Will Ghana be in breach of the international drug conventions if they decriminalize drugs for personal use?

In my opinion, I do not see Ghana being at risk of violating the conventions by moving towards decriminalization of drugs for personal use. Many are those who fear that Ghana risk being painted by the International  Narcotics Control Board  as they  descended on Switzerland and Uruguay years back when the two nations legalized the narcotic product where it was alleged that, The International Narcotic Control Board (INCB) accused Uruguay of ‘’Pirate attitude.''

Ghana does not stand being painted with same brush – mainly because the INCB itself has significantly changed and updated its narrative on this topic in recent years (and since the “pirate” comments were made by the previous President). INCB is now supportive of harm reduction responses and the removal of criminal sanctions in favor of alternative measures.

The INCB’s role is to monitor and enforce implementation of the First of all, the objective of the three international drug conventions, and the main objective of these conventions is the health and welfare of mankind-centered. Their original intention was to make essential medications available for the relief of pain and the alleviation of suffering, while preventing their non-medical or recreational use protecting the people, particularly the most vulnerable, from the potentially dangerous effects of these controlled drugs. Crucially, and has been repeatedly acknowledged by INCB and the UNODC.

The preamble of the 1961 Convention indicates that the main reason to consider these drugs as dangerous is their capacity to induce “addiction.” The drafters of the 1961 Convention were aware of the risk of those controlled drugs to affected individuals, and, in turn, the social and economic dangers related to addictive behavior.  Regarding possession, purchase or cultivation of controlled drugs for personal consumption, i.e. not for medical or scientific purposes, the 1988 Convention determines that these actions shall be established as criminal offenses. However, this obligation is subject to States parties’ constitutional principles or basic concepts of their legal systems. 

The same Convention also indicates that States parties may provide measures for treatment, education, aftercare, rehabilitation or social reintegration as an alternative to conviction or punishment. Therefore, the Conventions do not require the punishment of possession, purchase or cultivation for personal use. That is why, under the Conventions, de-penalisation of possession, purchase or cultivation of controlled drugs for personal use is possible, under specific circumstances.

It should be noted that decriminalization (de facto): -drug possession for personal use remains illegal (a punishable offense), but the action taken in response to this offense does not necessarily lead to punishment. In fact, a more effective alternative to punishment can be social protection and detoxification services, health care, treatment of dependence and reintegration into society. 

Also, the 1988 Convention indicates that in cases focused on drug dealers, the legislation should identify and divert cases of a minor nature from the criminal justice system. For example, as has  already happened  in many countries, individuals selling a small amount of drugs with the intent to obtain the money to maintain their habit as drug addicts do not receive the same institutional response given to criminals managing drugs as an illicit and profitable business. For these reasons, Article 3, Paragraph 4 (c) of the 1988 Convention states that “in appropriate cases of a minor nature,”  the parties may provide “as alternatives to conviction or punishment” measures such as education, rehabilitation or social reintegration, as well as treatment and aftercare. 

Treatment, as an alternative to prison, is mentioned in many provisions of the Conventions, clearly indicating that individuals affected by drug use disorders do not need to be criminally punished. See Art. 36, para. 1 (b) of the 1961 Convention; Art. 22, para. 2 (b) of the 1971 Convention; Art. 3, para. 4 (b) of the 1988 Convention. So clearly, the conventions in their clear language allows for decriminalization and so Ghana will not be in breach of the said conventions if they do so.