Landrace.wiki - Recent changes [en-gb]

Turkey

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:48:49 GMT

Link the Bulletin on Narcotics at its first mention in the text

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:48, 16 October 2026
Line 62:		Line 62:
	At the Second International Opium Conference in Geneva in 1924–25, Turkey supported the Egyptian delegate [[Mohamed El Guindy]] when he proposed bringing cannabis under international control. The [[wikipedia:Transnational Institute\|Transnational Institute]] writes that the supporting countries had experience of cannabis or had already banned it, with little or no success.<ref name="TNI2014">{{cite report \|last1=Bewley-Taylor \|first1=Dave \|last2=Blickman \|first2=Tom \|last3=Jelsma \|first3=Martin \|title=The Rise and Decline of Cannabis Prohibition: The history of cannabis in the UN drug control system and options for reform \|chapter=The history of cannabis in the international drug control system \|chapter-url=https://www.tni.org/files/download/rise_and_decline_ch1.pdf \|publisher=Transnational Institute; Global Drug Policy Observatory \|location=Amsterdam; Swansea \|date=March 2014}}</ref>{{rp\|10}} Turkey, [[Greece]], [[Cyprus]], [[Sudan]], [[Syria]], [[Lebanon]] and [[Palestine]] had been asked to help Egypt's law enforcement by restricting cultivation and trade.<ref name="TNI2014"/>{{rp\|11}}		At the Second International Opium Conference in Geneva in 1924–25, Turkey supported the Egyptian delegate [[Mohamed El Guindy]] when he proposed bringing cannabis under international control. The [[wikipedia:Transnational Institute\|Transnational Institute]] writes that the supporting countries had experience of cannabis or had already banned it, with little or no success.<ref name="TNI2014">{{cite report \|last1=Bewley-Taylor \|first1=Dave \|last2=Blickman \|first2=Tom \|last3=Jelsma \|first3=Martin \|title=The Rise and Decline of Cannabis Prohibition: The history of cannabis in the UN drug control system and options for reform \|chapter=The history of cannabis in the international drug control system \|chapter-url=https://www.tni.org/files/download/rise_and_decline_ch1.pdf \|publisher=Transnational Institute; Global Drug Policy Observatory \|location=Amsterdam; Swansea \|date=March 2014}}</ref>{{rp\|10}} Turkey, [[Greece]], [[Cyprus]], [[Sudan]], [[Syria]], [[Lebanon]] and [[Palestine]] had been asked to help Egypt's law enforcement by restricting cultivation and trade.<ref name="TNI2014"/>{{rp\|11}}

	Law No. 2313, adopted on 12 June 1933 and published in the Official Gazette on 24 June,<ref name="Law2313"/> made the sowing of "Indian hemp" (''Hint keneviri'') for ''esrar'' illegal, together with the preparation, import, export and sale of ''esrar''. Anyone sowing it faced one to six months in prison. The plants were to be destroyed by the police on a joint report of health and agriculture officials.<ref name="RG1933">{{cite act \|title=Uyuşturucu maddelerin murakabesi hakkında kanun \|type=Kanun \|number=2313 \|date=12 June 1933 \|at=arts. 3 and 23; Resmî Gazete no. 2435, 24 June 1933 \|jurisdiction=Turkey \|url=https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/arsiv/2435.pdf \|access-date=12 October 2026}}</ref> Writing in the UN ''Bulletin on Narcotics'' in 1951, J. Bouquet said that Turkey had raised its own hashish production when the Greek supply dried up, until the law of 1933. In that period, he wrote, the hashish seized in Egypt and North Africa was chiefly Turkish, from Istanbul and [[wikipedia:Bursa\|Bursa]].<ref name="Bouquet1951">{{cite journal \|last=Bouquet \|first=J. \|title=Cannabis (concluded) \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=1 \|pages=22–45 \|year=1951 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1951-01-01_1_page005.html}}</ref>		Law No. 2313, adopted on 12 June 1933 and published in the Official Gazette on 24 June,<ref name="Law2313"/> made the sowing of "Indian hemp" (''Hint keneviri'') for ''esrar'' illegal, together with the preparation, import, export and sale of ''esrar''. Anyone sowing it faced one to six months in prison. The plants were to be destroyed by the police on a joint report of health and agriculture officials.<ref name="RG1933">{{cite act \|title=Uyuşturucu maddelerin murakabesi hakkında kanun \|type=Kanun \|number=2313 \|date=12 June 1933 \|at=arts. 3 and 23; Resmî Gazete no. 2435, 24 June 1933 \|jurisdiction=Turkey \|url=https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/arsiv/2435.pdf \|access-date=12 October 2026}}</ref> Writing in the UN ''[[Bulletin on Narcotics]]'' in 1951, J. Bouquet said that Turkey had raised its own hashish production when the Greek supply dried up, until the law of 1933. In that period, he wrote, the hashish seized in Egypt and North Africa was chiefly Turkish, from Istanbul and [[wikipedia:Bursa\|Bursa]].<ref name="Bouquet1951">{{cite journal \|last=Bouquet \|first=J. \|title=Cannabis (concluded) \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=1 \|pages=22–45 \|year=1951 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1951-01-01_1_page005.html}}</ref>

	Turkey acceded to the [[Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs]] on 23 May 1967.<ref name="UNTC-VI-15">{{cite web \|title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 15 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-15&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> Law No. 2236 of 1979 rewrote Article 3 of the 1933 law in terms of ''kenevir'' sown exclusively to make ''esrar''. Law No. 3652 of 1990 amended Article 23,<ref name="Law2313"/> and a regulation of the same year made all hemp sowing subject to permission, to prevent the production of narcotics from it.<ref name="RG1990"/> Law No. 7442 of 2023 extended the licence to flower and leaf grown for medical and health products.<ref name="Law2313"/>		Turkey acceded to the [[Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs]] on 23 May 1967.<ref name="UNTC-VI-15">{{cite web \|title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 15 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-15&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> Law No. 2236 of 1979 rewrote Article 3 of the 1933 law in terms of ''kenevir'' sown exclusively to make ''esrar''. Law No. 3652 of 1990 amended Article 23,<ref name="Law2313"/> and a regulation of the same year made all hemp sowing subject to permission, to prevent the production of narcotics from it.<ref name="RG1990"/> Law No. 7442 of 2023 extended the licence to flower and leaf grown for medical and health products.<ref name="Law2313"/>

Thai stick

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:48:34 GMT

Link the Bulletin on Narcotics at its first mention in the text

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:48, 16 October 2026
Line 41:		Line 41:
	The tying was village work. In Fielding's account of Udon in 1971, "mothers and children sat in groups in the dirt, making up Buddha sticks", while the bricks "were being put together by the old people".<ref name="MaguireRitter2013"/>{{Rp\|63}} Maguire and Ritter quote a Thai grower's guess at how the stick began: the first sticks were about the size of a cigarette and wrapped in newspaper, and with a stick inside, smokers "can roll it in paper and just pull the stick out".<ref name="MaguireRitter2013"/>{{Rp\|66}} They also report the claim that Thai sticks were made to cater to American soldiers, and answer it by observing that in Thai markets "everything from flowers to frogs is tied to a stick".<ref name="MaguireRitter2013"/>{{Rp\|65}}		The tying was village work. In Fielding's account of Udon in 1971, "mothers and children sat in groups in the dirt, making up Buddha sticks", while the bricks "were being put together by the old people".<ref name="MaguireRitter2013"/>{{Rp\|63}} Maguire and Ritter quote a Thai grower's guess at how the stick began: the first sticks were about the size of a cigarette and wrapped in newspaper, and with a stick inside, smokers "can roll it in paper and just pull the stick out".<ref name="MaguireRitter2013"/>{{Rp\|66}} They also report the claim that Thai sticks were made to cater to American soldiers, and answer it by observing that in Thai markets "everything from flowers to frogs is tied to a stick".<ref name="MaguireRitter2013"/>{{Rp\|65}}

	The crop was financed and moved by intermediaries. Maguire and Ritter write that growers "were independently contracted by traders who put up the capital", and that ''kamnan'', regional leaders "who controlled multiple villages and large swaths of the northeast", hired villagers "to grow pot and carry it over the Phu Phan Mountains" at night to avoid police checkpoints, each man being paid "a few thousand baht for every 20 kilos successfully delivered".<ref name="MaguireRitter2013"/>{{Rp\|71}} A 1985 article by Mounted Police drug-intelligence staff in the United Nations ''Bulletin on Narcotics'' cited "Recent intelligence reports from Thailand" that placed cultivation "on hilly terrain and on flat lowlands", often "interspersed among legitimate crops to deter detection", in 12 of the 17 north-eastern provinces, "centred around Nakhon Phanom, Sakhon Nakhon and Nong Khai".<ref name="Stamler1985">{{cite journal \|last1=Stamler \|first1=R. T. \|last2=Fahlman \|first2=R. C. \|last3=Vigeant \|first3=H. \|title=Illicit traffic and abuse of cannabis in Canada \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=4 \|pages=37–49 \|year=1985 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1985-01-01_4_page006.html}}</ref>		The crop was financed and moved by intermediaries. Maguire and Ritter write that growers "were independently contracted by traders who put up the capital", and that ''kamnan'', regional leaders "who controlled multiple villages and large swaths of the northeast", hired villagers "to grow pot and carry it over the Phu Phan Mountains" at night to avoid police checkpoints, each man being paid "a few thousand baht for every 20 kilos successfully delivered".<ref name="MaguireRitter2013"/>{{Rp\|71}} A 1985 article by Mounted Police drug-intelligence staff in the United Nations ''[[Bulletin on Narcotics]]'' cited "Recent intelligence reports from Thailand" that placed cultivation "on hilly terrain and on flat lowlands", often "interspersed among legitimate crops to deter detection", in 12 of the 17 north-eastern provinces, "centred around Nakhon Phanom, Sakhon Nakhon and Nong Khai".<ref name="Stamler1985">{{cite journal \|last1=Stamler \|first1=R. T. \|last2=Fahlman \|first2=R. C. \|last3=Vigeant \|first3=H. \|title=Illicit traffic and abuse of cannabis in Canada \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=4 \|pages=37–49 \|year=1985 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1985-01-01_4_page006.html}}</ref>

	== Cannabis in Thailand and Laos ==		== Cannabis in Thailand and Laos ==

Panama

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:48:18 GMT

Link the Bulletin on Narcotics at its first mention in the text

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:48, 16 October 2026
Line 50:		Line 50:
	According to the 1932 report, most Army officers commanding troops did not accept these findings and held that the drug was habit-forming and undermined military morale. A year's study ordered in 1928 led the Department Surgeon to report in June 1929 that use was not widespread and did little harm to discipline, but on 1 December 1930 the Department Commander forbade soldiers to smoke it, on pain of trial for each offence. In June 1931 the committee was convened again, at the commanding general's request, to gather evidence that might support regulations against the cultivation, possession or sale of the plant in the Canal Zone. Between December 1931 and October 1932 it observed at Gorgas Hospital 34 soldiers who smoked marihuana grown at the Canal Zone Experiment Gardens, and found the drug, as grown and used on the isthmus, "a mild stimulant and intoxicant", with no symptoms on withdrawal. Post surgeons' estimates of the share of each command who were habitual users ran from 0.6 per cent at Fort Amador to 20 per cent at [[wikipedia:Fort Clayton\|Fort Clayton]]. In the two years to June 1932, possession or use of the drug figured among the charges against 51 soldiers tried by court martial, 4 of them with violence or insubordination.<ref name="Siler1933"/>		According to the 1932 report, most Army officers commanding troops did not accept these findings and held that the drug was habit-forming and undermined military morale. A year's study ordered in 1928 led the Department Surgeon to report in June 1929 that use was not widespread and did little harm to discipline, but on 1 December 1930 the Department Commander forbade soldiers to smoke it, on pain of trial for each offence. In June 1931 the committee was convened again, at the commanding general's request, to gather evidence that might support regulations against the cultivation, possession or sale of the plant in the Canal Zone. Between December 1931 and October 1932 it observed at Gorgas Hospital 34 soldiers who smoked marihuana grown at the Canal Zone Experiment Gardens, and found the drug, as grown and used on the isthmus, "a mild stimulant and intoxicant", with no symptoms on withdrawal. Post surgeons' estimates of the share of each command who were habitual users ran from 0.6 per cent at Fort Amador to 20 per cent at [[wikipedia:Fort Clayton\|Fort Clayton]]. In the two years to June 1932, possession or use of the drug figured among the charges against 51 soldiers tried by court martial, 4 of them with violence or insubordination.<ref name="Siler1933"/>

	The committee classed 85 per cent of the 34 soldiers as mentally abnormal, in the clinical terms of its day "constitutional psychopaths" and "morons", and held that commanders had "unduly emphasized the effects of mariajuana, disregarding the fact that a large proportion of the delinquents are morons or psychopaths". It recommended that the ban on military reservations stay in force and that no further legislation be sought.<ref name="Siler1933"/> H.B.M. Murphy quoted its conclusions in a review for the United Nations ''Bulletin on Narcotics'' in 1963, observing that the inquiry reported no psychosis over a year among what he estimated at about 500 users,<ref name="Murphy1963">{{cite journal \|last=Murphy \|first=H.B.M. \|title=The cannabis habit: a review of recent psychiatric literature \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|issue=1 \|pages=15–24 \|year=1963 \|publisher=United Nations \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1963-01-01_1_page004.html}}</ref> and [[Ernest L. Abel]] returned to the report in 1982.<ref name="Abel1982">{{cite journal \|last=Abel \|first=E.L. \|title=Marijuana on trial: the Panama Canal Zone report \|journal=International Journal of the Addictions \|volume=17 \|issue=4 \|year=1982 \|pages=667–678 \|doi=10.3109/10826088209053010 \|pmid=7049968}}</ref>		The committee classed 85 per cent of the 34 soldiers as mentally abnormal, in the clinical terms of its day "constitutional psychopaths" and "morons", and held that commanders had "unduly emphasized the effects of mariajuana, disregarding the fact that a large proportion of the delinquents are morons or psychopaths". It recommended that the ban on military reservations stay in force and that no further legislation be sought.<ref name="Siler1933"/> H.B.M. Murphy quoted its conclusions in a review for the United Nations ''[[Bulletin on Narcotics]]'' in 1963, observing that the inquiry reported no psychosis over a year among what he estimated at about 500 users,<ref name="Murphy1963">{{cite journal \|last=Murphy \|first=H.B.M. \|title=The cannabis habit: a review of recent psychiatric literature \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|issue=1 \|pages=15–24 \|year=1963 \|publisher=United Nations \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1963-01-01_1_page004.html}}</ref> and [[Ernest L. Abel]] returned to the report in 1982.<ref name="Abel1982">{{cite journal \|last=Abel \|first=E.L. \|title=Marijuana on trial: the Panama Canal Zone report \|journal=International Journal of the Addictions \|volume=17 \|issue=4 \|year=1982 \|pages=667–678 \|doi=10.3109/10826088209053010 \|pmid=7049968}}</ref>

	In December 1941 the War Department sent Congress a bill to add an article on marihuana to the Canal Zone Code, drafted at the request of the commanding general of the Panama Canal Department. The report of the House committee said that the Canal Zone had no marihuana law, that the military authorities now held its use "materially detrimental to morale" and a cause of delinquency, and that the Republic of Panama prohibited its possession, cultivation and use. Under the bill it would be unlawful to produce, possess, sell, give away, transport, import or export marihuana in the Canal Zone except under licence, and a first offence would carry a fine of up to $100 or up to 30 days in jail.<ref name="HRep77-1552"/>{{rp\|1–4}}		In December 1941 the War Department sent Congress a bill to add an article on marihuana to the Canal Zone Code, drafted at the request of the commanding general of the Panama Canal Department. The report of the House committee said that the Canal Zone had no marihuana law, that the military authorities now held its use "materially detrimental to morale" and a cause of delinquency, and that the Republic of Panama prohibited its possession, cultivation and use. Under the bill it would be unlawful to produce, possess, sell, give away, transport, import or export marihuana in the Canal Zone except under licence, and a first offence would carry a fine of up to $100 or up to 30 days in jail.<ref name="HRep77-1552"/>{{rp\|1–4}}

Northeastern Thailand

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:47:56 GMT

Link the Bulletin on Narcotics at its first mention in the text

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:47, 16 October 2026
Line 44:		Line 44:
	== Culture ==		== Culture ==

	Cannabis has the Thai name ''kancha'' (กัญชา).<ref name="martin1975">{{cite book \|chapter=Ethnobotanical Aspects of Cannabis in Southeast Asia \|last=Martin \|first=Marie Alexandrine \|editor-last=Rubin \|editor-first=Vera \|title=Cannabis and Culture \|title-link=Cannabis and Culture (1975) \|publisher=Mouton \|location=The Hague \|year=1975 \|pages=63–76 \|doi=10.1515/9783110812060.63}}</ref>{{Rp\|64}} The Forest Herbarium's collectors wrote the local name ''kan cha'' on a sheet from Loei in 1958 and ''po kan cha'' on one from Phu Kradueng in 1948.<ref name="BKF-009253">{{cite web \|title=Digitised sheet SN 009253 \|website=Forest Herbarium collections \|publisher=Forest Herbarium, Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation \|url=https://botany.dnp.go.th/image/Specimens/Cannabaceae/009253_1.jpg \|access-date=12 October 2026}}</ref><ref name="BKF-009255"/> The physician Joel Fort wrote in the ''Bulletin on Narcotics'' in 1965 that cannabis was "widely used in the country, particularly in the north-east by smoking in pipes or cigarettes or adding it to food".<ref name="Fort1965">{{cite journal \|last=Fort \|first=J. \|title=Giver of delight or liberator of sin: drug use and "addiction" in Asia \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=3 \|year=1965 \|pages=1–11 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1965-01-01_3_page002.html \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> In Thailand ground cannabis flowers were added to the curry ''kaeng phet''.<ref name="martin1975"/>{{Rp\|73}} Among 45 long-term cannabis users in [[Kalasin Province\|Kalasin]] followed for a year in a study published in 2019, all of them men and just over a third of them farmers, the bamboo pipe was the main way of using it.<ref name="Ritmontree2019">{{cite journal \|last1=Ritmontree \|first1=Sujitta \|last2=Kanato \|first2=Manop \|last3=Leyatikul \|first3=Poonrut \|title=The health, economic, and social effects of cannabis use in Thailand \|journal=F1000Research \|volume=8 \|article-number=614 \|year=2019 \|doi=10.12688/f1000research.17391.1 \|doi-access=free}}</ref>		Cannabis has the Thai name ''kancha'' (กัญชา).<ref name="martin1975">{{cite book \|chapter=Ethnobotanical Aspects of Cannabis in Southeast Asia \|last=Martin \|first=Marie Alexandrine \|editor-last=Rubin \|editor-first=Vera \|title=Cannabis and Culture \|title-link=Cannabis and Culture (1975) \|publisher=Mouton \|location=The Hague \|year=1975 \|pages=63–76 \|doi=10.1515/9783110812060.63}}</ref>{{Rp\|64}} The Forest Herbarium's collectors wrote the local name ''kan cha'' on a sheet from Loei in 1958 and ''po kan cha'' on one from Phu Kradueng in 1948.<ref name="BKF-009253">{{cite web \|title=Digitised sheet SN 009253 \|website=Forest Herbarium collections \|publisher=Forest Herbarium, Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation \|url=https://botany.dnp.go.th/image/Specimens/Cannabaceae/009253_1.jpg \|access-date=12 October 2026}}</ref><ref name="BKF-009255"/> The physician Joel Fort wrote in the ''[[Bulletin on Narcotics]]'' in 1965 that cannabis was "widely used in the country, particularly in the north-east by smoking in pipes or cigarettes or adding it to food".<ref name="Fort1965">{{cite journal \|last=Fort \|first=J. \|title=Giver of delight or liberator of sin: drug use and "addiction" in Asia \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=3 \|year=1965 \|pages=1–11 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1965-01-01_3_page002.html \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> In Thailand ground cannabis flowers were added to the curry ''kaeng phet''.<ref name="martin1975"/>{{Rp\|73}} Among 45 long-term cannabis users in [[Kalasin Province\|Kalasin]] followed for a year in a study published in 2019, all of them men and just over a third of them farmers, the bamboo pipe was the main way of using it.<ref name="Ritmontree2019">{{cite journal \|last1=Ritmontree \|first1=Sujitta \|last2=Kanato \|first2=Manop \|last3=Leyatikul \|first3=Poonrut \|title=The health, economic, and social effects of cannabis use in Thailand \|journal=F1000Research \|volume=8 \|article-number=614 \|year=2019 \|doi=10.12688/f1000research.17391.1 \|doi-access=free}}</ref>

	''Hang kra rog'' (หางกระรอก), "squirrel's tail", refers to inflorescences that resemble the tail of a squirrel,<ref name="Pongnaratorn2025">{{cite journal \|last1=Pongnaratorn \|first1=Panicha \|last2=Sophon \|first2=Natthida \|last3=Boueroy \|first3=Parichart \|title=''In vitro'' antimicrobial activity of Thai stick cannabis Hang Kra Rog Phu Phan (''Cannabis sativa'' L.), sugar leaves extract against pathogenic bacteria \|journal=Journal of Advanced Veterinary and Animal Research \|volume=12 \|issue=1 \|pages=44–52 \|date=March 2025 \|doi=10.5455/javar.2025.l870 \|doi-access=free}}</ref> and the name is joined to the Phu Phan range in ''Hang Kra Rog Phu Phan''. ''Hang suea'' (หางเสือ) is the name of a second Thai type.<ref name="DOA2021-Notice"/>{{Rp\|12}} When the Department of Medical Sciences and Rajamangala University of Technology Isan applied in 2021 to register a line of ''Hang Kra Rog Phu Phan'', they matched its seed with the descriptions given by village sages and folk doctors in Sakon Nakhon.<ref name="DOA2021-Notice"/>{{Rp\|2}} Researchers at the Sakon Nakhon campus of [[wikipedia:Kasetsart University\|Kasetsart University]] write that ''hang krarok'' is commonly grown in the province and that its leaves have been used in folk medicine for epilepsy, paralysis, stomach ache, nausea and lack of appetite and as a sleeping aid.<ref name="Watanakul2024">{{cite journal \|last1=Watanakul \|first1=Phurin \|last2=Phattaralerphong \|first2=Jessada \|last3=Pitija \|first3=Kitsada \|last4=Nakmee \|first4=Pattarawadee Sumthong \|title=Terpenoid profiling of Thai strain cannabis leaves (Cannabis sativa L. subsp. sativa) by headspace (HS) couple with GC/MS \|journal=Journal of Pharmacy \|volume=4 \|issue=1 \|pages=3–11 \|year=2024 \|doi=10.31436/jop.v4i1.225 \|doi-access=free}}</ref>{{Rp\|4}}		''Hang kra rog'' (หางกระรอก), "squirrel's tail", refers to inflorescences that resemble the tail of a squirrel,<ref name="Pongnaratorn2025">{{cite journal \|last1=Pongnaratorn \|first1=Panicha \|last2=Sophon \|first2=Natthida \|last3=Boueroy \|first3=Parichart \|title=''In vitro'' antimicrobial activity of Thai stick cannabis Hang Kra Rog Phu Phan (''Cannabis sativa'' L.), sugar leaves extract against pathogenic bacteria \|journal=Journal of Advanced Veterinary and Animal Research \|volume=12 \|issue=1 \|pages=44–52 \|date=March 2025 \|doi=10.5455/javar.2025.l870 \|doi-access=free}}</ref> and the name is joined to the Phu Phan range in ''Hang Kra Rog Phu Phan''. ''Hang suea'' (หางเสือ) is the name of a second Thai type.<ref name="DOA2021-Notice"/>{{Rp\|12}} When the Department of Medical Sciences and Rajamangala University of Technology Isan applied in 2021 to register a line of ''Hang Kra Rog Phu Phan'', they matched its seed with the descriptions given by village sages and folk doctors in Sakon Nakhon.<ref name="DOA2021-Notice"/>{{Rp\|2}} Researchers at the Sakon Nakhon campus of [[wikipedia:Kasetsart University\|Kasetsart University]] write that ''hang krarok'' is commonly grown in the province and that its leaves have been used in folk medicine for epilepsy, paralysis, stomach ache, nausea and lack of appetite and as a sleeping aid.<ref name="Watanakul2024">{{cite journal \|last1=Watanakul \|first1=Phurin \|last2=Phattaralerphong \|first2=Jessada \|last3=Pitija \|first3=Kitsada \|last4=Nakmee \|first4=Pattarawadee Sumthong \|title=Terpenoid profiling of Thai strain cannabis leaves (Cannabis sativa L. subsp. sativa) by headspace (HS) couple with GC/MS \|journal=Journal of Pharmacy \|volume=4 \|issue=1 \|pages=3–11 \|year=2024 \|doi=10.31436/jop.v4i1.225 \|doi-access=free}}</ref>{{Rp\|4}}

Lebanon

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:47:42 GMT

Link the Bulletin on Narcotics at its first mention in the text

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:47, 16 October 2026
Line 39:		Line 39:
	=== History ===		=== History ===

	The Real Seed Company writes that the Bekaa has been a major centre of commercial hashish production for export since the early 20th century.<ref name="rsc-2020">{{cite web \|title=Lebanese \|website=The Real Seed Company \|url=https://therealseedcompany.com/product/lebanese-landrace-strain-cannabis-seeds/ \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200805223917/https://therealseedcompany.com/product/lebanese-landrace-strain-cannabis-seeds/ \|archive-date=5 August 2020 \|url-status=live \|access-date=17 September 2026}}</ref> A. Ahmed El Hadka, writing in the UN ''Bulletin on Narcotics'' in 1965, names Syria, Lebanon and [[Greece]] as major sources of supply for Egypt from 1926, when hashish began to enter it in enormous quantities, especially from Syria and Lebanon.<ref name="ElHadka1965">{{cite journal \|last=El Hadka \|first=A. Ahmed \|title=Forty years of the campaign against narcotic drugs in the United Arab Republic \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=4 \|pages=1–12 \|year=1965 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1965-01-01_4_page002.html}}</ref> The Transnational Institute writes that the Egyptian ban on cannabis affected the whole eastern Mediterranean and that Lebanon was among the countries, with Greece, [[Cyprus]], [[Turkey]], Sudan, Syria and Palestine, asked to help Egypt's law enforcement authorities by restricting cultivation and trade.<ref name="TNI2014">{{cite report \|last1=Bewley-Taylor \|first1=Dave \|last2=Blickman \|first2=Tom \|last3=Jelsma \|first3=Martin \|title=The Rise and Decline of Cannabis Prohibition: The history of cannabis in the UN drug control system and options for reform \|chapter=The history of cannabis in the international drug control system \|chapter-url=https://www.tni.org/files/download/rise_and_decline_ch1.pdf \|publisher=Transnational Institute; Global Drug Policy Observatory \|location=Amsterdam; Swansea \|date=March 2014}}</ref>{{Rp\|11}}		The Real Seed Company writes that the Bekaa has been a major centre of commercial hashish production for export since the early 20th century.<ref name="rsc-2020">{{cite web \|title=Lebanese \|website=The Real Seed Company \|url=https://therealseedcompany.com/product/lebanese-landrace-strain-cannabis-seeds/ \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200805223917/https://therealseedcompany.com/product/lebanese-landrace-strain-cannabis-seeds/ \|archive-date=5 August 2020 \|url-status=live \|access-date=17 September 2026}}</ref> A. Ahmed El Hadka, writing in the UN ''[[Bulletin on Narcotics]]'' in 1965, names Syria, Lebanon and [[Greece]] as major sources of supply for Egypt from 1926, when hashish began to enter it in enormous quantities, especially from Syria and Lebanon.<ref name="ElHadka1965">{{cite journal \|last=El Hadka \|first=A. Ahmed \|title=Forty years of the campaign against narcotic drugs in the United Arab Republic \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=4 \|pages=1–12 \|year=1965 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1965-01-01_4_page002.html}}</ref> The Transnational Institute writes that the Egyptian ban on cannabis affected the whole eastern Mediterranean and that Lebanon was among the countries, with Greece, [[Cyprus]], [[Turkey]], Sudan, Syria and Palestine, asked to help Egypt's law enforcement authorities by restricting cultivation and trade.<ref name="TNI2014">{{cite report \|last1=Bewley-Taylor \|first1=Dave \|last2=Blickman \|first2=Tom \|last3=Jelsma \|first3=Martin \|title=The Rise and Decline of Cannabis Prohibition: The history of cannabis in the UN drug control system and options for reform \|chapter=The history of cannabis in the international drug control system \|chapter-url=https://www.tni.org/files/download/rise_and_decline_ch1.pdf \|publisher=Transnational Institute; Global Drug Policy Observatory \|location=Amsterdam; Swansea \|date=March 2014}}</ref>{{Rp\|11}}

	=== Cultivation ===		=== Cultivation ===

Iraq

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:47:26 GMT

Link the Bulletin on Narcotics at its first mention in the text

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:47, 16 October 2026
Line 54:		Line 54:
	In March 1924 the British High Commissioner listed "Traffic in Drugs" among the international undertakings that separate agreements under Article X of the [[wikipedia:Anglo-Iraqi Treaty of 1922\|Anglo-Iraqi Treaty]] were to secure.<ref name="CO1925-Iraq">{{cite report \|author=Colonial Office \|title=Report by His Britannic Majesty's Government on the Administration of ʿIraq for the Period April, 1923–December, 1924 \|series=Colonial No. 13 \|publisher=His Majesty's Stationery Office \|location=London \|year=1925 \|url=https://archive.org/details/report-admin-iraq-1920-27}}</ref>{{rp\|55–56}} By 1926 Britain had adhered on Iraq's behalf to the [[wikipedia:First International Opium Convention\|Hague Opium Convention]] of 1912 and the [[International Opium Convention (1925)\|Geneva convention of 1925]]. Under the latter the Ministry of Interior issued a notification on dangerous and intoxicating drugs, their manufacture, import, export, transit and illegal possession.<ref name="CO1927-Iraq">{{cite report \|author=Colonial Office \|title=Report by His Britannic Majesty's Government to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of ʿIraq for the Year 1926 \|series=Colonial No. 29 \|publisher=His Majesty's Stationery Office \|location=London \|year=1927 \|url=https://archive.org/details/report-admin-iraq-1920-27}}</ref>{{rp\|57–58}} In 1927 the Criminal Investigation Department worked with the police and the customs on cases of opium and ''[[charas]]'' smuggling.<ref name="CO1928-Iraq">{{cite report \|author=Colonial Office \|title=Report by His Britannic Majesty's Government to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of ʿIraq for the Year 1927 \|series=Colonial No. 35 \|publisher=His Majesty's Stationery Office \|location=London \|year=1928 \|url=https://archive.org/details/report-admin-iraq-1927}}</ref>{{rp\|69–70}} The ban on growing hemp came at the end of the decade, and before 1931 the Iraqi parliament passed a law for the country's accession to the International Opium Convention and its protocol.<ref name="CO1931-Iraq"/>{{rp\|18–19, 138–139}}		In March 1924 the British High Commissioner listed "Traffic in Drugs" among the international undertakings that separate agreements under Article X of the [[wikipedia:Anglo-Iraqi Treaty of 1922\|Anglo-Iraqi Treaty]] were to secure.<ref name="CO1925-Iraq">{{cite report \|author=Colonial Office \|title=Report by His Britannic Majesty's Government on the Administration of ʿIraq for the Period April, 1923–December, 1924 \|series=Colonial No. 13 \|publisher=His Majesty's Stationery Office \|location=London \|year=1925 \|url=https://archive.org/details/report-admin-iraq-1920-27}}</ref>{{rp\|55–56}} By 1926 Britain had adhered on Iraq's behalf to the [[wikipedia:First International Opium Convention\|Hague Opium Convention]] of 1912 and the [[International Opium Convention (1925)\|Geneva convention of 1925]]. Under the latter the Ministry of Interior issued a notification on dangerous and intoxicating drugs, their manufacture, import, export, transit and illegal possession.<ref name="CO1927-Iraq">{{cite report \|author=Colonial Office \|title=Report by His Britannic Majesty's Government to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of ʿIraq for the Year 1926 \|series=Colonial No. 29 \|publisher=His Majesty's Stationery Office \|location=London \|year=1927 \|url=https://archive.org/details/report-admin-iraq-1920-27}}</ref>{{rp\|57–58}} In 1927 the Criminal Investigation Department worked with the police and the customs on cases of opium and ''[[charas]]'' smuggling.<ref name="CO1928-Iraq">{{cite report \|author=Colonial Office \|title=Report by His Britannic Majesty's Government to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of ʿIraq for the Year 1927 \|series=Colonial No. 35 \|publisher=His Majesty's Stationery Office \|location=London \|year=1928 \|url=https://archive.org/details/report-admin-iraq-1927}}</ref>{{rp\|69–70}} The ban on growing hemp came at the end of the decade, and before 1931 the Iraqi parliament passed a law for the country's accession to the International Opium Convention and its protocol.<ref name="CO1931-Iraq"/>{{rp\|18–19, 138–139}}

	At the [[wikipedia:League of Nations\|League of Nations]]' Advisory Committee on the opium traffic in 1934, the Egyptian representative named Iraq with [[Bulgaria]], Egypt, [[Greece]], [[Turkey]] and [[wikipedia:Yugoslavia\|Yugoslavia]] among the countries that had recently prohibited the cultivation of Indian hemp.<ref name="LoN1934">{{cite report \|author=League of Nations, Advisory Committee on Traffic in Opium and Other Dangerous Drugs \|title=Report to the Council on the Work of the Nineteenth Session \|id=C.630.M.241.1934.XI \|location=Geneva \|date=4 December 1934 \|url=https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.85667}}</ref> Iraq's Dangerous Drug Law No. 44 of 1938, which brought existing legislation into line with the Limitation Convention of 1931, came into force on 14 June 1938. That year's report to the League said that the illegal traffic in hashish had increased, that the drug came in from Syria and that its users smoked in secret.<ref name="LoN1940"/> J. Bouquet wrote in the UN ''Bulletin on Narcotics'' in 1951 that growing and storing cannabis were forbidden in Iraq, but that a considerable traffic in hashish existed, probably fed in part by Iranian plantations.<ref name="Bouquet1951">{{cite journal \|last=Bouquet \|first=J. \|title=Cannabis (concluded) \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=1 \|pages=22–45 \|year=1951 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1951-01-01_1_page005.html}}</ref>		At the [[wikipedia:League of Nations\|League of Nations]]' Advisory Committee on the opium traffic in 1934, the Egyptian representative named Iraq with [[Bulgaria]], Egypt, [[Greece]], [[Turkey]] and [[wikipedia:Yugoslavia\|Yugoslavia]] among the countries that had recently prohibited the cultivation of Indian hemp.<ref name="LoN1934">{{cite report \|author=League of Nations, Advisory Committee on Traffic in Opium and Other Dangerous Drugs \|title=Report to the Council on the Work of the Nineteenth Session \|id=C.630.M.241.1934.XI \|location=Geneva \|date=4 December 1934 \|url=https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.85667}}</ref> Iraq's Dangerous Drug Law No. 44 of 1938, which brought existing legislation into line with the Limitation Convention of 1931, came into force on 14 June 1938. That year's report to the League said that the illegal traffic in hashish had increased, that the drug came in from Syria and that its users smoked in secret.<ref name="LoN1940"/> J. Bouquet wrote in the UN ''[[Bulletin on Narcotics]]'' in 1951 that growing and storing cannabis were forbidden in Iraq, but that a considerable traffic in hashish existed, probably fed in part by Iranian plantations.<ref name="Bouquet1951">{{cite journal \|last=Bouquet \|first=J. \|title=Cannabis (concluded) \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=1 \|pages=22–45 \|year=1951 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1951-01-01_1_page005.html}}</ref>

	==== Republic ====		==== Republic ====

History of cannabis in the Philippines

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:47:06 GMT

Point the Bulletin on Narcotics link at the wiki's own page instead of Wikipedia

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:47, 16 October 2026
Line 35:		Line 35:
	In June 1953 Republic Act No. 887 added "Indian hemp (marihuana)" to the prohibited drugs of the National Internal Revenue Code.<ref name="RA887-1953"/> The Narcotic Drugs Law (Republic Act No. 953), approved the next day, required everyone who produced, imported, sold or gave away opium or marihuana to register with the Collector of Internal Revenue and pay fixed taxes, and declared: "As a national policy the cultivation of marihuana (indian hemp) and opium poppy is hereby declared prohibited."<ref name="RA953-1953"/> Republic Act No. 2060 of 13 June 1958 added Indian hemp to the prohibited drugs of the Revised Penal Code, defining it as "otherwise known as marihuana, cannabis Americana, hashish, bhang, guaza, churrus, and ganjah".<ref name="RA2060-1958">{{cite act \|title=An Act Amending Article One Hundred and Ninety of the Revised Penal Code, so as to Include Marihuana and Similar Drugs Among the Prohibited Drugs \|type=Republic Act \|number=2060 \|date=13 June 1958 \|jurisdiction=Philippines \|url=https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/2/8247 \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> The Philippines signed the [[Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs]] at New York on 30 March 1961, the day it was concluded. It ratified the convention on 2 October 1967.<ref name="UNTC-VI-15">{{cite web \|title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 15 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-15&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref>		In June 1953 Republic Act No. 887 added "Indian hemp (marihuana)" to the prohibited drugs of the National Internal Revenue Code.<ref name="RA887-1953"/> The Narcotic Drugs Law (Republic Act No. 953), approved the next day, required everyone who produced, imported, sold or gave away opium or marihuana to register with the Collector of Internal Revenue and pay fixed taxes, and declared: "As a national policy the cultivation of marihuana (indian hemp) and opium poppy is hereby declared prohibited."<ref name="RA953-1953"/> Republic Act No. 2060 of 13 June 1958 added Indian hemp to the prohibited drugs of the Revised Penal Code, defining it as "otherwise known as marihuana, cannabis Americana, hashish, bhang, guaza, churrus, and ganjah".<ref name="RA2060-1958">{{cite act \|title=An Act Amending Article One Hundred and Ninety of the Revised Penal Code, so as to Include Marihuana and Similar Drugs Among the Prohibited Drugs \|type=Republic Act \|number=2060 \|date=13 June 1958 \|jurisdiction=Philippines \|url=https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/2/8247 \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> The Philippines signed the [[Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs]] at New York on 30 March 1961, the day it was concluded. It ratified the convention on 2 October 1967.<ref name="UNTC-VI-15">{{cite web \|title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 15 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-15&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref>

