In late August 2014 the National Drug Council purportedly began a series of public consultations on the question, I understand, of "marijuana." The first was reportedly held on August 25 in Port-of-Spain and was described as a "marijuana consultation" in the newspapers.What exactly was it meant to achieve? I have been unable to find out what the terms of reference for these events even after consulting the NDC Web site and calling the number(s) on at least five occasions.
More "consultations" were reported to have taken place in San Fernando and Sangre Grande, but with no public notice in the media of venue, time and date how could these have been reasonably been described as consultations?
In fact, after just two events the trail ends abruptly and we find no more media reporting on these chimerical events. The two or three newspaper reports I've been able to find about this all claimed poor attendance at these events. Whether this reflected lack of will or plain incompetence, one can only speculate.
One need only compare how the Ganja Commission of Jamaica was established (back in 1999) and conducted with clear guidelines from the senate and a timeline of nine months in which to report its findings. Everyone in the Caribbean knew of this and and its well known chairman, the late Prof Barry Chevannes.By contrast, we have an NDC with an imperative to complete data-gathering by the end of September (according to the newspaper report). In other words, barely one month!
If this is the case it could be described as consultation on the run and on the sly! What was expected to be generated out of this poorly conducted exercise? Effectively, this was a grand hoax of a consultation and one can only surmise its intent was not to open a dialogue with the public but for consultants to satisfy the criterion of having held such an event (or two).
The NDC failed on a number of grounds to make this a genuine consulation involving a wide cross-section of the public (assume this was within its remit and intention). Was there a real attempt to generate stakeholder awareness of impending consultations, ie, did the NDC advertise at all?
Was there notice of venues, dates and time? What were the terms of reference? What were the guiding issues to stimulate stakeholder thinking and inputs? What is curious in all this is that the National Drug Policy 2014-2018 has already been released.
The new drug policy of course continues to define "drugs" as the problem without looking at the contribution of the law-policing-prison nexus to constituting and reproducing the problem.So would these purported consultations-on-the run have offered any fundamental challenge or modification to a newly minted policy position? Would ideas which identify the law-policing-prison nexus as the source of the drug problem ever topple the drugs-as-security thrust?
In the context of a growing push toward decriminalisation, two states in the US having voted to legalise medical and recreational uses of cannabis, we in the Caribbean and T&T continue to hedge our policy based on a perception of how the "international community" will react.I can reach no other conclusion than that the NDC consultations were a grand hoax not intended as a genuine attempt to open a rethink on policy.
Peter Hanoomansingh
Valsayn Park