Category Archives:Drug Possession

July 20, 2016 Drug Importation, Drug Possession
0

United Nations on Drug Reform – All Talk, No Action

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) has released its annual World Drug Report, with mixed results in the area of drug use and trafficking.

Overall, the UN estimates that 1 in 20 adults worldwide used an illicit drug in 2014, a figure which has remained steady over the past four years.

The bad news is that the number of people suffering from drug-use disorders has increased, hitting a record 29 million in 2014. According to the report, the health costs are particularly concerning as an estimated 12 million people are injecting drugs, with 14% living with HIV.

New Trends

UNODC Executive Director Yury Fedotov outlined a number of further concerns, including:

“the disastrous resurgence of heroin in some regions; the use of the ‘Darknet’ for drug trafficking; the appalling loss of life due to overdoses, and the disproportionate impact illicit drugs have on women, among many others challenges.”

The Report found that the proliferation of anonymous online marketplaces is playing a key role in drug trafficking. It pointed out that:

“Monica Barratt, a researcher from the National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre at UNSW Australia… [found that] 8,058 GDS respondents out of 101,313 (8 percent) said they had used the dark web to source drugs. That’s up from around 5,000 in 2015, and 2,000 in 2014”.

Drug Use by Gender

The Report found that men are three times more likely than women to use cannabis, cocaine or amphetamines, while women are more likely to take opioids and tranquilizers for non-medical purposes.
This disparity is believed to be linked to increased opportunities for men to access drugs in their social environment.

The Report further found that the impact of drug use was greater on women because they difficulty accessing treatment facilities for their issues.

Spike in Heroin

Consistent with other studies, the Report found that North America has seen increase in both heroin use, and heroin-related deaths.

The US Drug Enforcement Agency’s National Heroin Threat Assessment Summary reports that the number of heroin users has been rising rapidly — there were 435,000 heroin users in 2014, a three-fold increase on 2007.

During the same period, the number of overdose deaths involving heroin jumped from 3,036 in 2010, to 10,574 in 2014.

Synthetic Drugs

The Report also found an increased use in synthetic drugs, which is again consistent with other recent studies.

Joseph J. Palamar, an Assistant Professor at NYU Langone Medical Center, tested hair samples from people outside clubs and festivals in New York, finding that four out of 10 people who reported only taking ‘ecstacy’ also came up positive for bath salts (a lab-created drug chemically similar to cathinone, a stimulant).

A separate European Report unearthed 101 new street drugs in 2014 alone. Most were synthetic cannabinoids, but there were also a number of variations of synthetic bath salts, known on the street as ‘flakka’.

UN Response

The Report is heavy on data but disappointingly light on solutions.

Rather than making solid recommendations for addressing drug issues and devising a plan for reform, the UN Secretary-General has called for “a global response that is simultaneously effective, compassionate and humane”.

Ineffectiveness of UNGASS

The Report follows the recent UN General Assembly Special Session on Drugs (UNGASS), which was heavily criticised for failing to condemn the “war on drugs” and neglecting to propose a pathway towards drug reform.

In the lead-up to UNGASS, drug reformists were hopeful the UN would urge member states to decriminalise small drug possession, and make recommendations addressing the collateral damage cause by the drug war. Indeed, the conference was brought forward from 2019 following pleas by the presidents of Colombia, Guatemala and Mexico; nations that are heavily affected by prohibitionist policies.

However, the conference saw representatives of member states rambling on about problems, facts and figures with little guidance or direction being provided by UN heads or mediators, and no recommendations for reform.

Drug reformists argue that, until the UN takes a firmer leadership role which recognises current policy failures and recommends pathways to reform, little will change on a global scale.

July 11, 2016 Drug Cultivation, Drug Possession
0

Help Police, Dad’s Burning My Marijuana!

Every now and then, police come across something so strange they’re left scratching their heads.

One such incident occurred recently in the Northern Territory, when Humpty Doo police received a call from a young man enraged that his father had burned his cannabis plants.

Apparently, the son had been fighting with his father since he moved to Humpty Doo (about 40km south of Darwin) from interstate a short time ago.

According to police, the son was “indignant and enraged” and felt it was “wrong” of his father to have burnt the plants. Officers arrived at the scene and questioned the son about whether he knew possessing of cannabis is illegal, and he could be sent to court.

However, the son felt his father’s destruction of the plants was a far worse crime.

As all of the plants had been destroyed by the fire, police decided not to lay any charges over the incident. Nevertheless, the officers took to social media, publishing a full account of the story.

Northern Territory

In the Northern Territory, the possession of small amounts of cannabis is decriminalised – which means police can issue a fine rather than sending a person to court to be dealt with under the criminal law.

