- Introduction -

Cannabis is the drug most used, it is the drug of choice for young people and it may serve as an introduction into the world of illicit drugs and problematic drug use.

Cannabis is less harmful than alcohol, tobacco or heroin. The three latter substances produce a significant higher burden of disease (mortality and morbidity). But Cannabis is far from harmless. It is harmful to health and social relations, and it can lead to other drugs.

There is evidence that cannabis may cause respiratory problem, lung damage, cancer. There is ample evidence showing marijuana’s effects on alertness and motor skills (see our section on drugged driving). There is an established link between marijuana and mental illness, including psychosis and schizophrenia. Not least, a significant proportion of those trying cannabis will experience depence. Dependence may occur as frequently as for alcohol amongst those who try it. It is commonly understood that cannabis dependence is not as serious as let's say for cocain, but evidence is accumulating showing that cannabis depence is more harmful than previously thought.

Not least, cannabis may have harmful impacts on human relations, it severs attention, concentration and development of in particular vulnerable young people. Young people, in particular those with existing social problems relating to school, family, work and friends and feeling lost in their search for identity, recognition and self esteem are particularly at risk.

The gateway theory does identify important aspects of this, namely the association between cannabis use and the inception of later drug use. There is no simple causality. There is however an undisputed correlation between marijuana and other drugs.

The majority of those who try cannabis will do that only a few times in their lives without moving on to harder drugs. The essence of the gateway theory is however that it helps us understand that drugs, drug use and the drug policy put in place to respond to it cannot be seen in isolated compartments but as a whole.

The prohibition of cannabis is there not only protecting young people in their biological, psychological and social development but it is an effective break on the development of the wider drug problem in society.

Finally, cannabis is controversial because there are groups that promote its legalization. The Netherlands has de facto legalized cannabis and this cause a continuous concern in Europe. It is however a misunderstanding to think that cannabis is legal in the Netherlands. And there are ongoing critical debates that question the Dutch policy from both within the European Union as well as in the Netherlands itself. These concerns have over the past years caused authorities to close a number of coffee shops and to introduce more restrictions such as age limits.

Many has called for the decriminalisation of cannabis. This debate is notoriously misleading. First, decriminalisation is a process of reducing or removing the application of penal sanctions. It does not imply legalisation and it does not mean an end to sanctions. And it does not imply an end to zero tolerance. Decriminalisation as such addresses only what type of sanction is applied and not whether one is apprehended by police or not, and not what sort of response is put in place.

The essential objective of prohibition is in the view of EURAD the support it gives to prevention and interventions. The legal basis is essential to make this happen. There must be credible sanctions attached, but equally important is the broader follow up of people that are caught with possession or use. Sanctions either adminsitrative or penal sanctions must be tailored to the aim of prevention and adequate help. There are several options within the penal code that should be explored in more detail, in particular conditional suspended sentences for use and possession. These programmes need to have an attractive carrot and a credible stick and bring together relevant parties to help and supervise.

To start the debate by discussing decriminalisation first is getting off on the wrong track. The question is, how do we respond in a comprehensive manner towards people with possession and use of drugs. The debate also tends to exagerate the indescriminate nature of law enforcement. In fact most people taken in for posession and use are not the average experimenting cannabis user. The majority of people apprehended by the policy for possession or use are already in an high risk situation/environment either being socially marginalised, being involved in criminal activities and with criminal friends, being in a problematic drug mileu, being involved in disturbing public order, domestic violence, vandalism, accidents etc. The legal basis provides an opportunity to intervene, help and protect.

The pages on cannabis are divided in three: the harm, the supply and policy.