Regime change: Re-visiting the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs

Bewley-Taylor, David; Jelsma, Martin

doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2011.08.003

Cited by 55 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In doing so it represented a significant shift away from drug regulation towards a more prohibitive approach (Bewley- Taylor and Jelsma, 2012) (Rolles and Kushlick, 2014), however, such strategies risk strengthening rather than challenging the fundamental flawed principles on which prohibition is built. We a gue these reforms fail to address the drug apartheid and instead perpetuate the arbitrary distinctions o e i g d ugs that privilege some substances as legal while prohibiting others.…”

Section: A Changing Landscape?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Prohibition, privilege and the drug apartheid: The failure of drug policy reform to address the underlying fallacies of drug prohibition

Taylor

Buchanan

Ayres

2016

Criminology & Criminal Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prohibition, Privilege and the Drug Apartheid: The failure of drug policy reform to address the underlying fallacies of drug prohibition http://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/3118/ Article LJMU has developed LJMU Research Online for users to access the research output of the University more effectively. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LJMU Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain.The version presented here may differ from the published version or from the version of the record. Please see the repository URL above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription. change. This paper, however, argues that such reforms adhere to the same arbitrary notions, moral dogma and fallacious evidence base as their predecessor. As such they represent the eta o phosis of p ohi itio , whereby the structure of drug policy changes, yet the underpinning principles remain unchanged. Consequentially, these reforms should ot e o side ed p og essi e as they risk further consolidating the underlying inconsistencies and contradictions that have formed the basis of drug prohibition.

show abstract

Section: A Changing Landscape?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Prohibition, privilege and the drug apartheid: The failure of drug policy reform to address the underlying fallacies of drug prohibition

Taylor

Buchanan

Ayres

2016

Criminology & Criminal Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The world is now saddled with drug treaties which are not fit for purpose [37]. While the system dates its origin from 1912, in their present form, dating from 1961 to 1988 [38], the treaties are over-reaching artefacts of the Cold War era, when one of the few issues on which the parties could agree was that drugs were suitable enemies for the modern state (to quote Christie & Bruun's analysis) [39].…”

Section: What Should Be Done About the Treaties?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Legalizing a market for cannabis for pleasure: Colorado, Washington, Uruguay and beyond

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Colorado, Washington state and Uruguay are currently designing legal non-medical markets for cannabis. These clearly contravene the 1961 and 1988 drug conventions; options for what may happen next are discussed. The current provisions in the three regulatory schemes are summarized. From a public health perspective, the emphasis should be on holding down consumption with regulatory measures, but the public health agenda does not seem to be a strong consideration in the implementation of the US schemes, and they are paying little attention to what can be learned from the history of alcohol and tobacco regulation. While alternative paths to a cannabis market under the conventions are noted, the legalization initiatives underline the need to revise the drug conventions, making prohibition of domestic markets an optional matter. Such changes would also ease the path for including alcohol under the conventions, which would be an important step forward in global health.

show abstract

“…One can justify non-criminalization by saying that, according to their domestic law system, prosecuting for drug possession for personal use is not within the interest of society, or that controlling what people consume or possess in their private homes would be a violation of the right to privacy, or that selfdestructive behavior may not be subject to punishment (Bewley-Taylor and Jelsma 2012). One can justify non-criminalization by saying that, according to their domestic law system, prosecuting for drug possession for personal use is not within the interest of society, or that controlling what people consume or possess in their private homes would be a violation of the right to privacy, or that selfdestructive behavior may not be subject to punishment (Bewley-Taylor and Jelsma 2012).…”

Section: Human Rights and General Treaties Obligations Regarding Drugmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prohibition, Religious Freedom, and Human Rights: Regulating Traditional Drug Use

Labate¹,

Cavnar²

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Regime change: Re-visiting the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs

Cited by 55 publications

References 7 publications

Prohibition, privilege and the drug apartheid: The failure of drug policy reform to address the underlying fallacies of drug prohibition

Prohibition, privilege and the drug apartheid: The failure of drug policy reform to address the underlying fallacies of drug prohibition

Legalizing a market for cannabis for pleasure: Colorado, Washington, Uruguay and beyond

Prohibition, Religious Freedom, and Human Rights: Regulating Traditional Drug Use

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About