DOCSLIB.ORG

Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill (No 3)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill (No 3) Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill (No 3) Government Bill Explanatory note General policy statement The purpose of the Bill is to ensure the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 ("the principal Act") is better able to meet its objective, which is to prevent the misuse of drugs. There are 2 main areas of amendment to the principal Act and the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Act 1978 ('the amendment Act"). The first relates to presumption of supply matters. Presumption of supply is the amount of a drug that a person would have in his or her possession to be legally presumed to be in possession of that drug for the purpose of supply. The policy objectives in relation to the amendments are to make the presump- tion of supply regime in the principal Act more flexible, responsive and accurate by- • adding presumption of supply matters to the Order in Council regime; and • amending the presumption of supply for methamphetamine; and • adding a Ministry of Justice official to the Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs' (EACD) membership. The second main area of amendment relates to concerns about the increasing prevalence of methamphetamine use and importations of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine which are believed to be destined for the manufacture of methamphetamine. Ephedrine and pseudoephedrine are key ingredients (or precursor substances) in the manufacture of methamphetamine. To address these concerns, the principal Act will be amended to- • create 2 new importing and exporting offences for precursor substances; and 186--1 2 Misuse of Drugs Amendment (No 3) Explanatory note create powers of search and seizure without warrant for ephe- drine and pseudoephedrine; and allow controlled deliveries of precursor substances (covered in Part 2 of the amendment Act). Part 1 Amendments to Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 The key changes made to the principal Act in this Part are to- • move presumption of supply matters to the schedules of the principal Act, so that they can be altered through the Order in Council regime: • provide that the presumption of supply amount for methamphetamine be set at 5 grams: . expand the membership of EACD to include a Ministry of Justice official: • create 2 importation and exportation offences for precursor substances imported into or exported from New Zealand. Those offences are- • importing or exporting a precursor substance knowing it will be used to commit an offence; and • importing or exporting a precursor substance without reasonable excuse: . create a new Part 3 of Schedule 4 and- • extend powers in sections 18(2) and (3) to enter, detain, search and seize without warrant to precursor sub- stances listed in the new Part 3 of Schedule 4;,and • list ephedrine and pseudophedrine in the new Part 3 of Schedule 4: move the defence available to the offence of possession of a needle or syringe from the Health (Needles and Syringes) Regulations 1998 into the principal Act and reverse the cur- rent onus of proof on the defendant: make consequential amendments to the principal Act and other Acts as a result of the creation of the two importation and exportation of precursor substances offences. Explanatory note Misuse of Drugs Amendment (No 3) 3 Presumption of supply matters Section 6(6) of the principal Act currently provides for a rebuttable presumption that when a person is found with a certain amount of a controlled drug, he or she possesses the drug for the purpose of dealing (by sale or supply). The onus is on the person found with the drug to prove that he or she was not supplying the drug and that the drug was intended for personal use. This presumption is referred to commonly as the "presumption of supply". Section 6(6) currently provides that presumption of supply is set at a default amount of 56 grams for all controlled drugs, except those that have a specific presumption of supply amount listed in that subsection. This gives rise to difficulties as at present the principal Act must be amended every time there is a decision to set or alter a specific presumption of supply for a controlled drug. This process can result in long delays. The principal Act will be amended to move presumption of supply matters to the Schedules of the principal Act so they can be set or altered through the Order in Council regime. This is achieved by amendments to sections 2,4 and 6 of the principal Act by clauses 4 to 9 of the Bill. The Order in Council process is currently used for the classification of drugs. The amendment will allow for a more efficient process than passing an Act of Parliament. It will allow for scrutiny by the Health Committee and the House of Representatives and for a measure of public consultation. An expert group, the EACD, will continue to give advice on how controlled drugs should be classified and the level at which any presumption of supply should be set. It is intended