This is the concluding segment of the four-part documentation of my interaction with the Supreme Court of India for ganja and charas legalization that also had the previous three steps: the writ petition; the special leave petition; and the appeal against the Registrar's order.
As I said at the start of this whole exercise of going to the Supreme Court of India with a petition to legalize ganja and charas, some of my objectives were: to bring the matter to the attention of the apex judiciary that protects our fundamental rights; to understand the current thought process of the judiciary in this matter; through this, to bring more attention from a wider audience to this grossest of violation of fundamental rights in India for the last 150 years; to share the findings of the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission of 1894-95 which showed how much ganja and charas were, and are still, integral to India's social, economic, spiritual, medical, legal and environmental fabric; to show that the classes and castes most affected by cannabis prohibition are the poorest people of India for whom ganja and charas were a vital part of what constituted a healthy, content, wholesome life; to show that when ganja and charas were completely legal, without any regulatory curbs whatsoever, Indian society had thrived for thousands of years without any problems because of this; to show the myths and propaganda that have been perpetrated by the upper classes and castes to keep ganja and charas prohibited; to show the vast economic benefits of ganja and charas legalization; to show the classes of persons opposed to ganja and charas legalization; etc.
In the process of going to the judiciary, I think I achieved the above stated goals.
Through the exercise, I found that the e-Filing option that has been introduced by the Supreme Court of India greatly improves the citizen's access to the highest judiciary. I found that the Supreme Court Registry worked smoothly and efficiently in assisting the citizen to package the matter and present it before the court. The main glitch I faced in terms of the processes was the accessibility and technology issues around attending hearings in virtual mode. Most people seem to fail to understand that more than half of India does not possess a smartphone, let alone a computer with good internet connectivity. Inclusivity, as a key criteria in designing systems, is still a long way off in this country. Almost everything that is thought about excludes the poorest citizens who make up the majority of this country. I do not know if there are any poor advocates who do not possess a smartphone or computer. The setting up of facilities - maybe in district courts - from where citizens can attend virtual court hearings for their matters in high courts and the Supreme Court will increase the accessibility of this mode of operation by the courts of law that is increasingly becoming an absolute necessity.
The matter - through its being processed and brought before the judiciary - got at least some members of the judiciary to look at it. Even if they did not do the right thing - as of now - and restore the fundamental rights of hundreds of millions of Indians, including myself, it at least came to their attention. Judges Bela Trivedi, Aniruddha Bose and Satish Chandra Sharma became aware of at least some part of what was presented before them. Aniruddha Bose spent some time thinking about it and voicing his views on the matter. The Registrar, Pavanesh D, went through the special leave petition, and provided a good summary of it in his order dismissing the special leave petition. Satish Chandra Sharma announced to open court at least some part of what the petition intended to achieve.
