an organisation for young people aged 16–25 campaigning against prohibition.
* [http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/ledain/ldctoc.html The Report of the Canadian Government Commission of Inquiry into the Non-Medical Use of Drugs – 1972] – The LeDain Commission Report
* [https://www.tni.org/en/drug-law-reform Drug Law Reform] – a project of the [[Organization:Transnational Institute|Transnational Institute]] (TNI)
* [https://archive.today/20130416014336/http://www.standardsoflife.org/Contribution+-+A+Practical+Plan+for+Substance+Legalization Draft Plan for Legalization from LIFE] – an example of a policy formulation proposed for substance legalization
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20160325130219/http://www.countthecosts.org/ Count The Costs]
* [http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/ Schaffer Library of Drug Policy]

{{drug use}}
{{Public policy}}

[[Category:Drug control law]]

fi:Huumeiden dekriminalisointi

{{Sourceattribution|Drug liberalization}}