Lack of clarity
Mr Jelsma, who keeps a close eye on the change process of the UN Drugs Conventions, said there are many critical questions regarding the consequences of the new classification. “There is still lack of clarity about the annual reporting obligations. Each year, every member state should report the use and trade in all types of drugs, including medicinal cannabis, to the INCB (International Narcotics Control Board, ed). The recommendation to transfer the substance THC from the 1971 Convention to the 1961 Convention doesn’t make that process any easier.”
Another important WHO recommendation is to remove products with cannabidiol (CBD) and less than 0.2 percent THC from the Schedule completely. Mr Jelsma fears that the control on cannabis will actually become more stringent and that this will generate administrative problems. He said “Not everyone is aware of this. Indirectly, transferring THC to the 1961 Convention means that even the plant material that contains THC will have to be controlled in the same way. The Convention does not distinguish between the content and the materials they were extracted from. It means that more will have to be controlled, including leaves and stems. The recommendation was supposed to be an improvement, but if you scrutinize it, it actually deteriorates the situation.” Countries with a major hemp industry, don’t need that at all. Hemp is cultivated for its low THC content and high CBD concentrations. With the extremely low threshold criterion of 0.2%, many hemp products and derivatives are likely to fall under the stricter control regime. “I believe that this is one of the possible consequences that was overlooked by the ECDD. This was never the intention”, according to Mr Jelsma.