	Zarco, drawing on Manila newspapers of January and February 1959, dated the illegal entry of marijuana to 1954 or 1955. In his account American merchant marine sailors gave seeds to residents of [[Pasay]] and [[Makati]], who grew the plants in flower pots and dried the flowering tops and leaves, mixed them with tobacco and rolled them into cigarettes for sale to "Manila's addicts and transients". [[wikipedia:Philippine Constabulary\|Philippine Constabulary]] raiders questioned arrested growers on 8 January 1959. Farmers in [[Masbate]], Cebu and [[Negros Oriental]] were also found growing the plant.<ref name="Zarco1995"/> Writing in the ''[[~~wikipedia:Bulletin on Narcotics\|~~Bulletin on Narcotics]]'' in 1965, Joel Fort estimated that the Philippines had 5,000 users of narcotics, most of them smoking opium or injecting morphine, and noted "some use of cannabis".<ref name="Fort1965">{{cite journal \|last=Fort \|first=J. \|title=Giver of delight or liberator of sin: drug use and "addiction" in Asia \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=3 \|year=1965 \|pages=1–11 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1965-01-01_3_page002.html \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> When the [[wikipedia:National Bureau of Investigation (Philippines)\|National Bureau of Investigation]] opened the country's first treatment and rehabilitation centre in 1965, there were 930 drug dependants, according to Aurora Cudal: 615 abused heroin and 13 marijuana.<ref name="Cudal1976">{{cite journal \|last=Cudal \|first=A.S. \|title=Educational programmes on the prevention and control of drug abuse in the Philippines \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=3 \|year=1976 \|pages=1–9 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1976-01-01_3_page002.html \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref>		Zarco, drawing on Manila newspapers of January and February 1959, dated the illegal entry of marijuana to 1954 or 1955. In his account American merchant marine sailors gave seeds to residents of [[Pasay]] and [[Makati]], who grew the plants in flower pots and dried the flowering tops and leaves, mixed them with tobacco and rolled them into cigarettes for sale to "Manila's addicts and transients". [[wikipedia:Philippine Constabulary\|Philippine Constabulary]] raiders questioned arrested growers on 8 January 1959. Farmers in [[Masbate]], Cebu and [[Negros Oriental]] were also found growing the plant.<ref name="Zarco1995"/> Writing in the ''[[Bulletin on Narcotics]]'' in 1965, Joel Fort estimated that the Philippines had 5,000 users of narcotics, most of them smoking opium or injecting morphine, and noted "some use of cannabis".<ref name="Fort1965">{{cite journal \|last=Fort \|first=J. \|title=Giver of delight or liberator of sin: drug use and "addiction" in Asia \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=3 \|year=1965 \|pages=1–11 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1965-01-01_3_page002.html \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> When the [[wikipedia:National Bureau of Investigation (Philippines)\|National Bureau of Investigation]] opened the country's first treatment and rehabilitation centre in 1965, there were 930 drug dependants, according to Aurora Cudal: 615 abused heroin and 13 marijuana.<ref name="Cudal1976">{{cite journal \|last=Cudal \|first=A.S. \|title=Educational programmes on the prevention and control of drug abuse in the Philippines \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=3 \|year=1976 \|pages=1–9 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1976-01-01_3_page002.html \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref>

	On 10 February 1971 agents of the bureau's narcotics division raided a plantation of about 100 marijuana plants at Malagasang in Imus, Cavite. According to the [[wikipedia:Supreme Court of the Philippines\|Supreme Court]]'s decision in the case, the plantation was protected by the bandit Leonardo Manecio, known as Nardong Putik, who shared its marijuana sales with the owner; his men captured two of the agents and killed them.<ref name="Jimenez1981">{{cite web \|title=People of the Philippines v. Jimenez, G.R. Nos. L-36613-14 \|date=24 July 1981 \|publisher=Supreme Court of the Philippines \|via=The LawPhil Project \|url=https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1981/jul1981/gr_36613_14_1981.html \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> Tony Cayado's film ''Nardong Putik'' (1972) was based on his case.<ref name="LascoYu2023">{{cite journal \|last1=Lasco \|first1=G. \|last2=Yu \|first2=V.G. \|title=Drugs and the Marcos dictatorship: the beginnings of the Philippines' punitive drug regime (1970–1975) \|journal=Journal of Illicit Economies and Development \|volume=5 \|issue=2 \|year=2023 \|pages=42–53 \|doi=10.31389/jied.210}}</ref> Cesarea Goduco-Auglar, clinical director of the National Mental Hospital, wrote in the ''Bulletin on Narcotics'' in 1972 that the main drug of abuse among students "seems to be marijuana" and that ten to twenty students and young people came to the attention of the bureau's narcotics division every day for marijuana. She reported indications that local dealers had begun growing their own supplies to meet student demand, with plantations found around Manila, in [[Caloocan]], [[Quezon City]], [[Las Piñas]], Rizal and Cavite. There appeared also to be plantations on Negros, in the [[Bicol Region]], in Mindanao and in [[Central Luzon]].<ref name="GoducoAuglar1972"/> Michael Tan attributed the increase in reported drug problems among young Filipinos in the late 1960s in part to the influence of the western "hippie" culture and to the country's role as a transhipment point for a drug trade serving United States servicemen on rest and recreation from the [[wikipedia:Vietnam War\|Vietnam War]].<ref name="Tan1995">{{cite journal \|last=Tan \|first=M.L. \|title=The construction of "drug abuse" in the Philippines: the case of cough preparations \|journal=Philippine Sociological Review \|volume=43 \|issue=1–4 \|year=1995 \|pages=17–42 \|url=https://pssc.org.ph/wp-content/pssc-archives/Philippine%20Sociological%20Review/1995/05_The%20Construction%20of%20Drug%20Abuse%20in%20the%20Philippines_%20The%20Case%20of%20Cough%20Preparations.pdf \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref>		On 10 February 1971 agents of the bureau's narcotics division raided a plantation of about 100 marijuana plants at Malagasang in Imus, Cavite. According to the [[wikipedia:Supreme Court of the Philippines\|Supreme Court]]'s decision in the case, the plantation was protected by the bandit Leonardo Manecio, known as Nardong Putik, who shared its marijuana sales with the owner; his men captured two of the agents and killed them.<ref name="Jimenez1981">{{cite web \|title=People of the Philippines v. Jimenez, G.R. Nos. L-36613-14 \|date=24 July 1981 \|publisher=Supreme Court of the Philippines \|via=The LawPhil Project \|url=https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1981/jul1981/gr_36613_14_1981.html \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> Tony Cayado's film ''Nardong Putik'' (1972) was based on his case.<ref name="LascoYu2023">{{cite journal \|last1=Lasco \|first1=G. \|last2=Yu \|first2=V.G. \|title=Drugs and the Marcos dictatorship: the beginnings of the Philippines' punitive drug regime (1970–1975) \|journal=Journal of Illicit Economies and Development \|volume=5 \|issue=2 \|year=2023 \|pages=42–53 \|doi=10.31389/jied.210}}</ref> Cesarea Goduco-Auglar, clinical director of the National Mental Hospital, wrote in the ''Bulletin on Narcotics'' in 1972 that the main drug of abuse among students "seems to be marijuana" and that ten to twenty students and young people came to the attention of the bureau's narcotics division every day for marijuana. She reported indications that local dealers had begun growing their own supplies to meet student demand, with plantations found around Manila, in [[Caloocan]], [[Quezon City]], [[Las Piñas]], Rizal and Cavite. There appeared also to be plantations on Negros, in the [[Bicol Region]], in Mindanao and in [[Central Luzon]].<ref name="GoducoAuglar1972"/> Michael Tan attributed the increase in reported drug problems among young Filipinos in the late 1960s in part to the influence of the western "hippie" culture and to the country's role as a transhipment point for a drug trade serving United States servicemen on rest and recreation from the [[wikipedia:Vietnam War\|Vietnam War]].<ref name="Tan1995">{{cite journal \|last=Tan \|first=M.L. \|title=The construction of "drug abuse" in the Philippines: the case of cough preparations \|journal=Philippine Sociological Review \|volume=43 \|issue=1–4 \|year=1995 \|pages=17–42 \|url=https://pssc.org.ph/wp-content/pssc-archives/Philippine%20Sociological%20Review/1995/05_The%20Construction%20of%20Drug%20Abuse%20in%20the%20Philippines_%20The%20Case%20of%20Cough%20Preparations.pdf \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref>

Hashish

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:46:53 GMT

Link the Bulletin on Narcotics at its first mention in the text

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:46, 16 October 2026
Line 71:		Line 71:
	The sources do not agree on when Egypt first banned hashish. A report of 2014 by the [[wikipedia:Transnational Institute\|Transnational Institute]] (TNI) dates the first prohibition of cultivation, use and importation to 1868, when Egypt was still ruled by the [[wikipedia:Ottoman Empire\|Ottoman]] sultan. It lists a tax on imports in 1874, although possession had been made illegal; a campaign to confiscate and destroy cannabis in 1877; a law against cultivation and importation in 1879; and the making of cultivation a criminal offence in 1884. Customs officers were allowed to sell confiscated hashish abroad to pay informers and the officers who had made the seizures. The decrees were reissued in 1891 and 1894 with little effect on use among the urban and rural poor.<ref name="TNI2014"/>{{Rp\|5}} A. Ahmed El Hadka, writing in 1965, dates to 1879 a law forbidding the cultivation of cannabis.<ref name="ElHadka1965">{{cite journal \|last=El Hadka \|first=A. Ahmed \|title=Forty years of the campaign against narcotic drugs in the United Arab Republic \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=4 \|pages=1–12 \|year=1965 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1965-01-01_4_page002.html}}</ref> Ahmad M. Khalifa, in 1975, calls the legislation of 1879 the first; it prohibited only cultivation.<ref name="khalifa1975">{{cite book \|last=Khalifa \|first=Ahmad M. \|chapter=Traditional patterns of hashish use in Egypt \|editor-last=Rubin \|editor-first=Vera \|title=Cannabis and Culture \|title-link=Cannabis and Culture (1975) \|location=The Hague \|publisher=Mouton \|year=1975 \|pages=195–206 \|doi=10.1515/9783110812060.195}}</ref>{{Rp\|199}} Egypt's delegate to the Second Opium Conference at Geneva, [[Mohamed El Guindy]], told it that a Dr Mohammed Ali Bey had reported to the authorities in 1868 on the accidents caused by the abuse of hashish and that cultivation had been forbidden in 1884.<ref name="Willoughby1925">{{cite book \|last=Willoughby \|first=W. W. \|title=Opium as an International Problem: The Geneva Conferences \|location=Baltimore \|publisher=The Johns Hopkins Press \|year=1925 \|url=https://archive.org/details/opiumasinternati00will \|via=Internet Archive}}</ref>{{Rp\|377}} M. I. Soueif of [[wikipedia:Cairo University\|Cairo University]] found in the laws passed since 1879 "a persistent tendency towards enforcing still severer penalties on users as well as traffickers".<ref name="Soueif1967">{{cite journal \|last=Soueif \|first=M. I. \|title=Hashish consumption in Egypt, with special reference to psychosocial aspects \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=2 \|pages=1–12 \|year=1967 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1967-01-01_2_page002.html}}</ref> Law 182 of 1960, as amended by Law 40 of 1966, made the illicit import, export, production or manufacture of drugs punishable by death and a fine of three to ten thousand pounds.<ref name="khalifa1975"/>{{Rp\|199}} Soueif noted in 1967 that no one had yet been executed under it.<ref name="Soueif1967"/>		The sources do not agree on when Egypt first banned hashish. A report of 2014 by the [[wikipedia:Transnational Institute\|Transnational Institute]] (TNI) dates the first prohibition of cultivation, use and importation to 1868, when Egypt was still ruled by the [[wikipedia:Ottoman Empire\|Ottoman]] sultan. It lists a tax on imports in 1874, although possession had been made illegal; a campaign to confiscate and destroy cannabis in 1877; a law against cultivation and importation in 1879; and the making of cultivation a criminal offence in 1884. Customs officers were allowed to sell confiscated hashish abroad to pay informers and the officers who had made the seizures. The decrees were reissued in 1891 and 1894 with little effect on use among the urban and rural poor.<ref name="TNI2014"/>{{Rp\|5}} A. Ahmed El Hadka, writing in 1965, dates to 1879 a law forbidding the cultivation of cannabis.<ref name="ElHadka1965">{{cite journal \|last=El Hadka \|first=A. Ahmed \|title=Forty years of the campaign against narcotic drugs in the United Arab Republic \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=4 \|pages=1–12 \|year=1965 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1965-01-01_4_page002.html}}</ref> Ahmad M. Khalifa, in 1975, calls the legislation of 1879 the first; it prohibited only cultivation.<ref name="khalifa1975">{{cite book \|last=Khalifa \|first=Ahmad M. \|chapter=Traditional patterns of hashish use in Egypt \|editor-last=Rubin \|editor-first=Vera \|title=Cannabis and Culture \|title-link=Cannabis and Culture (1975) \|location=The Hague \|publisher=Mouton \|year=1975 \|pages=195–206 \|doi=10.1515/9783110812060.195}}</ref>{{Rp\|199}} Egypt's delegate to the Second Opium Conference at Geneva, [[Mohamed El Guindy]], told it that a Dr Mohammed Ali Bey had reported to the authorities in 1868 on the accidents caused by the abuse of hashish and that cultivation had been forbidden in 1884.<ref name="Willoughby1925">{{cite book \|last=Willoughby \|first=W. W. \|title=Opium as an International Problem: The Geneva Conferences \|location=Baltimore \|publisher=The Johns Hopkins Press \|year=1925 \|url=https://archive.org/details/opiumasinternati00will \|via=Internet Archive}}</ref>{{Rp\|377}} M. I. Soueif of [[wikipedia:Cairo University\|Cairo University]] found in the laws passed since 1879 "a persistent tendency towards enforcing still severer penalties on users as well as traffickers".<ref name="Soueif1967">{{cite journal \|last=Soueif \|first=M. I. \|title=Hashish consumption in Egypt, with special reference to psychosocial aspects \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=2 \|pages=1–12 \|year=1967 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1967-01-01_2_page002.html}}</ref> Law 182 of 1960, as amended by Law 40 of 1966, made the illicit import, export, production or manufacture of drugs punishable by death and a fine of three to ten thousand pounds.<ref name="khalifa1975"/>{{Rp\|199}} Soueif noted in 1967 that no one had yet been executed under it.<ref name="Soueif1967"/>

	Much of the hashish used in Egypt came from abroad. Writing in the UN's ''Bulletin on Narcotics'' in 1951, J. Bouquet named [[Turkey]] and [[Greece]] as the main sources until some thirty years earlier: the smugglers' supplies to Egypt were Turkish and Greek hashish with some Indian charas. When Greek production dried up, Turkey raised its own, until a law of 1933 prohibited the cultivation, possession and use of hashish and the trade in it.<ref name="Bouquet1951">{{cite journal \|last=Bouquet \|first=J. \|title=Cannabis (concluded) \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=1 \|pages=22–45 \|year=1951 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1951-01-01_1_page005.html}}</ref> El Hadka writes that in 1926 Syria, Lebanon and Greece became major sources and that enormous quantities of hashish, especially from Syria and Lebanon, began to enter Egypt. Egyptian enforcement agencies seized 18.7 tons of hashish in 1928, a quantity not equalled even in 1958, when 18.6 tons were seized. The Bekaa was estimated to have harvested 60 tons in 1928, an estimated 90 per cent of it going to Egypt. Loads arrived hidden in steamers or sailing boats or were carried across [[Palestine]] into the [[wikipedia:Sinai Peninsula\|Sinai]] desert.<ref name="ElHadka1965"/> In 1958 G. T. Haneveld, writing from [[wikipedia:Beirut\|Beirut]] to a Dutch medical journal, thought Egypt probably the largest consumer of hashish in the [[wikipedia:Middle East\|Middle East]] and its supply to come for the most part from Syria and Lebanon.<ref name="Haneveld1959">{{cite journal \|last=Haneveld \|first=G. T. \|title=Hashish in Libanon \|trans-title=Hashish in Lebanon \|journal=Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde \|volume=103 \|issue=13 \|pages=686–688 \|date=28 March 1959 \|language=nl \|url=https://www.ntvg.nl/system/files/publications/1959106860001a.pdf}}</ref>{{Rp\|686}}		Much of the hashish used in Egypt came from abroad. Writing in the UN's ''[[Bulletin on Narcotics]]'' in 1951, J. Bouquet named [[Turkey]] and [[Greece]] as the main sources until some thirty years earlier: the smugglers' supplies to Egypt were Turkish and Greek hashish with some Indian charas. When Greek production dried up, Turkey raised its own, until a law of 1933 prohibited the cultivation, possession and use of hashish and the trade in it.<ref name="Bouquet1951">{{cite journal \|last=Bouquet \|first=J. \|title=Cannabis (concluded) \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=1 \|pages=22–45 \|year=1951 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1951-01-01_1_page005.html}}</ref> El Hadka writes that in 1926 Syria, Lebanon and Greece became major sources and that enormous quantities of hashish, especially from Syria and Lebanon, began to enter Egypt. Egyptian enforcement agencies seized 18.7 tons of hashish in 1928, a quantity not equalled even in 1958, when 18.6 tons were seized. The Bekaa was estimated to have harvested 60 tons in 1928, an estimated 90 per cent of it going to Egypt. Loads arrived hidden in steamers or sailing boats or were carried across [[Palestine]] into the [[wikipedia:Sinai Peninsula\|Sinai]] desert.<ref name="ElHadka1965"/> In 1958 G. T. Haneveld, writing from [[wikipedia:Beirut\|Beirut]] to a Dutch medical journal, thought Egypt probably the largest consumer of hashish in the [[wikipedia:Middle East\|Middle East]] and its supply to come for the most part from Syria and Lebanon.<ref name="Haneveld1959">{{cite journal \|last=Haneveld \|first=G. T. \|title=Hashish in Libanon \|trans-title=Hashish in Lebanon \|journal=Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde \|volume=103 \|issue=13 \|pages=686–688 \|date=28 March 1959 \|language=nl \|url=https://www.ntvg.nl/system/files/publications/1959106860001a.pdf}}</ref>{{Rp\|686}}

	In Greece, according to Stefanis, Ballas and Madianou, hashish appeared after 1850 by way of the island of [[Syros]]. The first cases of smoking on the mainland date from about 1870 to 1880. By the last decades of the century hashish was cultivated openly for local use and export. In 1887 the mayor of [[wikipedia:Orchomenus (Arcadia)\|Orchomenus]] in the Peloponnese reported that Egyptians, Cypriots and other immigrants from the East had taught the cultivation and processing of the crop. A circular of the Department of the Interior of 27 March 1890 prohibited the importation, cultivation and use of hashish. The ban stayed in force until 1920; hashish was nonetheless used regularly in the ''tekedes'', cafés frequented by hashish smokers in the harbour area of [[wikipedia:Piraeus\|Piraeus]] and in the centre of [[wikipedia:Athens\|Athens]]. Until the 1960s its use was limited to the working class: longshoremen, boatmen, sailors, porters, skinners, slaughterers and cart drivers among others. Soldiers returning from the [[wikipedia:Greco-Turkish War (1919–1922)\|war in Asia Minor]] brought back smoking habits learnt in Turkey; about one and a half million Greek refugees from the region were resettled in Greece. The narcotics laws grew more severe from 1932 to 1970, but until the end of the civil war in 1950 they were not strictly enforced; illegal cultivation and use then gradually declined.<ref name="stefanis1975">{{cite book \|last1=Stefanis \|first1=C. \|last2=Ballas \|first2=C. \|last3=Madianou \|first3=D. \|chapter=Sociocultural and Epidemiological Aspects of Hashish Use in Greece \|editor-last=Rubin \|editor-first=Vera \|title=Cannabis and Culture \|title-link=Cannabis and Culture (1975) \|publisher=Mouton \|location=The Hague \|year=1975 \|pages=303–326 \|doi=10.1515/9783110812060.303}}</ref>{{Rp\|311–315}} Bouquet instead dates the Greek ban on cultivation to 1920 and a harsher law, providing for the destruction of stocks, to 1932.<ref name="Bouquet1951"/>		In Greece, according to Stefanis, Ballas and Madianou, hashish appeared after 1850 by way of the island of [[Syros]]. The first cases of smoking on the mainland date from about 1870 to 1880. By the last decades of the century hashish was cultivated openly for local use and export. In 1887 the mayor of [[wikipedia:Orchomenus (Arcadia)\|Orchomenus]] in the Peloponnese reported that Egyptians, Cypriots and other immigrants from the East had taught the cultivation and processing of the crop. A circular of the Department of the Interior of 27 March 1890 prohibited the importation, cultivation and use of hashish. The ban stayed in force until 1920; hashish was nonetheless used regularly in the ''tekedes'', cafés frequented by hashish smokers in the harbour area of [[wikipedia:Piraeus\|Piraeus]] and in the centre of [[wikipedia:Athens\|Athens]]. Until the 1960s its use was limited to the working class: longshoremen, boatmen, sailors, porters, skinners, slaughterers and cart drivers among others. Soldiers returning from the [[wikipedia:Greco-Turkish War (1919–1922)\|war in Asia Minor]] brought back smoking habits learnt in Turkey; about one and a half million Greek refugees from the region were resettled in Greece. The narcotics laws grew more severe from 1932 to 1970, but until the end of the civil war in 1950 they were not strictly enforced; illegal cultivation and use then gradually declined.<ref name="stefanis1975">{{cite book \|last1=Stefanis \|first1=C. \|last2=Ballas \|first2=C. \|last3=Madianou \|first3=D. \|chapter=Sociocultural and Epidemiological Aspects of Hashish Use in Greece \|editor-last=Rubin \|editor-first=Vera \|title=Cannabis and Culture \|title-link=Cannabis and Culture (1975) \|publisher=Mouton \|location=The Hague \|year=1975 \|pages=303–326 \|doi=10.1515/9783110812060.303}}</ref>{{Rp\|311–315}} Bouquet instead dates the Greek ban on cultivation to 1920 and a harsher law, providing for the destruction of stocks, to 1932.<ref name="Bouquet1951"/>

Greece

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:46:40 GMT

Link the Bulletin on Narcotics at its first mention in the text

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:46, 16 October 2026
Line 43:		Line 43:
	=== History ===		=== History ===

	Citing an 1887 report by the mayor of [[wikipedia:Orchomenus (Arcadia)\|Orchomenus]], Stefanis, Ballas and Madianou write that hashish cultivation was introduced into Greece about 1875 by immigrants from Egypt, [[Cyprus]] and other eastern areas.<ref name="stefanis1975" />{{Rp\|313}} They date to 27 March 1890 a circular of the Department of the Interior, issued after a decision of the Medical Council, that prohibited the importation, cultivation and use of hashish. This restrictive law, they write, was "in force until 1920", yet hashish was used regularly in the ''tekedes''.<ref name="stefanis1975" />{{Rp\|314}} The Transnational Institute, which writes that a high prevalence of cannabis attracted strong legal responses in Egypt, Turkey and Greece, also dates the Greek ban to 1890.<ref name="TNI2014" />{{Rp\|5}} J. Bouquet, writing in the UN ''Bulletin on Narcotics'' in 1951, dates the prohibition of cultivation to 1920 and a more drastic law, providing for the destruction of stocks, to 1932.<ref name="Bouquet1951" /> From 1932 to 1970, according to Stefanis and colleagues, the narcotics laws became increasingly severe.<ref name="stefanis1975" />{{Rp\|315}}		Citing an 1887 report by the mayor of [[wikipedia:Orchomenus (Arcadia)\|Orchomenus]], Stefanis, Ballas and Madianou write that hashish cultivation was introduced into Greece about 1875 by immigrants from Egypt, [[Cyprus]] and other eastern areas.<ref name="stefanis1975" />{{Rp\|313}} They date to 27 March 1890 a circular of the Department of the Interior, issued after a decision of the Medical Council, that prohibited the importation, cultivation and use of hashish. This restrictive law, they write, was "in force until 1920", yet hashish was used regularly in the ''tekedes''.<ref name="stefanis1975" />{{Rp\|314}} The Transnational Institute, which writes that a high prevalence of cannabis attracted strong legal responses in Egypt, Turkey and Greece, also dates the Greek ban to 1890.<ref name="TNI2014" />{{Rp\|5}} J. Bouquet, writing in the UN ''[[Bulletin on Narcotics]]'' in 1951, dates the prohibition of cultivation to 1920 and a more drastic law, providing for the destruction of stocks, to 1932.<ref name="Bouquet1951" /> From 1932 to 1970, according to Stefanis and colleagues, the narcotics laws became increasingly severe.<ref name="stefanis1975" />{{Rp\|315}}

	Egypt prohibited cannabis in the late 19th century, through measures that the sources date from 1868 or from 1879.<ref name="TNI2014" />{{Rp\|5}}<ref name="ElHadka1965">{{cite journal \|last=El Hadka \|first=A. Ahmed \|title=Forty years of the campaign against narcotic drugs in the United Arab Republic \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=4 \|pages=1–12 \|year=1965 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1965-01-01_4_page002.html}}</ref> In the Transnational Institute's account those measures had very little effect on use; hashish was cheap and could easily be grown or smuggled in from Greece or elsewhere.<ref name="TNI2014" />{{Rp\|5}} The institute writes that the Egyptian ban affected the whole eastern Mediterranean: Greece, Cyprus, Turkey, [[Sudan]], [[Syria]], [[Lebanon]] and [[Palestine]] were asked to help Egypt's law enforcement authorities by restricting cultivation and trade.<ref name="TNI2014" />{{Rp\|11}}		Egypt prohibited cannabis in the late 19th century, through measures that the sources date from 1868 or from 1879.<ref name="TNI2014" />{{Rp\|5}}<ref name="ElHadka1965">{{cite journal \|last=El Hadka \|first=A. Ahmed \|title=Forty years of the campaign against narcotic drugs in the United Arab Republic \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=4 \|pages=1–12 \|year=1965 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1965-01-01_4_page002.html}}</ref> In the Transnational Institute's account those measures had very little effect on use; hashish was cheap and could easily be grown or smuggled in from Greece or elsewhere.<ref name="TNI2014" />{{Rp\|5}} The institute writes that the Egyptian ban affected the whole eastern Mediterranean: Greece, Cyprus, Turkey, [[Sudan]], [[Syria]], [[Lebanon]] and [[Palestine]] were asked to help Egypt's law enforcement authorities by restricting cultivation and trade.<ref name="TNI2014" />{{Rp\|11}}

Egypt

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:46:27 GMT

Link the Bulletin on Narcotics at its first mention in the text

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:46, 16 October 2026
Line 69:		Line 69:
	to the authorities on the accidents caused by the abuse of hashish as early as 1868 and that the		to the authorities on the accidents caused by the abuse of hashish as early as 1868 and that the
	cultivation of the plant had been forbidden in 1884.<ref name="Willoughby1925">{{cite book \|last=Willoughby \|first=W. W. \|title=Opium as an International Problem: The Geneva Conferences \|location=Baltimore \|publisher=The Johns Hopkins Press \|year=1925 \|url=https://archive.org/details/opiumasinternati00will \|via=Internet Archive}}</ref>{{Rp\|377}}		cultivation of the plant had been forbidden in 1884.<ref name="Willoughby1925">{{cite book \|last=Willoughby \|first=W. W. \|title=Opium as an International Problem: The Geneva Conferences \|location=Baltimore \|publisher=The Johns Hopkins Press \|year=1925 \|url=https://archive.org/details/opiumasinternati00will \|via=Internet Archive}}</ref>{{Rp\|377}}
	A. Ahmed El Hadka, writing in the UN ''Bulletin on Narcotics'' in 1965, dates to 1879 a law forbidding		A. Ahmed El Hadka, writing in the UN ''[[Bulletin on Narcotics]]'' in 1965, dates to 1879 a law forbidding
	the cultivation of the cannabis plant.<ref name="ElHadka1965">{{cite journal \|last=El Hadka \|first=A. Ahmed \|title=Forty years of the campaign against narcotic drugs in the United Arab Republic \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=4 \|pages=1–12 \|year=1965 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1965-01-01_4_page002.html}}</ref> M. I. Soueif,		the cultivation of the cannabis plant.<ref name="ElHadka1965">{{cite journal \|last=El Hadka \|first=A. Ahmed \|title=Forty years of the campaign against narcotic drugs in the United Arab Republic \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=4 \|pages=1–12 \|year=1965 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1965-01-01_4_page002.html}}</ref> M. I. Soueif,
	in the same journal in 1967, surveyed the successive legislation "on record since 1879".<ref name="Soueif1967">{{cite journal \|last=Soueif \|first=M. I. \|title=Hashish consumption in Egypt, with special reference to psychosocial aspects \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=2 \|pages=1–12 \|year=1967 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1967-01-01_2_page002.html}}</ref>		in the same journal in 1967, surveyed the successive legislation "on record since 1879".<ref name="Soueif1967">{{cite journal \|last=Soueif \|first=M. I. \|title=Hashish consumption in Egypt, with special reference to psychosocial aspects \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=2 \|pages=1–12 \|year=1967 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1967-01-01_2_page002.html}}</ref>

Talk:Bulletin on Narcotics

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:46:15 GMT

Talk page: scope, how the archive was read, dates and numbering, Bouquet's initials

New page

{{TalkHeader}}
{{TalkBox
|title=Page scope
|body='''[[{{SUBJECTPAGENAME}}]]''' covers the United Nations journal as a whole: its founding, publishers, editing and numbering, with its articles on cannabis from 1950 to 2006. Single articles are described within it. An article from the ''Bulletin'' that many pages cite can also have a page of its own.
}}
{{TalkBox
|title=Data verification
|body=Record source conflicts, dating problems and unresolved identifications here. Keep narrative content on the article.
}}

== Discussion ==


=== How the journal was read ===
The issue lists were taken on 16 October 2026 from the archive index on the UNODC website (vol. I, 1949, to vol. LXII, 2019) and from the contents page of every issue it links, over 1,100 items in all. Every article the page names was then read on its UNODC article page, whose "Details" line gives the author and page range used in the reference. The prefaces of vols. LIV (2002), LVII (2005), LVIII (2006), LX (2008), LXI (2017) and LXII (2019) were read in the PDF editions UNODC hosts, with the title pages and title versos of vols. LX, LXI and LXII. The publishers before 1957 and the languages of the early numbers come from the Wellcome Collection's catalogue record for its print run.

=== Dates and numbering ===
Most article pages in UNODC's archive carry a creation date of 1 January of their year, so the month of a number is not taken from them. The October 1949 date of the first number is the catalogue's. Until 1996 a year's volume number is its last two digits less 48: Bouquet's 1951 article refers to "vol. II, No. 4, October 1950"; a 2005 reference list cites vol. 23 (1971) and vol. 37 (1985). The 1997 and 1998 volumes (XLIX and L) appeared together in 1999. The archive files their articles under 1997, issue 1, with a creation date of 1 December 1999 and no page ranges, so those references have none. Several later volumes appeared after their nominal year: vol. LVII (2005) states that it keeps 2005 "for the sake of continuity", vol. LVIII (2006) was printed in 2008 and vol. LX (2008) in 2011. The archive lists vol. LXI (2017) and vol. LXII (2019) after vol. LX.

=== Bouquet's initials ===
The UNODC page for the 1950 part names its author "R. J. Bouquet"; the page for the 1951 part names "J. Bouquet". The references follow each page as printed.

=== Framing in the sources ===
The 1953 note on charas, the 1985 editorial note and Bouquet's survey characterise cannabis users and cannabis harms in the language of the control system that published them. The article quotes and attributes those passages.

Bulletin on Narcotics

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:46:03 GMT

New historical source page: the United Nations Bulletin on Narcotics (1949-), its publishers, editing and cannabis articles

New page

{{Infobox Historical Source
|title_original = Bulletin on Narcotics
|author = United Nations Secretariat
|language = English and French at first; all six official languages of the United Nations by 2002
|published = From October 1949; vol. LXII (2019) printed in 2020
|pub_year = 1949
|publisher = United Nations: Department of Social Affairs (1949–1956); Division of Narcotic Drugs (from 1956); later the United Nations International Drug Control Programme and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
|place = Geneva; New York; Vienna
|volumes = 62 (vol. I, 1949, to vol. LXII, 2019)
|period = 20th century sources
|cannabis_volume = Vol. II, no. 4 (1950) and vol. III, no. 1 (1951), Bouquet's survey; 1985, no. 4, and vols. XLIX–L (1997/1998), cannabis issues; vol. LVIII (2006), ''Review of the world cannabis situation''
|growing_regions = [[India]]; [[Xinjiang]]; [[Egypt]]; [[Brazil]]; [[South Africa]]; [[Nigeria]]; [[Morocco]]
|preparations = ''[[charas]]''; ''[[hashish]]''; ''[[ganja]]''; ''[[bhang]]''
|uses_documented = Medicinal; non-medical use, which the Bulletin calls "abuse"; fibre and seed hemp
|taxonomic_significance = Ernest Small's 1975 article on the species question in American cannabis law
|digital_facsimile = https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/index.html
|facsimile_label = View the archive at UNODC
|original_held_at = Wellcome Collection, London (print run); every issue online at UNODC
}}
The '''''Bulletin on Narcotics''''' is a journal of the [[wikipedia:United Nations|United Nations]] on the control of narcotic drugs. The UN Secretariat began it in October 1949. Since 2002 the [[United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime]] (UNODC) has published it.<ref name="BullNarc1949-Intro">{{cite journal |title=Bulletin on Narcotics |type=introductory note |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |volume=I |issue=1 |year=1949 |page=2 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1949-01-01_1_page002.html}}</ref><ref name="Wellcome-BullNarc">{{cite web |title=Bulletin on narcotics |type=catalogue record |website=Wellcome Collection |url=https://wellcomecollection.org/works/ehwykxhx |access-date=16 October 2026}}</ref><ref name="BullNarc2008-LX">{{cite journal |title=Measurement issues in drug policy analysis |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |location=New York |volume=LX |year=2008 |publication-date=2011 |url=https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/bulletin/2008/Bulletin2008_web.pdf}}</ref>{{Rp|title verso}} It carries technical and scientific articles, reports on national law and administration and accounts of the international control bodies' work.<ref name="BullNarc1949-Intro"/> Its cannabis papers include a two-part survey by R. J. Bouquet (1950–1951), country reports, laboratory studies and whole issues on cannabis in 1985, 1997–1998 and 2006.<ref name="Bouquet1950">{{cite journal |last=Bouquet |first=R. J. |title=Cannabis |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=4 |pages=14–30 |year=1950 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1950-01-01_4_page003.html}}</ref><ref name="BullNarc1985-Editorial">{{cite journal |title=Editorial note |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=4 |pages=1–2 |year=1985 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1985-01-01_4_page002.html}}</ref><ref name="UNODC2006-Bulletin">{{cite journal |author=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime |title=Review of the world cannabis situation |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |volume=LVIII |issue=1 and 2 |year=2006 |publication-date=2008 |publisher=United Nations |location=New York |url=https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/bulletin/2006/Bulletin_on_Narcotics_2006_En.pdf}}</ref>{{Rp|iii}}

As the journal of the international drug-control secretariat, the ''Bulletin'' is evidence of how that system described cannabis and argued for its control, as much as it documents the plant and its use.

