global environment on cannabis/ marijuana, that the US or other developed nations have the moral authority to or, will act against the Caribbean if cannabis is liberalised. 11.16. Further, by its very existence as an economic / quasi-political regional bloc, CARICOM is an affirmation of the strength that can come in regional solidarity. There is need for CARICOM to have a strong, unified position if it is to lend a persuasive voice to the calls for much needed reform of the relevant Conventions. The long history and cultural significance of cannabis in the region makes CARICOM a potentially authoritative player in this process, but only if it proceeds as a powerful, unified, regional bloc of states. 11.17. The entry into the market of powerful, traditional allies like Canada, together with the several states in Latin American on the road to law reform, also presents a unique opportunity for alliances which can be influential in pressing for amendments to the Conventions.
12. LAW REFORM MODELS FOR CANNABIS - DESIGNING A REGULATORY APPROACH 12.1. Several routes to law reform exist if CARICOM decides to move away from the existing status quo of prohibition and criminalisation. Given that several countries have already engaged in law reform, either decriminalised or legalised regimes to regulate cannabis/ marijuana, CARICOM has the benefit of learning from the experiences of these changes.225 The main models are: (a) Legalisation for Medicinal Purposes Only; (b) De-criminalisation for Small Amounts for any Personal Purpose; (c) Liberal Legalisation Model; (d) Legalisation Model with Strict Regulatory Controls; and (e) a Hybrid Model with Strict Regulatory Controls. 12.2. In any of these directions, the several issues already covered in this Report will need to be examined. For example, as discussed previously, reports indicate that while, after the relaxation of prohibition, there is an initial increase in use (the experimenter effect), this levelled out afterward, so that the fear of liberalisation leading to untrammelled use is misplaced. This would be so for any relaxation in the law, whether decriminalisation or legalisation. 12.3. Whatever a model is called or labelled, there are certain elements that the Commission believes should be prioritised as minimum standards in the design of a more efficient, developmental model for reforming the laws on cannabis/ marijuana. These include strict prohibitions to prevent the youth accessing marijuana, to regulate driving and to de-incentivise recreational use through managed supply and marketing mechanisms. More details of regulatory approaches are referenced below. The merits and demerits of each model will be briefly examined.
(a) Legalisation for Medicinal Purposes Only
12.4. This approach decriminalises or legalises cannabis for medicinal purposes only. However, this is a narrow perspective which ignores the several parameters of the issue of cannabis reform, as highlighted in the Commission’s mandate. For example, legalisation or decriminalisation of Medical Marijuana will not address at all the needs and justice requirements of the many, many persons throughout the region who use cannabis for recreational, religious and other purposes, an imperative which the Commission found to be perhaps the most compelling objective for law reform. Such persons will continue to be criminalised, especially those in lower income and marginalised groups and the justice system will remain discriminatory and unjust. This approach would short-change Caribbean peoples. 12.5. Law reform for medicinal purposes only, will also ignore the economic issues at play. Would this mean only permission to import and use medical marijuana products, for example? If so, this approach would deny the thousands of small farmers, entrepreneurs and indigenous scientists and medical For a description of several models, see How to Regulate Cannabis, A Practical Guide, Transform Drug Policy Foundation, 2016, for a description of several models. However, labelling is not so important. 225
61