Burning  stages:  Thoughts  on  the  rules  of  the  Law  Regulating  Cannabis  Markets  in  Uruguay  By:  Hernán  Delgado  *    In   early  May,   the   decree   of   regulations   to   the   law   that   controls   legal   access   to   cannabis   for  recreational   use   was   introduced   in   Uruguay.   Change   is   beginning   to   slowly   materialize   in  Uruguay,  and  coping  with  anxiety  has  been  a  real  challenge.  Because  if  this  southern  corner  of  the  world  has  been  taken  as  the  progressive  model,  those  of  us  who  are  living  the  day  to  day  of   a   Uruguay   lead   by   a   gerontocracy   that   unveils   conservative   values   –   escaping   from  redundancy  –  every  step  taken  turns  into  a  new  crusade.      Much  has  been  said  about  the  positive  elements  that  make  the  regulation  of  cannabis  markets  a  solid  and  viable  alternative  to  prohibition.  With  the  premise  that  the  Uruguayan  Law  is  the  best   of   its   kind,   I   will   focus   on   some   of   its   weaknesses,   as   well   as   in   some   of   the   main  challenges  that,  having  now  the  regulation  in  hand,  will  certainly  arise  in  the  future.    In  general  terms,  the  decree  did  not  bring  too  many  surprises.  The  Institute  for  Regulation  and  Control  of  Cannabis  will  be  created,  institution  to  be  in  charge  of  regulating  the  three  ways  of  accessing   the  substance:   supply   in  drugstores,   the  establishment  of   cannabis   clubs  and  self-­‐cultivation.  With  marked  willing  to  control,  the  establishment  of  arbitrary  limits  to  individual  consumption  has  been  confirmed,  setting  a  maximum  monthly  consumption  of  40  g  through  drugstores  and  clubs,  and  an  annual  harvest  limit  at  home  of  480  g.    The   decree   also   confirmed   the   installation   of   a   system   for   the   registration   of   users.   Of   an  unjust  nature,  this  registration  is  a  thorn  in  the  users’  side  and  their  will  to  become  a  part  of  the  legal  market.  It  is  true,  one  might  venture  that  this  is  the  price  for  Uruguayans  to  pay  for  being  the  first  country  to  promote  a  model  for  legal  regulation.    Time  will  tell  if  eventually,  in  a  regional   favorable   scenario,   it   ends   up   being   eliminated.   However,   beyond   claiming   that  personal  data  will  be  protected  and  will  not  be  publicly  available,  politicians  have  not  stopped  too  much  to  think  about  this  issue.  Far  from  trying  to  build  trust  with  users,  but  more  worried  in  providing  security   for   the  rest  of   the  population  -­‐  as   if  mutually  exclusive  –  decided   from  the   very   start   not   to   incorporate   into   their   arguments   the   advancement   in   rights   this   law  means,  argument  only  vindicated  by  social  organizations.    Under   a   law   that   incorporates   elements   of   exaggerated   social   control   and   integrates   a  paternalistic   public   health   approach,   based   on   the   perspective   of   a   President   that   does   not  distinguish   recreational   use   of   drugs   from   problematic   dependency,   the   selected  communications  strategy  has  aggravated  the  fact  that  user  registration  will  become  one  of  the  obstacles   to   overcome.     At   times,   it   seems   the   government   forgets   that   the   success   of   this  policy  is  intimately  related  to  the  adherence  of  users  to  regulated  markets.      