that there will always be a specified amount at which presumption of supply operates. It is intended that the specified amount for each drug accord with the status quo (ie, it will be the amount currently specified in section 6(6)(a) to (e) or the default 56 grams in section 6(6)(f)). For the future, amendments to the levels will be what Parliament determines following a recommendation from EACD in the normal Order in Council process. Membership of EACD The membership of EACD is to be expanded by the inclusion of a Ministry of Justice official. This will allow for the committee to have expertise in matters relating to the justice system, including matters 4 Misuse of Drugs Amendment (No 3) Explanatory note which are not solely criminal justice matters. In the Health Commit- tee' s reports to the House on both the Misuse of Drugs (Changes to Controlled Drugs) Order 2003 and the Misuse of Drugs (Classifica- tion of Fantasy) Order 2001, the committee stated that they "believe that it is essential for the Ministry of Justice to be involved in the EACD process because of the sentencing implications of the sched- uling of new drugs and the re-scheduling of existing drugs". Offences in relation to importation and exportation of precursor substances Concerns have been raised that the enforcement provisions in the principal Act available to deal with precursor substances are inade- quate. Concern has centred on ephedrine and pseudoephredrine, which are key precursor substances used in the illicit manufacture of methamphetamine. Within New Zealand these precursor substances are sourced through "chemist shopping" and theft. Due to tighter domestic policing, ephredrine and pseudoephredine are now increasingly being imported from overseas. This has highlighted the fact that at present the principal Act contains no offence relating to the import or export of precursors for the manufacture of illicit drugs, which is an anomaly. Currently the absence of specific offence provisions in relation to the illegal importation or exportation of a precursor substance has caused difficulties: when persons in possession of a precursor sub- stance are stopped at the border, authorities can lay charges for the offence of possessing a precursor. However, possession is impossi- ble to prove in cargo and mail interceptions as no person has physi- cal possession or control of the substance. When ephedrine and pseudoephredrine are intercepted by Customs through international mail, commercial cargo, or at international airports, the substances are seized under provisions of the Medicines Act 1981 and the Customs and Excise Act 1996. The penalties provided by the Medicines Act 1981 are seen as inappropriate for dealing with substances that are precursors for controlled drugs. The Government has agreed to the amendment of the principal Act to create 2 new offences- • enabling Customs officers to seize and detain precursor sub- stances imported into New Zealand or exported from New Zealand with the knowledge that they would be used to com- mit an offence against section 6(1)(b) (which is the offence of Explanatory note Misuse of Drugs Amendment (No 3) 5 producing or manufacturing any controlled drug) or an offence against the law of a country that corresponds to such an offence, with a maximum penalty of 7 years' imprison- ment; and • enabling Customs officers to seize and detain precursor sub- stances imported into New Zealand or exported from New Zealand without reasonable excuse, with a maximum penalty of 1 year's imprisonment. The second offence is a strict liability offence which will prohibit importing or exporting precursor substances without reasonable excuse. The offence, inter alia, would attract a maximum penalty of 1 year' s imprisonment. Some examples of what may constitute a reasonable excuse are provided, including that the imported or exported substance will be used for a lawful purpose. Amendment to Schedule 4 The Government has agreed that the principal Act be amended to-- • create a new Part 3 of Schedule 4 and extend powers in section 18(2) and (3) to enter, detain, search and seize without warrant to precursor substances in the new Part 3 of Schedule 4; and • list ephedrine and pseudoephedrine in the new Part 3 of Schedule 4. Police are attempting to address the increasing illicit trade in methamphetamine through targeting the precursor substances and chemical reagents used to manufacture the drug, principally, ephe- drine and pseudophedrine. The power to detain, search and seize without warrant under section 18 of the principal Act is restricted to Classes A, B l and C 1 controlled drugs. In particular, the police are concerned that they are unable to respond quickly (ie, without a warrant) when they are investigating shoppers who purchase large amounts of pharmacy-only pseudophedrine medication to pass on to illicit manufacturers (pill shoppers).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Misuse of Drugs Act 1975