A terminology note: the 1950s articles speak of ''Indian hemp'' and the ''hemp drugs''. The 1985 editorial note speaks of ''cannabis abuse'' for any non-medical use.<ref name="Duquenois1950">{{cite journal |last=Duquénois |first=P. |title=Chemical and physiological identification of Indian hemp |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=3 |pages=30–33 |year=1950 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1950-01-01_3_page005.html}}</ref><ref name="UNSecretariat1953">{{cite journal |author=United Nations Secretariat |title=The surprising extinction of the charas traffic |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=1 |pages=1–7 |year=1953 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1953-01-01_1_page002.html}}</ref><ref name="BullNarc1985-Editorial"/>

== Origins ==

The [[Commission on Narcotic Drugs]] and the [[wikipedia:United Nations Economic and Social Council|Economic and Social Council]] decided that authoritative information on drug control should go out in a bulletin published by the UN Secretariat. The General Assembly upheld the decision.<ref name="BullNarc1949-Intro"/> The first number placed the journal in a line of international control running from the Shanghai meeting of 1909 to the Paris Protocol of 1948, which the UN had inherited from the [[wikipedia:League of Nations|League of Nations]].<ref name="BullNarc1949-Intro"/>

The first number also set out what the ''Bulletin'' was to do. It was to report the latest results of governments, the UN and the treaty bodies in the control of narcotic drugs and "the struggle against addiction". It was to carry technical and scientific articles, articles on national legislation and administration and bibliography. It was also to follow the preparatory work on a single convention to replace the eight existing international instruments, the treaty adopted in 1961 as the [[Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs]].<ref name="BullNarc1949-Intro"/> The Secretariat planned four numbers a year, each arranged in four sections: International, Technical, Official and Bibliography.<ref name="BullNarc1949-Intro"/> The 1949 volume was a single number, dated October 1949. Its articles dealt with international control, opium and the coca leaf.<ref name="BullNarc1949-Intro"/><ref name="Wellcome-BullNarc"/>

== Publishers and editing ==

The UN Department of Social Affairs issued the ''Bulletin'' from October 1949 to the July–September number of 1956. The Division of Narcotic Drugs issued it from the October–December number of 1956.<ref name="Wellcome-BullNarc"/> The double issue for 1997 and 1998 appeared in 1999 under the United Nations International Drug Control Programme (UNDCP).<ref name="UNODC2006-Bulletin"/>{{Rp|iii}} The Office for Drug Control and Crime Prevention became UNODC on 1 October 2002. UNODC includes the UNDCP.<ref name="BullNarc2008-LX"/>{{Rp|title verso}}

The early numbers came out in English and French, with selected articles in Spanish and Russian.<ref name="Wellcome-BullNarc"/> By 2002 the ''Bulletin'' was printed in all six official languages of the UN: Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish.<ref name="BullNarc2002-Preface">{{cite journal |title=Preface |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |volume=LIV |issue=1 and 2 |year=2002 |pages=iii–v |url=https://www.unodc.org/pdf/bulletin/bulletin_2002_01_01_preface.pdf}}</ref>{{Rp|iii}}

The volumes of 2002, 2008 and 2017 print a statement of editorial policy. The Editor invited individuals and organisations to submit original scholarly work on drug control, of "relatively high professional calibre" for a United Nations technical publication. Contributors were asked to "exclude any critical judgement of a particular national or regional situation". Signed articles gave their authors' views, not necessarily the Secretariat's.<ref name="BullNarc2002-Preface"/>{{Rp|iii–iv}}<ref name="BullNarc2008-LX"/>{{Rp|iv}}<ref name="BullNarc2017-LXI">{{cite journal |title=Alternative development: practices and reflections |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |location=Vienna |volume=LXI |year=2017 |publication-date=2018 |url=https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/bulletin/2017/Bulletin_on_Narcotics_V1705843.pdf}}</ref>{{Rp|iv}} Volumes from 2002 had guest editors: Zili Sloboda for the two volumes on drug-abuse epidemiology (2002 and 2003), Martin Bouchard of Simon Fraser University for vol. LX, Jorrit Kamminga for vol. LXI and Isidore Obot of the University of Uyo for vol. LXII.<ref name="BullNarc2002-Preface"/>{{Rp|iii}}<ref name="BullNarc2008-LX"/>{{Rp|iii}}<ref name="BullNarc2017-LXI"/>{{Rp|iii}}<ref name="BullNarc2019-LXII">{{cite journal |title=Drugs in the Nigerian population |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |location=Vienna |volume=LXII |year=2019 |publication-date=2020 |url=https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/bulletin/2019/19-11671_ebook.pdf}}</ref>{{Rp|iii}} Sandeep Chawla was Editor of vol. LX and Angela Me of vol. LXII.<ref name="BullNarc2008-LX"/>{{Rp|title verso}}<ref name="BullNarc2019-LXII"/>{{Rp|title verso}}

Volumes are numbered from vol. I (1949); Bouquet's 1951 article refers back to "vol. II, No. 4, October 1950".<ref name="Bouquet1951">{{cite journal |last=Bouquet |first=J. |title=Cannabis (concluded) |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=1 |pages=22–45 |year=1951 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1951-01-01_1_page005.html}}</ref> UNODC's archive lists up to four issues a year from 1950. From 1999 to 2008 each volume appeared as one double issue (Nos. 1 and 2).<ref name="UNODC-BulletinIndex">{{cite web |title=Bulletin on Narcotics |website=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/index.html |access-date=16 October 2026}}</ref> A volume kept its nominal year even when it appeared late; vol. LVII is dated 2005 "for the sake of continuity".<ref name="BullNarc2005-Preface">{{cite journal |title=Preface |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |volume=LVII |issue=1 and 2 |year=2005 |page=iii |url=https://www.unodc.org/pdf/research/Bulletin07/bulletin_on_narcotics_2007_preface.pdf}}</ref> Vol. LX, dated 2008, was printed in New York in 2011 and carries papers from a conference held in Vienna in March 2009.<ref name="BullNarc2008-LX"/>{{Rp|title page}} Vol. LXI (2017) and vol. LXII (2019) were printed in Vienna in 2018 and 2020.<ref name="BullNarc2017-LXI"/>{{Rp|title page}}<ref name="BullNarc2019-LXII"/>{{Rp|title page}} UNODC hosts every issue from vol. I, no. 1.<ref name="BullNarc2002-Preface"/>{{Rp|iv}}<ref name="UNODC-BulletinIndex"/>

== Cannabis in the Bulletin ==

The ''Bulletin'' published on cannabis from 1950. Its papers include a survey of the plant and its use (1950–1951) and country reports from India, Egypt, Brazil, Nigeria, South Africa and Asia. Laboratory studies of the plant's chemistry and origin followed from the 1960s. Whole issues were given over to cannabis in 1985, 1997–1998 and 2006.

=== Surveys and the Single Convention, 1950–1962 ===

P. Duquénois of the Strasbourg faculty described the chemical and physiological tests used in France to identify Indian hemp in 1950.<ref name="Duquenois1950"/> Bouquet's article "Cannabis" followed in two parts: the introduction and parts I and II in October 1950 and the concluding part, which opens on intoxication, in 1951.<ref name="Bouquet1950"/><ref name="Bouquet1951"/> Bouquet had sat on the sub-committee on cannabis that the League of Nations set up in the 1930s. The Division of Narcotic Drugs contacted him in 1949–1950, when its progress report regretted that it had not been able to give cannabis studies as much attention as it wished.<ref name="Mills2016-Hygiea">{{cite journal |last=Mills |first=J. H. |title=The IHO as actor: the case of cannabis and the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs 1961 |journal=Hygiea Internationalis |volume=13 |issue=1 |year=2016 |pages=95–115 |doi=10.3384/hygiea.1403-8668.1613195 |pmc=6440645}}</ref> His 1951 part faulted earlier studies of intoxication for using "a few subjects of a high intellectual level who are members of advanced civilizations". In his view their findings did not describe "the mass of low-class addicts having little or no education".<ref name="Bouquet1951"/>

An unsigned note of 1953, "The surprising extinction of the charas traffic", followed ''charas'' from [[Xinjiang]] (Sinkiang) to India. It said the trade had centred on [[Yarkand]], that the Government of India had once allowed 70,000 kg a year to be imported and that the Sinkiang provincial government had ended the traffic, largely during the war years. The note called charas "generally considered the worst and most addiction-forming of the hemp drugs".<ref name="UNSecretariat1953"/> Roberval Cordeiro de Farias wrote on ''maconha'' in [[Brazil]] and its control by health and police authorities in 1955.<ref name="Farias1955">{{cite journal |last=Farias |first=Roberval Cordeiro de |title=Use of maconha (Cannabis sativa L.) in Brazil: control by health and police authorities |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=2 |year=1955 |pages=5–19 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1955-01-01_2_page003.html |access-date=14 October 2026}}</ref> I. C. Chopra and [[Ram Nath Chopra|R. N. Chopra]], then director of the Drug Research Laboratory of Jammu and Kashmir, wrote on [[India]] in 1957. Their chapters run from production and preparations through cannabis in Indian indigenous medicine and habitual use to control. They treated the Indian plant as ''[[Cannabis sativa]]'', ''[[Cannabis indica|C. indica]]'' having been reduced to it.<ref name="Chopra1957">{{cite journal |last1=Chopra |first1=I. C. |last2=Chopra |first2=R. N. |title=The use of the cannabis drugs in India |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=1 |pages=4–29 |year=1957 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1957-01-01_1_page003.html}}</ref>

In 1956 G. Bredemann, Fr. Schwanitz and R. von Sengbusch of Hamburg held that even [[hemp]] grown for fibre could yield enough resin to be misused. In their view only varieties with little or no hashish would remove the danger. They reported trials on about 20,000 plants in the winter of 1954–1955 and expected the breeding to take ten to fifteen years.<ref name="Bredemann1956">{{cite journal |last1=Bredemann |first1=G. |last2=Schwanitz |first2=Fr. |last3=von Sengbusch |first3=R. |title=Problems of modern hemp breeding, with particular reference to the breeding of varieties of hemp containing little or no hashish |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=3 |pages=31–35 |year=1956 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1956-01-01_3_page007.html}}</ref>

The Secretariat's 1962 note "The cannabis problem" set world seizures of cannabis drugs, taken from governments' incomplete annual reports, at 23,000 kg in 1934 and 832,000 kg in 1960. It said the rise could not be definitely split between better enforcement and reporting and more consumption and traffic. Its last sections dealt with the drafts of the Single Convention and the treaty adopted in 1961, which placed cannabis and cannabis resin in its schedule I.<ref name="UN1962-CannabisProblem">{{cite journal |title=The cannabis problem: a note on the problem and the history of international action |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=4 |pages=27–31 |year=1962 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1962-01-01_4_page005.html}}</ref>

=== Country reports, 1961–1977 ===

J. M. Watt wrote on ''[[dagga]]'' in [[South Africa]] in 1961. He derived the name from a [[wikipedia:Khoekhoe|Khoekhoe]] word, ''dacha''. It also covers species of ''[[wikipedia:Leonotis|Leonotis]]'', always with a qualifier such as ''wildedagga''.<ref name="Watt1961-Dagga">{{cite journal |last=Watt |first=J. M. |title=Dagga in South Africa |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=3 |pages=9–14 |year=1961 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1961-01-01_3_page003.html}}</ref> H. B. M. Murphy reviewed the psychiatric literature on cannabis in 1963.<ref name="Murphy1963">{{cite journal |last=Murphy |first=H.B.M. |title=The cannabis habit: a review of recent psychiatric literature |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |issue=1 |pages=15–24 |year=1963 |publisher=United Nations |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1963-01-01_1_page004.html}}</ref> T. Asuni reported on cannabis in [[Nigeria]] in 1964.<ref name="Asuni1964">{{cite journal |last=Asuni |first=T. |title=Socio-psychiatric problems of cannabis in Nigeria |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |volume=16 |issue=2 |year=1964 |pages=17–28 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1964-01-01_2_page003.html}}</ref> The physician Joel Fort surveyed drug use in Asia in 1965.<ref name="Fort1965">{{cite journal |last=Fort |first=J. |title=Giver of delight or liberator of sin: drug use and "addiction" in Asia |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=3 |year=1965 |pages=1–11 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1965-01-01_3_page002.html |access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> The same year Col. A. Ahmed El Hadka reviewed forty years of [[Egypt]]'s campaign against narcotic drugs. He called hashish and opium the "black" drugs, which "continue to baffle all Egyptian efforts".<ref name="ElHadka1965">{{cite journal |last=El Hadka |first=A. Ahmed |title=Forty years of the campaign against narcotic drugs in the United Arab Republic |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=4 |pages=1–12 |year=1965 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1965-01-01_4_page002.html}}</ref>

In 1977 Jack Fletcher and Paul Satz of the University of Florida criticised the sampling and psychometrics of the Egyptian study of chronic hashish users. M. I. Soueif of Cairo University replied in the same issue.<ref name="FletcherSatz1977">{{cite journal |last1=Fletcher |first1=J. |last2=Satz |first2=P. |title=A methodological commentary on the Egyptian study of chronic hashish use |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=2 |pages=29–34 |year=1977 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1977-01-01_2_page005.html}}</ref><ref name="Soueif1977">{{cite journal |last=Soueif |first=M. I. |title=The Egyptian study of chronic cannabis use: a reply to Fletcher and Satz |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=2 |pages=35–43 |year=1977 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1977-01-01_2_page006.html}}</ref>

=== Laboratory work and the plant, 1967–1985 ===

G. Joachimoglu, J. Kiburis and C. Miras of the University of Athens reported studies in 1967 with the UN cannabis reference sample, a stable preparation against which the potency of hashish samples could be compared.<ref name="Joachimoglu1967">{{cite journal |last1=Joachimoglu |first1=G. |last2=Kiburis |first2=J. |last3=Miras |first3=C. |title=Studies with the U.N. cannabis reference sample |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=1 |pages=21–22 |year=1967 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1967-01-01_1_page005.html}}</ref> In 1972 the ''Bulletin'' printed excerpts from a report of a [[wikipedia:World Health Organization|World Health Organization]] scientific group, which recognised a single species, ''C. sativa''.<ref name="WHO1972-Bulletin">{{cite journal |title=The use of cannabis: report of a WHO Scientific Group |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=1 |pages=11–19 |year=1972 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1972-01-01_1_page003.html}}</ref>

[[Ernest Small]] wrote in 1975 on "the species problem" in United States law. Defendants were arguing that their material came from ''C. indica'' or ''[[Cannabis ruderalis|C. ruderalis]]'', while the statutes named ''C. sativa''. Small and [[Arthur Cronquist]] had testified for the state; [[Richard Evans Schultes]] had testified for the defence in dozens of cases.<ref name="Small1975-Species">{{cite journal |last=Small |first=E. |title=American law and the species problem in Cannabis: science and semantics |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=3 |pages=1–20 |year=1975 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1975-01-01_3_page002.html}}</ref> [[Carlton E. Turner|C. E. Turner]] and colleagues compared the cannabinoid content of Mexican variants grown in [[Mexico]] and in [[Mississippi]] in 1982.<ref name="Turner1982">{{cite journal |last1=Turner |first1=C.E. |last2=ElSohly |first2=H.N. |last3=Lewis |first3=G.S. |last4=Lopez-Santibanez |first4=I. |last5=Carranza |first5=J. |title=Constituents of Cannabis sativa L., XX: the cannabinoid content of Mexican variants grown in Mexico and in Mississippi, United States of America |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |volume=34 |issue=1 |year=1982 |pages=45–59 |pmid=6923753 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1982-01-01_1_page007.html}}</ref> From 1982 P. B. Baker, T. A. Gough and B. J. Taylor reported on plants grown in the United Kingdom from seeds of known origin, a series that reached its third and fourth generations in 1985.<ref name="Baker1982-Seed">{{cite journal |last1=Baker |first1=P. B. |last2=Gough |first2=T. A. |last3=Taylor |first3=B. J. |title=The physical and chemical features of Cannabis plants grown in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from seeds of known origin |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=1 |pages=27–36 |year=1982 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1982-01-01_1_page005.html}}</ref><ref name="Taylor1985-Seed">{{cite journal |last1=Taylor |first1=B. J. |last2=Neal |first2=J. D. |last3=Gough |first3=T. A. |title=The physical and chemical features of Cannabis plants grown in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from seeds of known origin – Part III: third and fourth generation studies |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=4 |pages=75–81 |year=1985 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1985-01-01_4_page010.html}}</ref>

The fourth issue of 1985 was a special issue on cannabis research. Its editorial note called cannabis "the most widely abused illicit drug in the world", asserted that "evidence clearly shows" harm to health and cited the Economic and Social Council's resolution 1984/22 on the cannabis problem.<ref name="BullNarc1985-Editorial"/> The issue included [[Gabriel Nahas]]'s critique of ''[[Ganja in Jamaica (1975)]]'' and a report by staff of the [[wikipedia:Royal Canadian Mounted Police|Royal Canadian Mounted Police]] on cannabis traffic in [[Canada]].<ref name="Nahas1985">{{cite journal |last=Nahas |first=G.G. |title=Critique of a study on ganja in Jamaica |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |issue=4 |pages=15–29 |year=1985 |publisher=United Nations |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1985-01-01_4_page004.html}}</ref><ref name="Stamler1985">{{cite journal |last1=Stamler |first1=R. T. |last2=Fahlman |first2=R. C. |last3=Vigeant |first3=H. |title=Illicit traffic and abuse of cannabis in Canada |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=4 |pages=37–49 |year=1985 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1985-01-01_4_page006.html}}</ref>

=== Review issues, 1997–2006 ===

The double issue on cannabis for 1997 and 1998, published in 1999, set out recent research.<ref name="UNODC2006-Bulletin"/>{{Rp|iii}} K. Szendrei described fibre hemp bred to ever lower THC levels, clandestine breeding of types very high in THC and the spread of indoor cultivation in North America and Europe.<ref name="Szendrei1997">{{cite journal |last=Szendrei |first=K. |title=Cannabis as an illicit crop: recent developments in cultivation and product quality |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=1 |year=1997 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1997-01-01_1_page002.html}}</ref> G. Mignoni wrote on the revival of licit hemp in Europe.<ref name="Mignoni1997">{{cite journal |last=Mignoni |first=G. |title=Cannabis as a licit crop: recent developments in Europe |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=1 |year=1997 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1997-01-01_1_page003.html}}</ref> The UNDCP's Research Section estimated that about 140 million people, 2.5 per cent of the world's population, used cannabis in a year.<ref name="UNDCP1997-Review">{{cite journal |author=UNDCP Research Section |title=Cannabis as an illicit narcotic crop: a review of the global situation of cannabis consumption, trafficking and production |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |issue=1 |year=1997 |url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1997-01-01_1_page004.html}}</ref>

The 2005 volume, on laboratory science in drug control, included a study by the forensic laboratory of the Gendarmerie Royale of [[tetrahydrocannabinol|THC]] in 245 samples from 30 plots in three provinces of northern [[Morocco]]. The traditional growing areas of [[Al Hoceima Province|Al Hoceima]] and [[Chefchaouen Province|Chefchaouen]] gave higher THC than [[Larache]], where cultivation was recent.<ref name="Stambouli2005">{{cite journal |last1=Stambouli |first1=H. |last2=El Bouri |first2=A. |last3=Bellimam |first3=M. A. |last4=Bouayoun |first4=T. |last5=El Karni |first5=N. |title=Cultivation of Cannabis sativa L. in northern Morocco |journal=Bulletin on Narcotics |publisher=United Nations |volume=LVII |issue=1 and 2 |year=2005 |pages=79–118 |url=https://www.unodc.org/pdf/research/Bulletin07/Bulletin_on_narcotics_2007_Stambouli.pdf}}</ref>

Vol. LVIII, dated 2006 and printed in 2008, was a ''Review of the world cannabis situation''. Its preface called the cannabis market "little understood and under documented". The review drew on grey literature to fill the gap. Part of its research responded to the General Assembly's request of 2004 for a global market survey on cannabis. Ted Leggett of UNODC's Research and Analysis Section did the research. A shorter version appeared in the ''World Drug Report 2006''.<ref name="UNODC2006-Bulletin"/>{{Rp|iii}}

== Reception and historiography ==

The excerpts of the WHO scientific group's report printed in 1972 cite Bouquet (1950) for the plant's probable origin in Central Asia.<ref name="WHO1972-Bulletin"/> The historian James H. Mills found that cannabis "remained largely neglected at the United Nations in its early years". He quoted the Division's 1949–1950 progress report on that lack of attention. In his account a WHO statement on the effects of cannabis referred its readers to Bouquet's publications.<ref name="Mills2016-Hygiea"/>

== See also ==
* [[Charas]]
* [[Commission on Narcotic Drugs]]
* [[Egypt]]
* [[Ganja in Jamaica (1975)]]
* [[Hashish]]
* [[History of cannabis in the Philippines]]
* [[International Narcotics Control Board]]
* [[Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs]]
* [[Thai stick]]
* [[United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime]]

== References ==

<references />

<div style="display:none;">
[[Has region documented::India]]
[[Has region documented::Xinjiang]]
[[Has region documented::Egypt]]
[[Has region documented::Brazil]]
[[Has region documented::South Africa]]
[[Has region documented::Nigeria]]
[[Has region documented::Morocco]]
[[Has preparation documented::Charas]]
[[Has preparation documented::Hashish]]
[[Has preparation documented::Ganja]]
[[Has preparation documented::Bhang]]
[[Has use documented::Medicinal]]
[[Has use documented::Recreational]]
[[Has use documented::Fibre]]
[[Has source type::Periodical]]
[[Has source form::Intergovernmental journal]]
</div>

[[Category:21st century sources]]

United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:43:25 GMT

Link the International Opium Convention of 1925 to its page

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:43, 16 October 2026
Line 29:		Line 29:
	== Cannabis in the text ==		== Cannabis in the text ==
	=== The plant ===		=== The plant ===
	Article 1(b) defines the "cannabis plant" as "any plant of the genus Cannabis", the definition of the 1961 Convention. The UN ''Commentary'' of 1998 notes that the 1961 definitions of "cannabis" (the flowering or fruiting tops) and "cannabis resin" are not repeated, because the relevant provisions of the 1988 text "are concerned with the cultivation of the plant as a whole".<ref name="IllicitTrafficConvention1988"/>{{Rp\|art. 1(b)}}<ref name="UNCommentary1988"/>{{Rp\|28}} The ''Commentary'' states that the genus "consists of the single species Cannabis sativa L.", the name the 1925 Convention used for the "Indian hemp" plant.<ref name="UNCommentary1988"/>{{Rp\|29}}		Article 1(b) defines the "cannabis plant" as "any plant of the genus Cannabis", the definition of the 1961 Convention. The UN ''Commentary'' of 1998 notes that the 1961 definitions of "cannabis" (the flowering or fruiting tops) and "cannabis resin" are not repeated, because the relevant provisions of the 1988 text "are concerned with the cultivation of the plant as a whole".<ref name="IllicitTrafficConvention1988"/>{{Rp\|art. 1(b)}}<ref name="UNCommentary1988"/>{{Rp\|28}} The ''Commentary'' states that the genus "consists of the single species Cannabis sativa L.", the name the [[International Opium Convention (1925)\|1925 Convention]] used for the "Indian hemp" plant.<ref name="UNCommentary1988"/>{{Rp\|29}}

	A "narcotic drug" is any substance in Schedules I and II of the 1961 Convention.<ref name="IllicitTrafficConvention1988"/>{{Rp\|art. 1(n)}} The ''Commentary'' points out that the cannabis plant, the opium poppy and the coca bush are not narcotic drugs under this definition. Article 14(2) instead counts them among the "plants containing narcotic or psychotropic substances".<ref name="UNCommentary1988"/>{{Rp\|35}}		A "narcotic drug" is any substance in Schedules I and II of the 1961 Convention.<ref name="IllicitTrafficConvention1988"/>{{Rp\|art. 1(n)}} The ''Commentary'' points out that the cannabis plant, the opium poppy and the coca bush are not narcotic drugs under this definition. Article 14(2) instead counts them among the "plants containing narcotic or psychotropic substances".<ref name="UNCommentary1988"/>{{Rp\|35}}

Verdoovende Middelen Ordonnantie (1927)

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:43:19 GMT

Link the International Opium Convention of 1925 to its page

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:43, 16 October 2026
Line 26:		Line 26:
	== Origins ==		== Origins ==

	The ordinance's preamble states its purpose: to unite in one ordinance the provisions on opium and other narcotics "which are at present scattered over numerous ordinances", separated from the provisions on the lawful use of smoking opium and to take the opportunity to amend some of them.<ref name="VMO1927"/> It withdraws 44 earlier instruments, listed by date and ''Staatsblad'' number, from the ordinance of 24 April 1872 (No. 76) to that of 16 June 1926 (No. 233), among them the regional opium ''regie'' ordinances for Java, Aceh, the East Coast and West Coast of Sumatra, Tapanuli, Riau, Bangka, Billiton, Borneo, Celebes, Timor, Amboina and Ternate and New Guinea and the morphine ordinance of 26 August 1911.<ref name="VMO1927"/> The preamble cites, among its legal bases, article 2 under V of the Dutch act of 23 June 1925 (''Indisch Staatsblad'' No. 415).<ref name="VMO1927"/> The Transnational Institute attributes the ordinance to the inclusion of cannabis in the International Opium Convention signed at Geneva in 1925 and states that it was not a response to any domestic policy concern.<ref name="TNI2016"/>		The ordinance's preamble states its purpose: to unite in one ordinance the provisions on opium and other narcotics "which are at present scattered over numerous ordinances", separated from the provisions on the lawful use of smoking opium and to take the opportunity to amend some of them.<ref name="VMO1927"/> It withdraws 44 earlier instruments, listed by date and ''Staatsblad'' number, from the ordinance of 24 April 1872 (No. 76) to that of 16 June 1926 (No. 233), among them the regional opium ''regie'' ordinances for Java, Aceh, the East Coast and West Coast of Sumatra, Tapanuli, Riau, Bangka, Billiton, Borneo, Celebes, Timor, Amboina and Ternate and New Guinea and the morphine ordinance of 26 August 1911.<ref name="VMO1927"/> The preamble cites, among its legal bases, article 2 under V of the Dutch act of 23 June 1925 (''Indisch Staatsblad'' No. 415).<ref name="VMO1927"/> The Transnational Institute attributes the ordinance to the inclusion of cannabis in the [[International Opium Convention (1925)\|International Opium Convention]] signed at Geneva in 1925 and states that it was not a response to any domestic policy concern.<ref name="TNI2016"/>

	A companion ordinance of the same date, the ''Regie-opium ordonnantie'' (''Staatsblad'' 1927 No. 279), regulated the government opium monopoly and a government decision of 12 May 1927 (No. 280) set out the accompanying rules. All three were printed together by the Landsdrukkerij at Weltevreden in 1927 in a booklet entitled ''Wettelijke bepalingen betreffende opium en andere verdoovende middelen'', which replaced the earlier series of booklets issued under the title ''Wettelijke bepalingen voor de Opiumregie''; a second corrigendum sheet of 3 February 1928 is printed at its end.<ref name="VMO1927"/> That compilation is the text the wiki has sighted; the original ''Staatsblad'' issue has not been examined.		A companion ordinance of the same date, the ''Regie-opium ordonnantie'' (''Staatsblad'' 1927 No. 279), regulated the government opium monopoly and a government decision of 12 May 1927 (No. 280) set out the accompanying rules. All three were printed together by the Landsdrukkerij at Weltevreden in 1927 in a booklet entitled ''Wettelijke bepalingen betreffende opium en andere verdoovende middelen'', which replaced the earlier series of booklets issued under the title ''Wettelijke bepalingen voor de Opiumregie''; a second corrigendum sheet of 3 February 1928 is printed at its end.<ref name="VMO1927"/> That compilation is the text the wiki has sighted; the original ''Staatsblad'' issue has not been examined.

Philippines

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:43:09 GMT

Link the International Opium Convention of 1925 to its page

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:43, 16 October 2026
Line 75:		Line 75:
	A Bureau of Agriculture veterinarian tested an injected extract of "Cannabis americana" as an anaesthetic for animals in 1914.<ref name="Palmer1914">{{cite journal \|last=Palmer \|first=D.B. \|title=A new method of producing anesthesia \|journal=The Philippine Agricultural Review \|volume=7 \|issue=5 \|date=May 1914 \|page=242 \|url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Philippine_agricultural_review_(IA_acx0689.0007.002.umich.edu).pdf \|via=Wikimedia Commons \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> The bureau's [[wikipedia:Rinderpest\|rinderpest]] trials of 1917 included "Cannabis Indica", which showed no curative value.<ref name="PAR1919">{{cite journal \|author=Bureau of Agriculture \|title=Seventeenth annual report of the Bureau of Agriculture \|journal=The Philippine Agricultural Review \|volume=12 \|issue=2 \|year=1919 \|page=43 \|url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Philippine_agricultural_review_(IA_acx0689.0001.012.umich.edu).pdf \|via=Wikimedia Commons \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref>		A Bureau of Agriculture veterinarian tested an injected extract of "Cannabis americana" as an anaesthetic for animals in 1914.<ref name="Palmer1914">{{cite journal \|last=Palmer \|first=D.B. \|title=A new method of producing anesthesia \|journal=The Philippine Agricultural Review \|volume=7 \|issue=5 \|date=May 1914 \|page=242 \|url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Philippine_agricultural_review_(IA_acx0689.0007.002.umich.edu).pdf \|via=Wikimedia Commons \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> The bureau's [[wikipedia:Rinderpest\|rinderpest]] trials of 1917 included "Cannabis Indica", which showed no curative value.<ref name="PAR1919">{{cite journal \|author=Bureau of Agriculture \|title=Seventeenth annual report of the Bureau of Agriculture \|journal=The Philippine Agricultural Review \|volume=12 \|issue=2 \|year=1919 \|page=43 \|url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Philippine_agricultural_review_(IA_acx0689.0001.012.umich.edu).pdf \|via=Wikimedia Commons \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref>

	Gamella and Martín regard the American administration's encounter with mass opiate use in its first colony as decisive in the creation of international narcotics control. The Episcopal bishop [[wikipedia:Charles Brent\|Charles Henry Brent]], whom they name as the most influential figure in Philippine opium legislation, presided over the first international opium commission at Shanghai in 1909<ref name="GamellaMartin1992"/> and sat as a United States delegate "of the Philippine Islands" at the opium conference at The Hague.<ref name="FRUS1912-307">{{cite web \|title=Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 3, 1912, Document 307 \|website=Office of the Historian \|publisher=United States Department of State \|url=https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1912/d307 \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> Indian hemp was raised there at Italy's proposal. The conference's final protocol recommended only that it be studied.<ref name="FRUS1912-305">{{cite web \|title=Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 3, 1912, Document 305 \|website=Office of the Historian \|publisher=United States Department of State \|url=https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1912/d305 \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref><ref name="UNODC2008">{{cite report \|author=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime \|title=A Century of International Drug Control \|publisher=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime \|location=Vienna \|year=2008 \|pages=50–55 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/Studies/100_Years_of_Drug_Control.pdf \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> Cannabis came under international control through the 1925 Geneva convention, following a call by the delegation of [[Egypt]].<ref name="UNODC2008"/>		Gamella and Martín regard the American administration's encounter with mass opiate use in its first colony as decisive in the creation of international narcotics control. The Episcopal bishop [[wikipedia:Charles Brent\|Charles Henry Brent]], whom they name as the most influential figure in Philippine opium legislation, presided over the first international opium commission at Shanghai in 1909<ref name="GamellaMartin1992"/> and sat as a United States delegate "of the Philippine Islands" at the opium conference at The Hague.<ref name="FRUS1912-307">{{cite web \|title=Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 3, 1912, Document 307 \|website=Office of the Historian \|publisher=United States Department of State \|url=https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1912/d307 \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> Indian hemp was raised there at Italy's proposal. The conference's final protocol recommended only that it be studied.<ref name="FRUS1912-305">{{cite web \|title=Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 3, 1912, Document 305 \|website=Office of the Historian \|publisher=United States Department of State \|url=https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1912/d305 \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref><ref name="UNODC2008">{{cite report \|author=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime \|title=A Century of International Drug Control \|publisher=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime \|location=Vienna \|year=2008 \|pages=50–55 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/Studies/100_Years_of_Drug_Control.pdf \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> Cannabis came under international control through the [[International Opium Convention (1925)\|1925 Geneva convention]], following a call by the delegation of [[Egypt]].<ref name="UNODC2008"/>

	==== Prohibition and the first plantations (1953–1972) ====		==== Prohibition and the first plantations (1953–1972) ====

History of cannabis in the Philippines

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:42:57 GMT

Link the International Opium Convention of 1925 to its page

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:42, 16 October 2026
Line 29:		Line 29:
	The Philippine Commission's Food and Drugs Act of 1907 counted a medicine as misbranded if its label failed to state the quantity of "cannabis indica" it contained.<ref name="Act1655-1907"/> A Bureau of Agriculture veterinarian tried an injected extract of "Cannabis americana" as an anaesthetic for animals in 1914, without results that would justify its general use.<ref name="Palmer1914">{{cite journal \|last=Palmer \|first=D.B. \|title=A new method of producing anesthesia \|journal=The Philippine Agricultural Review \|volume=7 \|issue=5 \|date=May 1914 \|page=242 \|url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Philippine_agricultural_review_(IA_acx0689.0007.002.umich.edu).pdf \|via=Wikimedia Commons \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> The bureau's [[wikipedia:Rinderpest\|rinderpest]] trials of 1917 included "Cannabis Indica", which showed no curative value.<ref name="PAR1919">{{cite journal \|author=Bureau of Agriculture \|title=Seventeenth annual report of the Bureau of Agriculture \|journal=The Philippine Agricultural Review \|volume=12 \|issue=2 \|year=1919 \|page=43 \|url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Philippine_agricultural_review_(IA_acx0689.0001.012.umich.edu).pdf \|via=Wikimedia Commons \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> The ''Philippine Journal of Science'' described the trawl nets of Japanese fishermen working in Philippine waters in 1930 as made "from hemp, cannabio sativa" [''sic''].<ref name="MontalbanMartin1930">{{cite journal \|last1=Montalban \|first1=H.R. \|last2=Martin \|first2=C. \|title=Two Japanese fishing methods used by Japanese fishermen in Philippine waters \|journal=The Philippine Journal of Science \|volume=42 \|issue=4 \|date=August 1930 \|page=472 \|url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Philippine_journal_of_science_(IA_act3868.0042.001.umich.edu).pdf \|via=Wikimedia Commons \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> In 1941 the journal reviewed Robert P. Walton's ''Marihuana'', a book on a drug that "in recent years has become a deadly menace in the United States".<ref name="PJS1941-Walton">{{cite journal \|author=A.O.C. \|title=Review of ''Marihuana: America's New Drug Problem'' by Robert P. Walton \|journal=The Philippine Journal of Science \|volume=75 \|year=1941 \|page=343 \|url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Philippine_journal_of_science_(IA_act3868.0075.001.umich.edu).pdf \|via=Wikimedia Commons \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref>		The Philippine Commission's Food and Drugs Act of 1907 counted a medicine as misbranded if its label failed to state the quantity of "cannabis indica" it contained.<ref name="Act1655-1907"/> A Bureau of Agriculture veterinarian tried an injected extract of "Cannabis americana" as an anaesthetic for animals in 1914, without results that would justify its general use.<ref name="Palmer1914">{{cite journal \|last=Palmer \|first=D.B. \|title=A new method of producing anesthesia \|journal=The Philippine Agricultural Review \|volume=7 \|issue=5 \|date=May 1914 \|page=242 \|url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Philippine_agricultural_review_(IA_acx0689.0007.002.umich.edu).pdf \|via=Wikimedia Commons \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> The bureau's [[wikipedia:Rinderpest\|rinderpest]] trials of 1917 included "Cannabis Indica", which showed no curative value.<ref name="PAR1919">{{cite journal \|author=Bureau of Agriculture \|title=Seventeenth annual report of the Bureau of Agriculture \|journal=The Philippine Agricultural Review \|volume=12 \|issue=2 \|year=1919 \|page=43 \|url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Philippine_agricultural_review_(IA_acx0689.0001.012.umich.edu).pdf \|via=Wikimedia Commons \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> The ''Philippine Journal of Science'' described the trawl nets of Japanese fishermen working in Philippine waters in 1930 as made "from hemp, cannabio sativa" [''sic''].<ref name="MontalbanMartin1930">{{cite journal \|last1=Montalban \|first1=H.R. \|last2=Martin \|first2=C. \|title=Two Japanese fishing methods used by Japanese fishermen in Philippine waters \|journal=The Philippine Journal of Science \|volume=42 \|issue=4 \|date=August 1930 \|page=472 \|url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Philippine_journal_of_science_(IA_act3868.0042.001.umich.edu).pdf \|via=Wikimedia Commons \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> In 1941 the journal reviewed Robert P. Walton's ''Marihuana'', a book on a drug that "in recent years has become a deadly menace in the United States".<ref name="PJS1941-Walton">{{cite journal \|author=A.O.C. \|title=Review of ''Marihuana: America's New Drug Problem'' by Robert P. Walton \|journal=The Philippine Journal of Science \|volume=75 \|year=1941 \|page=343 \|url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Philippine_journal_of_science_(IA_act3868.0075.001.umich.edu).pdf \|via=Wikimedia Commons \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref>