In 1996, the NT decriminalised the possession of up to 50 grams of marijuana, one gram of hashish oil, 10 grams of cannabis seed, and two non-hydroponic plants.

New South Wales

Cannabis has not been decriminalised in NSW, but a cannabis cautioning scheme has been in place since the year 2000, which allows police to issue a caution for possession of less than 15 grams of cannabis rather than sending a person to court.

This scheme was implemented in response to recommendations by the NSW Drug Summit in 2000.

A review of the scheme in 2011 found it been effective in reducing reoffending by diverting people away from the criminal justice system.

Cultivation – Growing Cannabis in NSW

Under section 23 of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act, it is illegal to grow cannabis plants in NSW.

Cultivating outdoors is sowing or scattering the seeds, planting, growing, tending, nurturing and harvesting the plant. Cultivating by indoor means it occurs within a building or structure. This may involve the nurture of the plant in nutrient-enriched water (with or without mechanical support), or the application of an artificial source of light or heat, or suspending the plant’s roots and spraying them with nutrient solution.
You don’t need to be the sole cultivator to be guilty of the offence.

Penalties for Cannabis Cultivation

The penalties depend on the amount – the greater the amount, the more serious the penalty could be.

Here is a table containing the applicable maximum penalties:
ttt

If you are charged with cannabis cultivation, it is a good idea to seek advice from a specialist criminal lawyer who is experienced in dealing with drug charges.

July 03, 2016 Drug Possession
0

The Dangers of Drug Use by Doctors

By Blake O’Connor and Ugur Nedim

A prominent Sydney dentist has been banned from practising after using the drug ice and formulating an elaborate scheme to avoid being drug tested.

Young Hoon Sun ran a successful dentistry and cosmetic surgery practice in the Sydney CBD, but began using ice after the tragic death of his brother in 2010. In order to avoid being tested, he fabricated airline tickets and sales receipts to make it appear he was on holidays at the time of the scheduled tests.

Sun admitted to the Tribunal that he was a habitual user of ice and that the tickets were to avoid testing, which has raised concerns that he was operating on clients under the influence of ice.

The NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal cancelled Sun’s right to practise in order to protect the general public.

This case is not the first and certainly not the worst example of doctors using illegal drugs.

Other Cases

An anaesthetist with a declared drug habit, Victorian doctor James Peters infected 56 women with Hepatitis C after injecting himself with prefilled syringes of the opioid fentanyl, which were intended for patients. After using a portion for himself, he then used the same syringes to deliver the rest of the fentanyl to patients.

Peters was subsequently convicted of several offences and sentenced to 14 years’ imprisonment. He had a long history of drug addiction whilst working at the Box Hill Hospital, which he declared to the medical board. However, he failed to declare his Hepatitis C status. The case prompted many to question why Peters was allowed to continue practising despite his declared drug habit.

A similar situation occurred in the United States, where a doctor infected 45 patients with Hepatitis C after injecting them with the same drug, fentanyl. Many of the patients developed lifelong complications – one having his leg amputated as a result of the virus. The doctor was deregistered, prosecuted and sentenced to 39 years in prison.

Drug Use Common Amongst Doctors

Two NSW studies raised concerns about drug use amongst medical practitioners, suggesting that:

  • the use of prescription drugs is more common amongst doctors than the general population, presumably due to the relative ease of access; and
  • 0.4% of the medical profession had ceased to prescribe Schedule eight drugs as the result of confirmed self-administration of opioids.

Statistics also suggest that Australian doctors have higher rates of mental illness, substance abuse, burnout and suicide than the general public, frequently caused by the high stress levels associated with medical practice.

Mandatory Drug Testing

Due to cases like that of Dr Peters, there have been calls to implement a uniform mandatory drug testing regime on all medical practitioners.

Currently in NSW, doctors can be tested by direction of the Medical Council of New South Wales if a condition has been imposed on their registration as a result of an inquiry or hearing, or the self-reporting of drug abuse.

If a positive drug test is returned, the Council can then take disciplinary action. However, many believe the current regime is inadequate and exposes members of the public to the dangers of being treated by drug-affected practitioners.

May 26, 2016 Drug Importation, Drug Possession
0

Experts Agree that the War on Ice is Lost, But Will Governments Shift Focus?

A Western Australian Judge has declared the State has lost its war on drugs, as suppliers are undeterred by heavy penalties and increased enforcement measures.

During a District Court sentencing hearing, Judge Philip McCann called the ‘ice epidemic’ “a national and international disgrace,” blaming the continuing flow of the drug on Chinese drug cartels.

He conceded that drug experts are correct to say it is impossible to stop supply into the State by “criminal gangs in Asia”, who he believes targeted the growing drug market created by the WA mining boom.