    Reprint as at 1 July 2014 Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 Public Act 1975 No 116 Date of assent 10 October 1975 Commencement see section 1(2) Contents Page Title 4 1 Short Title and commencement 4 2 Interpretation 4 3 Act to bind the Crown 9 3A Classification of drugs 9 4 Amendment of schedules that identify controlled drugs 10 and precursor substances, and set amount, level, or quantity at and over which controlled drugs are presumed to be for supply 4A Procedure for bringing Order in Council made under 12 section 4(1) or (1B) into force 4B Matters to which Minister must have regard before 13 recommending Order in Council under section 4(1) or (1B) 4C Temporary class drug notice [Repealed] 14 4D Effect of temporary class drug notice [Repealed] 15 4E Duration of temporary class drug notice [Repealed] 15 Note Changes authorised by subpart 2 of Part 2 of the Legislation Act 2012 have been made in this official reprint. Note 4 at the end of this reprint provides a list of the amendments incorporated. This Act is administered by the Ministry of Health. 1 Reprinted as at Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 1 July 2014 5 Advisory and technical committees 15 5AA Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs 15 5A Approved laboratories 17 5B Functions of Minister 17 6 Dealing with controlled drugs 18 7 Possession and use of controlled drugs 20 8 Exemptions from sections 6 and 7 22 9 Cultivation of prohibited plants 26 10 Aiding offences against corresponding law of another 27 country 11 Theft, etc, of controlled drugs 28 12 Use of premises or vehicle, etc 29 12A Equipment,
    [Show full text]
  • 'Legal Highs' the Challenge of New Psychoactive Substances
    Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies Nr. 16 October 2011 ‘Legal highs’ The challenge of new psychoactive substances By Adam Winstock1 and Chris Wilkins2 This paper aims to set out some of the pol- icy and public health issues raised by the appearance of a wide range of emergent psychoactive substances of diverse origin, effect and risk profile (commonly referred to as ‘legal highs’). It will start by considering what is meant by the term ‘legal highs’ and consider the his- torical context that has framed their appear- ance and must inform any response. It will then consider some of the approaches that KEY POINTS have been adopted by different nations to Evidence shows that alternatives to control their availability and associated criminalisation exist that attain many harms, including a preliminary assessment desirable outcomes for governments, whilst of their consequences, both intended and minimising the unnecessary consequences not. of criminalising the individual user. To date, the approaches to regulation have While new psychoactive substances pose varied between nations, both with respect a challenge to existing drug control re- to the nature and specificity of the meas- gimes, their appearance provides an oppor- ures taken and their intended outcome. tunity to consider the trial of alternative Such diversity appropriately reflects the policy and legislative approaches to drug marked differences in the existing drug use control. problems and public health approaches to addressing such issues between nations. An objective evaluation based upon scientific evidence is required to evaluate WHAT IS A LEGAL HIGH? the utility of these different control options, as well as their impact on public Over the last decade the term ‘legal high’ health outcomes.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of the International Narcotics Control Board for 2018
    104 INCB REPORT 2018 816. The lack of data related to drug trafficking and abuse in the region, other than for Australia and New Zealand, coupled with the fact that many countries have not yet become parties to the drug control treaties, is a matter of great concern to the Board. The Board has con- ducted bilateral meetings with the Governments of Papua New Guinea and Solomon Islands to address those issues and has followed up with the Governments of all non- States parties to one or more of the international drug control conventions in the region. In that connection, the ­ ­ Board was informed that the authorities of Papua New Guinea were to commence the national process of adher- ing to the 1988 Convention in September 2018. 2. Regional cooperation 817. The Oceania Customs Organization84 held its twen- tieth annual conference, on the theme “Strengthening regional connections to support a safe and prosperous Pacific”, in Melbourne, Australia, from 11 to 14 June 2018. During the meeting, customs administrations from the 23 members signed a memorandum of understanding on customs cooperation to facilitate the exchange of infor- mation between relevant border security agencies. E. Oceania Members endorsed the re-establishment of the Information Working Group and the progression of the Small Craft Mobile Application Project, developed by Australia, to 1. Major developments phase 3 as of July 2018. The members also endorsed the signing the Declaration of Partnership between the Pacific 814. Oceania continues to be vulnerable to drug manu­ Islands Chiefs of Police, the Pacific Immigration facturing and drug and precursor trafficking.
