Contact

For inquiries regarding the utilization of ethnobotanicals, or in case you are experiencing an adverse situation or difficulty integrating and experience, please read this page. For inquiries regarding legal support , please read this page.

  • We don’t offer sessions of ayahuasca or iboga.
  • We don’t recommend centers or people who perform/do sessions.

    map mapa marcador ICEERS

    Office

    Carrer de Sepúlveda, 65 , Oficina 2, 08015 Barcelona España +34 931 88 20 99
    cannabis international treaty system

    Study: Cannabis in the International Treaty System

    08.10.2021

    Cannabis in the International Treaty System

    Joint Civil Society Contribution to the 40th Meeting of the WHO Expert Committee on Drug Dependence (ECDD40): Procedural, methodological and terminological bias

    Authors:
    Michael Krawitz, Kenzi Riboulet Zemouli, Boris Bañas​, Bernhard Beitzke​, David Borden, JosĂ© Carlos Bouso, Farid Ghehiouèche, Amy L. King, Alejandra Outomuro, Ă’scar ParĂ©s Franquero, and Jean-Jacques ‘Sonny’ Perseil.

    Journal:
    ECDD40

    Year:
    2018

    About the study

    This document about cannabis in the international Treaty system was submitted as an official contribution to the work of the 40th Meeting of the Expert Committee on Drug Dependence (ECDD) of the World Health Organization (WHO). Since this meeting, the documentation has been available on an earlier basis according to established rules of proceedings.

    On the moment of printing, this contribution was endorsed by 68 civil society organisations from 29 countries in all continents. As of June 3rd, the number of signatories had reached 106.

    This contribution examined, in detail, the bias and oversights that were likely to undermine the work done by the Committee — after presenting a brief historical overview of the previous WHO Expert Committee’s influence on the placement of cannabis in the international Treaty system.

     

    Excerpt: Cannabis in the International Treaty System

    “In light of the bias and errors pointed out in this contribution, three possible pathways forward appear: 
     
    – end the review process,
    – continue the process despite ethical concerns, bias and over strong objection,
    – slow down to ensure deliberative process, comprehensiveness and thoroughness.
     
    The last option is our preference. Our perspective is that the Expert Committee, whose role is to systematically recommend appropriate international scheduling (which apparents to the discipline of systematics) would benefit from first updating the description, identification and nomenclature of all the cannabis-related products and substances so that they match observed realities and the lege artis scientific research. In other words, as logic suggests, the Committee should start reviewing the taxonomy of ​cannabis​-related products and substances before addressing systematics​.”

     

    Link to the article

     
    Photo by Mikael Kristenson on Unsplash.

    Categories: Studies & papers , Cannabis , Drug policies
    Tags: cannabis , scientific research , study , Drug Policy , CBD , control , cannabis policy , World Health Organization