Drug Use in Western Australia

The 2013 national drug survey found that 3.8% of Western Australians aged over 13 had used methamphetamine during the previous year, significantly higher than the national average of 2.1%. The percentage using the crystalised version, or ice, rose from 43.9 to 78.2% between 2012 to 2013 – also well-above the rise in other jurisdictions.

The Judge added that WA Health Department data suggests the problem has worsened since the 2013 survey.

“We can no longer do anything to stop the predatory importing of the drug by Chinese criminal gangs and their Australian affiliates,” he said, suggesting that increased penalties and the targeting of offenders has done little to stem the problem.

“The damage now seems to have almost irreparably been done. The opportunities to do something about this were lost some years ago.”

State Response

Last year, the WA government established dedicated methamphetamine taskforces, conducting the biggest drug operation in the State’s history. Police Minister Liza Harvey said “Meth Transport Teams” were aiming to stop the flow of the drug from Asia.

The expensive initiative appears to achieved little, other than wasting taxpayer money and further demonising and alienating low-level users.

Government Initiatives

In last week’s State Budget, WA Treasurer Mike Nahan took the positive step of unveiling a $15 million boost to the Mental Health Commission, designed to target methamphetamine use. But at the same time, he set aside an additional $5.5 million for roadside drug testing.

Late last year, the Federal government committed to a $300 million strategy aimed at implementing recommendations by the National Ice Taskforce. Much of the money will be going to ‘primary health networks’ such as hospitals and medical centres, in order to treat users and assist them to overcome addiction.

And while Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has conceded that “we cannot arrest our way to success,” the Federal Government’s continues invest the lion’s share of resources into punitive measures rather than prevention and diversion.

Prevention is Better than a ‘Cure’

Justice Minister Michael Keenan has acknowledged that police are struggling to control supply, suggesting more should be done to educate and reduce demand. “If we are going to break the drug dealer’s model, we need to smash demand,” he said.

Reducing demand requires adequate funding to services which address the factors leading to addiction in the first place, including those which help improve socio-economic status and mental health. Spending on housing, employment support and mental health services has been shown by initiatives like justice reinvestment to decrease demand, reduce crime and enhance social cohesion and economic productivity.

The UN Office 2013 World Drug Report says that for every dollar spent on prevention, there is a benefit of four to seven dollars to the economy overall. Such investments can reduce healthcare and enforcement costs, while enhancing productivity.

Professor Nick Crofts of The Nossal Institute for Global Health was recently commissioned to report on the problem of methamphetamine use. “We interviewed something like 50 senior police, senior magistrates, senior politicians, senior public servants,” he said. “Every one of them, unanimously, said, ‘You are absolutely right and we totally agree with you, we need to move away from prohibition, we need more social policy, and you will never catch me saying that in public’.”

It is hoped State and Federal governments act upon that “unanimous” view, and move away from the current punitive model.

April 28, 2016 Drug Possession, Drug Supply
0

High Drug Prices Do Not Reduce Demand

The United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime has brought forward a special session on international policy, which will focus on a number of issues including the current worldwide debate about the decriminalisation of drugs.

Those who support prohibition typically argue that it reduces demand by sending a clear message that drug use is unacceptable and dangerous, while those against say it does more harm than good by creating an illegal black market for drugs (and all the associated problems), unnecessarily criminalises otherwise law-abiding individuals, exposes users to potentially-deadly fillers and fluctuating purity levels, and wastes tens or even hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars.

This blog focuses on the question of whether high prices caused by drug prohibition reduces demand.

Cost of Australian Drugs

The 2015 Global Drug Survey found that Australian users can expect to pay dramatically higher prices for drugs than those in the US and Europe. It found that Australians pay an average €18 for an ecstasy pill and €166 for a gram of MDMA. This is second only to New Zealand, and slightly more than double of price in the third most expensive country, Switzerland.

Australian cocaine users are paying up to four times as much as users in Britain- cocaine is about $300 a gram in Australia, and $75 a gram in England.

”It’s a luxury item here [in Australia]. People who’ve got lots of money use coke and if you’re on benefits and doing crime you do crystal [methamphetamine],” Survey coordinator, psychiatrist Adam Winstock said.

The Australian Crime Commission described the price paid by local users as “astronomical” compared with other countries.

“When the drug is purchased in China it costs around $100 per gram; by the time it gets to Perth it’s selling for about $650 a gram,” the head of the ACC Chris Dawson said.

The 2011 Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement similarly acknowledged the high price of drugs in Australia, noting the “extreme difference between Australian and international drug prices.”

Dr Adam Winstock says local prices are high because of the additional risk of importing drugs into Australia; a risk created by prohibition.

Quality of Australian Drugs

Drugs are also generally lower in purity in Australia, and can contain dangerous levels of deadly fillers.

In 2011, American street cocaine had an average purity of 52%, while the drug has an average purity of 19.85% in Australia.