	Juan Gamella and Elisa Martín regard the American administration's encounter with opiate use in its first colony as decisive in the creation of international narcotics control. They name Brent, who presided over the first international opium commission at Shanghai in 1909, as the most influential figure in Philippine opium legislation.<ref name="GamellaMartin1992"/> Preparing for the conference at The Hague, the Italian government asked in February 1910 that it also consider "the Indian hemp and hashish trade".<ref name="FRUS1910-272">{{cite web \|title=Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 6, 1910, Document 272 \|website=Office of the Historian \|publisher=United States Department of State \|url=https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1910/d272 \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> The United States, then the sovereign power in the Philippines, replied that it was "in hearty accord", warning that "as the suppression of excessive opium production proceeds, there is great danger that the production and trade in Indian hemp will replace it".<ref name="FRUS1910-278">{{cite web \|title=Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 6, 1910, Document 278 \|website=Office of the Historian \|publisher=United States Department of State \|url=https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1910/d278 \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> Brent sat at The Hague as a United States delegate "of the Philippine Islands";<ref name="FRUS1912-307">{{cite web \|title=Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 3, 1912, Document 307 \|website=Office of the Historian \|publisher=United States Department of State \|url=https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1912/d307 \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> the conference's final protocol recommended only that Indian hemp be studied "from the statistical and scientific standpoint".<ref name="FRUS1912-305">{{cite web \|title=Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 3, 1912, Document 305 \|website=Office of the Historian \|publisher=United States Department of State \|url=https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1912/d305 \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> Cannabis came under international control through the Geneva convention of 1925, after a call by the delegation of [[Egypt]]; the United States withdrew from that conference and did not sign the convention.<ref name="UNODC2008">{{cite report \|author=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime \|title=A Century of International Drug Control \|publisher=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime \|location=Vienna \|year=2008 \|pages=50–55 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/Studies/100_Years_of_Drug_Control.pdf \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> A United Nations survey of the illicit traffic, published in 1951, described the traffic in the Philippines as "largely confined to prepared opium" but named Indian hemp (marihuana) among the other drugs seized there. It reported that Indian hemp had been smuggled into the country from the United States.<ref name="UN1951">{{cite journal \|title=The illicit traffic in narcotics throughout the world \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=1 \|year=1951 \|pages=1–15 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1951-01-01_1_page002.html \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref>		Juan Gamella and Elisa Martín regard the American administration's encounter with opiate use in its first colony as decisive in the creation of international narcotics control. They name Brent, who presided over the first international opium commission at Shanghai in 1909, as the most influential figure in Philippine opium legislation.<ref name="GamellaMartin1992"/> Preparing for the conference at The Hague, the Italian government asked in February 1910 that it also consider "the Indian hemp and hashish trade".<ref name="FRUS1910-272">{{cite web \|title=Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 6, 1910, Document 272 \|website=Office of the Historian \|publisher=United States Department of State \|url=https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1910/d272 \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> The United States, then the sovereign power in the Philippines, replied that it was "in hearty accord", warning that "as the suppression of excessive opium production proceeds, there is great danger that the production and trade in Indian hemp will replace it".<ref name="FRUS1910-278">{{cite web \|title=Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 6, 1910, Document 278 \|website=Office of the Historian \|publisher=United States Department of State \|url=https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1910/d278 \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> Brent sat at The Hague as a United States delegate "of the Philippine Islands";<ref name="FRUS1912-307">{{cite web \|title=Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 3, 1912, Document 307 \|website=Office of the Historian \|publisher=United States Department of State \|url=https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1912/d307 \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> the conference's final protocol recommended only that Indian hemp be studied "from the statistical and scientific standpoint".<ref name="FRUS1912-305">{{cite web \|title=Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 3, 1912, Document 305 \|website=Office of the Historian \|publisher=United States Department of State \|url=https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1912/d305 \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> Cannabis came under international control through the [[International Opium Convention (1925)\|Geneva convention of 1925]], after a call by the delegation of [[Egypt]]; the United States withdrew from that conference and did not sign the convention.<ref name="UNODC2008">{{cite report \|author=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime \|title=A Century of International Drug Control \|publisher=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime \|location=Vienna \|year=2008 \|pages=50–55 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/Studies/100_Years_of_Drug_Control.pdf \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> A United Nations survey of the illicit traffic, published in 1951, described the traffic in the Philippines as "largely confined to prepared opium" but named Indian hemp (marihuana) among the other drugs seized there. It reported that Indian hemp had been smuggled into the country from the United States.<ref name="UN1951">{{cite journal \|title=The illicit traffic in narcotics throughout the world \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=1 \|year=1951 \|pages=1–15 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1951-01-01_1_page002.html \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref>

	== Prohibition and the first plantations (1953–1972) ==		== Prohibition and the first plantations (1953–1972) ==

Greece

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:42:50 GMT

Link the International Opium Convention of 1925 to its page

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:42, 16 October 2026
Line 21:		Line 21:
	In the Transnational Institute's account hashish was considered an "imminent threat to society", particularly among the urban poor and the rebellious youth known as ''manges'', who gathered in the ''tekedes'', the cafés frequented by hashish smokers in the harbour district of [[wikipedia:Piraeus\|Piraeus]] and in central [[wikipedia:Athens\|Athens]].<ref name="TNI2014" />{{Rp\|5}}		In the Transnational Institute's account hashish was considered an "imminent threat to society", particularly among the urban poor and the rebellious youth known as ''manges'', who gathered in the ''tekedes'', the cafés frequented by hashish smokers in the harbour district of [[wikipedia:Piraeus\|Piraeus]] and in central [[wikipedia:Athens\|Athens]].<ref name="TNI2014" />{{Rp\|5}}

	When the Egyptian delegate [[Mohamed El Guindy]] moved at the Second Opium Conference at Geneva (1924–25) to bring cannabis within the scope of the opium convention, Greece supported the proposal, alongside Turkey, [[South Africa]] and Brazil, which the Transnational Institute describes as countries that had experience of cannabis or had already banned it. Most countries at the conference, it writes, had little or no experience of cannabis and were inclined to rely on those that did, notably Egypt, Turkey and Greece.<ref name="TNI2014" />{{Rp\|10–11}}		When the Egyptian delegate [[Mohamed El Guindy]] moved at the Second Opium Conference at Geneva (1924–25) to bring cannabis within the scope of the [[International Opium Convention (1925)\|opium convention]], Greece supported the proposal, alongside Turkey, [[South Africa]] and Brazil, which the Transnational Institute describes as countries that had experience of cannabis or had already banned it. Most countries at the conference, it writes, had little or no experience of cannabis and were inclined to rely on those that did, notably Egypt, Turkey and Greece.<ref name="TNI2014" />{{Rp\|10–11}}

	Costas Stefanis, C. Ballas and D. Madianou wrote the chapter on hashish use in Greece in ''[[Cannabis and Culture (1975)\|Cannabis and Culture]]''.<ref name="stefanis1975" />		Costas Stefanis, C. Ballas and D. Madianou wrote the chapter on hashish use in Greece in ''[[Cannabis and Culture (1975)\|Cannabis and Culture]]''.<ref name="stefanis1975" />

Egypt

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:42:45 GMT

Main-article hatnote to the 1925 convention under Geneva, 1925

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:42, 16 October 2026
Line 98:		Line 98:

	==== Geneva, 1925 ====		==== Geneva, 1925 ====
			{{Main\|International Opium Convention (1925)}}

	Cannabis was not on the agenda of the Second International Opium Conference. On the second day of the		Cannabis was not on the agenda of the Second International Opium Conference. On the second day of the

Bengal Presidency cannabis trade

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:42:38 GMT

Link the International Opium Convention of 1925 to its page

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:42, 16 October 2026
Line 57:		Line 57:
	== Decline and Partition ==		== Decline and Partition ==

	The interwar decades brought a slow administrative tightening and a sustained fall in output, from a peak of about 880 tonnes in 1858 to roughly 170 tonnes by 1947.<ref name="Rahman2023"/> India was a party to the International Opium Convention concluded at Geneva in 1925, which for the first time placed cannabis, described in the convention as "Indian hemp," under international control alongside opium and cocaine.<ref name="Mills2003"/>		The interwar decades brought a slow administrative tightening and a sustained fall in output, from a peak of about 880 tonnes in 1858 to roughly 170 tonnes by 1947.<ref name="Rahman2023"/> India was a party to the [[International Opium Convention (1925)\|International Opium Convention]] concluded at Geneva in 1925, which for the first time placed cannabis, described in the convention as "Indian hemp," under international control alongside opium and cocaine.<ref name="Mills2003"/>

	[[Partition of India\|Partition]] in 1947 divided the trade along the Radcliffe Line. The entire licensed cultivation tract and its gola warehouses passed to East Pakistan, while [[West Bengal]] retained the principal consumption markets and the wholesale and retail vending infrastructure, including [[Calcutta]] and the [[Hooghly River\|Hooghly]] riverside.<ref name="Mills2003"/> Licensed cultivation continued in East Pakistan, and later [[Bangladesh]], through the [[Ganja Society]] until it was wound down in 1987, under a drug-control commitment entered into in 1974 that required it to end within 15 years.<ref name="Rahman2022"/>		[[Partition of India\|Partition]] in 1947 divided the trade along the Radcliffe Line. The entire licensed cultivation tract and its gola warehouses passed to East Pakistan, while [[West Bengal]] retained the principal consumption markets and the wholesale and retail vending infrastructure, including [[Calcutta]] and the [[Hooghly River\|Hooghly]] riverside.<ref name="Mills2003"/> Licensed cultivation continued in East Pakistan, and later [[Bangladesh]], through the [[Ganja Society]] until it was wound down in 1987, under a drug-control commitment entered into in 1974 that required it to end within 15 years.<ref name="Rahman2022"/>

Indonesia

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:42:31 GMT

Link the 1925 convention to its page at first mention; point the 1912 Hague conference link at the 1912 convention

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:42, 16 October 2026
Line 15:		Line 15:
	'''Indonesia''' has a cannabis record documented from the 17th century onwards, concentrated in [[Aceh]] on the northernmost tip of [[Sumatra]], where the plant is known as ''[[ganja]]''. Acehnese cooks have used cannabis seed as a flavouring, a use that informants in 2020 said continued only in private.<ref name="TNI2016"/><ref name="CNNIndonesia2020a">{{cite news \|title=Jejak Ganja dalam Kuliner Aceh \|trans-title=Traces of cannabis in Acehnese cuisine \|work=CNN Indonesia \|date=2 February 2020 \|language=id \|url=https://www.cnnindonesia.com/gaya-hidup/20200202143124-262-470886/jejak-ganja-dalam-kuliner-aceh}}</ref> When the national narcotics board proposed reviewing the plant's legal status in 2007, the debate drew street protests from religious groups and the proposal was dropped; Vice-President [[wikipedia:Jusuf Kalla\|Jusuf Kalla]] argued against legalisation while allowing that "[i]t's alright to use it as a food seasoning."<ref name="TNI2016">{{cite report \|last1=Putri \|first1=D. \|last2=Blickman \|first2=T. \|title=Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies \|series=Drug Policy Briefing No. 44 \|publisher=Transnational Institute \|location=Amsterdam \|date=January 2016 \|url=https://www.tni.org/en/publication/cannabis-in-indonesia}}</ref> The Dutch botanist [[Georgius Rumphius]], stationed on [[Ambon]] in the 1670s and 1680s, produced a detailed botanical description of cannabis in the Indonesian archipelago, the earliest located, including a record of a compact, curled-leaved variety from the [[Papua\|Papuan]] and [[Sula Islands]].<ref name="rumphius-v5">{{cite book \|last=Rumphius \|first=G.E. \|title=Herbarium Amboinense \|volume=V \|at=pp. 208–211, t. LXXVII \|publisher=Franciscus Changuion, Hermannus Uytwerf \|location=Amsterdam \|year=1747 \|language=la \|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/10355}}</ref> No modern study of eastern Indonesian cannabis populations has been located.		'''Indonesia''' has a cannabis record documented from the 17th century onwards, concentrated in [[Aceh]] on the northernmost tip of [[Sumatra]], where the plant is known as ''[[ganja]]''. Acehnese cooks have used cannabis seed as a flavouring, a use that informants in 2020 said continued only in private.<ref name="TNI2016"/><ref name="CNNIndonesia2020a">{{cite news \|title=Jejak Ganja dalam Kuliner Aceh \|trans-title=Traces of cannabis in Acehnese cuisine \|work=CNN Indonesia \|date=2 February 2020 \|language=id \|url=https://www.cnnindonesia.com/gaya-hidup/20200202143124-262-470886/jejak-ganja-dalam-kuliner-aceh}}</ref> When the national narcotics board proposed reviewing the plant's legal status in 2007, the debate drew street protests from religious groups and the proposal was dropped; Vice-President [[wikipedia:Jusuf Kalla\|Jusuf Kalla]] argued against legalisation while allowing that "[i]t's alright to use it as a food seasoning."<ref name="TNI2016">{{cite report \|last1=Putri \|first1=D. \|last2=Blickman \|first2=T. \|title=Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies \|series=Drug Policy Briefing No. 44 \|publisher=Transnational Institute \|location=Amsterdam \|date=January 2016 \|url=https://www.tni.org/en/publication/cannabis-in-indonesia}}</ref> The Dutch botanist [[Georgius Rumphius]], stationed on [[Ambon]] in the 1670s and 1680s, produced a detailed botanical description of cannabis in the Indonesian archipelago, the earliest located, including a record of a compact, curled-leaved variety from the [[Papua\|Papuan]] and [[Sula Islands]].<ref name="rumphius-v5">{{cite book \|last=Rumphius \|first=G.E. \|title=Herbarium Amboinense \|volume=V \|at=pp. 208–211, t. LXXVII \|publisher=Franciscus Changuion, Hermannus Uytwerf \|location=Amsterdam \|year=1747 \|language=la \|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/10355}}</ref> No modern study of eastern Indonesian cannabis populations has been located.

	The Dutch pharmacologist [[Willem Boorsma]], commissioned in 1913 to investigate the cannabis situation in the [[Dutch East Indies]], concluded that cannabis was used as an intoxicant only in three Sumatran residencies, the West Coast, the East Coast and Aceh, where it was grown, though not on any significant scale, and used mainly by foreigners, very little by the indigenous population.<ref name="Boorsma1917">{{cite book \|last=Boorsma \|first=W.G. \|chapter=Pharmacologisch laboratorium \|title=Jaarboek van het departement van landbouw, nijverheid en handel 1915 \|publisher=Landsdrukkerij \|location=Batavia \|year=1917 \|pages=21–29 \|language=nl}}</ref>{{rp\|27}} No measures to stop cultivation followed his study.<ref name="TNI2016"/>{{rp\|5}} The 1927 prohibition came from the inclusion of cannabis in the 1925 International Opium Convention; the decree's main concern was opium, for which cannabis often served as a surrogate.<ref name="TNI2016"/>{{rp\|4–5}} Cannabis remains in the same Group I category as heroin and crystal methamphetamine under the 2009 narcotics law.<ref name="TNI2016"/>		The Dutch pharmacologist [[Willem Boorsma]], commissioned in 1913 to investigate the cannabis situation in the [[Dutch East Indies]], concluded that cannabis was used as an intoxicant only in three Sumatran residencies, the West Coast, the East Coast and Aceh, where it was grown, though not on any significant scale, and used mainly by foreigners, very little by the indigenous population.<ref name="Boorsma1917">{{cite book \|last=Boorsma \|first=W.G. \|chapter=Pharmacologisch laboratorium \|title=Jaarboek van het departement van landbouw, nijverheid en handel 1915 \|publisher=Landsdrukkerij \|location=Batavia \|year=1917 \|pages=21–29 \|language=nl}}</ref>{{rp\|27}} No measures to stop cultivation followed his study.<ref name="TNI2016"/>{{rp\|5}} The 1927 prohibition came from the inclusion of cannabis in the [[International Opium Convention (1925)\|1925 International Opium Convention]]; the decree's main concern was opium, for which cannabis often served as a surrogate.<ref name="TNI2016"/>{{rp\|4–5}} Cannabis remains in the same Group I category as heroin and crystal methamphetamine under the 2009 narcotics law.<ref name="TNI2016"/>

	Nearly all the cannabis consumed in Indonesia is grown in Aceh Province and elsewhere in Sumatra and shipped from there to the other islands.<ref name="TNI2016"/>{{rp\|2}} Annual eradication campaigns run there against cultivation that has continued across generations. Between 2009 and 2012, 37,923 people were imprisoned for using cannabis, which the [[Transnational Institute]] puts at as many as 26 people sentenced daily.<ref name="TNI2016"/> No systematic botanical collection or genetic characterisation of Indonesian landrace cannabis has been located. The published chemical work profiles seized material rather than plants of documented provenance.<ref name="supiyani2025">{{cite journal \|last1=Supiyani \|last2=Salsabil \|first2=S. \|last3=Mumtazah \|first3=A. \|last4=Syakira \|first4=A. \|title=Profiling of various dry Cannabis sativa from Aceh, Indonesia, based on cannabinoids spectroscopy characteristics \|journal=Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences \|volume=15 \|issue=1 \|year=2025 \|doi=10.1186/s41935-025-00480-y \|doi-access=free}}</ref> The varieties face pressure from eradication, from hybrid introduction and from the interruption of traditional cultivation knowledge under prohibition.		Nearly all the cannabis consumed in Indonesia is grown in Aceh Province and elsewhere in Sumatra and shipped from there to the other islands.<ref name="TNI2016"/>{{rp\|2}} Annual eradication campaigns run there against cultivation that has continued across generations. Between 2009 and 2012, 37,923 people were imprisoned for using cannabis, which the [[Transnational Institute]] puts at as many as 26 people sentenced daily.<ref name="TNI2016"/> No systematic botanical collection or genetic characterisation of Indonesian landrace cannabis has been located. The published chemical work profiles seized material rather than plants of documented provenance.<ref name="supiyani2025">{{cite journal \|last1=Supiyani \|last2=Salsabil \|first2=S. \|last3=Mumtazah \|first3=A. \|last4=Syakira \|first4=A. \|title=Profiling of various dry Cannabis sativa from Aceh, Indonesia, based on cannabinoids spectroscopy characteristics \|journal=Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences \|volume=15 \|issue=1 \|year=2025 \|doi=10.1186/s41935-025-00480-y \|doi-access=free}}</ref> The varieties face pressure from eradication, from hybrid introduction and from the interruption of traditional cultivation knowledge under prohibition.
Line 91:		Line 91:
	The Netherlands East Indies colonial government initially gave cannabis little regulatory attention. The colonial administration's regulatory energies were focused on opium, which was controlled through a state monopoly (the '''[[Opium Regie]]''') that generated substantial revenue. Cannabis attracted attention primarily as an '''opium surrogate''': as opium controls tightened in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, cannabis use expanded among populations priced out of or legally excluded from opium.<ref name="Boorsma1917"/>		The Netherlands East Indies colonial government initially gave cannabis little regulatory attention. The colonial administration's regulatory energies were focused on opium, which was controlled through a state monopoly (the '''[[Opium Regie]]''') that generated substantial revenue. Cannabis attracted attention primarily as an '''opium surrogate''': as opium controls tightened in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, cannabis use expanded among populations priced out of or legally excluded from opium.<ref name="Boorsma1917"/>

	Concerns about "Indian hemp" were raised at the '''[[International Opium Conference]]''' in [[wikipedia:The Hague\|The Hague]] in 1912. The colonial government commissioned '''Willem G. Boorsma''', Head of the Pharmacological Laboratory of the Department of Agriculture, Industry and Trade, to examine the situation of cannabis across the Dutch East Indies. The survey was commissioned by a directive dated '''23 August 1913, No. 9031''' from the Director of Agriculture, Industry and Trade, and was conducted jointly by the Opium Regie (Opium Revenue Service) and 's Lands Plantentuin (the [[Bogor Botanical Gardens\|Botanical Gardens at Bogor]]), with regional administrators and agricultural instructors instructed to collect specimens and submit reports on occurrence and use.<ref name="Boorsma1917"/> Boorsma signed the report as "Chef van het Pharmakologisch Laboratorium."<ref name="Boorsma1917"/>		Concerns about "Indian hemp" were raised at the '''[[wikipedia:First International Opium Convention\|International Opium Conference]]''' in [[wikipedia:The Hague\|The Hague]] in 1912. The colonial government commissioned '''Willem G. Boorsma''', Head of the Pharmacological Laboratory of the Department of Agriculture, Industry and Trade, to examine the situation of cannabis across the Dutch East Indies. The survey was commissioned by a directive dated '''23 August 1913, No. 9031''' from the Director of Agriculture, Industry and Trade, and was conducted jointly by the Opium Regie (Opium Revenue Service) and 's Lands Plantentuin (the [[Bogor Botanical Gardens\|Botanical Gardens at Bogor]]), with regional administrators and agricultural instructors instructed to collect specimens and submit reports on occurrence and use.<ref name="Boorsma1917"/> Boorsma signed the report as "Chef van het Pharmakologisch Laboratorium."<ref name="Boorsma1917"/>

	Boorsma's findings, published across a 1915 departmental yearbook report and a 1918 journal article, found that '''most plants called ''gendji'' or ''gandja'' across Java and parts of Sumatra were not Cannabis at all''', but lookalike species including ''Clerodendron Siphonanthus'', ''Leonurus sibiricus'', ''Artemisia'' spp. and several others. True Cannabis was confirmed present only in [[Salatiga]] ([[Semarang]] residency), the West and East Sumatra coasts and Aceh and its dependencies.<ref name="Boorsma1918"/> The survey was carried out through the colonial administration and the Opium Regie, so its coverage followed theirs. In Aceh, as on the two Sumatran coasts, Boorsma's conclusion was that cultivation and use were "primarily by foreigners" (Klingalese [[Tamil people\|Tamil]] labourers, [[Bengali people\|Bengalis]] and Arabs) rather than by the indigenous Acehnese population, and that the variety grown was of relatively low potency compared to Indian forms.<ref name="Boorsma1918"/> The result was not prohibition but '''increased administrative scrutiny''': regional administrators were required to report annually on the cannabis situation in their areas.<ref name="TNI2016"/>		Boorsma's findings, published across a 1915 departmental yearbook report and a 1918 journal article, found that '''most plants called ''gendji'' or ''gandja'' across Java and parts of Sumatra were not Cannabis at all''', but lookalike species including ''Clerodendron Siphonanthus'', ''Leonurus sibiricus'', ''Artemisia'' spp. and several others. True Cannabis was confirmed present only in [[Salatiga]] ([[Semarang]] residency), the West and East Sumatra coasts and Aceh and its dependencies.<ref name="Boorsma1918"/> The survey was carried out through the colonial administration and the Opium Regie, so its coverage followed theirs. In Aceh, as on the two Sumatran coasts, Boorsma's conclusion was that cultivation and use were "primarily by foreigners" (Klingalese [[Tamil people\|Tamil]] labourers, [[Bengali people\|Bengalis]] and Arabs) rather than by the indigenous Acehnese population, and that the variety grown was of relatively low potency compared to Indian forms.<ref name="Boorsma1918"/> The result was not prohibition but '''increased administrative scrutiny''': regional administrators were required to report annually on the cannabis situation in their areas.<ref name="TNI2016"/>
Line 103:		Line 103:
	=== The Verdoovende Middelen Ordonnantie (1927) ===		=== The Verdoovende Middelen Ordonnantie (1927) ===

	The national prohibition came with the '''[[Verdoovende Middelen Ordonnantie]]''' (Narcotics Decree) of '''1927''', which followed the inclusion of cannabis in the '''[[1925 International Opium Convention]]''' and made cannabis subject to a system of export authorisations and import certificates.<ref name="TNI2016"/> The decree's primary focus was opium and its derivatives; cannabis was regulated as a secondary concern, principally in its role as an opium substitute. The decree prohibited cannabis cultivation and established restrictions on use, possession and distribution, though penalties were modest by later standards.		The national prohibition came with the '''[[Verdoovende Middelen Ordonnantie]]''' (Narcotics Decree) of '''1927''', which followed the inclusion of cannabis in the '''1925 International Opium Convention''' and made cannabis subject to a system of export authorisations and import certificates.<ref name="TNI2016"/> The decree's primary focus was opium and its derivatives; cannabis was regulated as a secondary concern, principally in its role as an opium substitute. The decree prohibited cannabis cultivation and established restrictions on use, possession and distribution, though penalties were modest by later standards.

	Under the 1927 Ordonnantie, penalties included a maximum fine of 1,000 guilders or six months' imprisonment for cultivation, and 3,000 guilders or three months for import, export, possession, preparation or use.<ref name="TNI2016"/>		Under the 1927 Ordonnantie, penalties included a maximum fine of 1,000 guilders or six months' imprisonment for cultivation, and 3,000 guilders or three months for import, export, possession, preparation or use.<ref name="TNI2016"/>

Ganja in Jamaica (1975)

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:42:25 GMT

Point the International Opium Convention link at the 1912 Hague convention

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:42, 16 October 2026
Line 47:		Line 47:
	The footnote records a three-term graded system in which ''ganja'' occupies the middle rank, ''[[charas]]'' the top rank in India and ''kali'' the top rank in Jamaica, with ''[[bhang]]'' the mildest. The authors add that ''kali'' is also a [[wikipedia:Swahili\|Swahili]] word for strong or sharp and judge the Jamaican usage probably independent of that.<ref name="RubinComitas1975"/>		The footnote records a three-term graded system in which ''ganja'' occupies the middle rank, ''[[charas]]'' the top rank in India and ''kali'' the top rank in Jamaica, with ''[[bhang]]'' the mildest. The authors add that ''kali'' is also a [[wikipedia:Swahili\|Swahili]] word for strong or sharp and judge the Jamaican usage probably independent of that.<ref name="RubinComitas1975"/>

	The third chapter, on ganja legislation, traces the colonial-era emergence of the issue. The authors find nothing in departmental reports, [[Legislative Council of Jamaica\|Legislative Council]] minutes, Governor's reports or newspaper accounts to indicate that ganja was treated as a major social issue before the turn of the century. The first official mention appeared in the lunatic asylum report for 1883–84. The 1892–93 report of the Protector of Immigrants recorded a belief that East Indians were using ganja. The question was raised in the Legislative Council during debate on the [[International Opium Convention]] signed at [[wikipedia:The Hague\|The Hague]]. Jamaica amended its consenting document to add prohibitions on the importation and cultivation of ''[[Cannabis sativa]]''. The resulting 1913 ordinance did not specify possession or use as criminal acts.<ref name="RubinComitas1975"/>		The third chapter, on ganja legislation, traces the colonial-era emergence of the issue. The authors find nothing in departmental reports, [[Legislative Council of Jamaica\|Legislative Council]] minutes, Governor's reports or newspaper accounts to indicate that ganja was treated as a major social issue before the turn of the century. The first official mention appeared in the lunatic asylum report for 1883–84. The 1892–93 report of the Protector of Immigrants recorded a belief that East Indians were using ganja. The question was raised in the Legislative Council during debate on the [[wikipedia:First International Opium Convention\|International Opium Convention]] signed at [[wikipedia:The Hague\|The Hague]]. Jamaica amended its consenting document to add prohibitions on the importation and cultivation of ''[[Cannabis sativa]]''. The resulting 1913 ordinance did not specify possession or use as criminal acts.<ref name="RubinComitas1975"/>

	The fourth chapter, on the ganja complex, reports that the Indian roots had for practical purposes been forgotten by the time of the study and that some culturally militant Black users instead claimed Africa as the origin, citing Biblical references to the herb.<ref name="RubinComitas1975"/> On prevalence, the authors record that various sources had estimated between one-third and two-thirds of the lower class as users. Against those figures they set a survey in one of the seven study communities, which found that half of all males over fifteen were smokers, half of them heavy smokers; 7.3 per cent were former smokers and 20 per cent non-smokers, with 22.3 per cent unclassifiable.<ref name="RubinComitas1975"/>		The fourth chapter, on the ganja complex, reports that the Indian roots had for practical purposes been forgotten by the time of the study and that some culturally militant Black users instead claimed Africa as the origin, citing Biblical references to the herb.<ref name="RubinComitas1975"/> On prevalence, the authors record that various sources had estimated between one-third and two-thirds of the lower class as users. Against those figures they set a survey in one of the seven study communities, which found that half of all males over fifteen were smokers, half of them heavy smokers; 7.3 per cent were former smokers and 20 per cent non-smokers, with 22.3 per cent unclassifiable.<ref name="RubinComitas1975"/>

Mexico

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:42:14 GMT

Point the 1912 Hague convention link at the 1912 convention

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:42, 16 October 2026
Line 61:		Line 61:
	In December 1938 the psychiatrist [[Leopoldo Salazar Viniegra]], drawing on 14 years at the asylum of Mixcoac, published "El mito de la marihuana" in ''Criminalia''; he concluded that neither crime nor madness was directly related to its use.<ref name="GonzalezAscencio2025">{{cite journal \|last=González Ascencio \|first=Gerardo \|title=La labor científica del médico Leopoldo Salazar Viniegra en México y el Reglamento Federal de Toxicomanías de 1940 \|journal=Alegatos \|issue=119 \|year=2025 \|page=109 \|language=es \|url=https://alegatos.azc.uam.mx/index.php/ra/article/download/1813/1768 \|access-date=14 October 2026}}</ref> A Reglamento Federal de Toxicomanías signed by President [[wikipedia:Lázaro Cárdenas\|Lázaro Cárdenas]] on 5 January 1940 was published on 17 February. It replaced the regulation of 1931 and its system of prosecuting addicts and required the health department to acquire drugs for treating them.<ref name="DOF-1940-02-17">{{cite journal \|author=Departamento de Salubridad Pública \|title=Reglamento Federal de Toxicomanías \|journal=Diario Oficial de la Federación \|date=17 February 1940 \|page=5 \|language=es \|url=https://dof.gob.mx/index_111.php?year=1940&month=02&day=17 \|access-date=14 October 2026}}</ref><ref name="DOF-1940-07-03">{{cite journal \|author=Departamento de Salubridad Pública \|title=Decreto que suspende la vigencia del Reglamento Federal de Toxicomanías \|journal=Diario Oficial de la Federación \|date=3 July 1940 \|page=12 \|language=es \|url=https://dof.gob.mx/index_111.php?year=1940&month=07&day=03 \|access-date=14 October 2026}}</ref> A decree of 7 June 1940, published on 3 July, suspended it indefinitely: the war in Europe had made those drugs too hard to obtain. The regulation of 23 September 1931 returned to force.<ref name="DOF-1940-07-03"/> Carlos Pérez Ricart attributes the suspension to pressure from several institutions of the United States government.<ref name="PerezRicart2021">{{cite journal \|last=Pérez Ricart \|first=Carlos A. \|title=Estados Unidos frente a la promulgación y suspensión en México del Reglamento de Toxicomanías de 1940 \|journal=Foro Internacional \|volume=61 \|issue=3 \|year=2021 \|pages=649–686 \|language=es \|doi=10.24201/fi.v61i3.2775}}</ref> Gerardo González Ascencio writes that the United States had decreed an embargo on medicines and drugs vital to medical practice.<ref name="GonzalezAscencio2025"/>{{rp\|101, 127}}		In December 1938 the psychiatrist [[Leopoldo Salazar Viniegra]], drawing on 14 years at the asylum of Mixcoac, published "El mito de la marihuana" in ''Criminalia''; he concluded that neither crime nor madness was directly related to its use.<ref name="GonzalezAscencio2025">{{cite journal \|last=González Ascencio \|first=Gerardo \|title=La labor científica del médico Leopoldo Salazar Viniegra en México y el Reglamento Federal de Toxicomanías de 1940 \|journal=Alegatos \|issue=119 \|year=2025 \|page=109 \|language=es \|url=https://alegatos.azc.uam.mx/index.php/ra/article/download/1813/1768 \|access-date=14 October 2026}}</ref> A Reglamento Federal de Toxicomanías signed by President [[wikipedia:Lázaro Cárdenas\|Lázaro Cárdenas]] on 5 January 1940 was published on 17 February. It replaced the regulation of 1931 and its system of prosecuting addicts and required the health department to acquire drugs for treating them.<ref name="DOF-1940-02-17">{{cite journal \|author=Departamento de Salubridad Pública \|title=Reglamento Federal de Toxicomanías \|journal=Diario Oficial de la Federación \|date=17 February 1940 \|page=5 \|language=es \|url=https://dof.gob.mx/index_111.php?year=1940&month=02&day=17 \|access-date=14 October 2026}}</ref><ref name="DOF-1940-07-03">{{cite journal \|author=Departamento de Salubridad Pública \|title=Decreto que suspende la vigencia del Reglamento Federal de Toxicomanías \|journal=Diario Oficial de la Federación \|date=3 July 1940 \|page=12 \|language=es \|url=https://dof.gob.mx/index_111.php?year=1940&month=07&day=03 \|access-date=14 October 2026}}</ref> A decree of 7 June 1940, published on 3 July, suspended it indefinitely: the war in Europe had made those drugs too hard to obtain. The regulation of 23 September 1931 returned to force.<ref name="DOF-1940-07-03"/> Carlos Pérez Ricart attributes the suspension to pressure from several institutions of the United States government.<ref name="PerezRicart2021">{{cite journal \|last=Pérez Ricart \|first=Carlos A. \|title=Estados Unidos frente a la promulgación y suspensión en México del Reglamento de Toxicomanías de 1940 \|journal=Foro Internacional \|volume=61 \|issue=3 \|year=2021 \|pages=649–686 \|language=es \|doi=10.24201/fi.v61i3.2775}}</ref> Gerardo González Ascencio writes that the United States had decreed an embargo on medicines and drugs vital to medical practice.<ref name="GonzalezAscencio2025"/>{{rp\|101, 127}}

	Mexico signed the [[wikipedia:International Opium Convention\|Hague Opium Convention]] of 1912 but did not ratify it.<ref name="PerezRicart2021"/> It signed the [[Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs]] on 24 July 1961 and ratified it on 18 April 1967.<ref name="UNTC-VI-15">{{cite web \|title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 15 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-15&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> It acceded to the [[Convention on Psychotropic Substances]] on 20 February 1975, with a reservation for Indigenous peoples who use wild plants containing psychotropic substances in magical or religious rites,<ref name="UNTC-VI-16">{{cite web \|title=Convention on Psychotropic Substances \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 16 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-16&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> became a party to the Single Convention as amended by its Protocol of 1972 on 27 April 1977<ref name="UNTC-VI18">{{cite web \|title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, as amended by the Protocol amending the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961: status \|work=United Nations Treaty Collection \|publisher=United Nations \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-18&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> and ratified the [[United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances\|1988 Convention]] on 11 April 1990.<ref name="UNTC-VI-19">{{cite web \|title=United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 19 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-19&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref>		Mexico signed the [[wikipedia:First International Opium Convention\|Hague Opium Convention]] of 1912 but did not ratify it.<ref name="PerezRicart2021"/> It signed the [[Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs]] on 24 July 1961 and ratified it on 18 April 1967.<ref name="UNTC-VI-15">{{cite web \|title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 15 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-15&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> It acceded to the [[Convention on Psychotropic Substances]] on 20 February 1975, with a reservation for Indigenous peoples who use wild plants containing psychotropic substances in magical or religious rites,<ref name="UNTC-VI-16">{{cite web \|title=Convention on Psychotropic Substances \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 16 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-16&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> became a party to the Single Convention as amended by its Protocol of 1972 on 27 April 1977<ref name="UNTC-VI18">{{cite web \|title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, as amended by the Protocol amending the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961: status \|work=United Nations Treaty Collection \|publisher=United Nations \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-18&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> and ratified the [[United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances\|1988 Convention]] on 11 April 1990.<ref name="UNTC-VI-19">{{cite web \|title=United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 19 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-19&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref>

	=== Cultivation ===		=== Cultivation ===

Jamaica

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:42:07 GMT

Point the International Opium Convention link at the 1912 convention, which the 1913 law followed

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:42, 16 October 2026
Line 16:		Line 16:
	}}		}}

	'''Jamaica''' is an island country in the [[Caribbean]], where cannabis is called '''ganja'''. The [[Hindi language\|Hindi]] name reached the island in the 19th century, with folk uses of the plant, among the [[wikipedia:Indian indenture system\|indentured labourers from India]] brought to work on the sugar plantations.<ref name="RubinComitas1975-book">{{cite book \|last1=Rubin \|first1=Vera \|last2=Comitas \|first2=Lambros \|title=Ganja in Jamaica: A Medical Anthropological Study of Chronic Marihuana Use \|title-link=Ganja in Jamaica (1975) \|location=The Hague \|publisher=Mouton \|year=1975 \|doi=10.1515/9783110812077}}</ref>{{rp\|1}} The first law against growing and importing the plant was passed in 1913, when the colony took up the [[wikipedia:International Opium Convention\|International Opium Convention]]; the Dangerous Drugs Law of 1924 and its later amendments made possession, sale and smoking offences and, from 1941, imposed mandatory prison terms.<ref name="RubinComitas1975-book"/>{{rp\|21–24}} In the [[Rastafari]] movement ganja is a holy plant and its use a ritual.<ref name="RubinComitas1975-book"/>{{rp\|4, 24}}		'''Jamaica''' is an island country in the [[Caribbean]], where cannabis is called '''ganja'''. The [[Hindi language\|Hindi]] name reached the island in the 19th century, with folk uses of the plant, among the [[wikipedia:Indian indenture system\|indentured labourers from India]] brought to work on the sugar plantations.<ref name="RubinComitas1975-book">{{cite book \|last1=Rubin \|first1=Vera \|last2=Comitas \|first2=Lambros \|title=Ganja in Jamaica: A Medical Anthropological Study of Chronic Marihuana Use \|title-link=Ganja in Jamaica (1975) \|location=The Hague \|publisher=Mouton \|year=1975 \|doi=10.1515/9783110812077}}</ref>{{rp\|1}} The first law against growing and importing the plant was passed in 1913, when the colony took up the [[wikipedia:First International Opium Convention\|International Opium Convention]]; the Dangerous Drugs Law of 1924 and its later amendments made possession, sale and smoking offences and, from 1941, imposed mandatory prison terms.<ref name="RubinComitas1975-book"/>{{rp\|21–24}} In the [[Rastafari]] movement ganja is a holy plant and its use a ritual.<ref name="RubinComitas1975-book"/>{{rp\|4, 24}}