From what I saw, the judiciary in India is still not up to speed on a matter in which apex courts like the South African Constitutional Court and the Mexican Supreme Court already made the right ruling more than three years ago. The Supreme Court of India seems to be behind the times - as is the case with most law courts in the world - when it comes to the cannabis resurgence that is happening globally. The judges of these courts seem to come from an entirely different era than that of the vast majority of young and middle aged people who now live on this planet. The effectiveness of the propaganda created by the upper castes and classes over the last 150 years is evident in the mindset of the judiciary. The complete irrationality of ganja and charas prohibition given the widespread evidence of its usage and relative harmlessness for thousands of years reveal the backward mindset of the judiciary in this matter. This irrationality is evident in: the complete unscientific nature of a plant being considered illegal just because it contains more than an arbitrarily set limit of 0.3% for the most medicinal and beneficial cannabis compound - delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC); the complete irrationality of considering a plant legal if it is drunk (as bhang) but illegal if it is smoked (as ganja or charas) just because the upper classes and castes prefer to drink it rather than smoke it; the complete disregard for the widespread scientific evidence of benefits of cannabis emerging from the US, Canada, Europe and other so-called developed nations; the complete disregard of the oppression of the poorer classes due to ganja and charas prohibition; and so on. According to the Indian drug terminology, bhang is the leaves of the cannabis plant while ganja is the flowers and charas is the resin. Bhang and the seeds are legal whereas the flowers and the resin is illegal. This system of separating what is legal and what is illegal is based on the 1961 UN Single Convention Treaty, and is completely different from what western societies use to define what is legal and what is illegal. In the west, cannabis with less than 0.3% delta9-tetrahydrocannabinal (THC) is legal, while cannabis with THC greater than 0.3% is illegal. This is irrespective of whether it is the leaves, flowers or resin. Both these criteria are equally absurd. For one thing, people who claim to drink bhang most definitely consume the flowers and resin along with the leaves. With regard to the 0.3% THC limit, there is no scientific basis for this limit, it has been arbitrarily set. THC is the most medicinal and beneficial compound in cannabis. None of all this has however stopped law and drug enforcement from cutting down a cannabis plant wherever they see it, whether it is a sapling, or a plant bearing only leaves. The persons found growing these plants have been arrested and charged with crimes according to the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act of 1985...These persons arrested are most often from the poorer classes...The upper classes and castes procure and consume their ganja and charas with impunity from the black market at high costs. They drink it as bhang in their religious and social occasions. Obviously, they seem to have connections that are beyond the means of the common man.
This is especially chagrining for India, since no other country in the world has the kind of cannabis culture India had, and still has. It is disappointing that the apex court does not recognize: the harms of ganja and charas prohibition to the majority of India's people - its poorest - who are denied a safe intoxicant and universal medicine; the overall harms to society that continued prohibition is causing, especially through the misuse and abuse of alcohol, tobacco, opioids, synthetic legal and illegal pharmaceutical drugs; the potential of cannabis to provide affordable universal healthcare; the urgency of the climate problem that has been caused by the fossil fuel, construction, synthetic fibers, petrochemical-based plastics, chemical fertilizer and pesticide industries who thrive in the absence of cannabis; the class and caste system that is behind prohibition and the blatant discrimination against large sections of the population that ganja and charas prohibition is; the spiritual importance of ganja and charas as entheogen for Indian society; the opportunity to rid the system of the evils of the black market for ganja and the extortion that law enforcement and excise thrive on; and so on...
The understanding that ganja and charas prohibition is, first and foremost, a class and caste issue continues to elude Indian society at large. Even the poorest classes and castes - who are the most affected by this prohibition - seem to not understand that it is a method for the upper classes and castes to subjugate and oppress the lower classes and castes. Not only does it render the working classes and outcasts unhealthy, it also builds dependency in them on the drugs that the higher classes sell to get richer - alcohol, tobacco, opioids and synthetic pharmaceutical drugs. The anti-ganja propaganda has been so strong and effective that most of the poorer classes themselves believe it to be evil and harmful, and alcohol and tobacco to be harmless. Certain sections of the working and poorer classes still do get access to ganja (rarely charas) but it is only for those who are willing to take the risk of losing their jobs or imprisonment and for those who can access and afford the ganja. The rich upper classes and castes have fooled the whole of Indian society by saying that bhang and ganja are two different drugs. By themselves giving sanction for bhang as permitted for religious usage, the priests of the religions of the upper classes and castes - and through them the kings and businessmen - consume cannabis with impunity. According to the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act of 1985, cannabis as bhang is legal. What does this legality mean? Can any person grow as much bhang as he wishes and use it for any purpose that he wishes? Why, then, is the cannabis plant seized and a human arrested when it is grown or found in someone's possession? If permissions are required for people to grow and consume bhang, where are these permissions? Who has given permission, and to whom, to consume cannabis as bhang? How can a person procure bhang if he says it is for religious use? Can any person procure bhang saying that it is for religious use? Which are the religions that have been given sanction for the consumption of bhang and how? Why are only some religions given sanction, if any sanction has been given at all? The answers to all these questions, and many more, will reveal that by calling cannabis 'bhang' when the upper classes and castes drink it, and 'ganja' or 'charas' when the lower classes and castes smoke it, the ruling upper classes and castes have created a means of discriminating against both the cannabis plant and the users who wish to smoke it rather than drink it (often because of the simple reason that the poorer classes cannot afford the milk, nuts and spices that the upper classes and castes use to prepare their bhang). All this legality of bhang and sanctions as per law are myths that the upper classes and castes use as convenient to condone their usage and punish others. As I stated elsewhere, the upper classes and castes procure cannabis through the poor members of the working class whom they employ. These workers often go back to their villages and hometowns and bring the cannabis for their masters to use as they please. If the worker is caught along the way by police or excise, the employer will wash his hands of all knowledge of the matter. The same employer will also fire the worker if he finds him smoking the same cannabis as ganja.