The purity of ecstacy is also much higher in other parts of the world – pills in the UK have an average purity of 66.3% MDMA (the most common active ingredient), Danish pills have 59%, and Dutch pills have 77.5%. Meanwhile, the Australian government’s forensic facility, ChemCenter, says the average here is just 18.9%.

Prevalence of Drug Use

The 2014 United Nations World Drug Report says Australia is leading the globe in terms of recreational drug use.

Australia was found to be the world leader in ecstacy use per capita, the third highest user of methamphetamines and fourth highest user of cocaine.

Price Inelasticity

The concept of price elasticity relates to the influence of price on consumer demand.

Price elasticity is when consumers react negatively at the same rate as a price rise; for example, buy 10% less Adidas shoes when the brand’s prices rise by 10%.

The opposite principle, price inelasticity, is where consumers do not react to price changes at a corresponding rate. An example may be petrol, where a 10% price rise typically leads to a less-than 10% fall in consumption.

Surveys have found that drug use is characterised by price inelasticity; where price increases do not result in corresponding reductions in use, and that, by the same token, price falls do not cause an equivalent rise in use. This is said to be due to a range of factors, not the least of which is that habitual users will buy drugs regardless of price increases, and low prices are not normally a primary consideration for first time or recreational users.

Accordingly, it is argued that increases in prices caused by prohibition do not lead to a corresponding reduction in drug use.

Like many others, President of the Australian Drug Law Reform Foundation, Dr Alex Wodak, argues that changes in illicit drug use are fueled not by fluctuations in prices, but by growing socioeconomic inequality, mental health issues, low employment prospects and traumatic experiences.

He points out that prohibition and corresponding price increases do not decrease demand, as prohibitionists suggest, and we can only address high demand by seeing drug addiction as a public health issue and not a law enforcement issue; and focusing on providing resources to preventative and diversionary programs, rather than law enforcement bodies.

April 24, 2016 Drug Possession
0

What do pot smokers and the number 420 have in common?

The 20th of April has rolled around again (pardon the pun) this week, and pot supporters around the globe marked the (unofficial) International Marijuana Day in various ways, all of which included indulging in their favourite pastime.

The stalwarts say though, that if you want to do things properly, then you’re not only supposed to celebrate your love of weed on the 20th day of the 4th month, but that you’re supposed to so it at precisely 4.20pm.

Because it is still illegal to use marijuana for recreational enjoyment in many parts of the world, the origins of this weird celebration are hard to pin point.

But the Sydney Morning Herald reported this week that sources trace its beginnings to a high school in California in 1971. According to reports, a group of San Rafael High School students met every afternoon at 4.20pm to smoke cannabis by a statue of Louis Pasteur. Eventually, the story goes, the term ‘420’ became code-speak for teens talking about smoking weed in front of their parents or other disapproving ‘grown ups’.

A lot of people also believe that ‘Dead Heads’ (the name given to fans of hippy band the Grateful Dead) were instrumental in taking the concept of 420 to the world. Regardless of when, or how it began, the day is now celebrated around the globe.

Despite the day gaining a reasonable amount of media attention – especially on social media – there were no public rallies in Sydney, with marijuana reform advocates preferring to remain low-key.

In Melbourne however, almost 2000 people showed up at Flagstaff Gardens to get high, as reported by the Legalise Cannabis Support Crew Victoria Facebook page.

Police were present, but stayed in their cars, and there were no reported arrests.

420 in the US and Canada

In America, 420 draws huge attention and crowds, particularly in places where marijuana possession is illegal. As support for the legalisation of recreational marijuana use grows – with several states having it on the agenda this year – festivities are becoming more and more mainstream.

On April 20 this year in Canada, in an unprecedented move, the Canadian Health Minister said the Government intends to introduce legislation next year that would make the sale of marijuana legal. If this becomes a reality, Canada would become one of the largest Western countries to allow widespread use of the drug.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau pushed for full legalisation during his election campaign, and firmly believes in the regulation of marijuana – when it is sold, who it is sold to and when it is used – in much the same way that alcohol is regulated.

By drafting and enforcing appropriate legislation, the Canadian Government believes that it can keep the drug away from children and young people, stop major drug cartels from profiting, as well as take some pressure off the criminal justice system.

Medicinal Marijuana

In recent years, many countries have legalised marijuana for medical purposes, recognising the benefits of the drug as treatment for various conditions, including epilepsy and chronic pain. Actress Whoopi Goldberg recently launched a range of cannabis-based products designed to help women get through monthly menstrual cramps.

Medical marijuana is also used to treat muscle spasms caused by multiple sclerosis, nausea caused by chemotherapy, poor appetite and weight loss caused by illnesses such as HIV, nerve pain, some seizure disorders and Crohn’s Disease.