    [Show full text]
  • Regulation of Drug Checking Services
    IN CONFIDENCE In Confidence Office of the Minister of Health Cabinet Social Wellbeing Committee Regulation of drug checking services Proposal 1 This paper seeks agreement to amend the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 and the Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 to enable a permanent system of regulation for drug checking service providers. Relation to government priorities 2 This proposal does not relate to a Government priority. Executive Summary 3 Drug checking services check the composition of illicit drugs and provide harm reduction advice to help individuals make informed decisions about drug use. Where a drug is not as presumed, the individual can make the potentially life-saving decision not to consume it. 4 Drug checking is currently regulated under amendmentsreleased made by the Drug and Substance Checking Legislation Act 2020 (the Drug Checking Act) to the Misuse of Drugs Act and the Psychoactive Substances Act. These amendments allow appointed drug checking service providers to operate with legal certainty. 5 The Drug Checking Act was always intended to be temporary legislation to allow time for a permanent licensing system to be developed. The Drug Checking Act includes mechanisms which will repeal the amendments to the Misuse of Drugs Act and the Psychoactive Substances Act in December 2021. 6 If a permanent system is not in place when the Drug Checking Act repeal provisions take effect, drug checking will revert to a legal grey area. This would impede service provision and make it more difficult to prevent harm from dangerous substances such as synthetic cathinones (sometimes known as “bath salts”). Regulation is required to enable good quality services and to prevent low-quality service providers from operating.
    [Show full text]
  • Briefing Paper: New Zealand's Psychoactive Substances Legislation
    IDPC/NZDF Briefing Paper New Zealand’s psychoactive substances legislation Catherine McCullough,1 Jackson Wood2 and Rob Zorn3 September 2013 This briefing paper was written in collaboration with the New Zealand Drug Foundation continues a long history of New Zealanders making Introduction the most of available resources to create substitutes for drugs that are unavailable. As with many western countries, New Zealand’s drug laws are out of date and are causing more It is fitting then, that New Zealand has become the harm than was originally intended. The laws carry first country to pass legislation that seeks to the shadow of a prohibitionist past, have failed to regulate NPS to ensure they are low risk, rather keep up with innovations in drug production and than to control them through prohibition and supply and do not relate well to modern punitive measures. understandings of harm reduction and health The Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 has been protection. generally well-received by politicians, the ‘legal The challenge of Benzylpiperazine (BZP) ‘party pills’ high’ industry and the public. It is also receiving in the late 1990s and early 2000s made deficiencies considerable attention from like-minded in New Zealand’s drug law abundantly clear. No jurisdictions around the world. framework for controlling BZP and other party pills As we shall see, if is far from a perfect or final could be found within existing laws and solution, but it bodes extremely well for future regulations. An endless cat and mouse game began drug policy development and reform, both here between the Government and the ‘legal high’ and overseas.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of the International Narcotics Control Board for 2010
    Chapter III. Analysis of the world situation in 2008 were reported to involve more than one concerned, such as Cook Islands, Kiribati, the Marshall substance. Islands, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, the Solomon Islands, Tuvalu and Vanuatu, to accede to the international drug control treaties without further delay E. Oceania and to strengthen national legislation and border control. 1. Major developments 758. In Australia, traffickers are increasingly using the 2. Regional cooperation Internet to obtain not only precursor chemicals but also 761. Regional meetings in Oceania continued to play equipment used for the illicit manufacture of drugs. an important role in bringing countries together to Recently, the Australian customs authorities launched address drug control issues. At the twenty-eighth an operation to monitor importation from Internet annual meeting of the Pacific Islands Law Officers’ pharmacies based overseas. The operation dismantled Network, held in Samoa in December 2009, an organized criminal group that ordered participants highlighted the need for States in the pharmaceutical products containing pseudoephedrine region that were not yet parties to the international from overseas-based Internet pharmacies, with the drug control treaties to ratify those instruments. The intention of reselling them to illicit drug annual meeting of the Regional Security Committee of manufacturers. the Pacific Islands Forum was held in Fiji in 759. The Government of New Zealand has given high June 2010. The issue of transnational crime, including priority to the fight against the illicit manufacture and trafficking in drugs and precursors, remained high on abuse of methamphetamine. The national action plan the agenda. There was consensus among participants to tackle illicit manufacture and abuse of that the region remained vulnerable to threats posed by methamphetamine, launched in October 2009, has led transnational crime and that countries in the region to the identification of new trafficking trends, the must respond collectively and promptly.