	The Dangerous Drugs (Amendment) Act of 2015 made possession of two ounces or less a ticketed contravention that carries no criminal record. It allows five plants to a household, exempts sacramental use in the Rastafarian faith and set up the [[Cannabis Licensing Authority]] to license a medical, therapeutic and scientific industry in ganja and [[hemp]].<ref name="JM-DDA-2015">{{cite act \|title=The Dangerous Drugs (Amendment) Act, 2015 \|type=Act \|number=5 of 2015 \|date=2015 \|jurisdiction=Jamaica \|url=https://japarliament.gov.jm/attachments/341_The%20Dangerous%20Drug%20(Amnedment)%20bill,%202015%20No.%205.pdf \|publisher=Houses of Parliament of Jamaica \|access-date=13 October 2026}}</ref>{{rp\|4, 9–12}} The United States Department of State describes Jamaica as the Caribbean's largest producer of cannabis.<ref name="INCSR2025">{{cite report \|author=Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs \|title=International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, Volume 1: Drug and Chemical Control \|publisher=United States Department of State \|date=March 2025 \|url=https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/2025-International-Narcotics-Control-Strategy-Volume-1-Accessible.pdf \|access-date=13 October 2026}}</ref>{{rp\|236}}		The Dangerous Drugs (Amendment) Act of 2015 made possession of two ounces or less a ticketed contravention that carries no criminal record. It allows five plants to a household, exempts sacramental use in the Rastafarian faith and set up the [[Cannabis Licensing Authority]] to license a medical, therapeutic and scientific industry in ganja and [[hemp]].<ref name="JM-DDA-2015">{{cite act \|title=The Dangerous Drugs (Amendment) Act, 2015 \|type=Act \|number=5 of 2015 \|date=2015 \|jurisdiction=Jamaica \|url=https://japarliament.gov.jm/attachments/341_The%20Dangerous%20Drug%20(Amnedment)%20bill,%202015%20No.%205.pdf \|publisher=Houses of Parliament of Jamaica \|access-date=13 October 2026}}</ref>{{rp\|4, 9–12}} The United States Department of State describes Jamaica as the Caribbean's largest producer of cannabis.<ref name="INCSR2025">{{cite report \|author=Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs \|title=International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, Volume 1: Drug and Chemical Control \|publisher=United States Department of State \|date=March 2025 \|url=https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/2025-International-Narcotics-Control-Strategy-Volume-1-Accessible.pdf \|access-date=13 October 2026}}</ref>{{rp\|236}}

Iraq

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:42:01 GMT

Point the 1912 Hague convention link at the 1912 convention; link the 1925 convention to its page

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:42, 16 October 2026
Line 52:		Line 52:
	==== Mandate and kingdom ====		==== Mandate and kingdom ====

	In March 1924 the British High Commissioner listed "Traffic in Drugs" among the international undertakings that separate agreements under Article X of the [[wikipedia:Anglo-Iraqi Treaty of 1922\|Anglo-Iraqi Treaty]] were to secure.<ref name="CO1925-Iraq">{{cite report \|author=Colonial Office \|title=Report by His Britannic Majesty's Government on the Administration of ʿIraq for the Period April, 1923–December, 1924 \|series=Colonial No. 13 \|publisher=His Majesty's Stationery Office \|location=London \|year=1925 \|url=https://archive.org/details/report-admin-iraq-1920-27}}</ref>{{rp\|55–56}} By 1926 Britain had adhered on Iraq's behalf to the [[wikipedia:International Opium Convention\|Hague Opium Convention]] of 1912 and the Geneva convention of 1925. Under the latter the Ministry of Interior issued a notification on dangerous and intoxicating drugs, their manufacture, import, export, transit and illegal possession.<ref name="CO1927-Iraq">{{cite report \|author=Colonial Office \|title=Report by His Britannic Majesty's Government to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of ʿIraq for the Year 1926 \|series=Colonial No. 29 \|publisher=His Majesty's Stationery Office \|location=London \|year=1927 \|url=https://archive.org/details/report-admin-iraq-1920-27}}</ref>{{rp\|57–58}} In 1927 the Criminal Investigation Department worked with the police and the customs on cases of opium and ''[[charas]]'' smuggling.<ref name="CO1928-Iraq">{{cite report \|author=Colonial Office \|title=Report by His Britannic Majesty's Government to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of ʿIraq for the Year 1927 \|series=Colonial No. 35 \|publisher=His Majesty's Stationery Office \|location=London \|year=1928 \|url=https://archive.org/details/report-admin-iraq-1927}}</ref>{{rp\|69–70}} The ban on growing hemp came at the end of the decade, and before 1931 the Iraqi parliament passed a law for the country's accession to the International Opium Convention and its protocol.<ref name="CO1931-Iraq"/>{{rp\|18–19, 138–139}}		In March 1924 the British High Commissioner listed "Traffic in Drugs" among the international undertakings that separate agreements under Article X of the [[wikipedia:Anglo-Iraqi Treaty of 1922\|Anglo-Iraqi Treaty]] were to secure.<ref name="CO1925-Iraq">{{cite report \|author=Colonial Office \|title=Report by His Britannic Majesty's Government on the Administration of ʿIraq for the Period April, 1923–December, 1924 \|series=Colonial No. 13 \|publisher=His Majesty's Stationery Office \|location=London \|year=1925 \|url=https://archive.org/details/report-admin-iraq-1920-27}}</ref>{{rp\|55–56}} By 1926 Britain had adhered on Iraq's behalf to the [[wikipedia:First International Opium Convention\|Hague Opium Convention]] of 1912 and the [[International Opium Convention (1925)\|Geneva convention of 1925]]. Under the latter the Ministry of Interior issued a notification on dangerous and intoxicating drugs, their manufacture, import, export, transit and illegal possession.<ref name="CO1927-Iraq">{{cite report \|author=Colonial Office \|title=Report by His Britannic Majesty's Government to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of ʿIraq for the Year 1926 \|series=Colonial No. 29 \|publisher=His Majesty's Stationery Office \|location=London \|year=1927 \|url=https://archive.org/details/report-admin-iraq-1920-27}}</ref>{{rp\|57–58}} In 1927 the Criminal Investigation Department worked with the police and the customs on cases of opium and ''[[charas]]'' smuggling.<ref name="CO1928-Iraq">{{cite report \|author=Colonial Office \|title=Report by His Britannic Majesty's Government to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of ʿIraq for the Year 1927 \|series=Colonial No. 35 \|publisher=His Majesty's Stationery Office \|location=London \|year=1928 \|url=https://archive.org/details/report-admin-iraq-1927}}</ref>{{rp\|69–70}} The ban on growing hemp came at the end of the decade, and before 1931 the Iraqi parliament passed a law for the country's accession to the International Opium Convention and its protocol.<ref name="CO1931-Iraq"/>{{rp\|18–19, 138–139}}

	At the [[wikipedia:League of Nations\|League of Nations]]' Advisory Committee on the opium traffic in 1934, the Egyptian representative named Iraq with [[Bulgaria]], Egypt, [[Greece]], [[Turkey]] and [[wikipedia:Yugoslavia\|Yugoslavia]] among the countries that had recently prohibited the cultivation of Indian hemp.<ref name="LoN1934">{{cite report \|author=League of Nations, Advisory Committee on Traffic in Opium and Other Dangerous Drugs \|title=Report to the Council on the Work of the Nineteenth Session \|id=C.630.M.241.1934.XI \|location=Geneva \|date=4 December 1934 \|url=https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.85667}}</ref> Iraq's Dangerous Drug Law No. 44 of 1938, which brought existing legislation into line with the Limitation Convention of 1931, came into force on 14 June 1938. That year's report to the League said that the illegal traffic in hashish had increased, that the drug came in from Syria and that its users smoked in secret.<ref name="LoN1940"/> J. Bouquet wrote in the UN ''Bulletin on Narcotics'' in 1951 that growing and storing cannabis were forbidden in Iraq, but that a considerable traffic in hashish existed, probably fed in part by Iranian plantations.<ref name="Bouquet1951">{{cite journal \|last=Bouquet \|first=J. \|title=Cannabis (concluded) \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=1 \|pages=22–45 \|year=1951 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1951-01-01_1_page005.html}}</ref>		At the [[wikipedia:League of Nations\|League of Nations]]' Advisory Committee on the opium traffic in 1934, the Egyptian representative named Iraq with [[Bulgaria]], Egypt, [[Greece]], [[Turkey]] and [[wikipedia:Yugoslavia\|Yugoslavia]] among the countries that had recently prohibited the cultivation of Indian hemp.<ref name="LoN1934">{{cite report \|author=League of Nations, Advisory Committee on Traffic in Opium and Other Dangerous Drugs \|title=Report to the Council on the Work of the Nineteenth Session \|id=C.630.M.241.1934.XI \|location=Geneva \|date=4 December 1934 \|url=https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.85667}}</ref> Iraq's Dangerous Drug Law No. 44 of 1938, which brought existing legislation into line with the Limitation Convention of 1931, came into force on 14 June 1938. That year's report to the League said that the illegal traffic in hashish had increased, that the drug came in from Syria and that its users smoked in secret.<ref name="LoN1940"/> J. Bouquet wrote in the UN ''Bulletin on Narcotics'' in 1951 that growing and storing cannabis were forbidden in Iraq, but that a considerable traffic in hashish existed, probably fed in part by Iranian plantations.<ref name="Bouquet1951">{{cite journal \|last=Bouquet \|first=J. \|title=Cannabis (concluded) \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=1 \|pages=22–45 \|year=1951 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1951-01-01_1_page005.html}}</ref>

South Africa

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:41:51 GMT

Link the International Opium Convention of 1925 to its page

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:41, 16 October 2026
Line 20:		Line 20:
	Cannabis reached southern Africa in the wider dispersal of the plant through the continent, and by the seventeenth century it circulated in a regional exchange economy between [[Bantu peoples\|Bantu-speaking]] farmers and [[Khoisan]] communities.<ref name="duvall2019">{{cite journal \|last=Duvall \|first=C.S. \|title=A brief agricultural history of cannabis in Africa, from prehistory to canna-colony \|journal=EchoGéo \|year=2019 \|issue=48 \|doi=10.4000/echogeo.17599}}</ref> Distinct vernacular names attach to the plant in the country's languages, including ''insangu'' among the [[Zulu people\|Zulu]], ''umya'' among the [[Xhosa people\|Xhosa]] and ''matekoane'' among the [[Sotho people\|Sotho]], while ''[[ganja]]'' was introduced separately by Indian indentured labourers in Natal from 1860.<ref name="paterson2009">{{cite thesis \|last=Paterson \|first=C. \|title=Prohibition and resistance: a socio-political exploration of the changing dynamics of the southern African cannabis trade, c. 1850 – the present \|degree=MA \|publisher=Rhodes University \|year=2009}}</ref>		Cannabis reached southern Africa in the wider dispersal of the plant through the continent, and by the seventeenth century it circulated in a regional exchange economy between [[Bantu peoples\|Bantu-speaking]] farmers and [[Khoisan]] communities.<ref name="duvall2019">{{cite journal \|last=Duvall \|first=C.S. \|title=A brief agricultural history of cannabis in Africa, from prehistory to canna-colony \|journal=EchoGéo \|year=2019 \|issue=48 \|doi=10.4000/echogeo.17599}}</ref> Distinct vernacular names attach to the plant in the country's languages, including ''insangu'' among the [[Zulu people\|Zulu]], ''umya'' among the [[Xhosa people\|Xhosa]] and ''matekoane'' among the [[Sotho people\|Sotho]], while ''[[ganja]]'' was introduced separately by Indian indentured labourers in Natal from 1860.<ref name="paterson2009">{{cite thesis \|last=Paterson \|first=C. \|title=Prohibition and resistance: a socio-political exploration of the changing dynamics of the southern African cannabis trade, c. 1850 – the present \|degree=MA \|publisher=Rhodes University \|year=2009}}</ref>

	Cannabis was criminalised through a sequence of colonial measures, beginning with the Cape Colony's prohibition under Act 34 of 1891 and culminating in national prohibition in the 1920s.<ref name="paterson2009"/> In 1923 the government of [[wikipedia:Jan Smuts\|Jan Smuts]] asked the [[wikipedia:League of Nations\|League of Nations]] to bring cannabis under international control, an intervention that fed into the plant's inclusion in the 1925 [[~~wikipedia:~~International Opium Convention\|Geneva International Opium Convention]] and gave South Africa a formative role in the global prohibition of cannabis.<ref name="chattopadhyaya2019">{{cite journal \|last=Chattopadhyaya \|first=U. \|title=Dagga and prohibition: markets, animals, and the imperial contexts of knowledge, 1893–1925 \|journal=South African Historical Journal \|year=2019 \|volume=71 \|issue=4 \|pages=587–613 \|doi=10.1080/02582473.2019.1641738}}</ref><ref name="kozma2011">{{cite journal \|last=Kozma \|first=L. \|title=The League of Nations and the debate over cannabis prohibition \|journal=History Compass \|year=2011 \|volume=9 \|issue=1 \|pages=61–70 \|doi=10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00740.x}}</ref> Prohibition was tightened under [[wikipedia:Apartheid\|apartheid]] and enforced in the rural growing districts through decades of policing and, from the 1980s, aerial herbicide spraying.<ref name="nkosi2020">{{cite journal \|last1=Nkosi \|first1=P.I. \|last2=Devey \|first2=R. \|last3=Waetjen \|first3=T. \|title=Cannabis policing in mid-twentieth century South Africa \|journal=Historia \|year=2020 \|volume=65 \|issue=1 \|doi=10.17159/2309-8392/2020/v65n1a4}}</ref>		Cannabis was criminalised through a sequence of colonial measures, beginning with the Cape Colony's prohibition under Act 34 of 1891 and culminating in national prohibition in the 1920s.<ref name="paterson2009"/> In 1923 the government of [[wikipedia:Jan Smuts\|Jan Smuts]] asked the [[wikipedia:League of Nations\|League of Nations]] to bring cannabis under international control, an intervention that fed into the plant's inclusion in the 1925 [[International Opium Convention (1925)\|Geneva International Opium Convention]] and gave South Africa a formative role in the global prohibition of cannabis.<ref name="chattopadhyaya2019">{{cite journal \|last=Chattopadhyaya \|first=U. \|title=Dagga and prohibition: markets, animals, and the imperial contexts of knowledge, 1893–1925 \|journal=South African Historical Journal \|year=2019 \|volume=71 \|issue=4 \|pages=587–613 \|doi=10.1080/02582473.2019.1641738}}</ref><ref name="kozma2011">{{cite journal \|last=Kozma \|first=L. \|title=The League of Nations and the debate over cannabis prohibition \|journal=History Compass \|year=2011 \|volume=9 \|issue=1 \|pages=61–70 \|doi=10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00740.x}}</ref> Prohibition was tightened under [[wikipedia:Apartheid\|apartheid]] and enforced in the rural growing districts through decades of policing and, from the 1980s, aerial herbicide spraying.<ref name="nkosi2020">{{cite journal \|last1=Nkosi \|first1=P.I. \|last2=Devey \|first2=R. \|last3=Waetjen \|first3=T. \|title=Cannabis policing in mid-twentieth century South Africa \|journal=Historia \|year=2020 \|volume=65 \|issue=1 \|doi=10.17159/2309-8392/2020/v65n1a4}}</ref>

	Prohibition held for most of a century until 2018, when the [[wikipedia:Constitutional Court of South Africa\|Constitutional Court]], in ''Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development v Prince'', decriminalised the private use, possession and cultivation of cannabis by adults on the ground of the constitutional right to privacy (see [[#Legal status\|Legal status]]).<ref name="prince2018">{{cite web \|title=Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Others v Prince; National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others v Rubin; National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others v Acton and Others (CCT108/17) [2018] ZACC 30 \|publisher=Constitutional Court of South Africa \|date=18 September 2018 \|url=https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACC/2018/30.html \|via=SAFLII}}</ref> Parliament later passed the Cannabis for Private Purposes Act, assented to on 28 May 2024, to codify the judgment, although the Act was not yet in force in 2026 and no legal commercial market for the plant existed.<ref name="cfppa2024">{{cite web \|title=Cannabis for Private Purposes Act 7 of 2024 \|publisher=Republic of South Africa \|date=3 June 2024 \|url=https://www.gov.za/documents/acts/cannabis-private-purposes-act-7-2024-english-sepedi-03-jun-2024}}</ref> Since decriminalisation the low-potency traditional crop of [[Mpondoland]] has been displaced on price by high-potency commercial material and smallholders have been excluded from the licensed medical market, while the country's landraces themselves remain scientifically uncharacterised.<ref name="kepe2003">{{cite journal \|last=Kepe \|first=T. \|title=Cannabis sativa and rural livelihoods in South Africa: politics of cultivation, trade and value in Pondoland \|journal=Development Southern Africa \|year=2003 \|volume=20 \|issue=5 \|pages=605–615 \|doi=10.1080/0376835032000149252}}</ref><ref name="ndlangamandla2024">{{cite journal \|last1=Ndlangamandla \|first1=V.V. \|last2=Salawu-Rotimi \|first2=A. \|last3=Bushula-Njah \|first3=V.S. \|last4=Hlongwane \|first4=N. \|last5=Sibandze \|first5=G.F. \|last6=Gebashe \|first6=F. \|last7=Mchunu \|first7=N.P. \|title=Finally freed—cannabis in South Africa: a review contextualised within global history, diversity, and chemical profiles \|journal=Plants \|year=2024 \|volume=13 \|issue=19 \|article-number=2695 \|doi=10.3390/plants13192695 \|doi-access=free}}</ref>		Prohibition held for most of a century until 2018, when the [[wikipedia:Constitutional Court of South Africa\|Constitutional Court]], in ''Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development v Prince'', decriminalised the private use, possession and cultivation of cannabis by adults on the ground of the constitutional right to privacy (see [[#Legal status\|Legal status]]).<ref name="prince2018">{{cite web \|title=Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Others v Prince; National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others v Rubin; National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others v Acton and Others (CCT108/17) [2018] ZACC 30 \|publisher=Constitutional Court of South Africa \|date=18 September 2018 \|url=https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACC/2018/30.html \|via=SAFLII}}</ref> Parliament later passed the Cannabis for Private Purposes Act, assented to on 28 May 2024, to codify the judgment, although the Act was not yet in force in 2026 and no legal commercial market for the plant existed.<ref name="cfppa2024">{{cite web \|title=Cannabis for Private Purposes Act 7 of 2024 \|publisher=Republic of South Africa \|date=3 June 2024 \|url=https://www.gov.za/documents/acts/cannabis-private-purposes-act-7-2024-english-sepedi-03-jun-2024}}</ref> Since decriminalisation the low-potency traditional crop of [[Mpondoland]] has been displaced on price by high-potency commercial material and smallholders have been excluded from the licensed medical market, while the country's landraces themselves remain scientifically uncharacterised.<ref name="kepe2003">{{cite journal \|last=Kepe \|first=T. \|title=Cannabis sativa and rural livelihoods in South Africa: politics of cultivation, trade and value in Pondoland \|journal=Development Southern Africa \|year=2003 \|volume=20 \|issue=5 \|pages=605–615 \|doi=10.1080/0376835032000149252}}</ref><ref name="ndlangamandla2024">{{cite journal \|last1=Ndlangamandla \|first1=V.V. \|last2=Salawu-Rotimi \|first2=A. \|last3=Bushula-Njah \|first3=V.S. \|last4=Hlongwane \|first4=N. \|last5=Sibandze \|first5=G.F. \|last6=Gebashe \|first6=F. \|last7=Mchunu \|first7=N.P. \|title=Finally freed—cannabis in South Africa: a review contextualised within global history, diversity, and chemical profiles \|journal=Plants \|year=2024 \|volume=13 \|issue=19 \|article-number=2695 \|doi=10.3390/plants13192695 \|doi-access=free}}</ref>

Hashish

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:41:43 GMT

Link the 1925 convention to its page at first mention; correct the LNTS page range (pp. 317-358)

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:41, 16 October 2026
Line 16:		Line 16:
	The Arabic word ''ḥashīsh'' (حشيش) means dry grass or herbage. Francis Joseph Steingass's Persian-English dictionary of 1892 marks it as Arabic and glosses it as "Dry herbage, hay, or grass" and as "the powder of the leaves of hemp, from which they prepare an inebriating electuary".<ref name="Steingass1892"/> The geographer Pierre-Arnaud Chouvy traces the word's senses from "grass" or "hay", through "Indian hemp", to compressed cannabis resin. Chouvy adds that it is not clear when the last sense settled, because the word has long been applied loosely to the plant, to its products and sometimes to a "hashish" made from the leaves.<ref name="Chouvy2022-Hashish"/>		The Arabic word ''ḥashīsh'' (حشيش) means dry grass or herbage. Francis Joseph Steingass's Persian-English dictionary of 1892 marks it as Arabic and glosses it as "Dry herbage, hay, or grass" and as "the powder of the leaves of hemp, from which they prepare an inebriating electuary".<ref name="Steingass1892"/> The geographer Pierre-Arnaud Chouvy traces the word's senses from "grass" or "hay", through "Indian hemp", to compressed cannabis resin. Chouvy adds that it is not clear when the last sense settled, because the word has long been applied loosely to the plant, to its products and sometimes to a "hashish" made from the leaves.<ref name="Chouvy2022-Hashish"/>

	The Anglo-Indian glossary ''[[wikipedia:Hobson-Jobson\|Hobson-Jobson]]'' quotes under the year 1578 a passage by Acosta stating that "the Arabs call this Bangue 'Axis'"; the glossary reads ''Axis'' as ''hashīsh''.<ref name="YuleBurnell1903-Bang">{{cite book \|last1=Yule \|first1=Henry \|last2=Burnell \|first2=A.C. \|editor-first=William \|editor-last=Crooke \|entry=Bang, Bhang \|title=Hobson-Jobson: A Glossary of Colloquial Anglo-Indian Words and Phrases, and of Kindred Terms, Etymological, Historical, Geographical and Discursive \|edition=New \|publisher=John Murray \|location=London \|year=1903 \|page=60 \|url=https://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/hobsonjobson/ \|via=Digital Dictionaries of South Asia}}</ref> According to the historian David A. Guba Jr., French explorers, soldiers and scientists began in the early 18th century to write of intoxicants made from a variety of hemp grown in the East, "which were given names such as bang, keif, and hachisch".<ref name="Guba2021">{{cite book \|last=Guba \|first=David A. Jr. \|chapter=Taming the Orient: France and the first global movement to medicalize cannabis, ca. 1800–1850 \|editor1-last=Richert \|editor1-first=Lucas \|editor2-last=Mills \|editor2-first=James H. \|title=Cannabis: Global Histories \|title-link=Cannabis: Global Histories (2021) \|location=Cambridge, Massachusetts \|publisher=The MIT Press \|year=2021 \|pages=3–28 \|doi=10.7551/mitpress/12102.003.0004}}</ref>{{Rp\|4}} The Geneva convention of 1925 named "hashish, esrar, chiras, djamba" as ordinary preparations made from the resin.<ref name="OpiumConvention1925">{{cite book \|title=International Opium Convention, adopted by the Second Opium Conference (League of Nations). Signed at Geneva, February 19, 1925 \|series=League of Nations Treaty Series \|volume=81 \|publisher=League of Nations \|year=1928 \|pages=~~317–359~~ \|url=https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/LON/Volume%2081/v81.pdf \|via=United Nations Treaty Collection}}</ref>{{Rp\|333}} In Afghanistan the local name for hashish is ''charas'', pronounced ''chaars'', the word that in northern [[South Asia]] names hand-rubbed resin.<ref name="bradford2019">{{cite journal \|last1=Bradford \|first1=James \|last2=Mansfield \|first2=David \|title=Known Unknowns and Unknown Knowns: What we know about the cannabis and the Hashish trade in Afghanistan \|journal=EchoGéo \|year=2019 \|volume=48 \|doi=10.4000/echogeo.17626 \|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name="acs2009">{{cite report \|author=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime \|author2=Ministry of Counter Narcotics, Government of Afghanistan \|title=Afghanistan Cannabis Survey 2009 \|publisher=UNODC \|date=April 2010 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/documents/crop-monitoring/Afghanistan/Afghanistan_Cannabis_Survey_2009.pdf}}</ref>{{Rp\|22}} In [[Iran]], according to the ''[[wikipedia:Encyclopædia Iranica\|Encyclopaedia Iranica]]'', "contemporary Iranian parlance does not distinguish among bang, hashish, and čars".<ref name="SaidiSirjani1988"/>		The Anglo-Indian glossary ''[[wikipedia:Hobson-Jobson\|Hobson-Jobson]]'' quotes under the year 1578 a passage by Acosta stating that "the Arabs call this Bangue 'Axis'"; the glossary reads ''Axis'' as ''hashīsh''.<ref name="YuleBurnell1903-Bang">{{cite book \|last1=Yule \|first1=Henry \|last2=Burnell \|first2=A.C. \|editor-first=William \|editor-last=Crooke \|entry=Bang, Bhang \|title=Hobson-Jobson: A Glossary of Colloquial Anglo-Indian Words and Phrases, and of Kindred Terms, Etymological, Historical, Geographical and Discursive \|edition=New \|publisher=John Murray \|location=London \|year=1903 \|page=60 \|url=https://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/hobsonjobson/ \|via=Digital Dictionaries of South Asia}}</ref> According to the historian David A. Guba Jr., French explorers, soldiers and scientists began in the early 18th century to write of intoxicants made from a variety of hemp grown in the East, "which were given names such as bang, keif, and hachisch".<ref name="Guba2021">{{cite book \|last=Guba \|first=David A. Jr. \|chapter=Taming the Orient: France and the first global movement to medicalize cannabis, ca. 1800–1850 \|editor1-last=Richert \|editor1-first=Lucas \|editor2-last=Mills \|editor2-first=James H. \|title=Cannabis: Global Histories \|title-link=Cannabis: Global Histories (2021) \|location=Cambridge, Massachusetts \|publisher=The MIT Press \|year=2021 \|pages=3–28 \|doi=10.7551/mitpress/12102.003.0004}}</ref>{{Rp\|4}} The [[International Opium Convention (1925)\|Geneva convention of 1925]] named "hashish, esrar, chiras, djamba" as ordinary preparations made from the resin.<ref name="OpiumConvention1925">{{cite book \|title=International Opium Convention, adopted by the Second Opium Conference (League of Nations). Signed at Geneva, February 19, 1925 \|series=League of Nations Treaty Series \|volume=81 \|publisher=League of Nations \|year=1928 \|pages=317–358 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/LON/Volume%2081/v81.pdf \|via=United Nations Treaty Collection}}</ref>{{Rp\|333}} In Afghanistan the local name for hashish is ''charas'', pronounced ''chaars'', the word that in northern [[South Asia]] names hand-rubbed resin.<ref name="bradford2019">{{cite journal \|last1=Bradford \|first1=James \|last2=Mansfield \|first2=David \|title=Known Unknowns and Unknown Knowns: What we know about the cannabis and the Hashish trade in Afghanistan \|journal=EchoGéo \|year=2019 \|volume=48 \|doi=10.4000/echogeo.17626 \|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name="acs2009">{{cite report \|author=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime \|author2=Ministry of Counter Narcotics, Government of Afghanistan \|title=Afghanistan Cannabis Survey 2009 \|publisher=UNODC \|date=April 2010 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/documents/crop-monitoring/Afghanistan/Afghanistan_Cannabis_Survey_2009.pdf}}</ref>{{Rp\|22}} In [[Iran]], according to the ''[[wikipedia:Encyclopædia Iranica\|Encyclopaedia Iranica]]'', "contemporary Iranian parlance does not distinguish among bang, hashish, and čars".<ref name="SaidiSirjani1988"/>

	In a paper read at the [[wikipedia:Institut de France\|Institut de France]] in July 1809, the orientalist [[wikipedia:Antoine Isaac Silvestre de Sacy\|Antoine-Isaac Silvestre de Sacy]] derived the word ''assassin'' from "Hachichin", "hashish-eater", which he took to be the Arabic name of a sect of drug-taking killers in Persia and Syria in the 12th and 13th centuries.<ref name="Guba2021"/>{{Rp\|4}} Guba counts among the account's inaccuracies "the probability that the Ismaili did not use hashish". Guba writes that it nonetheless became the basis on which French pharmacists and physicians of the early 19th century built their understanding of the drug.<ref name="Guba2021"/>{{Rp\|5}} The botanist [[David Prain]] doubted the derivation in 1893, finding no more reason for it than "the supposition, for which no evidence has been advanced, that the use of hemp incites to murder".<ref name="Prain1893">{{cite book \|last=Prain \|first=D. \|year=1893 \|title=Report on the Cultivation and Use of Gánjá \|location=Calcutta \|publisher=Bengal Secretariat Press \|url=https://digital.nls.uk/indiapapers/browse/archive/74913508 \|via=National Library of Scotland}}</ref>{{Rp\|44}} The historian of the [[wikipedia:Nizari Isma'ilism\|Nizari Ismailis]] Farhad Daftary finds "no evidence" that hashish or any other drug was used to motivate the Nizari ''fedāʾīs''; even the Muslim sources hostile to the Ismailis, Daftary notes, are silent on it. Muslim authors did call the Nizaris ''ḥašīšīya'' and ''ḥašīšīn'', abusive terms "meaning low-class rabble" given "without any derivative explanation". The [[wikipedia:Crusades\|Crusaders]] took them up as the forms of ''assassin'' in European languages. In Daftary's reading "it was the abusive name that gave rise to the imaginative tale".<ref name="Daftary1999-Fedai">{{cite encyclopedia \|last=Daftary \|first=Farhad \|title=Fedāʾī \|encyclopedia=Encyclopaedia Iranica \|volume=IX, fasc. 5 \|pages=468–470 \|date=15 December 1999 \|url=https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/fedai/ \|access-date=30 September 2026}}</ref>		In a paper read at the [[wikipedia:Institut de France\|Institut de France]] in July 1809, the orientalist [[wikipedia:Antoine Isaac Silvestre de Sacy\|Antoine-Isaac Silvestre de Sacy]] derived the word ''assassin'' from "Hachichin", "hashish-eater", which he took to be the Arabic name of a sect of drug-taking killers in Persia and Syria in the 12th and 13th centuries.<ref name="Guba2021"/>{{Rp\|4}} Guba counts among the account's inaccuracies "the probability that the Ismaili did not use hashish". Guba writes that it nonetheless became the basis on which French pharmacists and physicians of the early 19th century built their understanding of the drug.<ref name="Guba2021"/>{{Rp\|5}} The botanist [[David Prain]] doubted the derivation in 1893, finding no more reason for it than "the supposition, for which no evidence has been advanced, that the use of hemp incites to murder".<ref name="Prain1893">{{cite book \|last=Prain \|first=D. \|year=1893 \|title=Report on the Cultivation and Use of Gánjá \|location=Calcutta \|publisher=Bengal Secretariat Press \|url=https://digital.nls.uk/indiapapers/browse/archive/74913508 \|via=National Library of Scotland}}</ref>{{Rp\|44}} The historian of the [[wikipedia:Nizari Isma'ilism\|Nizari Ismailis]] Farhad Daftary finds "no evidence" that hashish or any other drug was used to motivate the Nizari ''fedāʾīs''; even the Muslim sources hostile to the Ismailis, Daftary notes, are silent on it. Muslim authors did call the Nizaris ''ḥašīšīya'' and ''ḥašīšīn'', abusive terms "meaning low-class rabble" given "without any derivative explanation". The [[wikipedia:Crusades\|Crusaders]] took them up as the forms of ''assassin'' in European languages. In Daftary's reading "it was the abusive name that gave rise to the imaginative tale".<ref name="Daftary1999-Fedai">{{cite encyclopedia \|last=Daftary \|first=Farhad \|title=Fedāʾī \|encyclopedia=Encyclopaedia Iranica \|volume=IX, fasc. 5 \|pages=468–470 \|date=15 December 1999 \|url=https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/fedai/ \|access-date=30 September 2026}}</ref>
Line 26:		Line 26:

	== Statutory definition ==		== Statutory definition ==
	The ~~[[wikipedia:~~International Opium Convention~~\|International Opium Convention]]~~ signed at Geneva on 19 February 1925 defined "Indian hemp" as "the dried flowering or fruiting tops of the pistillate plant Cannabis sativa L. from which the resin has not been extracted, under whatever name they may be designated in commerce".<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp\|329}} Its chapter on Indian hemp bound the parties to prohibit the export of "the resin obtained from Indian hemp and the ordinary preparations of which the resin forms the base" to countries that had prohibited their use, to require a special import certificate where export was allowed and to control "the illicit international traffic in Indian hemp and especially in the resin".<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp\|333}}		The International Opium Convention signed at Geneva on 19 February 1925 defined "Indian hemp" as "the dried flowering or fruiting tops of the pistillate plant Cannabis sativa L. from which the resin has not been extracted, under whatever name they may be designated in commerce".<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp\|329}} Its chapter on Indian hemp bound the parties to prohibit the export of "the resin obtained from Indian hemp and the ordinary preparations of which the resin forms the base" to countries that had prohibited their use, to require a special import certificate where export was allowed and to control "the illicit international traffic in Indian hemp and especially in the resin".<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp\|333}}

	The [[Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs]] of 1961 defines "cannabis" as the flowering or fruiting tops of the plant "from which the resin has not been extracted" and "cannabis resin" as "the separated resin, whether crude or purified, obtained from the cannabis plant". Its definition of "production" is the separation of [[wikipedia:Opium\|opium]], [[wikipedia:Coca\|coca]] leaves, cannabis and cannabis resin from the plants.<ref name="SingleConvention1961">{{cite web \|title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, as amended by the 1972 Protocol amending the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 \|publisher=United Nations \|via=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime \|url=https://www.unodc.org/pdf/convention_1961_en.pdf \|access-date=30 September 2026}}</ref>{{Rp\|art. 1(1)(b), (d), (t)}} Cannabis and cannabis resin were listed in Schedule I, together with extracts and tinctures of cannabis. They were also listed in Schedule IV, whose drugs are subject to further special measures of control.<ref name="SingleConvention1961"/>{{Rp\|art. 2(5); Schedules I and IV}} On 2 December 2020 the [[wikipedia:United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs\|Commission on Narcotic Drugs]] voted by 27 to 25, with one abstention, to follow a recommendation of the [[wikipedia:World Health Organization\|World Health Organization]] made in January 2019 and delete cannabis and cannabis resin from Schedule IV. Both stayed in Schedule I and so, in the Commission's words, "remain subject to all levels of control of the 1961 Convention".<ref name="CND2020-press">{{cite press release \|title=CND votes on recommendations for cannabis and cannabis-related substances \|date=2 December 2020 \|location=Vienna \|publisher=Commission on Narcotic Drugs \|via=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime \|url=https://www.unodc.org/documents/commissions/CND/CND_Sessions/CND_63Reconvened/Press_statement_CND_2_December.pdf}}</ref>		The [[Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs]] of 1961 defines "cannabis" as the flowering or fruiting tops of the plant "from which the resin has not been extracted" and "cannabis resin" as "the separated resin, whether crude or purified, obtained from the cannabis plant". Its definition of "production" is the separation of [[wikipedia:Opium\|opium]], [[wikipedia:Coca\|coca]] leaves, cannabis and cannabis resin from the plants.<ref name="SingleConvention1961">{{cite web \|title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, as amended by the 1972 Protocol amending the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 \|publisher=United Nations \|via=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime \|url=https://www.unodc.org/pdf/convention_1961_en.pdf \|access-date=30 September 2026}}</ref>{{Rp\|art. 1(1)(b), (d), (t)}} Cannabis and cannabis resin were listed in Schedule I, together with extracts and tinctures of cannabis. They were also listed in Schedule IV, whose drugs are subject to further special measures of control.<ref name="SingleConvention1961"/>{{Rp\|art. 2(5); Schedules I and IV}} On 2 December 2020 the [[wikipedia:United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs\|Commission on Narcotic Drugs]] voted by 27 to 25, with one abstention, to follow a recommendation of the [[wikipedia:World Health Organization\|World Health Organization]] made in January 2019 and delete cannabis and cannabis resin from Schedule IV. Both stayed in Schedule I and so, in the Commission's words, "remain subject to all levels of control of the 1961 Convention".<ref name="CND2020-press">{{cite press release \|title=CND votes on recommendations for cannabis and cannabis-related substances \|date=2 December 2020 \|location=Vienna \|publisher=Commission on Narcotic Drugs \|via=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime \|url=https://www.unodc.org/documents/commissions/CND/CND_Sessions/CND_63Reconvened/Press_statement_CND_2_December.pdf}}</ref>

