Preface
-
Published:22 Jul 2022
-
Special Collection: 2022 ebook collectionProduct Type: Textbooks
Forensic Chemistry of Substance Misuse, The Royal Society of Chemistry, 2022, pp. P011-P013.
Download citation file:
“Gold is worse poison to a man’s soul, doing more murders in this loathsome world, than any mortal drug”
William Shakespeare (Romeo and Juliet)
An earlier publication1 described the UK drugs legislation from the viewpoint of a forensic scientist. In the current book, an opportunity has been taken to rearrange and expand the material and improve clarity, to include the changes that have occurred in the past six years, and, more importantly, to widen the scope and the intended audience. Given the high political profile of drug misuse and the large number of offenders regularly prosecuted, drugs legislation is subjected to a high level of scrutiny by the Courts. The legislation is also technically complex with areas that are rarely explored. It follows that there is need for all participants in the legal process to have some familiarity with the underlying chemical principles.
This book is intended to provide that background understanding and complements other publications that deal primarily with legal interpretation and the case law that has built up over the past three decades. This book is largely based on UK law and practice, and provides a description of the current legislation. However, this is placed into the context of the United Nations drug control conventions, and, where appropriate, compared with the US legislation. Sitting between national legislations and the international drug control treaties, the European Union (EU) has a supranational role. The EU is having an increasing impact on domestic law. Thus, apart from precursor legislation, which derives from the United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances 1988, the EU has specific competence in the area of “new psychoactive substances”, formerly known as “new synthetic drugs”.
While most countries have chosen to implement only the essential elements required in international law by the 1961 and 1971 United Nations Conventions, a few have extended the scope to a wider range of substances. Examples of other countries' approaches to drug control in regard to generic/analogue controls and emergency legislation are provided. The structure-specific generic controls in the Misuse of Drugs Act are comprehensively covered with more examples. Yet other generic controls derive from the international drug control treaties, and are therefore common to the law of many countries. An unusual feature of UK drugs law, shared with that of the US and only a few other countries, is that it includes a large number of anabolic steroids. These substances not only lack psychoactivity, but even include testosterone: a steroid that occurs naturally in human and other mammalian tissues. Although many new substances have been brought under control in recent years, the list of potential candidates has increased even more. Throughout the 1990s most “new synthetic drugs” were either ringsubstituted phenethylamines or, less commonly, substituted tryptamines. In the last six years, clandestine drug manufacturers seem to have largely exhausted this chemical repertoire and have now diversified into a much more heterogeneous group of substances. Nevertheless, these psychoactive novelties continue to be mostly CNS stimulants or compounds with a pharmacology having some resemblance to that of the well-established drug MDMA (3,4-methylenedioxymethylamphetamine; ecstasy).
As a subtheme to the arguments about relative harmfulness, considerable time and energy have been expended in the UK, particularly since 2002, on the specific classification of cannabis, and to a lesser extent of certain other substances. The irony is that, despite three major reviews and an intermediate period when its status was changed, cannabis will soon be back to where it was in late 2003 and had been since 1971. When it is recognised that few substances have been reclassified since 1971, many observers might conclude that the system is largely impervious to change and should be replaced for that reason alone.
All States have to address the question of whether certain activities with certain substances should attract heavier penalties than others, regardless of whether those penalties are defined in the criminal law or are civil penalties or merely administrative sanctions. In recent years, many critical questions have been raised as to whether, after nearly 40 years, the UK drugs legislation is still fit for purpose. To a large extent such questions have centred on the classification of substances and their relative harmfulness. These concerns are relevant to all legislations, since it is a general principle of drug laws that there should be a correlation between harm, either to the individual or society, and the penalties associated with various offences.
As part of the critical light that now shines on drug control, not only are concerns being raised about the substances that are scheduled, but anomalies with society's approach to nonscheduled substances are becoming clearer. The most obvious of these are alcohol and tobacco, which together cause far more damage to society and to individuals than all of the scheduled substances combined. Yet these substances are often not even regarded as drugs. But these “socially acceptable” substances are by no means free of controls. The law determines such matters as who may sell them, where, when and to whom. Furthermore, the social acceptance of alcohol has a strong cultural and religious link. If we take a strict line about relating legal control to harmfulness and by relating harmfulness largely to the pharmacological and toxicological properties of those substances then we must recognise that the social drugs lie on a continuum of harm with all other substances and do not belong in some different dimension. From here it is a short step to examine our attitude to all harmful substances and ask how they should fit into the scale. Such substances include simple poisons, drug and weapon precursors, industrial solvents, established medicines, harmful materials in the workplace, the social drugs and those, often innocuous, substances intended for use as cutting agents.
This book is aimed not only at forensic scientists but also at police and customs officers, lawyers and all those with an interest in drugs legislation. There is coverage of the many problem areas that arise in the forensic interpretation of analytical results. For chemists, the extensive use of molecular structures in the text allows a complete and easier comprehension of the chemical background to the legislation. It is not a guide to general aspects of the law, stated cases, sentencing policy or related legislation although some of these are dealt with briefly in the Appendices. Also excluded is any comprehensive discussion of chemical analysis, but brief analytical properties of the major drugs are provided, and specific problem areas are mentioned where they have a bearing on interpretation. No account is provided of the wider social dimension to drug abuse, to epidemiology, pharmacology or toxicology, but the interested reader is directed to the Bibliography. Selected references to specific articles and research publications are included in the text as footnotes, but these are not meant to be exhaustive. There is no discussion of the arguments for or against legalisation or decriminalisation of some or all drugs, or to what extent drug misuse is a health problem as opposed to a law-enforcement issue. Finally, it is beyond the scope of this book to provide any recommendations on the presentation of evidence in Court or how analytical results should be set out in reports and statements.
I particularly wish to thank Professor Geoffrey Phillips, Dr John Ramsey and Professor Les Iversen for supporting the concept of this book in early discussions with the Royal Society of Chemistry. Professor Geoffrey Phillips, Rudi Fortson and Ric Treble kindly reviewed a draft manuscript and offered valuable comments.
Leslie A. King,
Hampshire
L. A. King, The Misuse of Drugs Act: A Guide for Forensic Scientists – see Bibliography.