31.738
Bearbeitungen
Descriminalização das drogas no Brasil e além (2): Unterschied zwischen den Versionen
Descriminalização das drogas no Brasil e além (2) (Quelltext anzeigen)
Version vom 11. September 2016, 15:00 Uhr
, 15:00, 11. Sep. 2016keine Bearbeitungszusammenfassung
Tiao (Diskussion | Beiträge) |
Tiao (Diskussion | Beiträge) |
||
| Zeile 1: | Zeile 1: | ||
== Global | == Brazil at the Crossroads == | ||
=== Literature === | |||
*[https://www.brasildefato.com.br/2016/06/27/decisao-do-stf-sinaliza-reforma-na-politica-de-drogas-no-brasil/ Decisão do STF sinaliza reforma na política de drogas no Brasil. Deliberação retira caráter hediondo de tráfico cometido por réus primários, sem ligação com organização criminosa 06/2016] | |||
*[http://druglawreform.info/en/country-information/latin-america/brazil/item/201-brazil TNI (12/2012) Brazil - Drug Law Reform ...] | |||
*[http://www.ganjatalks.com.br/single-post/2016/06/09/A-Evolu%C3%A7%C3%A3o-da-Reforma-Pol%C3%ADtica-e-de-Drogas-no-Brasil-palestra-no-Hilo-Coworking-de-Emilio-Figueiredo A Evolução da Reforma Política e de Drogas no Brasil (Ganja Talk)] | |||
== A Global View == | |||
The contemporary system – or global drug prohibition regime – is constructed upon a suite of UN treaties. Dating back to 1912, these treaties aimed to eliminate the non-scientific and non-medical production, supply, and use of narcotic and psychotropic drugs. The treaty-based system developed on the basis of two interconnected tenets: the belief that the best way to reduce problems caused by illicit drug use is to minimise the scale of the illicit drug market; and that this can be achieved through a reliance on prohibition-oriented supply-side measures. | The contemporary system – or global drug prohibition regime – is constructed upon a suite of UN treaties. Dating back to 1912, these treaties aimed to eliminate the non-scientific and non-medical production, supply, and use of narcotic and psychotropic drugs. The treaty-based system developed on the basis of two interconnected tenets: the belief that the best way to reduce problems caused by illicit drug use is to minimise the scale of the illicit drug market; and that this can be achieved through a reliance on prohibition-oriented supply-side measures. | ||
=== The Framework === | |||
Like most UN treaty-based regimes, a number of organisational actors oversee its various aspects. Key | Like most UN treaty-based regimes, a number of organisational actors oversee its various aspects. Key among these is the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND), which is the central policy-making body. The CND consists of 53 member states, and is assisted by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB or the Board). The Board is the self-described independent and quasi-judicial’ control organ for the implementation of the treaties. It assesses worldwide scientific and medical requirements for scheduled substances and monitors compliance with the relevant conventions. Both the CND and the INCB rely on the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) – the UN agency responsible for coordinating drug control activities – for administrative and technical support. | ||
among these is the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND), which is the central policy-making body. The CND consists of 53 member states, and is assisted by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB or the Board). The Board is the self-described independent and quasi-judicial’ control organ for the implementation of the treaties. It assesses worldwide scientific and medical requirements for scheduled substances and monitors compliance with the relevant conventions. Both the CND and the INCB rely on the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) – the UN agency responsible for coordinating drug control activities – for administrative and technical support. | |||
Within this framework, textual ambiguity and subjective legal interpretation allow certain leeway in formulating national policies. Yet flexibility is limited. Consequently, while there has long been variation in national policies – a spectrum ranging from quasi-legal coffee shops in the Netherlands to zero-tolerance policing elsewhere – the regime greatly restricts national freedom of action. For example, no member state can create a regulated cannabis market for recreational use and still remain within treaty boundaries. Moreover, the conventions generate a powerful ‘background prohibitionist expectancy’ on nations regarding personal drug use. | Within this framework, textual ambiguity and subjective legal interpretation allow certain leeway in formulating national policies. Yet flexibility is limited. Consequently, while there has long been variation in national policies – a spectrum ranging from quasi-legal coffee shops in the Netherlands to zero-tolerance policing elsewhere – the regime greatly restricts national freedom of action. For example, no member state can create a regulated cannabis market for recreational use and still remain within treaty boundaries. Moreover, the conventions generate a powerful ‘background prohibitionist expectancy’ on nations regarding personal drug use. | ||
| Zeile 96: | Zeile 108: | ||
*[http://goseasia.about.com/od/travelplanning/a/seasia_drugs.htm Travelplanet Southeast Asia Drugs (2016)] | *[http://goseasia.about.com/od/travelplanning/a/seasia_drugs.htm Travelplanet Southeast Asia Drugs (2016)] | ||
*[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/29/bali-nine-who-are-the-nine-people-being-executed-by-indonesia Bali Nine who are the nine people executed by Indonesia 2015] | *[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/29/bali-nine-who-are-the-nine-people-being-executed-by-indonesia Bali Nine who are the nine people executed by Indonesia 2015] | ||
==== The Special Case of the United States ==== | ==== The Special Case of the United States ==== | ||