SOLICITOR General Michael Hylton yesterday warned parliamentarians studying the ganja issue that Jamaica would breach international obligations and face tough US sanctions, if the drug is decriminalised.

Hylton told a meeting of the Joint Select Committee of Parliament studying the National Ganja Commission report, that although Parliament could pass amendments to remove the constitutional bar to decriminalisation it would, in all likelihood, breach international obligations in respect of drug control.

“If recommendation one is implemented, and the Dangerous Drugs Act is amended to decriminalise the private, personal use of marijuana in small quantities, Jamaica would, in all likelihood, be in breach of certain international obligations in respect of drug control,” he said. Recommendation one of the Ganja Commission’s report asked that, “the relevant laws be amended so that ganja can be decriminalised for the private, personal use of small quantities by adults.”

The statement landed like a spanner in the works of the parliamentarians who seemed on track to some sort of consensus on, at least, decriminalisation.

Committee members Senator Trevor Munroe; Dr Patrick Harris (Northern Trelawny) and Mike Henry (Central Clarendon) sought loopholes around the conventions and the threat of sanctions, but Hylton could only offer them the consequences.

Questions were also raised by Dr Ken Baugh (West Central St Catherine); Sharon Hay-Webster (South Central Clarendon) and Senator Shirley Williams.

“Jamaica would, in my view, be in breach of its international obligations if Parliament were to implement recommendation one of the Ganja Commission’s recommendations,” Hylton insisted. “The country could conceivably decriminalise marijuana use, but as the relevant conventions require possession, purchase, cultivation and the supply factors to be subjected to the criminal law, it is not clear how the recommendation would work in practice,” he added.

Henry suggested that it may be best that the committee sign off on its report, immediately, and move to a “conscience vote” on the issue in Parliament as soon as possible. But chairman Morais Guy, and Dr Munroe felt that it would be better to seek a consensus that could guide the final debate.

Hylton said that the problem was with the three recommendations for decriminalisation. The other two concerned decriminalisation for personal use, except by juveniles and in premises accessible to the public, and for use of ganja as a sacrament for religious purposes.

The United States Government is opposed to the decriminalisation of ganja. Embassy spokeswoman, Orna Bloom, has been quoted as saying that it could create “the perception, especially to our youth, that marijuana is not harmful, which could lead to an increase in its use”.

Hylton, in explaining decertification in this context, said that the United States Government policy under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, requires the president to take steps to decertify countries categorised as major illicit drug producing and/or drug transit countries. He noted that Jamaica was already listed among the major Illicit drug producing and drug transit countries.

“Thus, if Jamaica were to decriminalise marijuana for personal use, there would be a distinct risk that the country would be subject to the sanctions associated with decertification,” he said,. The sanctions, he added, would be significant.

The solicitor general also told the committee that Jamaica is currently a party to three international conventions concerning illicit drugs:

* The Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, as amended by its 1972 Protocol (the Single Narcotics Convention). Jamaica acceded to that treaty on October 6, 1989 and today over 155 states are parties thereto.

* The Convention on Psychiatropic Substances, 1971. Jamaica acceded to this treaty on October 6, 1989. Today, over 160 states are parties thereto.

* The United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, 1988. Jamaica acceded to this treaty on December 29, 1995. Today more than 150 states are parties thereto.

Hylton said that all three conventions adopt a restrictive approach to marijuana use and, in the interest of brevity, illustrated how implementation of the Ganja Commission’s first recommendation would cause Jamaica to be in breach of the Singles Narcotics Convention.”

He said that the convention, which lists ganja as a prohibitive drug, seeks to expressly “limit exclusively to medical and scientific purposes, the production, manufacture, export, import, distribution of, trade in, use and possession of drugs”. Language, which he said, clearly indicated that ganja use was not encouraged by the treaty.

The convention, he added, states that subject to constitutional limitations, each party must adopt measures to ensure that cultivation, production, manufacture, extraction, preparation, possession, offering for sale, distribution, purchase, sale, delivery, transport, brokerage, dispatch, importation and exportation of drugs is punishable when committed intentionally, “and that serious offences shall be liable to adequate punishment, particularly by imprisonment or other related penalties of deprivation of liberty”.

On the question of international human rights, Hylton said that this was the second legal consideration which had influenced the Ganja Commission in favour of the recommendation for decriminalisation. However, he said that even with the recognition of fundamental human rights, the conferences which formulated the three treaties, still sought to ensure, “in unambiguous terms”, that ganja possession, purchase and cultivation, even for personal use, are to be subject to criminal sanctionss.

“Given the clear language of the three relevant conventions, the device by which human rights considerations could somehow trump the rules against drug activity requires further explanation by those who posit the human rights argument in this context,” he said.