The global community of drug policy reformers can breathe a small sigh of relief this week after it was revealed that the enactment of the world’s most absurdly expansive drug law has been delayed. The United Kingdom’s Psychoactive Substances Act of 2016, which would effectively ban any drug that changes someone’s mood or behavior, may not be postponed indefinitely – as some media reports are suggesting – for the time being, common sense seems to have prevailed.
Despite alarm bells ringing from scientists, medical experts, government officials and law enforcement agencies across the entire political spectrum ever since the bill was first introduced by the UK Parliament’s Home Office, it sailed through the legislature without much debate. Chief among the various reasons for concern are the overreaching language in the law meant to define the drugs to be banned as “any substance capable of producing a psychoactive effect in a person who consumes it…by stimulating or depressing the person’s central nervous system…if the person causes or allows the substance, or fumes given off by the substance, to enter the person’s body in any way.”
Even a conservative interpretation of that definition led many to balk at the prospect of losing their right to take a quick smoke break, or blow off steam on nights and weekends with a cold beer, or even a morning cup of coffee! Though the law does contain a clause for “legal exemptions” for substances like alcohol, nicotine and caffeine, confusion remained. Following months of public opposition, including the decries from an advocacy group that led to the exclusion of amyl nitrates (aka ‘poppers’) from the Act, the official word of the delay came in the form of a letter to a headshop owner.
Despite what may ultimately end as a short-lived victory to reason, a number of questions remain regarding both the absurdity of the law, which has been deemed unenforceable by police, and what alternatives are needed to reflect its intended purpose in the first place.
The problem presented by the emergence of new psychoactive drugs have been poking holes in the prohibitionist approach to drug enforcement for over a decade. While unrelenting drug warriors in the UK scrambled for what they felt was the best way to respond to the seemingly endless emergence of newer and riskier substances never seen before, a silver lining emerged that reflected a change in the tone of enforcement – shifting away from the criminalization for simple possession of small amounts of banned substances.
On the one hand the UK law seems to be straight out of a George Orwell nightmare, but apart from the most far-reaching language there is also recognition of the need to shift away from simply handing low-level offenders a criminal record. Tremendous success has been seen elsewhere in Europe as countries like Portugal adopt policies that decriminalize drugs.
Even in the United States, long the global trendsetter for the war on drugs, not only has political rhetoric begun to echo the futility of attempting to incarcerate away recreational use of banned substances, but states like Maryland and Hawaii are considering decriminalizing possession of all drugs, and the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected challenges to Colorado’s legalization of marijuana.
Perhaps taking the philosophical view of the night always being darkest before the dawn; a signal that the recognition over the problems faced by the UK in enacting the Psychoactive Substances Act may very well be a glaring opportunity for a new, progressive day to arise.
Kevin Franciotti is a Program Associate at the Drug Policy Alliance.
Author: Kevin Franciotti
Date Published: April 1, 2016
Published by Drug Policy Alliance