Infringement Notice Research Articles

Expected impacts of the Cannabis Infringement Notice scheme in Western Australia on regular users and their involvement in the cannabis market

The effect on the cannabis market is one area of interest in the evaluation of the new 'prohibition with civil penalties' scheme for minor cannabis offences in WA. One goal of the scheme is to reduce the proportion of cannabis consumed that is supplied by large-scale suppliers that may also supply other drugs. As part of the pre-change phase of the evaluation, 100 regular (at least weekly) cannabis users were given a qualitative and quantitative interview covering knowledge and attitudes towards cannabis law, personal cannabis use, market factors, experience with the justice system and impact of legislative change. Some 85% of those who commented identified the changes as having little impact on their cannabis use. Some 89% of the 70 who intended to cultivate cannabis once the CIN scheme was introduced suggested they would grow cannabis within the two non-hydroponic plant-limit eligible for an infringement notice under the new law. Only 15% believed an increase in self-supply would undermine the large scale suppliers of cannabis in the market and allow some cannabis users to distance themselves from its unsavoury aspects. Only 11% said they would enter, or re-enter, the cannabis market as sellers as a result of the scheme introduction. Most respondents who commented believed that the impact of the legislative changes on the cannabis market would be negligible. The extent to which this happens will be addressed in the post-change phase of this research. Part of the challenge in assessing the impact of the CIN scheme on the cannabis market is that it is distinctly heterogeneous.

SPECIAL SECTION: EVALUATION OF THE WESTERN AUSTRALIAN CANNABIS INFRINGEMENT NOTICE SCHEME-PHASE 1: Community attitudes towards cannabis law and the proposed Cannabis Infringement Notice scheme in Western Australia

Western Australia (WA) became the fourth Australian jurisdiction to adopt a prohibition with civil penalties scheme for minor cannabis offences when its Cannabis Infringement Notice (CIN) scheme became law on 22 March 2004. Previous criminological research has demonstrated the importance of public attitudes towards the law in determining the effectiveness of legislation. This survey represents the first phase of a pre-post study that attempted to gauge public attitudes towards the legal status of cannabis, the proposed legislative reforms surrounding the drug and their likely effects. A random telephone survey of 809 members of the WA population was conducted prior to the implementation of the new laws with a view to exploring contemporary views of the existing legal status of cannabis, attitudes to the proposed legislative model and respondent perceptions of its likely effects. Despite cannabis being viewed negatively by large numbers of the sample, criminal penalties for minor cannabis offences were viewed as inappropriate and ineffective. Once explained, the proposed civil penalty scheme was viewed as 'a good idea' by 79% of the sample, despite significant differences due to personal experience of cannabis use, political affiliation, religiosity and age of offspring. Most believed that the legislative change would not result in changes to levels of cannabis use (70%) or ease of obtaining cannabis (59%). These data suggest that prior to its implementation the new legislation was highly acceptable to the majority of the community. These baseline data will be compared with data to be collected at the post-change phase of the study to allow empirical observations of attitudinal and behavioural changes occurring in the community.

Infringement versus conviction: the social impact of a minor cannabis offence in South Australia and Western Australia

AbstractQuantitative data is reported from a study of 68 South Australians who had received an infringement notice or ‘cannabis expiation notice’ (CEN) and 68 West Australians who received a criminal conviction for a minor cannabis offence not more than 10 years ago to compare impact of the infringement notice and the conviction on their lives. The majority of both groups saw themselves as largely law‐abiding, had respect for the law in general and had positive views regarding cannabis. However, more of the convicted group, compared to the infringement notice group, reported negative employment consequences (32% vs. 2%), further problems with the law (32% vs. 0%), negative relationship consequences (20% vs. 5%)and accommodation consequences (16%vs. 0%)as a result of their apprehension. While neither conviction nor infringement deterred subsequent cannabis use for the vast majority, the negative social impacts of conviction were far greater than those resulting from an infringement notice. The findings have implications for the legislative options for regulation of cannabis possesssion and use.

Laws applying to minor cannabis offences in Australia and their evaluation

Cannabis is the most widely used illicit drug in Australia. About 31% of Australians aged 14 years and over have ever used the drug while 18% have used it in the previous 12 months. During this same period, some 44% of males aged 20–29 years have used it (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 1999). However, while cannabis is not a harm free drug, many argue that the most probable public health risks of cannabis use itself are likely to be small to moderate because of the relatively small proportion of the population who are heavy users (Hall, 1995). In Australia, many recognise that the public health consequences of the application of the criminal law against cannabis users may be at least as significant as those of cannabis use itself (McDonald and Atkinson, 1995). As a consequence, a number of states and territories have adopted legislative and regulatory models incorporating either infringement notices or formal cautions for cannabis possession and use (Table 1). More than 70% of the Australian public believe that civil, rather than criminal penalties, should apply to minor cannabis offences (Bowman and SansonFisher, 1994; Lenton and Ovenden, 1996).