Can we discuss the ganja issue?

Wilberne Persaud, Financial Gleaner Columnist

Every so often we discuss policy with respect to marijuana production and use in Jamaica.

Recently, I came across a column I wrote in 1996 about the issue. At that time, Rastafari brethren had staged a demonstration aimed at convincing the authorities to decriminalise use and, by extension, the growing of ganja.

Their position at that time was based on religious observance. They were not making a claim for everyone - their advocacy did not cover the teenager experimenting for pleasure, nor tourist on the Negril strip.

I pointed out in that column that the "studies of ganja use in Jamaica with which I am familiar seem to indicate several features that should be considered in any policy. First, there is an ambiguity with which the society views ganja use. It is given to children in teas and used medicinally by many. Agricultural labourers use it and feel it enhances their ability to work. Entertainers and others use it more or less openly in the face of officers of the law. They are convinced it deepens their consciousness. Another segment of the society is of the view that it fosters indolence and criminal activity. Medical evidence suggests it impairs normal functioning and also has long-term negative health consequences. Yet, its use persists. Finally, it is clear that there is differential impact on individuals - some literally go mad, while others compose interesting music and seem to work more diligently."

Since that time, not much has changed in Jamaica. Ganja is still hawked at Coronation Market as the sellers carry around a pretty big wire ring with two-to-three-ounce packets of the stuff attached as they bellow, 'i-grade'!

They walk pass the police station with it. People buy it with impunity. So why is it even worthwhile to consider this issue?

Things have changed elsewhere in the world. The Dutch still have a rather liberal policy towards drug use - that is nothing new - but the Americans are also allowing ganja for personal and medicinal uses; and suppliers are mushrooming across districts in California, in particular. Mexico's president has even floated the sensible idea of considering whether the prohibition of these drugs is not the real root cause of the enormous crime and violence problems his country faces.

We have one hugely clear piece of evidence that prohibition is a foolhardy approach: the United States (US) prohibition of alcohol use which spawned organised crime operations and, yes, previously unknown levels of criminal violence, while never actually curtailing use of the substance.

It is the same thing with the substances we now deem to be illegal. Illegality does not seem to be reducing demand, but rather making supply - production and distribution - extraordinarily profitable..

Prohibition and definition of ganja cultivation and use as crimes have not, so far, eradicated it in Jamaica. The issue is really simple: should ganja remain illegal, the feature which maintains its high level of profitability, or should it be made legal while education as to its consequences is enhanced and treatment of disorders improved?

While there is a view that ganja use leads progressively to hard drugs - cocaine and the like - it appears that this is the track upon which the world is running. Once upon a time, it was thought Jamaica had some special features that made the local product unique. Is this still true? Was it ever true? Have the plant geneticists in the US found the formula? Will the giant tobacco companies launch their products as soon as the legalisation train pulls out? And would we have lost the opportunity to have a special brand or blend for which we could have something like the French 'Appelation d'origine contr ll`e' of Bordeaux?

An interesting statistic: earth's inhabitants spend more on illegal drugs than they spend on food, clothes and education. Perhaps our minister of agriculture might consider these issues.

wilbe65@yahoo.com