The Australian Government is following the lead international lead by working on a framework for legislation to cultivate and supply the drug for medicinal purposes.

Victoria recently became the first state to legalise medicinal cannabis, and Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce officially opened Australia’s first medicinal cannabis farm, in an undisclosed location near Tamworth in New South Wales.

However, with the exception of highly controlled circumstances, the cultivation, use and supply of marijuana remains illegal in Australia and the penalties can include a criminal record and even lengthy terms of imprisonment.

April 18, 2016 Drug Possession
0

Sydney’s ‘Free Cannabis’ Picnic a Huge Success

Organisers have dubbed the ‘Free Cannabis’ picnic held in Sydney last weekend a “huge success,” despite the heavy police and sniffer dog presence.

About 200 people turned up for the marijuana-legalisation protest, almost double the numbers from the previous rally. The group held joint rolling competitions, alongside stand-up comedy and speeches from pro-reform politicians and activists.

Free Cannabis NSW organiser, Chris Hindi, said the movement to “destigmatise” cannabis use was only going to keep growing with the cannabis picnics set to be a regular event held every couple of months.

“There are up to 2 million people in Australia who use cannabis regularly so we believe there is no reason to feel ashamed about it. We ask that everybody who has had enough of the ‘War on Drugs’ to come along and show their support”

“Everyone who came loved the atmosphere and had a great time with many saying not only will they be back but they will be bringing more friends along,” he said.

The group is part of broader movement that’s campaigning to see marijuana legalised across the country, for both recreation and medicinal purposes.

“I came here today because I suffer from chronic illness and marijuana has allowed me to get off all of the drugs I was taking,” one woman at the picnic said.

The protest ended at 4.20pm, with attendees lighting up joints and calling on the Government to legalise the drug. Despite the heavy police presence, which included several police from the NSW Riot Squad, no arrests were made.

This was the second picnic organised by the group, who already planning a third event for early June.

Campaign for Marijuana Reform Gathers Steam

This year has already seen two Australian Governments pass ground breaking marijuana reforms.

In February, the Federal Government announced that their amendments to the Narcotic Drugs Act, which allow for the cultivation of marijuana for medical research and people suffering from serious illness, had successfully become law.

This week has seen another breakthrough, with the Victoria becoming the first state to legalise the use of medicinal cannabis. The Victorian bill will give children with severe epilepsy access to medicinal marijuana as early as 2017.

In New South Wales, Premier Mike Baird recently announced plans for a third clinical trial into the effects of medicinal cannabis. The previous two trials have focused on the effects it has on terminally ill patients and children with severe epilepsy, while the upcoming one looks at its effectiveness in treating chemotherapy patients suffering from nausea. Campaigners hope that that the trials will pave the way for a broader medicinal cannabis program.

According to Dr Alex Wodak, president of the Australian Drug Law Reform Foundation, medicinal cannabis has a wide-range of applications and can be used to treat many other illnesses:

“Many prestigious scientific and medical organisations and reviews support medicinal cannabis… The conditions for which there is strongest evidence include: chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting; chronic non-cancer pain, especially due to nerve damage; wasting in advanced cancer and HIV infection; and muscle stiffness in multiple sclerosis.”

While this progress might be good news for some, it still means very little for those who hope to see the drug legalised for recreational use. While Governments around the world have begun fully decriminalising marijuana use, it seems unlikely that Australia will follow suit in the near future.

Recreational marijuana and New South Wales law

Under New South Wales law, cannabis is still a “prohibited drug.” This means that any activity involving cannabis is illegal – regardless of whether you’re possessing it, using it, growing it or supplying it.

In New South Wales, those caught with up to 15 grams of cannabis may, in certain circumstances, be given a ‘cannabis caution’. The first caution comes with information about the harm associated with marijuana use and a number to call for drug-related information. Any second caution requires compulsory attendance at drug counselling.

A person may be issued with up-to-two cautions before having to go to court, but at the end of the day there is no guarantee a police officer will decide to issue a ‘caution’ even if you meet the requirements.

If police decide to send you to court for cannabis possession, they must prove beyond reasonable doubt that you knew that you had the cannabis in your custody or that it was under your legal control.

That’s why the police will normally try to get you to talk, and admit to things they otherwise might not be able to prove.

In cases where more than one person has access to the cannabis – for example, where it is found in a shared house or in a car with several occupants – the prosecution must rule out, beyond reasonable doubt, the possibility that someone other you had possession.

If you’re caught with 300 grams or more, police may attempt to charge you for “deemed supply.” This means the law presumes the amount was large enough that you intended to supply it to others. If police can prove you possessed the required amount, you must then prove that the amount in your possession was not intended for supply.