    [Show full text]
  • Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill
    Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill 11/04/2019 Submission on the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill 1 Introduction 1.1 The New Zealand Law Society welcomes the opportunity to comment on the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill 2019 (the Bill). 1.1 The Bill amends the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 (the Act) by: (a) classifying two synthetic cannabinoids (5F-ADB and AMB-FUBINACA) as Class A controlled drugs; (b) affirming the existing Police discretion not to prosecute for possession and use (for all drugs) where a health-centred or therapeutic approach would be more beneficial; and (c) introducing a power for the Minister of Health to issue temporary (12 month) drug notices which classify new substances as Class C controlled drugs. 2 Executive summary 2.1 The Law Society’s key submissions are that: (a) The truncated process for development and scrutiny of the Bill creates a risk of poor quality regulation. (b) The Ministry of Justice’s view that there is no inconsistency with section 25(c) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law) requires further examination. That view is difficult to reconcile with: (i) previous negative section 7 reports by Attorneys-General relating to previous amendments to the Act concerning similar thresholds for the presumption of possession for the purpose of supply; and (ii) case law. 2.1 We also comment on whether there is sufficient evidence to establish the correct level at which the presumption of supply should apply, and whether the 56 gram threshold for presumption of supply applies to powder, liquid or plant weight.
    [Show full text]
  • Roadmaps to Regulation: New Psychoactive Substances (Nps)
    : ROADMAPS TO REGULATION: NEW PSYCHOACTIVE SUBSTANCES (NPS) Authors Amanda Feilding and Nicola Singleton Our sincere thanks to the John Paul Getty Jr. Foundation who were the main funders for the report Roadmaps to Regulation: Cannabis, Psychedelics, MDMA, and NPS, and to the Open Society Foundations (OSF), for their supplementary financial support towards this publication. Beckley Park, Oxford OX3 9SY. United Kingdom www.beckleyfoundation.org THE AIM OF THE REPORT This publication is a chapter from a four-part report, Roadmaps to Regulation: Cannabis, Psychedelics, MDMA, and NPS, that will be published later this year. The report was convened by Amanda Feilding, and principally funded by the John Paul Getty Jr. Foundation with further assistance from the Open Society Foundations (OSF). The report aims to bring together the best available evidence on the regulation of psychoactive drugs in a rigorous, yet accessible way. In part, it is an invitation to think differently about drug policy options. The wealth of expertise that we have gained from our work in the drug policy field strengthens our conviction that the strict legal regulation of drugs is the ultimate goal of drug policy reform. The governments of the world, duty-bound to safeguard their citizens’ well-being, surely would do a better job of minimising the overall harms of drugs than the criminal organisations currently profiting from the illicit market. It is no longer acceptable to simply assume that the risks of a legal market will exceed those of prohibition, especially when there is already the beginnings of a scientific evidence-base to show that a regulated market can provide effective ways of reducing harms.
    [Show full text]
  • Misuse of Drugs Act 1975
    Reprint as at 1 October 2012 Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 Public Act 1975 No 116 Date of assent 10 October 1975 Commencement see section 1(2) Contents Page Title 4 1 Short Title and commencement 4 2 Interpretation 4 3 Act to bind the Crown 8 3A Classification of drugs 9 4 Amendment of schedules that identify controlled drugs 9 and precursor substances, and set amount, level, or quantity at and over which controlled drugs are presumed to be for supply 4A Procedure for bringing Order in Council made under 11 section 4(1) or (1B) into force 4B Matters to which Minister must have regard before 12 recommending Order in Council under section 4(1) or (1B) 4C Temporary class drug notice 14 4D Effect of temporary class drug notice 14 4E Duration of temporary class drug notice 16 Note Changes authorised by section 17C of the Acts and Regulations Publication Act 1989 have been made in this reprint. A general outline of these changes is set out in the notes at the end of this reprint, together with other explanatory material about this reprint. This Act is administered by the Ministry of Health. 1 Reprinted as at Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 1 October 2012 5 Advisory and technical committees 16 5AA Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs 17 5A Approved laboratories 18 5B Functions of Minister 19 6 Dealing with controlled drugs 19 7 Possession and use of controlled drugs 21 8 Exemptions from sections 6 and 7 23 9 Cultivation of prohibited plants 28 10 Aiding offences against corresponding law of another 28 country 11 Theft, etc, of controlled drugs 29 12 Use of
    [Show full text]
  • Misuse of Drugs Act 1975
