New Zealand’s Parliament enacted a landmark law two weeks ago that will regulate and control – rather than criminalize – so-called “bath salts” and other new synthetic drugs.
The first-of-its-kind law, the Psychoactive Substance Act of 2013, came into effect on July 18, after being approved in Parliament by a 119-1 margin, with the support of seven different political parties from across New Zealand’s political spectrum.
The legislation creates a new government agency, the Psychoactive Substances Regulatory Authority, within the Ministry of Health that will be charged with ensuring that synthetic psychoactive products meet adequate safety standards before going to market. The new regulatory body will also implement and administer a licensing system for potential importers, manufacturers, wholesalers, retailers and researchers.
The law immediately establishes several regulatory restrictions:
- a minimum purchasing age of 18;
- restrictions on retail outlets, including a ban on sales in convenience stores;
- requirements for labeling and packaging, including mandatory health warnings;
- and a ban on advertising except at the point-of-sale.
“This represents a potentially transformative breakthrough in the legal regulation of drugs that typically have been criminalized with little forethought,” said Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance. “ It pokes an important hole in the edifice of drug prohibition.”
In recent years, several countries have adopted less repressive drug policies, including harm reduction approaches and decriminalization. In Latin America and many other parts of the world, momentum is currently building to explore less punitive measures that would reduce the economic, social and human costs of the war on drugs.
However, following sensationalized media reports, the U.S. Congress passed legislation in 2012 that completely prohibited many of these synthetic drugs.
As an island nation that produces (rather than imports) most of the illegal drugs it consumes domestically, New Zealand has struggled with the emergence of unregulated synthetic drugs. Unlike other countries that have passed laws to criminalize new synthetic drugs, though, New Zealand will now allow manufacturers to sell such products – but only if they can prove their product has a low risk to the consumer.
Individuals and companies who wish to apply for approval of a new drug product must demonstrate that the product poses a low risk of harm to the consumer. The application process requires the product to undergo rigorous clinical trials to examine toxicity and addictiveness (at the expense of the producer/importer), followed by an evaluation of the results by an independent expert advisory committee.
“Simply banning these drugs only incentivizes producers to develop drugs that get around the law – regardless of what they will do to the people that take them,” said Ross Bell, executive director of the New Zealand Drug Foundation. “This model incentivizes producers to develop drugs that are safer. We think that’s a much smarter way to go about it.”
Supporters of the legislation have argued that outright criminalization is likely to drive these products to the underground market, which provides no age restrictions or other regulatory controls. What is more, attempts to ban one new substance after another have proven futile – each time one gets banned, another new, untested and oftentimes more dangerous drug fills the void to replace it. According to the New Zealand Ministry of Health, “Regulating psychoactive substances will help protect the health of, and minimize harm to, individuals who use these substances.”
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.