The UN, for the time being, maintains the status of cannabis and, therefore, the limitations that affect, for example, the research of the product. At the last session in Vienna (Austria), the Commission for Narcotic Drugs did not follow the new approach of the World Health Organization (WHO), which recommended changing the plant's review and reducing the control that countries submit. The final vote is expected for the next December or March 2020.
The WHO recommended last January that the UN remove cannabis, the most consumed drugs in the world, from List IV of the Prohibited Substances of the 1961 Drug Convention. List IV is the most restrictive and in it they consider that the plants have great dependence and that, according to the United Nations, they have no medical value. For example, this list is heroin. To appear in this ratio of plants, research is very difficult and continues to advance in the properties of the plant, according to scientists.
The World Health Organization based its recommendation on the first cannabis report made in 1949. "The committee recommended reducing the control of cannabis and related compounds to ensure that patients who need it can access proven therapies," he explained at that time Daniela Bagoti, a spokeswoman for the WHO, to Efe. "The lower control will allow more scientific research on the possible medical use of the substance, and at the same time the new level of control would be recommended to provide sufficient restrictions for protection against the harm of consumption," he added.
"It was very important that the subject in charge of detecting danger or non-narcotics made that recommendation, but it was a great disappointment that the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs does not have the required viewing height," complained Bernardo Soriano, a lawyer at SF Agogados and spokesman for the legalization platform for responsible regulation.
Constanca Sánchez, Doctor of Law and Director of Laws, Policies and Human Rights at the ICEERS Foundation in favor of legalization, points out that this WHO report is the first one that the organization has made for cannabis from its existence, including a ban.
"Cannabis has been included in the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961, where the factory was examined, without any scientific report or review of scientific evidence that motivated inclusion. In 2018, it is first considered by the WHO. suggests that drug policy decisions are usually not evidence-based, they are more political than scientific decisions, "he explains.
Sources at a meeting in Vienna say the commission, composed of 53 countries, decided to postpone the vote partly because the WHO report arrived a little later than expected, and some countries needed more time to think about the issue. However, despite the fact that it was voted unanimously, the positions differ.
Among the countries that are most responsible are Russia, they believe that there is a very fierce anti-drug policy and that the WHO report is described as "debatable" and based on "weak" evidence, Efe reported. Also, Japan or the United States, where the paradox appears that ten states legalize their spending, but the federal government is returning in another direction. By contrast, Mexico and Uruguay are the most favorable. The North American country has indicated that this decision affects millions of people and complains that it "loses opportunity." Spain opted for a low profile and did not intervene.
The recommendation of the WHO is filled with optimism by those who defend the legalization of cannabis. After that, the UN was expected to follow the recommendations of its sanitary branch. The theory gained strength when countries such as the United States (several states, at least), Canada, Israel or Germany were considered to have partially or completely legalized cannabis.
Removing cannabis from list IV would mean that the UN gave permission to countries to regulate at least the medical use of the plant. It is not that the UN has the capacity to force states not to do so (there are cases mentioned above), but their position can be used to defend non-implementation.
This is the case of Spain, for example. The Spanish Agency for Drugs and Health Products (AEMPS) responded to a request for information by the deputy Francisco Igea, Citizens, during the last term: "Globally, the therapeutic efficacy and safety of cannabis treatments are studied in and there is still no decision in relation with this "and referred to the conclusion reached by the WHO regarding cannabis in January last year. The WHO has already made a statement, the UN has postponed it and it will be necessary to see which force of forces stems from 28-A to see how a consistent government will come.
Sanchez, who was in Vienna during the Convention, explains that making decisions in this body is a consensus: "This implies that countries that have the death penalty for drug-related crimes must agree with others who legalize cannabis, and the lowest common denominator is usually approved. "
This need for unanimity joins other major criticisms that this expert submits to the Commission. "The profile of the officials who make up [que cada país manda] Traditionally, people are related to justice and law enforcement, but there is very little in the health and social affairs sector: therefore, the Commission is a much more conservative drug-related body than other UN agencies. "And it seized the opportunity to seek The Spanish delegation, which basically corresponds to this profile, in some way involves members of the civil society, as do the other countries.
F / Eldiario.es
F / EFE