7. Recommendations

7. Recommendations

The Commission addresses only the issue of cannabis in this report. No new recommendations are made as to any action to be taken in relation to the other illegal drugs in the event of an amendment of the Swiss Narcotics Act; please refer to the reports issued by the previous Commission 1 , mentioned in Chapter 1 above (Aspects of Drug Policy, 1989; Drug Policy Scenarios, 1996), and to the report of the Experts Commission on the Amendment of the Swiss Narcotics Act (Schild Report, 1996). Against the background of the notable enhancement of the public profile of cannabis in the 1990s and the resulting change in the perception of the issue among broad sections of the community and also in view of the lesser risks posed by cannabis compared to other illegal drugs, the Commission is in favor of giving cannabis separate status from the drugs which are currently illegal. The intention is not to discount the potential dangers of consumption of cannabis products but rather to find ways of regulating such consumption appropriately. The legal status of cannabis should be aligned more closely with that of the legal psychoactive substances such as alcohol rather than that of the so- called hard drugs such as heroin and cocaine. The Commission is conscious of the fact that under the terms of the international conventions there is very limited scope for amending the drugs legislation in the direction of legalization. But it is not the function of an expert commission to assess the political importance of such agreements and to take into consideration only those models which are compatible with obligations under international law. The solution unanimously favored by the Commission is not compatible with the Single Convention of 1961. Since this may prove politically unacceptable, the Commission is also proposing a second choice model, which has the advantage of being capable of implementation within the ambit of the international conventions.

7. 1 Legal availability of cannabis

Following detailed consideration of the different options, the Federal Commission unanimously recommends the elaboration of a model which not only removes the prohibition of consumption and possession but also makes it possible for cannabis to be purchased lawfully. The model should not be one of free availability but instead should include clear provisions for the protection of the young and the prevention of all the potential adverse consequences of legalization.

Regulation should be tight enough to ensure that the public health objectives of the cannabis policy are attained. But it should be kept within appropriate bounds in order to guard against the possibility of a black market continuing to exist due to over- regulation. In terms of specific forms of regulation, on the supply side, supplier qualifications, distribution and product requirements, an advertising ban and, if thought fit, a minimum price could all be imposed. On the user side, an age limit would have to be introduced (making it illegal to sell to those under the age of 18). Furthermore, it would be necessary to impose a requirement of proof of residence in order to avert a 'drugs tourism’ phenomenon. For self- supply purposes, it should be lawful to grow a specified number of plants. Commercial production should be closely regulated. To avoid sending out the wrong signals (giving the impression that cannabis is harmless by making it legally available) a range of accompanying measures would be necessary. First and foremost, the prevention effort would need to be stepped up, including an effective information program on the risks of cannabis consumption and the provision of advisory facilities for high- risk or problem users. A model of this nature is not compatible with the Single Convention of 1961. The Commission nevertheless believes that a licensing model of the kind outlined above is objectively the best option, as it would create a clear and enforceable system for the handling of cannabis. The Commission is of the opinion that the implementation of such a model would greatly enhance the credibility of the state’s policy on drugs and, in addition, would mean that cannabis consumption could be taxed in the same way as consumption of other luxury goods. The Commission believes that a measure restricted to the decriminalization of consumption, possession and preparatory activities would not go far enough, as it would not address the issue of retail dealing, without which users cannot obtain supplies. The model described would entail Switzerland renouncing the Single Convention of 1961.

7.2 Limited decriminalization within the ambit of the Single Convention of 1961

In the event that the legalization model proposed above should prove to be politically impracticable, the Commission proposes an alternative amendment of the Swiss Narcotics Act, which can be implemented within the constraints of existing international obligations. This would comprise:
The repeal of the substantive offences of consumption and preparatory activities for personal consumption;
The introduction of an expediency principle in relation to dealing, by means of the creation of a statutory basis in the Swiss Narcotics Act and the enactment of the relevant criminal justice provisions by way of an implementing ordinance.

The statutory basis referred to would have to contain all the necessary provisions to enable the authorities (including the police) to desist from the investigation and prosecution of criminal offences. The Federal Council ordinance would thus merely perform the function of filling in the details of implementation. The same statutory basis would also offer the possibility of extending procedural decriminalization, on a clear legal basis, to the cultivation, purchase, storage, possession, etc., of fairly sizeable quantities – activities which are antecedent to the small- scale retailing which would be tolerated under such a system (for details see section 4.2.5 above).

As the example of the Netherlands illustrates, decriminalization by way of a discretionary approach of this kind would not put Switzerland in breach of its obligations under the Single Convention of 1961. On the other hand, a reservation would have to be made upon ratification of the Vienna Convention of 1988.

7.3 Medicinal use of cannabis

In the light of the international specialist medical literature on the subject, the Commission believes that a statutory basis should be established for controlled research projects to be permitted in relation to the therapeutic use of cannabis in Switzerland. The details of such legislation would have to be drawn up by a group of medical experts. Cooperation should be sought with other countries in which similar measures are proposed or are already being implemented. If they are scientifically proven to be effective for therapeutic purposes, cannabis and cannabinoids should be authorized as medicines.