From: NORML California <[canor m l] at [igc.apc.org]> Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs Subject: French Commission Backs Decrim Date: Tue, 07 Feb 1995 22:26:24 -0800 (PST) Drugs: the Henrion Report is Released in France No agreement on decriminalization of marijuana. (translated from Le Figaro, 4-5 Feb. 1995, p.1) Eleven months after being set up by Simone Veil, the comission on drugs and addiction headed by professor Roger Henrion announced its conclusions yesterday. After several weeks of internal arguments, notably on the decriminalization of the use of cannabis, the summary statement presented two opposing points of view. A slight majority of the 17 members pronounced themselves in favor of a regulated decriminalization of the usage of cannabis. As for the other drugs, the commission recommended keeping the 1970 law, subject to "a profound modification." The commissioners were agreed on seven points, among them the dissolution of the "Delegation generale" for the war on drugs, in preference for an independent agency. Among other propositions: Improved policies for prevention, especially directed at 10-14 year-olds, the improvement of hospitals specialising in emergency treatment of drug abusers, strengthening AIDS prevention by the development of programs for the free sale of needles. The Henrion commission releases its report on drugs: Simone Veil refuses to liberate pot (Liberation, 5 Feb. 1995, p. 1) Headed by Prof. Henrion, the commission appointed in March 1994 by Simone Veil delivered a split decision on the decriminalization of soft drugs. A bare majority (9 of 17) having pronounced themselves in favor of eliminating the crime of cannabis use, the Minister of Social Affairs opined that "lacking sufficient scientific and objective grounds," it was not possible to assume this risk as a decision of state. Thursday evening, on TF1 [French TV], Prime Minister Edouard Balladur had already declared himself against any opening in this direction, explaining that he too felt decriminalization was "a risk he did not wish to run." Decriminalization of drugs divides the Henrion commission (Le Monde, 4 Feb. 95, p. 9) After months of reading, listening, and reflecting, the members of the Henrion commission, appointed in March 1994 by Simone Veil, minster of social affairs, health, and cities, to examine the subject of the law of 31 December 1970 concerning drugs, were unable to agree on one thing: whether or not to eliminate penal sanctions for personal consumption of illicit substances. To the question posed by Mme. Veil on whether the distinction between hard and soft drugs should be upheld, the comission judged that "one can only state that drugs are more or less dangerous," cannabis and its derivatives (marijuana, hash, hash oil) being classified among the least dangerous. By a close vote (9 out of 17), a majority favorable to the decriminalization of the use and possession of small amounts of quantities emerged. "It is difficult to accept the confusion made, at least in the text of the laws, between the adolescent who occasionally smokes hash and the heroin addict who injects several times a day," the commission noted. Occasional users of cannabis and its derivatives are estimated to number between 1 and 3 million in France, according to the French Committee of Education for Health, and between 4 and 5 million according to Sofres. According to the report, this usage has been "recognized as commonplace and de facto decriminalized, beginning with the 1978 Peyrefitte memorandum, and continuing with the Badinter memorandum of September 1984," two texts which encouraged prosecutors not to prosecute personal consumption of cannabis. "To keep a criminal penalty which is no longer applied in practice becomes ridiculous and depreciates justice in the eyes of adolescents," concluded the nine members favoring decriminalization. The nine therefore propose substituting for the existing penalties a regime that would provide for prohibiting smoking before the age of 16 "on account of the amotivation and desocialization that it can provoke," as well as the prohibition of consumption in public places. The regulatory mechanism would be completed by measures for "suppression of cannabis intoxication on the highways," by "the creation of a misdemeanor for conduct under the influence of cannabis," and by "the prohibition of its use in professions judged safety-sensitive, such as flight controllers, pilots, high-speed train engineers, and others." "If the there is no deterioration in the situation over the next two years," say those favoring decriminalization, "One could then envisage true, regulated commerce under strict control of the State." On the other side, the eight defenders of full criminalization are worried about the potential health risks linked to cannabis abuse. They observe "an alteration in vigilance which can last 24 hours, and an alteration in memory which is temporary for occasional users but which can persist sometimes for weeks in heavy smokers." The theory of a gateway effect [escalade] to harder drugs is likewise invoked, "most heavy addicts having begun with cannabis." This gateway, which is qualified as "marginal," applies to some 5% -10% of smokers. Heavy cannabis abuse is likewise blamed for precipitating schizophrenia, even if it is not "in itself a sufficient cause." Also denounced is the cultivation of cannabis in greenhouses, in which the potency of the active principle (delta-9 THC) is particularly elevated: the Dutch "nederwelt" variety thus contains 20% to 40% THC, as against 1%-5% in marijuana and 6% - 10% in hashish. Finally, those favoring criminalization mention the anti-tobacco campaign, and ask about sending the right message ["la coherence des reflexions"]. Nonetheless, they do not oppose an "evolution in the law which would take account of the specificity of cannabis without shirking interdiction." They accordingly propose a modification in the 1970 law permitting the "exercise of constraint in the interest of users." The use of "alternative punishment (work days, loss of rights, community service)" and "possibilities for individualizing the punishment" are envisaged. As for the "dangerous" drugs, heroin, cocaine and crack, the majority of the commission, again by a close vote (9 to 8), leans in this case in favor of maintaining criminalization. "Whatever solutions are eventually adopted," cautions the report, "The members of the commission insist that they should not intervene before procedures for evaluation and sufficient health and judicial mechanisms are in place." Taking the example of the methods used to evaluate populations infected with AIDS, they proposed creating "precise indicators, based on anonymous biochemical urine samples, for studying drugs in large strata of the population whose composition doesn't vary a priori from year to year." Pregnant women, those called to national service during their "three days," and highway accident victims are recommended for constituting the first cohorts. The second point of consensus was upon the necessity of "promoting research" in three areas: neurobiology, clinics and therapy, and social sciences..... The two final areas on which there was unanimous agreement were those of prevention and care. The commission members judge that "it is important to present illict drugs without isolating them from other psychoactive substances that are capable of producing dependence." The creation of a "foundation composed of advertising and media professionals" is proposed. The improvement of hospital admissions for addicts is likewise part of the program. The commission asks that "every addict arriving in the emergency room be examined by a qualified physician" and proposes creating in the hospitals "a unified and established reception procedure for addicts"... In addition, the commission wishes that so-called harm reduction policies (for overdose, hepatitis, AIDS, marginalization, delinquency) based on distribution of clean needles, condoms, substitute products, and networks of general practitioners, be accelerated. It would like to see "greatly increased" the number of "boutiques," or drop-in centers for the most destitute drug users, as well as mobile "prevention buses." For drug users incarcerated on account of other misdemeanors (approximately 10,000 out of the 54,000 in custody), the report insists on the necessity of "pursuing the effort undertaken to organize a true therapeutic follow-up," taking for its example the problems associated with the follow-up of methadone treatment. Judging as "marginal" the number of methadone places actually open in French territory, but insisting that we cease to "constantly oppose weaning and substitution," the commission defends a full complement of treatment slots. Therapeutic communities, very little used in France, ought to be encouraged and developed, according to the report, by "groups other than the Patriarche," an organization using highly controversial methods founded by Lucien Enjelmajer.