Ban Khat in the UK - sign the epetition

[N.O.R.F]

NGONGE;773370 wrote:

^^ Not heresay. I am reporting facts. Germany recently arrested a guy transporting 1.7 tons of Khat through their borders (that's just one man). Sweden (which does not share a border with Holland) reported a guy crashing his car in a high speed chase with custom officials who was carrying

at least

200 kilograms of the stuff (

http://www.thelocal.se/38234/20111230/

).

 

People still chew in Norway, even though it's banned. It's all to do with the open borders between European countries (with random customs checks every now and then). The supply is not likely to dry out, saaxib. Wax fahan.

 

Still, this ban in Holland (a country that considers weed legal) is going to criminalise lots of people and the cose of Khat for these junkies is only going to increase by mere euroes rather than hundreds.

 

In addition, because of the amount of money that Kenya makes from the export of Khat, Air Kenya is not likely to think twice about starting direct flights to Lisbon, Prague or Athens. Marka where would that leave it all? What did the ban achieve, a moral victory? Wax fahan.

You do come across facts rather conveniently. You have established as FACT that the supply of qaad has not dropped in Sweden from a news report stating a man was 'caught' with the stuff at the border. The report doesn't mention anything about the level of availability before and after the ban but hey who cares?

 

The rest of that post is neither here nor there. Ma Somaalaa jooga Lisbon iyo Prague?

 

Sayid, that is exactly what I'm saying. Ngonge pretends the consequences of a ban can be, in an illogical way, worse than the current situation. He is yet to give us a clear, coherent argument why he feels this way. He keeps going on about a ban not having a major effect by using Europe's open borders as an example (without proof) but then tells us he learned the UK was an island seperate from the rest of europe (which has a much more stringent border policy).

[NGONGE]

Norf, how about the following facts?

 

Sweden 2010:

 

Integration minister Nyamko Sabuni said on Monday that the fight against khat, a herbal drug popular with the Swedish-Somali population, must be intensified, reports Dagens Nyheter (DN).

 

"Khat abuse causes a lot of suffering. It leads to unemployment and counters the integration of many Swedish-Somalis into Swedish society," said Nyamko Sabuni to the newspaper.

 

The Local reported back in May 2008 on the widespread use of khat, which was outlawed in Sweden in 1989. The report also revealed that prohibition is not strictly reinforced and that police turn a blind eye to the drug which can be found sold openly in areas where immigrants from the Horn of Africa live, such as the western Stockholm suburb of Tensta.

 

Johnny Lindh at Tensta-Rinkeby police appeared to confirm the view in an interview with DN on Monday.

 

"The customs plug away on their watch, but within the police and among national politicians no one cares. The problem is within a small ethnic group which lives outside of mainstream society, and as long as abuse does not spread to your average Swede then those in power are obviously not interested," he told the newspaper.

 

Sabuni rejected accusations of racism but said that if the situation was true, it was "unacceptable" and that much more can be done.

 

The minister also expressed concern that funds from the sale of khat could be finding their way into the hands of terror groups such al-Shabab.

 

"It is the first time that I have heard about this (the connection to al-Shabab). This is very serious if revenues from drug smuggling go to terror groups. I am presuming that the security police are investigating the issue," Sabuni told the newspaper.

 

http://www.thelocal.se/25408/20100308/

 

 

Like I told you, do some research first, adeer. Muranka jooji.

[NGONGE]

Ooops..

 

Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies Nr. 17

 

January 2012

 

By Axel Klein, Martin Jelsma and Pien Metaal

 

The globalisation of control and regulation of an ancient stimulant

 

 

 

In the context of a fast changing and well documented market in legal highs, the case of khat (Catha edulis) provides an interesting anomaly. It is first of all a plant-based substance that undergoes minimal transformation or processing in the journey from farm to market. Secondly, khat has been consumed for hundreds if not thousands of years in the highlands of Eastern Africa and Southern Arabia. In European countries, khat use was first observed during the 1980s, but has only attracted wider attention in recent years.

 

Discussions about appropriate regulatory systems and the implications of rising khat use for European drug policies4 should take cognizance of social, demographic and cultural trends, and compare the existing models of control that exist in Europe. Khat provides a unique example of a herbal stimulant that is defined as an ordinary vegetable in some countries and a controlled drug in others. It provides a rare opportunity to study the effectiveness, costs and benefits of diverse control regimes. As long as khat is legally produced and traded, it also allows for the views of stakeholders such as farmers and traders to be included in policy discussions.

 

KEY POINTS

 

• Where khat has been studied extensively, namely Australia, the UK and until recently the Netherlands, governments have steered clear of prohibition because the negative medical and social harms do not merit such controls.

 

• Strict bans on khat introduced ostensibly for the protection of immigrant communities have had severe unintended negative consequences.

 

• Khat prohibition has failed to further the integration, social incusion and economic prosperity of the Somali community.

 

• Assumptions about causal relations between khat use and the problems of a vulnerable minority with untreated mental health conditions need to be dealt with carefully and should not be used as a pretext for criminalising khat.

 

• Migrant communities and problematic users need a constructive engagement and targeted interventions. The criminalisation of a cultural practice will only intensify the problem that community leaders are seeking to address.

 

CONCLUSION

 

In several countries khat was prohibited after the active ingredients, cathine and cathinone were scheduled, without any investigation of feasibility, consequences or benefits of such a ban. Where khat has been studied most extensively, namely Australia, the UK and until recently, the Netherlands, governments have steered clear of prohibition. Not only does the evidence of khat related harm not merit such controls, but the negative consequences outweigh any benefits from reduced consumption.

 

The cost of khat controls can be summarized as criminogenic; reinforcing the isolation and vulnerability of immigrant populations, and impacting negatively on livelihoods and economic development in producer countries. The hoped for benefits of reduced khat consumption have not delivered social inclusion or economic prosperity in countries where khat has been banned. Indeed, migration patterns within the diaspora point towards movement from Scandinavia to Britain where opportunities are perceived as more promising. One of these is of course, the khat economy itself, with retail and catering providing a rare competitive advantage.

 

Khat related problems are tied to the underlying, structural vulnerabilities of the immigrant populations, and particularly the Somali community. This involves problems of cultural alienation, lack of professional skills and educational attainments, but also family fragmentation and poor mental health that resulted from the migration experience. These dovetail with the second dimension of problematic and intensive khat consumption by a minority of chewers. Post traumatic stress disorder, patterns of khat use in refugee camps, the ongoing crisis in Somalia as well as gender relations are important factors in this regard.

 

What migrant communities and problematic users need is constructive engagement and targeted interventions. The wholesale criminalisation of a cultural practice will only serve to intensify the very problem that community leaders are seeking to address.

 

http://www.encod.org/info/CHEWING-OVER-KHAT-PROHIBITION.html

[N.O.R.F]

The report also revealed that prohibition is not strictly reinforced and that police

turn a blind eye

to the drug

"The customs plug away on their watch, but within the police and among national politicians no one cares. The problem is within a small ethnic group which lives outside of mainstream society, and as long as abuse does not spread to your average Swede then those in power are obviously not interested,"

So the stuff gets through because the Swedish police can’t be bothered to do their jobs? Dee sida dhe. All this talk of open borders iyo EU naga daa

 

I’m no even going to bother with the one above

[NGONGE]

^^ It doesn't matter now, your pettiton has been rejected.