China

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:41:31 GMT

Link the International Opium Convention of 1925 to its page

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:41, 16 October 2026
Line 73:		Line 73:
	[[Thomas Douglas Forsyth\|Douglas Forsyth]]'s mission to Yarkand in 1870 reported that charas was that year the most important export from Yarkand to India, extracted from hemp "grown on the borders of every field".<ref name="Forsyth1871">{{cite book \|title=Yarkand (Forsyth's Mission): Copy or Extracts of Correspondence relating to the Mission of Mr. Douglas Forsyth to Yarkand \|publisher=India Office \|location=London \|year=1871 \|url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Yarkand_(Forsyth%27s_mission)_(IA_cu31924023438868).pdf \|via=Wikimedia Commons}}</ref>{{Rp\|28}} [[James Edward Tierney Aitchison\|J. E. T. Aitchison]] recorded 9,134 [[wikipedia:Maund\|maunds]] of charas imported into [[Leh]] from Yarkand over the preceding six years and gave its Turki names as ''kandir'' for the plant and ''nasha'' for the extract. He wrote that the ruler of Yarkand had prohibited its cultivation in regular fields, so that it was raised in single rows round fields of other crops.<ref name="Aitchison1874">{{cite book \|last=Aitchison \|first=J. E. T. \|title=Hand-book of the Trade Products of Leh, with the Statistics of the Trade, from 1867 to 1872 Inclusive \|location=Calcutta \|publisher=Wyman & Co. \|year=1874 \|url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hand-book_of_the_trade_products_of_Leh_-_with_the_statistics_of_the_trade,_from_1867_to_1872_inclusive_(IA_b21780547).pdf \|via=Wikimedia Commons}}</ref>{{Rp\|51–52}} [[Henry Walter Bellew\|H. W. Bellew]] wrote that the "hemp resin, or bang" of Yarkand formed the principal item of export towards [[Kashmir]] and the [[Punjab]].<ref name="Bellew1875">{{cite book \|last=Bellew \|first=H. W. \|title=Kashmir and Kashghar: A Narrative of the Journey of the Embassy to Kashghar in 1873–74 \|location=London \|publisher=Trübner & Co. \|year=1875 \|url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kashmir_and_Kashghar._A_narrative_of_the_journey_of_the_embassy_to_Kashghar_in_1873-74_(IA_kashmirkashgharn00bellrich).pdf \|via=Wikimedia Commons}}</ref>{{Rp\|7}} Kreutzmann finds silk yarn and charas "by far" the two major commodities exported from Xinjiang to British India between 1895 and 1939.<ref name="Kreutzmann2026"/>{{Rp\|80}}		[[Thomas Douglas Forsyth\|Douglas Forsyth]]'s mission to Yarkand in 1870 reported that charas was that year the most important export from Yarkand to India, extracted from hemp "grown on the borders of every field".<ref name="Forsyth1871">{{cite book \|title=Yarkand (Forsyth's Mission): Copy or Extracts of Correspondence relating to the Mission of Mr. Douglas Forsyth to Yarkand \|publisher=India Office \|location=London \|year=1871 \|url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Yarkand_(Forsyth%27s_mission)_(IA_cu31924023438868).pdf \|via=Wikimedia Commons}}</ref>{{Rp\|28}} [[James Edward Tierney Aitchison\|J. E. T. Aitchison]] recorded 9,134 [[wikipedia:Maund\|maunds]] of charas imported into [[Leh]] from Yarkand over the preceding six years and gave its Turki names as ''kandir'' for the plant and ''nasha'' for the extract. He wrote that the ruler of Yarkand had prohibited its cultivation in regular fields, so that it was raised in single rows round fields of other crops.<ref name="Aitchison1874">{{cite book \|last=Aitchison \|first=J. E. T. \|title=Hand-book of the Trade Products of Leh, with the Statistics of the Trade, from 1867 to 1872 Inclusive \|location=Calcutta \|publisher=Wyman & Co. \|year=1874 \|url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hand-book_of_the_trade_products_of_Leh_-_with_the_statistics_of_the_trade,_from_1867_to_1872_inclusive_(IA_b21780547).pdf \|via=Wikimedia Commons}}</ref>{{Rp\|51–52}} [[Henry Walter Bellew\|H. W. Bellew]] wrote that the "hemp resin, or bang" of Yarkand formed the principal item of export towards [[Kashmir]] and the [[Punjab]].<ref name="Bellew1875">{{cite book \|last=Bellew \|first=H. W. \|title=Kashmir and Kashghar: A Narrative of the Journey of the Embassy to Kashghar in 1873–74 \|location=London \|publisher=Trübner & Co. \|year=1875 \|url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kashmir_and_Kashghar._A_narrative_of_the_journey_of_the_embassy_to_Kashghar_in_1873-74_(IA_kashmirkashgharn00bellrich).pdf \|via=Wikimedia Commons}}</ref>{{Rp\|7}} Kreutzmann finds silk yarn and charas "by far" the two major commodities exported from Xinjiang to British India between 1895 and 1939.<ref name="Kreutzmann2026"/>{{Rp\|80}}

	According to China's annual reports for 1933 and 1935, "Indian hemp" was placed on the list of narcotic drugs after an analysis by the National Health Administration found the wild hemp of Sinkiang "homogenous" with ''[[Cannabis indica]]'', and in 1934 the government issued circular instructions to the provinces and municipalities for its suppression. A study by the United Nations Secretariat, published in 1953, concluded that the provincial government of Sinkiang prohibited the export of charas in 1934 on the national government's instructions, although the full effect was not felt for several years.<ref name="UNSecretariat1953">{{cite journal \|author=United Nations Secretariat \|title=The surprising extinction of the charas traffic \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=1 \|pages=1–7 \|year=1953 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1953-01-01_1_page002.html}}</ref> Kreutzmann describes two measures of 1936. The duty was raised from 20 to 200 rupees a pony load, after which the export of charas "nearly collapsed and never recovered", and in January the head of the Kashgar administration announced that "the sale and transmission (export) of opium, Charas and wine is prohibited from today".<ref name="Kreutzmann2026"/>{{Rp\|80, 82}} The Chopras wrote that charas was used in India until about 1934–35, when the Government of India stopped its import entirely,<ref name="Chopra1957"/> and India's annual report for 1944 recorded that illicit imports from Chinese Turkistan had stopped "on account of the reported stoppage of its production there".<ref name="UNSecretariat1953"/> China was not a party to the 1925 [[~~wikipedia:~~International Opium Convention\|Geneva International Opium Convention]], which the United Nations study calls the only one that controlled Indian hemp and its product charas,<ref name="UNSecretariat1953"/> although at the Geneva conference its delegate, Dr Sze, had supported the Egyptian proposal on controlling the traffic in [[hashish]].<ref name="Willoughby1925">{{cite book \|last=Willoughby \|first=W. W. \|title=Opium as an International Problem: The Geneva Conferences \|location=Baltimore \|publisher=The Johns Hopkins Press \|year=1925 \|url=https://archive.org/details/opiumasinternati00will \|via=Internet Archive}}</ref>{{Rp\|379}}		According to China's annual reports for 1933 and 1935, "Indian hemp" was placed on the list of narcotic drugs after an analysis by the National Health Administration found the wild hemp of Sinkiang "homogenous" with ''[[Cannabis indica]]'', and in 1934 the government issued circular instructions to the provinces and municipalities for its suppression. A study by the United Nations Secretariat, published in 1953, concluded that the provincial government of Sinkiang prohibited the export of charas in 1934 on the national government's instructions, although the full effect was not felt for several years.<ref name="UNSecretariat1953">{{cite journal \|author=United Nations Secretariat \|title=The surprising extinction of the charas traffic \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=1 \|pages=1–7 \|year=1953 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1953-01-01_1_page002.html}}</ref> Kreutzmann describes two measures of 1936. The duty was raised from 20 to 200 rupees a pony load, after which the export of charas "nearly collapsed and never recovered", and in January the head of the Kashgar administration announced that "the sale and transmission (export) of opium, Charas and wine is prohibited from today".<ref name="Kreutzmann2026"/>{{Rp\|80, 82}} The Chopras wrote that charas was used in India until about 1934–35, when the Government of India stopped its import entirely,<ref name="Chopra1957"/> and India's annual report for 1944 recorded that illicit imports from Chinese Turkistan had stopped "on account of the reported stoppage of its production there".<ref name="UNSecretariat1953"/> China was not a party to the 1925 [[International Opium Convention (1925)\|Geneva International Opium Convention]], which the United Nations study calls the only one that controlled Indian hemp and its product charas,<ref name="UNSecretariat1953"/> although at the Geneva conference its delegate, Dr Sze, had supported the Egyptian proposal on controlling the traffic in [[hashish]].<ref name="Willoughby1925">{{cite book \|last=Willoughby \|first=W. W. \|title=Opium as an International Problem: The Geneva Conferences \|location=Baltimore \|publisher=The Johns Hopkins Press \|year=1925 \|url=https://archive.org/details/opiumasinternati00will \|via=Internet Archive}}</ref>{{Rp\|379}}

	According to Zhou Limin, the Nationalist chairman of Xinjiang, [[wikipedia:Zhang Zhizhong\|Zhang Zhizhong]], campaigned against opium and ''máyān'' from 1945 and in June 1946 publicly burned confiscated opium, ''máyān'' and smoking utensils in [[Ürümqi]]. Growing cannabis and making and smoking ''máyān'' remained common in remote villages after 1949; in the mid-1960s and the 1970s most growers raised it for their own and their companions' use and very rarely sold it.<ref name="Zhou2015">{{cite journal \|last=Zhou \|first=Limin \|script-title=zh:我国大麻滥用的历史和现状 \|trans-title=History and current state of cannabis abuse in China \|journal=中国药物依赖性杂志 \|trans-journal=Chinese Journal of Drug Dependence \|issue=5 \|pages=327–331 \|year=2015 \|issn=1007-9718 \|language=zh \|url=http://www.jhak.com/index.php?m=content&c=index&a=show&catid=44&id=2904486 \|via=杜新忠戒毒网 \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> Hu, Zhang and Hao list Kashgar, Hotan, Makit, Yengisar, Bachu, Aksu, Xinhe, Kuqa, Luntai and Korla as places that still grew cannabis in quantity in the 1950s and 1960s, and give an incomplete count of more than 10,000 growers in Xinjiang in 1990.<ref name="Hu2015"/> The regional government issued a notice prohibiting the cultivation of cannabis in 1985. In 1991 the standing committee of the regional people's congress adopted regulations prohibiting cannabis drugs, which Zhou calls the first relatively systematic local regulation of its kind in China's history.<ref name="Zhou2015"/><ref name="XUAR1991">{{cite web \|title=新疆维吾尔自治区禁止大麻毒品条例 \|trans-title=Regulations of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region on the Prohibition of Cannabis Drugs \|type=as amended 11 December 1997 \|author=新疆维吾尔自治区人民代表大会常务委员会 \|date=2 November 1991 \|url=https://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/%E6%96%B0%E7%96%86%E7%BB%B4%E5%90%BE%E5%B0%94%E8%87%AA%E6%B2%BB%E5%8C%BA%E7%A6%81%E6%AD%A2%E5%A4%A7%E9%BA%BB%E6%AF%92%E5%93%81%E6%9D%A1%E4%BE%8B \|via=Wikisource \|language=zh \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> National statute had named cannabis among narcotic drugs in the Decision on the Prohibition of Narcotic Drugs of 28 December 1990.<ref name="NPCDecision1990">{{cite web \|title=全国人民代表大会常务委员会关于禁毒的决定 \|trans-title=Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress on the Prohibition of Narcotic Drugs \|work=全国人民代表大会常务委员会公报 \|trans-work=Gazette of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress \|date=28 December 1990 \|url=http://www.npc.gov.cn/zgrdw/wxzl/gongbao/2000-12/05/content_5004543.htm \|publisher=全国人民代表大会 \|language=zh \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref>		According to Zhou Limin, the Nationalist chairman of Xinjiang, [[wikipedia:Zhang Zhizhong\|Zhang Zhizhong]], campaigned against opium and ''máyān'' from 1945 and in June 1946 publicly burned confiscated opium, ''máyān'' and smoking utensils in [[Ürümqi]]. Growing cannabis and making and smoking ''máyān'' remained common in remote villages after 1949; in the mid-1960s and the 1970s most growers raised it for their own and their companions' use and very rarely sold it.<ref name="Zhou2015">{{cite journal \|last=Zhou \|first=Limin \|script-title=zh:我国大麻滥用的历史和现状 \|trans-title=History and current state of cannabis abuse in China \|journal=中国药物依赖性杂志 \|trans-journal=Chinese Journal of Drug Dependence \|issue=5 \|pages=327–331 \|year=2015 \|issn=1007-9718 \|language=zh \|url=http://www.jhak.com/index.php?m=content&c=index&a=show&catid=44&id=2904486 \|via=杜新忠戒毒网 \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> Hu, Zhang and Hao list Kashgar, Hotan, Makit, Yengisar, Bachu, Aksu, Xinhe, Kuqa, Luntai and Korla as places that still grew cannabis in quantity in the 1950s and 1960s, and give an incomplete count of more than 10,000 growers in Xinjiang in 1990.<ref name="Hu2015"/> The regional government issued a notice prohibiting the cultivation of cannabis in 1985. In 1991 the standing committee of the regional people's congress adopted regulations prohibiting cannabis drugs, which Zhou calls the first relatively systematic local regulation of its kind in China's history.<ref name="Zhou2015"/><ref name="XUAR1991">{{cite web \|title=新疆维吾尔自治区禁止大麻毒品条例 \|trans-title=Regulations of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region on the Prohibition of Cannabis Drugs \|type=as amended 11 December 1997 \|author=新疆维吾尔自治区人民代表大会常务委员会 \|date=2 November 1991 \|url=https://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/%E6%96%B0%E7%96%86%E7%BB%B4%E5%90%BE%E5%B0%94%E8%87%AA%E6%B2%BB%E5%8C%BA%E7%A6%81%E6%AD%A2%E5%A4%A7%E9%BA%BB%E6%AF%92%E5%93%81%E6%9D%A1%E4%BE%8B \|via=Wikisource \|language=zh \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> National statute had named cannabis among narcotic drugs in the Decision on the Prohibition of Narcotic Drugs of 28 December 1990.<ref name="NPCDecision1990">{{cite web \|title=全国人民代表大会常务委员会关于禁毒的决定 \|trans-title=Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress on the Prohibition of Narcotic Drugs \|work=全国人民代表大会常务委员会公报 \|trans-work=Gazette of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress \|date=28 December 1990 \|url=http://www.npc.gov.cn/zgrdw/wxzl/gongbao/2000-12/05/content_5004543.htm \|publisher=全国人民代表大会 \|language=zh \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref>

Chile

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:41:20 GMT

Link the International Opium Convention of 1925 to its page

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:41, 16 October 2026
Line 77:		Line 77:
	==== Pharmacy, police and prohibition (1905–1973) ====		==== Pharmacy, police and prohibition (1905–1973) ====

	Pharmacists objected to a draft regulation of 1905 that would have required a prescription for any preparation containing opium, coca or hemp.<ref name="FernandezLabbe2011"/>{{rp\|61}} The sanitary code of 1925 treated a drug as falsified if its package did not declare the quantity of "cáñamo indio" it contained.<ref name="DL602-1925">{{cite act \|title=Código Sanitario \|type=Decreto Ley \|number=602 \|date=13 October 1925 \|at=art. 164 \|jurisdiction=Chile \|url=https://www.bcn.cl/leychile/navegar?idNorma=175390 \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> Chile ratified the [[~~wikipedia:~~International Opium Convention\|1925 Geneva Opium Convention]], whose text defines "cáñamo indio" as the flowering or fruiting tops of ''Cannabis sativa'' L.; the ratification was deposited with the League of Nations on 31 March 1933 and promulgated in 1934.<ref name="Decreto422-1934">{{cite act \|title=Ratifica la Convención y Protocolo sobre el Opio, firmada en Ginebra el 19 de febrero de 1925 \|type=Decreto \|number=422 \|date=25 April 1934 \|jurisdiction=Chile, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores \|url=https://www.bcn.cl/leychile/navegar?idNorma=400815 \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> The earliest mention of cannabis users that Fernández Labbé found is a pharmacists' comment of 1929 that the habit had not yet acquired "carta de ciudadanía" in Chile.<ref name="FernandezLabbe2011"/>{{rp\|121–122}}		Pharmacists objected to a draft regulation of 1905 that would have required a prescription for any preparation containing opium, coca or hemp.<ref name="FernandezLabbe2011"/>{{rp\|61}} The sanitary code of 1925 treated a drug as falsified if its package did not declare the quantity of "cáñamo indio" it contained.<ref name="DL602-1925">{{cite act \|title=Código Sanitario \|type=Decreto Ley \|number=602 \|date=13 October 1925 \|at=art. 164 \|jurisdiction=Chile \|url=https://www.bcn.cl/leychile/navegar?idNorma=175390 \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> Chile ratified the [[International Opium Convention (1925)\|1925 Geneva Opium Convention]], whose text defines "cáñamo indio" as the flowering or fruiting tops of ''Cannabis sativa'' L.; the ratification was deposited with the League of Nations on 31 March 1933 and promulgated in 1934.<ref name="Decreto422-1934">{{cite act \|title=Ratifica la Convención y Protocolo sobre el Opio, firmada en Ginebra el 19 de febrero de 1925 \|type=Decreto \|number=422 \|date=25 April 1934 \|jurisdiction=Chile, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores \|url=https://www.bcn.cl/leychile/navegar?idNorma=400815 \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> The earliest mention of cannabis users that Fernández Labbé found is a pharmacists' comment of 1929 that the habit had not yet acquired "carta de ciudadanía" in Chile.<ref name="FernandezLabbe2011"/>{{rp\|121–122}}

	According to Fernández Labbé, a narcotics regulation of 1957 prohibited the production, import and sale, but not the use, of ''cáñamo indiano''.<ref name="FernandezLabbe2011"/>{{rp\|94}} The regulation of 1960 that replaced it added use to the prohibition.<ref name="Decreto137-1960"/> In January 1959 a trafficking ring led by an officer of the Investigations Police was broken up. The press coverage of the case revealed, in Fernández Labbé's reading, a persistent movement of cannabis from the producing zone of the Aconcagua valley to Santiago in loads of several tens of kilograms.<ref name="FernandezLabbe2011"/>{{rp\|49–50}} Fernández Labbé summarises a law thesis of 1961 as noting hemp grown in dry zones of the Andes "ya no por sus tradicionales usos industriales, sino por sus efectos narcóticos".<ref name="FernandezLabbe2011"/>{{rp\|159}}		According to Fernández Labbé, a narcotics regulation of 1957 prohibited the production, import and sale, but not the use, of ''cáñamo indiano''.<ref name="FernandezLabbe2011"/>{{rp\|94}} The regulation of 1960 that replaced it added use to the prohibition.<ref name="Decreto137-1960"/> In January 1959 a trafficking ring led by an officer of the Investigations Police was broken up. The press coverage of the case revealed, in Fernández Labbé's reading, a persistent movement of cannabis from the producing zone of the Aconcagua valley to Santiago in loads of several tens of kilograms.<ref name="FernandezLabbe2011"/>{{rp\|49–50}} Fernández Labbé summarises a law thesis of 1961 as noting hemp grown in dry zones of the Andes "ya no por sus tradicionales usos industriales, sino por sus efectos narcóticos".<ref name="FernandezLabbe2011"/>{{rp\|159}}

Cannabis in South Africa

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:41:13 GMT

Link the International Opium Convention of 1925 to its page

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:41, 16 October 2026
Line 20:		Line 20:
	The earliest official moves against cannabis in [[Natal]] targeted not the indigenous crop but the ''[[ganja]]'' brought by Indian indentured labourers, and none of them took effect. A medical officer's request for prohibition in 1884 left the Executive Council divided and no rule was issued, and the [[Indian Immigrants Commission]] of 1885 to 1887 then asked the Governor in Council to exercise his powers under section 70 of Law 2 of 1870 to prohibit the possession and use of the hemp plant by indentured labourers, and again no rule appears to have followed. At the time of [[Union of South Africa\|Union]] Natal still had no laws controlling cannabis, while the [[Cape Colony]] had prohibited it under Act 34 of 1891.<ref name="paterson2009"/> Over the following decades administrators, employers and medical officers increasingly linked cannabis to alleged insanity and to fears of disorder among Black and Indian workers, a framing that later scholarship reads as much as evidence of colonial anxiety as of the plant.<ref name="paterson2009">{{cite thesis \|last=Paterson \|first=C. \|title=Prohibition and resistance: a socio-political exploration of the changing dynamics of the southern African cannabis trade, c. 1850 – the present \|degree=MA \|publisher=Rhodes University \|year=2009}}</ref><ref name="nkosi2020">{{cite journal \|last1=Nkosi \|first1=P.I. \|last2=Devey \|first2=R. \|last3=Waetjen \|first3=T. \|title=Cannabis policing in mid-twentieth century South Africa \|journal=Historia \|year=2020 \|volume=65 \|issue=1 \|doi=10.17159/2309-8392/2020/v65n1a4}}</ref>		The earliest official moves against cannabis in [[Natal]] targeted not the indigenous crop but the ''[[ganja]]'' brought by Indian indentured labourers, and none of them took effect. A medical officer's request for prohibition in 1884 left the Executive Council divided and no rule was issued, and the [[Indian Immigrants Commission]] of 1885 to 1887 then asked the Governor in Council to exercise his powers under section 70 of Law 2 of 1870 to prohibit the possession and use of the hemp plant by indentured labourers, and again no rule appears to have followed. At the time of [[Union of South Africa\|Union]] Natal still had no laws controlling cannabis, while the [[Cape Colony]] had prohibited it under Act 34 of 1891.<ref name="paterson2009"/> Over the following decades administrators, employers and medical officers increasingly linked cannabis to alleged insanity and to fears of disorder among Black and Indian workers, a framing that later scholarship reads as much as evidence of colonial anxiety as of the plant.<ref name="paterson2009">{{cite thesis \|last=Paterson \|first=C. \|title=Prohibition and resistance: a socio-political exploration of the changing dynamics of the southern African cannabis trade, c. 1850 – the present \|degree=MA \|publisher=Rhodes University \|year=2009}}</ref><ref name="nkosi2020">{{cite journal \|last1=Nkosi \|first1=P.I. \|last2=Devey \|first2=R. \|last3=Waetjen \|first3=T. \|title=Cannabis policing in mid-twentieth century South Africa \|journal=Historia \|year=2020 \|volume=65 \|issue=1 \|doi=10.17159/2309-8392/2020/v65n1a4}}</ref>

	National prohibition followed in stages. A customs measure of 1922 controlled dagga as a habit-forming drug, and the Medical, Dental and Pharmacy Act 13 of 1928 prohibited its unlicensed cultivation and supply.<ref name="nkosi2020"/> In parallel South Africa pressed for international control. In 1923 the government of [[wikipedia:Jan Smuts\|Jan Smuts]] asked the [[wikipedia:League of Nations\|League of Nations]] to bring cannabis under the emerging drug-control regime, an intervention that fed into the plant's inclusion in the 1925 [[~~wikipedia:~~International Opium Convention\|Geneva International Opium Convention]] and gave the country a formative part in the global prohibition of cannabis.<ref name="chattopadhyaya2019"/><ref name="kozma2011">{{cite journal \|last=Kozma \|first=L. \|title=The League of Nations and the debate over cannabis prohibition \|journal=History Compass \|year=2011 \|volume=9 \|issue=1 \|pages=61–70 \|doi=10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00740.x}}</ref><ref name="mills2003">{{cite book \|last=Mills \|first=J.H. \|title=Cannabis Britannica: Empire, Trade, and Prohibition 1800–1928 \|location=Oxford \|publisher=Oxford University Press \|year=2003 \|chapter=‘An allusion was made to hemp in the notes appended to the Hague Opium Convention’: the League of Nations and British legislation, 1912–1928 \|pages=152–188 \|doi=10.1093/oso/9780199249381.003.0007}}</ref>		National prohibition followed in stages. A customs measure of 1922 controlled dagga as a habit-forming drug, and the Medical, Dental and Pharmacy Act 13 of 1928 prohibited its unlicensed cultivation and supply.<ref name="nkosi2020"/> In parallel South Africa pressed for international control. In 1923 the government of [[wikipedia:Jan Smuts\|Jan Smuts]] asked the [[wikipedia:League of Nations\|League of Nations]] to bring cannabis under the emerging drug-control regime, an intervention that fed into the plant's inclusion in the 1925 [[International Opium Convention (1925)\|Geneva International Opium Convention]] and gave the country a formative part in the global prohibition of cannabis.<ref name="chattopadhyaya2019"/><ref name="kozma2011">{{cite journal \|last=Kozma \|first=L. \|title=The League of Nations and the debate over cannabis prohibition \|journal=History Compass \|year=2011 \|volume=9 \|issue=1 \|pages=61–70 \|doi=10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00740.x}}</ref><ref name="mills2003">{{cite book \|last=Mills \|first=J.H. \|title=Cannabis Britannica: Empire, Trade, and Prohibition 1800–1928 \|location=Oxford \|publisher=Oxford University Press \|year=2003 \|chapter=‘An allusion was made to hemp in the notes appended to the Hague Opium Convention’: the League of Nations and British legislation, 1912–1928 \|pages=152–188 \|doi=10.1093/oso/9780199249381.003.0007}}</ref>

	Enforcement was racially structured, concentrated on urban possession by Black South Africans, and cannabis control operated as one instrument within the wider legal architecture of segregation and later of [[wikipedia:Apartheid\|apartheid]]. Recorded cannabis arrests rose from 5,762 in 1932 to 23,289 in 1955, and prohibition was tightened under the Abuse of Dependence-Producing Substances and Rehabilitation Centres Act 41 of 1971 and the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act 140 of 1992.<ref name="nkosi2020"/><ref name="waetjen2021">{{cite book \|last=Waetjen \|first=T. \|chapter=Dagga: how South Africa made a dangerous drug, 1902–1928 \|editor1-last=Richert \|editor1-first=L. \|editor2-last=Mills \|editor2-first=J.H. \|title=Cannabis: Global Histories \|location=Cambridge, MA \|publisher=MIT Press \|year=2021 \|pages=83–107}}</ref><ref name="waetjen2022">{{cite journal \|last=Waetjen \|first=T. \|title=South Africa's century of cannabis politics, 1922–2022 \|journal=South African Historical Journal \|year=2022 \|volume=74 \|issue=2 \|doi=10.1080/02582473.2022.2128274}}</ref>		Enforcement was racially structured, concentrated on urban possession by Black South Africans, and cannabis control operated as one instrument within the wider legal architecture of segregation and later of [[wikipedia:Apartheid\|apartheid]]. Recorded cannabis arrests rose from 5,762 in 1932 to 23,289 in 1955, and prohibition was tightened under the Abuse of Dependence-Producing Substances and Rehabilitation Centres Act 41 of 1971 and the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act 140 of 1992.<ref name="nkosi2020"/><ref name="waetjen2021">{{cite book \|last=Waetjen \|first=T. \|chapter=Dagga: how South Africa made a dangerous drug, 1902–1928 \|editor1-last=Richert \|editor1-first=L. \|editor2-last=Mills \|editor2-first=J.H. \|title=Cannabis: Global Histories \|location=Cambridge, MA \|publisher=MIT Press \|year=2021 \|pages=83–107}}</ref><ref name="waetjen2022">{{cite journal \|last=Waetjen \|first=T. \|title=South Africa's century of cannabis politics, 1922–2022 \|journal=South African Historical Journal \|year=2022 \|volume=74 \|issue=2 \|doi=10.1080/02582473.2022.2128274}}</ref>

Australia

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:41:03 GMT

Link the International Opium Convention of 1925 to its page

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:41, 16 October 2026
Line 45:		Line 45:
	{{Main\|History of cannabis in Australia}}		{{Main\|History of cannabis in Australia}}

	In the 19th century cannabis had some medicinal use in Australia. Cannabis cigarettes remained on legal sale until the early 20th century.<ref name="UNODC2008-Australia">{{cite report \|author=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime \|title=Drug Policy and Results in Australia \|publisher=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime \|date=October 2008 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/Studies/Drug_Policy_Australia_Oct2008.pdf \|access-date=14 October 2026}}</ref>{{rp\|21}} Controls then came at two levels. At the border the Commonwealth banned imports of the drug in 1926. The [[~~wikipedia:~~International Opium Convention\|Geneva Opium Convention]] of 1925, in force from 1928, had been the first international treaty to take in cannabis.<ref name="UNODC2008-Australia"/>{{rp\|23}}<ref name="MacKay2001">{{cite report \|last=MacKay \|first=Robin \|title=National Drug Policy: Australia \|publisher=Library of Parliament, Parliamentary Research Branch \|location=Ottawa \|date=20 December 2001 \|url=https://sencanada.ca/Content/SEN/Committee/371/ille/library/robin-e.pdf \|access-date=14 October 2026}}</ref>{{rp\|2}} Within the country, each state in turn made it an offence to use Indian hemp or its resin without authority: Victoria in 1927 or 1928, then South Australia (1934), New South Wales (1935), Queensland (1937), Western Australia (1950) and Tasmania (1959).<ref name="UNODC2008-Australia"/>{{rp\|23}}<ref name="MacKay2001"/>{{rp\|3}} Few Australians used it before the 1960s.<ref name="MacKay2001"/>{{rp\|3}}		In the 19th century cannabis had some medicinal use in Australia. Cannabis cigarettes remained on legal sale until the early 20th century.<ref name="UNODC2008-Australia">{{cite report \|author=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime \|title=Drug Policy and Results in Australia \|publisher=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime \|date=October 2008 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/Studies/Drug_Policy_Australia_Oct2008.pdf \|access-date=14 October 2026}}</ref>{{rp\|21}} Controls then came at two levels. At the border the Commonwealth banned imports of the drug in 1926. The [[International Opium Convention (1925)\|Geneva Opium Convention]] of 1925, in force from 1928, had been the first international treaty to take in cannabis.<ref name="UNODC2008-Australia"/>{{rp\|23}}<ref name="MacKay2001">{{cite report \|last=MacKay \|first=Robin \|title=National Drug Policy: Australia \|publisher=Library of Parliament, Parliamentary Research Branch \|location=Ottawa \|date=20 December 2001 \|url=https://sencanada.ca/Content/SEN/Committee/371/ille/library/robin-e.pdf \|access-date=14 October 2026}}</ref>{{rp\|2}} Within the country, each state in turn made it an offence to use Indian hemp or its resin without authority: Victoria in 1927 or 1928, then South Australia (1934), New South Wales (1935), Queensland (1937), Western Australia (1950) and Tasmania (1959).<ref name="UNODC2008-Australia"/>{{rp\|23}}<ref name="MacKay2001"/>{{rp\|3}} Few Australians used it before the 1960s.<ref name="MacKay2001"/>{{rp\|3}}

	The federal statute is the Narcotic Drugs Act 1967. It received assent on 30 May 1967 and came into force on 1 January 1968. Its stated object is "to give effect to certain of Australia's obligations under the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961".<ref name="AU-NDA-1967">{{cite act \|title=Narcotic Drugs Act 1967 \|type=Act \|number=53 of 1967 \|date=30 May 1967 \|legislature=Parliament of Australia \|jurisdiction=Australia \|at=ss. 2, 2A; Endnote 3; Compilation No. 16 \|url=https://www.legislation.gov.au/C1967A00053/latest/text \|access-date=14 October 2026}}</ref> Australia ratified the [[Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs\|Single Convention]] itself on 1 December 1967 and extended it the same day to Papua, the Trust Territory of New Guinea and its other territories.<ref name="UNTC-VI-15">{{cite web \|title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 15 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-15&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> It is also a party to the 1972 Protocol amending that convention (22 November 1972),<ref name="UNTC-VI18">{{cite web \|title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, as amended by the Protocol amending the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961: status \|work=United Nations Treaty Collection \|publisher=United Nations \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-18&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> the [[Convention on Psychotropic Substances]] (19 May 1982)<ref name="UNTC-VI-16">{{cite web \|title=Convention on Psychotropic Substances \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 16 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-16&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> and the [[United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances\|1988 Convention]] (16 November 1992).<ref name="UNTC-VI-19">{{cite web \|title=United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 19 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-19&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref>		The federal statute is the Narcotic Drugs Act 1967. It received assent on 30 May 1967 and came into force on 1 January 1968. Its stated object is "to give effect to certain of Australia's obligations under the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961".<ref name="AU-NDA-1967">{{cite act \|title=Narcotic Drugs Act 1967 \|type=Act \|number=53 of 1967 \|date=30 May 1967 \|legislature=Parliament of Australia \|jurisdiction=Australia \|at=ss. 2, 2A; Endnote 3; Compilation No. 16 \|url=https://www.legislation.gov.au/C1967A00053/latest/text \|access-date=14 October 2026}}</ref> Australia ratified the [[Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs\|Single Convention]] itself on 1 December 1967 and extended it the same day to Papua, the Trust Territory of New Guinea and its other territories.<ref name="UNTC-VI-15">{{cite web \|title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 15 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-15&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> It is also a party to the 1972 Protocol amending that convention (22 November 1972),<ref name="UNTC-VI18">{{cite web \|title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, as amended by the Protocol amending the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961: status \|work=United Nations Treaty Collection \|publisher=United Nations \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-18&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> the [[Convention on Psychotropic Substances]] (19 May 1982)<ref name="UNTC-VI-16">{{cite web \|title=Convention on Psychotropic Substances \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 16 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-16&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> and the [[United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances\|1988 Convention]] (16 November 1992).<ref name="UNTC-VI-19">{{cite web \|title=United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 19 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-19&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref>

Talk:International Opium Convention (1925)

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:40:39 GMT

Talk page: scope, how the sources were read, where they differ

New page

{{TalkHeader}}
{{TalkBox
|title=Page scope
|body='''[[{{SUBJECTPAGENAME}}]]''' covers the International Opium Convention signed at Geneva on 19 February 1925 by the Second Opium Conference of the League of Nations: its provisions on Indian hemp, how cannabis came onto the conference's agenda, and the debates that shaped chapter IV. The International Opium Convention signed at The Hague on 23 January 1912 is a separate treaty with the same title and is not covered here.
}}
{{TalkBox
|title=Data verification
|body=Record source conflicts, dating problems and unresolved identifications here. Keep narrative content on the article.
}}

== Discussion ==


=== How the sources were read ===
The convention was read in the scan of the ''League of Nations Treaty Series'', vol. 81, published by the United Nations Treaty Collection, which has a text layer. The English text was read in full (pp. 319–357, odd pages), and the French text where the English page carries no closing clause (p. 350). The volume's contents list No. 1845 at p. 317 and No. 1846 at p. 359, so the convention and its Protocol run to p. 358; some citations elsewhere give pp. 317–359.

The ''Records of the Second Opium Conference'' (C.760.M.260.1924.XI, Geneva, August 1925) were read in the scans published by the Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics: Volume I, the plenary debates, and Volume II, the committees and sub-committees. Both have a text layer. Every passage on hashish or Indian hemp found through the volumes' indexes and a text search was read, and every passage quoted in the article was checked on the page image. In Volume I the scan's image numbers and the printed page numbers do not run in step, so page references follow the folio printed on each page.

Willoughby's ''Opium as an International Problem'' (1925) was read in the Gokhale Institute's scan of the Johns Hopkins Press edition, which has no text layer: the title page, the index, p. 251 and chapter XIX ("Indian Hemp (Hashish)", pp. 374–381) were put through OCR and the passages used were checked on the page images. The Internet Archive copy named in the citation could not be opened from the network used.

The Transnational Institute's 2014 report was read in its chapter 1 PDF, pp. 9–13.

=== The 1912 and 1925 conventions ===
Both treaties are titled "International Opium Convention". The Hague convention of 23 January 1912 did not apply to hashish; a paragraph in its protocol called for the question to be studied. Accounts of events before 1925, such as Jamaica's law of 1913 against the import and cultivation of ganja, concern the 1912 convention. English Wikipedia's article on it is titled "First International Opium Convention", and its bare title "International Opium Convention" is a disambiguation page.

=== Where the sources differ ===
* '''The vote on the resin.''' Bewley-Taylor, Blickman and Jelsma (2014, p. 11) write that the United Kingdom, India and the Netherlands "opposed" the sub-committee's step. The minutes of Sub-Committee F (vol. II, p. 298) record that the British, Dutch and Indian members abstained on the vote for the absolute prohibition of the use of the resin, and that the British delegation entered a reservation, with which the Indian member associated himself. The article follows the minutes.
* '''Who drafted the experts' text.''' The same report (p. 11) says that El Guindy "introduced the proviso" on medical and scientific use in the sub-committee. The minutes (vol. II, pp. 297–298) and the report of Sub-Committee F (vol. II, p. 318) show the text drafted by the group on hashish under Professor Perrot as rapporteur, of which Egypt was a member. The article attributes the text to the experts' group.
* '''El Guindy's insanity figure.''' The plenary record (vol. I, p. 134) prints El Guindy's estimate as "from 30 to 60 per cent" of cases of insanity in Egypt. Willoughby's reprint of the memorandum (p. 379) prints "from 3 to 60 per cent". The 2014 report gives 30 to 60. The article quotes the official record.

=== Sources not used ===
* R. E. Kendell, "Cannabis condemned: the proscription of Indian hemp", ''Addiction'' 98 (2003): 143–151, and L. Kozma, "The League of Nations and the debate over cannabis prohibition", ''History Compass'' 9 (2011): 61–70, were not read in full. The figures for the Abbasiya asylum that the article reports from the 2014 report come, by that report's note 66, from Kendell.
* The two Egyptian memoranda on hashish circulated to the conference, by El Guindy (O.D.C. 38) and by Dr A. H. Mahfooz Bey (O.D.C. 55), were not read.
* The tables of hashish seized in Egypt in 1919–1924 that El Guindy read to the conference (vol. I, pp. 133–134) are not reproduced: the printed separators leave their magnitude unclear.

