Skip to main content

Cannabis: possession of cannabis for treatment purposes – petition (P.128/2014) – comments

The official version of this document can be found via the PDF button.

The below content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost, therefore it should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments.

STATES OF JERSEY

CANNABIS: POSSESSION OF CANNABIS FOR TREATMENT PURPOSES – PETITION (P.128/2014) – COMMENTS

Presented to the States on 8th September 2014 by the Minister for Health and Social Services

STATES GREFFE

2014   Price code: A  P.128 Com.

COMMENTS

The supply and use of cannabis for the treatment of certain conditions has been a controversial and sensitive issue for some considerable time, both in Jersey and the UK, as well as further afield.

Nevertheless, this petition is not about the rights and wrongs of cannabis use or whether it should be legalised in Jersey. That is a different debate.

This petition specifically relates to the issuing of a special licence to an individual allowing  for  the  possession  and  use  of  cannabis,  in  its  raw  form,  for  medicinal purposes.

Background

Discretionary powers vested in the Minister for Health and Social Services grant the authority to issue a licence for the possession of cannabis for "research or other special purposes".

Jersey legislation is identical to that of UK legislation in this matter. While there is no legal  definition  of  "special  purpose",  the  longstanding  interpretation  of  "special purpose" in the UK has been confined to industrial hemp production.

It is unlikely that "special purpose" was ever intended to cover medicinal use, as any substance which is acknowledged as having recognised medicinal benefit would be classified differently under misuse of drugs legislation. As such, any requirement for such a licence would be negated.

The broader and more fundamental question, therefore, is whether or not cannabis should be classified in the same way as, for example, morphine, to allow for medicinal use.

However, the classification of cannabis for medicinal use is not the issue in question in this proposition, nor the appropriate subject of this debate.

Nevertheless, I have sought advice on the medicinal use of cannabis, as well as an opinion  on  the  definition  of  "special  purpose"  in  the  context  of  licensing  the possession of cannabis, from the Misuse of Drugs Advisory Council, and this is expected later in the year.

Issues

The petitioner in this case is not a clinician, but a patient, supported by a States Member, who is seeking the granting of an individual licence for possession of raw cannabis, a drug that is illegal, unlicensed, uncontrolled and unsupervised through any clinical oversight.

Even were it not an illegal drug, the decision on its appropriateness for prescription for an individual would have to rest with professional medical experts, and not politicians.

Unless  advice  received  from  the  Misuse  of  Drugs  Advisory  Council  differs considerably from this position, no licence application for the importation, possession and/or use of cannabis in its raw form would be granted, even in circumstances where

Page - 2

P.128/2014 Com.

"special purpose" was defined in a way that would allow the Minister for Health and Social Services to do so.

Summary

Cannabis is an illegal drug and, without the ability to effectively control its use, purity or dosage, the importation and use of cannabis, in its raw form, could never be endorsed.

Certainly, without an opportunity to receive and consider fully, advice on this matter from the Misuse of Drugs Advisory Council, it would be wholly irresponsible to take a decision on the issuing of any licences for the importation, possession and/or use of an illegal substance.

I could not support a proposition to issue a special licence to an individual for the possession  of  illegal  cannabis  in  its  raw  form,  where  neither  the  quality  nor composition of the product, its safety, dosage or levels of individual use could be effectively  monitored,  and  I  would  urge  members  to  vote  firmly  against  this proposition.

Page - 3

P.128/2014 Com.