In this instance, I decided to go solo - as the individual citizen seeking restoration of his fundamental rights - through a mandamus writ petition. I wanted to take this option as far as I could. The Supreme Court and its Registry rejected this path and nudged me to take the legislature and Public Interest Litigation (PIL) routes. In each of these routes, what is emphasized is the large number of people - hundreds of millions - who are affected by ganja and charas prohibition. I like to speak for myself, so I do not see myself filing PILs on behalf of other people. Nor do I see myself lobbying the legislature to make the corrections to the NDPS laws. For trying to effect the required changes through these paths, I leave it to some people from the rest of the hundreds of millions who understand the importance of this and wish to influence positive societal changes. I sincerely wish that large numbers of persons come forward and exert pressure on the judiciary and legislature by filing PILs, talking to their representatives, and themselves filing similar writ petitions. The whole idea of sharing all this information through the blog is so that it will prove useful to anybody who wishes to do impactful work in these areas. The contents of the writ petition Diary Number 23878 of 2023 can be easily shaped into a PIL with minimum modifications. Anybody is free to do so...
What worries me the most about the stance of the judiciary is that its integrity appears to be compromised, leaning towards the upper class-upper caste government that favors the rich industries that are most opposed to ganja and charas legalization, and who benefit the most from its prohibition. The reluctance to initiate positive action in this matter seems to indicate that the same upper class and caste mentality that pervades government and industry in India also pervades the Supreme Court of India. I also get the impression that there is great pressure on the Supreme Court from these forces operating from outside and within to protect the evils of the current system. For a court of law - especially one that is established by the people to protect their fundamental rights and freedoms - integrity and credibility are the most important requirements. If integrity and credibility are lost, then the power that the court holds is lost, because this power has been given to it by the people. The court then becomes just another government department, routinely processing petty and trivial matters that are best left to the lower courts of justice. The people will go elsewhere looking for justice, or even start taking matters into their own hands, until a point is reached where the entire existing structure, including the judiciary, are rendered symbolic but hold no real value in the eyes of the citizen, much like the President of India is today.
Every citizen is a judge in the court of his or her own mind. Every person judges and is, in turn, judged. In my court, I find that the representatives of the Supreme Court of India - Bela Trivedi, Aniruddha Bose and Satish Chandra Sharma, and the Registrar Pavanesh D - failed in executing their responsibilities of protecting and upholding the fundamental rights of the citizen as enshrined in the Constitution of India. I gave them three opportunities to do so, but they failed...I will follow whatever path I think is necessary to exist in the freedom that is mine as the eternal spirit...I legalized ganja a long time ago...I was only asking the State to do the same so that the suffering of hundreds of millions of Indians and of the natural world - with its numerous living beings - that makes up this country called India, can be reduced rather than increased...That, my dear friends and foes, was the documentation of my visit to the Supreme Court of India for ganja and charas legalization...
No comments:
Post a Comment