The week before States Members gathered to vote on a proposal by Reform’s Deputy Tom Coles which would have decriminalised the possession and recreational use of cannabis in the island, the Council wrote to Deputy Tom Binet.
Released yesterday for the first time following a request under the Freedom of Information Law, the letter explained that the group – including senior officials from the Law Officers department, the Chief Pharmacist, Head of Customs, Accident and Emergency Consultant, Alcohol and Drugs Service representative, Interim Official Analyst and a senior Public Health policy officer – had met on 13 June to discuss the proposition.
While the group “did not have a strong opinion” on the “merits or otherwise of decriminalisation”, it did feel that there were “potentially far-reaching consequences that need to be considered more carefully” and recommended that “further discussion” takes place.
“Concern” over medicinal cannabis
The experts said they were already “aware that the introduction of medicinal cannabis has brought about some concern about how this has been implemented and regulated” and as such stated that it “would be unfortunate if further drugs legislation resulted in unintended consequences that compromised the Drugs Strategy’s intention to reduce harm”.
Among their specific warnings were that, “if we decriminalise simple possession we will create in all likelihood a growing demand for cannabis which will need to be met through supply”.
The concepts of “decriminalisation” and “recreational use” would need to be better defined, the group opined, and further thought would also need to be given to making changes to other laws to avoid inconsistency or unintended consequences.
“Confusion… likely to be counterproductive”
“If we do not decriminalise cultivation and trafficking then the decriminalisation of simple possession would see the States legislating in a way which is likely to encourage and expand criminal activity in the realm of cultivation and supply – in other words by decriminalising one aspect of the equation there is the obvious risk that we increase criminality in other aspects. There is also a risk that some may regard the decriminalisation of possession as also decriminalising importation and supply. This type of confusion is likely to be counterproductive,” they wrote.
The Council also noted that, “if we do not decriminalise supply itself then a person who buys cannabis from another will commit the offence of procuring an act of supply – thus the act of possessing would not be criminal but the act of obtaining from the dealer would continue to be criminal”.
“Human rights challenges” may also arise from decriminalising behaviour by adults while failing to do so for children, the Council commented.
“Important” Jersey consults with neighbours
The consequences of adopting the proposition would likely have consequences that extend beyond the island too, the expert group advised. It was therefore “important that Jersey first engages in consultation with our neighbours”, they said.
For instance, the Council stated that criminals in other jurisdictions “will wish to take advantage of Jersey’s supply needs and where, in those jurisdictions, exporting cannabis is a criminal offence – under English and Guernsey law, (as under Jersey law), exporting cannabis is a criminal offence”. “It may also be under French law too,” they added.
They equally warned of risks to the island’s “constitutional relationship” with the UK, which is a signatory of the UN Convention on Narcotic Drugs 1961 – which has been extended to Jersey.
Pictured: The Council explained that there may be implications for the island’s constitutional relationship.
In addition, the Council pointed out that “the customs arrangement that Jersey has with the UK requires Jersey to align our customs legislation and practices in a number of respects with the UK”.
“While it ensures tariff free access for Jersey’s goods to the UK market, the UK is entitled to maintain import and export licensing controls, and prohibitions and restrictions on imports from Jersey to the extent these could be justified under the WTO’s General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade,” they explained.
Matter to return to States Assembly
The vote on Deputy Coles’ proposition– and various amendments to it by States Members – took place on 26 June.
While the main element of the proposal – to decriminalise possession and recreational use of cannabis – was rejected by just one vote, States Members voted in favour of two other sections which will see the matter come to the table once more next year.
Pictured: Deputy Tom Coles’ proposal to decriminalise lost by just one vote.
With 26 votes for, 19 against and just one abstention, politicians agreed that Ministers should bring forward cannabis legislation for debate by November 2025, and that funding for a legislative framework should be incorporated into the next Government budget.
SUPPORT…
Islanders can contact the Alcohol and Drugs Service on 445000 for advice and support on cannabis use.
READ MORE…
Cannabis decriminalisation rejected by one vote
Warnings against young people self-medicating with cannabis
FOCUS: Cannabis regulation, decriminalisation, or legalisation?
Bid to change law which brands some cannabis products as Class A
Could Jersey be next to decriminalise cannabis?
Work underway to develop laws for cannabis clinic regulation
IN NUMBERS: Jersey’s medicinal cannabis usage
Medicinal cannabis clampdown looms after Jersey audit sparks “significant concern”