
Shortly after I made the proposed draft law public yesterday, the frustration became palpable with many Lebanese citizens, especially the youth. The reason I posted it immediately without writing a more in-depth analysis, is because it was on the parliamentary committee’s agenda, and we needed to mount pressure quick before they OK it and send it to the general assembly. That seemed to have worked, since it wasn’t even discussed.
Skoun, a treatment center and NGO I absolutely adore and have worked with many times over the years, made a more detailed analysis of the law, and with their expertise wrote several remarks about the law and why it’s a bad one. I will attempt to roughly translate it here from the Arabic version they sent me and which we are forwarding to MPs from every political party.
Skoun’s Remarks:
From Facebook: (as is, not translated)
After reviewing the draft law, Skoun insists on the necessity of revising and amending the current version of the draft, taking into consideration the following concerns:
First, it is surprising that this draft has not once mentioned the decriminalization of drug use and has ignored the proposal to amend the current drug law submitted to the Lebanese Parliament in June 2016. Even more surprising is that some of the signatories of this draft were on the frontline of calling for the amendment of the Lebanese drug law. We believe that the health and rights of our young men and women have always been, and continue to be a priority that is far more important than any revenue that this draft may bring to the Lebanese economy. Therefore, any reform of Lebanon’s drug policy must begin with an end to the criminalization of drug use and an adoption of public health based approach. (We recall here the difference between decriminalization and legalization of drug use).
Second, Skoun objects to the inclusion of “personal consumption” under the penalties and sanctions section of the draft law. Besides the fact that the sanctions carried are extremely heavy and are in contravention of the basic principles of human rights (hard labor for life), the essence of the sanctions associated with “personal consumption” are also contradictory to the direction adopted by the government, civil society working in drugs, as well as human rights organizations that call for the decriminalization of the use of drugs. The Inter-Ministerial Substance Use Response Strategy for Lebanon 2016–2021, developed by the Ministries of Public Health, Interior, Justice, Social Affairs and Education and Higher Education, expressly sets as an objective the revision of the “law towards the decriminalization of illicit drug use in line with international treaties and public health principles.”
Third, Skoun wonders what the law’s vision for this transitional phase between an illicit market and a regulated legal market? What are the mechanisms put in place by the draft law to ensure the protection of the rights of current cannabis cultivators (Farmers)? Will they be included and allowed to profit from the regulated market? Will the new law provide an amnesty to the “cultivation of illegal substances” crimes they have been convicted of, which, under the draft law pose an obstacle to their acquisition of a legal permit to cultivate cannabis?
Finally, Skoun asks will the draft law ensure the access of Lebanese citizens, in particular cancer patients, to the plant for medicinal purposes.
From the statement shared with MPs: (my rough translation)
Granting Permits
The proposal is inherently discriminatory towards current cannabis farmers, given that a main prerequisite is a clean criminal record, when a large portion of current farmers do not have a clean criminal record given most are convicted of the felony of growing hashish. This ignores the rights of these farmers the law is supposed to help, denying them the transition from illegal to a regulated market.
Article 21
The requirement of judicial records for everyone that will be employed in hashish growing is irrational, given most workers in this industry are convicted because of the type of work they do.
Article 39
First, the suggested sentences are extremely harsh. Hard labor goes against basic human rights, and can be considered as torture according to international standards, which comes as shock given Lebanon ratified a law that bans torture recently. This also fails to live up to the notion that the punishment should be equivalent to the crime.
Second, this article puts farming and promoting the use of hashish in the same category with the same penalty, which goes against the principle that the penalty should be comparable to the crime.
Third, the failure to clearly define what is “promoting” leaves the possibility open for abuse of this provision in terms of how law enforcement enforces it, and how the judiciary rules by it. Theoretically, this provision could mean anyone caught with a small amount of hashish can be indicted with “terweej”. A current example is with the current Drugs Law number 673 in Lebanon, where the justice system has found it difficult to properly define “promoting”, leading to thousands of young men and women incarcerated for simply having a small amount on them.
The fact that “personal use” is mentioned as something punishable under this law, with an extremely harsh penalty, clearly contradicts the direction the Lebanese government has been going in recently, as well as civil society actors who work in drug awareness and treatment, and organizations that work on the legal and human rights aspects. The general consensus among all these stakeholders is that penalty for personal use should be abolished. This was clearly outlined in the “Joint Strategy Between Ministries to Counter Drug Abuse and Addiction 2016–2021” which the ministry of public health, justice, interior affairs, education and social affairs worked on together, which included: “revision of the current laws to abolish criminalizing illicit substances to fulfill Lebanon’s commitment to inernational conventions and public health principles”






