    Reprint as at 21 February 2018 Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 Public Act 1975 No 116 Date of assent 10 October 1975 Commencement see section 1(2) Contents Page Title 3 1 Short Title and commencement 3 2 Interpretation 4 3 Act to bind the Crown 8 3A Classification of drugs 8 4 Amendment of schedules that identify controlled drugs and 9 precursor substances, and set amount, level, or quantity at and over which controlled drugs are presumed to be for supply 4A Procedure for bringing Order in Council made under section 4(1) 11 or (1B) into force 4B Matters to which Minister must have regard before recommending 11 Order in Council under section 4(1) or (1B) 4C Temporary class drug notice [Repealed] 13 4D Effect of temporary class drug notice [Repealed] 13 4E Duration of temporary class drug notice [Repealed] 13 5 Advisory and technical committees 13 5AA Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs 13 5A Approved laboratories 15 Note Changes authorised by subpart 2 of Part 2 of the Legislation Act 2012 have been made in this official reprint. Note 4 at the end of this reprint provides a list of the amendments incorporated. This Act is administered by the Ministry of Health. 1 Reprinted as at Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 21 February 2018 5B Functions of Minister 15 6 Dealing with controlled drugs 15 7 Possession and use of controlled drugs 17 8 Exemptions from sections 6 and 7 18 9 Cultivation of prohibited plants 21 10 Aiding offences against corresponding law of another country 22 11 Theft, etc, of controlled drugs 22 12 Use of premises or vehicle, etc 23 12A
    [Show full text]
  • Regulatory Impact Statement: Regulation of Drug Checking Services Coversheet
    Regulatory Impact Statement: Regulation of drug checking services Coversheet Purpose Decision Sought: Agreement to amend the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 and the Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 to enable a permanent system of regulation for drug checking services Advising Agencies: Ministry of Health Proposing Ministers: Hon Andrew Little, Minister of Health Date: March 2021 Problem Definition Primary problem: There are health risks and harms arising from the consumption of all illicit drugs. Some of these risks and harms arise from people not knowing the actual composition of their drugs, and/or not knowing how to mitigate other risks and harms. Secondary problem: Drug checking services address the primary problem by testing illicit drugs and providing harm reduction advice. However the legislation which regulates drug checking service providers will repeal in December 2021. If a new regulatory system is not established, it will be more difficult for drug checking providers to operate. Executive Summary Drug checking services check the composition of illicit drugs and provide harm reduction advice to help individuals make more informed decisions about drug use. Where a substance is not as presumed, the individual can make the potentially life- saving decision not to consume it. Until late 2020, several aspects of drug checking were potentially illegal under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 and the Psychoactive Substances Act 2013. For example, drug checkers were potentially committing a possession offence if they handled the drugs. The Drug and Substance Checking Legislation Act 2020 (the Drug Checking Act) amended the Misuse of Drugs Act to enable the Director-General of Health to appoint drug checking service providers and enable appointed providers to operate with legal certainty.
    [Show full text]
  • Misuse of Drugs Act 1975
    Reprint as at 22 December 2016 Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 Public Act 1975 No 116 Date of assent 10 October 1975 Commencement see section 1(2) Contents Page Title 3 1 Short Title and commencement 3 2 Interpretation 3 3 Act to bind the Crown 8 3A Classification of drugs 8 4 Amendment of schedules that identify controlled drugs and 8 precursor substances, and set amount, level, or quantity at and over which controlled drugs are presumed to be for supply 4A Procedure for bringing Order in Council made under section 4(1) 10 or (1B) into force 4B Matters to which Minister must have regard before recommending 11 Order in Council under section 4(1) or (1B) 4C Temporary class drug notice [Repealed] 12 4D Effect of temporary class drug notice [Repealed] 12 4E Duration of temporary class drug notice [Repealed] 12 5 Advisory and technical committees 12 5AA Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs 13 5A Approved laboratories 14 Note Changes authorised by subpart 2 of Part 2 of the Legislation Act 2012 have been made in this official reprint. Note 4 at the end of this reprint provides a list of the amendments incorporated. This Act is administered by the Ministry of Health. 1 Reprinted as at Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 22 December 2016 5B Functions of Minister 14 6 Dealing with controlled drugs 15 7 Possession and use of controlled drugs 17 8 Exemptions from sections 6 and 7 18 9 Cultivation of prohibited plants 22 10 Aiding offences against corresponding law of another country 22 11 Theft, etc, of controlled drugs 23 12 Use of premises or vehicle, etc 24 12A
    [Show full text]