By Jai Venaik
A decade ago, the Indian policy arena was battling over a simple definition that impacted a large subset of people. Bamboo, one of the fastest growing plants, raised a unique policy conundrum: should it be categorized as tree or a grass? To the common folk, this hardly made any sense. But on a regulatory and legislative wing, this was a popular and often hotly debated topic. The reason: a simple classification could change and transfer the ownership of bamboo from the Forest Department to the tribal community/people inhabiting and surviving because of the forest. The result was the 2006 legislation on Forests Rights which classified bamboo under minor forest produce and gave (and I quote), right of ownership, access to collect, use and dispose of minor forest produce, which has been traditionally collected within or outside village boundaries. A simple change of definition resulted in the recognition of the rights of communities whose sustenance depended wholly on the same.
About three decades ago, a similar attempt of classification is now the root cause for another plant whose use and sale has caused a rising uproar due to harsh sentencing and is internationally popular as the War on Drugs.
Cannabis, also known as ganja, charas, hemp, marijuana, bhang or simply maal, is a naturally occurring flowering plant indigenous to Central Asia and the Indian Subcontinent. Its use and cultivation is considered to be an ancient practice with significant mentions in scriptures dating back to about 1000 BC. It is mentioned in the Rigveda and Atharveda, as a significant component in the preparation of Soma; Sushrushta Samhita again mentions bhanga, as a medicinal plant, and recommends it for treating catarrh, phlegm and diarrhea. The mentions and depictions of the trinity lord Shiva is enough to accept the use, prevalence and acceptability of various forms of cannabis in the Indian Society.
A first attempt to study the nature of the plant was by the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission, set up by the House of Commons in the year 1893, concerned with the possible negative effects of the hemp drug in the Bengal province of British India. The Report produced was at least 3,281 pages long, with testimony from almost 1,200 doctors, coolies, yogis, fakirs, heads of lunatic asylums, bhang peasants, tax gatherers, smugglers, army officers, hemp dealers, ganja palace operators and the clergy. This thorough report summarized the effects (potentially negative) of cannabis in detail and recorded the following points:
In regard to the physical effects, the Commission have come to the conclusion that the moderate use of hemp drugs is practically attended by no evil results at all. There may be exceptional cases in which, owing to idiosyncrasies of constitution, the drugs in even moderate use may be injurious. There is probably nothing the use of which may not possibly be injurious in cases of exceptional intolerance. There are also many cases where in tracts with a specially malarious climate, or in circumstances of hard work and exposure, the people attribute beneficial effects to the habitual moderate use of these drugs; and there is evidence to show that the popular impression may have some basis in fact. Speaking generally, the Commission are of opinion that the moderate use of hemp drugs appears to cause no appreciable physical injury of any kind. (1:2634).
In respect to the alleged mental effects of the drugs, the Commission have come to the conclusion that the moderate use of hemp drugs produces no injurious effects on the mind. It may indeed be accepted that in the case of specially marked neurotic diathesis, even the moderate use may produce mental injury. For the slightest mental stimulation or excitement may have that effect in such cases. But putting aside these quite exceptional cases, the moderate use of these drugs produces no mental injury. (1:264).
In regard to the moral effects of the drugs, the Commission are of opinion that their moderate use produces no moral injury whatever. There is no adequate ground for believing that it injuriously affects the character of the consumer.(1:264).
Viewing the subject generally, it may be added that the moderate use of these drugs is the rule, and that the excessive use is comparatively exceptional. The moderate use practically produces no ill effects. In all but the most exceptional cases, the injury from habitual moderate use is not appreciable. The excessive use may certainly be accepted as very injurious, though it must be admitted that in many excessive consumers the injury is not clearly marked. The injury done by the excessive use is, however, confined almost exclusively to the consumer himself; the effect on society is rarely appreciable. (1:264).
This extensive and rigorous approach to the subject in the year 1893 showed that hemp was not really a drug as defined under the modern lingo.
So why is the same word looked upon with much detest and disdain in our society at large today?
The answer lies with the passage of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 in order to ratify and oblige the Indias treaty obligations under the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, Convention on Psychotropic Substances, and United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. A point to be noted in severe relevance here is the reference I made earlier to War on Drugs. It has been inferred and cited by many distinguished personalities that American hegemony as the moral liberal of the world has made some disastrous attempts to threaten individual freedom on the cost of free market opportunities. But I want to strictly limit my subject to India.
Post passage of the NDPS, the common plant of the common man became illegal. Though the common understanding did not deter the common use for much of the following years but after three decades we have started seeing its pitfalls.
Anyone who contravenes the NDPS Act will face punishment based on the quantity of the banned substance;
1. where the contravention involves a small quantity, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to 1 year, or with a fine which may extend to ?10,000 or both;
2. where the contravention involves a quantity lesser than commercial quantity but greater than a small quantity, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to 10 years and with fine which may extend to ?1 lakh;
3. where the contravention involves a commercial quantity, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than 10 years but which may extend to 20 years and also a fine which shall not be less than ?1 lakh but which may extend to ?2 lakh.
Besides the punishment, one faces the social stigma of being called a drug user which quickly translates to a drug abuser.
I have made no reference to the exhaustive debate on the scientific categorisation and use of the plant because I do not see myself as an expert on the same. Rather, I have made an attempt to understand the prevalence, use and history of regulating a simple plant and seeing the over-arching societal change it brings. Marijuana in India was NOT a DRUG but became a DRUG only in 1985.
Member of Parliament from Dhenkenal, Odisha Tathagata Sathpathy, has supported the legalisation of marijuana / cannabis in India. Dharam Vir Gandhi, Member of Parliament from Patiala, Punjab announced that he had received clearance from Parliament to table a Private Members Bill seeking to amend the NDPS Act to allow for the legalised, regulated, and medically supervised supply of non-synthetic intoxicants including cannabis and opium.
The world leaders are moving in effort today to correct this flaw made by yesteryear leaders. Many countries including the United States has made significant progress to correct this simple definition mistake. Its important that we in our country also correct measures to improve our own societal notions of acceptability and recognise individual freedom and individual choice.
Centre for Civil Society advances social change through public policy.
This article was originally published in Spontaneous Order
Featured Image Source: Spontaneous Order