 

               On   the  other  side,   the  emergence  of  new  dynamics  of  micro   trafficking   that  will   replace   the  ones  already  existing  will  be  inevitable.  A  non-­‐existent  gray  market  will  be  conformed,  which  will  offer  quality  cannabis  from  regulated  establishments,  but   in  a  context  of   illegality.  Legal  markets   do   not   consider   the   supply   to   three   populations   that   today   are   accessing   the  substance  through  the  black  market:  minors  under  18,  tourists  and  those  who  are  consuming  over  40  g.  Small  leaks  of  cannabis  will  be  the  norm  and  the  conformation  of  this  gray  market  will  become  one  of  the  main  pitfalls  capable  of  undermining  the  credibility  of  the  new  model  before  public  opinion.      In  contrast,  the  development  of  cannabis  trafficking  networks  of  greater  complexity  and  high  profitability  is  unlikely.  This  is  one  of  the  strengths  of  the  regulation.  The  implementation  of  evaluation  and  monitoring  mechanisms  that  the  law  possesses  will  be  of  utmost  relevance  in  generating  trustworthy  indicators  that  underpin  the  Uruguayan  experience.    Perhaps   the   fact   that   has   generated  more   confusion   among   social   organizations   is   that   the  regulation  poses  excessive  bureaucratic   requirements   for   cannabis   clubs,  discouraging   their  formation   and   proliferation.   To   this   must   be   added   that   no   apparent   criteria   was   set   to   a  maximum  of  45  members  per  club,  which  jeopardizes  the  economic  viability  of  self-­‐managed  and   not-­‐for-­‐profit   organizations.   Nonetheless,   beyond   these   provisions,   the   biggest  disappointment   has   been   to   confirm   that   those   thinking   drug   policies   in   Uruguay   continue  underestimating  the  ability  of  drug  users  as  valid  stakeholders.  The  regulation  forbids  clubs  to  undertake  any  kind  of  activity  or  initiative  of  information  dissemination  addressed  to  people  outside  the  club  intended  to  improve  drug  use  practices.    Those   of   us   at   social   organizations   working   in   drug   policy   understand   that   cannabis   clubs  constitute  a  new  space  for  drug  users  to  be  introduced  in  the  social  movement,  and  the  ideal  vehicle   in   the   conformation   of   a   new   comprehensive   discourse   of   prevention   and   harm  reduction,  enriched  by  the  better  articulation  of   institutions  and  citizens.   It   is  paradoxical  to  find   little   technical   elites   that   ignore   the   powerful   transforming   potential   of   decentralized  spaces  of  45  organized  users,  and  that  still  strive  to  address  the  reality  of  drug  use  from  their  desk.   Latin   America   has   slowly   begun   to   learn   from   the   European   experiences   of   working  together  with  drug  users.  Meanwhile,  today  Uruguay  seems  to  be  wasting  the  opportunity  to  diversify  citizen  participation  spaces  in  the  design  of  public  policy.                        

 

               Finally,  it  is  important  to  note  that  regulations  regarding  cannabis  control  for  medical  use  and  industrial   hemp   will   be   ready   during   the   second   half   of   the   year.   Uruguay   will   join   a   still  incipient   market   and   of   an   invaluable   demand,   that   given   the   current   situation,   presents  unprecedented  economic  opportunities  for  the  country’s  development.  The  discussion  about  the  production  model  for  exporting  cannabis  is  slowly  beginning  to  be  promoted.  It  would  be  desirable  to  pursue  the  creation  of  a  national  supply  chain  of  a  high  added  value,  that  among  other   things,   foster   social   development   through   the   incorporation   of   family   farmers   and  cooperative  workers.  Such  model  would  consolidate  the  most  effective  harm  reduction  policy  associated  to  the  use  and  abuse  of  drugs:  wealth  distribution.    Definitely,  Uruguay  is  moving  forward.  Echoing  its  own  history,   it  returns  to  the  forefront  of  human  rights;  it  is  a  fact  that  must  be  recognized  in  its  magnitude  and  cause  for  celebration.  However,  it  has  not  yet  been  understood  that  in  order  to  drive  a  deep  transformation  on  drug  policies,  it  must  be  incorporated  the  vision  of  a  stakeholder  that  so  far  has  been  invisible:  the  drug  users.          *  Member  of  ProDerechos,  Uruguay