April 15, 2016 Drug Possession
0

Victoria Legalises Medical Marijuana

Victoria has become the first State to legalise the use of medicinal cannabis, with the passing of the Access to Cannabis Bill 2015 on Tuesday.

The Bill will give children with severe epilepsy access to medicinal cannabis as early as 2017, with the State government establishing a strictly controlled cannabis cultivation trial.

Medicinal cannabis will initially be made available to patients who suffer severe epileptic seizures, muscle spasms resulting from multiple sclerosis, severe pain and nausea arising from cancer or HIV/AIDS, and chronic pain verified by two specialists.

Health Minister Jill Hennessy has welcomed the change, saying, “It’s absolutely heartbreaking to see families having to choose between breaking the law and watching their children suffer – and now … they won’t have to.”

The new law

The laws are a response to last year’s recommendations by Victorian Law Reform (VLR). They will be strictly regulated by an Office of Medicinal Cannabis, which will oversee the manufacture, supply and access to cannabis.

While the details of the scheme are yet to be finalised, the VLR recommended that only licenced cultivators and manufacturers would be permitted to produce the drug. Products would be sold at pharmacies under arrangements based on the methadone program.

Benefits of medicinal marijuana

The new legislation comes after the announcement of a small trial in February into the effects of synthetic cannabis on a group of Victorian children whose condition had not improved after trying three different anti-epilepsy drugs.

The Austin Hospital in Melbourne undertook the trial, providing a synthetic form of cannabis to children, without the psycho-active component THC, while monitoring their progress against a similarly suffering control group given a placebo.

Director of paediatrics, Professor Ingrid Scheffer, said that desperate parents had been illegally buying cannabis products for their suffering kids, or growing their own, with no way of knowing whether it was safe and effective. “There’s absolutely no checks and balances. We don’t know what they’re getting. We don’t know whether it has a lot of THC in it which could be damaging their child’s brain,” Professor Scheffer said.

NSW plans to trial medicinal cannabis by the end of this year. NSW Premier Mike Baird recently announced a clinical trial into the effects of medicinal cannabis on 330 chemotherapy patients suffering from nausea. The announcement was the third of its kind in the State, with previous trials focusing on terminally ill patients and children with severe epilepsy.

Similar to the Victorian trial, children with severe drug-resistant epilepsy in Queensland will also be treated with medicinal cannabis. “[It is] an opportunity to show medicinal cannabis can be a safe and effective addition to existing treatments,” Health Minister Cameron Dick said of the new treatment trials.

The science

Dr Alex Wodak, president of the Australian Drug Law Reform Foundation, says that a recent review of existing evidence has found 82 favourable and nine unfavourable controlled trials in respect of medicinal cannabis.

The therapeutic benefits relate to the way that the drug stimulates the pain relief endocannabinoid system. This system is different to the endorphin system that is affected by other pain relieving treatments, such as morphine type opiates or anti-inflammatory drugs. The endocannabinoid system can help reduce chronic and nerve-related pain.

The difficulty for medical cannabis, however, is that prohibition has presented an obstacle to research. While most available evidence is positive, the scientific community has not been able to sufficiently test the drug to determine its longer term effects.

Many patients have exhibited side-effects such as dizziness, fatigue, nausea and hallucinations. There are also concerns that it may increase the risks schizophrenia in young people.

The largest study ever undertaken on cannabis and epilepsy was presented at last year’s American Epilepsy Society’s annual meeting in Philadelphia. 313 children from 16 different epilepsy centres around the United States were given the cannabis compound cannabidiol. After a three-month period, 261 reported a fifty percent reduction in convulsive seizures.

Another study, published by the American Academy of Neurology, involved giving medicinal marijuana to 213 sufferers of epilepsy. Over the course of 12 weeks, there was a 54% decrease in the number of seizures – but around 10% of participants reported experiencing side-effects such as diarrhoea and drowsiness.

Emeritus Professor of Anaesthesia Laurence Mather, from the University of Sydney, believes that the side effects of cannabis alternatives are much worse. “People can die from morphine, they stop breathing; people can die from paracetamol because it buggers their livers, people can die from NSAIDS because it buggers their kidneys, but cannabis doesn’t do any of these things,” he said.

It is hoped that the Victorian reforms will see a reduction in the crippling symptoms of conditions such as epilepsy, especially in children.

April 07, 2016 Drug Possession
0

100 Demonstrators Smoke Weed Outside White House

Tourists were treated to an unusual sight outside the White House earlier this week. The manicured green lawns usually on display were replaced by different type of green altogether – as marijuana reform advocates inflated a 51-foot-long joint in front of the fence.

Protesting against President Obama’s apathy towards reclassifying cannabis from a Schedule 1 substance – a category it shares with heroin and LSD – the group then lit up joints which they smoked openly in front of the iconic building.