International Opium Convention (1925)

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:40:30 GMT

New historical source page: the International Opium Convention signed at Geneva in 1925 and its provisions on Indian hemp

New page

{{Hatnote|For the earlier convention signed at The Hague on 23 January 1912, see [[wikipedia:First International Opium Convention|International Opium Convention (1912)]].}}
{{Infobox Historical Source
|title_original = International Opium Convention, adopted by the Second Opium Conference (League of Nations). Signed at Geneva, February 19, 1925
|author = Plenipotentiaries of the states represented at the Second Opium Conference of the League of Nations
|language = English and French (both texts authentic)
|composed = 17 November 1924 – 19 February 1925 (the Second Opium Conference); signed 19 February 1925
|period = 20th century sources
|published = 1928 (''League of Nations Treaty Series'', vol. 81)
|pub_year = 1928
|publisher = League of Nations
|place = Geneva
|pages_total = ''League of Nations Treaty Series'' vol. 81, pp. 317–358 (with the Protocol), English and French on facing pages
|cannabis_volume = (single text)
|cannabis_pages = Art. 1 (the definition of "Indian hemp"), p. 329; art. 4(f), p. 329; chapter IV, art. 11, p. 333
|cannabis_chapter = Chapter IV, "Indian Hemp"
|preparations = Galenical extract and tincture of Indian hemp; the resin and "the ordinary preparations of which the resin forms the base (such as hashish, esrar, chiras, djamba)"
|uses_documented = Medical and scientific use; international trade under import certificates
|digital_facsimile = https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/LON/Volume%2081/v81.pdf
|facsimile_label = View the ''League of Nations Treaty Series'' scan
|original_held_at = Archives of the Secretariat of the League of Nations, Geneva (the single signed copy)
}}
The '''International Opium Convention''' signed at [[wikipedia:Geneva|Geneva]] on 19 February 1925 is the treaty of the [[wikipedia:League of Nations|League of Nations]]' Second Opium Conference that brought [[Cannabis sativa|cannabis]], under the name "Indian hemp", into international drug control.<ref name="OpiumConvention1925">{{cite book |title=International Opium Convention, adopted by the Second Opium Conference (League of Nations). Signed at Geneva, February 19, 1925 |series=League of Nations Treaty Series |volume=81 |publisher=League of Nations |year=1928 |pages=317–358 |url=https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/LON/Volume%2081/v81.pdf |via=United Nations Treaty Collection}}</ref>{{Rp|319, 329, 333}} It defined Indian hemp as the dried flowering or fruiting tops of the female plant and put the medicinal extract and tincture under the controls it applied to manufactured drugs. A separate chapter required import certificates for the export of Indian hemp and its resin.<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp|329, 333}} Its chapter on the internal control of raw materials covers raw opium and coca leaves.<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp|329}} The convention entered into force on 25 September 1928 and was replaced, between the parties to it, by the [[Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs]] of 1961.<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp|319}}<ref name="SingleConvention1961">{{cite web |title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, as amended by the 1972 Protocol amending the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 |publisher=United Nations |via=United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime |url=https://www.unodc.org/pdf/convention_1961_en.pdf |access-date=30 September 2026}}</ref>{{Rp|art. 44}}

Cannabis was not on the conference's agenda. Egypt's first delegate, [[Mohamed El Guindy]], asked in November 1924 for hashish to be added to the drugs under control. The conference's experts then drafted rules that would have confined Indian hemp to medical and scientific use and barred all trade in its resin. India would accept control of its exports but not of use within its borders. The text signed in February 1925 controls the international trade in Indian hemp and its resin. Within each country it controls only the medicinal extract and tincture.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I">{{cite book |author=League of Nations |title=Records of the Second Opium Conference, Geneva, November 17th, 1924 – February 19th, 1925. Volume I: Plenary Meetings, Text of the Debates |publisher=League of Nations |location=Geneva |date=August 1925 |id=C.760.M.260.1924.XI |url=https://dspace.gipe.ac.in/xmlui/handle/10973/53956 |via=Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics}}</ref>{{Rp|39, 136, 222}}<ref name="LoN1925-Records-II">{{cite book |author=League of Nations |title=Records of the Second Opium Conference, Geneva, November 17th, 1924 – February 19th, 1925. Volume II: Meetings of the Committees and Sub-Committees |publisher=League of Nations |location=Geneva |date=August 1925 |id=C.760.M.260.1924.XI |url=https://dspace.gipe.ac.in/xmlui/handle/10973/53957 |via=Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics}}</ref>{{Rp|318–319}}<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp|329, 333}}

The convention calls the plant's flowering tops "Indian hemp", and the delegates spoke of "hashish" for the plant and its products alike. What the delegates said about cannabis and the people who used it is evidence of how their governments saw both, as much as it is evidence of the plant.

== Origins ==

Hashish was not among the drugs to which the [[wikipedia:First International Opium Convention|International Opium Convention signed at The Hague in 1912]] applied.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I"/>{{Rp|134}} A paragraph in that convention's protocol called for the problem of hashish to be examined, and for its regulation if that should prove necessary.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-II"/>{{Rp|297}} In 1923 the government of the Union of [[South Africa]] proposed to the League of Nations that Indian hemp be treated as a habit-forming drug under the Hague convention. The League's [[wikipedia:Opium Advisory Committee|Advisory Committee on the Traffic in Opium and Other Dangerous Drugs]] recommended at its sixth session that governments first be asked for information on the production and use of the drug and the trade in it, with their observations on the South African proposal, and that the committee take up the question again in 1925.<ref name="Willoughby1925">{{cite book |last=Willoughby |first=W. W. |title=Opium as an International Problem: The Geneva Conferences |location=Baltimore |publisher=The Johns Hopkins Press |year=1925 |url=https://archive.org/details/opiumasinternati00will |via=Internet Archive}}</ref>{{Rp|374}} South Africa had prohibited the cultivation, sale, possession and use of cannabis nationwide in June 1922.<ref name="TNI2014">{{cite report |last1=Bewley-Taylor |first1=Dave |last2=Blickman |first2=Tom |last3=Jelsma |first3=Martin |title=The Rise and Decline of Cannabis Prohibition: The history of cannabis in the UN drug control system and options for reform |chapter=The history of cannabis in the international drug control system |chapter-url=https://www.tni.org/files/download/rise_and_decline_ch1.pdf |publisher=Transnational Institute; Global Drug Policy Observatory |location=Amsterdam; Swansea |date=March 2014}}</ref>{{Rp|10}}

The Second Opium Conference met at Geneva from 17 November 1924 to 19 February 1925.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I"/>{{Rp|title page}} It was called to give effect to the Hague convention and to limit the production of opium and coca and the manufacture of the drugs made from them.<ref name="TNI2014"/>{{Rp|10}} [[wikipedia:Malcolm Delevingne|Sir Malcolm Delevingne]], for the British Empire, told it that "it was not intended, when this Conference was summoned, that hashish should be discussed".<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I"/>{{Rp|136}}

== Egypt's proposal ==

El Guindy, the first delegate of [[Egypt]], raised the question in a statement to the conference on 19 November 1924. He called hashish a product "at least as harmful as opium, if not more so", said that Egypt had long prohibited its import except for the small quantities needed in medicine and asked for it to be classed with the other narcotics.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I"/>{{Rp|39–40}} Egypt's written proposals, circulated as document O.D.C. 44, asked first "that hashish be included in the list of dangerous drugs with which we are to deal".<ref name="LoN1925-Records-II"/>{{Rp|23, 34}}

He set out his case in a memorandum read to the sixteenth plenary meeting on 13 December 1924.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I"/>{{Rp|132}} He described the preparations eaten in Egypt (''manzul'', ''maagun'' and ''garawish'') and the smoking of [[hashish]] in water pipes. He listed the measures Egypt had taken: a ban on cultivation in 1884, the closing of the cafés where it was smoked and fines for cultivators and smugglers.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I"/>{{Rp|133}} He told the conference that hashish was "the principal cause of most of the cases of insanity occurring in Egypt", accounting for "from 30 to 60 per cent" of them. He added that the South African government had made the same proposal as his own.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I"/>{{Rp|134}} He argued that if opium and the other drugs were controlled and hashish was left out, hashish would take their place. He also told the delegates that, knowing "the mentality of Oriental peoples", he feared it would be said that the question had been set aside "because it did not affect the safety of Europeans".<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I"/>{{Rp|135}}

[[wikipedia:Alfred Sao-ke Sze|Alfred Sze]] of [[China]] seconded him. [[wikipedia:Stephen G. Porter|Stephen G. Porter]], for the United States, said the conference was asking Egypt and Turkey to help suppress opium and coca and that "this is a good time to practise a little reciprocity".<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I"/>{{Rp|135}} The delegates of [[India]], the British Empire and [[France]] answered that enquiries were under way and that the delegations most concerned, India's and France's, had no instructions. Delevingne added that the question had first been brought to the League by the government of one of the British Dominions. In his view the conference could not bring hashish under the full provisions of the Hague convention. M. Bourgois, for France, said that his government could apply strict measures in France but not in the Congo.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I"/>{{Rp|135–137}} The proposal was referred unanimously to Sub-Committee F, the conference's committee of experts.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I"/>{{Rp|137–138}}

== The experts' draft ==

Sub-Committee F, chaired by the Swiss delegate Dr Carrière, set up a smaller committee on hashish on 15 December 1924 under Professor Perrot of the French delegation, with members from the British Empire, [[Chile]], Egypt, France, [[Greece]], [[Japan]], [[Turkey]] and the United States.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-II"/>{{Rp|294, 296}} At the sub-committee's meeting the next day the Greek delegate called the question of hashish as grave as that of opium. The Brazilian delegate, Dr Pernambuco, called hashish more dangerous than opium. The Belgian, American, Japanese and Spanish members agreed to its inclusion. The Turkish delegate asked how the cultivation of [[hemp]] for textiles would be treated.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-II"/>{{Rp|297}}

The definition was settled on 17 December. Perrot wanted it to cover all the varieties of the plant. The British member, Perrins, objected on administrative grounds: male and female plants were mixed together in making [[bhang]], so a definition that left out the male plant would hamper prosecutions. He recommended the definition of the English pharmacopoeia. The text adopted read: "By Indian hemp is understood the dried flowering or fruiting tops of the pistillate plant of Cannabis sativa, from which the resin has not been extracted, under whatever name they may be designated in commerce." At the request of the Turkish and Brazilian delegates, the names under which the drug was known in their countries, ''essra'' and ''[[diamba]]'', were added to the list of preparations.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-II"/>{{Rp|298}} Every member present voted for the absolute prohibition of the use of the resin except the British, Dutch and Indian members, who abstained. The British delegation reserved its position.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-II"/>{{Rp|298}}

Perrot's report noted that hemp also gave fibre for cloth, cordage and matting and seeds for oil, so that the area grown would not be easy to limit.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-II"/>{{Rp|318}} It recommended that "the use of Indian hemp and the preparations derived therefrom may only be authorised for medical and scientific purposes" and that the raw resin (''[[charas]]'') and its preparations "may not be produced, sold, traded in, &c., under any circumstances whatsoever".<ref name="LoN1925-Records-II"/>{{Rp|318}}

The Indian delegation answered in a note dated 23 January 1925. The Government of India would control exports through the import-certificate system. It had not consulted the provinces or the Indian States on controlling production, sale and use within India, where [[ganja]] was grown only in small areas under excise control and charas was imported under licence from Central Asia. It pointed to "serious difficulties of an administrative order" in confining hemp drugs to medical and scientific use, among them "social and religious customs which naturally have to be considered". It doubted whether the total prohibition of drugs made easily from a wild-growing plant could be enforced.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-II"/>{{Rp|319}}

== The text adopted in February 1925 ==

On 6 February 1925 the United States delegation withdrew from the conference, writing that "the purpose for which the Conference was called cannot be accomplished". The Chinese delegation also withdrew. Their letters were read on 7 February.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I"/>{{Rp|201–204}} Neither country is among the convention's signatories.<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp|319, 321}}

When the experts' reports came before the conference that afternoon, Mr Walton of India said that the plant grew wild and the drug was made by very simple processes, so that confining its use to medicine was "a very difficult matter from the administrative point of view". He proposed applying the import-certificate system to the international traffic instead.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I"/>{{Rp|222}} On 12 February the conference set up a sub-committee of Egypt, France, the British Empire, India, [[Sweden]], Turkey, Uruguay, Belgium and Siam to draft a text.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I"/>{{Rp|261–262}} Perrot presented its agreed text on 14 February. He told the conference that the long-established customs of consuming Indian hemp made it "a problem as delicate as, and perhaps even more difficult to solve than, that of opium for smoking". The text, he said, tried to be effective in some countries without being impossible to carry out in others.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I"/>{{Rp|301}} The galenical preparations went into the article on manufactured drugs. The trade in the plant and its resin went into a chapter of its own.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I"/>{{Rp|301–302}}

At the second reading on 18 February El Guindy and Perrot asked that the paragraph on the resin name hashish and its kindred preparations. Delevingne summed up the three ways in which the draft now dealt with Indian hemp: certain preparations under article 4, the resin under article 11(a) and the dried tops under article 11(b). The paragraph was adopted naming "the ordinary preparations of which the resin forms the base".<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I"/>{{Rp|352–353}} The convention was signed the next day. In signing the Final Act the delegation of Siam (now [[Thailand]]) declared that, having no instructions on Indian hemp, "which was not originally on the agenda of the Conference", it reserved chapter III as regards the galenical preparations and chapters IV and V as regards Indian hemp.<ref name="LoN1925-Records-I"/>{{Rp|539}}

== What the convention controls ==

=== The definition ===
Article 1 reads: "'Indian hemp' means the dried flowering or fruiting tops of the pistillate plant Cannabis sativa L. from which the resin has not been extracted, under whatever name they may be designated in commerce."<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp|329}} The resin is named separately, in article 11.<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp|333}}

=== Medicinal preparations ===
Article 4(f) places the "galenical preparations (extract and tincture) of Indian hemp" in chapter III, with medicinal opium, morphine, heroin and cocaine.<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp|329}} For these the parties undertake to limit manufacture, import, sale, distribution, export and use "exclusively to medical and scientific purposes", to license the people who deal in them and to prohibit their delivery to or possession by unauthorised persons.<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp|329, 331}}

=== Chapter IV: Indian hemp ===
Article 11 applies the trade controls of chapter V to Indian hemp and its resin and adds two rules. The parties undertake to prohibit the export of the resin "and the ordinary preparations of which the resin forms the base (such as hashish, esrar, chiras, djamba)" to countries that have prohibited their use. Where export is permitted, they require a special import certificate stating that the import is approved for the purposes it specifies and that the goods will not be re-exported. Before licensing an export of Indian hemp itself, they require a certificate from the importing government that it is "required exclusively for medical or scientific purposes". The second paragraph binds the parties to "an effective control of such a nature as to prevent the illicit international traffic in Indian hemp and especially in the resin".<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp|333}}

Chapter V requires a separate import authorisation and export authorisation for every consignment and governs transit, free ports and bonded warehouses.<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp|333–337}} Each party reports to the Permanent Central Board, which chapter VI creates, the quantities of each substance the convention covers that are confiscated in illicit trade. It also reports its imports and exports every quarter.<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp|339, 341}}

=== Scope ===
Chapter II, "Internal control of raw opium and coca leaves", deals with those two raw materials. The annual production statistics of article 22 are for raw opium and coca leaves.<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp|329, 341}} Dave Bewley-Taylor, Tom Blickman and Martin Jelsma of the [[wikipedia:Transnational Institute|Transnational Institute]] write that "the Convention only dealt with the transnational dimension of the cannabis trade". In their account it did not prohibit the production of cannabis or the domestic trade in it, did not require measures to reduce domestic consumption and did not ask governments for estimates of cannabis production.<ref name="TNI2014"/>{{Rp|12}} They write that the laws on cannabis that European countries passed in the following years, among them the British Dangerous Drugs Act of 1928, a revised Dutch opium law of 1928 and a German opium law of 1929, "exceeded the obligations in the Convention".<ref name="TNI2014"/>{{Rp|12}}

== Entry into force and later history ==

The convention was to come into force ninety days after the last of ten ratifications, provided seven of the ratifying states were among those that appointed the Central Board and two were permanent members of the League Council.<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp|349}} It came into force and was registered on 25 September 1928.<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp|319}} The British Empire, India and South Africa deposited their ratifications on 17 February 1926. Egypt acceded on 16 March 1926. The Belgian ratification did not extend to the Belgian Congo or Ruanda-Urundi. The Netherlands ratified for the Netherlands Indies, now [[Indonesia]]. The Spanish ratification covered Spain's colonies except the Spanish Protectorate of [[Morocco]].<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp|319, 321}}

Between its parties the convention replaced chapters I, III and V of the Hague convention of 1912.<ref name="OpiumConvention1925"/>{{Rp|345}} The 1961 Single Convention terminated and replaced it between the parties to the later treaty. Until the new [[International Narcotics Control Board]] was constituted, its functions fell to the Permanent Central Board.<ref name="SingleConvention1961"/>{{Rp|art. 44, art. 45}} The 1961 convention defines cannabis as "the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant (excluding the seeds and leaves when not accompanied by the tops) from which the resin has not been extracted, by whatever name they may be designated".<ref name="SingleConvention1961"/>{{Rp|art. 1(1)(b)}}

== Reception and historiography ==

[[wikipedia:Westel W. Willoughby|W. W. Willoughby]], professor of political science at Johns Hopkins University, published an account of the two Geneva conferences in 1925. He had served the Chinese delegation as counsellor and expert. His book reproduces long passages of the delegations' statements, among them El Guindy's memorandum and the Indian delegation's note, in a chapter titled "Indian Hemp (Hashish)".<ref name="Willoughby1925"/>{{Rp|title page, 374–381}}

Bewley-Taylor, Blickman and Jelsma (2014) write that the delegates "were unprepared to contradict" El Guindy's claims despite "the lack of evidence" in his speech. They cite the 1920–21 report of the Abbasiya asylum in Cairo, which attributed 19 of 715 admissions (2.7 per cent) to hashish and 48 to alcohol, call his figure of 30 to 60 per cent "to be generous, an exaggeration". They describe the reception of his claims as "a moral panic among the delegates, the majority ill-informed".<ref name="TNI2014"/>{{Rp|11}} They note that neither the British nor the Indian delegates cited the report of the [[Indian Hemp Drugs Commission]], which in their words "offered a much more nuanced assessment of the benefits, risks and harms of cannabis".<ref name="TNI2014"/>{{Rp|11}} In their account the conference decided "without due consideration of relevant evidence" that Indian hemp was as addictive and as dangerous as opium.<ref name="TNI2014"/>{{Rp|12}}

== See also ==
* [[Egypt]]
* [[Hashish]]
* [[Indian Hemp Drugs Commission]]
* [[International Narcotics Control Board]]
* [[Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs]]
* [[Verdoovende Middelen Ordonnantie (1927)]]

== References ==
<references />

<div style="display:none;">
[[Has preparation documented::Hashish]]
[[Has preparation documented::Charas]]
[[Has preparation documented::Esrar]]
[[Has preparation documented::Diamba]]
[[Has preparation documented::Cannabis extract]]
[[Has preparation documented::Cannabis tincture]]
[[Has use documented::Medicinal]]
[[Has use documented::Scientific]]
[[Has use documented::International trade]]
[[Has source type::Legal instrument]]
[[Has source form::International treaty]]
</div>

Property:Has seed weight

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:36:38 GMT

Descriptor vocabulary: Quantity in grams

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:36, 16 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~This is~~ a ~~property~~ of ~~type~~ [[Has type::~~Number~~]].		The '''seed weight''' recorded for the accession, in grams. Set by [[Template:Accession]] from <code>seed_weight</code>, a bare number of grams.

			== Technical ==

			<nowiki>[[Has type::Quantity]]
			[[Display units::g]]
			[[Corresponds to::1 g, gram, grams]]
			[[Corresponds to::1000 mg, milligram, milligrams]]</nowiki>

			<!-- One "Corresponds to" value per conversion factor, aliases separated by commas. Keep \|+sep=; : without it SMW stores the whole list as ONE value and prints it as the unit label. -->
			{{#set:
			\|Has type=Quantity
			\|Display units=g
			\|Corresponds to=1 g, gram, grams;1000 mg, milligram, milligrams
			\|+sep=;
			}}

Property:Has population hermaphroditism

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:36:28 GMT

Descriptor vocabulary: Quantity in per cent

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:36, 16 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~This is~~ a ~~property of type~~ [[Has type::~~Number~~]].		The '''share of plants carrying both female and male flowers''' in the population, as a percentage. Set by [[Template:Accession]] from <code>population_hermaphroditism</code>, a bare number.

			== Technical ==

			<nowiki>[[Has type::Quantity]]
			[[Display units::%]]
			[[Corresponds to::1 %, percent]]</nowiki>

			<!-- One "Corresponds to" value per conversion factor, aliases separated by commas. Keep \|+sep=; : without it SMW stores the whole list as ONE value and prints it as the unit label. -->
			{{#set:
			\|Has type=Quantity
			\|Display units=%
			\|Corresponds to=1 %, percent
			\|+sep=;
			}}

Property:Has maximum flowering time

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:36:20 GMT

Descriptor vocabulary: Quantity in weeks

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:36, 16 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~This is~~ a ~~property~~ of ~~type~~ [[Has type::~~Number~~]].		The '''longest flowering time''' reported for the population, in weeks. Breeders' listings count it from the start of flowering to harvest. [[Property:Has minimum flowering time]] holds the shortest. Set by [[Template:Accession]] from <code>maximum_flowering_time</code>, a bare number of weeks.

			== Technical ==

			<nowiki>[[Has type::Quantity]]
			[[Display units::weeks]]
			[[Corresponds to::1 weeks, week, wk]]
			[[Corresponds to::7 days, day, d]]</nowiki>

			<!-- One "Corresponds to" value per conversion factor, aliases separated by commas. Keep \|+sep=; : without it SMW stores the whole list as ONE value and prints it as the unit label. -->
			{{#set:
			\|Has type=Quantity
			\|Display units=weeks
			\|Corresponds to=1 weeks, week, wk;7 days, day, d
			\|+sep=;
			}}

Property:Has minimum flowering time

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:36:11 GMT

Descriptor vocabulary: Quantity in weeks

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:36, 16 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~This is~~ a ~~property~~ of ~~type~~ [[Has type::~~Number~~]].		The '''shortest flowering time''' reported for the population, in weeks. Breeders' listings count it from the start of flowering to harvest. [[Property:Has maximum flowering time]] holds the longest. Set by [[Template:Accession]] from <code>minimum_flowering_time</code>, a bare number of weeks.

			== Technical ==

			<nowiki>[[Has type::Quantity]]
			[[Display units::weeks]]
			[[Corresponds to::1 weeks, week, wk]]
			[[Corresponds to::7 days, day, d]]</nowiki>

			<!-- One "Corresponds to" value per conversion factor, aliases separated by commas. Keep \|+sep=; : without it SMW stores the whole list as ONE value and prints it as the unit label. -->
			{{#set:
			\|Has type=Quantity
			\|Display units=weeks
			\|Corresponds to=1 weeks, week, wk;7 days, day, d
			\|+sep=;
			}}

Property:Has maximum height

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:36:03 GMT

Descriptor vocabulary: Quantity in metres

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:36, 16 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~Maximum~~ plant height ~~observed~~ in ~~meters~~.		The '''maximum plant height''' reported for the population, in metres, from the soil to the top of the plant. [[Property:Has minimum height]] holds the minimum. Set by [[Template:Accession]] from <code>maximum_height</code>, a bare number of metres.

	[[Has type::~~Number~~]]		== Technical ==

			<nowiki>[[Has type::Quantity]]
			[[Display units::m]]
			[[Corresponds to::1 m, meter, meters, metre, metres]]
			[[Corresponds to::100 cm, centimetre, centimetres, centimeter, centimeters]]</nowiki>

			<!-- One "Corresponds to" value per conversion factor, aliases separated by commas. Keep \|+sep=; : without it SMW stores the whole list as ONE value and prints it as the unit label. -->
			{{#set:
			\|Has type=Quantity
			\|Display units=m
			\|Corresponds to=1 m, meter, meters, metre, metres;100 cm, centimetre, centimetres, centimeter, centimeters
			\|+sep=;
			}}

Property:Has minimum height

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:35:54 GMT

Descriptor vocabulary: Quantity in metres

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:35, 16 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~Minimum~~ plant height ~~observed~~ in ~~meters~~.		The '''minimum plant height''' reported for the population, in metres, from the soil to the top of the plant. [[Property:Has maximum height]] holds the maximum. Set by [[Template:Accession]] from <code>minimum_height</code>, a bare number of metres.

	[[Has type::~~Number~~]]		== Technical ==

			<nowiki>[[Has type::Quantity]]
			[[Display units::m]]
			[[Corresponds to::1 m, meter, meters, metre, metres]]
			[[Corresponds to::100 cm, centimetre, centimetres, centimeter, centimeters]]</nowiki>

			<!-- One "Corresponds to" value per conversion factor, aliases separated by commas. Keep \|+sep=; : without it SMW stores the whole list as ONE value and prints it as the unit label. -->
			{{#set:
			\|Has type=Quantity
			\|Display units=m
			\|Corresponds to=1 m, meter, meters, metre, metres;100 cm, centimetre, centimetres, centimeter, centimeters
			\|+sep=;
			}}

Property:Has leaflet count

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:35:46 GMT

Descriptor vocabulary: describe the property, numeric allowed values

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:35, 16 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~Number~~ of leaflets ~~per leaf~~.		The '''leaflet number''' of the population: the usual number of leaflets on leaves from the middle of the plant (UPOV TG/276/2, the hemp and cannabis test guideline (2025), characteristic 3, "Leaf: number of leaflets"). A page may give several. Set by [[Template:Accession]] from <code>leaflet_count</code>.

	[[Has type::Number]]		[[Has type::Number]]
Line 9:		Line 9:
	* [[Allows value::9]]		* [[Allows value::9]]
	* [[Allows value::11]]		* [[Allows value::11]]
	* [[Allows value::~~11+~~]]		* [[Allows value::13]]

Property:Has chemotype

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:35:37 GMT

Descriptor vocabulary: chemotype as Text with the standard states

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:35, 16 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[Has type::~~Page~~]]		The '''chemotype''' of the population: the class of its cannabinoid profile, by the ratio of THC to CBD and the other cannabinoids. The classes follow the USDA Hemp Phenotyping and Protocol Handbook (2025). A THC content alone, such as "high THC", is not a chemotype. Segregating means the population holds plants of several chemotypes. It is set by [[Template:Accession]] through [[Module:Accession descriptors]], which maps the words a page was written with to these states; the page itself is not changed.

			This is a property of type [[Has type::Text]].

			The allowed values for this property are:
			* [[Allows value::THC-predominant]]: mostly THC(A).
			* [[Allows value::Mixed THC and CBD]]: THC(A) and CBD(A) together.
			* [[Allows value::CBD-predominant]]: mostly CBD(A).
			* [[Allows value::CBG-predominant]]: mostly CBG(A).
			* [[Allows value::Low cannabinoid content]]: little of any cannabinoid.
			* [[Allows value::Other]]
			* [[Allows value::Segregating]]: plants of more than one chemotype in the population.

Property:Has seed viability

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:35:30 GMT

Descriptor vocabulary: describe the property and its states

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:35, 16 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~Seed~~ viability		The '''seed viability''' of a seed lot: whether its seeds germinate. A tested germination percentage is the measured form. It is set by [[Template:Accession]] through [[Module:Accession descriptors]], which maps the words a page was written with to these states; the page itself is not changed.

			This is a property of type [[Has type::Text]].

	The allowed values for this property are:		The allowed values for this property are:
	* [[Allows value::Viable]]		* [[Allows value::Viable]]
	* [[Allows value::Marginal]]		* [[Allows value::Marginal]]
			* [[Allows value::Not viable]]
	* [[Allows value::N/A]]		* [[Allows value::N/A]]
	* [[Allows value::Unknown]]		* [[Allows value::Unknown]]
	~~[[Has type::Text]]~~

Property:Has serration

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:35:23 GMT

Descriptor vocabulary: add the standard states (UPOV TG/276/2 terms), describe the property

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:35, 16 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~Edge~~ serration ~~pattern~~ of the ~~leaflets~~.		The '''leaflet serration''' of the population: the depth of the teeth on the leaflet margin. No standard scores it, so the states are the wiki's own. It is set by [[Template:Accession]] through [[Module:Accession descriptors]], which maps the words a page was written with to these states; the page itself is not changed.

	[[Has type::Text]]		This is a property of type [[Has type::Text]].

	The allowed values for this property are:		The allowed values for this property are:
			* [[Allows value::Shallow]]
			* [[Allows value::Medium]]
	* [[Allows value::Deep]]		* [[Allows value::Deep]]
	* [[Allows value::Shallow]]
	* [[Allows value::Smooth]]		* [[Allows value::Smooth]]
	* [[Allows value::Sharp]]		* [[Allows value::Sharp]]
	* [[Allows value::Other]]		* [[Allows value::Other]]

Property:Has stigma color

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:35:16 GMT

Descriptor vocabulary: add the standard states (UPOV TG/276/2 terms), describe the property

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:35, 16 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~Color~~ of the stigmas ~~(pistil hairs)~~.		The '''stigma colour''' of the population: the colour of the stigmas, the threads of the female flower, at full flowering. Stigmas turn brown as the flowers mature, so brown describes the plant only when the stigmas were brown at full flowering. No standard scores stigma colour, so the states are the wiki's own. It is set by [[Template:Accession]] through [[Module:Accession descriptors]], which maps the words a page was written with to these states; the page itself is not changed.

	[[Has type::Text]]		This is a property of type [[Has type::Text]].

	The allowed values for this property are:		The allowed values for this property are:
			* [[Allows value::White]]
			* [[Allows value::Pink]]
			* [[Allows value::Red]]
			* [[Allows value::Orange]]
			* [[Allows value::Brown]]
	* [[Allows value::Orange hairs]]		* [[Allows value::Orange hairs]]
	* [[Allows value::Brown hairs]]		* [[Allows value::Brown hairs]]

Property:Has stem color

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:35:08 GMT

Descriptor vocabulary: add the standard states (UPOV TG/276/2 terms), describe the property

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:35, 16 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~Color characteristics~~ of the stem.		The '''stem colour''' of the population: the colour of the main stem below the top pair of leaves (UPOV TG/276/2, the hemp and cannabis test guideline (2025), characteristic 20, "Main stem: color"). A woody stem describes its tissue, not its colour, and is not stored. The wiki uses the guideline's words, not its scoring: a value is an observation of a population, not a note from a trial. It is set by [[Template:Accession]] through [[Module:Accession descriptors]], which maps the words a page was written with to these states; the page itself is not changed.

	[[Has type::Text]]		This is a property of type [[Has type::Text]].

	The allowed values for this property are:		The allowed values for this property are:
			* [[Allows value::Yellow]]
			* [[Allows value::Medium green]]
			* [[Allows value::Dark green]]
			* [[Allows value::Purple]]
	* [[Allows value::Light greens]]		* [[Allows value::Light greens]]
	* [[Allows value::Dark greens]]		* [[Allows value::Dark greens]]

Property:Has leaf color

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:34:59 GMT

Descriptor vocabulary: add the standard states (UPOV TG/276/2 terms), describe the property

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:34, 16 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~Color characteristics~~ of the ~~foliage~~.		The '''leaf green colour''' of the population: the intensity of the green of the leaves (UPOV TG/276/2, the hemp and cannabis test guideline (2025), characteristic 2). Purple or red colouring is a separate character, stored as [[Property:Has leaf anthocyanin colour]]. Yellowing, browning or bruising describe a leaf's condition, not its colour, and are not stored. The wiki uses the guideline's words, not its scoring: a value is an observation of a population, not a note from a trial. It is set by [[Template:Accession]] through [[Module:Accession descriptors]], which maps the words a page was written with to these states; the page itself is not changed.

	[[Has type::Text]]		This is a property of type [[Has type::Text]].

	The allowed values for this property are:		The allowed values for this property are:
			* [[Allows value::Light]]
			* [[Allows value::Medium]]
			* [[Allows value::Dark]]
	* [[Allows value::Light greens]]		* [[Allows value::Light greens]]
	* [[Allows value::Dark greens]]		* [[Allows value::Dark greens]]

Property:Has leaf shape

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:34:49 GMT

Descriptor vocabulary: add the standard states (UPOV TG/276/2 terms), describe the property

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:34, 16 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~General~~ shape ~~characteristic~~ of the ~~leaves~~.		The '''leaflet width''' of the population: the width of the central leaflet of fully grown leaves from the middle of the plant (UPOV TG/276/2, the hemp and cannabis test guideline (2025), characteristic 5, "Central leaflet: width"). Despite its name, the property records leaflet width, not leaf shape. The wiki uses the guideline's words, not its scoring: a value is an observation of a population, not a note from a trial. It is set by [[Template:Accession]] through [[Module:Accession descriptors]], which maps the words a page was written with to these states; the page itself is not changed.

	[[Has type::Text]]		This is a property of type [[Has type::Text]].

	The allowed values for this property are:		The allowed values for this property are:
	* [[Allows value::Narrow]]		* [[Allows value::Narrow]]
			* [[Allows value::Medium]]
	* [[Allows value::Broad]]		* [[Allows value::Broad]]
	* [[Allows value::Intermediate]]		* [[Allows value::Intermediate]]

Property:Has branching

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:34:40 GMT

Descriptor vocabulary: add the standard states (UPOV TG/276/2 terms), describe the property

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:34, 16 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~Degree and pattern~~ of ~~lateral~~ branching.		The '''degree of branching''' of the population: how many side branches the plants grow. No standard defines states for it, so they are the wiki's own; a count of branches per plant is its measured form. A habit such as apical dominance is not a degree of branching and is not stored here. It is set by [[Template:Accession]] through [[Module:Accession descriptors]], which maps the words a page was written with to these states; the page itself is not changed.

	[[Has type::Text]]		This is a property of type [[Has type::Text]].

	The allowed values for this property are:		The allowed values for this property are:
			* [[Allows value::Weak]]
			* [[Allows value::Medium]]
			* [[Allows value::Strong]]
	* [[Allows value::Minimal]]		* [[Allows value::Minimal]]
	* [[Allows value::Moderate]]		* [[Allows value::Moderate]]
	* [[Allows value::Extensive]]		* [[Allows value::Extensive]]
	* [[Allows value::Apical dominant]]		* [[Allows value::Apical dominant]]

Property:Has growth pattern

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:34:32 GMT

Descriptor vocabulary: add the standard states (UPOV TG/276/2 terms), describe the property

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:34, 16 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~Overall growth habit and architecture~~ of the plant.		The '''plant shape''' of the population: the overall form of the plant. A page may list several shapes seen in the population. No standard defines shapes for cannabis, so the states are the wiki's own. It is set by [[Template:Accession]] through [[Module:Accession descriptors]], which maps the words a page was written with to these states; the page itself is not changed.

	[[Has type::Text]]		This is a property of type [[Has type::Text]].

	The allowed values for this property are:		The allowed values for this property are:
	* [[Allows value::Bushy]]		* [[Allows value::Conical]]: main stem dominant; branches shorten towards the top (growers' term: Christmas tree).
	* [[Allows value::~~Columnar~~]]		* [[Allows value::Columnar]]: narrow and upright; short branches of similar length along the main stem.
			* [[Allows value::Bushy]]: rounded; many branches of similar length, no dominant main stem.
			* [[Allows value::Candelabra]]: a few strong lower branches rising to about the height of the main stem (growers' term: menorah).
			* [[Allows value::Spreading]]: branches angled outward; the plant is wider than tall.
			* [[Allows value::Sprawling]]: weak, leaning or trailing stems (growers' terms: creeper, vine-like).
	* [[Allows value::Christmas tree]]		* [[Allows value::Christmas tree]]
	* [[Allows value::Menorah]]		* [[Allows value::Menorah]]
	* [[Allows value::Spreading]]
	* [[Allows value::Vine-like]]		* [[Allows value::Vine-like]]
	* [[Allows value::Creeper]]		* [[Allows value::Creeper]]

Property:Has photoperiod response

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:34:24 GMT

Descriptor vocabulary: add the standard states (UPOV TG/276/2 terms), describe the property

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:34, 16 October 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~Plant~~'s flowering ~~response~~ to day length ~~changes~~.		The '''photoperiod response''' of the population: how its flowering responds to day length. Short-day plants flower as the days shorten; day-neutral plants flower with age, whatever the day length (growers call them autoflowering). The states follow the technical questionnaire of UPOV TG/276/2, the hemp and cannabis test guideline (2025). Other covers a response a source describes in its own words, such as a seller's "semi-autoflowering". The wiki uses the guideline's words, not its scoring: a value is an observation of a population, not a note from a trial. It is set by [[Template:Accession]] through [[Module:Accession descriptors]], which maps the words a page was written with to these states; the page itself is not changed.

	[[Has type::Text]]		This is a property of type [[Has type::Text]].

	The allowed values for this property are:		The allowed values for this property are:
			* [[Allows value::Short-day]]
	* [[Allows value::Day-neutral]]		* [[Allows value::Day-neutral]]
	* [[Allows value::~~Short-day~~]]		* [[Allows value::Other]]
	* [[Allows value::Semi-autoflowering]]		* [[Allows value::Semi-autoflowering]]
	* [[Allows value::Unknown]]		* [[Allows value::Unknown]]

Property:Has terpene profile

Eloise Zomia — Fri, 16 Oct 2026 01:33:17 GMT

New descriptor property: terpene profile, as tested

New page

The '''terpenes''' named by a laboratory test of the accession's plants, with the test's scope, for example "(one tested plant)". Aroma descriptions are stored as [[Property:Has aroma]]. It is set by [[Template:Accession]] through [[Module:Accession descriptors]], which maps the words a page was written with to these states; the page itself is not changed.

This is a property of type [[Has type::Text]].

