Drug Legalization in Federalist Constitutional Democracies

Daniel Alati is a professor in the Sociology Department, MacEwan University, Canada. His research falls into the categories of comparative criminal justice, comparative national security and anti-terrorism law, and criminal law and procedure.

• 1 Introduction 1.1 Aims and Objectives 1.2 Methodology 1.3 Chapter Summaries 2 Historical Evolution of Canada’s Federal Drug Policy 2.1 The Passage of the Opium Act and the Beginning of Prohibition 2.2 The LeDain Commission Inquiry and Subsequent Political Indifference 2.3 “The War on Drugs” and the Passage of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act 2.4 The Turn of the Century: A Return to Drug Policy Reform Inertia 2.5 The Turn of the Century: Legal Challenges Prompt Changes to Medical Cannabis Regulation 2.6 The Passage of the 2018 Cannabis Act: A Missed Opportunity 2.7 Voices From the Front Lines: Indigenous Community and Cannabis Industry Leaders Echo Academic Concerns 2.8 Conclusion 3 Provincial Implementation of Cannabis Legalization 3.1 Federalism Issues: Cooperation or Unilateralism? 3.2 Federalism Issues: Further Exclusion of Indigenous Participation 3.3 Broad Trends and Issues Associated with Provincial Implementation 3.4 Provincial Implementation of Cannabis Legalization in Ontario 3.5 Provincial Implementation of Cannabis Legalization in Alberta 3.6 Provincial Implementation of Cannabis Legalization in Quebec 3.7 Provincial Implementation of Cannabis Legalization in British Columbia 3.8 Provincial Implementation of Cannabis Legalization in Saskatchewan 3.9 Provincial Implementation of Cannabis Legalization in Manitoba 3.10 Provincial Implementation of Cannabis Legalization in Canada’s Eastern Provinces 3.11 Conclusion: Is a Course Correction Necessary? 4 Status of Drug Legalization in Other Federalist Constitutional Democracies 4.1 Commonwealth Jurisdictions 4.1.1 Australia 4.1.2 Jamaica 4.1.3 New Zealand 4.1.4 South Africa 4.1.5 United Kingdom 4.2 European Countries 4.2.1 Czech Republic 4.2.2 Germany 4.2.3 Italy 4.2.4 Malta 4.2.5 Netherlands 4.2.6 Portugal 4.2.7 Spain 4.2.8 Switzerland 4.3 Latin America 4.3.1 Argentina 4.3.2 Brazil 4.3.3 Chile 4.3.4 Columbia 4.3.5 Costa Rica 4.3.6 Mexico 4.3.7 Paraguay 4.3.8 Peru 4.3.9 Uruguay4.4 United States4.4.1 Alaska4.4.2 Arizona 4.4.3 California 4.4.4 Colorado4.4.5 Connecticut 4.4.6 Illinois 4.4.7 Maine 4.4.8 Massachusetts 4.4.9 Michigan 4.4.10 Montana 4.4.11 Nevada4.4.12 New Jersey 4.4.13 New Mexico 4.4.14 New York 4.4.15 Oregon 4.4.16 Vermont 4.4.17 Virginia 4.4.18 Washington State4.5 Conclusion 5 Lessons Learned and Future Challenges 5.1 Lessons Learned: Indigenous Exclusion Must Be Addressed 5.2 Lessons Learned: Time to Write a New Chapter in Canada’s Racist Drug History 5.3 Lessons Learned from Abroad: Other Jurisdictions Have Done More to Promote Social Equity, Broader Drug Policy Liberalization, and Harm Reduction Approaches 5.4 Future Challenges: The Government Should Listen to the “Voices” of its Industry 5.4.1 Future Challenges: Changes to the Excise Tax and Related Issues 5.4.2 Future Challenges: The Inadequacy of Health Canada Must Be Addressed 5.4.3 Future Challenges: Marketing and Advertising Restrictions Need to Be Relaxed 5.4.4 Future Challenges: The Issue of Market Concentration 5.4.5 Future Challenges: The Regulation of Consumption Lounges 5.4.6 Future Challenges: The Need for More Transparent Data 5.5 Conclusion: Where to Begin? 6 Conclusion 6.1 Recommendations for Future Change to Cannabis (and Wider Drug) Policy in Canada 6.2 Looking Towards the Future: Directions for Future Research