The Schedule 1 list is meant to be reserved for the ‘most dangerous drugs… with potentially severe psychological or physical dependence,’ and attracts the highest penalties for possession and supply. Despite state ballots repeatedly voting to decriminalise cannabis, roughly 5 million people have been arrested for marijuana-related offences since Obama took office.

Protesters argue that marijuana doesn’t belong on the list, and are campaigning to have it removed altogether or placed on a lower schedule. Adam Eidinger, the event’s organiser, accused Obama of hypocrisy, given his admission to formerly smoking pot.

“Obama — he smokes, maybe not now, but he did smoke,” Eidinger told the Washington Post. “So for him to oversee an enforcement regime that has arrested 5 million people for marijuana . . . I’m very motivated because I think it’s a discriminatory practice.”

In a sign that the tide is turning, police in the area decided not to arrest any of the protesters for taking part in the ‘smoke in’.

With a similar protest planned in Sydney this weekend, many are hoping the New South Wales Police will follow suit. But it is not looking likely…

Two Men Charged at Sydney Cannabis Picnic

In January this year, cannabis reform advocates held the first Free Cannabis NSW picnic in Sydney’s Victoria Park. Like the Washington protesters, the group hoped to highlight the harm caused by criminalisation – and the urgent need for reform.

As always, the NSW Police couldn’t help but overreact. For the 100 or so protesters gathered in the park, police deployed more than 30 officers, as well as sniffer dog teams at every nearby train station. Unlike their Washington counterparts, NSW Police arrested and charged two men with the possession of cannabis, after allegedly spotting them with half-smoked joints.

One of the men, Paul Lawrence, is fighting terminal cancer, and has visible tumors along his spine. He was charged for possessing less than a gram of cannabis.

Police issued the charges, despite their discretionary power to hand out a caution for the use or possession of small amounts of cannabis, and evidence of Mr Lawrence’s cancer.

“Only a sick state and a sick government and police force would arrest and charge an ill man like me,” Mr Lawrence said. “The prohibition of cannabis for both medicinal and recreational use does far more damage to society than someone like me having a quiet smoke with friends.”

Police Intimidation and the ‘War on Drugs’

This is not the first criticism of the tactics used by NSW Police to target cannabis in Sydney.

A recent viral clip, uploaded to the the Save New South Wales Facebook page, shows sniffer dog police harassing a man filming their operations in Central station.

“I travelled from Gosford to Central in Sydney where I was swapping form the country platforms down to the suburban platforms in order to catch a train to Circular Quay.” said the page’s administrator.

“What did I see in the way of New South Wales police resources? Ten uniformed officers plus a dog handler carrying out a sniffer dog operation!”

He then began filming the operation, which is perfectly legal to do, but this did not stop the officers from throwing their weight around.

After requesting to see his train ticket, an officer warns the man that filming of the operation could be viewed as suspicious “due to the current terrorism climate.” They then demand his name, and ask his purpose for being at the railway station. After he ‘respectfully declines’ to give that information, police ask whether he has health issues.

“It’s just public intimidation, the way all police states operate. Political dissent now gets you a prison sentence and cops with dogs patrol the streets to let the people know who runs things.” one Facebook user wrote in response.

Sniff Off at Central – 16 Mar 2016Posted by Save New South Wales on Saturday, 2 April 2016

The use of drug dogs in public spaces, and increasingly heavy handed police response to political rallies, has become symptomatic of a broader attack on civil liberties that’s taking place across the state. The gap between the response of the Washington Police to marijuana protesters, and the response we’ve seen from our own only serves to highlight that change.

April 03, 2016 Drug Possession
0

Sniffer Dog Operations: A Quick Look at the Facts and Figures

NSW police claim that drug detection dogs are a necessary part of law enforcement.

However, a number of comprehensive reports have found that sniffer dog operations are ineffective and can have dangerous consequences.

Studies have shown that far from deterring drug suppliers, the presence of sniffer dogs can lead to unnecessary harm and even death through risky behaviours like ‘loading up’ – where users consume all of their drugs at once, before or during events, to avoid detection.

Since drug detection operations commenced in early 2001, sniffer dogs have become a regular sight at train stations, music festivals, and public events, while invasive and humiliating procedures like strip-searches are becoming more common.

Loading Up

According to Will Tregoning, the Director of harm reduction group Unharm:

“One of the real concerns is that people preload – they take all their drugs before attending the event, and that can happen in one of two ways.”

“The first is pre-planned, and that is concerning in itself because it means if people have made that decision to use drugs, rather than spacing it out in a way that can enable them to see the effects of the first pill, for example, before they take the second, they are just taking the lot and hoping for the best.”

“But perhaps even more concerning is the panicked overdose,” Tregoning said, a practice which has only grown more commonplace at music festivals and public events.