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:48, 16 October 2026
Line 62:		Line 62:
	At the Second International Opium Conference in Geneva in 1924–25, Turkey supported the Egyptian delegate [[Mohamed El Guindy]] when he proposed bringing cannabis under international control. The [[wikipedia:Transnational Institute\|Transnational Institute]] writes that the supporting countries had experience of cannabis or had already banned it, with little or no success.<ref name="TNI2014">{{cite report \|last1=Bewley-Taylor \|first1=Dave \|last2=Blickman \|first2=Tom \|last3=Jelsma \|first3=Martin \|title=The Rise and Decline of Cannabis Prohibition: The history of cannabis in the UN drug control system and options for reform \|chapter=The history of cannabis in the international drug control system \|chapter-url=https://www.tni.org/files/download/rise_and_decline_ch1.pdf \|publisher=Transnational Institute; Global Drug Policy Observatory \|location=Amsterdam; Swansea \|date=March 2014}}</ref>{{rp\|10}} Turkey, [[Greece]], [[Cyprus]], [[Sudan]], [[Syria]], [[Lebanon]] and [[Palestine]] had been asked to help Egypt's law enforcement by restricting cultivation and trade.<ref name="TNI2014"/>{{rp\|11}}		At the Second International Opium Conference in Geneva in 1924–25, Turkey supported the Egyptian delegate [[Mohamed El Guindy]] when he proposed bringing cannabis under international control. The [[wikipedia:Transnational Institute\|Transnational Institute]] writes that the supporting countries had experience of cannabis or had already banned it, with little or no success.<ref name="TNI2014">{{cite report \|last1=Bewley-Taylor \|first1=Dave \|last2=Blickman \|first2=Tom \|last3=Jelsma \|first3=Martin \|title=The Rise and Decline of Cannabis Prohibition: The history of cannabis in the UN drug control system and options for reform \|chapter=The history of cannabis in the international drug control system \|chapter-url=https://www.tni.org/files/download/rise_and_decline_ch1.pdf \|publisher=Transnational Institute; Global Drug Policy Observatory \|location=Amsterdam; Swansea \|date=March 2014}}</ref>{{rp\|10}} Turkey, [[Greece]], [[Cyprus]], [[Sudan]], [[Syria]], [[Lebanon]] and [[Palestine]] had been asked to help Egypt's law enforcement by restricting cultivation and trade.<ref name="TNI2014"/>{{rp\|11}}

	Law No. 2313, adopted on 12 June 1933 and published in the Official Gazette on 24 June,<ref name="Law2313"/> made the sowing of "Indian hemp" (''Hint keneviri'') for ''esrar'' illegal, together with the preparation, import, export and sale of ''esrar''. Anyone sowing it faced one to six months in prison. The plants were to be destroyed by the police on a joint report of health and agriculture officials.<ref name="RG1933">{{cite act \|title=Uyuşturucu maddelerin murakabesi hakkında kanun \|type=Kanun \|number=2313 \|date=12 June 1933 \|at=arts. 3 and 23; Resmî Gazete no. 2435, 24 June 1933 \|jurisdiction=Turkey \|url=https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/arsiv/2435.pdf \|access-date=12 October 2026}}</ref> Writing in the UN ''Bulletin on Narcotics'' in 1951, J. Bouquet said that Turkey had raised its own hashish production when the Greek supply dried up, until the law of 1933. In that period, he wrote, the hashish seized in Egypt and North Africa was chiefly Turkish, from Istanbul and [[wikipedia:Bursa\|Bursa]].<ref name="Bouquet1951">{{cite journal \|last=Bouquet \|first=J. \|title=Cannabis (concluded) \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=1 \|pages=22–45 \|year=1951 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1951-01-01_1_page005.html}}</ref>		Law No. 2313, adopted on 12 June 1933 and published in the Official Gazette on 24 June,<ref name="Law2313"/> made the sowing of "Indian hemp" (''Hint keneviri'') for ''esrar'' illegal, together with the preparation, import, export and sale of ''esrar''. Anyone sowing it faced one to six months in prison. The plants were to be destroyed by the police on a joint report of health and agriculture officials.<ref name="RG1933">{{cite act \|title=Uyuşturucu maddelerin murakabesi hakkında kanun \|type=Kanun \|number=2313 \|date=12 June 1933 \|at=arts. 3 and 23; Resmî Gazete no. 2435, 24 June 1933 \|jurisdiction=Turkey \|url=https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/arsiv/2435.pdf \|access-date=12 October 2026}}</ref> Writing in the UN ''[[Bulletin on Narcotics]]'' in 1951, J. Bouquet said that Turkey had raised its own hashish production when the Greek supply dried up, until the law of 1933. In that period, he wrote, the hashish seized in Egypt and North Africa was chiefly Turkish, from Istanbul and [[wikipedia:Bursa\|Bursa]].<ref name="Bouquet1951">{{cite journal \|last=Bouquet \|first=J. \|title=Cannabis (concluded) \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=1 \|pages=22–45 \|year=1951 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1951-01-01_1_page005.html}}</ref>

	Turkey acceded to the [[Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs]] on 23 May 1967.<ref name="UNTC-VI-15">{{cite web \|title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 15 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-15&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> Law No. 2236 of 1979 rewrote Article 3 of the 1933 law in terms of ''kenevir'' sown exclusively to make ''esrar''. Law No. 3652 of 1990 amended Article 23,<ref name="Law2313"/> and a regulation of the same year made all hemp sowing subject to permission, to prevent the production of narcotics from it.<ref name="RG1990"/> Law No. 7442 of 2023 extended the licence to flower and leaf grown for medical and health products.<ref name="Law2313"/>		Turkey acceded to the [[Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs]] on 23 May 1967.<ref name="UNTC-VI-15">{{cite web \|title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 15 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-15&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> Law No. 2236 of 1979 rewrote Article 3 of the 1933 law in terms of ''kenevir'' sown exclusively to make ''esrar''. Law No. 3652 of 1990 amended Article 23,<ref name="Law2313"/> and a regulation of the same year made all hemp sowing subject to permission, to prevent the production of narcotics from it.<ref name="RG1990"/> Law No. 7442 of 2023 extended the licence to flower and leaf grown for medical and health products.<ref name="Law2313"/>

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:48, 16 October 2026
Line 50:		Line 50:
	According to the 1932 report, most Army officers commanding troops did not accept these findings and held that the drug was habit-forming and undermined military morale. A year's study ordered in 1928 led the Department Surgeon to report in June 1929 that use was not widespread and did little harm to discipline, but on 1 December 1930 the Department Commander forbade soldiers to smoke it, on pain of trial for each offence. In June 1931 the committee was convened again, at the commanding general's request, to gather evidence that might support regulations against the cultivation, possession or sale of the plant in the Canal Zone. Between December 1931 and October 1932 it observed at Gorgas Hospital 34 soldiers who smoked marihuana grown at the Canal Zone Experiment Gardens, and found the drug, as grown and used on the isthmus, "a mild stimulant and intoxicant", with no symptoms on withdrawal. Post surgeons' estimates of the share of each command who were habitual users ran from 0.6 per cent at Fort Amador to 20 per cent at [[wikipedia:Fort Clayton\|Fort Clayton]]. In the two years to June 1932, possession or use of the drug figured among the charges against 51 soldiers tried by court martial, 4 of them with violence or insubordination.<ref name="Siler1933"/>		According to the 1932 report, most Army officers commanding troops did not accept these findings and held that the drug was habit-forming and undermined military morale. A year's study ordered in 1928 led the Department Surgeon to report in June 1929 that use was not widespread and did little harm to discipline, but on 1 December 1930 the Department Commander forbade soldiers to smoke it, on pain of trial for each offence. In June 1931 the committee was convened again, at the commanding general's request, to gather evidence that might support regulations against the cultivation, possession or sale of the plant in the Canal Zone. Between December 1931 and October 1932 it observed at Gorgas Hospital 34 soldiers who smoked marihuana grown at the Canal Zone Experiment Gardens, and found the drug, as grown and used on the isthmus, "a mild stimulant and intoxicant", with no symptoms on withdrawal. Post surgeons' estimates of the share of each command who were habitual users ran from 0.6 per cent at Fort Amador to 20 per cent at [[wikipedia:Fort Clayton\|Fort Clayton]]. In the two years to June 1932, possession or use of the drug figured among the charges against 51 soldiers tried by court martial, 4 of them with violence or insubordination.<ref name="Siler1933"/>

	The committee classed 85 per cent of the 34 soldiers as mentally abnormal, in the clinical terms of its day "constitutional psychopaths" and "morons", and held that commanders had "unduly emphasized the effects of mariajuana, disregarding the fact that a large proportion of the delinquents are morons or psychopaths". It recommended that the ban on military reservations stay in force and that no further legislation be sought.<ref name="Siler1933"/> H.B.M. Murphy quoted its conclusions in a review for the United Nations ''Bulletin on Narcotics'' in 1963, observing that the inquiry reported no psychosis over a year among what he estimated at about 500 users,<ref name="Murphy1963">{{cite journal \|last=Murphy \|first=H.B.M. \|title=The cannabis habit: a review of recent psychiatric literature \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|issue=1 \|pages=15–24 \|year=1963 \|publisher=United Nations \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1963-01-01_1_page004.html}}</ref> and [[Ernest L. Abel]] returned to the report in 1982.<ref name="Abel1982">{{cite journal \|last=Abel \|first=E.L. \|title=Marijuana on trial: the Panama Canal Zone report \|journal=International Journal of the Addictions \|volume=17 \|issue=4 \|year=1982 \|pages=667–678 \|doi=10.3109/10826088209053010 \|pmid=7049968}}</ref>		The committee classed 85 per cent of the 34 soldiers as mentally abnormal, in the clinical terms of its day "constitutional psychopaths" and "morons", and held that commanders had "unduly emphasized the effects of mariajuana, disregarding the fact that a large proportion of the delinquents are morons or psychopaths". It recommended that the ban on military reservations stay in force and that no further legislation be sought.<ref name="Siler1933"/> H.B.M. Murphy quoted its conclusions in a review for the United Nations ''[[Bulletin on Narcotics]]'' in 1963, observing that the inquiry reported no psychosis over a year among what he estimated at about 500 users,<ref name="Murphy1963">{{cite journal \|last=Murphy \|first=H.B.M. \|title=The cannabis habit: a review of recent psychiatric literature \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|issue=1 \|pages=15–24 \|year=1963 \|publisher=United Nations \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1963-01-01_1_page004.html}}</ref> and [[Ernest L. Abel]] returned to the report in 1982.<ref name="Abel1982">{{cite journal \|last=Abel \|first=E.L. \|title=Marijuana on trial: the Panama Canal Zone report \|journal=International Journal of the Addictions \|volume=17 \|issue=4 \|year=1982 \|pages=667–678 \|doi=10.3109/10826088209053010 \|pmid=7049968}}</ref>

	In December 1941 the War Department sent Congress a bill to add an article on marihuana to the Canal Zone Code, drafted at the request of the commanding general of the Panama Canal Department. The report of the House committee said that the Canal Zone had no marihuana law, that the military authorities now held its use "materially detrimental to morale" and a cause of delinquency, and that the Republic of Panama prohibited its possession, cultivation and use. Under the bill it would be unlawful to produce, possess, sell, give away, transport, import or export marihuana in the Canal Zone except under licence, and a first offence would carry a fine of up to $100 or up to 30 days in jail.<ref name="HRep77-1552"/>{{rp\|1–4}}		In December 1941 the War Department sent Congress a bill to add an article on marihuana to the Canal Zone Code, drafted at the request of the commanding general of the Panama Canal Department. The report of the House committee said that the Canal Zone had no marihuana law, that the military authorities now held its use "materially detrimental to morale" and a cause of delinquency, and that the Republic of Panama prohibited its possession, cultivation and use. Under the bill it would be unlawful to produce, possess, sell, give away, transport, import or export marihuana in the Canal Zone except under licence, and a first offence would carry a fine of up to $100 or up to 30 days in jail.<ref name="HRep77-1552"/>{{rp\|1–4}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:47, 16 October 2026
Line 35:		Line 35:
	In June 1953 Republic Act No. 887 added "Indian hemp (marihuana)" to the prohibited drugs of the National Internal Revenue Code.<ref name="RA887-1953"/> The Narcotic Drugs Law (Republic Act No. 953), approved the next day, required everyone who produced, imported, sold or gave away opium or marihuana to register with the Collector of Internal Revenue and pay fixed taxes, and declared: "As a national policy the cultivation of marihuana (indian hemp) and opium poppy is hereby declared prohibited."<ref name="RA953-1953"/> Republic Act No. 2060 of 13 June 1958 added Indian hemp to the prohibited drugs of the Revised Penal Code, defining it as "otherwise known as marihuana, cannabis Americana, hashish, bhang, guaza, churrus, and ganjah".<ref name="RA2060-1958">{{cite act \|title=An Act Amending Article One Hundred and Ninety of the Revised Penal Code, so as to Include Marihuana and Similar Drugs Among the Prohibited Drugs \|type=Republic Act \|number=2060 \|date=13 June 1958 \|jurisdiction=Philippines \|url=https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/2/8247 \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> The Philippines signed the [[Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs]] at New York on 30 March 1961, the day it was concluded. It ratified the convention on 2 October 1967.<ref name="UNTC-VI-15">{{cite web \|title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 15 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-15&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref>		In June 1953 Republic Act No. 887 added "Indian hemp (marihuana)" to the prohibited drugs of the National Internal Revenue Code.<ref name="RA887-1953"/> The Narcotic Drugs Law (Republic Act No. 953), approved the next day, required everyone who produced, imported, sold or gave away opium or marihuana to register with the Collector of Internal Revenue and pay fixed taxes, and declared: "As a national policy the cultivation of marihuana (indian hemp) and opium poppy is hereby declared prohibited."<ref name="RA953-1953"/> Republic Act No. 2060 of 13 June 1958 added Indian hemp to the prohibited drugs of the Revised Penal Code, defining it as "otherwise known as marihuana, cannabis Americana, hashish, bhang, guaza, churrus, and ganjah".<ref name="RA2060-1958">{{cite act \|title=An Act Amending Article One Hundred and Ninety of the Revised Penal Code, so as to Include Marihuana and Similar Drugs Among the Prohibited Drugs \|type=Republic Act \|number=2060 \|date=13 June 1958 \|jurisdiction=Philippines \|url=https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/2/8247 \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref> The Philippines signed the [[Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs]] at New York on 30 March 1961, the day it was concluded. It ratified the convention on 2 October 1967.<ref name="UNTC-VI-15">{{cite web \|title=Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 \|website=United Nations Treaty Collection \|at=Chapter VI, 15 \|url=https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=VI-15&chapter=6&clang=_en \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref>

	Zarco, drawing on Manila newspapers of January and February 1959, dated the illegal entry of marijuana to 1954 or 1955. In his account American merchant marine sailors gave seeds to residents of [[Pasay]] and [[Makati]], who grew the plants in flower pots and dried the flowering tops and leaves, mixed them with tobacco and rolled them into cigarettes for sale to "Manila's addicts and transients". [[wikipedia:Philippine Constabulary\|Philippine Constabulary]] raiders questioned arrested growers on 8 January 1959. Farmers in [[Masbate]], Cebu and [[Negros Oriental]] were also found growing the plant.<ref name="Zarco1995"/> Writing in the ''[[~~wikipedia:Bulletin on Narcotics\|~~Bulletin on Narcotics]]'' in 1965, Joel Fort estimated that the Philippines had 5,000 users of narcotics, most of them smoking opium or injecting morphine, and noted "some use of cannabis".<ref name="Fort1965">{{cite journal \|last=Fort \|first=J. \|title=Giver of delight or liberator of sin: drug use and "addiction" in Asia \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=3 \|year=1965 \|pages=1–11 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1965-01-01_3_page002.html \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> When the [[wikipedia:National Bureau of Investigation (Philippines)\|National Bureau of Investigation]] opened the country's first treatment and rehabilitation centre in 1965, there were 930 drug dependants, according to Aurora Cudal: 615 abused heroin and 13 marijuana.<ref name="Cudal1976">{{cite journal \|last=Cudal \|first=A.S. \|title=Educational programmes on the prevention and control of drug abuse in the Philippines \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=3 \|year=1976 \|pages=1–9 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1976-01-01_3_page002.html \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref>		Zarco, drawing on Manila newspapers of January and February 1959, dated the illegal entry of marijuana to 1954 or 1955. In his account American merchant marine sailors gave seeds to residents of [[Pasay]] and [[Makati]], who grew the plants in flower pots and dried the flowering tops and leaves, mixed them with tobacco and rolled them into cigarettes for sale to "Manila's addicts and transients". [[wikipedia:Philippine Constabulary\|Philippine Constabulary]] raiders questioned arrested growers on 8 January 1959. Farmers in [[Masbate]], Cebu and [[Negros Oriental]] were also found growing the plant.<ref name="Zarco1995"/> Writing in the ''[[Bulletin on Narcotics]]'' in 1965, Joel Fort estimated that the Philippines had 5,000 users of narcotics, most of them smoking opium or injecting morphine, and noted "some use of cannabis".<ref name="Fort1965">{{cite journal \|last=Fort \|first=J. \|title=Giver of delight or liberator of sin: drug use and "addiction" in Asia \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=3 \|year=1965 \|pages=1–11 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1965-01-01_3_page002.html \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> When the [[wikipedia:National Bureau of Investigation (Philippines)\|National Bureau of Investigation]] opened the country's first treatment and rehabilitation centre in 1965, there were 930 drug dependants, according to Aurora Cudal: 615 abused heroin and 13 marijuana.<ref name="Cudal1976">{{cite journal \|last=Cudal \|first=A.S. \|title=Educational programmes on the prevention and control of drug abuse in the Philippines \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=3 \|year=1976 \|pages=1–9 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1976-01-01_3_page002.html \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref>

	On 10 February 1971 agents of the bureau's narcotics division raided a plantation of about 100 marijuana plants at Malagasang in Imus, Cavite. According to the [[wikipedia:Supreme Court of the Philippines\|Supreme Court]]'s decision in the case, the plantation was protected by the bandit Leonardo Manecio, known as Nardong Putik, who shared its marijuana sales with the owner; his men captured two of the agents and killed them.<ref name="Jimenez1981">{{cite web \|title=People of the Philippines v. Jimenez, G.R. Nos. L-36613-14 \|date=24 July 1981 \|publisher=Supreme Court of the Philippines \|via=The LawPhil Project \|url=https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1981/jul1981/gr_36613_14_1981.html \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> Tony Cayado's film ''Nardong Putik'' (1972) was based on his case.<ref name="LascoYu2023">{{cite journal \|last1=Lasco \|first1=G. \|last2=Yu \|first2=V.G. \|title=Drugs and the Marcos dictatorship: the beginnings of the Philippines' punitive drug regime (1970–1975) \|journal=Journal of Illicit Economies and Development \|volume=5 \|issue=2 \|year=2023 \|pages=42–53 \|doi=10.31389/jied.210}}</ref> Cesarea Goduco-Auglar, clinical director of the National Mental Hospital, wrote in the ''Bulletin on Narcotics'' in 1972 that the main drug of abuse among students "seems to be marijuana" and that ten to twenty students and young people came to the attention of the bureau's narcotics division every day for marijuana. She reported indications that local dealers had begun growing their own supplies to meet student demand, with plantations found around Manila, in [[Caloocan]], [[Quezon City]], [[Las Piñas]], Rizal and Cavite. There appeared also to be plantations on Negros, in the [[Bicol Region]], in Mindanao and in [[Central Luzon]].<ref name="GoducoAuglar1972"/> Michael Tan attributed the increase in reported drug problems among young Filipinos in the late 1960s in part to the influence of the western "hippie" culture and to the country's role as a transhipment point for a drug trade serving United States servicemen on rest and recreation from the [[wikipedia:Vietnam War\|Vietnam War]].<ref name="Tan1995">{{cite journal \|last=Tan \|first=M.L. \|title=The construction of "drug abuse" in the Philippines: the case of cough preparations \|journal=Philippine Sociological Review \|volume=43 \|issue=1–4 \|year=1995 \|pages=17–42 \|url=https://pssc.org.ph/wp-content/pssc-archives/Philippine%20Sociological%20Review/1995/05_The%20Construction%20of%20Drug%20Abuse%20in%20the%20Philippines_%20The%20Case%20of%20Cough%20Preparations.pdf \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref>		On 10 February 1971 agents of the bureau's narcotics division raided a plantation of about 100 marijuana plants at Malagasang in Imus, Cavite. According to the [[wikipedia:Supreme Court of the Philippines\|Supreme Court]]'s decision in the case, the plantation was protected by the bandit Leonardo Manecio, known as Nardong Putik, who shared its marijuana sales with the owner; his men captured two of the agents and killed them.<ref name="Jimenez1981">{{cite web \|title=People of the Philippines v. Jimenez, G.R. Nos. L-36613-14 \|date=24 July 1981 \|publisher=Supreme Court of the Philippines \|via=The LawPhil Project \|url=https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1981/jul1981/gr_36613_14_1981.html \|access-date=4 October 2026}}</ref> Tony Cayado's film ''Nardong Putik'' (1972) was based on his case.<ref name="LascoYu2023">{{cite journal \|last1=Lasco \|first1=G. \|last2=Yu \|first2=V.G. \|title=Drugs and the Marcos dictatorship: the beginnings of the Philippines' punitive drug regime (1970–1975) \|journal=Journal of Illicit Economies and Development \|volume=5 \|issue=2 \|year=2023 \|pages=42–53 \|doi=10.31389/jied.210}}</ref> Cesarea Goduco-Auglar, clinical director of the National Mental Hospital, wrote in the ''Bulletin on Narcotics'' in 1972 that the main drug of abuse among students "seems to be marijuana" and that ten to twenty students and young people came to the attention of the bureau's narcotics division every day for marijuana. She reported indications that local dealers had begun growing their own supplies to meet student demand, with plantations found around Manila, in [[Caloocan]], [[Quezon City]], [[Las Piñas]], Rizal and Cavite. There appeared also to be plantations on Negros, in the [[Bicol Region]], in Mindanao and in [[Central Luzon]].<ref name="GoducoAuglar1972"/> Michael Tan attributed the increase in reported drug problems among young Filipinos in the late 1960s in part to the influence of the western "hippie" culture and to the country's role as a transhipment point for a drug trade serving United States servicemen on rest and recreation from the [[wikipedia:Vietnam War\|Vietnam War]].<ref name="Tan1995">{{cite journal \|last=Tan \|first=M.L. \|title=The construction of "drug abuse" in the Philippines: the case of cough preparations \|journal=Philippine Sociological Review \|volume=43 \|issue=1–4 \|year=1995 \|pages=17–42 \|url=https://pssc.org.ph/wp-content/pssc-archives/Philippine%20Sociological%20Review/1995/05_The%20Construction%20of%20Drug%20Abuse%20in%20the%20Philippines_%20The%20Case%20of%20Cough%20Preparations.pdf \|access-date=3 October 2026}}</ref>

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:46, 16 October 2026
Line 71:		Line 71:
	The sources do not agree on when Egypt first banned hashish. A report of 2014 by the [[wikipedia:Transnational Institute\|Transnational Institute]] (TNI) dates the first prohibition of cultivation, use and importation to 1868, when Egypt was still ruled by the [[wikipedia:Ottoman Empire\|Ottoman]] sultan. It lists a tax on imports in 1874, although possession had been made illegal; a campaign to confiscate and destroy cannabis in 1877; a law against cultivation and importation in 1879; and the making of cultivation a criminal offence in 1884. Customs officers were allowed to sell confiscated hashish abroad to pay informers and the officers who had made the seizures. The decrees were reissued in 1891 and 1894 with little effect on use among the urban and rural poor.<ref name="TNI2014"/>{{Rp\|5}} A. Ahmed El Hadka, writing in 1965, dates to 1879 a law forbidding the cultivation of cannabis.<ref name="ElHadka1965">{{cite journal \|last=El Hadka \|first=A. Ahmed \|title=Forty years of the campaign against narcotic drugs in the United Arab Republic \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=4 \|pages=1–12 \|year=1965 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1965-01-01_4_page002.html}}</ref> Ahmad M. Khalifa, in 1975, calls the legislation of 1879 the first; it prohibited only cultivation.<ref name="khalifa1975">{{cite book \|last=Khalifa \|first=Ahmad M. \|chapter=Traditional patterns of hashish use in Egypt \|editor-last=Rubin \|editor-first=Vera \|title=Cannabis and Culture \|title-link=Cannabis and Culture (1975) \|location=The Hague \|publisher=Mouton \|year=1975 \|pages=195–206 \|doi=10.1515/9783110812060.195}}</ref>{{Rp\|199}} Egypt's delegate to the Second Opium Conference at Geneva, [[Mohamed El Guindy]], told it that a Dr Mohammed Ali Bey had reported to the authorities in 1868 on the accidents caused by the abuse of hashish and that cultivation had been forbidden in 1884.<ref name="Willoughby1925">{{cite book \|last=Willoughby \|first=W. W. \|title=Opium as an International Problem: The Geneva Conferences \|location=Baltimore \|publisher=The Johns Hopkins Press \|year=1925 \|url=https://archive.org/details/opiumasinternati00will \|via=Internet Archive}}</ref>{{Rp\|377}} M. I. Soueif of [[wikipedia:Cairo University\|Cairo University]] found in the laws passed since 1879 "a persistent tendency towards enforcing still severer penalties on users as well as traffickers".<ref name="Soueif1967">{{cite journal \|last=Soueif \|first=M. I. \|title=Hashish consumption in Egypt, with special reference to psychosocial aspects \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=2 \|pages=1–12 \|year=1967 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1967-01-01_2_page002.html}}</ref> Law 182 of 1960, as amended by Law 40 of 1966, made the illicit import, export, production or manufacture of drugs punishable by death and a fine of three to ten thousand pounds.<ref name="khalifa1975"/>{{Rp\|199}} Soueif noted in 1967 that no one had yet been executed under it.<ref name="Soueif1967"/>		The sources do not agree on when Egypt first banned hashish. A report of 2014 by the [[wikipedia:Transnational Institute\|Transnational Institute]] (TNI) dates the first prohibition of cultivation, use and importation to 1868, when Egypt was still ruled by the [[wikipedia:Ottoman Empire\|Ottoman]] sultan. It lists a tax on imports in 1874, although possession had been made illegal; a campaign to confiscate and destroy cannabis in 1877; a law against cultivation and importation in 1879; and the making of cultivation a criminal offence in 1884. Customs officers were allowed to sell confiscated hashish abroad to pay informers and the officers who had made the seizures. The decrees were reissued in 1891 and 1894 with little effect on use among the urban and rural poor.<ref name="TNI2014"/>{{Rp\|5}} A. Ahmed El Hadka, writing in 1965, dates to 1879 a law forbidding the cultivation of cannabis.<ref name="ElHadka1965">{{cite journal \|last=El Hadka \|first=A. Ahmed \|title=Forty years of the campaign against narcotic drugs in the United Arab Republic \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=4 \|pages=1–12 \|year=1965 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1965-01-01_4_page002.html}}</ref> Ahmad M. Khalifa, in 1975, calls the legislation of 1879 the first; it prohibited only cultivation.<ref name="khalifa1975">{{cite book \|last=Khalifa \|first=Ahmad M. \|chapter=Traditional patterns of hashish use in Egypt \|editor-last=Rubin \|editor-first=Vera \|title=Cannabis and Culture \|title-link=Cannabis and Culture (1975) \|location=The Hague \|publisher=Mouton \|year=1975 \|pages=195–206 \|doi=10.1515/9783110812060.195}}</ref>{{Rp\|199}} Egypt's delegate to the Second Opium Conference at Geneva, [[Mohamed El Guindy]], told it that a Dr Mohammed Ali Bey had reported to the authorities in 1868 on the accidents caused by the abuse of hashish and that cultivation had been forbidden in 1884.<ref name="Willoughby1925">{{cite book \|last=Willoughby \|first=W. W. \|title=Opium as an International Problem: The Geneva Conferences \|location=Baltimore \|publisher=The Johns Hopkins Press \|year=1925 \|url=https://archive.org/details/opiumasinternati00will \|via=Internet Archive}}</ref>{{Rp\|377}} M. I. Soueif of [[wikipedia:Cairo University\|Cairo University]] found in the laws passed since 1879 "a persistent tendency towards enforcing still severer penalties on users as well as traffickers".<ref name="Soueif1967">{{cite journal \|last=Soueif \|first=M. I. \|title=Hashish consumption in Egypt, with special reference to psychosocial aspects \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=2 \|pages=1–12 \|year=1967 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1967-01-01_2_page002.html}}</ref> Law 182 of 1960, as amended by Law 40 of 1966, made the illicit import, export, production or manufacture of drugs punishable by death and a fine of three to ten thousand pounds.<ref name="khalifa1975"/>{{Rp\|199}} Soueif noted in 1967 that no one had yet been executed under it.<ref name="Soueif1967"/>

	Much of the hashish used in Egypt came from abroad. Writing in the UN's ''Bulletin on Narcotics'' in 1951, J. Bouquet named [[Turkey]] and [[Greece]] as the main sources until some thirty years earlier: the smugglers' supplies to Egypt were Turkish and Greek hashish with some Indian charas. When Greek production dried up, Turkey raised its own, until a law of 1933 prohibited the cultivation, possession and use of hashish and the trade in it.<ref name="Bouquet1951">{{cite journal \|last=Bouquet \|first=J. \|title=Cannabis (concluded) \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=1 \|pages=22–45 \|year=1951 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1951-01-01_1_page005.html}}</ref> El Hadka writes that in 1926 Syria, Lebanon and Greece became major sources and that enormous quantities of hashish, especially from Syria and Lebanon, began to enter Egypt. Egyptian enforcement agencies seized 18.7 tons of hashish in 1928, a quantity not equalled even in 1958, when 18.6 tons were seized. The Bekaa was estimated to have harvested 60 tons in 1928, an estimated 90 per cent of it going to Egypt. Loads arrived hidden in steamers or sailing boats or were carried across [[Palestine]] into the [[wikipedia:Sinai Peninsula\|Sinai]] desert.<ref name="ElHadka1965"/> In 1958 G. T. Haneveld, writing from [[wikipedia:Beirut\|Beirut]] to a Dutch medical journal, thought Egypt probably the largest consumer of hashish in the [[wikipedia:Middle East\|Middle East]] and its supply to come for the most part from Syria and Lebanon.<ref name="Haneveld1959">{{cite journal \|last=Haneveld \|first=G. T. \|title=Hashish in Libanon \|trans-title=Hashish in Lebanon \|journal=Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde \|volume=103 \|issue=13 \|pages=686–688 \|date=28 March 1959 \|language=nl \|url=https://www.ntvg.nl/system/files/publications/1959106860001a.pdf}}</ref>{{Rp\|686}}		Much of the hashish used in Egypt came from abroad. Writing in the UN's ''[[Bulletin on Narcotics]]'' in 1951, J. Bouquet named [[Turkey]] and [[Greece]] as the main sources until some thirty years earlier: the smugglers' supplies to Egypt were Turkish and Greek hashish with some Indian charas. When Greek production dried up, Turkey raised its own, until a law of 1933 prohibited the cultivation, possession and use of hashish and the trade in it.<ref name="Bouquet1951">{{cite journal \|last=Bouquet \|first=J. \|title=Cannabis (concluded) \|journal=Bulletin on Narcotics \|publisher=United Nations \|issue=1 \|pages=22–45 \|year=1951 \|url=https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1951-01-01_1_page005.html}}</ref> El Hadka writes that in 1926 Syria, Lebanon and Greece became major sources and that enormous quantities of hashish, especially from Syria and Lebanon, began to enter Egypt. Egyptian enforcement agencies seized 18.7 tons of hashish in 1928, a quantity not equalled even in 1958, when 18.6 tons were seized. The Bekaa was estimated to have harvested 60 tons in 1928, an estimated 90 per cent of it going to Egypt. Loads arrived hidden in steamers or sailing boats or were carried across [[Palestine]] into the [[wikipedia:Sinai Peninsula\|Sinai]] desert.<ref name="ElHadka1965"/> In 1958 G. T. Haneveld, writing from [[wikipedia:Beirut\|Beirut]] to a Dutch medical journal, thought Egypt probably the largest consumer of hashish in the [[wikipedia:Middle East\|Middle East]] and its supply to come for the most part from Syria and Lebanon.<ref name="Haneveld1959">{{cite journal \|last=Haneveld \|first=G. T. \|title=Hashish in Libanon \|trans-title=Hashish in Lebanon \|journal=Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde \|volume=103 \|issue=13 \|pages=686–688 \|date=28 March 1959 \|language=nl \|url=https://www.ntvg.nl/system/files/publications/1959106860001a.pdf}}</ref>{{Rp\|686}}

	In Greece, according to Stefanis, Ballas and Madianou, hashish appeared after 1850 by way of the island of [[Syros]]. The first cases of smoking on the mainland date from about 1870 to 1880. By the last decades of the century hashish was cultivated openly for local use and export. In 1887 the mayor of [[wikipedia:Orchomenus (Arcadia)\|Orchomenus]] in the Peloponnese reported that Egyptians, Cypriots and other immigrants from the East had taught the cultivation and processing of the crop. A circular of the Department of the Interior of 27 March 1890 prohibited the importation, cultivation and use of hashish. The ban stayed in force until 1920; hashish was nonetheless used regularly in the ''tekedes'', cafés frequented by hashish smokers in the harbour area of [[wikipedia:Piraeus\|Piraeus]] and in the centre of [[wikipedia:Athens\|Athens]]. Until the 1960s its use was limited to the working class: longshoremen, boatmen, sailors, porters, skinners, slaughterers and cart drivers among others. Soldiers returning from the [[wikipedia:Greco-Turkish War (1919–1922)\|war in Asia Minor]] brought back smoking habits learnt in Turkey; about one and a half million Greek refugees from the region were resettled in Greece. The narcotics laws grew more severe from 1932 to 1970, but until the end of the civil war in 1950 they were not strictly enforced; illegal cultivation and use then gradually declined.<ref name="stefanis1975">{{cite book \|last1=Stefanis \|first1=C. \|last2=Ballas \|first2=C. \|last3=Madianou \|first3=D. \|chapter=Sociocultural and Epidemiological Aspects of Hashish Use in Greece \|editor-last=Rubin \|editor-first=Vera \|title=Cannabis and Culture \|title-link=Cannabis and Culture (1975) \|publisher=Mouton \|location=The Hague \|year=1975 \|pages=303–326 \|doi=10.1515/9783110812060.303}}</ref>{{Rp\|311–315}} Bouquet instead dates the Greek ban on cultivation to 1920 and a harsher law, providing for the destruction of stocks, to 1932.<ref name="Bouquet1951"/>		In Greece, according to Stefanis, Ballas and Madianou, hashish appeared after 1850 by way of the island of [[Syros]]. The first cases of smoking on the mainland date from about 1870 to 1880. By the last decades of the century hashish was cultivated openly for local use and export. In 1887 the mayor of [[wikipedia:Orchomenus (Arcadia)\|Orchomenus]] in the Peloponnese reported that Egyptians, Cypriots and other immigrants from the East had taught the cultivation and processing of the crop. A circular of the Department of the Interior of 27 March 1890 prohibited the importation, cultivation and use of hashish. The ban stayed in force until 1920; hashish was nonetheless used regularly in the ''tekedes'', cafés frequented by hashish smokers in the harbour area of [[wikipedia:Piraeus\|Piraeus]] and in the centre of [[wikipedia:Athens\|Athens]]. Until the 1960s its use was limited to the working class: longshoremen, boatmen, sailors, porters, skinners, slaughterers and cart drivers among others. Soldiers returning from the [[wikipedia:Greco-Turkish War (1919–1922)\|war in Asia Minor]] brought back smoking habits learnt in Turkey; about one and a half million Greek refugees from the region were resettled in Greece. The narcotics laws grew more severe from 1932 to 1970, but until the end of the civil war in 1950 they were not strictly enforced; illegal cultivation and use then gradually declined.<ref name="stefanis1975">{{cite book \|last1=Stefanis \|first1=C. \|last2=Ballas \|first2=C. \|last3=Madianou \|first3=D. \|chapter=Sociocultural and Epidemiological Aspects of Hashish Use in Greece \|editor-last=Rubin \|editor-first=Vera \|title=Cannabis and Culture \|title-link=Cannabis and Culture (1975) \|publisher=Mouton \|location=The Hague \|year=1975 \|pages=303–326 \|doi=10.1515/9783110812060.303}}</ref>{{Rp\|311–315}} Bouquet instead dates the Greek ban on cultivation to 1920 and a harsher law, providing for the destruction of stocks, to 1932.<ref name="Bouquet1951"/>

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:42, 16 October 2026
Line 21:		Line 21:
	In the Transnational Institute's account hashish was considered an "imminent threat to society", particularly among the urban poor and the rebellious youth known as ''manges'', who gathered in the ''tekedes'', the cafés frequented by hashish smokers in the harbour district of [[wikipedia:Piraeus\|Piraeus]] and in central [[wikipedia:Athens\|Athens]].<ref name="TNI2014" />{{Rp\|5}}		In the Transnational Institute's account hashish was considered an "imminent threat to society", particularly among the urban poor and the rebellious youth known as ''manges'', who gathered in the ''tekedes'', the cafés frequented by hashish smokers in the harbour district of [[wikipedia:Piraeus\|Piraeus]] and in central [[wikipedia:Athens\|Athens]].<ref name="TNI2014" />{{Rp\|5}}

	When the Egyptian delegate [[Mohamed El Guindy]] moved at the Second Opium Conference at Geneva (1924–25) to bring cannabis within the scope of the opium convention, Greece supported the proposal, alongside Turkey, [[South Africa]] and Brazil, which the Transnational Institute describes as countries that had experience of cannabis or had already banned it. Most countries at the conference, it writes, had little or no experience of cannabis and were inclined to rely on those that did, notably Egypt, Turkey and Greece.<ref name="TNI2014" />{{Rp\|10–11}}		When the Egyptian delegate [[Mohamed El Guindy]] moved at the Second Opium Conference at Geneva (1924–25) to bring cannabis within the scope of the [[International Opium Convention (1925)\|opium convention]], Greece supported the proposal, alongside Turkey, [[South Africa]] and Brazil, which the Transnational Institute describes as countries that had experience of cannabis or had already banned it. Most countries at the conference, it writes, had little or no experience of cannabis and were inclined to rely on those that did, notably Egypt, Turkey and Greece.<ref name="TNI2014" />{{Rp\|10–11}}

	Costas Stefanis, C. Ballas and D. Madianou wrote the chapter on hashish use in Greece in ''[[Cannabis and Culture (1975)\|Cannabis and Culture]]''.<ref name="stefanis1975" />		Costas Stefanis, C. Ballas and D. Madianou wrote the chapter on hashish use in Greece in ''[[Cannabis and Culture (1975)\|Cannabis and Culture]]''.<ref name="stefanis1975" />