Some of the world’s leading research institutes echo these findings, with the Chief Executive of drug research and advocacy organisation The Penington Institute, John Ryan, describing sniffer dogs as “a recipe for overdose”.

“Police crackdowns with dogs won’t dent drug usage … Sydney already has more accidental fatal drug overdoses than traffic accident deaths.”

Ineffectiveness

In June 2006, NSW Ombudsman Bruce Barbour released his eagerly awaited “Review of the Police Powers (Drug Detection Dogs) Act 2001”.

The Report examined 470 drug dog operations over two years, the majority occurring in greater Sydney.

Its findings were highly critical of the use of drug detection dogs.

The review found that prohibited drugs were located in only 26 per cent of the recorded positive indications by drug dogs.

And of the 10,211 positive indications made, there were only 19 successful prosecutions for drug supply – representing 0.19 per cent of those searched.

Barbour concluded that: “the use of drug detection dogs has proven to be an ineffective tool for detecting drug dealers”.

His findings were a significant blow to the primary justification for the use of sniffer dogs – which was to detect and prosecute those engaged in drug supply.

The rate of detection since 2006 has remained low – government figures obtained in parliament by Greens MP David Shoebridge show that only around one-third of positive indications lead to drugs being found:

2007
Searches after positive indications: 7,603
Drugs found: 2,435
Percentage: 32%

2008
Searches after positive indications: 10,562
Drugs found: 3,748
Percentage: 35%

2009
Searches after positive indications: 17,321
Drugs found: 5,109
Percentage: 29%

2010
Searches after positive indications: 15,779
Drugs found: 5,087
Percentage: 32%

2011
Searches after positive indications: 18,281
Drugs found: 5,031
Percentage: 28%

2012
Searches after positive indications: 16,184
Drugs found: 5,280
Percentage: 33%

2013
Searches after positive indications: 17,746
Drugs found: 6,415
Percentage: 36%

TOTAL: 2007 – 2013
Searches: 103,476
Drugs found: 33,105
Accuracy: 32%

Bearing in mind that under the law, drug detection dogs can only be used without a warrant in areas where there is a typically high concentration of drug use eg clubs, bars, dance parties, train stations etc – and given that police operations tend to focus on areas where the concentration is highest (eg music festivals and selected stations eg Redfern and Kings Cross) – the figure of less than one-third is alarmingly low.

One might even suggest that, at some venues such as music festivals, the overall rate of drug use might not be much lower than this figure; and that randomly subjecting one-in-three people to searches might produce similar results.

That argument is supported by studies into the ‘normalisation of drug use among young people’; one of which collected data from the ‘Big Day Out’ music festival over a 4 year period between 2006 and 2009, finding that more than half of the respondents surveyed used illicit drugs.

Police Response

Despite these findings, NSW police continue to strongly defend their powers to use sniffer dogs, claiming the use of sniffer dogs is an accurate and reliable method of detecting drugs.

‘”Any suggestion otherwise is incorrect,” said Inspector Chris Condon of the NSW Police dog unit.

‘”Drug-detection dogs are an important facet of the overall harm-minimisation strategy of the NSW Police Force. Drug-detection dogs are an extremely effective deterrent to persons transporting drugs for the purpose of supply.”

Like many others, the Ombudsman disagrees:

“Overwhelmingly, the use of drug detection dogs has led to public searches of individuals in which no drugs were found, or to the detection of (mostly young) adults in possession of very small amounts of cannabis for personal use.”

The Tide is Turning

Over the past few years, several MPs, medical practitioners and community leaders have called for a change in policy.

As reported in one of our blogs, NSW Greens MP Jenny Leong recently introduced a Bill to end the use of sniffer dogs in public places without warrant, arguing that the policy allows police to get away with large-scale harassment and intimidation.

“The most recent expansion of the drug dog program was to allow the dogs to operate on the entire Sydney train network. That expansion has been a clear policy failure, with 4,925 searches conducted between 1 January 2014 and 18 May 2015 of which 3,948—or more than 80 per cent—were false positives.”

“Any other police program that was getting it wrong 75 per cent to 80 per cent of the time would be shut down immediately, and that should be the case with the drug dog program,” Leong said.

This comes after another highly publicised overdose in November last year, when 25-year-old chemist Sylvia Choi died after taking ecstasy at the Stereosonic music festival.

However, the State government is unwavering in its support of sniffer dog operations. A spokesperson for Deputy Premier and Minister for Justice and Police Troy Grant, recently said:

“The use of drug detection dogs is an important tool in our efforts to combat dangerous, illicit drugs,”

“They are deployed not only to detect these drugs and prevent their use and distribution, but as a form of high visibility policing to deter drug activity which is illegal.”

It seems the government is loath to remove police powers in any context, regardless of the evidence.